Analysing Scientific Discourse From a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective: A Framework for Exploring Knowledge-building in Biology 9780815374992, 9781351241052

Citation preview

Analysing Scientific Discourse From a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective

This book describes the discourse of biology from a systemic functional linguistic perspective. It offers a detailed description of resources based on text analysis. The description reveals co-textual patterns of language features and their expressions through grammatical resources, as well as their functions in the disciplinary context. The book also applies the description to analyse student texts in undergraduate biology, revealing characteristics of language and knowledge development. Although the discussion in this book focuses on the discourse of biology, both the language description and the descriptive principle can be used to inform the examination of knowledge in academic discourse in general, making this key reading for students and researchers in systemic functional linguistics, discourse analysis, English for academic purposes, applied linguistics and science education. Dr Jing Hao is currently a postdoctoral researcher at the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, following her previous postdoctoral position at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and her doctorate in linguistics at the University of Sydney. Her research explores knowledgebuilding through English and Mandarin Chinese and their interaction with other semiotic modes.

Routledge Studies in Linguistics

Heart- and Soul-Like Constructs across Languages, Cultures, and Epochs Edited by Bert Peeters Systemic Functional Political Discourse Analysis A Text-based Study Eden Sum-hung Li, Percy Luen-tim Lui and Andy Ka-chun Fung Systemic Functional Language Description Making Meaning Matter Edited by J.R. Martin and Y.J. Doran Rarely Used Structures and Lesser-Studied Languages Insights from the Margins Emily Manetta Externalization Phonological Interpretations of Syntactic Objects Yoshihito Dobashi Approaches to the Study of Sound Structure and Speech Interdisciplinary Work in Honour of Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk Agnieszka Kiełkiewicz-Janowiak, Magdalena Wrembel and Piotr Gąsiorowski Casting a Minimalist Eye on Adjuncts Stefanie Bode Analysing Scientific Discourse From a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective A Framework for Exploring Knowledge-building in Biology Jing Hao For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/ Routledge-Studies-in-Linguistics/book-series/SE0719

Analysing Scientific Discourse From a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective A Framework for Exploring Knowledge-building in Biology Jing Hao

First published 2020 by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2020 Taylor & Francis The right of Jing Hao to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-0-8153-7499-2 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-351-24105-2 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by Apex CoVantage, LLC

To my father, 王恩东, and my mother, 郝亚虹.

Contents

List of Figures List of Tables Acknowledgements

ix xi xiii

SECTION I

Motivation and Background

1

  1 A Linguistic Perspective on Knowledge-Building

3

  2 A Multistratal Perspective on Knowledge-Building

23

SECTION II

Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

53

 3 Entity

55

 4 Dimensionality

80

 5 Figure

91

  6 Grammatical Metaphor

114

  7 Sequence, Activity and Field

145

SECTION III

Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

163

  8 A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy

165

  9 A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities

194

viii Contents SECTION IV

Conclusion

225

10 Describing Language, Describing Knowledge

227

Bibliography Appendix A Data Texts and Their Subject Areas Appendix B Sample Texts and Genre Analysis Appendix C List of Symbols and Abbreviations Appendix D Annotations Index

241 253 255 265 267 268

Figures

1.1 Stratification of language and context (adapted from Martin, 1992) 9 1.2 Metafunctional relations between language and context 11 1.3 Three kinds of meanings associated with three modes of expressions 12 1.4 Orbital and serial structures (adapted from Martin, 1996, p. 51) 13 1.5 A basic system network of mood (adapted from Caffarel et al., 2004, p. 25) 14 1.6 A simplified network system of clause (adapted from Martin, 1992, p. 9) 15 1.7 An example of rank scale in lexicogrammar 17 1.8 An example of embedded clause 18 1.9 Simultaneous dimensions of stratification, metafunction and rank (adapted from Martin, 1991, p. 115) 18 1.10 Realisation and instantiation (adapted from Martin, 1991, 2010) 20 2.1 Basic parameters of field (adapted from Doran & Martin, 2020) 29 2.2 A simplified connexion system (adapted from Martin, 1992)34 3.1 Entity types in experimental reports in biology (1) 64 3.2 Entity types in experimental reports in biology (2) 73 3.3 Entity types in experimental reports in biology (3) 77 4.1 Expanded network system of entities 90 5.1 Voice system (c.f. Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Martin, 2013a) 93 5.2 Types of occurrence figures and state figures 94 5.3 Expanded system of figure types 102 6.1 Mappings of sequence, positioned figures and state figures onto the lexicogrammar 142 6.2 Mappings of sequence, instigated figures and state figures onto the lexicogrammar 142

x Figures 7.1 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5

Field types and activity types Classification of sea urchin in Text 3 Classification of chytrid in Text 3 Classification of locust in Text 4 Composition of locust in Text 4 Classification of fungus in Text 4 Measured dimensions of fungal spore in Text 4 Activity of reasoning launches the field of depiction Activity of reasoning connects depiction and exploration Activity of reasoning launches depiction Activity of reasoning connects exploration to depiction Activity of reasoning connects phenomena within the field of depiction 9.6 Making hypothesis through reasoning 9.7 Confirming hypothesis through reasoning 9.8 Proposing new findings through reasoning

159 176 178 185 186 186 187 197 201 202 210 210 216 218 218

Tables

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 3.1 3.2 4.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15

Genres in science (c.f. Martin & Rose, 2008; Veel, 1997)26 Kinds of entities (adapted from Martin & Rose, 2007, p. 114) 31 Various ‘realisation’ relationships in SFL framework 37 Representation of grammatical metaphor as variation in expressions (adapted from Halliday, 1994, p. 347) 41 Representation of grammatical metaphor as semantic junction (adapted from Halliday & Matthiessen, 1999, p. 253) 43 Stages and instantiated elemental genres in laboratory report and research report 50 Texts selected for illustrating discourse analysis 51 Definitions of entities in spoken and written mode 72 Choices of entity types in undergraduate biology texts 78 Grammatical realisations of dimensions at the group rank82 Orbital structure of a self-engendered figure 95 Orbital structure of an engendered figure (1) 96 Orbital structure of an engendered figure (2) 96 Orbital structure of a domained occurrence figure 96 Orbital structure of a perpetrated occurrence figure 97 Orbital structure of an instrumented occurrence figure 98 Orbital structure of a presented figure 99 Typical realisations of co-elaborative state figures 100 Orbital structure of co-elaborated figures 100 Orbital structure of an extended state figure 101 Orbital structure of an instigated occurrence figure 103 Orbital structure of an instigated state figure 104 Orbital thing) shredding

figure they departed for the airport [process + participant + circumstance] (process => thing) departure

quality (thing => expansion of thing: possessive) their

(thing => expansion of thing: possessive) their

quality (thing => expansion of thing: qualifying) of the documents

(circumstance => expansion of thing: qualifying) for the airport (relator => process) precede

What seems to be going on in this table is that two grammatical analyses are undertaken—one for the congruent realisation, shown horizontally as ‘figure [Participant^Process^Participant]^relator^figure[Process^Particip ant^Process]’, and one for the metaphorical realisation, shown vertically as ‘Participant^Process^Circumstance’. It is the conflating functions of the metaphorical and the congruent realisations that reveal the ‘semantic junctions’. Semantic junctions, in other words, are shown as a doubling of grammatical categories. In contrast to treating grammatical metaphors either as variations of grammatical expression or as junctions of semantic elements (/grammatical functions), a further conceptualisation of grammatical metaphor treats grammatical metaphor as a tension between the strata of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar (Halliday, 1998; Martin, 1992, 2008; Taverniers, 2018). In other words, the grammatical metaphor does not in itself refers to a unit of meaning on one stratum or the other, but it is a relationship between the pair of strata. Halliday (1998) articulates grammatical metaphors along these lines. He explains that it is ‘a realignment between a pair of strata: a remapping of the semantics onto the lexicogrammar’ (p. 192). Martin (2008) suggests that this ‘realignment’ and ‘remapping’ of the interstratal relationship is a principle through which language’s meaning potential is indefinitely extended. Taverniers (2014, 2018) provides a more recent articulation of stratal tension from a syntagmatic perspective.

44  Motivation and Background She defines grammatical metaphor as a ‘doubling of semiosis’. Drawing on the different metafunctional modes of expression (c.f. ‘wave, field and particle’ in Halliday, 1979), Taverniers conceptualises ideational grammatical metaphors as ‘a bundle of building blocks, realising a configurational meaning’. In a metaphorical realisation (e.g. the restructuring of the economy was followed by a major crisis), a figure that could have been mapped congruently to a clause constituted by Participant^Process (e.g. ‘the economy was restructured’) is instead mapped metaphorically onto a Participant (i.e. the restructuring of the economy) in another clause. Two figures are thus ‘bundled’ together in the metaphorical realisation. The stratal tension model is the most plausible for revealing the stratification of the content plane of language. Meanings at both levels of (discourse) semantics and lexicogrammar can be considered. However, representations of stratal tension in early works (e.g. Martin, 2008) typically ‘borrow’ labels of grammatical functions (e.g. participant, process) to name semantic units, leaving grammatical units named only through class labels (e.g. nominal group, verbal group). Such representation is largely a result of the undistinguished description of the abstract stratum from that of lexicogrammar. This study builds on the stratal tension model of grammatical metaphor. Making visible the mapping between discourse semantics and lexicogrammar is critical for understanding the use of language for construing scientific knowledge. An important objective of this study is to develop a description of ideational discourse semantics that allows stratal tension to be modelled clearly and productively. 2.5.2  Grammatical Indicators of Ideational Metaphors Incongruent ways of mapping discourse semantics and lexicogrammar lead to various grammatical effects, including transcategorisation, derivation and rankshift. These grammatical features are useful indicators for identifying grammatical metaphors; at the same time, however, they are also often confused with grammatical metaphors. Here I need to introduce, as foundational knowledge, how these grammatical features are associated with grammatical metaphors. 2.5.2.1 Transcategorisation, Derivation and Grammatical Metaphor The remapping of a discourse semantic meaning onto lexicogrammar is typically reflected at the grammatical level as a shift from one grammatical function in a congruent realisation to another in a metaphorical realisation. For example, in (2.1) and (2.2), the meanings mapped

A Multistratal Perspective  45 congruently onto two clauses in (2.1)—i.e. Jing painted Hannah a picture; and Hannah was delighted—are remapped metaphorically onto two Participants at the group rank (Jing’s painting of a picture; and Hannah’s delight) in (2.2). (2.1) Jing painted Hannah a picture, so Hannah was delighted. (congruent) (2.2) Jing’s painting of a picture caused Hannah’s delight. (metaphorical) Given that different grammatical functions are usually (though not always) associated with different classes (e.g. Process in form of a verbal group, Participant in form of a nominal group), the shift of grammatical functions is typically marked by a shift from one word class to another (such as the shift from the adjective delighted to the noun delight or from the verb paint to the noun painting). This process of shifting word classes is transcategorisation. In Indo-European languages such as English, transcategorisation often involves a morphological change, known as derivation. In the above examples, the transcategorisation from paint to painting involves derivation. However, this is not always the case. Consider, for example, transcategorising a verb dance (e.g. he wants to dance with her) into a noun dance (e.g. the dance with her made him happy)—no derivation is involved. Importantly, although transcategorisation is a crucial grammatical indicator (Martin, 2008, p. 829), not all transcategorisation reflects stratal tension. For example, although runner as a noun is transcategorised from the verb run, in the utterance the runner runs every day, runner deploys a congruent usage, mapping an entity of people to a noun. In previous studies, grammatical metaphors realised through nominal groups have received significant attention, under the heading ‘nominalisation’. It needs to be stressed that nominalisation by definition is a type of transcategorisation; it is a class-shift towards the noun (e.g. verb to noun, adjective to noun, conjunction to noun). Also, just as not all transcategorisation involves stratal tension, not all nominalisations indicate grammatical metaphors (see Hao & Humphrey, 2019). Chapters 3 and 4 will illustrate various discourse semantic meanings that can be realised congruently as nominalisations. Chapter 6 will demonstrate grammatical metaphors involving nominalisations. 2.5.2.2  Rankshift and Ideational Metaphor Apart from shifting word class, the second indication of remapping of discourse semantic meaning to lexicogrammar is shifting rank, specifically

46  Motivation and Background when there is a shift of meaning at clause rank to the rank of the nominal group. Compare the pair of examples below: (2.3) Hannah was delighted because Jing painted her a picture. (congruent) (2.4) Hannah’s delight was caused by [[Jing painting her a picture]]. (metaphorical) In this pair, both Jing painted her a picture in (2.3) and [[Jing painting her a picture]] in (2.4) construe a discourse semantic figure realised by a clause. However, the clause in (2.3) is shifted to the nominal group rank functioning as a Participant as part of a relational clause. This remapping from clause rank to nominal group rank co-occurs with the remapping of discourse semantic meanings of another figure (‘Hannah was delighted’) onto a Participant (i.e. Hannah’s delight) and their logical relationship (‘because’) onto the Process (was caused). Such remapping, therefore, also represents a stratal tension and can be treated as a grammatical metaphor. However, not all embedding indicates grammatical metaphor. In the following example where a clause is embedded in the Qualifier of a nominal group: He doesn’t agree with the fact [[that the earth has been getting warmer]], the embedded clause functions to elaborate the semiotic entity fact. No grammatical metaphor is involved in this example. Typically, where rankshift reveals stratal tension, it does so as part of a syndrome of remapping meanings. 2.5.3 Functions of Ideational Metaphor in Scientific Discourse Ideational metaphors play a critical role in scientific discourse. As Martin (2013b) suggests, ‘It would be impossible to produce scientific knowledge without grammatical metaphor. And it is thus impossible to learn science without being able to process the stratal tension when reading and hearing, and impossible to be successful in assessment processes without being able to write it’. (p. 28) Two specific functions of grammatical metaphors have been revealed: 1) it contributes to developing technicality and 2) it manages logical reasoning (e.g. Halliday, 1988/2004; 1998; Martin, 2007; Wignell et al., 1993). Technicality is defined as ‘terms or expressions with a specialised fieldspecific meaning’ (Wignell et al., 1993, p. 161). Technical terms are mostly realised through nominal groups. Wignell et al. (1993) provide a summary of various nominal group configurations realising technicality, including

A Multistratal Perspective  47 a single nominal (e.g. mesas, buttes), a Classifier^Thing compound (e.g. physical environment) and also nominalisations (e.g. condensation, transpiration). Studies typically treat technical terms in the form of nominalisation as being originated from grammatical metaphor. The process of turning a grammatical metaphor into a technicality is known as ‘distillation’ (Martin, 1993b, p. 191). A critical step in the process of distillation is to define the technical term used in the specific field. A definition is realised typically through a Token/Value relational identifying clause. The technical term is always realised through the Participant Token. Nominalisation, such as diffusion, is defined as the following (example adapted from Martin, 1993b, p. 201): Diffusion [Token] is [Process: intensive identifying] the process whereby a substance in high concentration moves to a place of low concentration [Value]. Once a nominalisation such as diffusion is defined in this way, it is no longer necessary to be unpacked in the discourse. The initial grammatical metaphor becomes ‘dead’ (Halliday, 1998, p. 222). As a technical term, diffusion can enter into a range of taxonomic relations in the given field, such as in relation to simple diffusion, osmosis and facilitated diffusion. The second function of the ideational metaphor in scientific discourse is to develop logical reasoning. As Halliday (1998) points out, ‘technicality by itself would be of little value unless accompanied by a discourse of reasoning’ (p. 201). The discourse of reasoning is often realised metaphorically in scientific texts to ‘carry forward the momentum of the argument’ (p. 202). Halliday found that in scientific texts, logical relations can be distinguished into external and internal relations, respectively for explaining and interpreting scientific phenomena. Both kinds of relations can be realised metaphorically in various ways (Halliday, 1988/2004, p. 155). Instead of being realised congruently through a conjunction (e.g. a happens, so b happens; a happens, so we know b happens), external and internal relations can be mapped metaphorically onto a Process realised through a verbal group complex (e.g. a happens causes b to happen; a happened proves b to happen), or a verbal group (e.g. happening a causes happening b; happening a proves happening b), or be mapped onto a Participant realised through a nominal group (e.g. happening a is the cause of happening b; happening a is the proof of happening b). A significant feature in the metaphorical mapping of logical relations is that it necessarily creates a syndrome of grammatical metaphor, involving realising at least one of figures metaphorically. In contrast to technicality associated with ‘dead’ grammatical metaphors, logical reasonings involving grammatical metaphors are typically ‘live’. Halliday (1998) suggests that ‘live’ metaphors are ‘instantial’

48  Motivation and Background phenomena, whereas ‘dead’ metaphors are ‘systemic’. He emphasises that these two types of metaphor are in fact, not as oppositional as they might appear. As he explains, (if we view discourse) in the longer term, we can observe the instantial becoming the systemic. Technical terms are not, as a rule, created outright, in isolation from the discourse; they emerge discursively, as the ‘macro-text’ of the discipline unfolds. In this respect, they are just one manifestation of the general phenomenon whereby instantial effects flow through into the system—because there is no disjunction between system and instance: what we call the ‘system’ of language is simply the potential that evolves over time. (Halliday, 1998, p. 221) This understanding brings us to the fluid boundary between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ metaphors. In studies of disciplinary discourse, making a clear distinction between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ metaphors beyond the surface of ‘nominalisation’ is a challenging task (Hao, 2020a; Hao & Humphrey, 2019). Consider the pair of examples below involving the nominalisation ingestion. (2.5) The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes could have resulted from the ingestion of algae. (2.6) The viability of fungal spores after ingestion and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of an insect may be determined by the effect of the physical and chemical processes involved. In both examples, the nominalisation ingestion refers to a biological process during which something being ingested into an organism. Linguistically speaking, however, there is a lack of criteria for recognising whether these nominalisations are ‘live’ or ‘dead’ metaphors. The indeterminacy is a result of the fact that both ‘live’ and ‘dead’ metaphors involve making complex choices across several levels of meaning-making—i.e. across field, discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. To untangle the differences between the ‘live’ and ‘dead’ metaphors relies on explicitly distinguished descriptions across these strata and clarification of the interstratal relations among them. This study contributes to this endeavour by offering an ideational discourse semantic description.

2.6 Towards an Ideational Discourse Semantic Description Underpinned by SFL theory, knowledge-building from a linguistic perspective in this study is to explore how the contextual variable field is construed through patterns of (discourse) semantics, which is in turn

A Multistratal Perspective  49 construed through patterns of lexicogrammar. However, as has been reviewed critically in Section 2.4, neither the ideational discourse semantics established in Martin (1992) (later in Martin & Rose, 2007) nor the ideation base presented in Halliday and Matthiessen (1999), is sufficient to model the stratum between lexicogrammar and context. This study, therefore, needs to first describe meaning choices at this stratum and clarify its interstratal relationships to both context and lexicogrammar. With a better description, we can then analyse texts to reveal knowledge development in undergraduate biology. In order to provide an ideational discourse semantic description that is useful for revealing the construal of knowledge, it is essential to carefully select data for the descriptive purposes. Two important factors need to be taken into account. First, to provide a discourse semantic description that is appliable to examining texts in context, we need to move between the instances of discourse semantic resources revealed in texts and the systemic potential of resources that are available for the construal (i.e. between the instance pole and system pole on the cline of instantiation). It is therefore important to select texts in undergraduate biology which are representative for revealing the systemic potential. Second, describing an ideational discourse semantic system involves dealing with complex interactions of systems across strata, metafunctions and ranks. To offer a comprehensive trinocular consideration limits the amount of data that can be realistically explored in a study. It is necessary to select the amount of data that can balance the productivity and labour in the qualitative and systemic exploration. Based on these two factors, this study selects a set of texts for building the discourse semantic systems, including both student texts and pedagogic texts at the undergraduate level. The student texts consist of twenty-six laboratory reports and six research reports that were collected from three students at the School of Biology, at the University of Sydney (see Appendix A). The average word count of a laboratory report is 1,327, and that of a research report is 2,600. These texts were provided for assessments at different undergraduate year levels. The selected texts were all graded by the subject instructors as above ‘Distinction’ (above 75%). The high-achieving texts can demonstrate highly valued language choices, which can provide useful resources for developing academic literacy support. Laboratory reports and research reports are representative texts in this discipline. First, they demonstrate the literacy demands across the undergraduate years. Second, they both involve instantiation of a range of elemental genres, including reports, explanations, procedural recounts and expositions (Martin & Rose, 2008, p. 141). The instances of elemental genres are organised multivariately in the texts—that is to say, they function as different stages orienting to the social processes of either reporting

50  Motivation and Background laboratory experiment or reporting research as a whole. These canonical stages include (Abstract^)Introduction^Method(s)^Results^Discussion (^Conclusion) (c.f. Martin & Rose, 2008). As has been introduced in Section 2.2, such configuration is a genre simplex with embedded genres. The stages of the laboratory report and research report and the typical embedded elemental genres are shown in Table 2.6 below. The wide range of elemental genres in laboratory report and research report allows us to explore the patterns of language that achieve these social purposes. For samples of the genre analysis, see Appendix B. Apart from student texts, pedagogic texts are also considered, including laboratory manuals and instructions recorded by the students in their laboratory notes, and a textbook recommended by the lecturers, Campbell Biology (e.g. the 7th edition, Campbell & Reece, 2005). References to laboratory manuals and textbooks are important for understanding the systemic potential of language choices. They reveal language resources that students first encounter in their literacy development. The definitions and taxonomic relations of technical terms demonstrated in pedagogic texts offer linguistic evidence for technical terms instantiated in the student texts. After establishing the discourse semantic systems (Chapters 3–7), Chapters 8 and 9 apply the discourse semantic descriptions to analysing knowledge development demonstrated by texts produced by one individual student. In order to reveal the dynamic semiotic change across the undergraduate years, the analyses select four texts produced at different stages of the undergraduate study, offering four snapshots of the semiotic change. Table 2.7 shows the properties of these four texts. The theoretical foundations outlined in Chapter 1 and 2 have now prepared us to take the descriptive departure to explore discourse semantic resources in the data texts. In Section II, we will examine the elemental, configurational and sequential discourse semantic resources. We will take a multistratal approach, considering their roles in the discourse, their realisations through lexicogrammar and their construal of the static and dynamic aspects of the field.

Table 2.6 Stages and instantiated elemental genres in laboratory report and research report Laboratory report Stages • Introduction • Method • Results • Discussion • Conclusion

Research report

Elemental genres

Stages

explanation; description; recount recount  recount; description  explanation(s); exposition(s)  Reiteration (stage)

• Abstract • Introduction • Methods • Results • Discussion

 

Elemental genres explanation; description descriptive report(s); description  recount  descriptive reports  explanation(s); exposition(s)  

A Multistratal Perspective  51 Table 2.7  Texts selected for illustrating discourse analysis text

level

subject

word count

laboratory report

semester 1, 1st year

Concepts in Biology

842

laboratory report

semester 1, 2nd year

Molecular Biology

778

Vertebrates and Their Origins

1,976

research report semester 2, 2nd year

research report semester 2, 3rd year Fungi in the Environment

2,826

Notes 1. Complementing epistemological meaning, the other two metafunctions can be considered regarding disciplinary knowledge, in particular the values negotiated in a community (Martin et al., 2010; Martin, 2017; Hao & Hood, 2019). This point will be elaborated in Chapter 10. 2. It is important to note again here the role of multimodal resources in configuring genres (Bateman, 2008). In scientific texts, semiotic modes such as images, graphs, tables and symbols of mathematics often interact with verbal language to compose a genre (Doran, 2017; Guo, 2004; Martin & Rose, 2008; Martin, Unsworth, & Rose, in press; van Leeuwen & Humphrey, 1996). 3. Note that in Martin and Rose’s categorisation of entities, an additional category ‘indefinite pronouns’ is also included (e.g. some/any/nothing/one). These instances function textually in tracking ideational resources in the text. They are set aside in the review of ideational categories.

Section II

Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics This section describes ideational discourse semantics. A range of resources is described, including entities for naming taxonomies of people, places, things and activities in Chapter 3; dimensions of entities for naming the relationship between entities in Chapter 4; figures for configuring entities and other elements, and connecting figures into sequences in Chapter 5. The descriptions enable us to explore their mapping to resources at the strata below and above. Chapter 6 examines the stratal tension (i.e. grammatical metaphor) in the metaphorical mapping between sequences (and figures involved) and lexicogrammar. Finally, Chapter 7 takes a step towards recognising a more abstract level of meaning-making, identifying patterns of sequence construing types of activities in the register variable field.

3

Entity

3.1 Introduction In this chapter, we start to explore the language for construing scientific knowledge by looking at the resources construing taxonomies. It examines specifically how things, people, places and activities in biology are named through a discourse semantic resource known as entities. We begin with a glimpse of two short excerpts, one from the introduction to a firstyear laboratory report and the other from the introduction to a third-year research report. We can see that the entities used in the texts are rather different. In these and the following examples in this chapter, entities are annotated with underlines. (3.1) Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined. (. . .) In this experiment, a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a Bio-Rad P200 pipette were calibrated by using three methods— weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity. (. . .) (3.2) A complex interaction exists between insects and the health and diversity of fungal communities. These interactions may be beneficial to both insects and fungi, for example, symbiotic relationships between termites and cellulase-producing gut fungi (Slater, 1992). (. . .) We propose a model (. . .) This model was tested, using dung fungal spores and examining their passage through the gut of the Australian plague locust, Chortichocetes terminifera. (. . .) Text 1 contains a number of entities referring to utilitarian tools, such as pipette and Finnpipette, as well as methods, such as weight-of-water and spectrophotometry. If we follow the entity categorisation in Martin and Rose (2007), a nominalisation experiment and a ‘generic’ term volume may be taken as instances of ‘abstraction’. We can get a sense from Text 1 that the reported experiment employs more than one method and involves certain tangible tools for measurement. In Text 4, there are few entities of experimental tools, but many biological phenomena are mentioned, such as insects and fungi. Certain biological phenomena have scientific names,

56  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics such as Chortichocetes terminifera. We also find some nominalisations, which are likely to be technical terms, such as symbiotic relationships. Based on the brief glimpse, it is not difficult to suggest that Text 1 is more ‘concrete’, with some ‘abstractions’, and Text 4 is more ‘technical’ or involving more ‘theoretical/technical abstraction’ (Halliday, 1998). However, the questions concerning us are: what do we mean by ‘concrete’, ‘technical’ and ‘abstract’? What are the language features of entities in Text 1 or Text 2 that make them ‘concrete’, ‘technical’ or ‘abstract’? With respect to their grammatical realisation, should entities be identified by syntagm—i.e. their realisation as nominal groups or by functional structure—e.g. Thing within nominal groups? As far as field is concerned, are we able to conclude that Text 4 construes a ‘technical field’ just because the entities are mostly ‘technical’? It is these questions that motivate the exploration of discourse semantic entities in this chapter. In order to answer these questions, it is necessary to establish a discourse semantic system that is clearly stratified with respect to the grammar of nominal groups and that can take on its share of descriptive responsibility for construing taxonomies in field. In order to do so, we will explore entities from the tri-stratal perspective introduced in Chapter 3, which considers strata across field, discourse semantics and lexicogrammar.

3.2  Motivation From ‘Above’: A Field Perspective Chapter 2 has introduced that a field can be described from a static perspective by considering taxonomic relations among items, including classification and composition (Doran & Martin, 2020). Classification views relations between items in terms of types and sub-types. Composition relates items as parts and whole. A field distinguishes itself from other fields by its unique ways of building taxonomies. In Martin’s (1992) field distinction, different kinds of taxonomy include ‘natural’ objects in domestic fields, utilitarian tools in specialized fields, subjects or participants in administrative fields and technical things in exploration fields concerned with academic knowledge including science. Complementing these categories is Hood’s (2010) distinction of the field of the object of study and the field of research in the disciplinary field. Drawing on both perspectives, disciplinary knowledge construed in undergraduate biology can involve multiple fields at stake. As described by Janovy (2004), apprenticeship into biology involves a wide range of activities such as conducting laboratory experiments by following laboratory manuals, employing tools and apparatus, recording data, interpreting data and reporting findings. Latour and Woolgar’s (1979) influential ethnographic study of laboratory life reveals the complexity of producing scientific knowledge through everyday activities of scientific work.

Entity  57 Drawing on these concerns of field from ‘above’, I explore kinds of discourse semantic entities used to both create and make visible the diversity of taxonomies involved in undergraduate biology texts. In the next step, we consider from ‘below’ in terms of grammatical resources that can be used to realise discourse semantic entities.

3.3 Motivation From ‘Below’: A Grammatical Perspective Because of the natural relation between lexicogrammar and discourse semantics, of most direct relevance to ideational discourse semantic entities are experiential lexicogrammatical systems. Nominal group grammar at the group rank is a productive place to begin, owing to the congruent mapping of entities onto nominal groups. Entities are nominal elements entering into lexical cohesion in the discourse (Martin, 1992). By entering into lexical cohesion, an entity can be related to other entities between ‘stretches of discourse of indefinite extent’ (Martin, 2018). The discourse relationship between entities can be of various kinds, including repetition, synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy and meronymy (Martin & Rose, 2007). This book refers to all these discourse relations as ‘co-elaborations’. That is to say, each entity in the co-elaboration restates the meaning of the other. Grammatical structures including (Classifiern)^Thing (regular sea urchin), Focus^Thing (a kind of sea urchin) and possessive Deictic^Thing (the rainforest’s canopy) can all be used to realise an entity. Moving on to the clause rank, we can explore how entities may be realised through different Participants and Circumstances. This exploration needs to assume readers’ SFL knowledge of transitivity (e.g. Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014). We start from a distinctive feature among process types, that of conscious participants. Behavioural and mental processes distinguish themselves from the others in that they involve at least one conscious participant—Behaver or Senser. In scientific texts these conscious entities, e.g. biologists, are often implied in the use of receptive clauses, rather than explicitly realised: (3.3) No motile zoospore-like structures were observed [Process] (by me/ us [Senser]). (3.4) Both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms were seen [Process] (by me/us [Senser]). (3.5) Members of the Neocallimastigomycota are well known [Process] for inhabiting the rumen of ruminant grazers (by us/biologists [Senser]). The Phenomenon in mental processes of this kind typically realises a non-conscious thing, such as zoospore-like structure, prokaryotic and

58  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics eukaryotic organisms and members of the Neocallimastigomycota above. We will come back to the discussion of things of this kind later. At this point, we can take a step forward considering the conscious entity. Turning to verbal processes, we can see that this clause type can also involve a conscious participant and it is typically realised explicitly. (3.6) We [Sayer] propose [Process] a model whereby smaller fungal spores are more likely to retain integrity and viability. (3.7) We [Sayer] propose [Process] that size also becomes a determining factor in fracture initiation where fungal spores are concerned. In addition to conscious Sayers, ‘non-conscious’ Sayers are also possible: (3.8) Thorsen (1999) [Sayer] reported [Process] the presence of Chytridiomycota in the digestive system of the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum. (3.9) Radioactivity method [Sayer] suggested [Process] that the accuracy of the pipette was quite high throughout its range. (3.10) The results [Sayer] suggest [Process] that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage . . . Amongst these ‘non-conscious’ Sayers, we can refer to academic references such as Thorsen (1999) as publication entities. In addition to realisation as Sayers (i.e. ‘integral’ citation (Swales, 1990)), publications can be realised by Circumstances of Angle (e.g. according to Thorsen (1999)), although these are very rare in the scientific texts collected in this study. Much more commonly, they appear as ‘non-integral’ sourcing, realised not as part of grammatical structure, but rather appended at the end of the clauses: (3.11) The presence of microbial activity in both regular and irregular sea urchins has been demonstrated [Process] . . . (da Silver et al. (2006), Sawabe et al. (1995), Temara, De Ridder, and Kaisin (1991), Thorsen (1999)). Even though publications might be considered as topologically close to entities such as method and result, given their realisations by Sayers in verbal processes, method and result perform differently from publications in other process types. For example, method and result can be realised as Goal in material processes, along with the implication of conscious people realised by Actors, as in (3.12) and (3.13). (3.12) (. . .) (we [Actor]) using [Process] three methods—weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity [Goal]

Entity  59 (3.13) (. . .) results [Goal] that were easily and efficiently obtained [Process] (by us [Actor]). By contrast, publication is not the entity that is enacted upon, but rather the one that initiates the enactment. This difference is shown in a pair of examples below. Publications thus share the participant role of Actor with people entities such as we in (3.12). (3.14) Thorsen (1999) [Actor] used [Process] three methods [Goal] . . . (3.15) *Thorsen (1999) [Goal] is obtained/used/done [Process] Given their similar realisations through Actors in material processes and Sayers in verbal processes, we can group publications and people under the general category of source.1 Entities such as method and results further distinguish themselves from source entities by their realisations in relational processes, in which metaphorical realisation of a figure is involved, such as in (3.16) and (3.17) (the figures are in boldface). These figures can be mapped congruently to a clause: the pipette is highly accurate and precise throughout its range, and the viability was lost. (3.16) The weight-of-water method [Token] suggested high levels of accuracy and precision throughout the pipette’s range [Value]. (3.17) Other results [Token] corroborate the loss of viability [Value]. The similar grammatical performance of method and result, i.e. as Sayers in verbal processes and as Tokens in relational processes, suggests that they are topologically close. However, their typological differences are also salient. As shown in the pair of examples that follow, what is realised through Sayer^Process^(projected) Verbiage in (3.18) can be realised alternatively through a relational identifying process, as Token^Process^Value in (3.19), in which result symbolises the proposition. (3.18) The results [Sayer] suggest [Process] || that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage. (3.19) The results [Token] are [[that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage]] [Value]. These interchangeable realisations, however, are not possible for the Sayer realising method. (3.20) Radioactivity method [Sayer] suggested [Process] that the accuracy of the pipette was quite high throughout its range. (3.21) *Radioactivity method [Token] is [[that the accuracy of the pipette was quite high throughout its range]] [Value].

60  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics While method cannot symbolise a proposition, it can symbolise an act (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 252) which is usually realised by a material process. (3.22) Radioactivity method [Token] is [[to use spectrophotometer to test the calibration of pipette]] [Value] Following Halliday and Matthiessen, we can distinguish here between acts (macrophenomena) and facts (metaphenomena): entities such as method name acts, while entities such as results name facts. Names of metaphenomena can be treated as semiotic entities, and names of macrophenomena can be treated as activity entities. Alongside semiotic entities realised as names of facts we also need to make room for entities of the other metaphenomena: locutions and ideas. These are exemplified in (3.23) and (3.24), first for ideas and then for locutions. (3.23) This confirmed the previous knowledge [[that lactose induces B-galactosidase activity]]. (3.24) The suggestions [[that these organisms could be chytrid zoospores]] were further reinforced by the study. Halliday and Matthiessen (2014, p. 536) provide a summary of the nouns referring to propositions of facts, locutions and ideas, which are typical realisations of semiotic entities concerned here. In their categorisation, delicate types of fact are suggested, including cases, chances, proofs and needs. The proof type, specifically, is suggested as a realisation of causality. In the data of this study, causality includes a ‘proof’ type and a ‘result’ type, as exemplified respectively in (3.25) and (3.26). (3.25) The results of this investigation contribute to a growing body of literature documenting the role of insects in transporting fungal spores. (3.26) The literature provides evidence that the compound is fungicidal. This distinction has also been identified by Davidse (1991, p. 352). She distinguishes fact nouns that indicate ‘external causation’ from those referring to ‘internal causation’, drawing on Halliday (1988/2004)’s distinction between external and internal causal conjunctions (e.g. so that; therefore). The semiotic entities of facts, locutions or ideas realised through nominalisations (e.g. suggestion, hypothesis, knowledge, evidence) can, therefore, ‘look like’ other discourse semantic meanings, which are either realised congruently through conjunctions, mental and verbal processes or realised metaphorically through similar nominalisations. This ambiguity

Entity  61 brings a challenge for distinguishing semiotic entities from those other discourse semantic choices. We will reconsider this issue later where the interactions of semiotic entities with the discourse semantic systems of connexion and periodicity are discussed. We return at this point to the activity entity type introduced above, taking into account entities such as method, experiment, study and project. These entities refer to the activities of doing biology. These names of acts are typically configured in material processes with entities representing people who use the method, do the experiment or conduct the study. Within these, a further distinction can be made, according to their different realisations in Circumstances: entities such as experiment and study tend to be realised in Location such as in the experiment in (3.27), whereas entities such as method tend to be realised in Manner, such as through (. . .) culturing methods in (3.28). These sub-types of activity entity can be distinguished as manner versus investigation. (3.27) In this experiment [Circumstance: Location] a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a Bio-Rad P200 pipette were calibrated. (3.28) It also aimed to provide some evidence for the presence of chytrids within sea urchins, through microscopic observation and culturing methods [Circumstance: Manner]. At this point, we can take a further step in classifying the non-conscious thing entities introduced above based on their realisation through Phenomena in mental processes, such as zoospore-like structures in (3.29) and prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms in (3.30). (3.29) No motile zoospore-like structures [Phenomenon] were observed [Process] (by me/us [Senser]). (3.30) Both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms [Phenomenon] were seen [Process] (by me/us [Senser]). In addition to Phenomenon, thing entities are also realised as Goals in material processes such as in (3.31) and (3.32), with people entities realised as Actors (typically implicitly in receptive clauses). (3.31) In this experiment, a Finnpipette and a Bio-Rad P200 pipette [Goal] were calibrated [Process] (by us [Actor]). (3.32) E. coli bacteria [Goal] were cultured [Process] in a glycerol medium (by us [Actor]). The thing entities realised through Goals in material processes differ from those realised through Phenomena in mental processes. The former refers to tools and apparatus assisting in the observation of scientific

62  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics phenomena and can be located either in the field of object of study or the field of research (Hood, 2010); the latter refers to biological phenomena observed during laboratory experiments, which are associated only with the field of the object of study. Based on their different participant roles and field orientations, we can make a distinction between instrumental things and observational things. Apart from being realised through Goals, instrumental things can also be realised in Circumstances, either as Location in (3.33) or Manner in (3.34): (3.33) Set amount of water was pipetted (by us) into a container [Circumstance: Location]. (3.34) The reaction was stopped (by us) with sodium carbonate (6.9mM) [Circumstance: Manner]. We now return to the activity entity that was introduced above. We have identified activity entities naming activities carried out by biologists. This type of activity entity needs to be further distinguished from the activity entities naming a series of goings-on observed by biologists. The distinction between the two is that the ‘agents’ of enacted activities (manner and investigation) are people entities, whereas the ‘agents’ of observational activities are observational things. The instigation of activities by observational things can be found either as the Thing in a Thing^Qualifier structure or as a Classifier^Thing structure, as exemplified in (3.35) and (3.36), respectively. Note that the Thing^Qualifier structure in (3.35) construes two entities (since Qualifier enhances the Thing instead of elaborating it), both the observational activity maceration and observational thing insect mouthpieces, whereas in the Classifier^Thing structure, the observational thing fungal spore is subsumed in the activity entity by the Classifier. (3.35) . . . smaller spores more easily avoid maceration by insect mouthpieces . . . (3.36) A number of invertebrate hosts have been shown to aid fungal spore dispersal . . . These examples demonstrate that the realisations of observational activity entities rely heavily on nominalisations (maceration, colonization, dispersal, germination). However, they differ from the nominalisations representing grammatical metaphors in that there is no stratal tension between activity entities and the nominal group realisations (Hao, 2018, 2020a). As entities, they map congruently to a nominal group. Their status of being an entity is typically established through a definition. A canonical definition is realised through a Token^Value relational identifying clause (among other ways shown in Section 3.4.3). For example, dispersal is

Entity  63 defined in the biology textbook, as in the following (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 1084). (3.37) The movement of individuals away from the centre of high population density or from their area of origin [Value] is called [Process] dispersal [Token]. In the definition, the activity realised in the Value is named as dispersal. A pay-off of naming goings-on through activity entities is that they provide an essential resource for talking about field activities statically. In Doran and Martin’s (2020) term, the activities are ‘itemised’ and now have the potential to be taxonomised. For example, once the activity entity dispersal is created, it can be related to other activity entities in the discourse such as spore dispersal and autochory seed dispersal. Grammatically, a typical way of realising taxonomic relations is to add different Classifiers. To this point, four primary entity types in the data texts have been identified: source, thing, activity and semiotic. More fine-grained choices within each of these types have also been outlined. In addition to these, there are two other types, place and time, that were found based on their realisations in Circumstances, either through Locations such as in (3.38) or Times such as in (3.39). (3.38) Chytridiomycota are found in aquatic and terrestrial habitats [Circumstance: Location]. (3.39) Samples taken from E. heliocidaris and P. phyllacanthus were stored at four degrees Celsius for a week [Circumstance: Time]. Place and time occur less frequently in scientific reports. They construe what Doran and Martin (2020) refer to as the ‘spatio-temporal properties’ of field. Grammatical realisations of these entities tend to be limited to Circumstances. However, in other fields, they may construe taxonomised items rather than spatio-temporal properties. In an everyday conversation reported in Painter (1999) and an example of geography text in Wignell et al. (1993), entities of time and place play a central role. Grammatically they are realised through Participants. (3.40) Child: How come it’s a bigger day when it’s summer? (adapted from Painter, 1999, p. 123) (3.41) Desert streams usually drain down into the lowest portions of nearby desert basins which are called bolsons. (adapted from Wignell et al., 1993) To summarise the analysis looking from ‘below’ at the grammatical stratum, Figure 3.1 outlines the entity types in a system network.

64  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

Figure 3.1  Entity types in experimental reports in biology (1)

3.4 Motivation From ‘Around’: A Discourse Semantic Perspective In this section, we take a step to explore entities by looking from ‘around’ at the level of discourse semantics. The ways in which entities interact with choices from other discourse semantic systems further shed light on the distinctiveness of entity types. 3.4.1  Entity and Attitude In investigating the attitudinal resources in the discourse of biology from an interpersonal perspective, studies have found that the appreciation type of attitude (Martin & White, 2005) is a particularly significant interpersonal resource to persuade readers of the legitimacy of a study (Hao & Humphrey, 2012; Hood, 2010). Appreciation type concerns with our evaluation of things, in opposition to judgment types of attitude evaluating people’s behaviour and affect type expressing emotions. Within appreciation, further distinctions can be made among reaction to things, composition of things (how balanced or complex a thing is) and valuation of things (how worthwhile, innovative or authentic a thing is).

Entity  65 Drawing on these appreciation categories, we can explore if different entity types are evaluated in distinctive ways. Starting from thing entities, we can find that observational things are combined with valuation, whereas instrumental things tend to be evaluated through composition. In subsequent instances, evaluations are shown in boldface. (3.42) Members of this phylum [observational thing] are ecologically important [valuation]. (3.43) The equipment [instrumental thing] was easy to use [composition]. The different couplings with valuation versus composition resonate with the typological distinction between the two sub-types of things. We have seen from a grammatical perspective that semiotic entities and enacted activity entities are closely related topologically, given that both types can be realised by the Sayer in a verbal process and both can be configured with metaphorically realised figures in a relational process. The closeness between the two is further reflected by their combination with similar attitudinal resources. For example, both semiotic entities and enacted activity entities can be combined with composition, as exemplified in (3.44) and (3.45). (3.44) Such findings [semiotic entity] are consistent [composition] with the current understanding of food processing by members of the Acrididae . . . (3.45) There has been limited [composition] research [enacted activity entity] on both the identification and role of microbes . . . While both semiotic and enacted activity entities can be evaluated through composition, at the same time enacted activity entities can also be evaluated with valuation as in (3.46) (3.46) . . . making such a study ecologically realistic and important [valuation]. Their similar and different couplings with attitudes confirm with us their closeness and distance between these two entity types from a topological perspective. From an interpersonal perspective, the investigation of how entity types interact with attitudinal resources reinforces some distinctions of entities revealed in Section 3.3. 3.4.2  Entity and Periodicity We move next to the textual metafunction, to look at how entities interact with the textual discourse semantic systems periodicity and identification (see Martin & Rose, 2007, Chapter 6). Periodicity is concerned

66  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics with the ways in which discourse semantic meanings are packaged in text with an information flow accessible to the reader. The information in a text may be predicted by higher-level Themes (i.e. hyper-Theme or macroTheme) and consolidated in higher-level News (i.e. hyper-New or macroNew). Higher-level Themes and News often involve semiotic entities. Firstly, semiotic entities can be used to organise higher-level Themes. In examples (3.47) and (3.48), aspects and reasons are both identified as semiotic entities which function to preview and name a number of subsequent propositions. These propositions are organised in the text in order of succession through the internal conjunctions firstly, secondly, furthermore. The indentation displays the layers of information flow. (3.47) [hyper-Theme] There are a number of aspects which were unaddressed in this report and should be accounted for in future studies. Firstly, it remains clear whether the zoospore-like structure were chytrids . . . Secondly, the components of the digestive tract and coelom of sea urchins vary greatly . . . (3.48) [hyper-Theme] The identification of microorganisms within sea urchins, and attempts to understand their role in such a relationship is significant for a number of reasons. (Firstly,) As there has been limited research on both the identification and role of microbes within the Echinodermata . . . Secondly, the Chytridiomycota are a polyphyletic taxon, which are characterised by the presence of flagellated zoospores . . . Furthermore, symbiotic microorganisms, including anaerobic fungi, have been shown to increase the efficiency of nutrient uptake, and may be necessary for herbivory . . . Secondly, semiotic entities can also be used in organising higher-level News. As shown in excerpt (3.49), the entity disadvantages is used in the macro-New to consolidate the findings discussed previously in the body of the text where the radioactivity method was evaluated. The student writer labels this stage of the text as Conclusion. (3.49)   . . . Discussion . . . [macro-New]

Entity  67 Conclusion The different methods used in pipette calibration contained varying degrees of accuracy. Although the use of the weight-of-water method was simple and inexpensive, it did not provide an accurate representation of the accuracy and precision of the pipette. Similarly, there were disadvantages associated with the radioactivity method including high costs and elaborate preparation. Instead, spectroscopy provided results that balanced the need for high levels of precision and accuracy with safety, speed and efficiency. Periodicity provides us with a useful way of recognising semiotic entities— as either previewing or reviewing pieces of text. A significant feature of semiotic entities is that they are typically realised in the form of a nominalisation. However, the status of a semiotic entity cannot be determined by this feature, since in some texts, nominalisations such as disadvantage, limitation and reason may need to be treated as ideational metaphors instead of entities. The interactions with higher-level Themes and News can provide a criterion for distinguishing semiotic entities from ideational metaphors. However, nominalisation as a grammatical metaphor can as well appear within higher-level Themes and News, but they would be working inside the hyper-Theme and hyper-New, rather than relating the hyper-Theme and hyper-New to subsequent and preceding texts. In scientific reports, semiotic entities are used as subheadings to name chunks of text, including Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion and Conclusion. These subheadings refer to propositions construed by systematic linguistic patterns and they are employed in laboratory and research reports as a shared metalanguage in organising texts. Such semiotic entities can be treated as field-specific semiotic entities in academic literacy. From this textual perspective, periodicity is useful for providing criteria for recognising semiotic entities. 3.4.3  Entity and Identification A third discourse semantic system that is useful for distinguishing entity types is the textual system identification. Identification is concerned with tracking meanings in the discourse (Martin, 1992, Chapter 3, cf. lexical cohesion in Halliday & Hasan, 1976). At the most general level, meanings can be identified in a text as being generic or specific, presenting or presuming, and comparative or not (Martin, 1992, p. 105). What is most relevant to the distinction among entities is the systems of generic vs specific and presenting vs presuming. The opposition of generic vs specific distinguishes between whether it is ‘the whole of some experiential class of participants’ (e.g. deserts) that

68  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics is identified or whether it is ‘a specific manifestation of that class’ (e.g. the largest hot desert) (Martin, 1992, p. 103). The second relevant opposition, presenting vs presuming, differentiates between meanings in the discourse that are either introduced for the first time or already presumed. Meanings can be presumed in different ways. Of particular relevance to the analysis of entities include anaphoric references, which track a shared meaning in the preceding text, and esphoric references specifying a meaning by the information that follows it within the same nominal group. Martin (1992) points out that although a generic meaning can be either presented or presumed, generic identification tends to neutralise such distinctions unless a pronoun or demonstrative is used anaphorically to point to a generic meaning that was previously introduced. The analysis of experimental reports reveals that when entities are presented, they can be presented as either generic such as Ruminant fungi in (3.50) or specific such as Three species of regular sea urchin in (3.51): (3.50) Ruminant fungi [generic] play a significant role in animal nutrition. (3.51) Three species of regular sea urchin [specific] were collected. Amongst entities that are presented as specific, some refer to observational things that are used as samples in the experimental observation such as Three species of regular sea urchin in (3.51) and others refer to instrumental things that are utilitarian tools, such as a light microscope in (3.52). (3.52) The samples were viewed at 10 and 40 times magnification using a light microscope [specific]. It was noticeable that the specific instrumental things can also be presumed, through exophoric references by referring to their experimental setting, such as the balance in (3.53). (3.53) The balance [presumed: exophoric] was imprecise with external interference like breathing. By contrast, observational things are unlikely to be presumed through exophoric identification, but they can be presumed after being introduced in the text, such as this phylum in (3.54). (3.54) The Chytridiomycota are considered the most primitive phylum of the fungi. (. . .) Members of this phylum [presumed: anaphoric] are ecologically important. The distinctive ways of presenting and presuming instrumental and observational things are attributed by different modes in which these

Entity  69 meanings tend to be transmitted (Martin, 1992). Martin suggests that meanings in exploration fields tend to be transmitted in the written mode, whereas meanings in everyday and specialised fields tend to be transmitted through the spoken mode, in combination with visual images, gestures and so on (see also Gamble, 2001). In order to clarify the different modes of meaning transmission, we can draw on the spoken texts reported in Painter (1999), in which identification of meanings for two-year-old child Stephen relies on tangible objects in his world. (3.55) (Stephen watching his mother dress) S: What’s M:  That’s

that? my belly button. (Painter, 1999, p. 84)

In this example, Stephen verbally refers to a specific thing (i.e. belly button) by using the exophoric reference that. The specific thing is observable to Stephen and his mother in the material context of situation. Stephen’s mother assigns the name to the specific thing also through an exophoric reference that. Grammatically, this naming process is realised by the encoding type of intensive identifying clause—i.e. Value is what is known and Token is to be transmitted (for the delicate grammatical distinction between encoding and decoding identifying processes, see Halliday, 1968, 1994; Davidse, 1991). (3.56) That [Value/Identified; exophoric] is [Process: intensive identifying (encoding)] my belly button [Token/Identifier]. Following Martin (1992, 2007), such definition is an ostensive definition— that is, the definition of an entity relies on being able to point exophorically to an object. We can refer to such an entity as an ostensively defined entity. At a later stage of a child’s language development, entities are introduced differently. In the following episode from Painter (1999, p. 124), a semiotic entity order is introduced to Stephen. The linguistic definition of order offered by the mother is in bold. (3.57) S: Mummy, it’s a question that you don’t eat porridge with your fingers. (pause) It’s a question that you don’t eat porridge with your fingers. M:  That’s not a question. It’s an order. S:  What’s an order? M:  It’s something that you tell somebody and they have to do. S:  I meant an order. In this dialogue, order is firstly named by it’s an order, and so distinguished from a question. However, naming the situation is inadequate

70  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics to fully define the meaning order. The mother then offers a definition of order using an intensive identifying process, which is a decoding type—i.e. Token is the term in question and Value is to be transmitted. Note that order is presented as a generic entity, rather than a specific one like my belly button. (3.58) An order [Token/Identified] is [Process: intensive identifying (decoding)] something [[that you tell somebody and they have to do]] [Value/Identifier]. The definition of order here is distinct from the ostensively defined entities (e.g. belly button), as it relies solely on linguistic resources. This type of entity will be referred to as a linguistically defined entity (c.f. Martin, 2007). In science, understanding of utilitarian tools is typically developed by ostensively identifying the tools and physically manipulating the tools in laboratory experiments. Exophoric identification of utilitarian tools such as microscope in (3.52) and balance in (3.53) reflects the nature of its meaning transmission ‘outside’ the text. However, new terminologies in science are predominantly introduced linguistically in pedagogic texts. In contrast to a linguistically defined entity (e.g. an order is something you tell somebody and they have to do) in the spoken mode, those in the written mode have distinctive features at the levels of both lexicogrammar and discourse semantics. Grammatically, a linguistic definition in the biology textbook can involve both decoding and encoding subtypes of intensive identifying process. In the decoding type, exemplified in (3.59), the entity is situated in the Theme position, and its meaning is ‘unpacked’ through other entities. (3.59) A lysosome [Token/Identified] is [Process: intensive identifying (decoding)] a membranous sac of hydrolytic enzymes that an animal cell uses to digest all kinds of macromolecules [Value/ Identifier] (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 107). In contrast, an entity defined in the encoding type has a ‘naming process’. It labels what the scientific phenomenon is called, such as in (3.60). However, unlike the ‘naming’ process in the spoken mode, the Value does not rely on exophoric reference pointing to an object, but on describing through language. (3.60) The entire region between the nucleus and the plasma membrane [Value/Identified] is called [Process: intensive identifying (encoding)] the cytoplasm [Token/Identifier] (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 98). Token/Value relationship in identifying clauses is a prototypical grammatical structure that realises the general relationship of ‘x defines y’.

Entity  71 In addition to this, Wignell et al. (1993) have found various grammatical forms that can also be used to realise linguistic definitions, including embedded defining relative clauses, elaborating nominal group complex, elaborating conjunctive relations within a clause, as well as anaphoric references (e.g. this) to encapsulate meanings that are realised in one or more preceding clauses (Wignell et al., 1993, pp. 167–168). These various ways of defining entities are exemplified below; the definitions are in italics. The relationship between the ‘defined’ and the ‘defining’ is co-elaborative, typically involving establishing taxonomic relations. This relationship is annotated by ‘=’. • Defining an entity through an elaborating nominal group complex: All cells have ribosomes, = tiny organelles [[that make proteins according to instructions from the genes]] • Defining an entity through an elaborating nominal group complex: Within the membrane is a semifluid substance, = cytosol . . . • Defining an entity through an embedded clause: Mature plant cells generally contain a large central vacuole enclosed by a membrane [[= called the tonoplast]]. • Anaphoric reference to an entity You have probably learned the meaning of the term transpiration in your science lesson. = In this process, plants lose water in the form of vapour through their leaves, this water is replaced with water containing plant food collected by the plant roots . . . (Wignell et al., 1993, p. 168) As realisations of elaboration, these various forms are agnate to intensive identifying processes, either the encoding or decoding type. We can always reconstruct these definitions as Token^Value structure at the clause rank—e.g. ribosomes are tiny organelles [[that make proteins according to instructions from the genes]]; a semifluid substance within the membrane is called cytosol. Linguistic definition at the clause rank can be found frequently in textbooks. However, in the students’ experimental reports, few entities are defined at the clause rank, but if definition occurs, it occurs in the Introduction section, and it tends to be realised at the group rank via nominal group complexes. For example, the entity B-galactosidase in (3.61) is defined through ‘unpacking’ and the entity Echinocardium cordatum in (3.62) is defined through ‘naming’. (3.61) In this experiment, the activity of B-galactosidase, = an enzyme which breaks down lactose, was studied.

72  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics (3.62) Thorsen (1999) reported the presence of Chytridiomycota in the digestive system of the irregular urchin, = Echinocardium cordatum. This preference for defining entities at the group rank may be because the purpose of the experimental reports is to demonstrate prior knowledge, rather than, as in pedagogic texts, to introduce new knowledge. To summarise our analyses so far, we have found that ostensively defined entities are characteristic of the spoken mode, whereas linguistically defined entities have been found in both modes (see Table 3.1). Grammatically, both the decoding and encoding types of intensive identifying processes can be used to define entities in these modes. The distinction between ostensively defined and linguistically defined entities is therefore not revealed through experiential grammar. However, the linguistic definitions in written mode can reveal distinctive ideational discourse semantic features—a co-elaborative relationship between entities which we will discuss further in Chapter 4. Identification system has allowed us to expand the system of entity types, by adding a simultaneous system of definition. The system network is shown in Figure 3.2. The I/T convention in the system shows that semiotic entities are by nature linguistically defined entities, as semiotic entities are the names of facts, ideas and locutions which are brought into existence by language. Other entities can be either ostensively defined or linguistically defined. Linguistically defined people can occur in a field such as medicine (e.g. neonate) and administration (e.g. general manager, council); linguistically defined places can occur in fields such as geography and geology (e.g. continent, tropics); linguistically defined time can occur in a field such as history (e.g. BC, AD). As far as the field of biology is concerned, linguistically defined entities are primarily things and activities.

Table 3.1  Definitions of entities in spoken and written mode ostensively defined entity linguistically defined entity (generic) (specific; exophoric) decoding: spoken encoding: mode That is my belly button. An order is something that you tell somebody and they have to do. written decoding: mode A lysosome is a membranous sac of hydrolytic enzymes that an animal cell uses to digest all kinds of macromolecules. encoding: A semifluid substance is called cytosol.

Entity  73

Figure 3.2  Entity types in experimental reports in biology (2)

3.4.4  Entity and Connexion To this point, we have looked at how entities interact with interpersonal system attitude and with textual systems of periodicity and identification. I now move on to the logical metafunction to explore the interaction between entities and the system of connexion (i.e. conjunction in Martin, 1992). Connexions function in the discourse to relate figures into sequences. Sequences further construe momented activity series in the field. In the connexion system, a primary distinction is made between external and internal connexions (Martin, 1992; c.f. Halliday & Hasan, 1976). Martin (1992, p. 180) explains that the external relations are oriented to what is going on in the field, whereas the internal relations attend to the organisation of text itself. He identifies a simultaneous system of additive, comparative, temporal and causal connexions. Within external causal connexions, he also recognises choices of manner, consequence, condition, purpose and concession (see Figure 2.2 in Chapter 2). In the experimental texts causal connexions, both external and internal ones, can be related to certain fact-type semiotic entities with respect to the similar work they do in construing field, that is, both connexions and

74  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics semiotic entities can construe implication activities (for a discussion of discourse semantic realisations of implication activities, see Chapter 7). This similar function brings us to the borderline between semiotic entities and metaphorical realisations of connexions (i.e. logical metaphors). One strategy for distinguishing semiotic entities from logical metaphors, as was discussed in the previous section, is by considering their role in higher-level Themes and News. In (3.48) the semiotic entity reason in the hyper-Theme predicts three chunks of texts motivating the author’s claim about the significance of a biological relationship. The phases of discourse elaborate on the meaning that is encapsulated in the semiotic entity. The use of reason as a semiotic entity contrasts with the meaning of reason in (3.63), where it encodes the causal relationship between two figures (for the detailed discussion of figures, see Chapter 5): (3.63) The reason for the fact [[that the identification of microorganisms is significant]] is [[that there has been limited research on this topic]] (c.f. It is significant to identify microorganisms because there has been limited research). In this example, a sequence is realised by the clause. One of the figures, which is named as a fact (i.e. the identification of microorganisms is significant), refers to the effect of the other figure (there has been limited research). The causal relation between the figures is realised metaphorically by the noun reason. The contrasting examples suggest when functioning as semiotic entities, the terms in question are names for figures which function as causes or effects, but when functioning in grammatical metaphors, the terms in question encode a logical connexion between figures. By looking around at the level of discourse semantics, we have explored the ways in which entities interact with interpersonal, logical and textual discourse semantic resources. This perspective has helped to confirm the validity of the entity typology. The interactions between entities and a variety of discourse semantic systems have revealed important criteria for distinguishing between semiotic entities and grammatical metaphors.

3.5 Tangibility of Linguistically Defined Entities in Biology As has been discussed in Section 3.4.3, a critical distinction between linguistically defined entities and ostensively defined entities is their different reliance on meaning transmission in the written mode. However, this is not to suggest that linguistically defined entities can not be observed physically. A critical feature of biological science is that living

Entity  75 phenomena are observable. As has been exemplified by Wignell et al. (1993), birds of prey are observed and categorised by both birdwatchers and scientists. However, the birdwatchers’ taxonomy, which relies solely on observable physical characteristics, is significantly different from the scientific taxonomy drawing on biological similarities in chromosomes and genes. How scientific items are observed therefore provides us with a further parameter to consider entities involved in building scientific knowledge. In the discourse, the tangibility of scientific items can be revealed through the configuration of different types of entities in a going-on. Let us begin with a few examples. The linguistically defined observational entities (underlined) in the examples below are configured in the various goings-on with people entities (i.e. SCUBA and implied me/us), and also instrumental things (i.e. a light microscope, sodium carbonate). (3.64) Specimens of the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum (heart urchin) [observational thing], were also collected from within the oceanic sediment at Watsons Bay by SCUBA [people]. These were then dissected (by me/us) [people] . . . (3.65) Samples were then taken from the coelomic cavity and digestive tract of the sea urchins [observational things] and were viewed (by me/us [people]) at 10 and 40 times magnification using a light microscope [instrumental thing]. (3.66) The (cellular) reaction [observational activity entity] was stopped (by us [people]) with sodium carbonate (6.9mM) [instrumental thing]. These examples suggest that there are three distinctive ways in which the students handle with observational entities. Firstly in (3.64), the observational thing specimens of the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum (heart urchin) is physically manipulated (i.e. collected and dissected) by the student group (i.e. SCUBA) and the student writer who conducted the experiment. The physical activities are realised by material processes (i.e. collected and dissected). The physical manipulations involved in the collection and dissection suggest that sea urchins have a tangible presence which can be perceived. At the same time, a sea urchin is linguistically identified as a species that belongs to the phylum Echinodermata. Given their observable nature as well as scientific categorisation of sea urchin, we can name these entities as trained gaze entities. Secondly, in (3.65), the observational things (i.e. the coelomic cavity and digestive tract of sea urchins) were observed by people, suggested by their realisation in the mental process were viewed. The instrumental thing light microscope facilitated the observation. Modern technology

76  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics plays a significant role in scientific observation. The invention of microscopes and their technological development extended the limits of human senses in observing biological phenomena. Like trained gaze entities, these entities observed through a microscope are also tangible in the sense that they can be perceived. However, the perception can only be achieved with the assistance of technology, rather than through the naked eye. We can, therefore, name entities that can only be observed utilising technology as technologically enhanced gaze entities (tech-enhanced gaze for short). Furthermore, example (3.66), the cellular reaction was stopped (by us) with sodium carbonate, reveals that the instrumental thing sodium carbonate used by people is not technological but chemical. The use of sodium carbonate inhibits a cellular reaction, which involves chemical elements inside the cell. The understanding of chemical phenomena at stake here is beyond what can be observed under the microscope. These phenomena tend to differ from one another based on their chemical and physical structures. For example, fatty acids differ from other acids, e.g. amino acids, based on the different number of carbons, hydrogen atoms and oxygen in their structure. While these entities are not directly observed and perceived by biology students, they are inferred from chemical reactions by using chemical solutions. We can gloss them as inferable entities. In addition to verbal texts, the differences among trained gaze, techenhanced gaze and inferable entities can also be explored by their multimodal representation in the texts. Hao (2020b) illustrates that both trained gaze and tech-enhanced gaze entities are typically represented through realistic photographs, whereas inferable entities tend to be visualised trough analytical diagrams and illustrations (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006). In addition to observational things, observational activities can also be differentiated based on tangibility and observability. For example, bird migration can be observed through the trained gaze; cell division can be observed under the microscope; and enzymic digestion can be detected through a chemical reaction. To summarise, this section has illustrated that the linguistically defined entities in the data can be broken down into three subtypes according to their different means of observation: trained gaze, techenhanced gaze and inferable entities. We can now expand the entity system one step further by taking into account these different choices, as shown in Figure 3.3. The cross-classification implied in the system network, however, overgeneralises entities beyond the discourse of biology, such as linguistically defined people and time. The ways in which people, place and time are defined and observed in other disciplinary areas are outside the scope of this study. In order to avoid cross-classifications that

Entity  77

Figure 3.3  Entity types in experimental reports in biology (3)

are inapplicable here, a summary of the entities in this study is shown in Table 3.2.

3.6 Entity Types: Realising the Diversity of Field Taxonomies This chapter has identified a range of entities that are involved in the discourse of undergraduate biology. It has taken care to illustrate the trinocular principles based on which the entities are distinguished from one another. What this exercise reveals is the construal of the diversity of biological items and ‘itemised’ activities through language. The beginning of this chapter asked: ‘What do we mean by ‘concrete’, ‘technical’ and ‘abstract’ entities?’ The answer is that there is no single criterion for distinguishing these terms. Many factors are at stake in determining the nature of an entity. Taking the observational thing entity, for example, there are questions as to whether the entity can be ostensively defined through exophoric references or linguistically defined solely

tap water, plate, container, microscope, container, pipette, vial, gloves, Potato dextrose agar, Triton-X solution, glycerol medium, sodium carbonate,

ostensively defined instrumental linguistically defined: trained gaze thing trained gaze observational/ tech-enhanced gaze linguistically defined inferable investigation enacted manner activity trained gaze observational/ tech-enhanced gaze linguistically defined inferable ostensively defined place linguistically defined case chance fact needs semiotic consequence result (/ling. defined) proof idea locution people source publication

insects, gut, sea urchin, mouthpiece, Australian plague locust, herbivore fungal spore, eukaryotic cells, sporangium, flagella pathogen, fungal entomopathogen, enzyme, cytoplasm study, project, experiment method, dissection method, culturing methods, treatment, biocontrol physiological response, maceration, peristaltic movement fungal suspension, germination, fungal spore dispersal enzymic digestion, gene expression Chowder Bay, Watsons Bay aquatic habitat, terrestrial habitat, temperate zone, rocky-intertidal region fact, problem, limitations possibility, chance purpose, needs result, findings, consequence, evidence, confirmation, implication, reasons concern, knowledge, literature, explanation, suggestion, report, information, hypothesis we, students, biologists Smith (1999)

examples

types of entity

Table 3.2  Choices of entity types in undergraduate biology texts

Entity  79 through verbal language; if linguistically defined, whether it is observed based on its tangibility or has to be inferred through scientific knowledge; if it is tangible, whether it is observed through naked eyes or through technology. Each of these questions determines the choice of an entity type. Each of the choices is sensitive to the scientific item construed by the entity. ‘Concrete’, ‘technical’ and ‘abstract’ are reductive terms which cannot reveal the nature of entities nor the nature of a field. In the next chapter, we will explore entities further by revealing how they are related to one another in the discourse semantics. An augmentation of entity—dimensionality—will be described as a way of making visible the depth of field taxonomies in addition to the diversity that has been so far explored.

Note 1. The differentiation between people and publication is less explicit in the discourse of humanities and social science than in that of science. For the discussion of the realisation of explicit and implicit knowers in the discourse, see Hood (2011).

4

Dimensionality

4.1 Introduction This chapter continues to explore language resources for construing static knowledge, particularly the building of taxonomic relations. Taxonomy building in a particular field involves naming various items and activities as well as establishing taxonomic relations among them. Language is used to construe both diversity and depth of taxonomies. Chapter 3 has identified typology of entities, which allows us to explore the diversity of taxonomies. In this chapter, we will examine a resource that construes the depth of taxonomy, that is, the system of dimensionality. We will see that choices of dimensionality provide critical resources for making visible taxonomic relations as well as the criteria based on which taxonomic relations are established.

4.2  Augmentation of Entities I begin with two examples to demonstrate how entities can be augmented in the discourse. In (4.1) and (4.2) below, the entities are underlined, and their augmentations are emboldened. (4.1) Set amount of water was pipetted into a container, and the weight of the water was measured and recorded. (4.2) Three species of regular sea urchin were collected from the rockyintertidal region. Specimens of the irregular urchin were also collected . . . In (4.1), terms such as amount and weight do not relate taxonomically to the instrumental thing water, but they augment water from a dimension of how it can be measured. Similarly, in (4.2), species and specimen augment the entities regular/irregular sea urchin from a dimension of how they are categorised. The canonical lexicogrammatical realisation of the augmentation is a Focus group in a Focus^Thing nominal group structure (Martin et al., 2010)—e.g. set amount of water. Each of the augmentations can be named by the Thing in a Focus group—e.g. amount, weight,

Dimensionality  81 and species. This study refers to these augmentations as dimensions of an entity and names the system of dimensions as dimensionality. Dimensions enter the discourse by being dependent on an entity. Their relationship can be annotated by ‘’ pointing to the entity. This discourse semantic dependency is evident by looking from around in terms of their interaction with other discourse semantic meanings. Firstly, it is ‘entity Chytridiomycota. In what follows, underlying is used to annotate entity Chytridiomycota [observational thing] are ecologically important [valuation]. Secondly, both entities and dimensions may be elliptical in the text, but their ellipsis is correlative to the other’s presence. The omission of entity (such as the quantity (of > DNA) in (4.4)) only happens after the entity has been introduced in the preceding text. The omission can always be recovered in the discourse if necessary. For example, in (4.4), it can be revealed that quantity augments an entity DNA which has been introduced in the previous clause. Hereinafter, superscript is used to recover the ellipsis. (4.4) Isolating DNA and determining the quantity of > DNA extracted . . . Dimensions can also be elliptical when entities are present. Examples (4.5) and (4.6) rephrase (4.1) and (4.2) by omitting the dimensions. (4.5) Water was pipetted into a container, and the water was measured and recorded. (4.6) Three regular sea urchins were collected from the rocky-intertidal region. These characteristics reveal that entities and dimensions are tied closely together in the discourse. Dimension>entity as a whole is thus treated as a discourse semantic unit. It is necessary to recover the elliptical dimensions when analysing texts in order to make explicit the full range of dimensions of entities.

4.3 Typical Lexicogrammatical Realisations of Dimensions As has been mentioned, when looking from the perspective of lexicogrammar, dimensions are typically realised through an embedded nominal

82  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics group functioning as a Focus as part of another nominal group—e.g. the size of the cell. This nominal group structure (including the proposition  of ) grammaticalises the augmenting relationship between the entity and dimension. Martin et al. (2010, p. 170) identify types of Focus which provide a useful starting point for identifying instances of dimensions. As a canonical realisation of dimension, Focus group can offer a test to recover the elliptical dimensions in the discourse. For example, in (4.7) and (4.8), the Focus group kind of can be added to explicate the dimensions kind. (4.7) . . . (we) adding glucose, and alternative kind of > food sources to lactose. (4.8) . . . Cladosporium and Alternaria may also be present within sea urchins and other kinds of > marine invertebrates. In addition to the Focus group, there are several other grammatical structures in which a dimension can be realised. When an entity is omitted, a dimension can be realised through a nominal group with only a Thing (e.g. weight, shape, type); when the entity co-occurs, the entity sea urchin; members of > the geofungi regular sea urchin < species sea urchin’s < shape mandibles < of different sizes

Dimensionality  83

4.4  Co-Elaboration Between Entities In order to identify dimensions, particularly the categorised and structured dimensions, I need to first clarify the interstratal relationship between taxonomic relations established in the field and their realisations in the discourse. At the field level, taxonomic relations include classification and composition among items. Alongside naming items through discourse semantic entities, we can realise taxonomic relations by establishing coelaboration between entities as the discourse unfolds. Co-elaboration can be stretched as far as the text develops. The study annotates co-elaboration with ‘=’ following Martin (1992). Co-elaboration captures the fact that entities in classification and composition are understood not in isolation but with respect to each other. Co-elaboration can be realised lexicogrammatically in a number of ways. For example, between entities sea urchin and irregular sea urchin, the naming of irregular sea urchin with a Classifier (irregular) can indicate that irregular sea urchin is a type of sea urchin. Their relationship can also be constructed through a relational process: irregular sea urchin = is a kind of sea urchin, or an elaborating nominal group: (we collected) irregular sea urchins, = a kind of sea urchins. In addition to co-elaboration between entities, dimensions provide a resource for explicitly naming taxonomic relations in the discourse, particularly through categorised and structured dimensions. It is important to note, however, that taxonomic relations can be ‘subsumed’ in the discourse. In doing so, co-elaboration of entities is established by their textual patterns, without being named through dimensions. For example, in (4.9) both protein and B-galactosidase are realised in a Theme position, contributing to establishing an ideational co-elaboration. The use of the Circumstance additionally situates the biological phenomenon to a specific experiment, implying that B-galactosidase is a hyponym of protein. In this example, no dimension is used to name the taxonomic relation. (4.9) The activity of proteins can be controlled . . . In this experiment, the activity of B-galactosidase was studied. The subsumed taxonomic relations are not uncommon in the data. It will be illustrated further in Chapter 7 that in student experimental reports, taxonomic relations are often assumed in the discourse as shared knowledge between the student writer and the reader. A general tendency is that texts produced in later undergraduate years have less explicit realisations of taxonomic relations, as the texts assume prior learning.

84  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

4.5  Types of Dimension 4.5.1  Categorised Dimensions Categorised dimensions name classification among items explicitly in the discourse. In the above example irregular sea urchin = is a kind of sea urchin, the taxonomic relationship between the scientific items—i.e. a subtype ‘irregular sea urchin’ and a superordinate ‘sea urchin’—is named through the categorised dimension kind. Similarly, in (4.10), the relationship between ‘geofungi’ and its subtypes ‘Cladosporium’ and ‘Alternaria’ is named by members. At the same time, the entities are co-elaborated in the discourse, indicated by the minor Process such as. (4.10) Other members of > the geofungi = such as Cladosporium and Alternaria may also be present within sea urchins . . . Apart from kind and member, other lexical items such as hyponyms, types and classes can also realise categorised dimensions. Like entities that can be linguistically defined, dimensions of these entities can also be linguistically defined. For instance, in biology, an important object of study is to taxonomise living species. Since the initial classification by Linnaeus in the mid-eighteenth century, biologists have established a specific classification system of organisms including nine ‘ranks’: life, domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species. These ranks provide ways of grouping organism based on scientific criteria such as the evolution of species, characteristics of DNA and different components of cells. Their field-specific status can be indicated by their linguistic definitions in the pedagogic texts (e.g. a phylum [Token] is [Process] a taxonomic rank below kingdom and above class [Value]). Regardless of the linguistic definitions, these ‘ranks’ remain as field-specific dimensions realising taxonomic relations, rather than becoming entities themselves. For instance, while the trained gaze entity sea urchin belongs to the ‘rank’ class, it is not a hyponym of class (*a sea urchin is a kind of class); instead it is a hyponym of the trained gaze entity Echinoderm which belongs to the higher rank named phylum (a sea urchin is a kind of Echinoderm). Like field-neutral dimensions, field-specific dimensions can also be realised through a Focus group, such as species of in (4.11). (4.11) Three species of > regular sea urchin were collected. It is common in the experimental reports for a field-specific dimension to be realised by a Thing in a nominal group. For example, the dimension species in (4.12) is realised by the Thing in the Classifier^Thing structure the regular and irregular sea urchin species.

Dimensionality  85 (4.12) Dissection of both the regular and irregular sea urchin < species was successful. Note that such Classifier^Thing structures should be distinguished from the Classifier^Thing structure realising entities without explicit dimensions, such as regular and irregular sea urchins in (4.13). (4.13) The presence of microbial activity in the species of > regular and irregular sea urchins has been demonstrated . . . In the unfolding of a text categorised dimensions tend to be initially presented through a Focus^Thing structure such as species of regular sea urchin in (4.11), then restructured as Classifier^Thing such as the regular sea urchin species in (4.12) and then eventually made elliptical as regular sea urchins in (4.13). Apart from thing entities, categorised dimensions can also augment activity entities. For example, in (4.14), the elliptical dimension types makes explicit the co-elaboration between chemical process and enzymic digestion. The co-elaboration between these entities is realised through a Thing^Qualifier structure. (4.14) Types of > chemical processes [= including enzymic digestion or antifungal compounds] could cause spores to lose their viability. 4.5.2  Structured Dimension A second dimension type, structured dimensions, is similar to categorised dimensions in that it can also name taxonomic relations, particularly compositions between parts and whole. In (4.15), the entity nucleotide co-elaborates with three other entities—nitrogenous base, pentose and phosphate groups—in construing part/whole relations. The co-elaboration is realised grammatically through a relational process. The part/whole relation is named explicitly through the dimension parts. (4.15) A nucleotide, in general, is composed of three parts of > nucleotide: a nitrogen-containing (nitrogenous) base, a five-carbon sugar (a pentose) and one or more phosphate groups. In biological science, parts of a whole are not always named through an entity. When a part is unnamed, the structured dimension makes explicit the potential compositional relation by augmenting the entity naming the ‘whole’. For example, in (4.16), a section of indicates that a part/whole relation is established between two items; however, no entity is used to name the ‘section’. Similarly, in (4.17) although the structured dimensions

86  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics hydrophilic parts and side are used to name part/whole relations, neither the ‘parts’ nor the ‘side’ is named by an entity. (4.16) Such variation was not considered within this preliminary work, with samples (of the gut) taken from a section of > the gut. (4.17) The hydrophilic parts of > the molecule are exposed to the aqueous solutions on either side of > the membrane. Categorised and structured dimensions correspond to co-elaborations between entities in the discourse. Both dimensions and co-elaborations construe taxonomic relations in the field. We now consider two other types of dimension: measured and perceived dimensions, which make explicit the criteria based on which taxonomic relations are established. 4.5.3  Measured Dimensions Measured dimensions augment an entity by making visible how the entity is measured. Grammatically, measured dimensions have typical realisation through the Focus groups referred to as Pre-Numerative in Halliday (1985) and Martin (1992). They are exemplified in (4.18) and (4.19)—i.e. 5mL of and a number of, augmenting the entities scintillant and round cells. (4.18) 5mL of > scintillant were added. (4.19) A number of > round cells were also observed Depending on the ‘countability’ of an entity, the dimension can ‘count’ an inherently uncountable entity, e.g. a bottle of beer, or ‘uncount’ an inherently countable entity, e.g. a flock of geese (Martin, 1988, pp. 253–254). The measured dimensions can be more or less specific: for example, in (4.18) 5mL provides a specific quantity through numeration, whereas examples such as a number of (i.e. several) and a bottle of provide a rough measurement. Other unspecific measurements include naming measurements of different kinds such as amount, weight and levels in the following examples. (4.20) Set amount of > water was pipetted into a container. (4.21) The weight of the > water dispensed was measured and recorded. (4.22) The activity of proteins can be controlled through influencing levels of > gene expression. Measured dimensions correspond to the quantified qualities of an entity. Their relationship can be realised through an intensive identifying process, in which the Token realises the quantification (italicised) and the Value realises the measured dimension.

Dimensionality  87 The amount of > water [Value] is [Process] one litre [Token]. The length of the > fabric is 5 metres. The speed of the > car is 35mph. In addition to specific quantities realised through numeration, the measured dimension>entity as a whole can be provided with general quantifications, e.g. small, large, long, short, realised either through an Attribute at the clause rank or an Epithet in the embedded Focus group: The amount of > water [Carrier] is [Process] large/small [Attribute]: a large/small [Epithet] amount of > water:: The length of > the fabric is long/short: the long/short length of > the fabric:: The speed of > the car is low/high: the low/high speed of > the car The quantification can also be comparative: a large(r)/small(er) amount of > water; a long(er)/short(er) length of > the fabric; a high(er)/low(er) speed of > the car; Different measured dimensions, e.g. amount, number, length, size, speed, are likely to be concerned with different measurable units, e.g. metre, litre, mL, and achieved with the assistance of different utilitarian tools and mathematical symbols. The nature of the entity, therefore, determines the measured dimensions of an entity. From a perspective of field, quantification describes properties of items in a field and allows items to be compared with one another (Doran & Martin, 2020). Measured dimensions provide a way of naming the properties. In biology texts, apart from the field-neutral dimensions such as size, weight and amount, a large number of measured dimensions are fieldspecific, for example, the activity of proteins and the susceptibility of the spores in (4.23) and (4.24). (4.23) The activity of > proteins can be controlled. . . . In this experiment, the activity of > B-galactosidase, an enzyme which breaks down lactose, was studied. (4.24) Intrinsic structural differences such as the constituents of the spore wall could increase susceptibility of > the spores to antifungals and digestive enzymes of the locust gut. The measurement activity is usually associated with inferable entities such as enzymes. It is linguistically defined in textbooks, e.g. ‘The activity of enzyme—how efficiently the enzyme functions—is affected by general

88  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics environmental factors, such as temperature and pH’ (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 154). Activity in this sense is defined by a mathematical equation of quantification: Activity of enzyme = moles of substrate converted per unit time = rate × reaction volume. This field-specific measured dimension is realised in the form of a nominalisation, which is derived from the adjective active construing a quality. However, the nominalisation activity differs from a ‘live’ grammatical metaphor given its linguistic definition and dependency on linguistically defined entities (e.g. protein, enzyme). Similar to the field-specific categorised dimensions such as species, genus or phylum, the field-specific measured dimensions can be realised either through Focus^Thing as exemplified in (4.23) and (4.24) above or through Classifier^Thing structures such as in (4.25) and (4.26). (4.25) Loss of fungal spore < integrity and fungal spore < viability after ingestion and passage through the insect gastrointestinal tract . . . (4.26) Varying spore < concentrations would have affected the chances of a spore being plated from the serial dilutions. It is important to note that while the measured dimensions can be realised through the Thing in a Classifier^Thing structure, the Classifier does not construe a classification of the measurement. That is to say, fungal spore integrity and viability and spore concentrations are not subtypes of measurements of integrity, viability and concentration. The augmentation of entity can be rephrased through a Focus^Thing structure, e.g. the integrity of fungal spores, concentration of spore, activity of B-galactosidase. Realisation through a Classifier^Thing structure usually occurs in order to fit into the logogenetic unfolding of the text; it tends to appear after the initial Focus^Thing structure has been introduced in the preceding text. As exemplified in the excerpt below, the dimension activity is realised through the Focus group (i.e. the activity of protein; the activity of B-galactosidase), before it is realised through Thing in the Classifier^Thing structure (i.e. B-galactosidase activity). (4.27) The activity of > protein can be controlled through including levels of gene expression or their activation/deactivation when already present in the cytosol. In this experiment, the activity of > B-galactosidase, an enzyme which breaks down lactose, was studied. It is known that in the presence of lactose, B-galactosidase < activity increases.

Dimensionality  89 4.5.4  Perceived Dimension A further type of dimension provides a resource for naming qualitative properties of items that can be perceived and observed through human senses such as seeing, smelling, hearing and touching. We can refer to this kind of dimensions as perceived dimensions. Unlike those properties named by measured dimensions, properties named by perceived dimensions do not need to be quantified and measured through utilitarian tools and knowledge of mathematics. Typical examples of perceived dimensions include shape, colour, texture, taste, smell and look. Perceived dimensions are an important augmentation of ostensively defined and linguistically defined trained gaze entities. As has been discussed in Chapter 3, definitions of both ostensively defined entities and linguistically defined trained gaze entities rely critically on their observable characteristics. A typical realisation in addition to Focus^Thing is possessive Deictic^Thing, as in their shape in (4.28). The augmented entity can be recovered textually as organisms. (4.28) The combination of their motility and their (the organisms’) < shape suggests that these organisms could be chytrid zoospores. Furthermore, perceived dimensions can be rephrased through a verbal group. In (4.29), the dimension asymmetrical shapes augmenting the entity organisms is restructured through a verbal group asymmetrically shaped. The same nominal group also realises the measured dimension— i.e. a number of. (4.29) There were a number of asymmetrically shaped > organisms.

4.6  Dimensionality as a Subsystem of Entity The four types of dimensions identified in this chapter provide a framework for examining field taxonomy in terms of its depth. The categorised and structured dimensions name relationship between items, while the measured and perceived dimensions name quantitative and qualitative properties based on which items can be differentiated from one another. Dimensions provide a critical resource for construing and talking about complex taxonomies in a field. The more dimensions are used to augment an entity, the more in-depth static knowledge of the item is developed. In terms of discourse semantic systems and structures, dimensions are combined with entities to form a discourse semantic unit. The typology of dimensions, therefore, provides a simultaneous system to entity type identified in Chapter 3.1 Figure 4.1 demonstrates the extended system of entities.

90  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

Figure 4.1  Expanded network system of entities

In the next chapter, building on the description of entities and dimensions, we will expand our analytical scope by examining how entities are configured with other discourse semantic elements into a bigger unit known as a figure.

Note 1. Note that there may be a grammatical ambiguity in terms of whether a measured or a perceived dimension is realised through a Focus [descriptive quality]^Thing or Thing^Qualifier structure. Further exploration of this grammatical distinction is needed. Nonetheless, at the level of discourse semantics, what construed is the augmentation of entities.

5

Figure

5.1 Introduction This chapter expands the scope of identifying discourse semantic meanings, by first examining how entities, and some other discourse semantic choices, can be configured in an orbital structure known as a figure. It then discusses how figures are connected into a sequence as the discourse unfolds. The chapter develops our understanding of building knowledge through language in two ways. First, it provides a further understanding of the construal of static knowledge, including figures for building taxonomic relations and for describing properties. Second, it reveals important resources used for construing knowledge from a dynamic perspective, including sequencing of figures used for recounting and explaining activities. The identification of figures and sequences often involves disentangling the interstratal relationship between figure/sequence and their diverse grammatical realisations. Chapter 2 has introduced that the metaphorical mappings of figures and sequences to grammatical choices (i.e. grammatical metaphors) are salient language features in scientific texts. In order to make visible discourse semantic patterns, this chapter illustrates the system and structure of figures based on their congruent mapping onto the grammar. Metaphorical mappings will be discussed further in Chapter 6.

5.2  Other Discourse Semantic Choices We begin with considering briefly other discourse semantic choices that can configure with entities in a figure. In the following examples, entities and associated dimensions are underlined, and the other meanings are in boldface. (5.1) The weight of water was measured (by us). (5.2) The pipette is fairly inaccurate. (5.3) The weight of the water was successfully measured. In (5.1), the figure is realised grammatically through a material process. The Participants (the weight of water; us) construe entities. The Process, which is realized by the verbal group (i.e. was measured), construes a discourse semantic occurrence that has taken place. Occurrences are

92  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics typically realised through a Process in a material (e.g. were measured in (5.1)) or a behavioural clause (e.g. She laughed.). Note that apart from Process, a Process^Range:process structure in a ranged middle clause can also realise an occurrence, such as Mary did a dance.1 While a dance here is a Participant, it construes part of the occurrence itself. That is to say, do a dance and dancing are both occurrences. This construal of occurrence is common in spoken discourse, such as run a race (cf. race), sing a song (cf. sing) and play tennis. In addition, sometimes occurrences are realised in the form of a phrasal verb (Martin, 1992, pp. 312–313), for example, look at and examine, look over and check, look up to and admire can be interchangeable. Entities and occurrences are the most central units in constituting the orbital structure of figures, each of which orients to construing one aspect of the field. Entities orient to the static perspective, naming and taxonomising items of a field. Occurrences orient to the dynamic perspective, construing an activity taking place. As has been introduced in Chapter 2, both items and activities can be propertied (Doran & Martin, 2020). The construal of property brings us to the consideration of qualities, including qualities of entities and qualities of occurrences. In example (5.2), a figure consists of an entity pipette and a quality (i.e. fairly inaccurate) that describes the entity. The figure is realised grammatically through a relational attributive clause. The quality in this example is realised by the Participant [Attribute]. Apart from being realised through an Attribute at the clause rank, qualities can also be realised at the group rank through an Epithet in a nominal group structure (e.g. an accurate pipette, a very small cell). A useful way of recognising qualities in the discourse semantics is to draw on the system of attitude (in the appraisal system) from an interpersonal perspective (Hao & Humphrey, 2012; Hood, 2010; Martin & White, 2005). In addition to entities, occurrences can also be qualified. In (5.2), the occurrences (was measured) is described with a quality of occurrence (successfully). The quality is realised grammatically through a Circumstance [Manner], in the form of an adverb. Qualities of occurrence also interact with choices in the appraisal system, including both the choices of attitude (e.g. measured successfully; speak bitterly) that evaluate the occurrences and the choices of graduation (e.g. love deeply; understand completely) that provide intensification of occurrences (Martin & White, 2005; Hood & Martin, 2007). In addition to adverbials functioning as a Manner, a verb can also express a qualified occurrence as a whole. For example, the occurrences realised by investigate, explore, experiment or examine can be broken down as ‘find out/look at’ with ‘effort/rigour’ (Hood, 2004, p. 83).

5.3  Orbital Structures and Figure Types The choices of entity, occurrence and quality of entity can configure themselves in an orbital structure in the discourse. The orbital configuration is a figure. In previous descriptions, while Martin’s model of nuclearity

Figure  93

Figure 5.1  Voice system (c.f. Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Martin, 2013a)

shed light on modelling orbital structure in ideation, the naming of discourse semantic meanings still relied heavily on grammatical functions, which creates ambiguity in distinguishing discourse semantic choices from those of lexicogrammar (see the discussion in Chapter 2). The following description takes care to provide a distinctive set of discourse semantic labels to reveal orbital structures of figures. The exploration of systems and structures of figures is approached both from ‘around’ and from ‘below’. When looking from around, we can investigate the different choices—entity, occurrence and quality—that constitute orbital structures. When looking from below, we consider the grammatical realisations of figures. It is useful to draw on the voice system generalising across process types to synthesise the grammatical realisations of figures. As illustrated in Figure 5.1, the voice system has a primary distinction between middle and effective clauses (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004, p. 350). The middle clauses can be either ranged or non-ranged; the effective clauses can be either operative or receptive, depending on if the Subject plays the Agent or the Medium. Simultaneously, an agentive system is also available (Martin, 2013a, p. 71), providing the possibility of adding recursive Agents in all process types. 5.3.1  A Departure Drawing on the discourse semantic choices of entity, occurrence and quality, we now begin examining the configurations of figures. Following

94  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics both Halliday and Matthiessen (1999) and Martin (1992), the description assumes that the basic structure of a figure can be realised through a clause. Various configurations involving occurrence, entity and quality can be identified. In the following examples in this chapter, entities are underlined; occurrences are in boldface; and qualities are italicised. (5.4) (5.5) (5.6) (5.7)

The pipette was inaccurate. The pipette was calibrated. There were a number of asymmetrically shaped organisms. The microbes were either commensal organisms or symbiotic organisms.

These examples suggest that a figure can be constituted by an entity and a quality (5.4), by an entity and an occurrence (5.5) and solely by an entity (5.6) or entities (5.7). If we look from above at the level of field, the figures involving an occurrence construes an activity, whereas the figures constituted by entities and qualities describe and taxonomise items. The different field orientations to activities and items enable us to make a broad distinction between an occurrence figure that is centred on an occurrence and a state figure centred on one or more entities. Looking from around in terms of the discourse semantic relations between different choices, the relationship between entity and quality in (5.4) and between entity and occurrence in (5.5) is an extension (Martin, 1992), and the relationship between entities in (5.7) is a co-elaboration. In what follows, we explore the orbital structures of occurrence figures and state figures respectively. Different structures reveal further distinctions within each of the figure types. Figure 5.2 provides an overview of delicate types of occurrence figure and state figure before the following discussion of each type.

Figure 5.2  Types of occurrence figures and state figures

Figure  95 5.3.2  Occurrence Figure Occurrence figures can be realised through clauses with various voices. In the following examples of occurrence figures, they demonstrate several different grammatical realisations: a meteorological clause in (5.8); a ranged middle clause in (5.9) and (5.10); a non-ranged middle clause in (5.11); and an effective clause in (5.12).2 (5.8) It’s raining. (5.9) Mary did a dance. (5.10) Mary climbed the mountain. (5.11) The cell division repeats. (5.12) The weight of the water was measured by us. We can see that among these examples, the figure realised by the meteorological clause in (5.8) consists only of occurrence, whereas within all the other figures, occurrences are expanded by one or two entities. A distinction can thus be made between an occurrence figure that is self-engendered and an occurrence figure that is engendered by an entity. Given that the self-engendered figure involves only an occurrence, the orbital structure of the figure involves only a centre, as shown in Table 5.1. The occurrence is realised through a clause. By contrast, the structure of engendered figures expands the centre by including an entity as a nucleus. Both examples (5.9) and (5.11) demonstrate this structure. However, these two figures are realised through different grammatical structures. The figure in (5.11) is realised through Process (repeats)^Medium (the cell division) in a non-ranged middle clause, whereas the one in (5.9) is realised through a ranged middle clause involving a Range Participant a dance. We can label this Range Participant as an Inner Range to emphasise its construal of a discourse semantic occurrence in the centre. The relationship between the occurrence and the entity situated outside the centre is annotated as ‘+’. Tables 5.2 and 5.3 demonstrate the structures of these two figures. Similar to (5.9), the figure in (5.10) is also realised through a ranged middle clause. However, the Range Participant the mountain construes the domain of the occurrence instead of the occurrence itself. The entity mountain exists with or without the act of climbing it. The example (5.10) Table 5.1  Orbital structure of a self-engendered figure   discourse semantics (5.8) lexicogrammar

centre occurrence it is raining clause: meteorological

96  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Table 5.2  Orbital structure of an engendered figure (1)  

nucleus

discourse semantics (5.9)

centre

 

occurrence

+ entity

did a dance Mary Process: material Inner Range Medium lexicogrammar verbal group nominal group nominal group Table 5.3  Orbital structure of an engendered figure (2) nucleus centre discourse semantics (5.11)

occurrence

lexicogrammar

+ entity

repeats the cell division Process: material Medium verbal group nominal group

Table 5.4  Orbital structure of a domained occurrence figure   discourse semantics (5.10)

nucleus  

centre occurrence

(=+ entity)

+ entity

climbed the mountain Mary Process: material Outer Range Medium lexicogrammar verbal group nominal group nominal group

therefore demonstrates a distinctive structure of the figure. Such Range Participants are named in Halliday (1994) as entity Range from an ergative perspective. The entities construed by entity Range can be annotated as =+ given its additional meaning to the occurrence as well as its position outside the centre. This type of Range is labelled in the analysis as an Outer Range, in opposition to the Inner Range inside the centre. In scientific discourse, occurrence figures are typically realised through effective clauses, such as in (5.12).3 In this figure type, an additional participant realised by an Agent is involved. In contrast to the ranged middle clause (e.g. 5.9 and 5.10), an effective clause allows for receptive voice. The use of a perpetrator entity is thus optional (e.g. by us). Given its optional role, we can position the perpetrator entity realised by the Agent further away from the centre—i.e. in an inner orbit (in opposition to an ‘outer orbit’ which will be introduced in the next section), and its relationship to the other units can be annotated as +×.

Figure  97 Table 5.5  Orbital structure of a perpetrated occurrence figure   centre discourse semantics (5.12)

occurrence

inner orbit nucleus   + entity

    +× entity

was measured the weight of the water (by us) Process: material Medium Agent lexicogrammar verbal group nominal group nominal group

Several types of engendered figures have now been identified. The occurrence is either assigned with a domain or not. If there is a domain, an entity designates the occurrence; without a domain, an additional entity may perpetrate the occurrence. Amongst the engendered figures, a simultaneous distinction can be made according to the types of entities playing Engenderer and Perpetrator. Two entity types are at stake—i.e. people entities and thing entities. This distinction orients to different field activities; that is, whether an activity is enacted or observed by the biologists. The resulting figure types can be named as the observed occurrence figure and the enacted occurrence figure. Additionally, occurrence figures may involve some optional elements, such as successfully and with a balance in (5.13). (5.13) The weight of the water was measured (+× by us) successfully with a balance. The first optional element is the quality of occurrence. In this example, the quality has an explicit realisation as a Circumstance [Manner] (successfully). As discussed earlier, it is also possible to realise a quality of occurrence through an implicit infusion in the lexical item realising the occurrence itself (e.g. look at systematically/carefully vs examine). Given their close bond, the qualitied occurrence as a whole situates inside the centre. The opposition between qualified and non-qualified occurrences needs to be accounted for in an occurrence system, and therefore not included in the figure system. The other additional choice in figure (5.13) is the entity balance, realised through a Circumstance of Manner [Means]. Halliday and Matthiessen (2014, p. 318) point out that the Circumstances of Means (with a balance) (and also Comparison, e.g. like the devil), are more ‘participant-like’ than adverbial Manner Circumstances (e.g. successfully). This means, in contrast to the qualities of occurrences, entities realised in Means and Comparison are more dissociated from the occurrence in the centre. They can be situated outside the nucleus, given their optional

98  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Table 5.6  Orbital structure of an instrumented occurrence figure inner orbit   discourse semantics (5.13) lexicogrammar

 

nucleus centre

 

margin

periphery

qualitied occurrence

+ entity

+× entity

× entity

were measured successfully Process: material v.gr

the weight of the water Medium n.gr

(by us) Agent n.gr

(with a balance) Cir. Manner prep.ph

roles in the figure. A further distinction can be made between choices in the inner orbit—as margin and periphery, as modelled in Table 5.6. Following Martin (1992), the relationship between the entity (realised in the Circumstance) and the rest of the figure is treated as an enhancement, annotated by ‘×’. Like the Perpetrator entity realised by an Agent, which also situates outside the nucleus, the entities realised in the Circumstances are optional. Unlike Perpetrator entities, however, these entities are more ‘peripheral’ in that they are less likely to be realised in the interpersonal grammar as a Subject or in textual grammar as an unmarked Theme.4 The system network in Figure 5.2 accounts for the possibility of involving an Instrument entity in an engendered figure, shown as the opposition between ‘instrumented’ and ‘not instrumented (-)’. In addition to Manner, other Circumstances such as Place (in the laboratory) and Time (in September) can also construe entities in the periphery of inner orbit. These additional entities allow occurrence figures to be situated (see Figure 5.2). Place and time are not salient features in the discourse of undergraduate biology, but they can play a significant role in discourses such as history and literary studies (Dreyfus & Hao, forthcoming). 5.3.3  State Figures State figures are distinguished from occurrence figures because their discourse semantic configurations can be realised congruently at both the clause rank through a relational process and at the group rank through a nominal group. When realised through a relational process, various delicate types are possible, including existential clauses such as in (5.14), identifying clauses as in (5.15) and attributive clauses, both the classifying type as in (5.16) and the descriptive type as in (5.17). (5.14) There were a number of asymmetrically shaped organisms. (5.15) Members of this phylum include plant and animal parasites, as well as the ruminant symbionts.

Figure  99 (5.16) The microbes were either commensal or symbiotic organisms. (5.17) The pipette was fairly inaccurate. Among these examples, the existential process in (5.14) construes a figure involving one (dimensioned) entity (a number of asymmetrically shaped > organisms). After being introduced, the entity co-elaborates with entities in other orbital structures as the text unfolds. In comparison to (5.14) presenting an entity, (5.15) and (5.16) establish co-elaborations between entities within an orbital structure. We can first make a distinction between figures that are both centred on entities—i.e. a presented figure that presents an entity and a co-elaborated figure that relates more than one entity. In terms of their orbital structures, the presented state figure involves an entity in the centre, as modelled in Table 5.7. Note that in addition to existential clauses, ‘presentation’ of an entity may be lexicogrammaticalised through a Process such as exist, appear and occur in a material process (e.g. a number of asymmetrically shaped organisms exists), or through an Attribute in an attributive process (e.g. a number of asymmetrically shaped organisms are present). In terms of the co-elaborated figures, typical realisations include different types of relational processes (both attributive and identifying types) and their agnate structures at the group rank, particularly the paratactic elaborating nominal group complex. Logico-semantic elaboration described in Halliday and Matthiessen (2014, pp. 460–471) offers a useful perspective to differentiate types of co-elaboration between entities. Table 5.8 provides a summary of the co-elaboration types and their typical grammatical realisations revealed in this study.5 Exposition restates the meaning and can be lexicogrammaticalised as that is. Exemplification specifies instances of a category and can be lexicogrammaticalised through for example or such as. With respect to the orbital structures, the co-elaborated entities can be situated in the centre irrespective of their different grammatical realisations, as exemplified in Table 5.9. In other words, the co-elaborated entities have an equal status in the discourse.

Table 5.7  Orbital structure of a presented figure   discourse semantics (5.14)

centre entity

there were a number of asymmetrically shaped organisms Process: existential Medium lexicogrammar v.gr n.gr

Table 5.8  Typical realisations of co-elaborative state figures Realisation paratactic nominal group relational process types complex intensive identifying Chytridiomycota process [encoding]: were present in the The irregular urchin digestive system of 1 naming [Value/Identified] = is the irregular urchin, is called called Echinocardium = 2 Echinocardium cordatum [Token/ cordatum. Identifier]. intensive identifying process [decoding]: 1 B-galactosidase, = 2 an B-galactosidase unpacking enzyme which breaks [Token/Identified] = is defined as down lactose, was studied. is an enzyme which breaks down lactose [Value/Identifier]. exposition that is [i.e.] intensive attributive The flask containing lactose and 1 glucose, = 2 process (classifying categorising a preferred simpler food type): is categorised Glucose [Carrier] = is a source demonstrated as preferred simpler food a lower level of B-galactosidase activity. source [Attribute]. possessive identifying In this experiment, a process: Finnpipette and a BioThe three methods Rad P200 pipette were including [Token/Identified] = calibrated, using 1 three including include weight-of-water, methods 2 = —weight-ofspectrophotometry and water, spectrophotometry radioactivity [Value/ and radioactivity. Identifier]. intensive identifying process [encoding]: Further analysis could Molecular sequence be performed using 1 exemplification [Value/Identified] is molecular sequencing such as, for example [e.g.] exemplified by DNA methods, 2 = such as sequencing [Token/ DNA sequencing. Identifier]. co-elaboration type

Table 5.9  Orbital structure of co-elaborated figures   discourse semantics (5.15) (5.15b) (5.16) (5.16a)

centre entity

=

entity

plant and animal parasites, as well as the Members of include ruminant symbionts this phylum plant and animal parasites, as well as the Members of including ruminant symbionts this phylum, the microbes were either commensal or symbiotic organisms the microbes - i.e. either commensal or symbiotic organisms

Figure  101 In contrast to figures in (5.15) and (5.16) concerning with entities and their co-elaborations, the figure in (5.17) the pipette was fairly inaccurate describes an entity by extending it to a quality. This figure type can be referred to as extended state figures. Extended state figures can be realised at both clause rank and group rank, including descriptive attributive processes (Martin, 1992, p. 319; see also Davidse, 1991) and Epithet^Thing nominal groups structure. These agnate realisations are shown in the following examples. Medium^Range (/Attribute) : Epithet^Thing the pipette + was fairly inaccurate : the fairly inaccurate + pipette :: this method + was time consuming : the time consuming + method :: Given that quality extends the entity, the orbital structure of an extended state figure differs from the co-elaborated state figure in that the entity (realised through a Medium or a Thing) situates in the centre and the quality (realised through an Attribute or an Epithet) locates in the nucleus. In the realisation at the clause rank, the Attribute/Range construing the quality is inherent in the Process. As pointed out by Davidse, ‘the process itself is one of attribution rather than action’ (Davidse, 1991, p. 183). The bonding of Process and Attribute in construing quality is reflected in the fact that the quality in it is smelly can also be realised congruently through a Process as in it smells. We now take one further step from an interpersonal perspective to consider extended state figures. The quality of an entity may carry attitudinal meaning, interacting with either affect, judgement or appreciation (Martin & White, 2005). As has been discussed in Chapter 3, the entities in scientific discourse tend to be coupled with instances of appreciation, as fairly inaccurate and time consuming above. However, some qualities of entities do not carry any attitudinal meaning, but rather provide an epistemological description of the entity—e.g. motile in (5.18) and anaerobic in (5.19). (5.18) These cells [entity] + were motile [quality]. (5.19) Any chytrids [entity] + would be anaerobic [quality]. Table 5.10  Orbital structure of an extended state figure   discourse semantics (5.17) lexicogrammar

nucleus centre

 

entity

+ quality

the pipette

(was) fairly inaccurate Process: Range intensive attributive v.gr adj.gr

Medium n.gr

102  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Based on the orientation to either interpersonal or experiential meanings, we can further identify two subtypes of extended state figure, attitudinal and epistemological. Note that epistemological ones are closely associated with dimensions of entity discussed in Chapter 4, particularly with the measured and perceived dimensions. As exemplified by the pairs below, dimensions (i.e. colour, weight, susceptibility) catalogue the epistemological qualities involved. (5.20a) The bird [entity] is black [quality]. (5.20b) The colour of > the bird [dimension>entity] is black [quality]. (5.21a) The material [entity] is not heavy [quality]. (5.21b) The weight of > the material [dimension>entity] can be measured [occurrence]. We have now identified different types of figure and their orbital structures. In the next section, we examine ways in which the orbital structures can be augmented.

5.4  Augmentation of Figures The structures of occurrence figures and state figures can be augmented with three distinctive choices. These include instigation, evaluation and position of a figure. Before the detailed discussion, Figure 5.3 provides a

Figure 5.3  Expanded system of figure types

Figure  103 preview of these additional choices in three simultaneous figure systems: instigation, evaluation and position. 5.4.1  Instigated Figure A first way of augmenting an occurrence figure or a state figure is to include an additional entity that instigates the figure to take place. In the examples below, an additional entity cell wall composition is involved in the occurrence figure (5.22) and an entity fever is involved in the state figure (5.23). (5.22) Cell wall composition did not make Podospora lose its viability. (5.23) Fever makes the fungal infection by Metarhizium anisopliae less severe. In these examples, the instigation is realised through the Process in the form of verbal group complex (e.g. make . . . lose; make . . . (become) less severe). From the transitive perspective in the grammar, such Instigator entity is realised through an additional Participant available across process types (Halliday, 1985), as Initiator in a material process (e.g. cell wall composition in (5.22)), Inducer in a mental process, Attributor in a relational attributive process (e.g. fever in (5.23)) and Assigner in relational identifying process.6 From the ergative perspective, this Participant is seen as an additional Agent, choosing ‘agentive’ in the voice system (Figure 5.1), and thus differentiated from the Agent involved in the effective voice (Halliday, 1968; Davidse, 1991). This choice of additional Agent is glossed here as a 2nd order Agent. As far as the orbital structure is concerned, the Instigator entity realised by the 2nd order Agent situates further away from the primary structure of the figure. We can name the unit with the instigator entity as an outer orbit.7 The instigation relationship between the instigator entity and the figure is annotated as ‘××’, as shown in the following tables. Table 5.11  Orbital structure of an instigated occurrence figure outer orbit   inner orbit   nucleus     centre       discourse instigated + entity +× entity ×× entity semantics occurrence cell wall did not its viability Podospora (5.22) composition make . . . lose 1st Agent/ 2nd Agent/ Process: Medium/Goal Actor Initiator material lexicogrammar v.gr complex n.gr n.gr n.gr

104  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Table 5.12  Orbital structure of an instigated state figure

  centre discourse semantics

entity

outer orbit inner orbit nucleus   + quality

the fungal makes . . . become less infection severe Medium/ Process: Inner Range/ lexicogrammar Carrier attributive Attribute n.gr v.gr cplx adj.gr (5.23)

      ×× entity fever 2nd Agent/ Attributor n.gr

Note that the Instigator entity is structurally close to the entity involved in the periphery in the inner orbit (e.g. with a balance), since it too can be alternatively realised as a Circumstance, specifically the Circumstance [Cause]. This observation is exemplified by Davidse (1991, p. 75) (see also Halliday, 1968, p. 198 ff.) as the following: The slope made the ball roll : The ball rolled because of the slope :: Hunger made the soldiers march : The soldiers marched because of the hunger :: Nonetheless, the entity realised through the 2nd order Agent is still differentiated from the one in the inner orbit, since grammar allows for iterative realisations of instigator entities. In other words, instigation has indefinite expansion: The ball rolled : Fred rolled the ball : Mary made Fred roll the ball : John got Mary to make Fred roll the ball (Halliday, 1994, p. 172) 5.4.2  Orbital and Satellites Two other ways of augmenting a figure provide a ‘satellite’ of the orbital structure. We begin by looking at two examples. (5.24) It is beneficial [[that we identify components of the normal microbial community in sea urchin]]. (5.25) We propose || that size also becomes a determining factor. The figure in (5.24) ((we) identify components of the normal microbial community in sea urchin) is realised by an embedded clause; this figure is positively evaluated through beneficial. The Subject it is an anticipatory Subject (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 198), which refers forward

Figure  105 to the figure realised by the embedded clause. In (5.25) an occurrence figure (size becomes a determining factor) is realised by a projected clause. While grammatically these examples have realisations as clause complexes, at the level of discourse semantics, these augmentations are not relating two figures into a sequence, but rather to evaluate a figure (e.g. it is beneficial . . .) and position (e.g. we propose . . .) a figure in a heteroglossic space. In terms of their structures, evaluation and position both have an intermediate structure between a figure constituted by a mono-nuclear and a sequence involving multi-nuclear (i.e. ordered in a serial structure). They function as a ‘satellite’ that augmenting the orbital structure in two different ways, annotated here as orbital ‘ ’

(6.14)

The results for indicated Phycomyces

was lost

Med/Sayer

Pro

Pro: mat

Med/Act

Cir: Place

n.gr

v.gr

v.gr

n.gr

prep.ph

lexicogrammar (congruent)

n.gr lexicogrammar (metaphorical) Med/Tk/Id (6.15)

viability in the between the second crop and the instar faeces individuals

v.gr

n.gr

Pro: int. iden

Outer Range/Value/Ir

The results for indicated Phycomyces

a loss of viability between the crop and the faeces in the second instar individuals

[Process] a loss of viability [Value]) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014). In order to make an explicit distinction between the congruent and metaphorical mappings, this study treats such metaphorical realisation as a relational process. Through specifically here an intensive identifying process in (6.15), the occurrence figure realised initially through a ranking clause in (6.14) (the viability was lost . . .) is now realised metaphorically through a Participant [Outer Range/Value] (a loss of viability . . .). The remapping of the positioned figure is shown in Table 6.5. The stratal tension is shown by the mismatch between the verbal and the relational processes. The above discussion has provided a brief survey of typical metaphorical remapping of figure types. In the next section, we continue to explore stratal tension by examining the remapping of sequences of figures to various grammatical choices.

124  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

6.4  Metaphorical Realisations of Sequence Figures interconnect into a sequence through logical connexions. Chapter 5 has shown that a sequence of figures can be realised congruently through an expanding clause complex. When the sequence is realised metaphorically, one or both figures involved must be ‘‘thing-ised’ to some extent—via embedding or nominalisation’ (Martin, 1992, pp. 169–170). Based on how the figures in the sequence are realised, a diverse range of grammatical resources can be used to realise the sequence metaphorically. The diversity is reflected in the wide range of grammatical choices for realising connexions between figures. In addition to their congruent realisations through conjunctions, connexions can be remapped metaphorically onto other grammatical choices, including Circumstances (because of . . .) and Processes at the clause rank (e.g. cause; lead to; result from), and Qualifiers (in a nominal group) at the group rank (e.g. for). Halliday and Matthiessen (1999) point out that logical relationships between figures are the ‘most unstable in terms of their susceptibility to metaphoric transformation’ (p. 267). In this section, we consider first the metaphorical mapping between a sequence to a projecting clause complex, and then we examine the various mappings of a sequence to a clause. 6.4.1 Mapping a Sequence Metaphorically Onto a Projecting Clause Complex The congruent realisation of a sequence typically employs expanding clause complex; both figures in the sequence are then realised through ranking clauses. When the sequence is mapped metaphorically to the grammar, the preceding figure can be mapped onto a nominal group. This realisation can be shown in the following examples. The metaphorical realisations of the preceding figures are in boldface. (6.16) [[That the result also displayed a strong linear relationship]] suggested the pipette was both accurate and precise throughout its range. (6.17)  The minimal variability that existed between the readings demonstrated the pipette was fairly precise. (6.18) The flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity. This demonstrated that gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity. Similar to the discussion regarding positioned figures in Chapter 5, from a grammatical perspective, the structures in these examples are at the border of verbal and relational processes. On the one hand they are able to take a Receiver (e.g. The minimal variability that existed between the readings [Sayer] demonstrated to us [Receiver] . . .), which argues

Grammatical Metaphor  125 for them as a verbal process; one the other hand, the Verbiages cannot be quoted (e.g. *The minimal variability that existed between the readings demonstrated, ‘the pipette was fairly precise’), which argues for their structure as a relational clause. The study treats these structures as projecting clause complex (specifically hypotactic projections). This analysis allows us to distinguish the metaphorical mapping of one figure in a sequence to a group from the mapping of both figures in a sequence to a group (which will be discussed in Section 6.4.2). In the above examples, first figures are realised metaphorically through the Participant Sayer. Their metaphorical realisations are in various grammatical forms. The figure in (6.16) is realised in the form of an embedded clause; the one in (6.17) is realised through a nominalisation; and the one in (6.18) is tracked through a discourse referent this, which can also be treated as a metaphorical realisation (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 717).1 The second figures in these examples are realised congruently through a projected clause. The consequential connexions between the figures are realised through the Processes suggest and demonstrate. We can unpack the stratal tension in these examples, mapping the sequences congruently onto an expanding clause complex. The sequence in (6.16) can be unpacked as in (6.19), in which the consequential connexion is an internal one. The internal connexion is underlined and annotated on the left-hand side of the text. (6.19)

a. It (the result) also displayed a strong linear relationship, consequence

b.

SO

the pipette was both accurate and precise throughout its range.

From an interpersonal perspective, the Processes suggest and demonstrate enact heteroglossic engagement (Martin & White, 2005). That is, suggest expands the potential voices and demonstrate contracts the potential voices. The way of unpacking the logical metaphor in (6.19) does not reveal these interpersonal meanings. Ideationally, we may argue that the verbal process realises both a logical connexion and position of a figure at the same time. Suggest and demonstrate can be unpacked respectively into so we know/conclude and so we suppose. Such unpacking is exemplified in (6.20), (6.21) and (6.22). This way of unpacking the logical metaphor reveals both the connexion and the heteroglossic engagement enacted by the position. Note that by realising a position explicitly, the internal connexion is ‘externalised’, annotated on the right-hand side of the text. (6.20) (6.20) a. It (the result) displayed a strong linear relationship, a. It (the also result) also displayed a strong linear relationship, b.

SOb. we SO suppose the pipette bothwas accurate precise we suppose the was pipette both and accurate and

precise

consequence consequence

throughout its range. throughout its range. (6.21)

(6.21)

a. The readings were minimally variable,

a. The readings were minimally variable,

consequence

consequence

a. It (the result) also displayed a strong linear relationship, b.

SO

consequence

we suppose the pipette was both accurate and precise

throughout its range. 126  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics (6.21) (6.21) a. The readings were minimally variable, b.

SO

consequence

we know/conclude the pipette was fairly precise.

(6.22) (6.22) a. The flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity, b.

SO

consequence

we know/conclude gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity.

The stratal tension between a sequence and clause complex is shown in Table 6.6, taking (6.17) and (6.21) as a pair of examples. Grammatically, the realisation of sequence through a projecting clause complex shares the same structure with the congruent realisation of a positioned figure such as in (6.23). Regardless of the enate grammatical structures, the different discourse semantic structures suggest that two kinds of grammatical metaphor are at stake. (6.23) The results indicated || that the viability was lost between the crop and the faeces in the second instar individuals. Table 6.6  Stratal tension between a sequence and a projecting clause complex nucleus centre nucleus

state figure

centre discourse semantics

(6.21)

entity state figure

entity

the were readings minimally variable

(6.17)

conx posit > ‘’

so

we the conclude pipette

was

fairly precise

Pro

In.Rg/ Med/ Att Car

v.gr

adj.gr

v.gr

n.gr

v.gr

adj.gr

Sayer

Pro

Med/ Car

Pro

In.Rg/ Att

the minimal variability [[that existed between the readings]]

demonstrated

the was pipette

fairly precise

lexicogr. Med/Car (cong) n.gr

lexicogr. (metaph)

+ quality

+ quality

Pro: int. att

In.Rg/ Att

v.gr

adj.gr

n.gr

conj verbal pro

n.gr

Grammatical Metaphor  127 Table 6.7  Realising sequence and positioned figure through verbal processes || that the viability was lost between the crop and the faeces in the second instar individuals

positioned figure

The results

indicated

positioned figure / sequence

The result [[that the flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity]]

|| that gene expression controls demonstrated B-galactosidase activity.

sequence

[[That the result also displayed a strong suggested linear relationship]]

discourse semantics grammar

Sayer

Process: verbal

|| the pipette was both accurate and precise throughout its range. Locution

(key: experiential metaphors are in bold; logical metaphors are in bold and underlined)

In between positioned figures and sequences, there are borderline cases—that is when the source of the position, typically a semiotic entity, is elaborated through a figure. Compare three examples in Table 6.7. In the second example, the figure realised through the Qualifier (i.e. [[that the flasks demonstrated . . . ]]) elaborates the semiotic entity result. The clause complex as a whole can be seen as construing either a sequence or a positioned figure. It is important to treat such borderline cases consistently in the data analysis throughout a study. In this study, they are treated as sequences, given that the figures are identifiable through the Qualifiers, and hence the causal connexions between the figures are also identifiable. In other words, the distinction here between a sequence and a positioned figure is dependent on the nature of Sayer—i.e. if the Sayer construes an entity, the clause complex construes a positioned figure; if the Sayer construes a figure, the clause complex is seen as construing a sequence. 6.4.2  Mapping Sequence Metaphorically Onto a Clause When a sequence is realised through a clause, at least one of the figures needs to be realised at the group rank. In what follows, we first examine the realisation involving one figure at the group rank; we then look at the realisation having both figures at the group rank. 6.4.2.1  One of the Figures Realised at the Group Rank There are two ways in which a figure in a sequence can be mapped onto the group rank. The first way is to map the figure onto the Circumstance

128  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics of the ranking clause, such as in (6.24). In the following examples, the connexions are annotated in small caps. Metaphorical realisations are in boldface. (6.24)  In the presence of lactose, B-galactosidase activity increases. In this example, the Circumstance of Time in the presence of lactose realises a figure lactose is present. The Minor Process in realises the temporal connexion between the figures. The figures are related to each other externally. The sequence can be made explicit in its congruent mapping in (6.25). (6.25) (6.25) a.

WHEN

lactose is present,

temporal

b. B-galactosidase activity increases.

Table 6.8 demonstrates the stratal tension between the sequence and the clause. The second way of realising a sequence in a clause is to realise one of the figures through the 2nd order Agent, such as in the following examples. Table 6.8  Stratal tension between a sequence and a clause nucleus centre

centre

occurrence figure discourse semantics occurrence + entity

entity

B-galactosidase when activity

(6.25)

increases

lexicogr. (cong)

Pro: mat

Med/Act

v.gr

n.gr

lexicogr. (metaph)

v.gr

n.gr

Pro: mat

Med/Act

increases

B-galactosidase activity

(6.24)

state figure

conx

lactose is present Med/ Car

conj

n.gr

Pro: In.Rg/Attr int.attr v.gr

adj.

prep.ph prep

n.gr Cir: Time

in

the presence of lactose

Grammatical Metaphor  129 (6.26)  Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined. (6.27)  [[That some bacteria may also help fix nitrogen]] allows their hosts to successfully thrive on diets with a high carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (6.28) (Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of substrates, including cellulose, keratin and chitin.) This allows materials to be more readily degraded by fungi and bacteria. In these examples, the metaphorically realised figures are shown as the nominalisation (i.e. the calibration of a pipette) in (6.26), the embedded clause [[that some bacteria may also help fix nitrogen]] in (6.27) and the tracking via textual reference this in (6.28). The connexions between the figures are manifested in the verbal group complexes and lexicalised by the verb allow. Unpacking these grammatical metaphors, such as in (6.29), reveals that these figures are related to each other externally and consequentially. (6.29) (6.29) a. Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of substrates… b.

SO

consequence

materials can be more readily degraded by fungi and bacteria

Table 6.9 models this stratal tension between a sequence and an agentive clause. Note that the metaphorical realisation of sequence through an agentive clause can be enate to the congruent realisation of a figure involving an Instigator entity (see Section 5.4.1 in Chapter 5) as exemplified in (6.30). (6.30)  Ruminant fungi [2nd order Agent] make the fibrous plant materials degrade within the rumen. While grammatically enate, we can recognise their different discourse semantic structures based on the different meanings made by the 2nd order Agent. In an instigated figure, the 2nd order Agent construes an entity—e.g. Ruminant fungi in (6.17); whereas in a sequence, the 2nd order Agent construes a figure. Note that a 2nd order Agent sometimes realises an activity entity in the form of a nominalisation, as in (6.31). (6.31)  Maceration [2nd order Agent] could cause spores to fracture. Such instances may be mistaken as metaphorical realisations of sequences. However, drawing on the distinction made between activity entity and

Med/Go n.gr

Pro: mat

v.gr

lexicogrammar (c)

(6.28)

lexicogrammar (m)

enzymes

produce

(6.29)

materials

Med/Go

Pro allows…to be more readily degraded

n.gr

Med/Go

2nd Ag/Initiator

adv.

Man

This / [[That members of the Chytrids can produce enzymes]]

v.gr

Pro: mat

materials

can be degraded

more readily

+ entity

qualitied occurrence

occurrence figure

n.gr

conj

so

conx

centre

nucleus

inner orbit

v.gr cplex

n.gr

1st Ag/ Act

Members of the Chytrid

+× entity

n.gr / [[embedded clause]]

+ entity

occurrence

occurrence figure

discourse semantics

centre

nucleus

inner orbit

Table 6.9  Stratal tension between a sequence and an agentive clause

by fungi…

1st Ag/Act

prep.ph

prep.ph

1st Ag/Act

by fungi…

+× entity

Grammatical Metaphor  131 Table 6.10 The realisations of sequence and instigated figure through agentive clause discourse semantics sequence

instigated figure

example

lexicogrammar: agentive clause

Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined

2nd order Agent realises a figure

Maceration could cause spores to fracture.

2nd order Agent realises an activity entity

Ruminant fungi make the fibrous plant materials degrade within the rumen.

2nd order Agent realises a thing entity

(key: entities are underlined; experiential metaphors are in bold; logical metaphors are in bold and small caps)

grammatical metaphor in Chapter 3 (see also Hao, 2020a), we can identify that maceration is a linguistically defined activity entity that instigates the figure. Recognising the discourse semantic meaning construed by the 2nd order Agent is therefore critical for making the distinction between a sequence and an instigated figure. An overview of the construal of discourse semantic meanings through an agentive clause is shown in Table 6.10. 6.4.2.2  Both Figures Realised at Group Rank We now consider the mapping of both figures in a sequence onto the group rank. Depending on the type of connexions between the figures, the sequence can be mapped onto a material process, an identifying relational process or an attributive relational process. 1) Material process First, a sequence can be mapped onto an ‘abstract’ material process (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 196). This realisation is exemplified in (6.32) and (6.33). (6.32)  Understanding these relationships [Actor] would also assist [Process] understanding of ecological and evolutionary relationships between animals and microorganisms [Goal]. (6.33)  The survival of small but not large spores in this study [Actor] supports [Process] the importance of size in fracture initiation dynamics [Goal].

132  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics In these examples, the participants, Actor and Goal, respectively realise a figure in the sequence. The Processes (assist, support) realise the connexions between the figures. Through unpacking the grammatical metaphors, the connexion in (6.32) is revealed as an external one, i.e. if . . . then . . . in (6.34), and the connexion in (6.33) is an internal one, which is rephrased as an external connexion in combination with a position in (6.35) (i.e. so we know). (6.34) a.

IF we understand these relationships

b.

THEN

condion

we can understand the ecological and evolutionary relationship…

(6.35) a. Small but not large spores survived in this study. b.

SO we

consequence

know the size in fracture initiation dynamics is important.

Table 6.11 illustrates the stratal tension between sequence and a material process. 2) Relational identifying process The relational identifying process is the second typical realisation of sequence at the clause rank. In the example (6.36), one figure is tracked by the textual reference this, realised by a Token, and the other is made explicit by its elaboration of a semiotic entity (knowledge [[that . . . ]]), realised in a Value. The connexion between the figures is realised through the Process confirmed. (6.36) The flask containing lactose demonstrated a higher level of B-galactosidase activity in comparison to the control flask with nothing added. This [Token] confirmed [Process] previous knowledge [[that lactose induces B-galactosidase activity]] [Value]. The meaning construed by the Process confirm can be interpreted either as an internal connexion so/therefore or a combination of an external connexion and a position—so we conclude/we know (for sure). The example (6.37) unpacks the sequence in (6.36) as a combination of external connexion and position in order to reveal the heteroglossic engagement. The

n.gr

v.gr

Med/Go understanding of ecological and evolutionary relationships…

Pro would assist

[[understanding these relationship]]

(6.32)

n.gr

1st Ag/Act

n.gr

prep.ph

Med/Sen

v.gr

v.gr

Out.Rg/Ph

we

ecological and evolutionary relationships

would understand Pro: men

+× entity

+ entity

occurrence

occurrence figure

nucleus

[[embedded clause]]

conj

(if…) then

conx

centre

inner orbit

lexicogrammar (m)

n.gr

Med/Sen

Out.Rg/Ph

Pro: men

lexicogrammar (c)

we

these relationship

understand

(6.34)

+× entity

+ entity

occurrence

occurrence figure

nucleus

discourse semantics

centre

inner orbit

Table 6.11  Stratal tension between a sequence and a material process

134  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics modification of high certainty of the proposition can also be realised through an evaluation (e.g. it is certain). (6.37) a. The flask demonstrated a higher level of B-galactosidase activity, b.

SO

consequence

we conclude (/it is certain that) lactose induces B-

galactosidase activity.

In modelling the stratal tension between a sequence and an identifying process (in Table 6.12), because the Process construes a consequential connexion between two figures, the identifying process can be treated as a circumstantial one. According to the grammatical description (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014), in a circumstantial clause, the Process can be associated with various types of Circumstances including time, place, manner, cause, etc. (p. 290). It has been illustrated earlier that an identifying process can be a metaphorical realisation of a positioned figure, such as in (6.38). In other words, this grammatical structure is enate to the realisation of sequence in (6.36). (6.38) The results [Token] indicated [Process] a loss of viability between the crop and the faeces in the second instar individuals [Value]. Despite their similar grammatical structures, a sequence and a positioned figure need to be distinguished based on their discourse semantic configurations. The distinction is determined by the meaning construed by the Token. If the Token construes a figure, the clause construes a sequence; if the Token construes an entity (e.g. a semiotic entity results in (6.38)), the clause construes a positioned figure. 3) Relational attributive process A further way of mapping sequence to a clause is through a circumstantial attributive process, within which both figures are realised through the Participants (as Carrier and Attribute). The connexion can be realised through either the Process or the Attribute, as exemplified respectively in (6.39) and (6.40). (6.39) The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes [Carrier] could have resulted from [Process] the ingestion of algae [Attribute].

confirmed

This

(6.36)

conj

inner orbit

Out.Rg/Vl/Ir

n.gr

n.gr

Med/Go

B-galactosidase activity

+ entity

occurrence figure

nucleus

prep.ph

Ag/Act

lactose

+× entity

previous knowledge [[that lactose induces B-galactosidase activity]]

v.gr

Pro: mat

mental pro

v.gr

n.gr

induces

occur.

we conclude

Pro: cir.iden

v.gr

n.gr

Rg/Vl/Ir

so

n.gr

Pro: int.iden

Med /Tk/Id

a higher level of B-galactosidase activity

conx

Med/Tk/Id

demonstrated

The flask

entity = entity

state figure

posit > ‘’

lexicogrammar (m)

lexicogrammar (c)

(6.37)

discourse semantics

centre

centre

Table 6.12 Stratal tension between a sequence and a clause of circumstantial identifying process

136  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics (6.40) Although it was possible that chytrids were present within the samples used, none were present in the culture. This [Carrier] may have been [Process] due to the prolonged storage of these samples [Attribute]. The connexion in (6.39) is realised through the Process result from and the connexion in (6.40) is realised in the Attribute, through the Minor Process due to. These sequences are unpacked to their congruent realisations in (6.41) and (6.42). Both connexions are external and consequential. (6.41) (6.41) a. It is possible that chytrids was present within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes, b.

BECAUSE

consequence

algae were ingested.

(6.42) (6.42) a. ALTHOUGH it was possible that chytrids were present within the samples used,

concessive

b. none were present in the culture, c. probably BECAUSE we stored these samples for a long time.

consequence

Note that in these examples, most of the figures involve an evaluation modifying their probability (i.e. possible, it was possible and may in the metaphorical mapping and it is possible/possibly and probably in the unpacked congruent mapping). The modification radiates across the sequence. It provides an attitudinal ‘scope’ through which the volume of the certainty of propositions is turned down (see also ‘scoping clause’ and ‘scoping adverbials’ in McGregor, 1997). Following the representation of evaluated figures in Chapter 5 (Section 5.4.3), the prosody of evaluation is shown in Table 6.13 by the arrow ranging throughout the sequence. As grammatically the Process construes a consequential connexion, the clause is treated specifically as a circumstantial attributive process. 6.4.2.3  Mapping a Figure Within a Nominal Group In the next metaphorical mapping of sequences, connexions are realised nominally. The process type featuring this kind of realisation is typically an intensive identifying process (specifically an encoding type), as exemplified in the following examples. (6.43) The absence of Podospora from the crop [Token/Identifier] is [Process] evidence [for mandibular damage to the spores] [Value/ Identified].

(6.39)

In.Rg/ Attr

Pro: int. attr v.gr

Med/Car n.gr

In.Rg/Attr ingestion of algae

could have resulted from

n.gr

n.gr

Med/Go

algae

Pro: cir.attr

v.gr

Pro: mat

was ingested

+ entity

Med/Car

conj

probably because

occur.

occurrence figure

v.gr

n.gr

Cir

within the coelomic fluid

× entity

conx

centre

nucleus

n.gr

adj

present

was

state figure

Chytrids

entity

centre

nucleus

inner orbit

The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid

clause / modal Adj

lexicogrammar (c)

lexicogrammar (m)

it is possible / possibly,

(6.41)

discourse semantics

evaluation

Table 6.13  Stratal tension between a sequence and a circumstantial attributive process

138  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics (6.44) The alternative explanation [for the absence of colonization by Isaria] [Value/Identified] is [Process] [[that the locust initiated some physiological response]] [Token/Identifier]. (6.45) The consequence [of the inadvertent transmission] [Value/Identified] is [Process] [[that spores could be isolated from the locust]] [Token/Identifier]. In these examples, one figure in the sequence is realised by the Participant Token in the form of a nominalisation (i.e. the absence of Podospora . . . in (6.43)) or an embedded clause (i.e. [[that the locust initiated . . . ]] in (6.44)). Both the connexion and the second figure are realised inside the nominal group functioning as the Participant Value. The connexion is realised by the Head of the nominal group, in the form of a nominalisation (i.e. evidence, explanation, consequence). The second figure is realised by a downranked nominal group functioning as the Qualifier. By unpacking these grammatical mappings, the connexions between the figures are revealed as causal ones, including internal consequential connexions in (6.46) (so we know) and (6.47) (because we know), and external conditional connexion in (6.48) (if . . . then . . .). In order to make visible the heteroglossic contraction enacted by evidence and explanation, the internal connexions are paraphrased as an external connexion in combination with a position. (6.46) (6.46) a. Podospora from the crop is absent, b.

SO

consequence

we know mandibular damaged the spores.

(6.47) (6.47) a. The colonization by Isaria is absent, b.

BECAUSE

consequence

we know the locust initiated some physiological response.

(6.48) (6.48) a. BECAUSE we transmit it inadvertently, b. the spores could be isolated from the locust.

consequence

The stratal tension between a sequence and an intensive identifying process is exemplified in Table 6.14. It is important to note that nominalisations such as evidence, explanation and consequence may function as a realisation of a semiotic entity. When construing a semiotic entity, the nominalisation is a name for a figure (or a sequence) that functions as a cause or effect in the discourse; the semiotic entity can be elaborated through a fact projection as a Qualifier

(6.43)

lexicogrammar (m)

lexicogrammar (c)

(6.46)

discourse semantics

is

The absence of Podospora from the crop

conj.

Out.Rg/Vl/Ir

n.gr

n.gr

Med/Go

the spores

+ entity

+× entity

prep.ph

Ag/Act

mandibular

occurrence figure

evidence for mandibular damage to the spores

v.gr

Pro: mat

mental pro

occurrence

centre

damaged

Pro: int.iden

n.gr

inner orbit nucleus

we know

Med/Tk/Id

n.gr

v.gr

In.Rg/Att

so

posit.> ‘ ’

v.gr

Pro

Med/Car

absent

conx.

n.gr

is

Podospora from the crop

entity

state figure

centre

Table 6.14  Stratal tension between a sequence and an intensive identifying process

140  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics (e.g. the result = [[that the flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity]]). However, when the nominalisation realises a connexion, it is usually modified by a Qualifier in the form of a prepositional phrase (as in the above examples). The logico-semantic relation between the Thing and the Qualifier is enhancement (evidence × [for mandibular damage to the spores]) instead of elaboration. For the distinction between semiotic entity and logical metaphor, see also Section 3.4.4 in Chapter 3.

6.5  Interstratal Tension This chapter has illustrated the various metaphorical mappings of figures and sequences. We have seen that in the metaphorical mappings of sequences, one or two figures are realised at the group rank or even within a group. Table 6.15 provides an overview of the diverse grammatical realisations of sequence. These realisations are arranged in a way that, moving from the top row to the bottom, there is a general shift from mapping figures to clauses, then to mapping (one or both) figures to groups (functioning as Participants) and finally to mapping one of the figures further to an embedded group (functioning as a Qualifier). It can be suggested that the more down-ranked the realisation of figures, the stronger the stratal tension between the sequence and its grammatical realisation. This scale of stratal tension resonates with what Halliday (e.g. 1998, p. 211) refers to as the ‘general drift’ of grammatical metaphor. When untangling stratal tension, the grammatical questions were encountered several times concerning clauses with ‘showing’ and ‘enabling’ verbs. As far as ‘showing’ verbs are concerned, distinctions need to be made between verbal and relational process types, which are topologically close (Christie & Cléirigh, 2008; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014; Hao, 2017). The above analyses have shown that borderline examples of verbal and relational processes can realise either a positioned figure or a sequence. In order to both ensure the consistency throughout the analysis and provide a productive way of revealing variations of stratal tension, this study has made the following analytical decisions: a verbal process congruently realises a positioned figure, but it metaphorically realises a sequence; a relational process congruently realises a state figure, but it metaphorically realises either a positioned figure or a sequence. Figure 6.1 represents the various ways of mapping a positioned figure and sequence in relation to relational and verbal processes. Solid arrows represent congruent mappings and the dashed arrows represent metaphorical mappings. Another important parameter for distinguishing among various grammatical realisations of sequence/figures involves instances with ‘enabling’ verbs such as make and cause in verbal group complexes. At stake here is the identification of instigated figures, which is realised congruently

Table 6.15  An overview of realisations of sequence  

sequence congruent

clause complex

figure(s)

connexion

example

figure a – clause, figure b – clause

conjunction

A set amount of water was pipetted into a container, and the weight of the water was measured

figure a – clause, figure b – clause (metaphorical)

conjunction

Since these fungi vary in spore size, the use of dung fungi is ideal.

figure a – clause, figure b – group

verbal Process

The minimal variability [[that existed between the readings]] demonstrated the pipette was fairly precise.

figure a – clause, figure b – group

Minor Process in Cir.

Smaller fungal spores are more likely to retain integrity and viability, due to the ability to more easily avoid maceration.

figure a—clause, figure b—group

within Process

Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined.

figure a – group, figure b – group

Process

The survival of small but not large spores supports the importance of size in fracture initiation dynamics.

Minor Process in Participant

[[That chytrids were present within the samples used]] may have been due to the prolonged storage.

Participant

The alternative explanation [for the absence of colonization by Isaria] is [[that the locust initiated some physiological response]].

clause

figure a – group, figure b – within group [Qualifier]

metaphorical

142  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

Figure 6.1 Mappings of sequence, positioned figures and state figures onto the lexicogrammar

Figure 6.2 Mappings of sequence, instigated figures and state figures onto the lexicogrammar

through an agentive clause (e.g. Ruminant fungi [Instigator entity/2nd order Agent] make the fibrous plant materials [entity/1st order Agent] degrade [occurrence/Process] within the rumen [entity/Circumstance]). The congruent mapping between an instigated figure and an agentive clause allows us to clarify the stratal tension between an instigated figure and its realisation through a relational process, and between a sequence and its realisations through an agentive clause or a relational clause. Figure 6.2 demonstrates the congruent and metaphorical mappings between these resources. Sorting out different kinds of stratal tension has also revealed that internal and external connexions favour different metaphorical realisations (see Table 6.16). Internal connexions tend to be realised through a ‘showing’ Process (e.g. show, suggest, demonstrate, imply, indicate, prove, confirm, etc.), either in a verbal process or a circumstantial identifying process (specifically the decoding type); it can also be realised nominally through a Participant in an intensive identifying process. In order to reveal the heteroglossic engagement construed by the ‘showing’ Process, this study has unpacked all the metaphorical realisations of internal connexions into a combination of an external connexion and a position (e.g. so we know/suppose). In contrast to the internal connexions, external connexions have more diverse realisations, including a Minor Process, agentive relation involving ‘enabling’ verbs, Processes in a range of clause types (material,

Table 6.16  Diverse metaphorical realisations of internal and external connexions2  

internal connexion

Minor Process

Process

external connexion Circumstance: Smaller fungal spores are more likely to retain integrity and viability, due to the ability to be more easily avoid maceration.

verbal Process: The minimal variability that existed between the readings demonstrated that the pipette was fairly precise. circumstantial identifying (decoding) Process: The minimal variability that existed between the readings demonstrated the precision of pipette.

agentive clause: Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined. material Process: The survival of small but not large spores supports the importance of size in fracture initiation dynamics. circumstantial identifying (encoding) Process: This acidification was caused mainly by the burning of coal containing high levels of sulphur. circumstantial attributive Process: The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes could have resulted from ingestion of algae.

Participant

intensive identifying Process: The alternative explanation [for the absence of colonisation by Isaria] is [[that the locust initiated some physiological response]].

Minor Process within Participant in circumstantial attributive Process: [[That chytrids were present within the samples used]] may have been due to the prolonged storage. intensive identifying Process: The consequence [of the inadvertent transmission] is [[that spores could be isolated from the locust]].

(key: the metaphorical realisations of connexions are in bold small caps; internal connexions are underlined)

144  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics circumstantial identifying (specifically the encoding type) and attributive processes) and Participants in an intensive identifying process. The metaphorical scale of remappings revealed in this chapter provides a useful framework for tracking the development of grammatical metaphors overtime. It can provide a basis for developing quantitative methods for examining grammatical metaphors. The clarification of interstratal relations between discourse semantics and lexicogrammar presented in the previous chapters has made it possible for us to sort out stratal tensions in this chapter. Untangling stratal tension in analysing scientific discourse (and academic discourse in general) is critically important, as it enables us to recognise the discourse semantic patterns of sequence. It is the patterns of sequence that allow us to reveal the activities construed at the level of field. In the next chapter, we take this further step to identify field activities, moving from the stratum of discourse semantic to the stratum of field.

Notes 1. Note that figure can also be realised by α clause in the non-finite hypotactic projection, as in the following examples: The result also displayed a strong linear relationship [figure], suggesting [connexion] || the pipette is both accurate and precise throughout its range [figure]. 2. There is an additional realisation of connexions, that is through an Epithet (e.g. causal, subsequent), as discussed in Halliday (1998/2004, pp. 41–42). However, they have not been accounted for in this study, as few instances of such realisations were found in the data.

7

Sequence, Activity and Field

7.1 Introduction In the previous chapters, we have identified a range of ideational discourse semantic resources in the undergraduate biology texts and clarified both the congruent and metaphorical interstratal relations between the discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. This clarification enables us to identify discourse semantic patterns of sequence. In this chapter, we take a step from the stratum of discourse semantics towards the stratum of field, considering how the discourse semantic sequences construe dynamically the activities in the field. A critical analytical step towards recognising sequence in a text is to unpack any metaphorical realisations involved. Chapter 6 has illustrated the divergent realisations of sequence encountered in the analysis. After unpacking all the metaphorical realisations following the patterns shown in Chapter 6, we can then identify the patterns of sequence in the resulting texts. The discussion in this chapter draws on findings from the unpacked texts. Patterns of sequence can be distinguished by several variables, including different choices of entities, figures and connexions that are involved in the sequence. Different patterns of sequence offer criteria for distinguishing activities construed at the level of field. This consideration of field activities from a discourse semantic perspective sees the field from ‘below’ along the stratification hierarchy. We can also draw on an additional perspective from ‘above’, considering the genres within which the activities are contextualised. This chapter begins the discussion in Section 7.2 with the construal of various types of activities through external sequencing—i.e. sequences involving external connexions. The activity types then enable us to identify different field types in Section 7.3. Section 7.4 shifts attention to the ‘externalised’ internal sequencing, revealing that this resource plays an important role in construing an activity that manages interactions among various fields within the broader disciplinary field of science.

146  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics

7.2  Sequencing Through External Connexions External connexions are, by definition, oriented to the unfolding of field; internal connexions, by contrast, are oriented to organising text (Martin, 1992, p. 180). Sequences with external connexions thus provide a promising place to start exploring the construal of field activities. As far as activities are concerned, the figures at stake are the occurrence type rather than the state type. In the experimental reports, typical external sequences of occurrence figures are temporal and causal ones, following the description of connexions in Martin (1992). 7.2.1  Temporal Sequencing The first pattern of connecting occurrence figures into a sequence is through temporal connexions. The excerpt (7.1) exemplifies a temporal sequence. In this and the following excerpts in this chapter, the annotation of connexions follows the convention established in Martin (1992); the figures in the excerpt are numbered with alphabets; the connexions are shown in small caps; the implicit choices are explicated and placed in the parentheses. (7.1)(7.1) a. Set amounts of dye were pipetted (by us) into 1mL cuvettes, b. (AND) water was added (by us)

successive purpose

c. (IN ORDER) TO give a total volume of 1mL. d. (AND THEN) Each solution was mixed (by us),

successive successive

e. AND absorbances (of solution) were read (by us), f. (BY MEANS OF) using a spectrophotometer.

manner

In this excerpt, several occurrence figures are connected into the sequence through either explicit or implicit temporal [successive] connexions (i.e. and then). Additionally, figures (c) and (f) are both related to another figure through causal connexions, including purpose (in order to) and manner (by means of). In other words, the figures in temporal sequencing are themselves ‘purposeful’. The externally connected sequence construes the unfolding of field activities. The orbital configurations of these occurrence figures consistently involve occurrences (e.g. were pipetted, was added, give), instrumental entities (i.e. dye, water, solution, spectrophotometer) and people entities (i.e. elliptical we/the students in margin). The grammatical realisations of occurrences use the past tense, specifying the activities to the past. This temporal sequencing of occurrence figures construes a series of activities conducted in a laboratory experiment. The use of purpose and

Sequence, Activity and Field  147 manner connexions shows that the activities are planned in a way that one activity ‘facilitates’ another; in Martin’s (1992) terms, the Effect figure in the discourse is ‘modulated’ by the connexion. Facilitated activities are characterised by ‘expectancy’ (Doran & Martin, 2020; c.f. Martin, 1992), within which one activity expects another. However, the facilitated activities differ from the prototypical expectancy activities in the domestic life (e.g. brush the teeth, tie the shoelaces) by using purpose and manner relations to support the temporal unfolding. This activity type constitutes specialised fields such as sports, trades and crafts. At the level of genre, facilitated activities occur by and large in the Method stage of a procedural recount, functioning to report the procedure undertaken step by step in an experiment. The excerpt (7.1) is taken from the Method stage in a student experimental report. The facilitated activities in the student texts are usually re-instantiated from a procedure genre. This procedure genre can be a written laboratory manual or an inter-modal genre, such as the teacher’s demonstration of an experiment in the classroom or laboratory. As far as verbal language is concerned, we can consider the excerpt in (7.2) selected from a laboratory instruction recorded in a student’s laboratory notebook. The Arabic numbers are provided in the manual; the alphabets are added here to mark the figures in the analysis. (7.2) 1. a. Press the operating button to the first stop. 2. b. (And then) Dip the tip into the solution to a depth of 1cm, c. and slowly release the operating button. d. (And then) Wait 1–2 seconds e. and withdraw the tip from the liquid, f. (by) touching it against the edge of the reservoir g. (in order) to remove excess liquid. 3. h. (And then) Dispense the liquid into the receiving vessel i. by gently pressing the operating button to the first stop j. and then press the operating button to the second stop. k. This action will empty the tip. l. (And then) Remove the tip from the vessel m. (by) sliding it up the wall of the vessel. 4. n.  (And then) Release the operating button to the ready position. Similar to the sequence in (7.1), this sequence from the lab instruction also unfolds successively, either marked explicitly via numbers and conjunctions or implicitly via juxtaposition of clauses. Like in (7.1), the

148  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics temporal sequence is also supported by purpose (in order to) and manner (by), suggesting that the activities in the lab manual are facilitated. From an interpersonal perspective, the sequence in (7.2) differs from the one in (7.1) in that the figures are not statements realised through declarative clauses, but commands realised through imperative clauses. This shift of interpersonal choices indicates that the activity series in the lab manual has an instructional rather than a recording function. This difference in language underpins the distinction at the higher-stratum between two genres—recounts in student texts versus procedures in the lab manuals. While the facilitated activities are typically stepped out moment by moment as activity series and are realised through sequences of figures in the discourse, it is also possible to construe facilitated activities in an unmomented way, through figures and activity entities. Corresponding to the momented activities concerned with ‘calibrating a pipette’ in (7.2), example (7.3) selected from a student text construes the similar activity but in an unmomented way. The unmomented activity is realised through a figure. (7.3) a set amount of dye was pipetted . . . A further way of construing an unmomented activity is to name it through an activity entity. For example, the momented activities construed in the excerpt (7.1) is named in (7.4) as spectrophotometry. (7.4) In this experiment, a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a BioRad P200 pipette were calibrated, using three methods—weightof-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity. By naming the unmomented activity through an activity entity, language offers a way of construing activities from a static perspective. The activities become ‘itemised’ (Doran & Martin, 2019). Like items, the itemised activities can be taxonomised. In (7.4), spectrophotometry is taxonomised as one of three methods. In summary, facilitated activities can be construed dynamically in a momented way through temporally connecting occurrence figures in a sequence or in an unmomented way through a figure or an activity entity. Apart from the dynamic construal, facilitated activities can also be construed from a static perspective, being itemised and taxonomised through the activity entities. 7.2.2  Causal Sequencing A second way of connecting occurrence figures externally into a sequence is through causal connexions. Depending on whether the occurrence figures are enacted or observed, two different patterns of sequences are at stake.

Sequence, Activity and Field  149 7.2.2.1  Sequencing Enacted Occurrence Figures Occurrence figures can be connected externally through different types of causal connexions, including condition, purpose and consequence ones, as shown in the following examples. (7.5) a. We could analyse it (the zoospore like structure) further, b.

BY

using biochemical tests or molecular sequencing methods,

such as DNA sequencing, c.

manner

purpose

(IN ORDER) TO identify these organisms.

(7.6) a. It would be beneficial for future studies if we resolve a more defined point at which spore cease to become variable, b.

AS

consequence

we would know how to design fungal biocontrols.

The sequences of occurrences figures in (7.5) and (7.6) are similar to the realisation of facilitated activities (such as in (7.1)) in that they involve causal connexions and elliptical people entities. However, they differ from the realisation of facilitated activities in that the causal connexions play the primary role in developing the sequence. In (7.5) and (7.6) the figures functioning as a Cause modulates the figures as an Effect, proposing ‘what we should do’ in the future. The causal sequences can also review ‘what we did/what we have done’ and ‘what we should have done’ in the past, such as in (7.7) and (7.8). (7.7) a. We obtained different results, b.

BECAUSE

consequence

we used different treatments.

(7.8) a. The effect of developmental stage on spore size and viability could have been resolved (by us), b.

IF

we had used spore sizes that were more comprehensively

spread, especially in the range of 6-14 micron.

condion

150  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Unlike the realisations of facilitated activities found in the Method stage of a recount, the causal sequences are used typically in the Discussion stage. Given the different discourse semantic patterns and genre stages, we can identify a distinctive type of activity—i.e. the activity of reviewing (or previewing). Unlike facilitated activities that can be either momented or unmomented, pre/reviewing activities are all momented in the undergraduate biology texts. 7.2.2.2  Sequencing Observed Occurrence Figures Observed occurrence figures can also be sequenced externally through causal connexions. In student experimental reports, purpose and consequence connexions are commonly used, as in the following examples. (7.9) a. B-galactosidase is induced b.

BECAUSE

consequence

it is controlled by gene expression.

(7.10) a. A fracture needs to be initiated b.

AND (THEN)

c.

SO THAT

propagated,

successive purpose

the material can be fragmented by the mandibles.

(7.11) a. The ingested material was damaged b.

BECAUSE

consequence

the mandibular manipulated/controlled the material.

(7.12) a. The spores did not have enough pathogenicity, b. not BECAUSE spores lost their viability c.

BUT BECAUSE

consequence concessive

spores were recovered from both the crop and

faeces in all treated individuals.

These examples of sequencing are similar in a way that they all involve observed occurrence figures and causal connexions, and they all construe activities of biological phenomena. However, a distinction among these examples can be made based on how generalised the figures are. The generalisation is associated with how the entities in the sequences are identified

Sequence, Activity and Field  151 textually via the identification system as either generic or specific (Martin, 1992). The entities involved in sequences (7.9) and (7.10) are generic entities (e.g. B-galactosidase, a fracture), whereas those involved in the sequences (7.11) and (7.12) are specific ones (e.g. the mandibular, the spores). This distinction between generic and specific entities goes hand in hand with the different realisations of occurrences. Occurrences engendered by the generic entities are timeless, realised through simple present tense (e.g. B-galactosidase is induced in (7.9)); whereas the occurrences engendered by the specific entities are anchored in the past, realised through past tense (e.g. the mandibular manipulated the materials in (7.11)). These differences suggest that discourse semantic sequences can construe activities of biological phenomena either as generalised phenomena across time and space or as specific phenomena in a particular time and space, such as what is observed in a particular experiment. Once the activities of biological phenomena are generalised, they become a scientific principle in the field. The activities are ordered as one determining another; they are therefore known as implication activities (Doran & Martin, 2019; c.f. ‘implication sequence’ in Martin, 1992). At the level of genre, implication activities typically occur in an explanation (Unsworth, 1995; Veel, 1997; Martin & Rose, 2008). By contrast to implication activities, specific activities observed in a particular experiment occur in a recount genre, recording what has occurred in the past. We can name here the specific activities concerning the observed biological phenomena as observation. Note that it can be ambiguous sometimes to determine whether an implication activity is realised temporally or causally, particularly when the logical connexions are implicit ones, such as those in the brackets in (7.13). (7.13) a. Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally,

consequence

b. (SO THEN) increasing the ecological niche in which fungal species may inhabit, c. (SO THEN) potentially affecting higher plant and animal diversity d.

THROUGH

spreading symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi or entomo-

and entero-pathogens.

consequence

manner

152  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics These recovered implicit logical connexions, although interpreted as consequences in (7.13), can be interchangeable with the successive temporal ones in (7.14). (7.14) a. Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally,

successive

b. (AND THEN) increasing the ecological niche in which fungal species may inhabit,

successive

c. (AND THEN) potentially affecting higher plant and animal diversity d.

THROUGH

manner

spreading symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi or entomo-

and entero-pathogens.

What seems to be at issue here is that in implication activities, both temporal and causal realisations are possible. Using Barthes’ (1975) term, the relationship between activities are ‘chronological’ and ‘logical’ at the same time. Instances of implication activities in student experimental reports are usually supported with references to publications, as those underlined in (7.15). This suggests that these implication activities are construed in the first instance in published research articles and then re-instantiated in the student texts. (7.15) Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally, increasing the ecological niche in which fungal species may inhabit and potentially affecting higher plant and animal diversity through the spread of symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi or entomo- and entero-pathogens (Collier & Bidatnodo, 2008; Dromph, 2000; Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006; Nakamori & Suzuki, 2009; Vernes & Dunn, 2009). Implication activities share several similar features with facilitated activities. First, like facilitated activities, implication activities not only can be momented but also unmomented. In the students’ texts, many unmomented implication activities were found, realised either through a figure or an activity entity. For example, the figure in (7.16) selected from a student text construes an implication activity in an unmomented way.

Sequence, Activity and Field  153 (7.16) . . . lactose induces B-galactosidase activity. This unmomented activity is agnate to a momented activity series in an explanation genre in the textbook. The induction of enzymes, of which B-galactosidase is a particular kind, is explained in the textbook step by step through sequencing of figures, shown in example (7.17). (7.17) (7.17) a. In an enzymatic reaction, (…) the substrate is held in the active site by weak interactions, such as hydrogen bonds and ionic bonds.

successive/ consequence

b. (AND THEN/SO THEN) side chains (R group) of a few of the amino acids make up the active site, c. (AND THEN/SO THEN) the side chains catalyse the conversion of substrate to product, d.

AND (/SO THEN)

the product departs from the active site.

e. The enzyme is THEN free to take another substrate molecule into

successive/ consequence

successive/ consequence successive/ consequence

its active site. (Campbell & Reece, 2005, pp. 152-153)

A second similarity with facilitated activities is that implication activities can also be construed from a static perspective, being itemised through an activity entity and entering in the classification and composition taxonomy. In the excerpt (7.18) selected from a student text, the co-elaborated activity entities (underlined) realise the classification of itemised activities. (7.18) Members of the Chytridiomycota may be involved in symbiosis with the Echinoidea. Host-microbial relationships may include parasitism, commensalism and symbiosis. From the static perspective, the itemised activity parasitism is taxonomised as a class of host-microbial relationship and related to other co-classes commensalism and symbiosis. Chapter 3 has shown that these activity entities are usually linguistically defined in pedagogic texts through a Token^Value identifying clause (e.g. Parasitism [Token] is a +/- symbiotic interaction in which one organism, the parasite, derives its nourishment from another organism, its host, which is harmed in the process [Value] (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 1163)). In the experimental reports, implication activities were also found to be referred to textually through semiotic entities, particularly when they are generated from the students’ own research. For example, in (7.19) a series

154  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics of implication activities, mandibular manipulate the ingested material so it controls . . . is referred to textually through a semiotic entity findings. (7.19) The results suggest that mandibular manipulate the ingested material, so it controls how much the materials are damaged. Such findings are consistent with the current understanding of food processing by members of the Acrididae. In summary, sequencing observational occurrence figures can construe two kinds of activities—observation type, which is concerned with specific activities, and implication type, which is concerned with generalised scientific principles. While observation activities are typically momented, implication activities can be either momented or unmomented, and they can be itemised and taxonomised. We will see in chapters 8 and 9 that building scientific knowledge requires construing implication activities from both dynamic and static perspectives.

7.3  Identifying Fields Through Activities We have now identified various types of activities in undergraduate biology: facilitated, review/preview, observation and implication. Since field by definition is sets of activity series oriented for some global institutional purpose (Martin, 1992, p. 356), we can treat the institutionally organised and pedagogised field of undergraduate biology as a broad disciplinary field. Within this field, sub-fields can be identified based on their different organisations involving different activities. A field constituted by implication activities has been named by Martin (1992) as an exploration field. This study follows this terminology. In opposition to implication activities, the other activity types, i.e. facilitated, review/preview and observation types, characterise what has been known as the specialised field (c.f. Martin, 1992). Activities in the specialised field are largely specific and easily to be interrupted. At the same time, they differ from the activities in everyday and domestic life by being more controlled, anticipating any interruptions. This characteristic is reflected in their realisations through causal sequences. The different activity types allow us to make further distinctions within the specialised field. A field that is concerned with observation is termed here as depiction. An example of a depicted field can be the cell activities observed under a microscope. A field concerned with the facilitated activities is termed here as practice. An example of practice can be a laboratory manual instructing how to use a microscope. A field that is concerned with activities of preview and review is named as reflection. An example of reflection is the recount of what has gone wrong in the lab work and the proposal of its prevention in the future. In addition to activities from a dynamic perspective, these different fields can also be construed statically through items. For example, (7.20)

Sequence, Activity and Field  155 is an instance of an exploration field, which is established statically through taxonomies and realised by the co-elaborations between entities. Example (7.21) shows a depiction field, describing a relationship between two items realised by entities. (7.20) Members of this phylum (of chytrid) include plant and animal parasites, as well as the ruminant symbionts. (7.21) Chytrids were present within the Echinoidea. The identification of field types provides us with a guideline to reveal how they are instantiated in a text. We can examine both the kinds of field instantiated, and importantly, how they are brought together and interact with one another in the text. Examining their interactions leads us to consider sequences that are established through internal connexions.

7.4  Sequencing Through Internal Connexions In the above discussion, we have been focusing on external sequences, as they, by definition, orient to the unfolding of field. Sequencing figures through internal connexions, in fact, also offers an important resource for construing field activities. Example (7.22) below shows the use of an internal connexion. One sequence (a-b) is related internally to the other sequence (c-d) through therefore. The internal connexions in this and the following examples are all underlined and annotated on the left-hand side of the text. (7.22) (7.22) a.

Different developmental stages of C. terminifera have mandibles of different size,

consequence

b.

YET

c.

THEREFORE

d.

TO

concessive

they consume the same food, it is ideal for us to use this kind of insect

test our model.

purpose

Unsworth (1995), in his study of pedagogic texts in science, found that internal logical connexions can be used to establish relationships between scientific phenomena in different ‘domains’. As he explains, explanations of the tides, seasons, phases of the moon etc. may well involve deductive reasoning which relates implication sequences [JH: implication activities] in one ‘domain’ to implication sequences [implication activities] in another. In the case of explaining the tides, one has to deal with the inter-relationship among at least three such domains: the earth’s orbit around the sun, the moon as a satellite of

156  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics the earth and the consequent variation in the relative positioning of the sun and the moon with respect to the earth; the concept of gravitational force; and the movement of the tides . . . (Unsworth, 1995, p. 71) In the student experimental reports, internally related sequences also construe different ‘domains’. However, in contrast to pedagogic texts observed in Unsworth (1995), where different ‘domains’ involving implication activities as established knowledge, in the student texts these ‘domains’ can be either between different fields or within a field, concerning various activity types and taxonomies we have so far identified. In (7.22), there is a shift from an implication activity in the exploration field (a-b) to previewing activities in the field of reflection (c-d). Chapter 6 has illustrated that internal connexions are agnate to the combination of external connexions and positions of figures. Compare the pair of examples below. (7.23) a. Penicillin, Isaria and Absidia spores retained viability.

contrast

b. IN COMPARISON, the larger spores of Podospora did not retain their viability.

addive

c. (AND) Smaller mandibles fractured the materials into smaller consequence

fragments.

d. SO larger fragments would be more easily damaged by mandibular action. (7.24) a. Penicillin, Isaria and Absidia spores retained viability. b. IN COMPARISON, the larger spores of Podospora did not retain their viability.

contrast

addive

c. (AND) Smaller mandibles fractured the materials into smaller fragments.

consequence

d. SO we know larger fragments would be more easily damaged by mandibular action.

In this pair of examples, the internal connexion is agnate to the combination of an external connexion and a position: so we know. The data shows that in addition to positions, evaluations of figures can also offer relevant agnates to internal connexions. In the following pair of examples,

Sequence, Activity and Field  157 the internal connexion in (7.25) is agnate to the combination of an external connexion and an evaluation: if . . . (then) it is possible. (7.25) a. IF chytrid were present within the Echinoidea, condion

b. they may be transient, not symbiotic, members.

(7.26) a. IF chytrid were present within the Echinoidea,

condion

b. (THEN) it is possible that they are transient, not symbiotic, members.

What these examples demonstrate is that internal connexions can be ‘externalised’ by both positions and evaluations of figures. Positions and evaluations allow the sources ‘who position the proposition’ and ‘who evaluate/modify the proposition’ to be made explicit in the discourse. The sources of positions are typically people entities (we/biologists propose/suppose/know/think . . .) or semiotic entities (the result shows . . . ; the data demonstrates . . .) and the appraisers of evaluations are typically the student writers. Using positions and evaluations to ‘externalise’ internal connexions allows us to identify a distinctive set of activities construed at the level of field. This type of activity is conducted by the student writer to make logical connexions between causes and effects, from ‘we saw/we knew’ to ‘we suppose/we conclude’. We can refer to such activity as reasoning. A generalised pattern of reasoning is the following: We saw/the data shows . . . , so we know/it is certain . . . , so we suppose/it is possible . . . Activities of reasoning are a critical resource for knowledge production. Phylogenetically, they mark the transition from knowledge reproduction to knowledge production in a discipline. Ontogenetically, they indicate the expansion of students’ knowledge. Logogenetically, it marks a shift towards the accumulation of new information in the text (i.e. New, hyper-New, and macro-New). From an interpersonal point of view, positions and evaluations are salient resources for student writers to manage the heteroglossic space in the discourse. Learning to express seemingly ‘objective’ voice in scientific reasoning, and at the same time negotiate his or her own values is an important aspect of academic literacy development (Hood, 2010).

7.5 Activities and Fields in Undergraduate Biology Texts Table 7.1 provides an overview of activities types and their realisations that have been identified.

Table 7.1  Types of activities and their realisations types of activities

discourse semantic example realisations

facilitated

sequence: [temporal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures]

momented

unmomented occurrence figure entity [enacted activity] re/preview

momented

Set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and then water was added (in order) to give a total volume of 1mL. (and then) each solution was mixed, and absorbances were read, (by) using a spectrophotometer. We used the spectrophotometry method. method, spectrophotometry

sequence We obtained results because we [causal sequencing used the treatment. of enacted occurrence figures]

observation momented

The ingested materials were sequence [causal sequencing manipulated by the mandibles so they sustained to be damaged. of observed occurrence figure involving specific entities]

implication

sequence [causal sequencing of observed occurrence figure involving generic entities]

reasoning

momented

Some parasites change the behaviour of their hosts by increasing the probability of the parasite being transferred from one host to another. For instance, if parasitic acanthocephalan (spinyheaded) worms are present, then their crustacean hosts engage in a variety of atypical behaviours . . .

unmomented figure

Members of the Chytridiomycota may be involved in symbiosis with the Echinoidea

unmomented entity [observational activity; semiotic]

parasitism, symbiosis, findings

momented

We saw (chytrids were present within the Echinoidea), so we suppose/it is possible (they may be transient, not symbolic, members).

sequence [internal causal connexion; external causal connexion ^ evaluation/ position]

Sequence, Activity and Field  159

Figure 7.1  Field types and activity types

Activities of reasoning allow us to identify an additional type of field, which is named here as inquiry. Given that it is specific people conducting the activity of reasoning, the field of inquiry is also treated as a specialised field. The choices of field types revealed by the activity types are shown in a system network in Figure 7.1. Grammatically speaking, activities of reasoning tend to be realised through the projecting mental, verbal clauses and fact projections. The other activity types are typically realised through projected clauses. These grammatical realisations have been found useful for identifying two realms of meaning in academic discourse (Christie, 2002; Hood, 2010). Hood (2010), in her study of academic research articles, identifies two fields—one refers to the field of the object of study, the other, the field of research. The field of research is concerned with the ‘construction of the process of research itself’ and ‘the process of enquiry and knowledge building’ (p. 121). The field of the object of study is seen as being ‘projected’ by the field of research.1 She suggests, The notion of relocating, recontextualising, or re-presenting one field of human experience into another is highly applicable to the context of academic research. The field of research projects a representation of experience from another ‘world’ (field of the object of study) as ‘metaphenomenon’ (Halliday, 1994, p. 252). The field of research relocates the field of the object of study as intimately related although retaining separate field status. The phenomena of the object of study are brought into being and construed in certain ways by the processes of enquiry (mental) and processes of reporting (verbal) that construe the field of research. (Hood, 2010, p. 135)

160  Describing Ideational Discourse Semantics Table 7.2  Field types and their realisations field types •

exploration

•

• depiction •

• practice

specialised

•

object of study activity [implication] o sequence: temporal/causal sequencing of observed occurrence figures [generic] o entity: semiotic entity taxonomy: o sequence: sequencing of state figures o figure: state figures o entity: linguistically defined things [generic] and observational activity entities [generic]; activity [observation] o sequence: temporal/causal sequencing of observed occurrence figures [specific] o entity: semiotic entity taxonomy o figure: state figures o entity: linguistically defined things [specific] activity [facilitated] o sequence: temporal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures taxonomy o entity: instrumental things [linguistically or ostensively defined]; enacted activity entity o figure: state figures

research

• •

• reflection •

• inquiry •

activity [facilitated] o sequence: temporal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures taxonomy o entity: instrumental things [linguistically or ostensively defined]; enacted activity entity o figure: state figures activity [pre/review] o sequence: causal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures taxonomy o entity: instrumental things [linguistically or ostensively defined] activity [reasoning] o sequence: internal connexions; external connexions combined with positions/evaluations taxonomy o entity: source entity [people/publication]; semiotic entity; enacted activity entity

Based on this description, activities of reasoning constitute the field of research. They can ‘project’, or perhaps in a less problematic term, ‘launch’ the other fields. The opposition between the field of research and the field of the object of study in academic discourse provides a complementary perspective to the opposition between exploration and specialised fields. In the students’ experimental reports, the delicate types of specialised fields were found to combine with either the object of study or the research. The general interaction between the two sets of opposition is that the fields of exploration

Sequence, Activity and Field  161 and specialised [depiction] orient to the object of study; the fields of specialised [reflection] and specialised [inquiry] orient to the field of research; and specialised [practice] is associated with both the field of research (e.g. where a facilitated activity of laboratory experiment is conducted in order to observe biological phenomena) and the field of object of study (e.g. where an experimental activity aims to test the effectiveness of the method). Table 7.2 provides an overview of the cross-classification of these field types and their discourse semantic realisations. In addition to activities, taxonomies construed by entities and state figures are also summarised in the table. The single-sided arrows in the table annotate the syntagmatic realisations of fields through activities and taxonomy and the double-sided arrows annotate the interstratal realisation of activities and taxonomy through the discourse semantic resources. In Section II (from Chapter 3 to Chapter 7), I have illustrated a way of identifying ideational discourse semantic resources, including those of entities, figures and sequences, by considering meaning-making levels across field, discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. The resulting ideational discourse semantic description can be applied to reveal patterns of taxonomy and activities in building knowledge of undergraduate biology. In the next section of this book (Chapters 8 and 9), we apply this framework to examine the construal of fields from both static and dynamic perspectives by drawing on four experimental reports produced by one individual student at different stages of her undergraduate study. The examination will reveal some developmental features of language and knowledge across the four texts.

Note 1. Note that ‘projection’ is used in a metaphorical sense to describe the level of field, although it can be realised through mental, verbal and fact projection in lexicogrammar. For other discussions of one field ‘projects’ the other at the level of register, see Christie’s work on curriculum genre (e.g. Christie, 1997, 2002), which draws on Bernstein’s work (e.g. 1990) on pedagogic discourse.

Section III

Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology In this section, we apply the description of ideational discourse semantics established in Section II to analyse the building of knowledge in undergraduate biology texts. The texts are high-graded biology laboratory reports and research reports produced at different stages of undergraduate study. They include a laboratory report (Text 1) produced at the beginning of the first year, a laboratory report (Text 2) at the second year, a research report at the end of the second year (Text 3) and a research report at the end of the third year, before the student started an honour’s degree (i.e. an undergraduate research program). Section 2.6 in Chapter 2 has provided the details of the subject areas and the word count of the texts. The section is divided into two chapters. Chapter 8 first reports findings of static construal of fields throughout the texts. It focuses on the construal of taxonomies through ideational analysis of entities and their relations in the texts. Chapter 9 reports findings of dynamic construal of fields, focusing on revealing the sequencing of figures for construing activities.

8

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy

This chapter examines the static construal of knowledge across the four student experimental reports produced at different stages of the undergraduate study. The static construal concerns the building of taxonomies through discourse semantic resources. The examination aims to address the following questions: • How diverse are the taxonomies construed in the four texts? How does the diversity of taxonomies differ across the texts? • How deep are the taxonomies in the texts? How does the depth develop across the texts? • What are the fields construed from the static perspective in the texts? What are the developmental features of these fields? The diversity of taxonomies can be revealed by examining types of entities used in the texts. The depth of taxonomies can be explored by examining the ways in which entities are co-elaborated to one another, as well as their augmentations with dimensions. The diversity and depth of taxonomies can help us to identify the kinds of field that are construed and their developmental features across the texts. Findings of analyses are reported in this chapter based on the chronological order of the texts.

8.1 Entities and Dimensions in Text 1—First-Year Laboratory Report Text 1 reports on a laboratory experiment in the first undergraduate year. The experiment aimed to compare three different methods for calibrating a pipette, which is a tool used in laboratories to transport measured liquid. During the experiment, the student was required to enact the three calibration methods. Each method requires the usage of a different set of apparatus and tools. Based on the experimental results, the student was asked to determine the most suitable method among the three. In this text, four primary entity types—activity, thing, semiotic and source entities—were identified.

166  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology 8.1.1  Activity Entities The use of enacted activity entities is significant in Text 1. Both subtypes, investigation (e.g. experiment) and manner, were used. Since Text 1 concerns testing the effectiveness of the methods, naming and categorising methods are important. As exemplified in (8.1), three activity entities, i.e. weight-of-water, spectrophotometry, and radioactivity, are shown as hyponyms of method. The categorised dimension (e.g. type/kind) is implicit. (8.1)

In this experiment, a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a BioRad P200 pipette were calibrated, using three types of > methods— weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity.

8.1.2  Thing Entities Thing entities are a significant type in Text 1. They are predominantly instrumental ones, as suggested by their realisation through Circumstance types of Goal and Location. In the following examples, the Locations are in bold, and the entities are underlined. (8.2) (8.3) (8.4)

a set amount of water was pipetted into a container set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes set amounts (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) of radioactive C-14 glucose were pipetted into vials

The instrumental entities are associated with different activity entities referring to the experimental methods. Most instrumental things can be defined ostensively in the setting of the laboratory, in particular, those that are associated with the weight of water and radioactivity methods. However, among the entities involved in spectrometry, a few instances may require a linguistic definition, such as C-14 glucose. While C-14 glucose refers to a colourless liquid that is tangible and can be measured, ostensively pointing to the C-14 glucose would not help distinguish it from other colourless liquid, but its linguistic definition can. Most of the instrumental things in this text are augmented with measured dimensions, such as amount, weight, range and 5mL in the examples below. (8.5) (8.6) (8.7) (8.8)

a set amount of > water was pipetted into a container the weight of > the water dispensed was measured and recorded this accuracy decreased towards the larger end of the pipette’s < range 5mL of > scintillant was added

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  167 While these measured dimensions are relatively field neutral, instances of field-specific measurement were also found, such as absorbance in example (8.9): (8.9)

Each solution was mixed, and absorbances > of the solutions were read.

Absorbance is defined in chemistry as a measurement of radiation transmitted through a material. As a technical dimension, it is no longer a ‘live’ grammatical metaphor, regardless of its nominalised form. The omitted entity solutions can be recovered based on the preceding clause. Many instrumental things in this text are co-elaborated to one another to construe taxonomic relations as exemplified in (8.10). The entity pipette is co-elaborated to the hyponyms Finnpipette and Bio-Rad P200 pipette. The taxonomic relation construed by co-elaboration is not explicitly named through a categorised dimension (e.g. type). (8.10) In this experiment, a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a Bio-Rad P200 pipette were calibrated. 8.1.3  Semiotic Entities Several semiotic entities were identified in Text 1, including particularly the subtypes of fact semiotic entities. A few instances of the result type were found: (8.11) The spectrometer provided results that were easily and efficiently obtained. (8.12) Spectroscopy provided results that balanced the need for high levels of precision and accuracy with safety, speed and efficiency. Two other types of semiotic entity, case and need, help compose the periodicity of the text: e.g. the case entity limitations in (8.13) that previews the subsequent passages in a hyper-Theme, and the need entity needs in (8.14) that consolidates the preceding text in a hyper-New. (8.13) There were a number of limitations associated with it. (Firstly . . . Secondly . . .) (8.14) . . . the results balanced the needs for high levels of precision and accuracy with safety, speed and efficiency. 8.1.4  Source Entities A further entity type is source entities, particularly the people type. People entities are configured in the goings-on alongside the instrumental things and enacted activities throughout the text. However, their ‘presence’ is

168  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology not grammatically explicit, but implied through the use of receptive and non-finite clauses, as shown in (8.15) and (8.16). These implied people entities refer to the students who conducted the experiment. (8.15) . . . (we) using three methods—weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity (8.16) a set amount of water was pipetted (by us) into a container 8.1.5  Overview of Taxonomy Building Revealed in Text 1 The salient entity types in Text 1 include activity, thing, semiotic and people. An overview of these entity types and their dimensions is shown in Table 8.1. The instrumental entities are augmented through measurement. Both field-specific and field-neutral measurements were used. The fieldspecific measurements suggest that some knowledge of chemistry was

Table 8.1  Types of entity and dimensions in Text 1 dimension types entity types

ostensively linguistically defined defined

measured fieldneutral

field- categorised specific

investi- experiment gation activity

method, weightof-water manner method, spectrophotometry

thing [instrumental]

radioactive container, C-14 glucose pipette, vial, gloves, cuvette, balance, spectrophotometer, water, dye, solution

consequence semiotic: fact case

result limitations

needs source [people]

three  kinds of > methods

needs students

the weight of > water, the volume of > pipette, the range of > pipette

experimental value > of the

, absorbance

pipette

> of the solution

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  169 required in the experiment. Both instrumental thing entities, e.g. pipette, and enacted activity entities, e.g. method, are co-elaborated in construing taxonomic relations, but only the classification of activities is named with a categorised dimension. The entity types instantiated in Text 1 indicate that the taxonomy building at the beginning of knowledge development has mostly to do with differentiating experimental tools. The field construed from a static perspective in Text 1 has characteristics of a specialised field. The text demonstrated limited knowledge of biological phenomena. The apprenticeship revealed in this text resembles the level of ‘trade certificate or equivalent’ along the industrial hierarchy in the specialised field described by Rose (1998). This specialised field concerns with ‘selecting and using appropriate techniques and equipment required to perform tasks of some complexity’ (Rose, 1998, p. 243).

8.2 Entities and Dimensions in Text 2—Second-Year Laboratory Report Text 2 is a laboratory report produced for an assessment at the beginning of the second undergraduate year. It reports on an experiment testing how an enzyme reacts to five different biochemical treatments carried out during the experiment. Each treatment requires a different set of materials. We can compare the findings with those in Text 1, with respect to both the diversity and depth of taxonomies. 8.2.1  Thing Entities While Text 1 showed the significant use of instrumental thing entities, in Text 2, both the instrumental and observational thing entities were identified. Similar to Text 1, the instrumental things are significant in the procedure part of the experiment (i.e. the Method stage) in Text 2. They were identified through their grammatical realisation as Goals in material processes such as in (8.17) and Circumstance types including Location and Manner in (8.18) and (8.19). The entities in the examples are underlined and the Circumstances are in bold. (8.17) . . . (we) adding glucose, and alternative kinds of food source to lactose. (8.18) E. coli bacteria were cultured (by us) in a glycerol medium (pH 7). (8.19) The reaction was stopped (by us) with sodium carbonate (6.9mM) Most of the instrumental thing entities in Text 2 are tangible and at the same time linguistically defined in pedagogic texts. For instance, the instrumental thing entity glycerol medium above is tangible and recognisable in the laboratory setting. To fully understand its meaning, we need

170  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology to refer to its linguistic definition in the textbook—e.g. ‘glycerol is an alcohol with three carbons, each bearing a hydroxyl group’ (Campbell & Reece, 2005, p. 75). Given their tangibility and linguistic definitions, we can identify these entities as trained gaze things. Many trained gaze instrumental things in this text are co-elaborated to one another. For example, in (8.20), the comparative reference alternative suggests that glucose is one of the hyponyms of food source among many others. In the immediate co-text in (8.21), those ‘alternative’ food sources are introduced, including IPTG, lactose, 5-FU and chloramphenicol. The implicit categorised dimensions naming the co-elaborations are recovered in these examples. (8.20) . . . (we) adding glucose, and alternative kinds of > food sources to lactose . . . (8.21) One of the following six kinds of > treatments was added (by us): IPTG (0.48mM); lactose (0.41mM); Lactose (0.41mM) and Glucose (5.4mM); Lactose (0.4mM) and 5-FU (0.02mg/ml); Lactose (0.40mM) and chloramphenicol (0.02mg/ml); no treatment. In addition to the linguistically defined instruments, Text 2 also demonstrates ostensively defined ones. They are not presented together with the other instruments in the Procedure stage but presumed in the Result stage, such as control flask in (8.22). The ostensive identification is indicated by the exophoric reference the, pointing to the object in the laboratory setting. (8.22) The control flask with nothing added demonstrated a basal level of B-galactosidase activity. Presuming ostensively defined instruments suggests that they are not under focus in the text. That is to say, in Text 2, the task of operating instruments has shifted its focus from using ostensively defined instruments (as in Text 1) to linguistically defined ones. Apart from instrumental things, observational things were also used in Text 2. They are typically involved in metaphenomena projected by mental processes, such as in (8.23) and (8.24). (8.23) It is known [Process: mental] || that in the presence of lactose, B-galactosidase activity increases. (8.24) . . . to determine [Process: mental] || whether gene expression produces enzyme, so B-galactosidase is induced, or the enzyme which already exists is activated, so B-galactosidase is induced. These observational things (e.g. galactosidase and enzyme) belong specifically to the category of linguistically defined inferable type. Given their

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  171 intangibility, they need to be activated in chemical reactions by trained gaze things, such as glucose and lactose. Inferable things are co-elaborated in terms of classification in the text. For instance, in (8.25) the Circumstance [Location] in this experiment subsumes that B-galactosidase is a specific type of protein applied in this particular experiment. The taxonomy protein, enzyme and B-galactosidase can thus be seen as organised at three taxonomic ranks. An implicit categorised dimension kind naming the classification is recovered. (8.25) The activity of proteins can be controlled (. . .) In this experiment, the activity of B-galactosidase, a(n) kind of > enzyme which breaks down lactose, was studied. The measured dimensions of inferable thing entities were explicitly presented. Both field-specific measurement (e.g. the amount of in (8.26)) and field-neutral measurement (e.g. the activity of in (8.27)) were identified. (8.26) An ONPG assay was carried out to determine the amount of > B-galactosidase present. (8.27) The activity of > proteins can be controlled (. . .) In this experiment, the activity of > B-galactosidase, an enzyme which breaks down lactose, was studied. We can see that in contrast to the ostensively defined (instrumental) things used in Text 1, Text 2 focuses on linguistically defined ones, including both the instrumental and observational types. 8.2.2  Activity Entities In terms of activity entities, Text 2 reveals some similar features to those in Text 1. Examples of both activity entity types—investigation (e.g. experiment) and manner (e.g. methods and treatment) were identified. In addition to the similarities, a distinguishing feature in Text 2 was indicated by the use of observational activity entities, such as gene expression in (8.28). (8.28) Gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity. In the excerpt below selected from the textbook, gene expression is defined as ‘the process by which DNA directs protein synthesis’. The activity entity names a series of goings-on involving biological and chemical items such as DNA, protein, nucleic acids, molecules etc. This excerpt also involves an explanation of gene expression, which shows that gene expression involves several tiers of activities. The activities entities (underlined) naming the activity entities are co-elaborated to construe

172  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology compositional taxonomic relations. The composition is named by a structured dimension stages. The process by which DNA directs protein synthesis, gene expression, includes two stages, called transcription and translation. (. . .) Transcription is the synthesis of RNA under the direction of DNA. Both nucleic acids use the same language, and the information is transcribed, or copied, from one molecule to the other. (. . .) Translation is the actual synthesis of a polypeptide, which occurs under the direction of mRNA. During this stage, there is a change in language: the cell must translate the base sequence of an mRNA molecule into the amino acid sequence of a polypeptide . . . (Campbell & Reece, 2005, pp. 309–311) In Text 2, the student writer demonstrates her understanding of the taxonomic relations construed by the activity entities through an elaborating nominal group complex underlined in (8.29), although in the student text the structured dimension is not explicitly used. (8.29) The aim of this experiment was to determine whether the induction of B-galactosidase resulted from the production of the enzyme through gene expression (transcriptional and translational processes) or through activation of the existing enzyme. Activity entities are augmented in Text 2 by measured dimensions, such as level in (8.30). (8.30) The activity of proteins can be controlled through influencing levels of > gene expression. The use of observational activity entities, their co-elaborations and dimensions suggest that the knowledge developed at this stage of undergraduate study concerns both dynamic and static knowledge of activities. 8.2.3  Semiotic Entities The fact types of semiotic entities used in Text 1—result, case, need—were also found in Text 2. In addition to these, Text 2 also uses the idea type, such as knowledge and hypothesis in (8.31) and (8.32). (8.31) This confirmed the previous knowledge [[that lactose induces B-galactosidase activity]]. (8.32) If the hypothesis [[that activating the already present B-galactosidase induces activity]] was correct . . . Both semiotic entities are elaborated, respectively through an occurrence figure in (8.31) and a sequence in (8.32) (i.e. if we activate the already

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  173 present B-galactosidase, the activity can be induced). These elaborations construe biological activities at the level of field. This usage of semiotic entities suggests that they can play a similar role in the discourse with the observational activity entities, that is, to name the biological activities at the level of field. However, unlike activity entities, semiotic entities are not co-elaborated to one another to construe taxonomic relations. 8.2.4  Overview of Taxonomy Building in Text 2 Table 8.2 demonstrates a comparison of entity types identified in Text 1 and Text 2.

Table 8.2  Entity types in Text 1 and Text 2 types of entity

instrumental / ostensively defined

thing instrumental/ trained gaze

Text 1

radioactive glucose

ling. defined

investigation

experiment

experiment treatment

manner

method, weightof-water, spectro­ photometry radioactivity

activity

gene expression, transcription, translation, induction, bacterial growth

observational/inferable source

semiotic

people fact idea

mercaptoethanol, chloroform, glycerol medium, sodium carbonate, protein, cytosol, enzyme, lactose, glucose, B-galactosidase,

observational/ inferable

enacted

Text 2

container, pipette, control flask, spectrophotometer, vial, automatic dispenser, gloves, fume-cupboard, cuvette, balance, equipment, spectro­ photometer, water, dye, solution,

student (implied)

student (implied)

case

limitations

fact, mechanism

needs

needs

purpose

consequence

results

result knowledge, hypothesis

174  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Several distinctive features of Text 2 have been revealed. First, observational things and activities, specifically inferable ones, were used to construe taxonomies associated with knowledge at the border of biology and chemistry. Second, linguistically defined things referring to instrumental materials (e.g. solutions) were used to observe the inferable entities. Furthermore, semiotic entities were used name biological activities in the text. These distinguishing features reveal an increase of taxonomic diversity in Text 2. Text 2 has also demonstrated an expanded use of dimensions augmenting linguistically defined things and activity entities, including categorised, structured and measured dimensions, as summarised in Table 8.3. The extended use of dimensions suggests that the knowledge of subject-specific taxonomies is more in-depth compared to the previous text. Naming and connecting activities across different tiers are essential of taxonomy building. The taxonomies associated with utilitarian tools and instrumental materials suggest that the field construed in Text 2 has characteristics of a specialised field. At the same time, the taxonomy of scientific phenomena suggests that an exploration field has been developed. In comparison to Text 1, which aimed to practice the experimental procedures, the experiment in Text 2 aimed to practice scientific observation. That is to say, the specialised field construed in Text 2 is in service of the exploration field. Importantly, the exploration field is characterised by the taxonomies in both biology and chemistry, which suggests that developing the foundational knowledge of chemistry is important at this stage of the apprenticeship.

Table 8.3  Dimensions of entities in Text 2 dimension types Text 2: types of entity

ling. def. instrumental/ trained gaze thing ling. def. observational/ inferable ling. def activity observational/ inferable

categorised structured types of > food source a kind of > enzyme

measured field-neutral

field-specific

the amount of > activity of > B-galactosidase B-galactosidase, stages of levels of > gene > gene expression expression

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  175

8.3 Entities and Dimensions in Text 3—SecondYear Research Report Text 3 is a research report produced at the end of the second undergraduate year. It reports on a study of whether the fungi Chytridiomycota occur in sea urchins. In comparison to Text 2, Text 3 demonstrates a greater variety of entity types as well as a greater depth of taxonomic relations. 8.3.1  Thing Entities Like in Text 1 and Text 2, Text 3 uses both instrumental and observational things. Also, similar to Text 2, instrumental things in Text 3 include both ostensively defined entities and linguistically defined ones. What distinguishes Text 3 from the others is the use of tech-enhanced instrumental things associated with a microscope, such as a light microscope in (8.33) and a scanning electron microscope in (8.34). (8.33) . . . using a light microscope. (8.34) . . . and possibly observation of the gut wall structure using a scanning electron microscope could also aid in identification . . . The use of tech-enhanced instrumental things reveals that the knowledge of experimental methods has been further developed at this stage of the apprenticeship. The use of instrumental things corresponds to that of observational ones. The observational things in Text 3 are by and large linguistically defined. The delicate subtypes including trained gaze, tech-enhanced gaze and inferable ones were all found in the text. The trained gaze things are mostly associated with sea urchin, as underlined in the following examples. As trained gaze entities, they refer to tangible phenomena, indicated by the reference to colours (e.g. purple sea urchin and pink sea urchin) and shapes (e.g. heart urchin) in these examples. At the same time, their linguistically defined status is suggested by their scientific names such as Erythrogramma heliocidaris and Pyonotilus holopneustes. (8.35) The aim of the project would be to confirm the presence of members of the Chytridiomycota within different species of > sea urchin. (8.36) Three species of > regular sea urchin, Erythrogramma heliocidaris (purple sea urchin), Pyonotilus holopneustes (pink sea urchin) and Parvispirus phyllacanthus (slate pencil urchin), were collected . . . Specimens of > the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum (heart urchin), were also collected . . .

176  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Noticeably, the trained gaze entities in these examples are augmented with categorised dimensions (i.e. species of . . . ; specimens of . . .), making explicit taxonomic relations construed in the field. The specialised classification is also suggested by their scientific names (e.g. Erythorogramma heliocidaris). The first word (i.e. Erythrogramma) identifies the genus to which the sea urchin belongs, and the second one (i.e. heliocidaris) identifies the species as a smaller category under the genus. The classification of sea urchin continues to be expanded as the text unfolds, as shown in (8.37) and (8.38). (8.37) As sea urchins are a kind of > herbivorous . . . (8.38) . . . Cladosporium and Alternaria may also be present within sea urchins and other kinds of > marine invertebrates (MorrisonGardiner, 2002). The entity sea urchins in (8.37) is in co-elaboration with herbivorous in a state figure, as a hyponym of herbivorous. The taxonomic relation is named implicitly through a categorised dimension kind/type. In (8.38), the entity sea urchins is further established as hyponym of marine invertebrates. Note, however, that the relationship between herbivorous and marine invertebrate is subsumed in the text (i.e. marine invertebrate is a hyponym of invertebrate; invertebrate is a hyponym of herbivore). The assumed co-elaborations suggest that much of the classification (at the higher-level taxonomic ranks) is treated as assumed knowledge between the student writer and readers in Text 3. Figure 8.1 presents the classification taxonomy related to sea urchin in Text 3, drawing on the explicit and implicit use of categorised dimensions and the assumed co-elaborations. The compositional relationship between sea urchin and its parts is also construed in this text but with no explicit naming through dimensions. In the following examples, the part/whole relationships among items are realised through Thing^Qualifier structures. (8.39) Samples were then taken from the coelomic cavity and digestive tract of the sea urchins.

Figure 8.1  Classification of sea urchin in Text 3

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  177 (8.40) The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes could have resulted from ingestion of algae. In (8.39), the entities coelomic cavity and digestive tract co-elaborates with sea urchin, construing part/whole taxonomic relations. Similarly, in (8.40) coelomic fluid is construed as part of scientifically named sea urchins P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes. A part/whole relationship between coelomic cavity in (8.39) and coelomic fluid in (8.40) is subsumed based on the shared knowledge between the student writer and the reader, although the shared Classifier coelomic can be an indicator that they are taxonomically related. The second type of observational things in Text 3 are tech-enhanced gaze things, whose observation relies on technology. Most instances of this entity type in Text 3 are associated with Chytridiomycota (chytrid). Chytrid is linguistically defined at the beginning of the text, shown in (8.41). (8.41) The Chytridiomycota are considered the most primitive phylum of > the fungi. The categorised dimension phylum suggests that fungi is the superordinate of Chytridiomycota. Here phylum is a field-specific dimension used in biology. The classification of chytrid is further expanded in the same paragraph, shown in (8.42). (8.42) Members of > this phylum of > chytrid are ecologically important, and include plant and animal parasites, as well as the ruminant symbionts. In (8.41) chytrids and fungi are co-elaborated to construe a classification— i.e. fungi is the superordinate of chytrid. This relationship is named technically as phylum. In (8.42), a classification is construed by an implicit chytrid co-elaborated with plant parasites, animal parasites and ruminant symbionts. The classifying relationships are named by the dimension members. This classification continues to be expanded as the text unfolds. In (8.43), more entities are associated with chytrids. (8.43) . . . these included filamentous fungi, possibly species of > Penicillium or Aspergillus—but not chytrids. Here the elaborating nominal group complex as a whole further specifies the hyponyms of filamentous fungi—as Penicillium and Aspergillus. The entity chytrids is excluded from the category of filamentous fungi, but the category to which it belongs is not explicitly realised. Figure 8.2 demonstrates the potential classification related to chytrid established in Text 3.

178  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

Figure 8.2  Classification of chytrid in Text 3

In addition to categorised dimension, entities associated with chytrid are also augmented by measured and perceived dimensions, such as motility and shape in (8.44). These dimensions refer to some of the criteria for distinguishing chytrid from the other items in the classification taxonomy. (8.44) The combination of their < motility and their < shape suggests that these organisms could be chytrid zoospores. The further type of observational thing entities in Text 2 is the inferable ones, such as cellulose, keratin and chitin in (8.45). (8.45) Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of > substrates, including cellulose, keratin and chitin. This example categorises cellulose, keratin and chitin as three kinds of substrates. By contrast to the deep classification construed by the trained gaze and tech-enhanced gaze things, this example offers the only classification of inferable entities in the text. 8.3.2  Activity Entities Similar to Text 2, Text 3 uses both enacted type and observational type of activity entities. The distinguishing features of Text 2 are associated with the delicacy of activity entities. The delicate types include tech-enhanced gaze activity entities in the observational category and the investigation activity entities in the enacted category.

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  179 Observational activity entities in Text 3 correspond to the tech-enhanced thing entities (i.e. chytrid) discussed earlier. As shown in (8.46), the biological interaction between Chytridiomycota and Echinoidea is realised through the activity entity symbiosis. (8.46) Members of the Chytridiomycota may be involved in symbiosis with the Echinoidea. The activity entity symbiosis then co-elaborates with other activity entities to construe classification taxonomies, as shown in (8.47). An implicit categorised dimension naming the classification (e.g. type/kind) can be recovered. (8.47)

Host-microbial relationships may include parasitism, commensalism and symbiosis. Types of >

Both subtypes of enacted activity entity—manner and investigation—were found in Text 3. By contrast to investigation entities indicating localised laboratory activities (e.g. experiment) in Text 1 and Text 2, investigation entities in Text 3 move beyond an experimental level. They contextualise the student’s work as part of building knowledge in the field of biological science as a whole, as exemplified by preliminary study and project in (8.48). (8.48) This preliminary study aimed to determine the most practical methods to allow this project to be attempted, in particular collection and dissection methods. Here preliminary study is presented as a part of the project. The Classifier preliminary suggests that the project consists of different stages. A number of manner entities were identified in Text 3, including the methods used in the present study, such as collection method and dissection method in (8.49), and the methods that are proposed to be useful in the future studies, such as biochemical tests and molecular sequencing methods. Manner activities, by and large, are not taxonomically related to each other, but they simply form a collection of segmented activities. One exception is the relationship established between molecular sequencing methods and DNA sequencing in (8.49). (8.49) Further analysis could be performed using biochemical tests or molecular sequencing methods, such as DNA sequencing. The lack of classification associated with experimental methods suggests that building taxonomies of activities in the specialised field is not under focus in the development of knowledge.

180  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology 8.3.3  Source Entities Source entities were revealed in Text 3. They are realised mostly implicitly in clauses with receptive voice, e.g. Samples were taken from the coelomic cavity and digestive tract of the sea urchins (by us). Text 3 distinguishes itself from the previous texts by the significant use of references to publications, such as those underlined in (8.50) and (8.51). (8.50) Thorsen (1999) reported the presence of Chytridiomycota in the digestive system of the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum. (8.51) The presence of microbial activity in both regular and irregular sea urchins has been demonstrated . . . (da Silver et al., 2006; Sawabe et al., 1995; Temara, De Ridder, & Kaisin, 1991; Thorsen, 1998; Thorsen, 1999). References to publications correspond to the shift of investigation activity from an experiment to a study. The knowledge established at this stage of apprenticeship not only includes the knowledge recontextualised in the pedagogic texts in the practice of knowledge reproduction, but importantly also involves knowledge produced in published research articles, in the realm of knowledge production. 8.3.4  Semiotic Entities Semiotic entities in Text 3 have some distinctive features from the previous texts. Apart from the semiotic entities identified in Text 1 and Text 2 including case (e.g. fact), result (e.g. result) and idea (e.g. knowledge), two other types—proof and locution—were also found in Text 3. The proof entities are used to name the student’s interpretations of causes and effects, such as reason and evidence in (8.52) and (8.53). This usage contrasts with the result entities used in the previous texts, which name results derived externally from the experiment (e.g. results). (8.52) The identification of microorganisms within sea urchins, and attempts to understand their role in such a relationship is significant for a number of reasons. (8.53) This study also aimed to provide some evidence for the presence of chytrids within sea urchins . . . The entity reason in (8.52) names texts in the subsequent paragraphs that are causally related to the evaluated sequence of figures—i.e. it is significant to identify microorganisms within sea urchins and attempt to understand their role in such as relationship. Similarly, evidence in (8.53) names subsequent pieces of text in the Result and Discussion, which are

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  181 related causally to the figure chytrids were present within the sea urchins. These proof type of semiotic entities suggest that interpreting cause and effect relationships is important in Text 3. We will show in Chapter 9 that this finding corresponds to the activity of reasoning. A further type of semiotic entities, locutions, is exemplified by report and information in the following examples. (8.54) There were a number of aspects which were unaddressed in this report . . . (8.55) Such research would provide information . . . Report names the research report produced by the student; information refers to the contributions offered by a published research article. In contrast to fact (e.g. fact) and ideas (e.g. knowledge) used in the previous texts to refer to established scientific knowledge, the locution entities in Text 3 relativise the findings of the research as knowledge, which has not yet been accepted by the broad scientific community as established facts. 8.3.5  Place Entities Place entities were used in Text 3 but not in Text 1 and Text 2. Both ostensively defined and linguistically defined types were identified. The ostensively defined places are realised through Circumstances in the procedure part of the text, as shown in (8.56). (8.56) Three species of regular sea urchin were collected from the rockyintertidal region at Chowder Bay. Specimens of the irregular urchin, Echinocardium cordatum (heart urchin), were also collected from within the oceanic sediment at Watsons Bay. These places refer to the regions in the Sydney metropolitan region in Australia. They are ostensive not only because of their physical location but also that they can be pointed out on a map. They refer to the places where the student collected sea urchins for the study. These entities make clear that activities of doing biology at the end of the second undergraduate year is no longer limited in a laboratory setting, but the application of knowledge in a natural setting (such as recognising species) is also important. The linguistically defined places in Text 3 are mostly realised through Classifier^Thing structures, such as aquatic habitats, temperate zones and rocky-intertidal region in the following examples: (8.57) Chytridiomycota are found in both aquatic and terrestrial habitats and in a diverse range of > temperate zones.

182  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology (8.58) Three species of regular sea urchin were collected from the rockyintertidal region at Chowder Bay. In these examples, the uncommon sense meaning of the places are suggested by the Classifiers (e.g. temperate and intertidal) which have Latinate origins. Temperate refers to moderate temperature and intertidal refers to the region in between high and low watermarks. Similarly, the Classifiers in aquatic habitat and terrestrial habitat are derived respectively from Latin words aqua (‘water’) and terra (‘land’). Borrowings from Latin (and also Greek) is an important feature for creating technical terms in an exploration field (White, 1998). Linguistically defined places are typically used to construe taxonomies in geography, ecology and geology. The places used in Text 3 suggest that some knowledge of geography is involved at this stage of studying biology. However, the expansion of the taxonomy is limited. 8.3.6  Overview of Taxonomy Building in Text 3 A summary in Table 8.4 shows that Text 3 has a greater variety of entity types in comparison to Text 1 and Text 2. Several developmental features can be noted. First, the observational trained gaze things were not identified in the previous texts, but they are significant in Text 3. This provides some evidence that the readily observable phenomena in the commonsense world are re-construed taxonomically in the field of biology at the end of the second undergraduate year. Second, the tech-enhanced gaze entities, including both things and activities, were present in Text 3. Their presence is associated importantly with the instrumental entity microscope. These entities indicate that the biological observation is concerned with phenomena at the micro-level. Third, the investigation activities, such as study and project, as well as the source entities (e.g. Thorsen, 1999), indicate that Text 3 is related to other studies in the field. Importantly, the building of knowledge at this stage requires more than the recontextualised knowledge in the pedagogic texts. Engaging with texts concerning knowledge production (i.e. published research articles) has also become important. Furthermore, place entities were used in Text 3. The ostensively defined places indicate that the activities of doing biology have been expanded from the localised laboratory setting to the natural setting (i.e. the ‘real’ world). This finding corresponds to the choices of linguistically defined places, which reveal that some knowledge of geography is necessary for learning biology. Finally, the use of proof entities indicates that the student writer needs to be able to interpret cause and effect relationships in Text 3. The analysis has also shown significant use of dimensions for augmenting tech-enhanced gaze things, as shown in Table 8.5. All four types

Table 8.4  Entity types in Text 1, Text 2 and Text 3 types of entity

Text 1

ostensively defined/ instrumental

instru.

control flask, repressor, spectro­ photometer

radioactive glucose

mercap­ salt agar media toethanol, chloroform, glycerol medium

Chytridiomycota, zoospore, eukaryotic cells

tech-enhanced gaze inferable investigation enacted/ osten. defined manner activity obser./ ling. defined

experiment

protein, cytosol, enzyme, B-galactosidase

enzyme, fatty acid

experiment

study, project, experiment

method, treatment weightof-water, spectro­ photometry

tech-enhanced gaze

dissection method, molecular sequencing method

parasitism, symbiosis gene expression, transcription,

inferable

chemical process, celluloses activity

ostensively defined

Chowder Bay, Watsons Bay

linguistically defined

terrestrial habitat, temperate zone

place

fact semiotic

case

limitations

fact, mechanism

needs

needs

purpose

result

result

result

proof knowledge, hypothesis

locution people publication

problem, mechanism findings, results reasons, evidence

idea

source

water, microscope, scanning electron microscope

sea urchin, digestive tract, invertebrate

obser.

ling. defined

Text 3

container, pipette, vial, gloves, cuvette, balance

trained gaze

thing

Text 2

knowledge information, report

student (implied)

student (implied) students, biologists (implied) Sawabe et al. (1995)

184  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Table 8.5  Dimensions of entities in Text 3 dimension types

entity types

categorised

structured

instru

trained gaze obser species thing/ tech-enhanced species of > lingui­ gaze sea urchin; stically organism; defined phylum; species inferable place

linguistically defined

measured

perceived

sample size a section of > the gut structure of > zoospore; gut wall < structure

the number of the shape > round cells of > flagella

chemical composition a diverse range of > temperate zones

of dimensions are used to construe taxonomies of phenomena at the micro-level. Comparing to the previous texts, Text 3 demonstrates more in-depth taxonomies of biological phenomena, which suggests that building static knowledge of exploration field is a focus of the object of the study. While the text shows the taxonomies of the experimental procedure and utilitarian tools, they have limited developmental features compared to the previous texts. This finding suggests that the specialised field maintains in the service of the exploration field. Furthermore, the field of research demonstrates engagement with a broader academic research community, which resembles activities of research conducted by expert scientists (Hood, 2010; Humphrey & Hao, 2013).

8.4 Entities and Dimensions in Text 4—Third-Year Research Report Text 4 is a research report produced in the third undergraduate year. It reports on an investigation of the interaction between insects and fungal spores. Most of the entity types in Text 4 have appeared in the previous texts. The text shares many similar features to those found in Text 3, including the observation of biological phenomena through technology, research activities outside the localised laboratory experiment, engagement with academic sources and interpretation of cause/effect relations. However, Text 4 also distinguishes itself from the previous texts by having

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  185 distinct features in construing taxonomic relations. The taxonomies are associated mainly with thing entities and activity entities. 8.4.1  Thing Entities Both observational and instrumental things were shown in Text 4. Given that the usage of instrumental things is similar to that in Text 3, the discussion of thing entities here focuses on observational things. The subtypes of trained gaze, tech-enhanced gaze and inferable things were all identified. The trained gaze things in Text 4 are mostly associated with the entity locust. Noticeably, classification in Text 4 is largely assumed, with neither explicit co-elaboration between entities, nor naming through categorised dimensions. In the examples below, the entities insect, herbivore and locust are presented separately in the unfolding of the text and their classification taxonomy is assumed without explicit realisations. (8.59) Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally. (8.60) . . . the ability of fungal spore to pass unharmed through the chemical environment found in the digestive tract of herbivores. (8.61) . . . (fungal) spores could be isolated from the locust. Figure 8.3 maps out the assumed classification suggested by the instantiated entities. Similar to classification, compositions construed in this text are also mostly unnamed—i.e. few structured dimensions were found. However, compositions are realised by co-elaborations between entities, which are realised through various grammatical realisations, including a Thing^possessive Qualifier nominal group structure (e.g. the gastrointestinal tract of = each locust), a Classifier^Thing structure (locust = exoskeleton) and a possessive attributive clause realising a state figure (C.terminifera have = mandibles of different sizes). Figure 8.4 shows the instantiated compositional taxonomies associated with the entity locust in the text.

Figure 8.3  Classification of locust in Text 4

186  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

Figure 8.4  Composition of locust in Text 4

Figure 8.5  Classification of fungus in Text 4

As we can see, while Text 4 demonstrates a similar depth of taxonomic relations construed by the trained gaze things in comparison to that in Text 3, the taxonomic relations are less explicitly shown. A great deal of taxonomic relations has been assumed as shared knowledge between the student writer and the reader. Tech-enhanced gaze things in Text 4 are mostly associated with the entities fungi and fungal spore. Co-elaborations construing classification of fungi (e.g. phycomyces belongs to = a different fungal taxa (Zygomycota) to the other isolates) and categorised dimensions (e.g. species of > Penicillium, Podopspora, Absidia, Isaria and Phycomyces; a different fungal < taxa (Zygomycota)) naming the classification were both found. A rough mapping of the classification among the tech-enhanced gaze things revealed in Text 4 is displayed in Figure 8.5. The depth of the taxonomic relations is comparable to the tech-enhanced gaze things in Text 3. The tech-enhanced gaze thing, fungal spore, which is fungus at its beginning stage of a lifecycle, is augmented through measured dimensions, including both field-neutral measurements (e.g. size, quantity) and those that are field-specific (e.g. concentration, susceptibility, pathogenicity, integrity). These measured dimensions are summarised in Figure 8.6.

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  187

Figure 8.6  Measured dimensions of fungal spore in Text 4

As has been discussed in Chapter 4, measured dimensions (along with structured and perceived ones) name the properties by which an item can be differentiated from one another. The wide range of measured dimensions used in the text indicates that the student has developed a deeper understanding of the taxonomies realised by the tech-enhanced gaze entities (e.g. fungal spore). Additionally, a few instances of inferable things were identified in Text 4, as exemplified in (8.62) and (8.63). (8.62) The resident microbiota and digestive enzymes are also thought to have little involvement in the digestive process. (8.63) It is possible that intrinsic structural differences such as the constituents of the spore wall could increase the susceptibility of the spores to antifungals and digestive enzymes of the locust gut. Although the examples involve the inferable entities, there is no co-elaboration between entities or augmentation through dimensions. In other words, no taxonomic relation was construed by the inferable entities. 8.4.2  Activity Entities Like in Text 2 and Text 3, building taxonomies through observational activity entities is also significant in Text 4. While Text 2 focuses on inferable activity entities (e.g. gene expression), and Text 3 on tech-enhanced gaze activity entities (e.g. parasitism), Text 4 distinguishes itself by having both an increasing number and a greater variety of observational activities entities. Three types of observational activity entities were found in the text. They are associated with three types of thing entities—i.e. trained gaze activity entities (e.g. maceration) associated with trained gaze things (e.g.

188  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology locust); tech-enhanced activity entities (e.g. dispersal; spore germination) associated tech-enhanced things (e.g. fungal spore); and inferable activity entities (e.g. enzymic digestion) associated with inferable things (e.g. enzyme). The relationship between activity entities and thing entities are typically realised grammatically through a Thing^Qualifier structure in which the ‘agent’, i.e. thing entity, is realised by the Qualifier, such as in (8.64) and (8.65). (8.64) . . . smaller spores more easily avoid maceration by insect mouthpieces. (8.65) The alternative explanation for the absence of colonisation by Isaria . . . Sometimes observational activity entities are realised through Classifier^Thing nominal groups in which the Classifier subsumes the thing entity as an ‘agent’, such as fungal spore in (8.66). (8.66) A number of invertebrate hosts have been shown to aid fungal spore dispersal. Apart from the group rank, the relationships between these two entity types are realised at the clause rank. For example, in (8.67), the trained gaze thing locust plays the agent of the trained gaze activity physiological response. In this case, lexical verbs such as initiate, instigate and commence realise the occurrences. (8.67) . . . that the locust initiated some physiological response that prevented colonization. Structured dimensions are used in Text 4 to augment observational activity entities, realising compositions of the ‘itemised activities’ (Doran & Martin, 2020). In example (8.68), a relationship between the whole lifecycle and its (unnamed) parts is realised by the structured dimension stage. (8.68) . . . by selecting individuals (of fungal spores) at exactly the same stage of > their lifecycle. A further developmental feature regarding activities entities in Text 4 is associated with the use of manner type of enacted activity entities. In contrast to the previous texts, where the manner activity entities refer to the methods conducted in the laboratory experiments, many instances in Text 4 are not in the field of biology. They refer to policies and practices that manage available resources for the benefit of the society, such as

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  189 biocontrol and ecology and environmental management in the examples below. (8.69) This would inform the design of fungal biocontrols. (8.70) An understanding of the relationship between fungal spore viability would be beneficial in applications of biocontrol, ecology management and environmental management. This finding suggests that applications of scientific knowledge can be associated with activities in other fields, including industry and administration. That is to say, at the third undergraduate year, understanding meaningful applications of biological knowledge for social and environmental benefits has become relevant. 8.4.3  Overview of Building Taxonomies in Text 4 In summary, the findings of entity analysis in Text 4 demonstrate some potential developmental features. Table 8.6 provides a comparative summary of the entity types across the four texts. In terms of the diversity of entity types, Text 4 demonstrates delicate types of observational activities. The trained gaze, tech-enhanced gaze and inferable activity entities correlate with subtypes of observational thing entities. Another important finding is that manner activities are concerned not only with experimental methods in biology, but also with activities in social practice. Text 4 demonstrated a similar depth of taxonomic relations with that in Text 3. However, Text 4 involved a great deal of implicit realisations of both classification and compositions in the unfolding of discourse, in addition to some explicit naming through dimensions (see Table 8.7). Much knowledge of classification and composition has been subsumed as shared knowledge in the field. A significant depth of static knowledge has been construed by the techenhanced gaze entities, particularly those associated with fungal spores. The in-depth knowledge is evident in the augmentation of entities with a diverse range of dimensions. At this stage of the apprenticeship, the static knowledge has been developed in two important ways. First, in comparison to the knowledge construed in Text 3, which was concerned mostly with knowing ‘what something is’, the exploration field in Text 4 stresses an understanding of ‘how something happens’, revealed by the diverse types of activity entities. Second, although like in Text 3, the specialised field constituted by experimental practice assists in the building of the exploration field, importantly, Text 4 also concerns the interactions between the discipline of biology and other specialised fields including industry and administration. This finding resonates with the findings of literacy development in industry revealed by Rose (1997, 1998). Rose found that at the high

activity

thing

obser./ling. defined

enacted

ling. defined

Text 2

enzymic digestion

chemical process

inferable

gene expression, transcription

germination, fungal spore dispersal parasitism, symbiosis

dissection method biocontrol

tech-enhanced gaze

treatment

maceration, peristaltic movement

method, weight-ofwater

trained gaze

manner

study, experimental procedure

experiment

investigation

study, project, experiment

protein, cytosol, enzyme, fatty acid, pathogen, enzyme, enzyme amino acid cytoplasm

fungal spore

insects, locust, herbivore

potato dextrose agar

plate, container

Text 4

inferable

chytri­diomycota, flagella

salt agar media

tech-enhanced gaze

chloroform, glycerol medium

water, microscope

Text 3

sea urchin, algae, gut

experiment

radioactive glucose

pipette, gloves, control flask, cuvette, dye spectro­ photometer

Text 1

obser.

trained gaze

instr.

ostensively defined/instrumental

types of entity

Table 8.6  Entity types identified in Text 1, Text 2, Text 3 and Text 4

source

semi­otic

place

knowledge

reasons, evidence

findings, results

publication

Thorsen (1998)

students, biologists (implied)

student (implied)

knowledge hypothesis

result

people student (implied)

result

purpose

information, report

proof

result

needs

needs

fact, mechanism problem, mechanism

locution

idea

fact

limitations

aquatic habitat, temperate zone

linguistically defined

case

Chowder Bay, Watsons Bay

ostensively defined

Slater (1992)

we (students), biologists (implied)

literature,

concern

evidence, implication, ways

result, findings, consequence

192  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Table 8.7  Dimensions of entities in Text 4 types of entity

dimension types categorised

structured

instrumental/ ostensively defined

trained gaze thing/ ling. def.

members of > the Acrididae; tech-enhanced species of > gaze Penicillium

measured the number of > samples

the structure of > higher plant and animal communities

the size of > the insect mouthpiece; the number of > invertebrate hosts

constituents of > the spore wall; cell wall < composition

the numbers of > spore; the size of > fungal spores; integrity of > spores; viability of > spores

enacted [manner]

a crucial aspect of > autodissemination

activity

observational/ ling. defined tech-enhanced gaze

the same stage of > their lifecycle; the basis of > the adaptations

semiotic

locution

a growing body of > literature

level of the industrial hierarchy, the texts (i.e. technical notes) produced by applied scientists concern applying scientific knowledge and making recommendations for technological change (1998, p. 243).

8.5 Conclusion In this chapter, we have applied the description of discourse semantic choices to examine the development of static knowledge in the four student experimental reports. The resources include entity types, their dimensions, as well as their co-elaborations in the discourse. These reports produced at different stages of undergraduate study enable us to examine variations of language features, which reveal some developmental features of knowledge-building from a static perspective. The analyses reveal that both the diversity and depth of taxonomies have been developed across the four texts. Taxonomies become increasingly

A Static Perspective: Construing Taxonomy  193 more diverse, revealed by widening the range of entity types. The growing depth of entities was at first revealed by the increasing use of dimensions and co-elaborations between entities. However, as the depth of knowledge develops towards the end of undergraduate study, taxonomic relations are often subsumed in the text as shared knowledge between the writer and the reader. At the level of fields, the student texts have shown that apprenticing into the discipline of biology involves developing knowledge in both specialised field and exploration field. Although the specialised field (‘doing experiment’) was under focus at the beginning of the undergraduate study, it then maintained an assisting role for building the exploration field (i.e. the ‘observed’ biological world). Interestingly, at the final stage of undergraduate apprenticeship, it has been important to engage the discipline of biology as a whole with other disciplines constituted by other fields, such as the specialised field in the industry. In the next chapter, we shift our focus to the dynamic construal of knowledge in the student texts.

9

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities

9.1 Introduction In this chapter, we extend the analyses of the four texts produced at different stages of undergraduate biology. The analyses aim to reveal how knowledge in these texts is construed from a dynamic perspective. The analysis of each text considers the following questions: • What kinds of activities are construed in the text? What types of fields are revealed by the activities? • What are the distinctive discourse semantic realisations of activities? • What are the distinctive lexicogrammatical realisations? The language resources at stake for construing activities and associated fields include primarily sequence of figures at the level discourse semantics and a wide range of realisations of sequence at the level of lexicogrammar (see Chapter 6). In the analyses, we focus on revealing distinguishing patterns of sequence and their realisations in the four texts. Like in Chapter 8, the findings in this chapter are reported according to the chronological order of the production of the texts. In the discussion of each text, the findings are organised by the fields identified. As it has been revealed in Chapter 8, instantiation of exploration field and specialised field(s) can be diverse in different texts; however, the opposition between the field of the object of study and the field of research consistently appear throughout the four texts. The findings are thus grouped according to these two academic fields.

9.2 Construing Activities in Text 1—First-Year Laboratory Report Similar to the findings of static construal in Text 1, the specialised field, specifically the field of practice, plays a significant role from a dynamic perspective. Practice interacts with both the field of the object of study and

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  195 the field of research. Moreover, the field of inquiry was revealed as part of the research field from the dynamic perspective based on activities of reasoning, although this field was not shown from the static perspective in Chapter 8. 9.2.1  Field of Research Two delicate fields, practice and inquiry, constitute the field of research. The field of practice was revealed by the facilitated activities. The facilitated activities are mostly construed through temporal sequencing of occurrence figures in the Method stage, as exemplified and annotated in (9.1). In this and all the following examples in this chapter, the figures in a sequence are ordered by alphabets; the connexions are in small caps; the implicit connexions are explicated and placed in the brackets. Annotation of connexions at the right-hand side of the text indicates the connexions are external ones. (9.1) a. Set amounts of dye were pipetted (by us) into 1mL cuvettes, b. (AND) water was added (by us)

successive purpose

c. (IN ORDER) TO give a total volume of 1mL.

successive

d. (AND THEN) Each solution was mixed (by us), e. AND absorbances (of solution) were read (by us), f. (BY MEANS OF) using a spectrophotometer.

successive manner

The facilitated activities construed by the sequence recounts the experimental procedure in the laboratory. These activities involve taxonomies of utilitarian tools identified in Chapter 8 (e.g. pipette, cuvettes, solution, etc.). Grammatically, the sequence is realised congruently through clause complexes and the figures are realised through clauses. The preference of congruent grammatical realisation of facilitated activities is an important feature in Text 1, and this preference maintains across the texts produced in the later years. The second field that interacts with the field of research is the field of inquiry involving activities of reasoning. In this text, activities of reasoning are realised largely in the discourse through connecting positions of figures. However, the positions and connexions are further realised grammatically in complex ways. Both congruent and metaphorical realisations were identified. The excerpts (9.2) and (9.3) provide two examples of the realisations of reasoning. In these excerpts and the following throughout the chapter when grammatical metaphors are involved, the original texts are followed by the texts unpacking the grammatical metaphors. The

196  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology realisations of reasoning are highlighted. Metaphorical mappings and their unpacked agnates are in boldface. Internal connexions are underlined and annotated on the left-hand side of the text, following the convention established in Martin (1992). (9.2) According to this method (spectrophotometry method), the pipette was fairly inaccurate, with an 11% error with pipette volume of 200uL and 51% for 20uL. Furthermore, this accuracy decreased towards the larger end of the pipette’s range. (So) This minimal variability that [[existed between readings]] demonstrated the pipette was fairly precise. a. According to the spectrophotometry method, the pipette was fairly inaccurate, b.

BECAUSE

consequence

the pipette has an 11% error with pipette volume of

200uL and 51% for 20uL. addion

c. FURTHERMORE (/we also see), the pipette became less accurate towards the larger end of the pipette’s range.

consequence

d. (SO we know) the pipette was minimally variable between the readings.

consequence

e. SO we know that the pipette was fairly precise.

(9.3) This method (radioactivity method) suggested that the accuracy of the pipette was quite high throughout its range, with approximately a 3% difference between set and measured volumes for volumes of 150ul and 200ul. However, the presence of significant variability between the readings obtained showed a high degree of imprecision. a. Radioactivity method suggested that the pipette was highly accurate throughout its range b. concessive

BECAUSE

consequence

the set and measured volumes for volumes of 150ul

and 200ul are different by 3%.

c. HOWEVER, we saw the readings were significantly different, d. SO we know that the pipette was highly imprecise.

consequence

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  197

Figure 9.1  Activity of reasoning launches the field of depiction

As shown in these examples, positions are either realised congruently, through a Circumstance [Angle] (e.g. according to spectrophotometry method in (9.2)) or a verbal process (e.g. This method (Radioactivity method) suggested in (9.3)), or realised metaphorically through a verbal process (e.g. demonstrate in (9.2)). The connexions are presented in the discourse either explicitly, such as furthermore, or implicitly, such as so in (9.2). At the level of lexicogrammar, the connexions are realised either congruently through a conjunction or metaphorically through the same verbal process (demonstrate) also realising the position. The sources of the positions include people entity (e.g. we) and enacted activity entities (e.g. spectrophotometry method) naming ‘what we conducted’. The activities of reasoning ‘launches’ the field of the object of study constituted by the experimental results. At the same time, they make meaningful connections between the results. Figure 9.1 demonstrates a minimal sequence of these interactions across two fields. The arrow indicates the unfolding of the reasoning activities. From an interpersonal perspective, the positions in Text 1 all interact with contraction in the engagement system, conveying high certainty in the student’s interpretation. 9.2.2  Field of the Object of Study Although the field of the object of study is evident in Text 1, such as the results ‘launched’ through the field of inquiry in (9.2) and (9.3), its construal is predominantly static rather than dynamic. As has been illustrated in Chapter 8, from the static perspective, the object of study in Text 1 concerns the specialised field, including the efficiency of the instrumental tools and the effectiveness of the experimental methods. The field of practice is, therefore, only construed statically as part of

198  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology the object of study, but not dynamically. Its dynamic construal is only associated with the field of research. 9.2.3 Overview In summary, the dynamic construal of fields in Text 1 is associated particularly with the field of research. Two types of specialised fields are involved: practice and inquiry. These two fields were revealed through facilitated activities and reasoning. By contrast to the field of research, the text revealed few instances of dynamic construal in the object of study. Drawing on the findings of static construal in Chapter 8, we know that the field of the object of study is associated specifically with taxonomies and their properties in the field of practice. Table 9.1 provides a summary of the field types and their discourse semantic realisations, taking into account both findings of dynamic and static construal in Text 1. Table 9.1  Field types and their realisations in Text 1 field types

object of study/ practice

field perspectives

static taxonomy

discourse semantic realisations

figure [state figure]

sequence [temporal dynamic sequencing activities of enacted [facilitated] occurrence practice figures] research static taxonomy

inquiry

examples The pipette was highly accurate throughout its range. The method was time consuming. The equipment was inexpensive. Set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and then water was added (in order) to give a total volume of 1mL. (And then) each solution was mixed, and absorbances were read, (by) using a spectrophotometer.

entity [enacted method, spectrophotometry, activity entities; dye, pipette, cuvette, instrumental solution, spectrophotometer things]

sequence dynamic [external activities connexions + [reasoning] positions]

Radioactivity method suggests . . . so we know . . .

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  199

9.3 Construing Activities in Text 2—Second-Year Laboratory Report In comparison to Text 1, Text 2 demonstrates several distinguishing features ranging across the strata. 9.3.1  Field of the Object of Study The field of the object of study in Text 1 includes only a specialised field [practice]. Text 2 differs from Text 1 by involving two distinctive fields— i.e. an exploration field and a specialised field [depiction]. 9.3.1.1 Exploration The instantiation of the exploration field is identified by implication activities. They are realised through externally and causally related occurrence figures involving generic and linguistically defined entities [observational things], as shown in examples (9.4) and (9.5). (9.4) (9.4) a. The IPTG, unlike the lactose, does not run out, b.

AS

it is never metabolised.

consequence

(9.5) The activity of protein can be controlled through influencing levels of gene expression or (through) their activation/deactivation when already present in the cytosol. a. The activity of proteins can be controlled b. THROUGH influencing levels of gene expression c. or THROUGH activating/deactivating proteins d.

WHEN

manner alternave simultaneous

they (proteins) are already present in the cytosol.

The sequences are realised either congruently through clause complexes (such as in (9.4)), or metaphorically by realising one of the figures through a nominal group (e.g. their activation/deactivation in (9.5)). This identification of exploration field in Text 2 from the dynamic perspective complements the finding of static perspective in Chapter 8. The static perspective revealed the taxonomies in the exploration field, which are realised through a range of linguistically defined entity types. Text 2, therefore, shows that building knowledge from

200  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology both dynamic and static perspectives are salient at this stage of the undergraduate training. 9.3.1.2 Depiction The other choice in the field of the object of study in Text 2 is the specialised field [depiction], indicated by the specific scientific activities observed in the laboratory experiment. These activities contrast with the generalised implication activities in the exploration field. In (9.6), a set of observed activities is realised through a sequence. Grammatically, the sequence is realised congruently through a clause complex. The use of past tense in the verbal groups indicates the specificity of the activities. (9.6) a. The B-galactosidase was only activated b.

ONCE

simultaneous

(/WHEN) the alternative food source was depleted.

The object of the study involving both fields of exploration and depiction suggests that the student writer needs to not only report the laboratory observation but also link the observation to the generalised knowledge acquired in the pedagogic materials. How these two fields are brought together in the text will be discussed below when activities of reasoning are concerned. 9.3.2  Field of Research 9.3.2.1 Reasoning Similar to Text 1, Text 2 also involves activities of reasoning. However, both their functions and discourse semantic realisations are different from those in Text 1. As illustrated earlier, both the specific depiction and the generalised exploration were involved in the object of study. The student writer has an important task to link these two fields logically, and this is achieved by the activity of reasoning. As shown in the example (9.7), the reasoning activities (we say . . . , so we know . . .) enables the field of depiction to be generalised towards the field of exploration. (9.7) The flasks [[containing lactose as well as 5-FG or Chloramphenicol, inhibitors of transcription and translation respectively]], demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity in comparison to the flask [[containing just lactose]]. This

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  201 demonstrated

that gene expression controls B-galactosidase

activity. a. (We saw) The flasks [[containing lactose as well as 5-FG or Chloramphenicol, inhibitors of transcription and translation respectively]], demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity in comparison to the flask [[containing just lactose]]. b. SO we know that gene expression controls B-galactosidase

consequence

activity.

In this example, the reasoning activity is realised through a combination of position and connexion, which is realised further through a verbal process demonstrated. Since the depiction helps the student to ‘confirm’ the established knowledge in the pedagogic texts, the position functions interpersonally to close down the potential heteroglossic space. Figure 9.2 illustrates the interaction between depiction and exploration navigated through reasoning.

Figure 9.2  Activity of reasoning connects depiction and exploration

Apart from generalising from the depiction field to the exploration field, activities of reasoning also help interpret the experimental findings within the field of depiction. This is exemplified in (9.8). (9.8) The flask containing lactose and glucose, a preferred simpler food source, initially demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity in comparison to the flask containing lactose. After a period of time, the level of B-galactosidase activity sharply rose. This suggests that the B-galactosidase was only activated once the alternative food source was depleted.

202  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology a. (We saw) The flask containing lactose and glucose, a preferred simpler food source, INITIALLY demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity in comparison to the flask containing lactose.

successive

b. AFTER A PERIOD OF TIME, the level of B-galactosidase activity sharply rose.

consequence

c. SO we suppose that the B-galactosidase was only activated d.

ONCE

the alternative food source was depleted.

simultaneous

By contrast to the contraction enacted in the shift from depiction to exploration in (9.8), the reasoning activity in (9.8) functions interpersonally to expanding the heteroglossic space (e.g. so we suppose). This is because the ‘result’ in (9.8) is what deduced by the student, rather than the confirmation of established knowledge. Expanding the heteroglossic space for including other potential voices enables the student to enact ‘objectivity’ in interpreting the result. Figure 9.3 illustrates the connection made between depicted phenomena through reasoning. Grammatically, the connexions in the realisation of reasoning are mainly realised through the Process in a verbal clause (demonstrated, suggest). One of the figures in the sequence is realised metaphorically. This grammatical realisation of reasoning is similar to the finding in Text 1.

Figure 9.3  Activity of reasoning launches depiction

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  203 9.3.2.2 Review An additional feature in Text 2 is the activity of reviewing in the field of reflection. The activity reflects on ‘what we have done’ in the experiment. This activity type is realised in the discourse through causal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures, as exemplified in (9.9). Unlike the facilitated activities in the practice field, which recount experimental procedure in the Method stage, the reviewing activities occur typically in the Discussion stage, functioning to explain rather than to recount. This activity type points to an expansion of the field of research in comparison to Text 1. (9.9) The results [[obtained]] were

due to

the treatments [[used]].

The results [[obtained]] were DUE TO the treatments [[used]]. a. We obtained these results b.

BECAUSE

consequence

we used (different) treatments.

9.3.3 Overview In summary, Text 2 demonstrates several distinctive features of dynamic construal of fields. First, a variety of fields were identified in Text 2, including exploration field and a range of specialised fields (practice, depiction, reflection and inquiry). The activity of reasoning in the field of inquiry plays a significant role in linking the specific phenomena depicted in the experiment to the generalised scientific knowledge in the exploration field. The construal of exploration field indicates that this stage of undergraduate apprenticeship focuses on developing foundational knowledge. The interaction between the exploration and depiction fields shows that the experiments function to reproduce the established foundational knowledge by observing concrete phenomena that are here and now. This finding aligns with the findings of static construal of Text 2 revealed in Chapter 8. Table 9.2 provides an overview of the field types instantiated in Text 2 and their discourse semantic realisations, in comparison to those found in Text 1.

9.4 Construing Activities in Text 3—Second-Year Research Report In the second-year research report, the dynamic construal of fields can be revealed in both fields of the object of study and research. The activity types found in Text 2 were also identified in Text 3, including implication activities and observed activities in the field of the object of study and facilitated activities, pre/review and reasoning activities in the field of

research

object of study

practice

dynamic activities sequence [causal sequencing [re/preview] of enacted occurrence figures]

dynamic activities sequence [external [reasoning] connexions + positions]

reflection

inquiry

Radioactivity method suggests (. . .) so we know the pipette was highly imprecise.

method, spectrophotometry

sequence [temporal dynamic activities sequencing of enacted [facilitated] occurrence figures]

entity [enacted activity entities; instrumental things]

Set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and then water was added (in order) to give a total volume of 1mL. (And then) each solution was mixed, and absorbances were read, (by) using a spectrophotometer.

practice

static taxonomy

The pipette was highly accurate throughout its range. The method was time consuming.

static taxonomy figure [state figure]

depiction

(We saw) the flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity, so we know gene expression controls B-gal. activity.

We obtained the results because we used the treatment.

treatment, ONPG assay

E.coli bacteria were cultured in a glycerol medium, and then one of the six treatment was added to the bacterial culture, and bacteria growth was monitored by measuring absorbance . . .

At first the flask demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity, after a period of time the level of B-galactosidase activity sharply rose.

sequence dynamic activities [temporal sequencing of [facilitated] observed occurrence figures (specific)]

exploration

chloroform, protein, cytosol, enzyme, gene expression, transcription, induction

Text 2

entity [trained gaze static taxonomy entity; inferable entity; observational activity entity]

Text 1

sequence [temporal/causal dynamic activities sequencing of observed [implication] occurrence figures (generic)]

field perspectives discourse semantic realisations The activity of protein can be controlled through influencing levels of gene expression, or through activating/deactivating proteins when they are already present in the cytosol.

field types

Table 9.2  Field types and their realisations in Text 1 and Text 2

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  205 research. However, Text 3 distinguishes itself by demonstrating distinctive ways of realising these activities at both levels of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. 9.4.1  Field of the Object of Study Construing implication activities is a significant task in Text 3. More extended explanations of scientific phenomena appear in the Introduction and Discussion stages of the text. This is a significant difference from the laboratory reports in Text 1 and Text 2. The extended explanations establish multiple connections between causes and effects. In the example (9.10), two causes (realised by the figures a and b) are related to a result (realised by the figure c). Apart from the increased complexity in connecting activities, the grammatical realisations of implication activities also exhibit more complex grammatical patterns. By contrast to the realisations of implication activities in the previous texts, which were mostly congruent, the realisations in Text 3 demonstrate a salient pattern of mapping figures to a nominal group (e.g. this and physical degradation of substrates in (9.10)) and connexions to a verbal group (e.g. allow in (9.10)). (9.10) Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of substrates, including cellulose, keratin and chitin (Douglas, 1994; Trinci et al., 1994; Webster & Weber, 2007). This, in addition to the physical degradation of substrates resulting from hyphal growth, allow materials to be more readily degraded by fungi and bacteria. a. Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of substrates, including cellulose, keratin and chitin,

addive

substrates are physically degraded because of hyphal growth,

b.

AND

c.

SO THAT

consequence

materials are more readily degraded by fungi and bacteria.

Text 3 has a recurrent pattern in the realisations of implication activities, that is, one of the figures in the sequence is mapped congruently at the clause rank and the connexion is realised through a 2nd order Agent (e.g. allow in (9.10) and (9.11)) or a Minor Process (e.g. for in (9.12)). (9.11) Some bacteria may also help fix nitrogen, allowing their hosts to successfully thrive on diets with a high carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (Harris, 1992).

206  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Some bacteria may also help fix nitrogen, ALLOWING their hosts to successfully thrive on diets with a high carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (Harris (1992)). a. Some bacteria may also help fix nitrogen, b.

SO THAT

consequence

their hosts can successfully thrive on diets with a high

carbon-to-nitrogen ratio.

(9.12) These aquatic microorganisms may play a similar role to terrestrial gut symbionts—aiding host digestion and nutrition in return for a constant supply of nutrients within a homeostatic environment (Harris, 1992; Webster & Weber, 2007). a. These aquatic microorganisms may in return aid hosts to digest and provide nutrition, b.

IN ORDER TO

purpose

be constantly supplied with nutrients within a

homeostatic environment.

Realising connexions through 2nd order Agents or Minor Processes provides an important step towards realising sequence through a clause. This grammatical preference contrasts with the realisations of activities in the field of depiction, which is exemplified in (9.13). All figures in the example are realised through nominal groups and the connexions are realised through verbal groups. The resulting grammatical structure is a relational process (specifically a circumstantial attributive process). This clausal structure forms the ‘favourite clause type’ in scientific texts (Halliday, 2004). (9.13) The possible presence of chytrids within the coelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes could have resulted from the ingestion of algae. a. Chytrids were possibly present within the oelomic fluid of P. Phyllacanthus and E. heliopneustes

consequence

b. probably BECAUSE algae were ingested.

Among the range of metaphorical realisations outlined in Chapter 6, realising sequence through ‘the favourite clause type’ involves a relatively higher degree of stratal tension than the agentive clauses exemplified in (9.11) and (9.12). This higher degree ‘metaphoricity’ could be a result that the example (9.13) provides an interpretation

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  207 of result in the Discussion stage, within which both figures refer to specific findings that have been reported in the preceding text (i.e. in the Result stage). In other words, both figures function textually as pieces of ‘Given’ information. By contrast, in (9.11) and (9.12) the final figures are realised congruently, highlighting its textual function as ‘New’ information. 9.4.2  Field of Research 9.4.2.1 Preview The field of research involves reflection and inquiry fields, both of which reveal some distinguishing features. Similar to the reflection field in Text 2, the reviewing activities reflecting on ‘what has been done’ were also found in Text 3. In addition to this, Text 3 also involves the activities previewing ‘what could be done in the future’. In example (9.14), three activities of preview are realised through a sequence of figures. (9.14) [[Sampling a greater diversity of environments, including within the Echinoidea]], may provide a further understanding of phylogenetic diversity and relationships of the Chytridiomycota, aiding the classification of such organisms (James et al., 2006). a. IF we sample a greater diversity of environments, including within the Echinoidea, b.

THEN we

relationships of the Chytridiomycota, c.

SO THAT

condion

may understand further phylogenetic diversity and purpose

we can classify such organisms.

Previewing future activities indicates a significant development in the field of research. It suggests that the activities of ‘doing research’ is no longer restricted to following procedures in the experiments. The student is now able to design research methods for solving problems, which requires relatively in-depth knowledge of both methods in the practice field and biological phenomena in the exploration field. 9.4.2.2 Reasoning In comparison to those construed in Text 1 and Text 2, the activities of reasoning in Text 3 demonstrate several distinguishing features, which are revealed across the strata. At the discourse semantic level, reasoning

208  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology in Text 3 expands its use of discourse semantic resources. In addition to positions used in the previous texts (e.g. so we know; so we suppose), evaluations of figures (including both attitude and modification types) are also used to construe reasoning in this text. In the following examples, a modification it is possible is used in (9.15), and an evaluation it remains unclear is used in (9.16), both of which contributes to developing the activity of reasoning. Grammatically, both sequences are realised congruently through clause complexes. (9.15) a. IF chytrids were present within the Echinoidea,

condion

b. it is possible that they may be transient, not symbiotic, members. (9.16) a. It remains unclear whether the zoospore-like structures were chytrids alternaon

b.

OR IF

they belonged to another fungal group.

c. (SO we propose) we could analyse it further d. (BY) using biochemical tests or molecular sequencing methods,

consequence manner

such as DNA sequencing.

Evaluations of figures provide extended choices for construing activities of reasoning. From an interpersonal perspective, the activities of reasoning not only functions to manage heteroglossic space but also offer attitudinal choices, expanding the language repertoire for subjectifying the objective (Hood, 2010) in the scientific discourse. A second discourse semantic feature of reasoning is associated with how sequence interacts interpersonally with engagement. In this text heteroglossic expansion is significantly favoured over contraction, such as it could be assumed in (9.17), it is likely in (9.18) and it is likely and suggest (so we suppose) in (9.19). (9.17) As regular sea urchins are herbivorous, it could be assumed that chytrids present in their gut might aid the degradation of the plant material and nutrient acquisition. a. AS (we know) regular sea urchins are herbivorous, b. it could be assumed that chytrids present in sea urchins’ gut helped the sea urchin to degrade plant material and acquire nutrients.

consequence

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  209 (9.18) Members of the Chytridiomycota may be involved in symbiosis with the Echinoidea. Host-microbial relationships may include parasitism, commensalism and symbiosis. As there did not appear to be any defects in the urchins, it is likely that the microbes present in the urchins studied were either commensal or symbiotic organisms. a. (We know) Members of the Chytridiomycota may be involved in symbiosis with the Echinoidea. Host-microbial relationships may include parasitism, commensalism and symbiosis.

addion / successive

b. (AND) AS (we saw) there did not appear to be any defects in the urchins,

consequence

c. it is likely that the microbes present in the urchins studied were either commensal or symbiotic organisms.

(9.19) As their movement opposed the current, it is likely that these cells were motile. This motion seems to suggest the presence of flagella. a. As they move against the current, b. it is likely that these cells were motile.

consequence consequence

c. SO we suppose the flagella were present.

The preference for expansion could be a result of several distinguishing functions of reasoning activities in Text 3. First, reasoning connects established knowledge in the exploration field to the phenomena observed in the depiction field, such as (9.17) and (9.18). In other words, ‘what we know’ is drawn on to interpret ‘what we observed’. The use of expansion invites potential voices to contest the subjectified objective proposition. Figure 9.4 illustrates this shift from exploration to depiction. Second, the activity of reasoning is used to connect phenomena within the field of depiction, such as in (9.15) and (9.19). This feature is similar to what has been found in Text 2. However, unlike the depiction field in Text 2, which was construed dynamically, the depicted phenomena connected through reasoning in Text 3 are by and large construed statically with respect to taxonomy building. The text shows that recognising items based on their properties demonstrated in the experiments is an important task. As exemplified in (9.19), descriptions of phenomena (i.e. these cells were motile; flagella were present) are deduced from

210  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

Figure 9.4  Activity of reasoning connects exploration to depiction

Figure 9.5  Activity of reasoning connects phenomena within the field of depiction

the observation. This shift within the field of depiction is illustrated in Figure 9.5. From a grammatical perspective, the realisations of reasoning include the ‘favourite clause type’ (particularly the circumstantial identifying process), realising figures through Participants and realising connexions through Processes involving ‘showing’ verbs. As has been shown in (9.19), the ‘showing’ verb suggest is used to realise both the connexion and position. This mapping between sequence and a clause shows a higher degree of stratal tension in comparison to the realisations through verbal

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  211 projections revealed in previous texts, although it also used ‘showing’ verbs (e.g. in example (9.8)). This diversity reveals that the student’s grammatical choices for construing activities of reasoning have been further expanded. 9.4.3 Overview In summary, the dynamic construal of multiple fields in Text 3 demonstrates several developmental features compared to the previous texts. Although the types of activities and fields instantiated in Text 3 are similar to those in Text 2, there have been different ways of realising activities at both levels of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. At the discourse semantic stratum, implication activities in the field of the object of study are realised through more complex sequencing of multiple causes and effects. In the field of research, activities of reasoning are realised through more expanded discourse semantic resources, including both positions and evaluations of figures. From a grammatical perspective, metaphorical ways of mapping sequence to a clause is significant in the realisations of all activity types. Importantly, metaphorical syndromes of mapping sequence to a clause are increasingly more complex. Mapping sequences to the ‘favourite clause type’ is a significant pattern, in which the figures are mapped onto the Participants, and connexions are mapped onto the Processes. The findings in Text 3 reveal that as the disciplinary knowledge deepens at the end of the second undergraduate year, the student’s language repertoire is significantly expanded. Table 9.3 summarises the findings of both static and dynamic construal of fields in Text 3 in comparison to Text 1 and Text 2.

9.5 Construing Activities in Text 4—Third-Year Research Report The kinds of activities and fields instantiated in Text 4 are similar to the findings in Text 3. The developmental features of dynamic construal in Text 4 are by and large associated with how multiple fields are brought together in the text and are interweaved through activities of reasoning. A significant pattern is the organisation of reasoning activities in the logogenetic unfolding of the text. The pattern includes using reasoning activities to form hypotheses in the Introduction stage and then to confirm the hypotheses in the Discussion stage. In terms of the use of language, choices for construing reasoning activities are further expanded at both levels of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. Excerpt (9.20) is taken from the Introduction stage in Text 4. It illustrates that the development of reasoning activities in the field of inquiry

object of study

practice

depiction

explo­ ration

field types

discourse semantic realisations

figure [state figure]

figure [state figure]

figure [state figure]

static taxonomy

static taxonomy

sequence dynamic [temporal activities sequencing of [observation] observed occurrence figures (specific)]

static taxonomy

sequence [temporal/ dynamic causal sequencing of activities observed occurrence [implication] figures (generic)]

field perspectives

The pipette was highly accurate throughout its range. The method was time consuming.

Text 1

Table 9.3  Field types and their realisations in Text 1, Text 2 and Text 3

At first the flask demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity, after a period of time the level of B-galactosidase activity sharply rose.

Ruminant fungi, . . . help fibrous plant materials to degrade within the rumen and providing a source of readily digestible short chain fatty-acids and amino-acids (Douglas, 1994).

The activity of protein can be controlled through influencing levels of gene expression, or through activating/ deactivating proteins when they are already present in the cytosol.

The organisms had apparent motility and shape. The structures were morphologically similar to sporangium.

Small circular cells, which appeared to oppose the direction of the Brownian current, were also observed in the regular sea urchins.

The Chytridiomycota are considered the most primitive phylum of the fungi.

Text 3

Text 2

research

inquiry

static activities [reasoning]

sequence [external connexions + positions]

Radioactivity method suggests . . . so we know the pipette was highly imprecise.

entity [enacted method, activity entities; spectrophotometry, instrumental things] pipette, cuvette

static taxonomy

sequence [causal dynamic sequencing of reflection activities [re/ enacted occurrence preview] figures]

practice

sequence [temporal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures]

dynamic activities [facilitated]

Set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and then water was added (in order) to give a total volume of 1mL. dissection, microscope, 3.5% salt agar media

We could analyse it further, (by) using biochemical tests or molecular sequencing methods . . . to identify these organisms . . . we saw . . . so we know . . . ; it remains unclear . . . so we suggest . . .

We obtained the results because we used the treatment.

(We saw) . . . , so we know gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity.

The samples were then dissected . . . and were viewed at 10 and 40 times magnification, (by) using a light microscope . . .

treatment, ONPG assay, glycerol medium, solution

E.coli bacteria were cultured in a glycerol medium, and then one of the six treatment was added to the bacterial culture, and bacteria growth was monitored by measuring absorbance . . .

214  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology launches the implication activities in the exploration field. At first, the implications activities are posited by many cited studies. Based on the established knowledge, the student writer proposes two related hypotheses: 1) physical processes or chemical processes can cause the loss of fungal spores and 2) spore sizes determine the ability for fungal spores to withstand such processes. Finally, the student writer reiterates these hypotheses into a ‘model’. The realisations of reasoning activities are highlighted and the metaphorical realisations are unpacked where relevant (in boldface). The realisations of positions and evaluations of figures are italicised. (9.20) A complex interaction exists between insects and the health and diversity of fungal communities. These interactions may be beneficial to both insects and fungi, for example symbiotic relationships between termites and cellulase-producing gut fungi (Slater, 1992). Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally, increasing the ecological niche in which fungal species may inhabit and potentially affecting higher plant and animal diversity through the spread of symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi or entomo- and entero-pathogens (Collier & Bidatnodo, 2008; Dromph, 2000; Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006; Nakamori & Suzuki, 2009; Vernes & Dunn, 2009). However, insect-fungi interactions may also be detrimental to both groups, as shown in the effectiveness of the use of fungal entomopathogens in biocontrol (Ouedraogo, 2002) and in the loss of spore viability, in some fungal taxa, after ingestion and passage through the gut of insects. (So we suppose) Loss of fungal spore integrity and viability after ingestion and passage through the insect gastrointestinal tract may result from either physical processes, chemical processes or a combination of both. Physical processes such as maceration by mouthpieces or peristaltic movement through the gut could cause spores to fracture and then (cause spore to) lose their integrity. Similarly, chemical processes including enzymic digestion or antifungal compounds could cause spores to lose their viability whilst retaining their integrity. (So then we suppose) The ability for fungal spores to withstand such processes may be due to intrinsic characteristics of the fungal spore. In particular spore size may explain why some fungal spores retain their viability whilst other spores lose viability. (So) We propose a model, whereby smaller fungal spores are more likely to retain integrity and viability, after ingestion and passage through the insect gut, than larger spores, due to the ability for smaller spores to more easily avoid maceration by insect mouthpieces.

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  215 a. (Various studies show) a complex interaction exists between insects and the health and diversity of fungal communities (. . .) (Slater, 1992 Collier & Bidatnodo, 2008; Dromph, 2000; . . .)

concessive

b. HOWEVER (other studies also show) insect-fungi interactions may also be detrimental to both groups.

consequence

c. (SO we suppose) Loss of fungal spore integrity and viability after ingestion and passage through the insect gastrointestinal tract may result from either physical processes, chemical processes or a combination of both (. . .)

d. (SO THEN we suppose) The ability for fungal spores to

consequence

withstand such processes may be due to intrinsic characteristics of the fungal spore. similarity

e. IN PARTICULAR, we would understand why some fungal spores retain their viability whilst other spores lose viability f.

BY

considering the size of the fungal spore.

g. (SO) We propose a model, whereby smaller fungal spores are

manner consequence

more likely to retain integrity and viability, (. . .).

The realisations of reasoning in this excerpt are complex and mostly in ‘covert’ ways. First, the positions of figures are mostly covert. The positions sourced from other studies are indicated by the citations. The student writer’s own positions are realised covertly in two ways. When they are realised congruently, the positions are shown as implicit subjective modality (e.g. may and could). When they are realised metaphorically, the positions are embodied in the verbal process (e.g. explain). Only one ‘overt’ position is offered—i.e. we propose (a model). The second ‘covert’ characteristic of the realisations of reasoning activities is that the logical connexions between the positions tend to be implicit, as shown in the brackets in the excerpt. The ‘covert’ realisations of reasoning activities are significant in texts produced at the final undergraduate year. This is perhaps because by realising reasoning activities in this way, the knowledge in the exploration field can be foregrounded in the text.

216  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

Figure 9.6  Making hypothesis through reasoning

Making explicit the unfolding of reasoning activities in the analysis allows us to reveal the interactions between the field of inquiry and the field of exploration. The activities of reasoning function to both launch various phenomena (taxonomies and activities) in the field of exploration and to make connections among them. As illustrated by a minimal pair of this pattern in Figure 9.6, the established knowledge in the exploration field informs the student writer to make a hypothesis in the same field. From an interpersonal perspective, the hypotheses are enacted recurrently in Text 4 by expanding the heteroglossic space (e.g. we propose; may). Forming a hypothesis in the field of exploration is a typical research activity for expert scientists. This activity presented in Text 4 suggests that the student writer has been apprenticed into doing research ‘like a scientist’. As the text unfolds to the Discussion stage, the activities of reasoning draw on the experimental results—i.e. phenomena in the field of depiction—to confirm the hypothesised phenomena in the exploration. Such a shift from depiction to exploration is exemplified in (9.21) and (9.22). In these examples, the logical connexions are realised metaphorically through Processes (i.e. stands to reason; supports). As a confirmation of the hypothesis, the potential voices in the heteroglossic space is contracted rather than expanded. Both metaphorical mappings can be remapped congruently as so we know.

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  217 (9.21) (We see) Penicillin, Isaria and Absidia spores retained viability after ingestion and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of both second and fifth instar C. terminifera (Table 1 and 2). In comparison, the larger spores of Podospora (14–20um) did not retain their viability (Table 1 and 2). (Therefore/So we know) Smaller mandibles fracture material into smaller fragments. So it stands to reason that larger fragments would be more susceptible to damage by mandibular action. a. (We see from Table 1 and 2) Penicillin, Isaria and Absidia spores retained viability after ingestion by and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of both second and fifth instar C. terminifera.

contrast

b. IN COMPARISON, the larger spores of Podospora (14-20um) did not retain their viability.

consequence

c. (THEREFORE / SO we know) Smaller mandibles fracture material into smaller fragments, d.

SO

consequence

we know larger fragments would be more susceptible to be

damaged by mandibular action.

(9.22) The survival of small but not large spores in this study the importance of size in fracture initiation dynamics. a. The small spores but large spores survived in this study, b.

SO

supports

consequence

we know that size is important in fracture initiation dynamics.

The pattern of shifting from depiction to exploration through reasoning is illustrated in Figure 9.7. This pattern is similar to what has been found in Text 2. However, the exploration field in Text 2 was recontextualised knowledge acquired from the pedagogic texts, whereas the exploration field in Text 4 involves the hypotheses confirmed in the student’s study. Apart from legitimising hypothesis through contraction, Text 4 also demonstrates the exploration field being deduced through expanding potential voices, as exemplified in (9.23). The reason for using expansion rather than contraction could be that the phenomena in the exploration

218  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology

Figure 9.7  Confirming hypothesis through reasoning

Figure 9.8  Proposing new findings through reasoning

field in (9.23) is not part of the hypotheses, but an additional finding from the study. This pattern is illustrated in Figure 9.8. (9.23) The early absence of Podospora indicates that the spores were inviable before entering the gut. (So) The results suggest that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage sustained by the ingested material, rather than physical and/or chemical activity that occurs later within the gastrointestinal tract of C. terminifera.

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  219 a. Podospora was absent early, b. SO we suppose that the spores were inviable before entering the gut.

consequence

consequence

c. (SO) The results suggest that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage sustained by the ingested material, rather than physical and/or chemical activity that occurs later within the gastrointestinal tract of C. terminifera.

The above examples, including both confirming the hypotheses in (9.21) and (9.22) and proposing new findings in (9.23), all demonstrate that successful knowledge-building at the final stage of the undergraduate study has begun to engage with what is ‘unknown’ or ‘cutting-edge’ based on what has been known. This represents an important transition towards doing research in the discipline, moving from knowledge reproduction to knowledge production. From a grammatical perspective, Text 4 also demonstrates a further expansion of grammatical resources for realising activities of reasoning; that is, the connexions are mapped onto a nominal group. In example (9.24), a sequence is mapped onto a relational process (specifically an intensive identifying process). A combination of connexion and position (so we know) is realised nominally as the Thing of a nominal group. Figure a is mapped onto a nominal group (functioning as the Participant [Token]) and figure b is mapped onto a downranked nominal group (functioning as the Qualifier of the Thing evidence). (9.24) The absence of Podospora from the crop is dibular damage to the spores. a. Podospora was absent from the crop, b.

SO we

evidence

for man-

consequence

know that mandibular damaged the spores.

This metaphorical realisation of sequences was found only in Text 4. Among the range of metaphorical realisations illustrated in Chapter 6 (see Table 6.16), realising connexions through nominal groups has the highest level of metaphoricity. This finding resonates with the patterns of grammatical metaphors in the previous texts—that is, the higher level of knowledge development, the more complex use of grammatical metaphors. As a summary, Table 9.4 provides an overview of the instantiation of fields and their static and dynamic aspects across the four texts. Although

object of study

discourse semantic realisations

static taxonomy

figure [state figure]; entity [observational activity]

sequence [temporal/ dynamic causal sequencing of activity observed occurrence [implication] figures (generic)]

field perspectives

practice

figure [state figure] entity [observational activity]

figure [state figure]

static taxonomy

static taxonomy

sequence dynamic [temporal activity sequencing of [observation] observed occurrence depiction figures (specific)]

explo­ ration

field types

The pipette was highly accurate throughout its range.

Text 1

Table 9.4  Field types and their realisations in Text 1, Text 2, Text 3 and Text 4

time

the level of B-galactosidase activity sharply rose.

a period of

At first the flask demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity, after

Physical processes, chemical processes, or both of them can make fungal spores lose their integrity and viability after ingesting in the . . .

Ruminant fungi, . . . help fibrous plant materials to degrade within the rumen and providing a source of readily digestible short chain fattyacids and amino-acids (Douglas, 1994).

The activity of protein can be controlled through influencing levels of gene expression, or through activating/ deactivating proteins when they are already present in the cytosol.

Podospora spores were not re-isolated from any of the extracts of any individual.

The organisms had Phycomyces, apparent motility and fungal spores, C. shape terminifera

Small circular cells, which appeared to oppose the direction of the Brownian current, were also observed in the regular sea urchins.

The Chytridiomycota fungal dispersal, are considered the chemical most primitive processes phylum of the fungi.

Text 4

Text 3

Text 2

research

sequence [causal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures]

sequence [external connexions + positions]

dynamic activity [reasoning]

reflection

inquiry

Radioactivity method suggests . . . so we know the pipette was highly imprecise.

we know . . . so we saw . . . so we know . . . ; we suppose . . . it remains unclear . . . so we suggest . . .

(We saw) . . . , so we know gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity.

If we investigate further, it would be beneficial to use a larger sample size to allow for . . .

3.5% potato dextrose agar, 0.02% Triton-X, spore solution

Species of Penicillium, Podopspora, Absidia, Isaria and Phycomyces were isolated from possum faeces; the fungi were cultured on 3.5% potato dextrose agar.

We could analyse it further, (by) using biochemical tests or molecular sequencing methods . . . to identify these organisms . . .

taxonomy

dissection, microscope, 3.5% salt agar media

The samples were then dissected . . . and were viewed at 10 and 40 times magnification, (by) using a light microscope . . .

We obtained the results because we used the treatment.

method, treatment, ONPG entity [enacted spectrophotometry, assay, glycerol activity entities; pipette, cuvette medium, solution instrumental things]

dynamic activity [re/ preview]

practice

sequence [temporal sequencing of enacted occurrence figures]

E.coli bacteria were cultured in a glycerol medium, and then one of the six treatment was added to the bacterial culture, and bacteria growth was monitored by measuring absorbance . . .

dynamic activity [facilitated]

Set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and then water was added (in order) to give a total volume of 1mL.

222  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Text 4 demonstrates recurrent instantiation of field types, significant developmental features have been revealed in relation to activities of reasoning, including the functions of reasoning at the level of field, and the realisations of reasoning at both levels of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. Text 4 has marked a significant transition from knowledge reproduction to knowledge production.

9.6 Conclusion This chapter has analysed the construal of knowledge in the four student texts from a dynamic perspective. It has been revealed that as the student’s knowledge develops, the meaning-making choices are expanded at all strata. At the level of field, the object of study was found to shift from the specialised field [practice] in Text 1 to the exploration field in the other texts. The exploration field showed increasing complexity with respect to building multiple causes and effects among implication activities. In the field of research, the specialised field [practice] maintained its assisting role throughout the four texts. The most salient developmental features in the field of research are associated with activities of reasoning in the field of inquiry. Activities of reasoning have multiple functions, including connecting phenomena both across fields and within a field. While reasoning activities in the texts of the earlier years played an important role of drawing on established knowledge in the exploration field to inform observations in the depiction field, in the text produced at the final year, reasoning activities functioned to employ observations in the depiction to provide new understandings of knowledge in the exploration field. At the level of discourse semantics, the most significant expansion of resources is the realisation of reasoning activities. While positions of figures were typical resources in Texts 1 and 2, evaluations of figures became an important feature in Text 3 and 4. At the level of lexicogrammar, although activities in the practice field are realised consistently in relative congruent ways throughout the texts, with respect to realisations of all the other activity types, there is increasing usage of metaphorical mappings across the four texts. The general tendency is that logical connexions are first mapped onto Processes in agentive clauses and verbal clauses, then to Processes in relational and material clauses and then finally to nominal realisations in a Participant. The increasing complexity throughout the four student texts demonstrates an ontogenetic development of grammatical metaphors. This ontogenetic perspective resonates with the phylogenetic perspective on the use of grammatical metaphors in the historical development of scientific writing (Banks, 2008; Halliday, 1993a). In other words, the more developed

A Dynamic Perspective: Construing Activities  223 the knowledge of an individual and a discipline, the more grammatical metaphors are involved in the written communication. The analysis of dynamic construal of fields complements that of static construal illustrated in Chapter 8. The static perspective has revealed the diversity and depth of taxonomies in the texts; the dynamic perspective has revealed both the diversity of activities and the intricate logogenetic interactions among fields in the texts.

Section IV

Conclusion

10 Describing Language, Describing Knowledge

Language offers rich resources for building knowledge. This book has provided a detailed description of a set of discourse semantic resources for construing knowledge from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. It has then applied the description to analyse knowledge development of undergraduate biology in four student texts ranged at different stages of undergraduate apprenticeship. This final chapter consolidates the descriptions and findings of the study and discusses its descriptive, theoretical and pedagogic implications. Section 10.1 consolidates the description of ideational discourse semantic resources. Section 10.2 summarises the findings of language and knowledge development revealed in the student texts. Section 10.3 discusses the pedagogic implications in literacy education in science and Section 10.4 considers several future avenues in the semiotic description of knowledge-building warranted by this study.

10.1  Knowledge-Building Through Language 10.1.1 Multistratal Descriptions of Ideational Discourse Semantics A primary contribution of this study is the description of ideational discourse semantics in SFL. I have approached the conceptualisation of ideational discourse semantics from a tristratal perspective, considering simultaneously the stratum of field, with respect to the construal of taxonomies and activities; the stratum of lexicogrammar, in terms of transitivity and nominal groups; and the stratum of discourse semantics, with respect to the ways in which ideational meanings interact with interpersonal and textual meanings. Several ideational discourse semantic resources have been described, including entities, figures and sequence. The description has clarified the interstratal relationships across strata of lexicogrammar, discourse semantics and field. The clarification is reflected in several ways.

228 Conclusion First, discourse semantic entities and their dimensions are distinguished from nominal groups in the lexicogrammar. Although an entity can be typically realised through a nominal group involving only a Thing (e.g. bag, cell), or Classifier^Thing (e.g. paper bag; cell wall), it is not equivalent to either a nominal group or a noun. When an entity is dimensioned, a range of grammatical realisations is possible, including Thing (e.g. type; part; shape), Focus^Thing (e.g. a kind of > sea urchin), Classifier^Thing (e.g. regular sea urchin < species), possessive Deictic^Thing (e.g. sea urchin’s < shape) and Thing^Qualifier (e.g. mandibles < of different sizes). We have seen that dimensions play an augmenting role, contributing to a more delicate structure of entities. There is no dimension without an entity, even though sometimes entities appear to be elided grammatically (e.g. the type/part/shape of sea urchin) and need to be recovered in the discourse. The stratal distinction between discourse semantic and lexicogrammatical resources is also shown in the identification of figures and sequences. This book has argued that verbal, mental and fact projections are some of the key grammatical resources that enable the structure of figures to be expanded, named as the positioned figures and evaluated figures. The augmenting elements—i.e. positions and evaluations—are identified by interpersonal functions that evaluate a figure through engagement (e.g. Radioactivity method demonstrates [contract] || that the pipette was highly accurate) and attitude (e.g. It is important [appreciation] to study . . .). The metafunctional discourse semantic perspective enables us to differentiate discourse semantic figures from clauses, and sequences from clause complexes. This description contrasts with the classification of figures in Halliday and Matthiessen (1999). For these theorists, the boundary between figures is determined by the clause boundaries, which does not allow the choices at the two strata to be distinguished. The independent description of ideational discourse semantics from lexicogrammar has an advantage of clarifying grammatical metaphor as a stratal tension. An important initial payoff is the distinction between what has been previously known as ‘live’ and ‘dead’ grammatical metaphors (Halliday, 1998). This distinction is associated typically with demarcating activity entities and semiotic entities from ideational metaphors. Although activity entities are not always realised through nominalisations (e.g. method), when they are, they are easily confused with the experiential type of ideational metaphor, which realise figures. This study has used linguistic definitions of activity entities as an important way to differentiate between activity entities and experiential metaphors, particularly for instances in the exploration field. That is, if the nominalisation is linguistically defined as a Token in a Token/Value structure (e.g. The movement of individuals away from centre of high population density or their area of origin [Value] is called [Process] dispersal [Token]), it is then an activity entity construing taxonomy of biology, instead of an experiential metaphor realising a figure in the text. A second useful criterion

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  229 is that an activity entity can construe an itemised activity, which can be alternatively momented and realised through a sequence of figures in the discourse. It is, therefore, useful to find discourse semantic sequences that are agnate to activity entities. The sequences occur in phases of discourse, typically in explanation and procedure texts. Semiotic entities may be mistaken as a logical metaphor, metaphorically realising a connexion through a nominalisation. One criterion used for distinguishing semiotic entities from logical metaphors is their interaction with periodicity. Semiotic entities are regularly positioned in higher-level Theme or higher-level New to preview or review pieces of text (e.g. The identification of the microorganism is significant for a number of reasons. Firstly . . . Secondly . . . Furthermore . . .). When semiotic entities are not positioned to preview or review, they may name a figure (or a sequence) that functions as a cause or effect in the discourse. In this case, the semiotic entity is realised through a Thing and the figure/sequence elaborates on the entity, realised through an embedded clause functioning as a Qualifier (i.e. result in the result = [[that the flasks demonstrated a lower level of B-galactosidase activity]] suggested that gene expression controls B-galactosidase activity). By contrast, when a nominalisation is a logical metaphor, it is usually modified by a Qualifier in the form of a prepositional phrase, in which case the logico-semantic relation between the Thing and Qualifier is that of enhancement instead of elaboration (e.g. explanation in the alternative explanation x [for the absence of colonisation by Isaria] is [[that the locust initiated some physiological response]]). Distinguishing semiotic and activity entities from ideational metaphors has provided the basis for sorting out both congruent and metaphorical realisations of figures and sequences. Congruently, state figures are mapped onto relational processes; instigated figures onto agentive clauses; positioned figures onto projecting clause complexes; and sequenced onto expanding clause complexes. Building on these congruent mappings, a diverse range of metaphorical realisations of figures and sequences have been laid out (see Chapter 6). In analysing discourse, it is critical to uncover discourse semantic configurations through untangling the stratal tension, since it is the identification of discourse semantic patterns that allows us to reveal the meanings construed at the level of field. With respect to the interstratal relationship between discourse semantics and field, previous chapters have illustrated that both static and dynamic aspects of field—taxonomies and activities—can be realised through various ideational discourse semantic choices. Taxonomies are construed in the discourse through entities and their dimensions as well as state figures. An activity is construed through a figure when it is unmomented and through a sequence when it is momented. The static and dynamic construals can occur at the same time when the activity is itemised (Doran & Martin, 2020; Hao & Humphrey, 2019). Statically, an itemised activity (e.g. gene expression) can be decomposed into parts (e.g. transcription

230 Conclusion and translation); dynamically, the itemised activity is momented into other itemised activities at a more delicate tier. Based on the kinds of activities and taxonomies, the study has recognised different field types construed in the discourse of undergraduate biology, including the primary distinction between exploration and specialised fields, and delicate distinctions within the specialised field, including depiction, practice, reflection and inquiry. This field categorisation has allowed us to reveal the diversity of fields instantiated in the student texts, based on their realisations through resources of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar. 10.1.2  Revisiting ‘Technicality’ and ‘Abstraction’ In Chapter 1 I pointed out that ‘technicality’ and ‘abstraction’ have often been used in studies to characterise academic discourse (Martin, 1993a, 1993c; Wignell et al., 1993). While these descriptive terms have been useful in describing contrasting characteristics in the discourses of science and history, their precise reference to systematic features and strata has been unclear. An important contribution of this study is to provide independent clarifying terminology at the stratum of discourse semantics. As far as descriptions are concerned, neither ‘technicality’ or ‘abstraction’ are descriptive terms and do not refer to a particular language feature. They are therefore not useful terms for descriptive purposes. However, given that these terms have been widely used in SFL work, particularly as a metalanguage for pedagogic purposes, we can rearticulate the notion of ‘technicality’ and ‘abstraction’ to relate to the relevant language resources at stake. The notion of ‘technicality’ may be clarified in relation to field and discourse semantics. At the level of field, ‘technicality’ refers mainly to taxonomies in the exploration field; at the level of discourse semantics, technicality is realised by linguistically defined entities, such as observational things and activities in the discourse of biology (e.g. A lysosome is a membranous sac of hydrolytic enzymes . . .). In terms of their realisations in lexicogrammar, it is common that ‘technicality’ is lexicalised through a nominalisation when an activity entity is at stake (e.g. fungal dispersal; evaporation), but it is not always the case (e.g. lysosome; gene). Turning to ‘abstraction’, in SFL literature this notion has been associated with a range of language features. Many discourse semantic choices discussed in this study, including semiotic entities, internal connexions, dimensions of entities, as well as grammatical metaphors, have been referred to in various studies as instances of ‘abstraction’. At times instances associated with ‘technicality’ have also been treated as a kind of ‘abstraction’ (c.f. Martin, 1993c, p. 233; Martin & Rose, 2007, p. 114; Wignell, 2007, p. 48). Additionally, the notion of abstraction has been used theoretically in SFL to characterise levels of stratification (e.g. field is more abstract than discourse semantics, which is more abstract than

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  231 lexicogrammar). ‘Abstraction’ is, therefore, a problematic term and needs to be used with caution. It potentially conflates different discourse semantic categories, obscures the relationship between discourse semantics and lexicogrammar and fails to disassociate the theoretical account of stratification from discourse analysis. The point emphasised here is that although one may find interpretive labels useful for practical purposes, it is always important to be explicit as to what resources at which stratum are being referred to. This book has made a step towards explicating the resources at stake. Section 10.3 will return to this point, in relation to pedagogic implications of the descriptions, including the need to sometimes use interpretative labels as a ‘bridging metalanguage’ (Humphrey & Macnaught, 2016).

10.2  Knowledge-Building in Undergraduate Biology Drawing on the discourse semantic descriptions and the multistratal resources revealed from a trinocular perspective, the second part of the study analysed knowledge-building in undergraduate biology instantiated in the four student texts. Through analysing both the static and dynamic aspects of field, multiple field types were found in the student texts and developmental features were revealed by choices across the strata. Firstly, in terms of the instantiation of field types, it was found that biology is a disciplinary field involving exploration fields and various types of specialised fields. Throughout the apprenticeship, specialised fields are in the service of the development of exploration fields. These include the physical activities in the laboratory (in the specialised field [practice]), the observation of experiments (in the specialised field [depiction]), the preview and review of research activities (in the specialised field [reflection]) and critically also generalising from depiction to scientific principle through the activity of reasoning (in the specialised field [inquiry]). Exploration and specialised fields interact simultaneously with oppositions recognised as the field of the object of study and the field of research (Hood, 2010). In Text 1, written at the beginning of first year, the object of study was seen to interact with the specialised field [practice] as the focus of knowledge-building was on the effectiveness of laboratory methods. In the texts produced later, the object of study shifted to a combination of the specialised field [depiction] concerning laboratory observation and the exploration field concerning principles of biological phenomena. This reflected a shift in focus to the knowledge of biological phenomena. The field of research was found to interact solely with specialised fields across the four texts. Of particular significance to the development of the field of research were the subtypes [practice] and [inquiry]. In the specialised field [practice], there was a shift across the four student texts from operating the utilitarian tools, realised by ostensively defined instrumental things (e.g. balance; pipette), to utilising experimental materials, realised

232 Conclusion by trained gaze things (e.g. glycerol medium; sodium carbonate). The specialised field [inquiry] has an important function to bring together various fields, particularly in making connections between the depiction and exploration fields. In the texts written in the earlier years, established knowledge in the exploration field was drawn on to inform observations in the depiction field. By contrast, in the final year, understandings from the depiction field provided new understandings in the exploration field. The field of inquiry, therefore, plays a critical role in expanding students’ knowledge. Distinctive patterns of discourse semantics and lexicogrammar were also found across the student texts. The salient developmental features of discourse semantics include the increasing variety of entity types, the growing complexity and variety of dimensions and additionally the increasingly diverse ways of realising activities of inquiry. Lexicogrammatically, the four student texts were found to demonstrate increasingly complex ways of realising figures and sequences metaphorically. A general pattern was to start from realising only one of the figures in the sequence metaphorically, then progress to realising both figures metaphorically through nominal groups and then eventually progress to realising figures through down-ranked nominal groups (as Qualifier). This metaphorical drift complements the width and depth of knowledge development at the level of field. However, it is necessary to conduct a quantitative study using the metaphorical mappings outlined in this study to examine the co-relation between grammatical metaphors and knowledge development.

10.3  Pedagogic Implications and Applications This book has positioned itself in the realm of appliable linguistics. Although developing a discourse semantic framework for analysing the knowledge of undergraduate biology has been its primary focus, a major motivation for this linguistic pursuit is to support a pedagogy that makes knowledge more accessible. As such, it contributes ultimately to fostering an equal distribution of knowledge. The application of SFL theory in educational practice has been in progress for several decades. A significant impact of SFL in education is the development of teachers’ awareness of knowledge about language (KAL). SFL’s linguistic description of language provides rich resources that can be recontextualised into a systematic and accessible metalanguage in teaching—that is, a shared language between teacher and students for talking about subject knowledge and the texts they read and write. The development of metalanguage can be distinguished according to the educational aims of several generations of SFL research projects (Rose & Martin, 2012). In the 1980s, the Writing Project and Language and Social Power project aimed to identify the genres (e.g. narrative, explanation,

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  233 descriptive report, etc.) that students were required to write in Australian primary schools. It offered a metalanguage that draws on Halliday’s functional grammar in combination with genre structures. In the 1990s, the Write It Right project extended the understandings of subject specific knowledge in schools (e.g. science and history) and workplaces (e.g. media, administration and industry). The metalanguage developed from this project foregrounded the impact of grammatical metaphor in academic discourse. However, many ideational features, such as ‘technicality’ and ‘abstraction’ discussed in Section 10.1.2, remained intuitive without explicit criteria, and discourse semantic terms were still borrowed from terms naming grammatical functions (e.g. participants, processes and circumstances). A more explicit ideational discourse semantic metalanguage has emerged in the third generation of genre pedagogy. In the Reading to Learn pedagogy, which emerged in the 2000s, using terminologies such as ‘things’, ‘quality’ or ‘activities’ (e.g. Rose & Martin, 2012, p. 252) separates discourse semantic features from grammatical functions. Significantly also, the 3x3 rubrics developed in the SLATE Project (Dreyfus et al., 2016) and their further renovation as 4x4 toolkits in Humphrey (2016) have contributed to a conscious recontextualisation of metalanguage addressing meanings across metafunctions, ranks and strata. However, there is still no consensus in the metalanguage used across the strata in these frameworks and the terminology referring to discourse semantic choices is still undistinguished from that of field and often used interchangeably with grammatical functions. As a result, the meaning-making resources that were provided by the metalanguage have been limited, particularly in the context of building uncommon-sense knowledge. The recontextualisation of metalanguage for pedagogic purposes has gone hand in hand with the linguistic description and the theoretical development of stratification. At the same time, the inconsistency and ambiguity in the metalanguage has become a roadblock for the theoretical clarity of stratification. In order to overcome the dilemma, this book raises theoretical and descriptive questions in linguistics and expands the understanding of the language of knowledge. This linguistic development can, in turn, expand the metalanguage for literacy education. The explicit account of resources across strata provides a useful framework for educational linguists and teacher educators to conduct fine-grained analyses of disciplinary language in pedagogic texts and students work. Such analysis is described as ‘behind the scenes’ (Hao & Humphrey, 2019), in the sense that the linguistic findings are likely to be shared selectively with the partner teachers and students based on their teaching-learning goals and the linguistic terminology can be consciously ‘translated’ to a ‘bridging metalanguage’ for literacy support (Humphrey & Macnaught, 2016). For example, Humphrey and Hao (2019) report on several ‘behind the scenes’ steps needed to support young multilingual learners to write descriptive reports that describe scientific items and their properties

234 Conclusion (e.g. dolphins and their physical features). These researchers first analysed texts at different grades and selected the most relevant language features, including entities (‘human’, ‘place’, ‘thing’), dimensions (categorised, structured, perceived and measured) and state figures. In order to engage with teachers and students to use these language features, the researchers ‘translated’ the linguistic terms into more accessible metalanguage, including ‘topic bundles’ for naming sequences of figures and ‘quality labels’ for naming dimensions. In another study on supporting senior science students to read nominalisations in pedagogic texts, Hao and Humphrey (2019) introduced multiple functions of nominalisations to teachers and designed pedagogic practices to make explicit the subject knowledge encapsulated in nominalisations. In the study, the linguistic analysis of pedagogic texts ‘behind the scenes’ showed how the previous Hallidayan distinction between live and dead metaphors embodies rich meanings both in the discourse semantics and field. The relevant resources include activity entities, dimensions, figures and sequence in the discourse semantics, and momented activities, unmomented activities and itemised activities at the level of field. Without a more expanded metalanguage, much knowledge would have been left ‘hidden’ and unnoticed. However, since most teachers in the project had some understandings of nominalisation in their training from a grammatical perspective, the researchers proposed a bridging metalanguage that could both effectively engage with teachers’ existing expertise and foreground the meaning choices that required attention. Terms such as ‘technical’ nominalisations, ‘text-making’ nominalisations and ‘itemising’ nominalisations were proposed to build a shared understanding of different functions of nominalisations in building knowledge in scientific texts. Giving explicit terms to different features also aims to bring teachers’ awareness to the use of different strategies to unpack nominalisations for students in teacher-guided reading and writing activities. The multistratal description provided in this book has offered a productive metalanguage for ‘seeing’ meaning choices that are more expanded than previous metalanguages. The application of linguistic knowledge in literacy education is necessarily supported by the work ‘behind the scenes’, which includes conducting linguistic analysis, consciously selecting language choices to meet the teaching and learning goals and if necessary, creating accessible bridging metalanguage in the design of literacy support. Knowing what is available in the linguistic toolbox provides the foundation for a successful solution for practical problems about language.

10.4  Pushing Forward New developments necessarily raise new issues and open space for new investigations. First, the description of ideational discourse semantics offered here brings up further descriptive and theoretical questions about

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  235 the modelling of ideation. Second, the underlying principles for describing ideational discourse semantics in science offers a footprint that can be used to investigate ideational resources in other disciplines. Third, understanding the role of language paves the way for examining its interactions with other social semiotic modes in knowledge-building. Fourth, the understanding of the epistemological aspect of knowledge sheds new light on exploring disciplinary values, as they are inherently intertwined. And critically, the modelling of discourse semantics in English and its contribution to interstratal clarification offer a new perspective on language descriptions beyond English. This section briefly previews each of these research avenues. 10.4.1  Discourse Semantic Description Although the description offered here has expanded our recognition of discourse semantic resources, several issues remain to be addressed in future descriptions. In describing the syntagmatic structures of figures, the book has drawn on Martin’s description of orbital structure to model the different degree to which elements in the figure are more or less central. While some discourse semantic configurations are clearly motivated from ‘around’, such as the co-elaborative entities (e.g. The microbes = were either commensal or symbiotic organisms) and qualitied occurrences (e.g. measured successfully; look at carefully), the overall description of orbitality has drawn heavily on the voice system in the lexicogrammar. More discourse semantic–oriented criteria are needed to support the description. Additionally, from the grammatical perspective, few instances of entities in this study are realised through Beneficiaries (i.e. Client, Recipient and Receiver) (e.g. She threw the ball to the dog). It is thus unclear how such entities are related to other elements in the orbital structure. It can be useful, in future studies, to examine how figures, and the elements involved, interact with the periodicity of the text. The demarcations among the centre, nucleus, inner orbit and outer orbit could be determined based on their different contributions to the textual prominence. Additionally, there has been an assumption in SFL literature that a (discourse) semantic figure is realised through a clause, particularly in Halliday and Matthiessen (1999). This study has argued against this assumption by identifying positioned figures and evaluated figures, dissociating figures from clauses and sequences from clause complexes. Importantly, it has also been revealed that state figures, including entity = entity and entity + quality configurations, can be realised congruently through both relational processes and nominal groups, as shown in the following examples: entity + quality: The bird is black the black bird

236 Conclusion entity = entities: The three methods include weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity three methods—weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity (were used in the study). The congruent mapping of figures to both clauses and nominal groups further challenge our definition of figures and how they can be recognised in the discourse semantics. This also means that the system and structure of figures need to be further examined, drawing on their realisations at both the clause rank and nominal group rank. A final issue related to discourse semantic description has to do with the recognition of grammatical metaphors in relation to embedded clauses. In this book, the metaphorical realisations of figures included nominalisations (e.g. The survival of small spores . . .), ana/cataphoric text references (Members of the Chytridiomycota produce enzymes that have the ability to degrade a wide variety of substrates. This allows materials to be more readily degraded . . .), as well as embedded clauses (e.g. [[That chytrids were present within the sample]] may have been due to the prolonged storage). Although previous studies have documented ideational metaphors in the form of nominalisations (e.g. Halliday & Martin, 1993; Halliday & Matthiessen, 1999) and text references (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 717), there is no consensus in terms of whether the embedded clause is a realisation of ideational metaphor. Embedding is treated as a metaphorical realisation in Ravelli (1988). It is then described by Painter (2003, p. 191) in the context of child language development as a ‘protometaphorical’ realisation. Similarly, Derewianka (2003) suggests treating embedded clauses as ‘protometaphors’. As far as treating grammatical metaphor as stratal tension is concerned, this study identifies embedded clauses as ideational metaphors based on their contribution to the overall syndrome of mapping a sequence onto a clause. More linguistic evidence, however, is needed to determine their contribution to stratal tension with figures. 10.4.2  Describing Disciplinary Language(s) Although the ideational discourse semantic description in this book draws on the data of scientific texts, both the description and descriptive principles are appliable for identifying ideational resources in the discourse of other disciplines. The appliable description to another disciplinary discourse is determined by the delicacy of choices in the system. On the cline of delicacy, the relatively more general choices are likely to be appliable across disciplines and more delicate ones tend to be more discipline-specific. For instance, the distinctions among choices at the primary level in the entity

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  237 system, including thing entities, semiotic entities and activity entities, are also shown in the discourse of news stories (e.g. Martin et al., forthcoming). However, different discourses can differ in terms of the salience of the primary choices. The less significant entity types encountered in this study, including place and time, are expected to play a more central role in disciplines such as geography and history (e.g. Dreyfus & Hao, forthcoming). At a more delicate level, it is expected that choices are more diverse across disciplines. For instance, the delicate distinctions among linguistically defined entities (i.e. trained gaze, tech-enhanced gaze and inferable entities) in the discourse of biology may not be of concern in a different discipline. A further aspect of the appliability of the description offered in this study is the descriptive principle. A tristratal principle has been modelled in this book, revealing ideational discourse semantic choices from ‘above’ at the level of field, from ‘around’ at the level of discourse semantics and from ‘below’ at the level of lexicogrammar. This descriptive principle can be applied to describing ideational discourse semantic choices in other disciplinary fields. Although some choices in one discourse can appear in another discourse, the characteristics of the choices may be different. For example, an activity entity naming an itemised activity in the exploration field (e.g. in biological science) typically interacts with generic identification from a textual discourse semantic perspective; an activity entity in an everyday field, however, can interact with specific identification, such as party and game (e.g. Her birthday party was fun). It is thus important to apply the descriptive principle, rather than the description itself, to recognise the discourse semantic criteria of choices (i.e. their ‘reactances’) that are specific to the given discourse. 10.4.3 Knowledge-Building in Multimodal Semiotic Contexts This study has narrowed its scope to the linguistic contribution to knowledge-building. A vast amount of research on multimodal semiotics has necessarily been set aside. Since the pioneer work in Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) and O’Toole (1994), multimodal semiotic research informed by Systemic Functional Linguistics (also known as Systemic Functional Semiotics) has been developed as a research field that is theoretically rigorous and empirically engaged (Bateman, 2008; Bateman, Wildfeuer, & Hiippala, 2017; Hiippala, 2016). As far as knowledge-building is concerned, some disciplines such as mathematics (Doran, 2017; O’Halloran, 2005), physics (Doran, 2017) and music (Weekes, 2016) must be studied multimodally as the creation of knowledge necessarily relies on non-linguistic resources. Current visual and technological developments have made it impossible, as ever, to restrict teaching and learning solely to the linguistic mode. Two-dimensional

238 Conclusion pedagogic materials such as textbooks, web-based texts and PowerPoint slides employ numerous visual elements in construing knowledge (see for example de Silva Joyce & Feez, 2018; Jewitt, 2006; Martin et al., in press; Unsworth, 2001, 2008; Zhao, 2008; Zhao, Djonov, & van Leeuwen, 2014). Additionally, three-dimensional face-to-face interactions in the pedagogic discourse, including the use of space in institutional settings (Lim, O’Halloran, & Podlasov, 2012) and body language (Hao & Hood, 2019; Hood, 2011; Hood & Hao, 2020), all have an important impact on teaching and learning. These studies all demonstrate that both the convergent and divergent meaning-makings through multimodal semiotic resources need to be explored if we are to understand knowledge-building as a dynamic, interactive and socially constructed process. The description of the language in this book offers a useful resource for examining language interacting with other semiotics at the level of discourse semantics. It is at this level of multimodal interactions that disciplinary registers and multimodal genres can be revealed and systematised. 10.4.4  Knowledge and Value Over the last decade, the disciplinary dialogue between SFL and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) has initiated a great deal of SFL thinking about disciplinary knowledge-building. An important contribution of LCT to theorising knowledge-building from an SFL perspective is Maton’s (2014) notion of ‘specialisation codes of legitimation’ that characterise disciplines. These codes are shaped by the relative strength or weakness of underlying principles of ‘epistemic relations’ and ‘social relations’ to knowledge (Maton, 2014, pp. 29–33). Social relations ‘between practices and their subject, author or actor’ are relatively stronger in the knower code disciplines of the humanities, and epistemic relations or relations ‘between practices and their object or focus’ are relatively stronger in the knowledge code disciplines of the sciences. However, these are relative differences and in Maton’s terms, ‘there are always knowledges and there are always knowers’ (Maton, 2014, p. 96). In scientific disciplines such as biology, while the understanding of biological phenomena is seemingly foregrounded in teaching and learning, studies on both written texts (Hao & Humphrey, 2012; Hood, 2010) and classroom discourse (Hao & Hood, 2019) have demonstrated the use of evaluative resources to enact shared values in the scientific community. As for disciplines of the humanities, such as history and cultural studies, there is a challenge for ‘seeing’ the intuitive ‘insider knowledge’ that is cultivated in the discipline (Doran, 2019). ‘What you know’ is strongly tied with ‘how you feel’ (Martin, Maton, & Matruglio, 2010; Matruglio, 2018). In these different disciplinary fields, no matter how intuitive the values are, revealing values linguistically draws on the interpersonal discourse

Describing Language, Describing Knowledge  239 semantic system appraisal. Recognising choices in appraisal requires identifying the targets that are evaluated from an ideational perspective (Martin & White, 2005). That is to say, ‘what’ is evaluated offers criteria for recognising the kind of value at stake. The complex values embodied in the humanities involves teasing out many layers of evaluation involving arrays of targets (see ‘coupling of coupling’ in Szenes, 2016). Description of ideational discourse semantic resources, therefore, provides criteria for explicating values as an equally important aspect of understanding knowledge. 10.4.5  Knowledge, Language and Cross-Linguistic Contexts This book began with the premise that knowledge-building has been studied for decades and attracted interests from various disciplines. However, for the most part these studies have focussed primarily on English as a lingua franca. In linguistic studies of other languages, attention has been paid mainly to the spoken and everyday common-sense communication. There are some exceptions, including in Latin American contexts, studies on ideology in history discourse (Achugar, 2009; Oteíza, 2003, 2009) and corpus studies of academic and professional genres (Parodi, 2007; Parodi, Ibáñez, & Venegas, 2010), and in Chinese, studies on grammatical metaphors (e.g. Yang, 2015; c.f. Halliday, 1984, 1993b) and grammatical patterns (Chen & Yang, 2009) in scientific texts. These studies have opened up a promising and fruitful research area on knowledge-building across linguistic contexts. Examining languages other than English raises important questions about how language can be studied and analysed. A typical approach in SFL cross-linguistic work is to draw on the theoretical assumptions and descriptive categories developed in English to inform the description of another language. This is mainly because the theoretical and descriptive development in SFL has taken place predominantly in the English-speaking world. Typical assumptions made in describing another language include functional grammar in English (in one or another edition of Halliday, 1985, 1994; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014) and clause-wide semantics in Halliday and Matthiessen (1999). However, this book has argued that the clause-wide semantics does not enable more to be shown than the grammatical functions. Moreover, ‘borrowing’ grammatical categories from English descriptions has serious repercussions for treating patterns of another language in its own right (Caffarel et al., 2004; Quiroz, 2013, 2019). In order to face these challenges, recent studies have taken two important steps. First, Quiroz (2013, 2019) has argued for describing languages by revealing reactances in the given language in its own right and has modelled how this can be done in Chilean Spanish. Second, a ‘top-down’ perspective has been taken to consider contextual meanings and discourse

240 Conclusion semantic meanings (Hao, 2019). This is based on the understanding that across languages, meaning choices are more comparable at the higher strata (including genre, register and discourse semantics) and their differences are more salient at the lower strata, particularly in relation to lexicogrammar and graphology/phonology (Martin & Quiroz, 2019; Matthiessen, 2018; Rose, 2005; Martin, 1983). The book offers an English ideational discourse semantic description and clarification of stratification that can be useful for describing ideational discourse semantics in other languages. It also offers a perspective to see grammatical patterns from ‘above’. This ‘top-down’ perspective on lexicogrammar has proven to be productive in cross-linguistic comparisons, including in a study of clause complexing in Chinese (Hao, 2019) and in a comparative description of English, Spanish and Chinese grammar (Martin et al., forthcoming).

10.5 Envoi This final chapter has summarised the key findings and contributions in this book. This study has hopefully made one step towards sharpening the theoretical and descriptive tools of SFL as well as deepening the understanding of knowledge-building through language from an SFL perspective. The pursuit of this research has led to more questions and opened possibilities for further research, as outlined in Section 5.4, among many others. The respective directions will lead us to an enhanced linguistic and social semiotic depiction of knowledge-building and a growing understanding of language and social semiotics in the exploration field of SFL. Our linguistic and social semiotic endeavour will serve, one step at a time, towards a more democratic distribution of knowledge and power.

Bibliography

Achugar, M. (2009). Remembering and explaining a traumatic past: The Uruguayan military’s narrative about the dictatorship. Critical Discourse Studies, 6(4), 283–295. Banks, D. (2008). The development of scientific writing: Linguistic features and historical context. Sheffield: Equinox. Barthes, R. (1975). Introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. New Literary History, 6(2), 237–272. Barthes, R. (1977). Image, music, text. London: Fontana. Bateman, J. A. (2008). Multimodality and genre: A foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Bateman, J. A., Wildfeuer, J., & Hiippala, T. (2017). Multimodality: Foundations, research and analysis: A problem-oriented introduction. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Bemstein, B. (1990). Class, codes and control, Volume IV: The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge. Bernstein, B. (1977). Class, codes and control, Volume III: Towards a theory of educational transmissions (2nd ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157–173. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (revised ed.). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield. Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman. Bizzell, P. (1992). Academic discourse and critical consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Brisk, M. (2015). Engaging students in academic literacies: Genre-based pedagogy for K-5 classrooms. New York: Routledge. Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Campbell, N. A., & Reece, J. B. (2005). Biology. San Francisco: Pearson/Benjamin Cummings. Chen, S.-W., & Yang, W.-G. (2009). The language features of describing semantic relations in secondary school science textbook. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 54(4), 68–83.

242 Bibliography Christie, F. (1997). Curriculum macrogenres as forms of initiation into a culture. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 134–160). London and New York: Continuum. Christie, F. (2002). Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. London: Continuum. Christie, F., & Cléirigh, C. (2008). On the importance of ‘showing’. Unpublished manuscript, The University of Sydney. Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. New York and London: Continuum. Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.). (1997). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Cassell. Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.). (2007). Language, knowledge and pedagogy: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives. London: Continuum. Christie, F., & Maton, K. (Eds.). (2011). Disciplinarity: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives. London: Continuum. Chung, T. M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2004). Identifying technical vocabulary. System, 32(2), 251–263. Cloran, C. (1994). Rhetorical units and decontextualisation: An enquiry into some relations of context, meaning and grammar. Nottingham: University of Nottingham: Monographs in Systemic Linguistics Number 6. Coffin, C. (1996). Exploring literacy in school history. Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program, NSW Department of School Education. Coffin, C. (2006). Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum. Davidse, K. (1991). Categories of experiential grammar. PhD Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Davidse, K. (1992). A semiotic approach to relational clauses. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, 6, 99–131. Davidse, K. (1998). Agnates, verb classes and the meaning of construals: The case of ditransitivity in English. Leuvense Bijdragen, 87(3–4), 281–313. Derewianka, B. (2003). Grammatical metaphor in the transition to adolescence. In A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers, & L. Ravelli (Eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Vies from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 185–220). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. de Silva Joyce, H., & Feez, S. (Eds.). (2018). Multimodality across classrooms: Learning about and through different modalities. London: Routledge. Doran, Y. J. (2017). The discourse of physics: Building knowledge through language, mathematics and image. London: Routledge. Doran, Y. J. (2019). Seeing values: Axiology and affording attitude in Australia’s “invasion”. In J. R. Martin, K. Maton, & Y. J. Doran (Eds.), Academic discourse: Systemic functional linguistics and legitimation code theory. London: Routledge. Doran, Y. J., & Martin, J. R. (2020). Field relations: Understanding scientific explanations. In K. Maton, J. R. Martin, & Y. J. Doran (Eds.), Studying science: Language, knowledge and pedagogy. London: Routledge. Dreyfus, S., & Hao, J. (forthcoming). A multi-stratal perspective on circumstantial meaning. Journal of World Languages. Dreyfus, S., Humphrey, S., Mahboob, A., & Martin, J. R. (2016). Genre pedagogy in higher education: The SLATE project. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bibliography  243 Drury, H. (2006). Short answers in first-year undergraduate science writing: What kind of genres are they. In M. Hewings (Ed.), Academic writing in context: Implications and applications. Papers in honor of Tony Dudley-Evans (pp. 104–121). London and New York: Continuum. Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 219–228). London: Routledge. Eggins, S., Wignell, P., & Martin, J. R. (1993). The discourse of history: Distancing the recoverable past. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Registers in written English: Situational factors and linguistic features (pp. 75–109). London: Pinter. Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955. In Studies in linguistic analysis (pp. 1–32). Oxford: Blackwell. Flowerdew, L. (2015). Corpus-based research and pedagogy in EAP: From lexis to genre. Language Teaching, 48(1), 99–116. Gamble, J. (2001). Modelling the invisible: The pedagogy of craft apprenticeship. Studies in Continuing Education, 23(2), 185–200. Gleason, H. A. (1965). Linguistics and English grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Gleason, H. A. (1968). Contrastive analysis in discourse structure (pp. 39–63). Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics 21. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Institute of Languages and Linguistics. Guo, L. (2004). Multimodality in a biology textbook. In K. O’Halloran (Ed.), Multimodal discourse analysis: Systemic functional perspectives (pp. 196–219). London and New York: Continuum. Gutwinski, W. (1976). Cohesion in literary texts: A study of some grammatical and lexical features of English discourse. The Hague: Mouton. Halliday, M. A. K. (1961). Categories of the theory of grammar. Word, 17, 241–292. Halliday, M. A. K. (1966/2002). Some notes on “deep” grammar. In J. Webster (Ed.), On grammar (Vol. 1 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 106–117). London and New York: Continuum. (Reprinted from: Journal of Linguistics. (1966), 2(1), 57–67). Halliday, M. A. K. (1967a). Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 1. Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 37–81. Halliday, M. A. K. (1967b). Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 199–244. Halliday, M. A. K. (1968). Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 3. Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 179–215. Halliday, M. A. K. (1975/2003). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. In J. Webster (Ed.), The language of early childhood (Vol. 4 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday). London and New York: Continuum. (Reprinted from: Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.). Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1979/2002). Modes of meaning and modes of expression: Types of grammatical structure, and their determination by different semantic functions. In J. Webster (Ed.), On grammar (Vol. 1 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 196–218). London: Continuum. (Reprinted from: D. J.

244 Bibliography Allerton, E. Carney, & D. Holdcroft (Eds.). (1979). Function and context in linguistic analysis: A Festschrift for William Haas (pp. 57–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.). Halliday, M. A. K. (1981). Types of structure. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Readings in systemic linguistics (pp. 29–41). London: Batsford. Halliday, M. A. K. (1984/2005). Grammatical metaphor in English and Chinese. In J. Webster (Ed.), Studies in Chinese language (Vol. 8 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 325–333). London and New York: Continuum. (Reprinted from: New papers on Chinese language use, edited by Beverly Hong (1984)). Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1988/2004). On the language of physical science. In J. Webster (Ed.), The language of science (Vol. 5 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 140–158). London and New York: Continuum. (Reprinted from: Ghadessy, M. (Ed.). Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features. London: Pinter). Halliday, M. A. K. (1990/2007). On the concept of “educational linguistics”. In J. Webster (Ed.), Language and education (Vol. 9 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 354–367). London and New York: Continuum. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993a). The construction of knowledge and value in the grammar of scientific discourse: Charles Darwin’s the origin of the species. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993b). The analysis of scientific texts in English and Chinese. in M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: E. Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). Things and relations. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 185–235). London and New York: Routledge. Halliday, M. A. K. (1998/2004). Language and knowledge: The “unpacking” of text. In J. Webster (Ed.), The language of science (Vol. 5 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday) (pp. 24–48). London and New York: Continuum. (Reprinted from: Keynote speech presented at the conferenc ‘Language and knowledge: The unpacking of “text”’.). Halliday, M. A. K. (2004). The language of science (Vol. 5 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday). London and New York: Continuum. Halliday, M. A. K. (2008). Complementarities in language. Beijing: The Commercial Press. Halliday, M. A. K., & Greaves, W. S. (2008). Intonation in the grammar of English. London: Equinox. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context and text: A social semiotic perspective. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.

Bibliography  245 Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. London and New York: Routledge. Hao, J. (2010). Exploring ‘doing biology’: A multifunctional investigation of undergraduate Honours’ and related published research warrants. Unpublished MA Thesis, The University of Sydney. Hao, J. (2015). Construing biology: An ideational perspective. Unpublished PhD Thesis, The University of Sydney. Hao, J. (2017). The discourse semantic meanings of “showing” in scientific texts. In P. Chappell & J. S. Knox (Eds.), Transforming contexts: Papers from the 44th international systemic functional congress (pp. 102–108). Wollongong: The Organising Committee of the 44th International Systemic Functional Congress. Hao, J. (2018). Reconsidering “cause inside the clause” in scientific discourse – From a discourse semantic perspective in systemic functional linguistics. Text & Talk, 38(5), 520–550. Hao, J. (2019). Construing “implication” relations in scientific activities through Mandarin Chinese. In J. R. Martin, Y. J. Doran, & G. Figueredo (Eds.), Systemic functional language description: Making meaning matter. London: Routledge. Hao, J. (2020a). Nominalisation in scientific English: A tristratal perspective. Functions of Language, 27(3). Hao, J. (2020b). Building taxonomy in undergraduate biology. In K. Maton, J. R. Martin, & Y. J. Doran (Eds.), Studying science: New insights into knowledge and language in education. London: Routledge. Hao, J., & Hood, S. (2019). Valuing science: The role of language and body language in a health science lecture. Journal of Pragmatics, 139(2019), 200–215. Hao, J., & Humphrey, S. L. (2012). The role of “coupling” in biological experimental reports. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 5(2), 169–194. Hao, J., & Humphrey, S. L. (2019). Reading nominalizations in senior science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 42, 100793. Hasan, R. (1995). The conception of context in text. In P. H. Fries & M. Gregory (Eds.), Discourse in society: Systemic functional perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Hasan, R. (1996). Semantic networks: A tool for the analysis of meaning. In C. Cloran, D. Butt, & G. Williams (Eds.), Ways of saying, ways of meaning: Selected papers of Ruqaiya Hasan (pp. 105–131). London and New York: Cassell. Hasan, R. (2009). The place of context in a systemic functional model. In Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics (pp. 166–189). London: Continuum. Heyvaert, L. (2003). Nominalization as grammatical metaphor: On the need for a radically systemic and metafunctional approach. In A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers, & L. Ravelli (Eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Views from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 65–100). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. Hiippala, T. (2016). The structure of multimodal documents: An empirical approach. London: Routledge (Routledge Studies in Multimodality).

246 Bibliography Hjelmslev, L. (1961). Prolegomena to a theory of language (F. J. Whitfield, Trans.). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Hood, S. (2004). Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic writing. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Technology, Sydney. Hood, S. (2010). Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Hood, S. (2011). Body language in face-to-face teaching: A focus on textual and interpersonal metafunctions. In S. Dreyfus, S. Hood, & M. Stenglin (Eds.), Semiotic margins: Meaning in multimodalities (pp. 31–52). London: Continuum. Hood, S. (2017). Live lectures: The significance of presence in building disciplinary knowledge. In J. R. Martin, K. Maton, & B. Quiroz (Eds.), Onomázein (Special Issue on Knowledge and Education). Hood, S., & Hao, J. (2020). Gounded learning: Telling and showing in the language and paralanguage of a science lecture. In K. Maton, J. R. Martin, & Y. J. Doran (Eds.), Studying science: Knowledge, language, pedagogy. London: Routledge. Hood, S., & Martin, J. R. (2007). Invoking attitude: The play of graduation in appraising discourse. In J. Webster, C. M. I. M. Matthiessen, & R. Hasan (Eds.), Continuing discourse on language (Vol. 2, pp. 739–764). London: Equinox. Humphrey, S. (1996). Exploring literacy in school geography. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged School Program. Humphrey, S. (2013). Empowering adolescents for activist literacies. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 9(1), 114–135. Humphrey, S. (2016). Academic literacies in the middle years. New York. Routledge. Humphrey, S., & Hao, J. (2013). Deconstructing written genres in undergraduate biology. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 7(1–3), 29–53. Humphrey, S., & Hao, J. (2019). New descriptions of metalanguage for supporting English language learners’ writing in the early years. In L. C. de Oliveira (Ed.), The handbook of TESOL in K-12 (pp. 213–229). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. Humphrey, S., & Macnaught, L. (2016). Functional language instruction and the writing growth of English language learners in the middle years. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 792–816. Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum. Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 235–253. Iedema, R. (1997). The language of administration: Organizing human activity in formal institutions. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 73–100). London: Cassell. Jackendoff, R., Cohn, N., & Griffith, B. (2012). A user’s guide to thought and meaning. New York: Oxford University Press. Janovy, J. (2004). On becoming a biologist. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning: A multimodal approach. London: Routledge. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bibliography  247 Kress, G. R., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. New York and London: Routledge. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Lemke, J. L. (1984). Semiotics and education. Toronto Semiotic Circle Monographs, Working Papers and Prepublications 2. Victoria University, Toronto. Lemke, J. L. (1985). Ideology, intertextuality and the notion of register. In J. D. Benson & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic perspectives on discourse Volume 1: Selected theoretical papers from the 9th international systemic workshop (pp. 275–294). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Levison, M., Donald, M., & Lessard, G. (2012). The semantic representation of natural language. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Lim, V. F., O’Halloran, K. L., & Podlasov, A. (2012). Spatial pedagogy: Mapping meanings in the use of classroom space. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(2), 235–251. Lundquist, L., & Jarvella, R. J. (2000). Language, text, and knowledge: Mental models of expert communication (Vol. 2). New York and Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Maimon, E. P. (1981). Writing in the arts and sciences. Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Martin, J. R. (1983). Participant identification in English, Tagalog and Kâte. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 45–74. Martin, J. R. (1986). Grammaticalising ecology: The politics of baby seals and kangaroos. In T. Threadgold, E. A. Grosz, G. Kress, & M. A. K. Halliday (Eds.), Semiotics, ideology, language (pp. 225–268). Sydney: Sydney Association for Studies in Society and Culture. Martin, J. R. (1988). Hypotactic recursive systems in English: Towards a functional interpretation. In J. D. Benson & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic functional approaches to discourse (pp. 240–270). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Martin, J. R. (1991). Intrinsic functionality: Implications for contextual theory. Social Semiotics, 1(1), 99–162. Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Martin, J. R. (1993a). Life as a noun: Arresting the universe in science and humanities. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 242–293). London: The Falmer Press. Martin, J. R. (1993b). Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 166–202). London: The Falmer Press. Martin, J. R. (1993c). Technicality and abstraction: Language for the creation of specialized texts. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 223–241). London: The Falmer Press. Martin, J. R. (1994). Modelling big texts: A systemic functional approach to multi-genericity. Network, 21, 29–52. Martin, J. R. (1996). Types of structure: Deconstructing notions of constituency in clause and text. In E. H. Hovy & D. R. Scott (Eds.), Computational and

248 Bibliography conversational discourse: Burning issues – An interdisciplinary account (pp. 39–66). Heidelberg: Springer. Martin, J. R. (1997). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 3–39). London and New York: Continuum. Martin, J. R. (2007). Construing knowledge: A functional linguistic perspective. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Language, knowledge and pedagogy: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives (pp. 34–64). London and New York: Continuum. Martin, J. R. (2008). Incongruent and proud: De-vilifying “nominalization”. Discourse & Society, 19(6), 801–810. Martin, J. R. (2010). Semantic variation: Modelling realisation, instantiation and individuation in social semiosis. In M. Bednarek & J. R. Martin (Eds.), New discourse on language: Functional perspectives on multimodality, identity, and affiliation (pp. 1–34). London: Continuum. Martin, J. R. (2013a). Systemic functional grammar: A next step into the theory: Axial relations (Y. Zhu & P. Wang, Trans.). Beijing: Higher Education Press. Martin, J. R. (2013b). Embedded literacy: Knowledge as meaning. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 23–37. Martin, J. R. (2017). Revisiting field: Specialized knowledge in ancient history and biology secondary school discourse. In J. R. Martin, K. Maton, & B. Quiroz (Eds.), Onomázein (Special Issue on Knowledge and Education), pp. 111–148. Martin, J. R. (2018). Meaning beyond the clause: Co-textual relations. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 11(1–2), 203–235. Martin, J. R., & Maton, K. (2013). Cumulative knowledge-building in secondary schooling, special issue of Linguistics and Education, 24(1). Martin, J. R., Maton, K., & Matruglio, E. (2010). Historical cosmologies: Epistemology and axiology in Australian secondary school history discourse. Revista Signos, 43(74), 433–463. Martin, J. R., Maton, K., & Quiroz, B. (Eds.). (2017). Special issue: “SFL and LCT on education and knowledge”. Onomázein, March, pp. 1–242. Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., & Painter, C. (2010). Deploying functional grammar. Beijing: The Commercial Press. Martin, J. R., & Quiroz, B. (2019). Functional language typology: A discourse semantic perspective. In J. R. Martin, Y. J. Doran, & G. Figueredo (Eds.), Systemic functional language description: Making meaning matter. London: Routledge. Martin, J. R., Quiroz, B., Wang, P., & Zhu, Y. (forthcoming). Systemic functional grammar: Another step into the theory – Grammatical description. Beijing: Higher Education Press. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. New York: Continuum. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London and Oakville: Equinox. Martin, J. R., Unsworth, L., & Rose, D. (in press). Condensing meaning: Imagic aggregations in secondary school science. In G. Parodi (Ed.), Multimodality: From corpus to cognition. Berlin: Peter Lang (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series).

Bibliography  249 Martin, J. R., & Veel, R. (1998). Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London and New York: Routledge. Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Martin, J. R., & Zappavigna, M. (2019). Embodied meaning: A systemic functional perspective on body language. Functional Linguistics, 6(1). Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. London and New York: Routledge. Maton, K., & Doran, Y. J. (2017). SFL and code theory. In T. Bartlett & G. O’Grady (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of systemic functional linguistics (pp. 605–618). London: Routledge. Maton, K., Hood, S., & Shay, S. (Eds.). (2015). Knowledge-building: Educational studies in Legitimation Code Theory. London: Routledge. Maton, K., Martin, J. R., & Doran, Y. J. (Eds.). (2020). Studying science: Knowledge, language, pedagogy. London: Routledge. Maton, K., & Muller, J. (2007). A sociology for the transmission of knowledges. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Language, knowledge and pedagogy: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives (pp. 14–33). London: Continuum. Matruglio, E. (2014). Humanities’ humanity: Construing the social in HSC modern and ancient history, society and culture, and community and family studies. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Technology, Sydney. Matruglio, E. (2018). Neutral subjectivity: Facts and evidence in school Modern History writing. Linguistics and Education, 48(2018), 76–84. Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1993). Register in the round: Diversity in a unified theory of register analysis. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice (pp. 221–292). London: Pinter. Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1995). Lexicogrammatical cartography: English systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences. Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2018). The notion of a multi-lingual meaning potential: A systemic exploration. In A. Sellemi-Baklouti & L. Fontaine (Eds.), Perspectives from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 90–120). London: Routledge. Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., & Halliday, M. A. K. (2009). Systemic functional grammar: A first step into the theory. Beijing: Higher Education Press. McArthur, J. (2013). Rethinking knowledge within higher education: Adorno and social justice. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. McGregor, W. (1997). Semiotic grammar. Oxford and New York: Clarendon Press. Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. O’Halloran, K. (2005). Mathematical discourse: Language, symbolism and visual images. London: Continuum. Oteíza, T. (2003). How contemporary history is presented in Chilean middle school textbooks. Discourse & Society, 14(5), 639–660. Oteíza, T. (2009). Evaluative patterns in the official discourse of Human Rights in Chile: Giving value to the past and building historical memories in society. Delta, 25, 609–640. O’Toole, M. (1994). The language of displayed art. London: Leicester University Press.

250 Bibliography Painter, C. (1984). Into the mother tongue: A case study in early language development. London: Frances Pinter. Painter, C. (1999). Learning through language in early childhood. London: Cassell. Painter, C. (2003). The use of a metaphorical mode of meaning in early language development. In A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers, & L. Ravelli (Eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Views from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 151–168). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Parodi, G. (Ed.). (2007). Working with Spanish corpora. London: Continuum (Research in Corpus and Discourse) Valparaíso: Ediciones Universitarias de Valparaíso. Parodi, G., Ibáñez, R., & Venegas, R. (2010). Discourse genres in Spanish: Academic and professional connections. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Pike, K. L. (1959). Language as particle, wave, and field. The Texas Quarterly, 2(2), 37–54. Quiroz, B. (2013). The interpersonal and experiential grammar of Chilean Spanish: Towards a principled systemic-functional description based on axial argumentation. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Sydney. Quiroz, B. (2019). Experiential cryptotypes: Reasoning about PROCESS TYPE. In J. R. Martin, Y. Doran, & G. Figueredo (Eds.), Systemic functional language description: Making meaning matter. London: Routledge. Ravelli, L. (1985/1999). Metaphor, mode and complexity: An exploration of covarying patterns (Vol. 12). Nottingham: Dept. of English and Media Studies, Nottingham Trent University. Ravelli, L. (1988). Grammatical metaphor: An initial analysis. In E. H. Steiner & R. Veltman (Eds.), Pragmatics, discourse and text: Some systemically-inspired approaches. London: Pinter (pp. 133–147). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Rose, D. (1997). Science, technology and technical literacies. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 40–72). London and New York: Continuum. Rose, D. (1998). Science discourse and industrial hierarchy. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 236–265). London and New York: Routledge. Rose, D. (2005). Narrative and the origins of discourse: Patterns of discourse semantics in stories around the world. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics Series, 19, 151–173. Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney school. Bristol and Sheffield: Equinox. Rose, D., McInnes, D., & Korner, H. (1992). Scientific literacy (Write it right literacy in industry research project-stage 1). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program. (Reprinted from: Sydney: NSW AMES, 2007). Rothery, J. (1994). Exploring literacy in School English (Write it right: Resources for literacy and learning). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program. Rothery, J., & Stenglin, M. (1997). Entertaining and instructing: Exploring experience through story. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (Vol. 231–264). London and New York: Continuum.

Bibliography  251 Russell, D. R. (1991). Writing in the academic disciplines, 1870-1990: A curricular history. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Saussure, F. (1974). Course in general linguistics. London: Peter Owan. Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Szenes, E. (2016). The language of academic success in business: Towards embedding academic literacy support. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Sydney. Taverniers, M. (2014). Grammatical metaphor and grammaticalisation: Fractal patterns in linguistic change. Paper presented at the 25th European Systemic Linguistic Conference, Universite Paris Diderot, Paris. Taverniers, M. (2018). Grammatical metaphor. In T. Bartlett & G. O’Grady (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of systemic functional linguistics (pp. 354– 371). London: Routledge. Thompson, G. (2004). Introducing functional grammar. London: Arnold. Unsworth, L. (1995). How and why: Recontextualizing science explanations in school science books. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Sydney. Unsworth, L. (1997). “Sound” explanations in school science: A functional linguistic perspective on effective apprenticing texts. Linguistics and Education, 9(2), 199–226. Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the curriculum: Changing contexts of text and image in classroom practice. Buckingham: Open University Press. Unsworth, L. (Ed.). (2008). Multimodal semiotics: Functional analysis in contexts of education. London: Continuum. van Leeuwen, T., & Humphrey, S. (1996). On learning to look through a geographer's eyes. In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 29–49). London and New York: Longman. Veel, R. (1993). Exploring literacy in school science. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program. Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to mean—scientifically speaking: Apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 161–195). London: Cassell. Veel, R. (1998). The greening of school science: Ecogenesis in secondary classroom. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 114–151). London: Routledge. Veel, R. (1999). Language, knowledge and authority in school mathematics. In F. Christie (Ed.), Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness: Linguistic and social processes (pp. 185–216). London: Cassell. Ventola, E. (1987). The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters. London: Pinter. Weekes, T. (2014). From dot points to disciplinarity: The theory and practice of disciplinary literacies in secondary schooling. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of New England, Australia.

252 Bibliography Weekes, T. (2016). Mastering musical meaning: Images as interpretive resources in multimodal music texts. Visual Communication, 15(2), 221–250. White, P. R. R. (1997). Death, disruption and the moral order: The narrative impulse in mass-media ‘hard news’ reporting. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London and New York: Continuum. White, P. R. R. (1998). Extended reality: Protonouns and the vernacular. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 266–296). London and New York: Routledge. Wignell, P. (2007). On the discourse of social science. Darwin, NT: Charles Darwin University Press. Wignell, P., Martin, J. R., & Eggins, S. (1993). The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 151–183). London: Falmer. Woodward-Kron, R. (2008). More than just jargon – The nature and role of specialist language in learning disciplinary knowledge. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(4), 234–249. Yang, Y. (2015). Grammatical metaphor in Chinese. Sheffield and Bristol, CT: Equinox. Zhao, S. (2008). From her world to our world: Making history on a children’s website. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 16(2), 44–52. Zhao, S., Djonov, E., & van Leeuwen, T. (2014). Semiotic technology and practice: A multimodal social semiotic approach to powerpoint. Text & Talk, 34(3), 349–375.

Appendix A Data Texts and Their Subject Areas

Subject areas

Grades Texts

No. of texts

Student 1 BIOL1001 Concepts in Biology

HD

laboratory reports

2

MBLG1901 Molecular Biology and Genetics

HD

laboratory reports

2

BIOL1902 Living Systems

HD

laboratory reports

2

BIOL2912 Vertebrates and Their Origins

HD

laboratory reports

1

BIOL2916 Cell Biology

D

laboratory reports

1

MBLG2971 Molecular Biology and Genetics

D

laboratory reports

2

BCHM2972 Human Biochemistry

D

laboratory reports

4

BIOL3906 Ecological Methods

D

laboratory reports

3

HD

research report

1

D

research report

1

HD

research report

1

D

research report

1

BIOL3911 Ecophysiology BIOL3917 Fungi in the Environment BIOL3925 Evolutionary Genetics and Animal Behaviour BCHM3972 Human Molecular Cell Biology

(Continued)

Subject areas

Grades Texts

No. of texts

Student 2 BIOL1002 Living systems

D

laboratory reports

2

BIOL1901 Ecosystems to Genes

D

laboratory reports

2

MBLG1901 Molecular Biology and Genetics

D

laboratory reports

2

MICR2921 Microbial Life

D

research report

1

HD

research report

1

MICR2922 Microbes in Society Student 3 BIOL1002 Living Systems

D

laboratory reports

2

PLNT2003 Plant Form and Function

D

laboratory reports

1

Introduction

Results

Method

Calibration of a pipette allows the relationship between theoretical volumes and those actually obtained to be determined. It is necessary to ensure consistency throughout an experiment, with high levels of accuracy (closeness of measured value to the set value) and precision (closeness of measured values to each other) needed to reduce variability and increase the experiment’s reproducibility.

Weight-of-water: this method showed close correlation between the theoretical pipette and experimental values with little variability (Figure 1). It also displayed a strong linear relationship— shown by its correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.9999, suggesting the pipette to be both accurate and precise throughout its range (0–200uL).

Radioactivity: set amounts (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) of radioactive C-14 glucose were pipetted into vials, and 5mL of scintillant were added. The radioactive content of each vial was then measured using a specialized spectrophotometer.

Spectrophotometry: set amounts of dye (0, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200uL) were pipetted into 1mL cuvettes, and water was added to give a total volume of 1mL. Each solution was mixed, and absorbances were read, using a spectrophotometer, l = 445nm.

Weight-of-water: a set amount of water was pipetted into a container, and the weight of the water dispensed was measured and recorded.

In this experiment, a Finnpipette ranged 200–1000uL and a Bio-Rad P200 pipette were calibrated, using three methods—weight-of-water, spectrophotometry and radioactivity—and a comparison of these methods was made.

Text 1—first-year lab report (BIOL1001 Concepts in Biology)

Stages

Sample Texts and Genre Analysis

Appendix B

(Continued)

description

recounts

recount

explanation

Featured genres

Discussion

Stages description

description

description

exposition

exposition

Radioactivity: this method suggested that the accuracy of the pipette was quite high throughout its range, with approximately a 3% difference between set and measured volumes for volumes of 150ul and 200ul (Figure 3). However, the presence of significant variability between the readings obtained showed a high degree of imprecision (Figure 3).

The three methods used did not agree upon the pipette’s calibration. The weight-of-water method suggested high levels of accuracy and precision throughout the pipette’s range. Similarly, spectrophotometry suggested the pipette was precise. However it also suggested that the pipette declined in accuracy as the set volumes increased, whilst radioactivity suggested the pipette was moderately inaccurate and highly imprecise.

While the weight-of-water method appeared to provide the best calibration of the pipette, there were a number of limitations associated with it. Firstly, the sensitivity of the balance was limited, with its only measurements larger than 1mg detected. Thus it could not be used in calibrating a P20 and to some extent a P200. Secondly, the balance used was imprecise with external interference like breathing, which is able to cause the reading to fluctuate by 1–2g. This method was time consuming and the least useful in calibration. However, it was easy to perform, and the equipment (was) inexpensive. This method could prove more efficient in calibrating tools, i.e. automatic dispensers, which dispense larger volumes.

The other two methods used (spectrophotometry and radioactivity) were able to measure to a higher degree of accuracy and could be used in calibrating all three pipettes, providing a significant advantage. This discrepancy between the degrees of accuracy could also explain why such different calibration results between the methods were obtained.

Featured genres

Spectrophotometry: according to this method, the pipette was fairly inaccurate, with an 11% error with pipette volume of 200uL and 51% for 20uL. Furthermore, this accuracy decreased towards the larger end of the pipette’s range. The minimal variability that existed between readings demonstrated the pipette was fairly precise (Figure 2).

Text 1—first-year lab report (BIOL1001 Concepts in Biology)

Conclusion

exposition

exposition

reiteration (hyper-New)

While the radioactivity method contained a fairly high degree of accuracy, it involved a long waiting period, and the readings contained high levels of variability. Such variability could be due to experimental error, such as not depressing the pipette to the first stop or sucking up air bubbles in the pipette. Increasing the number of repeats could minimize such errors. The high expense, due to the use of C-14 glucose and the specialized spectrophotometer, would not be cost effective if this method were to be used regularly. Furthermore safety hazards associated with the use of radioactive C-14 glucose must be considered and precautions, such as the use of gloves and the fume-cupboard, must be implemented.

In comparison variability between the readings in the spectrophotometer was much less; this, combined with its high sensitivity to variations in volumes, could be used in the calibration for all three pipettes. This variability observed in the readings could be due to something such as fingerprints on the cuvette and incomplete mixing of solution, which could be reduced by implementing greater care. Although the equipment used would have been initially expensive, frequent use would ensure its cost effectiveness. Additionally, the spectrometer provided results that were easily and efficiently obtained.

The different methods used in pipette calibration contained varying degrees of accuracy. Although the use of the weight-of-water method was simple and inexpensive, it did not provide an accurate representation of the accuracy and precision of the pipette. Similarly, there were disadvantages associated with the radioactivity method including high costs and elaborate preparation. Instead, spectroscopy provided results that balanced the need for high levels of precision and accuracy with safety, speed and efficiency.

Introduction

Abstract

Stages explanation

description

recount

descriptive report

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the size of fungal spores was a factor in affecting spore viability after passage through the gastrointestinal tract of the Australian plague locust, Chortichocetes terminifera. The effect of spore size on viability was tested using five genera of dung fungi—Absidia, Isaria, Penicillin, Phycomycetes and Podospora—whose spores were fed to either second or fifth instar C. terminifera. Absidia, Isaria and Penicillin spores were recovered from both the faecal and gut samples from second and fifth instars, following feeding by C. terminifera on wheat inoculated with fungal spores.

Phycomyces was not recovered from faecal material obtained from second instars but was present in all other samples. Podospora spores, 20um in diameter, were not recovered from any of the samples.

A complex interaction exists between insects and the health and diversity of fungal communities. These interactions may be beneficial to both insects and fungi, for example symbiotic relationships between termites and cellulase-producing gut fungi (Slater, 1992). Insects may also aid the dispersal of fungal spores either externally or internally, increasing the ecological niche in which fungal species may inhabit and potentially affecting higher plant and animal diversity through the spread of symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi or entomo- and entero-pathogens (Collier & Bidatnodo, 2008; Dromph, 2000; Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006; Nakamori & Suzuki, 2009; Vernes & Dunn, 2009). However, insect-fungi interactions may also be detrimental to both groups as shown in the effectiveness of the use of fungal entomopathogens in biocontrol (Ouedraogo, 2002) and in the loss of spore viability, in some fungal taxa, after ingestion and passage through the gut of insects (Nakamori & Suzuki, 2009; Pupital et al., unpublished data).

featured genres

The viability of fungal spores after ingestion and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of an insect may be determined by the effect of the physical and chemical processes involved in the ingestion and digestion of food. In particular, mandibular maceration could damage fungal spore integrity and result in spores losing their viability.

Text 4—third-year research report (BIOL3917 Fungi in the Environment)

explanation

explanation

description

This model was tested using dung fungal spores and examining their passage through the gut of the Australian plague locust, Chortichocetes terminifera. The Australian plague locust, Chortichocetes terminifera, ingests large amounts of biomass and travels over a large geographical range, making such a study ecologically realistic and important (Walker et al., 2007). In particular, different developmental stages of C. terminifera have mandibles of different sizes, yet consume the same food, making this insect ideal to test our model of fungal spore size affecting viability after ingestion and passage.

Coprophilous fungal spores were used as a model for spore size to test this model, on account of their specialization to survive passage through the guts of herbivorous animals (Dix & Webster, 1995). The fungal taxa chosen—Absidia, Penicillin, Isaria, Podospora and Phycomycetes—were chosen on the basis of the adaptations associated with their ecological niche, that is, the ability to pass unharmed through the chemical environment found in the digestive tract of herbivores (Dix & Webster, 1995). As these fungi also vary in spore size the use of dung fungi to test this model is ideal.

Applying the model above to the system of dung fungi and C. terminifera, it is likely that the viability of spores will be dependent on both the size of fungal spores and the size of the insect mouthpiece. It is predicted that small spores will retain viability in after ingestion by both second and fifth instar C. terminifera whilst larger spores will lose viability after ingestion by either fifth instar C. terminifera only or both developmental stages.

(Continued)

explanation

Loss of fungal spore integrity and viability after ingestion and passage through the insect gastrointestinal tract may result from either physical processes, chemical processes or a combination of both. Physical processes such as maceration by mouthpieces or peristaltic movement through the gut could cause spores to fracture and lose their integrity. Similarly, chemical processes including enzymic digestion or antifungal compounds could cause spores to lose their viability whilst retaining their integrity (Dillan, 2001; Clissold, 2008). These mechanisms may explain why fungal spore viability after passage through the insect gut is either reduced or unaffected (Dromph, 2000; Devaranjan & Suryanarayanan, 2006; Nakamori & Suzuki, 2009; Pupitel et al., unpublished data). The ability for fungal spores to withstand such processes may be due to intrinsic characteristics of the fungal spore, in particular spore size, may explain why some fungal spores retain their viability whilst other spores lose viability (Pupitel et al., unpublished data). We propose a model whereby smaller fungal spores are more likely to retain integrity and viability, after ingestion and passage through the insect gut, than larger spores, due to the ability for smaller spores to more easily avoid maceration by insect mouthpieces.

recount

recount

A positive result for spore viability after ingestion determined when the target fungi was isolated from three or more of the five replicates. Additional growth on treatment plates was compared to non-target fungal growth present on control plates from the spore-free controls. Growth of Absidia, Penicillium and Isaria on dung extract media, from the faecal and gastrointestinal tract samples of their respective treatments, for both second and fifth instar C. terminifera was positive (Table 1 and 2). Phycomyces was absent from the faeces of the second instar locusts, but was successfully isolated from the second instar crop and the fifth instar crop and faeces. Podospora spores were not re-isolated from any of the extracts of any individual.

Results

featured genres

Method

Text 4—third-year research report (BIOL3917 Fungi in the Environment)

Species of Penicillium, Podopspora, Absidia, Isaria and Phycomyces were isolated from possum faeces (Table 1). The fungi were cultured on 3.5% potato dextrose agar (PDA). Plates of each fungus were flooded with 0.02% Triton-X and the mycelium agitated to remove the spores. Individual spore suspensions were inoculated to surface sterilized wheat, with five replicates of each fungus and a control (0.02% Triton-X solution). The effectiveness of inoculation was checked by spraying a fresh PDA plate with spore solution and monitoring spore germination. The thirty-second instar and thirty-fifth instar larvae of gregarious phase C. terminifera were starved for 24 hours. Individual locusts were placed on one of the six treatments and allowed to feed for a period of 24 hours. Individual locusts were then moved to clean containers and all faeces were collected. The gastrointestinal tract of each locust was removed following collection of the faeces. Faceal samples were macerated in 50 or 100ul of sterile de-ionised water for fifth and second instar samples respectively because the quantity was much greater from the larger insects. A one in ten dilution of each collection was then prepared and plated onto dung extract agar with antibiotics (2% agar, 20 pellets of possum dung per litre of media, 25mgL-1 Penicillin G, 25mgL-1 Streptomycin Sulphate in tap water to provide trace elements). Samples of digesta from the GIT were diluted one in twenty and plated out on dung extract agar. The plates were observed over a period of 4–14 days and any colonies unique to treatment plates were identified.

Stages

Discussion

exposition

exposition

The results suggest that mandibular manipulation of ingested material determines the level of damage sustained by the ingested material, rather than physical and/or chemical activity that occurs later within the gastrointestinal tract of C. terminifera. Such findings are consistent with current understanding of food processing by members of the Acrididae, with fractionation of material with teeth or mandibles the primary mechanism of food processing (Clissold, 2008). Although the foregut is lined with sclerotised spines (Hochuli et al., 1994; Uvarov, 1966) this is thought to aid in peristalsis and separation of material from digestive enzymes, rather than in the mechanical degradation of ingested material (Clissold, 2008; Hochuli et al., 1994). The resident microbiota and digestive enzymes are also thought to have little involvement in the digestive process, since the passage time of the ingested food is extremely short (Charnley et al., 1985; Clissold, 2008; Uvarov, 1966). The literature and our findings support for the model that the loss of fungal spore viability is mediated by mandibular maceration.

Mandibles play a crucial role in the digestive process of the locust by fragmenting ingested plant material to release the nutritious cytoplasm (Clissold, 2008). Fragmentation of materials requires a fracture to be initiated and propagated through the material. Fracture initiation is dependent upon the fracture stress and toughness of the material (Clissold, 2008; Samson, 2006; Samson et al., 2001). We propose that size also becomes a determining factor in fracture initiation where fungal spores are concerned, since the probability of a mandible encountering a spore to initiate a fracture is dependent upon the circumference of the spore. The survival of small but not large spores in this study supports the importance of size in fracture initiation dynamics.

(Continued)

explanation

Penicillin, Isaria and Absidia spores retained viability after ingestion by and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of both second and fifth instar C. terminifera (Table 1 and 2). In comparison, the larger spores of Podospora (14–20um) did not retain their viability (Table 1 and 2). Smaller mandibles fracture material into smaller fragments, so it stands to reason that larger fragments would be more susceptible to damage by mandibular action (Clissold, 2008). The retention of viability by the small spores can be explained in relation to our model initially proposed, in that spore size affects the viability of spores. The absence of Podospora from the crop is evidence for mandibular damage to the spores (Table 2b). The crop is early in the digestive sequence, so the early absence of Podospora indicates that the spores were inviable before entering the gut.

Stages

explanation

explanation

recount

However, two of the five second instar C. terminifera replicates for Phycomyces treatment died during the treatment. No faecal material was recovered and the crops obtained from these individuals discarded. Thus, the loss of viability between the crop and faeces is probably not significant, since the sample number was three rather than five locusts. As the young locusts were found to be quite delicate, further investigations would benefit from the use of a larger sample size to allow for unexpected deaths.

The capacity to interpret the absence of Podospora in the crop and faeces is somewhat limited, since there was no progression of spore sizes between 6–14 microns through which to evaluate the size at which viability was lost. Without other results to corroborate the loss of viability at 14–20 microns, it is impossible to be sure that the loss of viability in Podospora was size related and not due to some other feature of the spore, such as cell wall composition. Future studies would benefit from resolving a more defined point at which spores cease to become viable, as this would inform the design of fungal biocontrols. No correlation between the developmental stage of the insects and the size at which spores lost their viability was observed. The effect of developmental stage on spore size and viability could have been resolved if a more comprehensive spread of spore sizes had been used, especially in the 6–14 micron range.

featured genres

The results for Phycomyces indicated a loss of viability between the crop and the faeces in the second instar individuals. The loss of viability as a result of passage through the gastrointestinal tract was unexpected, especially because all other small fungal spores remained viable after passage through the gut of C. terminifera (Tables 1 and 2). Since Phycomyces belongs to different fungal taxa (Zygomycota) to the other isolates, it is possible that intrinsic structural differences such as the constituents of the spore wall could increase susceptibility of the spores to antifungals and digestive enzymes of the locust gut. Spore viability may therefore be dependent not only on spore size, but also on other intrinsic characteristics of the fungal spore including spore-wall composition.

Text 4—third-year research report (BIOL3917 Fungi in the Environment)

exposition

If entomopathogens are to be developed towards a biocontrol, there are a number of fungal-insect interactions beyond physical spore destruction that require consideration. Understanding spore viability in an entomopathogen/host context is a crucial aspect of autodissemination, a biocontrol strategy that employs insects to introduce a fungal pathogen into a population (Ignoffo, 1977; Dromph, 2003; Meyling et al., 2006). Our results indicate that the success of an autodissemination strategy involving ingestion will require that spores are sufficiently small to survive ingestion.

(Continued)

explanation

Interestingly, none of the test organisms exposed to Isaria—a known entomopathogen—appeared to have contracted an infection. The lack of pathogenicity cannot be attributed to a loss of spore viability, because viable spores were recovered from both the crop and faeces in all treated individuals. The absence of Isaria pathogenicity can be explained in two ways. Resident microbiota in the gut of the Desert Locust (Schistocera gregaria) has produced an antifungal compound that inhibits the germination of fungal spores invivo and invitro (Dillon & Charnley, 1985; Dillon & Charnley, 1995). However given that the Isaria spores were viable after passage through the gut, the antifungal would need to be fungistatic in its action. The literature provides evidence that the compound is fungicidal. The alternative explanation for the absence of colonization by Isaria is that the locust initiated some physiological response that prevented colonization. Evidence from Locusta migratoria has indicated that some locusts have an ability to induce a fever that reduces the incidence and severity of fungal infection by Metarhizium anisopliae (Ouedraogo, 2002).

The potential for false positive results was considered and carefully controlled for in the experimental procedure. A key concern was to avoid the inadvertent transmission of spores on the locust cuticle between the feeding and ‘spore-free’ containers. The consequence of non-specific transmission is that spores could be isolated from the locust without having passed through the mandibles and gastrointestinal tract. The recovery of spores from the crop was confirmation that spores has been ingested rather than being transported between containers on the locust exoskeleton. It was also noted that individuals preparing to moult ceased to eat, which had implications for the numbers of spores consumed and therefore the spore concentration in the crop and faeces. Varying spore concentrations would have affected the chances of a spore being plated from the serial dilutions. Fasting prior to moulting and the associated potential bias in data could be avoiding by selecting individuals at exactly the same stage of their lifecycle.

Stages

exposition

exposition

Fungal spore size appears to correlate to spore viability after ingestion and passage through the gastrointestinal tract of the Australian plague locust, C. terminifera. The results of this investigation contribute to a growing body of literature documenting the role of insects in transporting fungal spores. As transport of fungal spores has implications as to the health and diversity of animal and plant species, as well as the structure of higher plant and animal communities, an understanding the relationship between fungal spore viability would be beneficial in applications of biocontrol, ecology and environmental management.

featured genres

A number of invertebrate hosts have been shown to aid fungal spore dispersal, including aphids (Meyling et al., 2006), grasshoppers (Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006) and snails (Dromph, 2001, 2003). The dissemination of spores may hold implications for the structure of higher plant and animal communities (Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006; Vernes & Dunn, 2009) as many fungal taxa are implicated in the health of ecological systems. For example, grasshoppers (Acrididae) transfer the spores of fungal endophytes between plants in rainforest communities, thereby contributing to the diversity of endophyte communities (Devarajan & Suryanarayanan, 2006). The extent to which Acrididae-mediated dissemination occurs is possibly limited by the size of the spores: dissemination would be futile if the spore were rendered inviable by the mandibles in the process of macerating the leaf containing the spores.

Text 4—third-year research report (BIOL3917 Fungi in the Environment)

Appendix C List of Symbols and Abbreviations

In this book, the symbols and abbreviations used in system networks follow the convention established in Matthiessen and Halliday (2009) and Martin (2013). The following symbols and abbreviations are used in this book for structural categories, including labels of classes and functions. / || [[ ]] ‘’ “” 1st Ag 2nd Ag Act Adj adj adv adv.gr Ag Attr Att-or Car Cir cir.iden conj conx dim Fin Go Id In.Rg

conflated categories (e.g. Medium/Goal) clause boundary embedded clause projected idea projected locution First order Agent Second order Agent Actor Adjunct adjective adverb adverbial group Agent Attribute Attributor Carrier Circumstance circumstantial identifying process conjunction connexion dimension Finite Goal Identified Inner Range

266  Appendix C Ini-or int.attr int.conx int.iden Ir Loc ling.def Man mat Med men n.gr Out.Rg ost.def Par Ph poss.iden posit prep prep.ph Pro Rg Sen Tk v.gr v.gr cplx Vl =, +, x 1 2 3 . . . αβγ

Initiator intensive attributive process internal connexion intensive identifying process Identifier Location linguistically defined entity Manner (as Circumstance) material process Medium mental process nominal group Outer Range ostensively defined entity Participant Phenomenon possessive identifying process Position Preposition prepositional phrase Process Range Senser Token verbal group verbal group complex Value kinds of expansion in complex units: elaboration extension and enhancement sequence of Arabic numbers showing paratactic relations among elements in structure sequence of Greek letters showing hypotactic relations among elements in structure

Appendix D Annotations

This book uses the following fonts to annotate different language features: • entity • dimension > entity • occurrence • quality • external connexion • internal connexion • position of figure • evaluation of figure • experiential metaphor (and its associated congruent realisation) • logical metaphor (external) (and its associated congruent realisation) • logical metaphor (internal) • realisation of activity of reasoning

Index

Note: page numbers in italic indicate a figure and page numbers in bold indicate a table. abstraction: abstract entity 7, 55–56, 230–231, 233; stratification 8, 39 activity 28, 34–35, 92, 94, 97, 151, 154, 158, 159, 194; see also activity sequence; activity series; facilitated activity; implication activity; itemised activity; momented activity; observation activity; reasoning activity; re/preview activity; unmomented activity activity entity 60–65, 85, 107, 129, 131, 148, 153, 166, 168–169, 171–174, 178–179, 184–185, 187–190, 192–193, 198, 204, 213, 220–221, 228–229, 234, 237 activity sequence 31, 33, 35 activity series 29, 34–35, 73, 147–148, 153 administration field 25, 28, 32, 72, 189, 233 agentive clause 93, 103, 113n8, 119, 129–131, 142, 143, 206, 222, 229 agnation 105, 114–117; see also enation appraisal 30, 92, 239 attitude 64, 92, 105; attitude of figure 106, 208, 228 attributive process 92, 98–99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 119–122, 134, 136, 137, 143, 144, 185, 206 axis 13–16, 17, 19, 36–37; see also paradigmatic relations; structure; syntagmatic relations; system Bernstein, B. 3, 4, 24; see also code theory

causal connexion 34, 73–74, 110–111, 124–127, 138, 144n2, 146, 148–152 Chinese 239–240 circumstance: as grammatical function 14, 33, 43, 61–62, 63, 83, 92, 97–98, 104, 107, 121, 127–128, 142, 143, 166, 169, 171, 197; as semantic element 36, 37, 43 class 13–14, 17, 37, 44, 45, 115 classification 28–29, 31, 56, 83–84, 153, 171, 176–179, 185–186, 189; see also composition; taxonomy clause complex: expansion 35, 38, 41, 110, 111, 124–126, 141, 200; projection 35, 38, 107, 111, 127, 141 code theory 4; see also Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) co-elaboration 71–72, 83, 85–86, 94, 99, 100, 167, 176, 185, 187, 235 composition: as a choice in attitude 64–65, 105; as taxonomic relation 28–29, 31, 56, 83, 85, 153, 172, 176–177, 186, 189 conjunction 30, 35, 41–42, 45, 47, 141; see also connexion connexion 30, 33–35, 61, 73–74, 109–112, 141, 143; see also causal connexion; external connexion; implicit connexion; internal connexion; temporal connexion context 5–11, 24, 30, 49; see also genre; register contraction 108–109, 138, 197, 202, 208, 217 covariate relation 30, 33

Index  269 Davidse 60, 69, 101, 103–104, 112n3, 113n5, 115 delicacy 14, 22n4, 178, 236 derivation 44–45, 114 dimension 81–83, 89, 91, 102, 165, 168, 174, 184, 192, 228–229, 230, 232, 234; categorised 84–85, 170, 176, 185–186; measured 86–88, 166–167, 171, 172, 178, 186–187; perceived 89, 178; structured 85–86, 188; see also dimensionality dimensionality 80, 90 discourse semantics 6, 8, 16, 21, 27; ideational discourse semantics 30–35, 48–49, 53, 232, 235–237; see also grammatical metaphor; ideation; semantics; stratification; trinocular perspective distillation 47 domestic field 28, 32, 56, 147, 154 Doran, Y. J. 5, 23, 27, 237–238 Doran and Martin 27–29, 35, 56, 63, 87, 92, 147–148, 151, 188, 229 enation 114–117 engagement 106, 109, 197, 208, 228; see also contraction; expansion English for Specific Purposes (ESP) 3 entity 31–33, 55, 64, 73, 77, 78, 90, 228–230, 232, 235–237; see also activity entity; inferable entity; linguistically defined entity; ostensively defined entity; semiotic entity; tech-enhanced gaze entity; thing entity; trained gaze entity ergativity 21n3, 33, 38; ergative perspective 96, 103, 112n1, 113n6, 118 evaluated figure 104–106, 109, 120–122, 136, 180, 228, 235 expansion: as choice of engagement 109, 111, 208–209, 217; as logicosemantic relation 25, 35–36, 38–39, 43 (see also projection); see also contraction expectancy 28, 34, 147 experiential metafunction 10–12, 15, 38, 102 explanation genre 25, 26, 50, 151, 153, 171–172, 229; see also genre; genre pedagogy exploration field 154–155, 156, 174, 182, 184, 189, 193, 194, 199–203,

207, 209, 210, 214, 216, 217, 220, 228, 230, 231–232, 237 exposition genre 25, 27, 50 external connexion 110–112, 132, 138, 142, 143, 146, 156–157, 160, 198, 204, 213, 221 facilitated activity 147–148, 154, 158, 160, 161, 195, 198, 204, 213, 221 field 9–11, 24, 27–35, 198, 204, 212–213, 220–221, 227–230, 233–234, 237; see also administration field; domestic field; exploration field; field of research; field of the object of study; field perspectives; specialised field field of the object of study 28, 56, 62, 84, 159–161, 197–198, 199–200, 204, 205–207, 212, 220, 222, 231 field of research 28, 56, 62, 159–161, 195–198, 200–204, 207–213, 221, 222, 231 field perspectives 56–57, 198, 204, 212, 220; dynamic 28–29, 91–92, 148, 154, 172, 194, 229–231; static 28–29, 56–57, 80, 89, 91–92, 148, 153–154, 165, 229–231 figure: in discourse semantics 33, 46, 91, 94, 102, 228–229, 235; in ideation base 38–39, 42–44; metaphorical realisations of 117; see also evaluated figure; instigated figure; occurrence figure; positioned figure; state figure function: grammatical function 13–14, 17, 21n3, 33, 37–38, 42–44, 45, 93, 233, 239 genre 9–10, 12, 17, 24–27, 50, 51n2, 161n1; embedded genres 27, 50; macro-genre 25–27; see also explanation genre; exposition genre; genre pedagogy; procedural recount genre; recount; report genre genre pedagogy 233 Gleason, H. A. 30, 115 grammatical metaphor 7, 16, 32, 40–48, 114–117, 228, 233, 236; ‘dead’ metaphor 47–48, 88, 167, 228, 234; experiential metaphor 114, 127, 131, 228; ideational metaphor 41, 44–47, 67, 114, 228, 229, 236; logical metaphor 74, 114,

270 Index 125, 127, 131, 140, 229; see also nominalisation; semantic junction; stratal tension Halliday, M. A. K. 5, 7–8, 10–13, 15, 19, 23, 27, 32–33, 40–44, 46–48, 56, 60, 69, 86, 96, 103–104, 140, 206, 222, 228, 239 Halliday and Hasan 6, 10, 67, 73 Halliday and Martin 6, 24, 236 Halliday and Matthiessen 35–43, 49, 57, 60, 93–94, 97, 99, 104–105, 107–109, 112n2, 118, 123–125, 131, 134, 140, 228, 235–236, 239 Hao, J. 5–6, 24, 27, 45, 48, 51n1, 62, 64, 76, 92, 98, 131, 140, 184, 229, 233–234, 237–238, 240 Hasan, R. 10, 21n2, 34, 38–39 Heyvaert, L. 115, 116 Hood, S. 4–6, 24, 27–28, 30, 51n1, 56, 62, 64, 79n1, 92, 106, 157, 159, 184, 208, 231, 238 Humphrey, S. 9, 23, 24, 27, 45, 48, 51n2, 64, 92, 184, 229, 231, 233–234, 238 ideation 30, 33, 35, 38–40, 93, 235 ideational metafunction 10–11, 16, 22n5, 24, 30, 114, 227 ideation base 30, 35–39, 42, 49 identification 30, 65, 67–70, 72, 151, 237 identifying process 41, 59, 70, 86, 100, 103, 113n5, 123, 132, 134, 135, 136, 139, 142, 143, 144, 210, 219 implication activity 28, 34–35, 74, 151–156, 158, 160, 199, 204, 205, 211, 212, 214, 220, 222 implicit connexion 34, 110, 146, 151–152, 195, 197, 215 inferable entity 76, 78, 87, 170–171, 173, 174–175, 178, 183, 184, 185, 187–189, 190, 204, 237 instantiation 19–20, 24–25, 36, 49, 194, 199, 219, 222, 231 instigated figure 102, 103–104, 119, 120, 121, 129, 131, 140, 142, 229 instrumental entity 62, 65, 68, 75–76, 78, 80, 146, 160, 166–171, 173–175, 183, 185, 190, 192, 198, 204, 213, 221, 231 internal connexion 73, 110–112, 125, 132, 138, 142, 143, 146, 155–157, 160, 196, 230

interpersonal metafunction 10–11, 16–17, 40, 81, 125, 160, 111 interstratal relationship 10, 16, 22n4, 35–37, 40, 43, 48–49, 83, 91, 144, 145, 227, 229, 235 intrastratal relationship 17, 22n4, 36–37 itemised activity 29, 63, 77, 148, 153–154, 188, 229–230, 234, 237 KAL (Knowledge about Language) 232 knowledge and language 24 knowledge production 24, 157, 180, 182, 219, 222 knowledge reproduction 157, 180, 219, 222 knowledge structure 4, 10, 27 Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) 4, 27, 238 Lemke, J. L. 6, 9, 30 lexical metaphor 41 lexicogrammar 6–8, 14–17, 19, 30 linguistically defined entity 70, 72, 74–79, 88–89, 131, 153, 160, 168, 169–171, 174–175, 177, 181–184, 190–191, 199, 230, 237 linguistic definition 69–72, 84, 88, 166, 170, 228 logical metafunction 10–12, 73 logico-semantic relation 34, 38–39, 99, 140, 229; see also expansion; projection logogenesis 20; logogenetic 88, 211, 223 Martin, J. R. 4–10, 12–20, 22n6, 24–25, 27–36, 38–41, 43–47, 49, 56–57, 67–70, 73, 80, 82–83, 86, 92–94, 98, 101, 109–111, 113n7, 115, 124, 146–147, 151, 154, 196, 230, 235, 237–238, 240 Martin and Rose 6–9, 17, 23–27, 30–33, 35, 49–50, 51n3, 55, 57, 65, 151, 230 Martin and White 30, 64, 92, 101, 105–106, 125, 239 material process 41, 58–61, 75, 91, 99, 103, 112n2, 113n6, 118, 119, 120, 131–132, 133, 143, 169 Maton, K. 3–4, 6, 28, 238 Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 8, 15, 19, 21n3, 22n4, 240

Index  271 message 33–34, 38–39, 42, 111; message part 31, 34, 38 metafunction 10–13, 18–19, 24, 30, 39, 49, 51n1, 233; see also experiential metafunction; ideational metafunction; interpersonal metafunction; logical metafunction; textual metafunction metalanguage 67, 230, 232–234; bridging metalanguage 231, 233–234 mode 10–11, 30, 69, 70, 72, 74 momented activity 28–29, 73, 148 multimodal semiotics 27, 51n2, 237–238 negotiation 17, 30, 40 New Rhetoric 3 nominalisation 45, 47–48, 55–56, 60, 62, 67, 88, 124–125, 129, 138, 140, 228–230, 234, 236 nuclearity 12–13, 21, 33, 35, 38, 92; nuclear relation 30, 33; see also orbital structure; serial structure observation activity 151, 154, 158, 160, 212, 220, 231 observational entity 62–63, 65, 68, 75–77, 78, 81, 158, 160, 169–175, 177–179, 182, 185, 187–189, 192, 199, 204, 220, 230 occurrence 31, 91–98, 110, 118–123, 128, 130, 133, 137 occurrence figure 94–98, 102–103, 105, 109, 112, 118–123, 128, 130, 133, 137, 146, 148–150, 154, 158, 160, 172, 195, 198–199, 203, 204, 212–213, 220–221 ontogenesis 20; ontogenetic 24, 222 orbital structure 12–13, 22n5, 91–95, 99–103, 109, 113n7, 235; orbital and satellite 104–106, 108–109; orbitality 112n3, 235; see also serial structure ostensively defined entity 69–70, 72, 74, 76, 78, 89, 160, 166, 168, 170–171, 173, 175, 181–182, 183, 190–191, 192, 231 Painter, C. 20, 23, 63, 69, 236 paradigmatic relations 13–15, 17, 37–38 participant: as grammatical function 14, 17, 21n3, 39, 42–47, 57–59, 62–63, 91–92, 95–97, 103, 112n1, 112n4, 113n6, 123, 125, 132, 134,

138, 140–144, 210–211, 222, 233; as semantic element 36–39, 43–44 periodicity 30, 61, 65–67, 73, 167, 229, 235 phylogenesis 20; phylogenetic 222 positioned figure 107–109, 122–123, 126–127, 134, 140, 142, 228–229, 235 procedural recount genre 25, 26, 49, 147 procedure genre 25, 26, 147–148, 170, 181, 195, 229 process: as grammatical function 12–13, 17, 33, 37–39, 41–47, 91–92, 99, 101, 103, 119, 124–125, 132, 134, 136, 141, 142, 143, 202, 210–211, 216, 222, 233; as semantic element 36–38, 42–44 projection 25, 33, 38, 105, 125, 138, 144, 159, 161n1, 211, 228 property 28–29, 63, 82, 87, 89, 91, 187, 198, 209, 233 quality 31, 33, 42–43, 88, 90, 92–94, 101–102, 110, 118, 233, 235; of occurrence 97, 121, 130 Quiroz, B. 13, 19, 28, 239, 240 rank 8, 12–13, 16–19, 22n4, 22n5, 36, 39, 42, 49, 115, 233; rank scale 16–17, 22n6; see also intrastratal relationship rankshift 44–46, 114–115 Ravelli, L. 41–42, 115, 236 Reading to Learn 233 realisation 9, 13–14, 20, 22n4, 36–37, 100, 101, 107–108, 109–110, 115–117, 131, 141, 143, 158, 160, 198, 204, 212, 220–221; see also interstatal relationship; intrastratal relationship reasoning activity 157–160, 181, 195–198, 200–204, 207–211, 212–213, 214–219, 220–221, 222, 231 recount 50, 148, 150–151, 154, 195, 203 register 9–11, 19, 27, 30, 238, 240; see also field; mode; tenor relator 36, 42–43 report genre 25, 26, 49, 50, 233 re/preview activity 154, 158, 160, 203, 204, 207, 213, 221, 231 Rose, D. 6, 169, 189, 240 Rose and Martin 9, 23, 25, 232–233

272 Index scientific discourse 6–7, 21, 27, 46–47, 96, 101, 105, 110, 112, 144, 208, 230, 235 semantic junction 41–43, 114 semantics 6–8, 35–40, 42–44, 239 semiotic entity 7, 31–32, 46, 60–61, 65–67, 69, 72–74, 78, 105, 107, 127, 132, 134, 138, 140, 153–154, 157, 158, 160, 165, 167, 168, 172, 173, 180–181, 183, 184, 192, 228–230, 237 semogenesis 8, 19, 24; see also logogenesis; ontogenesis; phylogenesis sequence: in discourse semantics 30, 33–35, 91, 105, 109–112, 115–117, 124; in ideation base 36, 38–39, 42–43 serial structure 12–13, 22n5, 105, 110 social semiotics 5, 240 Spanish 239–240 specialised field 28, 32, 46, 69, 147, 154, 159–161, 169, 174, 179, 184, 189, 193, 194, 197–200, 203, 222, 230–232 state figure 94, 98–104, 118, 126, 128, 135, 137, 140, 176, 185, 198, 204, 212, 220 stratal tension 16, 32, 41, 43–46, 62, 114, 140–144, 206, 210, 228–229, 236 stratification 8–11, 16, 18–19, 21, 24, 40, 44, 114, 145, 230–231, 233, 240; see also interstratal relationship structure 11–13, 16–18, 22n4, 38, 94, 236; multivariate 11, 27; particulate 11–12, 22n4; periodic 11–12, 22n5; prosodic 11, 22n5, 106; univariate 11–12, 25; see also nuclearity; orbital structure; serial structure; syntagmatic relations syntagm 13, 56 syntagmatic relations 13–15, 17, 37–38, 161, 235 system 8, 10–11, 13–20, 30, 39, 49; see also paradigmatic relations

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) 5, 6, 8, 10, 14–15, 19, 20–21, 23, 227, 237 system network 14–17, 19, 34, 42, 64, 72–73, 76, 159 Taverniers, M. 43–44 taxonomic relations 28–32, 50, 56, 63, 71, 80, 83–86, 169, 172–173, 175–177, 185–186, 189, 193; see also classification; composition taxonomy 28, 31, 55–57, 75, 77, 80, 153, 155, 156, 160, 161, 165, 198, 204, 212–213, 220–221, 229–230 tech-enhanced gaze entity 76, 78, 175, 177–179, 182, 183, 184, 185–189, 190, 192, 237 technicality 6–7, 46–47, 230, 233 temporal connexion 34, 42, 73, 110, 128, 146–148, 152, 195 textual metafunction 10–12, 227 thing entity 57, 61–63, 65, 75–77, 78, 80–81, 97, 131, 166, 168, 169–171, 173, 175–178, 183, 185–188, 190, 237 tiers 29, 171, 174, 230 trained gaze entity 75–76, 78, 84, 89, 170–171, 173, 175–176, 183, 185–189, 190, 204, 232, 237 transcategorisation 41, 44–45, 114–116 trinocular perspective 19, 49, 77, 231; multistratal 50, 227, 231, 234; ‘topdown’ 239–240; tristratal 227, 237 unmomented activity 28–29, 148, 152–153 Unsworth, L. 5, 25, 151, 155–156, 238 Veel, R. 6, 23, 25, 151 verbal process 58–60, 65, 107, 111, 122, 125, 127, 140–143, 197, 201, 215 voice 93, 103, 113n6, 235 White, P. R. R. 12, 182 Wignell, P. 7, 24, 28, 32, 46, 63, 71, 75, 230