Lexicogrammatical cartography : English systems 9784877180027, 4877180028

Citation preview

LEXICOGRAMMATICAL CARTOGRAPHY: English Systems

by Christian Matthiessen, Ph.D.

International Language Sciences Publishers Tokyo

'To tlie Memory of my Motlier Cataloging Information: Matthiessen, Christian Lexicogrammatical Cartography

wfio taugfit me (a6out & tfirougfi) fanguage (Textbook series in the Language Sciences) Bibliography, index 1. English language- Grammar. I. Title. II. Series.

PE1112/M

1995

428.2

ISBN 4-87718-002-8 ©1995- International Language Sciences Publishers All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, by print, microfilm, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher: International Language Sciences Publishers, Mitaka P.O. Box 26, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181, Japan. November 1995 Printed in Taiwan by MEADEA Enterprise Co. Ltd.

Martin Emond (1895-1965)

Preface This book is intended as a survey of the major regions of the 'meaning-making' space of English grammar: such a survey needs a map - hence the notion that grammatical theory can serve as a theory for drawing the map (or indeed, maps reflecting different projections). Although the notion of grammar is often taken for granted, we have to recognize that the question of what constitutes grammar is determined by the theory used to explore it. The first step in approaching the grammar of English or any language is thus to decide how it is to be construed. There are two major alternatives here. We can try to understand grammar as a resource for expressing and making meanings - as a subsystem in language seen as a meaning potential; or we can see it as a rule system - as a subsystem in language seen as a rule system. The latter conception underlies the various types of formal grammar (phrase structure grammar with expansions and reinterpretations) that have been developed in the last thirty years or so. The former is associated with functional theories of grammar and it is the perspective that will be explored here by means of a particular functional theory of grammar, systemic-functional theory developed by M.A.K. Halliday and other systemic linguists. The difference between the two interpretations of grammar is fundamental; they foreground different aspects of grammar as the base upon which the system of grammar is built -for some comparison, see Section 1.9 below. As a resource, grammar is organized as a large set of interrelated options - the alternative strategies available to the language user for expressing and making meanings. These options are realized (expressed) by means of structural specifications and grammatical and lexical items. Grammatical structure is thus not an end in itself but has evolved to serve to express complex combinations of options (and this can be seen very clearly in a developmental perspective when we explore how children learn how to mean). The grammatical options are meaningful, so a description of them shows what a speaker can mean, using the grammar. The grammar construed in this way is represented by means of the system network of systemic-functional theory. I will show how this works in some detail below.

... The interpretation of English is based on Halliday's work and this document is

-i-

,...,

.

intended to be read together with his (1985/ 1994) Introduction to Functional Grammar (IFG) as a companion volume. IFG focuses on grammatical structures - more specifically function structures, but the principle underlying the organization of the grammar is choice - the grammar as resource for wording meanings. It is also intended ·as a descriptive companion volume to Matthiessen & Halliday (forthcoming), where the focus is on systemic theory (including grammatical theory). Only the first part of the present work is concerned directly with theory; the remainder presents a realization of theory in the interpretation of English. Finally, it complements Martin (1992) stratally; whereas the present book focuses on lexicogrammar, Martin's book, English Text, focuses on the higher stratum of (discourse) semantics. This book is a survey of the lexicogrammatical resources of English. It is organized around the system itself, not around arguments about alternative interpretations of the system. There is certainly plenty of evidence for the interpretation adopted here (and in IFG); but weighing this evidence in the form of serious, explicit argumentation would take up the space of another book and would require another type of organization. A book illustrating systemic argumentation and comparing alternative interpretations is being prepared- but it is another kind of book. Naturally, the present work can be criticized for not engaging in long arguments about alternative interpretations - but a serious, considered response can only be another type of book, the book being prepared. The present book uses the system of English grammar as its organizing principle; a book exploring alternative interpretations in depth would have to follow quite a different basic principle of organization. For any phenomenon being interpreted, it would have to shunt constantly along the various dimensions of the grammatical system such as axis (paradigmatic vs. syntagmatic), metafunction (ideational: logical/ experiential vs. interpersonal vs. textual), and rank (clause vs. group/phrase vs. word vs. morpheme) to identify alternative possible interpretive locations within the overall system and to bring out evidence from various angle along these dimensions. Systemic argumentation can thus never be local to some particular area of the grammar; it has to be global relative to the overall system of grammar in its stratal environment - global in the sense that all the implications of an interpretation of particular phenomenon have to be followed up along the dimension through which the interpretation relates it to other phenomena. Matthiessen (in press) illustrates this principle with respect to TENSE in English. It 1

-ii-

is also worth emphasizing that arguments about the interpretation of any linguistic phenomenon in the present fr~mework can be derived from its location in the overall system.

I

I

Grammar is really shorthand for lexicogrammar, the unified resource of grammar and lexis (vocabulary]:_'.It becomes possible to see this unity when both grammar and lexis are interpreted as resources and the network of options that make up the resources is represented:'Grammatical options tend to be more general and lexical ones, more delicate. That is, lexis is the more delicate part of lexicogrammar (just as lexical semantics is the more delicate part of semantics and grammatical semantics is the more general, less delicate part1, Grammatical options are realized by means of grammatical structure and grammatical items (such as the, and, who), whereas lexical choices are realized by lexical items (such as admire, impress, symbol, brand ); but there is no clear boundary here: Grammatical structures have lexical implications and lexical items go together lexically (collocate) in particular grammatical structures. And when we look across languages, we find considerable fluidity between lexis and grammar in various domains such as time.rthe traditional view handed down to us according to which grammar and dictionary are 'separate books' thus has to be questione

_,

2: _clause!

verbalization--{a: ~=iage nom. gp. { verbal--~ + Sayer Sayer/ Medium Sayer: nom. gp.

1

- { macrophenomenal

as locution---
"""'~'"':-.J)roJE!CtiOn clause

fact + Pheno clause, project.

repo_f!ing projection clause!

!-> ~:

!+ R~ieverj no reaever existence existential - - - - - : : i . i I Process: beI (po tu e { · . · s r , Proc: +Existent eXIstence plus emergence, stand come ...

~x:.:~g;,.

· .~-~.~·-·---~

{~1:; . . t

identifying---~ +Token +Identifier +Value +Identified circumstantial

::~~:~ee____ be make . . ··... •.

I

Fig. 1-18: Register Profile

42

CHAPTER ONE

PRELIMINARIES

43

1.5.5

Other Kinds of Variation

Register variation is only one kind of variation within language - variation according to use. In addition, we also find dialectal (including sociolectal) variation and codal variation in language (cf. Gregory, 1967; Gregory & Caroll, 1978; Hasan, 1973; Halliday, 1978; Halliday & Hasan, 1985: 41-3). These different kinds of variation differ in terms of both contextual significance and their domain of variation within language: See Figure 1-19a, which is based on Halliday's characterization of these types of variation according to the existence and location of a higher-level constant in relation to which there is variation. (ii) higher-level constant

significance pertains precisely to diversification in context of situation - to selections within field, tenor and mode across situation types. Since situation types are distributed and organized institutionally within a culture, registerial variation also reflects this type of social order. (2) Domain of variation: Since the function of register variation is functional diversification within context, that linguistic stratum which is the interface to the context of situation is implicated in the first instance - that is, semantics. In other words,-registerial .variation is semantic variation in the first instance. In -~-~~,-~-------..--~-·-·----··-·-----------·'.\--.,· contrast, Halliday (1978) suggests, dialectal variation primarily affects the lower strata of lexicogrammar and phonology. Hasan's (e.g., 1990) research has shown that codal variation is also variation in the semantics (cf. Halliday, 1991a); but it differs from registerial variation in that there is a higher-level contextual constant. .'

(3) Location on cline of instantiation: Register variation is inherently variation in instantiation (see Section 1.5.3 above). Registers are intermediate on the dine of instantiation between the systemic potential and the textual instance. (i) no higher-level constant

language

(ii) Codal variation:

(1) Higher-stratal significance of variation: Codal variation has a higher-level constant outside language in context; it is variation in SEMANTIC STYLE in the same situation type. The variation correlates with social structure within context; more specifically, different codes are associated with different subcultures, differentiated according to social class, caste, age, gender and the like. (2) Domain of variation: The primary domain of codal variation is the semantic system; codes are SEMANTIC STYLES (see Hasan, e.g., 1990). For example, codes will foreground different options in the speech-functional system for excercizing parental control over a young child. Fig.1-19a:

Different Types of Variation According to Presence and Location of Constant

(3) Location on cline of instantiation: Like registerial variation, codal variation is intermediate between the systemic potential and the textual instance.

The three types of variation can be characterized briefly as follows. (iii) Dialectal variation: (i) Registerial variation:

(1) ·mgher-stratal significance of variation: In contrast to the two other types of variation, register variation has no higher-level constant. Its higher-strata!

44

CHAPTER ONE

(1) Higher-stratal significance of variation: Dialectal variation has a higher-level constant within language; more specifically, the constant is within semantics

PRELIMINARIES

45

and the variation is at the strata below semantics. Hence, dialects are different ways of saying the same thing. Dialectal variation realizes social hierarchy within a culture. (2) Domain of variation: Dialectal variation is variation in the linguistic system below semantics, i.e., variation within lexicogrammar and phonology & phonetics. (3) Location on cline of instantiation: Dialectal variation has not been related explicitly to the cline of instantiation. It might be conceived of as variation in the systemic potential, i.e., at the potential endpoint of the cline; there is no very clear line between dialectal variation and separation of different languages (cf. the notion of dialect chain). A language thus varies in these three ways; or, if we take these varieties as our point of departure, we can see a language as an assemblage of varieties. All three kinds of variation involve lexicogrammar. Dialectal variation involves lexicogrammar directly, whereas registerial and codal variation involve it indirectly, as the realization of semantic variation. In the survey of English lexicogrammar presented here, there is no attempt to account for dialectal variation; examples have been drawn from different dialectal varieties, but there is no complete coverage of all of English. The account of context presented above is an introductory sketch. In more detailed accounts of language in context, the number and nature of the contextual systems depend on purpose for which the model is set up (see e.g., Halliday, 1978; 1984; Fawcett, 1980; Halliday & Hasan, 1985; and Martin, 1992: Ch. 7). There is also variation according to different proposals in systemic linguistics. Minimally, it is important to recognize the level of context above the linguistic system. Work on the 'stratal' organization of context is one of the current research areas in systemic linguistics, as can be seen in the recent collections and reviews of systemic research (e.g., Berry, 1984; Benson & Greaves, 1985; Halliday & Fawcett, 1987; Martin, 1992: Ch. 7). 10

1.6 Semogenesis 1.6.1

Instantiation and Logogenesis

Instantiation was introduced above in Section 1.5.3 as the cline between the systemic potential and the textual instance - with registerial varieties as an intermediate region on 10 The organization of 'context' is not necessarily a stratal one in the same way as the overall organization of the linguistic system is. In particular, Martin (e.g., 1985, 1992) has built a model using Hjelr,:islev's ( 1913) notion of konnotationssprog, 'connotative language'. A konnotationssprog has language as its expression plane.

46

CHAPTER ONE

the cline. As a text unfolds over time, instantiation is manifested as the selection of features within a registerial variety of the system and as the concomitant actualization of realization statements associated with those features. Through instantiation, meanings are created in the unfolding text; and this process of creating meanings is known as LOGOGENESIS. We can record logogenesis lexicogrammatically by noting down the lexicogrammatical features that are instantiated as a text unfolds through time. Appendix 6.1 provides an example of such a lexicogrammatical score for a simple text within the register of recipes. Such scores will reveal logogenetic patterns in the unfolding text patterns such as shifts in MOOD from imperative to declarative and in PROCESS TYPE from material to relational, as in the recipe just referred to, where these shifts coincide with the shift from Procedure to Use of dish in the generic structure; or patterns in THEME such as unmarked to marked: circumstantial indicating an episodic shift in a narrative. We can interpret logogenetic phases in instantiation with reference to organization at higher strata - semantics and context. Lexicogrammat,ical scores can thus be a very effective way into the interpretation of text. The features selected in the course of instantiation fall somewhere within the relevant register, and so, somewhere within the overall lexicogrammatical system. They form a pattern of instantiation within that system; and we can think of this pattern of instantiation as an INST ANTIAL SYSTEM - a system created in the course of logo genesis (see Matthiessen, 1993). In the course of logogenesis, this instantial system grows in the sense that additional different features are selected - and delicate, lexical features may even be introduced for the first time from the listener's point of view; there is thus an accumulation of instantial meanings in the system. In this sense, there is an increase in complexity; as meanings are created logogenetically, the instantial system becomes more complex: The text creates its own environment in the form of the expanding instantial system. The accumulation of instantial meanings in the instantial system supports selections that depend on a systemic environment for their interpretation. For example, the development of lexical taxonomies tends to move from less delicate to more delicate classes so that the less delicate ones provide the taxonomic environment for the more delicate ones; the development of classification in the nominal group tends to move from qualification and other forms of specification, where the specific classificatory relations are explicit to classification, where only the general relation of classification is explicit; the development of temporal reference tends to move from lower-order selections to higher-order ones (cf. Halliday, 1988), and the development of ideational grammatical metaphor tends to move from the congruent mode to the metaphorical one (see Halliday & Martin, 1993; Halliday & Matthiessen, 1994). A typical example of the last type is: The early products of weathering generally are eroded, transported, and deposited before they are transformed into sedimentary rocks. These processes are described in

PRELIMINARIES

47

Chapters 7 through 11. The transformation of a sediment into a rock is called lithification. When a text has unfolded, i.e., when logogenesis has stopped, the semiotic result is the instantial system at that point - the final logogenetic state of the instantial system. This instantial system can be profiled against the registerial system; it is an instantiation of or against the overall lexicogrammatical system - just as we can profile a registerial system against the background of the overall system (as shown above in Section 1.5.4). Profiling is illustrated for two interactants in a dialogue in Section 5.1.1.2, Text (3) below. Such instantial systemic profiles show clearly which options are taken up in the text and which are not; and they show an instantial angle on the general system that may imply a 'recompilation' of that system. 11 The instantial patterns brought out by the profile can then be interpreted at a higher stratum - semantics and context. For the example in Section 5.1.1.2 we can thus ask how the interactants, Meg and Petey, enact their roles and relationship in their instantial profiles.

1.6.2 Logogenesis, Ontogenesis and Phylogenesis Logogenesis is one kind of meaning creation or SEMOGENESIS. The time scale is that of the text, the instance; and the mode of genesis is that of instantiation. Beyond the text, there are two other time scales and two other modes of genesis of meaning (see Halliday & Matthiessen, 1994). One is ONTOGENESIS - a person's learning of the system. Here, the time scale is a life-time and the mode of genesis is growth. The other is PHYLOGENESIS the history of the system in the species. Here, the time scale is multi-generational and the mode of genesis is evolution. Both ontogenesis and phylogenesis give us perspectives on the development of lexicogrammar as a meaning-making resource. In the ontogenetic perspective, we can actually study how lexicogrammar emerges as a stratum intermediate between semantics and phonology. It begins to emerge as the child moves from his/ her proto-language into the mother tongue: See, e.g., Halliday (1975) and Painter (1984). This perspective helps us understand not only the motivation for the development of lexicogrammar but also the origins of its metafunctional organization. In the phylogenetic perspective, we can only track a very short period of the history of language in the human species - far too short to tell us anything about the emergence of lexicogrammar. We can, however, explore how particular systems have changed and how whole groups of systems have changed in resonance with one another. Such evolutionary change is typically gradual; and we can interpret it as gradual change of systemic probabilities. 11 In the lexical part of lexicogrammar, the instantial system may extend beyond the general system for the reader or listener.

48

CHAPTER ONE

1.6.3 Grammaticization Semogenic processes are constantly changing lexicogrammar in exchange with its total environment. Lexicogrammar is thus a dynamic, open system; and it is metastable: It achieves a relative stability by constantly changing together with its environment. In the logogenetic time frame, changes in the lexical end of lexicogrammar are the most evident. Lexical systems are more open than grammatical ones; and, since they are more delicate than grammatical ones, they are also much more local in the overall system, so lexical changes have few systemic repercussions outside their own local domain. Lexical systems are thus constantly being elaborated in delicacy; and the systemic organization of lexis is constantly being negotiated. It is easier to observe such semogenic processes within lexis in factual writing than in other forms of discourse because factual writing tends to be explicit about the elaboration and renovation of technical and scientific lexical taxonomies. Grammatical changes do also occur in instantial systelJlS, as in the move toward the metaphorical mode discussed above. In the ontogenetic and phylogenetic time frames, changes are easy to observe in the more general grammatical part of lexicogrammar as well as in the more delicate lexical part. (What is less easy to observe is, of course, the gradual, nature of such changes, manifested as slight shifts in systemic probabilities.) Here, we can investigate how the grammatical part of the system changes - how new combinations of systemic options emerge, how new systems emerge, how systems gradually fade away from the grammar, and so on. One aspect of such change in the grammatical domain of lexicogrammar is GRAMMATICIZATION (or GRAMMATICALIZATION; see Hopper & Traugott, 1993, for a recent functional-typological treatment). This is a semogenic process whereby some grammatical subsystem is expanded over numerous instantiations by 'importing' material from some other domain in lexicogrammar. Some of the dominant patterns of grammaticization are set out in Figure 19b.1 2 Concomitant with the moves shown in the figure is the move from instance to systemic potential, typically with casual conversation as the cutting edge of the developing system. In this respect, grammaticization is gradual increase in patterns of instantiation.

12 The figure shows the ideational metafunction as providing material for the interpersonal and textual ones; but the environment in which features that will eventually be predominantly ideational is often interpersonal.

PRELIMINARIES

49

(RST). These two approaches are complementary. Generic Structure Potential is designed to show what repertoire of text structures is available within a particular situation type; a given generic potential is specific to the register associated with that situation type. In contrast, Rhetorical Structure Theory operates with highly generalized RHETORICAL RELATIONS, such as elaboration, sequence, and motivation; it is intended to be applicable across a variety of different registers. (RST is, in fact, similar to Martin's (1983; 1992) conjunctive relations in many respects.) The division oflabour between the two approaches in text studies is a matter for further research; but it may be noted that for certain registers it is possible to indicate how the two types of text structure can be integrated fairly precisely. For instance, instructional texts are organized globally in terms of some particular generic structure, but the elements of this generic structure are organized internally in terms of rhetorical relations.

metaphorical

higher ranks interpersonal / textual

grammar:_ items

(e . . tense-

(e . . lexical verb o

marker

motion

lexis: items

abstract: time, intensity etc. ideational concrete: material & space

Generic structures belong within context; they are realizations of options within field, tenor, and mode within some situation type. In contrast;' rhetorical structures are semantic text structures: See Figure 1-20. Rhetorical structures have been approached from the point of view of the textual metafunction by reference to conjunction and from the point of view of the logical metafunction by reference to the logico-semantic and tactic relations of clause complexing. Consequently, they are shown as intermediate in the diagram.

coNTEXT (e.g. word-> clitic->

tenor

bound morpheme) mode

''

/

/

//

~

/

~

generic structures

/

/

~

/ /

Fig. 1-19b: Dominant Directions in Grammaticization

/

field

Leaving this very short discussion of semogenesis, we can now return to the topic of generic structures associated with situation types and introduce another kind of text organization as well.

1.7 Approaches to Text Organization In the discussions of the relationship between grammar and text, two approaches to text organization will be made use of, namely, Hasan's (e.g., 1978) Generic Structure Potential (GSP) and Mann, Matthiessen & Thompson's (e.g., 1992) Rhetorical Structure Theory

50

CHAPTER ONE

Fig. 1-20: The Location of Generic Structures and Rhetorical Structures in Terms of Stratification and Functional Diversification

PRELIMINARIES

51

1.7.1 Generic Structure Potential While Hasan's notion of Generic Structure Potential echoes Mitchell's (1957) classic Firthian study of the organization of buying and selling in Cyrenaica, it has developed independently of this early work and has been applied to registers other than service encounters. (See also work by Martin, 1992, and others on the related notion of schematic structure.) But Hasan's study of the organization of service encounters will provide a good starting point. Consider the following text from Halliday & Hasan (1985: 59): an ave ten oranges an a kilo of bananas lease

two

This dialogue is a service encounter and it is structured as such into Sale Request, Sale Compliance, Sale, Purchase, and Purchase Closure. A register is associated with a particular SITUATION TYPE. A service encounter evolves in a certain type of transactional situation, which can be defined in terms of specific values of field, tenor, and mode as shown in Figure 1-21.

The values of field, tenor, and mode influence the structure of the text. For example, the presence of the Sale Request depends on the fact that the partic,ipants are engaging in a purchase of retail goods. At the same time, a written purchase order would, of course, be significantly different from this spoken face-to-face encounter. Furthermore, if the social distance was near-minimum rather than near-maximum, if the encounter was one between friends, we would expect an element of exchange symbolising the friendship. And so on. The general point is that the values of field, tenor, and mode and the text structure covary. This is one aspect of the general principle that a contextual 'setting' of field, tenor, and mode corresponds to a particular functional variety - genre, or register - of the general linguistic system: A text structure is simply one part of such a variety. A context of situation is related to other contexts of situation and may itself be further differentiated in delicacy. Hasan calls the particular values of the field, tenor, and mode of a context of situation a CONTEXTUAL CONFIGURATION when they correspond to recognizable variants of text structure. (The contextual configuration for the illustrative service encounter we started with was given in Figure 1-21 above.) Hasan comments (1985:105) that the contextual configuration:

is not the end of the story where the notion of context is concerned: to reiterate, it is simply a particular calibration of values frozen at a particular point in delicacy for a particular purpose. Moves in delicacy are essential for explaining other features of texts. So, a contextual configuration is a class of situation type (context of situation), specified in terms of field, tenor, and mode. A genre or register is the linguistic reflection of a contextual configuration; "genre is language doing the job appropriate to that class of social happenings" that a particular contextual configuration constitutes (1985: 108).

TENOR:

From the point of view of text structure, a genre corresponding to a particular contextual configuration is reflected in a range or repertoire of structures available as a resource for that genre. This is what Hasan calls the Generic Structure Potential (GSP) of a genre. The GSP she gives for service encounters is as follows. The elements underlined are instantiated in the service encounter quoted above.

onhierarchic

AGENTS OF TRANSACTTON: ~

hierarchic

..

LANGUAGE ROLE: - - - - - - - - - - - - constitutive

MODE:

CHANNEL:

graphic

¥ ~ l\'i,\Tu~

spoken

[( . ) (Sale Initiation) "] [ (Sale Enquiry * ·) {Sale Request" Sale Compliance}*"]~" Purchase "Purchase Closure(" Finis)

MEDIUM: written

···

NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS:

Fig. 1-21: The Situation Type of a Service Encounter

52

CHAPTER ONE

() -

optional element

PRELTh1INARIES

53

A.B [ A . B J'

unordered elements

-

AAB A< B > -

Two spans of text enter into a rhetorical relation such as elaboration, cause, circumstance, or motivation.

the domain of the mobility of unordered elements ordered elements, A preceding B inclusion, B included within A [not exemplified above]

* linear recursion (iteration), repeated selection of an element or a pair of elements of structure The structure consists of a number of elements (or functions). The first element, Greeting, is optional, which is indicated by round brackets. It may either precede or follow Sale Initiation; the sequential freedom is indicated by the raised dot "·" Ordering is indicated by the circumflex "A"; the possibility of inclusion is shown by angle brackets. The asterisk * indicates linear recursion (iteration); an element or a pair of elements can be selected more than once. (Hasan uses a curved arrow.)

In the survey of the systems of English presented here, we will see how the generic organization of a text is reflected in different tendencies in grammatical selections for each element of generic structure (for a general discussion, see Halliday, 1981; Hasan, 1984; Fries, 1985). A simple example of this is provided in Appendix 6.1, where the generic stages of a recipe are differentiated lexicogrammatically across the metafunctions.

Rhetorical relations show a taxis-like distinction - a distinction like the distinction in clause complexing between hypotaxis (combining clauses of unequal status) and parataxis (combining clause of equal status). (i) A rhetorical relation is (typically) asymmetric; one of the spans is NUCLEAR and the other has a SATELLITE status. The difference between the two spans, the nucleus and the satellite, is a matter of centrality or nuclearity; related notions have been used in tagmemic work and work influenced by tagmemics, e.g., hypotaxis (Grimes, 1975) and nucleus-margin (Pike & Pike, e.g., 1982). The relational mode of structure contrasts with the constituency mode of structure most commonly used in linguistics. Some of the differences will be noted below; for a related discussion in the area of grammar, see Halliday (1965/81). (ii) In addition to the nucleus-satellite type of relations mentioned above, RST also identifies multinuclear relations, such as sequence . .,

1.7.2.2 An Example We can now consider the RST analysis of the following text. [l] Eltville (Germany) [is] An important wine village of the Rheingau region. [2] The vineyards make wines that are emphatically of the Rheingau style, [3] with a considerable weight for a white wine. [4] Taubenberg, Sonnenberg and Langenstuck are among vineyards of note.

Rhetorical Structure Theory

1.7.2

Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) is an approach to the study of text organization that was developed at the Information Sciences Institute (for the most comprehensive statement of it as a theory for text analysis, see Mann & Thompson, 1987; Mann, Matthiessen & Thompson, 1992; for a discussion of the current constructive version of the theory, see Hovy, 1988). 13 It gives us the resources for describing a text in terms of its rhetorical structure.

1.7.2.1

The nucleus is [1], which serves to give the most central specification of what Eltville is. There are two elaborations. The first [2-3] elaborates on the nature of the wines made in the vineyards of the village. It has a nuclear part [2], which states the basic style, and an elaboration [3], which elaborates on one of the attributes of wines. The second elaboration [4] gives examples of vineyards in Eltville. The RST structure is diagrammed in Figure 122 below. (Other RST diagrams appear in Chapters 3 and 6.)

Rhetorical Organization of Text

A text is interpreted as being structured by relations, so-called rhetorical relations (or roughly logico-semantic / conjunctive relations in terms often used in systemic linguistics): 13 Work on RST was started by W. Mann, S. Thompson, and C. Matthiessen in the summer of 1982 and the theory has since been extended and discussed by Mann and Thompson in a series of publications; see e.g., Mann & Thompson (1987), Mann, Matthiessen & Thompson (1992) and references therein. Others have contributed to ~nd used the theory, see, e.g., Fox (1987) and Ford (1987). RST started out as a descriptive theory of text organization, but it is now being developed as a constructive theory of how to organize text; see Hovy (1988). While RST is a theory of the rhetorical organization of text, there are important links to the grammatical organization of clauses into clause complexes; see Matthiessen & Thompson (1989).

54

CHAPTER ONE

PRELIMINARIES

55

(ii) The effect identifies the function of a rhetorical relation in terms of the

intended end-result - the intended effect on the listener. For instance, the relation motivate relates a motivational satellite to a nucleus and its (intended) effect is to increase the listener's willingness to comply or accept. It is important to note that rhetorical relations are characterized in contextual terms, more specifically in terms of the listener's mental states, rather than in lexicogrammatical terms: A text is not seen as a concatenation of sentences.

elaboration

elaboration

[1]

[2-3]

[4]

elaboration

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

Each span of text entering into a rhetorical relation may in turn be organized into spans related rhetorically; that is, there may be, and typically is, internal nesting. This provision for internal nesting can give a text a structure of considerable depth. We can see this as the hierarchic organization of text, but it is important to keep in mind that this HIERARCHY created by internal nesting is very different from the hierarchy of rank-based constituency. RST can be used to illuminate the use of clause complexes (see Section 3.1.6.2), conjunctions (see Section 6.1.3), and Theme selection (see Section 6.2.4.1).

Fig. 1-22: Rhetorical Structure of Eltville Entry The entry on Eltville is organized as an interdependency relation type of structure; it is structured by a number of rhetorical relations, all of which are elaboration. Each relation relates _two spa~s of text, one of which is nuclear while the other one of which is a supportive ~ate!hte. A ~pan may be terminal, as [l] and [4] in the first layer of the diagram, or a sp_an wuh its own mternal organization, as [2] and [3]; the structure allows for nesting. Th~re is on~y one type relation in this particular text, elaboration. In general, different regi~ters will favo~r different types of rhetorical relation; reports on things (such as Eltville) draw heavily on elaboration whereas instructions in procedures (such as recipes) dra~ on tem~oral sequence. However, relations do not identify texts as belonging to a particular register.

?f

1.7.2.3

Ch~racterization of Rhetorical Relations

How _can _we make explicit what a rhetorical relation is? A rhetorical relation is charactenzed m terms of (i) the conditions on its use (what Mann & Thompson 1987 call constraints) and (ii) its intended effect. ' ' (i) The c?nd_itions may apply to either text span entering into the relation or to the

combmation of them. They identify the conditions under which the rhetorical relati_on is applicable. For example, a relation of motivation is only applicable if the listener is not judged by the speaker to be motivated to comply with the request or accept the offer given in the nuclear span of text.

56

This brief presentation of GSP and RST concludes the discussion of the theory used here in describing the systems of English grammar, semantics, context and approaches to text organization. A few words will now be side about English and other languages and, then, about systemic-functional theory and other theories (Section 1.9).

1.8 English and Other Languages We can interpret the system of English lexicogrammar in terms of its internal organization; we can also go beyond that level of linguistic organization and explore its role first of all in the overall linguistic system and secondly in the overall social semiotic system of culture, investigating how the grammar constructs and is constructed by these other systems. These moves outside the grammar all stay within the same overall system the system within which the role of the grammatical subsystem is calibrated. There is variation both in the overall system - the culture (subcultures, etc.) - and in the linguistic and grammatical subsystems (dialectal variation, registerial variation); but the different varieties are still part of the same general system. In particular, English is an assemblage of varieties as mentioned in Section 1.5. However, we can also move outside the system of English grammar to compare and contrast it with the grammatical systems of other languages - we can adopt the perspective across languages. Such a sketchy comparison will be made throughout the discussion of English, providing a typological outlook for the major systems of the clause in particular. One major concern in such cross-linguistic studies is to identify recurrent

CHAPTER ONE PRELIMINARIES

57

types of subsystems (such as case marking, to pick one grammatical favourite) and perhaps even recurrent types of overall systems; in other words, to set up LANGUAGE TYPOLOGIES. Language typologies can be interpreted as MET A-PARADIGM A TIC descriptions descriptions of what options are possible in the organization of a grammatical system, i.e., what the dimensions of variability are, and of whether these options tend to co-occur or not. Cross-linguistic studies and language typology shed light on the systems of English and other languages, since these systems will be more clearly profiled against the background of alternative ways of organizing a grammatical system. It is also helpful in the various contexts where languages come into contact in linguistic work - description of languages other than English, language teaching, translation, natural language processing involving more than one language (machine translation, multilanguage generation). As we compare and contrast languages to clarify in what respect they are different and in what respect they are similar, it is important to keep in mind the distinction between THEORETICAL and DESCRIPTIVE categories. The categories introduced so far have all been theoretical. They are part of our general language - or meta-language - for talking about languages. They and the theory in general are abstractions that are manifested or realized in particular descriptions of English, French, Chinese, Japanese, Tagalog, and so on. That is, the relationship between the general theory and descriptions of particular languages is as follows: The descriptions realize the theory. See Figure 1-23 for a diagrammatic representation.

Systemic-Fundional Theory,aovrcc fo, reflediatt & mm

• ltratification (lexicogramrnar

bdween....,.ntolc~t. • metafunctlon (ldeatiollal, textua~ lnterpenonsl);

•uioc.y,,temlcllNC:IUJe): IIJl"'"ffl= networ!tol optio111, liJnulwl and so in recent years scientists from diverse disciplines have turned their attention to them In recent years scientists from diverse disciplines have turned their attention to them,--> since introspection cannot answer these questions but these clause complexes do not constitute a rank higher than the clause. There is thus no separate rank for sentences. There are two main reasons. (i) On the one hand, a sentence is simply any combination of clauses, minimally one clause; it is a purely univariate structure. (ii) On the other hand, the clause complex has the same distribution as the simple clause, while units of different ranks have different distributions. There are, of course, complexes of units of the other ranks as well. In alternative accounts, such as those provided by Longacre (1970) and Gregory (1983), the sentence is a separate rank, above clause rank. In Longacre's approach, there are two additional ranks above the sentence, the paragraph and the discourse. Organization beyond the clause (complex) is taken to be semantic here (see, for example, the discussion of Rhetorical Structure Theory in Section 1.7.2 and illustrations of grammaticalization by clause complexing in Section 3.5.2). The first clause system shown in Figure 2-4 is CLAUSE CLASS. (1) CLAUSE CLASS: major/ minor Clauses are either MAJOR (clause) or MINOR (clausette) (Halliday, 1984: 15). Major clauses can have a Subject and a Finite (verb) and make a mood' selection, whereas minor ones cannot. Minor clauses include calls (Henry!), greetings (Hello!), or exclamations (Ouch!). Minor clauses of the greeting type often occur at the boundaries of conversations -Hello! -Hello! ... Bye! -Bye! - whereas the major clauses carry the conversation itself forward. Major clauses make several simultaneous selections - one set for each metafunction: See Chapter 5. (2) STATUS: free/ bound

are open to each type of clause) and function potential (i.e., the kind of structural environment the clauses can serve in). Free clauses select freely for MOOD as a realization of SPEECH FUNCTION; if they are declarative or imperative they can be tagged. They cannot function as rankshifted or dependent clauses. In contrast, bound clauses do not select for MOOD as a realization of SPEECH FUNCTION and they can only marginally be tagged (thus that they shoot horses, don't they is unlikely). (One type of bound clauses may display a projected, or reported, MOOD selection: She said that they shoot horses : she asked whether they shoot horses. ) Bound clauses function as rankshifted or dependent clauses. Since they serve as units lower down the rank scale, rankshifted bound clauses take on part of the function potential of groups and words; for example, they can serve as Qualifiers in nominal groups (as in the boy [with green hair] : the boy [who has green hair]). (Later we will meet other early, indelicate clause systems such as PROCESS TYPE in Chapter 4.) ·'

2.1.3

Rank: Groups/ Phrases

The second-highest ranking grammatical unit is the group or phrase (Chapter 7); these are units that serve in the clause although, like clauses, they may be downranked to expand the overall grammatical potential. The feature groups-phrases is the root of the system netwo.rk of groups and phrases. As already mentioned, the current description of grammar does not cover words and morphemes. The number of ranks may vary from one language to another. Furthermore, languages vary with respect to how grammatical systems are distributed across the ranks. Certain languages have essentially no word structure so do not maintain a distinction between the word and morpheme ranks. Certain languages make much more out of word rank than English does. The role of the phrase within group-phrase rank is quite variable across languages. Apart from the fact that languages may have postpositional phrases (as in Japanese) instead of prepositional phrases (as in English), the circumstantial features realized prepositionally in English may, in other languages, be realized within a group as a bound case morpheme (as in Finnish) or as a dependent verb in a verbal complex (as in languages such as Akan with 'serial verb' constructions). Let us examine the early systems in the group/phrase system networks shown in Figure 2-4, viz. (1) GROUP/ PHRASE CLASS, (2) GROUP CLASS, (3) NOMINAL GROUP CLASS.

Major cl.auses are either FREE or BOUND, e.g., They shoot horses, don't they vs. that they shoot horses. The distinction is reflected both in systemic potential (i.e., what options

78

CHAPTER 1WO

OVERVIEWOFTIIEGRAMMAR

79

(1) GROUP-PHRASE CLASS: groups/ prepositional phrase

There are two types of groups & phrases, viz. groups on the one hand and phrases on the other. The two types are organized in quite different ways (cf. IFG, p. 180), but have partially overlapping functional potentials. A group is a group of words; it's like an expanded word. The basic principle of structural organization embodied in groups is modification, which allows us to form a group of words: A group of words has a Head and any number of Modifiers, as in old (Modifier) unread (Modifier) messages (Head) and very (Modifier) long (Head). In contrast, a phrase is like a reduced clause. In English, the only type of phrase is the prepositional phrase, a configuration of preposition + nominal group after lunch (cf. the configuration verb + nominal group in the clause following lunch). The sequence is preposition /\ nominal group, which it is called a pre-positional phrase; many languages (e.g., Hindi and Japanese) have post-positional phrases instead. The distinction between groups and phrases is usually not reflected in the terminology of most non-systemic grammatical accounts and the term PHRASE is used for both types. Thus, formal grammars refer to both nominal groups and prepositional phrases as phrases: Noun phrases and prepositional phrases. While 'noun phrase' corresponds by and large to 'nominal group', the notion of verb phrase of formal grammar does not correspond to verbal group. A verbal group is a group of verbs alone serving as Process / Finite & Predicator in the clause but a verb phrase consists of the verb serving as Event in the verbal group (auxiliaries are typically not treated as part of the verb phrase), and very often nominal groups, adverbial groups and prepositional phrases; it corresponds to the Predicate of traditional grammar. In the system network in Figure 2-4, the first system, groups/ prepositional phrase, is based primarily on the criterion of internal organization; as already noted, all groups have a similar structure of Head (+ Modifiers) while the prepositional phrase is structured more like the nuclear transitivity of a clause as Minorprocess + Minirange. Alternatively, more weight can be given to the different types of function groups and phrases serving in the clause, in which case 'prepositional phrase' and 'adverbial group' would be grouped together since they have most functional environments in common - they serve as circumstances in transitivity structure and adjuncts in mood structure. (2) GROUP-CLASS: nominal group/ verbal group/ adverbial group

If we look at the clause from the point of view of its transitivity structure (Chapter 4; IFG, Chapter 5), each class of group realizes one type of transitivity function, as in the example in Figure 2-3 above -

80

CHAPTER 1WO

Participants (Actor, Goal, Senser, Attribute, etc.): nominal groups e.g., Carrier: the sand; Attribute: stone Process: verbal group e.g., Process: became Circumstances (Location, Extent, Manner, Cause, etc.): adverbial group e.g., Manner: slowly The grammar of the verbal group produces verb sequences such as will do, have done, have been going to do, will have been doing, and seem to do. In a finite clause, the verbal group starts with the finite verb and ends with the full lexical verb. The most extensive part of the group network is that of the nominal group; it covers examples such as Henry, the JFK, message 45, the messages that have been deleted; small, larger than the old one; twelve, forty-five, and one hundred and twenty. The Head of a nominal group is a noun(/ pronoun), adjective, numeral, or determiner (or, due to rankshift, a clause). The feature adverbial group leads to adverbial groups, where the Head of the group is an adverb, e.g.: gracefully, quickly, unfortunately, andfrankly. Adverbial groups serve approximately the same range of functions in the clause as prepositional phrases and the grammar might have been written in such a way that they constituted two alternatives in the same system specializing a more general type 'prepositional phrase & adverbial group•.18 (3) NOMINAL GROUP CLASS: nominal head/ non-nominal head There are two types of nominal group, differentiated according to the class of word serving as the Head (a.) of the group. NOMINAL HEAD means that the group has a common noun (including nominalization), proper noun or pronoun as Head (the external drive; the deletion of the old file; Martin; they); NON-NOMINAL HEAD means that the group has an adjective, numeral or determiner as Head (very sweet; mad at him; almost twenty-three; these; those on the table). Broadly speaking, nominal groups represent participants things expanded by qualities.

18 . There is a :competition" between prepositional phrase and adverbial group as candidates for realizina circumstances 1n th~ clause. For example, the circumstance Manner could in principle be realized either by means of an ad~erb1al group or a prepositional phrase: elephants run very gracefully (adverbial group) and elephants run with great !}!'ace (prepositional phrase). In the current grammar, the' "competition" is resolved in tern:is of subclasses. ?f circumstances. For instance, manner of the subtype means (instruments, etc.) is realized by a prepos1t1onal phrase (we went to the border by train) and manner specifying the quality of the performance of the process is realized by an adverbial group (elephants run very gracefully).

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

81

The typical grammatical environments in which the features from the systems shown so far are preselected are tabulated below. Ranking and rankshifted environments are separated. Since clauses are the highest-ranking units, ranking clauses are not preselected within the grammar: They are the point of origin in the traversal of the grammar as a whole. See Table 2-2.

2.1.4

Rank: Words

The grammar of words is often treated as a separate MODULE in the accounts of grammar - morphology. It is not in a systemic interpretation of grammar, however. Words are related to groups/ phrases in the same way as groups/ phrases are to clauses; and they also display similar paradigmatic and syntagmatic organization. 19 However, as already noted, the word grammar falls largely outside the scope of the present survey.

functional environment - - - - , . - - , - - - - - - - - , 1 ranking l. -rank class

(in clause)

r ankshifted ( in group/ phrase)

The primary word classes are essentially predictable from the primary group/phrase classes:

clauseUe ( free so not preselected

clauses

11-----.-----1

within grammar)

free

clause

bound

Dependent clause in clause complex

*

Head

in nom. gp.

Qualifier

in nom. gp. & adv. gp.

t t-----o---~-----11---------.------1t-------------1

.

.;!

phrases - prepositiona1

,l!!

adverbial groupsphrases

groups

Adjuncts (including interpersonal & textual ones)

circumstance

nt

nominal

Subject, Complements

verbal

Finite+ Predicator

process

mood

transitivity

Qualifier

in nom. gp. & adv. gp.

mini-participant in

modification - structure

* This can be represented as a clause rankshifted directly within another clause Table 2-2: Ranking and Rankshifted Environments of Grammatical Units (Note that free clauses and minor clauses can serve as participants in intensive relational clauses - "I'm too tired" were his exact words; his last word was "Ellen!" ; her observation was "They shoot horses, don't they?" -but this is the environment where the grammar semioticizes phenomena that are not previously defined by the grammar itself as conventional participants - for example: \. means realization; • is the symbol for Apple -just as verbal clauses with "go" can project paralinguistic or kinesic phenomena, as in he went [noise of some kind or gesture/ facial expression].)

Group Class

Word Class

nominal j!;I"OUP verbal j!;I"OUP adverbial j!;I"OUP

nominals verbals 20 , adverbials

The Head of a nominal group is a nominal word, the Head of a verbal group is a verbal word and the Head of an adverbial group is an adverbial word. Other functions within these types of group are also typically words of the same primary class: Exceptions are due to (i) rankshift (e.g., prepositional phrases serving as Qualifiers in nominal groups); and (ii) certain cases of words of one primary class serving in a group whose Head is of a different primary class (e.g., participial verbs serving as Epithets in the structure of the nominal group). Overall, the nominal group shows the greatest variety in this respect. Secondary word classes differ with respect to which functions they can serve in the different groups. For instance, adjectives are one secondary class of nominals and they typically serve as Epithets in the structure of the nominal group. Since analysis often proceeds "bottom-up" in terms of the rank scale, it may be helpful also to tabulate the major word classes together with their unmarked and marked functions in group/phrase structure: See Table 2-3.

19 It would be perfectly easy to extend the grammar so as to include morphology. Its design enables it to do so-called word & paradigm (or, item & paradigm) type morphology. While there is very little systemic work on English morphology, Hudson has illustrated the approach in detail for Beja (see Hudson, 1972). Furthermore, it should be noted that the principle of logical interdependency structuring we find in groups also applies to words - they are essentially endocentric constructions with a Head (base) and Modifiers (affixes). Within formal grammar, the notion of Head began to be extended from syntax to morphology in the early 1980s; within systemic-functional grammar, this extension was, of course, always assumed· since there is no modular boundary between syntax and morphology - both are part of the unified lexicogrammatical system. 20 Prepositions are classed as one type of verbal (see IFG, Ch. 6) but they serve in the structure of prepositional phrases rather than in the verbal group.

82

CHAPTER TWO

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

83

l'nmary word class nominal

verbal

Secondary word class noun pronoun adiecuve determmauve adiective numeral aetermmer vero (lexical) auxiliary preposiuon

adverbial

Unmarked function Thing, Classifier Thmg Epithet Postdeicuc Numerauve Deictic Event

Marked function

interpersonal enacting

Classiller

textual

co11struc1i11g as text

Epithet warucipial forms)

a, p, y etc., (except for Event) M1mprocess (extension of verb in phrasal verbs; structural Conjunctive) Head [of adverbial group] or Modifier; Submodifier of adj. etc.

Table 2-3: Word Classes in Unmarked and Marked Functions

We have now seen the root of the system networks of clauses and groups/ phrases and can turn to metafunction, the second dimension that defines metafunction-rank matrix.

experiential

I

ideational

non-recursive systems

non-recursive, configurational structures

construing

2.2 Metafunction: Functional Components in the Matrix While rank generalizes part-whole relations in the grammar showing the distribution of the grammatical resources in terms of constituency, metafunctions constitute the dispersal of grammatical resources across a spectrum of different types of meaning. These two dimensions can be used to map the functional regions of the lexicogrammatical system.

2.2.1 Metafunction and Functional Region The three metafunctions were introduced in Section 1.2; they are now described in Figure 2-5 below in greater detail.

Fig. 2-5: The Metafunctions The IDEATIONAL MET AFUNCTION is the resource for construing our experience of the world around us and inside - sequences of process configurations, configurations of processes, participants, and circumstances, objects, qualities, quantities, and so on. There are two ideational modes - the logical and the experiential. The INTERPERSONAL METAFUNCTION is the resource for enacting roles and relations in dialogic interaction. The TEXTUAL METAFUNCTION enables the speaker to present ideational and interpersonal meanings as information organized into text that unfolds in context. Some systemic linguists have taken positions on the metafunctions different from Halliday's, which is followed here. In particular, Fawcett (1980) sets up eight metafunctions rather than three. In terms of the present treatment, a number of the

84

CHAPTER TWO

OVER VIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

85

metafunctions he differentiates (e.g., negativity, attitude) correspond to functional regions rather than metafunctions and the higher number of metafunctions is essentially a result of a more delicate differentiation. As will be noted below, functional regions within the same metafunction (in the framework used here) interact in metafunctionally principled ways and this is an important reason for recognizing metafunctional unity.

interpersonal enac1ing

textual

If we map out the whole grammar, we see that each metafunction defines a METAFUNCTIONAL DOMAIN or COMPONENT in the grammar- the ideational domain, the interpersonal one, and the textual one. 21 They represent the organization of the overall grammar 'projected' onto it through the metafunctions - the different domains of the metafunctional spectrum. We can view these across the different ranks and primary classes and this will be done in Sections 2.3.3 through 2.3.6. However, the ranks do define environments within the grammar which are the point of origin for system networks so we can interpret the grammar in terms of the intersections of rank and metafunction. In a sense, this gives us an experientially biased view of the whole system since rank is most closely associated with the experiential mode of organization (construing experience into parts and their subparts) so I will review the other metafunctional modes in Sections 2.3.4 through 2.3.6 noting generalizations across ranks.

conslrucling as text

& 1HEME&

MOOD& MODALITY& POLARITY & VOCATION

CULMINATION & VOICE& CONJUNCTION Mood + Residue + Moodtag + Vocative

experiential

&

Theme II Rheme

1RANSITNITY construing

Process+

When we intersect rank and metafunction, each functional component can in turn be divided into a number of smaller functional regions (or subdomains). The functional regions for the clause in the current grammar are shown in Figure 2-6. logical

Fig. 2-6: The Clause Regions in the Grammar (at clause rank) Each region makes a contribution towards the metafunctional domain to' which it is assigned, i.e., a contribution towards ideation, interpersonal interaction, or textualization. For example, the functional regions of MOOD, POLARITY, and MOODTAG all work together to determine the interaction between speaker and Iistener. 22 In the following example, MOOD (selection: yes/no in the system INTERROGATIVE TYPE) and POLARITY (selection: negative) combine to express the speech function of a question expecting an affirmative answer: 21 It. . . 1s convenient to speak o! co~P?N.ENTS in the gramn_iar; and we can see these as the clusterings in the system ~etwork. At_ the same lime, 1t 1s important not to re1fy the metafunctions and to remember that they are perspectives serving as principles of organization. Certain systems, such as VOICE, may be explainable in terms of more than one of these perspectives.

86

CHAPTER TWO

22 It is of course not always immediately clear whether an area in the grammar constitutes a functional component by itself or whether it is a functional region that contributes to a functional component. In general, functional regions are easier to recognize than are the more general functional components. This is just an example of the general principle that in any classification more specific subclasses are easier to find than are possible superclasses.

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

87

The grammatical resources are reviewed briefly below according to metafunction. Appendix 4 represents Table 2-4 with reference to relevant pages and it also presents more detail~ charts of the systems of the various regions of Table 2-4 mapped out in this book.

A: I.m:1Jl. Peel who's always having rows with Doyen: 'Is it Peel? I think it is Peel.' B: / don't know what he is doing now, but he always was very colourful.

2.2.3 Similarly, in the following example, MOOD (selection: declarative in INDICATIVE TYPE), POLARITY (positive), and TAG (selection: tagged) combine to express an assertion requesting a confirmation: A: He brings in every argument from every field of activity under the sun. heard him on this. haven't you?

ram

B: Yes, yes, yes, yes.

Experiential Resources

The experiential metafunction is concerned with the construal of experience. It organizes the phenomena of experience into wholes and their component parts - the grammatical theory of composition is embodied in the rank scale and, in this respect, the rank-scale is itself experientially oriented: The most inclusive phenomena recognized by the grammar are configurations of processes, participants, and circumstances (represented as clauses); these have their own internal organization (represented as groups/ phrases); for example, participants consists of configurations of things and qualities of various kinds; and soon.

2.2.2

The Metafunction-Rank Map

The particular set of functional regions within a metafunctional domain depends on rank and class. The metafunction-rank map (matrix) in Table 2-4, a more detailed and extended version of Table 2-1 above, shows the regions of the current grammar and it can be used as a reference resource for the more detailed presentation of the various functional regions. rank

ideational lo~ical

[class)

interpersonal

textual

MOOD MODALITY

TifEME CULMINATION VOICE CONJUNCTION

(cohesive)

exoeriential

clause

POLARITY

=:ll/

word

~=itional

COMPLEXING:

--------------------:;---:---:----:::------.. -~:-_.....__ ~~~ITIVITY

MODAL ASSESSMENT MINOR MOOD

MINOR TIIEME

FINITENESS VOICE [verbal group] TAXIS (parataxis/ t-:TEN=~sE~..;.:.:,;,;="""t--:::EV~EN=--::::T:,;,1Y~P;,;,E;.,:...--i-=e-==----,-----l~------I DEICTICITY 1 - - - - - - l l hypotaxis) & ASPECT (non-fmite) MOODOF DETERMINA[nominal LOGICALMODIFICATION TIIING 1YPE DETERMINATION group] SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION TION REI.A TION EPITHESIS PERSON (expan&ion/ QUALIFICATION ATfITUDE 1 - - - - - - I I projection) SELECTION [adverbial MODIFICATION CIRCUMSTANCE COMMENT CONJUNCTION mnuol 1YPE 1YPE 1YPE DERIVATION (DENOTATION) (CONNOTA·

:::::::::-:-:::::::::,:::=:=:-:::::: ::::::-:-:=:-:=:-:-:---:=--:,::-----=:-::::::-:- ::::::-:-:-·---·:·.:::-:-:-:-::-:,:-::-::,.,.,:,.-:-:-:-:-:-: :::·:---:------,·--_-:-_-:-:-_-_-_---:-:-:·_:_-:-:::::-:·_·:-:-: :-:·:-:·:·_-:-.-:-_-_-_-_·.-••_-_·_·_·__:······:··-_·______ _-_-_:_::

informa-

-

INFO. TAXIS

ACCENTUATION

tion unit

:-~:~~->.:-:-:-·-:-,-:-:-;-:_;_,:_:__: _:_ KEY

ELLIPSIS/ SUBSTITUTION

ELLIPSIS/ SUBSTITUTION REFERENCE ELLIPSIS/ SUBSTITUTION

In the clause, the experiential resource is that of TRANSITIVITY - the system for construing the world of goings-on as configurations of processes, participants and circumstances. There is a miniature version of this in the prepositional phrase - MINOR TRANSITIVITY - for the purpose of construing circumstances as a circumstantial relation and a participant. The three group types are concerned with processes (verbal), participants (nominal) and circumstances (adverbial). Their major experiential systems can be called EVENT TYPE (verbal group), THING TYPE (nominal group), and CIRCUMSTANCE TYPE (adverbial group), respectively. The nominal group resources for construing experience are the most extensive, making the nominal group the principal onomastic device of the language; THING TYPE is expanded through the systems of QUALIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION, EPITHESIS and QUANTIFICATION. Experiential structures for the clause, prepositional phrase, nominal group and verbal group are illustrated in Figure 2-7. The interpretation of these structures will be discussed in Chapters 4 and 7.

(REFERENCE)

·:·:-.-_---:-:-:-:-:-z:_:-:-:·--:-:-:-:-,:,_:J_.,_____,. :':--,·-----:-:-:-:-:-------:-:-:-:-----------:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-

INFORMATION

- -----------------------------

FOCUS comolexes

simnlexes

Table 2-4: Functional Regions in the Grammar Mapped out According to Metafunction and Rank

88

CHAPTER TWO

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

89

[clause] Our two old work mates from the com an Actor nominal

have not been working

·with her

since spring

[prepositional phrase] with

I

Minorprocess

preposition

ranks below the clause, it is in fact further differentiated according to primary class. These two perspectives are diagrammed in Figure 2-8. We might even include the type of comp~exing - projection vs. expansion - in the general logical systems alongside TAXIS. This would represent the basic principle that we find projection and expansion throughout the grammar; but their full potential is only manifested at clause rank and a number of lower ranking units can be related only through expansion. Projection and expansion also show up in environments other than complexing, e.g. relational transitivity and circumstantial transitivity: See IFG pp. 329-9 for a summary of expansion across the whole grammar.

[nominal group) our

Deictic determiner

two Numerative numeral

experiential perspective old E ithet ad"ective

work Classifier ram

mate Thin ram

- dispersed across the rank scale

[verbal group] have Finite aux. verb

not

workin Event lexical verb

logical perspective

- one basic resorce

Fig. 2-7: Experiential Structures at Clause and GrouplPhrase Ranks group/ phrase

The experiential metafunction is foregrounded in the PROJECTION chosen for the map of the lexicogrammatical resources in Table 2-4 in that this projection distributes the resources according to rank, which reflects experiential constituency (the composition of the phenomena of experience) in the first instance. As a result, there are certain categories that recur across ranks and primary classes within the other metafunctions, such as the resources for complexing within the logical mode of the ideational metafunction. Relative to the system as a whole, such categories can be interpreted as FRACTAL- categories that are manifested in different ranking environments. It is also possible to experiment with PROJECTIONS according to the other metafunctions, which is useful to keep in mind as we consider logical, interpersonal and textual resources. 2.2.4

... -{,unpl•

-

-{'""'"-

·--{-

-{'"""-

puuud,

UIUI

-{

""""-

-

hypol1>dt

word

6

Logical Resources

The logical metafunction provides generalized resources for creating complexes at any rank - for expanding at any point in the development of text. We can view this as one basic resource for complexing consisting of three systems: The option of complexing unit (instead of a simple unit) and, if complexing, whether to go on or stop (SYSTEMIC RECURSION) and whether to complex paratactically or hypotactically (TAXIS). But these systems have to be manifested in different rank environments: Looked at from the experiential point of view, there is a logical set of systems for each rank - and, for the

90

·--{-

CHAPTER lWO

Fig. 2-8: Complexing Seen Logically and Experientially, Dispersed Across the Ranks

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAMMAR

91

The logical column in Table 2-4 is meant to indicate the generalization across ranks of the logical systems for complexing. For example, we find the relation of additive extension forming complexes at all ranks (cf. Section 3.1.7); For instance:

I rank clause

(l

as I entered

it was dark

child

pianists

very

fa.st

un-

-plug

pre-

-war

clause complex: group/ phrase

I've read many pre-structuralists and studied quite a few post-structuralists. group complex: many pre-structuralists and quite a few post-structuralists

word

word complex: many pre-structuralists and post-structuralists

morpheme complex: pre-and-post-structuralists

Simple groups and words are organized partly in the same way as complexes; they can partly be seen as word and morpheme complexes, respectively. Examples are given in

Table 2-5: Examples of Hypotactic Complexes Across Ranks

(In addition, as already noted, the logico-semantic types of elaboration, extension, enhancement, and projection occur in various contexts other than those of complexes and groups in the lexicogrammatical system: See the table in IFG, pp. 328-9, Appendix 3 of IFG and Chapter 3.1.3 below.) 2.2.5

Interpersonal Resources

Table 2-5. The interpersonal metafunction is conc:~!_!!-~d with the interaction between speaker and listener - their collaboration in making meaning: as cfe~rly in dialogue. In- the clause, the central resource is that of MOOD - the system for symbolic exchanges of commodities between speaker and listener. It grammaticalizes the semantic system of giving/ demanding a commodity, information / goods & services. It is elaborated by MOOD TAG, POLARITY & MODALITY within the clause. MOOD is also reflected within the nominal and adverbial groups as MOOD OF DEIXIS in the contrast determinative ('I tell you')/ interrogative ('you tell me!'), as exemplified in the pairs which II that I this; what I it; when II then I now; where II there I here. Certain categories of MODALITY are also embodied in the post-deictic system in the nominal group probability (probable, possible), usuality (usual, unusual, regular) - as assessments of the membership of a discourse referent in the experiential class established in the nominal group:

~e~-;ery

I rank clause

group/ phrase

word

92

CHAPTER 1WO

a. it was dark

a.s I entered

don't

shoot

pianists

from the conservatory

faster

than most

enter

-ed

great

-ness

the

possible I usual

two

candidates

Deictic determiner

Postdeictic adjective

Numerative cardinal

Thing noun

OVER VIEW OF TI-IE GRAMMAR

93

This example means 'the two who (I think) are possibly/ usually candidates'. 23 The interpersonal metafunction also includes resources for expressing attitude prosodically; these are distributed throughout the grammatical system, as follows:

2.2.6

Textual Resources

The textual metafunction is concerned with presenting ideational and interpersonal meanings as text in context; it gives these meanings the status of information. From the point of view of text, lexicogrammatical resources fall into two types:

clause, minor: exclamations:

Great! Wonderful! Far out! Wow! clause, major:

attitudinal adverbial groups serving as Adjuncts (However, [Adjunct:] unfortunately! annoyingly, we haven't had any news from him yet); 'key' [realized by tone in tone group]; attitudinal nominal groups serving as Vocative. (It's a form of analysis, [Vocative:] dear).

(I) Those not contributing to the formation of grammatical structure but indicating textual ties in the discourse. These resources are called cohesion, since they serve to produce cohesive discourse. Cohesive devices all presuppose information elsewhere, outside of themselves - typically in the preceding discourse; and

(2) Those contributing to the formation of the grammatical structuring of clauses, groups, and so on (such as Theme" Rheme; Finite" ... " Event; and Deictic" ... A Thing; Given + New). ' (i) Cohesive resources. The cohesive resources of English are tabulated in Table 2-6a

group, nominal: attitudinal adjectives serving as Epithets (unfortunate, sweet, dear, as in the [Epithet:] poor academic staff); word: attitudinal suffixes serving as Postmodifiers in words (Willie; sweetie);

below with references to Halliday & Hasan's (1976) Cohesion in English. Type

Poi nt(s) of origin in the grammar clause

lexis: connotation (fool, dear, love, crook, creep; whinge, whine, pester, loath, detest, skulk; laudable, reprehensible, disgusting) Because they are distributed prosodically in the system, such interpersonal resources also provide the potential for being strung out prosodically in syntagmatic organization: That man didn't even try to help; that bastard didn't even try to help; Shit, that stupid bastard didn't even bloody try to help; Shit, that stupid bastard didn't even bloody try to fucking help. See Poynton (1984, 1990a,b, in press) for extensive work in this often neglected area of the lexicogrammar; and see also Martin (I 990) for work on Tagalog and Martin (1992) for an interpersonal analysis of meaning by degree in a persuasive text. Interpersonal assessments span both the cognitive and the emotive in the ideational construal of domains of experience.

word

-I [5]

organic (whole msgs): conj unction com pone nti al (components of msgs)

group

reference s ubsti t uti on, ellipsis lexical cohesion

Structural alternative

clause complex (structural conj unction) -I [2]

-I

-I

(3,4]

(3,4] what will happen Don't forget--> I'll visit tomorrow.

130

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSF.S AND CLAUSE COMPLEXF.S

131

TYPE OF INTERDEPENDENCY: expansion

TAXIS: hypotaxis

& parataxis

& projection(= reporting)

Perhaps one day he would work in a lwspital--> and [he would] make sick children well again.

Now I'm going to tell you--> what will happen Don't forget--> I'll visit tomorrow.

One day he was feeling sick--> so his mother took him to the lwspital.

& expansion

& hypotaxis

Some children wlw stay in lwspital for a long time, like Fred with the broken leg, have a special teacher--> so that they won't miss any sclwol.

Some children wlw stay in lwspital for a long time, like Fred with the broken leg, have a special teacher--> so that they won't miss any sclwol.

Benjamin held his mummy's hand tightly--> as he was wheeled along.

Benjamin held his mummy's hand tightly--> as he was wheeled along. The distinction in taxis is reflected in various ways; these are summarized in Table 3-2. TAXIS: parataxis/ hypotaxis TAXIS is concerned with the degree of interdependency. Parataxis means that the relationship is one of equality (notation: 1 2 3 4 etc.) whereas hypotaxis means that one clause is dominant and the other is dependent (notation: ex~ yo etc.). Examples: TAXIS: para taxis

(1) Structure (2) Functional Potential of Complex

(3) ST ATUS of clauses in complex

(4) TONE SEQUENCE (default) (Sa) Sequence of clauses - THEME

& expansion Perhaps one day he would work in a lwspital--> and [he would] make sick children well again. One day he was feeling sick--> so his mother took him to the lwspital.

projection: according to Iprojecting clause expansion: all clauses have the same status (free/ bound) projection: projecting clause is free or bound; projected clause is major/ minor (i.e. unconstrained)

& projection(= quoting) "We all miss you,"--> they said. "Can I go now,"--> asked Benjamin. "Goodbye Benji,"--> said Nurse Jones.

parataxis 12 3 4 ... expansion: according to complex as a whole

(Sb)THEME PREDICATION

l

I\

hypotaxis ex(3y~ ..•

according to Head ( Cl)

Head (ex) is free/ bound; Dependents(~ y O... ) are bound

(3Aex\ tone 4 " tone 1

l.),

tone 3 " tone 1 expansion: 1 "2 projection: 1 ""2; "l "2; 1 2 -> 3 -> 4 (etc.).

only the ex. clause instantiates the preselection of the Qualifier within the nominal group to be a relative clause (an ELABORATION CLAUSE). The difference in the instantiation of preselections between parataxis and hypotaxis clearly shows the difference between equal clauses in parataxis, where all clauses equally instantiate the preselections, and unequal clauses in hypotaxis, where only the dominant clause instantiates the preselections. Sometimes it is useful to generalize these two variants of interdependency structure as I -> II (etc.); this notation simply means 1; a-> 2; ~3.1.2

Systemic Recursion in Clause Complexing

The systems of TYPE OF INTERDEPENDENCY and TAXIS specify each interdependency relation that combines two clauses (or stibcomplexes of clauses) in a clause complex; but they do not embody the option of continuing to develop the clause complex. COMPLEX RECURSION: go on/ stop (II)

If the paratactic complex is itself hypotactically dependent or if it is rankshifted, all clauses in an expanding complex instantiate the same preselections. For example, in

the man [ 1 who would be king 2 and who was played by Connery D

When the option of complexing (i.e., expanding or projecting) has been chosen once, it is possible to choose to go on and further expand the complex already started: See Figure 3-9.

both paratactically related clauses instantiate the preselection of the Qualifier within the nominal group to be a relative clause.

simple

,J

prnjechon

TAXIS: hypotaxis 1expans1on

major clause

When the feature hypotaxis is selected, the clauses are related hypotactically and the interdependency structure is a dependency structure: cx. -> ~ -> y-> o(etc.).

parataxis complex {

If the hypotactic complex is itself hypotactically dependent or if it is rankshifted, only the dominant (cx.) clause instantiates the preselections and the dependent clauses are preselected according to their dependent status within the complex. For example, in

hypotaxis

(the man) [cx. who would be king D (He is someone) [ cx. who I would feel good about leaving in charge of NEXT D

138

CHAPTER THREE

Fig. 3-9: Open-ended Choice in Clause Complex

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

139

This loop back can be repeated again and again; clause complexes are open-ended rather than pre-defined structures. For instance: first time: He rose II and spoke about the war. second time (selecting 'go on'): He rose II and spoke about war II and

reminded us of its heroes.

enumerating a list, italicizing a name, etc. It is worth noting hypotactic combinations where the a clause is a paratactic s~bcomplex since these provide one reason why the hypotactically related clause should not be analyzed as a rankshifted clause serving as an Adjunct in the dominant clause (cf. Matthiessen & Thompson, 1988). For example:

third time (selecting 'go on' again): He rose II and spoke about the war II and reminded us of its heroes II and proposed a toast to them.

He/ell ill in May and his wife died soon afterwards, which was a real tragedy for the whole family.

fourth time (selecting 'go on' again): He rose II and spoke about the war II and reminded us of its heroes II and proposed a toast to them II and sat down

//you want a more substantial stuffing, add a little mashed potato or add less milk.

with a deep sigh. The paratactic marker and is not normally repeated - although it can be - but is only expressed in connection with the last link of the clausal chain being developed. This kind of realization is possible precisely because the structure is of a relational rather than constituency type. The same is true of structural ellipsis, such as the ellipsis of Subject in the clauses following the first one.

3.1.3

Types of PROJECTION and EXPANSI ON

In the system network above, the opposition between PROJECTION and EXPANSION ~as recognized. We can take the account of the type of interdependency (i.e., of logicosemantic relation) one step further in delicacy by specifying PROJECTION TYPE and EXPANSION TYPE: See Figure 3-10.

Because of this possibility of looping back, clause complexes can reach considerable intricacy, particularly in spontaneous casual conversation, as the spoken texts, texts 1 through 4, further below illustrate. In the constructed example above, each paratactic expansion involves only a simple clause. However, the systemic recursion may also lead to internal nesting: Not only simple clauses but also subcomplexes of clauses may be logically related. (See for example Text (2) below, where Our teacher says projects a whole subcomplex.) For example; 1 2

(l

2p (l(l

axp 1 axpx2

+p (l +px~ . +pxy 1

140

One day he was feeling sick so his mother took him to see Dr. Frederick Smith. A text editing program can follow comtruinds to create a text file and edit it, while a text formatting program can follow commands to format text by centering a heading,

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

141

hypota>ris .... --.. ----................................................................•...

i

parataxis··············································:

l

{ w

idea············ ;)

\U

'That's odd', she thought. 'Let's eat', they decided.

She thou~ht it was odd. They decided to eat.

projection

"That's odd", she said. " "Let's eat", they suggested to locution········ :;, him

She said it was odd. T}ley suggested to him to eat/ that they should eat.

parataxis

hypotaxis

That's odd; I don't understand. elaborating····;) i.e., that is, e.g., viz., especially, at least,

expansion

projecting saymg or sensing (mental/ verbal)

That's odd, which is good.

I

That's odd, but I understand

Besides being odd, it's unusual.

Iand, nor, but, or only I

besides, without, while, whereas, except that,

That's odd, so I don't like it.

Since it's odd, I don't like it.

extending····· ~

enhancing····· ;)

Iso, then, thus, though I

I

since, because, as, when, while, before, after, if, unless, although,

Fig. 3-11: Projection onto the CONTENT Side of Language

We can see this clearly with the example / just thought I'd tell you I appreciate it. There is a projection of an idea by sensing:/ just thought--> I'd tell you I appreciate it; but we also have a projection of a locution by saying, I'd tell you·-> I appreciate it. Now, in adult language, content is stratified into semantics and lexicogrammar and, as the example just given shows, projection may take place at either level. That is, the projected content can be at either of the two content levels of language - semantics or lexicogrammar (see IFG Section 7.5). At the level of semantics, content is projected as meaning (idea) and at the level of lexicogrammar it is projected as wording (locution). Thus I appreciate it may represent either an idea or a locution depending on whether it is projected by I'd think or I'd tell you.

Fig. 3-10: Subtypes of Projection and Expansion The two levels of projection and their typical type of "directness" (meaning: indirect; wording: direct- see below) are shown in Figure 3-12. '----·-----~--- --·

PROJECTION TYPE: idea/ locution PROJECTION TYPE is concerned with the symbolic order of the projection of something as linguistic content: It can be at the level of II1e~11_~~~ - IDEA- or at the level of wording (lexicogrammar) - LOCUTION. This can be represented and explained in terms of'the~agram of th;;tratal organization used throughout this book. First of all, a process of saying or sensing projects onto the content side of language rather than the ~xpression side: See Figure 3-11. Projection thus a fu~damental property of language stratification into content and expression.

the

142

CHAPTER THREE

;eflecis

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

143

& hypotaxis (i) as meaning (idea)

(ii) as wording (locution)

a: At one time physicists thought --> 'P: that atoms were constructed in the following way. a: Most people believe -->'P: that physicists are explaining the world. a: Deng Xiao-ping, still China's paramount authority at the age of 87, intends--> 'P: that it stay that way. a: Calypso knew--> 'P: that her aunt knew - - > 'y. she knew - - > '6: how unwelcome Richard would be in Enderby Street.

he thought Although ideas are typically projected hypotactically (reported), they may also be projected paratactically (quoted): sensing (mental)

& parataxis I tlunk to myself "I don't care whether they're sort of particularly devoted or not" (CEC:319)

saying (verbal)

Fig. 3-12: Two Levels of Projection - Ideas and Locutions

PROJECTION TYPE: locution (wording) Locutions are projected by verbal clauses - and also, more restrictedly, by certain behavioural clauses. Verbal projection may be either paratactic (quoting) or hypotactic (reporting), although paratactic locution is more likely; behavioural projection can only be paratactic (quoting). Quoted locutions cover the full range of clauses, both major clauses and minor ones (calls, greetings, exclamations, and so on). Reported locutions are more restricted; their range corresponds only to that of major clauses. Examples:

& parataxis PROJECTION TYPE: idea (meaning) Ideas are projected by mental clauses - in particular COONITIVE and DESIDERATIVE ones (rather than PERCEPTIVE and EMOTIVE ones) - see Section 4.10. The projected idea may be either a proposition (information) or a proposal (goods-&-services) - cognitive clauses project propositions (believing, knowing, thinking, imagining that; doubting, wondering, not knowing whether, and so on) and desiderative ones proposals (liking, wanting, intending sb to, and so fon). Ideas are typically projected "indirectly" as reports through hypotaxis rather than "directly" as quotes through parataxis. Examples:

"1 "What is REAL?" "2 "How strange!" "1 "No senor", "2 "/ could do better alone or with another woman?" "1 "The only thing we have in common," "is a bald head."

& hypotaxis They won't admit any more English, sir; a: they say--> "p: their lunatic asylums are too full already.

144

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

145

a: /11 tell them --> "p: they must be quiet. I to be quiet.

a: A study of more than one syllable shows --> "p: that in connected speech, or what may be called 'combinative style', the syllable structure proper to the isolative style is modified in some degree. As can be expected and as already noted, since locutions are closer to the final realization of content, they are far more likely to be represented as direct speech than ideas are; conversely, since ideas are further away from the final realization of content, they are far more likely to be represented as indirect thought than locutions are - see Nesbitt & Plum (1988, e.g., Table 1.3).

EXPANSION TYPE: elaboration/ extension/ enhancement EXPANSION TYPE: elaboration

EXPANSION TYPE: extension & hypotaxis

+p Without saying a word,

a he climbs over rows of seats,flirting, taunting, teasing and finally spilling a heap of popcorn on the heads of the hapless.

& parataxis 1 He was always smiling +2 and had a loud voice, +3 but he was very nice. Its fully galvanised body means [1 that its body not only lasts longer +2 but enables efficient recycling of the body meta/Il.

EXPANSI ON TYPE: enhancement & hypotaxis

& hypotaxis

When he was tucked into bed that night, a Benji looked around his own room at all his own toys and books. X~

a One of the most beautiful places in the inner city, and the pride of Sydney, is the Royal Botanic Gardens, Opera House. a Oppenheimer, > reveals how close reformers came to approving a plan. to ease Fidel into a Prime Minister's job and ease out socialism at the October 1991 Party Congress.

a Will you tell me x~ when you come to something good? x~ If he's not better by lunchtime, al'// go and get hold of a doctor. a Why didn't they come last night,

X~

if they were coming?

& parataxis a You depress me, x~ looking like that.

1 There was virtually no good news for Labor: =2 Approval of the way Premier Joan Kirner was handling her job dropped by 1 point, to only 31%, only 4 points above her low of27% in January last year.

a This pass offers absolute independence and flexibility, x~ because no preset routing is required.

1 Oppenheimer, a Pulitzer-prize-winning correspondent for the Miami

x~ As Bush and everyone else keep saying, a Iraq and Yugoslavia are challenges to the post-cold war order.

Herald, found a way around this difficulty: =2 he carried letters from Cubans in Miami to relatives on the island, thus gaining their trust.

& parataxis

1 First of all, Coherent was independently developed by Mark Williams Company, x2 so you don't pay for UNIX licensing fees.

146

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

147

1 It'll only be for a little while x2 and then you'll be home again. Halliday's analysis presented in the form of the system network in Figure 3-10 brings together and reinterprets a number of traditional categories; the correspondences are shown in Table 3-3.

projection

pere.te.ctic:

hypote.ctic:

direct speech (quott 119)

I ndl rect speech

1pposttton elaboration exparuion

( reporti 119)

elaboration

extension

enhancement

and

.../ [additive: positive]

but

.../ [adversative] (and yet, on the other hand)

addition + causal, temporal ordering: and (so, then, yet) [concessive] (although, nevertheless)

or

non-rostrlcttve/defl nt 119 r1l1ttv1 cl1usn

coordi 111tton

(1dverbl1l clauses)

(coordination)

adv1rbl1l CllUSH

[varying] (instead of; except for) [expository] (i.e.) (that .../ [alternative] is, an internal (alternatively) alternative)

.../ [temporal: simult: extent] (meanwhile);

as

extension

enhancement

Table 3-3: The Clause Complex and Traditional Categories

.,

since

.../ [causal: reason] (because) .../ [causal: conditional: positive] (if)

Certain conjunctions are used to mark more than one type of expansion; examples are given in Table 3-4.

whether

while

without [prep.]

.../ [manner: comparison] (as if, like) .../ [causal: reason] (since) .../ [temporal: successive: later] (later)

More Delicate EXPANSION Systems The account of the clause complex options can be taken even further in delicacy than TYPE OF EXPANSION: elaboration/ extension/ enhancement. Elaborating clause complexes include expository, exemplificatory, and clarificatory options; extending clause complexes include addition (also adversative) and variation; and enhancing clause complexes include the various circumstantial relations recognized in English (spatiotemporal, causal-conditional, manner, and matter in the context of the clause complex). These various types are displayed in the system network in Figure 3-13 and the conjunctions/ prepositions indicating the relations are tabulated to the right; see further Ch. 7 of IFG, from which the categories are drawn.

[conditional: negative] (otherwise}- or (else)

[additive: positive/ adversative]

[additive: adversative] (yet)

or (interrogative) projection .../ [temporal: simult: extent] (meanwhile); .../ [causal: conditional: concessive] (although) [causal: conditional: negative/ concessive] (unless/despite)

Table 3-4: Structural Conjunctions Used in More Than One Expansion Type

148

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

149

{

hypoc»;s ----------------------------____________________________________________________________

parataxis ------------------------------------------------·:

l

w

expository-------------·--------

--

I

finite

1

T

Paratactic enhancement can also often be indicated by and together with a nonstructural (cohesive) conjunction such as afterwards, similarly, in that w,ay, therefore, non-finite

i.e., or,

A simple infinitival clause normally realizes a hypotactic purpose clause - it is irrealis and that is the basis of the sense of purpose. However it may come to mean result; that is, slide from intended outcome to actual outcome:

elab.1 exemplifying·-··------·--···-·- ·- e.g., clarifying -----------------------

t

additiv

ext.

--

positive------------- negative------------

-·

viz., i.e. (both-) and

(neither-) nor

advers. -------------- - but, (and] yet

. _,.f replacive ------------ - but, not, not ... but

varym°i._

-- while, whereas

- --

- only, but, except

except that

altem. ----------------------------

- (either-) or (else)

If not, (then)

temp

succes. {

1

later------ - (and) then

after, since

since I I after

earlier---- .

before, until, till

until I I before

3.1.4 Systemic Probabilities as far as where wherever, everywhere

as, as if, like, the way

like 11 - ••

beeause, as, since, in case,_ see!ng that,

• • - I I because ot, with, at, as a

in order/ so that

• - - 11 (in order/ so

if, provided [that), in case

if I I in case of,

negahve-- or clse, (or) otherwise

unless

unless I I but for, without

concessive but, (and) yet/still,

even if, although

even if, although I I d,>spile, without,

cause

Jpositive·-· (and) then

an interview

the most likely interpretation is internal, 'I think ... because I've talked to him'.

• - - I I by [means of]

purpose---

It should be noted that at least with the enhancing type, there is a possible contrast within the clause complex between internal and external examples (for this distinction, see Halliday & Hasan, 1976, and Section 6.1 below on conjunction). Thus when Nixon says in

Even [Premier] Li Peng [favors that], because I've talked to him.

---

reason·---- (and) so; far

cond.

---

whenever, every time

Jmeans---·-·-·--·-·--- (and) thus man.L comparison---------- - (and) so, thus

11

except for, other than

spread--- -

spread ----------------

~

instead· of, rather than

when, as soon as, the moment

- (and) there

Early the next day I awoke to find that I still had a fairly tight grasp of my secret.

without

point----- -

point-----------------

causecond.

---

as, while

extent---·····-------- -

spat.

besides, apart from

extent---- - (and) meanwhile

t

-{

enh.

while, whereas

subtract.-------------

simult.

nevertheless.

Neither the options within each system (parataxis/ hypotaxis, projection/ expansion, etc.) nor the combinations of options in the network set out above are equi-probable. Nesbitt & Plum (1988) report on the relative frequencies of options in the system network above, based on counts in interviews with dog breeders in Australia. Their results are discussed in their paper and in Halliday (1989) and are summarized in Figure 3-14.

~~-~.~.}Y,

as), to, for, for fear of,

Fig. 3-13: More Delicate Subtypes of Elaboration, Extension and Enhancement

150

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

151

{

hypa::, ···········································································: ..

..:

,,,

,.,

Para taxis·----- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ------ ------ --- --, (70%)

PROJECTION TYPE: idea/locution above and Halliday's discussion of LOCUTION/IDEA and PARATAXIS/HYPOTAXIS in Chapter 7 of IFG. The figures presented above can be compar~d with the frequencies of combinations in a short written narrative for ~hildren, 'Benjrunin goes to hospital' (the clause complex analysis is given below, together with other text samples): See Figure 3-14.

X

f 8

projection

u"'

(16%)

--{

185

150

35

20%

87%

.

locution ------------------------ ~

264

35

227

elaborating-------------------- ~ ~ 3 8 6

(3 l.S%

0%

1100%

- 78.1% 25

(91.4%)

1159

42

458

611

I

628

6

0%

% of taxis type

0

38

88.8%

12.2%

24

30

80%

20%

(39.5%)

8

0%

100%

(50%)

(68.5%)

32

37.5%

38

extending

enhancing------------ ~

KEY:

11.1%

77.5%

expansion

1°%

3

5

162.5%

(10.5%)

I I

hypotaxis

75%

1656

7 :Z.1.9%

paratID>: "The moon is," he said, "a balloon·

Depending on the particular intersection of TAXIS and TYPE OF INTERDEPENDENCE, there are various possible relative orderings of a pair of interdependent clauses: See Figure 3-16.

projection --- --- -- --- • · -- --- --- --- ---- -~

I" 'TI: He said, "The moon's a balloon"

"':'

} paratactic expansion

6

{

':": '

~-----------------------------------------------:

1

~

l

para taxis·-- --- --- -- ---- -- --- · --•--· ·- • -- · · • · -•• --· ••· · -- ·- · -·· · -- --· •• · -· · --- ---· -· · -••·- -- ·-'

B Fig. 3-17: Examples of Relative Ordering rising dependency

B expansion'------:i11-:~~~~

included dependency

I

O

I

falling dependency projection initial

~

6

----,11- projection included

I

II h~

~

-:~

~

~

"Cl

E; Sl

"Cl (I)

§---------+----Fig. 3-21: Rhetorical Organization and Clause Complexes 3.1.7 Complexing at Lower Ranks We have seen what options are available for combining clauses into clause complexes - expansion / projection (with various subtypes) and hypotaxis / parataxis. These resources of the logical metafunction for creating complexes are more extensive at clause

172

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

173

rank than at any other rank; but they are also available at all the lower ranks. The recurrence throughout the grammar of the relations that serve to combine units into complexes is illustrated in the Table 3-7 (cf. also Section 2.2.4 for the fractal principle). expansion

projection

elabon.tion He told us "Leave I" He squeeled; he

told us He told us to leave He told us, which WU

a.relief

enhancement

extension He gave up and told us the ._.hole truth

He ._.., exhausted so ha 9ev• up

Besides givr,g up,

Because he was exhausted, he ga.ve u Smith end then Jones (have fled)

he told us the whole

truth The captive end Jones (have fled) The prisoner, r, a. Smith imtead of Jones white suit, (has fled) (has fled) (S fie._.) to Ne._. (S fie._.) to his (S fie._.) to Tempe Orleans then to Tampa hometo... n, to Tampa and to Miami (5 flew) east to Ta.mpa. ( S flew) to Tampa. u well u to Miami (S) drove and (to Tampa) ( S) Wil'\ts to fly ( to Ta.mpa.)

~S)seem, to fly to Timpa. ,vwy Tu.)

(S)trled to fr (to Timpa.)

n,._.

(S) drove then fie._. (to Tampa) (S)began by flying (to Tampa.)

para hypo para hypo para hypo para hypo

Table 3-7: Complexes at Clause and Group Rank As we can see, the relations are not equally distributed among these different classes of groups/phrases; we would see further differences if we had taken the table further in delicacy, for example from enhancement to the various subtypes of enhancement (causalconditional, temporal, spatial, manner, etc.). Expansion is more pervasive, than projection, which is not surprising. Since projection is essentially a relationship between processes, we find it with clauses and verbal groups, both of which deal with processes, but not with nominal groups, adverbial groups, or prepositional phrases. Furthermore, projection only comes in a hypotactic variant in the verbal group; there is no verbal group complex where one group serves to project another group as a quotation. Since they have often been interpreted in other ways, it is particularly important to emphasize the existence of hypotactic verbal group complexes such as a seem f3 to be running, a try (3 to concentrate, a venture (3 to say, a happen (3 to overhear in the overall system of the grammar. See Section 7.5.1. Within expansion, elaboration and extension seem to be the most pervasive. Although we find enhancement at group rank as well as at clause rank, it is more restricted at group rank; Halliday·(1985: 252) notes that instances of enhancement are less common at group

174

CHAPTER THREE

rank since "the meanings are too specific to be readily expressed as a relationship between units smaller than clauses." The grammar thus offers a choice between creating a complex at clause rank and creating a complex at a lower rank. The basic principle is simple enough. The first opportunity to combine units into a complex occurs at clause rank. If more than one element of clause structure is involved, the option of starting a clause complex is taken up. If, however, only one element of clause structure - a participant, circumstance, or process (to restrict the view to transitivity structure) - is involved, the option of creating a complex is delayed until the rank below: See Figure 3-22 for a schematic representation. domain related (i) logico-semantic domain related (ii) relation

rank (whole clause) clause

I

I

(part of clause) nom.

I

'i.e.'

'and' 't~~n·

D

group adv/ prep. verbal

~ry}

I t=]

D

D

D

D

Fig. 3-22: Domains Entering into Logico-semantic Relations And so on, down to the rank of morpheme. For example: clause: Henry went dancing and Anne took the kids to the movies. group: Henry and Anne went dancing. Note that complexing at group rank of nominal groups does not necessarily imply coparticipation in the Process of the clause in which the group complex serves. The nature of the involvement can be specified by means of a circumstance of Manner: group: Henry and Anne each! both went dancing together/ separately. There may be departures from the basic principle that complexes are formed at the lowest rank possible. In particular, textual considerations may favour a clause complex over a group complex to allow for the expression of continuity and contrast by means of the textual resources of SUBSTITUTION & ELLIPSIS (see above Section 3.1.5.3). Compare the following clause and group complexes:

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

175

clause rank- clause complex:

limo. went to the mall last night and Sfl did Anne group rank- nominal group complex:

Henry and Anne went to the mall last night These examples differ with respect to Theme (underlined), Culminative element which is likely to be main point of news (in bold), and substitution (italicized). (For these resources, see further in Chapter 6.)

(i) In one type, clauses may be combined through parataxis (as well as hypotaxis; there is an option in taxis). This means that independent clauses selecting for mood, tense/aspect, etc. can enter into combination in clause complexes as in English. In English as in many other languages, the choice of hypotaxis m~ans that either of the two sequences a " Por P" a is possible; the choice is largely determined by thematic considerations. However, the relative sequence may also be fixed; thus, in many languages, the relative sequence in an enhancing complex is fixed: The dependent clause has to precede the dominant clause (e.g., Mandarin [unmarked sequence], Japanese, and Turkish; cf. Thompson & Longacre, 1985: 174). (ii) In the second type, clause complexes are formed by the so-called clause-chaining;

3.1.8 Typological Outlook The use of logical resources to combine clauses into clause complexes is quite general across languages. In comparing systems, we can focus on two parameters of variation. (1) The type of clause complexing (see Longacre, 1985): (i) The type found in

clause complexes are built up of dependent, non-final clauses with verbs in "medial" form, culminating in an independent, final clause with the verb in "final" form. The full specification of mood and tense/ aspect is delayed along the chain until the culminating clause with the final verb, as in the following Yimas clause complex, taken from Foley (1986: 178): See Figure 3-23.

English and other Indo-European languages (called co-ranking by Longacre), and (ii) the clause chaining type of complexing found in New Guinea and a number of American Indian languages. (2) The division of labour within clause complexing (say between hypotaxis and

parataxis) and between the resources for combining clauses into complexes and transitivity on the one hand and verbal group complexes (so-called serial verb constructions) on the other.

y

marimp-in river

'obl'

D

D

a~kwi - mp - i down :in : 'seq' 'dep ·

These two parameters will be discussed briefly (for more extensive typological considerations, see in particular Longacre, 1985; Thompson & Longacre, 1985; Payne, 1985a; Talmy, 1978; and various papers in Haiman & Thompson, 1988). anti - nan

3.1.8.1 Two Types of Clause Complexing

ground

D

'obi'

'going down to the river then·

yampara - mp - i stand 'seq' 'dep'

D

Longacre (1985) differentiates two types of clause complexing; these will be described in the systemic terms used here. Both involve chains of clauses combined into complexes and they span the same range of logico-semantic types (addition, temporal sequence, etc.); but they differ with respect to the nature of taxis. 33 a 33 The terms for the two types are problematic. The term clause-chal!"lng is ~ommonly used to name the type found in New Guinea and American Indian languages. The problem 1s that this term does not reall~ reflect the contrast between the two types: Clause complexes in English and other langt1ag~s of the othe~ maior type are also organized as chains - relational, interdependency structures. Longacre s. term _for _this type, coranking structures is good in the context of the framework he uses, but could be misleading m the present context since rank is used here in its systemic sense.

176

CHAPTER THREE

ama '1 sg subj'

- tipa~ bath,

· standing on the ground then·

-fit7 ~

'I washtd'

Fig. 3-23: CLAUSE CHAINING Type of Clause Complex from Yimas

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

177

The verbs in the dependent clauses have suffixes indicating the. logicosemantic relation of sequence (-mp) and the taxis status of dependence (-i). English would typically construe such sequences paratactically rather than hypotactically, as Foley's translation indicates: / went down into the river, stood on the ground, and washed. The principle of presupposing the Subject throughout the interdependency structure is similar in English, but it is progressive rather than regressive as in Yimas. Languages vary to the degree in which they generalize markers of complexing across ranks and classes. Many languages have a set of generalized markers such as in English and, or, but; but languages may also differentiate according to rank and class, as in coordination in Fijian, where nominal group combinations are marked by key 'with', while other combinations are marked by ka 'and' (see Payne, 1985a: 28-9).

3.1.8.2

Division of Labour

(i) Hypotaxis and parataxis. English has quite an extensive paradigm of logicosemantic types (elaboration, extension, etc.) in both hypotactic and paratactic clause complexes. Not surprisingly, there is variation across languages at this point. For instance, Thompson & Longacre (1985: 174-5) note that in the Otomanguean languages of Mexico (enhancing) parataxis of clauses (combined through juxtaposition) with certain aspect markers is more common as a clause complexing strategy than (enhancing) hypotaxis. Thus, when my father arrived, he asked if the tortillas were heated would be '1 my father had arrived [imperfective], 2 he asked if the tortillas were heated':

Mi- ¢ni

ya

kam-ta

bi-?y¢ni

kha

's'i-pati

kar-hm'

past-arrive [imperf.] Process

now

my-father

past-ask

Q

past-heated [stat.] Process

the-tortilla

Process

(ii) Clause complexing and transitivity. From an ideational point of view, clause complexing is a way of combining transitivity structures of single clauses by means of logico-semantic relations such as addition and temporal sequence. The division of labour between transitivity in the clause and the combination of clauses through clause complexing may differ from one language to another. For instance, the relationship between a process of saying and the addressee is represented as a single configuration in English, the transitivity structure of one clause - as in John said to Mary. In contrast, Trique (Mexico) interprets this type of phenomenon as a sequence of two processes, one of saying and one of hearing (Longacre, 1985: 262-3), as in the following juxtaposition of clauses (tone i:adications omitted):

178

CHAPTER THREE

Juan Gatah Process said John 'John said to Mary'

II

guni Process heard

Maria

Mary

It is quite clear, then, that the nature of the system of clause complexing is related to the nature of the system of transitivity - in this case, to the number of inherent participants in a verbal clause. (We find the same kind of trade-off between transitivity and verbal group complexing. For instance, the beneficiary of a simple process in English may be expressed by means of an expansion of a simple process into a complex one in Akan (a Kwa

language).) (iii) Clause complexing and verbal complexing. In English, relations between processes may be expressed through clause complexing and also (at the next rank below) through verbal group complexing. The same situation holds' for many languages, but the division of labour between the two strategies is not always the same. In particular,feere are languages with quite a wide logico-semantic range of verbal group complexes - usually called serial verb constructions. Thus, in Nupe (a Kwa language spoken in Nigeria), the logico-semantic range includes purpose; it is expressed through a verbal complex rather than a (hypotactic) clause complex (Thompson & Longacre, 1985, citing George, 1975): ex bi. Process Musa came took 'ex Musa came II ~ to take the knife'

Musa

3.1.9

ebi knife

Clause-Complexing in Discourse

The clause complexes analysed here are in the notation introduced in IFG Ch. 7 (i.e., 1 2 3, ex ~ y, = + x, etc.); rankshifted (downranked, embedded) clauses are indicated in Text (6) by means of brackets: [ Il. Verbal group complexes in that text are in italics. Note that there are often alternative analyses; here, and can be treated as a marker of extension, even though there are examples where it is interpreted as marking enhancement - 'and so'; 'and then'.

Text (1): Planning

I[ these papers come by the twenty-ninth--> Cll1d. you send th'em through to me in Laughton Sil I shall have roughly from the twenty-ninth of June to the eighth of July,--> on which I can spend the whole of that time on those papers--> if they happen to come--> and then again from the eighth of July until whatever time your council meeting is again.

Our teacher says

1

if your neigbour has a new baby a and you don't know whether it's a he or a she

Analysis (leaving out the aside): 1

x~ (l

1 +2 (l

=13 x2 x3

(l

=~

(l

x~

14

if you call it 'it'

If these oaoers come by the twentv-ninth

well then the neighbour will be very offended

a

and [ifl vou send them throuRh to me in LouRhton Ihm between the twenty-ninth and the fourth of July, < < > > I'll have about half a day's work to look at some odd scripts before then

and then I shan't get any scripts from the assistants before about let me see four five six seven about the eighth SJl / shall have roughly from the twenty-ninth of June to the eiRhth of July, on which I can spend the whole of that time on those papers

it they haooen to come and then[/ shall have] again from the eighth of July until whatever time vour council meetinR is a2ain

Text (2): Reasoning: Neighbour's Baby Our teacher says the neighbour will be offended if you call the baby 'it' if the neighbour has a baby and you don't know whether it's a he or it's a she.

Analysis by MAKH (IFG, pp. 200-1)

KEY: + • extension x • enhancement • projection (of idea) " • projection (oflocution)

Fig. 3-24: Analysis of Text (2)

This clause complex serves as a turn contributing to a discussion of how to refer to a young baby: Halliday (1985b) offers an analysis of the whole discussion in terms of the various lexicogrammatical resources presented in IFG. The clause complex sets up a "naming procedure" as a report projected by an authority ('our teacher'). Notice in particular how the resources of the clause complex are used to guide the process of reasoning about the relevant conditions on the procedure for referring to a baby. Text (3): Tests [1] The more tests you do, [2] and the more different ways that questions are put to you, [3] the more you're going to understand [4] what the questions are about. [5] So what you're doing is sort of having a big bath of scientific language, [6] and the more times you get the bath [7] the better you swim. [8] And these kinds of tests are really good, [9] because at school the teacher knows what she's taught you, [10] and she knows the words she's used and everything else. [12] These tests are sort of generalized, [13] so there's no way that they can know exactly [14] what you've learnt; [15] but they know approximately [16] what you should be learning about, [17] so

180

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

181

they ask you questions [18] to test [19] how much of the information has gone into your brain [20] and been assimilated, [21] so that you can reproduce it [22] even if the question is slightly different (Recorded by Robert Borel)

The analysis of the extract in italics is presented in two forms; first a tree diagram in Figure 3-25. 1 these tests are sort of generalized

1

a so there's no way that they can know exactly

Alternatively, the analysis can be presented simply by means of the elements of the interdependency chains in the clause complex (see IFG Section 7 .2):

1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2

2 1 1 2 2 2

2 2 2

2 2 2

(X

p (X

p (X

p (X p 13

1

(X

x2 what you've learnt

·p a

but they know approximately

1

what you should be learning about

'P

13 13 (X 2 13 13 13 13 13 'Y

[12] These tests are sort of generalized [13] Ml there's no way that they can know exactly [14] what you've learnt [15] b.W. they know approximately [16] what you should be learning about [17] Ml they ask you questions [18] la test [19] how much of the information has gone into your brain [20] fll1li. been assimilated [21] SJJ...1ha1. you can reproduce it , [22] - ~ t h e question is slightly different.

Text (4): Dachshund Text

a so they ask you questions

+2

to test

x2

1 1 1 1

1 2 (X 2 13 1 2 13 2

2

(X

2 2 2 2 2

13 (X 13 13 (X (X 13 13 (X 13 13 13 13 (X 1 1313Pl3

I had to wait I had to wait 1i11 it was born, and till it got to about eight or ten weeks of age lM1J. I bought my first dachshund, a blackand-tan bitch puppy, as. they told me I should've bought a bitch puppy la start off with,

1 how much of the information has gone into your brain

a

+2

'p

X

p

xy

KEY: ' = projection (of idea) + = extension x = enhancement

and been assimilated

so that you can reproduce it

even if the question is slightly different

Analysis by MAKH

(X

because< ...

j[ she wasn't 100% good> I could choose a top champion dog, (X 2 13 13 13 1 13 la mate her to, 2 13 13 13 a 2 ex and then produce something that was good, 2 13 13 13 (X 2 13 »1lk.h. would be in my own kennel prefix.

(From Chapter 1 of Hasan, ed, 1985.) Fig. 3-25: Analysis of Text (3)

182

CHAPTER THREE

CLAUSES AND CLAUSE COMPLEXES

183

To bring out both the internal nesting of complexes within complexes and the linear movement forward in this complex, I will also display it in two dimensions. Figure 3-26 charts the logico-semantic journey that evolves in the clause complex. As the chart shows, the journey is carried forward by expansions and projections. internal nesting

1-1

See Appendix 6.1. This procedural text is dominated by enhancing paratactic clause complexes. In principle, the clause complexes are used to group related operations together; each complex constitutes one procedural sequence. Note that the paratactic marker is and; but since the ands can all be read as 'and then' the interpretation adopted here is enhancement rather than extension.

I had to wait

Text (6): Narrative: Benjamin Goes to Hospital

elaborate

...,

2-a

I had to wait

See Appendix 6.4 for the analysis of the clause complexes of Benjamin Goes to Hospital. Projection plays an important role in this narrative: It serves to relate the monologic and dialogic modes of narration. From a semantic point of view, a number of projections extend beyond the end of the clause complex in which the projecting clause occurs (cf. IFG, Section 7.5.1, p. 251) - see [103], for example. Temporal and causal enhancements are also favourite types in the text.

enhance

...,

~

j

Text (5): Procedure: Recipe

~-1

enhance

till it was born

I

j

extend

...,

and till it got to about ...

2

2-a

~

I bought my first dachsund,

I

Text (7): News Report

enhance

...,

~-a

ru; they told me

I project

'V

I should've bought a bitch puppy

~- a-a I

See Appendix 6.3. In this news report, clause complexing of the type projecting: locution play a central role since the writer's source of news is important. There is a movement in the text from hypotactic projection to paratactic projection as the text enters the stage where the story is replayed through eyewitness reports.

enhance

Text (8): Persuasion

!Q start off with,

enhance

..j, ~-a-1-a

+· ~

I

1

enhance

l'

enhance

2-a

because > -----rcould choose a top champion dog,

See Appendix 6.2. This text illustrates the use of hypotactic projection in interpersonal metaphors of modality. Hypotactic enhancement is deployed to qualify steps in the argument.

< +Actor (+Goal)

The door opened. I

Mf~~i:'

I

1

They

Mf~u;;1/

mental'>< +Senser +Phenomenon

I

She

middl e ranged '>< + Range / non-ranged

effective '>< +Agent (+Range) She

I I I I I

Agent/ Actor

Proc.

opened

the door.

Proc.

Medium/ Goal

I

material '>< +Actor (+Goal) ( +Recipient, Client)

I

played tennis. Proc.

He

Range

likes

music.

I I

Medium/ p Range/ Senser roe. Phenomenon

They

sang

us

Medium/ Proc. Benefic./ Actor Client washed

IMf~~/1 Proc.

I

Music

pleases

Agent/ Phenom.

Proc.

her.

I

Medium/ Senser

I

effective '>< +Agent (+Range) He

a song.

Attribute

I

relational '>< +Existent

I

She

said

nothing.

I I

Medium/ Proc Range/ Sayer · Verbiage

There

was an old man.

I I Proc.

Medium/ Existent

a kick.

He

gave

them

a book.

Agent/ Proc. Benific./ Medium/ Recipient Goal Actor

I

He verbal'>< +Sayer (+Verbiage)

the door

Agent/ Proc. Medium/ Range Goal Actor

Range

clean.

gave

Agent/ Actor

I

wrote

them

a book.

Medium/ Proc. Benific./ client Goal

,

I

He

washed

Af.ent/ ctor

Proc.

it

clean.

Medium/ Attribute Goal

or +Carrier +Attribute (+Attributor)

I

She Medi~/ Carner

was

very happy.

I I Proc

R~t/ Attn te

I

The news

made

Agent/ Attributor

Proc .

I

rer

very happy.

Medium/ Carrier

I

Rante/ A ttr u te

I

relational '>< +Carrier +Attribute ( +Beneficiary)

or He

is

Bruce.

Medium/ Agent/ Proc Value/ Token/ Identified Identifier

+Token +Value (+Assigner) He

is

Bruce.

Medium/ Range/ Token/ Proc Value/ Identifier Identified

Trey

call

him

verbal '>< +Sayer (+Verbiage) ( +Receiver)

She

said

nothing

to him.

Medium/ Proc. Range/ Benefic./ Sayer Verbiage Receiver He

made

her

a good friend.

They

charged

her

two dollars.

Berefic.

Ran~/ Attri te

IM&;::~11 Proc.

I I

Bruce.

Agent/ Proc. Medium/ Ran/t Token/ Va ue / Assigrer Identified Identifier

Table 4-4: Structures at the Intersection of AGENCY and PROCESS TYPE

Table 4-5: The Distribution of Beneficiary Across Transitivity Types

The generalized ergative functions and process-type specific transitive ones are mapped onto one another as shown in Table 4-6 (some of the conflations are shown in the system network above; others are stated in more delicate systems not shown above; see further Table 5(18) in IFG p. 166).

For the sake of reference, it may be helpful to tabulate some further examples at this point to include the generalized function of Beneficiary (in material, verbal and relational clauses), Attribute in material clauses, and Range in effective material clauses: See Table 4-5. Some of these are very restricted as far as the specific subtype of process goes.

208

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

209

material

Actor

Range

middle

Client effective

Goal

Recipient

types, with mental and verbal grouped together as mental (internal consciousness and external, verbalized, consciousness). See Table 4-7. They sang (a son They sang her a son He squashed it

Three Mafor types

([Attribute:]

material

at They gave him

a cake Client

mental

Senser

verbal

Sayer Target

relational: existential relational: ascriptive

relational: identifying

They baked him a cake He gave it a kick They liked music Music pleased them They told him a stor They praised him (to his

Existent Carrier

Token/ Identified

Attribute

Value/ Identifier They elected Juan the kin

Value/ Identifier

Four Major types

(Halliday, 1976)

Six Major Types

(Halliday, 1985) material

material behavioural

mental relational

mental

mental

verbal

verbal

relational

relational existential

Table 4-7: Different Groupings of Process Types ,

These different groupings are different ways of representing the space of processes typologically: The space will be discussed in Section 4.5, where it is shown how major process types can be set up as core or prototypical types between which there are more intermediate types. If MATERIAL, MENTAL, and RELATIONAL are taken as major types, as they are in IFG, it is interesting to note that the other minor types, BEHAVIOURAL, VERBAL and EXISTENTIAL are all more restricted in AGENCY - they are middle only: See Figure 4-8.

material

behavioural

mental

verbal

relational

existential

Table 4-8: Process Types Restricted and Unrestricted in Agency Table 4-6: Conflations of Process-Type Specific Functions and Ergative Ones

As noted earlier, AGENCY is the distinction between middle (e.g., the bomb exploded) The current grammar is slightly different from IFG in the area of PROCESS TYPE. IFG differentiates six process types: material, behavioural, mental, verbal, relational, and existential. In terms of the PROCESS TYPE system used here with its four options instead of six, behavioural processes belong with material ones and existential processes belong with relational ones.

and effective (e.g., the squad exploded the bomb). The effective option represents the process as having a causer (the squad), the Agent, external to the participant (Medium) present in the middle clause (the bomb). The variable is thus not the traditional one concerned with the presence of an "object," transitive/ intransitive; both middle and effective clauses can be either transitive or intransitive in the traditional sense: See Table 4-9a.

The grouping of processes in the current grammar is thus in between the treatment in IFG and the treatment in Halliday (1967/8, 1976), where there are three major process

210

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

211

1

"intransitive"

"transitive"

middle

effective

they played

they hunted ('game')

[non-ranged I

[goal-intransitive I

they played tennis

they hunted ducks

[ranged)

PROCESS TYPE

Functions

Grammatical Classes Examples

material

Actor

nominal group

Range

nominal group

Goal

nominal group

Attribute

nominal group: adjectival nominal group nominal group nominal group: conscious nominal grouo clause

Guess who's coming to dinner It happened one night Who's killing the Great Chefs of Europe? They've reached the station They've reached the station They lived a Ufetime in 24 crowded hours They shoot horses, don't they? Who's killing the Great Chefs of Europe? To catch a thief Carve her name with pride Drop dead, Darling

[goal-transitive I

Table 4-9a: AGENCY and the Traditional "Transitive/Intransitive" Contrast

In fact, the traditional distinction between transitive and intransitive is of very limited /4 value in the interpretation of English transitivity and is not used in IFG nor in the '} transitivity systems presented here (cf. Halliday, 1967; Halliday, 1967/8). ,/

While all the major transitivity types of English are covered in the current grammar, there are a number of specific patterns that have yet to be added. For example, the grammar only allows attributes to be generated in relational clauses, although they sometimes occur in certain material ones as well, either as conditional or resultative: Serve it ha.J.; beat it SJJfl. Further, the possibility of a Beneficiary in a relational clause is not covered: It didn't cost Ill£.. anything; He made ML a good husband. Additional examples will be noted in the relevant contexts.

mental

Phenomenon

verbal

PROCESS TYPE: material/ mental/ verbal/ relational The system PROCESS TYPE has four options: material / mental / verbal / relational. These types are tabulated in Table 4-9b with the range of participant functions they can occur with, typical realizations of these functions and examples.

Sayer Receiver Verbiage

Let us now consider the most general systems, PROCESS TYPE (Section 4.4) and AGENCY (Section 4.6).

4.4 The Major Process Types

Recipient Client Senser

relational

Existent

Carrier Attribute

nominal group (symbol source) nominal group (often conscious) nominal group (linguistic category speech functional, generic) nominal group (typically nonsoecific) nominal group clause nominal group: adjectival nominal group: nominal adverbial group; prepositional phrase

212

CHAPTER FOUR

Give us this day Peel me a ,?raoe Mother knows best Some like it hot Remember that face I regret that we didn't go I saw them cross the street at two Who did you ask? What does it say? Tell me how did you love the picture? Tell me the greatest story ever told

And then there were none Let there be light Such men are danRerous Knowing when to quit isn't easy Such men are dangerous I was a male war bride The devil is a woman It's a wonderful life The first show is at noon

CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

213

Token, Value; Identified, Identifier

nominal group

adverbial group; preoositional phrase

& middle

Love is the message and the message is love Which is he v/ayinJ? now? Today is forever

(i) non-Ranged [Actor:] I [Process:] appear [Location:] on the scene [Location:] at very

Love means never having to say you're sorry

clause

rare intervals. (CEC:483) [Actor:] I [Process:] was looking [Location:] at Farnham actually. (CEC: 296) [Actor:] The wind [Process:] was blowing [Location:] from the west.

Table 4-9b: Participant Roles Across PROCESS TYPE

(CEC:287) [Actor:] He [Process:] tried not to cry II but [Actor:] some little tears [Process:] dropped [Location:] on to his teddy.

Further examples follow (intersecting with AGENCY, middle/ effective, and providing some more delicate subtypes of the different process types):

(ii) ranged

PROCESS TYPE: material '.Ii + Actor;37 Actor: nominal [Goal if effective; Range if ranged middle]

group 3 8

[Actor:] They [Process:] surrounded [Range:] the field. [Actor:] Mr. Smith [Process:] is representing [Range:] Washington. [Actor:] They don't [Process:] frequent [Range:] Kennedy. (CEC: 484)

& effective The

shoot

horses,

material & effective: dis

Process

don't

PROCESS TYPE: mental '.Ii +Senser; Senser: nom.gp., conscious [+Phenomenon if PHENOMENALIZATION other than idea]

the ? & non-locative ...

Goal

non-phenomenalization

nom.

[Senser:] You've [Process:] heard [Matter:] of the foot, Abercrombie's feet. The

'd cut Process

nom.

(CEC:484)

Attribute

phenomenalization: phenomenal

& non-locative ...

material & effective: dis

Actor

down. Goal

adv.

[Senser:] He [Process:] saw [Phenomenon:] his X-ray picture. [Senser:] Nobody [Process:] likes [Phenomenon:] this bit. (CEC:296)

(CEC:287)

[Actor:] He [Process:] held [Goal:] his teddy bear [Manner: quality] very tightly [Manner: means] with his other hand. [Actor:] His mother [Process:] sat [Goal:] him [Location:] on her knee.

phenomenalization: meta-phenomenal: idea [Senser:] He [Process:] wondered-> what would happen tomorrow. [Senser:] I'd [Process:] forgotten-> the Australians were there.

3 7 The Actor may be implicit for interpersonal and or textual reasons. For example, in an active imperative, clause such as Hurry up/ , the Actor/ Subject will typically be implicit for interpersonal reasons; and in a continuing paratactically expanding clause, the Theme/ Subject/ Actor is often elided. The same is, of course, true of any of the other participants in passive material clauses, and of any of the participants in mental, verbal or relational clauses. 38 Note that the nominal group may have a downranked clause as Head: [Being nice to her] won't kill you

(CEC:250) [Senser:] Hitch [Process:] thought -> [Senser:] the man [Process:]

knew too much.

'the act of being nice to her'; [ what she did] fixed the problem 'the thing that she did'. But projection clauses are not possible: That she was unhappy smashed into the barge.

214

CHAPTER FOUR

,,, I

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

215

PROCESS TYPE: verbal'\, + Sayer; Sayer: nom. gp.

identifying

[+Receiver39 if addressed, +Verbiage if verbally ranged]

.It sounds silly II but [Token:] it [Process:] reflects [Value:] a whole national habit ofmind. (CEC:253) [Value:] The topic of this essay [Process:] is [Token:] the extension of RST. [Token:] The cerebrospinalfluid [Process:] is [Value:] a crystal-clear, colorless solution which looks like water and is found in the ventricular system and the subarachnoid space. [Token:] The term rostral ('toward the beak') [Process:] means [Value:] in the direction of the cerebrum. [Token:] The long axis through the brain and spinal cord [Process:] is called [Value:] the neuraxis. [Token:]/ [Process:] 'm no longer [Value:] Peter's footman. (CEC:484)

verbalization: as name

[Sayer:] She [Process:] told [Receiver:] him [Verbiage:] all [Matter:] about the hospital. [Sayer:] The X-ray picture [Process:] showed [Verbiage:] all his bones. verbalization: as locution

[Sayer:] Henry [Process:] tells [Receiver:] me-> you've decided to stay. [Sayer:] They [Process:] say->he's a fool. "Goodbye Benji, we'll miss you at home," < Q)

}....

I

middle

{

fl)

Q) fl)

;:I

ro

Fig. 4-16: Ergative Patterning in Avar This is thus like English the brother broke the bottle : the bottle broke, except that English does not use CASE to mark participant roles. (Only pronouns show case distinctions in English; and these distinctions mark the interpersonal difference between Subject in finite clause vs. other (nominative, e.g., she vs. oblique, e.g., her): she broke the bottle -they saw her break the bottle; the news broke her. )43 43 Phe~mena ~f th_is kind are ~sually discussed in the typological literature in terms of case marking systems - ergative, nom1nat1ve-accusat1ve, etc.. However, it is important to see that cases are realizational categories and that th~y may_serve to realize_fu"?tions within different metafunctions or combinations of functions. Thus from the point of .view of th~ expenent1al TRANSITIVITY system, English is ergative (IFG, Section 5.8); but in terms of overt case-marking (which is quite limited in English), it is nominative-accusative within the Interpersonal metafunctlon. The central point here is the interpersonal role that Subject serves in English.

u

material mental verbal

t

ranged !+Range! non-ranged eventive behavioural meteorological Process/ Medium

relational

Fig. 4-17: The Most General Grammar of Material TRANSITIVITY

44 The exception to this realization statement is "meteorological" clauses such as it's raining/ snowing/ hailing, where the Subject it does not serve a participant role. See footnote 35.

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

234

· CHAPTER FOUR

235

Some general characteristics of material clauses are set out in Table 4-15 (cf. IFG Table 5 (21), p. 173). The first four concern participant functions occurring in (subtypes of) material clauses; the features refer to systems in Figures 4-17 and 4-18.

Characteristic

Value

Unmarked example

Marked or.unacceptable examole

material

+Actor

He ran away

material &effective

+Goal

They ran him away He hunted the White Whale They awarded her a prize They awarded a prize lo her

(meteorological - no Actor: it's rainin2) (goal-intransitive - no Goal: He hunts r'llame'l\

material & effective: +Recipient dispositive: recioiencv material & +Client (effective: creative:/ middle: ranged: service) cliencv TENSE present-in-present 'present time'

PRO-VERB

do; do to/with

ACCENTUATION OF VERB VOICE

accented

DIRECTIONALITY PARTICIPANTS

middleActor/ Medium effective Actor/ Agent; Goal/ Medium one-wav thing, macro-thing45

They built him a new palace They built a new palace for him They sang him a song

& AGENCY: middle Middle material clauses represent happenings: The Process is actualized through the Medium/ Actor without an external cause. The Actor may or may not control the actualization of the Process; happenings include the full spectrum from clauses where an inanimate Actor undergoes a process (e.g., what happened to the house?-it collapsed) to clauses where an animate Actor performs a process (e.g., what did she do? -she ran down the stairs). In otl}.er words, the actualization of the Process may or may not be instigated by the Actor. trite Actor's involvement_in the Process will prototypically impact the Actor itself, e.g., by some qualitative change) (the house collapsed, the sky darkened, the lump of sugar dissolved, he died) or some locative change (she ran down the stairs, he

moved to Chicago, the car drove around the corner).

MATERIAL RANGE: non-ranged/ranged She's fixing the fence

What she did with the fence was fu:it What she did was climb Mt Whitney

simple present - generic/ habitual: Shefu:es fences Oil floats on water not [creative] What she did to/with the house was build it not [ranged) What she did to/with Mt Whitney was climb it

The Actor's involvement in the Process does not extend beyond the Actor to impact another participant. However, an additional participant may be present in a middle material clause - the Range, as in she walked the streets of New York, she climbed the mountain, she sang an old folk song. This participant construes the range or domain of the actualization of the Process in a concrete or abstract space.

MATERIAL RANGE: non-ranged The glass broke

[Actor:] Electrons [Process:] orbit [Location:] about the nucleus. (Sci. The cat broke the glass

The high note/ Henry falling broke the glass

not metathing: That Henry was unhappy broke the glass; Henry broke that he had a hannv life

American) [Actor:] The book [Process:] progresses [Location:] from basic techniques in recombinant DNA methodology to commonly met laboratory problems. [Actor:] We [Process:] shall disappear presently. (G.B.Shaw) Let [Actor:] life [Process:] come [Location:] to you.

Table 4-15: Characteristic Properties of Material Clauses Examples of the major types of material clause are given below; the bold feature labels are from Figure 4-17.

Whoever Actor

went Process

to Kilburn Location: direction

He

can't g_o Process

alone Manner: gualitr

IActor

I

in those da s Location: time

I

45 ~rototypical ~ings are objects, persons, animals, institutions, substances, and abstractions, realized by nominal groups with nouns as Hea~ .. Macro-thin~s are bigger: Process_configurations or figures ("acts" in IFG) - configuratlons of a process, partlc1pants and circumstances. Meta-things are more abstract: Facts.

236

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

237

MATERIAL RANGE: ranged

\I+

Range; Range: nom. gp.

(Elaborating range)

The different types of Range are shown in Table 4-16 - with the exception of behavioural Ranges. This classification will be used later as a basis for listing verbs serving in material clauses.

When

are

we

Location: time

Pro-

Actor

Range

middle: ranged existential

thing event

elaborating

expanding

extending enhancing

-he did! began a dance (danced, began to dance) he took a shower(: showered) he played squash he sang an Elizabethan folk sonJ! he obtained good results he received his def(ree he climbed (up) the mountain he travelled (around) the J!lobe

(Extending range - possessive) [Cause: condition] In the case of sodium [Actor:] we [Process:] obtain [Range:] two thin yellow lines.

(Enhancing range - spatio-temporal scope) I

I

Actor

travel

I

the ~obe

Process

Table 4-16: Kinds of Ranging in Middle Material Clauses [Actor:] Electrons [Process:] orbit [Range:] the nucleus. When [Actor:] a white light [Process:] enters [Range:] a glass prism, 11 ... then [Actor:] the car [Process:] turned [Range:] the corner II and was out of

Further examples follow.

sight. [Actor:] He [Process:] 'sonly just leaving [Range:] school, this backward boy.46 [Actor:] He [Process:] was following [Range:] his father II as he read the

(Existential range - eventive) I

do

Actor

Process

traveallin

bible.

Ranges in behavioural clauses are comparable to the Phenomenon of a middle mental D'you think II it'll be all right II if [Actor:] I [Process:] go and do [Range:] some crossword puzzles. [Range:] Dune stabilisation work [Process:] is being carried out [Location:] at this site.

clause:

(Phenomenon-like in behavioural type) He was following his father II as [Actor:] he [Process:] read [Range:] the bible. If [Actor:] you [Process:] listen [Range:] to Herman Kahn, be eclipsed by France in the not very distant future.

11

Germany will

46 THEME SUBSTITUTION: He ... this backward boy. See Section 6.2.1.4.

238

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPFJUENTIAL

239

& AGENCY: effective \+Goal; Goal: nom. gp. [unless 'goal-intransitive'] Effective material clauses represent doings: From the ergative point of view, an Agent that brings about actualization of the Process is actualized through the Medium; and from the transitive point of view, the Actor's involvement in the Process extends to impact another participant, the Goal. Just as the two perspectives co-exist in middle material clauses in the conflation of Actor and Medium, these two perspectives co-exist in the grammar of effective clauses; but with effective agency, the Actor is not the Medium but rather the Agent and the Goal is the Medium. For example:

transitive ergative

I

won't be beaten

by a woman

Goal

Process

Actor

Medium

Process

Agent

From the transitive point o,f view,/ represents the participant being impacted by the Actor's performance of the process of beating - the Goal; from the ergative point of view, it is at the same time the participant through which the process of beating is actualized the Medium. However, precisely because the transitive and ergative models constitute two different perspectives, the grammar of material clauses also allows them to combine in a different way so that another angle on doing can be construed. Here the conflation of Medium and Actor is constant across middle and effective clauses and the Agent corresponds to a different transitive participant role - the Initiator. For example: They

made

him

run

transitive

Initiator

Pro-

Actor

-cess

ergative

Agent

Pro-

Medium

-cess

Cl--

->6

This example involves an analytical causative, make ... run (see Section 4.6 above) agnate with the middle he ran ; but we find the same phenomenon of the Medium/ Actor conflation in both middle and effective clauses with synthetic causatives: The teacher marched the children back to school, The squad exploded the bomb, The flood widened the river. From the ergative perspective, examples such as They beat him blue and The marched him back to school are the same: Agent + Process + Medium. From the transitivity perspective, they differ: The first type is Actor + Process + Goal, whereas the second type is Initiator + Process + Actor. These transitive differences are brought out in various ways:

240

CHAPTER FOUR

Actor + Process + Goal

Initiator + Process + Actor

Question Probe

What did Actor do to/ with Goal?

Analytical Causative

often not possible -

What did Initiator make Actor do? always possible-

effective: goal-intransitive -

they marched him: they made him march middle:

they beat their prisoners viciously : they beat [sb] viciously

they marched him: they marched

they beat him :

-Interpretation Without Second Participant

For the sake of simplicity, I will, however, interpret all effective material clauses as Actor/ Agent + Process + Goal/ Medium. There is a wide spectrum of effective material clau~s. covering both concrete and abstract doing. One of the main variables is the nature of the impact on the Goal. The primary system is TYPE OF DOING.

TYPE OF DOING: dispositive/ creative This system distinguishes between clauses where the impact on the Goal is to bring it into existence, CREATIVE, and where the impact is on an already existing Goal, DISPOSillVE.

TYPE OF DOING: dispositive The impact on a pre-existing Goal of the dispositive type may be in terms of (i) class, quality or quantity, (ii) possession or grouping, or (iii) location or some other circumstantial relation (see further below); such a dispositive result may often be specified by means of a resultative Attribute (e.g., He polished it clean, She painted it red ), a resultative Role (e.g., He cut it into cubes, She transformed it into an effective operation), a (resultative) Recipient (e.g., He gave the teapot to my aunt), or a (resultative) Location of direction (e.g., He pushed it into the corner). But

I

won' t be beaten

by a woman

Goal

Process

Actor

and [Actor:] this also [Process:] cleared out [Goal:] the problem that we have had at home for ages.

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

241

[Actor:] He [Process:] 'd help [Goal:] you II if you got stuck. [Actor:] They [Process:] wanted to open [Goal:] it [Location:] on Sunday. [Location:] In a frying pan, [Process:] brown [Goal:] meat and green pepper. D'you think II it'll be all right II if I go and do some crossword puzzles. [Actor:] It [Process:] cultivates [Goal:] the mind, don't you think? If you listen to Herman Kahn, II [Goal:] Germany [Process:] will be eclipsed [Actor:] by France [Location:] in the not very distant future. Sally, if you have given your orders for the housework today, II go and cook something II or sew something II or [Process:] tidy up [Goal:] the books. [Actor:] The angels [Process:] are weeding [Goal:] the garden. Cliency I'

Actor

Shall

I

Pro-

ve bought

I Process I

Actor

you

drinks .

Beneficiary

Goal

Sally, if you have given your orders for the housework today, II go and cook [Goal:] something II or [Process:] sew [Goal:] something II or tidy up the books. The process of creation may be phased; for example: [Goal:] The building, [Process:] was begun [Location:] in 1785 II but was left uncompleted when the viceroy directing its construction was recalled to Spain. Further Material Transitivity Systems Since the material domain is very extensive, there are a large number of options in material clauses with structural realizations that are not specified in the network given above. They include the following.

run

your bath

for you?

-ce,s

Goel

Beneficier11

Goal-intransitive Well, [Actor:] they [Process:] would have conquered, II I suspect. (CEC) TYPE OF DOING: creative [Actor:] They [Process:] pledge to create [Goal:] a system of democratic institutions. [Actor:] Others [Process:] are building [Goal:] small dams. [Manner-quality:] Little by little, [Actor:] some of these fish [Process:] developed [Goal:] legs [Location:] where bony fins had been.

(i) Effective material clauses may be GOAL-INTRANSffiVE, i.e., with an implicit Goal: They hunted [game or the like] all day . The interpretation of the implicit Goal is in terms of the general experiential class likely to serve as Goal in a clause of the relevant process type. (It is thus different from presupposed goals in procedural registers where the interpretation is anaphoric: Chop the onions and fry_ [them] until golden brown.) (ii) Effective material clauses may have an Attribute, either expressing the result of the occurrence of the process or a condition for its occurrence: They painted the house green; he was shot dead; cut the potatoes into cubes; serve the dish hot. Similarly, certain middle material clauses may have an Attribute: He fell flat; the candle burnt low; he ran tired. (Note that in contrast to relational clauses, the Attribute is not inherent here. For example, contrast the well ran dry (relational) with he ran (tired) (material).) (iii) Dispositive effective material clauses that express some kind of transfer of goods may be benefactive and have a Recipient: Please send us a contribution. The realization of the Recipient depends on the textual choice between BENEFACTIVE CULMINATION and GOAL CULMINATION (See Section 6.4 ):

Benefactive Culmination \ Goal A Recipient; Recipient: 'to' Little by little

Menner: quelit11

some of these fish

Actor

developed

legs

ProceS3

Goel

[Actor:] She [Process] handed [Goal:] the parcel [Recipient:] to the courier

Goal Culmination \ Recipient A Goal [Actor:] She [Process:] handed [Recipient:] the courier [Goal:] the parcel

242

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

243

The culminative element falls within the Rheme of the clause; and since the unmarked placement of new information is on the last constituent with lexical content, it is by default new information. Verbs occurring in benefactive clauses of recipiency are typically concerned with the transfer of the possession of the Goal (from the Actor to the Recipient), by physical, legal or verbal means:

ucreative 4recipiency ~ 'make' extending +Recipient d:spositiv~ elaborating non-recepiency do to/wi~enhancing cliency

middle

0..

} { l+elientl non-cliency

Cl)

I

Cl) Cl)

mental

::s

,$

u

verbal

eventive behavioural meteorological Process/Medium

1I

• only with goal culmination

Many, perhaps all, of these benefactive processes can be interpreted as causative possessives, but of a material rather than a relational process type: Give somebody something: cause somebody to have something Note that the negative version, 'cause sombody not to have', is construed differently:

4.7.2

(V) Ranged middle material clauses that can be interpreted as a service may be benefactive in the sense of cliency and thus have a Client: He sang us an old folk song : He sang an old folk song for us.

Observations (iii) through (v) are represented provisionally in the system network in Figure 4-18. This system network is provisional and fragmentary because a good deal of work is needed to sort out the various possibilities that are open to different types of material clauses. This means pushing the account towards further delicacy, i.e., further towards lexis. I will illustrate this move briefly for one subfield of material processes.

244

CHAPTER FOUR

I

Fig. 4-18: Tentative Extension in Delicacy of the Grammar of Material TRANSITIVITY

(1) owner as Goal: rob/ deprive/ dispossess/ relieve somebody of sth; (2) goods as Goal: take/ steal/ buy/ borrow/ hire/ rent something .flil.m somebody. (iv) Effective material clauses expressing a service (dispositive effective) or the creation of goods (creative effective) may be benefactive and have a Client:/ can get you a blanket; Shall I make you a nice hot cup of tea?; Fetch me a chair; I've brought you a present; I'll still bring you up your early morning tea.

I

X

-9:l

.§ give, issue, donate, advance, leave, will, refuse*ldeny ['refuse to give'], offer ['offer to give'], promise ['promise to give']; hand, pass, throw, bring; deliver, send, rush, cable; lend, loan, lease, rent, sell

I

~

Towards Material Lexis

Material transitivity is the most extensive of the four major process types. Consequently, we will need to carry out a great deal of work to push towards lexical delicacy for all material processes. 4.7.2.1

Survey of Subtypes

To give a rough chart of the territory, I have tabulated subtypes of material processes according to the type of relational process to which the result of the occurrence of the material process can be classified as belonging: See Table 4-17. For example, the result of a material clause of creation can be taken as existential. This gives us creative : existential vs. others, where the others are dispositive : expanding, classified into intensive (elaborating result), possessive (extending result), or circumstantial (enhancing result). The result is either inherent in the Process itself or representable as a separate resultative Attribute. The behaviourals form a separate group (on the border of mental and verbal

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

245

clauses - see also the comment after the table). Note that as far as the clause grammar of material transitivity is concerned, this is an ad hoc classification and not yet a systemic interpretation. Reactances are noted for some delicate clusters, but they have not been recorded for the general taxonomy. After the tabular chart, Hasan's (1987) systemic account of material lexis as most delicate grammar is summarized: This account shows, among other things, that we can expect to find not a strict taxonomy but simultaneous intersecting parameters.

brush, lick, rake, scrape, shave, sweep

size

compress, her to leave

(3) As modality In Interpersonal metaphor er. IFG 10.4 (4) Verbal causation

I insist: m'4St I want : should : proposals

This is very serious. The woman is passing herself off on the Countess as a native. a: [Pro-:] Do [Senser:] you [-cess:] think p: so, sir? a: [Senser:] / [Process:] don't think p: so; a: [Senser:] / [Process:] know P: so. a: [Senser:] / [Process:] don't know p: whether any ministers from the Episcopal Church are here. a: [Senser:] / [Process:] hope P: so.

/per~you-> you want

(5) Directionality: two-way

SENSING: desiderative \ Process: verb of desire (6) Construed as active behaviour In behavioural clause

& metaphenomenal: idea & middle a: [Senser:] He [Process:] intended

'P: that she (should)finish by May.

a: [Senser:] Deng Xiao-ping, still China's paramount authority at the age of 87, [Process:] intends

'p: that it stay that way.

a: [Senser:] Ned [Process:] would have liked (Wesley)

[Extent-duration:] For at least two hours [Senser:] the Boy [Process:] loved [Phenomenon:] him. (Williams) [Senser:] We [Process:] miss [Phenomenon:] her [Manner-degree:] very, very much.

see : watch, look (at) M4T: listen (to)

think : ponder, meditate,

(7) Phase, duration as

,

'p: me to have a Labrador.

& phenomenal & middle

believe : convince forgeJ : escape recall : remind

laste : laste

Inherent distinctions In Process

SENSING: emotive \ Process: verb of emotion

perceive : striu, assail sb's senses

see : glimpse, sight, spot

know : discover, realize/ learn/ remember; forget know: conclude,

(8) Agnate ascriptive relational process

(9) Construed as Attribute In ascriptive relational clause

want : willing keen, eager; unwilling

delight in: delightful like : fond (of) fear : afraid [Note: also twoway - afraid : frightening I

These four types of SENSING differ in various ways: See Table 4-24.

264

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

265

(10) Sc:alable

some

some

suspect, guess believe, think know

wish- want

alarm -frigfi!,en, scare - terrify, horrify; interest - intrigue; upset - devastate

& intensification by Degree: greatly, deeply (11) Relfk:atlon

bounded - count

bounded - count

bounded - count

sight(s), view(s), perception(s), sensation(s)

thought(s), belief(s), memory(ies)

plan(s), wish(es), intenJion(s), hope(s)

unbounded - mass

unbounded - mass

knowledge, realization,

anger.fear, frustration, happiness, horror, ·o , sadness

Brief comments on each of the properties follow below. (1) Projection of ideas. This property has already been discussed and illustrated. As noted above, while both cognition and desideration project ideas, they project different kinds of ideas (cf. IFG: Section 7 .5). Cognition projects propositions - ideas about information that may or may not be valid: He believed! imagined! dreamt-> that the earth was flat. In contrast, desire projects proposals - ideas about action that has not been actualized but whose actualization is subject to desire: He wanted! intended for/ hoped-> for her to leave. Note also the relationship to property (4): Ideas may be caused verbally.

(2) Phenomenality: metaphenomenal Phenomenon. As already noted, a process of sensing may range over or be caused by a metaphenomenal Phenomenon, i.e., by a preprojected fact serving as Phenomenon, as in (the fact) that she is late worries me. The two types of sensing that cannot project, perception and emotion, are also the ones that can involve a metaphenomenal Phenomenon. That is, while perception and emotion cannot create ideas, they can 'react to' facts. In this respect, they are like a number of relational clauses such as (the fact) that she is late is a worry/ worrying - cf. (8) below. (3) Metap~or for modality. Both cognition and desire can come to serve as metaphors for the interpersonal system of modality - for modalization and modulation respectively

CHAPTER FOUR

I think that in a sense you've had to compromise, haven't you? (CEC 387) 'in a sense you've probably had to compromise, haven't you'

Neither perceptive nor emotive sensing can serve as metaphors for modalities. 50 (4) Verbal causation. Both cognition and desire may be brought about through verbal action: / tell you that : you know that :: I persuade you to : you want to. There are no related verbal types causing perception and emotion.

Table 4-24: Properties Differentiating Types of SENSING

2(,6

- alongside congruent realizations such as modal auxiliaries and adverbs (IFG Section 10.4). That is, a number of processes of cognition can stand for probabilities - / think : probably, I suppose : perhaps; and a number of processes of desire can stand for inclinations and obligations - / want : must, I insist : should. For instance:

(5) Directionality. Processes of emotion are typicalJy bidirectional. They can be construed either as the emotion ranging over the Phenomenon or as the Phenomenon causing the emotion - as in I like Mozart's music (the 'like' type): Mozart's music pleases me (the 'please' type). The grammar thus help construe the view that we are not in control of our emotions (particularly if we put directionality together with the lack of behavioural construal for emotion). Processes of desire are not bidirectional; there is no 'please' type, only the 'like' type. This is consistent with the view that we are in control of our desires. Cognitive and perceptive processes may be bidirectional but favour the 'like' type -perception almost exclusively so; 'please' type perception such as the noise assailed my ears seems quite marginal. (6) Construal as . behaviour. Sensing is inert; it is not construed as activity. But, as already noted above in the survey of behavioural processes, certain types of sensing may be construed as a kind of doing- as behaviour, as active sensing. For instance: Stanley (urgently): Look -McCann: Don't touch me. Stanley: Look. Listen a minute. (Pinter, The Birthday Party) Anna: Listen. What silence. ls it always as silent? Deeley: It's quite silent here, yes. Normally . You can hear the sea sometimes if you listen very carefully. (Pinter, Old Times)

50 Emotion is related to interpersonal attitude - I rejoice that she's returned: She has, happily, retu":'9.d, Unlike modality, attitude is not an assessment of the validity of a clause located some~ere be~e~n a definite 'yes' or 'no' (grammatically it is not a Mood Adjunct). Rather, it is an assessment of the information 1n a clause, which is typically definitely 'yes' or 'no'. See also Section 5.4.

CLAUSF.S - SIMPLE: EXPFRIENTIAL

267

Here look, touch, listen are verbs in material clauses rather than mental ones; they are construed as activities controlled by an Actor (of the subtype Behaver). The difference is suggested quite clearly in the last example-You can hear the sea sometimes if you listen very carefully. All the modes of perception exist both as behaviour and as sensing. One significant grammatical difference is that present behaviour would normally be reported as present-in-present (the present progressive) - What are you doing? I'm watching the last whales ofAugust - but present sensing would not-/ (can) see the whales in the distance. Another one is that only sensing can involve a metaphenomenal Phenomenon. Thus while we can say / saw that he had already eaten we cannot say / watched that he had already eaten. This is the borderline between the mental and material domains of experience. As long as the 'phenomenon' is of the same order of existence as ordinary things, there is no problem with either process type; we can both see and watch macro-phenomena: / saw/ watched the last whales leave the bay. There are some behavioural cognitive processes (pondering, puzzling, meditating) but no desiderative or emotive ones. (Behavioural processes of giggling, laughing, crying, smiling and the like indicate emotions; but they are not active variants of inert emotive processing such as rejoicing, grieving, and fearing.) (7) Phase, duration. The different types of sensing have somewhat different potentials for unfolding in time. With perception, we have glimpse, sight, spot as well as see; and with cognition, we have discover, realize, remember as well as know. But similar distinctions do not seem to obtain with desiderative and emotive processes. (8) Agnate ascriptive process. Processes of perception are unique among the different types of sensing in that they are related to a set of relational processes of ascription specifying the appearance of ascription, as in Madam, you'll look like a tulip.

(9) Construal as Attribute of ascription. With many processes of emotion, there is an alternative construal of the emotion as a quality that can be ascribed as an Attribute to a Carrier in a relational clause; and this alternative exists for both the 'like' type and the 'please' type. Thus I'm afraid of snakes is an ascriptive alternative to the mental / fear snakes; similarly, in the other direction, snakes are scary and snakes scare me. This relational type of alternative exists for some cognitive and desiderative processes, but it is much more productive with emotive ones. It does not exist for perceptive processes. (10) Scalability. Related to the possibility of construing emotion as an Attribute in an ascriptive relational clause is the possibility of scaling or intensifying processes of emotion: Many qualities can be intensified. We find sets of processes differentiated essentially according to degree of intensity - scare : terrify, horrify - and emotive processes can be intensified by means of adverbs of degree such as much, greatly, deeply.

268

CHAPTER FOUR

These options are also open to some cognitive and desiderative processes, but not to perceptive ones; but intensification is an essentially emotive characteristic.

7

(11) Reification. Finally, it is worth noting that the different types of sensing are construed metaphorically as things in different ways; they are reified in different ways. Perception, cognition and desire are reified as bounded things, i.e., countable things, 51 such as sight(s), thought(s), plan(s), whereas emotions are reified as unbounded things, i.e., masses, such as anger, fear, frustration, as in Hope springs eternal. That is, emotion is construed as boundless - like concrete resources such as water, air, iron and oil (cf. Halliday, 1990). Indeed, one can see from Lakoff & Kovecses' (1987) discussion of the cognitive model of anger in American English that a number of the metaphors for anger construe it as concrete mass (e.g., as a fluid contained in the body: He was filled with anger, She couldn't contain her joy, She was brimming with rage). In being construed as unbounded mass, emotions are again more like qualities (cf. the unbounded strength, height, heaviness, redness). , As always in language, the picture that emerges from a consideration of a multiplicity of properties is far from simple; it is multifaceted. But it is possible to bring out certain salient features of the system of sensing as suggested in Figure 4-23. Emotion seems to be closer to quality-ascription than prototypical process, something that arises from, but does not create, projections. In contrast, perception is essentially closer to behavioural processes. Cognition and desire are different from both in that they can project (i.e., bring the content of consciousness into existence), can stand for modalities, and are not in general like either behaviour or ascription; they may be interpreted as the most central classes of sensing. Cognition is arguably closer to perception than desire is - there are certain cross-overs like see in the sense of 'understand' alongside its basic sense of visual perception and both can be construed in an active mode as behavioural processes.

5 1 A few processes of cognition are also unbounded, e.g., knowledge, realization, understanding.

CLAUSES-SIMPLE: EXPFRIENTIAL

269

relational TYPE OF SENSING

perceptive

general sensespecific

emotive ascription

auditorv olfactorv 2ustatorv tactile cognitive

cognitive

proposal

thinking knowled2e opining

desiderative material

visual

two way direction: like : please :: be fond of : be pleasing

doubt pretence understanding

memory

perceptive & cognitive behaviour

desideralive

preference desire

plan

Fig. 4-23: The Orientations of the Different Types of Sensing

decision

emotive

4.8.2

like

The distinction in the SENSING system is the first step towards lexical delicacy within mental processes; as with material processes, I can only illustrate the move towards lexical delicacy here.

4.8.2.1

negative

effective

perceive, sense

strike, occur, hit, assail

glimpse, spot, notice, suv, observe hear, overhear smell taste feel think, reflect.feel, believe, fancv, consider know, learn guess, reckon, suppose, conjecture , presume, assume, suspect, infer, conclude, deduce wonder, doubt imaJ1ine, dream, pretend understand, realize, appreciate, recognize, see [= 'understand'l, discover see,

forget; _ remember, recall, bear i11 mind, iJ1nore care for, want (for), wait for, hove, vrefer ache for, burn for , desire , hope for , long for, wa11t, wish, vearn for a2ree, comvlv refuse aim for, intend, p/anfor hesitate choose, decide, determine, resolve, (make up one's mind) like.fancy, love, desire, need, miss Ifru1d. (of) , Q;JJIY(about) , run (on), taken (with) , smitten /with)} hate, detest, abhor, abominate, despise, loathe

CHAPTER FOUR

fear

convince

verbal: teach , tell, show, ...

occur to, strike

escape, elude; remind, come back to

(verbal) (verbal)

attract, tempt, allure , tantalize, [attracting, tempting,]

sicken, disgust, revolt, repel, offend, make somebody sick, appal [disgusting , revolting, ~ e. abhorre11t, all.emiaall.le] reassure, comfort, encourage, embolden, hearten

Survey of Mental Lexis

To indicate the range of mental processes, the verbs that serve as Event in verbal groups acting as the Process of a mental clause have been listed in Table 4-25 [related adjectives serving as Attribute in ascriptive relational clauses are given in angle brackets].

270

positive

Towards Mental Lexis

middle

positive

[reassured (at), comforted fat), I

[reassuring, comforting,]

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

271

negative

fear.dread

~ (of),

apprehensive. frighlened (of. abouJ), scared (of), alarmed (at ll

[frighlening, ~ alarming, worrying]

perceptive: PERCEPTION TYPE cognitive: COGNITION TYPE desiderative: DESIDERATION TYPE emotive: EMOTION TYPE & EMOTIONAL INTENSITY

agitate, perturb, shake, disturb.faze, startle, shock,

(surprise)

happiness

The lexical distinctions realized by these lexical items are made in systems more delicate than SENSING. The next step in delicacy is

alarm,frighlen, scare, terrify, worry, appal

positive

[disturbed, shocked, startledl uMit, rejoice

[disturbing, shocking, startlinJ1l please, delighl, enrapture, gladden, gralify, cheer, satisfy

7

This will be illustrated for perceptive clauses and some observations about the push towards lexical delicacy for cognitive and emotive clauses will be made. 4.8.2.2

negative (grief)

anger

low

lhm2Jzy, pleased (abouJ, with), CQ!1!m! (with)] bewail, bemoan, grieve, mourn, regret, deplore

UJJfi. (abouJ), aggrieved (abouJ), distressed (with), depressed (abouJ, wish), Jmhapp,y (abouJ, with, at)] dislike, resent

SENSING: perceptive

[delighlfal, pleasing, gratifying. satisfactory. satisfying] grieve, break sb's heart, sadden, distress, pain, depress, deject

The feature perceptive is the entry condition to PERCEPTION TYPE: general / specific. The feature specific leads to TYPE OF MODALITY. These systems are diagrammed in Figure 4-24 as elaborations of the previous system network for mental

console

clauses.

UJJfi., saddening, ~ u s , distressing, depressing, [a shame, a piJy]J effecti ve - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - } Plwnom,•non / Agent

dissaJ isfy, disappoint displease, annoy, irrisate, trouble, irk, vu, bother

{ middle

+Range Rang,• ------ ---------------------f-} Phenomenon/

ma teri al

[Jmw (aJ, with), annoyed (al, with), vexed (at, with)/

verbal

enrage, infuriate, gall, madden, pique

high

rela ti o nal

interest/ attention

positive

[/JlliiiJl.s (al, wish), l1JQli (at, withl1 enjoy, relish

marvel, wonder

amuse, entertain, divert, ticlcle, tisillate

lJJ,w.zy, amusing, entertainin~. 1 excise, interest, intrigue, animate, inspire, stir, fascinate

menta l

+Scnser Scnser / Medium Scnser: nom. gp. conscious

non-phenomenalizahon {

Phenomcnahza hon { cogmhve

phenomenal - - - - - - - - - - - - - , + Phenomenon: I {macrophenomena nom. gp. + Phenomenon: hyperphenomcnal clause, nonfmite .;;;:.:,_ _ ___, + Phenomenon: mctaphenomcnal clause, project.

----+-'

dcsidera ti vc

sens~, general "f?O'Ct [~.

1magmt

tactile

Jul

visual

set,

not ict, bthol d

TYPE OF

{interested fin), 1 negative

llzsm_d (with)]

[excising.fascinating, interestinJI 1 bore, weary [dull, uninteresting, J

Table 4-25: Lexical Spread of Verbs in Mental Clauses

272

CHAPTER FOUR

specific _M_O_D_A_Ll_TY---lll- olfactory smell

}[

bounded Phenomenon: "bare infinitive" unbounded Phenomenon: "present participle"

gustatory taste

____..,r unnoticed overhear auditory---,_ _ hear

J

Fig. 4-24: The Lexicogrammar of Inert Perception

CLAUSES - SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

273

PERCEPTION TYPE, general/specific, has consequences for the realization of Process; it makes a distinction between two sets of verbs, those that do not specify a specific mode of perception (sense, perceive, ... ) and those that do. The relevant parameter is thus a circumstantial one, viz. manner: Circumstance: manner: visual/ auditory/ ...

?

Those specifying the modality are further differentiated according to the type of modality in the system TYPE OF MODALITY, visual/ auditory/ gustatory/ etc., each term corresponding to a small set of verbs of perception. As the example illustrates, the system network can specify lexical sets such as see, notice, and behold, stopping short of specifying unique lexical items. As a result, there would be free variation in generation unless further distinctions are introduced. Perceptive mental clauses intersect with the different kinds of PHENOMENALITY; for example: phenomenal (simple phenomenon realized by a nominal group):

We saw Henry macrophenomenal (composite phenomenon realized by a nonfinite clause):

4.8.2.3

SENSING: cognitive

In general, cognitive mental clauses can project propositions, as in he thought II the moon was a balloon. When the projected clause is an intensive relational one, it may sometimes take the form of a perfective (infinitival) nonfinite clause with to be as the Process: a They considered -> ·~ me to be a friend. This is one step towards incorporation into the mental clause, as indicated by the passive / was considered by them to be a friend. Alternatively, the projected relation may be represented within the mental clause; i.e., the complex situation of projecting process + projected process can also be construed within the mental clause: The Carrier or Token of the projected intensive relational clause corresponds to the Phenomenon of the mental clause and the Attribute or Value appears within the mental clause as an Attribute (they considered me a friend) or as a Role (they considered me~ a friend). 52 Examples of this type can also be interpreted as causati;e relational clauses, where the Assigner or Attributor is a projecting causer rather than a material one; for example: [Attributor:] they [Process:] thought [Carrier:] him [Attribute:] very brave. Cf.: [Attributor:] the whiskey [Process:] made [Carrier:] him [Attribute:] very brave. This relational interpretation will actually be adopted below in Section 4.10.1 in the description of causative relational clauses. Different mental verbs occur with different sets of options; examples are given in Table 4-26. Within mental clause Process+ Phenomenon+·-

Projected clause -

+ Attribute/Value

+Role

finite

nonfinite: 'acc.+be infinitive'

consider x a friend

consider x as a friend

consider thaJ x is

consider x to be a friend

We saw Henry eating [unbounded] : We saw Henry eat [bounded] metaphenomenal (factual phenomenon realized by a finite clause): --

We saw that Henry had eaten Macrophenomenal perceptive clauses make a further choice in the system PHENOMENAL BOUNDING between bound and unbound: This is a temporal contrast · concerned with the unfolding in time of the macrophenomenon or act - the unfolding is either bounded in time, in which case the nonfinite clause realizing the Phenomenon is a bare infinitival one, i.e., perfective, or unbounded in time, in which case it is a present participial one,.i.e., imperfective (cf. Kirsner & Thompson, 1976).

----

------

----------

...

for2et

-----

know

know

reflect learn doubt

imaPine

imaoine

sunnose

suooose

exoect

expect

understand

understand

52 There is a similar verbal type: They declared him very brave; They reported him dead.

274

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

275

believe think

believe think

find

find

feel hold

------

feel hold

feel hold

consider deem reckon

consider as deem as reckon as

consider deem reckon

consider deem

----

rerwrd as see as

----

believe think find

take for mistake for

--

--

.

Intens111ed (high)

Nonmtensified (normal) scare,frighten like,fancy, enjoy please dislike amuse, tickle upset interest puzzle etc.

-reJ?ard

--

terrify, horrify love thrill hate, loathe, detest break- up devastate intrigue mystify

take

Table 4-27: Lexically Realized Degrees oflntensity in Emotive Clauses Table 4-26: Types of Cognitively Projected Ascription

• But: / take it that ...

At least provisionally, we can set up two simultanem;s systems, one for the type of emotion and one for the intensity: See Figure 4-25.

In these cognitive cases, the Attribute can be said to be ascribed to the Phenomenon through cognitive projection. This is different from cases where the Attribute is conditional as in the following clauses: Some like it hot. 'some like it when/if it is hot' He prefers his cold. He is wanted dead or alive. (Contrast these examples with the much more restricted desiderative type of example such as they wished him dead, where dead is not a conditional Attribute but is ascribed to him through their wishing.)

4.8.2.4

SENSING: emotive

Emotive mental processes represent an emotion; a mental reaction of fear, joy, and so on to some phenomenon (like, love, dislike , hatred, and so on).

,,ffective {

} Phenomenon / AgPnt

middle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

verbal

relatio nal

mental +Senser Senser/ Medium Senser: nom. gp. conscious

nP!

scare I terrify pltase / thrill scare/ please

terrify I tl,ril/

Fig. 4-25: Intensity of Emotion

CLAUSFS -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

277

(ii) Intensifiability is a typical property of qualities (realized by adjectives such as hot, cold, tall, short) rather than processes and the emotive domain is indeed one which can often be construed either mentally as a Senser's emotive processing or relationally as ascription of an emotive Attribute to a Carrier (cf. the discussion of the SENSING system and the characteristics of the different types). (1) The equivalent of the mental clause Phenomenon is introduced as a circumstance of Matter with one of the prepositions of, at, about, with: mental:

[Senser:] Who

[Process:] fears

[Carrier:] Who

[Process:] is

dis2ust

disRusted (at, with)

dis2ustinR

frighten

afraid (of),frightened

frightening

(of, about)

worrv

[Phenomenon:] Virginif' Woolf?

relational:

loathe fear

[Attribute:]

scare

scared (of)

scarv

worrv

worried (about)

wornin2

alarm

alarmed (at)

alarminR

anRer

anRry (at, with)

annoy

annoyed (at, with)

annoyinR

infuriate

furious (at, with)

infuriatinR

want

keen (on), ~ger

(/forl), willinR• ·

[Matter]

afraid

of Vir}?inia Woolf?

The relational example is intensive; as with many intensive clauses, there is often a metaphorical possessive option: have a fear of, have an affection for, have a high regard for; cf. also hold .. . in contempt.

unwillinR•, loath• desirous (of)

desire

hove (for) temptinR

hopeful

hooeful

tempted•

temptinR

·'

cf. more restrictedly with cognition: aware (of)

know

(2) Alternatively, the affective Attribute can be ascribed to a Carrier that is the equivalent of a mental Phenomenon. The equivalent of the Senser in a mental clause can be brought in circumstantially with the preposition to/for; for example:

desirable

conscious (of) sure (of), certain (on unsure ( of), uncertain

wonder

(of)

mental:

[Phenomenon:]

[Process:] scares

[Senser:] Edward

believe

convince

convinced (of)

convincinR

Virginia relational:

[Carrier:]

[Process:] is

[Attribute:]

Virginia

[Angle:] to Edward

scary

mental

relational effective

of Senser

of Phenomenon

like, rejoice

please

happy, pleased (about,

pleasing

with) content (with)

like

278

CHAPTER FOUR

doubtful

• Not with phenomenon as Matter.

middle

Rrieve

doubtful (about)

doubt

Table 4-28: Agnation between Mental and Relational in Domain of Emotion

Further examples are given in Table 4-28.

deli2ht in

believable

deli2ht

deli2hted (about, with)

deli2htful

amuse

amused (at, with)

amusin2, funny

sadden

sad (about)

sad, saddeninf!

aggrieve

anrieved (about)

2rievous

distress

distressed (with)

distressinR

deoress

depressed (about, with)

depressinR

please

fond (of), taken (with)

endearinR

4.8.2.5

Collocational Patterning in Cognitive and Emotive Clauses

Collocational patterning in material clauses involves Process+ Medium (e.g., ripen + fruit), Process+ Range (e.g., lend+ support), and Process+ Manner (e.g., fall+ sharply). With mental clauses, the most obvious collocational patterning is found with Process + Manner rather than with Process+ Senser or Phenomenon (with perhaps minor motifs like assail + senses). As in the case of the selection of a process of emotion, intensification plays an important role in emotive clauses, and also in cognitive ones: Alongside genera) specifications of high degree, such as very much and a good deal, we find more specific expressions deriving from lexical metaphors where intensity is construed in terms of vertical space (deeply) or coverage (totally, completely), in particular deeply (emotive), completely (cognitive), and totally (emotive/ cognitive); for example:

CLAUSF.S -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

279

She understands him completely but she dislikes him 1deeply. Poor Ned, I no longer mind but there were times when I deeply resented the asking and the giving of that promise. (Wesley)

effective- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - } rhcnomennn /;\ hl'nl

{

middle

Table 4-29 gives further examples of pairs of Process+ Manner: degree.

+Range; / R,rn ~,· -------------------------,=} l'henomrnon

ma terial

X

mental

emotive

cognitive

Process love desire hate loathe detest resent dislike like admire respect revere (Jl}Dreciate understand believe forget recall convince understand appreciate accept believe realize reco!lnize believe doubt susvect

Medium

Ranl!e

Manner: del!ree [vertical space] deeply

"

verbal

0.. E I

\

non-phcnomcnalization

·;;;

rcl.1tional

{ phcnomcnahzation

{

p,_h_en_o_m_ en_a~I + Phenom.: nom. gp.

macrophenomenal - - - + '

{

+ Phcnom.: clause, nonfmitc4

hypcrphcnomcnal m cnt.il

des1derat1vc

mctaphcnomcni'll

-, Scnser

Senscr/ Medi um Senser: nom. g p. conscious

pcrccpti ve

t

feanng

scare I ta nfy

liking

please I tliri/1

normal

scare / please

intensified

terrify / thrill

{

[coverage] completely

f ·t ·;;,c ac" - - - - ~ + Phcnom clause', proiec t

idea

B

Manner: Degree:

nodegrec

very 11111ch .. .

{

_Jlow dei;rcc =7\.. +Manner: high degree

[coverage] fully

deeply very m11ch ...

completely

[strength] strongly

Table 4-29: Collocational Patterns with Circumstantial Intensification of Emotion

To represent the combination of Process: emotive (care, love, dislike, fear , upset, offend, disturb, ... )+ Manner: degree (deeply), we can simply set up a system which allows us to choose to express high degree in terms of depth if the process type is emotive: See Figure 4-26.

Fig. 4-26: A Simple Strategy for Conditioned Lexical Choice

(With metaphorical mental processes on the relational model, we find collocations between Process and Range; for example: have + dislike (for), have + fear (of), hold+ attraction (for). Epithets of degree modifying the nominalized emotion also show the collocational pattern of Figure 4-26: have a deep dislike (for); have a deep fear (of).)

4.9 PROCESS TYPE: verbal PROCESS TYPE: verbal \ + Sayer; Sayer: nom. gp. 4.9.1

Verbal Grammar

Verbal clauses represent symbolizations involving a symbol source, the Sayer. There is often an Addressee or Receiver (the system ADDRESS). A verbal clause may be ranged

280

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

281

(Range/ Verbiage) or it may project a locution - a report (indirect speech) or a quote (direct speech) in a clause complex. (There is no verbal parallel with the mental contrast between projecting ideas and already projected facts: Locutions are projected by the verbal clause, just as ideas are projected by the mental clause.) These options are set out in the system network in 4-27.

Characteristic

Value

Unmarked example

verbal

+Sayer; Sayer/ Medium;

verbal: receiver

+Receiver; Receiver/ Beneficiary + Verbiage; Verbiage/ Range

he said to us of his old friend: "She's the best person for the job." he said to us of his old.friend: ... he told us: ... he told us a story/ the news he asked me a question he ordered an investigation of the incident

verbal: verbalization: name

verbal: verbalization: locution

effective {

*~

indicating: & quoting: -> '2

middle

& reporting: ->

'13

material imperating: & quoting: -> '2 & reporting: ->

mental

quoting ·

- { a s name . . + Verbiage: ver bal 1zation nom. ~{

~*

verbal----< + Sayer

Sayer/ Medium Sayer: nom. gp. relational

{

as locution

non-verbalization receiver ' R~iver: (to/of) nom. gp. no receiver

I+

I

{

I-> 2: _clause!

reporting j-> ~: projection clause!

He said that he was happy He asked whether I was happy He said "Be happy!" He told me to be happy. .,

'13

quoting: ->'2;

L imperating

(demanding type: he asked, demanded of us)

He said "I'm happy" He said •Are you happy?·

He said 'Tm happy"

reporting:

'13

He said he was happy

TENSE 'present time'

simple present

The paper says ... Henry tells me that ...

marked: present-in-present He's telling me the news righJ now

PRO-VERB

-

-

not What I do wiJhl to the story is tell iJ; but not What the paper did was say that a settlement had been reached

_J indicating

.. ~

verbal: verbalization: locution

Marked or unacceptable example

but What I did was tell the story

ACCENTUATION OF VERB VOICE

accented/ unaccented middle only

DIRECTION AUTY PARTIOPANTS

one-way Sayer: symbolic source

Fig. 4-27: Systems of Verbal TRANSITIVITY

Further, verbal clauses often occur with a specification of Matter (the subject matter or topic of the verbalization: about, of, regarding, concerning, on), which is inserted by the circumstantial system MATTER. Characteristics of verbal clauses are presented in Table 430.

Receiver: typically (but not necessarily) conscious Verbiage: speech function, genre; reified projection

I tell stories : The senator/ paper/ form says that ...

• Stories

I said to him

I said to iJ

me

I asked a question; I told him a lie; I told him a story; I demanded an investiJ/ation

Table 4-30: Characteristic Properties of Verbal Clauses

282

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

283

As in IFG, verbal processes are separate from mental ones. In earlier accounts (Halliday, 1967/8; 1976: Ch. 11), verbal processes constituted a subtype of mental ones. For discussion of the shared properties of mental and verbal clauses, see Halliday & Matthiessen (1994: 11:3).

4.9.1.1

VERBALIZATION

VERBALIZATION: non-verbalization/ verbalization

words). And with some the second interactant can be represented as Receiver (Anne spoke/ talked/ chatted to Henry). (ii) Processes of verbal impact are also on the borderline between the verbal domain and the material domain (cf. Section 4.5 above). Like verbal processes, they have a Sayer, which can be a speaker as well as some other symbol source; but the participant addressed is not construed as a Beneficiary that may be marked by to, but rather as a Goal-like Target of verbal impact. Verbs occurring in this type of clause include:

(\

The grammar set out in Figure 4-27 above defines various verbalization types. Verbs serving in verbal clauses have different potentials. The major split is between those only capable of serving in verbal clauses selecting NON-VERBALIZATION or VERBALIZATION: NAME, i.e., in clauses that don't project, and those also capable of serving in clauses selecting VERBALIZATION: LOCUTION, i.e., in clauses that project. The former indicate verbal behaviour and can in fact be grouped with behavioural processes. I will survey the VERBALIZATION types with special attention to the verbs serving in the different types.

accuse, blame, congratulate, criticise.praise, rebuke The unmarked present tense seems to be on either the material model (present-inpresent) or on the non-material one (the simple present). These clauses cannot project; but the reason for verbal impacting is often specified by a hypotactic enhancing clause and may be close to a projection of what was said (cf. the last example below):

a: Abadia accuses Congress xp: of dragging its feed on the $ 8.7 billion VERBALIZATION: non-verbalization

long-term modernization plan he presented last year. (author, year:page) a: Phnom Penh continued to accuse Thailand xp: of aiding the rebels.

[Process:] Don't remind [Receiver:] the angels [Matter:] of those tracts.

a: He criticized Western media xp:for "teaching people about freedom Verbs that can only occur in NON -VERBALIZATION clauses are of two types: (i) Processes verbal behaviour, and (ii) Processes of verbal impact. (i) Processes of verbal behaviour are on the borderline between verbal and behavioural; they can alternatively be interpreted as behavioural processes (cf. Section 4.5 above). They include:

speak, talk, argue, converse, confer, chat, chatter, gossip, yak Unlike other verbal processes, they cannot project (there is no she spoke/ talked/ conversed/ ... that she was very tired! "I'm very tired"); like behavioural processes, they select present-in-present as the unmarked present tense (they're chatting over there in the corner) and like other processes of interactive behaviour a second interactant can be construed either as a participant through nominal group expansion (Anne and Henry chatted for hours) or as a circumstance of Accompaniment (Anne chatted with Henry for hours). As with other verbal processes, Matter can be specified (Anne and Henry chatted for hours about the election results), as can the language (Anne and Henry chatted four hours in Frenc~); with, speak and talk the language can in fact be named as a Verbiage/ Range (She speaks French) and so can certain verbal categories (She spoke a few hasty

284

CHAPTER FOUR

without considering the negative impact that it may have on developing nations". VERBALIZATION: verbalization \+Verbiage; Verbiage: nom. gp. [if'as name'] : name: [Verbiage:] What was it [Sayer:] the angel [Process:] said? : locution: quoting

& indicating 1: [Sayer:] The student [Process:] says--> "2: "How strange!" 1: [Sayer:] Neville [Process:] admits--> "2: "the permitted harvest exceeds the capacity of the forest to replace itself" 1: [Sayer:] /nstaphone's Peter McNee [Process:] agrees--> "2: "We essentially started as a telecom alternative." "1: "No senor", "2: "I could do better alone or with another woman"? "l: "The only thing we have in common,"> "is a bald head." 1: "If the Prophet were alive today," "P: that spending on exploration projects had dropped alarmingly. "P: It's true, "P: that it would report border violations. a.: [Sayer:] Regent's Evering ton [Process:] agrees - - > "P: that such compa,,ies will be able to move quickly and maff,e full use of a recovery. a.: [Sayer:] The general [Process:] warned--> "P: that the military might

286

The basic choice is between indicating (indirect proposition) and imperating (indirect proposal) projection, as shown in Figure 4-27, but I have taken one step further in delicacy since these more delicate distinctions are also realized in the selection of verb in the reporting clause. These more delicate distinctions are the ideational grammar's construal, its interpretation and representation, of the MOOD categories of the interpersonal grammar. But they are not identical with the MOOD categories; for instance, the projecting type imperating is more general than the mood type imperative (see further below), and the contrast between indirect declarative and indirect interrogative is not concerned with the orientation of giving vs. demanding information but with the modal status of the information. Contrast, for example: He said "Jack's gone up the hill" and He explained who had gone up the hill. The indirect interrogative simply means that the information is 'open'.

CHAPTER FOUR CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

287

PROJECTION OF MOOD: 'indicating' Proposition:

Projected Clause Indirect

These verbal clauses project propositions; in the environment of reporting, these are indirect propositions (statements or questions). indirect statement (declarative) [Quirk et al., 1985: 1181]: say, tell; acknowledge, add, admit, affirm, announce, assert, bet, boast, claim, comment, complain, concede, confes;} confide, confirm, convey, convince, declare, deny, disclose, exclaim, explain,forecast, guarantee, hint, insist, maintain, mention, object, persuade, predict, proclaim, promise, pronounce, prophesy, prove, protest, remark, repeat, reply, report, retort, state, submit, suggest, swear, testify, vow, warn, write

indirect question (interrogative) [Quirk et al., 1985:1184: demanding information: ask, ascertain, check, elicit, enquire, query, question;

giving information (many as in (i) above): advise, answer, confirm, demonstrate, disclose, explain, indicate, inform, notify,point out,predict,prove, say, show, tell, write; argue, debate, discuss, negotiate,

This is the contrast between e.g., He asked whether she would come and He answered whether he would come.

the passive voice: It is said! claimed! rumoured --> That they lived happily ever after. Here it is highly unlikely that a Sayer would be specified through a by-phrase. The active alternative would construe the Sayer as people in general: they/ people say .... The verb rumour is only used in the passive in this impersonal projecting type of verbal clause; we cannot say people rumour that .... There are also clauses involving grammatical metaphor that can be interpreted as verbal clauses of impersonal projection. The Medium/Subject is some kind of semiotic phenomenon such as news, word, rumour and the Process represents either (i) the dissemination of this phenomenon on a material model (spread, get out, get around) or, (ii) together with an Attribute, its existence, on a relational model. The projected locution serves as a Qualifier within the nominal group serving as Medium; for example: The report [that the President had been shotll swept across the nation. ·'

The projecting Qualifier is typically post-posed at the end of the clause; and here it might also be interpreted as a projected clause: By now, rumours were rife-> [that Ramos and de Villa had switched sidesll . The news spread quickly -> [that he'd left town Il. Like wildfire, the prophecy spread -> [that the "end of the world as we know it" was nearll.

Such metaphorical verbal clauses can also occur without the projected locution; for example: News of the coup attempt was trickling into Japan.

PROJECTION OF MOOD: imperating The ideational category imperating is wider than the interpersonal mood type imperative: While imperative clauses enact only one type of proposal, commands, in the first instance, imperating verbal clauses also construe offers (and suggestions) through projection. The contrast is illustrated in Table 4-31.

There is an option in indicating projection that is not catered for in the system network in Figure 4-27 ._ This is the option of "impersonal" projection: The verbal clause may project through the Process only without specifying the Sayer. In this case, the verbal group is in

288

CHAPTER FOUR CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

289

roposa:

demanding goods-&services - command giving goods-&services - offer

nterpersona - enacte through MOOD

imperative

Pee/me a ra e! (various:)

Shall I peel you a grape?

modulated projecting bound finite clause [cf. Quirk et al., 1985:1182]

eahona - construe through verbal TRANSITIVITY & projection

agree,arrange,ask,beg,command,concede,decree, demand, enjoin, ensure, entreat, grant, insist, instruct, move, ordain, order,pledge,propose, recommend, request, require, rule, stipulate, suggest, urge, vote

imperating She told him/

He offered her to peel her a grape

perfective bound nonfinite clause [cf. Quirk et al., 1985:1187]

ask, beg, tell, order, command, demand,promise, suggest,

Table 4-31: Proposals Enacted and Construed

VOW

This generalization of commands and offers is quite con~istent with the principle that the orientation of the speech function is construed by the selection of the reporting verb (tell : offer), not by the reporting clause - indicating reports are, as we have seen, declarative in mood structure (e.g., she said/ asked that/whether he had peeled her a grape). Commands are addressee-oriented - 'you do!' - whereas offers are speaker-oriented - 'I do!'. It is thus quite natural that the implicit Subject (symbolised by_ i) of a reported proposal should be coreferential with that participant of the projecting verbal clause representing the appropriate orientation. For reported commands it is thus the Receiver, the representation of the addressee, and for reported offers it is thus the Sayer, the representation of the speaker: She told himi --> _ i to peel her a grape Hei promised her --> _ i to peel her a grape This difference is made explicit when the reported proposal is realized by a modulated bound finite clause:

She told him--> that he should peel her a grape He promised her--> that he would peel her a grape

Typological outlook. The congruent way of projecting a locution in English is by means of a verbal clause, as exemplified above. There ar,i:: other ways, in particular a circumstance of Angle, such as according to the police, the victim has not been identified yet, a passive projection within a verbal group complex, as in he is said/ rwnoured to have left the country; in addition, interpersonal Adjuncts such as reportedly may indicate the status of report without specifying the reporter. In some languages, quotation is not achieved verbally but instead by means of a quotative particle or affix, as in Yaqui (from Lindenfeld, 1973: 105, cited in Munro, 1982: 313): In

kuna

my

husband

si

yuk- ne - tia

much

rain - fut -

'quotative'

'My husband says it's going to rain much'

4.9.1.2

ADDRESS

ADDRESS: receiver/ no receiver The system ADDRESS is the option of specifying or not specifying the Receiver (sometimes called Addressee 53 ) of a verbal process (see Figure 4-27). For instance:

ADDRESS: no receiver There are two main types for realizing the reported proposal - modulated projecting bound finite clauses and perfective bound nonfinite clauses; selections of verbs serving in the verbal clauses projecting these two types are listed below:

[Sayer:] He [Process:] does not speak [Matter:] of laws. [Sayer:] The student [Process:] says II "How strange!" 53 The term Receiver is preferable since it helps preserve the distinction between the interpersonal interactant 'addressee' (the listener addressed by the speaker, 'you') and the ideational participant construing this interactant role, the Receiver.

290

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S -

SIMPLE: EXP0UENTIAL

291

ADDRESS: receiver\+ Receiver; Receiver: (to/oO nom. gp. ''What is REAL?" 11 [Sayer:] the Rabbit [Process:] asked [Receiver:] the Skin Horse [Location:] one day. "Filled her up?" II [Process:] asked [Sayer:] Mrs Farthing [Receiver:] of her mate. How often have [Sayer:] you [Process:] said [Receiver:] to yourself II "I could do better alone or with another woman"?

'1 The option is open to all verbal clauses but the marking of the Receiver varies: With some verbs it is always a nominal group, or it is always a prepositional phrase (to -, of-), whereas with others it can be either: See Table 4-32. (Note that some verbs, notably ask and tell, belong to different groups here depending on other verbal clause features: Cf. he told us to leave; he told us the story I the story to us.)

Receiver: nom. gp.

Receiver: to+ nom. gp.

Receiver: of+ nom. gp.

The possibility of receiver is one difference between mental and verbal clauses; only the latter can have a Receiver. This indicates the externalization of content in verbal clauses, contrasting with the senser-intemal content in mental clauses. (Naturally, there are borderline cases, where the Senser is also construed like a Receiver of an interior monologue: She thought to herself "They shoot horses, don't they?".) The nominal group Anne in Henry wanted II Anne to leave is part of the projected clause, not of the projecting one. Consequently, it cannot figure as Subject in the projecting clause (there is no Anne was wanted to leave), whereas the Receiver of a verbal clause can (They told Anne II to leave : Anne was told II to leave). (Note the intermediate status of order: Henry ordered/ told Anne to wash the car; Anne was told/ ordered to wash the car; Henry *told/ ordered/ wanted the car to be washed cf. the bracketing introduced by THEME IDENTIFICATION: We can get what Henry told Anne was to wash the car but not what Henry ordered/ wanted Anne was to wash the car.)

4.9.2 4.9.2.1

Towards Verbal Lexis Lexical Spread in Verbal Clauses

ask(])

Verbal processes can be further differentiated along a number of parameters, in particular the type of projection possible (report/ quote; indicating (proposition)/ imperating (proposal); declarative/ interrogative), the modality of the projection (either oriented to the Sayer - e.g., suggest 'Sayer say II perhaps p'; assure 'Sayer say II certainly p' - or to the Receiver - e.g., convince 'Sayer say & Receiver come to believe II p'; induce 'Sayer tell & Receiver come to want II p' - or to the speaker - e.g., claim 'Sayer say & I don't believe II p'; reveal 'Sayer say & I know II p') and the MANNER of performance indicating the KEY etc ..

assure

convince inform notify offer query tell(]) urJZe read show teach tell (2) write

read show teach tell (2) write announce

assert declare deny explain hint say

Table 4-33 lists verbs occurring in verbal clauses within semantically related sets. The groupings are provisional and have not yet been systemicized. A number of parameters that are construed by the lexicogrammar in the differentiation of different sets have been identified and which are particularly at issue for a given lexicogrammatical set of verbs have been indicated.

suggest speak [verbal behaviour) talk [verbal behaviour] chat [verbal behaviour] ask(2)

ask(2)

beg

beg demand

demand reauest

reauest enauire

Table 4-32: Realizational Patterns for Receiver

292

CHAPTER FOUR

CLAUSF.S -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

293

exchange orientalion giving

wm initiate

Projectln1 Projected > D fronosltlon) xsav time modality manner

modality

speaker-

sayer-

oriented

oriented

modality receiveroriented

I will only note a special case of the declarative type here information is given.

polarity

sav, state, tell boast, brag, report, narrate.joke, write, telegraph, e-

v

mail,pen,

fuwre

--

future

hi11.h

--

-

negative

not'

median

--

high

understand

believe

11 (enh: concessive)

unwilling ly

--

--

wending

high

not believe

low

believe

believe not

ding

--

out of tum

convince, persuade; vrove f!uarantee, promise acknowledge, admit, concede, confess

claim,

respond

deman-

dispute, (call in question) 'say: orobablv not' uplain,

disclose, reveal add continue (phase: 'go on savin11.') assert, assure, insist, proclaim;

know

doubt/

whisper, shout 'say softly/ loudly sif!n 'sav with hands' forecast, predict, vrovhesv bet deny, repudiate, 'say:

swear, testifv, vow hint, SUf!f!est, submit counter, reply, retort, (that) answer (thatlwh) affirm, con(,rm af!ree disagree, object, vrotest ask, ascertain, check, elicit, enquire, query, auestion (whl interrupt, (cut in), resume

Table 4-33: Lexical Spread of Verbs in Verbal Clauses

the type where

This declarative type is similar to an option also found with cognitive mental clauses (cf. the discussion above of lexical delicacy and cognitive clauses); as an alternative to projecting an intensive relational clause, the Attribute or Value may serve in the verbal clause itself:

They declared II that he was insane They declared him insane: He was declared insane Examples of verbs are given in Table 4-34. Within verbal Clause+Attribute/Value

ProJected uause ., +Role

finite

nonfm1te: 'acc.+ be infinitive'

--

--

--

say

reoort

report as

report

certify

certify as

certify

proclaim

proclaim as

proclaim

accept as

accept

acknowled11.e as

acknowledf!e

---

--

Table 4-34: Verbal Projection of Intensive Relation An alternative interpretation is to treat these as causative, assigned relational clause, where the cause is semiotic rather than material: Compare they made him insane [clearly a causative ascriptive relational clause]: They declared him insane: They thought him insane -he was I seemed insane. One issue is clearly the degree to which a Receiver is felt to be natural: The psychiatrist declared him insane to the court. The relational interpretation is set out in some detail in Section 4.10.1 in the presentation of intensive clauses.

4.9.2.2

Collocational Patterns in Verbal Clauses

Verbal collocations involve Process + Range/ Verbiage. Like material ones, they always involve a grammatical metaphor. 54 What would be represented congruently as the process is represented metaphorically as the Range/ Verbiage.

54 Cf. also mental, metaphorically represented as possessive or intensive relational clauses: hold + belief I opinion, have + doubt I feeling; be afraid, be angry.

294

CHAPTER FOUR CLAUSES -

SIMPLE: EXPERIENTIAL

295

In the verbal case, the verb may be make (as it often is in the material case), but it may also be issue, ask, tell, or express: make + suggesti