Blurring The Distinction Between Function (Structure) And Form (Rank Scale) [New]

Martin (1992: 5-6):

Fig. 1.2 represents the clause as a bundle of features, realised by the structural sequence Finite^Subject^Predicator.

Note that structures of this kind contain both function (e.g. Finite; initial upper case) and class labels (e.g. clause; lower case, enclosed in square brackets). These structures, like the systems which underlie them, are further organised along a scale of rank, which reduces the number of levels between clause and morpheme required in analysis (see Hudson 1967/1981). Making use of a different set of functions (from Halliday 1985a), implying a different set of options, this labelling and bracketing is further illustrated in Fig. 1.3. Three ranks are included (i.e. clause, group and word), but word structure is not shown.

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is potentially misleading. In SFL Theory structures are relations between functions. The string of formal units of various classes is known as a syntagm.

[2] This is also potentially misleading. The rank scale is a way of modelling formal constituency, such that a clause consists of groups and phrases, which consist of words, which consist of morphemes. Functions are assigned to constituents of a unit, such as groups and phrases of a clause, and it is the relations between these functions that constitute the structure of the (higher ranked) unit.

[3] See Halliday (1985: 22-30) on ranked constituent analysis (minimal bracketing, function labelling) vs immediate constituent analysis (maximal bracketing, class labelling).