Sunday 3 May 2015

Rebranding A Misunderstanding Of A Grammatical Opposition As Discourse Semantic

Martin (1992: 116):
As with superset reference, the nature of the experiential relevance of the presumed participant may or may not be specified.  It is not specified when other, same, different, identical and similar function as Post-Deictic or when the same items or such realise the Epithet; it is specified when comparative quantifiers and adjectives are deployed.  This opposition is illustrated below.
GENERAL -
the
other
four
frogs

Deictic
Post-Deictic
Numerative         
Thing






the
four
other
frogs

Deictic
Numerative
Epithet
Thing





EXPERIENTIALISED -




QUALITY:
the       
four
bigger
frogs

Deictic
Numerative
Epithet
Thing






the      
four
equally big
frogs

Deictic
Numerative
Epithet (β α)
Thing





QUANTITY:
fewer
frogs



Numerative
Thing








equally many
frogs



Numerative (β α)
Thing




Blogger Comments:

[1] This continues the mistaking of experiential construal for textual reference, and nominal groups for reference items; see previous posts.

[2] To be clear, Martin's opposition of general vs experientialised is a misunderstanding and rebranding of Halliday's comparative reference opposition of general vs particular on the grammatical stratum as a discourse semantic opposition.


No comments:

Post a Comment