Sunday, 11 October 2015

Misconstruing Logico-Semantic Relations Realised In The Clause [2]

Martin (1992: 311):
Table 5.7 illustrates a number of these Process ° Range constructions.  Note the way in which they contrast with the Process ° Medium structures in parentheses.  From the point of view of field, the Process ° Range:process structure involves just one meaning (which is realised through two lexical items, one elaborating the other; the Process ° Medium structures on the other hand involve two meanings, and an action and the participant that action is mediated through).


Table 5.7. Elaboration and extension in the clause
Clause
process
=
range:process
(process + medium)
play

tennis
(play + the ball)
sing

song
(sing + her x to sleep)
score

run
(score + some dope)
ask

question
(ask + Mary x to tea)
tell

story
(tell + him off)
take

bath
(bathe + the baby)
do

dance
(dance + her x over)
make

friend
(befriend + John)


Blogger Comments:

[1] The view from field is irrelevant to whether or not 'the Process ° Range:process structure involves just one meaning'.

[2] A 'Process ° Range:process structure' construes two meanings: a process and a range of the process — not one.

[3] In the case of a verbal Process, the Range (Verbiage) is related to the Nucleus by projection, not elaborating expansion.

[4] In SFL theory, logico-semantic relations obtain between the Nucleus and participants (and circumstances) outside the Nucleus — not between the Process and Medium within the Nucleus. There are no extending relations between the Nucleus and other participants (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 174-5).

[5] 'Friend' is an entity, not a process.

[6] In such construals, 'Mary' functions as Beneficiary (Receiver), not Medium — the omitted Sayer is the Medium.  The Receiver is related to the Nucleus by enhancement, not extension.

No comments:

Post a comment