Martin (1992: 199):
The hypotactic proportionalities can be exemplified as follows:
NON-CONCESSIVE : CONCESSIVE ::
(MANNER)Ben improved his time by training hard :
Ben didn't improve his time even by training hard ::
(CONSEQUENCE)Ben improved his time because he trained hard :
Ben didn't improve his time even though he trained hard ::
(CONDITION)Ben will improve his time if he trains hard :Ben won't improve his time even if he trains hard ::
(PURPOSE)Ben can train hard in order to improve his time :
Ben can train hard without improving his time
Blogger Comments:
In SFL theory, the logical meaning of condition: concessive is if P then contrary to expectation Q. It may be ordered concession^consequence or consequence^concession.
[1] The logical relation here does not involve manner: means — N is by means of M. A manner agnate would be Ben didn't improve his time by means of training hard. The logical relation here is simply condition: concessive as in Ben didn't improve his time even though he trained hard.
[2] The logical relation here does not involve cause: reason (Martin's 'consequence') — because P so result Q. A reason agnate would be because he trained hard Ben didn't improve his time. The logical relation here is simply condition: concessive.
[3] The logical relation here does not involve cause: purpose — because intention P so action Q. The logical relation here is not even a type of enhancement, but the type of extension termed addition: adversative — X and conversely Y — as in the paratactic agnate Ben can train hard and not improve his time.
