Misrepresenting The Unpacking Of Metaphor

Martin (1992: 411-2, 491n):

This means that abstract text, especially that textured by ideational metaphor, is often best unpacked in steps, up to the point where the analysis is sufficient for the deconstruction in which the analyst is engaged.  One such unpacking strategy involves first unpacking logical metaphors and any experiential metaphors necessary to render them, then moving on [to] unpack the remaining experiential metaphors and finally turning to any interpersonal ones.  This strategy is illustrated below for [6:23k].

[6:23k]

The enlargement of Australia’s steel-making capacity, and of chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles all owed something to the demands of war.

(i) UNPACKING IDEATIONAL METAPHOR

(rendering logical metaphors as conjunctions and unpacking any experiential metaphors necessary to accomplish this) 

alpha	Australia’s steel-making capacity enlarged, alongside that of chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles
beta	partly because war demanded it.

(ii) UNPACKING REMAINING EXPERIENTIAL METAPHORS

alpha	Australia’s capacity to make steel got bigger, alongside that of chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles
beta	partly because war demanded it.

 (iii) UNPACKING INTERPERSONAL METAPHORS

alpha	Australia could make more steel, chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles
beta	partly because people said
gamma	“Give us materials
delta	so that3 we can fight the war”

3 The conjunction so that has been selected here since it codes the meaning of inclination; see Chapter 4 above.

Blogger Comments:

[1] In terms of SFL theory, this is a semantic sequence of at least three figures incongruently realised as a single clause at the level of grammar:

The enlargement of Australia’s steel-making capacity, and of chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles all	owed	something	to the demands of war
Token/Identifier	Process: possession	Value/Identified	Beneficiary

A more congruent grammatical realisation might be something like the following complex of three clauses:

Australia	ended up being able to produce	more steel, chemicals, rubber, metal goods and motor vehicles	to some extent	because	it	had needed to be able to produce	them	in order to	fight	the war
a				x b cause: reason
				a				x b cause: purpose
Actor	Process: material	Goal	Manner: degree		Actor	Process: material	Goal		Process: material	Scope: process

[2] This is not unpacking interpersonal metaphor.  Interpersonal metaphor involves modality or speech function being construed as a proposition, as when realised grammatically by a projecting clause, or involves incongruent (grammatical) realisations of (semantic) speech functions, as when a command is realised by indicative mood.  See Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 626-35) and the following critiques.

[3] The conjunction group so that realises a logico-semantic relation of cause: purpose between the two clauses in the nexus.  It does not function interpersonally to "code the meaning of inclination". See previous critiques, e.g. here and here.

Confusing Logogenesis With Text Analysis & Misrepresenting The Unpacking Of Metaphor

Martin (1992: 410-1):

It is important to note that grammatical metaphor is a "recursive" process; a number of the "congruent" unpackings in the table above [Table 6.18] can themselves be unpacked. Capable for example is really an incongruent assessment of ability, realised congruently as can do.  Seen from an encoding perspective, the modulation of ability is first skewed from the modal verb (can) to adjective (capable), which is in turn nominalised as capabilities. Similarly, inadequate can be further unpacked as a negative phoric numerative not enough; emphasise can be rendered say to be important; advance can be related to make better; and strenuous is related to the noun strain which itself construes an action as a thing.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This confuses the process of grammatical metaphor (as deployed by speakers/writers during logogenesis) with the process of analysing grammatical metaphor (as carried out by a linguist).

[2] Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 621) on potentiality/ability:

This is on the fringe of the modality system.  It has the different orientations of subjective (implicit only) realised by can/can’t, objective implicit by be able to, and objective explicit by it is possible (for …) to.  In the last of these, the typical meaning is ‘potentiality’… .  In the subjective it is closer to inclination; we could recognise a general category of ‘readiness’, having ‘inclination’ and ‘ability’ as subcategories at one end of the scale… .

[3] This is not unpacking metaphor. The word inadequate is an adjective, which is the congruent realisation of a quality, and so is not metaphorical and therefore needs no unpacking. It typically serves in a nominal group as interpersonal (attitudinal) Epithet — or otherwise as Post-Deictic — not as Numerative; cf. more/most inadequate.

[4] This is not unpacking metaphor. The word emphasise is a verb, which is the congruent realisation of a process, and so is not metaphorical and therefore needs no unpacking.

[5] This is not unpacking metaphor. The word advance is a verb, which is the congruent realisation of a process, and so is not metaphorical and therefore needs no unpacking.  It means 'to go forward' or 'make progress' rather than 'make better' (cf. improve, ameliorate).

[6] This is not unpacking metaphor. The word strenuous is an adjective, which is the congruent realisation of a quality, and so is not metaphorical and therefore needs no unpacking.  (Etymologically, strenuous derives from Latin strenuus meaning 'brisk', whereas strain derives from Latin stringere meaning 'draw tight'.)

Reducing Ideational Metaphor To The Transcategorisation Of Elements

Martin (1992: 410, 411):

Metaphorical qualities and actions are illustrated in the following clauses from [6:23]. Their function there is mainly to package experiential meaning for realisation as New.

[6:23]	m.	The war had also revealed inadequacies in Australia’s scientific and research capabilities.
	n.	After the war strenuous efforts were made to improve these.
	o.	The Australian National University was established with an emphasis on research.
	p.	The government gave its support to the advancement of science in many areas, including agricultural production.

Table 6.18. Unpacking experiential metaphors in text [6:23:m-p]
	metaphorical	congruent
quality	inadequacies	inadequate
	capabilities	capable
process	efforts	try to do
	emphasis	emphasise
	research	research
	support	support
	advancement	advance
	production	produce
participant	scientific	science
	agricultural	agriculture
	strenuous	strain

Blogger Comments:

[1] The grammatical metaphor in (m), involves a semantic figure being incongruently realised as a nominal group (inadequacies in Australia’s scientific and research capabilities) instead of congruently as an attributive clause (Australia’s scientific and research capabilities are inadequate) — whose Carrier also involves the metaphorical realisation of a figure as a nominal group (Australia’s scientific and research capabilities).

The grammatical metaphor in (n) involves a semantic process being incongruently realised grammatically as the Thing (efforts) of a nominal group, thereby giving the 'process thing' modal responsibility by serving as Subject.  The word strenuous is not metaphorical, since it is a quality realised congruently as an adjective.

The grammatical metaphor in (o), involves a semantic figure being incongruently realised grammatically as a prepositional phrase (with an emphasis on research) instead of congruently as a clause (emphasising research).

The grammatical metaphor in (p) involves a semantic process being incongruently realised grammatically as the Thing (support) of a nominal group, and semantic figures being incongruently realised as nominal groups (the advancement of science, agricultural production).

[2] Neither of the 'process thing' metaphors (effort, support) are packaged as New information here; the unmarked New in the respective information units is improve and in many areas. Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 401) explain the discourse function of ideational metaphor as follows:

But ideational grammatical metaphors typically have a discourse function of this kind; they are as it were pressed into service by the textual metafunction, to provide alternative groupings of quanta of information.

[3] As the table illustrates, ideational metaphor is viewed here only from the perspective of elemental metaphors arising from transcategorisation; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 242ff).

Misconstruing Technical Terms As Grammatical Metaphors

Martin (1992: 409-10):

Note that incongruence can flow against the nominalising semantic drift which characterises much abstract discourse in English; fields like personal computing for example contain a number of verbalised participants as technical terms: computerise, boot, format, log on, paginate, scroll, tab and so on.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, nominalisation is a grammatical process; instances of other classes of grammatical form are transformed into nominals. The semantic drift of ideational metaphor is from logical to experiential meaning. Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 269):

We can say therefore that grammatical metaphor is predominantly a ‘nominalising’ tendency. But if we look at it semantically we can see that it is a shift from the logical to the experiential: that is, making maximum use of the potential that the system has evolved for classifying experience, by turning all phenomena into the most classifiable form — or at least into a form that is more classifiable than that in which they have been congruently construed.

[2] Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 286) explain the relation between grammatical metaphors and technical terms:

Almost all technical terms start out as grammatical metaphors; but they are grammatical metaphors which can no longer be unpacked. When a wording becomes technicalised, a new meaning has been construed — almost always, in our present-day construction of knowledge, a new thing (participating entity); and the junction with any more congruent agnates is (more or less quickly) dissolved.