Misunderstanding Stratification And Incongruence [New]

Martin (1992: 50):

The model of conversational structure developed to this point consists of three networks, two in the discourse semantics (NEGOTIATION at exchange rank and SPEECH FUNCTION at move rank) and one in lexicogrammar (MOOD at clause rank). Clauses selecting independently for MOOD are thus classified in three ways: by MOOD class, by SPEECH FUNCTION class, and with respect to their structural function in the exchange (i.e. with respect to their NEGOTIATION class). The picture is presented, by strata and rank, in Fig. 2.12.

The model thus makes provision for two types of incongruence: between NEGOTIATION and SPEECH FUNCTION and between SPEECH FUNCTION and MOOD.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, Martin does not provide a system network for NEGOTIATION, and the networks of SPEECH FUNCTION and MOOD are based on those previously devised by Halliday.

[2] This misunderstands the relation of semantics to grammar. To be clear, to claim that clauses (grammar) are classified by semantic system features ("classes") is to mistake an attributive relation (class membership) for an identifying relation (identity). That is to say, semantics (Attribute) does not classify grammar (Carrier); semantics (Value) is realised by grammar (Token).

[3] This misunderstands the notion of in/congruence in SFL Theory, where it describes realisation relations between strata. To be clear, to claim that in/congruence applies to ranks on the same stratum is to mistake composition (extension) for realisation (elaboration). See, for example, Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 145-6).

Misrepresenting Speech Function [New]

Martin (1992: 46):

It was further noted that through ellipsis and the grading systems associated with MODALISATION, MODULATION and attitude the grammar is structured in such a way as to pair off the interacts, giving rise to the seven basic adjacency pairs suggested above. The major limitation of the description to this point is that it is not explicit about how in dialogue this pairing takes place. Both MOOD and SPEECH FUNCTION classify individual interacts, not sequences. It is to the question of sequencing interacts that this section now turns.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is misleading, because it is not ellipsis, attitude and modality that give rise to adjacency pairs, but the fact that the giving or demanding of information or goods-&-services (SPEECH FUNCTION) invites a response from the addressee.

[2] This is misleading, because it is not true. The system of SPEECH FUNCTION specifies both initiating and responding moves. Halliday (1985: 69) listed the responses as follows:

and Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 108) later provided the following system network:

Misrepresenting Stratification [Augmented]

Martin (1992: 46):

To this point a stratified approach to the function of interacts has been proposed, with MOOD and SPEECH FUNCTION each contributing one layer of meaning on the content plane.

 

Blogger Comment:

[1] This is misleading, because it misrepresents Halliday's prior theorising as Martin's innovation. To be clear, firstly, Martin is claiming in this publication that stratifying the content plane is his innovation, despite the fact that Halliday & Hasan (1976: 5) present just such a stratification:

And secondly, Martin is here claiming that stratifying SPEECH FUNCTION (semantics) with respect to MOOD (lexicogrammar) is his innovation, despite this distinction being made in Halliday (1985: 71, 342), if not before:

The semantic function of a clause in the exchange of information is a proposition; the semantic function of a clause in the exchange of goods-&-services is a proposal. …

The other main type of interpersonal metaphor is that associated with mood. Mood expresses the speech function; and as we saw in Chapter 4 the underlying pattern of organisation here is the exchange system — giving or demanding information or goods-&-services, which defines the four basic speech functions of statement, question, offer and command.

[2] In SFL stratification, the content plane consists of one level of meaning, semantics, and one level of wording, lexicogrammar, not two levels of meaning. The grammatical system of MOOD is a system of wording that realises meaning: the semantic system of SPEECH FUNCTION. The semantic system of SPEECH FUNCTION is a system of meaning that is realised by wording: the grammatical system of MOOD.