Martin (1992: 207-8):
Internal comparative relations are a resource for organising meanings with respect to similarity and difference. The comparison involved is a textual one; it is not oriented to how meanings are alike or unlike with respect to field. One way to see this is to take the same experiential meaning and recast it internally as in [4:113] and [4:114] below. In [4:113] a text is developed in which Dr. Metherell's conservative politics are presented in opposition to his interest in 'reforming' education — the text is organised to challenge the idea that conservatives don't in fact turn back the clock. In [4:114] on the other hand a text is presented in which Dr. Metherell's reforms are presented as an elaboration of his conservative nature — the text takes it for granted that reactionary Ministers of Education will undo liberal reforms.
INTERNAL SIMILARITY (sic)
[4:113] Dr. Metherell's a conservative;
he wants to preserve the status quo.
On the other hand he does want education to change,
and his approach has alienated many parents and teachers.
INTERNAL DIFFERENCE (sic)
[4:114] Dr. Metherell's a conservative;
he wants to preserve the status quo.
That is, he does want education to change,
and his approach has alienated many parents and teachers.
The internal conjunction in these two texts codes different ideologies — different attitudes to what conservative governments do; but as far as external relations are concerned, what Dr. Metherell is up to experientially in the two texts remains the same.
Blogger Comments:
(Presumably the terms SIMILARITY and DIFFERENCE were intended to be in reverse order.)
In terms of SFL theory, the conjunctive relations demonstrated here are neither internal nor comparative. In terms of conjunctive cohesion:
[4:113] is extension: addition: adversative
[4:114] is elaboration: apposition: expository.
[1] This is a definition of cohesive conjunction in general, not internal conjunction in particular. External conjunctive relations involve textual relations between 'external phenomena', whereas internal conjunctive relations involve textual relations that are internal to the communication situation itself. See previous critiques here and here.
[2] This confuses difference (means: comparison) with adversative (extension: addition), as the term 'opposition' suggests.
[3] This confuses similar (means: comparison) with expository (elaboration: apposition), as the term 'elaboration' suggests.
In terms of cohesion, the lexical antonymy of status quo and change is inconsistent with the conjunctive elaboration.
[4] Cohesive conjunction does not 'code ideology' — it deploys the categories of expansion as a non-structural text-forming resource.
In terms of cohesion, the lexical antonymy of status quo and change is inconsistent with the conjunctive elaboration.
[4] Cohesive conjunction does not 'code ideology' — it deploys the categories of expansion as a non-structural text-forming resource.
