Martin (1992: 209-10):
With [reformulation], the basic distinction is between reworking a meaning in order to clarify it and adjusting it to get it right. This is the opposition between [4:115] above (repeated below) and [4:118]. In [4:115] that is does not imply that anything was wrong with the first formulation; its experiential meaning is simply restated by way of clarification. In [4:118] on the other hand in fact does imply that something was not quite right the first time round; in this example the implication is that the first formulation was not strong enough.
REFORMULATION:REWORK:ABSTRACTION:EXHAUST[4:115] The riot began shows that riot is a process term, even though it is in nominal form.That is, the fact that riot is a noun does not mean that it cannot represent an action as its colligation with began shows.
REFORMULATION:ADJUST[4:118] The riot began shows that riot is a process term, even though it is in nominal form.In fact, riot would have to be classified lexically as an action word.
Blogger Comments:
[1] This misconstrues the conjunctive relation of expository apposition ('that is'), which is a type of elaboration, as a subtype of similarity — i.e. comparison, a type of enhancement — despite being interpreted as clarification, another type of elaboration.
[2] This misconstrues the conjunctive relation of verificative clarification ('in fact'), which is a type of elaboration, as a subtype of similarity — i.e. comparison, a type of enhancement. The meaning of (what is) clarification — 'to be precise' — is interpreted as a repair strategy 'adjusting it to get it right'.
Summary: In SFL theory, the conjunctive contrast exemplified here is between two types of elaboration: expository apposition ('that is') and verificative clarification ('in fact').
[2] This misconstrues the conjunctive relation of verificative clarification ('in fact'), which is a type of elaboration, as a subtype of similarity — i.e. comparison, a type of enhancement. The meaning of (what is) clarification — 'to be precise' — is interpreted as a repair strategy 'adjusting it to get it right'.
Summary: In SFL theory, the conjunctive contrast exemplified here is between two types of elaboration: expository apposition ('that is') and verificative clarification ('in fact').
