The titles of the posts that evaluate chapter 7 provide a glimpse of some of its theoretical shortcomings.
- Misunderstanding Metafunctions
- Confusing Orders Of Experience
- The Invalidity Of The Argument For Register And Genre As Context Strata
- Theoretical Inconsistencies In Modelling Genre And Register As Context Strata
- The Invalidity Of The Argument For A Stratum Of Ideology
- Inconsistent Claims About Discourse Semantics, Register, Genre And Ideology
- Misrepresenting Firth On Context
- Misrepresenting Halliday On Formal And Contextual Meaning
- Misunderstanding Stratification And Context
- Purpose, Genre And Register
- Confusing Context With Semantics
- Confusing Context With Text Type
- Self-Contradiction
- Problems With The Non-Argument For Register As Context
- Problems With The Non-Argument For Genre As Context
- Assigning Purpose To Theoretical Dimensions
- Misrepresenting Purpose And Intention
- Confusing Text Type (Genre) With Text Structure (Semantics)
- Misrepresenting Previous Work On Text Structure And Context
- Misrepresenting Hasan On Text Structure
- Inverting The Stratification Hierarchy
- Misunderstanding Stratification And Realisation
- Confusing Context (And Semantics) With Text Type
- Problems With 'Genre As A Pattern Of Register Patterns'
- Seven Problems With The First Justification For A Genre Stratum
- Two Problems With The Second Justification For A Genre Stratum
- Eight Problems With The Third Justification For A Genre Stratum
- Two Problems With The Fourth Justification For A Genre Stratum
- Two Problems With The Fifth Justification For A Genre Stratum
- Misidentifying Metafunctions
- Misrepresenting Mode
- Misconstruing A Dialogic Response As Monologue
- Misunderstanding Mode
- Not Acknowledging Hasan As Intellectual Source
- Blurring Distinctions
- Misunderstanding Bakhtin's 'Dialogic' And 'Heteroglossic'
- Misunderstanding Orders Of Experience
- Confusing Material Order Phenomena With Textual Semiosis
- Confusing Context Potential (Mode) With Language Sub-Potentials (Registers)
- Multiple Violations Of Theoretical Dimensions
- Redefining Genre As Field
- Under-Acknowledging Hasan As Theoretical Source
- Confusing Contextual Potential With Semantic Sub-potentials
- Miscategorising Texts By Mode
- Miscategorising Text Types
- Misrepresenting The Distinction Between Hortatory And Analytical Exposition
- Misconstruing Degrees Of Abstraction
- Confusing Mode (Context) With The Ideational Semantics Of Registers
- Confusing Strata And Metafunctions
- Misrepresenting Abstraction
- Confusing Mode Potential (Context) With Text Types (Register)
- Misconstruing Language Rôle As Speaker Rôle
- Misconstruing Language Rôle As Speaker Rôle
- Confusing Theoretical Dimensions: Stratification, Instantiation & Metafunction
- Confusing Different Strata, Metafunctions & Orders Of Experience
- Misconstruing Ancillary As Constitutive
- Misconstruing Lower And Higher Orders Of Experience As Higher & Lower Levels Of Symbolic Abstraction
- Confusing Mode Potential With Ideational Semantics Subpotentials
- Confusing Mode Potential With Ideational Semantics Subpotentials
- Misconstruing Field As Mode
- Misconstruing The Notion Of Projection
- Misconstruing Mode
- Misconstruing Dialogue As Unprojected
- The Non-Argument For 'Experiential Distance'
- Misunderstanding Tenor
- Misconstruing Context Potential (Tenor) As Language Sub-Potential (Register)
- Blurring The Distinction Between Tenor (Context) And Interpersonal Meaning (Semantics)
- Misattributing A Source
- Three Minor Clarifications
- Confusing Context Potential With The Semantics Of Registers
- Misconstruing "Status-Like Relationships Between Participants"
- Misconstruing Status As Control
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Status & Phonology
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Status & Grammar
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Status & Lexis
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Status & Discourse Semantics
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Status & Grammatical Metaphor
- Misconstruing The Realisation Of Tenor
- Misrepresenting The Relation Between Contact And Field
- Metafunctional Confusion And A Non-Sequitur
- Confusing Instantiation With Axial And Stratal Realisation
- Misrepresenting Field As Discourse Semantics
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Tone
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Tonality
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Tonicity
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & “Phonology”
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Grammar
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Lexis
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Discourse Semantics
- Presenting Unsupported Claims As A Survey: Contact & Grammatical Metaphor
- Unsupported Claims About Affect
- Misconstruing Relations Between Speakers As Individual Predisposition
- Confusing Affect With Affection
- Mental vs Relational vs Material Affection
- Misconstruing Affect With Unsupported Claims
- Misconstruing A Tenor Relation As The Behaviours And Predispositions Of Individuals
- Blurring The Distinction Between Context And Semantics
- Inconsistent Unsupported Claims About The Realisation Of Misconstrued Affect
- Invoking Clinical And Social Psychology
- Confusing Field With The Language That Realises It
- Blurring The Distinction Between Realisation, Logogenesis And Instantiation
- Misrepresenting Data & Confusing Strata
- Confusing Context With Extra-Linguistic Knowledge, Register And Semantics
- Misrepresenting The Distinction Between Fabula And Syuzhet
- Misconstruing Barthes' 'Sequence' As Field
- Not Acknowledging Barthes As Intellectual Source
- Misrepresenting Barthes
- Misrepresenting Barthes And Confusing Material & Semiotic Orders Of Experience
- Confusing Composition And Superordination
- Why Chomskyan Linguistics Has Power
- Misconstruing Mode As Field
- Misconstruing Behaviour As A Register Of Language
- A False Dichotomy
- Confusing Field And Language
- Confusing Orders Of Experience
- Misconstruing Field Taxonomies As Classifications Of Personnel & Semiotic Objects
- Confusing Experience With Construals Of Experience
- Metafunctional Inconsistency
- Internal Inconsistency
- Some Of The Problems With Register and Genre As Semiotic Planes
- Misconstruing Activity Sequence (Semantics) As Field And Schematic Structure (Semantics) As Genre
- Confusing First And Second Orders Of Experience
- Inferring Invalidly From Misconstruals Of Semantic Structure As Field And Genre
- The Reason For Separating Field And Genre
- Misinterpreting Pike
- Misinterpreting Hasan And Proposing Theoretical Inconsistencies
- The Question Of Whether Systematising Generic Structure Potentials Leads Directly To A Two Plane Model Of Register And Genre
- Misrepresenting Hasan On Generic Structure Potential
- Prioritising Structure Over System
- Misrepresenting The Prosodic Mode Of Realisation
- Distinguishing Interpersonal Meaning From Evaluation
- Misconstruing Prosody
- Confusing Text Type With Text Structure
- Misrepresenting Halliday
- A Transparently False Claim
- Misunderstanding Stratal Relations And Confusing Text Type (Genre) With System (Potential)
- Misconstruing Language Sub-Potentials (Genres) As Context Potential (Culture)
- Misrepresenting Longacre
- Martin's Reason Why Field, Tenor & Mode Are Insufficient To Classify Genres
- Misconstruing Semantics As Context And Misidentifying Metafunctions
- Confusing Strata And Misidentifying Metafunctions
- Misconstruing Semantics (Activity Sequence) As Context (Field)
- Not Classifying Text Types From Above
- Classifying Text Types From Semantics Instead Of Context
- Misconstruing Language Sub-Potentials As Constituting Context Potential
- Weaving An Illogical Argument Around A Misinterpretation Of Halliday
- Martin's Reasons For Not Devising Genre Systems
- Why Martin Prefers His Own Model To Halliday's
- Misrepresenting Halliday On Context, Register And Genre
- Misconstruing A Higher Order Of Experience As A Lower Level Of Symbolic Abstraction
- Misconstruing One Mode System As Register And Another As Genre
- Misconstruing First & Second Orders Of Field
- Strategically Misrepresenting Hasan
- Why Martin Prefers His Own Model To Hasan's
- Asserting The Opposite Of What Is True
- Misunderstanding Realisation
- Misrepresenting Martin (1992)
- Misconstruing Heteroglossia And Dialogism As System And Process
- Misrepresenting Martin (1992) On Register & Genre
- Addressing "The Central Problem In Marxist Theory" By Adding A More Abstract Level
- Ignoring Halliday's Caution Against Premature Articulation
- Preparing To Misconstrue Bernstein's Codes As Ideology
- Misrepresenting Hasan
- Misunderstanding Semantic Variation And Bakhtin
- Martin's Reasons For Not Devising Ideology Systems
- Misconstruing Bernstein's Coding Orientation As Ideology
- Discursive Power And The Evolutionarily Necessary Resolution Of Semiotic Tension Through Dynamic Openness
- Confusing Linguistic Variabilty With Contextual Tension
- Misunderstanding System Architecture And Dynamics
- Affirming The Metastability Of Evolving Dynamic Open Systems
- Confusing Tenor (Context) With Interpersonal Meaning (Semantics)
- Subscribing To The Naturalistic Fallacy
- Misrepresenting Martin (1992) On Discourse Semantics And Contextual Theory
No comments:
Post a Comment