Martin (1992: 535):
Table 7.14 Tenor — aspects the realisation of affect
Blogger Comments:
Some of the problems with this table of unsupported can be noted briefly here.
[1] Here the distinction between 'system' and 'process' is identified with the stratal distinction of content and expression. See the post here on the previous misuse of these terms with regard to tenor.
[2] The general distinction of loud/soft is appropriate only for the phonological category loudness.
[3] The claim is that amplification is the 'basic realisation principle' of affect, and that 'amplification achieved largely through iteration' in the case of 'content form' (p533) — by which Martin means the content plane — and though various 'parameters' in the case of 'expression form' (p534). Here the superordinate category 'amplification' is presented as one of its hyponyms.
[4] The claim here is that lexis is foregrounded; the examples given are restricted to those of attitude: the superordinate (attitudinal) and one hyponym (taboo) and its hyponym (swearing).
[5] The claim here is that phonæsthesia is a means of realising affect — a charged relation between interlocutors — through amplification. Phonæsthesia is any correspondence between sound and meaning, as in onomatopœia and phonæsthemes such as the [sl] in sleaze sled sledge sleek sleet sleigh slice slick slide slime sling slink slip slither sliver etc.
[6] The claim here is that 'exclamative' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[7] The "prosodic nominal groups" are those that include multiple intrusions of attitude. That is, the same feature has been included twice in the grammar examples. See also the lexis examples.
[8] The claim here is that 'comment' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[9] The claim here is that 'minor expressive' (undefined) realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[10] The claim here is that grammatical intensification realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[11] The claim here is that repetition is one way of realising a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[12] The claim here is that diminutives realise a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration. A diminutive is a word which has been modified to convey a slighter degree of its root meaning, to convey the smallness of the object or quality named, or to convey a sense of intimacy or endearment.
[13] The claim here is that 'mental affection' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[14] The claim here is that Manner: degree ('how much?') realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration. See also [10] intensification.
[15] The claim here is that 'no negotiation' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[16] The claim here is that 'challenging' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
[17] The claim here is that '1/2 person modal responsibility' realises a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration. In SFL theory, modal responsibility is the meaning of 'Subject'. The claim then is that 1st/2nd person Subjects realise a charged relation between interlocutors through iteration.
