Trying To Classify Speech Function 'From Below' [New]

Martin (1992: 36):

As far as determining speech function is concerned, there are a number of factors to take into account. First of all, there are several indexical markers which clearly distinguish proposals from propositions. These include please, kindly, allright, okay and thank-you. Please and kindly are found in Commands, allright and okay in Response Offers to Commands and thank-you in responses to Offers or Commands.

Could I have a midi [middy] of Coopers, please?

— Okay.

— Thanks.

Beyond this, it is difficult to find unique grammatical criteria for recognising very general categories such as Offer, Command, Statement and so on.

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, here Martin is trying to argue semantic distinctions 'from below' — in terms of grammatical expressions. This is the direct opposite of the methodology of SFL Theory, which gives priority to the view 'from above' — the meanings that are expressed. See the previous post.

[2] This is misleading. To be clear, three of the four primary speech functions can be recognised by their congruent grammatical realisations:

• commands realised in imperative mood,
• statements realised in declarative mood, and
• questions realised in interrogative mood.

Misrepresenting Texture [New]

Martin (1992: 26):

Chapter 6 then looks at the ways in which the discourse structures generated by these systems interact systematically with lexicogrammatical structures (the question of texture).

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, Martin's notion that the discourse semantic stratum and the lexicogrammatical stratum "interact" derives from his misunderstanding (e.g. p390) of strata as modules. Importantly, strata are not modules, but different levels of symbolic abstraction, and to claim that they interact is analogous to claiming that Hamlet and the actor playing him interact.

[2] To be clear, in SFL Theory 'texture' refers to the property of being a text (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 2), and it is created by the textual resources of the lexicogrammar: the systems of THEME, INFORMATION and COHESION (Halliday 1985: 313-4). That is, texture is not a question of semantic structures interacting with lexicogrammatical structures.

Preparing To Argue 'From Below' And Misunderstanding 'Cumulative' [New]

Martin (1992: 10, 28n):

Structural arguments for metafunctional diversity are of particular relevance here in light of the proposals for discourse structures to be developed in Section 1.5 below. Halliday's (1979a) suggestion is that experiential meanings predispose particulate forms of realisation, interpersonal meanings prosodic ones and textual meanings periodic² ones.

² Halliday (1979) actually refers to periodic structures as culminative ones; the term periodic is preferred here because of the misleading association between culmination and final position.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, arguing for metafunctional diversity on the basis of structure is arguing 'from below', which is the direct opposite of the perspective taken in SFL Theory, where priority is given to the view 'from above'. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 49):

Giving priority to the view ‘from above’ means that the organising principle adopted is that of system: the grammar is seen as a network of interrelated meaningful choices. In other words, the dominant axis is the paradigmatic one: the fundamental components of the grammar are sets of mutually defining contrastive features. Explaining something consists not in stating how it is structured but in showing how it is related to other things: its pattern of systemic relationships, or agnateness …

[2] To be clear, in the field of linguistics, the term 'culminative' is not associated with final position, but with prominence, which in SFL Theory, is a resource of the textual metafunction. The notion of 'culminative function' is from the phonology of Trubetskoy (1960):

the function carried out by those characteristics (features) of sounds in speech that permit the listener to apprehend the number of words, or syntagmas, in a sentence. The unit containing the element of sound that performs the culminative function is called the culmination, for example, the culmination of a syntagma. The culminative function in German, for example, is performed by the primary stress. Stress, pitch, and other prosodic elements usually carry out the culminative function.