Misconstruing Technical Terms As Grammatical Metaphors

Martin (1992: 409-10):

Note that incongruence can flow against the nominalising semantic drift which characterises much abstract discourse in English; fields like personal computing for example contain a number of verbalised participants as technical terms: computerise, boot, format, log on, paginate, scroll, tab and so on.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, nominalisation is a grammatical process; instances of other classes of grammatical form are transformed into nominals. The semantic drift of ideational metaphor is from logical to experiential meaning. Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 269):

We can say therefore that grammatical metaphor is predominantly a ‘nominalising’ tendency. But if we look at it semantically we can see that it is a shift from the logical to the experiential: that is, making maximum use of the potential that the system has evolved for classifying experience, by turning all phenomena into the most classifiable form — or at least into a form that is more classifiable than that in which they have been congruently construed.

[2] Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 286) explain the relation between grammatical metaphors and technical terms:

Almost all technical terms start out as grammatical metaphors; but they are grammatical metaphors which can no longer be unpacked. When a wording becomes technicalised, a new meaning has been construed — almost always, in our present-day construction of knowledge, a new thing (participating entity); and the junction with any more congruent agnates is (more or less quickly) dissolved.

Under-Representing The Scope Of Ideational Metaphor

Martin (1992: 409-10):

Experiential metaphor is a complex process, which cannot be examined in detail here.  Some of the more common types of grammatical metaphor associated with actions, qualities and participants are outlined in Table 6.17.

Table 6.17. Congruent and metaphorical realisations of experiential meaning
Action:
congruent	finite Process	use	deceive
	non-finite Process	using	deceiving
metaphorical	Thing	use	deception
	Epithet	useful	deceitful
Quality:		(experiential)	(attitudinal)
congruent	Epithet	quick	sad
metaphorical	Adjunct	quickly	sadly
	Thing	speed	sadness
	Process	quicken	sadden
Participant:
congruent	Thing	disaster	computer
metaphorical	Epithet	disastrous
	Process		computerise

Blogger Comments:

[1] In SFL theory, ideational metaphor is an incongruent realisational relation between the strata of semantics (meaning) and lexicogrammar (wording), as when (semantic) sequences are realised by (grammatical) clauses instead of clause complexes, and (semantic) figures are realised by (grammatical) nominal groups instead of clauses.  Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 646):

… the general tendency for ideational metaphor is to ‘downgrade’ the domain of grammatical realisation of a semantic sequence, figure or element — from clause nexus to clause, from clause to group/phrase, and even from group or phrase to word.  Such downgrading affects both the unit whose domain of realisation is downgraded, and the units of which it is composed: the downgrading proceeds down the rank scale by a kind of ‘domino effect’.

[2] The types presented here are limited to incongruent grammatical realisations of semantic elements by means of transcategorisation (for which, see Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 242-3).

[3] On a pedagogical note, the table layout seems designed to obfuscate.  For example, the finite/non-finite and experiential/attitudinal distinctions are redundant, as is the second column of examples, and the inclusion of speed instead of quickness adds an inconsistency with regard to the otherwise use of transcategorisation.

[4] In SFL theory, the types of semantic element are process, participant, circumstance and relator. Quality, like thing, is a type of participant; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 58-64, 175-226).

[5] The term Adjunct is inappropriate for a discussion of ideational metaphor because it is an interpersonal function.  The relevant experiential term is Manner: quality.  Note that Martin (1992: 316) relocates circumstances of Manner: quality from the clause to the verbal group — though only if they are realised by adverbial groups, not if they are realised by prepositional phrases.  See critique here.  Despite relocating these functions to group rank, Martin here uses the clause rank function Adjunct to label them.

Misconstruing Experiential Manifestations Of Expansion As Logical Metaphor

Martin (1992: 409):

When combined with experiential metaphors, incongruent conjunctive relations are realised across a variety of TRANSITIVITY structures.  Note the following variations on [6:23f]:

[6:23f]	material process
	The Second World War further encouraged the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis.
[6:26]	circumstance of cause
	Because of the Second World War the Australian economy was restructured towards a manufacturing basis.
[6:27]	circumstantial attribute
	The restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis was due to the Second World War.
[6:28]	value
	The cause of the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis was the Second World War.
[6:29]	circumstantial process
	The restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis resulted from the Second World War.

Blogger Comments:

[1] From the perspective of SFL theory, there are no conjunctive relations in any of these purported examples of logical metaphor.  Instead, these clause simplexes exemplify some of the experiential environments that 'construe expansion as a semantic system' (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 597).

[2] This is a circumstantial identifying relational Process of cause: reason, not a material Process. The identity decodes the Second World War by reference to the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis.

The Second World War	further	encouraged	the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis
Token/Identified	Manner: degree	Process: relational: circumstantial	Value/Identifier

[3] The grammatical environment of cause as ideational metaphor is group rank (Thing), not clause rank (Value).

the	cause	of the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis
Deictic	Thing	Qualifier

The cause [of the restructuring of the Australian economy towards a manufacturing basis]	was	the Second World War
Value/Identified	Process: relational: intensive	Token/Identifier