Misinterpreting Theme And New

Martin (1992: 452):

The main contrast is in the range of meanings woven through Theme and New.  Only a few of the text's participants and processes are selected as unmarked topical Theme, with far greater variation in New.  The Themes focus on the major participants involved in the anecdote, while the News tell the story.  Putting this in more general terms, Themes angle in on a given field, reflecting a text's genre; News elaborate the field, developing it in experiential terms.  This contrast in functions operates across text types …

Blogger Comments:

[1] None of the text's processes are selected as topical Theme — unmarked or otherwise; see the Theme analysis below.  The reason for the greater variation in New information than unmarked topical Themes is that, in these declarative clauses, the unmarked topical Theme is restricted to the Subject, whereas any information at all can be highlighted as New, including the unmarked topical Theme/Subject.

[2] This unsupported assertion is manifestly untrue.  Both Themes and News textually highlight the major participants in the anecdote — and more besides; see the Theme analysis below, in which the focus of New information is highlighted as green when also thematic and blue otherwise.

[3] This unsupported assertion also is manifestly untrue. The speaker tells the story; the News are information that the speaker presents as non-recoverable to the listener. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 118):

We can now see more clearly what the terms Given and New actually mean. The significant variable is: information that is presented by the speaker as recoverable (Given) or not recoverable (New) to the listener. … what is treated as non-recoverable may be something that has not been mentioned; but it may be something unexpected, whether previously mentioned or not. The meaning is: attend to this; this is news. One form of ‘newness’ that is frequent in dialogue is contrastive emphasis…

[4] Unmarked topical Themes present the experiential wording that is to be the point of departure for the clause as message.  In declarative clauses, as in the text under discussion, these also present the Subject, the carrier of modal responsibility, as the point of departure.

Field, in contrast, is the ideational dimension of context (the culture as a semiotic system that is realised in language).  Martin's misunderstanding of the SFL notion of field is twofold.  On the one hand, he misconstrues context as register, and so misconstrues field as a dimension of register.  On the other hand, he misconstrues some ideational semantics ('activity sequences') as field, and thus as context misconstrued as register.

Genre, in the sense of text type, is modelled in SFL as register: the sub-potential of language that realises a sub-potential of context (situation type).  Register is a point of variation on the cline of instantiation.  Martin, on the other hand, models genre as a more abstract level of context than his register.

[5] This assertion also is manifestly untrue. News do not "elaborate the field". Elaborating the meanings that realise field is effected through logical structures and conjunctive cohesion.  News present the speaker's take on what is unrecoverable to the listener.

[6] The contrast in functions of Theme and New does operate across text types, but not the functions Martin attributes to them.  Misleadingly, Martin presents Theme and New as if they always highlighted different portions of messages, whereas, in fact, the conflation of Theme with New is an important textual resource.  In the text under discussion, the conflation of Theme with New occurs 9 times (out of 44).

Theme			Rheme
textual	interpersonal	topical
		the only real accident that I’ve ever had	was in fog and ice
and		there	was a big truck parked on the side of the road about three feet away from the side of the road
and		it	was very thick fog
and		a mini	had gone into this truck
well		the mini	had just touched the offside of the truck with its nearside wing
and so		it	meant [[[when I came along || my side of the road was completely blocked]]]
and	unfortunately	I	went into a four wheel skid
			before coming up to this mini
and		at that time	I didn’t know
		how	to deal with a four wheel skid
and so		I	went into the mini
		you	hit it sideways on
		about twelve cars	went into me
and then		a friend of ours	came along
and		he	decided
			to try and overtake the lot
and so		he	went into each one
			sort of banging them sideways as it were
and oh		this	was in daylight
			because of the fog
	needless to say	I	treat fog with great respect now
yes		I	know
		they	keep happening these multiple collisions in fog
	were	you	all right though as a result of this
(oh yes)
(oh yes)
		there	was no-one injured

Misrepresenting Textual Analysis

Martin (1992: 451-2):

In order to simplify the interpretation of New presented here, only the minimal domain of the New will be considered; this will be taken as the highest ranking clause constituent (usually a ranking group or phrase) the tonic syllable falls on the final salient syllable of. This principle determines the following minimal News for [6:38], which can be contrasted with the selections of marked and unmarked Topical Theme in the right-hand column.

minimal new in [6:38]	unmarked topical theme in [6.38]
the only real accident	driver (6)
‘ve ever had	friend (3)
in fog and ice	mini (2)
a big truck…on the side of the road	accident (3)
about three feet	there (2)
away	fog
very thick	it [e]
a mini	about twelve cars
into this truck
the mini
the offside
with its nearside wing
I	marked topical theme in [6.38]
my	when I came along
completely blocked
unfortunately
a four wheel skid
up to this mini
that
to deal
into the mini
sideways on
into me
a friend of ours
along
the lot
into each one
sideways
in daylight
the fog
needless to say
fog
great…now
yes
know
keep happening…in fog
allright
yes
yes
no-one injured

Blogger Comment:

For comparison, presented below are the culminations of New information as given in Halliday (1985: 60), alongside the actual topical Themes — including the one genuine marked topical Theme (overlooked by Martin). Instances where the culmination of New coincides with the Theme are indicated by colour.

culmination of new in [6:38]	topical theme in [6.38]
accident	the only real accident I’ve ever had
had
ice
truck	there
road
feet
(a)way
thick	it
mini	a mini
truck
mini	the mini
offside
wing
	it
I
my
blocked
(un)fortunately	I
skid
mini
that	at that time (marked)
deal	how
mini	I
on	you
me	about twelve cars
ours	a friend of ours
(a)long
lot	he
one	he
sideways
daylight	this
fog
say	I
fog
great
now
yes
know	I
happening	they
fog
right	you
this
yes
yes
injured	there

Misrepresenting Phonology

Martin (1992: 450-1):

Where the tonic falls on the final salient syllable in a tone group, the domain of the structural function New is indeterminate; in principle it extend may [sic] leftwards from the tonic syllable until the initial salient syllable of the tone group is reached.  Where a tonic falls on other than the final salient syllable of the tone group, then all information following the tonic syllable is Given.  In order to simplify the interpretation of New presented here, only the minimal domain of the New will be considered; this will be taken as the highest ranking clause constituent (usually a ranking group or phrase) the tonic syllable falls on the final salient syllable of.

Blogger Comment:

[1] This is potentially misleading.  'New' is not a 'structural function' of the tone group.  Given (optional) and New (obligatory) are elements of the function structure of the information unit.  An information unit (lexicogrammatical stratum) is realised by a tone group (phonological stratum). Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 116):

Each information unit is realised as a pitch contour, or tone, which may be falling, rising or mixed (falling-rising, rising-falling). This pitch contour extends over the whole tone group. Within the tone group, one foot (and in particular its first syllable) carries the main pitch movement: the main fall, or rise, or the change of direction. This feature is known as tonic prominence, and the element having this prominence is the tonic element (tonic foot, tonic syllable). … The element having this prominence is said to be carrying information focus. 

The tonic foot defines the culmination of what is New: it marks where the New element ends. In the typical instance, this will be the last functional element of clause structure in the information unit. As this implies, the typical sequence of informational elements is thus Given followed by New. But whereas the end of the New element is marked by tonic prominence, there is nothing to mark where it begins; so there is indeterminacy in the structure. If we take an instance out of context, we can tell that it culminates with the New; but we cannot tell on phonological grounds whether there is a Given element first, or where the boundary between Given and New would be. (This is not always true….)

[2] It is the tonic foot that marks where the New element ends, not the tonic syllable.

[3] To be clear, in SFL theory, this is the focus of New information.

Confusing The Textual And Interpersonal Metafunctions

Martin (1992: 448):

Considered from the the perspective of group rank as opposed to clause rank meanings, all of the topical Themes in [6:30] are in fact 'interpersonal' ones: first and second person pronouns (I, you, you, you, I, we, you, you, we) and the metaphorical modulation my responsibilities.  So the method of development of this text is an interactive one: the sitting member is concerned to engage his constituent.  The association of unmarked Theme and Subject in English means that these interpersonal considerations are better pursued during the discussion of modal responsibility in 6.3.4 below.  It is important to note at this point however that a pattern of Theme selection which foregrounds interpersonal meaning will not lend itself to he experientially oriented macro-Theme, hyper-Theme, Theme interaction reviewed above.  It is for this reason that school rhetoric has long cautioned against writing in the first person (although it has also long forgotten why this is so).

Blogger Comments:

[1] This confuses the textual metafunction (method of development) with the interpersonal metafunction (speaker-addressee 'engagement').

[2] To be clear, the "interaction" in this written monologic text is merely the use of the 'speech rôle' pronouns I, we (speaker) and you (addressee).

[3] This confuses the textual metafunction (Theme and method of development) with the interpersonal metafunction (Subject as the carrier of modal responsibility).

[4] To be clear, in saying 'a pattern of Theme selection which foregrounds interpersonal meaning' Martin means 'speech rôle' personal pronouns serving as topical (experiential) Themes.

[5] This is even manifestly untrue within Martin's model, since macro-Themes (Introductory Paragraphs) and hyper-Themes (Topic Sentences) can "predict" the appearance of (anaphorically referring) personal pronouns as Themes.

[6] Clearly, any proscriptions against writing in the first person do not derive from writers being unable to apply Martin's pedagogical model.

In SFL theory, this is a matter of variation according to the text type (register) and the situation type (cultural context) it realises.  Prescription and proscription arise in pedagogy when usuality (modalisation) is reconstrued as obligation (modulation).

Misconstruing Stratification, Metafunction And Metaphor

Martin (1992: 448):

Considered from the the perspective of group rank as opposed to clause rank meanings, all of the topical Themes in [6:30] are in fact 'interpersonal' ones: first and second person pronouns (I, you, you, you, I, we, you, you, we) and the metaphorical modulation my responsibilities.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the wordings at group rank and clause rank (lexicogrammatical stratum) realise meanings (semantic stratum).  The wordings of lexicogrammar are a lower level of symbolic abstraction than meanings.  Lexicogrammatical wordings are tokens of semantic values (meanings).

[2] All of the topical Themes in [6:30] are experiential Themes — by definition.  At group rank, personal pronouns serve as the Thing of a nominal group.  At clause rank, nominal groups with personal pronouns as Thing can function experientially as participants and interpersonally as Subject or Complement.  Personal pronouns serving as Thing in a nominal group also function textually in the cohesive system of personal (co-)reference.

[3] Genuine metaphorical grammatical realisations of modulation are the explicit forms, as exemplified by I want you to leave (subjective) and it is necessary for you to leave (objective).

Misconstruing Theme Selection As An Interpersonal Resource

Martin (1992: 447):

Finally, it needs to be kept in mind that the discussion of strings, chains, Themes and conjunctive relations has to this point focussed experientially on topical Themes.  Theme selection however is also an important interpersonal resource …

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is potentially misleading.  A focus on topical (experiential) Themes is a textual focus, not an experiential focus.  A topical Theme is the textual highlighting of experiential wording by means of the thematic structure of the clause.

[2] In SFL theory, theme selection is a resource of the textual metafunction, not the interpersonal metafunction.  This is true for all Themes — textual, interpersonal and experiential (topical). The system of theme selection is set out in Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 80; 2014: 106).

A False Conclusion Invalidly Argued From False Premises

Martin (1992: 447):

This pattern of marked Themes in [4:2] is the dynamic equivalent of the synoptic metaphorical hyper-Themes discussed above. But in spoken mode the marked Themes punctuate rather than predict, annotating the text in episodes as it unfolds rather than scaffolding it as a macro-constituent structure that is in some sense preconceived. Seen in this light hyper-Themes can be interpreted as a further category of textual metaphor: a hyper-Theme is an [sic] metaphorical marked Theme.

Blogger Comment:

The invalidity of this argument can be made more obvious by making the text less opaque.  This can be done by glossing three of the terms used, as follows:

• (metaphorical) hyper-Theme = Topic Sentence (involving nominalisation)
• punctuate = interrupt
• annotate = add notes to a text, giving explanation or comment

Martin's argument now becomes:

This pattern of marked Themes in [4:2] is the dynamic equivalent of the synoptic Topic Sentences involving nominalisation discussed above. But in spoken mode the marked Themes interrupt rather than predict, providing comments on the text in episodes as it unfolds rather than scaffolding it as a macro-constituent structure that is in some sense preconceived. Seen in this light Topic Sentences can be interpreted as a further category of textual metaphor: a Topic Sentence is a metaphorical marked Theme.

The argument, then, is as follows.

Because

• marked topical Themes interrupting and providing comments on a spoken text (in episodes as it unfolds) 
• are the (dynamic) equivalent of 
• (synoptic) Topic sentences involving nominalisations scaffolding a written text (as a macro-constituent structure),

it logically follows that

• a Topic sentence involving nominalisation 
• is a metaphorical 
• marked Theme.

Leaving aside the false claims of the premises — including the claim that marked topical Themes provide comments on ("annotate") spoken texts — the validity of the argument rests on the assumption that the written counterpart of a spoken language feature constitutes textual grammatical metaphor.

This, of course, is not consistent with the notion of grammatical metaphor.

Grammatical metaphor is the incongruent grammatical realisation of semantic selections.  It is, in the first instance, an incongruent relation between the two levels of content: semantics (meaning) and lexicogrammar (wording).

Considering now the conclusion of the argument, to say that 'a hyper-Theme is a metaphorical marked Theme' is to say that:

• a Topic Sentence is the metaphorical realisation of what would be congruently realised as a marked topical Theme of a clause.

That is to say, an unspecified semantic choice (textual metafunction) is realised 

• congruently in the grammar as a marked topical Theme, and 
• incongruently in the grammar as a Topic Sentence, which is itself a type of graphological unit construed as part of a discourse semantic interaction pattern.

Conclusion:

Martin's argument proceeds from false premises, is invalidated by a false assumption, and ends with a false (and internally inconsistent) conclusion.

Assigning A Text To The Wrong "Genre"

Martin (1992: 446-7):

Being a procedural text, most clauses in [4:2] take people as their point of departure… . Unmarked topical Theme selection is not deployed to scaffold [4:2]'s staging or development (although it does reflect its genre).  Instead marked Themes, both phrasal and clausal, are used to stage the dog showing procedure.

Blogger Comment:

[1] The clauses in (genuine) procedural texts take procedures — (typically material) processes — as their point of departure, and feature imperative mood (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 98; Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 479).  The clauses in text [4.2] take people as their point of departure, and feature indicative mood. This reflects the fact that this text is actually a recount of a procedure.  A recount of a procedure is a recount, not a procedure.

These two text types differ in terms of the situation type they realise.  The context of the recount text [4.2] is 'reporting', whereas the context of a procedural text is 'enabling' (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 219).

Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 356):

The notion of procedure can be taken as a summary gloss of the domain; it is a macro-operation, consisting of a number of atomic micro-operations. It is dominated by procedures (algorithms, figures of doing) that lead to some specific goal: the dominant cause is purposive. An agent or agents try to produce, assemble, repair, etc.. 

From the interpersonal point of view, the notion of procedure can also be taken as a gloss on the interaction between the writer and the reader, it is a macro-proposal, consisting of a number of instructions or directions to the reader.

[2]  A dependent clause in regressive clause nexus is not a marked topical Theme of a clause.  See previous posts.

Misrepresenting Halliday On 'Theme'

Martin (1992: 445):

Theme has been analysed in dependent clauses with Subjects and β clauses have been interpreted as marked Themes where they are realised before their α, ignoring Themes in this α as above; Predicators in imperative and non-finite clauses are not treated as Themes, following Halliday (1985).

Blogger Comments:

[1] A dependent clause in a 'regressive sequence' (β^α) clause nexus is not a marked topical Theme of a clause.  It has thematic status within the clause nexus — not within a clause.  See Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 392-3).

[2] In such cases, to ignore the Theme of either clause in the nexus, α or β, is to misrepresent the data.  Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 394):

… the point to bear in mind is that there will be two thematic domains — that of the clause nexus, and that of the clause.

[3] In imperative clauses, 'it is the Predicator that is the unmarked Theme' (Halliday 1985: 49; Halliday 1994: 47; Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 76; Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 103).