Describing any linguistic unit within the systemic-functional framework that Martin adopts consists of providing both a paradigmatic and a syntagmatic description. … Applying this mode of description to texts allows Martin to claim that a text holds together precisely because of the discourse semantic options that have been taken up. These options have manifestations in particular discourse structures, which in turn find systematic re-expression in particular patterns of lexical and grammatical material.
Blogger Comments:
[1] In SFL theory, a text "holds together" through the instantiation of choices in the systems of the textual metafunction across all strata. As previously explained, in relocating Halliday's textual systems to logical and experiential semantics, Martin has mistaken a metafunction (textual) for a stratum (level of symbolic abstraction).
[2] This is very misleading. The system networks devised by Martin do not provide any realisation statements that specify how discourse semantic choices are realised in discourse semantic structures.
[3] This misunderstands the architecture of SFL theory. There is no sequencing in realisation relations between axes or between strata. The identifying relation between them is intensive (elaborating), not circumstantial (enhancing: temporal).
[4] This is very misleading. The system networks devised by Martin do not provide any realisation statements that specify how discourse semantic choices are realised in the lexicogrammar.
No comments:
Post a Comment