Jun 22
ChRIS CLÉiRIGhlexico-grammar
(1) WHAT DOES THE TEXTBOOK SAY?
Complement
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 122-3):
A Complement is an element within the Residue that has the potential of being Subject but is not; in other words, it is an element that has the potential for being given the interpersonally elevated status of modal responsibility — something that can be the nub of the argument.
Adjunct
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 123):
An Adjunct is an element that has not got the potential of being Subject; that is, it cannot be elevated to the interpersonal status of modal responsibility.
(2) EXAMPLES
(a) Consider the following clause:
Maureen gave David the book.
Q1. Can ‘David’ be raised to Subject?
A. Yes, as follows: David was given the book by Maureen.
Conclusion: ‘David’ is Complement.
Q2. Can ‘the book’ be raised to Subject?
A. Yes, as follows: The book was given to David by Maureen.
Conclusion: ‘the book’ is Complement.
(b) Consider the following clause:
Maureen gave the book to David.
Q1. Can ‘to David’ be raised to Subject?
A. No. *To David was given the book by Maureen.
Conclusion: ‘to David’ is Adjunct.
(c) Consider the following clause:
The book was given to David by Maureen.
Q1. Can ‘to David’ be raised to Subject?
A. No. *To David was given the book by Maureen.
Conclusion: ‘to David’ is Adjunct.
Q2. Can ‘by Maureen’ be raised to Subject?
A. No. *By Maureen gave the book to David.
Conclusion: ‘by Maureen’ is Adjunct.
May 07
ChRIS CLÉiRIGhlexico-grammar
DATA
The guitar lends itself well to playing pentatonic scales.
ANALYSIS
(1) What does the text book say? Take a trinocular perspective.
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 31):
We cannot expect to understand the grammar just by looking at it from
its own level; we also look into it ‘from above’ and ‘from below’,
taking a trinocular perspective. But since the view from these
different angles is often conflicting, the description will inevitably
be a form of compromise.
SO
(2) THE VIEW ‘FROM ABOVE’: MEANING
QUESTION: What type of clause is it in terms of the experiential
meaning being realised?
ANSWER: In terms of the meaning it is realising, the clause is an
‘attributive relational’.
REASON: An entity (guitar) has some class attributed to it (the class
of things good for playing pentatonic scales)
EVIDENCE:
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 219):
In the ‘attributive’ mode, an entity has some class ascribed or
attributed to it.
(3) THE VIEW ‘FROM ROUND ABOUT’: WORDING (clause rank)
QUESTION: What type of clause is it in terms of lexicogrammatical
paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations?
ANSWER: In terms of the wording realising the meaning, the clause is ‘material’.
REASON: The clause structure includes a Recipient (‘playing pentatonic
scales’) of the lending process, and the Recipient is a participant
restricted to ‘material’ clauses.
EVIDENCE:
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 191):
Recipients occur only in ‘transitive transformative’ clauses of the
‘extending’ type; and within that category, they occur with those
clauses that denote a transfer of the possession of goods. …
(4) THE VIEW ‘FROM BELOW’: WORDING (group/phrase rank)
QUESTION: What type of clause is it in terms of how it is realised at
the rank below?
ANSWER: ‘Material’ is not excluded by the probe for unmarked present
tense of the verbal group.
REASON: The unmarked ‘present in present’ tense is used for specific
doings and happenings, whereas the marked ‘simple present’ tense is
used for generalised or habitual doings, such as construed by this
clause.
EVIDENCE:
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 179-80):
The unmarked tense selection is the present–in–present (eg is doing)
rather than the simple present (eg does) … The present–in–present
serves to narrow down the present from the extended now of habits and
‘general truths’ that is characteristic of the simple present with
‘material’ clauses …
(5) CONCLUSION
The clause is a ‘material’ realisation of an ‘attributive’ relation,
and so an instance of grammatical metaphor. The structural analysis
is as follows:
The guitar: Actor
lends: Process: material
itself: Goal
well: Manner: quality
to [[playing pentatonic scales]]: Recipient
(6) FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
FIRST OBSERVATION: the role of Actor is filled by an inanimate
(guitar) rather than animate entity
COMMENT: This is at odds with the notion of Actor as the source of
energy for a material process.
EVIDENCE:
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 179):
… ‘material’ clauses are clauses of doing–&–happening: a ‘material’
clause construes a quantum of change in the flow of events as taking
place through some input of energy. … the source of the energy
bringing about the change is typically a participant — the Actor …
The Actor is the one who does the deed — that is, the one that brings
about the change.
SECOND OBSERVATION: the role of Recipient is filled by a ‘macrothing’
(an Act) rather than a ‘simple thing’, conscious or non-conscious.
COMMENT: This is at odds with the notion of Recipient as the one to
whom goods are given.
EVIDENCE:
Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 191):
The Recipient is the one that goods are given to …
RSS
Recent Comments