Fawcett (2010: 184):
The other line of structure where Halliday frequently shows more than one line of structural analysis is in THEME, and this happens whenever there is a case of 'multiple theme'. For example, on page 55 of IFG there are three lines of structure for THEME in the analysis of Well but then Ann surely wouldn't the best idea be to join the group. On the pattern of the IFG approach to the structure of MOOD (as in Figure 7 of Chapter 7), Halliday's grammar would operate by first generating the 'multiple theme' of Well but then Ann surely wouldn't the best idea, since he analyses all of these items as different 'subcomponents' of the 'Theme', and it would then "split" it into its separate parts. It seems most unlikely that Halliday (or anyone else) would wish to treat all of these as parts of a single element, but that is the clear implication of the introduction of his "Split" operation. (See Section 10.3.4 of Chapter 10 for a discussion of 'primary' and 'secondary' structures.)
Blogger Comments:
[1] To be clear, the example in Halliday (1994: 55) is:
[2] As previously explained for Mood, the grammar does not first "generate" a multiple Theme and then expand it into textual and interpersonal sub-components. This is to mistake a system network of relations for an algorithmic procedure. The identity relation between system and structure is intensive (elaboration), not circumstantial (enhancement: temporal): thematic structure realises systemic features selected from simultaneous networks, including those that specify textual and interpersonal Themes; Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 106):
[3] This is misleading, because it is the opposite of what is true. To be clear, all the sub-components do indeed constitute Theme as a single element of clause structure. The reason why this seems 'most unlikely' to Fawcett is that his 'systemic syntax' views grammar from below: giving priority to structure over system, and to form over function. In this case, because the structure has multiple forms, he assumes that there cannot be a single functional element realising the system of THEME.
[4] Again, it is only Fawcett who regards these structures as 'primary' and 'secondary'.
No comments:
Post a Comment