Classifying Groups By Their Internal Structure

Fawcett (2010: 196n):

⁶ Let me give an example of the use of these criteria when introducing a new class of unit. The quantity group was only introduced to the present description of English syntax when detailed studies of this area of the grammar showed that it could not reasonably be handled in terms of an existing unit, such as the quality group. In other words, it became clear that there are units with 'quantities' as their pivotal element (e.g., over sixty) as well as groups with 'qualities' as their pivotal element (e.g., quite clever) — and that the elements of structure in the two classes of unit serve different functions. 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, for Fawcett (p196):

… the different classes of syntactic unit that are recognised in the description of a language are to be identified by their internal structure, i.e., by the elements of structure of those units.

[2] To be clear, in SFL Theory, Fawcett's quantity group and quality group are both "reasonably handled in terms of an existing unit": the nominal group. Fawcett's quantity group over sixty is a nominal group with a Numerative as sub-modified Head, and Fawcett's quality group is a nominal group with an Epithet as sub-modified Head.

[3] To be clear, in SFL Theory also, the elements of these nominal group structures serve different functions: Numerative vs Epithet. Moreover, both can serve the same function at the rank above, Attribute, as in he was over sixty, he was quite clever.

In SFL Theory, groups are classified according to the clause functions they realise, not according to their internal structure. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 363):