Misrepresenting Halliday On Instantiation

Fawcett (2010: 48-9):

Ten years later, Halliday was still writing in similar terms — but only at times, as we shall see in Section 4.6. Here, for example, is an excerpt from his "Introduction" to Readings in systemic linguistics (Halliday & Martin 1981). Notice that he distinguishes and defines the two relationships of 'instantiation' and 'realisation' in very similar terms to those used in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of Chapter 3. (Here he characterises the relationships as "processes", because he is thinking in terms of a generative model of language.)

'Instantiation' is the process of selecting within the sets of options (the systems) that make up the meaning potential (the system). It is the process of choosing. By this step particular paths are traced through the network of paradigmatic alternatives. [...] 'Realisation' is the process of making manifest the options that have been selected. It is the process of expressing the choices made. By this step meanings are encoded in wordings [my emphasis]. (Halliday 1981:14) 

Here Halliday is characterising 'instantiation' at the level of meaning, in terms of Figure 4 in Chapter 3, but there is also, of course, as we saw in Chapter 3, a process of instantiation at the level of form.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is misleading because it is untrue, as we shall see in the examination of Section 4.6.

[2] This is misleading because it is untrue, as was demonstrated in the examination of Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of Chapter 3.  As all the critiques of Fawcett's model (Figure 4) demonstrate — see, for example, here — Fawcett's use of 'instantiation' and 'realisation' are inconsistent with the theoretical notions.  See also [5], below.

[3] To be clear, instantiation and realisation are types of attributive and identifying relational processes, respectively; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 144-5).

[4] This is misleading because it misrepresents Halliday in a way that favours Fawcett's argument.  In the quote, Halliday characterises the process of instantiation for any system, not just at the level of meaning.  (As explained in previous posts, Fawcett misunderstands Halliday's meaning potential — language as system — as merely the level of semantics.)  Halliday then goes on to contrast instantiation with the realisation relation between content strata: meaning (semantics) and wording (lexicogrammar).

[5] Fawcett's "instantiation" at the level of form (Figure 4) is the relation between realisation rules and syntagmatic structure.  It can be seen that, contrary to Fawcett's claim (critiqued above in [2]), this interpretation of instantiation is entirely inconsistent with Halliday's characterisation of instantiation as  'selecting within systems of options'.