Arguing On The Basis Of Misunderstandings Of Realisation And Instantiation

Fawcett (2010: 63):

Interestingly, the symbol for the meaning of 'is realised by' in informal realisation rules in a SF grammar is a small arrow pointing diagonally from the top left corner of an imaginary rectangle to the bottom right corner. And one could draw just such an arrow with a felt tip pen right across the diagram in Figure 4, so symbolising that the relationship between the meaning potential and the realised instance is the same, both in individual cases and in the case of the model as a whole. Yet this relationship is in fact, as we can see, one that involves not just realisation but both instantiation (twice) and realisation. 

Blogger Comments:

Reminder:

[1] As Fawcett's term 'realised instance' discloses, his flowchart confuses the relations of realisation (between system and structure) and instantiation (between potential and instance), as previously demonstrated on this blog.  In SFL terms, the relation between Fawcett's top-left module (paradigmatic system) and his bottom-right module (syntagmatic structure) is realisation.  A structure is not an instance of a system, by definition.

[2] To be clear, this is only true in terms of Fawcett's flowchart.  As previously demonstrated, Fawcett's flowchart is not consistent with the architecture of SFL theory, and not consistent with itself, in terms of realisation or instantiation.  See, for example, the first critique of Figure 4 here.