Promising A Critique Of An Imaginary Theoretical Inconsistency

Fawcett (2010: 81):

However, as we shall see in Chapter 7, it seems that two different positions on how a grammar works have been allowed to develop alongside each other in the Sydney version of SFL — and that in this case the two positions are not compatible with each other. This then raises the difficult question of which one is the 'correct' version of the theory — and, in relation to the other version, why it is different and what status it has in the theory.

Blogger Comments:

[1] It is worth mentioning, given how frequently Fawcett uses it as a rhetorical strategy, that Fawcett  primes the uncritical reader by repeatedly making substantial claims for which the evidence is said to lie elsewhere (in an upcoming chapter, in a past or forthcoming publication, etc.).

[2] To be clear, Fawcett's Chapter 7 is concerned with the 'box diagram' representations of metafunctional structures at the rank of clause in IFG. "As we shall see in the examination of Chapter 7", Fawcett's misunderstandings in this regard are multi-dimensional and, as such, very instructive.