Thus, only one of the four "fundamental" categories of "Categories" appears in the list of "basic concepts" in "Systemic theory" (i.e., 'system') — and even then it has a significantly modified sense. Two are either used informally or presupposed (i.e., 'element' and 'class (of unit)'), but it is really surprising to find that they are not presented as "basic concepts". And one of the four original "fundamental concepts" ('unit') is completely missing.
How far, then, are the 'scales' of "Categories" still treated as "basic concepts" in "Systemic theory"? In the section headed "Other basic concepts" Halliday makes the claim that "systemic theory retains [from "Categories"] the concepts of 'rank', 'realisation' [his 1966 replacement for 'exponence'] and 'delicacy'" (Halliday 1993:4505-6). But are these the same concepts that we met in the summary of "Categories" in Chapter 2?
Blogger Comments:
[1] See the preceding 6 posts for the validity of these claims.
[2] See the next 4 posts for the validity of these claims.
[2] See the next 4 posts for the validity of these claims.
No comments:
Post a Comment