On Fawcett's 'Form Potential' And 'Instances Of Meaning' Being Compatible With SFL Theory

Fawcett (2010: 93): 

The position, therefore, is that the generative apparatus in the two frameworks is broadly comparable. Or, to put it in terms of the diagram of language in Figure 4 in Section 3.2 of Chapter 3, the 'form potential' of the two models is fairly similar. Moreover, both models also recognise the importance of instances at the level of meaning, i.e., the concept of a 'selection expression'.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is misleading, because it is untrue.  In Fawcett's Figure 4, 'form potential' is modelled as realisation rules (that are instantiated as structures!):

In SFL theory, however, there is no level of form. Instead, form is modelled on the grammatical stratum as a rank scale whose units serve the entry conditions for grammatical functions, as exemplified by 'clause' being the entry condition for the system PROCESS TYPE.

[2] This is misleading.  On the one hand, in SFL theory, instances are not limited to the level of meaning.  On the other hand, selection expressions are not limited to the instance pole of the cline of instantiation, since, for example, the selection expression [voiced, bilabial, stop] specifies the phoneme /b/ as both potential and instance.