Fawcett's Argument Against The Adverbial Group

Fawcett (2010: 208, 208n):

There is no equivalent in IFG — nor in any other grammar that I know of — for the concept of the 'quantity group'. Halliday would probably handle the type of meaning that occurs as a Degree Adjunct (e.g., the underlined portion of He loves her very much indeed) as an 'adverbial group', because of its potential for functioning as an Adjunct.¹⁴

¹⁴ In such cases, Halliday's stated criterion of the unit's ability to fill the relevant element in the unit above on the 'rank scale' would lead him to label this unit as an "adverbial group", but in cases such as the present one this criterion might be thought to be supported by the fact that in traditional grammar items such as much in such contexts are called "adverbs". However, the category of "adverb" in English is a 'ragbag', with items such as very also being traditionally classed as "adverbs", so these grounds are flimsy. It seems to respect the data more properly to introduce a unit that gives an appropriate weight to the concept of 'quantity' — as we do here.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, Halliday would analyse the underlined portion of He loves her very much indeed as two consecutive Adjuncts, the first circumstantial (Manner: degree), and the second modal (counter-expectancy: exceeding):

As Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 158) point out:

modal and conjunctive Adjuncts occur finally only as Afterthought and can never carry the only tonic prominence in the clause.

In this instance, indeed is likely to carry the second tonic prominence of a compound tone group: 

// 13 ‸ He /loves her / very much in/deed //

[2] This is not misleading, because it is true.

[3] To be clear, the adverbial group is based on the word classes recognised by SFL Theory; Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 75):

[4] To be clear, Fawcett's argument is:

1. the category of adverb in English is a ragbag,
2. therefore the grounds for an adverbial group are flimsy,
3. therefore the adverbial group does not properly respect the data,
4. therefore introducing a quantity group does properly respect the data,
5. because a quantity group gives an 'appropriate' weight to the concept of 'quantity'.

Clearly, this argument is a ragbag of non-sequiturs and bare assertions:

• 2 does not follow from 1, because the adverbial group is an expansion of the word class adverb, however varied the members of the class;
• 3 does not follow from 1 & 2, because it is a subjective judgement ('properly'), unsupported by evidence; 
• 4 does not follow from 1, 2 & 3, because it is a subjective judgement ('properly'), unsupported by evidence, that also ignores the possibility of alternative valid approaches;
• 5 does not follow from 1, 2, 3 & 4, because it is a subjective judgement ('appropriate'), unsupported by evidence, that also ignores the possibility of alternative valid approaches.

It might be added that adverbial groups are not restricted to the concept of 'quantity', but realise a wide range of Adjuncts: circumstantial, modal and conjunctive.