Fawcett (2010: 211, 211n):
This unit of syntax is not found in any other grammatical framework. Yet the fact is that there are frequently occurring units in English syntax that have the characteristics of the classes of unit to be described below. Perhaps I may add, in support of the proposals put forward here, that most other grammarians simply do not say how they would handle, in a systematic manner, the syntax of the types of phenomena for which the various classes of cluster are used.¹⁵
¹⁵ In my experience, the need to recognise these units only becomes imperative (1) when one is working with a functional theory of syntax in which the criteria for recognising a unit in are made fully explicit (as they are here) and (2) when there is a serious commitment to the full analysis of large quantities of naturally occurring text. The need to attend to individual orthographic words is also increased when one tries to build a computer model that parses a text consisting of a string of words into its functional syntax.
Blogger Comments:
[1] This is misleading, because it misrepresents SFL Theory as not providing the means of analysing the wordings that Fawcett models as clusters. This claim is invalidated by providing the relevant analyses. For example, the genitive cluster girl's in the nominal group a girl's bike ('a bike that is suitable for a girl') is a word serving as Classifier, whereas the genitive cluster my sister's in the nominal group my sister's most precious doll is an embedded nominal group serving as Deictic.
[2] This is misleading, because it misrepresents personal anecdote as argument in support of a theoretical proposal, and implies that only Fawcett's approach is "fully explicit" and has a "serious commitment".
No comments:
Post a Comment