Halliday's "Most Spectacular Breach Of The 'Rank Scale' Principle"

Fawcett (2010: 234-5):

However, Halliday's most spectacular breach of the 'rank scale' principle is his treatment of the 'Finite' element (e.g., did in Did he like it?). Throughout IFG his analyses of the MOOD structure of clauses show the Finite as an element of the clause. The effect is that single words such as the 'modal verbs' and forms of do, be and have all regularly function as direct elements of the clause. In Fawcett (2000) and (forthcoming a) I demonstrate that the way to resolve this and the various other problems of the 'verbal group' is to promote not just the Finite but all of the elements of the supposed 'verbal group' to function as elements of the clause. This two-part paper sets out important evidence against the concept of the 'verbal group, and so against the concept of the 'rank scale'. (See Section 4 of Appendix C for a summary.)

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the Finite element is irrelevant to the theoretical validity of the rank scale principle because the Finite is a function whereas the rank scale is a model of form. Halliday (2002 [1961]: 43):

The relation among the units, then, is that, going from top (largest) to bottom (smallest), each consists of one, or of more than one, of the unit next below (next smaller). The scale on which the units are in fact ranged in the theory needs a name, and may be called rank.

That is, Fawcett critiques a model of formal constituency by confusing it with the relation between function and form. This fundamental misunderstanding invalidates his entire argument.

[2] This is not misleading, because it is true. However, what it strategically omits is that the Finite is also an element of the verbal group where it is realised by a word (finite verb).

[3] As previously noted, Fawcett (forthcoming a) is still unpublished, 21 years after the first edition of this publication.

[4] To be clear, Fawcett's solution to this non-existent problem is to mistake a formal unit, his 'Main Verb', for a functional element of the clause.

[5] As foreshadowed by this discussion, the "important evidence" against the concepts of the verbal group and rank scale arise from theoretical misunderstandings on the part of Fawcett. This will be further confirmed in the examination of Section 4 of Appendix C.