Failing To Recognise Embedding

Fawcett (2010: 265-6):

Let us consider an example of this crucial point. Figure 24, which is taken from Fawcett (in press), illustrates the important fact that nominal groups frequently contain other classes of groups within them. In this invented example, I have chosen to illustrate the use of units other than nominal groups, so that the only cases of 'embedding' are the two nominal groups that occur inside (1) the genitive cluster and (2) the prepositional group. It is well known, of course, that nominal groups frequently contain clauses that function as a qualifier ('relative clauses'), and Figure 24 complements this by illustrating the less widely-recognised fact that the richness in the layering of structure in the nominal group comes equally often from the occurrence of groups other than nominal groups.

Thus much of the very great richness in the syntax of English results from the fact that, when we come to fill the elements of the units of English, we very frequently do not take a step down the supposed 'rank scale', and so do not use embedding, in the proper sense of the term.

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, from the perspective of SFL Theory, the complexity of the nominal group of Figure 24 arises from three levels of embedding (rankshift) and three instances of submodification. The layers of embedding can be represented as follows: 

| about ten more of [the most expensive of [ [my supplier's] amazingly sweet  apricots [from Iran] ] ] |

That is, 

(a) the nominal group [my supplier's] and prepositional phrase [from Iran] are embedded in the nominal group 

[my supplier's amazingly sweet apricots from Iran]

(b) this nominal group is embedded in the nominal group 

[the most expensive of my supplier's amazingly sweet apricots from Iran]

(c) this nominal group is embedded in the nominal group 

| about ten more of the most expensive of my supplier's amazingly sweet apricots from Iran |

The three instances of submodification, the first with two layers, can be represented as follows:

[2] As previously observed, Fawcett (in press) is still unpublished, 21 years after the first edition of this publication.

[3] To be clear, from the perspective of SFL Theory, the only embedded unit here that is not a nominal group is the prepositional phrase from Iran that serves as the Qualifier in the nominal group my supplier's amazingly sweet apricots from Iran.

[4] To be clear, these other units, quantity group, quality group and genitive cluster, are not units in SFL Theory.

[5] To be clear, from the perspective of SFL Theory, on the one hand, these are not the only cases of embedding — see [1] above — and on the hand, the nominal group in the prepositional phrase ("prepositional group") from Iran is not embedded. Moreover this analysis flatly contradicts Fawcett's own model (p264):

So we shall not say that we have a case of embedding in on the table, where the nominal group the table fills the completive of the prepositional group on the table…

[6] This is misleading because it is untrue. For a theory that models formal constituency as a rank scale, embedding, in the sense of rankshift, is precisely what Fawcett's example illustrates — together with the fact that Fawcett's Cardiff Grammar only sometimes manages to recognise embedding, thereby creating theoretical inconsistency with the more usual occasions when it does not recognise it.