The Functional Analysis of English

A Hallidayan Approach

Thomas Bloor, Meriel Bloor

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781135971090
• Edition: 3
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

The Functional Analysis of English is an introduction to the analysis and description of English, based on the principles of systemic functional linguistics. It sets out the tools and analytic techniques of Hallidayan grammar with clear explanations of terminology and illustrates these with examples from a variety of texts, including science, travel, history and literary sources. This revised third edition incorporates references to recent research, better explanations of complex problems, and additional exercises.

Key features:

• 
  
  

• an updated overview of applications to real world issues

• 
  
  

• revised sections on the current historical position of systemic functional grammar

• 
  
  

• simple introductions to agnation, grammatical metaphor, and information structure

• 
  
  

• chapter summaries, suggestions for further reading, exercises with answers and a glossary of terms

• 
  
  

• a companion website with additional activities, exercises and supplementary readings for students and instructors

This third edition is an indispensable introduction to systemic functional linguistics, which can be used independently or in preparation for M.A.K. Halliday and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen's Introduction to Functional Grammar. The book is an ideal text for students of linguistics, applied linguistics and grammar- those new to the field, or who have a background in traditional grammar, as well as teachers of English language.

1

A meaningful approach

1.1 How to use this book

This book provides an introduction to the analysis of English. The aim is to provide the reader with the grammatical tools needed to take samples of English apart and find out how the language works. It is by the process of analysis that linguists build up descriptions of the language and gradually discover more about how people use language.

Readers who are new to this subject may find it useful to familiarize themselves with the way in which the book is organized and with the tools that are provided to assist the reader. Of the 12 chapters in this book, the first two are introductory. Chapter 1 introduces some general concepts of the model of grammar and Chapter 2 deals with basic terms used in grammatical analysis. These are followed by eight chapters each focusing on a different key aspect of linguistic analysis.

Towards the end of each chapter there is a brief summary of the ground covered and a short Further study section, which suggests additional reading and sometimes raises controversial issues. The Further study sections are particularly suitable for advanced students or those who have a particular interest in the topic discussed. Chapters 1 to 10 end with short practice exercises. These can be done by individuals or by groups of students. Some are ‘open-ended’, having more than one possible answer, but most have correct answers, which can be found in the answer key at the end of the book.

After the answer key, there is a glossary, which provides brief explanations of technical terminology. Most terms are introduced and explained as they arise in this book. Even so, the large number of technical terms can sometimes present difficulties, and the glossary is the place where readers can check the meaning of a term. The glossary does not offer precise definitions, and the glosses are not intended to be accessible independently of the rest of the book.

The analytical approach taken in this book is, in the main, drawn from the work of the linguist Michael Halliday, in particular the model of grammar set out in some detail in An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1985, 1994) and later editions revised by Matthiessen (2004 and 2013), henceforth referred to by the initials IFG. This branch of linguistics is known by the name of Systemic Functional Linguistics and is usually referred to in this book as SFL. The grammar that systemic functional linguists have developed is known as Systemic Functional Grammar or SFG.

Other linguists working in a similar tradition also have a significant influence on some sections of this book. Mention of the work of these linguists can be found in the Further study sections and in the list of References, at the end of the book, just before the index.

Since readers are not expected to be familiar with Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), there is some simplification of the more complex and comprehensive work and of the theoretical underpinnings of the grammar.

1.1.1 Using the website

As additional support, sections of this book are now supplemented with work on the companion website. This website contains: (1) more exercises to help readers who feel they need extra practice of particular points; (2) open-ended activities where readers can try out sample research problems; and (3) supplementary readings to provide extra background or introduce contro versial issues for discussion. The website address is: www.routledge.com/CW/Bloor.

However, the work in this book is quite independent of the website. Readers should not worry if they are unable to access the supplementary materials.

1.2 Grammar and meaning

There are certain theoretical and practical principles that must be introduced because they are crucial to the type of analysis that is presented in this book. In this chapter, therefore, as a first step, we outline the nature of these principles. In Chapter 12, we explain how these principles can be seen as part of a historical tradition in linguistics and indicate something of how they differ from other theoretical approaches.

For SFL, a language is a ‘system of meanings’. That is to say that, when people use language, their language acts produce or, more technically, construct meaning. From this point of view, grammar becomes a study of how meanings are built up through the choice of words and other grammatical resources such as singular or plural, negative or positive, and other linguistic forms such as tone and emphasis. This may seem fairly obvious to most people since it accords with a commonsense view of language, but not all linguists have been concerned with meaning in such a direct way as Systemic Functional grammarians.

Linguists have approached the study of English from different points of view. Some, for example, have tried to account for formal aspects of the grammar of the language largely divorced from meanings. Others have started out by looking at words and sentences (language forms) and then asked how the forms of the language represent meanings. Here, we take the view that the approach that is likely to be most successful will be one that recognizes meaning and use as central features of language and that tackles grammar from this point of view. It follows from this that the grammar is semantic (concerned with meaning) and functional (concerned with how the language is used). Moreover, it is also a lexicogrammar, a term that embraces the idea that vocabulary (lexis) is inextricably linked to grammatical choices.

1.3 Meaning potential

We have said that the theory of language followed in SFL involves the idea that a language consists of a set of systems, which offers the speaker (or writer) an unlimited choice of ways of creating meanings.

Thus, if I want to know the time, I might use one of the following expressions (or any one of many more ways that the language offers us).

(1) What's the time?

(2) Tell me the time, please.

(3) I'd like to know the time.

Although each of these examples includes the word ‘the time’, there is considerable variation in the choice of other words. In addition, the first expression uses the interrogative mood, the second uses the imperative mood and the third uses the declarative mood. (The mood system is discussed further in Chapter 3.)

Linguistic choice is available to speakers not only with regard to interrogatives, imperatives and declaratives; it operates at every point in the production of speech. We may, for example, refer to a shop as ‘the supermarket’ or ‘the store’; we may address our father as ‘Dad’, ‘Daddy’, ‘Pop’ or by the use of his personal name or some invented nickname. Options also permit use of full sentences or indicate meaning by the use of one or two words. Either (4a) or (4b) might be an equally satisfactory answer to the question ‘What's the time?’

(4a) Four-thirty.

(4b) It's half-past four.

Some of the options available are different grammatical formulations of the same idea, each of which would be appropriate in a different language environment. The next three examples all carry similar meaning but with different grammatical formulations. This means that they would be likely to appear in different linguistic contexts.

• the prosecution disagreed with what had been decided by the judge

• the prosecution disagreed with the judge's decision

• … the prosecution's disagreement with the judge's decision …

The first two could stand as sentences on their own, the third would have to be part of a longer sentence. Structures of this type, which are semantically related but not identical, are said to be agnate.

Most of the linguistic choices we make are unconscious. We do not usually stop and think about whether to use a past tense or a present tense verb, and the choice between active and passive sentences depends on the circumstances of use, as we can see from the examples (5) and (6) taken from a book for parents¹ on the subject of teaching children to fish.

(5)Last summer, my boys finally caught their first fsh.

(6)It is said that many more fish are caught in May or June than in any other months.

In (5) the writer is telling us something that his sons did the previous summer. He refers to them as ‘my boys’ and uses the past tense, active voice, of the verb ‘catch’ (caught) because the language makes this form available for completed past actions. However, in (6) the same writer uses a different form of the verb, the present tense, passive voice: are caught. In (6) he does not mention who is responsible for the action of catching the fish. The Subject of the verb is many more fish, and the writer is simply making a general comment about the fish that are caught in May or June, regardless of who is responsible for the catching. Moreover, here the writer is not writing about a completed past action, but about something that happens regularly every year. The ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Full Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• List of symbols
• 1 A meaningful approach
• 2 Labels
• 3 Clause structure
• 4 Information structure and thematic structure
• 5 Grammar and text
• 6 Process and participant
• 7 Group structure
• 8 Embedded clauses
• 9 Clause complexes: Expansion
• 10 Clause complexes: Projection
• 11 Applications of functional analysis
• 12 Historical perspectives
• Answer key
• Glossary
• References
• Index of authors
• Subject index