Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T09:54:40.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - SFL: The Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2019

Edited by
Geoff Thompson ,
Wendy L. Bowcher ,
Lise Fontaine  and
David Schönthal
Geoff Thompson
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Wendy L. Bowcher
Affiliation:
Sun Yat-Sen University, China
Lise Fontaine
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
David Schönthal
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Get access

Summary

This chapter outlines the important role of J. R. Firth and the underlying intellectual background to the development of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory. It sets out Firth’s approach to the role of linguistics in the human sciences, particularly his emphasis on meaning and context of situation, and outlines some of the fundamental differences between his view of language and other key views such as those held by Bloomfield and Chomsky. The chapter explains what Firth means when he argues that linguistics is about producing 'statements of meaning', and discusses three key terms that guide Firth’s approach to the study of language: patterns, pragma, and polysystem.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics , pp. 9 - 282
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Allen, W. S. 1953. Relationship in Comparative Linguistics. Transactions of the Philological Society 52(1): 52–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, W. S. 1970 [1951]. Some Prosodic Aspects of Retroflexion and Aspiration in Sanskrit. In Palmer, F. R., ed., Prosodic Analysis. London: Oxford University Press. 82–90.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. R. 1985. Phonology in the Twentieth Century: Theories of Rules and Theories of Representations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., and Roger, G.. 1982. Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time Varying Analyzers. Physical Review Letters 49(25): 1804–7.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S., Eckart, R., Holtz, M., and Teich, E.. 2005. Corpus-based Register Profiling of Texts from Mechanical Engineering. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference CL 2005 1(1). Available online at: www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/activity/corpus/publications/conference-archives/2005-birmingham.aspx. (Last accessed 25/07/2017.)Google Scholar
Bateson, G. 1982. Difference, Double Description and the Interactive Designation of Self. In Hanson, F. A., ed., Studies in Symbolism and Cultural Communication. Kansas: University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology. 3–8.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. 1962. The Menomini Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. 1952a A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables, I. Physical Review Letters 82(2): 166–79.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. 1952b. A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables, II. Physical Review Letters 82(2): 180–93.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. 2011. The Secret Anarchy of Science. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1972. Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. and McGilvray, J.. 2012. The Science of Language: Interviews with James McGilvray. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. and Stewart, I.. 1995. The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
de Corte-Real, B. 1998. Mambae and Its Verbal Art Genres: A Cultural Reflection of Suru-Ainaro, East Timor. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University.Google Scholar
DeWitt, R. 2004. Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Duranti, A. 2009. Linguistic Anthropology: A Reader. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. 1993. Language, Thought and Logic. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1935. The Technique of Semantics. Transactions of the Philological Society 34(1): 36–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1957. Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1962. A Synopsis of Linguistic Theory 1930–55. In Firth, J. R. et al., eds., Studies in Linguistic Analysis: Special Volume of the Philological Society. Oxford: Blackwell. 1–32.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1964. The Tongues of Men and Speech. Edited by Strevens, P. D.. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1968. Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952–59. Edited by Palmer, F. R.. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Glock, H. J. 1996. A Wittgenstein Dictionary. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1959. The Language of the Chinese ‘Secret History of the Mongols’. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1963. Intonation in English Grammar. Transactions of the Philological Society. 62(1): 143–69.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1974. Language and Social Man. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1984. Language as Code and Language as Behaviour: A Systemic-Functional Interpretation of the Nature and Ontogenesis of Dialogue. In Fawcett, R., Halliday, M. A. K., Lamb, S. M., and Makkai, A., eds., The Semiotics of Language and Culture: Language as Social Semiotic, Vol. 1. London: Pinter. 3–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002 [1985]. On the Ineffability of Grammatical Categories. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday Volume 1: On Grammar. London: Continuum. 291–322.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and James, Z. L.. 1993. A Quantitative Study of Polarity and Primary Tense in the English Finite Clause. In Sinclair, J., Hoey, M., and Fox, G., eds., Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse. London: Routledge. 32–66.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1985. Language, Context and Text: A Social Semiotic Perspective. Geelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1999. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harris, R. 1981. The Language Myth. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Harris, R. 1990. On Redefining Linguistics. In Davis, H. G. and Taylor, T. J., eds., Redefining Linguistics. New York: Routledge. 18–52.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2009. The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 2: Semantic Variation: Meaning in Society and in Sociolinguistics. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. and Cloran, C.. 1990. A Sociolinguistic Interpretation of Everyday Talk between Mothers and Children. In Halliday, M. A. K. et al., eds., Learning, Keeping and Using Language: Selected Papers from the 8th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Sydney, 16–21 August 1987. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Henderson, E. J. A. 1949. Prosodies in Siamese: A Study in Synthesis. Asia Major New Series 1: 189–215.Google Scholar
Henderson, E. J. A. 1987. J. R. Firth in Retrospect: A View from the Eighties. In Steele, R. and Threadgold, T., eds., Language Topics: Essays in Honour of Michael Halliday. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hull, G. 1998. The Basic Lexical Affinities of Timor’s Austronesian Languages: A Preliminary Investigation. Studies in Languages and Cultures of East Timor 1: 97–202.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1966. Henry Sweet’s Path toward Phonetics. In Bazell, C. E. et al., eds., In Memory of J. R. Firth. London: Longmans. 242–54.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. B. 2015. Socially Realistic Linguistics: The Firthian Tradition. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 72–93.Google Scholar
Langendoen, D. T. 1968. The London School of Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Laver, J. 1980. The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B. and Tabouret-Keller, A.. 1985. Acts of Identity: Creole-based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Love, N. 1988. The Linguistic Thought of J. R. Firth. In Harris, R., ed., Linguistic Thought in England 1914–1945. London: Duckworth. 148–64.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. 1968. Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1983. Nigel: A Systemic Grammar for Text Generation. Marina del Rey: Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015a. Halliday on Language. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 137–202.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015b. Register in the Round: Registerial Cartography. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1–48.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T. F. 1957. The Language of Buying and Selling in Cyrenaica: A Situational Statement. Hesperis 44: 31–71.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T. F. 1975. Principles of Neo-Firthian Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F. R. 1968. Introduction. In Palmer, F. R., ed., Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952–59. London: Longmans. 1–11.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. 1970. Prosodic Analysis. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Panksepp, J. and Trevarthen, C.. 2009. The Neuroscience of Emotion in Music. In Malloch, S. and Trevarthen, C., eds., Communicative Musicality: Exploring the Basis of Human Companionship. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 105–46.Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. 1957. Malinowski, Firth, and the ‘Context of Situation’. In Ardener, E., ed., Social Anthropology and Language. London: Tavistock. 33–46.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shklovsky, V. 1972. Mayakovsky and his Circle. New York: Dodd, Mead and Co.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. 1966. Beginning the Study of Lexis. In Bazell, C., Catford, J., Halliday, M. A. K., and Robins, R., eds., In Memory of J. R. Firth. London: Longman. 148–62.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, R. M.. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stensæth, K. and Trondalen, G.. 2012. Dialogue on Intersubjectivity: An Interview with Stein Braten and Colwyn Trevarthen. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy 12(3). Available online at: https://voices.no/index.php/voices/article/view/682/568#31. (Last accessed 29/05/2017.)Google Scholar
Teich, E. 2003. Cross-linguistic Variation in System and Text. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Thomas, M. A. 2011. Fifty Key Thinkers on Language and Linguistics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trevarthen, C. 1998. The Concept and Foundations of Infant Intersubjectivity. In Bråten, S., ed., Intersubjective Communication and Emotion in Early Ontogeny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 15–46.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. 1938. Modes of Thought. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. 1979. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Whitaker, A. 2006. Einstein, Bohr, and the Quantum Dilemma: From Quantum Theory to Quantum Information. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whorf, B. L. 1956. Science and Linguistics. In Carroll, J. B., ed., Language, Thought and Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 207–19.Google Scholar

References

Bradshaw, W. E. and Holzapfel, C. M.. 2006. Evolutionary Response to Rapid Climate Change. Science 312(5779): 1477–8.Google Scholar
Daneš, F. 1974. Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text. In Daneš, F., ed., Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague: Academia. 106–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1957. Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1967a. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: Part 1. Journal of Linguistics 3(1): 37–81.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1967b. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3(2): 199–244.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1968. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: Part 3. Journal of Linguistics 4(2): 179–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002a. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 1: On Grammar. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002b. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 2: Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2003a. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 3: On Language and Linguistics. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2003b. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 4: The Language of Early Childhood. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 5: The Language of Science. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2005a. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 6: Computational and Quantitative Studies. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2005b. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 7: Studies in English Language. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2006. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 8: Studies in Chinese Language. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2007a. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 9: Language and Education. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2007b. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 10: Language and Society. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2008. Complementarities in Language. Edited by Webster, J. J.. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2009. The Essential Halliday. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2013. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Vol. 11: Halliday in the 21st Century. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2015. The Influence of Marxism. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 94–100.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1985. Linguistics, Language and Verbal Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holborow, M. 1999. The Politics of English. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Kauffman, S. 2008. Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2013. Interviews with M. A. K. Halliday: Language Turned Back on Himself. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015. Halliday’s Conception of Language as a Probabilistic System. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 203–41.Google Scholar
Shaviro, S. 2008. Reinventing the Sacred (Stuart Kauffman). Available online at: www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=636. (Last accessed 16/05/17.)Google Scholar
Yousafzai, M. 2013. The Full Text: Malala Yousafzai Delivers Defiant Riposte to Taliban Militants with Speech to the UN General Assembly. Independent, 12 July 2013. Available online at: www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/the-full-text-malala-yousafzai-delivers-defiant-riposte-to-taliban-militants-with-speech-to-the-un-8706606.html. (Last accessed 05/06/17.)Google Scholar

References

Butler, C. S. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-functional Theories, Volume 2: From Clause to Discourse and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. and Taverniers, M.. 2008. Layering in Structural-functional Grammars. Linguistics 46(4): 689–756.Google Scholar
Eggins, S. and Slade, D.. 2005. Analysing Casual Conversation. 2nd ed. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Gregory, M. 1967. Aspects of Varieties Differentiation. Journal of Linguistics 3: 177–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17: 241–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1975. Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1976. Functions and Universals in Language. In Kress, G., ed., Halliday: System and Function in Language. London: Oxford University Press. 26–31.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1977. Text as Semantic Choice in Social Contexts. In van Dijk, T. and Petöfi, J. S., eds., Grammars and Descriptions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 176–225.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1982. The De-automatization of Grammar: From Priestley’s ‘An Inspector Calls’. In Anderson, J. M., ed., Language Form and Linguistic Variation: Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 129–59.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1984. Language as Code and Language as Behaviour: A Systemic-functional Interpretation of the Nature and Ontogenesis of Dialogue. In Fawcett, R. P., Halliday, M. A. K., Lamb, S., and Makkai, A., eds., The Semiotics of Culture and Language, Volume 1: Language as Social Semiotic. London: Pinter. 3–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1991. Towards Probabilistic Interpretations. In Ventola, E., ed., Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 39–61.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1992. How Do You Mean? In Davies, M. and Ravelli, L., eds., Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. 20–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1996. On Grammar and Grammatics. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C., and Butt, D. G., eds., Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–38.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1998a. Things and Relations: Regrammaticising Experience as Technical Knowledge. In Martin, J. R. and Veel, R., eds., Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science. London: Routledge. 185–235.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1998b. Linguistics as Metaphor. In Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M., Davidse, K., and Noël, D., eds., Reconnecting Language: Morphology and Syntax in Functional Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 3–27.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2008. Opening Address: Working with Meaning: Towards an Appliable Linguistics. In Webster, J. J., ed., Meaning in Context: Implementing Intelligent Applications of Language Studies. London: Continuum. 7–23.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2009. Methods – Techniques – Problems. In Halliday, M. A. K., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 59–86.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2013. Meaning as Choice. In Fontaine, L., Bartlett, T., and O’Grady, G., eds., Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 15–36.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1999. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J.. 2009. Keywords. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 229–53.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1996. Semantic Networks: A Tool for the Analysis of Meaning. In Cloran, C., Butt, D. G., and Williams, G., eds., Ways of Saying, Ways of Meaning: Selected Papers of Ruqaiya Hasan. London: Cassell. 104–31.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2009. The Place of Context in a Systemic Functional Model. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 166–89.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2010. The Meaning of ‘Not’ is Not in ‘Not’. In Mahboob, A. and Knight, N., eds., Appliable Linguistics. London: Continuum. 267–306.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2014. Towards a Paradigmatic Description of Context: Systems, Metafunctions, and Semantics. Functional Linguistics 1(9): 1–54.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. 2003. The Geometry of Grammatical Meaning: Semantic Maps and Cross-linguistic Comparison. In Tomasello, M., ed., The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure. Mahwah: Erlbaum. 213–42.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L. 1963. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Translated by Whitfield, F. J.. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Lamb, S. M. 1962. Outline of Stratificational Grammar. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. 1984. Semiotics and Education. Toronto: Victoria University. 23–62.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. 1992. New Challenges for Systemic-functional Linguistics: Dialect Diversity and Language Change. Network 18: 61–8.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. 1995. Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Louw, W. 1993. Irony in the Text or Sincerity in the Writer? The Diagnostic Potential of Semantic Prosodies. In Baker, M., Francis, G., and Tognini-Bonelli, E., eds., Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 157–76.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Thompson, S. A.. 1992. Rhetorical Structure Theory and Text Analysis. In: Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A., eds., Discourse Descriptions: Diverse Analyses of a Fund-raising Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 39–78.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1995. Text and Clause: Fractal Resonance. Text 15(1): 5–42.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1991. Systemic Typology and Topology. In Christie, F., ed., Literacy in Social Processes. Darwin: Northern Territory University, Centre for Studies in Language and Education. 345–83.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Painter, C.. 1997. Working with Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2003. Working with Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and White, P.. 2005. The Language of Evaluation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1993. Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2002. Combining Clauses into Clause Complexes: A Multi-faceted View. In Bybee, J. and Noonan, M., eds., Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 235–320.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2009. Meaning in the Making: Meaning Potential Emerging from Acts of Meaning. Language Learning 59: 206–29.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. and Thompson, S. A.. 1988. The Structure of Discourse and ‘Subordination’. In Haiman, J. and Thompson, S. A., eds., Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 275–329.Google Scholar
Taverniers, M. 2002. Systemic-functional Linguistics and the Notion of Grammatical Metaphor: A Theoretical Study and the Proposal for a Semiotic-functional Integrative Model. PhD Thesis, Ghent University.Google Scholar
Taverniers, M. 2008. Hjelmslev’s Semiotic Model of Language: An Exegesis. Semiotica 171: 367–94.Google Scholar
Taverniers, M. 2011. The Syntax–semantics Interface in Systemic Functional Grammar: Halliday’s Interpretation of the Hjelmslevian Model of Stratification. Journal of Pragmatics 43(4): 1100–26.Google Scholar
Thibault, P. J. 2004. Agency and Consciousness in Discourse: Self–Other Dynamics as a Complex System. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. 1996. Introducing Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
White, P. R. R. 1999. Beyond Interpersonal Metaphors of Mood: Modelling the Discourse Semantics of Evaluation and Subjectivity. Paper presented at the 11th Euro-International Systemic Functional Workshop, July 1999, Ghent University.Google Scholar
White, P. R. R. 2015. Appraisal Theory. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C., and Sandel, T., eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Hoboken: Wiley. 1–7.Google Scholar

References

Bartlett, T. 2014. Analysing Power in Language: A Practical Guide. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, M. 1975. An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics, Volume 1: Structures and Systems. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Berry, M. 1996. What is Theme? A(nother) Personal View. In Berry, M., Butler, C. S., Fawcett, R. P., and Huang, G., eds., Meaning and Form: Systemic Functional Interpretations. Meaning and Choice in Language: Studies for Michael Halliday. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation. 1–64.Google Scholar
Berry, M. 2016. Interpersonal Meanings, with Particular Reference to Getting People to Do Things. Paper for seminar, Vigo, February 2016.Google Scholar
Berry, M. forthcoming. ‘Actually Given’ Versus ‘Presented as Given’ and ‘Actually New’ Versus ‘Presented as New’: What Happens when the ‘Presented as’ Gets out of Step with the ‘Actually’? Paper presented at the 2nd Round Table on Communicative Dynamism, Namur, Belgium, September 2016.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1999. On the Subject of the Subject in English. Functions of Language 6(2): 243–73.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2013. Analysing English Grammar: A Systemic Functional Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fries, P. H. 1981. On the Status of Theme in English: Arguments from Discourse. Forum Linguisticum 6: 1–38.Google Scholar
Gwilliams, L. and Fontaine, L.. 2015. Indeterminacy in Process Type Classification. Functional Linguistics 2(8): 1–19.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002. Modes of Meaning and Modes of Expression: Types of Grammatical Structure and Their Determination by Different Semantic Functions. In Webster, J. J., ed., On Grammar: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday. Vol. 1. London: Continuum. 196–218.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1992. Interpreting the Textual Metafunction. In Davies, M. and Ravelli, L., eds., Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. 37–81.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M., Zappavigna, M., and Whitelaw, C.. 2009. A Survey of Process Type Classification over Difficult Cases. In Jones, C. and Ventola, E., eds., From Language to Multimodality: New Developments in the Study of Ideational Meaning. London: Continuum. 47–64.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. 2014. Introducing Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

References

Berry, M. 1975. An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics, Vol. 1: Structures and Systems. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Berry, M. 2017. Stratum, Delicacy, Realisation and Rank. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 42–55.Google Scholar
Caffarel-Cayron, A. 2017. The Verbal Group in French. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 319–38.Google Scholar
Davidse, K. 2004. The Interaction of Identification and Quantification in English Determiners. In Achard, M. and Kemmer, S., eds., Language, Culture and Mind. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 507–33.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1980. Cognitive Linguistics and Social Interaction: Towards an Integrated Model of a Systemic Functional Grammar and the Other Components of an Interacting Mind. Heidelberg: Julius Groos and Exeter University.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2000a. In Place of Halliday’s ‘Verbal Group’, Part 1: Evidence from the Problems of Halliday’s Representations and the Relative Simplicity of the Proposed Alternative. Word 51(2): 157–203.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2000b. In Place of Halliday’s ‘Verbal Group’, Part 2: Evidence from Generation, Semantics and Interruptability. Word 51(3): 327–75.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2010. A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2013. Analysing English Grammar: A Systemic-functional Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2017a. The English Nominal Group: The Centrality of the Thing Element. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 267–83.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2017b. On Prepositions and Particles: A Case for Lexical Representation in Systemic Functional Linguistics. Word 63(2): 115–35.Google Scholar
Fries, P. H. 1977. English Predications of Comparison. In DiPietro, R. and Blansitt, E., eds., The Third LACUS Forum 1976. Columbia: Hornbeam Press. 545–56.Google Scholar
Ghesquière, L. 2014. The Directionality of (Inter)subjectification in the English Noun Phrase: Pathways of Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17(2): 241–92.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M 2014. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, A. et al. 2014. The Sketch Engine: Ten Years On. Lexicography 1: 1–30.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. 2016. Nominal Structure in Cognitive Grammar: The Lublin Lectures. Edited by Głaz, A., Kowalewski, H., and Łozowski, P.. Lublin: Marie Curie-Skłodowska University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1996. Types of Structure: Deconstructing Notions of Constituency in Clause and Text. In Hovy, E. H. and Scott, D. R., eds., Computational and Conversational Discourse: Burning Issues – An Interdisciplinary Account. Heidelberg: Springer. 39–66.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1995. Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K., and Lam, M.. 2010. Key Terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
McDonald, E. 2017. Form and Function in Groups. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 251–66.Google Scholar
Morley, D. 2000. Syntax in Functional Grammar: An Introduction to Lexicogrammar in Systemic Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Quiroz, B. 2017. The Verbal Group. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 301–18.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. 1998. The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic Functional Approach to Lexis. London: Cassell Academic.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. 2017. The Adjectival Group. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 284–300.Google Scholar

References

Bartlett, T. 2013. ‘I’ll Manage the Context’: Context, Environment and the Potential for Institutional Change. In Fontaine, L., Bartlett, T., and O’Grady, G., eds., Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 342–64.Google Scholar
Bartlett, T. 2016. Multiscalar Modelling of Context: Some Questions Raised by the Category of Mode. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 166–83.Google Scholar
Bartlett, T. 2017. Context in Systemic Functional Linguistics: Towards Scalar Supervenience? In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 375–90.Google Scholar
Berry, M. 2016. On Describing Contexts of Situation. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 184–205.Google Scholar
Bortoluzzi, M. 2010. Energy and Its Double: A Case Study in Critical Multimodal Discourse Analysis. In Swain, W., ed., Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Applications to Other Disciplines, Specialised Discourses on Languages Other than English. Trieste: Edizione Universitarie Trieste. 158–81.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 1999. Investigating Institutionalization in Context. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 141–76.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2007. Field and Multimodal Texts. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 619–46.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2013. Material Action as Choice in Field. In Fontaine, L., Bartlett, T., and O’Grady, G., eds., Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 318–41.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2014. Issues for Developing Unified Systems for Contextual Field and Mode. Functions of Language 21(2): 176–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2015. Structure and Multimodal Texts. In Wildfeurer, J., ed., Building Bridges for Multimodal Research: International Perspectives on Theories and Practices of Multimodal Analysis. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 167–89.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y.. 2016. GSP and Multimodal Texts. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 251–74.Google Scholar
Butt, D. G. 2001. Firth, Halliday and the Development of Systemic Functional Theory. In Auroux, S., Koerner, E. F. K., Niederehe, H.-J., and Versteegh, K., eds., History of the Language Sciences. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 1806–38.Google Scholar
Butt, D. G. 2004. Parameters of Context: On Establishing the Similarities and Differences between Social Processes. Unpublished mimeo. Sydney: Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Butt, D. G., Moore, A. R., Henderson-Brooks, C., Meares, R., and Haliburn, J.. 2010. Dissociation, Relatedness and ‘Cohesive Harmony’: A Linguistic Measure of Degrees of ‘Fragmentation’. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 3(3): 263–93.Google Scholar
Carter, R. 1978. Register, Styles and Teaching Some Aspects of the Language of Literature. Educational Review 30(3): 227–36.Google Scholar
Catford, J. C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cheong, Y. Y. 2004. The Construal of Ideational Meaning in Print Advertisements. In O’Halloran, K., ed., Multimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic-functional Perspectives. London: Continuum. 163–95.Google Scholar
Cloran, C. 1987. Negotiating New Contexts in Conversation. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics 1: 85–110.Google Scholar
Cloran, C. 1994. Rhetorical Units and Decontextualisation: An Enquiry into Some Relations of Context, Meaning and Grammar. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
Cloran, C. 1999 Context, Material Situation and Text. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 177–217.Google Scholar
Cloran, C. 2016. Construing Instructional Contexts. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 275–99.Google Scholar
Eggins, S. and Martin, J. R.. 2012. Genres and Registers of Discourse. In Wang, Z., ed., Genre Studies: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 3. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. 1965. Linguistic Sociology and Institutional Linguistics. Linguistics 19: 5–20.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. 1966. On Contextual Meaning. In Bazell, C. E., Catford, J. A., Halliday, M. A. K., and Robins, R. H., eds., In Memory of J. R. Firth. London: Longmans. 79–95.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. and Ure, J.. 1974. The Contrastive Analysis of Language Registers. Unpublished mimeo.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1950. Personality and Language in Society. The Sociological Review: Journal of the Institute of Sociology 42(2): 37–52.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1957. A Synopsis of Linguistic Theory 1930–55. In Firth, J. R. et al., eds., Studies in Linguistic Analysis: Special Volume of the Philological Society. Oxford: Blackwell. 1–32.Google Scholar
Godley, A. and Escher, A.. 2012. Bidialectal African American Adolescents’ Beliefs about Spoken Language Expectations in English Classrooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 55(8): 704–13.Google Scholar
Gregory, M. 1967. Aspects of Varieties Differentiation. Journal of Linguistics 3(2): 177–274.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1959/1974. The Language of the Chinese ‘Secret History of the Mongols’. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17(3): 241–92.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1977. Text as Semantic Choice in Social Contexts. In van Dijk, T. A. and Petofi, J. S., eds., Grammars and Descriptions. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 176–225.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Part A. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R., Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Geelong: Deakin University Press. 1–49.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1992. How Do You Mean? In Davies, M. and Ravelli, L., eds., Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. 20–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1999. The Notion of ‘Context’ in Language Education. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–24.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., and Strevens, P.. 1964. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1973. Code, Register and Social Dialect. In Bernstein, B., ed., Class, Codes and Control, Volume 2: Applied Studies towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge. 253–92.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1978. Text in the Systemic-functional Model. In Dressler, W. U., ed., Current Trends in Textlinguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 228–46.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1981. What’s Going on: A Dynamic View of Context in Language. In Copeland, J. E. and David, P. W., eds., The Seventh LACUS Forum 1980. Columbia: Hornbeam Press. 106–21.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1985. Part B. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R., Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Geelong: Deakin University Press. 51–118.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1995. The Conception of Context in Text. In Fries, P. H. and Gregory, M., eds., Discourse in Society: Systemic Functional Perspectives. Meaning and Choice in Language: Studies for Michael Halliday. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1999. Speaking with Reference to Context. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 219–328.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2001. Wherefore Context? The Place of Context in the System and Process of Language. In Shaozeng, R., Guthrie, W., and Fong, I. W. Ronald, eds., Grammar and Discourse: Proceedings of the International Conference on Discourse Analysis. PRC Macau: Publications Centre, University of Macau. 1–30.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2005. Language and Society in a Systemic Functional Perspective. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 55–80.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2009. The Place of Context in a Systemic Functional Model. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 166–89.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2014. Towards a Paradigmatic Description of Context: Systems, Metafunctions, and Semantics. Functional Linguistics 1(9): 1–54.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2016. In the Nature of Language: Reflections on Permeability and Hybridity. In Miller, D. R and Bayley, P., eds., Hybridity in Systemic Functional Linguistics: Grammar, Text and Discursive Context. Sheffield: Equinox. 337–83.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L. 1961. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Khoo, K. 2016. ‘Threads of Continuity’ and Interaction: Coherence, Texture and Cohesive Harmony. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 300–30.Google Scholar
Lamb, S. 1966. Outline of Stratificational Grammar. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lukin, A. 2010. ‘News’ and ‘Register’: A Preliminary Investigation. In Mahboob, A. and Knight, N. K., eds., Appliable Linguistics. London: Continuum. 92–113.Google Scholar
Lukin, A. 2016. Language and Society, Context and Text: The Contributions of Ruqaiya Hasan. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 143–65.Google Scholar
Lukin, A., Moore, A. R., Herke, M., Wegener, R., and Wu, C.. 2011. Halliday’s Model of Register Revisited and Explored. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 4(2): 187–213.Google Scholar
Malinowski, B. 1923. The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. Supplement 1. In Ogden, C. K. and Richards, I. A., eds., The Meaning of Meaning. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C and Thompson, S. A. 1988. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization. Text 8(3): 243–81.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Thompson, S. A.. 1992. Rhetorical Structure Theory and Text Analysis. In Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A., eds., Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-raising Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 39–78.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1999. Modelling Context: A Crooked Path of Progress in Contextual Linguistics. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 25–61.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2008. Tenderness: Realisation and Instantiation in a Botswanan Town. In Nørgaard, N., ed., Systemic Functional Linguistics in Use. Odense: University of Southern Denmark. 30–62.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2012a. A Context for Genre: Modelling Social Processes in Functional Linguistics. In Wang, Z., ed., Genre Studies: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 3. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. 248–77.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2012b. From Little Things Big Things Grow: Ecogenesis in School Geography. In Wang, Z., ed., Genre Studies: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 3. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. 278–302.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2012c. Language in Education: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 7. Edited by Wang, Z.. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2012d. Language, Register and Genre. In Wang, Z., ed., Register Studies: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 4. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. 47–68.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2012e. A Universe of Meaning: How Many Practices? In Wang, Z., ed., Genre Studies: Collected Works of J. R. Martin, Volume 3. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. 303–13.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2008. Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2009. Ideas and New Directions. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 12–58.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2014a. Registerial Cartography: Context-based Mapping of Text Types and Their Rhetorical-relational Organization. Proceedings of the 28th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation. Unpublished conference paper.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2014b. Appliable Discourse Analysis. In Fang, Y. and Webster, J. J., eds., Developing Systemic Functional Linguistics: Theory and Application. Sheffield: Equinox. 138–208.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015. Register in the Round: Registerial Cartography. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1–48.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. and Teruya, K.. 2016. Registerial Hybridity: Indeterminacy among Fields of Activity. In Miller, D. R. and Bayley, P., eds., Hybridity in Systemic Functional Linguistics: Grammar, Text and Discursive Context. Sheffield: Equinox. 205–39.Google Scholar
McIntosh, A. 1961. ‘Graphology’ and Meaning. Archivum Linguisticum 13: 107–20.Google Scholar
Miller, D. R. and Bayley, P., eds. 2016. Hybridity in Systemic Functional Linguistics: Grammar, Text and Discursive Context. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Ogden, C. K. and Richards, I. A.. 1923. The Meaning of Meaning. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Reid, T. B. W. 1956. Linguistics, Structuralism and Philology. Archivum Linguisticum 8: 28–37.Google Scholar
Thibault, P. J. 1987. An Interview with Michael Halliday. In Steele, R. and Threadgold, T., eds., Language Topics: Essays in Honour of Michael Halliday. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 601–27.Google Scholar
Ure, J. 1982. Introduction: Approaches to the Study of Register Range. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 35: 5–33.Google Scholar
White, R. 1974. The Concept of Register and TESL. TESOL Quarterly 8(4): 401–16.Google Scholar

References

Banks, D. 2014. A Note for –ed: Comments on the Treatment of –ed in Handel’s Messiah. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 221–34.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 1998. Intonation in Radio Sports Commentating: Towards an Analysis and Interpretation. In Nagahara, Y., ed., Kobunnokairuinikansuru Kijutsutekioyobi Rirontekikenkyuu. Japanese Ministry of Education Research Grant no. 07451097.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2003. Creating Informational Waves: Theme and New Choices in Play-by-play Radio Sports Commentary. In Amano, M., ed., Creation and Practical Use of Language Texts: Proceedings of the Second International Conference for the Integrated Text Science. Nagoya: Graduate School of Letters, Nagoya University. 111–22.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. 2004. Theme and New in Play-by-play Radio Sports Commentating. In Banks, D., ed., Text and Texture: Systemic Functional Viewpoints on the Nature and Structure of Text. Paris: L’Harmattan. 455–93.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A.. 2014a. Introduction. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 1–24.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds. 2014b. Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Bowcher, W. L. and Zhu, S.. 2014. Meaningful Reading: Intonation Choices by Native and Non-native English Speakers Reading The Giving Tree. Unpublished manuscript. 1–36.Google Scholar
Caldwell, D. 2014. A Comparative Analysis of the Rap and the Sung Voice: Perspectives from Systemic Phonology, Social Semiotics and Music Studies. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 235–63.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. 1986. An Introduction to English Prosody. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. and Davy, D.. 1969. Investigating English Style. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cummings, M. 2000. The Inference of Given Information in Written Text. In Ventola, E., ed., Discourse and Community: Doing Functional Linguistics. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. 331–53.Google Scholar
Cummings, M. 2001. Intuitive and Quantitative Analyses of Given/New in Texts. In de Villiers, J. and Stainton, R. J., eds., Communication in Linguistics, Volume 1: Papers in Honour of Michael Gregory. Toronto: GREF Publishers. 61–94.Google Scholar
Cummings, M. 2014. The Spoken Interpretation of Written Text. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 199–217.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 1989. Prosodic and Nonprosodic Cohesion in Speech and Writing. Word 40(1–2): 255–62.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 1992. Prosodic Cohesion in a Systemic Perspective. In Tench, P., ed., Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter. 206–30.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 1994a. Intonation IS Visible in Written English. In Čmejrková, S., Daneš, F., and Havlová, E., eds., Writing vs Speaking: Language, Text, Discourse, Communication. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. 199–204.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 1994b. I’m Sorry I’ll Read that Again: Information Structure in Writing. In Čmejrková, S. and Štícha, E., eds., The Syntax of Sentence and Text: A Festschrift for Frantisek Daneš. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. 75–89.Google Scholar
Davies, M. 2014. The Black Hole in Graphology. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 153–98.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2014. The Meanings and Forms of Intonation and Punctuation in English: The Concepts Required for an Explicit Model. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 324–401.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1948. Sounds and Prosodies. Transactions of the Philological Society 47(1): 127–52.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1968. Linguistic Analysis as a Study of Meaning. In Palmer, F. R., ed., Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952–59. London: Longmans. 12–26.Google Scholar
Greaves, W. S. 2014. Locating the Limerick ‘Wall Street Irene’ and the Sonnet ‘On His Blindness’ in the Semiotic Space between the Body as Signal Generator/Receiver and the Body as Social Interactant. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 405–38.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17(3): 242–92.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1963a. Intonation in English Grammar. Transactions of the Philological Society 62(1): 143–69.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1963b. The Tones of English. Archivum Linguisticum 15(1): 1–28.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1967. Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1970. A Course in Spoken English: Intonation. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985a. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985b. Part A. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R., Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Geelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1992. How Do You Mean? In Davies, M. and Ravelli, L., eds., Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. 20–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Greaves, W. S.. 2008. Intonation in the Grammar of English. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Iwamoto, K. 2014. A Multistratal Approach to Paragraph-like Organisation in Lectures. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 116–49.Google Scholar
Johns-Lewis, C. 1986. Prosodic Differentiation of Discourse Modes. In Johns-Lewis, C., ed., Intonation in Discourse. London: Croom Helm. 199–219.Google Scholar
Kuiper, K. 1996. Smooth Talkers: The Linguistic Performance of Auctioneers and Sportscasters. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lukin, A. 2014. Creating a Parallel Universe: Mode and the Textual Metafunction in the Study of One News Story. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology. Sheffield: Equinox. 53–90.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1995. Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Language Science Publishers.Google Scholar
McGregor, W. B. 1992. Towards a Systemic Account of Gooniyandi Segmental Phonology. In Tench, P., ed., Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter. 19–43.Google Scholar
Ogden, R. 2012. Firthian Prosodic Analysis. Firthian Phonology Archive. Available online at: https://sites.google.com/site/firthianarchive/fpa. (Last accessed 27/07/2017.)Google Scholar
O’Grady, G. 2014. An Investigation of How Intonation Helps Signal Information Structure. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology. Sheffield: Equinox. 27–52.Google Scholar
O’Grady, G. 2017. Intonation and Systemic Functional Linguistics: The Way Forward. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 146–62.Google Scholar
Prince, E. 1981. Towards a Taxonomy of Given-New Information. In Cole, P., ed., Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 223–56.Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. 1970. Aspects of Prosodic Analysis. In Palmer, F. R., ed., Prosodic Analysis. London: Oxford University Press. 104–11.Google Scholar
Smith, B. A. 2008. Intonational Systems and Register: A Multidimensional Exploration. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University. Available online at: www.isfla.org/Systemics/Print/Theses/SmithBradPhD.pdf. (Last accessed 27/07/2017.)Google Scholar
Storynory, n.d. How Love and Peace Came to the Woods. Available online at: www.storynory.com/2017/04/22/love-peace-came-woods. (Last accessed 27/07/2017.)Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1988. The Stylistic Potential of Intonation. In Coupland, N., ed., Styles of Discourse. London: Croom Helm. 50–84.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1990. The Roles of Intonation in English Discourse. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1992a. From Prosodic Analysis to Systemic Phonology. In Tench, P., ed., Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter. 1–17.Google Scholar
Tench, P., ed. 1992b. Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1996. The Intonation Systems of English. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 2014. Towards a Systemic Presentation of the Word Phonology of English. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 267–93.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, T. 1992. Rhythm and Social Context: Accent and Juncture in the Speech of Professional Radio Announcers. In Tench, P., ed., Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter. 231–62.Google Scholar
Young, D. 1992. English Consonant Clusters: A Systemic Approach. In Tench, P., ed., Studies in Systemic Phonology. London: Pinter. 44–69.Google Scholar
Zhu, S. 2014. Intonation: Signal of Information Peaks. In Bowcher, W. L. and Smith, B. A., eds., Systemic Phonology: Recent Studies in English. Sheffield: Equinox. 91–115.Google Scholar

References

Bateman, J. 2008. Multimodality and Genre: A Foundation for the Systematic Analysis of Multimodal Documents. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Biber, D. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, C. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories, Part 1: Approaches to the Simplex Clause. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cloran, C. 1987. Negotiating New Contexts in Conversation. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics 1: 85–110.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. 1965. Linguistic Society and Institutional Linguistics. Linguistics 3(19): 5–20.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. and Ure, J.. 1969. Language Varieties: Register. In Meetham, A. R., ed., Encyclopedia of Linguistics: Information and Control. Oxford: Pergamon. 251–9.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2009. Seven Problems to Beware of When Analyzing Processes and Participant Roles in Texts. In Slembrouck, S., Taverniers, M., and van Herreweghe, M., eds., Will to Well: Studies in Linguistics, Offered to Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen. Ghent: Academia Press. 209–24.Google Scholar
Gregory, M. and Carroll, S.. 1978. Language and Situation: Language Varieties and Their Social Contexts. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gregory, M. and Malcolm, K.. 1981. Generic Situation and Discourse Phase: An Approach to the Analysis of Children’s Talk. Unpublished mimeo. Toronto.Google Scholar
Gwilliams, L. and Fontaine, L.. 2015. Indeterminacy in Process Type Classification. Functional Linguistics 2(8): 1–19.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1965. Speech and Situation. English in Education 2(A2): 14–17.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1970. Language Structure and Language Function. In Lyons, J., ed., New Horizons in Linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 140–65.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1973. Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1984. Language as Code and Language as Behaviour: A Systemic Functional Interpretation of the Nature and Ontogenesis of Dialogue. In Fawcett, R., Halliday, M. A. K., Lamb, S., and Makkai, A., eds., The Semiotics of Culture and Language, Vol 2: Language and Other Semiotic Systems of Culture. London: Pinter. 3–35.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1989. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2006. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1978. Text in the Systemic-functional Model. In Dressler, W., ed., Current Trends in Text Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 228–46.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1981. What’s Going On: A Dynamic View of Context. Seventh LACUS Forum. Columbia: Hornbeam Press.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1995. The Conception of Context in Text. In Fries, P. and Gregory, M., eds., Discourse in Society: Systemic Functional Perspectives. New York: Ablex. 183–284.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1999. Speaking with Reference to Context. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 219–328.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2015. Towards a Paradigmatic Description of Context: Systems, Metafunctions, and Semantics. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1–54.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. A. 1971. English Complex Sentences. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Lee, D. Y. W. 2001. Genres, Registers, Text Types, Domains, and Styles Clarifying the Concepts and Navigating a Path through the BNC Jungle. Language Learning and Technology 5(3): 37–72. Available online at: https://llt.msu.edu/vol5num3/lee. (Last accessed 15/05/2017.)Google Scholar
Lukin, A., Moore, A. R., Herke, M., Wegener, R., and Wu, C.. 2011. Halliday’s Model of Register Revisited and Explored. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 4(2): 187–213.Google Scholar
Malcolm, K. 2010. Phasal Analysis: Analyzing Discourse through Communication Linguistics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1984. Types of Writing in Infants and Primary School. In Unsworth, L., ed., Reading, Writing, Spelling: Proceedings of the Fifth Macarthur Reading/Language Symposium. Sydney: Macarthur Institute of Higher Education. 34–55.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1985. Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis. In Benson, J. and Greaves, W., eds., Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. 1. Norwood: Ablex. 248–74.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1999. Modelling Context: A Crooked Path of Progress in Contextual Linguistics. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 25–61.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., ed. 2013. Interviews with M. A. K. Halliday: Language Turned Back on Himself. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2014. Evolving Systemic Functional Linguistics: Beyond the Clause. Functional Linguistics 1(3): 1–24.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Painter, C.. 2010. Deploying Functional Grammar. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2003. Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2008. Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1995. Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015. Register in the Round: Registerial Cartography. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1–49.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. 1991. Functional Explanation in Linguistics and the Origins of Language. Language and Communication 11(1–2): 3–28.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M. 1990. A Dynamic Model of Exchange. Word 41(3): 293–328.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M. 1999. Context in Dynamic Modelling. In Ghadessy, M., ed., Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 63–99.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M. 2012. Tenor in a Dynamic Model of Context. Paper presented at Register and Context 2012. Macquarie University, 6–8 February 2012. Available online at: www.wagsoft.com/Presentations/ODONNELL-MAcquarie-Tenor2012.pdf. (Last accessed 15/05/2017.)Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M. and Sefton, P.. 1995. Modelling Telephonic Interaction: A Dynamic Approach. Interface: Journal of Applied Linguistics 10(1): 63–78.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M., Zappavigna, M., and Whitelaw, C.. 2008. A Survey of Process Type Classification over Difficult Cases. In Jones, C. and Ventola, E., eds., From Language to Multimodality: New Developments in the Study of Ideational Meaning. London: Continuum. 47–64.Google Scholar
Paltridge, B. 1996. Genre, Text Type, and the Language Learning Classroom. ELT Journal 50(3): 237–43.Google Scholar
Stillar, G. 1992. Phasal Analysis and Multiple Inheritance: An Appeal for Clarity. Carlton Papers in Applied Language Studies 9: 104–28.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. 2015. Pattern Grammar and Transitivity Analysis. In Groom, N., Charles, M., and John, S., eds., Corpora, Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 21–41.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. 1990. Functionalism in Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11: 155–77.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. 2014. Process Types and Their Classification. In Kunz, K., Teich, E., Hansen-Schirra, S., Neumann, S., and Daut, P., eds., Caught in the Middle: Language Use and Translation. A Festschrift for Erich Steiner on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday. Saarbrücken: universaar, University of the Saarland. 401–16.Google Scholar
Ure, J. N. and Ellis, J.. 1977. Register in Descriptive Linguistics and Linguistic Sociology. In Uribe-Villegas, O., ed., Issues in Sociolinguistics. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. 197–243.Google Scholar
Ventola, E. 1983. The Dynamics of Genre. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 13:103–23.Google Scholar
Ventola, E. 1987. The Structure of Social Interaction: A Systemic Approach to the Semiotics of Service Encounters. London: Pinter.Google Scholar

References

Berry, M. 1975. An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics, Volume 1: Structures and Systems. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Biber, D. and Clark, V.. 2002. Historical Shifts in Modification Patterns with Complex Noun Phrase Structures: How Long Can You Go without a Verb? In Fanego, T., Lopez-Couso, M. J., and Perez-Guerra, J., eds., English Historical Syntax and Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 43–66.Google Scholar
Butler, C. 2002. On Being True to Form: Models of Syntax in Systemic Functional Grammar. Functions of Language 9(1): 61–86.Google Scholar
Butler, C. 2003a. Structure and Function: An Introduction to Three Major Structural-functional Theories, Volume 1: Approaches to the Simplex Clause. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Butler, C. 2003b. Structure and Function: An Introduction to Three Major Structural-functional Theories, Volume 2: From Clause to Discourse and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Butler, C. and Gonzálvez-García, F.. 2014. Exploring Functional-cognitive Space. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1973. Generating a Sentence in Systemic Functional Grammar. Reprinted in Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R., eds. 1981. Readings in Systemic Linguistics. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1974. Some Proposals for Systemic Syntax, Part 1. MALS Journal 1: 1–15.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1975. Some Proposals for Systemic Syntax, Part 2. MALS Journal 2(1): 43–68.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1976. Some Proposals for Systemic Syntax, Part 3. MALS Journal 2(2): 35–68.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1980. Cognitive Linguistics and Social Interaction: Towards an Integrated Model of a Systemic Functional Grammar and the Other Components of an Interacting Mind. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1990. The Computer Generation of Speech with Semantically and Discoursally Motivated Intonation. In Proceedings of 5th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1993. Language as Program: A Reassessment of the Nature of Descriptive Linguistics. Language Sciences 14(4): 623–57.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1994. On Moving on on Ontologies. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 1998. System Network for Thing. Version 5. Unpublished manuscript, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2000a. A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2000b. In Place of Halliday’s ‘Verbal Group’, Part 1: Evidence from the Problems of Halliday’s Representations and the Relative Simplicity of the Proposed Alternative. Word 51(2): 157–203.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2000c. In Place of Halliday’s ‘Verbal Group’, Part 2: Evidence from Generation, Semantics and Interruptability. Word 51(3): 327–75.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2007. Modelling ‘Selection’ between Referents in the English Nominal Group: An Essay in Scientific Inquiry in Linguistics. In Butler, C. S., Hidalgo Downing, R., and Lavid, J., eds., Functional Perspectives on Grammar and Discourse: Papers in Honour of Professor Angela Downing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 165–204.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2008a. Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics: The Cardiff Grammar as an Extension and Simplification of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2008b. Systemic Functional Grammar as a Formal Model of Language: A Micro-grammar for Some Central Elements of the English Clause. Unpublished manuscript, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2009. Seven Problems to Beware of When Analyzing Processes and Participant Roles in Texts. In Slembrouck, S., Taverniers, M., and van Herreweghe, M., eds., From ‘Will’ to ‘Well’: Studies in Linguistics Offered to Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen. Ghent: Academia Press. 209–24.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2010. A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2013. Choice and Choosing in Systemic-Functional Grammar. In Fontaine, L., Bartlett, T., and O’Grady, G., eds., Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 115–34.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. 2017. From Meaning to Form in the Cardiff Model of Language and its Use. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 56–76.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. forthcoming. Functional Syntax Handbook: Analyzing English at the Level of Form. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R., Tucker, G., and Lin, Y.. 1993. How a Systemic Functional Grammar Works: The Role of Realization in Realization. In Horacek, H. and Zock, M., eds., New Concepts in Natural Language Generation. London: Pinter. 114–86.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2008. A Systemic Functional Approach to Referring Expressions: Reconsidering Post-modification in the Nominal Group. PhD Thesis, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2012. Analyzing English Grammar: A Systemic-functional Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fontaine, L. 2017. The English Nominal Group: The Centrality of the Thing Element. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 267–83.Google Scholar
Funamoto, H. 2014. The Interface between Culture and Mind: A Systemic Functional Account of Nominality. 北陸大学紀要 第 38 号: 51–80.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17: 241–92.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Hodder.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
He, W. 2014. Bi-functional Constituent Constructions in Modern Mandarin Chinese: A Cardiff Grammar Approach. Language Sciences 42: 43–59.Google Scholar
Huang, G. 2017. Theme in the Cardiff Grammar. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 163–76.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. 1971. English Complex Sentences: An Introduction to Systemic Grammar. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Lin, Y. 1993. Aspects of a Linguistic Approach to Logical Form and Reasoning: COMMUNAL Report No 32. Unpublished manuscript, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Lin, Y., Fawcett, R., and Davies, B.. 1993. GENEDIS: The Discourse Generator in COMMUNAL. In Sloman, A., Hogg, D., Humphreys, G., Ramsay, A., and Partridge, D., eds., Prospects for Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of AISB 93, the 9th Biennial Conference of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour. Amsterdam: IOS Press. 148–57.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. and Bateman, J.. 1991. Text Generation and Systemic-functional Linguistics: Experiences from English and Japanese. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Neale, A. 2002. More Delicate TRANSITIVITY: Extending the PROCESS TYPE System Networks for English to Include Full Semantic Classifications. PhD Thesis, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Neale, A. 2017. Transitivity in the Cardiff Grammar. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 178–93.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, S., and Svartvik, J.. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Quiroz, B. 2017. The Verbal Group. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 301–18.Google Scholar
Schulz, A. 2008. Tense, Modality and Polarity: The Finite Verbal Group in English and German Newsgroup Texts. In Norgaard, N., ed., Systemic Functional Linguistics in Use. Odense: OWPLC 29. 697–716.Google Scholar
Schulz, A. 2015. Me, Myself and I: A Corpus-based, Contrastive Study of English and German Computer-mediated Communication from a Systemic Functional Perspective. PhD Thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1990. The Roles of Intonation in English Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 1996. The Intonation Systems of English. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Tench, P. 2017. The Phoneme and Word Phonology in SFL. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 233–50.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. 1998. The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic Functional Approach to Lexis. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. 2017. The Adjectival Group. In Bartlett, T. and O’Grady, G., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 284–300.Google Scholar
Wegener, R. 2011. Parameters of Context: From Theory to Model and Application. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University.Google Scholar

References

Bateman, J. and O’Donnell, M.. 2014. Computational Linguistics: The Halliday Connection. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 453–66.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories, Part 2: From Clause to Discourse and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. 2008. Cognitive Adequacy in Structural-functional Theories of Language. Language Sciences 30: 1–30.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. 2013. Systemic Functional Linguistics, Cognitive Linguistics and Psycholinguistics: Opportunities for Dialogue. Functions of Language 20(2): 182–218.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. and Gonzálvez-García, F.. 2005. Situating FDG in Functional-cognitive Space: An Initial Study. In Lachlan Mackenzie, J. and de los Ángeles Gómez-González, M., eds., Studies in Functional Discourse Grammar. Bern: Peter Lang. 109–58.Google Scholar
Butler, C. S. and Gonzálvez-García, F.. 2014. Exploring Functional-cognitive Space. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R., and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., eds. 2004. Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Christie, F. and Unsworth, L.. 2005. Developing Dimensions of an Educational Linguistics. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 217–50.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. P. 2000. A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. P. 2008. Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar: An Extension and Simplification of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. P. in press. An Integrative Architecture for Systemic Functional Linguistics and Other Theories of Language. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, F. and Butler, C. S.. 2006. Mapping Functional-cognitive Space. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 4: 39–96.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word 17: 241–92.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1995. On Language in Relation to the Evolution of Human Consciousness. In Sture, A., ed., Of Thoughts and Words: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 92: The Relation between Language and Mind. London: Imperial College Press and the Nobel Foundation. 45–84.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002. Introduction: A Personal Perspective. In Webster, J. J., ed., On Grammar: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 1. London: Continuum. 1–14.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2003a. Introduction: On the ‘Architecture’ of Human Language. In Webster, J. J., ed., On Language and Linguistics: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 3. London: Continuum. 1–29.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2003b. The Language of Early Childhood: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 4. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. On Grammar as the Driving Force from Primary to Higher-order Consciousness. In Williams, G. and Lukin, A., eds., The Development of Language: Functional Perspectives on Species and Individuals. London: Continuum. 15–44.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2005. Computational and Quantitative Studies: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 6. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2007. Language and Society: Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2009. Methods – Techniques – Problems. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 59–86.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1999. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2005. Language and Society in a Systemic Functional Perspective. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 55–80.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2009. The Place of Context in a Systemic Functional Model. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 166–89.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 2014. Systemic Functional Linguistics: Halliday and the Evolution of a Social Semiotic. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 101–36.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1991. Systemic Typology and Topology. In Christie, F., ed., Literacy in Social Processes: Papers from the Inaugural Systemic Functional Linguistics Conference, Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 345–83.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2005. Designing Literacy Pedagogy. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 251–80.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2007. The ‘Architecture’ of Language According to Systemic Functional Theory: Developments since the 1970s. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 505–61.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2009. Ideas and New Directions. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 12–58.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2014. Halliday’s Conception of Language as a Probabilistic System. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 203–41.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, M. and Bateman, J.. 2005. SFL in Computational Contexts: A Contemporary History. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 343–82.Google Scholar
Painter, C. 2009. Language Development. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 87–103.Google Scholar
Parret, H. 1974. Discussing Language. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Taylor Torsello, C. and Baldry, A.. 2005. SFL in Text-based, Web-enhanced Language Study. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 311–42.Google Scholar
Teich, E. 2009. Linguistic Computing. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 113–27.Google Scholar
Torr, J. 2014. Language Development in Early Childhood: Learning How to Mean. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 242–56.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 1996. ‘So Grammarians Haven’t the Faintest Idea: Reconciling Lexis-oriented and Grammar-oriented Approaches to Language. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C., and Butt, D. G., eds., Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 145–78.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 1998. The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic-functional Approach to Lexis. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 2001. ‘Getting our Heads around It’: Semantic and Syntactic Tension in the Transitivity Analysis of Metaphorically-derived Multi-word Verbs. Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 30(2): 303–13.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 2006. Systemic Incorporation: On the Relationship between Corpus and Systemic Functional Grammar. In Thompson, G. and Hunston, S., eds., System and Corpus: Exploring Connections. Sheffield: Equinox. 81–102.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 2007a. Between Lexis and Grammar: Towards a Systemic Functional Approach to Phraseology. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 954–77.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. H. 2007b. ‘Sorry to Muddy the Waters’: Accounting for Speech Act Formulae and Formulaic Variation in a Systemic Functional Model of Language. In Butler, C. S., Hidalgo Downing, R., and Lavid, J., eds., Functional Perspectives on Grammar and Discourse: In Honour of Angela Downing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 395–418.Google Scholar
Williams, G. 2005. Grammatics in Schools. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 281–310.Google Scholar
Williams, G. 2014. Halliday as an International Educator. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 327–47.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×