Chapter 1. An overview of the Systemic functional approach.

Four main theoretical claims about language (systemic linguists): -that language use is functional -that its function is to make meanings -that these meanings are influenced by the social and cultural context in which they are exchanged -that the process of using language is a semiotic process Thus, language is functional, semantic, contextual, and semiotic. SFL is then a functionalsemantic approach to language which is functional in two respects: a. it asks functional questions: how do people use language? b. it interprets the linguistic system fuctionally: how is language structured for use? Language is structured to make three main kinds of meanings simultaneously: experiential, interpersonal, and textual. This semantic complexity is possible because language is a semiotic system: a conventionalized coding system, organized as sets of choices. Semiotic systems are particular in which each choice in the system acquires its meanings against the background of the other choices which could have been made (in this respect here is agency conceptualized and its ingrained in some ideas on social theory, for example Giddens each act could have been otherwise. Fairclough 2003 mentions this too). Then she goes into analyzing the questions above with examples of language in use. The baby crying. Some important ideas the text reveals: Language use is purposeful behavior. We have to look at more than isolated sentences. A text is a complete linguistic interaction (oral or written) preferably from beginning to end. Context is in text: context and language are heavily linked.

This last point was made through the exercise of guessing where the source of the three sample text was. We were able to distinguish among the three texts because the text itself gave us cues to be able to deduce the context of language use from the linguistic patterns in a text (lexical or word use, style- you vs. not you- academic vs chatty, interactional vs. not ). Again: Context is in text. The sentence: is experientially ambiguous because you dont know what dimensions of reality are being referred to, interpersonally ambiguous because we dont know what the relation between the two interactants are. When we include another sentence such as: Yeah! I brought some French reds. Thus, in asking functional questions, we are not only asking about language, but about language use in context. Systemicists attempt to a. describe what dimensions of context have impact on language use (i.e., the color of hair is part of the context, but it is usually irrelevant), b. describe which aspects of language use appear to be effected by particular dimensions of context (i.e., friends vs strangers). These questions are explored through genre and register theory. Levels of context are genre (or context of culture), register (or context of situation). Register theory studies the dimensions that have more impact on language use: three dimensions are: mode: amount of feedback and role of language (oral or written?) tenor: role relations of power and solidarity (talking to boss or lover?) Field: topic or focus of activity (talking about baseball or linguistics?). I suggest we attack the reds

A higher level of context to which special attention is being given within the field of Systemic Functional Linguistics is the level of ideology. (CDA is one of these

disciplines, how patterns of language use interact with social structures and ideology p. 23). Just as no text is free of context (genre or register), no text is free of ideology. Thus, we need a way of talking about language not only as representing but actively constructing our view of the world. Linguistic texts make not just one, but many meanings (mainly 3 experiential, interpersonal and textual all of which are made SIMULTANEOUSLY). The texts used in this chapter as sample texts are simultaneously making experiential (related to the real world), interpersonal (distant vs. close), and textual meanings (use of pronouns ie..). At both Macro (text) and Micro (sentence) level, it is possible to identify these three different types of meanings being made and most significantly, being made simultaneously. Language as a social system: Meaning as choice Semiotic systems: finite collection of discrete signs. Systems consist of: -a finite set of choices -the choices are discrete: one at a time -the oppositions not the substance is what matters. Red is not green. In order to be a semiotic system, we need to see that certain light colors triggers certain behaviors. a red light does not just mean this is a red light, it means stop now. So, now the system has a content (red light) and an expression (stop now). Semiotic systems are established by social convention. Wherever we have the option to choose, then we find the potential for semiotic systems, as the choices we make are invested with meaning. (i.e., clothing began as natural and now is part of a semiotic system ie. Job interview, femenity, masculinity). In language we do not just have meanings realized by words, because the words themselves are realized by sounds. We can divide words in sounds, but we cannot divide the green light into smaller components. -Linguistic systems order the content (i.e., child neutral vs. brag negative) and the expression (kid different from kit in which t and d are different meaningful. Aspirated k vs non aspirated k is different but carries no distinctive meaning).

Content

Folk Names Meanings Wordings (words & structures) Sounds/ letters

Technical Terms (discourse-) semantics Lexico-grammar Phonology/ graphology

Expression

In simple language (Folk names). In language, meanings are realized as wording which are realized by sounds (or letters). Technically, discourse-semantics gets realized through the lexico-grammar, which in turns gets realized through phonology or graphology. Thus, language has 3 levels, two meaning making ones (content- our focus) and one expression level.

Eggins contends that what is distinctive to systemic linguistics (albeit related to text grammarians, discourse analysis, sociolinguistics, ethnography of speaking, CDA) is that it seeks to develop both a theory about language as social process AND an analytical methodology which permits the detailed and systematic description of language patterns (p. 23). As such, Eggins claims that this book explores both: the systemic model of language (what language is, how it works), and techniques to analyzing different aspects of the language system (analysis of reference, transitivity, cohesion, mood, theme).

Chapter 2. Context of Culture: Genre Deals primarily with genre, but explains register also. -Genre can be thought of as the general framework that gives purpose to interactions of particular types, adaptable to the many specific contexts of situation that they get used in. Both registers and genres are realized through language. Two main realizations of genre in language are: Schematic structures: step-by-step, schematic organization. (once upon a time = Introduction etc..). Two fundamental concepts in linguistic analysis dealing with genre:

-Constituency: relations between the parts and the whole. Genres are constituted of parts which generally are beginning, middle, and end. -Functional labeling: formal and functional criteria. We should use functional rather than formal criteria. i.e., request, answer, evaluation, and not jus beginning, middle, end. The second is the Realizational patterns, whereby the boundaries between stages, and the function of each stage of the genre, are expressed through language choices (discoursesemantic, and lexico-gramatical) realized in a text. Realization refer to the way meaning gets encoded or expressed in a semiotic system (see diagram). From this it follows that realizational patterns differ across genres and schematic stages (i.e., words and structures in a transactional genre are not the same as the ones in an interview). For more on this, follow the example on page 42 (the recipe). -Each stage in the recipe genre is associated with a number of grammatical and lexical features. Types of Generic Structure Genre theory is about bringing unconscious cultural knowledge (typical type of meanings that get made in each stage of genre, typical words and structures that get used to express them) to consciousness by describing how we use language to do things. -wherever language is being used to achieve a culturally recognized and culturally established purpose, there will we find genre. In longer more complex texts a genre study is also possible, but they can be referred to as macrogenres (Martin 1992b). Within these macro-genres it is possible to identify a number of genres going on. Generic structures are not always realized in such a neat way as in a bet, of in a recipe. This is so, because there are two different kinds of functional motivations for linguistic interactions: pragmatic and interpersonal. Pragmatic ones have a clear identifiable purpose (buying, betting). Interpersonal interactions do not have a tangible goal to be achieved, they are motivated by the exploring and establishment of interpersonal relations. This more fluid kind of interaction is better to be described in terms of phases rather than stages. However, we are always using language purposefully, we never just use language, we always use it to do something.

Ch. 6 The Grammar of Interpersonal Meaning: Mood Tries to uncover the correlation between the semantic categories of speech functions of offer, command, statement, question and grammatical Mood classes. Through mood analysis we try to study the organization of the clause to realize interpersonal meaning. So, when we ask how is language structured to enable interaction? we find the answer lies (primarily) in the system of Mood and Modality. In describing the functional grammatical constituents of mood and their configurations, analysts are describing how language is structured to enable us to talk to each other. We can trace a link between the grammatical patterns of Mood in the clause, up to the semantics of interpersonal meanings, and out into the context of the register variable of tenor. This relation between mood and tenor can be done easily by analyzing Who is doing the talking in a situation (This relates to Bakhtin and Bloome). This reveals issues of power. Another relation between mood and tenor is seen by looking at what speakers do when they get the speakers role, who gives, who demands, is it reciprocal (usually teacher demands, students give). P. 184 (some claims about gender). (Eggins 1994) Ch. 8 The grammar of Experiential meaning: Transitivity Transitivity deals with the organization of the clause to express experiential meaning. It deals with the encoding of this type of meaning: meaning about the world, about experience, about how we perceive and experience what is going on. Systemicists argue that the clauses experiential meaning is realized simultaneously with its interpersonal meaning. Just as Mood can be related to tenor, transitivity is closer to the concept of field; the world of actions, participants and circumstances that give content to their talk. In the experiential metafunction, we are looking at the grammar of the clause as representation (for Fairclough, this would be at the level of discourse or ways of representing). As with the clause as exchange, we find there is one major system of grammatical choice involved in this kind of meaning. This is the system of TRANSITIVITY or

process type (material, mental, behavioral, verbal .). The process type specifies the action, events or relationships between implicated participants (nominal..) and the processes may be situated circumstantially (for time, place, cause). Carrying out a transitivity analysis involves determining the process type, participants, and circumstances realized in any clause. -Transitivity patterns are the clausal realization of contextual choices.

Ch. 9 The grammar of textual Meaning: Theme

This chapter explores the third simultaneous strand of meaning that enables texts to be negotiated: textual meaning. mood dealt with interpersonal meaning, and transitivity with experiential meaning. The tripartite semantic structure of the clause mirrors that of the semantic structure of the language. ******2. Context, register and genre: Martins perspective Martins teleological perspective (1992, 1997, 2000) on genre analysis is grounded on systemic functional linguistics. In his perspective genre is dened as: A system structured in parts, with specic means to specic ends. Considering that teleology sees the world as a system of relationships between means and ends [Novo Dicionrio Aurlio da Lngua Portuguesa], the stages through which a text is structured lead the user to a concluding point, and the text can be seen by the speaker/listener as incomplete if this conclusion is not reached. (Vian Jr & Lima-Lopes, 2005: 29) As I have pointed out above, functional linguists put great emphasis on the relationship between language and context. The main contention here is that it is impossible to understand the meaning of what someone has said or written without knowing something about the context surrounding the text. And the opposite is also true: if we can understand what our interlocutor writes or says, we can also draw conclusions about the context of situation (Martin, 2001). The relation between language and context is one of realization: the text realizes the situation and the linguistic system realizes the culture. We must keep in mind, however, that we are referring to a semiotic and not a material relationship, that is, not a relationship of cause and effect but of semiotic construal the culture is construed by systems of linguistic choice, while the situation is construed by patterns of language use (Halliday, 1978).

The uses of language and the diverse social contexts are interrelated and realize each other. The organization of language and of its contexts of use is functional, that is, it serves the three linguistic metafunctions mentioned before: ideational, interpersonal and textual. In that line, Martins teleological perspective on genre, grounded on a systemic-functional view of language, employs the Hallidayans constructs of register and metafunctions. However, Martins proposal discusses and advances the concepts of genre and register, looking not only at the context of situation, but also at the context of culture, where, according to the author, genres are located. About the notion of context of culture in Martins work, Vian Jr. and Lima-Lopes state that: Context, register and genre: Implications for language education / Figueiredo, D.128 Revista Signos 2010, 43 / Nmero Especial Monogrco N 1 The study of the context of culture involves the observation of how a language is structured for use. To do so, we have to investigate authentic and complete interactions that will allow us to observe how people use language to achieve culturally motivated goals (Eggins, 1994: 25), which is done through the analysis of different genres. When analysing the context of culture, we should try to describe how the interactions general purpose leads us to organize a text in stages, since it is not possible to convey all the meanings simultaneously. A genre, thus, is structured in stages, as Martin proposes (1992: 505), and consists of a social process oriented towards a goal teleologically oriented, therefore organized and realized by the register. (2005: 31-32) In Martins view (2001), register and genre are semiotic systems distinct from other semiotic systems such as language, music, dance, images, etc, in the sense that register and genre are kinds of parasites. That is, they do not have a phonology of their own, and the only way they can create meaning is by using words and structures from the semiotic system we call language, a system able to generate its own meanings without making use of resources from another one. In short, register corresponds to the context of situation, and genre to the context of culture. For Martin (2001: 155), a genre is a staged, goal-oriented, purposeful activity in which speakers engage as members of our culture. Virtually everything we do involves some kind of genre. Language, in that sense, functions as the fonology of register, and both register and language function as the fonology of genre, as we can see in Figure 1: Figure 1. Language, register and genre (Martin, 2001: 156). As the three register variables (eld, tenor and mode) do not have their own forms of expression (words or structures), they have to make use of the lexico-grammatical structures from language, and this is done in two ways: rst, by making certain linguistic choices much more likely than others, so that when we read or hear a text certain patterns start to emerge in a non-random way, in what Martin calls probabilistic realization: these patterns represent 129 a particular register choice telling us its there (Martin, 2001: 157). Second, the register categories take over a small number of linguistic choices as their own, in what Martin calls indexical realization, that is, certain linguistic choices, once made by the text producer, lead the hearer/reader to immediately identify the register in which the text is being produced. However, linguistic realizations should not be taken as register variables. Field, tenor and mode are register categories, whereas lexico-grammatical items are linguistic categories through which register is realized. Genres, like registers, need language to be realized. Genres create meaning by shaping the register variables by conditioning the way eld (what is going on in a given situational context), tenor (how people relate to one another within this situated event) and mode (the

medium and the channel chosen for communication during the event) are combined in recurrent forms in a certain culture (Martin, 2001). The combination of the register variables and the linguistic choices made within each of these variables seems to progress in stages, generating a goal-oriented structure that characterizes genres. As Martin (2001) points out, the register variables change according to our communicative goals, and this is exactly what the concept of genre tries to explain: how we do things in our daily lives in culturally specic ways (e.g. how a class, a medical appointment, a job interview, an informal conversation or a research paper are developed and carried out). Like register, genre is realized both in probabilistic and indexical ways. Martin (2001) uses narrative to illustrate this point: two of the most famous indexical forms in narrative genres are the opening once upon a time and the closing and they lived happily ever after. When we hear these clichs, we immediately know which genre we are dealing with. Probabilistic realizations are also relevant in narratives. The Orientation (Labov & Waletsky, 1967), which introduces the characters and locates the story in time and space, tends to include relational clauses (Once upon a time there was ...., She/he was ...., the little house was ...), with their accompaning circumstances. The Complication, which answers the question What happened then?, tends to include a series of material processes (She did this and then she did that ...), leading to something unexpected a crisis. This is followed by the Resolution (What nally happened?), which presents similar forms to those found in the Complication until the problem is solved. Finally, the narrator(s) might make comments on the point of her/his narrative, in what Labov and Waletsky (1967) called Coda, often by using a demonstrative pronoun such as this combined with an expression of attitude to refer to the story itself (E.g. That was really scary). We have to keep in mind, though, that these patterns are not monolithic or closed, they can be adapted by the text producer according to her/his interests. As Martin (2001: 162) points out: Context, register and genre: Implications for language education / Figueiredo, D.130 Revista Signos 2010, 43 / Nmero Especial Monogrco N 1Since both genre and register are realised for the most part probabilistically, they allow the individual considerable freedom in determining just how they are to be realized. The patterns of selection by which we recognise a genre, or some eld, mode or tenor, are distributed throughout a text; there are only a few local constraints. In spite of the freedom we have as speakers/writers, we cannot ignore the notions of register and genre in the process of text production. As text producers, we must provide our hearer/reader with enough clues about the register and the genre so that she/he can make sense of our text, and we can achieve our communicative purpose. According to Martin (2001), it might sound like an obvious truth to say that it is impossible to write without rst knowing the language, but it is also true that we cannot write if we do not control the systems

of genre and register.