1887
The dynamicity of communication below, around and above the clause
  • ISSN 1874-8767
  • E-ISSN: 1874-8775
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper puts the case that viewing text dynamically can be valuable in the practice of semantic description. Using, as its case study, the statistically significant occurrence of Subject ellipsis across consecutive clauses in a corpus of newspaper football reports, the paper demonstrates a systematic difference between the lexicogrammatical characteristics of clauses containing such patterned use of ellipsis and the clauses of their surrounding co-text. The lexicogrammatical features in question, which are analysed in detail in the paper, are: clause length in words, number of clause elements, amount of syntactic embedding, and patterns in Hallidayan transitivity process-types. Given the nature of these lexicogrammatical features, the argument is made that Subject ellipsis across consecutive clauses can iconically express an increase in pace – something only observable when the text is viewed dynamically.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/etc.9.1.06cla
2016-06-20
2019-11-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barthes, Roland
    1966 Introduction à l’analyse structurale des récits. Communications8: 1–27. doi: 10.3406/comm.1966.1113
    https://doi.org/10.3406/comm.1966.1113 [Google Scholar]
  2. 1977Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, Douglas , Stig Johansson , Geoffrey Leech , Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
    1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chatman, Seymour
    1969 New ways of analysing narrative structure. Language and Style2: 3–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 1978Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clarke, Ben P
    2012 Do patterns of ellipsis in text support systemic functional linguistics’ ‘context-metafunction hook-up’ hypothesis? A corpus-based approach. Ph.D. dissertation, Cardiff University.
  7. 2016 Cohesion in Systemic Functional Linguistics in the 21st century: A theoretical reflection. InThe Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds). Oxford: Routledge, n.a.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. . Forthcoming. Further semantics of ellipsis: The increased textual pace construed by consecutive Subject ellipsis. Submitted to Word.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cloran, Carmel
    1994Rhetorical Units and Decontextualisation: An Enquiry into some Relations of Context, Meaning and Grammar. Nottingham: Monographs in Systemic Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Daneš, František
    1974 Functional sentence perspective and the organisation of the text. InPapers on Functional Sentence Perspective, František Daneš (ed.). The Hague: Mouton, 106–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fawcett, Robin P
    2000 A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.206
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.206 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2008Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar: An Extension and Simplification of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar, 3rd edition. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Firbas, Jan
    1971 On the concept of communicative dynamism in the theory of functional sentence perspective. Sbornik prací filosofické fakulti brnenské university19 (71): 135–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 1992Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597817
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597817 [Google Scholar]
  15. Firth, John R
    1951 Modes of meaning. Essays and Studies of the English Association4: 123–149.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Genette, Gerard
    1980Narrative Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Givón, Talmy
    1985 Iconicity, isomorphism and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. InIconicity in Syntax, John Haiman (ed.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 187–219. doi: 10.1075/tsl.6.10giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.10giv [Google Scholar]
  18. Gregory, Michael J
    2002 Phasal analysis within communication linguistics: Two contrastive discourses. InRelations and Functions within and around Language, Peter Fries , Michael Cummings , David Lockwood & William Spruiell (eds). London: Continuum, 316–345.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Halliday, M.A.K
    1961 Categories of the theory of grammar. Word17: 241–292. doi: 10.1080/00437956.1961.11659756
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1961.11659756 [Google Scholar]
  20. 1967a Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 1. Journal of Linguistics3 (1): 37–81. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700012949
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012949 [Google Scholar]
  21. 1967b Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 2. Journal of Linguistics3 (2): 199–244. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700016613
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016613 [Google Scholar]
  22. 1968 Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 3. Journal of Linguistics4 (2): 179–215. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700001882
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700001882 [Google Scholar]
  23. 1978Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 1979 Modes of meaning and modes of expression: Types of grammatical structure, and their determination by different semantic functions. InFunction and Context in Linguistic Analysis: Essays Offered to William Haas, David J. Allerton , Edward Carney & David Holdcroft (eds). London: Cambridge University Press, 57–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 1985 Systemic background. InSystemic Perspectives on Discourse, James D. Benson & William S. Greaves (eds). Norwood: Ablex, 1–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 1993 Systemic theory. InThe Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Ron E. Asher (ed.). Oxford: Pergamon Press, 4505–4508.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Halliday, M. A. K
    1996 On grammar and grammatics. InFunctional Descriptions: Theory in Practice, Ruqaiya Hasan , Carmel Cloran & David G. Butt (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1–38. doi: 10.1075/cilt.121.03hal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.121.03hal [Google Scholar]
  29. Halliday, M.A.K. & Ruqaiya Hasan
    1976Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 1985Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social Semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Matthiessen, Christian M.I.M
    2002 Lexicogrammar in discourse development: Logogenetic patterns of wording. InDiscourse and Language Functions, Guo Huang & Zong Wang (eds). Shanghai: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Miller, George A
    1956 The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review63: 81–97. doi: 10.1037/h0043158
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158 [Google Scholar]
  33. Noordman, Leo & Wietske Vonk
    1994 Text processing and its relevance for literacy. InFunctional Literacy: Theoretical Issues and Educational Implications, Ludo Verhoeven (ed.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 75–92. doi: 10.1075/swll.1.07noo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.1.07noo [Google Scholar]
  34. Oakes, Michael
    1998Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Quirk, Randolph , Sidney Greenbaum , Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Simpson, Paul
    2014 Just what is narrative urgency?Language and Literature23 (1): 3–22. doi: 10.1177/0963947013510650
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947013510650 [Google Scholar]
  37. Sinclair, John
    1991Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Xueyan, Yang
    2013 Modelling ellipsis in EFL classroom discourse. InDeveloping Systemic Functional Linguistics: Theory and Application, Fang Yan & Jonathan J. Webster (eds). Sheffield: Equinox, 227–240.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/etc.9.1.06cla
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ellipsis , semantic description , subject ellipsis , textual dynamism and textual pace
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error