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


In this paper I explore the etic category of textuality and the emic category of Theme arguing that while Theme in English may simultaneously signal the point of departure of a clause with respect to the preceding text and also the ‘aboutness’ of the clause in relation to the method of development of a text, this is not necessarily the case with other languages. In particular I consider the rich textual resources of Scottish Gaelic, a verb-initial language with no morphological marking for Theme, to problematise standard treatments of thematicity in languages other than English. I elaborate on Cloran’s (2010) account of Rhetorical Units to present as a hypothesis for further exploration the idea that, while Gaelic and English ground clauses in both space and time, Gaelic is a process-centred language while English is a Subject-centred language and that these differences in the respective characterology of the two languages have repercussions on the process of textualisation and the method of development in each language.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Andersen, Thomas Hestbaek , Morten Boeris , Eva Maagerø & Elise Seip Tønnessen
    2015Social Semiotics: Key Figures, New Directions. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arús Hita, Jorge
    2007 On the aboutness of theme. InProceedings of the 30th International AEDEAN Conference, María Losada , Pilar Ron , Sonia Hernández & Jorge Casanova (eds). Huelva: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Huelva. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235345776_On_the_aboutness_of_Theme (Last accessed on29 December 2015).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bartlett, Tom
    2015 Multiscalar modelling of context: Some questions raised by the category of Mode. InEssays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan: Society in Language, Language in Society, Wendy Bowcher & Jennifer Yameng Liang (eds). London and New York: Palgrave, 166–183.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Berry, Margaret
    1996 What is Theme? A(nother) personal view. InMeaning and Form: Systemic Functional Perspectives, Robin P. Fawcett , Margaret Berry , Christopher Butler & Guowen W. Huang (eds). Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Caffarel, Alice , James R. Martin & Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen
    (eds) 2004Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.253
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.253 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2004a Foreword. In Caffarel , et al , Language Typology: A Functional Perspective,xi–xiii. doi: 10.1075/cilt.253
  7. 2004b Introduction. In Caffarel , et al , Language Typology: A Functional Perspective,1–76. doi: 10.1075/cilt.253.03caf
  8. Cloran, Carmel
    2010 Rhetorical unit analysis and Bakhtin’s chronotope. Functions of Language17 (1): 9–70. doi: 10.1075/fol.17.1.02clo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.17.1.02clo [Google Scholar]
  9. 1994Rhetorical Units and Decontextualisation: An Enquiry into some Relations of Context, Meaning and Grammar (Monographs in Systemic Linguistics 6). University of Nottingham.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Daneš, František
    1974 Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. InPapers on Functional Sentence Perspective, František Daneš (ed.). The Hague: Mouton, 106–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fawcett, Robin P
    2003The many types of ‘Theme’ in English: Their semantic systems and functional syntax. Unpublished mimeo. www.isfla.org/Systemics/Print/Papers.html (Last accessed on30 December 2015).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Firbas, Jan
    1992aFunctional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597817
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597817 [Google Scholar]
  13. 1992b On some basic problems of functional sentence perspective. InAdvances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice, Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds). London: Pinter, 167–188.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fries, Peter
    1995 Themes, methods of development, and texts. InOn Subject and Theme: A Discourse Functional Perspective, Ruqaiya Hasan & Peter Fries (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 317–360. doi: 10.1075/cilt.118.10fri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.118.10fri [Google Scholar]
  15. 2008 The textual metafunction as a site for the discussion of the goals of linguistics and techniques of linguistic analysis. InText Type and Structure, Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds). London and Oakville: Equinox, 8–44.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gregory, Michael
    1988 Generic situation and register: A functional view of communication. InLinguistics in a Systemic Perspective, James D. Benson , Michael Cummings & William Greaves (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 301–329. doi: 10.1075/cilt.39.12gre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.39.12gre [Google Scholar]
  17. Halliday, M.A.K
    1985An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Halliday, M.A.K & Ruqayia Hasan
    1976Cohesion in English. London and New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Halliday, M.A.K & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2004An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edition. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Halliday, M.A.K. & Jonathan J. Webster
    2014Text Linguistics: The How and Why of Meaning. Sheffield and Bristol: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Langacker, Ronald W
    1991Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. MacDonald, Flora
    2009Còco is Crùbagan. Cocoa and Crabs. A Hebridean Childhood. South Lochs: Islands Books Trust.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mackenzie, Lachlan J
    2009 Aspects of the interpersonal grammar of Gaelic. Linguistics47 (4): 885–911. doi: 10.1515/LING.2009.031
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2009.031 [Google Scholar]
  25. MacLean, Iain
    2009Cogadh Ruairidh. Dingwall: Sandstone Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Mann, William C. , Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen & Sandra Thompson
    1992 Rhetorical structure theory and text analysis. InDiscourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text, William C. Mann & Sandra A. Thompson (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 39–78. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16.04man
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.04man [Google Scholar]
  27. Mathesius, Vilém
    1964 On linguistic characterology with illustrations from Modern English. InA Prague School Reader in Linguistics, Josef Vachek (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 59–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. O’Grady, Gerard
    2010A Grammar of Spoken English Discourse: the Intonation of Increments. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Tannen, Deborah
    1993 What’s in a frame? Surface evidence for underlying expectations. InFraming in Discourse, Deborah Tannen (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 14–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Gaelic; Rhetorical Unit; textualisation; textuality; Theme
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