Volume 24, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This article describes how procedural knowledge is produced in a meeting of the South African parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Transport, using concepts from Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) and Legitimation Code Theory (LCT). Members of this committee argue over whether or not to amend a draft committee report and in the process co-construct procedural norms for future committee meetings. Participants on both sides of the argument use , in which actions and ideas are associated with each other and charged with a particular moral or affective value ( Maton 2014 : 130) to portray their version of the procedure to be followed as morally superior to that of their opponents. They also use ( Maton 2014 : 130) to reinforce their positions by making apparent concessions to those on the other side of the argument. This is revealed through an analysis of the of ideation and Appraisal ( Martin 2000 : 161) in the logogenetic unfolding of members’ talk, combined with elements of Interactional Sociolinguistics ( Gumperz 1982 ). The analysis suggests that axiological condensation and rarefaction in this meeting reflect competing visions of what it means to be ‘pro-democracy’ in post-apartheid South Africa.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Almutairi, Bandar A. A.
    2014Visualizing evaluative language in relation to constructing identity in English editorials and op-eds. Sydney: University of Sydney PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bednarek, Monika & James R. Martin
    (eds.) 2010New discourse on language: Functional perspectives on multimodality, identity and affiliation. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernstein, Basil B.
    2000Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique, revised edn.Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2003Class, Codes and Control Volume IV: The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. De Jager, Nicola
    2009 No ‘new’ ANC?Politikon36(2). 275–288. doi: 10.1080/02589340903240245
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02589340903240245 [Google Scholar]
  6. Fairclough, Norman
    2001Language and power. Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2003Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gumperz, John J.
    1982Discourse strategies. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511611834
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834 [Google Scholar]
  9. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2013Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar, 4th edn.London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Joubert, Jan-Jan
    2015 Order! Order! Can Zuma steal the SONA show from Malema?Times Live. Available online atwww.timeslive.co.za/politics/2015/02/05/order-order-can-zuma-steal-the-sona-show-from-malema.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Knight, Naomi K.
    2010 Wrinkling complexity: Concepts of identity and affiliation in humour. In Monika Bednarek & James R. Martin (eds.), 35–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Macnaught, Lucy , Karl Maton , James R. Martin & Erika Matruglio
    2013 Jointly constructing semantic waves: Implications for teacher training. Linguistics & Education24(1). 50–63. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.008 [Google Scholar]
  13. Martin, James R.
    1993 Technology, bureaucracy and schooling: Discursive resources and control. Cultural Dynamics6(1). 84–130. doi: 10.1177/092137409300600104
    https://doi.org/10.1177/092137409300600104 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2000 Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 142–175. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2010 Semantic variation: Modelling realisation, instantiation and individuation in social semiosis. In Monika Bednarek & James R. Martin (eds.), 1–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 2011 Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick. In Frances Christie & Karl Maton (eds.), Disciplinarity: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives, 35–61. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Martin, James R. & Peter R. R. White
    2005The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Melbourne: Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230511910
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  18. Maton, Karl
    2013 Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics & Education24(1). 8–22. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2014Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Matruglio, Erika , Karl Maton & James R. Martin
    2013 Time travel: The role of temporality in enabling semantic waves in secondary school teaching. Linguistics & Education24(1). 38–49. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.007 [Google Scholar]
  21. Mthembu, Bongani
    2006 Travelgate fraudster says crime was ‘trivial’. IOL News. Available online atwww.iol.co.za/news/politics/travelgate-fraudster-says-crime-was-trivial-1.268862.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ramagaga, Tizina
    2009 The future of opposition parties after the recall of Mbeki. Available online atwww.issafrica.org/index.php?link_id=5&slink_id=7143&link_type=12&slink_type=12&tmpl_id=3.
  23. Rampton, Ben , Karin Tusting , Janet Maybin , Richard Barwell , Angela Creese & Vally Lytra
    2004 UK linguistic ethnography: A discussion paper. Available online atuklef.ioe.ac.uk/documents/papers/ramptonetal2004.pdf.
  24. Siebörger, Ian
    2012Literacy, orality and recontextualization in the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa: An ethnographic study. Grahamstown: Rhodes University MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Siebörger, Ian & Ralph D. Adendorff
    2015a Black-boxing and the politics of oversight in the South African parliament. In Mirjana Dedaić (ed.), Singing, speaking and writing politics: South African political discourses, 43–66. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/dapsac.65.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.65.03sie [Google Scholar]
  26. 2015b Resemiotizing concerns from constituencies in the South African parliament. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies33(2). 171–197. doi: 10.2989/16073614.2015.1061892
    https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2015.1061892 [Google Scholar]
  27. Stenglin, Maree
    2004Packaging curiosities: Towards a grammar of three-dimensional space. Sydney: University of Sydney PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Southern, Neil
    2011 Political opposition and the challenges of a dominant party system: The Democratic Alliance in South Africa. Journal of Contemporary African Studies29(3). 281–298. doi: 10.1080/02589001.2011.581478
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02589001.2011.581478 [Google Scholar]
  29. Unsworth, Len
    1999 Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history texts: A functional grammatical perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy42(7). 508–521.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wignell, Peter
    1998 Technicality and abstraction in social science. In James R. Martin & Robert Veel (eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science, 297–326. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Zappavigna, Michele
    2011 Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New Media Society13(5). 788–806. doi: 10.1177/1461444810385097
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385097 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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