Functions of Language - Volume 11, Issue 2, 2004

This paper discusses the relationships between corpus linguistics and functionalist theories, specifically in the light of the distinction which has been proposed between ‘corpus-based’ and ‘corpus-driven’ approaches. It argues that functional theories must take on board the findings of corpus-driven linguistics if they are to fulfil the aims they set for themselves. It also presents a selective survey of corpus work in two functional theories, Functional Grammar and Systemic Functional Grammar, and concludes that although much valuable work has been and is being done to make particular aspects of lexicogramamatical description more sensitive to attested linguistic data, more should be done to test the fundamental theoretical claims of such theories rigorously against what corpora can tell us, these claims being modified or even abandoned where necessary.

Using material from a parallel corpus with originals and translations in both English and Norwegian, the present study sets out to explore the lexicogrammatical properties of Theme and thematic choice in the two languages. Theme is defined according to systemic-functional grammar as the first element that has a function in transitivity, plus any preceding element(s). The extent to which Themes are preserved or altered in the translation process is also studied. There are more similarities than differences between the two languages as regards thematic structure. Some differences are due to the verb-second constraint that applies to Norwegian, but most are due to differences in frequency. Norwegian allows non-subject participants to be thematic more often than English does, while multiple Themes are more frequent in English. Within multiple Themes, the logical relations expressed by textual Themes differ between the languages. Translators tend to preserve the topical Theme of the original in the great majority of cases. When changes are made this may be due to lexicogrammatical differences between the languages or they may represent ‘normalization’ to a more frequent pattern in the target language. Translations are found to differ from original text in the same language as they borrow features from the source language.

Fries (1981) hypothesises that the textual phenomena of ‘thematic progression’ (TP) (Danesˇ 1974) and ‘method of development’ (MOD) provide discourse evidence for the function proposed by Halliday (1967) for Theme, in particular that ‘initial position in the sentence, or sentence-level Theme, means “point of departure of the sentence as message”‘. This paper discusses the theoretical basis for this hypothesis, in particular the relation between TP and MOD, and reviews previous empirical research. Further research conducted by the author is described, into global proportions of TP, TP patterning, and the relation between TP and rhematic progression (RP) in a small corpus of 80 short argumentative texts. It was found that only small proportions of either argumentative text, or high-quality argumentative text could be considered as having a MOD. It was also found that texts had comparable levels of TP and RP. It is concluded that MOD is not a universal feature of discourse organisation, and therefore not conclusive evidence for Fries’s original hypothesis.