Functions of Language - Volume 21, Issue 2, 2014

In this paper, I report on a long-term research project concerned with the elaboration of the description of the system of PROCESS TYPE (within the overall system of TRANSITIVITY), extending this description in delicacy, or degree of detail. I discuss the background to the research and different approaches that have been taken to the development of more delicate descriptions of PROCESS TYPE. Then I introduce the approach that I have taken — to classify Levin’s (1993) verb classes in terms of the systemic functional description of the system of PROCESS TYPE (Halliday 1967/8, 1985). Having outlined the approach, I summarize the outcome of the classificatory project, and go on to identify all the instances where it was necessary to split verb classes and all the cases where it was necessary to add verb classes. I characterize the classification in terms of the cline of delicacy (the continuum between grammar and lexis); in fact, the result of the classificatory project provides strong evidence in favour of Halliday’s (1961) hypothesis that lexis can be described as delicate grammar — what he called ‘the grammarian’s dream’. In addition, I indicate how the result of the classification can be used as a resource in the development of more delicate systemic descriptions of the type pioneered by Hasan (1987) in her pursuit of the grammarian’s dream.

‘Context of situation’ is a central concept in Systemic Functional Linguistic (SFL) theory, and recently there has been a renewed interest in modelling context and developing a set of features for the contextual parameters Field, Tenor, and Mode. Much of this work has been inspired by Hasan’s and Butt’s development of ‘contextualisation system networks’ (Butt 2004; Hasan 1999, 2009). However, a single comprehensive descriptive framework has still not yet been agreed upon. The current Field and Mode networks include contextual features that are under some debate: ‘the role of language’, ‘ancillary’, ‘constitutive’, and ‘material action’. This paper reviews these features and presents a unified set of primary systems for Field and for Mode. Further, the paper proposes that the primary systems should reflect the core defining features of the contextual parameters, in this case, Field and Mode: the nature of the activity in terms of the kind of experience around which the situation revolves, and the nature of the activity in terms of the mode through which it is expressed respectively. Reference is made to key notions within SFL theory that need to be considered in modelling the contextual parameters as sets of choices in system networks: the relations of realisation and instantiation, inter- and intra-stratal interdependency, and the concept of ‘semiotic’. Where relevant, choices in the system networks are explained using illustrative examples.

Intensifiers in English speech have received considerable attention in the literature, due to their flexibility, ongoing changes in the system, and the grammaticalisation processes that some of them undergo. This paper looks first at differences in the use of intensifiers in the speech of adults and teenagers, before moving on to consider in detail two maximisers, absolutely and totally. These were chosen because of their relative frequency within the group of -ly adverbs, their special syntactic behaviour, and the lack of previous contrastive studies. Comparable data from COLT (The Bergen Corpus of London Teenage Language) and DCPSE (The Diachronic Corpus of Present-Day Spoken English) were used in the analysis. Findings indicate that teenagers opt for so, really and taboo words (bloody, fucking) when they want to intensify their spoken language, whereas adults prefer very and also some -ly adverbs (totally, absolutely, completely). In addition, both absolutely and totally are shown to be more flexible in the language of teenagers, in that they seem to be spreading gradually to new syntactic environments by performing new functions which are more discourse-oriented, used as emphatic, affirmative response items. This is broadly in keeping with the innovative nature of teen talk as well as with grammaticalisation and delexicalisation processes characteristic of the intensifier system.