Lexis and phraseology in a systemic functional grammar Gordon Tucker Centre for Language and...

Lexis and phraseologyin a systemic functional

grammar

Gordon Tucker

Centre for Language and Communication ResearchCardiff University

LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

grammar, lexis and phraseology as linguistic phenomena

what lexical and phraseological phenomena are there to account for and model?

grammar, lexis and phraseology through the lens of SFL

how can these phenomena be modelled within a systemic functional lexicogrammar?


The orientation of these two sessions


overview

grammar and lexis in a model/theory of language

lexical phenomena to be accounted for

Cardiff SFG resources for modelling the lexicogrammar

where and how lexis is modelled in general

modelling the various phenomena

issues and problems for an SFG approach

grammar (syntax) and lexis

SYNTAX LEXICON

syntagmatically oriented opposition

paradigmatically oriented opposition

(meaning) potential carried by

the standard traditional view

interface

LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010


Cognitive linguistics does not accept the sharp distinction made in generative grammar between syntax and the lexicon (…..) Rather, it contends that syntax and the lexicon form a continuum of constructions ranging from very specific elements (e.g. cat, kick the bucket) to increasingly more general patterns (e.g. noun, transitive construction)

(Cristiano Broccias 2006:81-82)


Corpus studies, based on large collections of authentic text from a range of different sources, have provided massive evidence for the interdependence of lexis and grammar (or vocabulary and syntax). They have demonstrated that two areas that have traditionally been kept apart, both in language pedagogy and in linguistic theory, are in fact inseparable.

(Römer 2009)

The lexicon (….) is simply the most delicate grammar. In other words there is only one network of lexicogrammatical options (Halliday 1978:42)


ship /ʃɪp / noun a large boat that carries people or goods by sea: There are two restaurants on board ship. a sailing / cargo / cruise ship a ship’s captain / crew / company / cook Raw materials and labour come by ship, rail or road. They boarded a ship bound for India. When the ship docked at Southampton he was rushed to hospital.—see also AIRSHIP, FLAGSHIP, LIGHTSHIP see JUMP V., SINK V., SPOIL V., TIGHT

verb (-pp-) 1 [VN] to send or transport sb/sth by ship or by another means of transport: The company ships its goods all over the world. He was arrested and shipped back to the UK for trial.2 to be available to be bought; to make sth available to be bought: [v] The software is due to ship next month. [VN] The company continues to ship more computer systems than its rivals.3 [VN] ~ water (of a boat, etc.) to have water coming in over the sides see SHAPE V.

ship sb off (disapproving) to send sb to a place where they will stay: The children were shipped off to a boarding school at an early age.

Lexical information (as represented in a dictionary


1. grammatical (syntactic) relations (e.g. the word class, grammatical environment, colligation and grammatical consequences of the choice of a given lexical sense/item)

2. morphology and phonology

3. the experiential organisation of lexis

4. collocation

5. polysemy

6. field-specificity and genre-specificity

7. phraseology – idiom – metaphor - formulaicity

8. formality

9. technicality

10. Appraisal and evaluation

11. textual cohesion (e.g. lexical cohesion in Halliday and Hasan 1976)

12. social group variation

(Some of the) Lexical Phenomena to be Modelled



LEXIS IN SYSTEMIC

FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS

He [the grammarian] would like to turn the whole of linguistic form into grammar, hoping to show that lexis can be defined as ‘most delicate grammar’. The exit to lexis would then be closed, and all exponents ranged in systems.

..........................

No description has yet been made so delicate that we can test whether there really comes a place where increased delicacy yields no further systems: relations at this degree of delicacy can only be stated statistically, and serious statistical work has hardly begun. (Halliday 1961)

Halliday’s ‘grammarian’s dream’

Lexis as Most Delicate Grammar (LAMDG)



The Problem of Lexical Description

It would take at least 100 volumes of the present size (689 pages: GHT) to extend the description of the grammar up to that point (grammar extended to the point of maximum delicacy) for any portion of the vocabulary of English, and as we have noted, the returns diminish the farther one proceeds)

(Halliday and Matthiessen 2005:46)


‘Lexicalism’ or ‘Grammaticalism’

lexis as most delicate grammar (e.g. Halliday)

grammar as most general lexis (e.g. Sinclair)

lexical choice determined by grammatical choice

grammatical choice determined by lexical choice

or BOTH?


Hoey’s Theory of Lexical Priming

In this book I want to argue for a new theory of the lexicon, which amounts to a new theory of language. The theory reverses the role of lexis and grammar, arguing that lexis is complexly and systemically structured and that grammar is an outcome of lexical structure.

(Hoey 2005:1)


systemic functional approaches to lexis and phraseology

Halliday 1961Berry 1977Fawcett 1980Hasan 1985,1987Martin 1992Matthiessen 1990Cross 1993Tucker 1996a, 1996b, 1997, 1998, 2001, 2006, 2007Wanner 1997


GENDER

animate

inanimate

ANIMALHOOD

MATURITY

differentiated

undifferentiated

human

non-human

adult

youthful

tame

wild

masc

fem

PART OF BERRY’S GENDER SYSTEMS NETWORK (BERRY 1977:62)


Hasan 1987 ‘The Grammarian’s Dream’

gather, collect, accumulate

scatter, divide, distribute, strew, spill, share

canine

bovine

mature

immature

male

female(dog)

(cow)

(dog : cow)

(puppy : calf)

dog : bull

bitch : cow

from Martin (1992:286)

Martin (1992): Lexis and Ideation

SEX OF WEARER

FORMALITY

PART OF WEARER

non-specific

specific

unmarked

casual

head

body

on head

around neck

upper

lower

extremities

torso

long

short

closed

opening (at front)

non-supporting

supporting

inner

outer

partitioned

non-partitioned

firm

soft

holes

tubesfrom Halliday and

Matthiessen (1999:199)

male

female

items of clothing

[unmarked] [non-specific] [body] [lower]

[extremities] [supporting] [firm] shoe

[unmarked] [non-specific] [body] [lower]

[extremities] [supporting] [soft] slipper

[unmarked] [non-specific] [body] [lower] [extremities] [non-supporting] [soft]

sock

resulting selection expressions


LEXIS IN

THE CARDIFF GRAMMAR


System Network and Realisation Rule Resources

Available in the Cardiff Grammar for the

Modelling of Lexis

is the architecture of the Cardiff Grammar adequate for the representation of lexical and phraseological phenomena?

SYSTEM NETWORK OF

SEMANTIC FEATURES

REALISATION RULES AND

POTENTIAL STRUCTURES

SELECTION EXPRESSIONOF SEMANTIC FEATURES

ONE LAYER OF A RICHLY LABELLED TREE STRUCTURE

the core components of a simplified systemic functional grammar (from Fawcett 2008:41)

MEANING

FORM

re-entry


(1) a full range of system network conventions

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

klmn


o

(2) realisation rules

(a)the exponence rule

72.825 : magpie_c : h < "magpie".

Rule no 72.825: expound head of nominal group by the item “magpie”

h

ngp

magpie

(4) preferences and re-entry rules

68.42 : by_age :

mage @ 44,

for mage prefer [quality, quality of thing, presenting quality of thing, age q],

for mage re-enter at entity.

(5) re-entry into the system network


(3) probabilities on features in systems

a

b

c

a

b 100%

c 0%


90%

10%


situation

thing (including minor relationship with thing)

quantityquality

entity

- MODE

- TECHNICALITY

- DIALECT

- ENTITY TYPE

the very first system in the Cardiff Grammar!

Cl

S/Ag M C/Af

ngp ngp

h dd m h

he kissed his little sister

SYSTEM

NETWORK

SELECTION

EXPRESSION

(REALISATION RULES)

[action, two role process (1), contact, kick (3) , agent subject theme (5), information giver (6) pastness (7) , not retrospective, not modalised (31), circumstance unspecified, positive (44), etc. etc.]

FUNCTIONAL

STRUCTURE

‘Cl’ , S @ 33, Ag by S, m < “little” etc.

Where and how is lexis represented in the Cardiff Grammar?

1. Where?


SEMANTICS GRAMMATICAL UNIT LEXICAL CLASS

Situation Clause lexical verb

Thing nominal group noun

Quality adjectival/adverbial group adjectiveadverb

Minor Relationship prepositional group preposition


From Semantics to Grammartical Unit to Lexical Class

action

mental

relational

like, love, think, see, hear, understand etc.

eat,run, touch, break, repair etc.

be, become, equal, represent etc.

system network forTRANSITIVITYrealised in the Clause

process type


cultural classification

particularisation

THING

quantification

premodificationmodification

postmodification

mass

count

happiness

hammer

e.g. the, this, that, these, my

e.g. a, some, three,

big, unusual

which we liked

systems in the network for THING (meanings realised in the nominal group)

(nominal group)



quality presented

QUALITY ROLE

QUALITY TYPE

TEMPERING

CO-ORDINATION

quality of thing carefulquality of situation carefullyrelative differentthing oriented bigsituation oriented easyenvironmental sunny

tempered veryuntemperedtempering sought how

co-ordinated red and whitenot co-ordinated

systems in the network for QUALITY (meanings realised in the adjectival and adverbial groups)


Where and how is lexis represented in the Cardiff Grammar?

2. How?

• system network is traversed

• features are collected (selection expression)

• realisation rules on features are executed

• lexicalisation is associated with ‘exponence’

• some element of structure (e.g. the head of the nominal group) is ‘expounded by’ some lexical (and/or) morphological item

selecting lexical senses* and items


realisation rules

filling rules insert a unit of structure (e.g. clause, adjectival group)

‘ngp’ (= fill an element of structure with a nominal group)

componence rules insert an element of structure

‘h’ @ 84 ( = insert a ‘head’ into the ngp structure at place 84)

exponence rules insert a lexical (or morphological item)

h < “player” (expound the ‘head’ element with the item ‘player’)

S ngp

ngp

h

h

player

Tom Bartlett is a terrible darts player

h h

ngp ngp

mmdd

S M C

Cl


tool as such saw

tool hammer

tool specified screwdriver

chisel

drill

part of a simplified ‘lexical’ system network

whole

head

part

shaft


from grammatical to lexical choice

increase in delicacy

grammatical…………………………………………lexical



What lexical phenomena can be represented in an SFG approach such as the Cardiff Grammar?

1. grammatical (syntactic) relations (e.g. the word class, grammatical environment, colligation and grammatical consequences of the choice of a given lexical sense/item)

2. morphology and phonology

3. the experiential organisation of lexis

4. collocation

5. polysemy

6. field-specificity and genre-specificity

7. phraseology – idiom – metaphor - formulaicity

8. formality

9. technicality

10. Appraisal and evaluation

11. textual cohesion (e.g. lexical cohesion in Halliday and Hasan 1976)

12. social group variation

(Some of the) Lexical Phenomena to be Modelled



modelling the various phenomena

1. The grammar of lexis

• general grammar-lexis correlations – general colligations

• the individual grammar of lexical sense/items – individual colligations

general grammar lexis correlations

assigns a lexical item to a word class through its exponence relationship with a functional element of structure

M < ‘give’ h < ‘electricity’ a < ‘happy’ p < ‘with’specifies the grammatical context(s) in which a lexical item/word class operates

determiner + modifier + head + qualifier

determiner + adjective + noun + relative clause/prepositional group


N.B. No explicit reference to word class labels such as ‘noun’, ‘adjective’ etc.

The grammar:

individual grammar-lexis correlations

specifies grammatical dependency associated with a lexical sense

e.g. complementation of verbs, intensification and complementation of adjectives


she likes to go out on Fridaysshe likes going out on Fridaysshe likes parties

angry with the governmentangry about the decisionangry at the prime minister

The Grammar of Verbs

TRANSITIVITY

mental

cognition

emotion

perception

simple perceiver

affected perceiver

agent perceiver

perc third party agent]


simple perceiver

seeing

feeling

hearing

places the M (Main Verb) in the clause expounds the M with a lexical item (e.g. heard) specifies and places any realised associated Participant

Role(s) specifies re-entry and preferences for the Participant

Role(s)

specifies any complementation types, re-entry and preferences, particularly in the case of mental processes

e.g. he heard the intruderhe heard the intruder arrivinghe heard the intruder arrive


Cl

S/Per M C/Ph

heard

ngp ngp

Victor the intruder


positive liking

negative liking

normal like

high love

very high adore

normal dislike

high loathe

very high detest

mental…

the grammar of individual lexical items: verb complementation

in and out of lexis


positive liking:

[+ V-ing]

[+to + infinitive]

[+ngp]

negative liking:

[+ngp]

[+V-ing] (rare)

[+to + infinitive] (v.v. rare or unattested)

different probabilities of rareness between dislike, loathe and detest

complementation of [liking] processes


positive liking

negative liking

normal like

high love

very high adore

normal

high hate

very high loathe

70% Ph thing

70% prospective

30% Ph situation

dislike 30% performance

95% Ph thing

5% Ph performance


consequences

lexicalise: M < “dislike”

for Ph re-enter system network for ENTITY TYPE,

prefer [95% thing/5% situation, dependent situation, performance] (e.g. ing)

for Em enter system network for Thing,

prefer [concrete, living, 95% human – 5% animal] LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

like

dislike

lexicalise as

‘dislike’

re-enter network for situation (clause) or thing (nominal group) for complementation

re-entry into the system network with probabilities set


lexical items have their own grammar

mental process remember in sense of ‘celebrate’ or ‘hold a special place in one’s memory’

he is remembered by old timers as the doctor who never sent the bill (COBUILD)

the 1991 cup will always be remembered (COBUILD)

30% active

70% passive

‘lexis or grammar first’ issue

cultural classification

particularisation

THING

quantification

premodificationmodification

postmodification

mass

count

happiness

hammer

sawe.g. the, this, that, these, my

e.g. a, some, three,

big, unusual

that we wanted

Lexical items often have their own grammar (?)



2. Experiential Meaning

lexical organisation in terms of lexical semantic relations

a holding position?

61

The Experiential Organisation of Lexis

lexical semantic relations

hyponymymeronymyopposition (e.g. antonymy, complementarity etc.)identity (synonymy) (similarity) cross-classification

thing

living non-living

animal plant natural thing artefact

fish mammal insect tree flower rock water instrument building

taxonomy/hyponymy

63

th

ing

liv

ing

n

on-l

ivin

g

a

nim

al pla

nt

n

atu

ral th

ing art

efa

ct

fish

mam

mal in

sect

t

ree fl

ow

er

r

ock

w

ate

r inst

rum

ent

build

ing

system network

64

tool as such tool saw saw

tool hammer hammer

tool specified screwdriver screwdriver

chisel chisel

drill drilltool as such : h < “tool”

hammer : h < “hammer”

HYPONYMY

whole saw

saw

part saw

whole saw : h < “saw”

handle : h < “handle”

MERONYMY

handle

blade

parts are generalised to the extent that they are shared by different ‘wholes’

sharp : a < “sharp”

hard : a < “hard”

OPPOSITION

sharp

edge of object

blunt


5. POLYSEMY AND

HOMONYMY

Head

1. the part of the body which contains the eyes, ears, nose, mouth and the brain - in animals at the front of the body, in man on top, a bonobo’s head

2. the end where this part rests, the head of the bed, of the grave

3. the mind or brain, my heart says yes, but my head says no

4. a ruler or leader, head of state

5. a headache, I’ve got a terrible head this morning

6. the front side of a coin, heads or tails?

7. a measure of height or distance, he won by a short head

POLYSEMY

69

specifies polysemy/homonymy

whole body

part of bodyheadlimbchest

whole bed

part of bedhead

foot

whole hammer

part of hammershaft

head

animal….

furniture…

tool…

h < ‘head’

h < ‘head’

h < ‘head’


natural thing

artefact

furniture

use of land

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

bed (32)

garden

for vegetables

for flowers (208)

32: bed : h < “bed”208 : for flowers : h < “bed”

A condensed and simplified section of the network showing different paths for two senses of the noun

BED

POLYSEMY


4. COLLOCATION

(a lexical co-occurrence relationship)

top collocates of ?Collins Wordbanks data + BNC data

span of 4 words either side of node

(T- and Z-scores > 9.00)

abandonaboardaircraftbigboardcaptaincargocarrycontainer

planerescuesailseashoresinkspacetall

crewcruisegreek greenpeacehospitalnavalnavypassengerpirate

top collocates of ?Collins Wordbanks data + BNC data

: span of 4 words either side of node

(T- and Z-scores > 9.00)

aboardfishfleethireinflatablemissmoormotornarrow

ownerpatrolpeoplepleasureracerescuerideriverrockrow

sailsinkseashowsmallspeedtraintripvietnamesewater


Subject + Main Verb + [Complement(s)] + [Adjunct(s)]

Participant + Process + [Participant(s)] + [Circ(s)]

Noun + Verb + Noun/Adjective + Noun

thieves + steal + money + weekend

Modifier + Head Temperer + Apex

Quality + Thing Intensifier + Quality

Adjective + Noun Adverb + Adjective

clever + thieves very + clever

Some very clever thieves stole the money over the weekend

specifies collocational relations

lexical collocates or semantic classes of collocates that expound any functional element(s) associated with the functional element expounded by the lexical item in question (the collocant) may be specified by probabilistic preference statements.

Word Overall frequency Joint frequency t-score

red 10498 270 16.098332white 17801 232 14.621772


COLOUR COLLOCATES OF WINE

wine (1)

beer

cider

for modifier prefer [50% classifying, (48% red, 48% white), (30% dry, 30% medium, 20% sweet)]

50% red0% black0% green50% white0% blue0% yellow

if [wine] then


absolutely

48 41.65

most 117 40.0so 68 31.41truly 18 29.62really 25 23.19quite 20 20.99very 28 18.58just 19 16.67rather 10 16.55perfectly 3 9.56pretty 3 9.3deeply 2 7.04especially

2 6.87

simply 2 5.36

modifiers of wonderful (BNC through Kilgarriff’s Sketch Engine)

http://beta.sketchengine.co.uk/auth/corpora/run.cgi/view?q=w11307518;corpname=preloaded/bnc;lemma=wonderful;lpos=-j












absolutely 22 36.37

most 21 24.51

really 10 18.75

truly 3 13.17

so 6 11.56

increasingly

3 11.3

just 3 6.83

modifiers of fantastic (BNC through Kilgarriff’s Sketch Engine)

preferences for re-entry for the tempering (intensification) of fantastic

for td (degree temperer) prefer

[tempered quality, by degree, relative degree, higher degree, 0% simple intensity /30% hyperbolic intensity/ 20% simple affective emphasis/ 30% insistent affective emphasis/20%pseudo-superlative]

N.B. [simple intensity] is essentially removed from system (0%)

so no *very fantastic


9. TECHNICALITY

technicality

heart specialist

bell ringer

campanologist

if [technical] then h < “campanologist, else h < “bell ringer”

cardiologist

82

technicality

technical

bell ringer

non-technical

83

technicality

bell ringer

campanologist


6. FIELD SPECIFICITY

lexical fields and genres

lexical field specification leads to probabilistic preferences across the network

if {gardening} prefer:

grow, weed, dig, prune, plant, water, rake, etc.

soil, garden, border, plants, vegetables, leaves, flower etc.

ripe, young, dead, green, diseased, bumper etc.


many of these will be specified by preferences

e.g. plant (process) will specify roses, vegetables, trees etc. as preferential complement


7. CONGRUENT VERSUS

METAPHORICAL/IDIOMATIC REALISATION

congruent versus metaphorical/idiomatic

a nuisance

a pain in the neck

relax

take it easy

enjoy oneself

have a good time


congruence/metaphorical

congruenta pain in the neck

metaphoricalcongruence

nuisance nuisance

if metaphorical then re-enter at thing, prefer ………., else h < “nuisance”


8. FORMALITY

scale of formality

inebriated

intoxicated

drunk

sloshed

pissed

rat-arsed

(experiential denotatative equivalence)


state of drunkenness

if formal then h < “intoxicated”if casual then h < “sloshed”


9. APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION

appraisal and evaluation

affect

judgement

appreciation

lexical resource

to what degree does the resource for appraisal draw on the ideationally oriented resource (e.g. adjectival lexis)?LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010


10. LEXICAL COHESION

logogenesis and lexical cohesion

referent thing

the Rottweiler

the dog

the animal

the hound

the beast

the thing



11. CROSS-CLASSIFICATION

cross-classifies all lexical senses in terms of contextual and lexicogrammatical relevant

features

CULTURAL CLASSFICIATION

FIELD SPECIFICITY

FORMALITY

TECHNICALITY

SOCIOLINGUISTIC VARIABILITYLINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

cross-classifies all lexical senses in terms of contextually and lexicogrammatically relevant features (multiple metafunctional

determination)

CULTURAL CLASSIFICATION

FIELD SPECIFICITY

FORMALITY

TECHNICALITY

SOCIOLINGUISTIC VARIABILITY

foodgrubnoshnourishment etc



theoretical and descriptive issues with the ‘lexis as most delicate grammar’ approach

‘top-down’ perspective

computational applications of SFG ‘execute’ system networks in a left-right, top-down manner, moving from major clause systems to group systems. The choice of nominal lexis is therefore procedurally dependent on systems in the clause.


system network as relation

clause and verbal lexis

ngp and nominal lexis

adjectival group and adjectival lexis


some problematic issues with the LAMDG approach

1. lexical systems cannot (yet?) be entirely motivated formally (as are grammatical systems)

2. individual lexical senses/items often have their own external grammar

3. does lexical choice follow or precede grammatical choice?

4. Where does phraseology fit in?LINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

1. lexical systems cannot (yet) be motivated formally

“It may well be that the nature of language is such that this ‘most delicate grammar’ will evaporate in distinctions which are so slenderly statistical that the system has, in effect, been replaced by the open set” (Halliday 1961/1976:69).


identification of lexical items by grammatical means

the difference between any lexical item in the language and any other, however minimal semantically, has a grammatical reflex (reactance)

no two lexical items in the language share exactly the same set of grammatical contexts

In reality, these grammatical contexts are of both a grammatical and a lexical nature (hence lexicogrammatical contexts)


(co-)occurrence tendencies(from corpus linguistic investigation)

• collocational: a tendency to co-occur with certain lexical items or semantic classes of lexical item

• colligational: a tendency to co-occur in certain grammatical frameworks rather than others

• discoursal: a tendency to occur in certain contexts within discourses/texts

• registerial/generic: a tendency to occur in certain registers and genres rather than others

• Lexical Priming (Hoey 2005)these are tendencies, expressible probabilistically


THINGS [nouns]

PROCESSES [verbs]

QUALITIES [adjectives/adverbs]

SPATIO-TEMPORAL AND LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS [prepositions]

lexical classes maximally distinguished by the grammar

although they do cross-classify semantically

e.g. please, pleasure, pleasant, pleasantly


COUNT

THING

NON-COUNT (MASS)

classes of THING (nouns) maximally distinguished by the grammar


count

THING

mass

increase in delicacy

concreteabstractevent

concreteabstractevent


living

concrete natural

non-living

artefactual

further increase in delicacy


33

0.69%0.69%

104104

24.07%24.07%

4141

9.49%9.49%

5555

12.73%12.73%

113113

26.15%26.15%

116116

26.85%26.85%boatboat

3535

8.72%8.72%

3030

7.48%7.48%

6262

15.46%15.46%

6565

16.20%16.20%

115115

28.67%28.67%

9494

23.41%23.41%shipship

77

1.73%1.73%

22

0.49%0.49%

8484

20.79%20.79%

4545

11.13%11.13%

121121

29.95%29.95%

145145

35.89%35.89%vesselvessel

gengenmmqqAACCSS

distribution of nouns by external (clause) function

S = Subject A = Adjunct m = modifier (in ngp)

C = Complement q = qualifier (in ngp) g = genitive (in ngp)


142142

38%38%

3232

8%8%

8181

21%21%

119119

32%32%

3636

10%10%

140140

37%37%

179179

47%47%boatboat

377377

149149

40%40%4646

12%12%

4848

13%13%

129129

34%34%

3636

10%10%

150150

40%40%

135135

36 %36 %shipship

377377

206206

46%46%

103103

23%23%

2626

6%6%

127127

28%28%

4343

10%10%

184184

41%41%

179179

40%40%vesselvessel

452452

modmodqualqualqaqapapapppppspsplpl

distribution of nouns by internal relations (within the nominal group)

pl = plural ps = particularised singular pp = particularised plural

pa = particularised alone qa = quantified alone qual = qualified

mod = modifiedLINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

TRANSITIVITY

MOOD

THEME

VOICE


the influence of lexical choice on other grammatical systems

mental process remember in sense of ‘celebrate’ or ‘hold a special place in one’s memory’

he is remembered by old timers as the doctor who never sent the bill (COBUILD)

the 1991 cup will always be remembered (COBUILD)

30% active

70% passive

‘lexis or grammar first’ issueLINC SUMMER SCHOOL 2010

Idiom

“The principle of idiom is that a language user has available to him or her a large number of semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices, even though they might be analysable into segments” (Sinclair 1987:320)

Where does phraseology fit in?


phraseological expressions

phraseological/idiomatic multi-word expressions can be specified by ‘pre-determined pathways’ through the system network

obligatory features are assigned 100%, as are all features in their path

semi-fixed elements will be specified by relative probabilities (e.g. 60% - 40%)


(…) semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices, even though they might be analysable into segments” (Sinclair 1987:320)

....you hear she's popped her clogs .... (COBUILD)

The process pop and the thing clog are obligatorily co-selected

clog obligatorily selects for plural clogs clogs co-selects possessive determiner (his, her,

their etc) The majority of clause elements are available as

with the process die (TENSE, ASPECT, POLARITY, CIRCUMSTANCE etc.) but with some important restrictions

? he was popping his clogs when I last saw him


direct die@

congruent

euphemistic pass@ away

dying

kick-the-bucket idiomatic kick@ the bucket

pop-one’s-clogs

pop@ + dd + clogs


Preselection

all features marked

preselected by rule


path 1

path 2

path 3

path 4

a pre-determined pathway through a system network

100%

100%100% 100%


because of the selection of features (and associated realisation rules) the expression will have a ‘regular’ lexicogrammatical representation.

this is important (and necessary) for semi-fixed expressions

and even for fixed expressions which can be subject to creativity

the representation will not necessarily be ‘literal’

e.g pop one’s clogs is a one role process, like die, so one’s clogs is not a normal complement, but an extension of the verb pop.

because of obligatory feature selection, the outputted expression is tantamount to unanalysed

Bruce Lee popped some amyl nitrate and his clogs (COBUILD)

some features of phraseological representation in the Cardiff Grammar


phraseology, formulaicity, idiomaticity etc

fixed and semi-fixed expressions that seem to be outside of the lexicogrammatical area, or somewhere between grammar and lexis

by and large

the thin end of the wedge

to tell you the truth

on a bender

have a nice day


Date post:	28-Mar-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	gabriella-frost
View:	221 times
Download:	3 times

Lexis and phraseology in a systemic functional grammar Gordon Tucker Centre for Language and...

Documents