Most Pageviews by Country Since Blog Relocation

ChatGPT On The Long Term Prospects Of Theories Like SFL

Q. What are the long term prospects for a theory whose community cannot recognise misunderstandings of the theory?

ChatGPT said:

The long-term prospects for such a theory are limited, as the inability to recognise and address misunderstandings within the community can lead to fragmentation, stagnation, and erosion of credibility. Key challenges include:

1. Loss of Coherence: Without consensus on the theory's core principles, its application risks divergence, reducing its effectiveness and clarity.

2. Erosion of Credibility: If misunderstandings persist unchallenged, critics may view the theory as ill-defined or incoherent, undermining its intellectual reputation.

3. Stagnation: Misunderstandings can discourage productive debate, limiting opportunities for refinement and development.

4. Fragmentation: The community may fracture into subgroups with competing interpretations, further diluting the theory's influence.

For long-term success, communities need robust mechanisms for self-reflection, debate, and correction to ensure the theory evolves coherently and meaningfully.

Your or You're?

ChatGPT On The Sysfling Post On The Situation In Gaza

Daniel Portman sent the following message to Sysfling on 10 Nov 2024, at 18:29:

We are sorry to hear about the predicament of Mohammed as indeed we are sorry about the suffering of all non-combatants in this war. We Israelis, Arabs and Jews, have had many casualties every day and many children are left orphans, too. We as citizens of Israel will continue to urge our government to come to a lasting agreement with Hamas.

You have read what the situation in Gaza looks like to citizens such as Mohammed. However, as academics, we should be aware of all the facts and definitions supplied by Hamas and its supporters. This is not the 'history' that Mohammed was allowed to hear by the Hamas government; nor was he allowed to ask questions. As an intelligent person, earning his Ph.D., he surely is aware that IDF soldiers are not risking their lives just because Jews suffered in history.

We would like to shed light on a few of the assertions and then to make an appeal to our community for the children being held hostage in underground Hamas tunnels :

1. Does Israel occupy Gaza?

Apparently, Mohammed did not have access to this information because he feels "the Jews are cruel because other people were cruel to them'". We (the authors) were witnesses to this history, which is also documented in the prominent news media of the day. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2007. The Israelis who were living there were forcibly removed by the IDF. Even the dead were removed from the cemeteries. Israeli residents left houses, synagogues, very profitable farms, and businesses. The export from the Gaza community was in the millions.

2 What was the reaction of the Gazans to the evacuation of Jews?

Immediately after Israel left, the Gazans tore down and destroyed everything, even the greenhouses that were donated to them and would have afforded them a good livelihood. They then elected their own government, Hamas, whose written 'constitution' sets as its aim the destruction of Israel and 'all its infidels' and replacing it with Moslems. Qatar and the EU sent millions of dollars to build up the economy but Hamas used the money to build tunnels, manufacture missiles and smuggle in weapons. Gazans could only earn a good livelihood by working in Israeli communities across the border. Until Oct. 7 Israel was issuing over 18,000 permits for Gazans to work in Israel in jobs that typically paid much higher salaries than what a worker could earn in Gaza. In addition, Gaza was also exporting over $130 million a year of fish, agricultural produce, textiles and other products to Israel and the West Bank.

3. Whom did Hamas attack?

Many Israelis had set up kibbutzim (community farming villages) on our side of the border. These were settled by predominantly idealistic people who wanted to reach out to their neighbors and held many joint activities with them. Among these, the Israelis had volunteers who would accompany patients from Gaza to be treated in Israeli hospitals. A very well-known person was Vivian Silver, the head of "Women Wage Peace", an organization of Palestinian and Israeli women who have been campaigning for a peaceful solution to our conflict. `

4. What happened on Oct. 7, 2023?

Since Israel’s withdraw, Hamas attacked Israel 5 times; Israel did not strike first. After each missile attack from Gaza, the IDF would counter-attack, and eventually, the sides would reach a ceasefire. These attacks recurred repeatedly over the years. The most recent one on October 7, 2023, was not a missile attack but a massacre of the very communities which had been established to live in peace and help the Gazans. We will not repeat the brutality of the massacre, which was well-documented by the terrorists themselves. Among the dead was the peace activist Vivian Silver, whose burnt body was only found later, in the charred remains of her house. Among the dead were also the daughter and son-in-law of Dr. Carole Troen, a linguist and colleague of Beverly's. Carole's family used their bodies to protect their 3 children. The children survived, but the terrorists succeeded in killing their parents. Today, Carole and her husband, Dr. Ilan Troen, a historian, are senior citizens who must raise their grandchildren. In addition, the terrorists invaded a nearby music festival, murdering over 300 young people.

5. Who are the hostages?

Besides the murders, Hamas captured men, women, children, and babies; they released some hostages, murdered other captives and are holding the remaining 100 as hostages until this day. Among the remaining hostages are Shiri Bibas and her two children: Kfir, captured when he was 9 months old, and Ariel, 4. None of the hostages has received the medications they were sent by Israel, none has been visited by the Red Cross, and they receive very little food, as reported by those hostages who were released in the Nov. cease fire. We are in doubt as to how many of these 100 hostages are still alive.

6. Accuracy in terminology

Apartheid is constantly applied to Israel by its critics, but it is inaccurate. Unlike South Africa, which did not even allow Black (Native) South Africans to vote, or share a drinking fountain with Whites, Arab-Israelis have the right to vote, have their own political party, which now sits in the Knesset [parliament], a Judge on the Supreme Court, a high percentage of university students in non-segregated universities, and a high percentage in the medical profession, etc.

Genocide is another word which is misapplied. Absolutely, any intentional killing of non-combatants is to be condemned. But so far, the International Court has found it can’t make a case for genocide. For one thing, there are no objective counts of people killed by Israel bombing. We quote Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ – who appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done.

“It did not decide - and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media... that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge.

“It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided.” [source: BBC: what did the ICJ ruling really say? May 17, 2024]

As of this writing, it is a question the court is far from deciding.

Academics should equally ask, “Is Hamas trying to commit genocide?” We refer you to the Hamas Covenant:

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al­Banna, of blessed memory).

Hamas believes that “Palestine is an Islamic Waqf, land consecrated for Muslim generations until Judgement Day” and calls for the obliteration of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state – not a democratic one - extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea (article II) … the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say, “O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him” (article 7). (“Why is this Seder different from all other Seders?” David Breakstone, Jerusalem Post, April 19, 2024)

7. Has Israel tried to make peace with the Palestinians?

We can only turn to former President Bill Clinton, the author of many peace plans, who tried continuously to get the two sides together during the 1990s. You can access his latest statement about the history of this attempt on You Tube.

In sum, honest people should conclude there is no side which is totally innocent or totally guilty in this conflict. We urge you as academics to contribute to help Mohammed and his family. Could we ask for a parallel gesture towards the Israeli hostages? Can you write to human rights organizations such as Save the Children and Amnesty International, and urge them to press for the release of the Bibas family and all young children?

Save the Children

Janti Soeripto, President & Chief Executive Officer of Save the Children US. jsoeripto@savechildren.org. You can also find her on social media. She has a profile on LinkedIn.

Amnesty international: Secretary-General Dr. Agnes Callamard: israelpalestine@amnesty.org.

With hope for a peaceful future for all.

Beverly Lewin, Daniel Portman, and Hagit Rifinski

ChatGPT Comments:

The letter provides a specific perspective, largely supportive of the Israeli position and critical of Hamas, using historical and contemporary arguments to justify Israel's policies and actions. The structure attempts to address a range of issues—occupation, peace attempts, terminology (like "genocide" and "apartheid"), and the humanitarian crisis stemming from hostages. While it highlights personal stories and references political, academic, and media sources to reinforce its points, it omits broader Palestinian perspectives on Israeli policies, which could limit the letter's perceived objectivity, especially in an academic setting.

The letter's call for academics to support Israeli hostages and engage human rights organisations could be seen as an appeal for balanced humanitarian concern. However, given the political sensitivity, responses to such a letter might emphasise the need for a more comprehensive discussion of both Israeli and Palestinian experiences and grievances to foster constructive dialogue.

The Graphologial Realisation Of Information Distribution

ChatGPT's Sense Of Humour

Excellent Incompetence

ChatGPT on the ethics of Wokeism

I asked ChatGPT about the Woke practice of bullying people to be ethical. Here is its response:

Bullying individuals to be ethical also raises significant ethical concerns. Here are some points to consider: 

1. Coercion vs. Genuine Ethics: 

Ethical Behaviour: Genuine ethical behaviour arises from personal conviction, understanding, and empathy, not coercion. Bullying undermines the possibility of fostering true ethical understanding and commitment. 

Coercive Methods: Forcing individuals to act ethically through bullying may lead to compliance but not a genuine understanding or acceptance of ethical principles. 

2. Respect for Autonomy:

Just as with belief conformity, respecting individual autonomy is crucial. Ethical beliefs and actions should be based on informed choice rather than coercive pressure. 

3. Harm Principle:

Bullying inherently causes harm, which contradicts the very principles of ethical behaviour. Promoting ethics through harm is paradoxical and undermines the values one is trying to instil. 

4. Long-term Impact:

Coercive approaches to ethics may lead to resentment, rebellion, or superficial compliance, where individuals may adopt the desired behaviours outwardly but not genuinely internalise ethical values. 

Those who are bullied into ethical behaviour may become defensive, leading to further resistance rather than meaningful change. 

5. Role of Empathy and Understanding:

Ethical development is often rooted in empathy, reflection, and dialogue. Engaging in open discussions about ethical principles encourages understanding and personal growth, rather than resorting to intimidation. 

6. Teaching vs. Imposing Ethics:

Teaching ethical principles through positive reinforcement, modelling behaviour, and open dialogue is far more effective than bullying. This approach fosters a supportive environment where individuals feel safe to explore ethical concepts. 

7. Moral Responsibility:

Those who resort to bullying in an attempt to enforce ethical behaviour may themselves be acting unethically. It raises questions about the moral integrity of using harmful methods to promote good. 

In summary, while promoting ethical behaviour is important, using bullying as a means to achieve that goal is fundamentally flawed and counterproductive. A more ethical approach involves fostering understanding, respect, and open dialogue to encourage individuals to engage with ethical principles voluntarily.

Caveat Lector

Phonemic Awareness

The Science Of Punctuation

Speech Function

Goodwyn's Deictic Furniture

Embedding vs Ranking

Merda Most Foul

The Science Of Spelling

Origins Of the Modern Concept Of Markedness And Markedness vs Congruence

While the idea of linguistic asymmetry predated the actual coining of the terms marked and unmarked, the modern concept of markedness originated in the Prague School structuralism of Roman Jakobson and Nikolai Trubetzkoy as a means of characterising binary oppositions.

Andersen, Henning (1989). "Markedness—The First 150 Years". In Markedness in Synchrony and Diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Halliday glosses 'unmarked' as neutral, default.

Markedness is about choice in a system: neutral/default or notable, whereas congruence is about the stratal relation between meaning and wording: in a congruent realisation, the meaning and wording agree, and in an incongruent (metaphorical) realisation, the meaning and wording do not agree. Markedness is about systemic choice, congruence is about intra-content realisation. A Theme can be unmarked or marked, but not congruent or incongruent, since there is no such thing as textual metaphor.

The Science Of Reading

The Science Of Writing

Jam-Packed

Shared Protolanguage Vs Unshared Language

Protolinguistic Body Language

The System of Purview

Interpersonal control and responsibility: The system of PURVIEW in English

Yaegan Doran

Australian Catholic University

Whenever we speak or write, we are constantly negotiating control over our meanings and positioning our listener/s readers to respond in particular ways. We put forward meanings that are shared between us and the listener, such that it is presumed the listener will agree, or we simply assert meanings such that the listener’s response is only minimally relevant, or we can hand meanings over to the listener to determine and so leave it in their hands, or alternatively simply put meanings out there with no indication that anyone will necessarily be tied to them. This sharing or not of meanings waves [sic] and wanes through conversations and written text, and form a crucial resource for enacting our social relations. In this talk, I will introduce a system for understanding these meanings called PURVIEW, drawn from a recently renovated model of [TENOR] presented in Doran, Martin & Zappavigna (2025). The resources of purview concern the degree to which the speaker and listener are interpersonally tied to the message being put forward or wedded to its outcome. We will see that we can view purview in terms of a small sets of parameters: whether or not the speaker has purview, in the sense that the speaker is wedded to what they are putting forward or not; whether the listener has purview, in terms of whether the speaker is handing control of the meanings over to the listener or not; and whether the purview being negotiated is of the proposition or proposal being put forward, or of the linguistic act itself. As we will see, varying purview offers a rich resource for nuancing the way we relate to people in both spoken and written language, and allows for intricate negotiations of our meanings through texts. The talk will illustrate the system through a range of spoken and written texts, including through casual conversation, legal discourse, and spoken personal reflections, and will show that it is realised through a range of interpersonal systems across language, including discourse semantic systems of ATTITUDE, ENGAGEMENT and NEGOTIATION, lexicogrammatical systems of POLARITY, TAGGING, MOOD and MODALITY and the phonological system of TONE.

References

Doran, Y.J., Martin, J.R. & Zappavigna, M. (2025) Negotiating Social Relations: Tenor Resources in English. London: Equinox.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the intellectual source of Doran's 'purview' is the work on 'epistemic authority' in social psychology, as formulated by the sociologists John Heritage and Geoffrey Raymond, in their paper The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction (Social Psychology Quarterly 2005, Vol. 68, No. 1, 15-38). The term 'purview' serves the social function of a buzzword.

[2] To be clear, the authors' renovated model of tenor involves reinterpreting context (tenor) as a resource for language (interpersonal meaning) and then modelling the resource as the language for which it is a resource. See A Close Examination Of Yaegan Doran's 2023 ASFLA Plenary Abstract.

Language vs Other Semiotic Modes

Good Enough Theorising

Double The Meaning Potential

Solidary Confinement vs Solitary Release

The 3 Orientations Of Conference Papers

A Prophet With His Priests

Celebrating Excellence

Cannibal Lector

School Excursion

Schooling

Attitude Checker

Story Time

The Perils Of Grammaticalisation (Literally)

He literally wiped the floor with the opposition.

He literally exploded during the argument.

His head was literally spinning with ideas.

He literally eats like a pig.

He literally broke her heart.

He was literally on a roller coaster of emotions.

Negotiating Truth

Nowadays To Be Intelligible Is To Be Found Out

What Counts As Knowledge In An Academic Safe-Space

The Determined Fighter

Entrance Exam

 

ALSFAL 2024 in Mexico City: Pre-congress workshop

Pre-congress workshops:

1. Jim Martin

Intermodality: paralanguage … 

In this workshop we will focus on intermodality from the perspectives of paralanguage … drawing on recent work published as Ngo et al. 2022 … . On Monday we will introduce the model of paralanguage developed in Ngo et al., taking into account the essential convergence between prosodic phonology and paralanguage in spoken discourse and degrees of concurrence, resonance and synchronicity between paralanguage and language as far as ideational, interpersonal and textual meaning are concerned.

 

Blogger Comments:

See

• Buyer Beware!
• ASFLA Awards The Inaugural MAK Halliday Prize To Cléirigh's Plagiarisers
• A Meticulous Review Of Ngo, Hood, Martin, Painter, Smith and Zappavigna (2022)

Bad Luck When Thinking

Know Your Limits

Correction

Politeness

"Courtesy Costs Nothing"

David Rose's History Of SFL In Sydney

On the asflanet discussion list, David Rose replied to Brad Smith on 23 Feb 2024 at 15:25:

Let’s consider that hypothesis in the light of Rob’s iteration of ‘our prophet’ (in a parallel post). I’ve no doubt that’s the last thing Michael would have wanted to be. Until 1985 he was an academic leader, in both senses of leading a theoretical field and organising it through courses, doctorates, conferences, university politics etc. His ten years at Sydney enormously expanded the field, resulting not only in IFG, but also Xian’s Lexicogrammatical Cartography and Jim’s English Text, along with courses that taught them and graduates to teach them, and arguably SFL’s biggest export, genre literacy pedagogy.

His elevation to ‘prophet’ status coincided with both expansion and fragmentation of the field. When he retired early, the Australian descriptivists organised a coup in Sydney that marginalised SFL ever after. Jim refused to give in, but has used it as a base to seed further generations of research in genre pedagogy, appraisal, multimodality, individuation, register studies, grammar and typology. He too has been an academic leader in both senses.

Meanwhile, SFL became more widely taught, particularly the IFG grammar. Macquarie became another base thanks to Ruqaiya’s powerful academic leadership. As it widened, and Michael’s status grew, a rift started appearing between the work emerging from Sydney and elsewhere (I’m obviously oversimplifying). Students at Sydney and associated centres continued to study IFG, but applied its principles to researching other strata and modes. From outside, this work got corralled as the ‘Sydney school’. Its boundaries were defined in contrast to work up to 1985, which were cemented as the SFL ‘canon’ (as Rob put it), in concert with Michael’s canonisation as ‘prophet’.

Ironically the opposite of his own stated goals, politics, and how he carried himself...

‘This standpoint is associated with impure categories, with tendencies (analogy), with functionalism, and with the testing of theories by better-or-worse criteria of application - whether or not you can do something with them.’

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, it was Rose himself who introduced Bernstein's (2000) application of 'prophet' to the social structure of a pedagogical field, and Spence merely used what Rose provided: 

The religious field is constituted by three positions which stand in various relations of complementarity and opposition. In the religious field, we have the prophets, we have the priests, and we have the laity. The rule is that one can only occupy one category at a time. Priests cannot be prophets, and prophets cannot be priests, and the laity cannot be either. There is a natural affinity between prophets and laity, and there is a natural opposition between prophets and priests. These are the lines of opposition structuring the religious field.

If we look at the structure of the pedagogic field, we also have basically three positions that provide analogues to the prophets, priests and laity. The ‘prophets’ are the producers of the knowledge, the ‘priests’ are the recontextualisers or the reproducers, and the ‘laity’ are the acquirers. Thus, we have the structure of the pedagogic field.

[2] To be clear, this is irrelevant, since it is Bernstein's sociological model that positions Halliday as a prophet.

[3] To be clear, Martin's English Text, including his model of genre, is inconsistent with the theory that Halliday created (evidence here).

[4] To be clear, Halliday was not elevated to prophet status. There was no historical event. 'Prophet' is merely Halliday's position in Bernstein's sociological model.

[5] As should be obvious, there was no 'coup'. As one member of the selection panel, not a linguist, told her son, a linguistics student, the choice of Halliday's successor as departmental professor was decided on the basis of publication history. Importantly, if Halliday had wanted Martin to succeed him as departmental professor, he need only have retired at a later date, instead of at the comparatively young age of 59.

[6] To be clear, Martin subsequently tried to leave the Sydney University Linguistic Department by applying for a professorship at Macquarie University, but lost out again, this time to Christian Matthiessen, six years his junior.

[7] To be clear, any rift that appeared was between those who adopted Martin's misunderstandings of Halliday's theory (evidence here), and those who didn't.

[8] This is very misleading because it is very untrue. According to its Wikipedia entry, which Rose obviously contributed to, at the very least, the Sydney School was founded by Michael Halliday who established it in 1979 at the Working Conference on Language in Education held at the University of Sydney. See also Deceptive Use Of Wikipedia.

[9] To be clear, the SFL 'canon' is a religious term for what, in science, would be called the Standard Theory.

[10] To be clear, this quote from Halliday (1984) is part of a characterisation of the rhetorical-ethnographic orientation to meaning, as opposed to the logico-philosophical orientation. As such, it is entirely irrelevant to any point previously made by Rose in this email post. Its inclusion here is an instance of logical fallacy known as the Red Herring:

As an informal fallacy, the red herring falls into a broad class of relevance fallacies. Unlike the straw man, which involves a distortion of the other party's position, the red herring is a seemingly plausible, though ultimately irrelevant, diversionary tactic. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a red herring may be intentional or unintentional; it is not necessarily a conscious intent to mislead.

Brad Smith On Theories-As-Languages As Formative/Constitutive Of Academic Communities

 Brad Smith wrote to asflanet on 23 Feb 2024 at 11:35:

there is an argument, or hypothesis I suppose, that theories-as-languages are actually formative/constitutive of academic communities — as Kay O'Halloran used to say (and possibly still does), 'the systemic functional way of life!'

Blogger Comments:

[1] Some relevant notes from The Life Of Meaning (2002):

Aligning With Specific Metafunctional Consistencies

Meaning potential thus involves a web of different networks of metafunctional consistencies: different construals, different values, different foci of attention. Meaning-makers variously align (consistently or inconsistently) with different networks of consistency within the overall web of variant consistencies. Those who share a specific network of consistency potentially form a community of ‘like-minded’ individuals with a ‘common interest’: a community formed around a way of construing experience, a community formed around a way of valuing a construal, a community formed around a way of grading the relative importance of construals and values. Since each individual can align (consistently or inconsistently) with multiple networks, each can belong to multiple communities, “us”, and disassociate from multiple communities, “you” or “them”.

Communities As Bodies Organised By Shared Construals, Values And Attentions

Communities of users of shared construals-values-attentions emerge from social-semiotic interactions between potential users of models in a population. Bonding through shared values and attentions of specific construals of experience reinforces group identity and social identity of individuals in that group. It provides group cohesion and co-operation, creating a community of ‘us’ as an integrated ‘self’. Just as shared biological potential groups individuals as kin, as family, shared semiotic potential, in general, groups individuals together as kith, friends and acquaintances. But importantly, local bonding of ‘us’, the ‘self’, also defines the ‘not-us’ as the ‘not-self’, as the ‘other’. To bond is to exclude. The self-other distinction is itself a continuum rather than a binary opposition: a scale that extends from ‘first person us’ to ‘second person you’ (those we talk to) to ‘third person them’ (those we talk about).

Semiosis As Social Immunological Process

The specific construals, values and foci of attention that organise a specific community can be understood as functioning as a type of immunological system of that social body. That is, semiotic construals, values and foci are a means of extending immunological function beyond the confines of an individual body to the confines of a social body. This can be explained as follows. 

Immunological systems in bodies recognise molecules as either ‘self’ or ‘other’ with regard to the systems of the body. Those that are categorised as ‘self’ are allowed, while those that are categorised as ‘other’, antigens, trigger an immune response in the system: the molecular shape of the antigen selects the production of multiple antibodies whose molecular shape fits into the antigen (and any of its copies) in order to neutralise it as a threat to the body. 

Similarly, semiotic systems in social bodies recognise the construals, values and foci of attention in models as either ‘self’ or ‘other’ with regard to systems of the social body. Those that are categorised as ‘self’ are allowed, while those that are categorised as ‘other’ trigger an immune response in the social-semiotic system: the metafunctional ‘shape’ (meanings) of the model selects the production of multiple ‘anti-texts’ (negative critiques) whose metafunctional ‘shape’ fits into the offending model (and any of its ‘copies’) in order to neutralise it as a threat to the social body (by undermining certainty in the offending model). 

Because the probability that a model will be selected is dependent on the recognition of it as ‘self’ or ‘other’ — in terms of consistency with the construals, values and attentions that potential users are most certain of — there is the possibility of misrecognition. On the one hand, ‘other’ construals, values and/or attentions can be misrecognised as ‘self’, and so not attacked. On the other hand, ‘self’ construals, values and/or attentions can be misrecognised as ‘other’ and consequently attacked with anti-texts. 

[2] A relevant quote from What Lies Beneath (2022):

The Culture Of 'Faith' In The SFL Community

SFL Theory is both intellectually challenging and unfamiliar in its methodology. For example, it requires linguists to be able to operate at multiple levels of different types of abstraction, and to be always aware of the level at which they are operating. This is most problematic in the case of distinguishing meaning (semantics) from wording (lexicogrammar), since wording is lexicogrammatical form (clause, group & phrase, etc.) categorised according to the meaning it realises.

In terms of unfamiliar methodology, where other linguistic theories begin with the lowest levels of symbolic abstraction: structure and form, and assign them categories, SFL Theory begins the highest levels of symbolic abstraction: system and meaning, and asks how these are realised in structure and form.

Its intellectual challenges and contrary methodology make SFL Theory and its argumentation comparatively difficult to understand. This creates a culture in the SFL community where the theory is less understood than taken on trust, like religious faith.

In a faith community, a doctrine is held as a revelation to be believed, rather than a theory to be in/validated by reasoned argumentation. In such a community, experts are providers or interpreters of revelations, rather than experts in reasoned argumentation, and in matters of interpretation, it is such individuals that are criterial, rather than reasoned argumentation. With individuals as criterial in doctrine interpretation, communities form around those individuals.

Where, in a scientific community, interpretations of theory are on a scale from accurate to inaccurate, in a faith community, interpretations of doctrine are on a scale from orthodox to unorthodox (if tolerated), or to heretical (if not tolerated).

Declare Your Reading Position

Audience Comprehension

Facts And Reasons vs Personal Attacks

Our Policy

Dumbing Down Theory & Practice

Friday Research Student Course Semester 1 2024

James Martin wrote to asflanet on 21 Jan 2024, at 11:20:

Hi all

This semester's course will be convened by me, with a focus on axial argumentation in linguistic descriptions informed by SFL. We'll begin with an introduction to system/structure relations in SFL, before moving on to modelling the relation of axis to basic theoretical dimensions of SFL (i.e., rank, metafunction and stratification).

The course assumes familiarity with Halliday's description of English grammar, up to the level of delicacy canvassed in Martin et al.'s 2010 Deploying Functional Grammar workbook.

The course is open to all research students. There is no need to register; simply come along to the first meeting Feb 23, at 2pm, in Quad Seminar Room 204 (Oriental Room).

There is no auditing or on-line participation for this course – all students are expected to attend in person and do the coursework assigned; completed assignments will be submitted to the course instructor and their supervisors (with formal assessment undertaken by their supervisors).

Bring some paper and writing instruments to practice network drawing.

Cheers

Jim

Blogger Comments:

For some of the theoretical misunderstandings that Martin will be inculcating in students in this course, see the review of Systemic Functional Grammar: A Next Step Into The Theory — Axial Relations.

For some of the theoretical misunderstandings in Martin et al.'s 2010 Deploying Functional Grammar workbook, see the meticulous review here.