Realisation: Encoding & Decoding

In an identifying relation, the identity either encodes the Value (the higher level of abstraction) by reference to the Token (the lower level of abstraction), or it decodes the Token by reference to the Value (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 230).

So, in the identifying relation: expression realises content, 

the identity either encodes content by reference to expression,

or it decodes expression by reference to content.

And, in the identifying relation: form realises function, 

the identity either encodes function by reference to form,

or it decodes form by reference to function.

And, in the identifying relation: structure realises system, 

the identity either encodes system by reference to structure,

or it decodes structure by reference to system.

Linguistic "Borrowing"

Construing Experience

'A quantum of experience is not defined before it is construed' (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 118)

I'd Rather Be A Hammer Then A Nail

Circumstance Vs Expanding Clause

Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 369):

In the creation of text, we choose between augmenting a clause ‘internally’ by means of a circumstantial element and augmenting it ‘externally’ by means of another clause in a complex. The decision depends on many factors; but the basic consideration has to do with how much textual, interpersonal and experiential semiotic ‘weight’ is to be assigned to the unit.

Semantic Weight

Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 111):

… whenever two figures are related in a sequence, they may be either equal or unequal in semantic weight. … The projecting and projected figures may have equal status in the sequence: this relation is that of quoting … . Or they may have unequal status: this relation is that of reporting ….

Projections Of Meaning & Wording: Ideas & Locutions

Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 108):

We have suggested that the relation of projection sets up one figure on a different plane of reality — we refer to this as the second-order or semiotic level. This second-order level of reality is the content plane of a semiotic system. That is to say, the projected figure is projected in the form of ‘content’. We have seen that the content plane is stratified into two levels — semantics (the level of meanings) and lexicogrammar (the level of wordings). Consequently, we would expect projections to be located at either or both of these levels, and this is indeed what happens: a projected figure is either a meaning or a wording. […] We will refer to these [i.e. meaning and wording] in the context of projection as ideas and locutions.

Comment Adjuncts

Type					Examples Of Adverbs
propositional	on whole	asseverative	natural		naturally, inevitably, of course
			obvious		obviously, clearly, plainly, of course
			sure		doubtless, indubitably, no doubt
		qualificative	prediction	predictable	unsurprisingly, predictably, to no-one’s surprise
				surprising	surprisingly, unexpectedly
			presumption	hearsay	evidently, allegedly, supposedly
				argument	arguably
				guess	presumably
			desirability	desirable: luck	luckily, fortunately
				desirable: hope	hopefully
				undesirable	sadly, unfortunately
	on Subject	wisdom	positive		wisely, cleverly
			negative		foolishly, stupidly
		morality	positive		rightly, correctly, justifiably
			negative		wrongly, unjustifiably
speech-functional	unqualified	persuasive	assurance		truly, honestly, seriously (+ tone 1)
			concession		admittedly, certainly, to be sure (+ tone 4)
		factual			actually, really, in fact, as a matter of fact
	qualified	validity			generally, broadly, roughly, ordinarily, by and large, on the whole
		personal engagement	honesty		frankly, candidly, honestly, to be honest
			secrecy		confidentially, between you and me
			individuality		personally, for my part
			accuracy		truly, strictly
			hesitancy		tentatively

Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 130)

Modal Adjuncts

	Type	Meaning	Examples
I	probability	how likely?	probably, possibly, certainly, perhaps, maybe
	usuality	how often?	usually, sometimes, always, (n)ever, often, seldom
	typicality	how typical?	occasionally, generally, regularly, for the most part
	obviousness	how obvious?	of course, surely, obviously, clearly
II	opinion	I think	in my opinion, personally, to my mind
	admission	I admit	frankly, to be honest, to tell you the truth
	persuasion	I assure you	honestly, really, believe me, seriously
	entreaty	I request you	please, kindly
	presumption	I presume	evidently, apparently, no doubt, presumably
	desirability	how desirable?	(un)fortunately, to my delight/distress, regrettably, hopefully
	reservation	how reliable?	at first, tentatively, provisionally, looking back on it
	validation	how valid?	broadly speaking, in general, on the whole, strictly speaking, in principle
	evaluation	how sensible?	(un)wisely, understandably, mistakenly, foolishly
	prediction	how expected?	to my surprise, surprisingly, as expected, by chance

(Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 82)