Affiliation:
1. School of Foreign Studies, South China Agricultural University , Guangzhou , China
2. School of Foreign Languages, Sun Yat-sen University , Guangzhou , China
Abstract
Abstract
The literature to date features two very different approaches to the study of syntax, the formal or structure-based approach and the functional or semantics-based approach, both of which have advantages and disadvantages. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the “ngp1 + vgp + ngp2 + ngp3” construction in English by identifying the relationship between the clausal elements in terms of clause types. The theoretical support is Systemic Functional Linguistics which is semantics-based and which regards form/structure as the realization of meaning/semantics. Specifically, the paper discusses the issue by keeping in mind questions such as “What kind of process is it?”, “How many participants can/must be involved in the process?”, and “What roles can/must those participants play?”. By analyzing three pairs of clauses which share the same “ngp1 + vgp + ngp2 + ngp3” structure, it is found that the clause types SVOO, SOVA, SVOC, and SVO all exhibit the same “ngp1 + vgp + ngp2 + ngp3” structure. The identification of the clause types is conducted by examining the Process in the Transitivity system of the clause. The implication of the present study is that a functional-syntactic analysis should start from meaning and consider how the meaning is realized and that although syntactic analysis at the level of form is necessary, the focus of a good functional-syntactic analysis should be based on semantic analysis at the level of meaning.
Reference18 articles.
1. Fawcett, Robin P. 1987. The semantics of clause and verb in English. In Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday & Robin P. Fawcett (eds.), New developments in systemic linguistics, vol. 1: Theory and description, 130–183. London: Pinter.
2. Fawcett, Robin P. 2000a. A theory of syntax for systemic functional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
3. Fawcett, Robin P. 2000b. In place of Halliday’s “verbal group”, Part 1: Evidence from the problems of Halliday’s representations and the relative simplicity of the proposed alternative. Word 51(2). 157–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2000.11432500.
4. Fawcett, Robin P. 2000c. In place of Halliday’s “verbal group”, Part 2: Evidence from generation, semantics and interruptability. Word 51(3). 327–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2000.11432503.
5. Fawcett, Robin P. 2008. Invitation to systemic functional linguistics through the Cardiff grammar: An extension and simplification of Halliday’s systemic functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Equinox.