Friday, 6 December 2019

Pageviews by Countries

United States
United Kingdom

Referring To Quotes vs Substituting For Reports

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 530):
There are different ways of referring back to what is quoted and what is reported. Typically a reference item, usually that, is used to pick up a quoted passage, while a substitute, so/not, is used with a report. For example,
She said, ‘I can’t do it.’– Did she really say that?
She said she couldn’t do it.– Did she really say so?
This is because the act of quoting implies a prior referent, some actual occasion that can then be referred back to, whereas in reporting there is nothing but the reported text. This explains the difference in meaning between I don’t believe that ‘I do not accept that assertion as valid’ and I don’t believe so ‘in my opinion such is not the case’.

Thursday, 5 December 2019

The Semantic Inequivalence Of Direct And Indirect Speech

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 530):
Traditional school exercises of the kind ‘turn into direct/indirect speech’ suggest that the two always fully match. This is true lexicogrammatically, in that it is always possible to find an equivalent – although not always a unique one: given Mary said she had seen it, the quoted equivalent might be I have seen it, I had seen it or I saw it, or she (someone else) has seen it, etc. But it is not true as a general statement about usage. Semantically the two do not exactly match, and there are many instances where it does not make sense to replace one by the other. Note, for example, Alice thought that that was the jury-box, where we should have to change Alice thought to something like Alice said to herself in order to avoid the sense of ‘held the opinion’, which is the natural interpretation of a verb of thinking when it is projecting by hypotaxis.

Wednesday, 4 December 2019

Reported Imperative (‘Indirect Command’)

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 530):
With the imperative the relationship is less clear. We noted in Chapter 4 that the imperative is a somewhat indeterminate category, having some features of a finite and some features of a non-finite clause. Similarly the category of reported imperative (‘indirect command’) is not very clearly defined. But non-finite clauses with to, following a verb such as tell or order, can be interpreted as reported proposals. They likewise display the properties of ‘indirect speech’, although without sequence of tenses, since the verb does not select for tense. For example,
‘I know this trick of yours.’ She said || she knew that trick of his.
‘Can you come tomorrow?’ He asked || if she could come the next day.
‘Why isn’t John here?’ She wondered || why John wasn’t there.

‘Help yourselves.’ He told them || to help themselves.
‘We must leave to-night.’ She said || they had to leave that night.

Tuesday, 3 December 2019

The Shift Of Mood In Reported Interrogatives

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 530):
If the reported clause is interrogative it typically shifts into the declarative; the declarative is the unmarked mood, and is used in all clauses that do not select for mood independently, including all dependent clauses. A yes/no interrogative becomes declarative, introduced by if or whether (he asked ‘is she coming at noon?’ : he asked whether she was coming at noon); a WH- interrogative becomes declarative with the WH- element remaining at the front (he asked ‘when is she coming?’ : he asked when she was coming).

Monday, 2 December 2019

The Shift Of Deixis And Tense In Reported Propositions

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 529):
As we have seen, a reported proposition typically takes on a set of related features collectively known as ‘indirect speech’. What happens is that all deictic elements are shifted away from reference to the speech situation: personals away from first and second person (speaker and listener) to third, and demonstratives away from near (here-&-now) to remote. A part of this effect is the ‘sequence of tenses’: if the verb in the reporting clause has ‘past’ as its primary tense, then typically each verb in the reported clause has its finite element in the corresponding System II (‘sequent’) form: see Table 7-24.
In other words, an additional ‘past’ feature is introduced at the Finite element in the mood structure of the projected clause. The use of the sequent form is not obligatory; it is less likely in a clause stating a general proposition, for example they said they close at weekends. But overall it is the unmarked choice in the environment in question.

Sunday, 1 December 2019

Quoting And Reporting As Modes Of Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 528):
Quoting and reporting are not simply formal variants; they differ in meaning. The difference between them derives from the general semantic distinction between parataxis and hypotaxis, as it applies in the particular context of projecting. In quoting, the projected element has independent status; it is thus more immediate and lifelike, and this effect is enhanced by the orientation of the deixis, which is that of drama not that of narrative. Quoting is particularly associated with certain narrative registers, fictional and personal; it is used not only for sayings but also for thoughts, including not only first-person thoughts, as in
... and watching that trial wondering whether in fact he was innocent or not and I couldn’t make up my mind, after a while I thought ‘No, I’m sure he’s guilty’.
but also third-person thoughts projected by an omniscient narrator, as in
‘And that’s the jury-box,’ thought Alice.
So after about two hours he thought ‘Well they’re not coming back’ and he started hitchhiking.
Reporting, on the other hand, presents the projected element as dependent. It still gives some indication of mood, but in a form which precludes it from functioning as a move in an exchange; the mood is projected, not straight. And the speaker makes no claim to be abiding by the wording.

Friday, 29 November 2019

Mental Reporting Of Proposals: Indeterminacy

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 527-8, 527n):
As with those that are projected verbally, so with those that are projected mentally the exact limits are fuzzy; they merge with causatives and with various aspectual categories. The relevant criteria are similar to those set up for propositions, except that we cannot realistically test for quoting, since mental proposals are rarely quoted.* For reporting, however, if the process in the dominant clause is one of desire, and the dependent clause is a future declarative, or could be replaced by a future declarative, then the structure can be interpreted as a projection; for example we hope you will not forget. In Chapter 8, Section 8.8, we shall suggest an alternative interpretation for those where the dependent clause is non-finite and its Subject is presupposed from the dominant clause, e.g. he wanted to go home (where it is difficult to find a closely equivalent finite form); but there will always be a certain amount of arbitrariness about where the line is drawn.
* Note that ‘I wish he’d go away,’ thought Mary is a quoted proposition incorporating a reported proposal, not a quoted proposal, which would be ‘Let him go away!’ wished Mary. As with mental propositions, so also with mental proposals: the notion behind quoting is generally that of ‘saying to oneself’, or saying silently to a deity as in prayer.

Thursday, 28 November 2019

Mental Reporting Of Proposals (Vs Propositions)

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 527, 517):
With the ‘mental’ reporting of ideas, there is an important distinction between propositions and proposals, deriving from their fundamental nature as different forms of semiotic exchange. Whereas propositions, which are exchanges of information, are projected mentally by processes of cognition – thinking, knowing, understanding, wondering, etc. – proposals, which are exchanges of goods-&-services, are projected mentally by processes of desire, as illustrated by the examples given above under ‘mental’ (for examples of verbs of desire, see above Table 7-21). Thus, while propositions are thought, proposals are hoped.

Wednesday, 27 November 2019

Verbal Reporting Of Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 526, 523):
The parallel between quoting and reporting is not so close with proposals as with propositions, because reported proposals merge gradually into causatives without any very clear line in between. Thus not only are there many verbs used in quoting which are not used in reporting – again the complex ones: we would not write his driver soothed him to be steady or soothed that he should keep steady – but also there are many verbs used to report that are not used to quote, verbs expressing a wide variety of rhetorical processes such as persuade, forbid, undertake, encourage, recommend, as illustrated above; see Table 7-23.

Tuesday, 26 November 2019

Reported Non-Finite Proposals: The Status Of The Subject In Locutions Vs Ideas

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 526):
However, these typically differ with respect to the status of the Subject of the reported proposal. With reported locutions, the Subject is implicit; it is presumed from the Receiver of the reporting ‘verbal’ clause: he told/promised me || to wash the car. This is shown by the agnate finite variant (he told me || that I should wash the car; he promised me || that he would wash the car) and by the fact that the ‘verbal’ clause has a passive variant with the Receiver as Subject – I was told || to wash the car
In contrast, with reported ideas, the Subject is explicit as part of the projected proposal: he wanted || me to wash the car; he intended/planned/hoped || for me to wash the car. Here there is no passive variant of the reporting clause – we cannot say I was wanted || to wash the car, I was hoped || (for) to wash the car; but there is a passive variant of the reported idea clause – we can say he wanted || the car to be washed (by me). Not surprisingly, there are intermediate cases; more specifically, certain nexuses of reported locutions have properties usually associated with nexuses of reported ideas. Thus with order we can say I was ordered || to wash the car (cf. I was told || to wash the car); but we can also say he ordered || the car to be washed (by me) (cf. he wanted || the car to be washed (by me)).

Monday, 25 November 2019

The Presumed Subject Of Reported Non-Finite Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 526, 526n):
Unlike reported propositions, reported proposals take the same form regardless of whether they are giving or demanding in orientation:* (giving) he promised me to wash the car; (demanding) he told me to wash the car. This applies to both locutions and ideas. 
* This is true of the form of non-finites; but they differ with respect to the source of the presumed Subject of the non-finite clause, as is shown by the agnate finite variant of the reported clause: when the orientation is demanding, the source is the Receiver of the verbal clause (he told me || to wash the carthat I should ...); when it is given, the source is the Sayer (he promised me || to wash the car – that he would ...). Finites differ between giving and demanding in the choice of modal: (giving: inclination) he promised that he would wash the car; (demanding: obligation) he demanded that we should wash the car.

Sunday, 24 November 2019

Reported Non-Finite Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 525-6):
The non-finites are typically perfective, e.g.
||| I tell people || to say thank you. |||
||| And then, finally, I was invited || to create the interior of the United States Pavilion at the New York World’s Fair in 1964. |||
||| Of course I want || Labour to win || but I don’t think || they will. |||
||| Do you want || me to explain that? |||
However, a few verbs take imperfective projections, e.g. she suggested talking it over.

Saturday, 23 November 2019

Reported Proposals In Subjunctive Mode

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 525):
In American English in particular, reported proposals are often in the ‘subjunctive’ (where the third person singular is the base form of the verb); for example:
||| The negotiations were suspended in January || when Syria insisted || Israel commit to returning to prewar 1967 borders. ||| 
||| Did they suggest || the attorney general investigate? ||| 
||| When Evans returned to Sydney with glowing reports of this fertile land [[he’d found]], || the Governor ordered || that a road be built. ||| 
||| Perhaps it was history that ordained || that it be here, at the Cape of Good Hope [[that we should lay the foundation stone of our new nation]]. |||

Friday, 22 November 2019

The Mood Of Finite Reported Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 525):
The finites are declarative, usually modulated with a modal auxiliary of obligation (should, ought to, must, has to, is to, might, could, would) serving as Finite, e.g.
||| The doctor ordered || that all the books and toys [[that the Boy had played with in bed]] must be burned. |||
||| Yet somebody told me || that I mustn’t repudiate my non-fiction, || because it’s saying very much || what the fiction is saying. |||
||| He told Philip || that he should demand higher wages, || for notwithstanding the difficult work [[he was now engaged in]], he received no more than the six shillings a week [[with which he started]]. ||| 
||| I wish || you’d do something about that wall, Jane. |||
||| But until you’ve got kids || and are bringing them up ||| ... I wish || mine would hurry up || and grow up || and leave home. |||

Thursday, 21 November 2019

The Finiteness Of Reported Propositions And Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 525, 525n):
With propositions, the reported clause is finite.* With proposals, it may be (a) finite or (b) non-finite. 
* Except for certain projected ideas, which may take a non-finite form on the model of the Latin ‘accusative + infinitive’, e.g. ||| I understood || them to have accepted ||| he doesn’t consider || you to be serious |||. These shade into attributed intensive relational clauses, e.g. [Attributor:] he [Process:] doesn’t consider [Carrier:] you [Attribute:] serious.

Wednesday, 20 November 2019

Reporting Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 524-5):
Like propositions, proposals can also be reported: projected hypotactically (1) by ‘verbal’ clauses as ‘indirect speech’ or (2) by ‘mental’ clauses as ‘indirect thought’. The former involves indirect commands, offers and suggestions; the latter desired (ideas of) states of affair. One central feature they share is the mode of the projected proposal: it is ‘irrealis’, or non-actualised, and the projecting clause represents the verbal or mental force of actualisation. The mode is reflected in the realisation of the reported clause. (Both mental and verbal reporting of proposals can be used to realise direct proposals).

Tuesday, 19 November 2019

Quoting Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 524):
As with verbs used to quote propositions, verbs such as moan serve in ‘behavioural’ clauses pressed into quoting service; for example:
||| ‘Say something nice to me,’ || she murmured. |||
||| ‘Oh, don’t go yet,’ || he cried. ||| ‘I must,’ || she muttered. |||
||| ‘Oh, don’t take him away yet,’ || she moaned. |||
These are the ‘direct commands’ of traditional grammar, to which we would need to add ‘direct offers (and suggestions)’; in other words, all proposals projected as ‘direct speech’. Just like non-projected proposals, quoted proposals may be realised by ‘imperative’ clauses; but they may also be realised by modulated ‘indicative’ ones:
||| ‘Then please tell him’, || Liz begged like a child. |||
||| ‘Don’t be ridiculous’, || Julia snapped. |||
||| ‘Perhaps you and your wife would like to look around together’, || Richard suggested with frosty politeness. |||
||| ‘You could still apply for it, you know – the managership’, || Andrew was suggesting helpfully. |||
||| ‘I shouldn’t keep him waiting, || if I were you’, || Eleanor tossed over her shoulder || as she left. |||

Blogger Comments:

Matthiessen's interpretation of the quoting clause as behavioural is problematic, because it creates unnecessary inconsistency and complication in the theory.  The simplest (and Hallidayan) interpretation is that the quoting clause is verbal, not behavioural, and that the lexical choice adds a behavioural feature to the process of saying.

This use of lexis is a common strategy in English, as shown by clauses like she talked her way into the press conference. In this instance, the lexical selection 'talk' adds a (near-verbal) behavioural feature to a material Process.  We know the clause isn't behavioural because the Range of the Process her way is not a Behaviour (as it would be for behavioural clauses).

Monday, 18 November 2019

Quoting Offers And Commands

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 523-4):
Offers and commands, and also suggestions which are simply the combination of the two (offer ‘I’ll do it’, command ‘you do it’, suggestion ‘let’s do it’), can be projected paratactically (quoted) in the same way as propositions, by means of a verbal process clause having a quoting function. For example (using an exclamation mark as an optional notational variant),
||| If we’re talking || when she’s writing up on the board, || all of a sudden she’ll turn round || and go || ‘will you be quiet!’ |||
||| she’ll go || will you be quiet |||
1               “2!
Here the verb go is the quoting verb. Further examples:
||| I said to Peter, || ‘Don’t say anything.’ |||
||| ‘The ark must be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high,’ || he said, || ‘big enough for you and your wife, your three sons, and their wives’. |||
||| He said, || ‘I could fix that hot-water heater!’ |||
||| ‘Let’s celebrate today, || because beginning tomorrow || there’s a lot of work [[to do]],’ || he said. |||

Sunday, 17 November 2019

Quoting Thought

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 522-3):
This combination of a verbal process with ‘reporting’, although we are treating it as logically subsequent to quoting, being arrived at by analogy with the reporting of a mental process, is the normal way of representing what people say, in most registers of English today. The opposite combination, that of a mental process with ‘quoting’, is also found, although considerably more restricted. Here a thought is represented as if it was a wording, for example
I saw an ad in the paper for dachshunds, and I thought ‘I’ll just inquire’ – not intending to buy one, of course.
||| I thought || ‘I’ll just inquire’ |||
1                ‘2
||| ‘The gods must watch out for Kukul,’ || he thought to himself. |||
||| So I figured ||‘Well, then obviously it’s going to be a nineteenth-century American novel’. |||
||| ‘When all’s said and done,’ << he reflected, >> ‘she hasn’t had much chance.’ |||
The implication is ‘I said to myself ... ’; and this expression is often used, recognising the fact that one can think in words. Only certain mental process verbs are regularly used to quote in this way, such as think, wonder, reflect, surmise.

Saturday, 16 November 2019

A Strategy For Construing Processes Of Saying That Externalise Processes Of Consciousness

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 522, 523):
In addition to the verbs listed in Table 7-23, we also find a pattern with verb: express + a noun of sensing such as belief, confidence, suspicion; hope, desire; apprehension, concern, disappointment, frustration, fear(s), anger, outrage, regret (+ to nominal group) + that-clause. 
This pattern could be analysed as a ranged ‘verbal’ clause: Process: express + Verbiage: [nominal group: Head: fear, etc. + Qualifier: that-clause]; we also find such nouns of sensing (often nominalisations of verbs of sensing) serving as Head and configured with phrases as Qualifier, as in express + fear of attack / childbirth / for safety / about labour unrest
However, looked at ‘from above’, this pattern can be interpreted as a strategy for construing processes of saying externalising processes of consciousness. They may be configured with an element that can be interpreted as Receiver, and they often occur in the environment of hypotactically projecting verbal clauses; for example:
Assange expressed fears that cyberspace had its limits. 
The coach of the Peruvian Football, Sergio Markarian, expressed confidence that their pupils achieve a victory over Colombia and said it is in the semi-finals of the Copa America. 
Many viewers have expressed frustration that the supposedly feminist Joss Whedon would create a story about a glorified, high-tech form of prostitution. However, I argue here that in his feminist repertoire, Dollhouse gives us just as much fodder for thinking about gender, feminism, and power as Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which drew its appeal by resisting the very forms of systemic oppression, both male and female disempowerment, that Dollhouse sought to make explicit. 
After Warren died from HIV in 1995, I expressed regret to Kirk that I hadn’t seen more of Warren in his last years, and Kirk suggested that one way I could respond would be by seeing more of him – which I did, and was glad to do.

Friday, 15 November 2019

Verbs That Assign Interpersonal And/Or Behavioural Features To The Speech Event

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 522, 522n):
On the other hand, many verbs that assign interpersonal and/or behavioural features to the speech event, and are used to quote especially in narrative contexts, are never used to report because they do not contain the feature ‘say’. Thus we are unlikely to find … Poirot mused that discretion was a great thing, and even more unlikely to find examples involving behavioural processes that are closer to the physiological end of the behavioural end of the spectrum.*
*But they do occur when they embody assessment, as is illustrated by the following selection from the web:
(a) Drinking in the view across the Potomac River, Kennedy reportedly mused that he could stay in that spot forever; 
(b) When we invented the wheel, people moaned that we’d forget how to walk; 
(c) Citizens have long grimaced that their votes are the only input they gave into government; 
(d) I muttered, embarrassed, something about having never been to see him all this time and she frowned that I had never gone to see him; 
(e) The careful telephonic questions of Dictator Mussolini were followed by abrupt commands. Consul Riccardi gulped that he understood, hung up, donned resplendent attire, and fairly strutted to the residence of Provincial Governor Stumpf.
However, there do not (at the time of writing!) appear to be examples of reporting with hiccupped (hiccoughed) that, coughed that, spat that.

Thursday, 14 November 2019

'Reporting Only' (Usually) Verbs

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 521-2):
Many semantically complex verbs for elaborated speech functions are used only in reporting, e.g. insinuate, imply, remind, hypothesise, deny, make out, claim, maintain. These verbs are seldom used to quote; there is too much experiential distance between them and the actual speech event.

Wednesday, 13 November 2019

Speech Function Is Made Explicit In The Reporting Verb

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 521):
In quoting, the word say can project sayings of every mood, whereas in reporting we find say, ask and tell: see examples in Table 7-22.
Note also the reporting form Henry told Janet who was there ‘answered Janet’s question “who’s here?” ’, to which there is no quoting equivalent.

Tuesday, 12 November 2019

Verbs Reporting Statements And Questions

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 521):
Verbs used in reporting statements and questions are often the same as those used in quoting; but there is one significant difference. In quoting, the independent status of the proposition, including its mood, is preserved; hence the speech function is as explicit as in the ‘original’. In reporting, on the other hand, the speech function is, or may be, obscured, and is therefore made explicit in the reporting verb.

Monday, 11 November 2019

The Projection Of Minor Clauses

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 520):
While minor clauses can be quoted, they cannot be reported; that is, the quoting clause nexus He said ‘Ah!’ has no reporting agnate. Similarly, while non-linguistic sounds can be quoted (often with go as the Process, as in she went (sound of a sigh)), they cannot be reported.

Sunday, 10 November 2019

Verbal Reports: Wordings Represented As Meanings

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 519-20):
It is possible to ‘report’ a saying by representing it as a meaning. This is the ‘reported speech’, or ‘indirect speech’, of traditional Western grammars; for example, the noble Brutus hath told you Cæsar was ambitious. In this instance, Brutus had, indeed, said those very words …
But the principle behind this hypotactic representation of a verbal event is that it is not, in fact, being presented as true to the wording; the speaker is reporting the gist of what was said, and the wording may be quite different from the original …
This is not to suggest, of course, that when a speaker uses the paratactic, ‘direct’ form he is always repeating the exact words; far from it. But the idealised function of the paratactic structure is to represent the wording; whereas with hypotaxis the idealised function is to represent the sense, or gist.

Saturday, 9 November 2019

The Perspectives Of Hypotactic vs Paratactic Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 519):
As pointed out earlier, the hypotactic relationship implies a different perspective. If we contrast the following pair of examples:
(a) Mary said: ‘I will come back here to-morrow’.
(b) Mary thought she would go back there the next day.
then in (a) the standpoint in the projected clause is that of the Sayer, Mary; she is the point of reference for the deixis, which thus preserves the form of the lexicogrammatical event, using I, here, come, tomorrow. In (b) on the other hand the standpoint in the projected clause is simply that of the speaker of the projecting one; so Mary is ‘she’, Mary’s present location is ‘there’, a move towards that location is ‘going’, and the day referred to as that immediately following the saying is not the speaker’s tomorrow but simply ‘the next day’. Furthermore, since the saying clause has past time the projected clause carries over the feature of temporal remoteness: hence would (future in past – the past defined by thought), not will (simple future). Hypotactic projection preserves the deictic orientation of the projecting clause, which is that of the speaker; whereas in paratactic projection the deixis shifts and takes on the orientation of the Sayer. And while paratactic projection can represent any dialogic features of what was said, hypotactic projection cannot; for example, vocative elements and minor speech functions can be quoted but not reported …

Friday, 8 November 2019

The Reason For The Typical Pattern For Projecting Meanings

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 518):
When something is projected as a meaning, we are not representing ‘the very words’, because there are no words. If we want to argue about whether or not the experts held this opinion, we have no observed event as a point of reference. Hence, in combination with the tactic system, the basic pattern for projecting meanings is not parataxis, which treats the projection as a free-standing event, but hypotaxis, which makes it dependent on the mental process clause. In other words, the typical pattern for representing a ‘thinking’ is the hypotactic one …

Thursday, 7 November 2019

Wordings As 'Twice Cooked'

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 518):
So, for example, the phenomenon of water falling out of the sky may be construed as a meaning, by a mental process of cognition, in (she thoughtit was raining; but when the same phenomenon is represented by a verbal process, as in (she said:) ‘it’s raining’, it is the meaning ‘it is raining’ that has been reconstrued to become a wording. A wording is, as it were, twice cooked. … We are unconsciously aware that when something has the status of a wording it lies not at one but at two removes from experience; it has undergone two steps in the realisation process.

Blogger Comments:

unconsciously adverb 'without awareness'

Wednesday, 6 November 2019

Mental Projections As Meanings

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 517-8):
Something that is projected as a meaning is still a phenomenon of language – it is what was referred to above as a ‘metaphenomenon’; but it is presented at a different level – semantic, not lexicogrammatical. When something is projected as a meaning it has already been ‘processed’ by the linguistic system – it is a phenomenon of experience that has been construed as a meaning; but processed only once, not twice as in the case of a wording, where a phenomenon of experience is construed first as a meaning and then in turn as wording.

Tuesday, 5 November 2019

Mentally Reported Questions [2]

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 517):
But they also include clauses where the uncertainty is represented grammatically in the projecting clause by a feature of negative polarity or interrogative mood, or by projection or expansion within the verbal group serving as Process, or by perfective aspect in a purpose clause; for example:
||| I do not know || whether you have seen it. ||| 
||| It is not known || whether the mystics could give objective certainty to their experiences. ||| 
||| Who knows || whether his debt was true or false? ||| 
||| So I want to know || whether this devious and hypocritical me could have been whole and innocent at least as a boy. |||

Monday, 4 November 2019

Mentally Reported Questions [1]

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 516):
The projected idea clause is either an indirect statement or an indirect question; … different sets of verbs are associated with these two types. In the environment of ‘mental’ projection, the contrast between statement and question is not concerned with the speech functional orientation of giving vs. demanding information but rather with the status of the validity of the information. In a statement, it is fixed with respect to the polarity and the elements of transitivity (realised by an indirect declarative clause optionally introduced by that), but in a question, it is open with respect to the polarity (realised by an indirect yes/no interrogative clause introduced by whether or if) or one (or more) of the elements of transitivity (realised by an indirect wh- interrogative clause introduced by who, which, when, where, etc.). Consequently, mental clauses representing an ‘undecided’ state of mind are used to project indirect questions. These include clauses of wondering and doubting, finding out and checking, and contemplating, which tend to be characterised by special lexical verbs such as wonder, ascertain; for example:
||| Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday || he doubted || President Clinton could broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal before the end his presidential term on Jan. 20. ||| 
||| I’ll ask Jenny about laptops || and find out || whether we have got any. ||| 
||| She had not been in || when he had phoned || to check || whether they were going out for dinner that night. ||| 
||| It should be noted || that the first step taken by the underwriter or agent is [[[ to examine the policy || to ascertain || whether the loss is recoverable thereunder]]] . ||| 
||| He investigated || whether his feeling [[ that the veena produced the most exquisite musical sound]] was a subjective reaction || or has a sound physical basis. ||| 
||| Let us now consider || whether the arrangement of the stanzas in the particular order bears out any such meaning [[ as we have got from it]] . |||

Sunday, 3 November 2019

Verbs Serving As Process In ‘Mental’ Clauses Projecting Ideas

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 516, 517):

Examples of verbs serving as Process in ‘mental’ clauses projecting ideas are set out in Table 7-21. The verbs are largely restricted to two of the four types of sensing – cognition and desideration (but usually not perception and never emotion). So far we have concentrated on clauses of the ‘cognitive’ type; these always project propositions. Here a proposition is, as it were, created cognitively; it is brought into existence by a process of thinking.

Saturday, 2 November 2019

Projection & Orders Of Experience: Phenomenon vs Metaphenomenon

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 516):
As with nexuses projecting locutions, nexuses projecting ideas consist of a phenomenon — the projecting clause — and a metaphenomenon — the ‘content’ of the projecting clause; for example, in some experts believe that people someday will have their unique genetic code on smart cards ... , the phenomenon is some experts believe and the metaphenomenon is that people someday will have their unique genetic code on smart cards ... .

Friday, 1 November 2019

Uses Of Mental Reporting

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 515):
The uses of this kind of projecting nexus include
(i) the representation of the speaker’s thinking in dialogue (often as a way of assessing what is projected, where the projecting clause comes to stand for a modality of probability);
(ii) the representation of the addressee’s thinking in dialogue, often as a way of probing for information;
(iii) the representation of a character’s consciousness in narrative;
(iv) the representation of institutional or expert opinions and beliefs in news reporting and scientific discourse;
(v) the representation of the speaker’s angle in scientific discourse, often as the result of a chain of reasoning.

Thursday, 31 October 2019

Mental Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 515):
Talking is not the only way of using language; we also use language to think. Hence a process of thinking in a ‘mental’ clause also serves to project; the process is typically of the ‘like’ [emanating] type, but the ‘please’ [impinging] type is also possible:
(a) ‘like’ type
||| So you believe || that the short story is better at dealing with real-life, human emotions. |||
||| Mum, do you know || where the scissors are? |||
||| Naval authorities believe || the boat may have capsized || because it was carrying a heavy load of construction materials in choppy waters. |||
||| Therefore, I believe || that the protocol will do absolutely nothing [[ to protect the antarctic region]]. |||
(b) ‘please’ type
||| It strikes me || that Eve’s disloyalty and ingratitude must be contagious! |||
||| When I attended at Bombay’s C.J. Hall the Kal Ke Kalakar festival, || it struck me || that, although we did not have the resources, || this particular festival had the potential of an Avignam Nervi or Spoletto. |||
||| It did not occur to him || that I might want to stay on and watch the cricket. |||
||| Then it dawned on me || that I was talking to a cricketer [[ who had so recently been crucified at the altar of expediency ]]. |||

Wednesday, 30 October 2019

Verbal Quoting Clauses: Verbs With The Circumstantial Feature Of Manner Specifying Connotation

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 515):
A very wide range of different verbs can be pressed into service under this heading, verbs which are not verbs of saying at all but serve in ‘behavioural’ clauses, especially in fictional narrative, to suggest attitudes, emotions or expressive gestures that accompanied the act of speaking, eg sob, snort, twinkle, beam, venture, breathe; e.g.
‘It is a great thing, discretion,’ mused Poirot.
Here the implication is that Poirot is trying to give the impression of thinking aloud, while making sure the listener ‘overhears’.

Tuesday, 29 October 2019

Verbs Used In Quoting Propositions And Proposals

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 514, 515):
Verbs used in quoting ‘verbal’ clauses include those listed in the ‘proposition’ column in Table 7-20. … Verbs used in clauses quoting proposals — offers and commands — are also listed …
26 In addition, we find the verb go used in quoting clauses. This verb is also used to project representations of non-linguistic semiosis, as in the tires went [sound of screeching]. A more recent addition to quoting verbs in casual speech is be like; for example: I was like ‘Are you in the right show?’; ‘My friends were like, “Eddie, you’re drinking too much, you’re out too much, you’ve got to, like, slow down.” And that was true,’ he said...

Monday, 28 October 2019

The Projection Of A Verbal Process: A Lexicogrammatical Metaphenomenon

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 514):
The projected clause here stands for a ‘wording’: that is, the phenomenon it represents is a lexicogrammatical one. Take for example ‘I’m not so sure,’ replied the Fat Controller. While the projecting clause replied the Fat Controller represents an ordinary phenomenon of experience, the projected clause I’m not so sure represents a second-order phenomenon, something that is itself a representation. We will refer to this as a ‘metaphenomenon’. If we want to argue, the issue is not ‘is he or is he not, so sure?’ – that is a separate question; it is ‘did he, or did he not, say these words?’ The total structure, therefore, is that of a paratactic clause complex in which the logical-semantic relationship is one of projection; the projecting clause is a verbal process, and the projected clause has the status of a wording.

Sunday, 27 October 2019

The Main Function Of The Projecting Clause Of A Quoting Nexus

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 512):
In written English, the projection is signalled by quotation marks (‘inverted commas’; for the significance of double and single quotation marks see below). In spoken English, the projecting clause is phonologically less prominent than the projected: if it comes first, it is often proclitic (non-salient and pre-rhythmic, while if it follows all or part of the projected, instead of occupying a separate tone group, it appears as a ‘tail’, a post-tonic appendage that continues the pitch movement of the preceding projected material … .
The reason for this is that the main function of the projecting clause is simply to show that the other one is projected: someone said it. There is nothing in the wording of a paratactic projected clause to show that it is projected; it could occur alone, as a direct observation.

Saturday, 26 October 2019

A Quoting Nexus

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 512):
In a quoting nexus the ‘tactic’ relationship, the type of dependency, is parataxis; the two parts have equal status. The projected clause retains all the interactive features of the clause as exchange, including the full mood potential (with the option of mood tagging in ‘declarative’ and ‘interrogative’ clauses), vocatives and expletives, tone selections, and (textual) continuatives.

Friday, 25 October 2019

System Network Of Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 511):
This is represented systemically in Figure 7-19 below. The fact that minor clauses cannot be reported is represented by means of a conditioning relationship: ‘if minor, then quoting’.

Thursday, 24 October 2019

The Speech Function Of Quoted Vs Reported Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 510-1):
… paratactic projection allows for a greater [speech functional] range: we can quote not only propositions and proposals but also minor speech functions such as greetings and exclamations … . This is part of the general principle whereby reporting reduces the potential for projecting dialogic features. For example, while Vocative elements can be quoted … they cannot be reported. … Adding this third systemic variable to our account, we can now expand Table 7-17: see Table 7-18.

Wednesday, 23 October 2019

Relative Probabilities Of Four Kinds Of Projection Nexus

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 510, 510n):
… all combinations of taxis and mode of projection are not equally probable; while some are very frequent in text, others are relatively rare. As the numbers in Table 7-17 indicate, out of 1,392 instances of projection nexuses in a sample of texts from a range of spoken and written registers, there were only 15 instances of paratactically projected ideas; in other words, 97.5% of all 595 projected ideas in the sample were reported rather than quoted. In contrast, projected locutions were more evenly balanced between quoting and reporting in the total sample – around 46% and 54%, respectively. The sample contains more projection nexuses from spoken texts (845) and from written texts (557); but it is still interesting to note that in spoken discourse paratactic locution (quoting: 53%) is favoured over hypotactic locution (reporting: 47%)*, whereas in written discourse it is the other way around: paratactic locution (quoting: 39%) is significantly less common than hypotactic locution (reporting: 61%).
* In spoken casual conversation, this difference is even more marked: quoting accounts for two thirds (65%) and reporting for one third (35%). In written news reports, the ratio is almost the reverse.

Tuesday, 22 October 2019

Four Kinds Of Projection Nexus

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 509-10):
Level of projection and mode of projection intersect to define four kinds of projection nexus … see Table 7-17.

Monday, 21 October 2019

Modes Of Projection: Direct & Indirect Speech & Thought

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 509):
The distinction between these two modes of projection was recognised in traditional accounts as the contrast between direct and indirect speech; but as we have already noted, we need to take account of direct and indirect thought as well.

Sunday, 20 October 2019

Mode Of Projection: Quote Vs Report

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 509):
… projection combines with the same set of interdependencies that have been shown to occur with expansion – (1) the two tactic interdependency relations of parataxis and hypotaxis and (2) the constituency relation of embedding. 
For instance, ‘We really have to have mandatory child safety trigger locks, and photo license IDs for the purchase of new handguns,’ is projected paratactically by Gore told the crowd. This means that the projection is represented as a quote
In contrast, she saw one young man open fire after a feud between youths became violent is projected hypotactically by Nakisha Johnson, 17, said. This means that the projection is represented as a report – as something that is dependent on the projecting clause and thus cannot serve on its own. … 
In addition to the two tactic modes of projection – paratactic projection of quotes and hypotactic projection of reports, there is one further environment in which projected clauses occur – that of embedding: the witness’s claim that she saw one young man open fire seems plausible.

Saturday, 19 October 2019

Level Of Projection: Meaning Vs Wording

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 509):
Through projection, one clause is set up as the representation of the linguistic “content” of another — either the content of a ‘verbal’ clause of saying or the content of a ‘mental’ clause of sensing. … There are thus two kinds of projections.  On the one hand, the projection may be a representation of the content of a ‘mental’ clause — what is thought; we call such projections ideas.  On the other hand, the projection may be a representation of the content of  ‘verbal’ clause — what is said; we call such projections locutions.  Projection may thus involve either of the two levels of the content plane of language — projection of meaning (ideas) or projection of wording (locutions).

Friday, 18 October 2019

Kinds Of Projection

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 509):
There are in fact three systems involved in the differentiation of different kinds of projection:
(i) the level of projection (idea vs locution),
(ii) the mode of projection (hypotactic reporting vs paratactic quoting), and
(iii) the speech function (projected proposition vs projected proposal).

Thursday, 17 October 2019


Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 508):
… Projection [is] the logico-semantic relationship whereby a clause comes to function not as a direct representation of (non-linguistic) experience but as a representation of a (linguistic) representation.

Wednesday, 16 October 2019

Different Environments In Which Expansion Is Manifested

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 507-8):
The different environments in which expansion is manifested are summarised in Table 7-16.

Tuesday, 15 October 2019

Metaphenomena And Process Types

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 506-7):
Metaphenomena – projections – can be associated only with certain types of process, essentially saying and sensing, plus in certain circumstances being. Macrophenomena – expansions – can enter into material processes. Thus you can say [[ = crushing him like that]] broke his bones. But you cannot say it broke his bones that you crushed him like that, because finite that (‘indirect’) clauses can only be projections, not expansions. (You can on the other hand say it broke his heart that you crushed him like that, because heart-breaking, unlike bone-breaking, is a mental process.)
Complication arises because the names of metaphenomena, nouns such as belief and fact, can sometimes enter into material processes where the metaphenomena by themselves cannot. For example, although we cannot say it destroyed his life that the experiment had failed, we can say the knowledge that the experiment had failed destroyed his life – not the idea as such, but his knowledge of it, was the destroyer. We may also note abstract material processes used metaphorically to construe mental phenomena:
The passage of time, romantic travellers’ tales – of which Marco Polo’s supply the classic example – and wishful thinking, all combined to build up the late medieval belief [[ that Prester John was a mighty, if probably schismatical Christian priest-king ]].
We might also say the fact that the experiment had failed destroyed his life; here fact stands for a state of affairs, rather than for a projected metaphenomenon as in its prototypical sense. In other words, although projections cannot participate in processes other than those of consciousness, the names of projections can, because they can be used to label events or states of affairs. Here we have reached the borderline between expansion and projection; the two come together under conditions of nominalisation, where there is metaphor in the grammar and many of the semantic distinctions expressed in the clause tend to be neutralised.

Monday, 14 October 2019

Act (Macrophenomenon) vs Projection (Metaphenomenon)

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 505-6):
(2) Projections: we saw that the boats had been turned. If I say I can see the boats turning, this is an event. A process ‘the boats are turning’ is being treated as a single complex phenomenon – a ‘macrophenomenon’. If I say I can see that the boats are turning, this is a projection. The process ‘the boats are turning’ is being treated as the projection or idea of a phenomenon – a ‘metaphenomenon’, something not just bigger but of a different order of reality. So we can say I can see that the boats have been turned but not I can see the boats having been turned – because you cannot see a past event. You can see the state of affairs resulting from that past event; but the past event itself can only be treated as a projection. In the present, both are possible; but the meaning is slightly different. If the ‘seeing’ is understanding, or what is seen is a report in writing, then again the relationship must be one of projection.

Sunday, 13 October 2019

Process Nominal Groups

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 505):
We have now reached a point where we can relate these clauses to their close relatives that lie just beyond the bounds of expansion, on different frontiers. [i.e. process nominal groups and projections]
(1) Process nominal groups: we saw the turning of the boats. Here the process has been nominalised at the word rank, with turning as noun; cf. the departing/departure of the boats. The structure is that of a nominal group having a prepositional phrase with of as Postmodifier; the Complement of the of phrase corresponds to what would be the Complement if the process was realised as a clause. Examples:
| The building [ of [ the bridge ] ] | presented a problem.
Devaluation is taken to be | a humiliation [ akin to [ the defacing [ of [statues [ of [national heroes ] ] ] ] ] ] ] |
Where there would be an explicit Subject, if the process was realised as a clause, what corresponds to this is the ‘possessor’ of the process serving as Deictic in the structure of the nominal group, as in his handling of the situation, nobody’s peeling of potatoes is as careful as mine, or as Qualifier, marked by either by or of, as in Letters to the press indicate a ground-swell of rejection of this display, by catholic and non-catholic members of church communities and Yet another contributory factor is the disappearance of the horse from our farms.*
Since a possessor can also be realised as an of phrase, this leads to the well-known ambiguity of expressions such as the visiting of relatives: going to visit relatives, or having relatives come to visit?

Saturday, 12 October 2019

Perceived Acts: Imperfective vs Perfective

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 505):
Here what is being perceived is again some action or event; the clause is typically imperfective, but sometimes perfective (without to) to highlight the end state as distinct from the process (cf. Kirsner & Thompson, 1976):
I saw the boats turning/(passive) being turned
I saw the boats turn/(passive) turned
If the embedded clause is used as Postmodifier the Head noun is usually one of sight or sound: I heard the noise of ... , I had a view of ... , etc. (cf. the smell of something burning); …
In this case the clause is always imperfective.

Friday, 11 October 2019

Environments Of Acts

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 506):

Blogger Comments:

Mental: emotive examples:
I enjoy [[exposing the charlatan]] / [[exposing the charlatan]] pleases me
I hate [[him getting away with fraud]] / [[him getting away with fraud]] outrages me

Thursday, 10 October 2019

Typical Grammatical Environments Of Acts

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 504):
[relational: attributive]
It was careless of him [[ = to put another man’s helmet on ]]
[relational: identifying]
[[ Not being much of a reader]] hardly affected the ascent of George W. Bush or his father.
These examples show typical contexts for such nominalisations: relational clauses, especially attributive ones where the attribute is an evaluative term and identifying ones where they are related to a nominalisation. There is one other common environment, namely that of clauses of perception, either mental (inert perception) or behavioural (active perception). Examples:
[behavioural + mental: perceptive]
We were watching [[ = the catch being brought in]] and you could see [[[ = the boats turn || × as they rounded the headland]]]
[behavioural: perceptive]
We went and watched [[ = these kids try to produce ‘Hair’ ]] .
[mental: perceptive]
Here you can see [[ = beer being brewed ‘on sight’]]

Wednesday, 9 October 2019

Embedded Clauses: Acts

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 503):
There is one further function of embedded clauses which is related to expansion in that, although there is no Head noun (so the embedded clause itself functions as ‘Head’), the embedded clause is the nominalisation of a process. For example, [[threatening people]] will get you nowhere.  Such a clause is the name of an action, event or other phenomenon.  It represents a ‘macro-phenomenon’ … ; let us call it an act.
An ‘act’ clause may also occur as Postmodifier to a Head noun of the appropriate class, for example the act [[= of threatening people]].  Hence it is reasonable to treat these as elaborations.