Paratactic Nesting

Halliday (1994: 222):

Modification With Internal Regressive Bracketing In A Clause Complex

Halliday (1994: 217):

Modification With Internal Bracketing In A Clause Complex

Halliday (1994: 217):

Progressive Modification In A Clause Complex

Halliday (1994: 216):

Sentence As Clause Complex

 Halliday (1994: 215):

Why The Group Is Recognised As A Distinct Rank

Halliday (1994: 215):

Preposition Group vs Prepositional Phrase

Halliday (1994: 212):

Preposition Group

Halliday (1994: 212):

Conjunction Group

Halliday (1994: 211):

The Domain Of Adverbial Group Postmodifiers

Halliday (1994: 211):

Adverbial Group Postmodification

Halliday (1994: 210):

Adverbial Group Premodification

Halliday (1994: 210):

Embedding Within Postmodifier

Halliday (1994: 193):

Premodifier And Postmodifier As Two Distinct Chains Of Modification

Halliday (1994: 192-3):

Postmodifier

Halliday (1994: 192):

Pre-Head Modification Of The Nominal Group

Halliday (1994: 191-2):

The Logical Structure Of The Nominal Group: Subcategorisation

Halliday (1994: 191):

Participants As Things That Can Accrue Attributes

Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 183):

Experientially, there is a 'carrier' — the Thing — and there are 'attributes' — Epithets and other modifiers. However, participants are construed not only experientially but also logically, which means that the Thing (typically) saves as a Head that can be modified by successive attributes and that this modifying relation is inherently ascriptive. There is thus no equivalent, in the nominal group, of the Process in an ascriptive figure; this is construed instead as the logical relation of modification, indefinitely repeatable. For instance, corresponding to the figure the swede is nutritious we have the participant the nutritious swede, which, unlike the figure with its experiential, multivariate organisation (Carrier + Process + Attribute), can be logically expanded through further modification: the tasty tolerant orange nutritious swede. That is, participants are construed as things that can accrue attributes.

Why Prepositional Phrases Are Not Groups But A Kind Of Minor Clause

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 425):

But note that prepositional phrases are phrases not groups; they have no logical structure as Head and Modifier, and cannot be reduced to a single element. In this respect, they are clause-like rather than group-like; hence when we interpret the preposition as ‘minor Predicator’ and ‘minor Process’ we are interpreting the prepositional phrase as a kind of ‘minor clause’ — which is what it is.

Preposition Group

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 423):

Prepositions are not a sub-class of adverbials; functionally they are related to verbs.  But they form groups by modification, in the same way as conjunctions; e.g. right behind, not without, way off as in right behind the door, not without some misgivings, all along the beach, way off the mark. Again, there are more complex forms such as in front of, for the sake of which can be left unanalysed.  These are also subject to modification, as in just for the sake of, immediately in front of.