1
TheBaboonandtheBee:exploringregisterpatternsacrosslanguages
DavidRose
Abstract
Thispaperreportsonatypologicalstudy,notofparticularlinguisticfeaturesorparticularlanguages,butofpatternsofregisterrealisedbylanguage.Thedataisasetoftraditionalstoriesinarangeoflanguagesaroundtheworld.Analysesfocusonunitsofstructureknownasstoryphases,thatrealiseelementsofthefieldsofstories.Textsareanalysedforpatternsofinformationthatorganisesequencesofphases,andpatternsofideationthatrelatephasesbyexpectancyandimplication.Interestingfindingsincludenotonlyvariationsinplotstructuringasphases,buttheirdeploymentinnegotiatingideologicalpositionsindifferentcultures,throughtheperspectivesofnarratorsandcharacters,alongsidethelinguisticrealisationsofthesecontextualpatterns.
0Introduction
TheSaussureantrinityiscompletedbytheconceptheattachestotheFrenchwordlangage-languageingeneral;lelangagecomprisesthelinguistictendenciesofthegeneralhumanfaculty.Languageingeneralisapower,apartofhumannature,social,individual,heterogeneousandmultiform…ifwetakeawayalltheovertindividualactsofsujetsparlantsofanygivencommunity,wehavetheall-importantresidue,asilenthighly-organisedsystemofsignsexistingapartfromandoverandabovetheindividualassujetparlant.Langageminusparolegivesyoulangue,andnowwecometothemainconclusion:thatitisthestudyofthislanguewhichistherealpurposeandobjectoflinguistics[Firth1950:41].
FirthdidnotentirelyagreewiththisconclusionofSaussure’s,for“Inthemostgeneraltermswestudylanguageaspartofthesocialprocess,andwhatwemaycallthesystematicsofphoneticsandphonology,ofgrammaticalcategoriesorofsemantics,areorderedschematicconstructs,framesofreference,asortofscaffoldingforthehandlingofevents.Thestudyofthesocialprocessandofsinglehumanbeingsaresimultaneousandofequalvalidity”(ibid).Hisvisionanticipatedmajordimensionsofsystemicfunctionaltheory,particularlystratification,fromphoneticsuptosocialcontext,andinstantiation,notmerelyfromlanguetoparole,butfromlangagedowntosinglehumanbeings,Saussure’ssujetsparlants.Andequallysignificantishisviewofthesocialfunctionoflinguistictheory,itsappliability,‘asortofscaffoldingforthehandlingofevents’.
Wecanusethesecriteriatointerrogatethepurposeandobjectoftypologicallinguistics,acenturyafterSaussure.Intermsofinstantiation,typologicalstudiesassumecertaingeneralpotentialsthataresharedbylanguages.Thegoalofastudyistodescribehowcertaingeneralfeaturesatoneoranotherstratumandrank(langage)areinstantiatedintheparticularsystemsandstructuresofoneormorelanguages(langue).Intermsofstratificationandrank,atraditionalconcernoflanguagetypologyhasbeenwithvariationsingeneralpotentialsatlowerranksofphonologyandmorphology.Thetraditionalapplicationisreconstructionofhistoricalrelationsbetweenlanguages,forwhichhumanbeingsareinterestingmerelyasinformants.Functionallanguagetypologyassumessharedpotentialsinclauseranksystems,inordertodescribevariationsinmood,modality,transitivity,clausecomplexityandtheme,alongwithgrouprankanddiscoursesemanticcategoriestosome
2
extent.Matthiessen2015referstothesegeneralfunctionalpotentialsas‘multilingualmeaningpotentials’.1
Thispapertakesanotherstepupthestratalhierarchy,toexploresomegeneralpotentialsatthelevelsofgenreandregister,anddowntheinstantialcline,tointerprethowpeoplemightreadtextsindiversecultures.ThestudyitreportsonbeganwiththefirstfunctionaltypologyconferenceinSydneyin2000,forwhichIwasaskedtospeakonthetextualmetafunction(Rose2001a).TheinitialdatacamefromtypologicalstudieslaterpublishedinCaffarel,Martin&Matthiessen2004,butparticularlyfromstoriesprovidedtomebytheauthors,whichwereneededforexploringtextualstrategiesindiscourse.Thedatasethassincegrownasacorpusoftraditionalstoriesinlanguagesaroundtheworld.Thesetexttypesareparticularlyusefulfortypologicalstudy,asgenreandmodearerelativelyconstant,allowingustoexplorevariationsinotherdimensions.Manypublishedgrammarsnowincludestorieswithinterlinearglossesthatcanbeinterpretedinfunctionalterms.
PatternsofgenreandregisterareillustratedwiththreestoriesfromChina,AustraliaandAfrica.Findingsincludegeneraloptionsfortypesofstoriesatthelevelofgenre,thatarerealisedingeneraloptionsforstructuringtheregistersofstories,realisedingeneraloptionsforideationalandtextualstructuresindiscoursesemantics.Itsuggeststhatsystemicpotentialsatthelevelofgrammar,suchasprocesstypes,haveco-evolvedwithregisterpotentials,andhencemirrortheirorganisation,andthatinstantiationinlanguagecannotbedivorcedfrominstantiationinregisterandgenre.Indeed,linguisticstudycannotavoiddisplayinginstancesofregister,inordertoexemplifylinguisticfeatures.Buttheregisterofexamplesisusuallybackgrounded,inordertofocusattentiononpatternsoflanguage.Thisstudyreversesthefocus,backgroundinggrammartoattendtopatternsofregister.
1Theory
1.1Stratification&instantiation
ThestudyisgroundedinthemodeloflanguageincontextproposedbyMartin1992(Figure1).MartinfollowsHjelmslev’sproposaltotreatcontextasaconnotativesemioticrealisedbylanguageasadenotativesemiotic.Inthisview,cultureismodelledasconstellationsofgenresthatconfiguresocialactivities,socialrelations,andmodalitiesofmeaningmaking.Inotherwords,agenreisaconfigurationofselectionsinfield,tenorandmodethatisrecognisabletomembersofaculture.Lookingdownthestrata,genreisrealisedthroughtheseregistervariables,whichareinturnrealisedinlanguagebyselectionsfromdiscoursesemanticsystems,ofideation,conjunction,exchange,appraisal,identificationandperiodicity(Martin&Rose2003/2007).Thesediscourseselectionsarerealisedinturnbyselectionsfromgrammaticalsystemsatclause,group,wordandmorphemeranks(Halliday1985/2014),thatareexpressedbyselectionsinsoundorwritingsystems(Halliday&Greaves2012).
3
Figure1:Connotativeanddenotativesemiotics
Alongsidethishierarchyofrealisation,potentialoptionsateachstratumareinstantiatedasactualpatternsofmeaningasatextunfolds.InstantiationismodelledasaclineinFigure2(afterMartin2006).Eachgenreanditsregisterconfigurationsaresub-potentialsoftheoverallsemioticsystemofaculture,andparticulartextsareactualinstancesofthesegenreandregisterselections.Inbetween,texttypesco-instantiategenreandregisterselectionsinregularpatterns,thatHallidaycalls‘generalisedactuals’,quotingFirth(inMartin2013:75).Andfinally,eachtextaffordsdifferentpossiblereadings.
Figure2:Clineofinstantiation
Lookingupthecline,Martin(2006:285)explains“areadingisthesubjectifiedmeaningsomeoneconstruesfromatext,whichcanthusbeinterpretedasanaffordinginstanceoflanguageuse;ifwemoveontogeneraliseacrossasetofcomparabletexts,wemoveuptoaconsiderationofgeneralisedactuals;generalisingfurtherwearriveattherecurrentconfigurationsofmeaningwerecogniseasregistersandgenres;andfinallywereachthereservoirofmeaningsconstitutingalanguageasawhole”.
Eachstratumcontributesalayerofunfoldingpatternstoatext.Genrecontributestheglobalorganisationoftextsorientedtosocialgoals,instantiatedasvariablesequencesoftextstages(Martin&Rose2012).Fieldcontributessequencesofactivitiesinvolvingpeopleandthings,whichtenornegotiatesandevaluates,andmodeorganisesasdialogueandmonologue,accompanyingorconstitutingfieldsofactivity.Storiesareusuallymonologictextsthatconstitutetheirownfields.Theirfieldsarespecificactivitysequences,peopleand
phonology/)graphology)
idea/onal)interpersonal)
textual)
genre)
field) tenor)
mode)
phonology/)graphology)
discourse)seman/cs)
lexico)grammar)
register)
connota&vesemio&c
denota&vesemio&c
system (generalisedmeaningpoten1al)genre/register (seman1csub-poten1al) texttype (generalisedactual) text (affordinginstance) reading (subjec1fiedmeaning
4
places,whiletheirtenorisvariable.Theynegotiateexpectancywithlisteners/readers,andtheymaysharefeelings,judgepeople,and/orappreciateactivities,thingsandplaces(Martin&Rose2008).Discoursepatternsconstruefieldsofactivityassequencesoffigures,linkedbyconjunction;theyenactsocialrelationsasspokenexchangesandprosodiesofappraisal;andtheypresentmeaningsaschainsofidentityinwavesofinformation.Grammaticalstructuresconfigurediscoursestructuresaspatternsofwordsingroupsandclauses,thatareexpressedassequencesofsounds.
Twofurtherpointsneedmakingaboutrelationsbetweenstratificationandinstantiation.Firstly,eachlowerstratumbothinstantiatesitsownsystemsandrealisestheinstantiationsofhigherstrata.Sequencesofdiscoursepatternsinstantiateselectionsindiscoursesemanticsystems,torealiseinstantialpatternsofregisterandgenre.Sequencesofgrammaticalpatternsinstantiateselectionsingrammaticalsystems,torealiseinstantialpatternsofdiscourse.Secondly,whilegrammaranddiscoursesystemsevolveasgeneralisedresourcesforrealisinganyinstanceofgenreandregister,thegenresandregisterconfigurationsthatparticularculturesinstantiatearelimitedbytheirsocialorganisation,economicactivitiesandavailablesemioticmodalities.Oneimplicationfortypologyisthatvariationislikelytobegreaterinregisterandgenrethaningrammaranddiscourse.
1.2RealisationsoffieldsinregisteranddiscourseAfieldiscomposedofrecurrentsequencesofactivities.Becausetheyarerecurrent,anysequenceistosomeextentpredictablewithinafield,sothatvariationsfromsuchsequencesarecounterexpectant(Martin&Rose2007:101.)
FollowingMartin’s1992modeloffieldagnation,JingHao2015analysedthefieldofundergraduatebiologyintosub-fieldsofexploration,depiction,practice,reflectionandinquiry.Eachofthesefieldtypesisrealisedintrastratallyastypesofactivitysequences,respectivelyimplication,observation,operation,review,previewandreasoning(Figure3).InthetermsdevelopedbyMartinandRose(2007,2008,2012),typesofactivitysequencessuchasthesearetermedphases.Inotherwords,phasesareunitsofstructureatthelevelofregisterthatrealiseoptionsinfieldsystems.
Figure3:Fieldtypesrealisedintrastratallyasphasesofactivity
5
Secondly,Haodescribesthediscoursesemanticsystemsandstructuresthatrealisefieldtypesinterstratally.Inparticular,phasesarerealisedbysequencesoffiguresinvolvingentities,eventsandrelations,illustratedinFigure4.
Figure4:Fieldactivitiesrealisedinterstratallyassequencesoffigures
Haoreservesthetermsactivityandactivitysequenceforthelevelofregister.Thetermsentity,event,figureandfiguresequencearereservedforthelevelofdiscoursesemantics.ThisterminologyclarifiesandbringstogetherMartin’s1992termsandHalliday&Matthiessen’s1999terms,whichwerealsousedinRose’s2001bdescriptionofPitjantjatjara.Thetermsprocessandparticipantarereservedforgeneralisingtransitivityfunctionsingrammar(Halliday1985/2014).
1.3Storygenresrealisedintrastratallybystaging
Forthepurposesofthisstudy,wecanapplythistypeofmodellingtorelationswithinandbetweengenreandregister,focusingonstorygenresandtheirfields.Atthelevelofgenre,relationsbetweenstoriesarerealisedintrastratallybytheirstaging.FivestorygenresaredescribedinMartin&Rose2008(followingMartin&Plum1997),includingrecount,narrative,anecdote,exemplumandobservation.Eachstorygenremayincludeanorientingandanoptionalevaluatingstage.TheirobligatorystagesareshowninFigure5asrealisationstatements.
ThecorestageofarecountisaRecordofexpectantactivities.Thecorestagesofothergenresconfigurecounterexpectantactivities.InanarrativethisstageisknownasaComplication,followedbyaResolution.Thecounterexpectancyofanecdotes,exemplumsandobservationsisnotresolvedbutisreactedto,interpretedorcommentedon,eitherexplicitlyorimplicitly.
6
Figure5:Storygenresrealisedintrastratallybystaging
Expectancyisaprobabilisticrelationbetweenmeaningsindiscourse.AsFirthnotedlongago,“Themomentaconversationisstarted,whateverissaidisadeterminingconditionforwhat,inreasonableexpectation,mayfollow”[1935:31].Recognitionofexpectancyinstoriesdependsonsystemsofregisterandgenrepotentialsthataresharedbetweenstorytellersandlisteners.
1.4Fieldsofstories
Figure6offersatentativemodellingoffieldsinstories,borrowingafewtraditionaltermsfromliterature.Theaimistopositiontheplotofstoriesinrelationtootherdimensionsoftheirfields.
Figure6:Fieldsofstories(tentative)
Plotreferstotheoverallstructuringofactivities,thateithercontextualiseasequenceorunfoldassequencesthatareexpectantorcounterexpectant.Charactersmaybepeople,orpersonifiedanimalsorthings.Themesaretheabstractionsconstruedbythestory,its
reactedtoanecdote+Remarkableeventinterpretedexemplum+Incidentunresolved
resolvednarra/ve+Complica7on;+Resolu7on
counterexpectant
expectantrecount+Record
commentedobserva/on+Eventdescrip7on
contextualisingPLOT expectant…
sequencingcounterexpectant…
people…CHARACTERS
other…
explicitTHEMES
implicitcontemporary…
TEMPORALITYhistorical…
experienced…SETTING ACTUALITY
imagined…
placeLOCATION
Fme
7
interpretationsofsocialsignificance,thatmayormaynotbemadeexplicit.(Itmaybepossibletoclassifytypesofstorythemes,butthisisnotattemptedhere.)Settingdistinguishescontemporaryandhistoricalstoriesthatnarrateactualexperiencesorimaginedevents.ThetermactualityistakenfromMalinowski,whocomparesTrobriandmythswithhistoricalandimaginedstoriesandcontemporaryexperience:
…thereallyimportantthingaboutthemythisitscharacterofaretrospective,ever-present,liveactuality.Itistoanativeneitherafictitiousstory,noranaccountofadeadpast;itisastatementofabiggerrealitystillpartiallyalive.Itisaliveinthatitsprecedent,itslaw,itsmoral,stillrulethesociallifeofthenatives[1926:183].
Contemporarystoriesmaynarrateeventsexperiencedbytheteller,orapreviousteller,ortheymaybebeimagined(fictional).Historicalstoriesmayalsonarrateeventsexperiencedbyactualpeople,orbyimaginedpeopleoranimals,asinlegends,historicalfiction,fairytalesandfables.ButasMalinowskiexplains,classificationofmythsdependsonperspective.Tothemembersofaculturetheirmythsmaynarrateactualhistoricalevents,whileoutsidersmayseethemasimagined.Finally,settingintimeandplaceco-selectwiththeseoptionsintemporalityandactuality.Forexample,locationsinmythsarelikelytobeactualplacesknowntolisteners,whereaslocationsinfairystoriesareimagined.Orthetimeperiodinhistoricalstoriesmaybespecific,whereastimeperiodisindeterminateinbothmythsandfairystories.
Theseoptionsinstoryfieldsaresub-potentialsinaculture’sfieldsystems.Martinofferscriteriaforclassifyingfieldsinmoderncultureaccordingtomodesoftransmission,oralorwritten,andspecialisationsofoccupation.Thisclassificationpointsuptheculturalspecificityoffields,asthestoriesinthisstudybelongtooralculturaltraditionswithminimaldivisionsoflabour.Forexample,Rose2001bsuggestscriteriaforclassifyingfieldsinindigenousAustralianculturesaccordingtoperiodicgroupingsofpeopleengagedineconomic,ceremonial,recreationalordisputeactivities.Indeed,broadclassificationsofcultures,ashunter-gatherer,pastoralist,agrarianorindustrial,merelyclassifyeconomicfields,withoutreferencetosystemsofsocialrelationsorsemioticmodalities,whichareinprincipleindependentlyvariable.
Lookingtopologicallyacrossfieldsystems,Martin1992drawsaclinefromcommonsensetouncommonsensefields,withacademicoccupationsspecialisinginuncommonsense.Butinoralculturesthereisnosuchspecialisation,exceptperhapstherolesofshamansorpriests.Bernsteinarguesthatabstractordersofmeaningcanbefeaturesofsocietieswitheithercomplexorsimpledivisionsoflabour.Uncommonsenseor‘elaboratedorientations’arerealisedinthecosmologiesofsmallscalesocieties,buttheir“codeofculturaltransmission,therelayitself,isnotanelaboratedcode”(1990:251),i.e.thewrittenmodesofacademicfields.Inoralcultures,the‘relays’ofelaboratedorientationsarereligiousceremoniesandstories.
Sotraditionalstoriesinstantiatetwofieldsatonce-theparticularmundanefieldofthestoryplotandthetranscendentgeneralisingfieldofitstheme(Malinowski’s‘biggerreality’).Thisgeneralisingfunctionmayalsobeacharacteristicofstoriesingeneral(Rothery&Stenglin1997).AlthoughthispointisalsoassumedbymythologistssuchasPropp,Jung,Levi-StraussorJosephCampbell,thisstudyisnotconcernedwithreducingstoryplotsandthemestothesetheorists’pan-cultural‘monomyths’.Rather,effortsatuniversalisingshouldthemselvesbeseenasculturallyspecificpractices.
8
Insum,storyfieldsareasub-potentialwithinaculture’soverallfieldpotential.Thatis,theyarenotequallyavailabletoothergenres,butareaffordedbystorygenresinparticular.Ontheclineofinstantiation,theyareastepdownfromtheoverallsemioticsystemsofaculture,co-instantiatedwithparticularselectionsintheculture’sgenresystems.
1.5Storyplotsrealisedintrastratallybystoryphases
StoryphasesweredescribedinMartin&Rose2003/2007,andsubsequentlyforstoriesinarangeoflanguagefamiliesinRose2005.Theyhavebeendescribedasthebasicbuildingblocksofplotstructure,acrossstorygenres.Interstratally,eachstageofagenreisrealisedbyoneormorephases.Intrastratally,phasesaretypesofactivitysequences,thatrealisetypesoffield.Storyphasesspecifyelementsofplot,setting,characters,theme.
Figure7describesstoryphasesrelationally,intermsoftheirfunctionstoeitherexpandorcommentonthefieldofthestory.Thatis,storyphasescanonlybedescribedinrelationtothesequenceofprecedingandfollowingphases.Inthisrespecttheyarenotunlikegrammaticalfunctions.
Figure7:Storyplotsrealisedintrastratallybystoryphases
Settingsestablishplotexpectanciesintermsofthepeopleandthingsinvolved,theiractivities,placeandtime–whoorwhatit’sabout,whatthey’redoing,whereandwhen.Descriptionspausetheflowofactivitytodescribepeople,thingsandplaces.Problemsarecounterexpectantsequencesthatcreatetension,whilesolutionsreleasetension.Problemsneednothavenegativeeffects;theyaremerelyactivitiesthatcounterexpectancy.Butsolutionsmustbepositiveinsomerespect.
Martin1992associatesexpectancywithmodalisation–howprobableasequenceis–andimplicationwithmodulation–howobligatedasequenceis,ascauseandeffect.AlthoughMartincontraststhesetypesofsequence,implicationsequencesinstoriesarealsoexpectant.Reactionsandresultsareimplicatedbyprecedingphases.Reactionsexpresscharacters’feelingsaboutprecedingactivities,asbehavioursorqualities.Resultsarematerialoutcomesofprecedingactivities.Expectantphasesthatarenotmodulatedare
presen&ngse#ngcontextualising
describingdescrip+on
expanding createtensionproblemcounterexpectant releasetensionsolu+on
sequencingemo&onalreac+on
implica&onalexpectant materialresult
unmodulatedeventsnarratorvoicecomment
commen&ngpar&cipantvoicereflec+on
9
simplytermedevents,commonlyseeninrecounts.Commentingphasesinterrupttheaction,eitherforthenarratortocomment,oracharactertoreflectonitssignificance.
Table1suggestssomeformalrealisationstatementsforeachstoryphasetype,includingsequencesandinsertions.Settingsprecedeotherphases,presentingpeopleorthings,andoptionallyplace,timeandactivities.Descriptionsfollowotherphases,ascribingqualitiestopeople,thingsorplaces,andoptionallytheiractivities.Problemsprecedeotherphaseswithcounterexpectantactivities.Solutionsfollowproblemswithcounterexpectantactivities.Reactionsfollowanotherphase,withemotionsthatareimplicatedbytheprecedingphase.Resultsincludeactivitiesorqualitiesthatareimplicatedbyaprecedingphase.Eventsmayoccurinanysequence.Commentsandreflectionsmayalsooccurinanysequence,butusuallyfollowotherphases.
Table1:Realisationstatementsforstoryphases
sequence insertions
setting setting^# +person(s)/thing(s);(+place);(+time);(+activities)
description #^description +person/thing/place;+qualities;(+activities)
problem problem^# +counterexpectantactivity
solution problem(^#)^solution +counterexpectantactivity
reaction #^reaction +implicatedemotion:quality/behaviourofcharacter
result #^result +implicatedactivities/qualities
events +expectantactivities
comment +commentonactivities;narratorperspective
reflection +commentonactivities;characterperspective
1.6Storygenresrealisedinterstratallybystoryphases
Genresystemsandstructuresarerealisedinterstratallybyregistersystemsandstructures.Inparticular,thetypesandstagesofstorygenresarerealisedbytypesandsequencesofstoryphases.Thecounterexpectantstagesofanarrative,anecdote,exemplumorobservationarenecessarilyrealisedbyatleastoneproblem,andnarrativesmustinvolveasolution,butbeyondthisthepotentialforvariationisconsiderable,althoughnotrandom.Rathertherearepredictablevariationsinphasalpatternswithineachstorygenre.Forexample,aComplicationmaybeforeshadowedbylesserproblemswithintheOrientation.TensionmaybebuiltwithinaComplicationbyaseriesofworseningproblemsandintensifyingreactions.Arecountmayconsistsimplyofaseriesofexpectantevents,oraseriesofepisodesthatincludeotherphases.
Fromtheperspectiveofinstantiation,storygenresandstoryphasesco-instantiate.Thisco-instantiationisasteportwodowntheinstantiationclinefromthesub-potentialsofstorygenres,towardsthegeneralisedpatternsofstorytypes.Storytypesmayincluderecognisabletypesofplots,characters,settingsandthemesforeachgenre.Morespecific
10
instantiationswithinthesefieldvariablesproduceindividualstories,thateachlistenerapprehendsaccordingtotheirexperienceandaffiliations.
Researchsofarsuggeststhatsystemsofstorygenresandstoryphasesoutlinedabovearecommonpotentialsacrosslanguagefamilies(Rose2001a&b,2005).Questionsforthisstudyarehowthesecommonpotentialsareinstantiatedinparticularcultures,andparticularstorytypes,andhowtheseinstantiationsarerealisedinlanguage.
2Thestories
Threestoriesareanalysedtoillustratetheinstantiationofthesegeneralparametersacrossculturesandlanguages.ThefirstisatraditionalexemplumfromChinese,nowspokenbyaround1billionpeople,traditionallypeasantgrainfarmers.ThesecondisamythicnarrativefromPitjantjatjara,adialectoftheAustralianWesternDesertlanguage,spokenbyaround10,000people,whoweretraditonallyaridlandshunter-gatherers.ThethirdstoryisamythicexemplumfromtheBoraanadialectofOromo,anAfroasiaticlanguageintheCushiticfamily,spokenbyabout70,000peopleinsouthernEthiopiaandnorthernKenya,traditonallynomadiccattleherders.
Theseexamplesthuscoveracross-sectionofpre-moderneconomictypesandlanguagefamilies.Howevertheyexemplifyalargerdatasetofstoriesfromvariouslanguagefamiliesandculturesthatcanbeaccessedatwww.readingtolearn.com.au.
2.1Chinesestory
‘TheFarmerandTheHare’isapopulartraditionalexemplum.Afarmerisplowinghisfield,whenahareunexpectedlydashesitselftodeath,givinghimafreemeal.Thefarmerthengivesuphiswork,expectingthisextraordinaryeventtoberepeated.Accordingtooneinterpretation,thestory“warnsusthateveryoneneedstoworkhardinordertoreaptheharvest.“Nopay,nogain.”2
Inthetranscriptionbelow,theChinesewordingsareglossedinEnglishintwosteps.Thefirstglossiswordforword,butarrangedinwordgroups.Asfaraspossible,grammaticalitemsareglossedwithEnglishitemsoraffixes,ratherthanwithformallabels.TheaimistorendertheglossingascomprehensibleaspossibletoreadersofEnglish.IftheChinesewordingsarereadaloud,eachlinewillthusbecomprehensibletoEnglishreaders.Alternatively,readingtheEnglishglossgivestheflavouroftheoriginalgrammarwithouthearingtheoriginalphonology.
FollowingtheEnglishglossisrelativelyeasywithChinese,astheirgrammarssharesomecommonstructuralpatterns.Forexample,grammaticalfunctionstendtoberealisedbywordsratherthanaffixes,nominalgrouporderisModifierHead(butwithsomepost-positions),clausesequencestendtobesimilar,andonceidentitiesarepresented,theymaybeellipsedinfollowingclauses.VerbswithrealisaspectareglossedwiththeEnglishsuffix‘V–ing.’Notethat‘being’inEnglishmaybeinstantiatedas‘have’inChinese.Secondly,thewholeclauseisglossedwithanEnglishclause,butthisisnotaso-called‘freetranslation’,asthetextualstructureismaintainedascloselyaspossible.
11
Text:1RenTuzi‘TheFarmerandtheHare’
1 congqian you yigeren zaitianlizhongdi once have oneperson atfieldfarmland Onceupontime,therewasamanfarminginafield2 huran pao laile yizhituzi suddenly run come-ing onehare suddenlyoutranahare3 yitou zhuang zaitianbianirde dashushang headlong dash.against atfieldsideof bigtreeupon anddashedheadlongagainstabigtreenearthefield4 tuzi zhuangsile hare dash.againstdie-ing Theharedasheditselftodeath.5 nageren feichanggaoxing. thatperson veryhappy Themanwasveryhappy.6 taba tuzi shiqilai heDISP hare pickup Hepickedupthehare7 daihui jia qu bringback home go andtookithome8 congnatianyihou ta jiu fangxia chutou fromthatdayafterwards he then putdown hoe Fromthenon,heputdownthehoe9 zuo zaidashudixiadeng zhe sit atbigtreeunderneath wait:ing andsatunderneaththebigtree,waiting,10 kiwang zal you tuzi paolai hope again have hare runcome hopingthatanotherharewouldcome, zhuangsi zaidashushang dash.againstdie atbigtreeupon anddashitselftodeathonthebigtree.11 ta dengle henjiuv he wait-ing verylong Hewaitedverylong12 tuzi meiyou zai lai hare nothave again come aharenevercameagain.13 tadetiandi ke huangwule hisfield very lay.waste-ing andhisfieldslaywaste.
Source:Bittner,M.2011http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~mbittner
2.1.1Periodicity
Storyphasesarerealisedindiscourseassequencesoffigures,thatareorganisedinhierarchiesofperiodicity(wavesoftextualprominence).ItispossibletodisplaythesepatternsusingonlytheEnglishglosses,withoutneedingtorepeattheoriginalwordings.ThisisafurtheradvantageofglossingwithEnglishwordsandaffixesratherthaninscrutableformallabels.
Table1displaystheThemesofeachmessage,uptoandincludingthefirstparticipantidentity.ThisenablesustoseehowidentitiesaretrackedthroughtheThemesofmessages,aswellasthetextualandcircumstantialThemesthatprecedeidentities(Martin&Rose
12
2007,Rose2001b).Eachmessageincludesafiniteclause,alongwithdependent,projectingandprojectedclauses(Martin1992).TheanalysisshowstheThemeofthefirstclauseineachmessage.Phaseshiftsareindicatedwithlines.
Table1:ThemesinTheFarmerandtheHare
textual/circumstantial farmer hare1 once oneperson 2 suddenly onehare3 headlong (it)4 hare5 thatperson 6 heDISP hare7 (he) (it)8 thenfromthatdayafterwards he 9 (he) 10 again (he) 11 he 12 again hare13 hisfield
ThedisplayclearlyshowstherolesofThemesinstructuringthesequenceofphases.Thematicidentitiesarerelativelyconstantwithineachphase,trackedbystringsofreferenceorellipsis.Shiftsfromonephasetothenextarepresentedby:
• textualandcircumstantialThemesinlines2and8,• switchingthematicidentities,fromthefarmertothehareandbackinlines2and5,• restatingidentitiesinline8and11.
InTable1,participantsinMediumrolesareblueandRangeisred.Mediumisthenuclearparticipantinaprocessorrelation,whichmaybeextendedtoaRange.PrimarilyitistheMediumthatispresentedasTheme.Fromadiscourseperspective,itisthisnuclearidentitythattendstobetrackedthematically,asthestartingpointforeachmessage.Soitissignificantthatthematicidentitiesareconstantwithineachphase.3
2.1.2Phases,figuresandperspectives
Table2displaysthesequenceoffiguresineachphaseofText1,andnuclearrelationswithineachfigure.Thenucleusofeachfigureincludesaneventandanentity,orarelationbetweenentities.Themarginandperipheryofafigureincludesotherentities,qualitiesandcircumstances(Halliday&Matthiessen1999,Martin1992,Martin&Rose2007,Rose2001a).Phasesarelabelledtotheleft.Thefarmerandhareareinblue,eventsaregreen,placesarebrown,appraisalsarered.
13
Table2:Phases,figuresequences,nuclearrelations&perspectiveinText1
phase conjunc nucleus margin/periphery perspectivesetting 1 oneperson have atfieldfarmlandonce narratorproblem 2 suddenly onehare runcome-ing recountingharedies 3 (hare) dash.against headlong 4 hare dash.against uponbigtreeatsideoffield dead-ing reaction 5 thatperson veryhappy farmerfarmer 6 heDISP pickup hare feelinghappy 7 (person) bringback (hare) acting go home problem 8 then he putdown hoe,fromthatdayafterwards farmerstops 9 (person) sitwait:ing atbigtreeunderneath actingworking 10 (person) hopehave feeling “ hare runcome again dash.againstdie atbigtreeupon result 11 he wait-ing verylong narratorfields 12 hare not-ingcome again recountingwasted 13 hisfield verylay.waste-ing evaluating
Intermsofgenre,thisstory’sprimarysocialfunctionisinterpretationofbehaviour.Itisanexemplum,realisedintrastratallybyacounterexpectantIncidentthatstartsinline2.Theinterpretationisleftimplicitforlistenerstoinfer.TheIncidentisrealisedinterstratallyintwostepsorepisodes,includingaproblemandreaction,andasecondproblemandresult.
WithineachphaseinTable2,figuresfolloweachotherexpectantly,butrelationsbetweenphasesareeithercounterexpectantorimplicational.Thesettingestablishesfieldexpectancy,offarmingactivity.Thisexpectancyisdisruptedbythefirstproblem,signalledby‘suddenly’.Unexpectedly,ahareruns,dashesagainstthetree,anddies.Consequently,thefarmerishappy,picksupthehare,andtakesithome.Unexpectedlyheputsdownhishoe,markedwiththecircumstantialTheme,‘thenfromthatdayafterwards’,andsitswaitingforaharedothesame.Theresultisthathewaitedalongtimeandhisfieldlayinwaste.Theproblemsarecounterexpectant,whilethereactionandresultareimplicatedbytheproblems.
Table2alsointroducesanotherangleontheregisterofstories,thesourcesofexpectancyfromthenarratororcharacters,inotherwordstheirperspectivesontheactivities.Thesettingandfirstproblemaresimplyrecountedbythenarrator,aso-called‘observerperspective’.Thereactionontheotherhandisthefarmer’s;heisthesourceofhappiness,whichexpectshimpickingupthehareandbringingithome.
However,expectancyinthesecondproblemisambiguous.Fromthefarmer’sperspective,puttingdownhishoeisexpectant,ashehopesaharewillcomeagain.Butfromthelisteners’perspectiveitiscounterexpectant;inapeasanteconomy,oneunlikelyincidentshouldnotexpectafarmerquittingwork.Itisasolutionforthefarmer(totheproblemofworkingforaliving)butaproblemtolisteners(forthesocialorder).Whilethefarmerdidnotexpecttheresult,forlistenerstheresultisnotonlyexpectedbutimplicatedbytheproblem.Hencetheperspectiveshiftsfromfarmertonarrator,recountingandevaluatingtheresult.
14
Theimplicitinterpretationoftheexemplumisshapedbytheseperspectivesonexpectancy.Membersofapeasantcommunitywouldbesurprisedattheharedashingitselftodeath,empathisewiththefarmer’sreactiontohisluck,butthenjudgehishopeasfoolishandexpectthebadresult,andhenceinterprettheimplicittheme.Theperspectiveshiftstothenarratorbecausethejokeisonthefarmer,implicitlysharedbynarratorandlisteners.
ThetermevaluatingisusedinTable2togeneraliseregisterfeaturesthatarerealisedinappraisalsystemsasengagement,graduation,judgement,appreciation.Happyandhopingaregeneralisedasfeeling,realisedinappraisalasaffect.Feelingisdistinctbecauseitssourceiswithintheconsciousnessofthecharacters,whereasthenarratorevaluatesfromoutsidetheevents.
OtheractivitiesaregeneralisedinTable2asacting.Feelingisasignifyingactivity,whosesourceisthecharacters,whereasactingisnon-signifyingactivity.Itisincludedincharacters’perspectiveswhereitisexpectedbytheirsignifying.Thefarmerwashappysohepickedupthehare,thenheputdownhishoebecausehehopedaharewouldcome.(Expectancyisamutual,bi-directionalrelationindiscourse.4)
Thefocusonsourcesofexpectancyhelpstoexplainotherspecificchoicesininstantiation.Forexample,‘suddenly’explicitlysignalscounterexpectancytothelistener,but‘then’isneutral,astheexpectancyofthesecondproblemisambiguous,althoughitssignificanceisthematicallymarked‘fromthatdayafterwards’.Thefarmer’sreactiondoesnotrequireanexplicitconjunctionasitisintrinsicallyimplicatedbytheproblemofthehare’sdeath-‘so’wouldbesuperfluous.Theresultalsolacksaconjunctionbecausetheperspectiveshiftsfromthefarmertothelisteners.Acounterexpectantconjunctionwouldtakethefarmer’sperspective,andanexpectantonewouldexplicitlycounterit.Leavingtherelationimplicitallowslistenerstoreadtheresultasimplicated.
Lookingwithinphases,thereactionstartswiththefarmer’shappiness,whichexpectshissubsequentactions.Problem2startswithhisactionsbecausetohimtheyareexpectedbyhisgoodfortune,althoughsurprisingtothelistener.Theresultisrecountedandevaluatedwithmildgraduationbutwithoutexplicitattitudeorexpectancy,allowinglistenerstointerpretforthemselves.Thetenorisdeadpan.
Perspectivesofcharactersandnarratorsisknowninnarrativetheoryasfocalization,afterGenette1982.Incriticaltheory,perspectiveisideologicallyloadedas‘readingposition’.Martin[2006:276]examinessourcingandtargetsofattitudeinstories,torevealhow“textsareideologicallyinterestedindivergentways,andthedifferentreadingpositionsnaturalisedbyeachtext”(taking‘naturalisation’fromBarthes).Heshowshowthesamestoryplotmaybere-instantiatedbydifferentauthors,withvaryingdegreesandsourcingofattitude(primarilyjudgementandaffect),tonaturalisevaryingpositionsonthesameevents.
Theanalysisherefocusesonthesourcingofexpectancyratherthanattitude,whichisgenerallyfarlessinscribedintraditionaloralstories,thanincontemporarywrittenones.Thetermperspectiveisformalisedtorefertoexpectancysourcing(andcouldalsobeusedforattitudesourcing).5Crucially,theanalysisshowshowperspectiveisrelatedtoplotstructuring,thephasesthroughwhichastoryunfolds.Itisthroughthepatternedco-
15
instantiationofperspectiveswithstoryphasesthatlistenersarepositionedinrelationtoideologicalthemes;inotherwords,thatreadingpositionsarenaturalised.
2.2PitjantjatjarastoryThenextstoryisa‘Dreamingstory’ormythofthePitjantjatjarapeopleofAustralia’sWesternDesert.Thisnarrativeisconcernedwithrelationsbetweenmenandwomeninthiskinshipstructuredsociety.Itopenswithtwobrothersmarryingtwosisters,andcampingtogetherataplacecalledPiltati,hencethenameofthestory.Themenhuntkangaroosinthehills,whilethewomencollectplantsanddigforburrowinganimalsontheplain.Expectancyisdisruptedbyadroughtthatforcesthewomentoforagefurtherawayeachday,untiltheyfailtoreturn.Themensearchbutcannotfindthem,andwonderwhathasbecomeofthem,andwhattheywilldothemselves.Theyresolvetheproblembytransformingthemselvesintogiantserpents,risingintotheskyfromwheretheycanseetheirwives,andthendescendintotheearth.
InPitjantjatjara,functionssuchastenseandcircumstancetypearerealisedbysuffixes.Toenhancereadability,tensesuffixesareglossedwithEnglishauxiliaryverbs,andcirumstancesuffixeswithprepositions,insteadofformallabels.AsforChinese,realisaspectisglossedwith‘–ing’.Pitjantjatjarahasdualandpluralpronouns,glossedhereasthey2,we2andthey4.Pronounsalsoshowtransitivityfunction(or‘case’),butinthistexttheyareallMedium.Theymaybefullpronouns,orcliticpronounsattachedtothefirstclauseelement.PitjantjatjaraalsousestwodifferentadditiveconjunctionstotracktheMediumidentityasthesameorswitchedfromtheprecedingclause,glossedas‘and’or‘andSWITCH’.Participantstendtobepresentedatthestartofeachclause,withprocessestowardstheend,sometimesfollowedbycircumstancesorothernewelements.
Text2Piltati
1 watikutjarakunyu kuta-rara nyina-ngi mantwo,it’ssaid brother-pair sit-were It’ssaidthatthereweretwomen,whowerebrothers.2 kungkawarakutjara alti-ngu kangkuru-rara youngwomantwo marry-did sister-pair Twoyoungwomenweremarriedtothem,whoweresisters.3 watikutjarapula a-nu malu-ku mantwothey2 go-did kangaroo-for Thosetwomenwenthuntingforkangaroos. 4 kukakanyila-ku tati-nu puli-ngka gamewallaby-for climb-did hill-on Forwallabies,thatis,theyclimbedupinthehills,5 munupula kukakanyila kati-ngu andthey2 gamewallaby bring-did andtheybroughtbackwallabymeattothecamp.6 kapula mai-ku tjaru-ukali-ngu andSWITCHthey2 vegetable.food-for down-descend-did Andtheothertwowentdownforvegetablefoods,7 munupula maiili ura-ningi andthey2 foodfig collect-were andwerecollectingwildfigs.8 ngura-ngkaalatjitu-ya nyina-ngi place-atexactly-they4 sit-were Itwasrightatthatplace(Piltati)thattheywereliving.
16
9 munu kuka wiya-ringku-la ailuru-ri-ngu and game finish-ing drought-become-did Thenasallthegamefinishedadroughtbegan.10 putu tjawa-ra pitja-ngi unable digg-ing come-were Unabletodiganythingup,thewomenwerecoming11 munupulakunyu pararitja-kutu a-nu andthey2,it’ssaid far-towards go-did Thenit’ssaidtheytravelledfaraway,12 munupula ma-antjakari-ngu andthey2 away-camp.out-did andcampedawayovernight.13 munupula ngarin-tjanu-ngku andthey2 sleeping-after Thenaftersleeping, pungku-la antjakaringku-la wirkati-ngu kill-ing, camp.out-ing arrive-did killingandcampingoutfurther,theyfinallyarrived14 ngurakutjupa-lta tjawaningi placeanother-then dig-were Thentheyweredigginginanotherplace.15 kapula putunguri-ranguri-ra andSWITCHthey2 unablesearch-ingsearch-ing Meanwhiletheothertwowereunabletofindthem.16 pulakunyu nguri-ranguri-ra minyma utiwirkan-ma they2,it’ssaid search-ingsearch-ing woman shouldarrive Theykeptonsearching,thinking,“Thewomenshouldarrive.” yaltjiri-ngupulaai? what.happen-didthey2eh? “What’shappenedtothem,eh?” pararimanti pulaa-nu farprobably they2go-did “Theymust’vegonefar.”17 kapula kuli-nu palya-nti andSWITCHthey2 think-did alright-maybe andtheythought“They’reprobablyalright.” ka-likuwari-mpa, putunya-kula-mpa, yaltjiri-nku-li? so-we2now, unablesee-ing-if, what.do-will-we2? “Sonowifwecan’tseethem,whatwillwedo?”18 munupula kulata kulpi-ngka tju-nu andthey2 spear cave-in put-did Thentheyputtheirspearsinacave19 munu-lta kuli-nu-lta and-at.that think-did-then Thentheythoughtsomemore;20 paka-rangara-ngu karpikarpi rise-ingstand-did twisttwist theyleapedupintothesky,twistingaroundtogether.21 kutjarapanya tati-rampakunyu wanampi-rampa nya-ngu-lta twothat climb-ing,it’ssaid wanampi-becom-ing see-did-then Thosetworisingup,turningintoWanampi,saw, munta nyaratja nguranyaraparari aha yonder placeyonfar “Oh,theretheyare,thatplacefaraway.”22 munupulakunyu unngu-wanu-lta a-nu andthey2,it’ssaid inside-through-at.that go-did Andthentheydescendedandenteredtheearth.
Source:Rose,D.2001b
17
2.2.2Periodicity
TheThemeanalysisinTable4showssomeinterestingparallelswiththeChinesestory.Thematicidentitiesareagainconstantwithinphases,trackedbypronounsorellipsis,andidentitiesswitchfromphasetophase.However,phaseshiftsarenotsignalledbycircumstantialThemes,whichtendtoculminateeachphaseratherthanstartthem.Instead,phaseshiftsaresignalledbyidentityswitcheswithswitchconjunctionsandfullnominalgroupsorpronouns.Thefinalphaseissignalledbyaswitchconjunction,althoughtheidentityofthemencontinues(showingthatthisconjunctioncanrealisebothidentificationandperiodicity,alongsideaddition).
Table4:ThemesinthePiltatistory
textual/circumst. men women game1 mantwo 2 (they2) youngwomantwo 3 mantwothey2 4 gamewallaby-for (they2) 5 and they2 6 andSWITCH they2 7 and they2 8 place-at -theyPL 9 and game10 (they2) 11 and they2 12 and they2 13 and they2 14 placeanother-at.that (they2) 15 andSWITCH they2 16 they2 17 andSWITCH they2 18 and they2 19 and-at.that (they2) 20 (they2) 21 twothose 22 and they2
2.2.3Phases,figuresequences,nuclearrelations&perspective
Intermsofgenre,thisstory’sprimarysocialfunctionisresolutionofadisruptioninnormality.Itisanarrative,realisedintrastratallybyacounterexpectantComplicationthatisevaluatedandresolvedbythecharacters.TheComplicationisrealisedinterstratallybyasequenceoftwoproblems,theEvaluationbyareaction,andtheResolutionbyasolution.
18
Table4:Phases,figures&perspectivesinthePiltatistory
phase conjunc nucleus margin/periphery perspectivesetting 1 mantwo sit-were brother-pair narratormen& 2 (they2) marry-did youngwomantwo,
sister-pair
recountingwomen 3 mantwothey2 go-did kangaroo-for foraging 4 (they2) climb-did gamewallaby-forhill-on 5 and they2 bring-did gamewallaby 6 andSW they2(woman2)down-descend-did vegetable.food-for 7 and they2 collect-were foodfig 8 they3 sit-were place-atexactly problem19 and game finish-ing narratorwomen drought-become-did recountingcannot 10 (woman2) unabledig.up-ing (food) forage come-were problem211and they2 go-did far-towards narratorwomen 12and they2 away-camp.out-did recountingdepart 13and they2 sleep-after kill-ing camp.out-ing arrive-did 14at.that dig.up-were placeanother reaction 15andSW they2 unablesearchsearch menmen 16 they2 searchsearch perceivingworry “ woman shouldarrive saying “ they2 what.happen-did evaluating “ they2 go-did farprobably solution 17andSW they2 think-did thinkingmen “sonowif we2 OK-maybeunableseeing(women) evaluatingtransform “ we2 what.do-will? 18and they2 put-did spearcave-in acting 19and-at.that think-did-at.that thinking 20 ris-ingstand.up-did acting twisttwist 21 twothose climb-ing wanampi-becom-ing see-didaha yonderplaceyonfar perceiving 22and-then they2 go-did inside-through(earth) acting
Theanalysisofnuclearrelationsandfiguresequencesagaindisplayspatternsofexpectancywithinphases,andcounterexpectancyorimplicationbetweenphases.Thesettingincludesthreeactivitysequencesthatareexpectantwithinthedesertculture:ofmenandwomenmarrying,menhuntinggame,andwomengatheringfood.Thisnormalityisinitiallydisruptedbytheproblemofgamefinishing,droughtstarting,andthewomenunabletodigupfood.Theninproblem2eachactivityisexpectant,buttheoutcomeiscounterexpectant.Thelackoffoodexpectsthemtravellingfartofindfood,thencampingoutbecauseitistoofartoreturneachday,thenkillingandcampingoutagain,thenarrivinganddiggingatanotherplace,implicitlyfarfromPiltati.6Atthispointtheyhavelefttheirhusbands,furtherdisruptingthenormalsocialorder.
Thewomen’sunexpecteddepartureimplicatesthemen’sreaction,inwhichtheysearchforthewomen,expecttheirreturn,andwonderwhathashappened.Thesolutioniscounterexpectant,astheyriseup,twistingaroundeachother,andtransformintowanampi
19
serpentsinthesky,fromwheretheyseethewomeninthedistance,solvingtheproblemoftheirdisappearance.
Intermsofperspective,thesourceinthefirstthreephasesisthenarratorsimplyrecountingwhathappened.Incontrast,thereactionisfromthemen’sperspective,searchingforthewomen,sayingtoeachother,evaluatingwhatshouldhavehappened,andwonderingwhathashappened.Likewise,thesolutionisalsofromthemen’sperspective.Theystartbywonderingwhattodo,thenputtheirspearsinacave,symbolicallyburyingthisindexoftheirmanhood.Theiractivitythenturnsagainfromactingtothinking,whencetheyamazinglyriseupandtransform,toseetheirwivesinthedistance.
Listenersinthisdesertculturewouldrecognisetheexpectantsequenceinthesettingasanidealofgenderrelationsandeconomicactivity.Theywouldexperiencethedroughtwithapprehension,andinterpretthewomenleavingasaninversionofnormality.Sotheywouldempathisewiththemen’sreaction,searchingandwonderingwhathashappened.Themen’stransformationintoserpentsisnotasolutioninitself,butitresultsinseeingtheirmissingwives,andalsosetsthesceneforthenextepisode.Enteringtheearthinthelastlineisexpectantastheyarenowsnakes.
Thisextractisactuallyonlythefirsthalfofthestory.Thenextepisodebeginsfromthewomen’sperspective,whentheyreturntoPiltati,discoverthewanampiserpents’burrow,andattempttodigthemout,onlytobeswallowedbythemandtransformedintowanampiserpentsthemselves.ItisaserialnarrativewithtwoComplicationsresolvedthroughtransformations.Bytransformingintotheserpents,themenandwomenbecometheancestralspiritsofPiltatianditspeople.Theimplicitthemeisthewebofrelationsbetweengender,descent,placeandDreaming.
Finally,inTable3,activitiesofsearchingandlookingaregeneralisedasperceiving,andsayingispresumedbythemen’slocutionsin16and17.Theyevaluatewithinthesignifyingactivitiesofsayingandthinking.
2.3Oromostory
ThefinalstoryisamythoftheOromopeople,traditionallycattleherdersofEthiopiaandnorthernKenya.TheOromohavebeenmanagingconflictoverpastureandcattleformillennia,whichisanimplicitthemeofthisexemplum.Abeegenerouslygivessomehoneytohisguestababoon,butthebabooncovetsthehoneyandchallengesthebeetoabattle.Thebattletakesplaceinafieldofmogoreeherb,afoodforcattleandpeople,butthebeesdefeatthebaboons,killingmanyandmutilatingtheircorpses.
LikePitjantjatjara,Oromousessuffixesfortenseandsomecircumstances,butusespost-positionwordsforothercircumstances,asitsnominalgrouporderisHeadModifier(whereEnglishusesprepositions).Participantsarealsoconsistentlypresentedatthestartoftheclauseandprocessesattheend.Oromoalsore-identifiestheMediumineachverbalgroup,intheformsoftensesuffixes.Thesetense/identitysuffixesareglossedasdid:he,did:they,do:I.
20
Text3JaldeesifaJenaaniTheBaboonandtheBee
1 gaaftoko jaldeesi worrakiniisa duf-e dayone baboon homebee come-did:he Onedayababooncametothehomeofabee.2 jenaani kiniisa damma itti kenn-e then bee honey him give-did:he Thenthebeegavehimsomehoney.3 jenaani jaldeesi guddo dammasuni meef-at-e then baboon very honeythat like-ing-did:he Thenthebaboonhavinglikedthathoneyverymuch, kiniisirra fud-acufed-e beefrom take-towant-did:he wantedtotakeitawayfromthebee.4 ammo waani ta-hu wolaal-e but what be-to know.not-did:he Buthedidn’tknowwhattodo.5 jenaani waani kiniisa-ni jed-e an si had-ufed-a then what bee-to say-did:he I you fight-towant-do:I Thenhesaidtothebee,“Iwanttofightyou.”6 worrakeesani hojaatami had-ani jed-egaaf-at-e tribeyour timewhich? fight-did:they say-did:heask-ing-did:he “Whattimedoesyourtribefight?”heasked.7 kiniisa waani jed-e-ni bee what say-did:he-to Thebeerepliedtohim.8 hojaa adduun baa-te lafamogorreekeesatti had-ani jed-e time sun emerge-did:she fieldmogorreein fight-did:they say-did:he “Whenthesuncomesout,theyfightinafieldofmogorreeplants,”hesaid.9 jenaani jaldeesi gal-e then baboon go.home-did:he Thenthebaboonwenthome.10 jaldeesidibiihedduu yaam-e baboonothermany call-did:he andcalledalltheotherbaboons.11 wolin duf-ani together come-did:they Theyallcametogether12 kiniisa had-ani lafamogorreekeesatti bee fight-did:they fieldmogorreein andfoughtthebeesinthefieldofmogorreeplants, yoo addunni guddo baa-te when sun very emerge-did:she whenthesunhadfullyrisen.13 ammo jaldeesi hin-dabs-at-ne but baboon not-winn-ing-did:not Butthebaboonwasn’twinning.14 kiniisa dabs-at-e bee winn-ing-did:he Thebeewaswinning.15 eegi lola hobbaas-ani then war finish-did:they Thenthewarfinished.16 jaldeesi namaisakaadu-e hed-e woli gaaf-at-e baboon manhimwhodie-did:he count-did:he each.other ask-ing-did:he Thebaboonscountedthemenwhohaddied,askingeachother.17 jenaani waani jed-ani then what say-did:they Thentheysaid,
21
ilmaniwayyuharkolama lacuharkairra sonWayyuHarkotwo bothhandfrom “ThetwosonsofWayyuHarkohadbothhandscutoff cir-ani-tti karaakeesa ciciis-ti cut-did:they-and roadon lie-are:they andtheyarelyingintheroad.
ammalle harkisoogudubofaharkambiyedarbofacufa-ya fit-ani
also HarkisooGuduboandHarkambiyedarboandall-utterly perish-did:they “AlsoHarkisooGuduboandHarkambiyedarboandallperished.”18 jabeeni cubbuu laafinna dugaa hin-dabs-at-u strength evil weakness truth not-winn-ing-are:not:it Evilstrengthdoesnotwinagainsthonestweakness.
Source:Stroomer,K.1995.AGrammarofBoraanaOromo.Koln:RudiggerKoppeVerlag
2.3.1Periodicity
ThemeanalysisinTable6showsthattemporalconjunctions‘then’areusedconsistentlytosignalphasesshifts,asisalsocommoninEnglishstories.ButasinPitjantjatjara,circumstantialThemesarenotusedforthisfunction.EachphasebeginswithanexplicitidentityasTheme,butthematicidentitiesmaythenswitchwithinphases,morevariablythanintheChineseandPitjantjatjaraexamples.
Table6:Themesin‘TheBaboonandtheBee’
text/circumst baboonbee otherbaboons other1 dayone baboon 2 then bee 3 then baboon 4 but what(todo)5 then what(theysay)6 tribeyour 7 bee 8 timesunemerge
groundmogoreein
9 then baboon 10 baboonothermany11together come-they:did 12 bee 13but baboon 14 bee 15then war16 baboon 17then what(theysay)18 strengthevil
2.3.2Phases,figuresequences,nuclearrelations&perspective
Intermsofgenre,thisstory’sprimarysocialfunctionisinterpretationofbehaviour.Itisanexemplum,realisedintrastratallybyacounterexpectantIncidentthatstartsinline3.TheInterpretationisstatedexplicityasaproverb.TheIncidentisrealisedinterstratallythroughthreeproblemsthatbuildtension,culminatingwithasolutionthatreleasestension,followedbyaresult.
22
Table7:Phases,figures&perspectivesin‘TheBaboonandtheBee’
phase conj nucleus margin/periphery perspectivesetting 1 baboon come-he:did homebeedayone narratorbeegives 2 then bee give-he:did honeyhim recountingproblem1 3 then baboon verylike-ing-he:did honeythat baboonbaboon take-towant-he:did beefrom feelingcovets 4 but (baboon) be-toknow.not-he:did what thinkingproblem2 5 then (baboon) say-he:did whatbee-to baboonbaboon “ I fight-towant-I:do you sayingchallenges6 “ tribeyour fight-they:do timewhich feelingbee say-he:didasking-he:did saying 7 bee say-he:did-to bee 8 “ (bees) fight-they:do fieldmogorreein
whattimesunemerge-she:didsaying
problem3 9 then baboon go.home-he:did baboonbabooons 10 baboon call-he:did othermany sayingfightbees 11 (baboons) come-they:did together acting 12 (baboons) fight-they:did beefieldmogorreein
whensunveryemerge-she:did
solution 13 but baboon not-winn-ing-not:did narratorlosing 14 bee winn-ing-they:did recountingresult 15 then war finish-they:did baboonbabooonscount
16 baboon count-he:did manhimwhodie-he:did (perceiving)
thedead ask-ing-he:did each.other saying 17 then (baboons) say-they:did what “ (bees) cut-they:did- sonWHtwobothhandfrom “and lie-they:do roadon “alsoHGandHandallperish-they:did comment 18 strengthevil not-winn-ing-it:not:do weaknesstruth narratorproverb evaluating
AnalysisofnuclearrelationsandfiguresequencesinTable7againdisplayspatternsofexpectancyandimplicationwithinandbetweenphases.Withinthesetting,baboonvisitingbee’shomeexpectsthehostgivinghoneytohisguest.Althoughthebaboonpredictablylikesthehoney,tensioniscreatedwhenheunexpectedlywantstotakethehoneyfromthebeeandwondershow.Tensionisincreasedwhenheunexpectedlychallengesbeetofight,askshimwherethebeesfight,andbeereplies.Itisincreasedagainwhenhecallsmanybaboons,whocometogethertofightthebees.
Inthesolution,signalledwithcounterexpectant‘but’,thebaboonsareunexpectedlylosing.Thisissurprising,consideringthemanybaboons,butdefusesthetensionbuiltthroughtheprecedingthreeproblems.Thebaboons’lossthenimplicatestheresult,ofcountingtheirdead.Thedisasterisamplifiedinmessage17,signalledagainwith‘then’,asthebeeshavemutilatedsomenamedbaboonkinsmen.Thisresultstronglyexpectstheconcludingproverb.
Analysisofsourcesshowsthattheperspectiveineachphaseisprimarilythebaboon’s.Inthefirstproblemhelikesthehoney,wantstotakeitbutknowsnothow.Inproblem2hetellsthebeehewantstofight,asksthebeewhere,andthebeereplies.Inproblem3hecallstheotherbaboons.Howeverinthesolution,theperspectiveshiftstothenarrator,asthebaboonsarelosingandbeesarewinning.Butintheresult,theperspectiveswitchesbacktothebaboonsagainastheycounttheirdead,andaskandanswereachother.Finallyitisthenarratorwhoevaluatestheresultwiththeproverb.
23
Thereisanapparentcontradictionherebetweenphasesandperspectives.Fromthebaboon’sperspective,problems2and3aresolutionstoproblem1,howtotakethehoney,andlosingthebattleisaproblemforhim,notasolution.Howeverintermsofplotstructuring,problems1,2and3buildtension,thatisreleasedbythesolution.
Thiscontradictioninthestorypointstoasocialcontradiction.Theplotstructuringisorientedtotheexplicitinterpretation,thatcondemnsthebaboon’s‘evilstrength’whilepraisingthebee’s‘honestweakness’.Thisisamessageaboutsocialorderbasedonpropriety.Inthesettingthebeeactsproperlyingivinghoneytohisguest,sothebabooncovetingitisimproper.Thebaboon’sformalchallengemayseemproper,butitsmotiveisnot,andcallingmanybaboonstofightcreatesafurtherproblemforthesocialorder.Hencethebaboon’slosingandcountingtheirdeadrestoresthesocialorder.
Ontheotherhand,thestorytakesthebaboon’sperspectivebecauseOromocultureisalsoawarriorculture,asinmanypastoralistcultureswheregroupscompeteforpastureandanimals.Sothebaboon’sperspectiveisthewarrior’sperspective,ofpursuinggoalsthroughviolence.Organisedviolenceislegitimatedbyprotocolssuchasthebaboon’sformalchallengetothebee,whoalsoultimatelywinsthroughorganisedviolence.ThisperspectiveisnotoutsideOromoculture,butwithinit.Thestoryisnotcondemningoutsidersbutwarninginsiders,abouttheconsequencesofillegitimateviolence.
Thestorythusattemptstoresolveaninherentcontradictionforsocietiesbetweennegotiatingresourcesthroughexchange(givingthehoney)andnegotiatingthroughviolence(tryingtotakeit).Likemythsingeneral,itisamessagefromtheancestorstotheirdescendantsaboutstrategiesforsurvival,inparticular,counteringgreedwithmorality,instinctwithideology.
Intermsofgenre,itmaybeobjectedthatthisstorymustbeanarrative,asitinvolvesaproblemthatissolved.Hereadistinctionmustbemadebetweenthefunctionofsolutionsatthelevelofregister,andtheResolutionstageinnarratives.Asolutionisacounterexpectantactivitysequencethatreleasesthetensioncreatedbyaproblem.Anystorymayinvolveproblemsandsolutions,inanystage,butanarrativeisconsummatedbyitsResolutionstage,incontrasttootherstorygenres.AResolutionisrealisedbyoneormoresolutions(andpotentiallyadditionalphasessuchasreactionsorcomments),butasolutionneednotresolveaComplication.
3Discussion:expectancyandsourcinginstoryplots
Phasesweredescribedaboveasunitsoffield,astypesofactivitysequences.Buttheyalsohavevaluesintenorandmode.Inmode,aphaseisapulseofmeaning,presentedindiscourseaschainsofidentityinawaveofperiodicity,asourthemeanalysesshowed.Intenor,aphaseisnegotiatedasanexchange,orasaprosodyofattitudeandengagement.Storyphasesarenegotiatedbetweennarrator,charactersandlisteners.Thenegotiationisabouttheactivitysequence–howprobableorobligatorytheactivitiesare,andfromwhoseperspective.Likemovesinanexchange,theroleofeachphaseinthenegotiationcannotbeunderstoodinisolation.
24
Readingpositionsarenegotiatedphase-by-phasethroughthesourcingofexpectancyandimplication.Areadingisthelaststepininstantiation,asMartinexplains,“textscanbeinterpretedasaninstantialmeaningpotentialallowingfordifferentreadings[and]readingasthefinalstageonthisinstantiationcline”[2006:85].Differencesinreadingsarealsoalaststepontheclineofindividuation,whichincludesbothallocationofsemioticresourcestogroupsandindividuals,andindividuals’affiliationwithsocialgroupings(Figure10).Anindividualreadingisafforded,ononehandbythemeaningsinstantiatedinatext,andontheotherbyaperson’sresourcesforinterpretingthem.
Figure10:Individuationfromtheperspectivesofallocationandaffiliation
Affiliationisconcernedwith“howpersonaemobilisesocialsemioticresourcestoaffiliatewithoneanother-howusersshareattitudeandideationcouplings…toformbonds,andhowthesebondsthenclusterasbelongingsofdifferentorders”(Martinetal2013:489).Inourstoriesitisnotsomuchattitudebutexpectancythatisshared(seealsoMandela’sautobiographicalTheMeaningofFreedominMartin&Rose2007:276).
Storiesnegotiatesourcesofexpectancytoguidelistenerstowardsparticularreadings,tonaturalisereadingpositions.TheFarmerandtheHarepositionedthefarmer’sbehaviouroutside,andthelistenerinside,aresponsible,hard-workingpeasantidentity.ThePiltatistorypositionedthewomens’behaviouroutsideappropriatehunter-gatherergenderrelations.TheBaboonandtheBeepositionedthebaboon’sbehaviouroutsideappropriatepastoralistgrouprelations.
Asignificantresourcefornegotiatingaffiliationistypesofcounterexpectancyinproblemphases.Ineachstory,problemsdisruptnormalcy,inthesenseofregular,predictableactivitysequences(whatshouldhappen),andpropriety,orbehaviourconsideredpropertothesocialorder(whatshouldbedone).7InTheFarmerandtheHare,theharedashingtodeathwassurprisinglyunusual,aswasthefarmerputtingdownhishoe,aswellasimproperforapeasantworkethic.InthePiltatistory,thedroughtwasunusualbutnotsurprisinginthedesertclimate,whilethewomendepartingwassurprisinglyunusualandimproperforPitjantjatjaragenderrelations.InTheBaboonandtheBee,thebabooncovetingthehoneyandfightingtotakeitwereimproperbehaviours,butnotsurprisingforhumannature.Other
25
typesofproblemsinthisstudy’scorpusoftraditionalstoriesincludedthreatstocharacters’safety,difficultyincarryingoutactivities,andlossofpeopleorthings.Eachtypemaybemoreorlesssurprising.Eachproblemtypealsoimplicatescertainoptionsforreactions,suchassadnessforloss,frustrationfordifficulty,fearforsafety.
Sourcingofperspectivesisachievedbythetypesofactivitiesavailabletonarratorsandcharacters.Narratorsmayrecount,describeandevaluateactivities.Buttheperspectivesofcharactersaresourcedassignifyingactivities-saying,perceiving,thinking,feeling-theviewfromwithin.Insomephases,weareonlyallowedthenarrator’sviewfromoutsidetheevents,whileinothersweexperiencetheeventsthroughtheeyes,ears,hearts,mindsandvoicesofthecharacters.Itistheswitching,backandforthfromnarratortocharacters,whilemanipulatingexpectancyandimplication,thatguidesustowardsintendedreadings.Optionsforco-selectingexpectancywithsourcinginstoryplotsisoutlinedinFigure11.
Figure11:Expectancyandsourcinginstoryplots
Signifyingactivitiesincludemanypossiblevariationsonsaying,perceiving,thinkingandfeeling.Thesearehighlygeneralisedcategories,andarewideopenforresearchandcritique.Theyarealsogeneralisedintransitivitysystemsacrosslanguagesasmentalandverbalprocesstypes(Caffareletal2004),butthereisnoone-to-onerelationbetweenactivitiesattheleveloffieldandgrammaticalprocesstypes.Atthelevelofregister,signifyingactivitiesmaybeinstantiatedinmanydifferentways.Forexample,fearmaybeinstantiatedbyyelling,runningawayorlyingstill.Perceptionmaysimplybeimpliedbyadescriptionofwhatcharactersseeorhear,oncetheirperspectivehasbeenestablished.Thinkingandsayingmaybeimpliedmerelybythesignifiedactivity.
Despitethewidevariationsbetweenthecultures,thesefunctionsoftheirstoriesareremarkablyconsistent,butthereadingsdependonculturalmembership.Individuationthusgivesusanotherusefulperspectiveontypology,asexpectancyandsourcinginstoryphasesaremultilingualpotentialsforaffiliation,butresourcesforreadingthemaredifferentlyallocatedtoculturalgroupings.
contextualising
expanding expectant…
structuring sequencing
(expectancy) counterexp.…
commen8ng…
characters
perspec8ve +signifyingac8vity
(sourcing) narrator
26
4Conclusion:shuntingbetweenlanguageandcontext,systemandtext
Inconclusion,thecentralhypothesisofthispaperisthataphaseisaunitofstructureatthestratumofregister,thatis,likeclausesingrammar,ageneralstructuralpotentialacrosslanguages.Alsolikeclauses,thetypesofphaseslikelytobeinstantiatedinatextareconditionedfromthestratumabove.Forclausesthesearefunctionsindiscourse,asmessage,moveandfigure(Halliday1985/2004);forphasestheyarefunctionsingenre.Inbiologyreports,JingHaofindspredominantfunctionsofphasesasimplication,observation,operation,preview,reviewandreasoning.Instories,thegeneralfunctionsofphasesareexpectancyandimplication,contextualisingandcommenting.
Phasesofregistercanonlybeidentifiedinsequence,notbyanalysingthegrammaroftheirclauses.Theycanbeinstantiatedinvariousways,thatarerealisedaspatternsofdiscourse,thatareconfiguredinvarietiesofgrammaticalstructures.Ontheotherhand,grammaticalsystemshaveco-evolvedwithregisteranddiscoursesystems,sotheirorganisationmirrorsthoseofregisteranddiscourse.Forexample,fieldsconsistofactivitiesinvolvingpeopleandthings,sodiscourseconstruesfieldsasfiguresofeventsandentities,andgrammarastypesofprocessesandparticipants.Mentalandverbalprocesstypesmayhaveevolvedasdefaultgrammaticaloptionsforrealisingsignifyingactivitiesinfields,butwhatdrivestheelasticityofthesystemistheendlesspossibilitiesforinstantiation.Similarly,thetypesofcounterexpectancydiscussedaboveasdisruptionstonormalcyandpropriety,aremirroredingrammaticalsystemsofmodalisation(whatshouldhappen)andmodulation(whatshouldbedone),whicharefairlycommonacrosslanguages.Theyarealsorealisedindiscoursesystemsofconjunction,engagementandjudgement(Martin&White2005),thatappeartovarymorewidelybetweenlanguages.Butforthemostpart,expectancyisimplicitintheactivitysequencesofourtraditionalstories,readablebylistenersfromtheirexperienceofthegenresandregistersoftheircultures.
Asfarastypologyisconcerned,systemiclinguistsareparticularlyinterestedinvariationsinmeaningpotential,butthesevariationsliewellbeyondthestratumofgrammar.Myowndetailedstudyofgrammarsfromverydifferentcultures,PitjantjatjaraandEnglish,foundmarkedlysimilarfunctionalpotentials,despitenumerousminordifferences(Rose2001b).Whatvariesmostwidelyistheregistersthatthesegrammarsaredeployedtorealise.Inthisrespect,Whorf’shypothesisthatthegrammarsofNativeAmericanand‘StandardAverageEuropean’languagesencoderadicallydifferentwaysofthinkingwaspremature.Whathisgenerationlackedwasastratifieddescriptionoflanguageincontext,toadequatelydescribetheculturaldifferencesheperceived.MichaelHallidayandJimMartinhavenowgivenuspowerfultoolsfordescribinghowgrammaranddiscourserealisevariationsinregisterandgenre,inotherwordsformappingcultures.Typologicalresearchnowhasmuchgreatercapacitytoshuntfruitfullybetweenlangueandparole,betweenmappingthe‘silenthighly-organisedsystems’oflangageandinterpretingthe‘social,individual,heterogeneousandmultiform’voicesofitssujetsparlants.
27
References
deBeaugrande,Robert.1982.Thestorygrammarandthegrammarofstories.JournalofPragmatics6:383-422
Caffarel,A,J.R.Martin&C.M.I.MMatthiessen(eds.)2004.LanguageTypology:afunctionalperspective.Amsterdam:Benjamins
Firth,J.R.(1935).Thetechniqueofsemantics.TransactionsofthePhilologicalSociety,34(1),36-73.
Firth,J.R.(1950)Personalityandlanguageinsociety.SociologicalReview42,37–52.Firth,J.R.1957.ASynopsisofLinguisticTheory,1930–1955.StudiesinLinguisticAnalysis
(SpecialvolumeofthePhilologicalSociety).London:Blackwell,1–31.(reprintedinPalmer1968,168–205).
Genette,G.1982Figuresofliterarydiscourse.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPressHalliday,MAK1985AnIntroductiontoFunctionalGrammar.London:EdwardArnold.
[revised2ndedition1994;revised3rdedition,withCMIMMatthiessen2004;revised4thedition,byCMIMMatthiessen2014]
Halliday,M.A.K.,&Matthiessen,C.M.I.M.1999.Construingexperiencethroughmeaning:alanguage-basedapproachtocognition.London:Cassell.
JingHao2015Construingbiology:AnIdeationalPerspectivePhDthesis.UniversityofSydneydeSouza,LMF2010Interlingualre-instantiation:amodelforanewandmore
comprehensivesystemicfunctionalperspectiveontranslation.PhDThesis.UniversidadeFederaldeSantaCatarina,Brazil.
Martin,J.R.1992.Englishtext:systemandstructure.Amsterdam:BenjaminsMartin,JR2006Genre,ideologyandintertextuality:asystemicfunctionalperspective.
LinguisticsandtheHumanSciences2(2),275-298.Martin,JR[Ed.]2013InterviewswithMichaelHalliday:languageturnedbackonhimself.
London:Bloomsbury.Martin,JR2014Evolvingsystemicfunctionallinguistics:beyondtheclause.Functional
Linguistics,1:3http://www.functionallinguistics.com/content/1/1/3Martin,JR&GPlum1997Construingexperience:somestorygenres.JournalofNarrative
andLifeHistory7(1-4),299-308Martin,J.R.&Rose,D.2007.WorkingwithDiscourse:meaningbeyondtheclause.London:
Continuum(1stedition2003)Martin,J.R.&Rose,D.(2008).GenreRelations:MappingCulture.London:EquinoxMartin,J.R.&Rose,D.(2012).Genresandtexts:livingintherealworld.IndonesianJournal
ofSFL,1(1),1-21Martin,JR&PRRWhite2005TheLanguageofEvaluation:appraisalinEnglish.London:
PalgraveMartin,JR,MZappavigna,PDwyer&CCleirigh2013Usersinusesoflanguage:embodied
identityinYouthJusticeConferencing.Text&Talk33(4/5),467-496.MatthiessenC.M.I.M.2015.Thenotionofamultilingualmeaningpotential:asystemic
exploration.Mss.PolySystemicResearchGroup,FacultyofHumanities,PolyU,HongKong.
Rose,D.2001a.TheWesternDesertCode:anAustraliancryptogrammar.Canberra:PacificLinguistics
Rose,D.2001b.SomevariationsinThemeacrosslanguages.InFunctionsofLanguage8(1),109-45
28
Rose,D.2005.Narrativeandtheoriginsofdiscourse:Construingexperienceinstoriesaroundtheworld.AustralianReviewofAppliedLinguisticsSeriesS19,151-173
Rose,D.2006a.Asystemicfunctionalmodeloflanguageevolution.InCambridgeArchaeologicalJournal.16(1),73–96
Rose,D.2006b.Readinggenre:anewwaveofanalysis.LinguisticsandtheHumanSciences2(2),185–204
Rose,D.2008.NegotiatingKinship:thelanguageofintersubjectivityinanAustralianculture.Word59(2),1-26
Rose,D.2013.PhylogenesisoftheDreamtime,LinguisticsandtheHumanSciences 8.3,335–359
Rothery,J&MStenglin1997Entertainingandinstructing:exploringexperiencethroughstory.InFChristie&JRMartin(eds.)GenreandInstitutions:socialprocessesintheworkplaceandschool.London:Pinter(OpenLinguisticsSeries),231-263.
1SomeapplicationstodatehaveincludedtestingandextensionofsystemicfunctionaltheorybeyondtheconfinesofEnglish(Matthiessen2004),translationstudies(deSouza2010),languageeducation(Kartika2016),ethnography(Crane2014,Rose2001b,2008),andlanguageevolution(Rose2006a,2013).2https://sites.google.com/site/chinesefolktales/fable/farmer-and-rabbit3InChinesetransitivity,theMediumfunctionisrealisedstructurallybysequencingtheMediumbeforetheProcess,whileotherparticipantsfollowtheProcess(Halliday&McDonald2004).OneChinesestrategytothematisenon-Mediumroles,istomarktheMediumwithaso-called‘displaced’particleba,sobothfarmerandharearearguablythematicin6-7.ReadersmayalsobesurprisedthatthehareisclassifiedasRangeinlines6-7,asitisaGoalinamaterialprocess,andGoalisMediuminEnglish(Halliday1985/2004).TheEnglishpatternisrelatedtoitstextualstrategyofconflatingunmarkedThemewithSubject/Medium,anunusualstrategyamonglanguages(Rose2001b).Inmanylanguages,ActorisMediuminbothintransitiveandtransitiveclauses,construingGoalastheRangeoftheprocess.4“Elementsofstructure,especiallyingrammaticalrelations,shareamutualexpectancyinanorderwhichisnotmerelyasequence”[Firth1957:17].5Martin2006usesperspectiveinformallyforattitudesourcing,e.g.‘AustralianandJapaneseperspectives’.6Theplacethesistersarrivedatwasabout800kmtothesouthwestofPiltati,recountedinanotherversionofthestory.7Iamusing‘normalcy’incontrastto[normality]inappraisaland[usuality]inmodality.