Misunderstanding Intensification

Martin & Rose (2007: 45):

Another feature of certain genres is that grading is erased when we technicalise attitude. For example, in common sense terms gross is at the extreme of scales such as minor/unacceptable/gross or unpleasant/disturbing/gross. But once we define a gross violation of human rights then gross doesn’t scale how unacceptable or unpleasant the violation is any more. Gross simply becomes part of the name of the offence, classifying the type of offence, rather than intensifying it:

a gross violation of human rights - defined as an abduction, killing, torture or severe ill-treatment

Blogger Comment:

The absurdity of this claim can be demonstrated by comparing the technical term with the Classifier:

a gross violation of human rights 

with the term — technical or otherwise — without the Classifier:

a violation of human rights.  

Here Martin & Rose have taken the fact that Classifiers cannot be intensified, and falsely concluded that Classifiers cannot intensify.  Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 377):

Classifiers do not accept degrees of comparison or intensity – we cannot have a more electric train or a very electric train; and they tend to be organised in mutually exclusive and exhaustive sets – a train is either electric, steam or diesel. The range of semantic relations that may be embodied in a set of items functioning as Classifier is very broad; it includes material, scale and scope, purpose and function, status and rank, origin, mode of operation – more or less any feature that may serve to classify a set of things into a system of smaller sets;

In this instance, the Classifier gross ranks this type of human rights violation relative to other types.