Misconstruing Middle Clauses As Effective

Martin & Rose (2007: 91-2):

Some effective processes can also be extended to a third participant, known as a Beneficiary:

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the acceptance of a Beneficiary applies to middle clauses as well as effective clauses, as demonstrated by the three clauses that Martin & Rose present above, all of which are actually middle, not effective:

The Commission	may grant	amnesty	to those who plead guilty
Medium	Process	Range	Beneficiary

amnesty	is not granted	by the Commission	to innocent people
Range	Process	Medium	Beneficiary

the police officers	were refused	amnesty	by the Commission
Beneficiary	Process	Range	Medium

That is, the process of granting or refusing is actualised through the Commission, with amnesty being the range of their granting or refusing.  It will be seen that the authors subsequently build their rebranding of Halliday's clause nuclearity on such misunderstandings.

[2] To be clear, it is the clause that is effective (+agency) or middle (–agency), not the Process.

[3] To be clear, in SFL theory, the variable of extension applies to the transitive model, not the ergative model of nuclearity, where the variable is instead one of causation (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 339-40). Moreover, the relation of the Beneficiary is to the clause Nucleus (Process/Medium), and the relation is one of enhancement (cause), not extension; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 348).