Misconstruing A Clause Beneficiary As A Nominal Group Qualifier

Martin & Rose (2007: 112):

In the following example the processes of ‘exposing’ and ‘humiliating’ become things that qualify the penalty, and are themselves qualified by their participant the perpetrator:

Blogger Comments:

Original Text:

Thus there is the penalty of public exposure and humiliation for the perpetrator.

Here Martin & Rose misconstrue an element of clause structure (Beneficiary) as an element of nominal group structure (Qualifier):

Thus	there	is	the penalty of public exposure and humiliation	for the perpetrator
		Process	Existent	Beneficiary

The fact that the prepositional phrase for the perpetrator serves a function at clause rank, and not group rank, is demonstrated by the fact that, unlike a nominal group Qualifier, it can be relocated to other parts of the clause:

1. Thus, for the perpetrator, there is the penalty of public exposure and humiliation.
2. Thus there is, for the perpetrator, the penalty of public exposure and humiliation.