Martin & Rose (2007: 140-1):
The full system for internal conjunction is displayed as Table 4.6.
Blogger Comments:
To be clear, this a taxonomy, presented as a table, rather than a system. It lacks, for example, both an entry condition and realisation statements that specify how the features are realised structurally.
For theoretical problems with the system of internal addition, see
- Misconstruing Continuity As Additive Conjunction
- Misconstruing Distractive And Dismissive Clarification (Elaboration) As Addition (Extension)
- Theoretical Inconsistencies In The System Of Internal Addition
For theoretical problems with the system of internal comparison, see
- Misconstruing Elaboration And Modal Assessment As Comparison
- Misconstruing Subclasses Of Elaboration (And Modal Assessment) As Subclasses Of Comparison (Enhancement)
- Misconstruing Elaboration (And Modal Assessment) As Comparison And Misunderstanding The Ideational Content Of The Illustrative Text
- Mistaking Comment Adjuncts For Conjunctive Adjuncts Of Comparison
- Misconstruing Subtypes Of Variation And Addition (Extension) As Subtypes Of Comparison (Enhancement)
- Theoretical Inconsistencies In The System Of Internal Comparison
For theoretical problems with the system of internal time, see
For theoretical problems with the system of internal consequence, see
- Misconstruing Means (And Clarification) As Internal Consequence
- Misconstruing Continuity As Internal Consequence
- Misconstruing Modal Assessment As Internal Consequence [1]
- Misconstruing Dismissive Clarification As Internal Consequence
- Misconstruing Modal Assessment As Internal Consequence [2]
- Rebranding Concessive Condition As Internal Unexpected Consequence
- Rebranding Concessive Condition As Internal Concessive Consequence
- Theoretical Problems With The System Of Internal Consequence
No comments:
Post a Comment