"Identification Resources Within Nominal Groups"

Martin & Rose (2007: 184):

We introduced the grammatical perspective on participants in Chapter 3, in the structure of nominal groups that realise things and people. Each of the resources for identifying that we have discussed above are realised by one or another function in the nominal group. Deictic and Thing functions identify participants with a determiner or noun. Numerative and Epithet functions compare participants by their order (numbers) or qualities (adverbs). The Qualifier compares or locates the participant it qualifies. (The Classifier function is not involved in identifying.) These resources are set out in Table 5.8.

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, nominal groups realising things and people is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, not reference in the textual sense of a reference item presuming information to be recovered elsewhere in the text or without. These two senses of reference have been confused throughout this chapter.

[2] To be clear, Halliday & Hasan's (1976) reference, which Martin (1992) relabelled as his system of identification, has two grammatical domains: the nominal group and the adverbial group (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 626).

[3] To be clear, determiners have two distinct functions. Structurally, within the nominal group, a determiner functions as a Deictic whose function is to sub-classify the Thing of the nominal group. Non-structurally, a determiner can serve as a reference item that presumes information to be recovered elsewhere. These two functions of determiners have been confused throughout this chapter.

[4] To be clear, the realisation of a Thing as a noun is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, not reference in the textual sense of a reference item presuming information to be recovered elsewhere in the text or without.

[5] Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 633) identify the comparative reference items as follows:

[6] To be clear, the locating of a Thing by a Qualifier is an ideational function of a Qualifier. Qualifiers do not serve as reference items, though any nominal or adverbial groups serving functions within a Qualifier may include reference items.

[7] Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 626) locate the types of reference item as follows:

Tracking Systems

Martin & Rose (2007: 183-4):

As for tracking, presumed information can be recovered either on the basis of communal understandings (the Truth Commission, Mandela) or situational presence, as shown in Figure 5.4. Within a situation, information can be presumed from either verbal (endophora) or non-verbal modalities (exophoric). Reference to the co-text can point forward or back: if back, then direct reference can be distinguished from inference; if forward, then reference from a nominal group to something following that group can be distinguished from reference that’s resolved within the same nominal group. Terminologically, we can refer to bridging as a type of anaphora; but forward reference within (esphora) is so much more common than forward reference beyond the nominal group that it’s probably best to reserve the term cataphora for reference beyond.

Blogger Comments:

[1] As previously observed, the misunderstanding of reference as tracking leads to absurdities such as speakers using I, me, my, mine to keep track of themselves.

[2] As previously noted, homophoric reference — as in the Truth Commission —is 'self-specifying; there is only one – or at least only one that makes sense in the context' (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014: 631). Homophoric reference is not textually cohesive.

[3] As previously explained, the use of names, such as Mandela, is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, not textual reference in which a reference item presumes an identity to be resolved elsewhere.

[4] As previously explained, in SFL Theory, a 'situation' is an instance of context, the culture as semiotic system, which is realised in language. Inconsistent with theory, Martin & Rose here use it to refer to both the perceptual field of the interlocutors (phenomena) and their projected text (metaphenomena) that realises a situation.

[5] To be clear, this is the first use of 'modalities' in the chapter. Endophoric reference is reference to within the text, exophoric reference is reference to outside text. Both verbal and non-verbal modalities (eg. pictures) can be referred to either endophorically or exophorically. For example, endophoric reference to a 'non-verbal modality' is to a diagram within the same text; exophoric  reference to a 'verbal modality' is reference to a different text.

[6] As previously demonstrated here, bridging (inference/indirect reference) is a confusion of reference with lexical cohesion.

[7] To be clear, in SFL Theory, this is the distinction between non-structural cataphora, which is cohesive, and structural cataphora ("esphora") which is not.

Identification Systems

Martin & Rose (2007: 182-3):

Identification systems involve two systems, shown in Figure 5.3: one for presenting (a young man) or presuming the identity of the participants in question, and another for optionally relating their identity to another identity through comparison (another policeman). Various resources are used to presume identity, divided into pronominal and nominal. Pronominal reference is usefully divided into speaker and addressee roles (1st and 2nd person) and other (3rd person); nominal reference involves either names (Tutu) or determined nouns, with determination split into the definite article (the Commission) and demonstratives (this chapter). Where the grammar allows, these options combine with the choice of comparative or not. This choice is shown by the simultaneous system with options of ‘comparative’ or not (shown by a dash '– ’).

Blogger Comments:

[1] As previously explained, the authors' notion of 'presenting' reference is ideational denotation, not textual reference. That is, the nominal group a young man realises a participant, but it does not include a reference item whose reference needs to be resolved.

[2] As previously explained, in SFL Theory, only 3rd person forms function cohesively (the textual function of reference); see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 628).

[3] As previously explained, the use of names is ideational denotation, not textual reference. That is, the nominal group Tutu realises a participant, but it does not include a reference item whose reference needs to be resolved.

[4] As previously explained, in SFL Theory, the 'definite article' functions as a demonstrative (as both Deictic and reference item).

[5] To be clear, the authors' claim here is that comparative reference freely combines with 'presenting' and 'presuming' reference. This yields the following combinations:

• comparative + present;
• comparative + presume: pronominal: 1st and 2nd person;
• comparative + presume: pronominal: 3rd person;
• comparative + presume: nominal: named;
• comparative + presume: nominal: determined: definite;
• comparative + presume: nominal: determined: demonstrative.

From the perspective of SFL Theory, this is nonsensical, because no single reference item makes relations of both co-reference and comparative reference; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 628, 629, 633). From the perspective of the authors' misunderstanding of reference, the claim is just that reference items of either kind can appear in the same nominal group. The adverbial group as domain for both demonstrative and comparative reference is ignored in the misunderstanding of reference as participant identification.

Mistaking Ideational Denotation For Textual Reference

Martin & Rose (2007: 181-2):

This local tracking rule also applies to demonstrative reference to provisions:

(c) The joint committee may at any time review any regulation made under section 40 and request the President to amend certain regulations or to make further regulations in terms of that section. 

41. (1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (2), the State Liability Act, 1957 (Act No. 20 of 1957), shall apply, with the necessary changes, in respect of the Commission, a member of its staff and a commissioner, and in such application a reference in that Act to "the State" shall be construed as a reference to "the Commission", and a reference to "the Minister of the department concerned" shall be construed as a reference to the Chairperson of the Commission.

Comparative reference is similarly constrained:

(viii) "former state" means any state or territory which was established by an Act of Parliament or by proclamation in terms of such an Act prior to the commencement of the Constitution and the territory of which now forms part of the Republic; 

(a) establishing as complete a picture as possible of the causes, nature and extent of the gross violations of human rights which were committed during the period from 1 March 1960 to the cut-off date, including the antecedents, circumstances, factors and context of such violations, as well as the perspectives of the victims and the motives and perspectives of the persons responsible for the commission of the violations, by conducting investigations and holding hearings

Overall, what this means is that unless we use a proper name to refer to something (e.g. For the purposes of sections 10(1), (2) and (3) and 11 and Chapters $6 and 7...), any information presumed must be available in the immediately preceding co-text. This kind of tracking has evolved, we presume, in order to avoid any ambiguities that might be exploited in a legal challenge. The result is a formally-partitioned text unfolding as short phases of proposals and definitions. We’ll return to the significance of this kind of scaffolding in Chapter 6.

Blogger Comments:

[1] Again, this has more to do with the length of orthographic sentences in such registers, than the deployment of reference.

[2] Again, the notion that reference is 'tracking' leads to absurdities such as the view that an author uses first person pronouns to keep track of herself in her discourse.

[3] Again, using names to refer is ideational denotation, not textual reference; in textual reference, a reference items presumes an identity to be recovered elsewhere.

"Tracking In Administrative Discourse"

Martin & Rose (2007: 181):

With policy, almost everyone and everything mentioned is generic, since the provisions are designed to apply across the board. The exceptions to this are the specific agents and agencies set up by the provisions, and the provisions themselves. As noted above, the provisions are named section by section, paragraph by paragraph and so on as the text unfolds (using numbers and letters). And these names are used to refer forward and back in the document in almost every case such reference is required, very much more often than in narrative or argument because of legal pressures to be absolutely clear about how the parts of the text are tied together. The effect of this is a complex lattice of intratextual relations, as opposed to the chaining effect we see in narrative. Significantly, there is no text reference; naming does the work of distilling discourse so that it can play a role in another clause.

With other kinds of reference the general rule for policy is that participants can be tracked within but not between sentences. This holds true for generic classes of person and thing and for specific agents or agencies:

(c) establishing and making known the fate or whereabouts of victims and by restoring the human and civil dignity of such victims by granting them an opportunity to relate their own accounts of the violations of which they are the victims, and by recommending reparation measures in respect of them; 

4. The functions of the Commission shall be to achieve its objectives, and to that end the Commission shall

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the "mentioning" of 'everyone and everything' and 'specific agents and agencies' is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, which is the construal of experience, not textual reference, in which a reference item presumes an identity to be recovered elsewhere.

[2] To be clear, "naming" is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, which is the construal of experience, not textual reference, in which a reference item presumes an identity to be recovered elsewhere. Naming sections of text with numbers and letters is naming metaphenomena, rather than the first-order phenomena of experience.

[3] To be clear, this is more a statement about the (orthographic) sentences of such texts, than the deployment of textual reference. Consider the following sentence (showing referent of reference item):

11. When dealing with victims the actions of the Commission shall be guided by the following principles:

(a) Victims shall be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity; 

(b) victims shall be treated equally and without discrimination of any kind, including race, colour, gender, sex, sexual orientation, age, language, religion, nationality, political or other opinion, cultural beliefs or practices, property, birth or family status, ethnic or social origin or disability; 

(c) procedures for dealing with applications by victims shall be expeditious, fair, inexpensive and accessible;

(d) victims shall be informed through the press and any other medium of their rights in seeking redress through the Commission, including information of –

(i) the role of the Commission and the scope of its activities;
(ii) the right of victims to have their views and submissions presented and considered at appropriate stages of the inquiry;

(e) appropriate measures shall be taken in order to minimise inconvenience to victims and, when necessary, to protect their privacy, to ensure their safety as well as that of their families and of witnesses testifying on their behalf, and to protect them from intimidation; 

(f) appropriate measures shall be taken to allow victims to communicate in the language of their choice; 

(g) informal mechanisms for the resolution of disputes, including mediation, arbitration and any procedure provided for by customary law and practice shall be applied, where appropriate, to facilitate reconciliation and redress for victims.

"Generic Participants" And "Text Reference"

Martin & Rose (2007: 180-1):

Where generic participants are presumed, it’s often whole classes of people that are involved and the reference will tend to be local (within the same sentence) and not sustained (just 1 or 2 pronouns involved):

because amnesty is only given to those who plead guilty, who accept responsibility for what they have done 

It is also not true that the granting of amnesty encourages impunity in the sense that perpetrators can escape completely the consequences of their actions

With text reference as well, tracking tends to be fairly local, with just one or two references back to what’s been said. Here of course the reference is typically between sentences:

For some it has been so traumatic that marriages have broken up.
That is quite a price to pay. 

It is important to note too that the amnesty provision is an ad hoc arrangement meant for this specific purpose.
This is not how justice is to be administered in South Africa for ever,
it is for a limited and definite period and purpose.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, these "generic references" are just simple cases of demonstrative and personal reference:

• those refers cataphorically (and structurally, not cohesively) to who plead guilty;
• they refers anaphorically to those who plead guilty; and
• their refers anaphorically to perpetrators.

[2] To be clear, this unsupported claim is invalidated by every text in which this type of reference is made beyond the clause complex ("sentence") by more than 2 reference items.

[3] To be clear, the reference highlighted in these "text reference" instances is actually as follows:

• that only refers to marriages have broken up;
• this only refers to the amnesty provision; and
• it only refers to the amnesty provision.

[4] As previously demonstrated, the misunderstanding of reference as 'tracking' leads to absurdities. Here the claim is that 'the break up of marriages' is being tracked by that.

[5] To be clear, this unsupported claim is invalidated by every text in which this type of reference is typically made within the clause complex; that is, where clauses are related structurally, as in spoken mode, rather than cohesively, as exemplified by the agnates of the above quotes:

For some it has been so traumatic that marriages have broken up, and that is quite a price to pay. 

It is important to note too that the amnesty provision is an ad hoc arrangement meant for this specific purpose, and this is not how justice is to be administered in South Africa for ever: it is for a limited and definite period and purpose.

Mistaking Ideational Denotation And Deixis For Textual Reference

Martin & Rose (2007: 180):

So whereas the examples in an argument identify specific participants like narratives do, the generalisations in an argument do not. The reason for this is that with generic reference there’s not a lot of sorting out to do. If you know what amnesty means in English, you know what Tutu is talking about, because he’s talking about amnesty in general. Helena on the other hand had to sort out several different men in her story: her first and second loves, her first husband, her second love’s three friends, Mr de Klerk, ‘those at the top’ and so on. This puts a lot more pressure on the identification system to sort out who’s who. For amnesty in general, a simple noun generally does the trick.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, this mistakes reference in the sense of ideational denotation — nominal groups realising participants — for reference in the textual sense of a personal, demonstrative or comparative reference item presuming an identity to be recovered endophorically (cohesively) or exophorically.

[2] To be clear, this mistakes the deictic function of determiners — sub-classifying the Thing of a nominal group — for the reference function of determiners. It is the deictic function of determiners that "sorts out the the different men in her story". The referential function of determiners presumes Helena as the identity to be recovered, not the men in her life.

Mistaking Ideational Denotation For Textual Reference

Martin & Rose (2007: 179-80):

Just as when she compares spiritual murder with physical murder she’s talking about the concepts in general, not the spiritual murder of her second love or the physical murders he may have committed; similarly a murder victim refers to all members of this class of things:

Spiritual murder is more inhumane than a messy, physical murder.
At least a murder victim rests.

Because it refers to general classes of things, reference of this kind is called generic reference. As with the examples just considered, it involves much less tracking than specific reference to individuals.

In arguments this kind of reference is the norm. Tutu opens with a question about amnesty and justice in general, not amnesty or justice in relation to a specific case:

So is amnesty being given at the cost of justice being done?

Amnesty is referred to several times in the rest of the argument, but just once through a pronoun:

the granting of amnesty
amnesty is only given to those who plead
Amnesty is not given to innocent
that amnesty was refused to the police officers who applied for it
Once amnesty is granted
The effect of amnesty is as if the offence had never happened

And that pronoun it is in fact used to refer to the only specific reference to amnesty in Tutu’s text — the specific refusal of amnesty in the case of the police officers who murdered Steve Biko:

It was on precisely this point that amnesty was refused to the police officers who applied for it for their part in the death of Steve Biko.

These specific officers on the other hand are tracked pronominally, just like the characters in Helena’s story.

to the police officers who applied for it
for their part in the death of Steve Biko
They denied that
they had committed a crime
claiming that they had assaulted him only in retaliation
for his inexplicable conduct in attacking them.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, this is not textual reference, but reference in the sense of ideational denotation (a nominal group realising a participant). The nominal group a murder victim does not include a reference item that presumes a recoverable identity.

[2] To be clear, this is not textual reference, but reference in the sense of ideational denotation (a nominal group realising a participant). The nominal groups amnesty and justice do not include a reference item that presumes a recoverable identity.

[3] To be clear, these are genuine instances of textual reference: the reference item it refers anaphorically to amnesty, and the items their-they-they-they-them refer anaphorically to the police officers who applied for it.

[4] As previously demonstrated, the misunderstanding of textual reference as participant tracking leads to absurdities like a speaker keeping track of herself, and keeping track of participants by not mentioning them (ellipsis). 

Misunderstanding Abstraction

Martin & Rose (2007: 179):

The things we’ve covered so far tell us most of what we need to know because identification is essentially a device for tracking people, who are after all the mainstays of storytelling and casual conversation. As we’ve seen, the same kinds of resources can be used for concrete things, and for abstract things and even discourse itself; but in general, with non-humans, there is much less tracking going on. As a rule of thumb, the more abstract a participant, the less likely it is to be presumed.

One important reason for this is that abstractions tend to occur in discourse which generalises about things. Helena does make moves in this direction towards the end of her story as she spells out the point of her narrative. When she refers to white people for example, it’s to white people in general; she doesn’t have specific individuals in mind:

If I had to watch how white people became dissatisfied with the best and still wanted better and got it.

Blogger Comments:

[1] As previously demonstrated, the notion that identification is a device for tracking people leads to absurdities such as a speaker keeping track of herself and people being tracked by not being mentioned. To be clear, identification is Martin's (1992) rebranding of his misunderstandings of Halliday & Hasan's (1976) reference, relocated from lexicogrammar to discourse semantics.

[2] To be clear, the nature of referents will vary with the context that the text realises. For example, in a book explaining Quantum Theory, much reference will necessarily be made to abstractions.

[3] To be clear, generalisation is not necessarily abstraction. As Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 615) point out: 'a bird is no more abstract than a pigeon'.

[4] To be clear, this is reference in the sense of ideational denotation, not reference in the textual sense.

[5] To be clear, the nominal group white people does not denote an abstraction, since both people and their coloured skin have concrete, material form. In construing white people as observable, Helena emphasises the fact.

Tracking Participants By Not Mentioning Them

Martin & Rose (2007: 178-9):

One part of the picture we haven’t covered yet, but which is relevant here is the use of ellipsis as a tracking device. In the following example, Helena doesn’t actually use a pronoun to tell us who abruptly muttered and who drove off, but we know perfectly well who she means because English can refer to participants by leaving them out:

Suddenly, at strange times, they would become restless.
Ø Abruptly mutter the feared word 'trip'
and Ø drive off.

This kind of implicit reference is known as ellipsis. In many languages (e.g. Spanish, Japanese), ellipsis of this kind is far more common than pronouns; but English more often likes its pronouns there (for reasons outlined in Chapter 7, section 7.3). Once again here, Helena’s punctuation isn’t quite the norm for tracking by ellipsis of this kind; in English this would be more common within rather than between sentences.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the claim here is that omitting participants is a way of tracking them. A more efficient way of tracking them might be to include them in the text.

[2] To be clear, in SFL Theory, reference and ellipsis are very different types of relation. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 641-2):

We remarked earlier that ellipsis is a relationship at the lexicogrammatical level: the meaning is ‘go back and retrieve the missing words’. Hence the missing words must be grammatically appropriate; and they can be inserted in place. This is not the case with reference, where, since the relationship is a semantic one, there is no grammatical constraint (the class of the reference item need not match that of what it presumes), and one cannot normally insert the presumed element. Reference, for the same reason, can reach back a long way in the text and extend over a long passage, whereas ellipsis is largely limited to the immediately preceding clause.

[3] To be clear, §7.3 'Speech Function And Mood' (pp227-31) does not explain why English "likes its pronouns" more than ellipsis, as will be seen when that section is examined.

Indeterminate Participant Tracking

Martin & Rose (2007: 177):

Another place where the story sends out mixed signals has to do with tracking Helena’s second love and his special forces friends. In the passage below, we can’t be completely sure whether they (in they stayed over) includes her second love or not. If her second love is living with her, presumably not; but if he’s away living with his team, probably so. Helena hasn’t made it clear whether moving to a special unit also meant moving away from home:

Then he says: He and three of our friends have been promoted. 'We're moving to a special unit. Now, now my darling. We are real policemen now.' We were ecstatic. We even celebrated. He and his friends would visit regularly.
They even stayed over for long periods. 
Suddenly, at strange times, they would become restless.

As the text unfolds it seems clear that they includes her second love, since he obviously takes off on trips with his team; and from this we might conclude that he has in fact moved away from home after promotion just like her first love:

Then he says:
He and three of our friends have been promoted.
'We're moving to a special unit. Now, now my darling.
We are real policemen now.' We were ecstatic. We even celebrated.
He and his friends would visit regularly.
They even stayed over for long periods.
Suddenly, at strange times,
they would become restless.
Ø Abruptly mutter the feared word 'trip'
and Ø drive off.
I ... as a loved one.. .knew no other life than that of worry, sleeplessness, anxiety about his safety and where they could be.

So at one point we can’t be sure; but looking back we feel more confident. This kind of tension shows us that participant tracking is a dynamic device that’s very sensitive to just where we are as a discourse unfolds. In analysis it’s important not to lose sight of indeterminacy that eventually gets resolved because we can look backwards, carefully, taking as much time as we like, and with hindsight weigh up the evidence and make sense of the meaning overall. The ways in which meaning accumulates in discourse is just as significant as what we finally decide a discourse meant. Reading opens; readings close.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This misunderstands the text. To be clear, we can be sure that they (even stayed…) refers anaphorically to he and his friends, because, given that both Helena's lover and his friends visit, it follows that these visitors are the ones that 'stay over'.

[2] To be clear, any indeterminacy in resolving a referent is evidence against the claim that the function of reference is to track participants, since indeterminacy undermines the effectiveness of the tracking.

[3] To be clear, the accumulation of meaning in the unfolding of text, logogenesis, is the instantial system of that text. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: ):

It is helpful to have a term for this general phenomenon – i.e. the creation of meaning in the course of the unfolding of text. We shall call it logogenesis, with ‘logos’ in its original sense of ‘discourse’. Since logogenesis is the creation of meaning in the course of the unfolding of a text, it is concerned with patterns that appear gradually in the course of this unfolding; …. We shall refer to the version of the system created in the course of the unfolding of a text as an instantial system since it represents a distillation of patterns at the instance pole of the cline of instantiation.

[4] Inanity opens, inanities close.

Misunderstanding A Reporting Nexus

Martin & Rose (2007: 177-8):

At one point in Helena’s story we see a bit of tension between what the grammar tells us to expect and what in fact takes place. Helena seems about to quote (Then he says followed by a colon), but continues in the third person (he and three of our friends) without opening quotes:

Then he says: He and three of our friends have been promoted.
'We're moving to a special unit. Now, now my darling. We are real policemen now.'

Within quotes she would have written ‘Three of our friends and I…'. The tense of the verb (have not had) combines with the tracking to delay for one clause the actual move to the direct speech. The overall effect of this interaction between punctuation, grammar and discourse is to create a meaning somewhere between telling and quoting.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, this instance is merely a reporting nexus, thinly disguised by graphology (punctuation) that invites a misinterpretation of the relation between clauses as paratactic:

Then he says (that) he and three of our friends have been promoted.

Cf 'free indirect speech' where a reporting clause projects a quote instead of a report; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 531-3).

[2] To be clear, there is no tension and no delay. Martin & Rose have merely been fooled by taking the view 'from below' (the expression in graphology) rather than the view 'from above' (the meaning being expressed).

[3] To be clear, in SFL Theory, the distinction is between reporting and quoting. However, Martin's system of logical discourse semantics, CONJUNCTION, does not account for the logico-semantic relation of projection.

"Tracking Resources Have A Role To Play In Setting Up Planes Of Narration"

Martin & Rose (2007: 177):

In quoted speech the pronouns used to track participants shift, from third person to first person for Helena’s first and second loves:

'We won’t see each other again... maybe never ever again.'
'We're moving to a special unit. Now, now my darling. We are real policemen now,’
'What you don't know, can't hurt you.'
'They can give me amnesty a thousand times. Even if God and everyone else forgives me a thousand times - I have to live with this hell. The problem is in my head, my conscience. There is only one way to be free of it. Blow my brains out. Because that's where my hell is.'

So tracking resources have a role to play in setting up planes of narration, including what the narrator tells us directly alongside what she quotes from others.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, setting up higher orders of experience ("planes of narration") is achieved through projection, not through an orientational shift in personal reference, since the latter merely indicates a change in speaker, at whatever order of experience.

Importantly, the logico-semantic relation of projection does not figure in Martin's logical system of discourse semantics, conjunction, because Martin's conjunction is his misunderstanding of Halliday's cohesive conjunction, rebranded as Martin's discourse semantics; evidence here. Halliday's conjunction does not feature projection, because projection does not function cohesively. However, projection does function at a semantic level, and Martin's discourse semantics fails to account for it.