Martin & Rose (2007: 251, 252):
In this chapter we’ve developed two systems for analysing dialogue. The first, SPEECH FUNCTION, was designed to explore the relationship between moves and their realisation in grammar (technically speaking their MOOD). The relevant network of choices is consolidated in Figure 7.4, and allows for the 13 basic speech acts presented above. Further delicacy is of course possible; we could for example distinguish questions asking for missing content from those exploring the modality and polarity of a given clause (i.e. Who betrayed Daniel? vs Did one of his friends betray Daniel?). This kind of specificity is much further developed in Eggins and Slade (1997) and in the work of Hasan and her colleagues (e.g. Hasan 1996).
Blogger Comments:
[1] This is misleading, because, once again, the authors' here misrepresent themselves as the intellectual sources of Halliday's system of SPEECH FUNCTION. See, for example, Halliday (1985: 68-71).
[2] To be clear, the network in Figure 7.4
- has no entry condition,
- omits the minor speech function 'alarm' ('warning' vs 'appeal')
- ungroups minor speech functions ('express self' vs 'attending'), and
- groups minor speech functions with major speech functions ('attending' with 'negotiating').
Cf Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 136):
No comments:
Post a Comment