A Corpus-Based Approach to Clause Combining in English from the Systemic Functional Perspective - Qingshun He - 2019 - Springer Singapore

5.14 Diachronic distribution of non-finite embedded clauses of subject in the COHA .... 6.20 Genre distributions of finite and non-finite clauses introduced by hypotactic conjunctions in

The M.A.K Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series

Qingshun He

A Corpus-Based

Approach to Clause

Combining in English from the Systemic

Functional Perspective

The M.A.K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series

Series editors

Chenguang Chang

Guowen Huang

About the Series

This series focuses on studies concerning the theory and application of Systemic Functional Linguistics It bears the name of Professor M.A.K. Halliday, as he is generally regarded as the founder of this school of linguistic thought The series covers studies on language and context, functional grammar, semantic variation, discourse analysis, multimodality, register and genre analysis, educational linguistics and other areas Systemic Functional Linguistics is a functional model of language inspired by the work of linguists such as Saussure, Hjelmslev, Whorf, and Firth The theory was initially developed by Professor M.A.K. Halliday and his colleagues in London during the 1960s, and since 1974 it has held an international congress every year at various continents around the world It is well-known for its application in a variety of fields, including education, translation, computational linguistics, multimodal studies, and healthcare, and scholars are always exploring new areas of application

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13311

ISSN 2198-9869 ISSN 2198-9877 (electronic)

The M.A.K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series

ISBN 978-981-13-7390-9 ISBN 978-981-13-7391-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7391-6

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd 2019

This work is subject to copyright All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors

or omissions that may have been made The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims

in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Qingshun He

School of Foreign Languages

Sun Yat-Sen University

Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

Notational Conventions

1 the initiative clause

2 the continuing clause

α the dominant clause

β the dependent clause

[[[ ]]] rank-shifted or embedded clause complex

[[ ]] rank-shifted or embedded clause

[ ] rank-shifted or embedded group/phrase

<< >> included clause

Acknowledgments

This research could not have been completed without the help of many colleagues and friends, among whom, I am particularly grateful to Profs Guowen Huang at South China Agricultural University and Chenguang Chang at Sun Yat-sen University Profs Binli Wen (Guangdong University of Foreign Studies), Bingjun Yang (Shanghai Jiao Tong University), Xiaopeng Liang (Qingdao University of Science and Technology), and Lise Fontaine (Cardiff University) have generously supported me in many ways during the writing and revising of the manuscript I would give my deepest thanks to Emeritus Profs Dennis Hawkes and Freda Hawkes

at the University of South Wales for their kind encouragement and help during my visit in Cardiff Many thanks also to Rebecca Zhu, Carolyn Zhang, and Vaishnavi Venkatesh from Springer for their help The research is supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (17BYY185)

Qingshun He

Contents

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Research Background 1

1.2 Purpose of the Study 4

1.3 Organization of the Book 6

References 7

2 A Systemic Functional Approach to Clause Combining in English 11

2.1 Introduction 11

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining 11

2.2.1 Parataxis 14

2.2.2 Hypotaxis 16

2.2.3 Embedding 20

2.3 Cline 26

2.4 Cline in Clause Combining 30

2.5 A Sketch of Grammatical Metaphor 36

2.5.1 Ideational Metaphor and Interpersonal Metaphor 37

2.5.2 Textual Metaphor 38

2.6 Summary 39

References 40

3 Research Design 43

3.1 Research Questions 43

3.2 Research Methods 44

3.3 Data Collection 45

3.4 Data Processing 47

References 48

4 Genre Distributions of Clause Combining 51

4.1 Introduction 51

4.2 Crown Corpus-Based Research on Clause Combining 51

4.2.1 Overall Frequency Distribution 51

4.2.2 Genre Distribution of Overall Frequency 55

4.2.3 Genre Distribution of Logico-semantic Relations 56

4.2.4 Genre Distribution of Embedding 63

4.2.5 Existing Questions 64

4.3 Research Based on the BNC and the COCA 64

4.3.1 Genre Distribution of Expansion 64

4.3.2 Genre Distribution of Projection 78

4.3.3 Genre Distribution of Embedding 88

4.4 Summary 93

References 94

5 Diachronic Distribution of Clause Combining 95

5.1 Diachronic Distribution of Overall Frequency 95

5.2 Diachronic Distribution of Expansion 99

5.3 Diachronic Distribution of Projection 102

5.4 Diachronic Distribution of Embedding 105

5.5 Diachronic Distribution of Non-finite Clauses 108

5.5.1 Diachronic Distribution of Non-finite Clauses of Expansion 111

5.5.2 Diachronic Distribution of Non-finite Embedded Clauses 119

5.5.3 Diachronic Distribution of Personal Pronoun Subjects of Absolute Clauses 121

5.6 Summary 124

References 125

6 Grammatical Metaphor in Clause Combining 127

6.1 Introduction 127

6.2 The Creation of Grammatical Metaphor 127

6.3 Types of Grammatical Metaphor in Clause Combining 129

6.3.1 Ideational Metaphor 130

6.3.2 Textual Metaphor 131

6.4 Diachronic Distribution of Grammatical Metaphor in Clause Combining 132

6.4.1 Diachronic Distribution of Experiential Metaphor 133

6.4.2 Diachronic Distribution of Logical Metaphor 148

6.4.3 Diachronic Distribution of Cohesive Metaphor 150

6.5 Genre Distribution of Grammatical Metaphor in Clause Combining 163

6.5.1 Genre Distribution of Experiential Metaphor 163

6.5.2 Genre Distribution of Logical Metaphor 167

6.5.3 Genre Distribution of Cohesive Metaphor 168

6.6 Summary 172

References 174

Contents

7 Conclusion 177

7.1 Research Findings 177

7.2 Limitations and Suggestions 180

7.2.1 Limitations 181

7.2.2 Further Research 182

References 183

Appendices 185

Abbreviations

BROWN the Brown Corpus (American English, 1961)

FROWN the Freiburg-Brown Corpus (American English, 1992)

CROWN the China-Brown Corpus (American English, 2009)

LOB the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus (British English, 1961)

FLOB the Freiburg-Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus (British English, 1991)CLOB the China-Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen corpus (British English, 2009)BNC the British National Corpus

COCA the Corpus of Contemporary American English

COHA the Corpus of Historical American English

CLAWS Constituent-Likelihood Automatic Word Tagging System

CLAWS 7 The newest version of CLAWS

SFL Systemic Functional Linguistics

Fig 2.1 Cline from clause to group 30

Fig 2.2 System network of clausal relations 36

Fig 4.1 Genre distribution of elaboration in the BNC 67

Fig 4.2 Genre distribution of elaboration in the COCA 68

Fig 4.3 Comparing the genre distributions of elaboration in the BNC and the COCA 68

Fig 4.4 Genre distribution of extension in the BNC 70

Fig 4.5 Genre distribution of extension in the COCA 71

Fig 4.6 Comparing the genre distributions of extension in the BNC and the COCA 71

Fig 4.7 Genre distribution of enhancement in the BNC 73

Fig 4.8 Genre distribution of paratactic enhancement in the BNC 74

Fig 4.9 Genre distribution of hypotactic enhancement in the BNC 75

Fig 4.10 Genre distribution of enhancement in the COCA 75

Fig 4.11 Comparing genre distributions of enhancement in the BNC and the COCA 76

Fig 4.12 Genre distribution of paratactic enhancement in the COCA 77

Fig 4.13 Genre distribution of hypotactic enhancement in the COCA 78

Fig 4.14 Projections in Halliday and Matthiessen (2014) and the BNC 81

Fig 4.15 Genre distribution of projection in the BNC 82

Fig 4.16 Projections in the BNC and the COCA 86

Fig 4.17 Genre distribution of projection in the COCA 87

Fig 4.18 Genre distribution of embedding in the BNC 91

Fig 4.19 Genre distribution of embedding in the COCA 92

Fig 5.1 Diachronic distribution of logico-semantic relations between clauses 96

Fig 5.2 Diachronic distributions of different types of logico-semantic relations between clauses 97

Fig 5.3 Diachronic distributions of interdependent relations between clauses 98

List of Figures

Fig 5.4 Diachronic distributions of different types of interdependent

relations between clauses 98Fig 5.5 Diachronic distributions of parataxis and hypotaxis

in the COHA 101Fig 5.6 Diachronic distributions of different types of expansion

in the COHA 101Fig 5.7 Diachronic distributions of projected quotation

and projected report 104Fig 5.8 Diachronic distributions of different types of projection

in the COHA 105Fig 5.9 Diachronic distributions of four types of embedding

in the COHA 107Fig 5.10 Diachronic distribution of non-finite clauses of expansion

in the COHA 113Fig 5.11 Diachronic distribution of expansion of participles

and infinitive clauses in the COHA 114Fig 5.12 Diachronic distribution of the three types of participle

clauses of expansion in the COHA 115Fig 5.13 Diachronic distributions of finite clauses and infinitive

clauses of purpose in the COHA 116Fig 5.14 Diachronic distribution of non-finite embedded clauses

of subject in the COHA 120Fig 5.15 Diachronic distribution of personal pronoun subjects

of absolute clauses in the COHA 123Fig 6.1 Diachronic distributions of verbs and their nominalizations

in the COHA 134Fig 6.2 Diachronic distributions of mass and countable

nominalizations in the COHA 136Fig 6.3 Diachronic distributions of present participles

and gerunds in the COHA 139Fig 6.4 Diachronic distributions of determiners of gerunds

in the COHA 140Fig 6.5 Diachronic distributions of gerunds, mass nouns,

and countable nouns in the COHA 142Fig 6.6 Diachronic distribution of passive constructions with

and without by-phrase in the COHA 147

Fig 6.7 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and verbalizations in the COHA 149Fig 6.8 Diachronic distributions of conjunctive adverbs

and paratactic conjunctions in the COHA 152Fig 6.9 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite

clauses in the COHA 154

List of Figures

Fig 6.10 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite clauses

in the COHA (2) 156Fig 6.11 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and zero conjunctions introducing non-finite clauses

in the COHA 158Fig 6.12 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and zero conjunctions introducing non-finite clauses

in the COHA (2) 160Fig 6.13 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

although , when, and if and conjunctive prepositions

before , after, and since in the COHA 162

Fig 6.14 Genre distributions of verbs and nominalizations

in the COCA 164Fig 6.15 Genre distributions of mass nominalizations and countable

nominalizations in the COCA 165Fig 6.16 Genre distributions of all verbs and the 21 verbs

in the COCA (equal totality) 166Fig 6.17 Genre distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and verbalizations in the COCA 168Fig 6.18 Genre distributions of conjunctive adverbs and paratactic

conjunctions in the COCA 169Fig 6.19 Genre distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite

clauses in the BNC 170Fig 6.20 Genre distributions of finite and non-finite clauses

introduced by hypotactic conjunctions in the COCA

and the BNC (equal totality) 172Fig A1 System network of clausal relations in English 191Fig A2 System network of clause combining working in the UAM

Corpus Tool 192

Table 3.1 Genres and texts in the Crown corpus 46

Table 3.2 Genre distribution and size of the COCA and the BNC 47

Table 3.3 Phases and size of the COHA 48

Table 4.1 Clause complexes analyzed by Halliday and Matthiessen (2014) 52

Table 4.2 Interdependent relations in the Crown corpus 52

Table 4.3 Interdependent relations realized by finite secondary clauses in the Crown corpus 53

Table 4.4 Interdependent relations in the Crown corpus (all levels) 53

Table 4.5 Interdependent relations realized by finite secondary clauses in the Crown corpus (all levels) 54

Table 4.6 Correlation test of different types of interdependent relations 54

Table 4.7 Genre distribution of simple clauses and clause complexes in the Crown corpus 55

Table 4.8 Correlation test of the genre distributions of clause combining in the Crown corpus 55

Table 4.9 Genre distributions of the logico-semantic relations 56

Table 4.10 Genre distribution of elaboration in clause complexes 59

Table 4.11 Genre distribution of elaboration in clause complexes (finite) 59

Table 4.12 Genre distribution of extension in clause complexes 60

Table 4.13 Genre distribution of enhancement in clause complexes 60

Table 4.14 Genre distributions of reporting and quoting 62

Table 4.15 Genre distributions of speech functions of projection 62

Table 4.16 Genre distributions of positions of projecting and projected clauses 62

Table 4.17 Genre distribution of embedding 63

Table 4.18 Explicit conjunctive expressions realizing expansion 65

Table 4.19 Genre distribution of elaboration in the BNC 66

Table 4.20 Genre distribution of elaboration in the COCA 67

Table 4.21 Genre distribution of extension in the BNC 69

List of Tables

Table 4.22 Genre distribution of extension in the COCA 70

Table 4.23 Genre distribution of enhancement in the BNC 72

Table 4.24 Genre distribution of the five types of enhancement in the BNC 74

Table 4.25 Genre distribution of enhancement in the COCA 75

Table 4.26 Genre distributions of the five types of enhancement in the COCA 77

Table 4.27 Genre distribution of projection in the BNC 80

Table 4.28 Projections in Halliday and Matthiessen (2014) and the BNC 81

Table 4.29 One-level and two-level embedded projection 84

Table 4.30 Genre distribution of projection in the COCA 85

Table 4.31 Projections in the BNC and the COCA 85

Table 4.32 Genre distributions of embedding in the BNC 90

Table 4.33 Genre distribution of embedding in the COCA 92

Table 5.1 Logico-semantic relations between clauses 96

Table 5.2 Interdependent relations between clauses 97

Table 5.3 Correlation test of the diachronic distributions of the three types of interdependent relations 99

Table 5.4 Diachronic distribution of expansion in the COHA 100

Table 5.5 Correlation test of the diachronic distributions of different expansions 102

Table 5.6 Diachronic distribution of projection in the COHA 103

Table 5.7 Correlation test of the diachronic distributions of different types of projections 105

Table 5.8 Diachronic distribution of embedding in the COHA 106

Table 5.9 Correlation test of the diachronic distributions of embedding in the COHA 108

Table 5.10 Diachronic distribution of non-finite clauses of expansion in the COHA 112

Table 5.11 Diachronic distribution of the three types of non-finite clauses of expansion in the COHA 114

Table 5.12 Diachronic distribution of finite clauses and infinitive clauses of purpose in the COHA 116

Table 5.13 Diachronic distribution of non-finite embedded clauses of subject in the COHA 120

Table 5.14 Diachronic distribution of personal pronoun subjects of absolute clauses in the COHA 123

Table 6.1 Diachronic distributions of verbs and their nominalizations in the COHA 134

Table 6.2 Diachronic distributions of present participles and gerunds in the COHA 138

Table 6.3 Diachronic distributions of determiners of gerunds in the COHA 140

Table 6.4 Diachronic distributions of gerunds, mass nouns,

and countable nouns in the COHA 141Table 6.5 Diachronic distribution of passive constructions

with and without by-phrase in the COHA 146

Table 6.6 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and verbalizations in the COHA 149Table 6.7 Diachronic distribution of conjunctive adverbs

and paratactic conjunctions in the COHA 151Table 6.8 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite

clauses in the COHA 153Table 6.9 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite

clauses in the COHA (2) 156Table 6.10 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and zero conjunctions introducing non-finite clauses

in the COHA 158Table 6.11 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and zero conjunctions introducing non-finite clauses

in the COHA (2) 160Table 6.12 Diachronic distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

although , when, and if and conjunctive prepositions

before , after, and since in the COHA 162

Table 6.13 Genre distributions of verbs and nominalizations

in the COCA 163Table 6.14 Genre distribution of all verbs in the COCA 166Table 6.15 Correlation test of genre distributions of different types

of verbs in the COCA 167Table 6.16 Genre distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and verbalizations in the COCA 168Table 6.17 Genre distributions of conjunctive adverbs and paratactic

conjunctions in the COCA 169Table 6.18 Genre distributions of hypotactic conjunctions

and conjunctive prepositions introducing non-finite

clauses in the BNC 170Table 6.19 Frequencies of finite clauses and non-finite clauses

introduced by hypotactic conjunctions in the COCA

and the BNC 171Table A1 Genre distributions of clause combining

in the Brown Corpus 193

List of Tables

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd 2019

Q He, A Corpus-Based Approach to Clause Combining in English from the

Systemic Functional Perspective, The M.A.K Halliday Library Functional

Linguistics Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7391-6_1

Introduction

This research intends to examine English clause combining and the potential of transfer therein Clause combining generally involves two clauses Traditional grammar (e.g., Quirk et al 1985) distinguishes two basic patterns of clause combin-ing, i.e., coordination and subordination Subordination is readily identifiable by two basic properties, i.e., dependency and embedding Halliday (1985, 1994) and Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, 2014) categorize embedded clauses into embed-ded defining clauses and embedded fact clauses An embedded defining clause is the restrictive relative clause that is embedded in a nominal group to function as its post-modifier An embedded fact clause is the clause that is embedded in a fact noun

to function as its appositive, including subject appositive and object appositive

1.1 Research Background

Coordination is said to hold if two grammatical units are syntactically equivalent or have the same status in the given syntactic context (Lang 1984; Lehmann 1988; Huddleston and Pullum 2002; Haspelmath 2004a, ; Carston and Blakemore 2005; Crysman 2006) Coordination is realized by coordinate conjunctions, and the most

typical coordinate conjunction in English is and, which can be used to link any two

grammatical units

Quirk et al (1985: 918) distinguish two types of coordination, i.e., syndetic dination and asyndetic coordination The former has an explicit conjunctive expres-sion and hence is the unmarked or typical coordination (e.g.,1-1a), while the latter does not have an explicit conjunctive expression and hence is the marked or untypi-cal coordination There is always a punctuation mark between the two elements of asyndetic coordination (e.g., 1-1b)

1-2a The mountains shook, and the earth trembled (BNC_FIC)

b The treatment succeeded, and the patient recovered rapidly (BNC_NA)

c Tell me where to stay, and I will go there (BNC_FIC)

1-2a is a symmetrical coordination, and the two clauses can be transposed, while 1-2b is asymmetric, and the two clauses cannot be transposed They are equal only

in form The asymmetry is only related to meaning and has nothing to do with tax 1-2c is also asymmetric The two clauses are not equal in form The asymmetry

syn-is related not only to meaning (imperative and declarative) but also to syntax (phrasal verb and complete clause) “Syntactic-semantic mismatches may occur in natural language coordination” (Fabricius-Hansen and Ramm 2008: 10) Many lin-guists (e.g., Fabricius-Hansen 1992; Lefèvre 2000) have discussed this kind of syntactic- semantic mismatch

Subordination refers to clauses “that are embedded as a constituent of a matrix sentence” (Holler 2008: 188) Typical subordination in traditional grammar includes adverbial clauses, subject clauses, object clauses, relative clauses, and appositive clauses Subordination is a hierarchical relation The subordinate clause is syntacti-cally lower than the matrix clause it is embedded in (Aarts 2006; Blühdorn 2008) There may be no formal markers of subordination between the two clauses (Reis 1999)

Of the two types of subordination, the dependent clause is attached to the matrix clause and cannot be used alone, and the embedded clause is embedded in the matrix clause assuming an element of the matrix clause or in a constituent of the matrix clause to function as its modifier They are different from coordination in that

a coordinate clause can be neither dependent nor embedded

Semantically, the subject clause or the complement clause is an argument of the predicate They differ from adverbial clauses and relative clauses in that the latter two are often subsumed under the notion of syntactic adjuncts (Lang et al 2003; Austin et al 2004) Adjuncts have the semantic features of asymmetric coordina-tion For example, nonrestrictive relative clauses tend more to realize coordination than restrictive relative clauses See example 1-3:

1 Introduction

1-3a When Ernest came home, he could not believe his eyes (BNC_FIC)

b Eventually they got divorced, which was so good for the family

(BNC_NEWS)

c People who could not bear it walked out (BNC_MISC)

d The fact that Mr Ridley looked awful on television is not entirely his fault (BNC_NEWS)

e They believe that the minimum wage could threaten their jobs

(BNC_NEWS)

f That I took the commandments quite literally was not surprising

(BNC_MISC)

The subordinate clauses in 1-3a and 1-3b are dependent clauses The former is an

adverbial clause introduced by the subordinate conjunction when and the latter a nonrestrictive relative clause introduced by the relative pronoun which, respectively

Both function as adjuncts of the matrix clauses In other words, without these two subordinate clauses, the matrix clauses can still stand alone The subordinate clauses

in 1-3c and 1-3d are embedded in the matrix clauses The former is a restrictive

rela-tive clause introduced by the relarela-tive pronoun who, imposing restriction on the cedent people, and the latter an appositive clause introduced by the complementizer

ante-that , functioning as the description of the meta-noun fact Without these two clauses,

the corresponding matrix clauses can also stand alone The subordinate clauses in 1-3e and 1-3f are an object clause and a subject clause introduced by the comple-

mentizer that, respectively Both are indispensable constituents of the matrix clauses

and hence cannot be omitted These two clauses are neither typical-embedded clauses nor typical-dependent clauses

The major difference between coordination and subordination is that “a nate clause is often placed in the background with respect to the superordinate clause” (Quirk et al 1985: 919) The syntactic representation of semantic symmetry

subordi-is that the two coordinated clauses can be translocated with no significant changes

in meaning (Verstraete 2005); the syntactic representation of semantic asymmetry is that the translocation of the two coordinated clauses will lead to significant changes

in meaning “Where an inversion of the relata gives rise to such a change of ing, it can be concluded that the connection is not understood as symmetrical, even

mean-if it is syntactically encoded by a coordinator” (Blühdorn 2008: 70) In other words, the coordination in form is not necessarily that in meaning and vice versa In subor-dination, the lower level clauses are embedded in the higher-level matrix clauses

“Semantically asymmetric connections, too, can be characterized, in a sense, as embedding relations” (Blühdorn 2008: 74)

In addition, conjunctive adverbs establish connections on discourse level, “while subordinators and coordinators establish connections on sentence level” (Blühdorn 2008: 68) For example:

1-4a Mrs Allinson was very reassuring However, Mrs Singh clearly saw

cedars as a temporary phase. (BNC_ACAD)

b The victim had become owner at the time of the deception Therefore,

the accused did not obtain the price of the deception (BNC_ACAD)

During the past decades, many people conducted research on the two basic patterns

of clause combining from the sentence level (e.g., Foley and Van Valin 1984; Kortmann 1996; Johannessen 1998; Cristofaro 2003; Haspelmath 2004a, b) and the discourse level (e.g., Thompson and Longacre 1985; Mann and Thompson 1988; Günthner 1996; Lefèvre 2000; Asher and Vieu 2005) At the sentence level, two clauses are connected to form a clause complex by such linkers as coordinate con-junctions, subordinate conjunctions, complementizers, relative pronouns, preposi-tions or non-finite verbs, etc At the discourse level, the two discourse components combine together by means of cohesive devices such as conjunctive adverbs, anaphora, or zero conjunctions (Halliday and Hasan 1976; Polanyi 1988; Knott and Dale 1994; Knott et al 2001)

Recent studies on coordination and subordination generally focus on two tions The first is the relationship between coordination and subordination It is gen-erally believed that coordination and subordination are not absolute dichotomies It

ques-is a continuum from typical coordination to typical subordination (e.g., Quirk et al 1985; O’Dowd 1992; Kortmann 1996; Johannessen 1998; Givón 2001; Cristofaro

series of intermediate stages, such as coordination with features of subordination

introduced by and and pseudo-coordination introduced by subordinate

conjunc-tions Similarly, as for the two types of subordination, it is also a continuum from the typical embedding (e.g., restrictive relative clauses) to the typical dependency (e.g., adverbial clauses)

The second question about the studies on coordination and subordination is the corpus-based quantitative research (e.g., Johansson and Hasselgård 1999; Webber

et al 2003; Wolf and Gibson 2005; Cosme 2008; Ramm 2008) The use of the two patterns of clause combining is different in different languages, and their use in the same language may also be different in different genres The corpus-based quantita-tive research makes it possible to explore the characteristics of cross-language applications, cross-stylistic applications, and the diachronic evolution of coordina-tion and subordination

1.2 Purpose of the Study

Clause combining is also focused on within the framework of systemic functional linguistics (Halliday 1985, 1994; Halliday and Matthiessen 2004, 2014) The rela-tionship between coordination and subordination embodies the notion of cline in SFL, and the corpus-based quantitative research embodies the idea of probability in SFL. Meanwhile, SFL studies language-in-use, and the quantitative research method based on natural language is also the main research method of SFL

According to SFL, two independent clauses can be combined together to struct a semantic sequence by means of a certain cohesive device, and two clauses can also form a clause complex of parataxis or hypotaxis by conjunctive expres-sions A clause can also be embedded in another clause as an element of that clause

con-1 Introduction

or embedded in a component of another clause to function as a modifier of this component The relationship between two independent clauses is cohesive and that between the two clauses in a clause complex is structural, while embedding is the relation between components Therefore, SFL distinguishes such relations between clauses as parataxis, hypotaxis, and embedding.

Hypotaxis in SFL as a part of subordination in traditional grammar (Matthiessen and Thompson 1988) does not include embedding Embedded defining clauses of SFL realize quality of participants, and embedded fact clauses realize participants

in clauses A participant is realized as subject or complement in grammar However, SFL considers subject clauses as embedded clauses, the whole construction being a simple clause, while complement clauses as projected clauses, the whole construc-tion being a clause complex

Thompson (1996), Fawcett (1996), and Huang (1999) consider the hypotaxis in the Hallidayan sense as embedding They believe that the dependent clauses can also be regarded as the circumstances of the dominant clauses He (2002), on the other hand, puts constructions consisting of an embedded clause in the Hallidayan sense into the category of clause complexes The criterion to judge whether a clause

is embedded is double transitivity analyses or double syntactic analyses, that is, whether one of the two clauses can be a constituent of another clause or a constitu-ent of a constituent of another clause Adverbial clauses, subject clauses, and com-plement clauses in traditional grammar all are subject to double syntactic analyses and double transitivity analyses Therefore, they can all be regarded as clause com-plexes or simple clauses with embedded clauses

Finite clauses have the potential to realize parataxis, hypotaxis, and embedding, and non-finite clauses can realize hypotaxis and embedding In addition to finite and non-finite clauses, prepositional phrases can also realize embedding This is because clauses and clause complexes are concepts at the lexico-grammatical stratum, while parataxis, hyotaxis, and embedding are concepts at the semantic stratum The trans-fer at the lexico-grammatical stratum will create new meaning but will not change the logical relation A sequence at the semantic stratum can be realized as two inde-pendent clauses, a clause complex, a simple clause, or even a rank-shifted phrase or word group Although two independent clauses do not belong to the category of clause complexes in SFL, a hypotactic relation may also be realized as a paratactic conjunction

Therefore, the overall purpose of this study is to explore the patterns of clause combining and their genre and diachronic distributions and to further analyze the transfers between the patterns of clause combining that create grammatical meta-phor The specific objectives are as follows:

1 To construct a system network of clause combining This research will guish parataxis and hypotaxis at the lexico-grammatical stratum and those at the semantic stratum, based on which, this research will rethink the system network

distin-of clause complexes in SFL and construct the system network distin-of clause combining

2 To explore the general characteristics of text organization It is possible to find out the application tendencies of different types of clause combining, to sum-marize the basic features of text organization through corpus-based quantitative research of clause combining, and to explore their synchronic and diachronic distributions

3 To identify the transfers within clause combining patterns Both textual function and grammatical metaphor are second-order language phenomena (Halliday and Matthiessen 1999; Taverniers 2006) Ideational metaphor and interpersonal metaphor have textual effects (Halliday and Mattihessen 2004, 2014), but this does not mean at all that ideational and interpersonal metaphors are also textual metaphors Textual metaphor is not induced by the rank-shift- producing ideational metaphor or the transcatetorization-producing interper-sonal metaphor; rather, it is induced by its own organizations (He et al 2015) Therefore, textual metaphor arises from the reorganization of the cohesive struc-ture, thematic structure, and information structure The study of grammatical metaphor in the patterns of clause combining can provide a reasonable explana-tion for the existence of textual metaphor The recognition of textual metaphor should follow the basic principle of double functionality

meta-1.3 Organization of the Book

This research consists of three parts The first part is the literature review and the theoretical background The second part is the corpus-based quantitative research of the synchronic and diachronic distributions of different types of clausal relations in English The third part is the corpus-based research of grammatical metaphor in English clause combining

The first part consists of three chapters Chapter 1 is the introduction, including the research background, the aim of the study, and the layout of this research Chapter 2 is the theoretical background This chapter will review the traditional studies of coordination and subordination and provide an overview of functional syntax theory, pointing out the theoretical basis for conducting research on clause combining Through defining embedding in the framework of SFL, this research proposes the identification criteria of embedding, and according to the notion of cline and the rank scale hypothesis, this research differentiates the depth of embed-ding and constructs the system network of clausal relations Chapter 3 is the meth-odology This chapter puts forward the research questions, research method, and data collection and analysis

The second part consists of two chapters Chapter 4 is the corpus-based research

of the genre distributions of different patterns of clause combining According to the basic genre distribution patterns, this research analyzes the information density of different genres Chapter 5 is the study of the diachronic distribution of different patterns of clause combining This research is conducted to test the hypothesis that different patterns of clause combining have different diachronic distribution trends

1 Introduction

The third part is Chap 6 This chapter is a corpus-based study of grammatical metaphor in clause combining The research is conducted to explore the nominal-ization of verbal groups, the verbalization of conjunctive expressions, and the transcategorization of different types of conjunctive expressions The genre and dia-chronic distributions of different types of grammatical metaphor will also be inves-tigated in this chapter.

Chapter 7 is the conclusion This chapter will first summarize this research, then point out the existing questions, and suggest further research in this field of study

References

Aarts, B (2006) Subordination In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics (2nd

ed., pp. 248–254) Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Asher, N., & Vieu, L (2005) Subordinating and coordinating discourse relations Lingua, 115(4),

591–610.

Austin, J. R., Engelberg, S., & Rauh, G (2004) Adverbials: The interplay between meaning,

con-text, and syntactic structure Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Blakemore, D (2005) And-parentheticals Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1165–1181.

Blakemore, D., & Carston, R (2005) The pragmatics of sentential coordination with and Lingua,

115(4), 569–589.

Blühdorn, H (2008) Subordination and coordination in syntax, semantics, and discourse: Evidence

from the study of connectives In C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’

ver-sus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 59–88) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Carston, R., & Blakemore, D (2005) Introduction to coordination: Syntax, semantics and

prag-matics Lingua, 115(4), 353–358.

Cosme, C (2008) A corpus-based perspective on clause linking patterns in English, French and

Dutch In C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’ versus ‘coordination’ in

sentence and text: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 89–114) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Cristofaro, S (2003) Subordination Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crysman, B (2006) Coordination In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics

(2nd ed., pp. 183–196) Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Fabricius-Hansen, C (1992) Subordination In L. Hoffmann (Ed.), Deutsche Syntax: Ansichten

und Aussichten (pp. 458–483) Berlin: de Gruyter.

Fabricius-Hansen, C., & Ramm, W (2008) Editors’ introduction: Subordination and coordination

from different perspectives In C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’

ver-sus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 1–30) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Fawcett, R. P (1996) A systemic functional approach to complementation in English In M. Berry,

C. Butler, R. P Fawcett, & G. W Huang (Eds.), Meaning and form: Systemic functional

inter-pretations (pp. 297–366) Norwood: Ablex.

Foley, W. A., & Van Valin, R. D., Jr (1984) Functional syntax and universal grammar Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Givón, T (Ed.) (2001) Syntax: An introduction, Vol II Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Gunthner, S (1996) From subordination to coordination? Verb-second position in German causal

and concessive constructions Pragmatics, 6(3), 323–370.

Halliday, M. A K (1985) An introduction to functional grammar London: Edward Arnold Halliday, M.  A K (1994) An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.) London: Edward

Arnold.

Halliday, M. A K., & Hasan, R (1976) Cohesion in English London: Longman.

Halliday, M. A K., & Matthiessen, C. M I. M (1999) Construing experience through meaning:

A language-based approach to cognition London/New York: Cassell.

Halliday, M. A K., & Matthiessen, C. M I. M (2004) An introduction to functional grammar (3rd

ed.) London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A K., & Matthiessen, C. M I. M (2014) An introduction to functional grammar (4th

ed.) London/New York: Routledge.

Haspelmath, M (2004a) Coordinating constructions: An overview In M.  Haspelmath (Ed.),

Coordinating constructions (Typological studies in language 58) (pp.  3–40) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Haspelmath, M (Ed.) (2004b) Coordinating constructions Amsterdam: Benjamins.

He, W (2002) On recursiveness, embedding and functional syntactic reanalysis Foreign Language

Research, 3, 64–69.

He, Q., Yang, B., & Wen, B (2015) Textual metaphor from the perspective of relator Australian

Journal of Linguistics, 35(4), 334–350.

Holler, A (2008) German dependent clauses from a constraint-based perspective In C. Fabricius-

Hansen & W.  Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’ versus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text: A

cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 187–216) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Huang, G (1999) A functional approach to English syntactic analysis Journal of Sun Yat-Sen

University (Social Science Edition), 4, 20–27.

Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G.  K (2002) The Cambridge grammar of the English language

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johannessen, J. B (1998) Coordination Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Johansson, S., & Hasselgård, H (1999) Corpora and cross-linguistic research in the Nordic

coun-tries In S. Granger, L. Beheydt, & J.-P. Colson (Eds.), Contrastive linguistics and translation

(pp. 145–162) Leuven: Peeters.

Knott, A., & Dale, R (1994) Using linguistic phenomena to motivate a set of coherence relations

Discourse Processes, 18, 35–62.

Knott, A., Sanders, T., & Oberlander, J. (Eds.) (2001) Levels of representation in discourse

rela-tions Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 197–332.

Kortmann, B (1996) Adverbial subordination: A typology and history of adverbial subordinators

based on European languages Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Lang, E (1984) The semantics of coordination (Studies in language companion series 9)

Authorized English translation from Lang (1997) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Lang, E., Maienborn, C., & Fabricius-Hansen, C (Eds.) (2003) Modifying adjuncts Berlin:

Mouton de Gruyter.

Lefèvre, M (Ed.) (2000) Subordination in syntax, semantik und textlinguistik Tübingen:

Stauffenburg.

Lehmann, C (1988) Towards a typology of clause linkage In J.  Haiman & S.  D Thompson

(Eds.), Clause combining in Grammar and discourse (pp. 181–226) Amsterdam: Benjamins Levinson, S. C (2000) Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implica-

ture Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A (1988) Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory

of text organization Text, 8(3), 243–281.

Matthiessen, C. M I. M., & Thompson, S. A (1988) The structure of discourse and

‘subordina-tion’ In J. Haiman & S. A Thompson (Eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.  (1985) A comprehensive grammar of the

English language London/New York: Longman.

1 Introduction

Ramm, W (2008) Upgrading of non-restrictive relative clauses in translation: A change in

discourse structure? In C.  Fabricius-Hansen & W.  Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’ versus

‘coordination’ in sentence and text: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 135–160) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Reis, M (1999) On sentence types in German: An enquiry into the relationship between grammar

and pragmatics Interdisciplinary Journal for Germanic Linguistics and Semiotic Analysis, 4,

195–236.

Taverniers, M (2006) Grammatical metaphor and lexical metaphor: Different perspective on

semantic variation Neophilologus, 2, 321–332.

Thompson, G (1996) Introducing functional grammar London: Edward Arnold.

Thompson, S. A., & Longacre, R. E (1985) Adverbial clauses In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language

typology and syntactic description, Vol II: Complex constructions (pp. 171–234) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Verstraete, J.-C (2005) Two types of coordination in clause combining Lingua, 115(4), 611–626 Verstraete, J.-C (2007) Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy In Interpersonal gram-

mar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English (Topics in English linguistics 55) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Webber, B., Joshi, A., Stone, M., & Knott, A (2003) Anaphora and discourse structure

Computational Linguistics, 29(4), 545–587.

Wolf, F., & Gibson, E (2005) Representing discourse coherence: A corpus-based analysis

Computational Linguistics, 31(2), 249–287.

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd 2019

Q He, A Corpus-Based Approach to Clause Combining in English from the

Systemic Functional Perspective, The M.A.K Halliday Library Functional

Linguistics Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7391-6_2

SFL focuses on the meaning realization as form, and the basic language unit of analysis is clause After the analysis of the functional syntactic structures of clauses, SFL analyzes the grammatical structures below the clause (group/phrase), above the clause (clause complex), around the clause (cohesive and coherent devices from the perspective of text), and beyond the clause (grammatical metaphor) In this chapter,

we will summarize the relation types of clause complexes above clauses, and then

we will discuss the characteristics of parataxis, hypotaxis, and embedding following the notion of cline, and finally we will reconstruct the relation system network of the

“clause + clause” constructions

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

Clauses can be used independently However, two clauses used independently are not arranged in disorder They are often linked together by some cohesive devices to realize certain logico-semantic relations Two clauses can also be bound together by some structural devices to form a clause complex A clause can also be embedded

in another clause as a component of that clause or embedded in a constituent of

another clause to function as a modifier of that constituent In this way, the two clauses can realize three basic types of relation, i.e., cohesion, interdependency, and embedding For example:

2-1a || I will wear an evening dress || || However, I don’t like the long dress ||

(BNC_NEWS)

b ||| At first I thought || it was steam from the coffee machine ||| ||| Then I

realised || it must be a ghost ||| (BNC_NEWS)

The two independently used clauses in 2-1a are linked together by the

conjunc-tive adverbial group however, realizing the relationship of adversaconjunc-tive addition The

two clause complexes of projection in 2-1b are linked together by the conjunctive

adverbial group then, realizing the relationship of time Cohesive relations are

tex-tual, while dependency and embedding are structural In this research, we will mainly discuss the relationships at the structural level

The internal organization of the clause is a multifunctional construct (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 428) Two clauses can be bound together to form a clause complex realizing some logico-semantic relation, one being the primary clause and the other the secondary clause In a clause complex, the relationship between the two clauses is determined by two basic relation systems, i.e., interdepen-dency and logico-semantic relation Interdependent relation includes parataxis and hypotaxis The two clauses in a clause complex of parataxis are equal in status, the first clause being the initiating clause and the second clause, the con-tinuing clause The two clauses in a clause complex of hypotaxis are unequal: the one that can be used independently is the dominant clause, and the other clause modifying or complementing the dominant clause is referred to as the dependent clause

The logico-semantic relation can be divided into two basic types: expansion and projection The former is further divided into elaboration, extension, and enhancement and the latter, into locution and idea “Expansion relates phenom-ena as being of the same order of experience, while projection relates phenomena

to phenomena of a higher order of experience (semiotic phenomena –– what people say and think)” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004: 377) Interdependency and the logico-semantic relationship intersect to form a relation system network

of clause complexes (see Appendix Fig.  1) According to this relation system network, we can distinguish the following basic types of clausal relations For example:

2-2a || [[That it would be unpopular with students or colleges]] was obvious || (BNC_NEWS) (embedded fact: subject)

b ||| Mr Berkley had almost felt pity for him, || and genuinely regretted [[that they should be at war]] ||| (BNC_FIC) (embedded fact: complement)

c || We have to face the fact [[that we are not a nice species]] ||

(BNC_MISC) (embedded fact: appositive)

d ||| All examples show similar characteristics; || they are generally

stone vaulted ||| (BNC_NA) (paratactic elaboration)

e ||| But I am Earth Commander, || and you are nobody! ||| (BNC_FIC) (paratactic extension)

f ||| But fashion changes every week, || so it doesn’t mean anything ||| (BNC_NA) (paratactic enhancement)

g ||| My father has a flat, || which he uses during the parliamentary session ||| (BNC_FIC) (hypotactic elaboration)

h ||| Some are remarkably hardy, || whereas others need the protection

of a warm wall or even a greenhouse ||| (BNC_MISC)

(hypotactic extension)

i ||| This causes her to write a letter to God, asking for a sign, ||

because she cannot understand [[what has happened]] ||| (BNC_MISC) (hypotactic enhancement)

j ||| He said, || “We’re talking about hiring a coach.” ||| (BNC_FIC)

(paratactic projection: locution)

k ||| He said || that they were not terribly reliable ||| (BNC_MISC)

(hypotactic projection: locution)

l ||| I thought, || ‘I’ll go and see what’s doing.’ ||| (BNC_MISC)

(paratactic projection: idea)

m ||| I think || that we are succeeding in that aim ||| (BNC_MISC)

(hypotactic projection: idea)

In parataxis, both the initiating and continuing clauses can be used dently; in hypotaxis, only the dominant clause can be used independently; and in embedding, the matrix cause is independent, and the embedded clause is rank- shifted In a clause complex of hypotaxis, the semantic type of the dependent clause

indepen-is the circumstance in the transitivity system and the adjunct in the mood system

“Circumstances augment the configuration of process + participants in the clause in terms of either projection or expansion” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004: 367) For example:

2-3a ||| You will seek me and find me || when you seek me with all

your heart ||| (BNC_MISC)

b ||| Water had to be ferried from the nearest hydrant || using a bowser |||

(BNC_NEWS)

The prepositional phrase with all your heart in 2-3a augments the clause

cir-cumstantially within the domain of the clause In contrast, the non-finite clause

using a bowser expands the clause, opening up a clause complex Example 2-3 shows that the circumstance of a clause contains only one minor process, and

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

hence cannot construe a Figure, enact a proposition or proposal, or present a sage “In contrast, clause complexing always involves assigning clause-hood to an augmentation of expansion or projection: the augmentation has the full potential of

mes-a clmes-ause, in experientimes-al, interpersonmes-al mes-and textumes-al terms” (Hmes-allidmes-ay mes-and Mmes-atthiessen 2004: 368)

2.2.1 Parataxis

The logico-semantic relation of expansion and projection can both be paratactic Since the two clauses in a paratactic clause complex are equal in status, if the pri-mary clause is finite, the secondary clause must also be finite

2.2.1.1 Paratactic Expansion

2.2.1.1.1 Paratactic Elaboration

There are three types of paratactic elaboration, i.e., exposition, exemplification, and clarification The two clauses of paratactic elaboration are both finite and do not require conjunctions If there are conjunctions, they are “cohesive rather than struc-tural markers” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 464) For example:

2-4a ||| [1] The processor can interpret several elements of the picture at

once; || [=2] in other words it acts in parallel fashion ||| (BNC_NA)

(exposition)

b ||| [1] Similar reasoning occurs in the criminal law; || [= 2] for example,

liability for death is much stricter than liability for theft |||

(BNC_ACAD) (exemplification)

c ||| [1] I wasn’t very happy with my legal representation; || [=2] in fact,

I think I could have done a better job myself ||| (BNC_NA) (clarification)

2.2.1.1.2 Paratactic Extension

In a clause complex, “one clause extends the meaning of another by adding thing new to it” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 471), which is called extension Paratactic extension can be divided into addition, variation, and alternation Addition

some-is further divided into positive addition (and), negative addition (nor), and tive (but) addition, and variation is further divided into replacive and subtractive

adversa-For example:

2-5a ||| [1] Costs have been reduced || [+2] and service improved |||

(BNC_MISC) (addition: positive)

b ||| [1] It would not appear that the debtor need be informed of

the application || [+2] nor be given the opportunity to attend the

hearing of the application ||| (BNC_ACAD) (addition: negative)

c ||| [1] Unemployment is rising, || [+2] but inflation is falling |||

(BNC_MAG) (addition: adversative)

d ||| [1] She said nothing, || [+2] but instead left the two young

people by the window ||| (BNC_FIC) (variation: replacive)

e ||| [1] He would have fitted up this room, || [+2] only he couldn’t

afford it ||| (BNC_MISC) (variation: subtractive)

f ||| [1] They can give in, || [+2] or they can die ||| (BNC_FIC)

(alternation)

2.2.1.1.3 Paratactic Enhancement

In enhancement, “one clause (or subcomplex) enhances the meaning of another by qualifying it in one of a number of possible ways: by reference to time, place, man-ner, cause or condition” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 476) Paratactic enhance-ment is characterized with circumstance which is realized as a conjunction or conjunction group For example:

2-6a ||| [1] You do a complete circuit, left or right depending on wind, ||

[×2] and then you can go where you want ||| (BNC_MISC) (time)

b ||| [1] Herbert finds a lonely spot for himself, || [×2] and there he cries

himself to sleep ||| (BNC_ACAD) (place)

c ||| [1] Decide which these are now, || [×2] and in this way you will have

a good supply of fresh vegetables and fruit ||| (BNC_MISC)

(manner: method)

d ||| [1] Plato, after all, might never have thought of Atlantis; ||

[×2] and similarly Homer might never have thought of Achilles |||

(BNC_ACAD) (manner: comparison)

e ||| [1] Jenkins has been in the job for about 10 days, || [×2] so she

can be forgiven for forgetting a lot of names |||(BNC_NA) (cause: result)

f ||| [1] This must be returned within 5 days, || [×2] otherwise we reserve

the right to cancel the contract (BNC_MISC) (condition: negative)

g ||| [1] He isn’t our dog, || [×2] but he lives next door to us |||

(BNC_FIC) (condition: concession)

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

2.2.1.2 Paratactic Projection

Halliday and Matthiessen (2014: 509–511) classify projection in terms of three tems: (1) level of projection, (2) mode of projection, and (3) speech function of projection Projection mode includes paratactic quoting and hypotactic reporting The macro-speech function can be paratactic or hypotactic, but a minor speech function can only be paratactic This can also mean that the continuing clause of minor speech function is not a typical parataxis This is because the two clauses of parataxis are both finite Paratactic quoting is equivalent to the direct speech in tra-ditional grammar Examples 2-7 and 2-8 are projected propositions and projected proposal, respectively

sys-2-7a ||| [1] He said, || [“2] “We’re talking about hiring a coach.” ||| (BNC_FIC) (quoting locution)

b ||| [1] I thought, || [‘2] ‘I’ll go and see what’s doing.’ (BNC_NA)

(quoting idea)

c ||| [1] Mller said, ||| [“2] “Goodbye, Madame.” (BNC_FIC)

(quoting minor speech)

2-8 ||| [1] And at first his mum said, || [“2] “Don’t bring that girl in

my house.” ||| (BNC_NA) (quoting locution: command)

2.2.2 Hypotaxis

The logico-semantic relationship of expansion and projection can also be tic As the two clauses of hypotaxis are not equal in status, non-finite clauses can also realize hypotaxis

elabo-2-9a ||| [α] The Terminator game, <<[=β] which costs 40>>, has

jumped straight into the Top Ten best-selling list ||| (BNC_NEWS)

b ||| [1] Mandeville and Santerre soon returned from the trees; ||

[=2] the latter had a crossbow in his hand ||| (BNC_FIC)

2-11a ||| [α] The charity cuppa cost 30p, || [+β] while Mr Jones charged 60p

||| (BNC_MISC) (addition: positive)

b ||| [α] To date, the Board has had three meetings, || [+β] while the

Committee has only met once ||| (BNC_ACAD) (addition: adversative)

c ||| [α] The same rules apply to the losers, || [+β] except that the date

used is when their shares were at their peak ||| (BNC_MISC)

(variation: subtraction)

d ||| [α] If it has no atmosphere, || [+β] then it will be surrounded by

space, which is a near vacuum ||| (BNC_NA) (alternation)

There is no hard boundary between paratactic and hypotactic extensions “If the extending clause could precede (thereby becoming thematic in the clause complex), the relationship is hypotactic (since +β ^ α is a possible sequence, but +2 ^ 1 is not)” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 474) For example:

2-12a ||| [1] The writer may seem to be actively creating, || [+2] whereas in

fact he or she is being passively fashioned by the public’s desires ||| (BNC_ACAD)

b ||| [+β] Whereas calf is smooth, || [α] without perceptible grain,

morocco can vary considerably in texture ||| (BNC_MISC)

Non-finite clauses of extension include addition and variation, but there is no alternation or negative addition Thus, non-finite clauses of extension include posi-tive addition, adversative, replacive, and subtractive For example:

2-13a ||| [+β] Besides being a computer-game otaku, || [α] Kojak is an idol

otaku ||| (BNC_FIC) (addition: positive)

b ||| [α] It gives a lovely natural glow to the wood, || [+β] without making

it appear too shiny ||| (BNC_MISC) (addition: adversative)

c ||| [+β] Instead of going into the green room, || [α] we went to the

girls’ dressing room ||| (BNC_MISC) (variation: replacive)

d ||| [α] Our life has no meaning || [+β] other than serving our

controllers ||| (BNC_FIC) (variation: subtractive)

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

The extension of variation always requires a preposition to realize relator, while the extension of addition does not need a conjunctive expression For example:2-14a ||| [α] She stooped, looked inside, then straightened, angry, || [+β]

talking to herself ||| (COCA_FIC) (addition: positive)

b ||| [+β] Slowly, hardly knowing what she did, || [α] Alexandra

nodded ||| (COCA_MAG) (addition: adversative)

2.2.2.1.3 Hypotactic Enhancement

“The combination of enhancement with hypotaxis gives what are known in tional formal grammar as ‘adverbial clauses’” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 481) Enhanced finite hypotactic clauses always require a conjunctive expression which is called “binder” to realize parataxis and circumstance For example:2-15a ||| [×β] By the time I got outta that house, || [α] my mouth run dry

tradi-and my knees wobbled ||| (COCA_FIC) (time)

b ||| [α] House prices will tend to rise || [×β] where the sun shines |||

(COHA_MAG) (place)

c ||| [×β] As it happens, || [α] railroad shopping is a growth industry

in Zurich ||| (COCA_NEWS) (manner: quality)

d ||| [α] There is also an Accident Legal Advice Service (ALAS!), ||

[×β] whereby solicitors offer a free interview to accident victims |||

(BNC_ACAD) (manner: means)

e ||| [α] The profit chargeable for income tax purposes is calculated

in the same way || [×β] as if the Bond has been fully encashed

at the date of death ||| (BNC_MISC) (manner: comparison)

f ||| [α] We are reducing the numbers of people who qualify for free

food || [×β] because people are cheating ||| (COCA_NEWS)

(cause: reason)

g ||| [α] We treat criminals in a disrespectful and often dehumanising

way || [×β] so that they will continue to express our Shadow |||

(BNC_NA) (cause: purpose)

h ||| [α] The steppes were the first to be affected, || [×β] so that in

June alone over a million peasants left them for the Volga |||

(BNC_ACAD) (cause: result)

i ||| [×β] If I had a look, || [α] I’d be sure to find it ||| (BNC_MISC)

(condition)

j ||| [×β] Even though she feared him, || [α] she respected him and

was always trying to impress him ||| (BNC_MISC) (concession)

Non-finite enhancing clauses can also realize the relationship of time, mode, causality, and condition, and the relator can be realized as conjunctions or preposi-tions or even as zero conjunctions For example:

2-16a ||| [×β] When returning home, || [α] the group was instructed to

remain in silence ||| (COCA_ACAD)

b ||| [×β] On returning home || [α] he sets to work ||| (COCA_MAG)

c ||| [×β] Returning home, || [α] Mick throws a party for the local poor |||

(COCA_FIC)

2.2.2.2 Hypotactic Projection

Hypotactic projection corresponds to the indirect speech in traditional grammar Examples 2-17 and 2-18 are projected propositions and projected proposals, respec-tively For example:

2-17a ||| [α] He believes || [‘β] that EON will much improve the service |||

(BNC_NA) (reporting idea)

b ||| [α] He said || [“β] that the council hoped for an amicable solution |||

(BNC_NEWS) (reporting locution)

2-18a ||| [α] Helmut told me || [“β] he would continue paying my allowance

until I got a job ||| (BNC_FIC) (reporting locution: offer)

b ||| [α] I wish || [‘β] that you could be here with me ||| (BNC_FIC)

(reporting idea: command)

Projected propositions are realized as finite clauses, and projected proposals can also be realized as non-finite clauses For example:

2-19a ||| [α] We told him || [“β] to look for us in the evening ||| (BNC_MISC)

(reporting locution: command)

b ||| [α] I want || [‘β] you to take this out to Tony Asmar ||| (BNC_MISC)

(reporting idea: command)

c ||| [α] You promised me || [“β] to hurry back before you’re missed |||

(BNC_FIC) (reporting locution: offer)

In a projected proposal, the subject of the non-finite clause of projected giving is the subject of the primary clause (e.g., 2-19c), and the subject of the non-finite clause of projected demanding is the complement of the main verb of the primary clause (e.g., 2-19a) In other words, the beneficiary of the giving type of projection

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

verbs assumes only one syntactic function of the complement of the projection verb, and the beneficiary of the demanding type of projection verbs may assume two syntactic functions, i.e., the complement of the projection verb and the subject of the projected non-finite clause (e.g., 2-19a), or only assumes one syntactic function, i.e., the subject of the projected non-finite clause (e.g., 2-19b) From another point

of view, the subject of the reporting locution is implicit For example, him in 2-19a and me in 2-19c are the complements of the projecting verbs, the former being the

subject of the projected clause and the latter, not The subject of the reporting idea

is explicit For example, you in 2-19b is the subject of the projected non-finite

clause

There is also an intermediate stage between quoting and reporting, which Halliday and Matthiessen (2014: 465) refer to as “free indirect speech.” That is to say, it is a cline from parataxis to hypotaxis (see Sect 2.3) For example:

2-20a ||| She wondered, || “Do I do it wrong?” ||| (BNC_FIC) (quoting: direct

speech)

b ||| I wonder, || do you attend a day centre at all? ||| (BNC_FIC)

(free indirect speech)

c ||| And he wondered || if he would ever discover them |||

(BNC_FIC) (reporting: indirect speech)

the antecedent the fact For example:

2-21a || The interest [[which this shift in police policy provoked]] was

considerable || (BNC_ACAD) (embedded defining clause:

post-modifier in nominal group)

b || She scrambled down the tree as fast [[as she could]] || (BNC_FIC)

(embedded defining clause: post-modifier in adverbial group)

c || [[That the core of the issue was hedonism]] was unsurprising ||

(BNC_ACAD) (embedded fact clause: head of nominal group)

d || We regret [[that we are unable to answer your letters personally]] ||

(BNC_FIC) (embedded fact clause: head of nominal group)

e || The fact [[that regular exercise is beneficial]] is therefore beyond

question || (BNC_MISC) (embedded fact clause: appositive of

nominal group)

Embedded clauses may also be non-finite For example, the non-finite clauses in 2-22a–c function as the subject of the clause within which it is embedded, the com-

plement of the verbal group saw, and the post-modifier of the head noun company

in the nominal group, respectively

2-22a || [[Having a baby]] would have taken us off the front pages ||

(BNC_FIC)

b || Then suddenly I saw [[him riding towards me]] || (BNC_FIC)

c || A company [[breaking this agreement]] should give us the absolute

right to seek compensation || (BNC_SPOK)

2.2.3.1 Embedded Defining Clauses

Embedded defining clauses can also realize the logico-semantic relations of expansion

2.2.3.1.1 Embedded Defining Clauses of Elaboration

Embedded clauses of elaboration can be introduced by explicit relative pronouns

such as who, which, and that If the relative pronoun is not the subject of the

embed-ded clause, an explicit relative pronoun is not always necessary Then, the matical function of the relative pronoun in the embedded clause is assumed by the antecedent Embedded defining clauses of elaboration can be either finite or non- finite When it is non-finite, the relative pronoun is not necessary no matter what a syntactic role it assumes in the embedded clause For example:

gram-2-23a ||| You say || you’ll try to lift up the child [[= who is stillest]] |||

(BNC_ACAD)

b ||| Here she was at last with the man [[= she loved]] ||| (BNC_FIC)

c ||| There is a certain irony about the events [[= leading up to the 1954

Convention]] ||| (BNC_ACAD)

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

2.2.3.1.2 Embedded Defining Clauses of Extension

Embedded clauses of extension are also defining relative clauses in grammar They

are possessive clauses introduced by relative pronouns such as of which and whose Grammatically, the relative pronoun, e.g., whose is not a direct participant of the

embedded clause, and hence cannot be omitted Embedded clauses of extension are all finite such as those in 2-24 which have no corresponding non-finite equivalents.2-24a ||| A Colombian [[+ whose daughter had ‘disappeared’]] gave an

impromptu speech ||| (BNC_FIC)

b ||| That seems to be the stuff [[+ of which miscarriages of justice are

made]] ||| (BNC_MISC)

2.2.3.1.3 Embedded Defining Clauses of Enhancement

Embedded clauses of enhancement are the circumstances of the head noun within which they are embedded, including time, place, manner, cause, condition, etc The circumstantial meaning can be in the clause within which it is embedded or in the head noun of the clause within which it is embedded In the latter case, the relative adverb introducing embedded clauses can be omitted For example:

2-25a ||| The room [[× in which we lunched]] was referred to as the ‘salon’ |||

(BNC_FIC) (place)

b ||| This was the time [[× when the old style of gabled manor was

feeling the first breath of classical ideas]] ||| (BNC_MISC) (time)

c |||This world was more complex [[× than his stories had ever made it]]

||| (BNC_FIC) (manner: comparison)

d ||| The reason [[× why it is more productive in these middle years]] is

simple ||| (BNC_MISC) (cause: reason)

e ||| The people downstairs – there’s no way [[× they could have got

out]] ||| (manner: means)

Embedded clauses of enhancement can also be non-finite For example:

2-26a ||| You will receive a copy of the report and have the opportunity [[× to

discuss it in an interview]] ||| (BNC_NA) (cause: purpose)

b ||| There still remains great difficulty [[× in getting agreement on the

map]] ||| (BNC_NEWS) (place)

c ||| I doubt || that this is an appropriate time [[× for you to visit my

stepmother]] ||| (BNC_FIC) (time)

d ||| Brutus has no reason [[[× for thinking || that Caesar would change

his nature]]] ||| (cause: reason)

2.2.3.1.4 Embedded Act Clauses

In addition to post-modifiers, embedded clauses can also realize participants as macrophenomena through nominalization, which are referred to as embedded act clauses, directly assuming an element of the clauses within which they are embed-ded Embedded act clauses can be regarded as post-modifier of action nouns, and so their logico-semantic relation can also be elaborated Embedded act clauses are syntactically subject or complement of verbal groups For example:

2-27a || [[= Turning failure into success]] is an attitude of mind || (BNC_

MISC) (relational: attributive)

b || [[= Having no power]] was the greatest problem || (BNC_MISC)

(relational: identifying)

c || These officers watched [[= sacks being off-loaded into a dinghy for

transfer to another vessel]] || (behavior)

d || She saw [[= birds whirling in the stark sky || (mental: perceptual)

If the complement of the mental verbal group of projection is a finite clause, this finite clause is a meta-phenomenon, and if it is a non-finite clause, this non-finite clause is a macro-phenomenon The projected meta-phenomenon is a fact, and the projected macro-phenomenon is an act or an event Thus, 2-28c is not acceptable because we cannot see an event in the past 2-28a and 2-28b are both acceptable because we can see a fact, whether past or present For example:

2-28a ||| [α] In the less than half light Owen saw || [‘β] that Georgiades had

come out on to the gallery ||| (BNC_FIC) (projection: fact)

b || In the less than half light Owen saw [[=Georgiades coming out on to

the gallery]] || (embedding: act)

c *|| In the less than half light Owen saw [[=Georgiades having come

out on to the gallery]] || (embedding: act)

2.2.3.2 Embedded Fact Clauses

Projection can also be realized as embedded clauses In this case, the projecting clause is rank-shifted to function as the appositive of the nominal group within which it is embedded, and the matrix clause is nominalized to function as the Thing For example:

2-29a || Kosann loves the personal statement “[[that black-and-white photos

make on this mirrored vanity]] || (BNC_MAG) (projected locution: embedding)

b || The plan begins with the belief ‘[[that good teachers won’t

necessarily thrive in all classrooms]] || (BNC_NEWS) (projected idea: embedding)

2.2 Overview of Clause Combining

Embedded clauses of projection are embedded in the nominal groups of locution

or idea “Hence any noun that belongs to a projecting class may be defined

(restricted) in either of these two ways, either by projection (e.g., the thought [that

she might one day be a queen ]) or by expansion (e.g., the thought [that came into

her mind])” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 535) Here is an example:

2-30 || This is a statement [[= that you put out about the president’s

budget]] || (BNC_SPOK) (expansion: embedding)

The head noun within which the embedded clause of projection is embedded is usually a nominalization of the verbal group of projection or is derived from the verbal group of projection They can also be divided into propositions and proposals

in function “Thus verbal processes, and mental: cognitive processes, project in the indicative mode (propositions), while verbal processes, and mental: desiderative processes, project in the imperative mode (proposals)” (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 536) For example:

2-31a || The assertion “[[that GMO labeling somehow implies inferior

quality]] is transparently specious || (COCA_MAG) (proposition: statement)

b || We must know the answer to the question “[[whether missile defense

increases or decreases Poland’s safety]] (COCA_ACAD)

(proposition: question)

c || Tony braced himself for the suggestion “[[that he get out of Sam’s

way]] || (COCA_FIC) (proposal: offer)

d ||| [1] The Marine made no meaningful movement, || [×2] and Jess gave

the order “[[that he be moved to the expectant ward]] ||| (COCA_

NEWS) (proposal: command)

Embedded defining clauses of projection can also be non-finite For example:2-32a || The thought ‘[[of being on medication for the rest of my life]] is

depressing || (COCA_MAG) (proposition: statement)

b ||| [×β] When courts interpret precedents, || [α] they face the question

“[[whether to treat them as standards or rules]] ||| (COCA_ACAD) (proposition: question)

c || He has made known his desire ‘[[to play for a contender and receive

proper compensation]] || (COCA_NEWS) (proposal: offer)

d || They later increased their demand “[[to include the release of a

further 1,000 prisoners]] || (COCA_NEWS) (proposal: command)Embedded fact clauses are not necessarily projected by verbal verbs or mental verbs, nor projected clauses embedded within nominal groups of locution or idea

Rather they may be packaged as the appositive of the general noun fact in the

pro-jected form without projecting verbs For example: