Metaphor, based on the association of similarity, is one of the two basic types of semantic transference that have been an interest for many linguistic researchers

Metaphor, based on the association of similarity, is one of the two basic types of semantic transference that have been an interest for many linguistic researchers

Part I: Introduction

1 Rationale

Metaphor, based on the association of similarity, is one of the two basic types of semantictransference that have been an interest for many linguistic researchers Galperin ( 1981: 139-40) states that the term ‘metaphor’ can be understood as the transference of some quality fromone object to another Metaphor is widely used to designate the process in which a wordacquires a derivative meaning.

In theory, there are at least three communicative functions that metaphor might serve (Ortony1975) First, they might allow one to express that which is difficult or impossible to express ifone is restricted to literal uses of language Evidence for this "inexpressibility" claim wouldconstitute encouraging support for the necessity-of-metaphors view A second possiblefunction of metaphors is that they may constitute a particularly compact means ofcommunication Although conscious experience is continuous in form, the linguistic systemwe use to talk about it is comprised of discrete elements (lexical items) Unlike more literalforms of language, metaphor may enable us to convey a great deal of information in a succinctmanner by obviating the need to isolate the predicates to be expressed into their correspondinglexical representations Finally, metaphors may help capture the vividness of phenomenalexperience If metaphors convey chunks of information rather than discrete units, they canpaint a richer and more detailed picture of our subjective experience than might be expressedby literal language This we call the "'vividness" claim.

In this paper we are interested in the first and last of these possible functions Thus, we need toexamine a discourse domain for which a prima facie case can be made for supposing thatliteral language will often be inadequate and which lends itself to variations in vividness.There doubtless are many such domains The one that we selected was that of internal states,in particular, emotional states The literature on the linguistic expression of emotions suggestsa relatively high incidence of figurative language use (Davitz 1969), providing pragmaticreasons for believing that the context of (linguistic) emotional expression may be a profitable

one within which to study metaphor production Emotional states seemed well-suited becausethey tend to have an elusive, transient quality that is difficult to describe using literal language,

although, of course, they can usually be labeled using literal language Thus, while it might be

easy for a person to label an emotional state as, for example, "fear," it is difficult to provide a

literal description of the quality of some particular experience of fear Furthermore, because

emotions vary in intensity, one might expect differential levels of vividness.

Our thesis is entitled “ An investigation into the role of metaphor in description ofemotions in English poetic disscourse” and focused on William Shakespeares’ sonnets The

choice is based on two reasons Firstly, recent research states that “Metaphorical modes ofexpression are characteristic of all adult discourse” Secondly, as stated above, the literature onthe linguistic expression of emotions suggests a relatively high incidence of figurativelanguage use (Davitz 1969)

2 Aims of the study

This study aims to investigate the characteristics of metaphor in poetry from a systemicfunctional perspective The objective of the study is:

- To examine the characteristics of metaphor in poetry from the approach ofSystemic Functional Linguistics

More details on the aimed objective of the study are discussed in Part 2, chapter Methodology.

2-3 Scope of the study

This study only attempts to explore metaphorical modes of expression of emotions in Englishpoetry discourse and takes William Shakespeares’ sonnets as an illustration due to theiravailable presence in the discourses.

Halliday (1994:341) states that: “ lexical selection is just one aspect of lexicogrammaticalselection, or wording; and that metaphorical variation is lexicogrammatical rather than simply

lexical”; basing on this the study will focus on grammatical metaphor or the way ideas areexpressed rather than on words used

4 Methodology of the study

As the thesis sets its main objective of investigating the characteristics of metaphor in Englishpoetry discourse, it is descriptive research which begins with a phenomenon and seeks todescribe and explain it The study was conducted in a deductive approach where data wascollected from English literature to describe metaphor as a natural linguistic process Thetechniques involved in data analysis are both qualitative and quantitative

The concepts of metaphor and emotion was discussed in systemic functional and cognitiveapproach respectively, and in comparison with other linguistic views in a linear line of time.The emotion metaphors was retrieved from metaphor dictionaries and corpus data andanalyzed with respect to the use of it to convey emotion Only metaphor that helpsconceptualize emotions was studied.

5 Organization of the study

The study is composed of three parts.

 Part 1: Introduction This part introduces the relevance, the aims, the scope and themethodology of the study.

 Part 2 : Development This part consists of two chapters:

- Chapter 1: Literature review: provided the theoretical background of the study Itsfocus was on introducing important concepts relevant to the topic of the thesis Thischapter gave a general picture of metaphor The notion of emotion and how it is expressedin poetry via metaphor was also taken into consideration.

- Chapter 2: The study: In this chapter, the research design applied in the study wasreported and the results of the study were presented

 Part 3 is the conclusion of the study which summarized the issues addressed in themain part and offered implications for teaching and further study.

PART II: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEWI THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1 Introduction

Language is a systematic resource for expressing meaning in context and linguistics,according to Halliday (1985), is the study of how people exchange meanings through the useof language This view of language as a system for meaning potential implies that language isnot a well defined system, nor a "the set of all grammatical sentences." It also implies thatlanguage exists and therefore must be studied in contexts such as professional settings,classrooms, and language tests This is the key concept expressed in the theory of SystemicFunctional Linguistics developed by Halliday (1985) and basing on it this chapter is concernedwith some of the concepts which set the theoretical background for the study of metaphor

Since a great deal has already been written about the systemic function model, both from

practical and theoretical perspective ( Halliday 1994; Halliday & Hasan 1989; Martin 1985,1992; Matthiessen 1995, Hoang Van Van 1997, Do Tuan Minh 2001 amongst many others)this section will be restricted to a number of key points in the theories that are closely related

to the topic of the study- metaphor

Our overview on the systemic functional linguistics is organized around the headings:Language and Social Context, Levels of Context, Levels of Language, Metafunction,Instantiation, Rank and Nominal Group.

2 Language and Social Context

Systemic Functional Grammar was established as a linguistic theory by M.A.K Halliday It isa theory of language centred around the notion of language function Halliday argues that it isthe social context for communication that regulates the way the semantics of language areemployed He believes that social settings shape the development of language The form of

human language is as it is since it co-evolves with the meanings which co-evolve with thecommunity’s contexts of social interaction

Then, language and social is treated as complementary levels of semiosis related by theconcept of realization We can illustrate the relationship between them by the image of co-tangential circles as in figure 2.1

Figure 1 : Language as the Realization of Social Context

( Source: Halliday& Martin 1993:25)

Extralinguistic levels

Linguistic levels

Figure 2 ( Source: http//:wwww.uefap.com/courses/beacc/fsl/intro/htm)

The context of culture can be thought of as deriving from a combination of all of the genreswhich make up a particular culture Genres are the culturally evolved ways of achieving goalsthat involve language They are "staged, goal- oriented social processes" (Martin 1992: 505) inwhich people engage as members of their culture They are “social” because we participate ingenres with other people; goal-oriented because we use genres to get things done; stagedbecause it usually takes us a few steps to reach our goals" (Martin & Rose 2003: 7-8) Eachgenre is therefore characterized by a distinctive schematic structure with a clear beginning,middle and end through which the function of the genre is realized These genres include all ofthose routines from everyday experience such as purchase of goods (food, clothing etc), to thegenres of particular forms of social life including TV interviews, getting arrested etc Theyalso include genres which are valued in education and business Lectures are genres, as areseminars and tutorials etc and written genres such as narratives, reports, explanations,procedures, and expositions These genres have their own distinctive structures (or well-established stages) because of the social purposes they fulfill in the culture in which they areused They occur in particular situation types and it is the characteristics of this situation typethat influence the forms of language that realize the genre So the context of situation (register)is the second aspect of social context that influences the linguistic realization of the genre.

This context of situation of a text has been described by Halliday (Halliday and Hasan 1985:12) in terms of the variables of Field, Tenor and Mode.

+ The FIELD OF DISCOURSE concerns what is happening, to the nature of the social actionthat is taking place: what is it that the participants are engaged in, in which the language is anessential component?

+ The TENOR OF DISCOURSE concerns who is taking part, to the nature of the participants,their statuses and roles: what kinds of role relationships obtain among the participants,including permanent and temporary relationships of one kind or another, both the types ofspeech role that they are taking on in the dialogue and the whole cluster of socially significantrelationships in which they are involved?

+ The MODE OF DISCOURSE concerns what part the language is playing, what it is that theparticipants are expecting the language to do for them in that situation, the symbolicorganisation of the text, the status that it has, and its function in the context, including thechannel (is it spoken or written or some combination of the two?) and also the rhetoricalmode, what is being achieved by the text in terms of such categories as persuasive, expository,didactic and the like

Figure 3 Source: http//:wwww.uefap.com/courses/beacc/fsl/intro/htm on

4 Levels of Language

While SFL accounts for the syntactic structure of language, it places the function of languageas central (what language does, and how it does it), in preference to more structuralapproaches, which place the elements of language and their combinations as central SFLstarts at social context, and looks at how language both acts upon, and is constrained by, thissocial context.

Systemic Functional Grammar divides the language system into four strata: context,semantics, lexico-grammar, and phonology/graphology As shown in Fig 2.4, each stratumcan be further divided into functional components or functions Ideational, interpersonal andtextual functions of language are considered in the semantic stratum Here, ideational meaningrefers to the way one uses representational tools to compose the idea In the context stratumfor example, functional components are concerned with field (what is going on in thecommunication), tenor (the social roles and relationships involved) and mode (the medium forcommunication) Lexico-Grammar is a resource for putting meanings into words, i.e.realizing them as configurations of lexical and grammatical items It concerns the syntacticorganization of words into utterances, involving analysis of the utterance in terms of rolessuch as Actor, Agent, Medium, Theme, Mood, etc This gives Martin (1992:496):

Figure 4 Source: http//:wwww.uefap.com/courses/beacc/fsl/intro/htm on

5 Metafunctions, rank and the nominal group5.1 Metafunctions

Central to SFL is the use of systems, used to represent the choices present in making an

utterance The three systems related to the three metafunctions are: Transitivity,Theme/Rheme and Mood & Modality Ideational (experiential and logical) meanings

construing Field are realized Lexico-Grammatically by the system of Transitivity This systeminterprets and represents our experience of phenomena in the world by describing experientialmeanings in terms of participants, processes and circumstances Interpersonal meanings arerealized Lexico-Grammatically by systems of Mood & Modality The Mood system is thecentral resource establishing an exchange between interactants by assuming and assigningspeech roles such as giving or demanding goods and services or information Thus the givingof information or goods and services is grammaticalized as declaratives, questions aregrammaticalized as interrogatives and commands as imperatives Textual meanings areconcerned with the interaction of interpersonal and ideational information as text in context.Lexico-Grammatically textual meanings are realized by systems of Theme/Rheme.Theme/Rheme selections establish the orientation or angle on the interpersonal and ideationalconcerns of the clause.

Figure 5 Source http//:www.uefap.com/cources/baecc/sfl/intro.htm

5 2 Rank

Rank orders units into a hierarchy according to their constituency relation: the highest-ranking

units consist of units of the rank immediately below, these units consist of units at the nextrank below, and so on, until we arrive at the units of the lowest rank, which have no internalconstituent structure Rank is thus a theory of the global distribution of the units of thegrammar The English grammatical rank scale recognized by Systemic Functional Grammar isas follows:

In turn, each unit has their own members which are grouped into classes For example,sentences can be divided into nominal, verbal, adverbial and adjectival groups; noun, verb,adverbs, etc belong to word

The most important unit that functional grammar takes into consideration is clause Analyzingclause structure means identifying the functional parts of the clause from each of the threedifferent perspectives: ideational, interpersonal and textual In each metafunction, an analysisof a clause gives a different kind of structure composed from a different set of elements For example, in the ideational metafunction, a clause is analyzed into the functional parts asthe following:

Unitsentenceclause

group/ phrase word

morpheme

Chart 1 : Clause structure- ideational metafunction - four functional parts by Martin,Matthiessen & Painter (1997: 7-8)

In textual metafunction, the clause is analyzed as Theme and Rheme The above example canbe illustrated as follows:

Chart 2 : Clause structure- textual metafunction - four functional parts by Martin,Matthiessen & Painter (1997: 7-8)

In English Theme is the first element of a clause and providing what we call the departure forthe starting point for the clause By changing Theme we do not change the ideational meaningbut the textual meaning.

There is the third kind of meaning called interpersonal meaning which is realized by Mood and Residue

Chart 3 : Clause structure- interpersonal metafunction - four functional parts byMartin, Matthiessen & Painter (1997: 7-8)

5 3 The nominal group

The metafunctional organization of the grammar that we illustrated above for the clause applies to theother ranks as well For example, the nominal group has ideational systems of THING TYPE,CLASSIFICATION, EPITHESIS and QUALIFICATION, interpersonal systems of PERSON andATTITUDE, and textual systems of DETERMINATION But the way the metafunctionalcontributions map structurally one onto another varies; in particular, groups are organized both asorganic wholes and as logical complexes The figure below shows an example of an English nominalgroup

Table 1: Experiential and logical analysis of the English nominal group

Deictic Numerative Epithet Classifier Thing Qualifier: Minor process

Minor Range

6 Summary

In this chapter we have tried to give an overview of systemic functional linguistics It isdescribed as a functional- semantic approach to language which explores how language isused in different contexts, and how it is constructed for using as a semiotic system Languageand context are viewed as complementary abstractions, related by the important concept ofrealization Context is realized by the content level of language ( semantics and lexico-grammar) and content is given form in the expression level ( phonology or graphology) Then,the semantics level is classified into three metafunctions( experiential, interpersonal andtextual) and each of them is related to a specific context or register variable ( field, tenor ormode) which then is realized through one or more of the lexico-grammartical systems( transitivity, mood or theme) Another notion of SFL is rank- the hierarchical relationshipbetween the various units of language, has also been mentioned

II METAPHOR: A GENERAL DESCRIPTION1 Introduction

The notion of meaning potential is central to a systemic description of language: there aremany things we can mean, and in order to communicate we choose from this range ofpotential meanings Therefore, a theory of language must be able to describe both thepotential, and the initiation of a choice from that potential If the relationship between themeaning potential and the realization of a choice was totally random, then language would beimpossible to describe and study, and probably useless as a communication tool Evidently,the relationship is not random Halliday ( 1994:343) states that “ for any selection inmeaning there will be a natural sequence of steps leading towards its realization”.

2 Definition of metaphor

Traditionally, metaphor has been viewed as poetic or literary language Nevertheless, in the

last few decades, cognitive linguists like, for example, Lakoff and Johnson have revealed thatmetaphors play an important part in colloquial language and everyday use Lakoff andJohnson have found that “metaphor is conceptual system, in terms of which we both think andact, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature” (1980: 3) Even though not all language ismetaphorical, metaphors are indeed an important part of language (Saeed 2003: 247)

So how do we define metaphor? It is taken to be ( as the name suggests in Greek) a transfer of

some kind We will mention some of the definitions of metaphor as follows.

A simplified definition is that metaphor is a “mapping of the structure of a source model ontoa target model” (Ungerer and Schmid 1999: 120) The source and the target domain of ametaphor belong to two different cognitive domains To complicate things these belong todifferent superordinate domains and it has not yet been stated precisely what a domain is,neither when one is different from another nor when exactly a domain is superordinate(Barcelona 2003: 32).

The basic claims of the cognitive account of metaphor, developed by Lakoff, Johnson andTurner (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Lakoff 1987, Lakoff and Turner 1989, Lakoff 1993), andelaborated as a more general model of 'blending' by Turner and Fauconnier can be summarisedas follows (see Figure 7):

(1) Metaphor is a cognitive process in which one set of concepts (a target) is understood interms of another (a source) According to the model of blending, metaphor is a conceptualintegration of four (or more) mental spaces Mental spaces are small conceptual arraysconstructed for local purposes of understanding When a conceptual projection occurs, twoinput mental spaces (source and target in a metaphor) are created These input spaces haverelevant information from the respective domains, as well as additional structure from culture,context, point of view and other background information

Figure 7 Model of blending

Consider the following examples:

In the first example, swept out, which literally refers to a physical movement in which

something is removed from a certain place to another, is used to refer to the meaning “dismissing as a lover” In the second example, the action “ crying” is transferred to anothermeaning as “ raining” In both of the examples there is a transfer from a literal to a new,figurative meaning According to Lakoff and Johnson (1980) this is a metaphorical movement.

Amongst the conventional metaphor given by the cognitive linguistics we find the conceptEMOTION IS AS A PHYSICAL FORCE In the view of cognitive linguistics the generalmetaphor EMOTION IS AS A PHYSICAL FORCE is illustrated as follows:

EMOTION IS A PHYSICAL FORCE

ANGER IS HEAT: He was steaming I thought he was going to explode Wait until you’ve cooled down.

LOVE IS HEAT: She positively glowed He gave me an icy stare Come on baby, light my fire.

LOVE IS (MAGNETIC) ATTRACTION: We’re poles apart I keep being drawn back to her.She turns heads wherever she goes.

ANXIETY IS A BURDEN: It’s been a great weight off my mind

He had been labouring under that assumption for a long time Let me shoulder some of your worries for a while.

SADNESS IS A BURDEN: It’s weighing me down

It’s the last straw (that broke the camel’s back) I keep being dragged under.

On summary, many researchers have been working on giving out a definition of metaphor butthere has not been a universal one yet One broad and better definition is given by Kleinginnaand Kleinginna (1981) They gathered, analyzed and classified 92 definitions and 9 skepticalstatements about the concept of emotion concluding that there is little consistency amongdefinitions and many are too vague Therefore, the researchers suggested a comprehensivedefinition as follows:

"Emotion is a complex set of interactions among subjective and objective factors,mediated by neural/hormonal systems, which can:

(a) give rise to affective experiences such as feelings of arousal, pleasure/displeasure; (b) generate cognitive processes such as emotionally relevant perceptual effects,appraisals, labeling processes;

(c)activate widespread physiological adjustments to the arousing conditions; and (d) lead to behavior that is often, but not always, expressive, goal directed, andadaptive" (Kleinginna and Kleinginna 1981 p 355)

So far we have discussed the metaphorical movement in lexical level, the changes happen towords, and this is called lexical metaphor, a feature belongs to lexicon and refers to a changeof meaning to a new, figurative ones.

It is against the background of lexical metaphor, Michael Halliday , in the early 1980s, in hiswork on Systemic Functional Linguistics, introduced the notion of grammatical metaphorwhich we will discuss more thoroughly in the next session.

3 Grammatical Metaphor

As typical examples of grammatical metaphor, Halliday considers various types ofnominalization Let us look at the following instances:

1.The fact that he failed in the exam surprised me.

In order to see why examples such as (1) is not while (2) is grammatical metaphor, inHalliday’s sense, we can take recourse to the notion of a metaphorical movement, whichcharacterizes metaphors in general, as we have seen in the previous section In example (2),his failure in the exam refers to a process taking place at a particular time in reality Now,according to Halliday, processes are normally expressed by means of a conjugated verb and a

number of participants taking part in the activity, with the verb and its participants togetherconstituting a full clause In this view, the most straightforward encoding of the processreferred to in (1) What exactly is metaphorical, in an example such as (2), in Halliday’s view,

is the fact that a process (a verb, fail, and its participants, He + the exam) is not realized by

means of a clause, but rather by means of another type of form, such as a noun phrase, as inthe example at hand In this sense, grammatical metaphor again involves a type ofmetaphorical movement: from a process as clause (the default encoding of a process) to aprocess as noun phrase Grammatical metaphor is thus based on the variation betweensomething common, standard, default (i.e a process realized as a clause) and something whichis extended from that (i.e a process realized by some other form, e.g a noun phrase), and inthis sense grammatical metaphor is similar to the traditional type of metaphor looked at above.However, in the case of grammatical metaphor, the two aspects involved in the movement ormetaphorical extension no longer refer to lexemes and lexical meanings (as with lexicalmetaphor) Rather, they refer to grammatical forms, or grammatical means of expression, suchas a clause and a nominal group According to Halliday, grammatical metaphor is conceivedas an incongruent realization of a given semantic configuration in the lexicogrammar ( 1985:321)

4 Classification of grammatical metaphor

In general, there are four kinds of grammartical metaphor: ideational (experiential),interpersonal, , logical and textual They occur when the usual or ‘congruent’ realization ofmeaning is given a ‘non congruent’ or metaphorical expression The ideational grammaticalmetaphor relates to the experiential meaning, the logical metaphor to the textual meaning andthe interpersonal metaphor to the interpersonal meaning

4.1 Congruent realization of meaning

SFL describes the congruent form of representing experience like this:Example 1: Congruent realization of meaning

(1) He is furious because his wife has been kidnapped.

In the following example we have a more incongruent form of representing reality through agrammatical metaphor:

Example 2: Incongruent realization of meaning: grammatical metaphor

(2) He is in a flood of anger because his wife has been kidnapped.

Why consider this a metaphorical expression? The answer relies on the acceptance of thenotion that the congruent form is the unmarked way we represent experience and that thealternative or marked realization is a form of metaphor

1 Adjective (Qualifier) Noun (Entity)

3 Verb (Process) Adjective (Qualifier)4 Adverb (Circumstance) Adjective (Qualifier)

5.Conjunction (Relator) Prepositional Phrase ( Circumstance)

Table 2 - Class shift (semantic type)

( Adapted from Halliday 1995)

4.2 Logical grammatical metaphor

Logical grammatical metaphor refers to the consideration of meaning in an incongruent way atthe level of the organization of the discourse The most congruent form of joining two ideas iswith a conjunction but when conjunctions are realized through processes and nouns allowingfor two or more clauses to become one, it is referred as a logical grammatical metaphor.In spoken medium the logico-semantic relations such as cause-effect are more commonlyrealized by conjunctions This type of metaphor is called ‘ logical metaphor’ because itinvolves what Martin (1993) calls ‘buried reasoning’, or the metaphorical realization of the

logico-semantic relations such as cause and effect that in a less metaphorical realization wouldbe expressed by the conjunctions This metaphorical realization of conjunctive relations byprocesses like ‘resulting’, ‘causing’, ‘depending’, etc and nominal groups like ‘ classifier’,‘qualifier’, ‘numerative’ , etc

4 3 Ideational grammatical metaphor

The examples given in 3, which are repeated here for ease of reference, have been described asillustrating a metaphorical shift from process as clause to process as noun phrase:

1 His failure in the exam surprised me.

In the systemic functional model of language, the notion of a ‘process’ belongs to theideational metafunction: a ‘process’ is one aspect by which we represent and shape the realitywe live in as human beings In the previous section, ‘process’ has been mentioned ascomplementary to other ideational notions, viz ‘entity’ and ‘quality’ With these notions inmind, the nature of the metaphors in (1) and (2) can now be further explained We have seen

above that, in Halliday’s view, a process is normally expressed by means of a clause, but it can

metaphorically be expressed by means of a noun phrase What is important is that a noun

phrase is also the ‘normal’ (i.e default, standard) expression of some other ideational type ofmeaning, viz an entity An entity is normally expressed by means of noun phrase: a table, the

sun, my sister, joy, eight books In this sense, in example (1), the form ‘noun phrase’ is

borrowed to metaphorically express the meaning of a process, in the same sense as the lexica;

in example (4) (repeated here) borrows the lexeme grasp to express the meaning ‘understand’:

(4) He didn’t grasp it.

The form of a noun phrase can be borrowed to express processes (which are normally realizedby means of clauses), but it can also be used metaphorically to express qualities, which are bydefault encoded by adjectives In this sense, (6) is a metaphorical variant of (5).

(5) She is dishonest.

(6) You cannot really count on her honesty.

Another common sub-type of ideational metaphor is where a process (normally expressed bymeans of clause) comes to be expressed by means of an adjective, and thus, comes to beconceived of as a quality instead

Ideational metaphor is a powerful resource in the grammar of a language, by which theexpression of ideational meanings such as processes, qualities and entities is extended inimportant ways beyond their default encodings as clauses, adjectives and nouns (or nounphrases) respectively: different forms can be borrowed to express different meanings

4.4 Interpersonal grammatical metaphor

The main function of the ideational grammatical metaphor is to condense the information as away to pack more lexical items in one clause at the expense of deleting the participants andtime of the processes, i.e the ideational grammatical metaphor is a more metaphorical way ofexpressing the meaning at the level of experience The interpersonal grammatical metaphor,on the other hand, can be described as a metaphorical way to express interpersonal meaningsthat are congruently represented in mood and modality choices The use of this kind ofgrammatical metaphor is especially important in language as they allow for a more explicit orimplicit presence of the writer/speaker in the discourse

The interpersonal component of grammar especially concerns the areas of modality and mood.In these two areas, Halliday also distinguishes between basic, non-metaphorical expressions,and metaphorical ones, i.e inter- personal metaphors Let us look at each area in turn.

A default realization of a modal meaning, for example, a degree of certainty, according toHalliday, is by means of modal elements that occur within the clause that is being modallyevaluated For example, in order to express the likelihood of John having left already, we canuse a modal verb such as must (9) and/or a modal adverb such as certainly (10):

(9) John must have left (, because the lights are off).(10) John will certainly have left by now.

Halliday calls these expressions of modality, which occur within the clause structure itself, thebasic type However, the same meaning of likelihood with a high degree of certainty can alsobe expressed by adding more elements to the initial clause John + have left The followingexamples illustrate just a few possibilities:

a I think John has already left.

b It is very likely that John has already left.c Everyone believed that John had already left.d It is clear that John has already left.

In each of the examples above, the modal meaning (i.e a high degree of certainty thatsomething is the case) is expressed by elements which lie outside the original clause, andwhich are based on particular types of verbs, such as think (a) or believe (c), or particulartypes of adjectives, such as likely (b) or clear (d) Halliday calls such expressions interpersonalmetaphors of modality, because the modal meaning is realized outside the clause (in contrastwith the standard encoding by means of modal verbs or adverbs, which lie within the clausestructure) In this case, again, the metaphors are based on a borrowing: for example the verbthink can be borrowed to express a modal meaning, as in example (a).

The second interpersonal area in grammar, according to systemic functional linguistics, is thatof mood In order to understand the notion of interpersonal metaphors of mood, it is necessaryto consider, again, what the default types of encoding are With regard to mood, Hallidaydistinguishes three major types of interactive functions: statements are expressions which giveinformation, questions are expressions which ask information, and commands are expressionswhich ask for something to take place Each of these functions has its standard, default type ofencoding: statements are encoded by the declarative, questions by the interrogative, andcommands by the imperative, as we have seen in examples (2)–(4) above The expression ofstatements and questions is fairly straightforward, but with regard to commands, the situationis different There is a large variety of expressions that can be used to express the samecommand:

(11) Send your proposal by email, please.

(12) a Could you send your proposal by email, please ?b I would advise you to send it by email.

c You are kindly requested to send your proposal by email.d It is recommended that you send your proposal by email.e It is advisable to send your proposal by email.

The examples in (11) are different metaphorical variants of expressing a command that canalso be expressed, in its most straightforward, standard way, as an imperative (11) Themetaphorical examples in (12) include the interrogative mood type (which is the standardexpression of requests for information), and the declarative mood type (which normally, i.e.non-metaphorically, expresses the speech function of giving information) Halliday bringstogether these various expressions under the heading of the notion of interpersonal metaphorof mood The reason why these examples are regarded as metaphorical, lies in the fact thatthey deviate from the standard, most straightforward realization of a command by means ofthe imperative mood Their metaphorical nature can be made clear by pointing to the literalmeanings that these expressions have For instance, (12a), at face-value, is basically a requestfor information: ‘could you send your proposal by email, or couldn’t you’? Similarly, at face-value, (12b) only refers to a statement: I state that I advise something to you.

The metaphorical nature of such metaphors of mood is exploited in verbal play A case inpoint is the well-known dinner-table example, where someone asks: Can you pass me the salt,please?, and the addressee answers, ‘Yes, I could certainly do that’, without undertaking anyfurther action with regard to the salt.

4.5 Textual grammatical metaphor

Halliday (1994) does not include this kind of grammatical metaphor in his stydy Martin(1992) is the only systemic scholar who deals with metaphor from the textual perspective Hestates that “ grammatical metaphor affects both the ideational and textual structure of the

clause since it is a tool for organizing text” ( martin in Halliday & Martin 1993: 41) Hebelieves that textual metaphors are logically oriented – they provide source for metaphoricalrealization of conjunctive relations:

Meta-message relation: reason, factor, pointing out Text reference: this

Negotiating texture: let me begin by

Internal conjunction: A number of reasons, for example, as a result

5 Nominalization

5.1 Taking process as thing

In the congruent form of realization, a process should be realized by a verb But in theincongruent form, a process can be represented as a thing, as in:

[1a] First, she reviewed how the dorsal fin evolved.

[1b] There was a first review of the evolution of the dorsal fin.

This kind of metaphor has three functions First, it can turn a dynamic process into a staticentity through recategorization and provides us with a different way of construing the world.Second, it can increase the information load of the nominal group by nominalizing thedynamic process and putting several epithets before the head of the nominal group, and thussucceeds in condensing the information of the clause Third, it can blur or cover up the actorby using nominalizations

5.2 Taking quality as thing

In the congruent form, quality is realized by adjectives But in the incongruent form, it can berepresented by a noun That means that the speaker can take quality as thing, as in:

[2a] I was not hungry to be free.

[2b] I was not born with a hunger to be free.

In this type of metaphor, quality can appear in the form of a circumstantial element or aparticipant In the meantime, the original carrier can become the epithet of a participant and itsrole in the clause becomes less important

3.5.3 Taking assessment as thing

In the congruent form, assessment is expressed by modal verbs or modal adverbs But in theincongruent form, it can be expressed by a noun as in:

[3a] I achieved what I could.[3b] I achieved my potential

This kind of metaphor is termed interpersonal metaphor by Halliday Modal adverbs differ notonly in meaning but also in the attitudes taken by the speaker However, all these modal verbsare colloquial and informal in style Comparatively speaking, their correspondingnominalizations sound more formal This difference can result in different interpersonalmeanings, which can influence the establishment and maintenance of the interpersonalrelationship between the speaker and the listener and affect the fulfillment of the goal of theverbal interaction.

6 Verbalization and grammatical metaphor

By definition, verbalization refers to the language phenomenon that a non-process is taken as aprocess.

6.1 Taking temporal relation as process

Two types of temporal relation: same time and different time To express two or more thantwo events that happen at different time congruently, connectives are used But this kind oftemporal relation can also been taken as process and realized by verbs, as in:

[1a] She left before I arrived.

[2b] Her departure preceded my arrival

To express two or more than two events that happen at the same time congruently, connectivesare used But like the different-time type, this kind of temporal relation can also been taken asprocess and realized by verbs, as in:

[2a] The strike took place last Monday The party conference was held at the same time.[2b] The strike was timed to coincide with the party conference.

To express the same or different time, the congruent forms tend to take the temporal relationas a logical element outside of the transitivity system The incongruent forms, however, tendto encode this relation as a dynamic process.

6.2 Taking cause-effect relation as process

To express cause-effect relation in the congruent way, connectives are used But this kind oflogical meaning can also been taken as process and realized by verbs, as in:[1a] Because he was careless, a traffic accident occurred.

[2b] His carelessness caused a traffic accident.

6 3 Taking condition as process

To express the meaning of condition in the congruent way, connectives are used But in theincongruent form, this meaning can be realized by verbs as in:

[1a] If you have good food, exercises and enough sleep, you will have good health.[2b] Good health depends on good food, exercises and enough sleep.

6 4 Taking concession as process

To express the meaning of concession in the congruent way, connectives are used But in theincongruent form, verbs can be used instead as in:

[1a] I felt he was wrong, although I didn't say so at the time.[2b] My silence didn't mean that I felt he was right.