The significance of theme
This paper explores the area of mismatches between the grammatical semantics of definite NPs and equivalent features actually operative in common ground in a given context of utterance. It does so with a view to examining the provision for accounting for their significance in terms of a Prague School approach and in terms of Systemic Functional Linguistics; and finds problems, of different kinds, with both these approaches. The rhetorical exploitation of such mismatching demonstrated by opening a text in medias res is discussed; and a third approach, that of “significance generation”, is proposed.
This approach of significance generation, which has previously been applied with respect to the meaningfulness of different sentence types, is proposed here as offering a new perspective on a confusing area of different kinds of meaningfulness in the treatment of theme. It involves a “change of gear” between features of meaning associated with the forms of language (linguistic semantics) and features operative in a context of their use. It is based on the claim that a single variable, such as ‘± given’, may have a different value according to whether it is derived from “context as is”, or from the semantics of the linguistic expression used in that context. For example, the linguistic semantics may indicate ‘+ given’, where there is nothing in context to validate this, and so the value as derived from context would be ‘− given’. By allowing for features from these two different sources to clash, this approach provides for a significance outcome, seen as a category in pragmatics which is the product of their combination, to be different from both of them: that is, here, “clash” , as opposed to either ‘+ given’ or ‘− given’. In so doing, I suggest that it provides a framework in terms of which to account for ways in which such opposition may be exploited for rhetorical effect.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The relation between context and semantics in FSP
- 3.Semantics and context in SFL, and Halliday’s definition(s) of Theme
- 4.The Significance Generating Device (SGD): A proposal for accounting for semantics-context clashes
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (28)
References
Austin, J. L. 1970. How to talk: Some simple ways. In J. L. Austin: Philosophical Papers, 2nd ed., James O. Urmson & Geoffrey J. Warnock (eds). London and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 134–153.
Daneš, František. 1966. A three level approach to syntax. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 11: 225–240.
Davies, Eirian C. 2015 [1979]. On the Semantics of Syntax: Mood and Condition in English (Routledge Library Editions: The English Language 8). London: Routledge. (Original edition London: Croom Helm.) 

Davies, Eirian C. 1985. On types of meaningfulness in discourse. In Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. 11, James D. Benson & William S. Greaves (eds). Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 229‑247.
Davies, Eirian C. 1988a. English questions: A ‘significance-generating-device’ for building in context. In Pragmatics, Discourse and Text, Erich H. Steiner & Robert Veltman (eds). London: Pinter, 28‑45.
Davies, Eirian C. 1988b. On different possibilities in the syntax of English. In Linguistics in a Systemic Perspective (Current issues in Linguistic Theory 39), James D. Benson, Michael J. Cummings & William S. Greaves (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 155–184. 

Davies, Eirian C. 1989. Sentence types in English discourse: A formal approach. In Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, Dirk Noel (ed.). Nottingham: Nottingham English language and linguistics research group, 109–127.
Davies, Eirian C. Forthcoming. Elements of English Functional Grammar: A Set-Theoretical Approach (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 280). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Firbas, Jan. 1966. Non-thematic subjects in contemporary English. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 21: 239–256.
Firth, John R. 1962. A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1951. In Studies in Linguistic Analysis, John Rupert Firth (ed.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1–32.
Fries, Peter H. 1981. On the status of Theme in English: Arguments from discourse. Forum Linguisticum 6 (1): 1–38.
Givón, Talmy. 1978. Negation in language: Pragmatics, function, ontology. In Pragmatics (Syntax and Semantics 9), Peter Cole (ed.). New York: Academic Press, 69–122. 

Halliday, M. A. K. 1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3 (2): 199–244. 

Halliday, M. A. K. 1968. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 3. Journal of Linguistics 4 (2): 179–215. 

Halliday, M. A. K. 1970. Language structure and language function. In New Horizons in Linguistics, John Lyons (ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 140–165.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 1st ed. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th ed. London: Arnold. 

Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. Constituency, multi-functionality and grammaticalization in Halliday’s Functional Grammar. Journal of Linguistics 24 (1): 137–74. 

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Pettigrew, John (ed.). 1981. Robert Browning: The Poems, Vol. 11. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Poldauf, Ivan. 1966. The third syntactical plan. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 11: 241–256.
Trnka, Bohumil. 1966. On the linguistic sign and the multilevel organization of language. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 11: 33–40.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.