systemic functional grammar

systemic functional grammar

THE UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM

English Language and Applied Linguistics – ELAL

Student 1509604
Country
Programme MA Applied Linguistics
Module Number 3
Module Title Systemic Functional Grammar
Assignment no. FG/15/05
Date Submitted 02/09/15
First Marker SG Mann
Second Marker Joe Bennett
Percentage 45

General Comments (These give an overall assessment of your work, their main purpose is to indicate the extent to which you fulfill the assessment criteria. They relate to your mark, although they may also contain general advice on how to improve future work.)
Organisation There is a sense of organisation to your essay but too often this is obscured by some very complex and flawed language. Your essay would really have benefitted from a clear Literature Review which used that body of literature to discuss some of the important analytical issues relevant to your essay.
References Although you take some time to get started on this, you do refer to some relevant writers throughout the essay. You need however to provide a critical commentary on the ideas of these writers and to allow your reader to hear your voice. Setting out what systemic functional grammar and its relevant concepts are at this stage in your essay will help strengthen your analysis.
Analysis You have used the question to focus your analysis but too often that analysis is somewhat convoluted and simply difficult to follow. You provide some appropriate definitions but too often these lack clarity and only serve to confuse the reader.
Relevance Your essay is a relevant response to the question you have chosen to respond to. The main issue here is that this relevance is partly obscured by a lack of clear focus and a language framework which tends to obscure your ideas rather than shed light on them.
Presentation Generally speaking your essay is presented using the sort of conventions we would expect in academic writing at this postgraduate level.
Overall Making your writing more straightforward and clear is something you need to address quickly. It is clear that you have thoroughly immersed yourself in the language of these two texts but sharpening your focus and generally making your work more reader-friendly are important issues that you must address.

Specific Comments (These relate to specific points in your work and are intended to be mainly formative in nature. By identifying specific examples of strengths and weaknesses in your work, we aim to help you see how you could improve future assignments. The numbers in the column on the left correspond to the section numbers you have used in your assignment).
Section nos.
1 You are right to include an Introduction to your essay but here you don’t really set up your essay very well and the reader is simply confused. Although some reference to the literature at this stage is always welcome, what needs to be done at this stage is for you to tell the reader how the essay will unfold and what it will focus on. On this first page (p4) you unsettle the reader through over complicating the language you use. Good examples of this are your use of words such as entails, encompasses, encountered, concurred, duration, disbursed, accruing and amidst which are either wrongly used or look very much like an attempt to make fairly straightforward ideas come across as much more complex/academic than they actually are.
2 As I say above, it would have been a good idea to have included at this stage a Literature Review which would have allowed you to embed your ideas in the views of important writers in this field. This analysis section is very brief and, in fact, tells the reader very little about what you will analyse or how you will conduct your analysis.
3 Another good example of your over complicating things is the sentence (p6),”Nevertheless . . . . rather descriptive.” This is unfortunate because I am sure that this sentence does indeed contain some important and well thought-through ideas but they are simply very hard to locate. Your analysis of the texts is now fully underway (p7) but what the reader needs is more by way of examples to make your comments clearer.
4 It is good that at the start of this section you tell the reader what it will contain. This sort of signaling is simple enough but it is important. I am not at all sure what you mean by this idea of the audience being able to “interpret and foretell the exchange” (p8). You refer to “relational verbs” (p9) but explaining what these actually are is really important. I wonder what you mean (p11) by this idea of Text A approaching “events and agents in a distinct way rather than utilising nominalisation.”?
5 You refer (p12) to Thompson and his ideas of modality but rather than attempting to paraphrase his ideas it might have been better to have given the reader access to the exact words he uses and to have added a critical commentary of your own.
6 You make some interesting comments about the sort of patterns (p16) that can be present in texts of this sort, but what exactly do you mean by “ranking” in terms of readership?
7 Your conclusion is right to feature “evaluative positions” (p17) in relation to texts of this sort. It might have been a good idea to also mention briefly how suitable you felt the tools you were using were to an analysis of this sort.

Key points to bear in mind for your next piece of work:
There are a number of issues you need to address in relation to this essay. You need to create reader confidence by maintaining a clear focus and by simplifying the language you use. Careful proof-reading is important also. The lack of a section which focuses solely on the literature or theoretical background is a problem as is a lack of criticality in terms of the ideas of the writers you refer to. Clearly defining the terminology you use is also important. In many ways your essay is bursting with ideas: it is a question of establishing a clear framework for these ideas so as to leave your reader feeling that he/she has fully understood the ideas you are seeking to put across.
GRADING SYSTEM: SUMMARY
80% and above Excellent work in all areas. Includes a significant element of originality and insight. MA /
PG Diploma pass with distinction
70-79% Distinction level work of a very high standard in all areas. Includes elements of originality.
60-69% Very good work. Well organised and presented, showing critical insight and an ability to appraise evidence. MA /
PG Diploma pass with merit
50-59% Reasonable to good work of MA/diploma level. Knowledge and insight are demonstrated, but there may be faults in organisation, presentation, or in the number of references cited, or the level of interpretation or analysis. MA/
PG Diploma pass
40-49% Below a pass at MA/diploma level. One or more aspects of the essay will require attention, and a substantial re-write may be necessary if the essay is to pass. Resubmission allowed
Below 40% Substantially below a pass at MA level. A great deal of work will be needed to achieve a pass grade. Resubmission allowed

All work is subject to review by a second marker. All marks are provisional and subject to revision and approval by the External Examiner and the Academic Boards of the University.

Student ID number 1509604
Module Number (1-6) M3
Title of Degree Programme: MA Applied Linguistics
Title of Module: Systemic Functional Grammar
Date Submitted 02/09/15
Name of tutor Michael Hind
I declare:
a) that I have read the handbook and understand the guidance on ‘preparing assignments’ which includes information on ‘producing a reference list’ and ‘plagiarism’;

b) I understand that by submitting this work I confirm that it is my own work and written in my own words;

c) I confirm that I have kept an electronic copy of this work which I can provide should it be required;

b) Complete as appropriate:

i. I confirm that this essay assignment does not exceed 4,000 words, and actually consists of approximately 3999 words; excluding footnotes, references, figures, tables and appendices;

FG/15/05
Although the two following texts (Texts A & B) can be said to have a similar subject matter, they adopt rather different evaluative positions with respect to the primary participants/protagonists with which they are concerned. By means of a close grammatical analysis, compare and contrast the way the two texts act to position their readers attitudinally. Consider in particular the way the texts seek to portray particular individuals in either positive or negative terms. You should develop an argument about how each text seeks to deal with potentially contentious propositions, how it acts to win over readers to its particular evaluative position and how basic grammatical and text organisational choices might offer more or less covert support for the evaluative stance being adopted. You may, in particular, choose to consider,
? difference in Theme choices in the two texts,
? which Participants are represented as agents or initiators of actions,
? which Participants are represented as acted upon,
? the types of Processes associated with particular Participants,
? the use of evaluative or judgemental language by the author,
? the use of modal values of probability or obligation by the respective authors.

Assignment Title
Same Same, but Different

Table of contents:
1 Introduction Page 4
2 Analysis Page 5
3 Syntactical Complexity Page 6
4 Modes of meaning Page 7
4.1 Experiential meaning Page 8
4.1.1 Relational processes Page 8
4.1.2 Verbal process Page 9
4.1.3 Participants Page 10
5 Interpersonal meaning Page 12
6 Textual meaning Page 14
7 Conclusion Page 17
8 References Page 19

1 Introduction
This research paper provides an intensive grammatical comparison and contrast between two texts (articles), that is, Text A and Text B. Additionally, Text A entails an article from The Guardian (TG) by Norman Stone, while Text B encompasses an article from New Statesman (NS) by Maurice Walsh. Both texts encountered their publication in the year 1998. Both articles’ publication (1998) concurred with a duration when Augusto Pinochet (Chilean military dictator) was in the UK for medical treatment. Simultaneously, the Spanish government had disbursed several worldwide arrest warrants for Pinochet requesting his extradition. Nevertheless, compliance with the request amounted to a significantly problematic issue accruing to the UK’s bureaucracy presumably because Pinochet met the consideration of a friend at the moments of crimes. Additionally, Pinochet encountered satisfactory praise regarding his quick implementation accruing to free market policy as well as deregulation in Chile besides his cooperation amidst the Falklands War. Besides to that, Pinochet emerged to be a Latin-American dictator (prototypical brutal) especially in the realisation of the public consciousness dominating the UK. Such severe dictatorship established a significant obstacle for the UK government to allow Pinochet to face an extradition since the entire exercise seemed to be quite controversial. This analogy elaborates the primary discourse at which both texts secure their existence.
Besides the above, the two documents commence from the Pinochet aspects besides proceeding to evaluate other political elements guilty of civil rights’ violations that haven’t met extradition or justice. Text A concentrates on Turkish Kurd, Apon Ocalan (separatist leader) as well as the PLO, who both evaded from extradition from Italy. On the other hand, Text B evaluates Fidel Castro, Cuban President, besides recounting the events succeeding the prevailing revolution. Moreover, in Text B, the comparison between Castro and Pinochet implies a significant solution to an uncertain “right” in the UK community who propose similar analogies for the two subjects. Invariably, the rest of the article operates as a factual chronology regarding what Castro, as well as the Cuban legislature, could appear guilty of when put into comparison with that of Pinochet. On the other hand, Text A seems not to offer reaction to any significant byte dominant in the civil mind but rather pre-emptive especially in chastising the Italian government for not permitting Ocalan or the PLO affiliates’ extradition. Nevertheless, the text further summarises the crimes of which the respective parties were significantly guilty.
Universally, both texts’ ultimate objective entails pulling attention particularly away from Pinochet besides portraying the UK’s refusal so as to permit his extradition as a less ridiculous thing. However, both texts differ in the manner via which they examine the figures under description. This assignment offers a comparison and contrast between the two texts in terms of the underlying grammatical analogies dominating the description of the subject data in the articles. The paper further offers a systemic analysis of the systemic functional linguistics dominating the two texts.
2 Analysis
Text A portrays significant utilisation of language regarding Ocalan, the PLO, the Italian government, and the PKK. The underlying language is rather demonizing and colorful. On the other hand, Text B’s imagery of Castro emerges to be more objective and sometimes perhaps downplays the type of events that surround Castro. Hopefully, a close evaluation of the grammatical features, regarding the texts, entails the significant use of the systemic tools.
3 Syntactical Complexity
The two texts exhibit a varying level regarding syntactical complexity. Distinction in the length of a sentence can emerge due to several factors such as the degree of complexity accruing to nominal groups and specification of details in circumstances or even by Adjuncts. Nonetheless, it is possible to determine whether sentences entail a single clause or many in a complex phrase (Young, 2004). Despite the higher word limit in Text A comparative to that of Text B, Text A bears a lower syntactical complexity. More specifically, Text A utilises short sentences more frequently than Text B. Invariably; this analogy has its evidence in scenarios of uninterrupted chains of declarative, short statements especially when Text A recounts the Achille Lauro phenomenon whose perpetration met the PLO affiliates in 1985. Nevertheless, the simplicity seeks to put up a dramatic rhetorical implication in that it meets segregation from the remainder of the article or the broadsheets’ style in common, which would seem to be rather descriptive. Additionally, the syntactic minimalism establishes a succinct, significant gift to the executions that seem to portray emphasis on the section of the narrator (Stone) pinpointing the injustice of the scenario. The use of such short sentences facilitates disclosure of a significant rhetorical effect in Text A. Furthermore, it is vividly evident that Text A’s conciseness is approximately abrupt especially in establishing an emphatic as well as almost shocking quality. On the other hand, Text B is more typified particularly by describing actions in more detail and with longer clauses.
To extend the grammatical analysis regarding the two texts, systemic linguistics bears the contention that the primary three elements are accruing to “context of situation” concur with the three purposes of language. The three linguistics’ functions amount to the three metafunctions accruing to meaning. The situation’s context entails field, mode, and tenor. They are significant components regarding the social situation besides having a one-on-one influence in the nature of meanings prevailing in the texts. According to Thompson (2004), field refers to the subject of a conversation. Additionally, tenor amounts to the people engaged in the communication as well as the correlation between them. Nonetheless, Thompson (2004) defines mode as the manner in which the language is operating in the dominant interaction. From other perspectives, field amounts to the subject matter dominating the text, tenor refers to the relationship accruing to the speaker (writer) and the audience. Ultimately, mode refers to the nature in which the act of conveying information is occurring (spoken or written). A text’s field encounters its reflection in the prevalent experiential meanings. Additionally, tenor meets its reflection in the dominant interpersonal meanings while mode bears its representation in the underlying textual meaning. According to this co-dependent correlation, utilisation of language entails not only reflecting a social analogy but also the simultaneous shaping and its transformation (White, 2000).
Despite the fact that both Text A and B exhibit a unanimous social context, distinctions prevail between the manners in which the texts deliver their messages besides positioning their audience. Text A denotes a more subjective understanding of events as well as participants who value the Exposition or Opinion Piece. It makes often utilisation of what is mainly known as “Writer Voice.” On the other hand, Text B endeavours to establish a more conventional objective report, particularly typical of an ordinary News Story. It engages what is universally known as the “Reporter Voice.”
4 Modes of Meaning
This section describes the three primary modes of meaning (functions of language): the interpersonal, experiential, as well as textual metafunctions. Experiential meaning utilises language specifically to encode the prevailing experience accruing to the world. This analogy implies that language facilitates communication of an impression regarding the surrounding reality. Additionally, interpersonal meaning utilises language particularly to encode interaction (White et al., 1994). This analogy means that language enables the exchange of information as well as the adoption of specific attitudes and projection of absolute judgments. It focuses on the interaction prevailing between speaker and audience. Ultimately, textual meaning entails the use of language to connect and organize the interpersonal and experiential meanings to realize a coherent whole. This analogy implies that language facilitates bringing together the two interpretations to achieve an intelligible text permitting the audience to interpret and foretell the exchange.
4.1 Experiential Meaning
The following section elaborates the experiential meanings specifically concentrating on verbal and relational processes besides representation of participants.
4.1.1 Relational Processes; they identify states of ‘having’ or ‘being’. They entail several verbal groups such as ‘have’, ‘sound’, ‘prove’, ‘demonstrate’, and ‘show’. They are fairly standard especially in news discourse when writers endeavour to offer their interpretations regarding reality and events as objective truths. Additionally, these verbal groups denote facts as well as how things meet transformation into facts (Coffin, 2010). Comparing the two texts, Text A bears a higher percentage, regarding relational verbal groups than Text B. These rates indicate that both writers (Stone and Walsh) utilise a large quantity pertaining relational verbs. This analogy puts up and upholds a structure constituting to factual reporting universally known as “hard news.” This statement is unanimous with the fact that hard news has most of its verbal processes being relational. Besides to that, relational verbs further facilitate positioning of readers to admit the prevailing opinions and ideas ultimately.
Nevertheless, the prevalence of relational verbs makes sentences quite difficult to contest; as a result, it amounts to a rather persuasive and powerful tool. More precisely, sentence eight in Text B provides an elaborate instance about how authors can pursue manipulation of relational verbs with an aim of turning evaluations into significant facts. Walsh states, “…there is a vivid connection between Castro’s leadership and the dissent’s repression in Cuba…” The prevailing ‘clear link’ appears to the audience as a fact, though there is no demonstration of this statement, no supportive evidence regarding this ‘link’, and there is no direct quotation or referencing of the ‘link’. The higher quantity of relational verbs in Text A does not significantly imply that the text is more factual. Notably, Stone is utilising relational verbs more often to establish an objective impression besides offering subjective ideological positions. An elaborate example of such an analogy is in sentence three when Stone commences his description regarding Ocalan and expounds how Ocalan “has initiated waging of a terroristic war especially in Southern East of Turkey.” This analogy reveals Stone’s interpretation of actions as well as his appraisal regarding a principle participant, meeting the denotation as truth. Furthermore, this scenario illustrates how Text A’s relational verbs assist in keeping the author’s opinions astray from challenges. The verbs also maintain the writer from isolating the audience especially by making explicit compliments appear factual (Halliday & Matthiessen, 1997).
4.1.2 Verbal process: Focusing on the verbal processes dominating the two texts, it is vividly true to assert that Text B verbal groups that are typical of an objective and Reporter Voice discourse. This analogy implies that the verbal processes in Text B tend to portray factuality. Additionally, they assist the writer in establishing a text in which the absence of a unit overt authorial interruption is perceivable. On the other hand, the verbal processes in Text A are frequently an indication of impartial news reporting in conjunction with the regular and noteworthy exceptions accruing to sentences four and seventeen. Here Stone chooses to present the verb ‘claim’ which bears connotations of dubiousness and doubt. Invariably, both instances erupt when Stone refers to participants that he deems morally contemptible and unacceptable. Sentence four focuses on Ocalan, who Stone later terms as ‘a murderer’ (in sentence 37). Nonetheless, sentence seventeen concentrates on the PKK, which Stone terms as a “terroristic organization (in sentence twenty-seven). More precisely, the instances accruing to the verb ‘claim’ in Text A are elaborate examples regarding the author’s opinion and assessment.
4.1.3 Participants: This section explores the diverse ways via which the texts present the underlying members. More specifically, the section focuses on the texts’ construction regarding agent-patient relations as well as agent deletion via nominalisation. The agent-patient analysis demonstrates the depiction accruing to individuals initiating processes or rather being processes’ recipients. Additionally, the representation of specific agents initiating actions, imparting power, or even having responsibility enables the creation of an ideological ‘slant’, which affects reader perceptions. On the other hand, agent deletion frequently occurs via nominalisation as well as the utilisation of passive structure (Halliday, 2009). Additionally, it permits writers to depict events without assignation of roles to any particular individuals. Nevertheless, another purpose of agent deletion entails the possibility of the author’s ‘retreat regarding personal invisibility’. This ‘invisibility’ amounts to an essential parameter accruing to the establishment of the neutrality and authority prevalent in news reporting.
Besides to that, Text B exists in favour of nominalisation over a one-on-one agency depicting the author’s endeavour to put up an official sounding chronology of events especially by upholding authorial distance. Nevertheless, there are nine scenarios of nominalisation in Text B compared to five instances in Text A. Thompson (2004) offers a substantive account of how nominalisation is elementary to objective, formal register. Sentence nineteen offers an elaborate case of such a legal effect: “Torture was institutionalised.” Analysis of this statement portrays how nominalisation helps the author to present adverse events with a significantly objective slant. Instead, the statement could have been “Castro institutionalised torture” and it could have conveyed a condemning portrait regarding Castro as well as his government. Additionally, it would further serve as an instance of explicit judgment accruing to the writer. Nevertheless, this impersonal distance advances the feeling prone to unbiased reporting and also making the writer’s presumptions quite difficult to contest.
On the other hand, Text A approaches the events and agents in a distinct way rather than utilising nominalisation; it positions individuals as agents as well as initiators of processes. Nonetheless, the primary participants, the PKK and Ocalan, systematically meet a foregrounding as adverse agents especially by being persistently engaged in violent, criminal events. Moreover, according to Text A, the principle participants have “waged a significantly terroristic war” (third sentence), disintegrated a ceasefire. Additionally, they executed the “killing of twenty unarmed young conscripts” twenty-third sentence), besides amounting to “a terroristic organization” (twenty-seventh sentence). This nature of agent foregrounding yields an evaluative repercussion that seems more to be an Argumentative or Exposition text rather than being a factual report. Furthermore, Stone offers eleven examples of the PKK and Ocalan as agents linked to adverse connotations, comparative to three instances of Castro and his legislature as agents in adverse backgrounds.
5 Interpersonal Meaning
This section concentrates on the interpersonal meanings dominating the two text Modality; amounts to one of the very distinct ways regarding examination of writers’ commitment accruing to the validity of the subject matter (Thompson, 2004). Additionally, this analogy implies that modality can depict to the audience how sure or unsure an author is in valuation to the prevailing message. Additionally, the pattern facilitates introduction of subjectivity into an article, permitting writers to comment besides expressing opinions. Text A adopts modality primarily for two functions. Firstly, it utilises pattern to depict a negative appraisal accruing to the Italian legislature’s extradition policy in correlation to Ocalan and to oppose the English council’s principle about Pinochet. More precisely, sentence thirteen and fourteen demonstrates Stone’s adverse judgments about the Italian government. Stone states, “Now it deems the Italian legislature is at it again” (thirteenth sentence). Via the use of impersonal ‘it’ Stone indicates a probability modal is presupposing explicitly that the Italian government is additionally bearing its ‘soft spot accruing to murderers’ (seventeenth sentence). Secondly, the author utilises modality so as to frame his opinion regarding the Kurdish challenge as well as to convince the underlying audience of his conclusions and logic. Furthermore, five of the nine instances exhibiting modality in Text A meet their utilisation in reported speech. More specifically, sentences 31-33 are outstanding as probable solutions regarding the Kurdish problem as per nationalist Turks’ proposition. Additionally, Stone claims to have no answer or solution to this challenge stating, “What is the solution to the Kurdish problem” (thirtieth sentence). However, focusing on sentence thirty-two, when Stone reports that decentralisation “is sensible”; it is vivid that he doesn’t exhibit an opinion on what to and not to happen. The same ideology is further supplementary to the fact dominating sentence thirty-four when the author states that “Whatever the solution, this isn’t a situation in which you can apply minority statutes automatically.” The writer is utilising modality to depict his opinion regarding the ‘Kurdish challenge’ in comparison to several views, as well as how to portray his proposition’s strengths.
On the other hand, in Text B, Walsh utilises modals to depict an opinion about the conditions that would be in place especially for Castro to meet charges similar to those of Pinochet. The analogy evades making judgments about any of the underlying participants (Coffin, 2010). The utilisation of modals seems to counter ‘the right’s’ query (third sentence) about the possibility accruing to a legal case versus Castro. Walsh believes that if Castro faces a legal case against him, the charges ought to resemble the ones protested against Pinochet. Additionally, Walsh believes that the charges “would have to be founded on crimes subject to the joint jurisdiction, such as crimes against humanity, genocide, as well as war crimes” (eighth sentence). The writer further proceeds to expound how the evidence has the potential of “falling into three broad classes” (ninth sentence). Also to that, utilisation of modals in Text B facilitates the presentation of opinions via a hypothetical condition but in rather less sensational and subjective manner. Unlike Text A, Text B doesn’t utilise modals to assure explicit judgments regarding Castro or Pinochet. Though the distinctions between Pinochet’s crimes and Castro’s crimes are evaluated and compared, their execution is in conjunction with greater objectivity. In other words, the modals in Text B act to offer the readers with the situation that would be in place for warranting a case against Castro.
6 Textual Meaning
This section provides an elaborate analysis of the textual meanings dominating the two texts found in The Guardian and New Statesman. More precisely, the section focuses on how the ideas of New and Theme, and also Thesis and Conclusion, organise both texts to appear as expositions so as to diversify arguments and communicate stances rather than merely reporting information. The theme can refer to the primary subject of a message; the instance of departure regarding what the speaker intends to say. Additionally, Yallop et al (2003) states that Rheme amount to where the portion of the text that the author terms exciting or vital has its destination. Besides to that, a substitute way to term Rheme, when tackling textual navigation is “New.” Invariably, Theme and New amount to the labelling system that significantly dominates textual analysis accruing to genres regarding journalistic discourse. Factual expositions commence with a section depicting the Thesis where writers convey their primary argument.
Considering Text B, the Thesis section entails five sentences (in length), equivalent to the first paragraph. Furthermore, here Walsh frames his primary argument, the ideology of a legal case protested against Castro (sentence one, three, and four). On the other hand, in Text A, the Thesis section is rather longer, encompassing sentence one to fifteen, equivalently the length equalling the article’s first paragraph. In most cases, the Thesis section entails some arguments that offer a significant preview of the text’s progressive position (Halliday, 2009). Nonetheless, the inclusion of such ‘previewing arguments’ amounts to the reason Text A’s Thesis is relatively longer than that of Text B. In Text A’s Thesis, Stone presents an elaborate comparison between Pinochet’s probable extradition and Ocalan’s (first-second sentence). Additionally, it further compares the demeanour of the British legislature with the Italian parliament in correlation to Ocalan and Pinochet (sentence two, six, fourteen, and fifteen). Nevertheless, the other Thesis’ sentences (3-5) present an adverse indication of Ocalan, as well as the Italian legislature’s ‘soft’ history regarding ‘murderers’.
According to White et al (1994), Media Expositions concentrates on advancing, elaborating, as well as extending ideas. This ideology is contrary to the News Story, which entails recycling of information. The expositions exhibit a predictable interplay prevalent between Theme and New, which permits the authors to present and advance their arguments and beliefs. Nonetheless, both texts portray a vivid accomplishment of such elaboration as the New meets it is picking up especially in the prevailing Theme, and after introduction, it becomes ‘known’. Moreover, in Text B, there is a vivid and elaborate instance of such a progression especially after analysing the underlying Thesis section. In the first sentence, Ocalan faces his introduction in the New. Commencing from sentence three and progressing to sentence six, Ocalan meets a presumption of being known and hence encounters the transformation into the Theme. Nevertheless, sentence six provides an introduction of the Italian legislature (Rome) into the New. In sentences seven, eleven, and thirty-seven, the ultimate sentence, Italy emerges as the Theme.
In Text A, the pattern New to Theme pattern is further evident. Commencing from sentence nine paragraph three, Stone makes an introduction into the new, the ‘three broad categories’ that evidence versus Castro might meet its trap. These ‘major categories’ initiate generation of three elided Themes, which are evident in sentence ten paragraph three, then in sentence seventeen paragraph five, and ultimately in sentence twenty-three paragraph six.
It is vividly clear from the two texts’ examples that once authors introduce information especially in the New, the information becomes known besides meeting its perception as the Theme. Invariably, this pattern, prevalent in journalistic exposition, permits writers to add significant support as well as elaboration essential to their assertions and also to their ranking of readers. Ultimately, a key element of media exposition entails the presence of a vivid conclusion. According to White et al. (1994), all media exhibitions tend to incorporate summaries of their individual opinions so as to add ‘closure’ to the underlying argument.
The conclusion in Text A reflects a reasonable subjective appraisal regarding the Italian legislature and Ocalan stating, “By offering comfort and aid to this murderer, the Italian government has behaved contemptibly” (sentence thirty-seven). The conclusion further operates as an ultimate reiteration accruing to the Thesis and also is crucial to the entire efficiency dominating the text. Text A utilises the media exposition structure to convey significant information regarding an attack on Ocalan as well as the Italian government. The text further uses the format to indicate how the British legislature’s policy about Pinochet is rarely condemnable (White, 2000). This analogy signifies an endeavour to divert attention away from Britain besides redirecting it to the subjects that the writer believes to be more despicable reserves.
On the other hand, in Text B, there is no evidence of an elaborate conclusion. The text rapidly stops, which amounts to an expectation accruing to a News Story. The ultimate sentence states, “It was recognised at the moment that there were other disappearances and deaths yet to remain as firmly established” (sentence thirty-one). This absence of closure is synonymous with an unexpected and abrupt termination. This analogy reveals a primary distinction between the two texts as well as their design of textual progression. An analysis of the structure and thematic progression of both Text A and B portrays that they nearly conform to the context of News Exposition. This analogy implies that they meet the adoption of similar textual patterns regarding the presentation of their individual political opinions. The enormous distinction, dominant in the textual analysis of both texts, entails the absence of conclusion in Text B. Otherwise; both texts have similar textual meanings as well as a similar socio-political agenda.
7 Conclusion
Although the texts bear a comparable situation’s context, paramount distinctions prevail in how the texts convey their evaluative positions. Stone utilises projecting verbs and relational verbs to express an adverse appraisal regarding the PKK, Ocalan and the Italian government. Text A systematically places the PKK and Ocalan as initiators of adverse events besides using modals to offer a significant critique of the Italian legislature. Textually, Text A entails a thesis as well as the interplay between Theme and new, alongside a vivid conclusion. This thematic progression and structure are the denotation of Media Exposition.
On the other hand, Text B adopts a rather subjective tone, rendering its position in reporting of hard news. The text takes on the Reporter Voice, utilising neutral verbs besides presenting events and actors via nominalisation. The textual progression and structure depicts a marked opposition regarding the Reporter Voice dominating the text. Both versions entail a clear thesis as well as the similar interplay between Theme and New. However, Text B lacks a concise conclusion. Consequently, Text B bears a tendency to depict an impartial and impersonal report regarding events by utilising linguistic resources denotative of the underlying Reporter Voice.

8 References:

Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S. & Yallop. (2003). Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer’s Guide. Sydney: National Centre for English language Teaching & Research, Macquarie University.
Coffin, C. (2010). Applied linguistics methods: A reader: Systemic functional linguistics, critical discourse analysis and ethnography. London: Routledge.
Halliday, M. & Matthiessen, C. (1997). Systemic Functional Grammar: a primary step into theory. Available at: http://www.minerva.ling.mq.edu.au/resource/VirtualLibrary/Publications/sfg
Halliday, M. (2009). Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics. London: Continuum.
Iedema, R., Feez, S. & White, P.R. (1994). The Commentary: Media Literacy. Sydney: NSW Department of School Education.
Thompson, G. (2004). Introducing Functional Grammar. Arnold: London.
White, P. (2000). Functional Grammar. MA Tesl/Tefl Courses, University of Birmingham.
Young, L. (2004). Systemic functional linguistics and critical discourse analysis studies in social change. London: Continuum.

 

 

Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!