149:, any delineated object of study is defined by its relations to other units postulated by the theory. In systemic functional linguistics, this has been described as the trinocular perspective. Thus a descriptive category must be defended from three perspectives: from above (‘what does it construe?’ ‘what effect does it have in a context of use?’), below (‘how is this function realized?’) and round about (‘what else is in the neighbourhood?’ ‘what other things does this thing have to interact with?’). This gives systemic functional linguistics an affinity with studies of
22:
140:
In
Halliday’s early work, “system” was considered to be one of four fundamental categories for the theory of grammar, the others being unit, structure and class. The category of ‘system’ was invoked to account for “the occurrency of one rather than another from among a number of like events” At that
101:
The paradigmatic principle - the idea that the process of using language involves choosing from a specifiable set of options - was established in semiotics by
Saussure, whose concept of value (viz. “valeur”), and of signs as terms in a system, “showed up paradigmatic organization as the most abstract
144:
In adopting a system perspective on language, systemic functional linguistics can be seen as part of a more general 20th and 21st century reaction against atomistic approaches to science, in which an essence is sought after within smaller and smaller components of the phenomenon under study. In
132:
In this use of the term “system”, grammatical, or other features of language, are considered best understood when described as sets of options. Thus, “the most abstract categories of the grammatical description are the systems together with their options (systemic features). A systemic grammar
129:, where linguistic systems are considered to furnish the background for elements of structure. Halliday argues that, unlike system in the sense in which it was used by Firth was a conception only found in Firth’s linguistic theory.
178:
Halliday, M.A.K. 2004. Introduction: How Big is a
Language? On the Power of Language. In The Language of Science: Volume 5 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Edited by J.J.Webster. London and New York: Continuum. p.
168:
Halliday, M.A.K. 2004. Introduction: How Big is a
Language? On the Power of Language. In The Language of Science: Volume 5 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Edited by J.J.Webster. London and New York: Continuum. p.
237:
Halliday, M.A.K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of
Grammar. Word. 17(3). pp241-92. Reprinted in Full in On Grammar: Volume 1 of the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday. London and New York: Continuum. p
227:
Halliday, M.A.K. 1961. Categories of the Theory of
Grammar. Word. 17(3). pp241-92. Reprinted in Full in On Grammar: Volume 1 of the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday. London and New York: Continuum. p
214:
Halliday, M.A.K. 1992. Systemic
Grammar and the Concept of a “Science of Language”. In Waiguoyu (Journal of Foreign Languages), No. 2 (General Series No. 78), pp1-9. Reprinted in Full in Volume 3 in
137:) in that it is paradigmatic: a system is paradigmatic set of alternative features, of which one must be chosen if the entry condition is satisfied.
40:
197:
Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. Systemic
Background. In "Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. 1: Selected Theoretical Papers" from the
114:(SFL). SFL uses the idea of system to refer to language as a whole, (e.g. “the system of language”). This usage derives from
58:
111:
252:
141:
time, Halliday defined grammar as “that level of linguistic form at which operate closed systems”
33:
that states a
Knowledge editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic.
287:
258:
79:
308:
36:
8:
201:, James D. Benson and William S. Greaves (eds). Ablex. Reprinted in Full in Volume 3 in
278:
87:
126:
146:
95:
188:
Firth, J.R. 1968. Selected Papers of J.R. Firth 1952-1959. London: Longman. p183.
150:
115:
91:
282:
134:
302:
267:
83:
119:
105:
250:
Baggio, G., Van
Lambalgen, M., & Hagoort, P. (2012)
256:, in M. Werning, W. Hinzen, & E. Machery (Eds.),
133:
differs from other functional grammars (and from all
300:
125:There is also the notion of “system” as used by
122:describes language as an open, dynamic system.
268:On the systematicity of language and thought
253:processing consequences of compositionality
106:'System' in systemic functional linguistics
288:Systematicity and natural language syntax
59:Learn how and when to remove this message
110:“System” is used in two related ways in
262:(pp. 655–672). Oxford University Press.
259:The Oxford handbook of compositionality
301:
216:The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday
203:The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday
199:Ninth International Systemic Workshop
78:appears in the linguistic theory of
15:
71:
13:
244:
14:
320:
20:
112:systemic functional linguistics
293:Croatian Journal of Philosophy
231:
221:
208:
191:
182:
172:
162:
1:
156:
218:. London: Continuum. p. 209.
205:. London: Continuum. p. 186.
7:
10:
325:
273:The Journal of Philosophy
31:is written like an essay
29:This article or section
102:dimension of meaning”
275:, 101(3), pp. 111-139.
74:idea of language as a
39:by rewriting it in an
80:Ferdinand de Saussure
265:Johnson, K. (2004)
118:. In this context,
88:Benjamin Lee Whorf
41:encyclopedic style
295:, 7(21), 375-402.
76:linguistic system
69:
68:
61:
316:
239:
235:
229:
225:
219:
212:
206:
195:
189:
186:
180:
176:
170:
166:
147:systems thinking
96:Michael Halliday
73:
64:
57:
53:
50:
44:
24:
23:
16:
324:
323:
319:
318:
317:
315:
314:
313:
299:
298:
247:
245:Further reading
242:
236:
232:
226:
222:
213:
209:
196:
192:
187:
183:
177:
173:
167:
163:
159:
151:complex systems
135:formal grammars
108:
92:Louis Hjelmslev
65:
54:
48:
45:
37:help improve it
34:
25:
21:
12:
11:
5:
322:
312:
311:
297:
296:
276:
263:
246:
243:
241:
240:
230:
220:
207:
190:
181:
171:
160:
158:
155:
107:
104:
67:
66:
28:
26:
19:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
321:
310:
307:
306:
304:
294:
290:
289:
284:
283:Scholz, B. C.
280:
279:Pullum, G. K.
277:
274:
270:
269:
264:
261:
260:
255:
254:
249:
248:
234:
224:
217:
211:
204:
200:
194:
185:
175:
165:
161:
154:
152:
148:
142:
138:
136:
130:
128:
123:
121:
117:
113:
103:
99:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
63:
60:
52:
49:February 2020
42:
38:
32:
27:
18:
17:
292:
286:
272:
266:
257:
251:
233:
223:
215:
210:
202:
198:
193:
184:
174:
164:
143:
139:
131:
124:
109:
100:
75:
70:
55:
46:
30:
309:Linguistics
157:References
127:J.R. Firth
84:J.R. Firth
120:Jay Lemke
116:Hjelmslev
303:Category
281:, &
285:(2007)
35:Please
94:, and
271:, in
291:in
179:xv.
169:xi.
72:The
305::
238:40
228:52
153:.
98:.
90:,
86:,
82:,
62:)
56:(
51:)
47:(
43:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.