Smmg Home Page

Smmg resources

Network

Glossary of Systemic Functional terms

Christian Matthiessen

ELM, Macquarie University

iii/97

DRAFT.

� C. Matthiessen. Please do not copy or quote without permission. Comments very welcome!

This document offers a glossary of terms related to the material in Halliday (1994), Halliday & Hasan (1985), Martin
(1992), Matthiessen (1995), and other systemic-functional works, either theoretical or descriptive (see Matthiessen, 1995:
Section 1.9 and Figure 1-23). It is based on Appendix 3 of Matthiessen (1995) and on the glossary in Matthiessen &
Bateman (1991). It also relates to the current effort to produce a multilingual glossary of systemic-functional terms and
glosses being co-ordinated by M.A.K. Halliday & C. Matthiessen. The French terms given are taken from Alice Caffarel's
glossary of French systemic terms, Glossaire anglais-fran�ais des termes en linguistique syst�mique -fonctionnelle.

But first a word on the nature of this glossary as a general resource and as an aid in translating between different approaches
is in order. We have to understand technical terms as part of a theory of language and the descriptions of particular
languages that are based on that theory. So what is a theory of language? Many years ago, J.R. Firth characterized linguistics
as "language turned back on itself"; and what he said about using language to describe language in The semantics of
linguistic science (in 1948, Lingua) is still very relevant:

Let it be borne in mind that language is often not very apt when used about itself, even in technical linguistic studies.
If we pause to consider the stylistics of the language of the common sensual life, we can be sure it will not serve as the
language for linguistic science. The technical language for the systematic statement of facts of language cannot, any
more than for mathematics, be the language of everyday common sense. Professor Hjelmslev, fully realizing this, has
endeavoured to frame a sort of linguistic calculus which might serve the linguistic sciences in the way mathematics
has served the physical sciences. Even if the attempt be considered unsuccessful, it has not been sufficiently
understood that the work of Professor Hjelmslev in general linguistics has been in the direction of our emancipation
from the handicap of the common-sense idiom and 'self-explanatory' nomenclature in half a dozen languages ...
However much we may disagree with it or dislike it, the terminology is necessitated by a system of thought ...
Questions of terminology inevitably arise when new systems of thought are applied to the handling of material or
events. The whole conceptual framework, the whole syntax of thought and words, should hold together systematically.

Terminology, nomenclature or technical vocabulary/ lexis is thus something that is "necessitated by a system of thought". It
is one aspect of the language we use to model language - it is one aspect of our metalanguage. Now we know that an
ordinary language cannot be equated with its vocabulary: English is not the same as English lexis; we see only one aspect of
English when we look up lexical items in a dictionary. English is far more than its lexis; it also includes the grammatical
resources that together with lexis make up the system of wording or lexicogrammar of the language and it includes the
systems of sounding (phonology) and of meaning (semantics). Consider the following passage from the introduction to
Chapter 3 of Halliday's Introduction to Functional Grammar:

In Section 2.6 we introduced the notion of a clause as a unit in which meanings of three different kinds are
combined. Three distinct structures, each expressing one kind of semantic organization, are mapped on to one
another to produce a single wording.
Of the various structures which, when mapped on to each other, make up a clause, we will consider first the one
 which gives the clause its character as a message. This is known as thematic structure.
We may assume that in all languages the clause has the character of a message: it has some form of organization
giving it the status of a communicative event. But there are different ways in which this may be achieved. In English,
as in many other languages, the clause is organized as a message by having a special status assigned to one part of it.
One element in the clause is enunciated as the theme; this then combines with the remainder so that the two parts
together constitute a message.

Technical terms are shown in bold. It's very clear from this passage that the distinction between technical terms and non-
technical ones is indeterminate: for example, we might consider map in three distinct structures are mapped on to one
another or combine in meanings of three different kinds are combined, this then combines with the remainder to be technical
terms. However, wherever we draw the line between technical terms and non-technical ones, it is also very clear from the
passage that the technical terms are only part of the picture: they make up some of the lexical items that together with
grammatical structures constitute the wordings of the metalanguage. For example, the clause each expressing one kind of
semantic organization draws on part of the grammar of English that is very central to linguistic theory. This is the grammar
of identifying clauses where a general relationship of symbolization is construed between two participants, the Token and
the Value:

[Token:] each (structure) [Process:] expressing [Value:] one kind of semantic organization

Other examples in IFG that draw on this type of clause are: a noun expresses a person, other animate being, inanimate object
or abstraction, bounded or unbounded, etc.; the Theme is the element which serves as the point of departure of the message,
it is that with which the clause is concerned; the Subject specifies the one that is actually responsible for realizing (i.e., in
this case for carrying out) the offer or command; [the Actor] means the one that does the deed. This is of course only one
example of a grammatical construction that is important in modelling language; there are many others and it is helpful to pay
attention to the way in which the resources of grammar are used to theorize about and describe language (what Halliday &
Martin, 1993: 6, call "technical grammar"). The general point is technical terms are only part of the lexical resources we use
in linguistics; and lexis is only part of the system of wording, lexicogrammar. And beyond lexicogrammar, we also have to
consider the many and varied patterns of discourse semantics that play a central role in our metalanguage. Halliday &
Martin (1993: 4) makes the point as follows:

Of course, technical terms are an essential part of scientific language; it would be impossible to create a discourse of
organized knowledge without them. But they are not the whole story. The distinctive quality of scientific discourse lies
in the lexicogrammar (the 'wording') as a whole, and any response it engenders in the reader is a response to the total
patterns of discourse.

The technical terms of our metalanguage thus only make up one part of the overall metalinguistic resources: a theory is
much more than its technical terms. Now, just as with terms or lexical items in general, we can view and describe technical
terms in two different ways - (i) dictionary view and (ii) thesaurus view.

(i) Dictionary view. We can view them as individual items, list them alphabetically in a dictionary and describe them in
terms of the dictionary definitions or glosses. For example, in their glossary, Halliday & Martin (181: 345) provide the
following glossary entry for Theme:

Theme: clause function, textual; realizes the point of departure of the message; pairs with Rheme; not to be confused
with Given (New) as in some Prague School, and much recent work on functional grammar; signalled by first position
in the clause in English.

Here we access information about the theoretical and descriptive terminology by looking up lexical forms in alphabetical
order. The various technical terms form a network of lexical relations, but this network is not represented in an explicit form
- it has to be recovered from the gloss. Thus from the gloss above we can infer part of a network of technical terms where
'Theme' is related by realization to both 'point of departure' and to 'first position' and where it is classified as a kind of clausal
textual function:
This gloss illustrates a very fundamental property of all technical terms: they are defined by their location in a network of
relationships that they enter into.

(ii) Thesaurus view. In the dictionary view of technical terms, we have to "uncover" the relationships that individual terms
enter into from the glosses. In contrast, the thesaurus view brings out these relationships quite explicitly; in particular, it
represents taxonomic relationships involving the'kinds of' relationship between a class and its subclasses (see IFG, pp. 332-
3). Thus Mark Roget organized the English vocabulary into a small number of general lexical domains, which he
subclassified further in several steps.

Martin (1992) provides a "thesaurus view" of part of the lexis of symbolic relations - relations that serve within the
identifying clause type discussed briefly above. Using a system network, he shows explicitly what the taxonomic
relationships are: see the figure below.

A glossary is by definition a dictionary view of (technical) vocabulary; but I have tried to indicate theoretical relationships as
explicitly as possible to ensure that particular technical terms do not remain insulated from the rest of the metalanguage. In
particular, I have indicated whether terms are theoretical or descriptive. Theoretical terms are part of the general theory of
language; descriptive terms are part of descriptions of particular languages such as Chinese, English, French, Japanese,
Tagalog and Vietnamese. For descriptive terms, I have further indicated the relevant theoretical categories and dimensions
(such as paradigmatic/ syntagmatic, ideational/ interpersonal/ textual). For the relationship between theory and description,
see e.g. Matthiessen (1995: 57-62) and Matthiessen & Nesbitt (1996)

This glossary is intended to explain systemic terms and to relate systemic and non-systemic terms; it is an aid in
metalinguistic translation, i.e. in translation between the systemic meta-language and other meta-languages. It is necessary
to do this, but at the same time it is important to recognize that glossaries can be misleading and even intellectually harmful,
since, as noted above, a theory cannot be reduced to a glossary of its technical terms. A glossary is based on items - the
terms glossed - and this tends to foreground the items at the expense of the system or network of relations they are part of. A
technical vocabulary is not a list of items; it is a network of relationships. So if we pick out one vocabulary item, say Goal
(systemic), and gloss it as Patient (non-systemic), we have lost the fact that Goal is just one part of one theoretical model of
transitivity and Patient is part of another model and they are not systemically equivalent although they may be applied
analytically to the same constituents of a clause in a large number of examples.

Although there are significant points of contact between the systemic tradition and Indian and Chinese linguistics (e.g. in the
theoretical foregrounding of prosodies and syllables), the 'translations' between the systemic tradition and other traditions in
this glossary are concerned with Western traditions and more specifically traditional grammar and those originating in the
US. (Thus, there are only a few items from the Prague School, while Glossematics, continental European structuralism,
current French and Dutch functionalist approaches, the various German traditions, and so on are left out entirely.) Also, it
should be noted that the main focus is on the level of lexicogrammar (= syntax + morphology + lexis) rather than phonology,
semantics, and context, although some central terms in these areas are included.

Conventions

Systemic terms in bold italics, e.g. Actor.

Non-systemic terms in bold, e.g. Actor.
Theoretical systemic terms are marked "[theoretical]".
Descriptive systemic terms are marked "[descriiptive:", and their location in the interpretation of English lexicogrammar is
given by reference to stratum, metafunction, axis, and rank, e.g. "[descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause
rank]".

Glossary of terms

Absolute. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x clause rank] Interpersonal clause function neutralizing
the distinction between Subject and Complement. It is assigned to nominal groups in certain minor clauses of the type
'alarm' (as in [Absolute:] Fire! ) and to nominal groups standing unattached in headlines, product names, business names,
street names and other "little texts" (as in [Absolute:] A Multinational Era). => IFG p. 96 and p. 395.

Accompaniment. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in transitivity
structure: the extending type of circumstance. Accoompaniment is the circumstantial equivalent of the meanings 'and', 'or',
and 'and not'. For example:

He invited Gorbachev to "work [Accompaniment: commitative:] with me to bring down the last barriers to a new world of
freedom. (Time 94)

He is the boss, and [Accompaniment: commitative:] without him, the accord will not work.

[Accompaniment: additive:] Instead of tidings of joy, Hollywood offers the writhings of Job. (Time 94)

you end up regulating those people [Accompaniment: additive:] instead of the small percentage of people who commit most
crimes (Time 93)

=> LexCart p. 343.

Actor. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in a material clause; the
participant always inherent in the clause according to the transitive model of transitivity. The process it participates in may
or may not extend to affect another participant, the Goal. For instance:

[Actor:] The Marchioness [Process:] broke [Role:] into two.

[Actor:] Ambulance crews, firefighters and police [Process:] helped to rescue [Goal:] passengers [Location:] from the
water.

The systemic term Actor is to be distinguished from the systemic term => Agent. While the former is confined to material
clauses in the transitive model, the latter is a generalized transitivity function - the 'causer' - in the ergative model of
transitivity (see transitivity models). In non-systemic literature, the term Agent may correspond to either Actor or Agent.
Bloomfield (1933) used the terms Actor-Action-Goal, but it has not been taken over in most non-systemic treatments of
transitivity roles. => LexCart Section 4.7.

adjective. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] Secondary word class within
primary word class of nominals serving as Epithet within nominal groups. For example:

It might have been [adjective:] otherwise had President Bush not waited until after the election to announce that he
was nearly doubling U.S. troop strength in the Persian Gulf. As it was, only a few sitting members of Congress were
defeated, hardly [adjective:] enough to make more than a token difference in the composition of the Senate (where the
Democrats picked up one seat) and the House (where they picked up eight). In fact, the most [adjective:] significant
result involved a politician who wasn't even on the ballot. For if the election of 1990 changed nothing else, it
undermined the perception that George Bush is all but [adjective:] immune to the [adjective:] normal vicissitudes of
 politics. Suddenly, and for the first time in his presidency, Bush seemed [adjective:] vulnerable.

The weakening process began when Bush abandoned his "no [adjective:] new taxes" pledge and deprived Republican
right-wingers of their [adjective:] favorite issue. Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package negotiated by
White House aides and [adjective:] congressional leaders. After that, the President went from [adjective:] bad to
[adjective:] worse as he alternately attacked the Democrats, tried to explain his [adjective:] domestic policies and
confronted growing doubts about the U.S. deployment in the [adjective:] Persian Gulf. By the time he finally signed a
budget deal [adjective:] last week, his performance ratings in the polls had dropped 20 points. (Time)

Certain adjectives can also serve in hypotactic verbal group complexes; for example:

Old enemies from the Warsaw Pact are [adjective:] keen to join the Western alliance, but Moscow frowns on the idea.
(Time 93)

For its part, Israel was [adjective:] eager to reduce its defense costs by selling overseas and to increase its influence
over a country that supported Israel's Arab enemies. (Time 93)

Adjunct. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x clause rank] Interpersonal clause function: constituent
that is not an alternative Subject (in contrast to a Complement). Adjuncts are experiential (circumstances), textual
(conjunctives), or interpersonal (modal adjuncts or comment adjuncts). For instance:

[Adjunct: textual] However [Adjunct: interpersonal] unfortunately we can't meet [Adjunct: experiential / Location:] at
noon.

Non-systemic writers often use adverbial as roughly equivalent to Adjunct; Quirk et al. (1985) use adjunct roughly in the
sense of experiential Adjunct (circumstance) together with subjunct, disjunct and conjunct. => LexCart Section 5.1.1.1.

adverb. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] Primary class of word serving as
Head or Modifier in adverbial group or as Submodifier in any kind of group (or as expansion of verb in a phrasal of
consisting of verb + adverb). For example:

It might have been otherwise had President Bush [adverb:] not waited until after the election to announce that he was
[adverb:] nearly doubling U.S. troop strength in the Persian Gulf. As it was, [adverb:] only a few sitting members of
Congress were defeated, [adverb:] hardly enough to make [adverb:] more than a token difference in the composition
of the Senate ([adverb:] where the Democrats picked [adverb:] up one seat) and the House ([adverb:] where they
picked [adverb:] up eight). In fact, the [adverb:] most significant result involved a politician who wasn't [adverb:] even
on the ballot. For if the election of 1990 changed nothing else, it undermined the perception that George Bush is
[adverb:] all but immune to the normal vicissitudes of politics. Suddenly, and for the first time in his presidency, Bush
seemed vulnerable.

The weakening process began when Bush abandoned his "no new taxes" pledge and deprived Republican right-
wingers of their favorite issue. Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package negotiated by White House aides
and congressional leaders. After that, the President went from bad to worse as he [adverb:] alternately attacked the
Democrats, tried to explain his domestic policies and confronted growing doubts about the U.S. deployment in the
Persian Gulf. By the time he [adverb:] finally signed a budget deal last week, his performance ratings in the polls had
dropped 20 points. (Time)

=> IFGpp. 25, 214

adverbial. Often used as term for Adjuncts outside of systemic functional terms, as in "manner adverbial" or "sentence
adverbial".

adverbial group. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x group rank] Group of words of the
primary class adverb. They serve to realize Adjuncts in the clause - interpersonal Adjuncts and certain experiential ones, in
particular those of Manner: quality/ degree. => IFG � 6.4.1; LexCart� 7.4.

AGENCY. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x systemic x clause rank] Transitivity system simultaneous with
PROCESS TYPE: the choice between 'middle' (nucleuse of Process + Medium construed as not being caused by an Agent)
and 'effective' (nucleus of Process + Medium construed as being caused by an Agent). For example:
 middle:

[Medium:] The window [Process:] broke.

effective

[Agent:] The wind [Process:] broke [Medium:] the window.

middle:
[Medium:] Limestone [Process:] can form in many ways

effective:
[Medium:] Non-clastic rocks [Process:] are formed [Agent:] by chemical precipitation, by biological precipitation,
and by accumulation of organic material.

=> LexCart Sections 4.3 and 4.6.

Agent. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in clause, according to the
ergative transitivity model (see transitivity models): the participant causing the actualization of the combination of Process +
Medium. In a material clause, it is the Actor; in a mental one, the Phenomenon; and in a relational one, the Attributor or the
Token. For instance:

[Agent:] The wind [Process:] broke [Medium:] the window.

[Agent:] The mouse [Process:] scared [Senser:] the brave elephant.
[Agent:] They [Process:] elected [Medium:] her [Range:] president.
[Agent:] They [Process:] elected [Medium:] her [Range:] President.

=> IFG p. 147 ff. => LexCart Section 4.6.

In non-systemic literature, the term agent may correspond to the systemic Actor, to Agent or to both.

Angle. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the transitivity structure
of the clause, of the projecting type. For example:

[Angle:] According to the well-respected 1990 Justice Department report National Incidence Studies on Missing,
Abducted and Thrown-Away Children in America, far fewer--3,200 to 4,600 minors a year--are seized by strangers.

=> IFG p. 151, 158 => LexCart Section 4.11.2.1.

ascriptive. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x systemic x clause rank] Term in system RELATIONAL
ABSTRACTION, contrasting with 'identifying'. A Carrier is construed as being ascribed or attributed to an Attribute: the
relation can be interpreted as one of class-membership - the Carrier is construed as a member of the class described by the
Attribute. For example:

[Carrier:] You [Process:] are not [Attribute:] a man; [Carrier:] you [Process:] are [Attribute:] a rhinoceros.

[Carrier:] Some granite [Process:] has [Attribute:] large crystals.

[Carrier:] The names of external structures [Process:] appear [Attribute:] in boxes.

=> LexCart p. 302.

Assigner. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in intensive identifying
relational clauses: the participant that assigns a relation of identity between Token and Value. It serves as Agent in the
ergative model of transitivity. For example:

[Assigner/ Agent:] This state [Process:] is dying to elect [Token/ Medium:] a woman [Value/ Range:] senator (Time)

[Assigner/ Agent:] Spencer had helped elect and re-elect Reagan as Governor. (Time)
 Rostenkowski became the first example of [Token/ Medium:] what [Assigner/ Agent:] wags [Process:] were to
christen [Value/ Range:] the "dead-cat syndrome" (Time)

=> IFG p. 171 => LexCart p. 314.

Attribuend. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Alternative systemic term for => Carrier,
the participant role to which an Attribute is ascribed in an ascriptive relational clause.

Attribute. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant or participant-like role in an
ascriptive relation to a participant serving as Medium, typically in an ascriptive relational clause (as in The moon is
[Attribute:] a balloon, David tconsidered the moon [Attribute:] a balloon), but also, more restrictedly, in certain material
clauses (as in They painted the collage [Attribute:] red; He fell [Attribute:] flat). => LexCart Section 4.10.1. on relational
Attributes. The Attribute of a relational clause conflates with Range.

[Carrier/ Medium:] The Barracks [Process:] is [Location: time:] now [Attribute/ Range:] a museum of the history of
Sydney and New South Wales. (Fodor's Sydney)
[Carrier/ Medium:] this city park [Process:] comes [Attribute/ Range:] alive [Location: time:] on Sundays. (Fodor's
Sydney)

attributive. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x systemic x clause rank] Alternative term for => 'ascriptive'.

Attributor. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in intensive ascriptive
relational clauses: the participant that assigns a relation of ascription between Carrier and Attribute. It serves as Agent in the
ergative model of transitivity. => IFG p. 171. => LexCart p. 314.

[Attributor/ Agent:] I [Process:] cannot wish [Carrier/ Medium:] Ned [Attribute/ Range:] dead, though. (Mary West)

[Attributor/ Agent:] He [Process:] considered [Carrier/ Medium:] himself [Attribute/ Range:] a master storyteller.

Behalf. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the clause, type of
Cause.

Behaver. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in the clause, more
specifically in 'behavioural' clauses.

Beneficiary. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in the clause, according
to the generalized ergative transitivity model (see transitivity models): the participant benefiting from the actualization of the
combination of Process + Medium. In a material clause, it is the Recipient (My aunt gave the farmer a duckpress) or the
Client (Pour me out a cold Dos Equis beer) and in a verbal one, it is the Addressee (Joe told us all about Eve). It also occurs
in a few relational clause types (I owe you an apology) and mental clauses (I envy you your luck; I don't begrudge you your
happiness). IFG pp. 132-134. => LexCart Section 2.2.1.7 (Beneficiary/ Recipient), => LexCart Section 2.2.11 (Beneficiary/
Receiver), => LexCart Section 2.2.1.12.3 (Beneficiary in certain relational clauses).

[Location: time:] On 9 May, [Goal/ Medium:] blood specimens from several of these initial patients [Process:] were
provided [Recipient/ Beneficiary:] to the WHO Collaborating Centre at the centres for Disease and Control and
Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America. (WER)

binder. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] Tertiary word class: subtype of
conjunction (which is a subtype of adverbial) marking hypotactically dependent clauses and downranked clauses.

It might have been otherwise had President Bush not waited until after the election to announce [binder:] that he was
nearly doubling U.S. troop strength in the Persian Gulf. [binder:] As it was, only a few sitting members of Congress
were defeated, hardly enough to make more than a token difference in the composition of the Senate (where the
Democrats picked up one seat) and the House (where they picked up eight). In fact, the most significant result
involved a politician who wasn't even on the ballot. For [binder:] if the election of 1990 changed nothing else, it
undermined the perception [binder:] that George Bush is all but immune to the normal vicissitudes of politics.
Suddenly, and for the first time in his presidency, Bush seemed vulnerable.
 The weakening process began [binder:] when Bush abandoned his "no new taxes" pledge and deprived Republican
right-wingers of their favorite issue. Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package negotiated by White House
aides and congressional leaders. After that, the President went from bad to worse [binder:] as he alternately attacked
the Democrats, tried to explain his domestic policies and confronted growing doubts about the U.S. deployment in the
Persian Gulf. [binder:] By the time he finally signed a budget deal last week, his performance ratings in the polls had
dropped 20 points. (Time)

call. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x systemic x clause rank] Systemic term in the system MINOR CLAUSE
CLASS.

Carrier. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role, the participant to which the
Attribute is ascribed in an ascriptive relational clause. => LexCart Section 4.10.1.

[Carrier/ Medium:] The Barracks [Process:] is [Location: time:] now [Attribute/ Range:] a museum of the history of
Sydney and New South Wales. (Fodor's Sydney)
[Carrier/ Medium:] this city park [Process:] comes [Attribute/ Range:] alive [Location: time:] on Sundays. (Fodor's
Sydney)

case marking. The term case marking was originally restricted to the marking by morphological case (such as nominative,
accusative, dative). It has now been extended to include other means of such as adpositions and sometimes even word order.
In systemic work, it would still be used in its original sense since "case" has not been extended as a descriptive category.

case marking system. The system according to which different cases are assigned to different nominal groups in a clause.
Two different systems are widely discussed, the nominative-accusative and the ergative(-absolutive) systems. Languages
may implement either of these or a mix of the two (a "split" system). These systems have now been extended to include
phenomena such as reflexivization and structural ellipsis in coordinated clauses. The notion of a case-marking system is
related to the systemic notion of transitivity model; and nominative-accusative and ergative are related to the transitive and
intransitive transitivity models of systemics. However, while the systemic transitivity models are confined to the experiential
metafunction, the notion of case-marking system is not tied to a particular metafunction. (In systemic accounts, the different
metafunctional influences on case marking are teased apart. Thus a language may be experientially ergative without
interpersonal or textual ergativity in the 'case marking'.)

case role. The role served by an argument of a verb (predicate) -- sometimes also called semantic role; the notion goes back
to Fillmore's (1968) category of deep case. It corresponds largely to the systemic notion of transitivity function or role
(including participant roles and circumstance roles; e.g. Halliday 1967/8; 1985: Ch. 5), except that case role may sometimes
be interpreted as entirely semantic and not grammatical whereas systemic transitivity functions are grammatical. Another
difference is in the theoretical status of case roles or deep cases vs. transitivity functions: inventories of the former are often
taken to be universal where the transitivity functions presented in e.g. Halliday (1985: Ch. 5) are not. See Martin (1996) for
detailed discussion of case role/ deep case vs. systemic transitivity function.

category. [theoretical] A construct or abstraction in systemic theory; units, functions, classes, and so on are categories of the
theory of grammar (cf. Halliday, 1961). Caterogies are distinguished from scales such as delicacy and stratification. In
formal linguistics, "category" has been used in a much more restricted sense, corresponding to 'class' in systemic linguistic.

category. As in phrase category. The systemic term for the category of formal grammar is the traditional term class (as in
word class).

Cause. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank]

[Cause: concessive:] Despite Bush's sweeping rhetoric, his closest advisers predict that he will stick to the cautious
script he has followed since Hungary, Poland, East Germany and most recently Czechoslovakia began loosening the
grip of Communist repression.

challenge. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x systemic x move rank] A move in an exchange that challenges the
previous move.

circumstance. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Generalized transitivity function in the
clause, which consists of a process, participants involved in it, and attendant circumstances. Circumstances belong to four
types: (i) enhancing circumstances: Location, Extent, Cause, Manner; (ii) extending circumstances: Accompaniment; (iii)
elaborating circumstances: Role; and (iv) projecting circumstances: Angle, Matter. For example:

[Angle:] According to government sources [Verbiage:] the new peace plan [Process:] will be discussed [Location:] on
Monday.

Participants tend to be more centrally involved with the process than circumstances, which are consequently said to be
attendant, more peripheral, or obliquely related to the process. The difference, which is comparable to Tesni�re's (1959)
distinction between actant and circonstant, between participants and circumstances is a cline; it is clearer in some languages
than in others. For instance, in English, it is fairly clear since, broadly speaking, (i) participants can be Subject but
circumstances cannot, and (ii) participants are realized by nominal groups but circumstances by adverbial groups or
prepositional phrases. In Akan, the difference is much less clear: there is no voice system to differentiate between
participants and circumstances and both are realized by nominal groups (rather than nominal groups vs. prepositional
phrases); circumstantial relations are marked by dependent verbs in serial verb constructions. => LexCart Section 4.11.

class. [theoretical] The systemic term for the term category in formal grammar. It generalizes the traditional notion of word
classes and thus applies to morphemes, groups, phrases, and clauses as well as words. The least delicate classes are
sometimes called primary classes and further differentiations are secondary classes. For example:

Classifier. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x group rank: nominal] Function in the structure of the
nominal group; a premodifier specifying of subclassification of the thing represented by the nominal group. Classifier
corresponds to Fries' (1970) close-knit modifier. It is usually realized by a noun. Classifier is differentiated from Epithet. For
instance: a (Epithet:) soft-spoken (Classifier:) Government (Thing:) aid. (In typological literature, the term classifier is used
for nouns expressing classes of things in languages such as Chinese and Thai. In systemic work, this has often been called
"measure".) IFG p. 164-5. => LexCart Section 7.3.3.3 .1.

[Classifier:] Ebola [Thing:] infections end in death from 50% to nearly 90% of those clinically ill. (WER)

During the same period, total [Classifier:] hotel [Thing:] capacity increased from less than 500 rooms to over 25,000.
(Bali, Periplus Travel Guides)

Even if you have no particular interest in [Classifier:] war [Thing:] memorials (this one was dedicated to those who
served in World War I), do stop a minute inside. (Fodor's Sydney)

clause. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic/ structural: unit x clause rank][French: phrase] The
highest-ranking unit in the grammar. It is the point of origin of the systems of TRANSITIVITY, MOOD and THEME,
realized by three simultaneous structural layers (transitivity structure, modal structure and thematic structure). In the
unmarked case, it realizes a figure (experiential), move (interpersonal) and message (textual); and it is realized by a tone
group. Examples (ranking clauses separated by ||, clause complexes by |||; included clauses separated by << >>, downranked
clauses by "'):

||| It might have been otherwise || had President Bush not waited until after the election || to announce || that he was nearly
doubling U.S. troop strength in the Persian Gulf.||| As it was, || only a few sitting members of Congress were defeated, hardly
enough "to make more than a token difference in the composition of the Senate <<(where the Democrats picked up one
seat)>> and the House <<(where they picked up eight)>>'. ||| In fact, the most significant result involved a politician "who
wasn't even on the ballot'. ||| For if the election of 1990 changed nothing else, || it undermined the perception "that George
Bush is all but immune to the normal vicissitudes of politics'. ||| Suddenly, and for the first time in his presidency, Bush
seemed vulnerable. |||

The weakening process began || when Bush abandoned his "no new taxes" pledge || and deprived Republican right-wingers
of their favorite issue. ||| Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package "negotiated by White House aides and
congressional leaders'. ||| After that, the President went from bad to worse || as he alternately attacked the Democrats, || tried
to explain his domestic policies || and confronted growing doubts about the U.S. deployment in the Persian Gulf. ||| By the
time he finally signed a budget deal last week, || his performance ratings in the polls had dropped 20 points. ||| (Time)

clause complex. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x logical x structural x clause rank] [French: phrase complexe] Halliday's
(1965, 1985) term for a combination of clauses related paratactically (as in I came, I saw, I conquered) or hypotactically (as
in when I came, I conquered) but not through embedding (i.e. downranking of clause to serve within another unit); the mode
of combination is the mode of organization of the logical subtype of the ideational metafunction. For example, clauses
combined through coordination form a clause complex. IFG Ch. 7. => LexCart Section 3.2.(For examples, see under
"clause".)

The term clause complex corresponds roughly to the non-systemic term clause combining, except a clause complex never
involves embedding and 'clause combining' may include embedding (i.e., constructions where one clause serves as a
constituent in another unit as if it were a group/phrase or word).

cleft. (Sometimes it-cleft.) The it be ... that construction in English and its equivalent in other languages (as in it was the dog
that died : the dog it was that died). It corresponds to the systemic notion of => theme predication (IFG p. 59-61). =>
LexCart Section 6.2.1.4.

Client. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant function in the transitivity function
of the clause. It represents the participant a service is done for. It is related to one type of cause, viz. Behalf. For instance: Sir
Chris built (Client:) him a gazebo; Sir Chris build a gazebo (Client:) for him. Cf. I'll do it (Behalf:) for you. IFG p. 132. =>
LexCart Section 4.7.1.

Shall I run your bath [Client:] for you?

cline. [theoretical] Introduced in Halliday (1961), in opposition to a hierarchy of discrete terms, as a continuum along a
single dimension with potentially infinite gradation - as in "cline of instantiation". "Cline" might be glossed as scale, except
that this term has a special technical sense, particularly in early systemic linguistics.

Cognizant. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Older term for what is now usually called
=> Senser (IFG p. 111) - the senser of a mental process, i.e. the participant involved (inertly) in conscious processing; it
corresponds roughly to the non-systemic notion of => Experiencer.

cohesion. [theoretical] [French: coh�sion] The textual lexicogrammatical resources for expressing relations within text
without creating grammatical structure. The cohesive resources include reference, substitution / ellipsis, conjunction, and
lexical cohesion. The term cohesion is also used in non-systemic literature, sometimes in direct reference to systemic work
on cohesion (particularly, Halliday & Hasan, 1976), sometimes more loosely to refer to the text-ness of a text. (The term has
a different use in Tagmemics, where it refers to one of the four cells in a four-cell tagmeme.) => IFG Chapter 9. => LexCart
Section 2.3.6.

collocation. [theoretical] [French: collocation] Non-structural, lexical relation between lexical items, measured as the
likelihood of their co-occurrence in text. For instance, regret and deeply collocate. => IFG pp. 312-3. => LexCart Section
4.8.2.

complex. [theoretical] Complex of grammatical units of any rank or class, potentially lineally recursive; complexes include
coordination (extending complexes) and apposition (elaborating complexes). => LexCart Section 2.3.4. (See also => clause
complex.)

conflation. [theoretical] Realization operator used to specify the identity of two functions, as in Agent / Subject. Corresponds
to what is sometimes called assignment in non-systemic work (as in function assignment). => LexCart Section 1.4.

congruent. [theoretical] The 'literal' as opposed to the metaphorical realization of meaning: the congruence between
semantics and lexicogrammar (IFG Ch. 10). => LexCart Sections 1.5.3; 2.4.2; 3.2.6.1; 4.12; 5.1.2.2; 7.3.3.3.5.

CONJUNCTION. [descriptive: lexicogrammatical x textual x systemic x clause rank] [French: CONJONCTION] Textual
system of cohesion: resource for making rhetorical-semantic relations explicit. => IFG Section 9.4. => LexCart Section 6.1.
The basic CONJUNTION TYPES are 'elaboration', 'extension' and 'enhancement'; examples are given below:

It might have been otherwise had President Bush not waited until after the election to announce that he was nearly doubling
U.S. troop strength in the Persian Gulf. As it was, only a few sitting members of Congress were defeated, hardly enough to
make more than a token difference in the composition of the Senate (where the Democrats picked up one seat) and the
House (where they picked up eight). [elaboration: clarification: verificative:] In fact, the most significant result involved a
politician who wasn't even on the ballot. [enhancement: causal-conditional: general:] For if the election of 1990 changed
nothing else, it undermined the perception that George Bush is all but immune to the normal vicissitudes of politics.
Suddenly, and for the first time in his presidency, Bush seemed vulnerable.

The weakening process began when Bush abandoned his "no new taxes" pledge and deprived Republican right-wingers of
their favorite issue. [enhancement: temporal: following:] Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package negotiated by
White House aides and congressional leaders.[enhancement: temporal: following:] After that, the President went from bad to
worse as he alternately attacked the Democrats, tried to explain his domestic policies and confronted growing doubts about
the U.S. deployment in the Persian Gulf. By the time he finally signed a budget deal last week, his performance ratings in
the polls had dropped 20 points. (Time)

context. [theoretical] [French: contexte] Context is a higher-order semiotic system located stratally above the linguistic
system. Context is functionally diversified into field, tenor, and mode. The notions of context of situation and context of
culture originate with Bronislaw Malinowski, an anthropologist working in the first half of this century. Doing field work in
the Trobriand Islands, he came to recognize and argue for the importance of context in the interpretation of text. His work on
context was further developed within linguistics, first by Firth and then by Halliday and others.

Context is differentiated along the cline of instantiation, from context of culture to context of situation. Context of culture is
the context of the overall linguistic system and context of situation is the context of a text, an instance of the system.
Intermediate between the two is situation type - the context of a registerial variety of the overall linguistic system. => IFG p.
370. => LexCart Section 1.6.

In earlier systemic writings, context was used for what is now called semantics. The term context is also used widely in non-
systemic literature, sometimes in the systemic sense sometimes not. Frames, schemata, and scripts within cognitive
psychology and AI are similar to situation and situation types in many respects.

cryptotype, cryptotype. [theoretical] Whorf's term for a covert grammatical category. For instance, the process types,
material, mental, verbal, and relational, are largely cryptotypes in English. It has been taken over in systemic work (e.g.,
Halliday, 1983). Cryptotypes affect the organization of the grammatical system; that is, the grammatical system 'reacts' to
their presence and we can identify cryptotypes by reference to such reactances.

culmination. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] The textual choices controlling the relative
sequence of clause elements after the Process, in particular in examples such as I gave him some money vs. I gave the
money to a friend (cf. IFG p. 149-50). The transformational term for the relative sequence of direct and indirect object
(complement), as in the pair above, is dative shift. => LexCart Section 6.4.

dative shift. Transformational term used to describe the relationship between pairs such as she gave her friend a cook book
for his birthday ~ she gave a cook book to her friend for Christmas; cf. culmination.

de-automatization, de-automatization. [theoretical] Prague School term, which has been taken over in systemic theory to
refer to the situation where the grammar realizes higher-level meanings or themes over and above the semantic categories it
normally realizes automatically (see Halliday, 1982).

Deictic. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x structural x group rank: nominal] [French: D�ictique] Function in the
structure of the nominal group, inserted as a realization of choices in DETERMINATION and realized by a determiner (or a
rankshifted genitival nominal group). For instance: the wages of sin.

The term deictic is also used in non-systemic work but not to refer to a particular function but in the general sense related to
deixis. => IFG p. 160-2. => LexCart Section 7.3.5.1.

DEICTICITY. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x systemic x clause rank]The name of the choice between 'modal'
and 'temporal' in indicative clauses: the question is how the clause is made finite, i.e. related to the here & now, through the
Finite element -- through time (past / present / future in relation to 'now') or through modality (possible, probable, etc. in
relation to 'now'). For instance, he's cutting the lawn is temporal while he may be watering the lawn is modal. => LexCart
Section 5.1.1.3.

delicacy. [theoretical] [French: finesse] The scale from general to specific. In a system network, delicacy corresponds to the
ordering of systems from left to right by means of entry conditions. For example, the following systems of MOOD increase
in delicacy from left to right:

=> LexCart Section 1.2.2.

elaboration. [descriptive: semantics/ lexicogrammar x ideational x systemic x transphenomenal] [French: elaboration] One
of the three types of expansion, the other being 'extension' and 'enhancement'. Elaboration is a transphenomenal type, which
means that it is manifested in different environment of the lexicogrammatical system - for example, those of the clause
complex, CONJUNCTION, and RELATION TYPE (in relational clauses). It is a reltion of 'being', covering subtypes such
as restatement/ identity, exemplification/ classification.

ELLIPSIS. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x various ranks] [French: ELLIPSIS] Textual system within the
domain of cohesion for giving elements of wording in clauses or groups a textual status as continuous and contrastive
information. The distinction between 'continuous' and 'contrastive' is realized by leaving out or eliding continuous elements
and retaining contrastive ones. For example:

A: It looks like verse a little bit on the page, doesn't it?

B: Oh yes, it looks like verse a little bit on the page. (CEC 847)

A: Have you read Pincher Martin?

B: No, I haven't read Pincher Martin. (CEC 849)

=> IFG Section 9.3. => LexCart p. 95, pp. 158-60, Section 6.6.

entry condition. [theoretical] The condition under which the options specified by a system are available; that is, in terms of
the traversal of the system network, the condition under which the system can be reached. An entry condition is a simple
feature or a complex of features. See example under entry for => system. => LexCart Section1.2.2.

Epithet. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x group rank: nominal] Experiential nominal group function,
representing qualities of the thing represented by the nominal group. Typically realized by an adjective. It corresponds to
Fries' (1970) loose-knit modifier. It is distinct from the Classifier function. For instance:

Note that the Epithet comes after the Thing under certain circumstances; this is always true of non-specific pronominals as
Thing: [Thing:] something [Epithet:] wrong.

(Outside of systemic linguistics, adjectives serving as Epithet are often said to serve an attributive function, and this is a
potential source of confusion since the function Attribute is a clause function in systemic descriptions of grammar, as in the
evening is (Attribute:) delightful. This use of often called predicative outside of systemic linguistics.) => IFG p. 162-4. =>
LexCart Section 7.3.3.3.5.

ergative model. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x clause rank]Experiential model &shyp; transitivity model
based on the variable of external cause: the basic question is whether the occurrence of the combination of Process +
Medium (e.g., 'open + door') is brought about by a cause external to this combination, the Agent (e.g., 'Henry + open +
door': Henry opened the door) or not (e.g., 'open + door': the door opened). There is one function common to both
alternatives, the Medium. => IFG LexCart Section 5.8.

If we look at the clause in English from an interpersonal point of view, asking about the identity of the Subject, English
looks 'nominative-accusative':

However, if we look at the clause from an ideational point of view, focusing on transitivity patterns, we find an ergative
model (alongside the 'nominative-accusative' or transitive one):

Exchange. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x exchange rank] Metaphor for talking about the fundamental organization
of dialogue and the context in which speech functions are used. The interactants in a dialogue engage in a symbolic
exchange of meanings. For instance, one interactant may move the dialogue forward by demanding information, thus
assigning himself or herself the role of 'questioner' but also assigning the addressee the complementary role of intended
'answerer'. => IFG LexCart Section 4.1; Halliday (1984); Martin (1992: Chapter 2). => LexCart Section 5.1.2.3.

Experiencer. Case (semantic) role used in non-systemic work inspired by Fillmore's (1968) case grammar. It corresponds
roughly to the systemic transitivity function Senser (earlier, Cognizant), but is not necessarily restricted to mental clauses.

expansion. [descriptive: semantics/ lexicogrammar x ideational x systemic x transphenomenal]

experiential. [theoretical] [French: exp�rientielle] One of the two subtypes of the ideational metafunction. It is the resource
for representing experience. Its mode of organization is constituency. It corresponds (more or less) to what has been called
functions of Darstellung, representation, denotation, cognitive content, semantics. (Sometimes these non-systemic terms
include the other subtype of the ideational metafunction, the logical metafunction, sometimes not.) => LexCart Section 1.3,
2.3.3.

extension. [descriptive: semantics/ lexicogrammar x ideational x systemic x transphenomenal] [French: extension] A type of
expansion.

feature. [theoretical] The label of a term in a system; it can be semantic, lexico-grammatical, or phonological. For instance,
in the system 'indicative/imperative', there are two terms, the features 'indicative' and 'imperative'. Feature is also used
widely in the non-systemic literature, where it does not entail systemicization in a system. It is used quite extensively in
phonology and lexical semantics but also (increasingly) in grammar, in particular in Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar
and Lexical Functional Grammar. The term component is also used (as in componential analysis). => LexCart Section 1.
2.2.

field. [theoretical] [French: champ] Field of discourse; one of the aspects of context. The field is the social activity relevant
to a text; it includes the traditional notion of subject matter. It may be similar to certain uses of the term domain in
computational linguistics. => LexCart Section 1.6.1.

floating quantifier. Transformational term for items such as all in the boys all laughed; originally treated as moved (floated)
out of quantifier position in the noun phrase, i.e. from all the boys laughed. In systemic analysis, such items would not be
floating quantifiers but circumstances of Manner, as in (Actor:) the boys (Manner:) all (Process:) laughed.

function, function. [theoretical] Common term both in systemic and non-systemic linguistics. In systemic linguistics, there
are three terms for particular types of function. (i) micro-function: language use/ domain of meaning in proto-langauge,
before use and metafunction have become differentiated. (ii) macro-function: language use in the transition between proto-
language and adult language. (iii) metafunction: generalized functional principle of linguistic organization. There are three
metafunctions - ideational (with two modes: experiential + logical), interpersonal, and textual. (iv) structural function:
functionally defined constituent; e.g. Subject, Actor, Theme.

Structural functions are configured in => function structures; each structural function derives from one or other of the
metafunctions. The table below summarizes the structural functions used in the descriptions of the grammar of English
according to rank and metafunction.

(Note that there is a special use of the term function in mathematics and formal semantics: such a function takes an argument
and returns a value.)

function structure. [theoretical] A function structure (or structure for short) is made up of a configuration of grammatical
functions such as Actor, Subject, and Theme. Each function may be realized by either a set of grammatical features or a set
of lexical features. The grammatical feature set constitutes a preselection of features that have to be chosen when the
grammar is re-entered to develop a function further. For example, the function Actor may have the associated preselection
'nominal group', which means that once the structure of the clause of which Actor is a constituent has been fully defined, the
grammar is re-entered and Actor is developed as a nominal group. The term function structure is used inside and outside
systemic linguistics. It always refers to a configuration of functions, but in certain non-systemic theories there may be only
one functional layer. In systemic theory, function structure is contrasted with syntagm (Halliday, 1966). In Lexical
Functional Grammar, there is a similar contrast between function structure (f-structure) and constituent structure (c-
structure). => LexCart Section1. 4.

functional dialect. The Prague School notion of functional variation; corresponds to the systemic notion of register.

Functional Sentence Perspective (FSP). Prague School term roughly equivalent to the textuall clause and information unit
systems (cf. Halliday, 1974), including centrally something like the Theme ^ Rheme structure in English.

Generic Structure Potential (GSP) is Hasan's term for a statement of the resources for structuring a particular type of text.
'Generic' is related to genre: the structure is defined for a particular genre, such as a type of service encounter, a type of
advertisement, or a nursery tale. 'Potential' refers to the fact that a given generic structure potential specifies the set of
possible structures for a defined genre. => LexCart Section 1.7.1.

Given. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x texual x structural x information unit rank] Textual function of the information unit:
information presented as recoverable to the listener. Part of the Given + New structure of the information unit. Unless the
assignment of New is marked (as opposed to unmarked), the boundary between Given and New is variable. The term given
is also used outside of systemic linguistics. Given has sometimes been combined with Theme as one function, but they are
independently variable (see Fries, 1981). => IFG p. 59-60; Section 8.6 (278-81). => LexCart Section 6.5.

Goal. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in the material clause, in the
transitive model of transitivity (the goal of the impact), together with the function Actor. For instance: They shoot horses
don't they. Bloomfield (1933) uses the term Goal, but nowadays Patient (sometimes Undergoer in roughly the same sense) is
the common term outside of systemic linguistics; it is comparable to Goal but Patient is not necessarily restricted to the
context of material clauses, so the two terms are not equivalent. => IFG p. 103. => LexCart Section 4.7.

grammar. [theoretical] The term has the traditional sense in systemic theory. That is, it includes syntax as well as
morphology, the two simply having different domains on the grammatical rank scale. Grammar is taken to be the most
general part of lexicogrammar, the system of wording. The other part of lexicogrammar is lexis (vocabulary).
Lexicogrammar realizes semantics and is realized by phonology (graphology).

grammar. In linguistic work influenced by Chomsky, grammar is the model of the overall linguistic system: it includes
semantics and phonology as well as syntax (and morphology).

grammatics. [theoretical] Systemic term for grammatical theory, sometimes used to avoid the potential ambiguity between
grammar in the sense of grammatical theory (as in Functional Grammar) and grammar as the phenomenon under study (as in
the grammar of Hopi).

group. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x rank] Group is the rank between clause rank and word rank: groups function in clauses
and are composed of words. A group is in many respects a group of words or a word complex: words enter into logical
structure to form a group. Examples:

well he'd been doing a thesis on feet (CEC 484)

This aspect of the group explains its difference from the phrase; a phrase does not have a logical (univariate) structure but
rather an experiential (multivariate) structure: the structure of the prepositional phrase is like a miniature of the transitivity
structure of the clause, viz. Minorprocess: preposition + Minirange: nominal group. In the terms of Bloomfield (1933), we
can say that groups are endocentric and phrases are exocentric. If groups were only word complexes, we would not need
them as a separate rank; there is more to them than logical structure (a b g ...). The degree to which other metafunctions
contribute to their structuring depends on the class of group; the primary classes of group in English (as described in IFG
Ch. 6) are tabulated below:

As the table indicates, nominal and verbal groups are interpreted as having both logical, univariate structures and
multivariate structures; the other classes of group are interpreted as only having logica, univariate structures (although
multivariate ones could be set up). => IFG Ch. 6. => LexCart Section 7.2.

Outside systemic linguistics, the distinction between group and phrase is not usually made; phrase is the usual term for both
(cf. noun phrase, verb phrase, and prepositional phrase). While the nominal group of systemic linguistics is comparable to
the noun phrase in formal grammar (although they are interpreted in terms of different types of structure), the verbal group is
not equivalent to the verb phrase; the verbal group is a purely verbal construct while the verb phrase is roughly the predicate
of traditional grammar and logic. => LexCart Section 7.1.

ideational. [theoretical: metafunction] [French: id�ationnelle] One of the metafunctions: language as ideation. It comprises
two modes of 'ideating', the logical and experiential subtypes. It corresponds roughly to non-systemic terms such as
Darstellung, representational, [semantic] content, and semantics. While ideational is often equated with semantics outside
systemic linguistics, it is treated as a metafunction in systemic linguistics and applies to grammar as well as to semantics. =>
LexCart Section 1.3.

IDENTIFICATION. [descriptive: semantics x textual x systemic x rank] [French: identification] Semantic textual system of
options in reference, presenting or presuming a (discourse) referent: see Marting (1992: Chapter 3). IDENTIFICATION is
realized lexicogrammatically by REFERENCE. => IFG Section 9.2.
INFORMATION. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x rank of information unit] Textual system of options in
assigning elements statuses in newsworthiness as given or new information. => IFG Chapter 8. => LexCart Section 6.5.

information unit. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x rank] The grammatical unit of spoken English realized by the tone
group. It is the point of origin of one textual system, INFORMATION (Given-New organization), and one interpersonal
system, KEY. In the unmarked case, an information unit is coextensive with a clause. => IFG Chapter 8. => LexCart Section
6.5.

instantiation. [theoretical] [French: actualisation]The cline between the overall systemic potential of language and the text
(instance of the potential). Intermediate between these two on the cline of instantiation are registers (registerial varieties of
the overall potential). At higher-level system of context, the overall systemic potential is associated with context of culture,
registers with situation types and texts with situations. Instantiation also refers to the process of moving between potential
and instance - the process of actualizing the system in text. => LexCart Section 1.6.1.

interpersonal. [theoretical: metafunction] [French: interpersonnelle] One of the metafunctions: language as interaction. The
resources for establishing and maintaining the relationship between speaker and listener. It combines B�hler's conative and
expressive functions, which are simply different orientations (towards addressee and speaker) within the interpersonal
metafunction in the linguistic system (cf. the notion of inter-act in entry on speech act). => LexCart Section 1.3, 2.3.5.

hypotaxis. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x logical] One of the two types of logical interdependency, the other one being
parataxis (Halliday, 1965, 1985: Ch. 7; Hudson, 1968). Hypotaxis is interdependency where the interdependents are of
unequal status -- dependency. Roughly comparable to co-subordination in Role and Reference Grammar (Foley & Van
Valin, 1984). The traditional term subordination does usually not differentiate hypotaxis and embedding (rankshifted
clauses). The term hypotaxis is also used outside systemic linguistics, but not necessarily in the same sense. => LexCart
Section 2.3.4, 3.2.

KEY. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x information unit rank] Interpersonal system, with the
information unit as point of origin. It includes those speech functional distinctions not expressed by MOOD systems in the
clause and realized by TONE selections at the level of phonology (falling vs. rising pitch and many elaborations of this basic
distinctions). => IFG Section 8.9 (284-5). => LexCart Section 5.1.3.

lexicogrammar. [theoretical: stratum] [French: lexicogrammaire]The combination of grammar and lexis (vocabulary); the
resources for expressing meaning as wordings. Outside of systemic linguistics, grammar and lexis are almost always treated
as distinct modules and lexis is modelled as the lexicon (though the lexicon also includes lexical semantics and phonological
information). => LexCart Section 1.2, 2.4.4.

logical. [theoretical: metafunction] [French: logique] A subtype, together with experiential, of the ideational metafunction.
(The term is also used widely outside systemic linguistics, but in the sense of pertaining to logic rather than in the
metafunctional sense.) This is the metafunction providing the resources for creating clause complexes and other complexes,
for representing serial time by means of serial tense, and so on. => LexCart Section 1.3, 2.3.4.

metafunctions. [theoretical: metafunction] [French: m�tafonction] The highly generalized functions language has evolved
to serve and which are evidenced in its organization. Halliday (1967/8) identifies three metafunctions, the ideational, the
interpersonal, and the textual. The ideational metafunction can be further differentiated into the experiential and the logical
subtypes. Metafunctions are distinguished from macrofunctions and microfunctions. Macrofunctions can be identified in a
child's transition between his/her protolanguage and adult language (cf. Halliday, 1975); microfunctions are the first
functions/uses of a child's protolanguage.

Ideational grammar is often treated as semantics outside of systemic linguistics, while textual and interpersonal grammar are
dealt with partly under the heading of pragmatics. In systemic theory, all three metafunctions are found both at the level of
semantics and the level of grammar: it is not possible to export transitivity from grammar into semantics, because this area
of semantics is already occupied by the semantics of transitivity. => LexCart Section 1. 3, 2.1.2.

Manner. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the transitivity structure
of the clause (corresponding to the interpersonal Wh element how?), of the enhancing subtype. There are four types of
Manner: quality, degree, comparison and means. For example:

Bush hopes not only to impress Gorbachev [Manner: means:] with his understanding of Soviet problems but also to argue
[Manner: quality:] cogently about solutions.
Matter. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the transitivity structure
of the clause, of the projecting subtype. For example:

Bush hopes not only to impress Gorbachev with his understanding of Soviet problems but also to argue cogently [Matter:]
about solutions.

Circumstances of Matter typically occur in mental or verbal clauses (and also in certain relational clauses where the
Attribute refers to a mental quality).

Means. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the transitivity structure
of the clause, subtype of => Manner.

Tie them [Manner: means:] with string.

metarule. In Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, a rule for pairing two (structural) rules, i.e. a meta-statement for
relating them. In this respect, it resembles the system of systemic theory.

minimal bracketing. [theoretical] Minimal bracketing is differentiated from the maximal bracketing of IC-analysis (IFG
Section 2.2, p. 22-). The rank-based constituency of systemic-functional grammar (and phonology) differs from the
immediate constituency of formal grammar (and phonology). The former is associated with minimal functional bracketing,
while the latter works with maximal bracketing in terms of grammatical classes. Some contrasting examples are given below
(the formal analyses are adapted from Radford, 1981).

MODALITY. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x systemic x clause/ group rank] [French: modalit�]
Interpersonal system of options in assigning an assessment in probability, usuality, readiness or obligation of a high/
medium/ low value on the scale between 'yes' and 'no'. => IFG Section 4.5, 10.4. => LexCart Section 5.5.

mode. [theoretical] [French: mode] One of the components of context. It represents the role played by language in the
speech interaction, including the medium (spoken, written, written to be spoken, etc.) as well as the rhetorical mode
(expository, instructive, persuasive, etc.). Mode is a second-order category in the sense that it is brought into existence by
the existence of language itself. (The term mode is also used in other ways in linguistics, for example as the name of the
distinction between realis and irrealis.) => LexCart Section 1.6.1.

modes of meaning. [theoretical] Refers to the different kinds of meaning associated with the different metafunctions
(Halliday, 1979; Matthiessen, 1988, 1990). => LexCart Section 1.3.

modes of organization. [theoretical] Refers to different kinds of syntagmatic or paradigmatic organization (Halliday, 1979;
Matthiessen, 1988), in particular, constituency, interdependency, pulse (period), and prosody. => LexCart Section 1.2.2.

Mood. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x clause rank] Interpersonal clause function, in the
interpretation of the English clause as interaction. It typically includes Subject and Finite, but may also include modal
adjuncts (more specifically, mood Adjuncts). IFG Chapter 4, Section 4.2 in particular. => LexCart Section 5.1.1.1.

MOOD. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x systemic x clause rank] [French: modes/types de phrase]
Interpersonal clause system; the grammaticalization of speech function in the clause (accompanied by KEY in the
information unit, IFG Section 8.8, 284-5). MOOD is thus the primary grammatical resources for enacting dialogic roles and
relationships; it is the grammar of interaction. Also used outside of systemic linguistics. (Note that mood is traditionally also
used for morphological categories such as the subjunctive.) => IFG Chapter 4. => LexCart Section 5.1.1.1.

multivariate. [theoretical] A type of structure: the functions of a multivariate structure stand in different kinds of relation to
one another. For example, the functions of the transitivity structure of the clause all have different values -- Actor, Process,
Goal, Location, and so on. Contrasts with univariate. => IFG p. 172. => LexCart p. 639.

NEGOTIATION. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x systemic x exchange rank] [French: NEGOCIATION] Semantic
interpersonal system of options in dialogic exchange: see Martin (1992: Chapter 2).

network. A relational type of organization; a graph. Examples include discrimination networks, the networks of
stratificational theory, and system networks. In systemic theory, a network is specifically a system network.

Nigel. The name of the systemic generation grammar of the Penman text generator developed at the University of Southern
California / the Information Sciences Institute. It includes the systemic grammar of the generator and the semantic interface
between the grammar and the rest of the system.

nominal. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] Primary => word class (subtypes:
noun [common/ proper/ pronoun]/ adjective/ numeral/determiner) serving as ranking element of nominal group.
Collectively, nominals in a nominal group thus serve to construe participants, to enact persons and to present referents; the
different subtypes contribute to different aspects of these tasks. Examples:

[nominal: noun:] It might have been [nominal: adjective:] otherwise had [nominal: noun:] President [nominal: noun:] Bush
not waited until after [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] election to announce that [nominal: noun:] he was nearly
doubling [nominal: noun:] U.S. [nominal: noun:] troop [nominal: noun:] strength in [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal:
adjective:] Persian [nominal: noun:] Gulf. As [nominal: noun:] it was, only [nominal: determiner:] a [nominal: numeral:]
few sitting [nominal: noun:] members of [nominal: noun:] Congress were defeated, hardly [nominal: adjective:] enough to
make more than [nominal: determiner:] a [nominal: noun:] token [nominal: noun:] difference in [nominal: determiner:] the
[nominal: noun:] composition of [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] Senate (where [nominal: noun:] the [nominal:
noun:] Democrats picked up [nominal: numeral:] one [nominal: noun:] seat) and [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:]
House (where [nominal: noun:] they picked up [nominal: numeral:] eight). In fact, [nominal: determiner:] the most
[nominal: adjective:] significant [nominal: noun:] result involved [nominal: determiner:] a [nominal: noun:] politician
[nominal: noun:] who wasn't even on [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] ballot. For if [nominal: determiner:] the
[nominal: noun:] election of [nominal: numeral:] 1990 changed [nominal: noun:] nothing [nominal: adjective:] else,
[nominal: noun:] it undermined [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] perception that [nominal: noun:] George
[nominal: noun:] Bush is all but [nominal: adjective:] immune to [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: adjective:] normal
[nominal: noun:] vicissitudes of [nominal: noun:] politics. Suddenly, and for [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: numeral:]
first [nominal: noun:] time in [nominal: determiner:] his [nominal: noun:] presidency, [nominal: noun:] Bush seemed
[nominal: adjective:] vulnerable.

[nominal: determiner:] The weakening [nominal: noun:] process began when [nominal: noun:] Bush abandoned [nominal:
determiner:] his "[nominal: determiner:] no [nominal: adjective:] new [nominal: noun:] taxes" [nominal: noun:] pledge and
deprived [nominal: adjective:] Republican [nominal: noun:] right-wingers of [nominal: determiner:] their [nominal:
adjective:] favorite [nominal: noun:] issue. Then [nominal: noun:] Congress rejected [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal:
noun:] deficit-reduction [nominal: noun:] package negotiated by [nominal: noun:] White House [nominal: noun:] aides and
[nominal: adjective:] congressional [nominal: noun:] leaders. After [nominal: noun:] that, [nominal: determiner:] the
[nominal: noun:] President went from [nominal: adjective:] bad to [nominal: adjective:] worse as [nominal: noun:] he
alternately attacked [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] Democrats, tried to explain [nominal: determiner:] his
[nominal: adjective:] domestic [nominal: noun:] policies and confronted growing [nominal: noun:] doubts about [nominal:
determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] U.S. [nominal: noun:] deployment in [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: adjective:]
Persian [nominal: noun:] Gulf. By the time [nominal: noun:] he finally signed [nominal: determiner:] a [nominal: noun:]
budget [nominal: noun:] deal [nominal: adjective:] last [nominal: noun:] week, [nominal: determiner:] his [nominal: noun:]
performance [nominal: noun:] ratings in [nominal: determiner:] the [nominal: noun:] polls had dropped [nominal: numeral:]
20 [nominal: noun:] points. (Time)

(The classification of nominal words has varied over the history of Western linguistics from ancient Greece onwards, for
example with respect to whether nouns and adjectives have been classified together or not (as nouns: substantives/
adjectives. See Robins (1966: 3-19/ 1969: 187-204.) => IFG p. 28-9, 214. => LexCart pp. 83-84, p. 652.

packaging. Metaphor sometimes used outside systemic linguistics (due to Chafe, 1979) for the presentation of information --
the content is 'packaged' by means of resources such as voice and theme. It is roughly equivalent to the textual metafunction
of systemic theory, although it may include other considerations as well. The metaphor is one example of the general
conduit metaphor used in talking about language (cf. 'put meaning into words' etc.).

Patient. Case (semantic) role in many non-systemic approaches to transitivity functions; comparable to Goal, but unlike
Goal, Patient is not necessarily restricted to material clauses.

path augmentation. [theoretical] The computation of the path from a preselected feature in a system to the root of the system
network, i.e. of the path that leads to the feature.

Penman. Text generation system being developed at the University of Southern California / the Information Sciences
Institute.

phase I, II, and III. [descriptive: ontogenesis] The three phases of language development -- protolanguage, the 'child tongue'
before the child starts learning the mother tongue (phase I), the transition into adult language (phase II), and the period of
learning adult language (phase III).
Phenomenon. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Participant role in the transitivity
structure of a mental clause: the phenomenon sensed by the Senser, as in She saw [Phenomenon:] them, She saw
[Phenomenon:] them leaving the house. In a middle clause, it is the Range; in an effective clause, it is the Agent. The
Phenomenon can be phenomenal (an ordinary 'thing'), macro-phenomenal (an act, i.e. process configuration), or meta-
phenomenal (a fact, i.e. a projected process configuration). => LexCart Section 4.8.1.

phrase. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x group/phrase rank] Like groups, phrases constitute the rank intermediate between
clauses and words. However, unlike groups they are not logically structured groups of words, but rather more like miniature
clauses. IFG Section 6.1, p. 158-8; Section 6.5, 189-91. => LexCart Section 2.2.3, 7.0.2.

phrase. In non-systemic work, often the common term for both group and phrase (no distinction is made).

POLARITY. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x systemic x clause (& group: verbal) rank] [French: polarit�]
The term for the system 'positive / negative' and for the region of systems including this system. Often simply called
negation outside systemic linguistics. => IFG p. 75; Section 4.5, p. 85-89. => LexCart Section 5.3.

potential. [theoretical] The representation of what a language user can do, as in meaning potential = what he/she can mean.
It contrasts with actual, what he/she does (i.e., potential vs. actual = can do vs. does). The actual is the actualization of the
potential. => LexCart Section 1.6.3, 1.7.1.

Predicate. (i) In traditional logic and grammar, the predicate forms a sentence together with the subject; it corresponds to the
VP of modern formal grammar. That it, Subject + Predicate is represented as NP + VP. So for instance, the Predicate of I'll
be seeing you is ll be seeing you. (In modern formal grammar, the category of Aux has also been recognized, giving the
sentence the basic structure NP + Aux + VP.) (ii) In predicate logic and (formal) semantics, the predicate is the unit
expressed by the (main) verb of a sentence, capable of taking one or more arguments. It is roughly comparable to the notion
of process in systemic linguistics.

Predicator. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x clause rank] Interpersonal clause function; the verbal
part of the Residue. It is realized by a verbal group or a verbal group complex, excluding only the Finite element. For
instance: I'll be seeing you, you seem to tend to forget your duties. (Note that Predicator is different from Predicate. ) IFG p.
78-9. => LexCart Section 5.1.1.1.

preposition. [descriptive: semantics x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] Secondary word class of primary class
verbal. Prepositions serve as Minor-processes in prepositional phrases, with a nominal group (complex) as Complement/
Range; the phrase forms a kind of mini-clause. Prepositions may be simple (e.g., at, on, in, over), sometimes of verbal origin
(indicating their affinity with verbs, e.g. regarding, following, using), or complex (e.g, on top of, according to, because of).
Examples:

It might have been otherwise had President Bush not waited [preposition:] until [preposition:] after the election to announce
that he was nearly doubling U.S. troop strength [preposition:] in the Persian Gulf. As it was, only a few sitting members
[preposition:] of Congress were defeated, hardly enough to make more [preposition:] than a token difference [preposition:]
in the composition [preposition:] of the Senate (where the Democrats picked up one seat) and the House (where they picked
up eight). In fact, the most significant result involved a politician who wasn't even [preposition:] on the ballot. For if the
election [preposition:] of 1990 changed nothing else, it undermined the perception that George Bush is all but immune
[preposition:] to the normal vicissitudes [preposition:] of politics. Suddenly, and [preposition:] for the first time
[preposition:] in his presidency, Bush seemed vulnerable.

The weakening process began when Bush abandoned his "no new taxes" pledge and deprived Republican right-wingers
[preposition:] of their favorite issue. Then Congress rejected the deficit-reduction package negotiated [preposition:] by
White House aides and congressional leaders. [preposition:] After that, the President went [preposition:] from bad
[preposition:] to worse as he alternately attacked the Democrats, tried to explain his domestic policies and confronted
growing doubts [preposition:] about the U.S. deployment [preposition:] in the Persian Gulf. By the time he finally signed a
budget deal last week, his performance ratings [preposition:] in the polls had dropped 20 points. (Time)

preselection. [theoretical] Selection of a feature before it is actually encountered; preselection takes place from one stratum
to the stratum next below or from one rank to the rank next below (allowing for the possibility of rankshift). Preselection is
partly similar to various feature spreading conventions, as used e.g. in Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. => LexCart
Section 1.4.

proposal. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x systemic x move rank] An offer or command, i.e. the exchange of goods-
&-services. => IFG p. 71. => LexCart Section 5.1.2.1.

proposition. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x systemic x move rank] A statement or question, i.e. the exchange of
information. (Note that this use of the term differs both from its use in logic and its everyday use.) => IFG p. 70. => LexCart
Section 5.1.2.1.

proposition. In logic and (formal) semantics, the logico-semantic unit expressed by a sentence capable of being assigned a
truth value.

prosody. [theoretical] Term used technically in Firthian phonology, where it is opposed to phonematic unit, and taken over
into systemic phonology: a phonological feature extending over more than one phonematic unit (which means that the
feature is not placed segmentally); for instance, nasalization and lip rounding may be prosodic. (Prosody is roughly
comparable to Harris's, 1951, long component.) One of the advantages with treating features as prosodic is that they don't
have to be placed arbitrarily in phonemic structure. In systemic theory, the term prosody has been extended to grammar and
semantics to refer to the interpersonal mode of syntagmatic organization (Halliday, 1979; Martin, 1992; Matthiessen, 1988,
1991).

rank (scale). [theoretical] A hierarchy of units such as [grammar:] clause - group/phrase - word - morpheme, [semantics,
interpersonal:] exchange - move, or [phonology:] tone group - foot - syllable - phoneme. The rank scale determines the basic
realization patterns. Functions of the units at one rank are realized by units at the rank below. For example, clause functions
are realized by groups/phrases and group functions are realized by words. In non-systemic work, the term level is sometimes
used. (The term rank was used in a different sense in Jespersen's writings.) => IFG Ch. 1; p. 25; 158-9. => LexCart Section
1.2.1, 2.2.

rankshift. [theoretical] [French: d�plac� de rang] The semogenic process whereby a unit of one rank is moved down the
rank scale to serve as if it were a unit of a lower rank as an element within another unit.

realization, realization. [theoretical] Term in linguistics in general for a symbolic relationship between content and
expression; also expression, coding, etc.. Realization and mutation have been contrasted (cf. Gleason, 1965) as basic
principles underlying grammatical theories. Systemic grammar is realizational whereas transformational grammar is
mutational. => IFG p. 37. => LexCart Section 1.4.

realization operator. [theoretical] Together with one or more operands, a realization operator makes up a realization
statement. Realization operators include Insert, Conflate, Expand, and Order. See realization statement. => LexCart Section
1. 4.

realization statement. [theoretical] A specification of a structure fragment, such as the presence of a function or its ordering
in relation to another function, stated as a re-expression of a systemic feature or a combination of features. A realization
statement consists of one realization operator and one or more operands. For example, the statement (Conflate Subject
Agent) consists of the conflation operator Conflate and the operands Subject and Agent, which are grammatical functions.

=> LexCart Section 1.4.

recoverable. [descriptive: semantics x textual x systemic] With respect to a referent in a text: it is recoverable to the
addressee if he/she can identify it (elsewhere in the text or in the context, including both immediate and general context).
The term identifiable is often used in the same sense. => LexCart Section 7.3.5.1.

register. [theoretical] A variety of language determined by a particular set of values of the context; it is determined by what
the speaker is doing socially. (Cf. register in music.) The principle controlling variables are field [of discourse] (type of
social action), tenor [of relationship between speaker and listener] (role relationships), and mode (symbolic organization).
The notion of register is a generalization of the traditional notion of genre; it is also akin to the Prague school notion of
functional dialect. Registers can be identified at different degrees of delicacy or specificity. For example, we can identify a
particular register as written instruction in how to prepare food - a recipe in a cookery book - or, more delicately, as written
instruction for an American public in how to prepare Thai food. In Martin's (e.g. 1992), the term register is used in a
different sense to refer to field, tenor and mode within context: see Matthiessen (1993) for a comparison with Halliday &
Hasan's model. (Outside systemic linguistics, the term register is also used in several other senses.) => LexCart Section
1.6.4.

Residue. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x interpersonal x structural x clause rank] Modal function in the interpretation of the
clause as representation. The part of the clause that does not constitute the Mood, i.e. the Predicator, complements, and (non-
modal) adjuncts. The earlier term was Proposition. Residue is different from Predicate in the logical / traditional Subject ^
Predicate analysis in a number of respects. For instance, it only includes the Predicator part of the verbal group, not the
Finite. Further, it is a rhetorical notion, not a logical one; it is the part of the clause often elided in dialogic exchanges (as in,
Mood: He'll Residue: be here tomorrow. - No, Mood: he won't Residue: --). => IFG Section 4.3, p. 78-. => LexCart Section
5.1.1.1.

Rhetorical Structure Theory. Theory of text organization developed within the Penman project. It interprets text as being
organized relationally. A rhetorical relation is typically asymmetric, relating two spans of text, a nucleus and a satellite. The
spans of texts related rhetorically may have internal organization. A rhetorical relation is defined in terms of the conditions
for using it and its intended effect on the addressee. Rhetorical relations correspond partly to conjunctive relations. =>
LexCart Section 1.8.2.

right dislocation. Transformational term for examples such as he's a real genius, your brother. It corresponds to theme
substitution (Halliday, 1967/8). => LexCart Section 6.2.1.5.

Role. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] Circumstantial role in the transitivity structure of
the clause, of the elaborating subtype. The "guise" a participant serves in when taking part in the Process or the "product"
resulting from taking part in the Process. For example:

Cut the ducks [Role: product:] into portions.

scale. [theoretical] [French: gamme]Introduced in Halliday (1961) as the general term for rank, exponence (later,
realization), and delicacy. (The term scale is also used widely outside systemic linguistics in the sense of cline.)

schema. This term has been used in a number of ways in cognitive psychology, linguistics and AI. It is often used to refer to,
in systemic terms, a configuration of elements within a situation type, but interpreted as a cognitive construct. Often used in
the same way as frame.

script. This term was introduced into AI by Schank and Abelson; it's associated in particular with Schank's Yale School of
AI. A script is a conventional sequence of actions for achieving some purpose. So, for instance, there are scripts for a visit to
the restaurant and for a fishing expedition. The idea of script is related to situation type in systemic theory. Broadly
speaking, Schank and Abelson responded to the same type of concerns Malinowski had when he introduced his theory of
context (context of culture and context of situation; Malinowski, 1923). For instance, Malinowski pointed to the
impossibility of interpreting text without reference to context, including problems in translation.

sentence. [descriptive: graphology x rank: sentence] Graphological unit realizing clause complex in lexicogrammar. Its
beginning is normally marked by initial capital and its end by a full stop, exclamation mark or question mark. => IFG
Section 1.1. Outside systemic linguistics, "sentence" has been used in a variety of senses, often neutralizing the distinction
between 'clause' and 'clause complex'.

specific. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x group rank: nominal] Halliday's generalization of 'definite' in the
definite article of traditional grammar so as to include other demonstratives and personals as well. => IFG p. 160. =>
LexCart Section 7.3.5.1.

speech act. Notion originating within the philosophy of language (the classic study is Austin's "How to do things with
words") but now widely used and developed within linguistics, particularly within approaches close to philosophy. When a
speaker speaks, s/he acts; and such an act of speech is relevant at more than one level, including its preconditions and its
intended effect. The theory of speech acts is known as speech act theory; it is often treated as part of pragmatics. Speech act
corresponds to speech function in systemic semantics (more specifically, interpersonal semantics); it also corresponds to
speech function and 'notional mood' in more traditional approaches. The difference between the systemic notion of speech
function and speech act is partly that the former is conceived of as an inter-act that forms part of an exchange.

SPEECH FUNCTION. [descriptive: semantics x interpersonal x systemic x move rank][French: fonction �locutive]
Semantic system of interactive options for the construction of moves in dialogue: the adoption and assignment of speech
roles. The most central systems are the simultaneous ones of: TURN: initiating/ responding, ORIENTATION: giving/
demanding, and COMMODITY: information/ goods-&-services. SPEECH FUNCTION is realized by MOOD in the
lexicogrammar, and through MOOD, by TONE in the phonology. => IFG Section 4.1 => LexCart Section 5.1.2.

starting structure. [theoretical] The default structure for any grammatical unit posited by Fawcett (1980).

stratum, stratum. [theoretical] A system or a particular order of abstraction in language: semantics, lexicogrammar, and
phonology are the three strata in Halliday's version of systemic theory. Strata are related through (inter-stratal) realization;
for instance, semantics is realized through lexicogrammar. The earlier term in systemic linguistics (taken over from Firth)
was level (as in Firth's levels of analysis); since level was used in other senses in non-systemic linguistics, the equivalent
term stratum was taken over from stratificational linguistics. In Relational Grammar, stratum has a different use, more like
the layer in a function structure. => LexCart Section 1.1.

SUBSTITUTION. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause & group rank ] Textual system for
differentiating between continuity and contrast, functioning together with => ELLIPSIS as a cohesive resource. For
example:

A: Are there any questions you want to ask use, Mr Blake?

B: No, I don't think so.

system. [theoretical] A system is the central category for representing paradigmatic organization at any stratum -
phonological, grammatical, or semantic. It consists of (i) a statement of a choice between two or more terms, represented by
features, (ii) and an entry condition, which specifies when the choice is available. The entry condition is a simple feature or a
feature complex; these features are terms in other systems. Because of their entry conditions, systems form system networks.
Each term in a system may have one or more realization statements associated with it. (The realization statements specify
structure fragments; from their vantage point, the system is like a 'metarule'.) Example:

=> LexCart Section 1.2.2.

tenor. [theoretical] One of the components of context. The role relationship between the interactants in a speech situation. It
includes relations of formality, power, and affect. Tenor influences interpersonal choices in the linguistic system. For
instance, the strategy chosen for issuing a command depends largely on the tenor of the relationship. => LexCart Section
1.6.1.

text, text. [theoretical] As a systemic term, text refers to a semantic unit; it is a stretch of language functioning - doing a job -
in context. As language functioning in context, a text is an instance of the linguistic system. Note that a text can be either
spoken or written. => LexCart Section 1.5.

textual. [thetorical: metafunction] One of the systemic metafunctions - the resources for presenting information as text in
context. It includes the resources of theme, information, conjunction, substitution-ellipsis and reference. => LexCart Section
1.3, 2.3.6.

THEME. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] Textual clause systems, including THEME
SELECTION, THEME PREDICATION, and others. These systems provide options for giving certain elements of the clause
textual prominence as local context or point of departure and other elements non-prominence, realized as Theme ^ Rheme;
certain other features may be added to this status, such as identification. => LexCart Section 6.2.

Theme. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x structural x clause rank] Textual clause function: the point of departure of
the clause as message. It sets up the local context for each clause. This local context often relates to the method of
development of the text: the Theme is selected in such a way that it indicates how the clause relates to this method and
contributes to the identification of the current step in the development. The term theme has an entirely different meaning in
formal grammars (as does the term thematic roles), which has nothing to do with the long tradition of work on theme in
Prague School linguistics and other functional traditions. => IFG Chapter 3. => LexCart Section 6.2.

theme. (i) In functional linguistics, following the Prague School, an aspect of Functional Sentence Perspective. (ii) In formal
grammar, nowadays particularly Government and Binding theory but following Gruber (1965), a particular case role in the
case frame of a verb. The term theme is also used outside grammar, as in the 'theme' of a story.

THEME PREDICATION. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] One of the textual clause systems
of THEME. It provides the option of imposing an additional layer of thematic organization on the clause so as to set up the
Theme as an identifier, typically selected from a set of potential alternatives, as in it was the dog that died (... 'not the cat')
(instead of the unmarked the dog died). For example:

A: There's a lot more in grammar than people notice. People always notice the lexis.
B: Yes.
A: Lots has been done about that - but I mean you can only get so far and so much fun out of 'pavement', 'sidewalk', etcetera.
B: Mm.
A: It's the grammar "where the fun is'.
B: //1 Yes // 4 it's the grammar "which is interesting' // (CEC: 255)

Cleft or it-cleft in formal grammar. => IFG Section 3.7, 59-61. => LexCart Section 6.2.1.4.

THEME IDENTIFICATION. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] One of the textual clause
systems of THEME. It provides the option of imposing an alternative constituency organization of the clause on the model
of an identifying clause, where the thematic constituent is explicitly identified with the rhematic constituent, as in what we
want is Whatneys (instead of the unmarked We want Whatneys). Example:

Let's be quite specific. They write articles that taunt us and mock us to make us look silly. We write a reply that makes each
writer of those articles look sillier. They refuse to publish our reply. We say, in that case we will limit your circulation. We
haven't blacked them out. We reduce them to a few thousand copies. What we stop them from doing is to sell
advertisements. The fact that they know that I reserve the right to reply has been an educating experience for the
correspondents. (Lee Kuan Yew, in Time)

Pseudo-cleft or wh-cleft in formal grammar. => IFG p. 41-4. => LexCart Section 6.2.1.6.

THEME MATTER. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] One of the textual clause systems of
THEME. It provides the option of specifying a marked topical Theme as a purely thematic element not serving a transitivity
role - often as an elaboration of something inintroduced earlier in the discouse, after some distance in the text. This type of
Theme is typically "picked up" cohesively in the clause, by reference or lexical cohesion. In writing it appears with a marker
such as as for, as to, with respect to, regarding; but in speech, it typically occurs by itself. Example:

a: If you felt you could have got honours ...

A: no. I - well, maybe I was slightly ... cos there was this other friend of mine that knows about the same amount as me and
he actually got an honours viva - you have to have another viva to get honours - and four people went for it and two got it
and this friend of mine he didn't get it and I mean I couldn't have got it either: the questions he had got in therapeutics and
that he was asked I wouldn't have known either and the questions that the other chap who got it was asked I wouldn't have
known. You know, I didn't know it in as much depth as that, so I wouldn't have got it anyway. (CEC: 600)

THEME SUBSTITUTION. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x textual x systemic x clause rank] One of the textual clause
systems of THEME. It provides the option of replaying the Theme at the end of the clause as an 'afterthought': they're such
darlings, your children. Example:

I was an undergraduate here, of very ripe years, until last July and I went back to my old job in the Civil Service and I found
it so dull that I got this lecturing job in a teacher's training college, which is quite fun. I mean they're not university calibre,
obviously, the students on the whole, but in some ways they're more fun ... (CEC: 154)

The transformational term is right dislocation. => LexCart Section 6.2.1.5.

tone group. [descriptive: phonology x rank: tone group] The highest-ranking unit on the phonological rank scale of English.
A tone group carries an intonation contour (a 'tone' or 'medolody') and is the point of origin of two systems that determine its
shape, TONE (the direction of the pitch movement) and TONICITY (the placment of the major pitchmovement). The
structure of the tone group is (Pretonic ^) Tonic, which are realized by feet (units at the rank next below on the phonological
rank scale). => IFG Ch. 8. => LexCart Section 5.1.3.

topic. The subject matter of a clause; what it is about - often as one member of the pair topic + comment. Topic corresponds
roughly to the experiential part of Theme, Topical theme, in Halliday's analysis of English, but it typically excludes textual
and interpersonal Themes. (Sometimes the notion of given or known is also included in topic, but never in Halliday's
Theme.) Cf. IFG p. 39.

transformational relations. Terms sometimes used to describe paradigmatic relations, systemic agnation, as transformations
between structures; for instance, voice can be seen as a transformational relation between active and passive clauses.
Transformational relations often correspond to systems in systemic-functional grammar - systems are part of the
paradigmatic organization of grammar.

transitivity models. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x ideational x systemic & structural x (typically) clause rank] General
model for organizing the configuration of a process plus its participants. Halliday (1967, 1967/8 etc.) discusses two
transitivity models in relation to English, the transitive model and the ergative one. The transitive model is one of extension
or impact: a process is acted out by one participant, the actor (the lion ran), and it may extend ('transcend') to another
participant, the goal (the lion hunted the tourist), and it may be initiated by yet another participant, the initiator (hunger
made the lion hunt the tourist):
The fundamental question is whether the process the Actor engages in extends to (impacts) a Goal (transitive) or not
(intransitive).

The ergative model is one of external causation: the fundamental question is whether the actualization of the combination of
Process + Medium is caused externally by an Agent (the soldier marched the prisoners) or not (the prisoners marched):

=> IFG Section 5.8. => LexCart Section 4.1.2.

transitivity functions (roles). [descriptive: lexicogrammar x experiential x structural x clause rank] The functions in the
experiential structure of the clause - its transitivity structure (clause as representation): process, participants, and
circumstances. Outside of systemic linguistics, case roles and semantic roles have been used for different but related
interpretations of the same area of language. One difference has to do with the level (stratum) at which these roles are
posited: in systemic theory they are at the level of grammar, whereas outside systemic theory they are usually treated as part
of (lexical) semantics nowadays. In systemic theory, there are correlates at the semantic level; but both semantics and
grammar are needed in the interpretation of transitivity, for instance to handle grammatical metaphor in this area. =>
LexCart Section 4.1.1.

unification-based grammars. Family of grammars where there is a clear separation between data structures specifying
grammatical information and procedures for using these data structures. Grammar is interpreted as a set of data structures
and these are brought together, say in the specification of a sentence, by means of some kind of operation of unification.
(Unification is largely comparable to the notion of union in set theory, but there are differences; see e.g. Kay, 1979.) In his
survey of unification grammars, Schieber (1986) includes Martin Kay's Functional Unification Grammar, Bresnan &
Kaplan's Lexical Functional Grammar, and Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. He does not discuss Systemic
Functional Grammar, but it also belongs with this family of grammars (cf. Winograd, 1983, on feature and function
grammars; and Kasper, 1988, on the intertranslatability between Systemic Functional Grammar and Functional Unification
Grammar.)

unit. [theoretical] Units are the carriers of structure (i.e. they are organic configurations of functions) and the poins of origin
of system networks. They ordered by the rank scale (of a particular stratum). Grammatical units of English include the
clause, the nominal group, the verbal group, the prepositional phrase, the noun, and the verb. Units may be combined
through the logical metafunction to form complexes of units (such as the clause complex); but these complexes do not
themselved constitute units (since they are not multivariately structured organic wholes but rather univariately structured
series or chains). The systemic notion of 'unit' is, in many respects, comparable to the AI use of the term 'frame' (cf.
Halliday's, 1961, description of a meal). => LexCart Section 1.2.1.

univariate. [theoretical: structure] A type of structure, opposed to multivariate. In a univariate structure, each function stands
in the same relation to the others. For example, as we build up a coordinate structure, each new element is related to the
previous simply as the 'next' link in the coordination chain: Tom [Next:] Dick [Next:] Harry [Next:] Sally [Next:] and
Hellen. There are two types of univariate structure, hypotactic structure and paratactic structure. => IFG p. 172.

word. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x rank: word] In systemic linguistics, the rank between group/ phrase and morpheme on
the grammatical rank scale in e.g. English. In systemic theory, morphology is simply word grammar, i.e. the grammar of
units of a particular rank, but it is not separated from 'syntax'.

word class. [descriptive: lexicogrammar x metafunction: general x systemic x word rank] The general theoretical category of
class manifested in the description of languages with a word rank: class of word - primary, secondary or more delicate
(traditionally also "part of speech"). The primary and secondary word classes posited in IFG and LexCart in the description
of English are as follows:

wording. [theoretical] The term is taken from 'folk linguistics'. Wording is the output of lexicogrammar to be realized
phonologically or graphologically: the combination of 'words' (i.e., lexical and grammatical items) and structure.

References
Bloomfield, L. 1933.
Chafe, W. 1979.

Fries' (1970)

Fries, 1981

Gruber (1965)

Halliday, M.A.K. 1966

Halliday, M.A.K. 1974. In F. Danes (ed.), .

Halliday, M.A.K. 1975. Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday (1984); The nature and ontogenesis of dialogue.

Martin (1992: Chapter 2)

Martin, J.R. 1996. Metalinguistic diversity.

Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. & C. Nesbitt. 1996. On the idea of theory-neutral descriptions. R. Hasan, C. Cloran & D. Butt (eds.).

Radford, 1981

Robins, R.H. 1966. The development of the word class system of the European grammatical tradition. Foundations of
Language 2: 3-19. Reprinted in R.H. Robins, 1969, Diversions of Bloomsbury: Selected writings on linguistics. Amsterdam:
North Holland. pp. 187-204.

Tesni�re's (1959)

(Halliday, 1979; Martin, 1992; Matthiessen, 1988, 1991