Book contents
- Interpersonal Grammar
- Interpersonal Grammar
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction: Theory and Description in Interpersonal Grammar across Languages
- 2 Interpersonal Grammar in Spanish
- 3 Interpersonal Grammar in Khorchin Mongolian
- 4 Interpersonal Grammar in Mandarin
- 5 Interpersonal Grammar in Tagalog: Assessment Systems
- 6 Interpersonal Grammar of Pitjantjatjara
- 7 Interpersonal Grammar in Brazilian Portuguese
- 8 Interpersonal Grammar in British Sign Language
- 9 Interpersonal Grammar in Scottish Gaelic
- Index
- References
9 - Interpersonal Grammar in Scottish Gaelic
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 May 2021
By
Book contents
- Interpersonal Grammar
- Interpersonal Grammar
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction: Theory and Description in Interpersonal Grammar across Languages
- 2 Interpersonal Grammar in Spanish
- 3 Interpersonal Grammar in Khorchin Mongolian
- 4 Interpersonal Grammar in Mandarin
- 5 Interpersonal Grammar in Tagalog: Assessment Systems
- 6 Interpersonal Grammar of Pitjantjatjara
- 7 Interpersonal Grammar in Brazilian Portuguese
- 8 Interpersonal Grammar in British Sign Language
- 9 Interpersonal Grammar in Scottish Gaelic
- Index
- References
Summary
In this chapter I use a text-based approach to grammatical description in order to explore the interpersonal grammar of Scottish Gaelic. I analyse extracts from two Scottish Gaelic novels from the perspectives of the semantic systems of NEGOTIATION and ENGAGEMENT and correlate distinctions in these systems with function structures at the lexicogrammatical stratum. By these means I build up a partial systems network for MOOD in Gaelic profile, with choices and distinctive features represented in the most economical way and labelled according to their distinctive usages in discourse. On the basis of this analysis, I will suggest that Scottish Gaelic does not have a [declarative] versus [interrogative] opposition in MOOD, redounding with the system of NEGOTIATION at the semantic stratum, but rather an [assertive] versus [non-assertive] opposition, redounding with the system of ENGAGEMENT at the semantic stratum.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Interpersonal GrammarSystemic Functional Linguistic Theory and Description, pp. 257 - 284Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (2019). Language Characterology and Textual Dynamics: A Crosslinguistic Exploration in English and Scottish Gaelic. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 51(2), 124–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2019.1650607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, T. (2016). Phasal Dynamism and the Unfolding of Meaning as Text. English Text Construction, 9(1), 143–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.9.1.08bar.Google Scholar
Berry, M. (1981). Systemic Linguistics and Discourse Analysis: A Multi-layered Approach to Exchange Structure. In Coulthard, M. and Montgomery, M., eds., Studies in Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Byrne, M. (2002). Gràmar na Gàidhlig [A Grammar of Gaelic]. Stornoway: Stòrlann-Acair.Google Scholar
Caffarel, A. (2004). Metafunctional Profile of the Grammar of French. In Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., eds., Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., eds., (2004). Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1996). On Grammar and Grammatics. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C. and Butt, D., eds., Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed., London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1984). On the Ineffability of Grammatical Categories. In Manning, A., Martin, P. and McCalla, K., eds., The Tenth LACUS Forum. Columbia: Hornbeam Press pp.13–18.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. Maryland.University Park Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1961). Categories of the Theory of Grammar. Word, 17(3), 242–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd ed., London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. (1996). Semantic Networks as a Tool for the Analysis of Meaning. In Cloran, C., Butt, D. and Williams, G., eds., Ways of Saying: Ways of Meaning. Selected Papers of Ruqaiya Hasan. London/New York: Cassell, pp. 104–31Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. & Waugh, L. R. (1979). The Sound Shape of Language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, E. (2008). Meaningful Arrangements: Exploring the Syntactic Description of Texts. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. L. (2009). Aspects of the Interpersonal Grammar of Scottish Gaelic. Linguistics 47(4), 885–911.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. (2018). Interpersonal Meaning: Systemic Functional Perspectives. Functions of Language, 25(1), 2–19.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. (1995). Logical Meaning, Interdependency and the Linking Particle {-ng/na} in Tagalog. Functions of Language, 2(2), 189–228.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. & Cruz, P. (2018). Interpersonal Grammar of Tagalog: A Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective. Functions of Language, 25(1), 53–91.Google Scholar
Martin, J.R. & Rose, D. (2007). Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause, 2nd ed., London, Oxford, New York, New Delhi and Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. & White, P. R. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathesius, V. (1964). On Linguistic Characterology with Illustrations from Modern English. In Vachek, J., ed., A Prague School Reader in Linguistics. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Muntigl, P. (2009). Knowledge Moves in Conversational Exchanges: Revisiting the Concept of Primary vs. Secondary Knowers. Functions of Language, 16(2), 225–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.16.2.03munGoogle Scholar
O’Grady, G. (in press) Intonation and Exchange: A Dynamic and Metafunctional View. Lingua. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102794Google Scholar
Ventola, E. (1987). The Structure of Social Interaction: A Systemic Approach to the Semiotics of Service Encounters. London: PinterGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D. (2020). Towards a Discourse Semantic Characterisation of the Modal Particles in Khorchin Mongolian: A Case Study of an Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 158, 13–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.12.013.Google Scholar
- 3
- Cited by