8.1 Introduction
Chapter 6 showed in some detail how the networks for the Causation semantic field were derived. Chapter 7 did the same for the Cognition field and the Communication field. It was argued that a taxonomic Meaning Network is the most efficient way to show the progression from semantic field to specific constructions, while the Systemic Network summarises the information as a set of alternatives between features. The distinction between taxonomy and system is drawn from Matthiessen (Reference Matthiessen2023).
This chapter summarises the meaning and systemic networks for six further semantic fields. These are semantic fields rather than process types, but they are inspired by the process type distinctions made in Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014). Specifically, three of the fields correspond to meanings that relate to material processes, while the other two correspond to relational processes. The six fields are:
Material processes: Change (Section 8.2), Creation (Section 8.3), Location change (Section 8.4), and Possession transfer (Section 8.5).
Relational processes: Equivalence (Section 8.6) and Logical relation (Section 8.7).
Each of the following sections consists of: (a) an explanation of which constructions comprise the field, and a note of how many there are; (b) a description of the systemic network; and (c) a description of the meaning network. The accompanying figures show the two networks. The conclusion to the chapter relates the semantic fields to the process types in Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014).
8.2 The Change Semantic Field
The term ‘Change’ refers to those constructions which indicate that an entity changes in some way, so that there is an end point that is different from the start point.
There are 44 constructions that express this meaning, drawing on 11 verb complementation patterns.
The Systemic Network. The Systemic Network, shown in Figure 8.1, comprises simultaneous choices of meaning and of form. In terms of meaning, three main independent distinctions are identified. The most important of these is the distinction between constructions where the cause of change is expressed in the construction (described here as ‘caused change’) and those where it is not (‘autonomous change’). This distinction is illustrated in examples (1) and (2).
(1) Joe pushed the door open. (caused change)
(2) The door slammed shut. (autonomous change)
Figure 8.1 Change Systemic Network
Then, the entity that is changed can be physical or abstract. This is shown in examples (3) and (4).
(3) Joe repaired the bicycle. (physical changed entity)
(4) Maria solved the problem. (abstract changed entity)
Finally, there is a distinction between the types of outcome to the process: whether the change results in a different state, quantity, or composition. This is illustrated in examples (5)–(7).
(5) The magician turned the watch into a dove. (change of state)
(6) The price increased to £10. (change of quantity)
(7) Joe divided the cake into three parts. (change of composition)
In turn, ‘state’ can be divided into three types: ‘property’ (e.g. ‘fade into darkness’), ‘role’ (e.g. ‘progress to sainthood’), and ‘emotion’ (e.g. ‘burst into tears’).
Turning to form, three independent distinctions are identified. One is simply the pattern used in the construction. In Figure 8.1, patterns are notionally divided into those with a preposition and those without. Because some constructions have fixed collocations and others have more open ones, a second distinction shows a choice between open and fixed collocations. This is illustrated in examples (8) and (9).
(8) The puppy made its new owner happy. (The collocation between ‘made’ and ‘happy’ is relatively open.)
(9) She wiped the table clean. (The collocation between ‘wiped’ and ‘clean’ is relatively fixed.)
Finally, there is an important distinction between constructions that express the outcome of the change in the verb element, or ‘process’ element, of the construction and those which express the outcome as a non-verb element, or ‘participant’. This distinction is illustrated in examples (10) and (11).
(10) Joe repaired the car. (The outcome is expressed in the process ‘repair’.)
(11) Joe divided the cake into three parts. (The outcome is expressed in the participant ‘three parts’.)
The Meaning Network. The Meaning Network combines choices from ‘meaning’ and ‘form’ and is shown in Figure 8.2. Figure 8.2 shows the overall network; the primary distinction made is between ‘autonomous change’ and ‘caused change’. Within each of these is the distinction between ‘outcome as participant’ and ‘outcome as process’. Each of the four resulting sets is shown in Figures 8.2b–e. Figure 8.2 is described in the next subsection, under the headings of ‘Autonomous Change’ and ‘Caused Change’.
Figure 8.2a Change Meaning Network
Figure 8.2b Change: autonomous change, the outcome as participant network
Figure 8.2c Change: autonomous change, the outcome as process network
Figure 8.2d Change: caused change, the outcome as participant network
Figure 8.2e Change: caused change, the outcome as process network
The ‘Autonomous Change’ Meaning Network: Choices and Examples
The outcome of the change may be expressed as a participant or in the process.
The outcome of change is expressed as a participant in the construction (Figure 8.2b)
◦ V adj
◾ Cx8 e.g. ‘The door slammed shut’.
◾ Cx9 e.g. ‘The prisoner broke free’.
◾ Cx10 e.g. ‘The next athlete jumped higher’.
◾ Cx11 e.g. ‘The stock market closed higher’.
◾ Cx12 e.g. ‘The lake froze solid’.
◦ V into n
◾ The outcome is a change in property. Cx7 e.g. ‘The tadpole turned into a frog.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘The apparition faded into shadow’.
◾ The outcome is a change in composition. Cx9 e.g. ‘The road divided into two lanes’.
◾ The outcome is a change in emotion. Cx12 e.g. ‘The child burst into tears.’ and Cx13 e.g. ‘They lapsed into gloom’.
◦ V to n
◾ The collocation is relatively open
Cx1 e.g. ‘She converted to Buddhism’.
Cx3 e.g. ‘He progressed to a leadership position’.
Cx4 e.g. ‘They switched to solar energy’.
◾ The collocation is relatively fixed
Cx38 e.g. ‘The victim bled to death’.
Cx39 e.g. ‘The vehicle ground to a halt’.
Cx40 e.g. ‘The child dropped off to sleep’.
Cx41 e.g. ‘Our candidate coasted to victory’.
The outcome of change is expressed in the process (Figure 8.2c)
◦ V pron-refl Cx2 e.g. ‘She killed herself.’ and Cx10 e.g. ‘They disguised themselves’.
◦ V in n Cx15 e.g. ‘Crimes have increased in quantity’.
◦ V to n Cx2 e.g. ‘Prices increased to their highest level’.
The ‘Caused Change’ Meaning Network: Choices and Examples
The outcome of the change may be expressed as a participant or in the process.
The outcome of change is expressed as a participant in the construction (Figure 8.2d).
◦ V n adj
◾ The collocation is relatively open. Cx7 e.g. ‘She made the stew spicy’.
◾ The collocation is relatively fixed.
Cx8 e.g. ‘He pushed the door shut’.
Cx9 e.g. ‘He wiped the table clean’.
Cx11 e.g. ‘She cranked the volume higher’.
Cx12 e.g. ‘The child coloured the trees blue’.
Cx15 e.g. ‘The gangsters shot him dead’.
◦ V in n Cx1 e.g. ‘She divided the loaf into three.’ and Cx10 e.g. ‘He drilled a hole in the wall’. (Note: The wall is changed by this action. This construction also appears as an instance of ‘Creation’, because the hole is created.)
◦ V in into n
◾ The outcome is a change in the state of the entity.
Cx1 e.g. ‘He changed the frog into a princess’.
Cx2 e.g. ‘They condensed the gas into liquid’.
Cx3 e.g. ‘She translated the book into Spanish’.
◾ The outcome is a change in the composition of the entity.
Cx5 e.g. ‘She amalgamated the departments into one’.
Cx6 e.g. ‘He chopped the onions into small pieces’.
◦ V n to n
◾ The outcome is a change in the quantity of the entity. Cx8 e.g. ‘He increased the concentration of the liquid to 80 per cent’.
◾ The outcome is a change in the state of the entity.
◾ Cx9. ‘He changed the princess to a frog.’ and Cx11 e.g. ‘The ghost frightened him to death’.
The outcome of change is expressed in the process (Figure 8.2e). The entities may be physical or abstract.
◦ V n (Material)
◾ The entities are physical.
Cx4 e.g. ‘Joe broke the mirror’.
Cx5 e.g. ‘Joe repaired the car’.
Cx6 e.g. ‘Joe decorated the room’.
Cx11 e.g. ‘The polluted air affected his lungs’.
◾ The entities are abstract.
Cx8 e.g. ‘He controlled the network’.
Cx9 e.g. ‘She solved the problem’.
Cx10 e.g. ‘They ended the affair’.
◦ V n with n
◾ The entities are physical.
Cx13 e.g. ‘She decorated the windows with stickers’.
Cx14 e.g. ‘They coated the walls with creosote’.
Cx16 e.g. ‘He sweetened the tea with honey’.
Cx17 e.g. ‘He peppered the steak with spices’.
◾ The entities are abstract. Cx19 e.g. ‘His character imbued the situation with menace.’ and Cx21 e.g. ‘She tempered the announcement with kindness’.
◦ V n by n Cx5 e.g. ‘They lowered the price by a few pounds’.
8.3 The Creation Semantic Field
The term ‘Creation’ refers to constructions which indicate that an action brings an entity into being.
There are 10 constructions that express this meaning, drawing on 6 verb complementation patterns.
The Systemic Network. The Systemic Network is shown in Figure 8.3. It shows simultaneous choices between meaning and form. The only meaning distinction identified is between created entities of different types: physical and abstract. Prototypical physical entities are physical objects as in instances such as ‘build a house’ or ‘knit a sweater’, but the action may be more distributed as in ‘publish a book’, and the category includes communicative acts such as ‘give a speech’. The abstract category includes thoughts as in ‘form an opinion’ and completely abstract notions as in ‘form a bond’ or ‘hold an event’. In terms of form, the primary distinction is between constructions that specify only two participants, as in ‘build a house’ or ‘drill a hole’, and those that specify an additional participant. The additional participant can be a beneficiary, a location, or constituents. These are shown in examples (1)–(3). The verb complementation patterns specified here do not include multiple prepositional phrases, but in practice, these can be chained to include more participants, as in example (4).
(1) They built Mary a house. (includes a beneficiary)
(2) They drilled a hole in the wall. (includes a location)
(3) They built a house out of bricks and mortar. (includes constituents)
(4) They built Mary a house out of bricks and mortar. (includes a beneficiary and constituents)
Figure 8.3 Creation Systemic Network
The Meaning Network. The Meaning Network prioritises the form distinction and makes a distinction between ‘simple constructions’, which have two participants only, and ‘complex constructions’, which have three. Within the simple constructions only there is a choice between physical and abstract entities. The Meaning Network can be seen in Figure 8.4 and is described here.
Figure 8.4 Creation Meaning Network
Simple constructions
◦ V n (Material)
◾ The entities are physical. Cx1 e.g. ‘Joe built a house’.
◾ The created entity is abstract. Cx2 e.g. ‘Emma formed an opinion.’ and Cx3 e.g. ‘We held an event’.
◦ V n (Communication) Cx8 e.g. ‘She published her first book.’ and Cx9 e.g. ‘Emma gave a speech’.
Complex constructions
◦ With beneficiary
◾ V n n Cx10 e.g. ‘She made him dinner’.
◾ V n for n Cx1 e.g. ‘She made dinner for him’.
Note: Constructions that include a beneficiary are not restricted to verbs that express the Creation meaning.
◦ With location
◾ V n in n Cx6 e.g. ‘They carved their initials in the tree.’ and Cx10 e.g. ‘They drilled a hole in the wood’.
◾ V n on n Cx17 e.g. ‘She wrote three words on the paper’.
◦ With constituents
8.4 The Location Change Semantic Field
The term ‘Location change’ refers to those constructions which indicate that an entity moves from one location to another. The name ‘Movement’ can also be used for this field, though ‘Location change’ is more precise.
There are 31 constructions that express this meaning, drawing on 13 verb complementation patterns.
The Systemic Network. The Systemic Network is shown in Figure 8.5. It shows independent choices between meaning and form. The form distinctions comprise choices in the nature of the process (‘process types’) and in how the direction of movement is expressed (‘direction indicator’). The two process types are ‘autonomous’, meaning that the construction construes the entity moving itself, or ‘caused’, meaning that the construction construes the movement as being caused by something. This is illustrated in examples (1) and (2).
(1) The crowd converged on the notice board. (The movement is autonomous.)
(2) The player kicked the football into the goal. (The movement is caused.)
Figure 8.5 Location change Systemic Network
Figure 8.5:Long description
The meaning system is entry to four simultaneous systems: entity type, movement type, direction type, and location type. Within entity type, there is a choice between physical and abstract. Within physical, there is a choice between individual and collective. Within movement type, there is a choice between specified and unspecified. Within direction type, there is a choice between to, from, round and along. Within location type, there is a choice between speaker, container and structure. The form system is entry to two simultaneous systems: process type and direction indicator. Within process type, there is a choice between autonomous and caused. Within direction indicator, there is a choice between verb and preposition.
The direction indicator may be the verb in the construction or the preposition. This is illustrated in examples (3) and (4).
(3) The guest brought a present. (The direction (‘to here’) is indicated by the verb.)
(4) The player kicked the ball into the net. (The direction indicated by the prepositional phrase.)
Figure 8.5 shows these two choices as independent; however, when the process type is ‘autonomous’, only the preposition as direction indicator is available. It should be noted, however, that if the constructions identified in this book were extended to include verbs without complementation (i.e. the intransitive ‘V’ pattern), then some constructions would comprise autonomous location change with the direction indicated by the verb e.g. ‘She left’ and ‘He approached’.
The meaning distinctions comprise choices in the nature of each of the participants in the constructions: the entity that moves, the movement itself, the direction type, and the ‘target’ type. More detail is given here:
The entity that moves may be physical or abstract, as illustrated in examples (5) and (6). Physical entities may be individual or collective. That is, the nature of the activity may require there to be more than one person or thing involved, or not. The verb CROWD, for example, requires that more than one person moves (see example 8). In other instances, such as the verb BARGE, there may be more than one person involved but there does not need to be (see example 7).
(5) Joe kicked the ball into the net. (‘the ball’ is a physical entity.)
(6) Emma breathed life into the situation. (‘life’ is an abstract entity.)
(7) Emma barged through the crowd. (‘Emma’ is an individual.)
(8) The fans crowded around the film star. (‘the fans’ act collectively.)
The nature of the movement may be specified or unspecified. The difference is often between verbs used in the same construction, as in examples (9) and (10).
(9) She brought a dog into the room. (The nature of the movement is unspecified.)
(10) She dragged a dog into the room. (The nature of the movement is specified.)
The direction type may be specified by the preposition, and there are as many directions as there are prepositions. However, four primary directions may be identified: ‘to’ (which includes ‘into’ and ‘on’), ‘from’ (which includes ‘out of’), ‘around’ (which can include ‘on’ with some verbs), and ‘along’ (which includes ‘through’). These directions are illustrated in examples (11)–(14).
(11) The fans crowded into the stadium.
(12) They deported him from the USA.
(13) The fans crowded around the singer.
(14) Emily barged through the crowd.
The location where the entity moves to or from can be described as: the speaker, a container (which may be an enclosed space, an abstract space, or a geographical space) or a structure. These are illustrated in examples (15)–(17).
(15) Joe brought a cake. (The location, indicated by the verb, is the speaker, or a space into which the speaker projects themselves.)
(16) They were deported to a third country. (The location is a geographical space: a third country.)
(17) Joe detached the door from the barn. (The location is a structure: the barn.)
The Meaning Network. The Meaning Network is shown in Figure 8.6 and is described in this section. It combines choices from ‘meaning’ and ‘form’. The primary distinction is between ‘autonomous location change’ and ‘caused location change’. This is shown in Figure 8.6. More detail of the ‘autonomous’ constructions is shown in Figure 8.6b and detail of the ‘caused’ constructions is shown in Figure 8.6c.
Figure 8.6a Location change Meaning Network
Figure 8.6b Location change: autonomous change
Figure 8.6c Location change: caused change
The Location Change Meaning Network: Choices and Examples
Autonomous Location Change. See Figure 8.6b.
◦ V around n
◾ Cx4 e.g. ‘The lions circled around the encampment’.
◾ Cx5 e.g. ‘The fans crowded round the singer’.
◾ Cx6 e.g. ‘The crowds moved around the square’.
◦ V pron-refl from n Cx6 e.g. ‘Joe absented himself from the meeting’.
◦ V into n
◾ Cx1 e.g. ‘The fans crowded into the stadium’.
◾ Cx2 e.g. ‘Emma barged into the room’.
◾ Cx3 e.g. ‘The students filtered into the classroom’.
◦ V off n Cx1 e.g. ‘Light reflected off the polished surface’.
◦ V on n Cx13 e.g. ‘The fans converged on the stadium’.
◦ V out of n Cx7 e.g. ‘The fans cleared out of the room’.
◦ V through n Cx e.g. ‘Emma barged through the crowd’.
◦ V to n Cx34 e.g. ‘Emma journeyed to her destination.’ and Cx35 e.g. ‘The fans flocked to the stadium’.
Caused Location Change. See Figure 8.6c. The entity that moves may be physical or abstract.
◦ The entity is physical.
◾ V n (Material) Cx17 e.g. ‘She brought a cake.’ and Cx22 e.g. ‘The police moved the crowd along’.
◾ V n from n
Cx7 e.g. ‘They deported him from the USA’.
Cx8 e.g. ‘He sent the package from his home’.
Cx9 e.g. ‘Joe detached the door from the barn’.
◾ V n in n Cx4 e.g. ‘Emma inserted a key in the lock.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘Joe shut the pig in the barn’.
◾ V n into n Cx14 e.g. ‘Emma dragged the logs into the barn’.
◾ V n out of n Cx1 e.g. ‘Joe plucked the flower out of his buttonhole.’ and Cx2 e.g. ‘Emma kicked the ball out of the park’.
◾ V n to n Cx12 e.g. ‘They deported him to the USA’.
◦ The entity is abstract
◾ V n (Material) Cx19 e.g. ‘Emma gathered information’.
◾ V n from n Cx10 e.g. ‘Joe dismissed the idea from his mind’.
◾ V n in n Cx 12 e.g. ‘The speech fixed this new idea in her mind.’ and Cx15 e.g. ‘Joe placed a great deal of trust in Emma’.
◾ V n into n
8.5 The Possession Transfer Semantic Field
The term ‘Possession Transfer’ refers to constructions that indicate that an entity is given by one person to another or taken by one person from another. The entity may be something physical, such as ‘a book’, or something abstract, such as ‘permission’ or ‘a confession’. There are 20 constructions with this meaning, derived from 8 verb complementation patterns.
The Systemic Network. The Systemic Network, shown in Figure 8.7, shows independent choices in meaning and in form. Two simultaneous meaning choices are made: the process type and the direction (‘give’ and ‘take’). The process type includes two further simultaneous systems: ‘type’ (‘action’ or ‘communication’) and the degree of physicality (‘physical’ or ‘abstract’). Action process types include examples such as ‘provide something’ which is physical, and ‘grant permission to someone’, which is abstract, while communication process types include examples such as ‘demand something from someone’. The example ‘provide something’ also exemplifies the direction ‘give’, while the example ‘demand something from someone’ also exemplifies the direction ‘take’. Examples (1)–(3) illustrate this.
(1) Sara provided extra balloons. (Action process; physical process; ‘give’ direction)
(2) Sara granted Jenny permission to take the book. (Action process; abstract process; ‘give’ direction)
(3) Sara demanded respect from her subordinates. (Communication process; abstract process; ‘take’ direction)
Figure 8.7 Possession transfer Systemic Network
Figure 8.7:Long description
Two simultaneous systems are shown: Meaning and Form. The Meaning system is entry to two simultaneous systems: Process type and Direction. Process type is entry to two simultaneous systems: type and physicality. Within type there is a choice between action and communication. Within physicality there is a choice between physical and abstract. Within Direction there is choice between give and take. The Form system is entry to two simultaneous systems: Object type and Pattern. Within Object type there is a choice between with object and without object. Within with object there is a choice between possessor object and possession object. Within Pattern there is a choice between with preposition and without preposition.
Two simultaneous form distinctions are identified. One is the object type, and the other is the pattern. Most constructions include an object element, with one construction (‘borrow from someone’) having no object. The object can be the possessor or the possession, as shown in examples (4) and (5).
(4) Thieves robbed the baron of all his gold. (The object, ‘the baron’, is the possessor.)
(5) Thieves stole money from the baron. (The object, ‘money’, is the possession.)
In terms of pattern, examples (3), (4), and (5) illustrate patterns with prepositions while examples (1) and (2) illustrate patterns without prepositions.
The Meaning Network. The Meaning Network for this semantic field combines choices from both ‘meaning’ and ‘form’. The primary distinction made is between the process types – action and communication – while the other distinctions prioritise form. The meaning network is shown in Figure 8.8. Figure 8.8 shows the process type distinction. Figures 8.8b and 8.8c show the ‘by action’ constructions. Figure 8.8d shows the ‘by communication’ constructions.
Figure 8.8 is described here.
Figure 8.8a Possession transfer Meaning Network
Figure 8.8b Possession transfer: by action, the noun phrase only network
Figure 8.8c Possession transfer: by action, the with prepositional phrase network
Figure 8.8d Possession transfer: by communication
The process may construe action or communication.
Possession Transfer by action
◦ Patterns without prepositions (Figure 8.8b). All the constructions have a clause object.
◾ V n (Material). The clause object may indicate the possessor or the possession.
The object indicates the possessor. The direction of transfer may be ‘give’ or ‘take’.
◦ Give Cx13 e.g. ‘Emma fed the cat’.
◦ Take Cx14 e.g. ‘The gang robbed the bank’.
The object indicates the possession. The direction of transfer may be ‘give’ or ‘take’.
◦ Give Cx16 e.g. ‘Emma provided food’.
◦ Take Cx15 e.g. ‘The gang took the money’.
◾ V n n Cx11 e.g. ‘He brought her a book’.
◦ Patterns with prepositions (Figure 8.8c). The constructions may or may not have a clause object.
◾ Constructions with an object. The object may indicate the possessor or the possession.
The object indicates the possession.
◦ The things transferred are physical entities. The direction of transfer may be ‘give’ or ‘take’.
◾ Give
V n for n Cx1 e.g. ‘Emma brought gifts for the children’.
V n to n Cx1 e.g. ‘Emma gave gifts to the children.’ and Cx2 e.g. ‘Emma mailed gifts to the children’.
◾ Take
V n from n Cx2 e.g. ‘Joe acquired land from his cousin.’ and Cx5 e.g. ‘Joe took the gifts from Emma’.
◦ The things transferred are abstract entities. The direction of transfer is only ‘give’.
◾ V n to n
Cx3 e.g. ‘They allocated tasks to the staff’.
Cx4 e.g. ‘Joe bequeathed his possessions to Emma’.
Cx6 e.g. ‘Emma conceded the argument to Joe’.
The object indicates the possessor. The direction of transfer is only ‘take’.
◦ V n of n Cx1 e.g. ‘Emma deprived the children of gifts.’ and Cx2 ‘Emma rid the barn of rats’.
◾ Construction without an object.
V from n Cx14 e.g. ‘Joe borrowed from his father’.
Possession Transfer by communication (Figure 8.8d). The clause object may indicate the possession or the possessor.
◦ V n from n (The object indicates the possession) Cx3 e.g. ‘Emma demanded gifts from Joe.’ and Cx4 e.g. ‘Emma coaxed gifts from Joe’.
◦ V n out of n
8.6 The Equivalence Semantic Field
The Equivalence semantic field is the first of two that draw on the concept of Relational processes. The canonical form of the Equivalence meaning is ‘x is y’ (e.g. ‘Gemma is sad/a sad person’). In other words, constructions in this field indicate that something has an identity or quality. The canonical participant roles are Carrier and Attribute. In this book, the semantic field of Equivalence is considered to include constructions that go beyond relational processes and beyond the canonical form. For example, it includes constructions which indicate that someone construes an Equivalence relation through something they say or think (e.g. ‘Ivan described Gemma as a sad person’). For this reason, many of the constructions in this semantic field also participate in other fields, such as Communication, Cognition, or Causation.
There are 106 constructions that express this meaning, drawing on 26 verb complement constructions.
The Systemic Network. The choices within this semantic field can be considered under the headings of ‘meaning’ and ‘form’. These can be shown as independent choices, as has been done with other semantic fields in this book. However, given that in this case the distinction between meaning and form is particularly arbitrary, it would be more accurate to say that the choices between constructions can be conceptualised as either semantic choices or as form choices. The resulting network is somewhat large, so to make it as legible as possible it is shown here as two figures. Figure 8.9a models the distinctions as meaning choices, while Figure 8.9b models them as choices of form.
Figure 8.9a Equivalence Systemic Network: meaning choices
Figure 8.9a:Long description
There are three simultaneous systems: representation type, dynamism, and attribute type. Within representation type, there is a choice between integral and construed. Within integral, there is a choice between unmodified and modified. Construed is the entry to two simultaneous systems: type of construal and attitude. Within type of construal, there is a choice between conceptual and by action. Within conceptual there is a choice between communication and cognition. Within dynamism, there is a choice between stasis and change. Within attribute type, there is a choice between inherent and relative. Within inherent, there is a choice between quality and entity. Within entity, there is a choice between nature and role. Within relative, there is a choice between quantity/value, similarity and composition. Within similarity, there is a choice between sameness and difference.
Figure 8.9b Equivalence Systemic Network: form choices
Figure 8.9b:Long description
There are four simultaneous systems: process type, pattern, agency, and evidentiality. Within process type, there is a choice between relational and material. Within pattern, there is a choice between with preposition and without preposition. Within agency, there is a choice between with agent and without agent. Within evidentiality, there is a choice between with evidential and without evidential.
Figure 8.9 shows three independent choice systems: the type of representation, the presence or absence of dynamism, and the attribute type.
The type of representation distinguishes assertions that something is the case (‘integral’) from assertions that something is construed by speech, thought or action to be the case (‘construed’). The integral representation may or may not be modified by the verb. The ‘unmodified’ meaning is exemplified by the verb ‘be’, whereas the ‘modified’ meaning is exemplified by ‘seem’ or ‘appear’. These distinctions are illustrated in examples (1)–(3).
(1) He is foolish. (Representation type: integral: unmodified)
(2) He appeared foolish. (Representation type: integral: modified)
(3) She considered him foolish. (Representation type: construed)
Within the ‘construed’ system, further independent choices are made of the type of construal and of attitude. The type of construal may be conceptual, i.e. someone construes an equivalence through thought or through speech, or it may be by action i.e. someone does something to bring about an equivalence. This is illustrated in examples (4)–(6).
(4) She called him foolish. (Construal: conceptual: communication)
(5) She considered him foolish. (Construal: conceptual: cognition)
(6) They voted her President. (Construal: action)
Attitude may be marked or unmarked, as illustrated in examples (7)–(9). If the choice is ‘unmarked attitude’, there is no indication of a judgement of truth or value by either the speaker or the reported person. This is the case in example (4): from the verb CONSIDER, it is not known if the speaker of the clause agrees with ‘she’ or not, or what value the reported ‘she’ places on being foolish. If the choice is ‘marked’, an attitude is indicated. In example (5), the reported person’s attitude is expressed. In example (6), the fact that the speaker considers the reported person to be wrong is indicated by the verb MISTAKE.
(7) She considered him foolish. (Attitude: unmarked)
(8) She denounced him as foolish. (Attitude: marked: attitude of reported person)
(9) She mistook him for a fool. (Attitude: marked: attitude of reporter)
Under ‘dynamism’, a distinction is made between constructions indicating a state and those indicating a process of change. This is illustrated in examples (10) and (11). ‘Attribute type’ distinguishes between attributes that are inherent, such as quality or identity, and those that are relative to other entities, such as quantity, composition or degree of similarity. This is illustrated in examples (12)–(14).
(10) He was old. (Dynamism: stasis)
(11) He became older. (Dynamism: change)
(12) He was a teacher. (Attribute: inherent: entity: role)
(13) He surpassed his rivals in every way. (Attribute: relative: value)
(14) He resembled his brother. (Attribute: relative: similarity: sameness)
The system of form choices, shown in Figure 8.9b, is more straightforward and identifies four simultaneous systems: the process type, the pattern, whether agency is expressed or not and whether there is an evidential or not. The process, agency, and evidentiality choices are illustrated in examples (15)–(20). As with other semantic fields, the pattern system simply distinguishes patterns with a preposition, as in example (19) and those without, as in the other examples.
(15) She became President. (Process: relational)
(16) They elected her President. (Process: material)
(17) The news made him angry. (Agency: with agent)
(18) He became angry. (Agency: without agent)
(19) His shirt identified him as a rapper. (Evidentiality: with evidential)
(20) He was a rapper. (Evidentiality: without evidential)
The Meaning Network. The Meaning Network combines choices from ‘meaning’ and ‘form’. The primary distinction combines the representation and dynamism systems, and distinguishes between ‘being’, ‘construal’, and ‘becoming’. This is shown in Figure 8.10. The main distinctions are described here, with examples. These are shown under the headings ‘Entity is: being’ (Figure 8.10b–d), ‘Entity is construed as: construal’ (Figure 8.10e–h), and ‘Entity becomes: becoming’ (Figure 8.10i–Figure 8.10m).
Figure 8.10a Equivalence Meaning Network
Figure 8.10b Equivalence: being
Figure 8.10c Equivalence: being, showing choices of inherent quality
Figure 8.10d Equivalence: being, showing choices of relative quality
Figure 8.10e Equivalence: construal
Figure 8.10f Equivalence: construal by communication
Figure 8.10g Equivalence: construal by cognition, the desiderative network
Figure 8.10h Equivalence: construal by cognition, the cognitive network
Figure 8.10i Equivalence: becoming
Figure 8.10j Equivalence: becoming, the change network, showing choices of inherent quality
Figure 8.10k Equivalence: becoming, the change network, showing choices of relative quality
Figure 8.10l Equivalence: becoming, the result network, showing choices of inherent quality
Figure 8.10m Equivalence: becoming, the result network, showing choices of relative quality
The ‘Equivalence: Being’ Meaning Network
The Attribute (quality or identity) may be inherent or relative.
The quality or identity is inherent (see Figure 8.10c).
◦ The construction indicates a quality.
◾ V adj. The construction may modify the truth of the assertion or not.
Unmodified. Cx1 e.g. ‘Sid is clever.’ and Cx4 e.g. ‘Sid arrived exhausted’.
Modified. Cx3 e.g. ‘Sid seems clever’.
◾ V with n
Cx8 e.g. ‘The musical brimmed with joy’.
Cx9 e.g. ‘The room blazed with light’.
Cx10 e.g. ‘The house echoed with laughter’.
◦ The construction indicates an entity.
◾ V n (Relational). The construction may modify the truth of the assertion or not.
Unmodified. Cx1 e.g. ‘Sid remained a recluse.’ and Cx5 e.g. ‘Sid departed a bitter man’.
Modified. Cx4 e.g. ‘Sid seemed a bitter man’.
◾ V as n. Cx5 e.g. ‘The phone box functions as a spaceship.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘Sid came out as a devil-worshipper’.
The quality/identity is relative (see Figure 8.10d). The construction may indicate quantity, similarity, or composition.
◦ The construction indicates a value or quantity.
◾ V at n. Cx2 e.g. ‘The price stands at £200.’ and Cx3 e.g. ‘The shares sell at £2’.
◾ V for n. Cx18 e.g. ‘The chairs sell for £45 each’.
◾ V in n. Cx4 e.g. ‘Becca lay in 2nd place’.
◦ The construction indicates a degree of similarity. This may be resemblance or difference.
◾ The construction indicates resemblance.
V like n. Cx1 e.g. ‘Becca looked like a goth.’ and Cx2 e.g. ‘Becca dressed like a goth’.
V of n. Cx6 e.g. ‘The perfume smelled of roses’.
V to n. Cx10 e.g. ‘The line on the graph corresponds to the increase in prices’.
V towards n. Cx3 e.g. ‘The garden tends towards a wilderness’.
◾ The construction indicates difference.
V from n. Cx16 e.g. ‘The garden differs from a wilderness’.
V n from n. Cx18 e.g. ‘The presence of cultivated shrubs distinguishes the garden from a wilderness’.
◦ The construction indicates how something is composed.
◾ V n (Relational). Cx2 e.g. ‘A collection of tents constitutes the camp.’ and Cx3 e.g. ‘Several tents comprise the camp’.
◾ V of n. Cx7 e.g. ‘The camp consists of several tents’.
The ‘Equivalence: Construal’ Meaning Network
The construal may be by communication, by cognition or by action (see Figure 8.10e).
Construal by communication (Figure 8.10f). The construal may be marked or unmarked.
◦ The construal is unmarked.
◾ V n n. Cx12 e.g. ‘Becca called Sid an idiot’.
◾ V n adj. Cx5 e.g. ‘Sid called Becca stupid.’ and Cx6 e.g. ‘Sid professed himself baffled’.
◾ V n as n/adj. Cx4 e.g. ‘Sid described Becca as the worst driver he had seen’.
◦ The construal is marked.
◾ V n as n/adj. Cx5 e.g. ‘Sid denounced Becca as a terrible driver.’ and Cx6 e.g. ‘Sid mispresented Becca as a terrible driver’.
Construal by cognition. The process may be desiderative or cognitive.
◦ The process is desiderative (Figure 8.10g).
◾ V n n. Cx20 e.g. ‘Sid envied Becca her composure’.
◾ V n adj. Cx1 e.g. ‘Becca liked her tea strong.’ and Cx2 e.g. ‘Becca wants her tea strong’.
◦ The process is cognitive (Figure 8.10h). The quality or identity may be inherent or relative.
◾ The quality is inherent.
◦ V n n. Cx13 e.g. ‘Becca considered Sid an idiot’.
◦ V n adj. Cx3 e.g. ‘Becca believed Sid stupid.’ and Cx4 e.g. ‘Becca imagined the house larger’.
◦ V n as n/adj. Cx1 e.g. ‘Becca regarded Sid as stupid’. And Cx3 e.g. ‘Sid struck Becca as intelligent’.
◦ V n to n. Cx35 e.g. ‘Becca attributed great intelligence to Sid’.
◾ The quality is relative. The construed relation may be one of similarity or quantity.
The construed relation is one of similarity. It may be marked or unmarked for truth value.
◦ The construal is unmarked.
◾ V n from n. Cx19 e.g. ‘Sid could not tell Becca from a goth’.
◾ V n to n. Cx34 e.g. ‘Becca compared Sid to a Greek god’.
◾ V n with n. Cx1 e.g. ‘Sid contrasted the house with a palace’.
◦ The construal is marked.
V n for n. Cx13 e.g. ‘Sid mistook his wife for a hat’.
Quantity
◦ V n at n. Cx6 e.g. ‘Becca estimated the value of the chair at £200’.
Construal by action (Figure 8.10e)
◦ V n as n/adj. Cx2 e.g. ‘The party revealed Sid as their candidate.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘Sid used his umbrella as a weapon’.
The ‘Equivalence: Becoming’ Meaning Network
The constructions may indicate change without a cause, or the result of a cause (see Figure 8.10i).
The constructions indicate change without cause. The quality or identity may be inherent or relative.
◦ The quality or identity is inherent (Figure 8.10j). It may be a quality, an entity, a state or a role.
Quality
V adj. Cx2 e.g. ‘Mo became stronger’.
V n (Relational). Cx8 e.g. ‘The machine developed a fault.’ and Cx9 e.g. ‘The problem reached a crucial stage’.
Entity
V into n. Cx7 e.g. ‘The caterpillar turned into a butterfly.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘The image faded into the background’.
V to n. Cx1 e.g. ‘Sid converted to Buddhism’.
State
V between n. Cx2 e.g. ‘Becca alternated between fear and anger’.
V into n. Cx12 e.g. ‘Mo burst into laughter.’ and Cx13 e.g. ‘Mo lapsed into depression’.
V to n.
◦ Cx38 e.g. ‘The victim bled to death’.
◦ Cx39 e.g. ‘The train ground to a halt’.
◦ Cx40 e.g. ‘Mo dropped off to sleep’.
◦ Cx41 e.g. ‘Mo coasted to victory’.
Role
V as n. Cx6 e.g. ‘Becca qualified as a vet’.
V to n. Cx3 e.g. ‘Sid progressed to a qualified teacher’.
V n as n. Cx9 e.g. ‘Mo replaced Sid as the candidate’.
◦ The quality or identity is relative (Figure 8.10k). It may be a quantity or composition.
◾ Quantity
V at n. Cx1 e.g. ‘The shares peaked at £2 each’.
V between n. Cx1 e.g. ‘The price varies between £150 and £200’.
V to n. Cx2 e.g. ‘The price has increased to £200’.
◾ Composition
V into n. Cx9 e.g. ‘The road divided into two carriageways’.
The constructions indicate the result of a cause. The quality or identity may be inherent or relative.
◦ The quality or identity is inherent (Figure 8.10l). It may be an entity, a state, or a role.
◾ Entity
V n in n. Cx24 e.g. ‘Sid couched the criticism in flowery language’.
◾ State. The construction may express an agent or not.
The construction may express an agent.
◦ V adj
◾ Cx8 e.g. ‘The door slammed shut’.
◾ Cx9 e.g. ‘The prisoner broke free’.
◾ Cx10 e.g. ‘Mo jumped higher’.
◾ Cx12 e.g. ‘The lake froze solid’.
The construction may not express an agent.
◦ V n adj
◾ Cx7 e.g. ‘The failure made him stronger’.
◾ Cx8 e.g. ‘Mo pushed the door open’.
◾ Cx9 e.g. ‘Sid wiped the table clean’.
◾ Cx10 e.g. ‘Becca kept the cat safe’.
◾ Cx11 e.g. ‘Mo cranked the volume higher’.
◾ Cx12 e.g. ‘Sid coloured the clouds grey’.
◾ Cx13 e.g. ‘Mo served the soup cold’.
◾ Cx14 e.g. ‘The shares began the day higher’.
◾ Cx15 e.g. ‘He left the second victim alive’.
◾ Cx16 e.g. ‘He captured the second victim live’.
◾ Cx17 e.g. ‘He buried his victim alive’.
◦ V n n Cx15 e.g. ‘Sid held Jake prisoner’.
◦ V n into n
◾ Cx1 e.g. ‘Jake changed the curtains into blinds’.
◾ Cx2 e.g. ‘Jake compressed the dough into a tiny ball’.
◾ Cx3 e.g. ‘Mo translated the book into English’.
◾ Cx 16 e.g. ‘The decision plunged the meeting into gloom’.
◦ V n to n
◾ Cx9 e.g. ‘Becca turned the curtains into blinds’.
◾ Cx10 e.g. ‘Sid attached the tow line to the car’.
◾ Cx11 e.g. ‘Jake almost frightened Mo to death’.
◾ Cx12 e.g. ‘The government deported Jake to Canada’.
◾ Cx13 e.g. ‘The contract shackled Jake to his job’.
◾ Cx14 e.g. ‘The committee broadened the conversation to a general discussion of the result’.
◾ Cx36 e.g. ‘The decision brought a sense of relief to the proceedings’.
◦ V n with n. Cx19 e.g. ‘His failure imbued the atmosphere with gloom.’ and Cx21 e.g. ‘Sid tempered his remarks with humour’.
◾ Role
V n n. Cx14 e.g. ‘Mo appointed Jake secretary’.
V n as n. Cx7 e.g. ‘The committee elected Mo chairman’.
V n for n. Cx11 e.g. ‘Mo recruited Jake for the position of secretary’.
V n to n. Cx15 e.g. ‘Mo promoted Jake to the position of secretary.’ and Cx16 e.g. ‘Mo delegated the position of secretary to Jake’.
◦ The quality or identity is relative (Figure 8.10m). It may be a quantity or composition.
◾ Quantity
V adj. Cx11 e.g. ‘The share price closed higher’.
V n at n. Cx7 e.g. ‘Becca set the price at £20.’ and Cx8 e.g. ‘Becca priced the table at £20’.
V n to n. Cx8 e.g. ‘Sid increased the price to £20’.
◾ Composition
V n in n. Cx1 e.g. ‘Mo divided the apple in two’.
V n into n.
◦ Cx4 e.g. ‘Mo organised the participants into groups’.
◦ Cx5 e.g. ‘Sid amalgamated the departments into one larger department’.
◦ Cx6 e.g. ‘Mo chopped the apple into pieces’.
V n out of n. Cx4 e.g. ‘Becca constructed the hut out of spare timber’.
8.7 The Logical Relations Semantic Field
The term ‘Logical Relations’ refers to those constructions where the verb expresses the relationship between two entities or two actions or events. In this study, it is limited to those relations that are not covered by the ‘Equivalence’ Networks or the ‘Causation’ Networks.
There are 22 constructions that express this meaning, drawing on 12 verb complementation patterns.
The Systemic Network. This network, Figure 8.11, shows simultaneous choices in meaning and form. The form choices are simply choices between patterns. The meaning choices are more interesting. There are simultaneous choices between the type of logical relation expressed and between the type of participant.
Figure 8.11 Logical Relations Systemic Network
Figure 8.11:Long description
There are two simultaneous systems: meaning and form. Meaning is the entry to two simultaneous systems: relation type and participant type. Within relation type, there is a choice between dependence, correspondence, evidence, and time. Within dependence, there is a choice between unidirectional and bidirectional. Within unidirectional, there is a choice between influence and condition. Within bidirectional, there is one option: connection. Within correspondence, there is a choice between averred and attributed. Within time, there is a choice between follows and precedes. Within participant type, there is a choice between entities and actions/events. Within form, there is a choice between with preposition and without preposition.
The relation types are divided into: dependence, correspondence, evidence, and time. The time relation is the simplest; the constructions indicate the sequence of two events. This is illustrated in examples (1) and (2).
(1) The celebrations followed the meeting. (Relation type: time: ‘follows’)
(2) The meeting preceded the celebrations. (Relation type: time: ‘precedes’)
The correspondence relation comprises constructions that indicate a measure of similarity between two entities or events. It may be simply stated (averred) or it may involve an observer or construer of some kind (attributed). This is illustrated in examples (3) and (4).
(3) The arrows correspond to the decision path. (Relation type: correspondence: averred)
(4) She based her argument on three points. (Relation type: correspondence: attributed)
The evidence relation refers to constructions where one entity or event provides evidence for the existence of another entity or event, as in example (5).
(5) The witness’s testimony pointed to Joe’s innocence. (Relation type: evidence)
The dependence relation refers to constructions where one entity or event is dependent on another. The dependence may be unidirectional (one thing influences another) or bidirectional (two things influence each other). The unidirectional dependence may work in either direction, with the first-mentioned entity either influencing or being conditional upon the second. This is illustrated in examples (6)–(8).
(6) These working conditions impinged on the effectiveness of their efforts. (Relation type: dependence: unidirectional: influence)
(7) Their effectiveness depends on the working conditions. (Relation type: dependence: unidirectional: condition)
(8) Working well involves working together. (Relation type: dependence: bidirectional)
The types of participants are divided into entities and actions/events. Because all participants can be realised as nouns, however, the distinction is not absolute. The clearest distinctions are illustrated in examples (9) and (10).
(9) Gloom descended over the town. (Participants: entities)
(10) An explosion can result from mixing chemicals. (Participants: event and action)
The Meaning Network. In the meaning network (see Figure 8.12), participant type is prioritised, which means that most of the relation types occur twice in the network. The meanings and patterns are shown here with examples of the constructions.
Figure 8.12a Logical Relations Meaning Network
Figure 8.12a:Long description
Logical relations splits into between entities and between actions or events. Between entities splits to influence (a to b), condition (b to a), correspondence, and evidence. Between actions or events splits to influence (a to b), condition (b to a), connection, and time.
Figure 8.12b Logical Relations: the between entities network
Figure 8.12c Logical Relations: the between actions/events network
The construction may indicate relations between entities or between actions/events.
The constructions indicate relations between entities (see Figure 8.12b). The relation may be one of influence, condition, correspondence, or evidence.
◦ The relation is one of influence.
◾ V on n Cx21 e.g. ‘Stress impinged on her ability to work’.
◾ V over n Cx12 e.g. ‘Gloom hung over the town’. And Cx13 e.g. ‘Gloom descended over the town’.
◦ The relation is one of condition.
◾ V on n Cx22 e.g. ‘They all depended on his kindness’.
◦ The relation is one of correspondence. It may be averred or attributed.
◾ The relation is averred
V to n Cx10 e.g. ‘The arrows correspond to the decision path’.
◾ The relation is attributed
V n into n Cx18 e.g. ‘They built energy efficiency into the design’.
V n on n Cx12 e.g. ‘They based their ideas on ancient writings.’ and Cs13 ‘They modelled the design on Roman villas’.
V n in n Cx24 e.g. ‘They couched their teaching in story form’.
◦ The relation is one of evidence.
◾ V n (Relational) Cx17 e.g. ‘The evidence proved his innocence’.
◾ V to n Cx9 e.g. ‘The evidence pointed to his innocence’.
The constructions indicate relations between actions/events (see Figure 8.12c). The relation may be one of influence, condition, connection, or time.
◦ The relation is one of influence (unidirectional).
◾ V that Cx20 e.g. ‘The need to work quickly dictated that some short-cuts were taken’.
◾ V n (Relational) Cx18 e.g. ‘The short-cuts they took ensured early completion of the work’.
◾ V to n Cx37 e.g. ‘The short-cuts they took led to early completion of the work’.
◾ V wh Cx20 e.g. ‘The way they worked determined how quickly the work was finished’.
◦ The relation is one of condition (unidirectional).
◾ V n (Relational) Cx19 e.g. ‘Finishing quickly requires absolute concentration’.
◾ V n -ing Cx8 e.g. ‘Finishing quickly necessitates the craftsman concentrating absolutely’.
◾ V from n Cx11 e.g. ‘Finishing quickly results from absolute concentration’.
◾ V on n Cx22 e.g. ‘Finishing quickly depends on absolute concentration’.
◾ V out of n Cx6 e.g. ‘Her desire to succeed arose out of incidents in her childhood’.
◦ The relation is one of connection (bidirectional).
◾ V -ing Cx15 e.g. ‘Scoring goals involves working as a team’.
◦ The relation is one of time.
8.8 Conclusion
This chapter has presented the proposed meaning taxonomies and systemic networks for six semantic fields, as examples of how such fields might be modelled in terms of constructions and in terms of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG). In this concluding section, the way that these fields are treated by Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014) is briefly outlined.
Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014: 234–236) divide material process verbs into two main categories: Creative and Transformative. The ‘creative’ category is the equivalent of the Creation semantic field as described in this chapter. Transformative verbs are further divided into: Elaborating (equivalent to the Change semantic field); Extending (equivalent to the Possession_transfer semantic field); and Enhancing (equivalent to the Location_change semantic field).
Causation in Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Matthiessen2014: 483) is a feature of inter-clause relations, and is treated in the context of the clause complex. It is also explained under the heading of hypotaxis in the verbal group (Halliday and Matthiessen (Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014: 578–584)), that is, a verb phrase can be extended by the addition of causative verbs such as HELP, FORCE, MAKE, and ENABLE.
Halliday and Matthiessen treat relational processes at length, with a detailed discussion of alternative ways of modelling the various relations between an entity and the attributes, identities, circumstances, or possessions it may have (Halliday and Matthiessen Reference Halliday and Matthiessen2014: 265; 279–290). These processes correspond to the Equivalence semantic field, though this is an area where the field covers a great deal more than the process type, as previously noted in this chapter. For example, when the construal of equivalence is attributed to a speaker, the salient process type may be Verbal. Finally, the Logical_relations semantic field corresponds to items discussed under the heading of experiential grammatical metaphor (Halliday and Matthiessen Reference Matthiessen2014: 707–726).
It is clear that although the study reported in this book is to some extent compatible with the approach of SFG, the two are also to some extent misaligned. This is due to the different starting points and different aims of the two schemas. The degree to which the two can be brought into alignment, and whether it is advantageous to do so, is discussed in Chapter 9.
Open access