47th International Systemic Functional Congress (ISFC 47)

18th China National Conference on Discourse Analysis (CNCDA 18)

47th International Systemic Functional Pre-Congress Institute (PCI 47)

21st China Systemics Week (CSW 21)

21-23 July 2022: CSW 21 & PCI 47, SHENZHEN, CHINA

25-27 July 2022: ISFC 47 & CNCDA 18, SHENZHEN, CHINA

http://isfc2022.cn

Hosted by:

University of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China (深圳大学)

Organised by:

School of Foreign Languages at University of Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China

Language, Context and Text: The Social Semiotics Forum

（《语言、语境与语篇——社会符号学论坛》）

Foreign Languages in China（《中国外语》）

Co-organised by:

Shenzhen Shenda Yifeng Culture Development Co., Ltd.

（深圳市深大倚风文化发展有限公司）

Welcome Speech

Professor ZHANG Xiaohong

Vice-President, University of Shenzhen

Distinguished international guests,

Dear colleagues and friends, old and new:

It is my great honour to welcome you at this Opening Ceremony of the 47^th International Systemic Functional Congress, which was planned to take place two years ago, when I was then the Dean of the School of Foreign Languages.

We, as host of this important academic event, were well-prepared for the Congress in the summer of 2020, to which more than 900 abstracts had been submitted. However, our efforts were frustrated, of course, by the sudden outbreak of COVID-19, with its local and international impact. We so wish that we had been able to realise the original plan. Regrettably, the number of abstracts submitted this year is four times less than that received two years ago. That figure suggests that the global pandemic has frustrated so many systemicists’ interest in Shenzhen, which is, after all, the new international cosmopolitan city.

That frustration is understandable because Shenzhen is now an essential stretch of the Greater Bay Area, of intense interest to China and the world at large. I do hope we will be able to fulfill your wish to visit in the near future, when the health situation turns to normal.

Thank you to the Executive Committee of the International Systemic Functional Linguistics Association for accepting our proposal to postpone the Congress until this summer. Thank you also to you all for overcoming considerable difficulties to make a contribution to this annual scholastic activity, which I understand has enjoyed a long-standing reputation from the mid-1970s. You are today taking initiatives, some of which, I am sure, will cause your names to be remembered by future generations.

International colleagues and friends, I am proud to mention the miracle of Shenzhen City, as well as the miracle of University of Shenzhen. Most probably you know the name of this University by the name of the city, but please allow me to tell you that University of Shenzhen also enjoys its own international fame. The University was founded in 1983 and, just through a span of less than 40 years, has achieved a strong international reputation. In fact, a considerable number of research teams are at the frontiers of their disciplines.

Comparatively, we could say that Linguistics here is playing catchup; but we have a large research community who have strong international academic associations and fruitful, international publications. I am confident that my Linguistics colleagues are making extraordinary progress, too, and will attract your attention to their innovative ideas.

The present Congress will, of course, enhance opportunities for in-depth interactions and exchanges among different generation of scholars. The academic growth of our younger generations will benefit from the exchanges, and make significant impact on the Greater Bay Area and beyond. Thank you so much for this.

I sincerely invite you to consider joining us by becoming a member of our Linguistics team, to work together for a prosperous future.

I look forward to meeting you online!

Thank you for participating in this important Congress.

The Theme of the Congress is:

SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS AND PRAXIS: Sustaining dialogue between theory and practice

Convenors:

          Alex) Xuanwei Peng | University of Shenzhen

Geoff Williams | University of Shenzhen & University of Sydney

    This congress will be an opportunity to re-examine praxis in SFL as it continues to expand globally and into new domains of activity. Praxis has been a key concept throughout the development of SFL. Halliday, in reflecting on the Marxist origins of SFL in his contribution to The Bloomsbury Companion to M.A.K. Halliday, commented:

… I have always thought of linguistic theory as something to be applied, to real problems either in research or in some domain of practice; eventually I came up with the term ‘appliable’ linguistics to encapsulate this preoccupation with a theory as a mode of action that is based on understanding. It is of course not specifically Marxist, except perhaps in the notion that there are cycles of mutual reinforcement between practice and theory: theory improves the effectiveness of practice, and practice contributes to the ongoing refinement of theory (Halliday 2015: 97).

    The organising committee again welcomes papers which address the interface between SFL theory and research/practice, oriented from either starting point, or which report advances in the ‘appliability’ of SFL using new theoretical developments.

The Congress is interested in but not confined to the following issues:

1. Developments in SFL Theory and Description

2. Case Studies of Individual Languages

3. Emerging Areas for SFL Transdisciplinary Research

4. Grammatical Metaphor and Discourse Strategies

5. Translation Studies

6. Ecolinguistics

7. Healthcare Communication

8. Clinical Linguistics

9. Language Education

10. Disciplinary English

11. Linguistic Studies of Literary Texts

12. Legal Registers

13. Multimodality/Multisemiosis

14. Corpus Research

15. Comparison of Contemporary Online Texts in Different Languages

16. Advances in Digitally-Based Research Methodologies

17. Semiotics and Applied Linguistics in Theoretical Orientations

18. SFL in relation to Modern Sciences (e.g. Quantum Mechanics, Theories of Complex Systems, Cybernetics, System Theory, Information Theory)

General Program of PCI 47 & CSW 21, Shenzhen/Beijing Time

General Program of ISFC 47 & CNCDA 18, Shenzhen/Beijing Time

(25—27 July Monday through Wednesday)

Day 1. ID: 961 2628 7228; Code: 619 903, for all the main Conference Hall

ID: 931 5301 1335; Code: 578 411, for all sessions

Day 2. ID: 961 6411 4470; Code: 500 302, for all main Conference Hall

ID: 928 4741 3759; Code: 306 902, for all sessions

Day 3. ID: 937 7441 3480; Code: 078 882, for all main conference Hall

ID: 960 5209 7461; Code: 480 826, for all sessions

47th International Systemic Functional Congress (ISFC 47)

18th China National Conference on Discourse Analysis (CNCDA 18)

47th International Systemic Functional Pre-Congress Institute (PCI 47)

21st China Systemics Week (CSW 21)

Program in Detail

Monday, 25 July 2022 Shenzhen/Beijing Time

ISFC 47 & CNCDA 18

Tuesday, 26 July 2022

ISFC 47 & CNCDA 18

Wednesday, 27 July 2022

ISFC 47 & CNCDA 18

Contents

21st China Systemics Week (CSW 21) 1

1. CHENGUANG CHANG (常晨光), Sun Yat-sen University, China 2

2. YAN FANG (方琰), Tsinghua University, China 5

3. CHUNYU HU (胡春雨), Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China 7

4. ZHANZI LI (李战子), National University of Defense Technology, China 9

5. CHENGYU LIU (刘承宇), Southwest University, China 11

6. XINGWEI MIAO (苗兴伟), Beijing Normal University, China 13

7. BINGJUN YANG (杨炳钧), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China 15

8. ZHONG YANG (杨忠), Northeast China Normal University, China 18

9. HUI YU (于晖), Beijing Normal University, China 20

10. CHUANYOU YUAN (袁传有), Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China 22

11. DELU ZHANG (张德禄), Tongji University, China 24

12. YONGSHENG ZHU (朱永生), Fudan University, China 26

47th International Systemic Functional Pre-Congress Institute (PCI 47) 28

1. MEENA C. DEBASHISH, The English and Foreign Languages University, India 29

2. YAEGAN DORAN, University of Sydney & Australian Catholic University, Australia 33

3. EDWARD MCDONALD, Independent Scholar, Australia 37

4. MICK O’Donnell, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain 41

47th International Systemic Functional Congress (ISFC 47) 44

18th China National Conference on Discourse Analysis (CNCDA 18) 44

1. JOHN A. BATEMAN, University of Bremen, Germany 45

2. David Butt, Macquarie University, Australia 47

3. SHOOSHI DREYFUS, University of Wollongong, Australia 50

4. LISE FONTAINE, Cardiff University, United Kingdom 53

5. WEI HE, Beijing Foreign Studies University, China 57

6. THEO VAN LEEUWEN, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark & University of New South Wales, Australia 59

7. JAMES R. MARTIN, University of Sydney, Australia 62

8. CHRISTIAN M. I. M. MATTHIESSEN, Hunan University, China 65

9. TERESA OTEÍZA, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile 72

10. PIN WANG, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China 76

11. YANNING YANG, East China Normal University, China 78

Abstracts of Panel Speakers 80

Panel 1: Discourses of Family, Parenting and Motherhood 81

Wendy L. Bowcher, Tana X. Nie 81

Jennifer Yameng Liang 82

Zhao Wenting 83

Zhang Qianqian 84

Tana X. Nie 85

Chang Xinping 87

Panel 2: Applying Appraisal Theory in the Analysis of Stance and Persuasiveness 89

Xu Qingxin 90

Jing Yi 91

Panel 3: A Multimodal Corpus-based Approach to Discourse Analysis 93

John Bateman 95

Kong Youqi, Lin Wei 95

He Yufei, Xu Qingxin, Wu Xiaoqin 96

Panel 4: System Networks as A Resource in Language Education 99

Natalia Ignatieva, Victoria Zamudio-Jasso, Guillermo Jiménez-Sánchez, Daniel Rodríguez-Vergara 100

Sheena Gardner 102

Silvia Pessoa, Thomas D. Mitchell, Maria Pia Gomez-Laich 103

Jorge Arús-Hita 105

Panel 5: The Semogenesis of Experiential Grammar 108

Chen Xiaoran 108

Dong Tianshu 110

Li Xinying 113

Liu Na 115

Liu Shuxin 118

Wang Jiawei 120

Xia Weifan 123

Zhao Xiaoliang 125

Panel 6: Multimodal Discourse Analysis in Translation Studies from the Perspective of SFL 128

Pan Li 128

Pan Hanting 130

Huang Chuxin 132

Zhang Xiaoyu, Zeng Weixin 134

Wu Xiaoping 136

Michelle Sut I Lam 138

Qian Hong, Feng Dezheng (William) 139

Pan Li, Wu Danping 140

Pan Li, Han Lin 143

Abstracts of Parallel Speakers 146

Balsam Alghamdi 147

Atheer M. Alqarni 149

Mário Amado Alves, Ângela Quaresma, Carlos A. M. Gouveia, Fausto Caels, Joana Vieira Santos, Helga Arnauth, Luís Filipe Barbeiro, Marta Filipe Alexandre, Paulo Nunes da Silva 151

Thomas Amundrud 153

Bao Yue, Zhang Yi 154

Bu Zhanting 155

Georgia Carr 157

Chai Tongwen 158

Chang Chenguang 159

Chang Shuhan, Jennifer Yameng Liang 160

Chen Gangni 162

Chen Lin 163

Chen Mo, Li Xi 165

Chen Tingting 167

Chen Wenge 168

Chen Yujuan 168

Dai Yujie 171

Deng Rui, Zhang Yi 172

Di Yanhua 173

Dong Juan, Chen Yang 176

Fu Youyou 178

Fu Zhuxia, Liu Yongcan 179

Gao Hua, Liu Lianzhi 181

Gao Jiawen 183

Gao Nan 184

Gao Yanmei, LI Danni 186

Gu Xiaole, Bao Beibei 189

Guo Lihui 190

Guo Ya 192

Hao Jing 195

Hao Sihan 197

He Juan 198

He Ning 200

He Qingshun 202

He Zhongqing 207

Hong Ling 209

Susan Hood 211

侯建波（Hou Jianbo） 212

Hu Chunyu , Lu Chunmei 213

Hu Heng 218

Hu Yuling 220

黄芳静（Huang Fangjing） 221

Huang Jinyi 222

Huang Kaiyu, Chen Jing 224

Huang Man 226

Jia Peipei 227

Jiang Ting, Fan Borui 229

Jiang Ting, Jiang Yan 231

Jiang Ting, Jin Shangran 233

Jiang Ting, Tang Ping 236

Jin Nana¹, Chen Zili² 237

Lai Liangtao, Su Shumiao 239

Li Bingru 241

Li Jie 243

Li Jingjing 245

Li Meiqi 249

Li Meizi 250

Li Peng 252

Li Shuquan 253

Li Xuejiao 255

Li Yixi, Zhang Ranran 256

Li Zhanzi 258

Liao Qi 259

Lin Hanzhao 260

Lin Xiaoling 263

Liu Chengyu 265

Liu Feifei, Luo Meng 265

Liu Ning, Derek Irwin 266

Liu Yi 269

Liu Yujie 270

Liu Zhiping 271

Lu Jiqiang 274

Lu Nan 275

Ma Defeng, Zhang Xiufeng, Ma Zhenqi 276

Ma Haocheng 277

Arianna Maiorani¹, Russell Lock¹, Massimiliano Zecca¹, Liu Chun¹, John Bateman², Dayana Markhabayeva² 279

苗宁（Miao Ning） 280

Miao Xingwei 281

Anannya Mondal 282

Mu Xuqin 284

Esterina Nervino 286

Pang Yutian 288

Mariana Pascual 289

Qiu Min 291

Qu Yingmei, Liu Meishan 293

Beatriz Quiroz 294

David Rose 296

Hanaa Samaha, Yap Teng Teng, Kumaran Rajandran 299

She Xiumin 300

Shi Rui 301

Shi Wenrui 303

Rini Singh 303

Song Jinge 304

Dragana Stosic 306

Su Hang 308

Tang Bin 308

Tang Qingye, Mu Yujia 309

Tang Weize 310

Tian Yuhe 312

Wang Di 313

Wang Hongyan 318

Wang Jin 319

Wang Shanghao 321

Wang Yingyu 322

Wang Yong 324

Wu Geqi 330

Wu Qijing 331

Wu Yayin, Zhang Yi 333

Xing Junjun 334

Xu Hongying 336

Xu Wei, Liu Chengyu 337

Xu Wentao 341

Xuan Lei 344

Yan Xiaoqing 345

Yang Bingjun 347

Yang Caiying 348

杨华华（Yang Huahua） 351

Yang Jinhua 351

Yang Linxiu 353

姚海燕（Yao Haiyan） 354

Yao Siyu 359

Yu Haiyang 359

于洪江（Yu Hongjiang） 360

Yu Hui, Zhang Shaojie 361

Yu Yingchen 364

Yu Zhigang, Yaegan Doran 366

Yuan Chuanyou, Cao Huishu 367

Yuan Surong 369

Yuan Weiliang 370

Zhang Dongbing (Mus) 372

Zhang Hui 373

Zhang Kunkun 374

Zhang Lei 376

Zhang Mingjin 378

Zhang Ranran 380

Zhang Yalin 382

Zhang Yan 384

Zhang Yulan 385

Zhao Qingli 387

Zhao Wenchao 389

Zheng Jie 390

Zhong Xiaotang, Chen Yi 395

Zhou Yaru 396

Zong Shan, Zhang Liping 398

Index of Speakers, Affiliations and E-mails 401

Organising Committee 414

21st China Systemics Week (CSW 21)

Speakers and Speeches

(In Alphabetic Order of Family Names)

1. CHENGUANG CHANG (常晨光), Sun Yat-sen University, China

Applying SFL in Language Teaching

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), as an appliable linguistics, is designed to help solve language-related problems, including problems in language teaching and learning. Halliday sees all learning as itself linguistic activity. “Whatever you learn, you are engaged in language; learning involves ‘languaging’” (Halliday 2016). In fact, one of the most important areas of application of SFL has been language education. This meaning-based theory of language has provided invaluable insights and inspirations for the communicative approach to language teaching and continued to be explored in actual language teaching practice.  In this workshop, I will try to explore the implications of different aspects of this theory in this area of application, focusing in particular on the following:

     (1) The multifunctional view of language

     Different from other models of language, SFL (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014) emphasises three broad types of meanings that language serves: the experiential, the interpersonal and the textual. This all-round view of the functions of language has important implications in language learning and teaching. Raising learners’ awareness in this regard can help them learn to understand a language more comprehensively and communicate more effectively in that language.

(2) The interdependence between language and context

SFL emphasises the interdependence between language and context. Socio-cultural factors influence and determine the kinds of things we do through language, and these factors are accounted for in SFL by invoking the concepts of register and genre. Register – the particular functional variety of language – reacts with the context of situation. Register analysis enables language learners to understand something of why people say or write what they do. Genre, in Martin’s formulation, involves the general notion of what people are doing through language and how they organize the language event in stages to achieve their purpose (Thompson 2014). The Sydney School genre-based approach to language teaching has proved useful in enabling us to make informed decisions in terms of both the curriculum and the pedagogy.

    (3) The probabilistic nature of language

    Halliday stresses that the quantitative properties of systems are part the grammar of an individual, and when one learns a language, one also learns the probabilistic profile of the language. Our discourse as a whole will pattern quantitatively according to the probabilistic profile of the grammar. To build the overall probabilistic profile of a language and the local variations within different registers, one needs plenty of textual experience, i.e. exposure to a broad range and variety of language input. This important insight has apparent implications for curriculum design and the selection and compilation of teaching materials.  

References:

Halliday, M.A.K and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (4^th edition). London & New York: Routledge.

Halliday, M.A.K. 2016. Aspects of Language and Learning. Heidelberg: Springer.

Thompson, G. 2014. Introducing Functional Grammar (3^rd edition). London & New York: Routledge.

    Dr. Chang Chenguang is a professor of linguistics at the School of International Studies, Sun Yat-sen Univesity, China. His research interests include systemic functional theory, discourse analysis, translation studies, and language education. His recent publications include Halliday and Sun Yat-sen University (co-edited with Dai Fan, Sun Yat-sen University Press, 2019), Linguistic Sustainability (co-edited with Yu Changsen, Sun Yat-sen University Press, 2020), Working with Discourses: Corpus and Systemic Functional Perpestives (co-edited with Josef Schmied and Matthias Hofmann, Cuvillier Verlag, 2020), and Functional Approaches to Translation Studies (co-edited with Si Xianzhu, Sun Yat-sen University Press, 2021).

2. YAN FANG (方琰), Tsinghua University, China

Introducing Textual Function

    The presenter will explain the definition and concept of Textual Function from the SFL perspective and introduce the systems of Textual Function at the clausal and discourse levels. By citing English and Chinese examples from clauses and discourses, she will elaborate on the concepts of Theme, New, Hyper-Theme, Hyper-New, Macro-Theme, Macro-New, Thematic Progression and on the possibility of revealing the semantic meanings by applying these concepts to discourse analysis. Then she will discuss the definition and concept of the Genre theory in different periods of its development, with focus on the theoretical models proposed respectively by Ruqaiya Hasan and James Martin. Finally, the presenter will illustrate the applicability of their models in teaching English writing by referring to the results of an experiment of an English writing course conducted in an ordinary Chinese university for more than 10 years.

Before dealing with the Textual Function, she will briefly introduce the founder and main representatives of the school of Systemic-Functional Linguistics, its international and internal organizations and the key concepts of this school. The presenter will emphasize that in SFL, “meaning matters” much and that system is prior to structure – language system is regarded as the database for the construction of language structure.

Key words: Systemic-Functional Linguistics; Textual function; Theme; New; Thematic Progression; Genre

语言功能理论入门

阐释系统功能语言学派有关语篇的定义，介绍小句的语篇功能系统和语篇的语篇功能系统。通过小句和语篇的英、汉两种语言的实际例子，阐明主位、新信息、超主位、超新信息、宏观主位、宏观新信息、主位进程模式的概念，探讨这些概念对揭示语篇意义的可能性。其次，将解释语篇类型（语类）的定义和概念，介绍语类研究的几个阶段，着重阐明韩茹凯和马丁的语类理论和模式，并通过在一所普通中国大学里进行了十几年英语写作教学试验的结果，阐述语类分析对写作教学的理论应用指导作用。在引入语篇的功能理论之前，将简介系统功能语言学的创始人、主要代表人物、国际国内的组织结构、系统功能语言学的关键词汇及其含义，强调该学派以意义为核心及系统优于结构的重要性。

关键词：系统功能语言学；语篇功能；主位；新信息；主位进程模式；语篇类型（语类）

    Fang Yan, Professor of English and Linguistics of Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Tsinghua University; (retired since 2004); one of the Vice-Chairpersons of China Functional Linguistics Association (1995 to 2009), Deputy-Chair of Systemic-Functional Linguistics International Executive Committee (2002 to 2008); National Research Centre for Foreign Language Education (2001-2005); Co-organizer of the 1995 Summer Institute of Systemic-Functional Linguistics held in Tsinghua University; Co-convenor of the 1997 Discourse Analysis Conference held in Macao University sponsored by Macao University and Tsinghua University; Convenor of 36 ISFC (International Systemic Functional Congress); Editor or author of five books and more than 40 articles in Chinese or English; Field of Expertise/Specialty in English, Systemic-Functional Linguistics, Discourse Analysis and Applied Linguistics.

3. CHUNYU HU (胡春雨), Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China

Introduction to Disciplinary English

With the increasing importance of disciplinary knowledge in the social life and the rapid development of new technology, more and more attention has been paid in recent years to the construction, transmission and understanding of disciplinary knowledge. However, each discipline has its own way of organizing and construing world experience. Disciplinary English, as a functional variety, is characterized by its important role in the academia. Knowledge about the way disciplinary knowledge is constructed lexicogrammatically is crucial for students to understand the linguistic features of their field. In order to illustrate how knowledge is presented linguistically in disciplinary English, three aspects will be covered in this workshop. First, it intends to introduce some of the key concepts involved in the field, such as knowledge, disciplinary epistemology, and examine the relation of studies in disciplinary English to language learning and teaching, particularly ESP, EAP and EMI. Second, it will trace the development of the field and examine the contributions SFL has made to the study of disciplinary English. Third, it will illustrate how corpus linguistics can be applied to the analysis of knowledge building in English disciplinary discourse. For this purpose, several case studies will be presented as examples to show the advantages of SFL and corpus linguistics in the study. In particular, this workshop will focus on the functioning of various lexicogrammatical resources in representing disciplinary knowledge in the disciplines of management and economics.  

    Dr. HU Chunyu is a professor of applied linguistics at the School of English for International Business, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China. His research interests include corpus linguistics, systemic functional linguistics, and business discourse studies. He has published 2 books and over 30 journal articles. He has been teaching Economics, Business Essentials, and International Business over the past decade, which enables him to have fostered a keen interest in disciplinary discourse studies.

4. ZHANZI LI (李战子), National University of Defense Technology, China

Transitivity and Ideational Meaning

In this age of valuing experience in the sense of just experiencing rather than owning something or acquiring some goods, the systemic functional linguistic theory of ideational meaning takes on a new significance in shedding light on understanding the basics of reflecting on our linguistic construction (at the clause level) of the flow of events or goings on. This talk looks at transitivity system in SFL by reviewing how a manageable set of PROCESS types gives meaning to our experience. Here is a taste of it in the typical Hallidayan discourse: “each quantum of change is modeled as a figure ---- a figure of happening, doing, sensing, saying, being, or having. All figures consist of a process unfolding through time and of participants being directly involved in this process in some way; and in addition, there maybe circumstances of time, space, cause, manner or one of a few other types.”

概念功能和及物性

社会科学家告诉我们，人不可能直接认识世界，人所知的生活是透过活过的经验（lived experience）。那么人们是怎么组织这种活过的经验的？人们以什么样的语法赋予其意义？或者说活过的经验是怎样表达的？为了创造生活的意义，人们必须安排自身事件经验的时间顺序甚至阐释其因果关系，建立自己和周遭世界前后一致的一份记录。系统功能语言学的概念意义分为经验意义和逻辑意义。经验意义主要指对及物性的研究。及物性过程则是对六种过程的描述。本讲座通过回顾和总结及物性系统的特征，概述系统功能语法概念功能中的经验意义，将其扩展到社会符号学的过程中，并考察及物性系统在新媒体语境中的延展，简要概述与经验意义密切相关的名词化和作格等概念，并且有一些针对每一种及物性过程的练习和讨论。

    Li Zhanzi is Professor in the English Department, School of International Studies, National Defense University. She received her PhD in the English language and literature from the English Department of Peking University. She is a member of the English Teaching Supervisory Committee of the Ministry of Education. Her major research interest lies in systemic functional linguistics, discourse analysis and new media literacy.

5. CHENGYU LIU (刘承宇), Southwest University, China

Meaning-Making in Systemic Functional Linguistics

By locating the Hallidayan notion of semogenesis in the context of social semiotics, this paper attempts to make an in-depth analysis of the spatial and temporal aspects of meaning-making. The study shows that Halliday’s theory of semogenesis, in essence, incorporates the dimensions of time and space. Apart from the three time frames of phylogenesis, ontogenesis and logogenesis (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999), the spatial dimension of semogenesis is analyzed on the basis of interactional sociolinguistics into three spatial frames, i.e., semogenesis in communal integration; semogenesis in interpersonal communication; semogenesis in textual interaction. These three spatial frames of semogenesis work closely in the instantiation process of language system to promote the evolution of language in terms of context, semantics and lexicogrammar. By integrating both the spatial and temporal dimensions of semogenesis, a comprehensive analytical framework is finally proposed, with an aim to investigate the complicated process of meaning making in the light of systemic functional linguistics.

Key words: meaning making; semogenesis; time frames; spatial frames; systemic functional linguistics

Liu Chengyu is a professor of linguistics at the College of International Studies, Southwest University. He got his PhD degree in linguistics at Xiamen University, and then worked as a visiting scholar at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign between 2003 and 2004, a post-doctoral research fellow at Sun Yat-Sen University between 2008 and 2010, and as a visiting professor at Hong Kong City University in 2012. His major research interests include: systemic functional linguistics, discourse studies, and multilingualism and multilingual education. To date, he has published over 70 papers and 5 books in these fields. His academic affiliations include: Secretary General of the China Association of Functional Linguistics, Executive Director of the China Association of Discourse Analysis, Chairman of the China Association of Multilingualism and Multilingual Education. He also works as a member of the editing committee of the journal Asian-Pacific Journal of Second / Foreign Language Education (Springer) and The Journal of Pakistan Linguistics.

6. XINGWEI MIAO (苗兴伟), Beijing Normal University, China

Analysing Transitivity in Discourse

    The ideational function of language enables us to talk about our experience of the world, that is, to describe various processes and the entities involved in them. The ideational meaning is mainly realized by the transitivity system of language, and transitivity analysis involves determining the process type, participants, and circumstances realized in any clause. By examining the transitivity patterns in discourse, we can explain how experiences are represented and how the field of the situation is being constructed (Eggins 1994/2004: 266). Transitivity analysis plays an important role not only in explaining the ideational meaning of discourse but also in the scrutiny of the ideological implications of discourse. This talk sets out to introduce the main concepts and ideas involved in transitivity analysis and some of the methods and recent trends of transitivity analysis in discourse studies.

    Miao Xingwei, professor of School of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Beijing Normal University. He holds an M.A. degree in TEFL (Beijing Foreign Studies University, 1994) and a Ph.D. degree in linguistics (Fudan University, 1999). His research interests include functional linguistics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, stylistics and applied linguistics. He is particularly interested in the application of systemic functional theories to discourse analysis. He is currently Director of China Stylistics Association, Deputy Director of Association of English and Chinese Discourse Analysis, Deputy Director of China Discourse Studies Association, Deputy Director of China Ecolinguistics Association and Managing Director of China Pragmatics Association. He has published 5 books and more than 90 academic articles. His major publications include “The relationship between cohesion and coherence”, “The explanatory power of Relevance Theory to discourse coherence”, “Discourse functions of negative structure”, “Discourse pragmatics: a discourse perspective on sentence structure”, “Working mechanisms and discourse functions of ergativity”. He is currently working on the state-funded research project “Syntactic Processes of Information Management in Chinese and English Discourse”.

7. BINGJUN YANG (杨炳钧), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China

Functional-Semantic Relations in Clause Complex

The terms ‘coordination, subordination and embedding’ are traditional types of clause combining (Haiman & Thompson, 1988) or clause linkage (Lehmann, 1988), and these relations are now widely understood as connecting clauses rather than sentences. As well-established grammatical terms, they are used in a variety of senses depending on distinctive theoretical contexts (Fabricius-Hansen & Ramm, 2008). However, disputes arise if to consider the function or meaning between clauses.

    There is no advantage to postulating a grammatical category of ‘subordinate’ clause; rather the grammar of English at least, and perhaps of other languages as well, suggests that a distinction between what we have been calling ‘hypotaxis’ and ‘embedding’ is crucial. (Matthiessen & Thompson, 1988: 317)

Thus, clause relations include hypotaxis and parataxis in terms of taxis (Halliday, 1985; 1994; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014). The logico-semantic of clause combining is put under two categories: expansion and projection. The expansion type includes elaborating by which one clause expands another by elaborating on it or some portion of it; extending by which one clause expands another by extending beyond it; and enhancing by which one clause expands another by embellishing around it. The projection type includes two categories: locution by which one clause is projected through another as a construction of wording, and idea by which one clause is projected through another as a construction of meaning.

The SFL approach to clause complex is illuminating in many ways, but problems arise when embedding is considered. How to improve the SFL approach to logico-semantic relations in clause complex remains to be a significant question, particularly when Chinese is taken into consideration.

References:

Fabricius-Hansen, C., & Ramm, W. (2008). Editors’ introduction: subordination and coordination from different perspectives. In C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), Subordination versus coordination in sentence and text: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 1–30). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Haiman, J., & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.). (1988). Clause combining in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar (1st edn.). London & New York: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edn). London & New York: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd edn). London: Hodder Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edn.). London & New York: Routledge.

Lehmann, C. (1988). Towards a typology of clause linkage. In J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse (pp. 181–225). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Matthiessen, C., & Thompson, S. A. (1988). The structure of discourse and “subordination.” In J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse (pp. 275–329). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Dr. Bingjun Yang was once a visiting professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Basel University. He is now tenured full professor of systemic functional linguistics at Shanghai Jiao Tong University. His research articles appeared in journals like Language Sciences (2004), Australian Journal of Linguistics (2014, 2015, 2018), Journal of Quantitative Linguistics (2015), Lingua (2018), Social Semiotics (2019), and Journal of World Languages (2017, 2020). His academic books include Non-finiteness: A Process-relation Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 2022); Language Policy: A Systemic Functional Linguistic Approach (Routledge, 2017; with Rui Wang) and Absolute Clauses in English from the Systemic Functional Perspective: A Corpus-based Study (Springer, 2015; with Qingshun He).

8. ZHONG YANG (杨忠), Northeast China Normal University, China

Grammatical Metaphor: Consensus and Controversy

The theory of grammatical metaphor is invaluable contribution to the study of language in use. Systemic functional linguists have gained many insights into the trans-categorization in words, modality, and transitivity as well as the motivation of this kind of metaphor. Nevertheless, there are still some issues that await clarification. The problem of definition, the disagreement in classification of grammatical metaphor, and the relation between grammatical metaphor and lexical metaphor are reviewed and the solutions are proposed.

杨忠，东北师范大学外国语学院教授（二级）、博士生导师，兼任东北师范大学关心下一代工作委员会主任委员、中国英汉比较学会语篇分析研究会名誉副会长、认知语言学研究会常务理事、中国逻辑学会语用学研究会常务理事、吉林省翻译协会副会长。曾兼任首届教育部外语专业教学指导委员会委员、教育部大学生素质教育指导委员会委员、教育部学风建设委员会委员、中国英语教学研究会常务理事、吉林省社会科学联合会副主席。

研究方向为功能语言学、认知语言学、翻译理论与实践。迄今指导硕士生200余名，博士生24名。主持完成国家哲学社会科学基金项目1项，教育部人文社会科学基金项目2项，教育科学规划基金项目1项，教育部与英国文化委员会合作项目1项。在国内外学术期刊发表论文百余篇；出版著作及教材12部。获得中国图书奖1次、省社科成果奖5次；获吉林省优秀教学成果一等奖1次。1993年起享受国务院政府特殊津贴。曾获吉林省有突出贡献的中青年专家、宝钢教育基金会优秀教师、东北师范大学首批“研究生心中的好导师”等称号。

9. HUI YU (于晖), Beijing Normal University, China

Below the Clause: Groups and Phrases

In this talk, we shall look at the groups and phrases that make up the structural elements of the clause. Whereas a group is an expansion of a word, a phrase is a contraction of a clause. We shall examine the experiential structure of two main classes of group: nominal group and verbal group. The natural ordering of elements in the group will be accounted for. We shall also interpret the similarity of experiential structure between nominal groups and verbal groups, demonstrating how the structure of groups recapitulates the meaning that is incorporated as choice in the thematic structure of the clause. Finally we shall look at phrasal verbs and prepositional phrases. Our analysis will show why a phrasal verb is a single process rather than Process plus circumstantial elements whereas prepositional phrases are clause-like rather than group-like. Hence prepositional phrases should be regarded as a minor process and cannot be reduced to a single element.

    Dr. Yu Hui, Professor of School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Beijing Normal University. She got her Ph.D. in linguistics from Sun Yat-sen University in 2001. She completed her postdoctoral research in Beijing Normal University and has since been teaching in the English Department. She has been teaching Functional Linguistics for years both at the undergraduate and the graduate level. She is currently Vice Dean of School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Beijing Normal University. She serves as Vice Chair of China Association of Functional Linguistics and Standing member of Council of China Association of English-Chinese Discourse Analysis and China Association of Ecolinguitics. Her research interests include genre analysis (Discourse as Genre: Arresting Semiotics in Research Paper Abstracts, Henan University Press 2003; Essentials to Genre Analysis, Beijing Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press 2018), systemic functional grammar, genre typology (research grant by Ministry of Education: A corpus-based study of genre typology), academic and scientific writing and knowledge structure (research grant by Ministry of Education: A comparative study of knowledge structure across different educational discourses).

10. CHUANYOU YUAN (袁传有), Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China

Forensic & Legal Linguistics and Forensic Discourse Study from SFL Perspective

    This workshop will start with the recent name change (nomenclature) of this newly-emerging discipline from Forensic Linguistics (IAFL) to Forensic & Legal Linguistics (IAFLL): its Origin, Development, and Latest Status-quo both in Common-law countries and in China.

    Then, we will focus on our own Forensic and Legal Discourse Studies from the SFL and LCT perspectives in China, which include, but not confined to:

1. Legislative discourse, with a focal point on its Fuzziness from the perspective of Graduation

2. Judicial opinions from the perspective of Genre and Discourse semantics

3. Construction of Rule of Law from the perspective of Multimodality

4. Judicial Social Worker’s identity in Community correction discourse from Appraisal system

5. Stancetaking and Value Positioning in Judicial Documents with Constellation Analysis

    Finally, some future trends of development and topics of research will be discussed.

Key words: Forensic Linguistics; Legislative discourse; Judicial opinions; Community correction discourse; Rule of law; Multimodality; Genre

Dr. Yuan Chuanyou is a professor and full-time researcher at the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. He is currently the director of the Forensic Linguistics Committee of the China Association for Comparative Studies of English and Chinese, the director of the Forensic Linguistics Institute and the deputy director of the Functional Linguistics Research Center of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. He has served as an Ordinary Member on the Executive Committee of the International Association of Forensic Linguists (IAFL) from 2013-2017. He has been engaged in teaching and research work in the fields of legal English, forensic linguistics, systemic-functional linguistics, legal discourse studies, etc. He has published some 20 academic papers in SSCI and CSSCI journals and an academic monograph. He has been funded and appointed by the China Scholarship Council and has been a visiting research scholar at Cardiff University and the University of Sydney, conducting collaborative research with Prof. Jim Martin and Prof. Karl Maton.

11. DELU ZHANG (张德禄), Tongji University, China

Introduction to Multimodal Discourse Analysis

The present study is intended to give a short introduction to the basic theoretical framework of multimodal discourse analysis. Firstly, it introduces the reasons for the emergence of multimodal discourse analysis theory and the previous research results. Then it discusses the semiotic resources for the theory of multimodal discourse analysis, the basic models of multimodal grammar, the concept of design in multimodal discourse analysis, the relationship between modes, and the re-semiotization of modes in multimodal discourse. And finally, it briefly introduces the perspectives and the models of analysis for multimodal discourse analysis.

Key words: multimodal discourse analysis; systemic functional linguistics; design; semiotic resources; multimodal grammar; synergy of modes; resemiotization

    Zhang Delu, male, distinguished professor and Ph.D supervisor of Tongji University, vice chairman of Functional Linguistics Association; vice chairman of China Linguistics and Semiotics Society, and vice chairman of Stylistics Society. His main research fields include systemic functional linguistics, English stylistics, semiotics, foreign language teaching, discourse analysis, pragmatics and so on. He has published more than 200 papers in important journals at home and abroad; 28 monographs, translations, textbooks and dictionaries in important and authoritative publishing houses at home and abroad. He has presided over 11 scientific research projects, including 2 national humanities and social science projects. He has won more than 20 awards for teaching and scientific research, including one first prize for outstanding achievements in scientific research in colleges and universities (humanities and social sciences) of the Ministry of education, four second prizes and two third prizes for outstanding achievements in Social Sciences Research in Shandong Province; Three first prizes for outstanding scientific research achievements in colleges and universities in Shandong Province. He is now member of the Editorial Board of the international journal: Language, Context and Text; member of the Editorial advisory Board of the international journal: Multimodality and Society; member of the Academic Board of the CSSCI journal: Foreign Languages in China, member of the Invited Editorial Board of the journal: Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, and member of the Editorial Board of the journal: Shandong Foreign Languages.

12. YONGSHENG ZHU (朱永生), Fudan University, China

Interpersonal Function and Its Realization

This talk will introduce Halliday's three-metafunction hypothesis first and then focus on the interpersonal function and its realization in mood, modality, forms of address, personal pronouns and evaluative words. 

人际功能及其体现形式

人际功能的界定，与概念功能和语篇功能之间的关系，及其在语气、情态、人称代词、称呼语和评价性词语中的体现。

朱永生，复旦大学教授、博士生导师，国际学术刊物Linguistics and Human Sciences及《中国外语》等学术刊物编委、全国高校功能语言学研究会名誉副会长，曾任苏州大学外语系主任、复旦大学外文系主任、复旦大学国际文化交流学院院长、国际系统功能语言学研究会执委会委员、国务院学科评议组成员、全国高校外语教学指导委员会委员、斯德哥尔摩大学孔子学院理事长、教育部汉语国际教育硕士教学指导委员会委员等。研究方向：功能语言学和话语分析。专著有《系统功能语言学多维思考》、《系统功能语言学再思考》、《语境动态研究》、《系统功能语法概论》、《系统功能语言学概论》、《功能语言学导论》、《英汉语篇衔接手段对比研究》等，发表论文90多篇，参加过《英语搭配大词典》等大型工具书的编写和《英语语法大全》的翻译工作。获得省部级以上科研奖多项。

47th International Systemic Functional Pre-Congress Institute (PCI 47)

Speakers and Speeches

(In Alphabetic Order of Family Names)

1. MEENA C. DEBASHISH, The English and Foreign Languages University, India

Intonation in the Grammar of English

The main aim of this course is to help participants appreciate the various contrasts in English intonation that are exploited in the grammar of the language in order to make distinctions in meaning. In order to achieve this, we will be working with a trinocular perspective of language, to see how the choices in intonation construe choices in lexicogrammar and semantics.  

The goal is to introduce all strata of systemic functional analysis (context, semantics, lexicogrammar, phonology and phonetics) with particular emphasis on the lower end of the realization chain: choices in the English TONE system (phonological stratum) realizing choices in the system of MOOD (lexicogrammatical stratum), and the choices in the systems of SPEECH FUNCTION and KEY (semantic stratum). For instance, when a speaker realizes the declarative ‘I am a teacher’ with a falling tone (tone 1) // I am a /TEAcher //, then he is construing the neutral meaning of a statement. On the other hand, if he uses a rising tone (tone 2), then he is still making a choice of a declarative mood, but construing a marked meaning of a question. Further, one can also study the attitudinal meanings indicated by the speaker by examining the secondary tones used, for instance, whether tone 1 (for the same example) is realized with a wide (tone 1+), or a neutral (tone 1.), or a low (tone 1-) fall. Here, the speaker is making a choice from a delicate system of tone 1, to construe either a neutral meaning of ‘certainty’ (tone 1.), or a stronger ‘emphatic’ meaning (tone 1+), or a mild ‘disinterested/uninvolved’ meaning (tone 1-).  

The format of the course would be lectures plus practice by examining spoken texts using PRAAT, followed by application to research.

Session 1: “Interpretation of sound” and “The linguistic environment of intonation”.

Session 2: “Intonation and meaning”: a demonstration of how sound makes meaning in different spoken texts.

Session 3: “The secondary tones and their meanings”, followed by a discussion on “How to bring intonation into your own work”.

Please get your laptops and headphones. Also, remember to download the PRAAT software (www.praat.org) onto your laptops before the course begins.

References:

Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). A Course in Spoken English: Intonation. London: Oxford University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Greaves, W. S. (2008). Intonation in the Grammar of English, London: Equinox.

DAY 1: (14:30 – 17:00 hrs)

“The interpretation of sound” and “The linguistic environment of intonation”

You will be first introduced to the system network of English intonation: the TONALITY system – the chunking of information, the TONICITY system – the focus of information, and the TONE system – the primary tones. In this session, you will also be introduced to PRAAT and learn to identify tone groups, tonic syllables and tones in some spoken dialogues. Later, we will discuss the choices in the systems of TONALITY and TONICITY, and the textual function of these choices.    

DAY 2: (14:30 – 17:00 hrs)

“Intonation and meaning”: a detailed demonstration of how sound makes meaning in different spoken texts

In this session, we will study spoken dialogues with reference to the interpersonal function of the Primary tones: how the choices in the Primary TONE system construe the choices in the system of MOOD in the lexicogrammatical stratum, and the choices in the system of SPEECH FUNCTION in the semantic stratum. We will discuss both the neutral and marked meanings realized by the Primary tones within the context of some selected spoken texts.

DAY 3: (14:30 – 17:00 hrs)

“The secondary tones and their meanings” and “How to bring intonation into your research”

This session will be devoted to studying the choices in the tonic secondary tones and the pretonic secondary tones. Later, we will examine the interpersonal function of these secondary tones with reference to the system of KEY for expressing attitudes/emotions. We will also address the question of bringing intonation into your respective research work.

Key words: Intonation; Trinocular perspective; Textual function; Interpersonal function; System; Primary tones; Secondary tones; KEY; neutral; marked

Meena Debashish is an Associate Professor in the Department of Phonetics & Spoken English at The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, India. The broad field of her research interest includes the interrelations of phonetics, intonation, grammar, and discourse. She has specialized in the study of speech sound, including the Indian varieties of English, and has researched and taught over many years on the intonation of English. She has worked as a research assistant (2002 – 2005, based in India) to Prof. William Greaves and Prof. Jim Benson (Glendon University, Canada) on the Bonobo-Human Research Project and the Forgiveness Project.

2. YAEGAN DORAN, University of Sydney & Australian Catholic University, Australia

The Language of Science

In this course, we will explore the language of science and how it organises its highly uncommon sense knowledge. Scientific language has been explored since the earliest days of Systemic Functional Linguistics with research continuing to expand to this day. A key feature of this research is its wide-ranging view, encompassing multiple perspectives on scientific meaning-making. This course will focus on scientific discourse from three key perspectives in SFL. First, we will explore the key linguistic features of scientific language in terms of ideational grammatical metaphor and technicality. This will enable a window into seeing how scientific language works in terms of both lexicogrammar and (discourse) semantics. Second, we will explore scientific language in terms of the particular register patterns that occur – focusing in particular on its organisation through field – as well as the typical genres that are found in science. Finally, we will look at scientific discourse multimodality, considering the way science uses its range of images, diagrams, symbols and formalisms to construe its knowledge. For each of these perspectives, we will be concerned with how science manages to construe uncommon sense knowledge that allows it to explain, describe and predict the outside world. At the end of the course, you will have a cutting-edge knowledge of scientific language and discourse, and a range of analytical tools for tackling complex scientific texts.

Day 1 Abstract

On this first day, we will focus on certain key lexicogrammatical and (discourse) semantic features of scientific discourse. In particular we will explore the role of ideational grammatical metaphor in packaging meaning in texts. This will involve stepping through both how experiential metaphors are built in the text (such as through nominalisation), and how they can be connected through logical metaphors. We will compare this to another key feature of scientific language, technicality, and the different ways that these linguistic resources are built. Throughout this session, we will explore these features from the perspective of both lexicogrammar (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014) and (discourse) semantics (using Hao’s 2020 model, which builds upon Halliday and Matthiessen 1999), as well as how they work to build text (drawing on Halliday 2004, Halliday and Martin 1993, Martin and Veel 1998; Maton, Martin and Doran 2021).

Day 2 Abstract

On the second day, we will re-examine scientific language from the perspective of context. In particular, we will look at the registers and genres of science and the role they play in building knowledge (we will explore this using the stratified model of context given in Martin and Rose 2008). As far as genre is concerned, we will focus on how different families of genres – explanations, reports and procedures – perform different functions, drawing on the key accounts given in Martin and Rose 2008 and Rose et al. 1992. As far as register is concerned, we will explore how these different genres organise different parameters of field – activities that organise the dynamic unfolding of events, taxonomies that present relations between items, properties that can be graded and arrayed, and interdependency relations between them all (drawing on the model of field in Doran and Martin 2021). Throughout, we will link each of these register and genre patterns with the (discourse) semantic and lexicogrammatical perspectives introduced on Day 1.

Day 3 Abstract

On the final day, we will complement our linguistic perspective by looking at the multimodal discourse of science. We will focus in particular on the role of images and symbolic formalisms such as mathematics and various chemical formulas and equations. We will see that these are crucial components of scientific discourse, and ones that students must master in order to be successful in science. We will consider why these images and symbolisms are used in science, how they organise their meanings and how this complements scientific language (drawing on O’Halloran 2005, Doran 2018, Kress and van Leeuwen 2021, Yu 2021, and ongoing work by J. R. Martin and Len Unsworth on images).

References:

Doran, Y. J. (2018) The Discourse of Physics: Building Knowledge through Language, Mathematics and Images. London: Routledge.

Doran, Y. J. and Martin, J. R. (2021) Field relations: Understanding scientific explanations. In K. Maton, J. R. Martin and Y. J. Doran (eds) Studying Science: Language, Knowledge, Pedagogy. London: Routledge.

Halliday, M. A. K. (2004) The Language of Science. Volume 5 in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R. (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Farmer.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999) Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.

Hao, J. (2020) Analysing Scientific Discourse from a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective: A Framework for Exploring Knowledge-Building in Biology. London: Routledge.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2021) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. 3^rd Ed. London: Routledge.

Martin, J. R. and Rose, D. (2008) Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London: Continuum.

Martin, J. R. and Veel, R. (1998) Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourse of Science. London: Routledge.

Maton, K., Martin, J. R. and Doran, Y. J. (2021) Teaching Science: Knowledge, Language, Pedagogy. London: Routledge.

O’Halloran, K. L. (2005) Mathematical Discourse: Language, symbolism and visual images. London: Continuum.

Rose, D., McInnes, D. and Korner, H. (1992) Scientific Literacy (Literacy in Industry Research Report: Stage 1). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.

Yu, Z. (2021) Knowledge-Building of Chemistry in Secondary School Chemistry Textbooks: A Multisemiotic Perspective. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Tongji University, China.

    Y. J. Doran is a Research Fellow at The University of Sydney and from 2022 will be Senior Lecturer in Education at the Australian Catholic University. His research focuses on language, semiosis and education from the perspectives of Systemic Functional Linguistics and Legitimation Code Theory. His research has developed grammatical, discourse semantic, register and genre-based descriptions of mathematics, language (focusing on English and Sundanese), images and academic formalisms, as well as fine-grained analytical tools for understanding variations in knowledge practices. His most recent books include The Discourse of Physics (2018, Routledge) and the edited collections Teaching Science (2021, with Karl Maton and J. R. Martin, Routledge), Systemic Functional Language Description (2020, with J. R. Martin and Giacomo Figueredo) and Accessing Academic Discourse (2020, with J. R. Martin and Karl Maton).

3. EDWARD MCDONALD, Independent Scholar, Australia

Language as Sign System: The Materiality and Sociality of Human Language

    Halliday's seminal 1978 publication Language as Social Semiotic follows Saussure and Hjelmslev in regarding the semiotic nature of language as one of its key defining characteristics, and this viewpoint has provided one of the jumping-off points for the explosion of interest in multimodality in subsequent decades. However it could be argued that in this shift of focus to other semiotic systems around language, it is visual systems that have received the most attention, and for the most part in the context of their co-presence with language. In the process not only have other semiotic systems failed to be theorised in terms of their own affordances and meanings, being seen more as auxiliary to language, language has been unproblematically regarded as the interpretative grounding to these other systems, and the specific semiotic character of language itself has been rather neglected. In this workshop we will explore language as a semiotic system from the dual perspective of its material affordances, in its primary form of the human voice, and its social embeddedness, as a system that both reflects and construes the material and social worlds of its speakers. As a way of contextualising both the materiality and sociality of language, we will make a systematic comparison of language with music, as a system which semioticises the fundamental features of human embodiment in interestingly different ways, and whose meanings, while highly compatible with those of language, approach their common material and social worlds from quite distinct perspectives.

Day 1, 21 July

The singer’s text: accounting for an embodied, multimodal, performative semiotic system

The humble song, a feature of human cultures worldwide, is in fact a highly complex semiotic object, drawing on the two key semiotic systems that exploit the affordances of the human voice – language and music – as well as other embodied systems that operate alongside them, such as gesture, gaze, and dance. How might we as analysts account for this multimodal text in ways that give full theoretical due to the separate semiotic systems involved, as well as to their combination in performance? In this first session of the workshop we will address the affordances of the human voice as a semiotic medium, and explore its materiality on the expression plane, as well as its sociality on the interpretation plane. Drawing on the semiotic model of the human voice put forward by David Burrows (1990), which stresses “the unique capacity of vocal sound for rapidity of articulation in detachment from the world of enduring spatial objects”, we will attempt to account for the range of meanings expressed in a single song: the Irish folk song She moved through the fair. From the ballad genre of the verbal text, one whose plot incorporates significant “absences” and hence challenges for interpretation, to the simple ternary form of the musical text, balanced between the two tonal poles of “tonic” and “dominant”, we will see how the resources of the two semiotic systems are drawn upon, and how their meanings both reinforce and undercut each other.

Key words: interpretation; expression; voice; materiality; sociality

Day 2, 22 July

The analyst’s framework: the nature of embodiment and meaning in language and music

Drawing on our preliminary understanding of the semiotic affordances of the human voice gained in the first day’s session, we will move on to theorise more explicitly and systematically the organisation of the semiotic system of language in contrast with that of music. We will see how, although both systems semioticise the fundamental embodied affordances of breath, pulse and pitch, they do so in interestingly different ways. Stratificationally, music, similar to human protolanguage, is a classic example of a bistratal system of interpretation and expression – here tentatively labelled “e/motion” and “phonotactics” – while language features a third stratum, whereby the interpretation plane is split into meaning or “semantics” and wording or “lexicogrammar”. This goes together with the presence in language of a “line of arbitariness” between this double interpretation plane and the expression plane of sound or “phonology”, while music features no such “arbitrary” relation between meaning and sound. This suggests that while language, in order to function as a model of the human world, must be “set apart” from that world, music, by contrast “recreates” the processual nature of our experience as embodied beings, and this is one of the key differences in the kinds of meanings each system most naturally expresses. Since for the analyst, the first step is normally to “reduce” the multimodal text of speech or music to a monomodal written version, we will also consider the nature of “notation” in the broad sense, with the key insight here from musicology being that all such notation is only ever partial, with just enough information provided for a fluent user to recreate a “text” in “performance”, something which needs to be informed by familiarity with a particular performative tradition. Hence, far from the written form being an autonomous realisation of linguistic meanings, although as a visual text it does of course have distinct affordances not open to spoken texts, it depends on the prior existence of spoken performances which have become embedded in memory. We will examine some simple examples of musical notation and written text, and see what kinds of musical or linguistic features tend to be “notated” in each case and which are left to be supplied by the “performer”.

Key words: stratification; line of arbitariness; embodiment; performance; notation

Day 3, 23 July

Language and music as performative semiotics: system(s) and text

Comparing language and music as instances of systems which semioticise the human voice has a number of theoretical and practical benefits. On the one hand, it enables us to focus more specifically on the key features of human language from the viewpoint of both interpretation and expression, this being particularly significant because of the presence in many cultures of a whole other set of natural languages which exploit a quite different medium, the visual-gestural one, i.e., sign languages. On the other hand, it also “dethrones” language from what tends to be its unquestioned position as the “pattern” for all semiotic systems, a status which Saussure for one was wary of awarding it. But it also allows us to concentrate on a feature which often gets lost in linguistic analyses, depending so much as they do on “reducing” the multimodal linguistic text to a largely monomodal written form: that is, the performativity of both language and music. Although the history of musicology also shows tendencies to reduce the musical text to its notated version, it is much harder to argue away the fact of music’s performance in accounting for its semiotic power. In this final session we will examine a simplified version of what might be regarded as the multimodal text par excellence in the Western tradition: opera. Through a pared-down performance of part of the penultimate scene of Mozart & da Ponte’s opera Don Giovanni, the presenter will dramatise the “singer’s text” as a multimodal, multisemiotic, embodied performative text, and invite participants to reflect on not only the separate and joint contribution of the systems of language and music to that text, but on the simultaneous presence of many other semiotic modes which are crucial to the overall coherence of the performance.

Key words: performativity; multimodality; notation; system; text

4. MICK O’Donnell, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain

Introduction to Corpus-based Discourse Analysis for SFL

Our discourses are not randomly produced. Every utterance we make, every sentence we write, represents a set of linguistic choices as to what we are expressing and how we express it. These choices are not made only in relation to the experience we are at the moment expressing, but also reflect who we are, the immediate situation we are in, and the cultural background we are from.

Discourse Analysis often focuses on the single text, exploring how the text relates to its context of situation and context of culture. Critical Discourse analysis might explore how the text maintains or challenges the current power relations of its society. Corpus-based Discourse analysis (CBDA) moves beyond the single text. It stems from a dissatisfaction in the reaching of ad-hoc conclusions from single examples. CBDA prefers to reach conclusions based on patterns over large numbers of texts. It focuses on systematic correlations between linguistic choices and the individual, situational, or cultural context in which the texts are produced.

These three workshops will introduce the participants to the practice of using a corpus of texts to reveal deeper patterns in text. It will move from the exploration of more surface items over very large corpora (online concordancing), and move to the exploration of automatically produced functional analyses in smaller corpora (Transitivity, Mood and Theme). As even deeper aspects of language cannot be automated as yet, it will also explore the use of manual annotation of more semantic aspects to reveal patterns in smaller corpora.

Key words: Corpus Linguistics; Discourse Analysis; Systemic Functional Grammar; Contrastive Linguistics

Session 1: Introduction to Corpus-based Discourse Analysis

This workshop will introduce the practice of using a corpus of texts as the basis of discourse analysis, basing findings on patterns over large amounts of text, rather than on patterns found in a single text.

I will start by demonstrating how large online corpora (over 100 million words) can be used to establish patterns of lexical usage, or in some cases, grammatical usage. I will focus here firstly on changing lexical usage over time, and secondly, with grammatical differences over register/genre.

I will then introduce UAM Corpustool, software which allows you to build your own (smaller) corpora, for studies of particular registers/genres, at more functional levels of analysis. I will briefly show how to set up a project, how to assign register/genre features to each text, and then how to contrast them for various features of the text.

I will then demonstrate how the texts can be automatically annotated for Mood, Transitivity Theme, and Modality, and then how one can contrastively show registerial differences in these analyses.

Session 2: Automatic Analysis in UAM Corpustool

This session will be a workshop. Attendees need to bring a laptop. Participants will be provided with a small corpus of texts, and led through the process of introducing these to the corpus software, annotating the register and genre of the texts, and automatically annotating the texts for Transitivity, Mood and Theme. Participants will then be shown how to contrastively reveal the lexico-grammatical differences between registers/genres.

Session 3: Manual Analysis in UAM Corpustool

This session will also be a workshop. The more interesting aspects of language cannot be annotated by computers (yet!). This workshop will lead participants through the process of manually annotating a corpus of texts, so that patterns in deeper meanings can be revealed. For the workshop, we will explore patterns of evaluation (e.g., Appraisal Analysis) used by politicians, hopefully to reveal their underlying system of values.

Requirements: Students should bring their own laptop to the sessions. Chrome should be installed, and used in the sessions.

Mick O’Donnell is a Lecturer at Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. He is best known for his application of SFL in the areas of computational linguistics and corpus linguistics. He has been developing corpus annotation software for the last twenty-five years, including Systemic Coder, RSTTool and UAM Corpustool, all of which have been widely used. He initially worked in areas related to automatic text generation, syntactic parsing and dialogue systems, however since 2009, he has been focused more on exploring the EFL learning process via corpus analysis of learner writing. This includes both discovering critical learner gaps via error analysis, and also exploring what learners can do via automatic lexico-grammatical analysis. His research group are currently developing an online system for targeted individualized grammar learning.

47th International Systemic Functional Congress (ISFC 47)

18th China National Conference on Discourse Analysis (CNCDA 18)

Speakers and Speeches

(In Alphabetic Order of Family Names)

1. JOHN A. BATEMAN, University of Bremen, Germany

Challenges in Multimodality Research and the Need to Reconnect Theory, Empiricism and Practice

Research into multimodal artefacts and performances has long drawn on input from systemic-functional linguistics and several of the currently most established areas of multimodality studies exhibit a strong systemic-functional and social semiotic orientation. Expanding the targets of investigation to include objects as varied as face-to-face interaction, office buildings, films or websites is not, however, without difficulty. Whereas well developed methodologies are pursued within systemic-functional approaches to language in order to ensure close interactions between the development of linguistic theory, linguistic description, and the demands of appliability, such methodologies continue to have only a restricted influence on systemic-functional and social semiotic multimodality research. In this talk, I characterise some of the challenges raised in our ongoing work on multimodality and show how a far more explicit orientation to usable methodologies is essential for bringing the complexity encountered under control. In an important sense, this requires going `back to basics' concerning how any objects of analysis are to be made accessible to analysis in the first place. To help in this discussion, the talk will explore how notions from Legitimation Code Theory on the relation between ‘internal languages’ of theory and external ‘languages of description’ can help illuminate problems in conducting practical multimodality research as well. This analysis will be used to design a robust methodology for multimodality research that insists on a far closer orientation to empirical data, while also not compromising multimodality’s aims of engaging with ever broader cases of meaning-making practices. The discussion will then be used to reflect more generally on the relations between theory, practice and empirical investigations necessary for effective theory development.

Key words: empirical cycle; complex data; multimodality; corpus methods; theoretical methods; Legitimation Code Theory

John Bateman received his PhD in Artificial Intelligence from the University of Edinburgh in 1986 and has worked since then in Japan, California, Germany and the UK specializing in functional, computational and multimodal linguistics. Since 1999, he has been a full Professor of Applied Linguistics in the English and Linguistics Departments of the University of Bremen, researching and teaching in the areas of functional linguistic approaches to multilingual and multimodal document design, multimodal semiotics, situated human-machine dialogue systems, natural language generation and analysis, and formal ontology. He has published widely in all these areas, including several introductory and survey articles on natural language generation, systemic-functional linguistics and, most recently, the theory and practice of multimodality research. In 2017, together with co-authors Janina Wildfeuer and Tuomo Hiippala, he produced a foundational introduction to the theory and practice of multimodality research.

2. David Butt, Macquarie University, Australia

Semantic Cycles: From Context to Lexicogrammar, and Back Again

Systemic Functional Linguistics and a number of congruent theories suggest that the meanings of a cultural group can be best described by the co-interpretation of 4 kinds of statement: statements of context; of semantics; of lexicogrammar; and, ultimately, of realization in phonological, graphological or other expressive substance. An account of meaning depends, in particular, on the realization statements between context, semantics, and lexicogrammar. While each of these levels can be economically described by Halliday’s system networks, nevertheless special conditions pertain to the development of the network ‘picture’ at each stratum.

There exists a wide variety of approaches as to what semantics needs to encompass – from rhetoric to folklore to formal logic and speech acts. Existing proposals are also notable for their diversity of ‘scale’ – from genre/language‘game’ to text to trope to act to semantic feature or even semantic prime (viz. in a semantic atomism). Accordingly, many linguistic theorists have sought to justify their categories with assumptions concerning evidence from theories concerning: human cognition (hence binomials like cognitive grammar and cognitive stylistics); natural categories (eg. of space, time, and causation); intention and affect (eg. speech acts, according to Searle); and ‘natural’ kinds (+/- animate; +/- male (!)).    

In Systemic Functional Theory, there are a number of proposals for linguistic semantics, each of which resonates with J.R. Firth’s notion that linguistics was just natural language “turned back on itself” (1962 [1957]). He combined this view with the dictum that one should look back at one’s language from the perspective of a typologically distant language, and that one should adopt a positively ‘ad hoc’ method. The emphasis in SFL has been on: 1) making explicit the differences of meaning within a specific language; 2) ordering the differences in degrees of delicacy, and with the possibility of defending a rank scale; and 3) relating the differences to generic or other social parameters (ie. respectively, to register: the variation in semantic resources in the activity; or to code: semantic variation in the users).