Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:51:30.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes on transitivity and theme in English Part 3

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

M. A. K. Halliday
M. A. K. Halliday
Affiliation:
Department of General Linguisties, University College, London W.C.1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Previous parts of this paper have been concerned with two areas in the syntax of the English clause: Part 1 with transitivity, Part 2 with theme. Transitivity is defined as relating to the experiential component of meaning (or ‘cognitive’, though this term is not really appropriate since all components involve a cognitive stratum); the discussion has been confined to the expression of processes and the participants therein – syntactically, those functions having in general verbal and nominal realizations – although a full treatment of the experiential component in the syntax of the clause would take account of other features, the expression of time and place and other adjuncts to and conditions on the process. Theme is related to the discoursal, or informational, component; under this heading are brought together the principal options whereby the speaker introduces structure into the discourse and (in the ideal case) ensures ‘comprehension’ – the recognition of the text as a text, and its interpretation along predicted lines.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , September 1968 , pp. 179 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Curme, George O. (1931). Syntax. (Volume 111 of Curme, George O. and Kurath, Hans, A Grammar of the English Language.) New York: Heath.Google Scholar
Daneš, F. (1964). A three-level approach to syntax. TLP 1. 225–240.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. (1966). Toward a Modern Theory of Case. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University Research Foundation Project on Linguistic Analysis, Report 13. 1–24.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Grammar, Society and the Noun. (Inaugural lecture.) London: H. K. Lewis (for University College London).Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D., Hudson, R. A., Winter, Eugene and Henrici, A. (1968). Sentence and Clause in Scientific English. University College London, Communication Research Centre: Report of the O.S.T.I. Programme in the Linguistic Properties of Scientific English.Google Scholar
Lyons, John (1966). Towards a ‘notional’ theory of the ‘parts of speech’. JL 2. 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pegge, Samuel (1814). Anecdotes of the English Language, Chiefly Regarding the Local Dialect of London and its Environs. London: Nichols, Son & Bentley.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara M. H. (1962). Modern English Structure. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry (1891). A New English Grammar, Part I: Introduction, Phonology and Accidence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry (1898). A New English Grammar, Part II: Syntax. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar