Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) stands as a prominent
framework for analysing and understanding texts across various linguistic
contexts. Its application has been extensive, ranging from linguistic research
to practical applications such as language teaching and computational
linguistics. However, despite its widespread use, there exists a noticeable gap
in the literature concerning critical syntactic issues within the framework. At
the heart of these issues lies the foundational theoretical framework of SFG,
which prioritises a semantic approach to grammar. Unlike some other linguistic
theories that primarily focus on syntax as a separate domain from semantics,
SFG integrates both syntactic structure and semantic meaning into its
analytical framework. While this integration can offer valuable insights into
how language functions in communication, it also presents challenges,
particularly in defining and analysing syntactic units within clauses. One of
the primary areas of concern highlighted in the passage is the Mood system
within SFG. The Mood system encompasses elements such as the Subject, Finite,
and Predicator, which together express the functional meaning of a clause.
However, within this system, the term 'Complement' poses particular challenges.
In traditional grammatical frameworks, a complement typically refers to a
syntactic element that completes the meaning of a verb or other predicate.
However, within the SFG framework, the term 'Complement' may be used in a
broader sense, encompassing elements that fulfil various semantic roles within
a clause. This broad conceptualisation of 'Complement' within SFG can lead to
inconsistencies and ambiguity in its application. For instance, it may be
unclear whether a particular element should be categorised as a Complement or
as another syntactic or semantic unit within the clause. Additionally,
characterising terms within the SFG framework may vary across analyses, further
complicating the understanding and interpretation of syntactic structures.
While the passage does not conduct an exhaustive analysis of each syntactic
issue within SFG, it serves as a call to action for further scholarly attention
and advocacy within the framework. Addressing these theoretical grammatical and
syntactic challenges is essential for refining and strengthening SFG as a
linguistic theory. By fostering continued discussion, research, and refinement
within the SFG framework, scholars can work towards enhancing its clarity,
coherence, and applicability in the analysis of textual data.
Author(s) Details
Kwasi Opoku
Department of English, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology,
PMB, Kumasi, Ghana.
Stephen Kwaku Duah
Department of Languages and General Studies, University of Energy and
Natural Resources, Ghana.
Please see the book here :- https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/nicass/v5/980
No comments:
Post a Comment