Functions of language in two frameworks

• William C. Mann ^[2] ; Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen ^[1]
  1. [1] University of Sydney

     University of Sydney

     Australia

     
  2. [2] Nairobi, Kenya
• Localización: Word: Journal of the International Linguistic Association, ISSN-e 2373-5112, ISSN 0043-7956, Vol. 42, Nº 3, 1991, págs. 231-249
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Some of the most central problems in linguistics concern how language fills its characteristic roles: how it is useful, the nature and extent of its translatability, and the nature of the integrity of texts. Within linguistics there are many kinds of description that bear on such questions, one kind being the description of language in terms of its functions. Comparing these functional descriptions, the various descriptions do not all cover the same ground. Rather, each is quite partial, and appropriate ways to combine them into a more comprehensive account are not evident. It is hard to know wherein they conflict, wherein they agree, and where they simply speak of different things.

    This paper is part of an effort to relate various accounts. It is the first in a pair of papers that compare two particular accounts: Rhetorical Structure Theory and Systemic Linguistics.

    Rhetorical Structure Theory, initially formulated in 1983, describes texts in terms of functionally-defined relations that hold between their parts. Systemic Linguistics is a much more comprehensive view of language initiated in the early 1960s. Where the two approaches are comparable, systemic linguistics describes texts in terms of categories of processes which the texts perform.

    The paper focus on correlating the relations used in rhetorical structure theory with the categories of function found in systemic linguistics. The correlation employs descriptions of speakers’ intentions in an essential way. A surprisingly strong correlation results.