Despite the widespread application of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) in various text analyses, there exists a dearth of reviews concerning critical syntactic issues within SFG. These syntactic challenges stem primarily from its fundamental conceptual framework—The semantic approach to handling grammar. This theoretical framework seems to intertwine the syntactic capacity and semantic role in text analysis, two of the three levels in syntactic examination. Consequently, it creates inconsistencies in defining the syntactic unit under investigation within a clause and also in characterizing numerous terms. This paper offers a general overview of both syntactic and semantic issues, particularly focusing on problems evident in the Mood system, notably the term “Complement”. It does not delve into a comprehensive and systematic analysis of each problem; rather, it aims to highlight the existence of several unresolved issues within the theory of SFG itself. Therefore, there is a need for further scholarly attention and advocacy within the SFG framework, specifically directed towards addressing theoretical grammatical and syntactic challenges.
References
[1]
Aarts, B. (2001). English Syntax and Argumentation (2nd ed.). Palgrave.
[2]
Al-Luhaibi, A. E., & Al-Jashami, R. A. (2023). A Another Look at Thematization of Complement in English from Functional Linguistic Perspective. Transcultural Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4. https://doi.org/10.21608/tjhss.2023.292076
[3]
Alqarni, M. (2021). The Syntax of PP-Adverbs within English Determiner Phrases. English Language & Linguistics, 25, 325-345. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674320000088
[4]
Berry, M. (2004). Patterns of Grammar Change in the History of English: A Corpus-Based Approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[5]
Biber, D. (1999). Complement Clause Constructions in Spoken and Written English. In R. Hickey (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Language Variation and Change (pp. 103-122). Cambridge University Press.
[6]
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (1995). The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach. Arnold.
[7]
Bloor, T., & M. Brool. (2004). The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach (2nd ed.). Arnorld.
[8]
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., & Yallop, C. (2000). Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer’s Guide. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
[9]
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112316009
[10]
Cornish, F. (2018). Revisiting the System of English Relative Clauses: Structure, Semantics, Discourse Functionality. English Language & Linguistics, 22, 431-456. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067431700003X
[11]
DiSciullo, A. M. (Ed.) (2003). Asymmetry in Grammar: Volume 1, Syntax and Semantics. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.57.01dis
[12]
Dixon, R. W. M. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611896
[13]
Downing, A., & Locke, P. (2006). English Grammar: A University Course (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203087640
[14]
Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics (2nd ed.). Continuum.
[15]
Fawcett, R. P. (2000). A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.206
[16]
Fries, P. H. (1983). On the Status of Syntactic Structures in Systemic Linguistics. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, 1, 1-21.
[17]
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press.
[18]
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of language and Meaning. Edward Arnold.
[19]
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
[20]
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). Arnold.
[21]
Halliday, M. A. K. (2014). Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771
[22]
Halliday, M. A. K., & Mathiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. Continuum.
[23]
Halliday, M. A. K., & Mathiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). Arnorld.
[24]
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771
[25]
Hasan, R. (1985). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford University Press.
[26]
Kusmanto, J. (2011). Refine-Tuning Imperfect Grammatical Analyses of SLF for More Accurate Interpretation: Two Explorative Cases. In F. H. Tomasowa, & S. Muttaqin (Eds.), Systemic Functional Linguistics: Applied and Multiculturalism. Aditya Media.
[27]
Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59
[28]
Martin, J. R. (2013). Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences: Complementarity, Suppleness, and the Functional Perspective. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[29]
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2013). Systemic Functional Grammar: A Next Step into the Theory (3rd ed.). Equinox Publishing.
[30]
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K., & Lam, M. (2010). Key Terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. Continuum.
[31]
Subroto, E. (2011). Pengantar Studi Semantik dan Pragmatik 1. Cakrawala Media.
[32]
Tesnière, L. (1959). éléments de syntaxe structurale. Klincksieck.
[33]
Thompson, G. (2014). Introducing Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203785270
[34]
Ventola, E. (1991). Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses. Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883527
