"Meaning Potential Is Construed By Systems Of Language Choice"

Fontaine (2017: 6):

The relationship between context and lexicogrammatical systems is still being developed within SFL. For the position taken in this paper, the relationship of instantiation may provide one way to develop an account of lexical representation within the framework. The concept of construal is also significant. Halliday (1991:282) explains that “the culture is construed by systems of language choice; the situation is construed by patterns of language use”. Based on Fig. 2, this statement can be rephrased in more abstract general terms as follows: the meaning potential is construed by systems of language choice; the instance is construed by patterns of language use. This is a point we will come back to in the next section when considering meaning potential and instance in terms of lexical representation.

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is misleading, because it is untrue. In SFL Theory, the "relationship between context and lexicogrammar" is precisely specified, as the relation between levels in a hierarchy of symbolic abstraction: realisation (elaborating identification). On this model, taking metaredundancy into account, context is realised by the realisation of semantics in lexicogrammar.

[2] To be clear, the "relationship of instantiation" is the relation between potential and instance at a given level of symbolic abstraction. As such, this says nothing about relations between different levels of abstraction, such as context and lexicogrammar.

[3] As previously explained, the notion of lexical representation, which assumes a mental lexicon, is inconsistent with both SFL Theory and 'the known facts of human biology and brain science' (Edelman: 1989: 152, 228, 234).

[4] To be clear, by 'construal' Halliday means 'intellectual construction', and the meaning of the Halliday quote is that culture (context as potential) is an intellectual construction of systems of language (language as potential) and situation (context as instance) is an intellectual construction of patterns of language use (language as instance). That is, Halliday here relates context to language at the two poles of the cline of instantiation.

[5] This seriously misunderstands the Halliday quote. Fontaine's interpretation is that language as potential ('meaning potential') is an intellectual construction of language as potential ('systems of language choice') and that language as instance ('the instance') is an intellectual construction of language as instance ('patterns of language use'). That is, Fontaine's tautological gloss omits Halliday's crucial point that context is an intellectual construction of language.