Fontaine (2017: 1-2):
As attractive as it may seem to model lexis as most delicate grammar, it is not without problems as will be discussed below. This paper introduces a new theoretical perspective on lexis in SFL theory by developing it within a different dimension, instantiation, which as will be shown, leads to a different approach – lexis as most local context. Looked at from the perspective of instantiation, lexis can be seen in terms of meaning potential and as I argue in this paper, through this lens, the SFL concept of ‘context’ can be extended to account for the relationship between a lexeme (or lemma) and its instantiation as a lexical item in text. This is a potentially exciting development since it can offer a bridge between the more textually oriented theory of SFL and the more lexically driven approaches to lexis as typically found within corpus linguistics.
Blogger Comments:
[1] To be clear, these problems arise from Fontaine's misunderstandings of lexis, including her confusion of word as lexical item with word as grammatical unit, as will be discussed in situ.
[2] To be clear, this is not a new theoretical perspective. In SFL Theory, the cline of instantiation already applies to lexis, as will be explained in situ.
[3] To be clear, from the perspective of the architecture of SFL Theory, the notion of 'lexis as most local context' is absurd, and derives from Fontaine's misunderstandings of lexis, context and instantiation, as will be demonstrated in situ.
[4] To be clear, from the perspective of the architecture of SFL Theory, the notion that the stratum of context, can be extended to account for the instantiation dimension of lexical items is absurd, not least because context is not language, but the culture as a semiotic system, whereas lexical items are language, on the stratum of lexicogrammar.
[5] To be clear, this is not a "potentially exciting development", since it is an absurdity deriving from Fontaine's multiple misunderstandings of SFL Theory, as will be demonstrated in situ.