You are on page 1of 10

Halliday

9 2 46
20123


201011Halliday


Halliday

H03 A 1672-9382(2012)02-0029-09

1935

Halliday201011 Firth

12

Halliday

Firth

Halliday

2011137

Firth1957b31-32
Sarangi & Coulthard2000xvi F i r t h

a n t i- HallidayFirth

d i s c o u r s eS a u s s u r e 1934

langueparolelangue

paroleFirth1935 Firth1957b5-6

conversationSaussure E-m a i l: j g w g q@

parole pku.edu.cn

Sarangi & CoulthardFirth F i r t h 195719301955

29

127

138

F i r t h198890

92

96 Halliday

HallidayFirth

1960

/ Halliday1960

Halliday2002a9-10

Halliday

Halliday2011137-8 Halliday2002b19

1976Halliday

H a s a n

BloomfieldChomsky

1985H a l l i d a y

H a l l i d a y

1985/1994x


Vol.9 No.2 (General Serial No.46)

Saussure


2
Mar. 2012

Halliday
F L C

30

9 2 46
20123

xxii

Halliday

3
20

Halliday

H a l l i d a y2005x v19671968

H a l l i d a y1967a38

1967b1991968179

xvi-vii

Halliday 2080Halliday

Halliday

xvii

H a l l i d a y2002a221

222

structure

Halliday c o h e r e n c ef u n c t i o nd e v e l o p m e n t

31
character235 Halliday

Halliday

Halliday

Firth

236 Halliday

Martin

237

246

Halliday

Martin19921

H a l l i d a y

M a r t i n 2009

M a r t i n2009

Halliday Halliday2011144
Vol.9 No.2 (General Serial No.46)

M a r t i n2009

Discourse studies

Martin 1992
Mar. 2012

Martin Rose 20032007


F L C

32

M a r t i n1992M a r t i n R o s e

2003/7 Martin2009160

9 2 46
20123
genre genre//

mode metaredundancy
field
register/ (realisation)

ideational textual
language
tenor
interpersonal

1 Metafunctions in relation to register and genre

MartinRose2003/7 2004Martin2009162-3

9. 2 M a r t i n

Martin & Rose2007309 g e n r e a n a l y s i s

M a r t i n Iedema1997aMartin1998

90 I e d e m a1997b

W h i t e1997

161 /

ideational semantics Martin2009163

participant identification M a r t i n2009

higher level units in

discourse162

register analysis M a r t i n2009154

M a r t i n M a r i n

E g g i n s 19921

& S l a d e 1997

O T o o l e1994

Kressvan Leeuwen1996van Leeuwen

J e w i t t2001

OHalloran1999a1999b2000
5
2005Halliday & Martin1993Martin &

Veel1998Unsworth1998Halliday Halliday

33
1977Coulthard & Brazil1979

S a c k s

SchegloffJeffersonPomerantz

7 Levinson1983286-94

Halliday2011138 L e v i n s o n

Halliday 1987

Halliday van DijkLongacre

H o r nW a r d2004

32

11

Thibault1987611

Halliday

stmanVerschueren10

102009

Hallidy 5

Hallidy2011138

Levinson1983

Sacks
Vol.9 No.2 (General Serial No.46)

Levinson1983284-5
Mar. 2012

van Dijk

1972Sinclair & Coulthard 1975


F L C

L o n g a c r e1976L a b o v & F a n s h e l

34

:

Chomsky,

9 2 46
20123

(2003: 145), ,
6

Halliday

Firth [1] Christie, F. & Martin, J. R. (eds). Genre and

Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace

Halliday and School[C]. London: Pinter (Open Linguistics

Series), 1997.

Martin [2] Coulthard, M. & Brazil, D. Exchange

structure[J]. Discourse Analysis Monographs, 5.

Martin2009164 Birmingham: Birmingham University, 1979.

[3] Eggins, S. & Slade, D. Analysing Casual

Conversation[M]. London: Cassell, 1997.

[4] Firth, J. R. The principles of phonetic notation

in descriptive grammar[Z]. 1934. Reprinted in

Firth 1957b.

[5] Firth, J. R. The technique of semantics[Z]. 1935.

Reprinted in Firth 1957b.

12 [6] Firth, J. R. A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930-

(201111, ) 1955[A]. 1957a.

( [7] Firth, J. R. Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951[Z].

)20111, London: Oxford University Press, 1957b.

10 [8] Halliday, M. A. K. Categories of the theory

(2011: 37-39) of grammar[J]. Word, 17 (3), 1961: 241-292.

Zellig Harris Reprinted in Halliday 2002a.

Halliday [9] Halliday, M. A. K. The linguistic study of

(macrosentence) literary texts[A]. Proceedings of the Ninth

(Halliday, 2002a : 221) International Congress of Linguists, 1964.

35
Reprinted in Halliday 2002b. Science: Literacy and Discursive Power[M].

[10] Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on transitivity London: Falmer (Critical Perspectives on

and theme in English. Part 1[J]. Journal of Literacy and Education), 1993.

Linguistics, 3 (1), 1967a: 37-81. Reprinted in [22] Halliday, M. A. K. & Webster, J. J. (eds).

Halliday 2005. Continuum Companian to Systemic Functional

[11] Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on transitivity Linguistics[C]. London: Continuum, 2009.

and theme in English. Part 2[J]. Journal of [23] H o r n , L . R . & Wa r d , G . H a n d b o o k o f

Linguistics, 3 (2), 1967b: 199-244. Reprinted in Pragmatics[M]. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

Halliday 2005. [24] Iedema, R. The language of administration:

[12] Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on transitivity organizing human activity in formal

and theme in English. Part 3[J]. Journal of institutions[A]. In Christie, F. & Martin, J. R.

Linguistics, 4 (2), 1968: 179-215. Reprinted in (eds). 1997a: 73-100.

Halliday 2005. [25] I e d e m a , R . T h e h i s t o r y o f t h e a c c i d e n t

[13] Halliday, M. A. K. Text semantics and clause news story[J]. Australian Review of Applied

grammar[A]. The Seventh LACUS Forum 1980, Linguistics, 1997b 20(2): 95-119.

1981. Reprinted in Halliday 2002a. [26] Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. Multimodal

[14] H a l l i d a y, M . A . K . A n I n t ro d u c t i o n t o Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary

Functional Grammar[M]. London: Edward Communication[M]. London: Arnold, 2001.

Arnold, 1985. (2nd ed. 1994) [27] L a b o v, W. & F a n s h e l , D . T h e r a p e u t i c

[15] Halliday, M. A. K. On Grammar[M]. London: Discourse: Psychotherapy of Conversation[M].

Continuum, 2002a. New York: Academic Press, 1977.

[16] Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic Studies of Text and [28] Levinson, S. C. Pragmatics[M]. Cambridge:

Discourse[M]. London: Continuum, 2002b. Cambridge University Press, 1983.

[17] Halliday, M. A. K. Representing the child [29] L o n g a c r e , R . E . A n A n a t o m y o f S p e e c h

as a semiotic being (one who means)[A]. In Sounds[M]. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press, 1976.

Foley, J. A. (ed). Language, Education and [30] Martin, J. R. English Text: System and Structure[M].

Discourse: Functional Approaches[C]. London: Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1992.

Continuum, 2004: 19-42. [31] Martin, J. R. Practice into theory: catalysing

[18] H a l l i d a y, M . A . K . S t u d i e s i n E n g l i s h change[A]. In Hunston, S. (ed). Language at

Language[M]. London: Continuum, 2005. Work[C]. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters (British


Vol.9 No.2 (General Serial No.46)

[19] Halliday, M. A. K. Studies in Applied Linguistics, 1998, 13: 151-67.

[J]. ( [32] Martin, J. R. Discourse studies[A]. In Halliday

), 2011(1): 137-46. & Webster (eds). 2009: 154-169.


Mar. 2012

[20] Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. Cohesion in [33] M a r t i n , J . R . & R o s e , D . Wo r k i n g w i t h

English[M]. London: Longman, 1976. Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause[M].


F L C

[21] Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. Writing London: Continuum, 2003.

36

[34] Martin, J. R. & Veel, R. (eds). Reading Science: [44] Unsworth, L. Sound explanations in school

Critical and Functional Perspectives on science: a functional linguistics perspective on

9 2 46
20123
Discourses of Science[C]. London & New York: effective apprenticing texts[J]. Linguistics and

Routledge, 1998. Education, 1998, 9(2): 199-226.

[35] OHalloran, K. L. Interdependence, interaction [45] v a n D i j k , T. A . S o m e A s p e c t s o f Te x t

and metaphor in multisemiotic texts[J]. Social Grammar[M]. The Hague: Mouton, 1972.

Semiotics, 1999a, 9(3): 317-54. [46] van Leeuwen, T. & Jewitt, C. Handbook of

[36] OHalloran, K. L. Towards a systemic functional Visual Analysis[M]. London: Sage, 2001.

analysis of multisemiotic Mathematics texts[J]. [47] White, P. R. R. Death, disruption and the moral

Semiotics, 1999b, 124(1/2): 1-29. order: the narrative impulse in mass hard news

[37] OHalloran, K. L. Classroom discourse in reporting. In Christie, F. & Martin, J. R. (eds).

Mathematics: a multisemiotic analysis[J]. 1997: 101-33.

Linguistics and Education, 2000, 10(3): 359-88. [48] . [A].

(Special Edition: Language and Other Semiotic (). [C]. :

Systems in Education). , 2003: 142-56

[38] OHalloran, K. L. Mathematical Discourse: [49] . [M]. :

Language, Symbolism and Visual Images[M]. , 2011.

London: Continuum, 2005.

[39] OToole, L. M. The Language of Displayed Halliday on Discourse Analysis and

Art[M]. London: Leicester University Press (a Disciplines Related

division of Pinter), 1994. Abstract: There is a deep-rooted connection

[40] stman, Jan-Ola & Verschueren, Jef. Handbook between systemic functional linguistics and

of Pragmatics Highlights[M]. Vols. 1-5. discourse analysis, a topic which Halliday has

Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. discussed many times. In November 2010, in the

[41] Sarangi, S. & Coulthard, M. Discourse and conference held at Tongji, he summarized his views

Social Life[M]. Harlow: Pearson Education on discourse analysis. In brief, Halliday argues

Limited, 2000. that discourse analysis is a part of linguistics in

[42] Sinclair, J. M. & Coulthard, R. M. Towards general and that a linguistic analysis of discourse

an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used implies that the text is being brought into relation

by Teachers and Pupils[M]. London: Oxford with the system of language that is, it is being

University Press, 1975. described in terms which form part of a general

[43] Thibault, P. J. An interview with Michael linguistic description of the lexicogrammar and

Halliday[A]. In Steele, R. & Threadgold, T. phonology of the language in which it is spoken

(eds). Language Topics: Essays in Honour of and/or written. This paper starts with Hallidays

Michael Halliday, Vols. I and II[C]. Amsterdam: speech and discusses the profound implications of

Benjamins, 1987, 599-627. (53)

37

Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1974. , 2007c.

[20] Wi t t g e n s t e i n , L u d w i g . P h i l o s o p h i c a l [32] . :

9 2 46
20123
Investigations [M]. . : [J]. , 2009, (6).

, 1996. [33] .

[21] Wolf, H. A cognitive Linguistic Approach to the [J]. , 2010(6).

Cultures of World Englishes: the Emergence of a [34] . :

New Model [A]. In Kristiansen G. & R. Dirven. [M]. : , 2004.

2008. [35] , . :

[22] . Kristiansen & Dirven (2008)

[MA]. [J]. , 2010(3).

, 2009. [36] .

[23] . [ M ] . : , [MA]. , 2008.

1982/2000.

[24] . 1844[M]. Cognitive Sociolinguistics

42. : , 1979. Abstract: The integration of CL with SL has

[25] . [A]. brought forth a new interdisciplinary CSL,

()[C]. : which, based on SL, has refreshed itself with some

, 2011. methods from CL, such as prototype category,

[26] . subjective cognition, usage-based model, construal,

4 000 metaphtonomy, etc. , then combining the social

[MA]. , 2008. and cognitive factors in language, and enlarging

[27] . [M]. : both SLs and CLs fields. The present paper

, 1995. contemporarily confines SCL in the principle of

[28] . [ J ] . , taking social reality as starting point, linguistic

2005, (5). meaning as center, real usage as direction, and

[29] . : making a deep insight into language variation,

[J]. (), 2007a, (1). community dialects, cultural models, ideology, bi-

[30] . VN lingual contrast, language policy from the viewpoint

: /eat of social and cognitive natures of language.

[J]. , 2007b, (2). K e y Wo r d s : C o g n i t i v e S o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s ;

[31] . [M]. : Sociolinguistics; CL; social nature; cognitive nature

(37)

his positioning of discourse analysis, the relations relation between pragmatics and discourse analysis.

between text and language system, text and clause, Key Words: discourse analysis; text; system;

discourse semantics and discourse analysis, and the pragmatics

53