2012
DOI: 10.1590/s0102-44502012000300002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systemic Functional Linguistics as appliable linguistics: social accountability and critical approaches

Abstract: This article is concerned with the relationship between Systemic FunctionalLinguistics (SFL)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(11 reference statements)
0
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The position we sought to illustrate is that an integrative approach to generic and ideological knowledge about language enables socially relevant discussions to take place in the process of mediating access to academic discursive practices. Such integration demands adoption of an 'appliable' theory of language capable of describing texts as semiotic processes and cultural artifacts, and congeniality with the principles of a logocentric pedagogy which privileges discussions around texts and the social values they legitimate (Matthiessen, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The position we sought to illustrate is that an integrative approach to generic and ideological knowledge about language enables socially relevant discussions to take place in the process of mediating access to academic discursive practices. Such integration demands adoption of an 'appliable' theory of language capable of describing texts as semiotic processes and cultural artifacts, and congeniality with the principles of a logocentric pedagogy which privileges discussions around texts and the social values they legitimate (Matthiessen, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This integrative approach affords the possibility of specifi c moves in classroom interaction to foreground one component over another, as deemed necessary. In pursuing such an approach, the linguistic theory employed to mediate learners' exposure to genres and ideologies should be 'applicable': it should be a metalanguage designed to cope with the complexity of language in naturally occurring text, rather than to disregard it in favor of parsimony (Matthiessen, 2012). These principles (integrativeness and applicability) should, in our view, be complemented by a focus on informed critique of the linguistic mechanisms supporting ideological manipulation coming from diverse sources, avoiding political polarization or indoctrination.…”
Section: Genre Pedagogy and Critical Literacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As an alternative, Berry proposes a multilayered framework of analysis based on language metafunctions developed by Halliday and his disciples and followers (see e.g. Martin, 1985;Matthiessen, 2012). Instead of IRF, Berry proposed a different system of exchange network and representation as Dk1 ^ K2 ^ K1 ^ K2f ^ K1f, in which if K stands for knowledge or knower, 1 for primary, and 2 for secondary and D for delaying and ^ for followed by, the representation may be read as the teacher may sometimes delay his/her role as the primary knower in the interaction (Dk1), or ask question rather than giving/transferring information.…”
Section: Analyzing LImentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SRT is combined with transitivity analysis (Matthiessen and Halliday, 1997) as a means of offering an account of agency that is predicated on examining the 'choices' that speakers (in our case journalists and commentators writing about AMR) make when constructing sentences and making meaning. Transitivity analysis has offered a systematic method for examining how discourses at the macro level are formulated by language constructs at the clausal level, which has been influential in critical discourse analysis studies (e.g., Fairclough, 1992;Fowler, 1996;Matthiessen, 2012;Van Dijk, 2002). The approach considers the clause in terms of the 'process' (event or state) that is being described, the participants involved in the process and the circumstances associated with the process.…”
Section: Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%