Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (2000) 20, l16-126. Printed in ...

AnnualReviewof AppliedLinguistics(2000)20, l16-126. Printedin the USA.

Copyrighto 2000CambridgeUniversityPress0267-1905/00

$9.50

DESIGN AND PRACTICE: ENACTING FTJNCTIONALLINGUISTICS

JamesR. Martin

LINGUISTICSAS SOCIALACTION

I havetriedto practicelinguisticsasa form of socialaction,a practice

cannotbe otherthanideologically

whichHalliday(e.g., 1985)hassuggested

the linguisticsvs. appliedlinguisticopposition

committed.This practicedissolves

hegemonyof Americanformalism-whose

to

the

which hasevolvedin response

idealizingreductivitycomesnowherenearservingthe needsof languageusersand

theory

their aidsaroundthe world. In its stead,linguisticsas socialactionengages

with practicein a dialecticwherebytheoryinformspracticewhich, in turn,

reboundson theory,recursively,asmoreeffectivewaysof interveningin various

processes

aredesigned(Martin 1997;1998a).My own experience

of semogenesis

hasbeenmainly in the field of literacy,especiallyof writing

of this engagement

ilevelopmentin primary and secondaryschool. Accordingly,I'll draw on this

the sub-field'WritingandLiteracy,'writingas a linguist

experience

to address

as

working acrosswhat is generallyreadand hasbeenincreasinglyinstitutionalized

an appliedvs. theoreticalfrontier.

WRITING DEVELOPMENT

literacyresearchto which I am referringevolvedas

The transdisciplinary

an actionresearchprojectin and aroundSydneyfrom 1979(reviewedin Christie

1992,CopeandKalantzis1993,Martin 1993:1998b,Rothery1989;1996),

involvingat key stagesthe LinguisticsDepartmentat the Universityof Sydneyand

Schools

the MetropolitanEastRegionof the New SouthWalesDisadvantaged

linguists,wasto intervenein the processof

program. Our goal,aseducational

in primaryand secondaryschoolacrossvariousdepthsof

writing development

wasconcerned,we attemptedto providestudentswith

time. As far as logogenesis

knowledgeaboutlanguage(Carter1996)that they couldusein reading,writing,

we workedwith teacherson the designof

and editing. As for ontogenesis,

curriculum(learnerpathways)andpedagogy(classroomactivity). Finally, with

116

DESIGNAND PRACTICE:ENACTINGFUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS

tl7

respectto phylogenesis,

we werecommittedto a redistributionof literacyresources

(Fairclough1992)which we hopedwould

andcritical languageawareness

emancipate

the meaningpotentialof the studentswe wereworking with, with a

view to giving themwaysof redesigningtheir world. To date,we havehad some

impacton the first two of theseframesfor intervention;only time will tell the

extentto which the work hasbeensociallyempoweringfor the non-mainstream

studentsinvolved.

To inform our interventions,we drew on the functionalmodelof language

in socialcontextevolvingaroundthe work of Halliday(1994),especiallythe

notionof genre(Martin 1992).r Genrewasusedto redesignboth curriculumand

pedagogy.As far as curriculumwasconcerned,

we workedin secondary

schools

for example,to mapdisciplines

as systemsof genres(e.g., Coffin 1996;1997,

Veel and Coffin 1996for secondaryschoolhistory). From thesemaps,we

developedlearnerpathways2

as a guidefor movingstudentsthroughthe uncommon

sensediscourses

of the discipline. Our secondaryschoolhistorypathwayis

outlinedin Table1.

The pathwaybeginswith variousrecountgenresdesignedto reconstruct

personaland vicariousexperience;it moveson throughgenresconcernedwith

genres;and it

explainingcauseandeffect;it continueswith argumentative

culminateswith Foucauldiangenealogy.(The generalstagesin eachgenreare

indicatedin brackets.)Onecritical factorin this development

is the mobilization

of grammatical

metaphor(Halliday1994;1998,HallidayandMartin 1993,Martin

qualities,and

for nominalizingprocesses,

1993,Martin andVeel 1998) resources

modalassessments

resources

for

realizing

logico-semantic

inside

and

connections

the clause. Our work in this projectconvincedus that learningto readand write

metaphorwasthe mainlinguistictask

heavilydependent

on grammatical

discourse

for teachersand studentsin secondaryschool;it is throughgrammaticalmetaphor

that everydisciplineand institutionwe consideredevolvesthe discourseswhich

construespecializedknowledgeand regulatepopulations(Christieand Martin

1997).

GENRE

INFORMAL DESCRIPTION

KEY LINGUISTICFEATURES

(Halliday 1994, Martin 1992)

agnateto story geffes;

what happenedto me

borderline- agnateto

story & factualgenres;

story of my life [oral

historyl

in time; lst person;

sequence

specificparticipants

lstagingl

personalrecount

IOrientation^Record]

autobiographical

recount

IOrientation^Record]

settingin time; lst person;

specificparticipants

else's settingin time; 3rd person

biographicalrecount storyof someone

IOrientation^Record]

life

(specific);other specific&

genericparticiDants

118 J. R. MARTIN

settingin time; 3rd person;

mainly genericparticipants

[Background^Record]

(but specificgreat 'men')

naturalizinglinearization incongruentexternalcausal

historical account;

unfolding;3rd person;mainly

[Background^Account] renderingthe grand

genericparticipants;prosodic

narrativeinevitable

iudgement

notion

complexifying

of

internalorganizationof

factorial explanation

what leadson to/from

factors;factorsexternally

[Outcome^Factors]

what

linked to outcome:3rd

person;mainly generic

participants

complexif,iingnotionof

internalorganizationof

consequential

what leadson to/from

factors;consequences

explanation

what; hypothetical

externallylinked to input; 3rd

[Input^Consequences]

variant- if x, thenthese person;mainly generic

participants

outcomes

problematic

internalconjunctionkeying on

exposltron- oneinterpretation

that

needs

thesis

sided;promote

^Arguments]

justifying

[Thesis

else's

internalconjunctionkeyingon

someone

challenge- oneproblematic

thesis

sided:rebut

interpretationthat needs

IPosition^Rebuttal]

demolishing

internalconjunctionkeyingon

more than one

discussion multiinterpretation

considered

thesis;

* internalorganization

sided;adjudicate

^

^

of pointsof view

IIssue Sides Resolution]

replacenaturalizing

avoidingreductive

deconstruction

time/causeexplanationwith

temporal& causal

IFoucault]

'spatial'discursiveformation

linearizationinto grand

narrative,effacingvoices realizingepisteme

of the 'other'...

historical recount;

establishingthe time line

of the grand narrative

Table l.: lrarner pathwayfor secondaryschoolhistorygenres(by genre[including

stagingland languagefeatures)

As for pedagogy,in orderto providethe scaffoldingneededto move

cyclewasdeveloped,and

learnersalongpathwaysof this kind, a teaching/learning

(from

Figure

1

Rotheryand

the

lines

of

refinedfor secondaryschoolalong

Stenglin1994:8). In this model,settingup the socialcontextof the genreand

acrossall stagesof the model

are generalized

buildingfield-knowledge

Construction).The point of

(Deconstruction,

JointConstruction,andIndependent

about

of sharedunderstandings

the instrumentality

this cycle is to emphasize

in their culturalcontextsfor scaffoldingto proceed

disciplines/institutions

(Martin

1998b). In orderto establisheffectivezonesof proximal

effectively

in otherwords,the knowledgethatteachersand studentscan all

development,

assumeis vital.

DESIGN AND PRACTICE: ENACTING FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS

Figure 1. A teaching/learning

cycle for secondaryschool(from Rotheryand

Stenglin1994:8)

cot{rgx}

Sernnc

irsonsTRtcQa,

a

IL

x

-u

-l

ct

CJ

gt

2F

F.

I ct,

=

gt

I

o

ct

I

L

a /cr

C':l

=

,rr-

x

-/

s""r/rF/

_gzs7

6v,t

In addition,the goal of the model is explicitly orientedto both control of,

and a critical orientationto, the discourseunder consideration.This goal reflectsa

concernthat genresbe taughtas part of a critical languageawarenessprogram

(Fairclough1992,Hasanand Williams 1996)which gives studentsoppornrnitiesto

critique and renovategenresalongsidemobilizing them to interrogatepower

relationsin the culture (Christieand Misson 1998).

Bernstein'swork on pedagogicdiscourse(Bernstein1990,Christie1998)

providesa model for consideringthis pedagogyin relationto alternativepositions

in their idealizedform, as reviewedfor ARAL in Martin (1993).

119

I2O J. R. MARTIN

Janks(in press)suggestsa comprehensiveframework for assessing

languagein educationinterventionsof this kind, organizedaroundthe issuesof

access,dominance,diversity, and design. In relation to genre-basedinitiatives,

accessfocusesattentionon the extent to which pedagogyand curriculum

redistributecontrol of genresto non-mainstreamgroups. Dominancedealswith

issuesof power-which genresare selected,how critically is their social function

addressed?Diversi4r considersthe range and hybridity of subjectivitiesinvolved in

institutional learning, for example,divergentorientationsto literacy, and the

problem of valuing non-mainstreamdiscoursesat the sametime as offering access

to mainstreamones. Design takesup the questionof creativify and innovation:

Does renovationindeeddependon masteryof a genre, and how do we provide

oppornrnitiesfor studentsto rework genresin line with their interestsand goals?

Our experienceis that the approachto curriculum and pedagogyoutlined above is

flexible enoughto addressissuesof this kind (Callow 1999). Naturally, some

measureof redesignis to be expectedas it is recontextualizedin new social

environments,for example,the challengeof reconstructionin South Africa, as

outlinedby Janks.

BEYOND GENRE

Functionallinguistics is concernedwith relating languageto the social in a

motivatedway. The utility of genretheory in languageeducationderives from its

articulationas recurrentconfigurationsof meanings,so that the social (genres)can

be naturally relatedto language(meanings). Interventionsin Australia have tended

to move into educationfrom the genre, and then move on to look more closely at

meaningas resourcespermit. Underpinninggenrewith functionalgrammar has

turned out to be a vexing political issue,with the print and electronicmedia and

politicians voicing a variety of reactionaryconcerns(seeMartin 1997 for

discussion). And not much progresshas beenmadewith bringing discourse

analysis(e.g., cohesion,following Martin 1992)and registeranalysis(e.g.,

Christie and Martin 1997, Eggins and Slade 1997, Martin and Veel 1989) into

schoolsby way of mediatingthe connectionbetweengrammaticalmeaningand

geffe. Clearly, the next phaseof interventionwill have to addressthe problem of

constructingfunctional grammar, discourseanalysis,and registeranalysisas tools

for teachersand sfudentsto use when relating languageto the social, whether as

part of literacy programs, or as subject-specificlearning acrossthe curriculum.

Hasan'selaborationof Bernstein'swork on codingorientations(e.g., Hasan 1996)

will also have a critical role to play, especiallyin relation to Janks' diversity issue

noted above.

Strong contributionsare also to be expectedin the area of evaluative

language(Martin 1999bon appraisal),where frameworkshave now been

developedthat systematicallyaccountfor the constructionof value in texts. This

focus on attitude(embracingaffect, ethics, and aesthetics)helps balancethe

ideationalbias which often colors discourseanalysis,especiallywhere factual

writing is concerned. It also calls into focus the issueof subjectivityand reading

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download