Giving Priority To Form Over Function

Martin (2013: 22):

As a final step we can consider adding CASE to the system, and so distinguish between pronouns which reference the nub of the argument (grammatically the Subject of a clause) and those which don't (grammatically the Complement of a clause or prepositional phrase, or the 'subject' of a non-finite clause) — cf. She noticed him texting me for them.

I, she, he, it, you, we, they

me, him, her, us them

Fortunately you remains the odd one out, since it doesn't distinguish either NUMBER or CASE. That effectively leaves us with the problem of it, which is [singular] and [neuter], as we saw above. As far as NUMBER and GENDER are concerned it is a regular part of the system; but as far as CASE is concerned it is an exception.

 Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, 'case' is a formal category, not a functional one, so it is misleading to present it as a system in a work purporting to be 'a next step' into Systemic Functional Grammar.

[2] To be clear, distinguishing between pronouns is distinguishing between forms, not functions, so it is misleading to present them as features in a system in a work purporting to be 'a next step' into Systemic Functional Grammar.

[3] This is misleading. Pronouns don't reference the Subject; the nominal group in which a pronoun figures realises the Subject. Such a pronoun references an entity elsewhere — either (endophorically) in the text, or (exophorically) in the environment of a text.

[4] This is misleading because it uses the opposite methodology to that of Systemic Functional Grammar. That is, it gives priority to the view 'from below', form, instead of the view 'from above', function.