Existential Clause With Marked Theme

Nowhere else	was	there	a joint like that
Location	Process		Existent
Adjunct	Finite	Subject	Complement
Theme	Rheme

Hypotactic Elaborating Clause Complex With Enclosed Clause

||| Preliminary GDP figures for the fourth quarter of 2006 and final figures for 2006 << released by the Bank of Korea on the 25th >> show that real GDP in 2006 totaled 757.94 trillion won || a 5% increase on the 2005 figure of 721.5 trillion won |||

a

Preliminary GDP figures [for the fourth quarter of 2006] and final figures [for 2006]	show	[[that real GDP in 2006 totaled 757.94 trillion won]]
Token/Identifier	Process: identifying	Value/Identified

=b

released	by the Bank of Korea	on the 25th
Process: material	Actor	Location

=c

a 5% increase [on the 2005 figure [of 721.5 trillion [[won]] ] ]

Attribute

Attributive Clause With Mental Assignment And Marked Theme

This	we	considered	a course [[to which it was not desirable [[that the leave [[that had been granted]] should be taken as extending]] ]]
Carrier	Attributor	Process: relational: intensive	Attribute
Medium	Agent	Process	Range
Complememt	Subject	Finite/Predicator	Complement
Theme: marked	Rheme

Attribute As Marked Theme

tempting	as	it	may be
Attribute		Carrier	Process: attributive
Theme	Rheme

Halliday & Matthiessen (2004: 419)

Verbal Vs Mental Projection Of Reports

she	told	him	to leave
a			“ b
Sayer	Process: verbal	Receiver	Process: material

she	wanted	him	to leave
a		‘ b
Senser	Process: mental	Actor	Process: material

See Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 130) for the grammatical argumentation.

Words And Meaning

Commonsense model: class membership

words	have	meaning
Carrier	Process: attributive: possessive	Attribute

Uncommonsense (SFL) model: identity

words	realise	meaning
Token	Process: identifying: intensive	Value

Verbal Not Behavioural

they	described	the new project	to the Board
Sayer	Process: verbal	Verbiage	Receiver

they	insulted	her	to her face
Sayer	Process: verbal	Target	Receiver

Viewed from 'roundabout', these are clear-cut verbal processes, since the configuration includes the verbal clause participants Verbiage, Receiver and Target.

Note that this is anomalously analysed as 'behavioural' in Deploying Functional Grammar (Martin, Matthiessen & Painter 2010: 125-6):

they	described	the new project	to the Board
Behaver	Process: behavioural	Verbiage	Receiver

they	insulted	her	to her face
Behaver	Process: behavioural	Target	Receiver

presumably on the assumption that the potential to project is a necessary condition of all verbal processes, ignoring the exceptional subtype of those that accept a Target.

Note that mixing transitivity functions this way — behavioural with verbal — complicates the model without adding any extra explanatory power, and compromises the valeur of the terms used for each configuration.

Material Not Behavioural

Even though 'solve' does not project, viewed 'from above', in terms of the meaning being realised, problem-solving is a cognitive mental process: coming to understand a semiotic phenomenon.

they	solved	the problem
Senser	Process: mental	Phenomenon

On the other hand, viewed 'from roundabout', such clauses can accept a Beneficiary — eg for the teacher — which is a participant in material, verbal and relational clauses only (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 293), thereby ruling out mental, behavioural and existential clauses.  Since the clause is clearly neither verbal nor relational, on this criterion, the clause is material.

they	solved	the problem
Actor	Process: material	Goal

So the clause combines features of mental and material processes, depending on the stratum of content — the level of symbolic abstraction — meaning or wording, it is viewed from.

Note that this is anomalously analysed as 'behavioural' in Deploying Functional Grammar (Martin, Matthiessen & Painter 2010: 125-6):

they	solved	the problem
Behaver	Process: behavioural	Phenomenon

While it is true that behavioural processes display aspects of both mental and material processes, the tension here is across strata, between semantics and lexicogrammar, not within lexicogrammar.

Creative Happenings Metaphorically Realised As Quoting Clause Nexus

the tyres	went	'screech!'
the little engine	went	'wheeee!’
the car	went	'bang!'
Sayer	Process: verbal		metaphorical
1		“2
Actor	Process: material	Scope	congruent

In Deploying Functional Grammar, these processes are analysed as behavioural rather than verbal, because 'it is not possible to have a Receiver in these clauses' (p125). This is despite the fact that these processes project and in a footnote (p124), the inability to project is used as a criterion for preferring a behavioural analysis over a verbal one.