Idea Clause Projected By Impinging Mental Process Clause

it	struck	her	that	God	is	a metaphor
Subject	Finite/Predicator	Complement	‘	Subject	Finite	Complement
	Process: mental: cognition	Senser	‘	Carrier	Process: relational	Attribute

cf

it	surprised	her	that God is a metaphor
Sub-	Finite/Predicator	Complement	-ject
Pheno-	Process: mental: emotion (?)	Senser	-menon

Note that difference here lies in the fact that, in the first example, the mental clause projects the attributive clause into "semiotic existence", whereas in the second example, the attributive clause already existed as a pre-projected fact which caused the Senser to be surprised.

Verb Vs Process Type

she	felt (touched)	the cloth
Actor	Process: material	Goal

she	felt (perceived)	the cloth
Senser	Process: mental: perception	Phenomenon: material

she	felt	sad
Carrier	Process: attributive: intensive	Attribute: emotive

she	felt	keen
Carrier	Process: attributive: intensive	Attribute: desiderative

she	felt	intelligent
Carrier	Process: attributive: intensive	Attribute: cognitive

she	felt	observed
Carrier	Process: attributive: intensive	Attribute: behavioural

'Surprise' Serving As Mental Process Of The Impinging Type

with regard to the beautiful yet morally repugnant artwork	her lack of emotional reaction	surprised	her
Matter	Phenomenon	Process: mental	Senser

Encoding Identifying Clause With Assignment By Cognitive Mental Projection

languages	construe	meaning	as	either lexical or grammatical
Assigner	Process	Value/Identified		Token/Identifier