This paper is a review of a journal by Lynne Young entitled Systemic Functional Linguistics. The need to develop language structurally to a well-understood form in recent society is vital for better interaction between individuals. The review of the SFL is considered under the following approach:
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
- Articulation of ideas acquired through readings the journal- the useful key sentences and phrases from the journal are adopted instead of only paraphrasing such to anchor the original work’s rendition;
- Acquired ideas are related to the development of a standpoint of the original work- and emphases on novel or useful ideas and familiar are highlighted.
The theme of the Systemic Functional Linguistics
The journal discusses briefly the rudiments of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) which are carved from the Prague School of Linguistics and J. R. Firth’s notable kinds of literature. This is followed by an explanation of the difference between SFL and the 1980 Chomskian tradition which happened shortly after a 1978 central book of Halliday. These presentations are expressed for generally understandable roots of language and communication theories (Ola, 2010). The roots of SFL would now be considered.
Roots of SFL
The roots of the SFL have been considered under four points to include viewing language as interconnection or a communicative network, viewing language as being structural and systematic with strata, considering the functionality of language to which it is purposeful and revealing, and then viewing the derivatives of the functionality of language based on the intended message for conveying by users. These are standpoints to which ideas expressed by Young & Fitzgerald (2006) are useful to context.
An in-depth look at SFL
SFL is a biaxial language describing perspective that views the external social-cultural phenomenal of the formal internal system through which the expression of the meaning of language is derived. The SFL perspective is designed to work through the interaction of people through the use of language. However, it also provides a file for analyzing a number of discussions, methodologically. SFL looks at language, theoretically, as been organized function; these functions generate and underlie the language’s structure. The beam-light of the performance of task of a language at a point is influenced by the settings accrued to its use; intrinsic in this language perspective is that it both creates and realizes its cultural part. This overview of the active nature of a language brings about the theory which says that language has its nature in the evolved service of its usage.
Language then results from a continuous act of options and choices that it transpires in. It is also fashioned by varying cultural and social situations. Halliday (1994) accepts that the functional concept of language has equal usage functions and that language property is fundamental and basic to its semantic evolution.
This paper has looked at the main features that have structured the SFL; which are compared to the language paradigm prominent with the earlier works of Halliday. The deep evaluation of SFL encompasses vital metafunctions that makes the basic organization of language. It also shows how different matafunctions are realizable.
The view point presented by Lynne Young about SFL is acceptable since its view of language as been structural and systematic suggests that language can be developed elementally to a more acceptable and understandable form.
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as
Ula, G. M. (2010). Language structure and usage. Ghana: Whitmore Publishers.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edn, London: Edward Arnold.
Young, L., & Fitzgerald, B. (2006). The Power of Language How Discourse Influences Society. London: Equinox Publishers.