A Systemic Functional Approach To Grammaticalization

After a brief introduction of the ebb and flow of grammaticalization research, it is pointed out in Chapter One that existing grammaticalization studies suffer certain initial missteps: the passivity of grammaticalization and the particular cases as the easier starting point. This dissertation aims to establish a new general picture of grammaticalization by looking into the"what","why"and"how"questions of grammaticalization (Chapters 3, 4 and 5), with the historical account being the point of departure for discussion (Chapter 2) and the explication of the constructive nature of grammaticalization as a further indication of the perplexity of the issue (Chapter 6).The historical account of grammaticalization in Chapter 2 is sorted along two lines, the generative orientation and the functional orientation. While at first sight the concept of grammaticalization seems to be not applicable to generative accounts of language, it is not altogether incompatible with them. Strictly speaking, the generative approaches to grammaticalization only deal with two particular facets: the diachronic syntax or the evolution of functional categories, which are implemented by such morphosyntactic mechanisms as reanalysis and analogy, with the principles and constraints internal to the grammar as"explanatory"tools. Comparatively speaking, functional approaches make more contribution to the understanding of grammaticalization. They have developed two widely-accepted models of grammaticalization: the lexical item > morpheme model, which defines grammaticalization as the evolution of grammatical forms out of earlier lexical forms; and the discourse > morphosyntax model, which is concerned with the packaging of discourse and evolution of syntactic and morphological structures through fixing of discourse strategies. These functional models propose that grammaticalization is primarily motivated by cognitive factors (e.g. iconicity, conceptual gap) or pragmatic factors (e.g. economy) and is implemented by both morphosyntactic mechanisms such as re-analysis and analogy and semantic mechanisms such as metaphor and metonymy.Chapter 3 makes a critical evaluation of the previous generative and functional approaches to grammaticalization (Section 3.1), in the hope of a more plausible redefinition of grammaticalization (Section 3.2). On the one hand, generativism obviously makes little contribution to the full understanding of grammaticalization in that their accounts are rather limited in scope and restricted in explanatory power, which are the natural and necessary consequences of generative tenets. On the other hand, in spite of their greater contribution to the study of grammaticalization, functional accounts (and predictably generative accounts as well) suffer from three limitations in their theorization: narrow conception of grammar, inferior status of meaning and trivial focus of research. Based on this critical evaluation of previous views, Chapter 3 further makes some bold if not hazardous attempts to redefine the concept of grammaticalization. After examining the previous"pseudo-systemic-functional approaches"to grammaticalization and explicating Halliday and Matthiessen's own contribution to this issue, we propose certain guiding principles so as to develop a new general picture of grammaticalization: lexicogrammaticalization instead of mere overt grammaticalization, semantic orientation, and systemic orientation. Under these guiding principles, grammaticalization can be tentatively redefined as"the process of evolving the lexicogrammatical systems through interacting with the semantic systems".Chapter 4 follows the above systemic functional redefinition of lexicogrammaticalization and intends to re-explore the motivating factors involved in the evolution of lexicogrammar. It is argued that lexicogrammaticalization is natural and motivated; in co-evolution with other human systems (physical, biological and social), lexicogrammar responds to the ever-increasing metafunctional demands, augmenting the semanticizing power of language either through simple elaboration or through restructuring of the system. Lexicogrammar is as it is because of the functions it has evolved to serve in the human species. The rest of Chapter 4 illustrates the detailed operation of the metafunctional forces with respect to the phylogenetic and ontogenetic history of lexicogrammar. A phased model for the ontogenetic process of lexicogrammaticalization is proposed in Section 4.3:Phaseâ… : proto-linguistic: pre-lexicogrammaticalPhaseâ…¡: transition: proto-lexicogrammaticalPhaseâ…¢: linguistic: lexicogrammaticalPhaseâ…£: transition: proto-re-lexicogrammaticalizedPhaseâ…¤: linguistic: re-lexicogrammaticalizedIn view of the analogy between ontogeny and phylogeny, the above ontogenetic model of lexicogrammaticalization is reasonably adaptable to the phylogenesis of lexicogrammar. Under similar metafunctional pressures, hominids must have crossed the same"semantic milestones"that children have crossed to become the forebears of the powerful meaning-making resources (Section 4.4).Following the systemic functional framework of lexicogrammaticalization set up in previous chapters, Chapter 5 endeavors to explore the complex mechanisms in lexicogrammaticalization. The first critical mechanism seems to be the fundamental semogenic process of decoupling and recoupling, which deconstrues the protolinguistic bi-stratal sign system and introduces a purely abstract, lexicogrammatical stratum in between the meaning and the expression. When the stratal principle becomes well established, the language evolves a full-fledged lexicogrammar stratum, which can be further expanded and transformed under increasing pressures to mean in new ways. Realization, an interstratal process of lexicogrammatical metaphorization, is one major mechanism in this further lexicogrammaticalization; lexicogrammar grows by the primary metaphorization of"new semiotic domains"or"more delicate domains", or by the secondary metaphorization. Instantiation, an intrastratal process of moving between system and instance, is the other major mechanism; each instance is governed by and at the same time perturbs the system. The two mechanisms co-function to push forward lexicogrammaticalization; realization allows for the permeability of lexicogrammar with its semiotic environment, and instantiation provides foundation for incorporating the permeability into the system.Chapter 6 chiefly aims to look into the nature of lexicogrammaticalization by relating the present systemic functional approach to a basically philosophical perspective, that is, the perspective of lexicogrammaticalization in relation to knowledge and reality. After a brief introduction of logical positivism and logical relativism and their respective attitudes to the relationship between language, knowledge and reality, it is pointed out that previous approaches to grammaticalization, generative or functional, imply the passive nature of grammaticalization and thus are non-constructive. On the contrary, the present systemic functional approach is pro-constructive. It is argued that lexicogrammaticalization is a mutually creative process, giving rise to the particular lexicogrammars we have today and at the same time bringing about the distinctively human construction of reality. The main constructive power resides in the development of lexicogrammatical syndromes, especially those of covert grammatical categories. Though lexicogrammaticalization is surely neutral when we look at it in relation to the human evolution as a whole, it is highly partial and non-neutral from the standpoint of a given moment in human history in that it interacts with particular historical conditions of existence and may come to privilege one particular segment. Therefore, we shall adopt a socially responsible and practically useful approach to lexico- grammaticalization, that is, a metatheoretical approach, an approach of using the theory of lexicogrammaticalization as a metatheory for understanding the lexicogrammatical theory of our reality.Chapter 7 offers a brief summary of the whole dissertation, provides some tentative conclusions, and ends up (conventionally enough, but necessarily here) with some suggested topics for future research.