J.L. Mackenzie

First things first: towards an Incremental Functional Grammar

Abstract In the ultimate chapter of his last and posthumously published work, Dik (1997b) calls for a “functional grammar of discourse”. Whereas Functional Grammar (FG) was originally conceived of as a grammar of smaller units, variously identified in Diks work as “predications”, “linguistic expressions” and “clauses”, his final contribution to linguistics consisted in a sketch of his views on a question that has been very prominent in FG work in the nineties: what is the relation between clause structure and discourse structure? The fact that the phrase “functional grammar of discourse” can be parsed in two ways reflects the two major answers to this question offered in FG work hitherto. The parsing [functional grammar [of discourse]] invokes various proposals to extend the existing hierarchical framework of FG to cover the structure of discourse; the parsing [functional [grammar of discourse] ], in contrast, suggests that discourse has a structure sui generis, but a structure that is best approached from the general philosophical perspective shared by Functional Grammar, with discourse being linked to grammar at best through some interface.

Reflections on the lexicon in Functional Discourse Grammar

Abstract This article contains a series of reflections on the nature of the lexicon in FDG inspired in large measure by the preceding articles. We start by considering how the lexicon relates to the Conceptual Component, arguing that lexemes do not label units of conceptualization but rather are associated with experientially based beliefs about their appropriate use. In our view, the Conceptual Component first develops a Message, which then influences the choice of a frame in the Grammatical Component into which appropriate lexemes are inserted. Lexemes are thus not inherently associated with frames, as was proposed in earlier work. Instead, they are marked with numerical indicators for the set of frames with which they are compatible, with coercion allowing one-off extensions of that frameset. It is a further consequence of our position that lexemes come with neither meaning definitions nor selection restrictions. We adopt Keizer’s notion of partially instantiated frames to account for idiomatic expressions. We then turn to parts-of-speech, as they apply to lexemes in various language types. Lexemes are distinguished from Words: for example, the single class of Contentives in the Esperanto lexicon corresponds to Verb Words, Noun Words, etc. in morphosyntax. This leads to a discussion of derivation and compounding, where it is shown that two types of derivation are to be distinguished in FDG, lexical derivation, which uses lexical primitives (

Aspects of the interpersonal grammar of Gaelic

) as its input, and grammatical derivation, which takes place after insertion of a lexeme into its frame. Three major types of compounding are differentiated and exemplified from English and Dutch: predicate-argument, nucleus-modifier, and conjunct-conjunct compounds, each of which can be either endocentric or exocentric. Turning finally to the difficulty of drawing a sharp distinction between the lexicon and the grammar, we apply Keizer’s (2007) distinctions among primary and secondary lexical elements and primary and secondary grammatical elements, showing how findings from various of the preceding articles can be interpreted in this light.

Alinhamento interpessoal, representacional e morfossintático na Gramática Discursivo-Funcional

Abstract Any description of Scottish Gaelic must make continual reference to interpersonal factors, since the occupancy of the first position in the clause (PI) is codetermined by the illocutionary status of the discourse act being carried out through the formulation of that clause. Gaelic is a language in which syntactic functions play no part, but which gives great prominence to pragmatic functions. Although topic has no role in Gaelic grammar, focus and contrast both impinge upon its morphology and syntax, with the cleft construction extending from being an indicator of contrast to a marker of focus, where no contrast is intended.

Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure

Within the framework of Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG), alignment concerns the relations between the Interpersonal, Representational and Morphosyntactic Levels of grammar. This article proposes a typology of languages based upon what we find to be encoded in their morphosyntactic organization: pragmatic distinctions (as in Tagalog), semantic distinctions (as in Acheh), or distinctions inherent to the morphosyntax (as in English, Basque and Kham). By including both subject and object, and both accusative and ergative languages in our treatment of morphosyntactic alignment, we provide a better coverage of typological variation and show the potential of FDG for cross-linguistic analysis.