David Rose Positively Judging Martin's English Text

David Rose wrote to sys-func and sysfling on 22 February 2016 at 18:45:

There is no greater homage to Hasan’s work than Martin’s English Text. The whole of its 600 pages is an admiring conversation with her.

Appraised	Appraisal
	Polarity	Attitude
Martin’s English Text	positive	judgement: capacity
Martin’s English Text	positive	judgement: propriety

Blogger Comment:

It is true that, without the ideas in Hasan's work, Jim Martin's English Text could not exist.  However, there is ample evidence that English Text is neither the greatest 'homage to Hasan's work', nor 'an admiring conversation with her'.  See, for example:

Misrepresenting Hasan And Confusing Strata And Metafunctions

Misrepresenting Hasan's Work On Cohesion

Misrepresenting Hasan's Cohesive Harmony

Presenting Misunderstandings Of Hasan's Cohesive Harmony As Deficiencies In The Model

Misrepresenting Hasan's Work On Coherence As Formalist

*Why Martin Prefers His Own Model To Hasan's*

Examples such as these represent the same type of homage that Jim Martin paid to the late Ruqaiya Hasan at the symposium to honour her achievements, when he insinuated that she had plagiarised Mitchell and argued that her model was wrong and should be replaced by his. See Jim Martin "Honouring" The Late Ruqaiya Hasan.

The apology that Martin eventually made merely regretted the factual inaccuracies.  Martin expressed no remorse for using the tribute ceremony to attack his deceased colleague, nor for any hurt caused by his false accusations and impropriety.

David Rose Positively Appreciating Jim Martin's Misunderstanding

After Annabelle Lukin wrote to sysfunc and sysling on 10 February 2016 at 16:57:

I recall at the Appraisal symposium a couple of years ago Jim saying it should not be called 'appraisal theory', because it wasn't theory (though the term is still very much in common usage at conferences).

David Rose responded to sys-func and sysfling on 11 February 2016 at 07:24:

Great point 

The theory is SFL

Appraised	Appraisal
	Polarity	Attitude
it should not be called 'appraisal theory', because it isn't theory	positive	appreciation

For why this is a misunderstanding, and the interpersonal motivation behind it, see the explanation here.