David Rose Negatively Judging David Kellogg For Judging Negatively

David Rose replied to David Kellogg on sys-func on 16/6/22 at 12:00:

I tried to say this more subtly before, as ‘judgement overtaking reason’ … 

the rhetorical problem with forceful appreciations like ‘rejection’ and ‘refutation’, is that they shut down readers’ options for evaluation, and so weaken the writer’s argument, except for the already convinced.

Blogger Comments:

Here Rose falsely accuses Kellogg of using judgement instead of reason while doing this very thing himself. That is, instead of presenting a reasoned response on the validity of the content of Kellogg's post, Rose merely judges Kellogg as judging instead of reasoning.

What David Kellogg actually wrote to sys-func on 16/6/22 at 11:18:

There is an excellent discussion of the important differences (and also the even more important similarities) between the 1961 grammar and the SFL of ten years later in

Matthiessen, C.M.I.M., Wang, B., Ma, Y.-Y. and Mwinllaaru, I.N. (2022). Systemic Functional Insights on Language and Linguistics. Singapore: Springer Nature.

See p. 104, and table 4.3. But see also Christian Matthiessen's comment on how scale-&-category theory was already neo-Firthian, because it introduced the paradigmatic axis as co-equal to the syntagmatic one. Matthiessen has a beautiful demonstration of how this made it easier for Halliday to deal with consonant clusters (because you could treat them as offering different paradigmatic systems at different points in the syntagmatic structure) and how that, in turn, led to the clear distinction between instantiation and realisation that is rejected in the Martin model.

But see also Ruqaiya Hasan's refutation of "connotative semiotic" and "discourse semantics" in Volume Four of her Collected Works:

Hasan, R. (2016). Context in the System and Process of Language. London: Equinox.