Middle Material Clauses

Matthiessen (1995: 215, 218):

middle

(i) non-Ranged

[Actor:] I [Process:] appear [Location:] on the scene [Location:] at very rare intervals.

[Actor:] I [Process:] was <still> looking [Location:] at Farnham actually.

[Actor:] The wind [Process:] was blowing [Location:] from the west.

[Actor:] He [Process:] tried not to cry II but [Actor:] some little tears [Process:] dropped [Location:] on to his teddy.

(ii) ranged

[Actor:] They [Process:] surrounded [Range:] the field.

[Actor:] Mr. Smith [Process:] is representing [Range:] Washington.

[Actor:] They don't [Process:] frequent [Range:] Kennedy.

… 

A good many verbs can serve in more than one clause type. For instance, represent can be either relational (as in, up represents happiness) or material (as in, Jones is representing the City).

 

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, for Halliday (1985, 1994) and Halliday & Matthiessen (2004, 2014), these are behavioural Processes mediated by Behavers.

[2] To be clear, the Process of this clause is circumstantial relational: identifying, with they as Token/Medium and the field as Value/Range. See, for example, Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 294).

[3] To be clear, the Process of such clauses is intensive relational: identifying, with Mr. Smith/Jones as Token/Medium, and Washington/the City as Value/Range. See, for example, Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 277-86). The (marked) use of 'present in present' tense is not criterial of process type (e.g. he is being an idiot, she is playing the fool, etc.)