The Minor Theme Of A Prepositional Phrase

Matthiessen (1995: 637):

The textual option in the prepositional phrase has just been illustrated for wh-phrases. That is, the prepositional phrase may be thematic as a whole, or its Complement/Range may alternatively be thematic on its own:

What's it | like_ | out today?

✝ That house I'll never set my foot | in_ | again.

From the point of view of the prepositional phrase, the Complement/ Range conflates with a function that is external to the prepositional phrase (shown as Theme ↑). If the nominal group serving as Complement/ Range has an elaborating or extending Facet (Selector) and its structure is ambivalent, it is even possible to thematise only the non-Facet part of the nominal group (cf. Matthiessen, 1991):

✝ That peak I've never talked about [a picture of _].

Blogger Comments:

[1] Again, this misconstrues what is thematic at clause rank — the prepositional phrase or its Complement/Range — as thematic at phrase rank.

[2] To be clear, the clause That peak I've never talked about a picture of is extremely unlikely.

Minor Theme In Prepositional Phrases

Matthiessen (1995: 630):

As already noted above, prepositional phrases can be interpreted as mini-clauses (IFG, p. 180; 212-3). Experientially, they offer the system MINOR TRANSITIVITY — a system of relational process types; interpersonally, they offer MINOR MOOD, where the distinction is simply between wh- and non-wh-; and textually they offer MINOR THEME which is the choice between having an externally thematic participant or not. These systems are set out in Figure 7-3. (The symbol ↑ indicates that the Complement of the prepositional phrase is conflated with a function external to the domain of the prepositional phrase, viz. the Theme of the clause in which the prepositional phrase serves: See Section 7.1.2.3 below.)

This system network thus defines a three-dimensional paradigm; examples are given in Table 7-5.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, Halliday proposes no thematic structure for the prepositional phrase. Here Matthiessen misconstrues what is thematic at clause rank — the Range/Complement of prepositional phrase — as thematic at phrase rank. A structure is the relation between functions, so a thematic structure for a prepositional phrase would be a relation between the minor Process/Predicator and the minor Range/Complement.

[2] To be clear, neither the two examples of 'externally thematic projection' are likely instances of English:

• who is it going to rain according to?
• Henry it's going to rain according to

The Minor Range Of A Prepositional Phrase

 Matthiessen (1995: 627):

As already noted, a prepositional phrase is like a mini-clause — more specifically, it is like a mini relational clause. For example, corresponding to the relational clause The fence surrounds the property, we have the prepositional phrase around the property. While the finite clause represents both participants entering into the relation (Token + Value, or Carrier+ Attribute), the phrase only represents one of them (the one construed in the clause as Value or Attribute).

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, since, for Halliday (1994: 151-2), a prepositional phrase is like a relational or verbal clause, the minor Range of a prepositional phrase may also correspond to the Verbiage or Sayer of a verbal clause — the former when the phrase serves as Matter, the latter when it serves as Angle.

Prepositional Phrases As Mini Relational Clauses

Matthiessen (1995: 626):

In contrast, prepositional phrases are mini-clauses, more specifically mini relational clauses — shrunken clauses (see IFG Ch. 6).

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, for Halliday (1994: 151-2), a prepositional phrase is like a relational or verbal clause:

For the present discussion, what is important is the notion of ‘circumstance’ as a kind of additional minor process, subsidiary to the main one, but embodying some of the features of a relational or verbal process, and so introducing a further entity as an indirect participant in the clause.

Preposition Group As Word Complex

Matthiessen (1995: 626):

Note that adverbial group is treated quite broadly here; it includes conjunctions and continuatives as well as adverbs at Head. In IFG, adverbial groups and conjunction groups are distinguished. Here they are just taken as more delicate types of adverbial group. IFG also recognises a prepositional group. Here groups of prepositions are simply treated as complexes of prepositions at word rank (paratactic - e.g., extending: above —> and below the surface; enhancing: from —> beyond the mountains).

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, this treatment has the advantage of acknowledging the hybrid nature of the prepositional phrase, with one element realised by a unit (complex) at word rank, and the other element realised by a unit (complex) at group rank, and also of economising the rank scale, since it proposes just a single class of form at group/phrase rank for the word class 'preposition'.