Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics

Hui Zou

doi:doi:10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics

Hui Zou

Published in International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 12, Issue 1)

Received: 25 December 2023 Accepted: 12 January 2024 Published: 5 February 2024

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This paper explores the intricacies of causative constructions within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework, emphasizing their significance in understanding the relationship between processes and the individuals affected. Delving into diverse theoretical perspectives on causation, the study provides an overview of causative expressions, highlighting the formalist view and its proponents such as Nash and Pylkkänen. Cognitive linguists, like Langacker, contribute to the discussion with the action chain model, emphasizing the transfer of energy between entities in the causal chain. After discussing these clashing positions, the paper critiques previous studies that equate agency with causation within the transitivity system. SFL communities have also debated how causation simultaneously fits in the whole transitivity system along with the subsystems of agency and process type. This study revisits the debate and offers an overview of different positions among SFL scholars such as Lavid and Arús, and García. The relationship between agency and causation is discussed while considering the complexity of the transitive and the ergative perspectives. After fully discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the opposing viewpoints of these scholars, this paper suggests extending the agency system to include analytic and synthetic, which interact with the causation system to form analytic causation, supporting the idea of a comprehensive causation system within the transitivity system. Finally, the paper suggests future avenues for research, endorsing the incorporation of corpus-based analyses to complement qualitative approaches in understanding causative constructions fully.

Published in	International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 12, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
Page(s)	53-57
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Causation, Agency, Transitivity System, Systemic Functional Linguistics

References

[1]	Caffarel, A. 2006. A systemic functional grammar of French from grammar to discourse. New York: Continuum.
[2]	Comrie, B. 1976. The syntax of causative constructions: Cross-language similarities and divergences. In M. Shibatani (ed.), The Grammar of Causative Constructions. New York: Academic Press, 261-312.
[3]	Cuervo, M. C. 2015. Causation without a CAUSE. Syntax, 18(4), 388-424.
[4]	Davidse, K. 1991. Categories of Experiential Grammar. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Leuven. Leuven, Belgium.
[5]	Davidse, K. 1992. Transitivity/ergativity: The janus–headed grammar of actions and events. In Davies, M., Martin, J. R. & Ravelli, L. (eds.), Advances in systemic linguistics: Recent theory and practice. London: Pinter, 105-135.
[6]	Dik, Simon C. 1985. Formal and semantic adjustment of derived constructions. In A. Machtelt Bolkestein, Casper de Groot & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (eds.), Predicates and terms in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris, 1-28.
[7]	Doron, E. 2003. Agency and voice: The semantics of the Semitic templates. Natural Language Semantics, 11, 1-67.
[8]	Fillmore, Charles J. 1971. Some problems for case grammar. In Richard J. O’Brien (ed.), Report of the twenty-second annual round table meeting on linguistics and language studies. Washington D. C.: Georgetown University Press, 35-56.
[9]	García, A. 2012. Construing experience in Spanish: Revisiting a Systemic Functional Description of Spanish Nuclear Transitivity. Revista Signos, 46(81), 29-55.
[10]	Gudrun, R. 2011. Causality and causation: A functional approach to causative constructions in modern Swedish. Folia Linguistica, 45(1), 127-163.
[11]	Halliday, M. A. K. 1968. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: part III. Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 179-215.
[12]	Halliday, M. A. K. & McDonald, E. A Metafunctional Profile of Chinese Grammar. in Caffarel, A. C. Matthiessen & J. R. Martin (eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 359-469.
[13]	Harley, H. 2008. On the causative construction. In S. Miyagawa & M. Saito (eds.), Handbook of Japanese Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 20-53.
[14]	Huddleston, R. 1970. Some remarks on Case Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 1(4), 501-511.
[15]	Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[16]	Lavid, J. & Arús, J. 2002. Nuclear transitivity in English and Spanish: A contrastive functional study. Languages in Contrast, 4(1), 75-103.
[17]	Lavid, J., Arús, J. & Zamorano, J. 2010. Systemic functional grammar of Spanish: A contrastive study with English. London: Continuum.
[18]	Lemmens, M. 1998. Lexical perspectives on transitivity and ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[19]	Nash, L. 2002. Between the inflection and the verb: Syntax, morphology, acquisition. Postdoctoral thesis, Université de Paris 7, Paris.
[20]	Parsons, T. 1990. Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[21]	Pylkkänen, L. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[22]	Qi, X. 2006. English causative constructions-a systemic functional approach. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
[23]	Talmy, L. 1976. Semantic causative types. In M. Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causative constructions: A conspectus. New York: Academic Press, 43-116.
[24]	Talmy, L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49-100.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Zou, H. (2024). Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 12(1), 53-57. https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Zou, H. Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2024, 12(1), 53-57. doi: 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Zou H. Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Int J Lang Linguist. 2024;12(1):53-57. doi: 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/ijll.20241201.17,
  author = {Hui Zou},
  title = {Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {12},
  number = {1},
  pages = {53-57},
  doi = {10.11648/ijll.20241201.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.ijll.20241201.17},
  abstract = {This paper explores the intricacies of causative constructions within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework, emphasizing their significance in understanding the relationship between processes and the individuals affected. Delving into diverse theoretical perspectives on causation, the study provides an overview of causative expressions, highlighting the formalist view and its proponents such as Nash and Pylkkänen. Cognitive linguists, like Langacker, contribute to the discussion with the action chain model, emphasizing the transfer of energy between entities in the causal chain. After discussing these clashing positions, the paper critiques previous studies that equate agency with causation within the transitivity system. SFL communities have also debated how causation simultaneously fits in the whole transitivity system along with the subsystems of agency and process type. This study revisits the debate and offers an overview of different positions among SFL scholars such as Lavid and Arús, and García. The relationship between agency and causation is discussed while considering the complexity of the transitive and the ergative perspectives. After fully discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the opposing viewpoints of these scholars, this paper suggests extending the agency system to include analytic and synthetic, which interact with the causation system to form analytic causation, supporting the idea of a comprehensive causation system within the transitivity system. Finally, the paper suggests future avenues for research, endorsing the incorporation of corpus-based analyses to complement qualitative approaches in understanding causative constructions fully.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics
AU  - Hui Zou
Y1  - 2024/02/05
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
DO  - 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 53
EP  - 57
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
AB  - This paper explores the intricacies of causative constructions within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework, emphasizing their significance in understanding the relationship between processes and the individuals affected. Delving into diverse theoretical perspectives on causation, the study provides an overview of causative expressions, highlighting the formalist view and its proponents such as Nash and Pylkkänen. Cognitive linguists, like Langacker, contribute to the discussion with the action chain model, emphasizing the transfer of energy between entities in the causal chain. After discussing these clashing positions, the paper critiques previous studies that equate agency with causation within the transitivity system. SFL communities have also debated how causation simultaneously fits in the whole transitivity system along with the subsystems of agency and process type. This study revisits the debate and offers an overview of different positions among SFL scholars such as Lavid and Arús, and García. The relationship between agency and causation is discussed while considering the complexity of the transitive and the ergative perspectives. After fully discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the opposing viewpoints of these scholars, this paper suggests extending the agency system to include analytic and synthetic, which interact with the causation system to form analytic causation, supporting the idea of a comprehensive causation system within the transitivity system. Finally, the paper suggests future avenues for research, endorsing the incorporation of corpus-based analyses to complement qualitative approaches in understanding causative constructions fully.

VL  - 12
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Hui Zou

The School of Foreign Languages, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Contact Email

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Zou, H. (2024). Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 12(1), 53-57. https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Zou, H. Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2024, 12(1), 53-57. doi: 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Zou H. Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Int J Lang Linguist. 2024;12(1):53-57. doi: 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/ijll.20241201.17,
  author = {Hui Zou},
  title = {Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {12},
  number = {1},
  pages = {53-57},
  doi = {10.11648/ijll.20241201.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.ijll.20241201.17},
  abstract = {This paper explores the intricacies of causative constructions within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework, emphasizing their significance in understanding the relationship between processes and the individuals affected. Delving into diverse theoretical perspectives on causation, the study provides an overview of causative expressions, highlighting the formalist view and its proponents such as Nash and Pylkkänen. Cognitive linguists, like Langacker, contribute to the discussion with the action chain model, emphasizing the transfer of energy between entities in the causal chain. After discussing these clashing positions, the paper critiques previous studies that equate agency with causation within the transitivity system. SFL communities have also debated how causation simultaneously fits in the whole transitivity system along with the subsystems of agency and process type. This study revisits the debate and offers an overview of different positions among SFL scholars such as Lavid and Arús, and García. The relationship between agency and causation is discussed while considering the complexity of the transitive and the ergative perspectives. After fully discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the opposing viewpoints of these scholars, this paper suggests extending the agency system to include analytic and synthetic, which interact with the causation system to form analytic causation, supporting the idea of a comprehensive causation system within the transitivity system. Finally, the paper suggests future avenues for research, endorsing the incorporation of corpus-based analyses to complement qualitative approaches in understanding causative constructions fully.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Causation from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics
AU  - Hui Zou
Y1  - 2024/02/05
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
DO  - 10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 53
EP  - 57
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/ijll.20241201.17
AB  - This paper explores the intricacies of causative constructions within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework, emphasizing their significance in understanding the relationship between processes and the individuals affected. Delving into diverse theoretical perspectives on causation, the study provides an overview of causative expressions, highlighting the formalist view and its proponents such as Nash and Pylkkänen. Cognitive linguists, like Langacker, contribute to the discussion with the action chain model, emphasizing the transfer of energy between entities in the causal chain. After discussing these clashing positions, the paper critiques previous studies that equate agency with causation within the transitivity system. SFL communities have also debated how causation simultaneously fits in the whole transitivity system along with the subsystems of agency and process type. This study revisits the debate and offers an overview of different positions among SFL scholars such as Lavid and Arús, and García. The relationship between agency and causation is discussed while considering the complexity of the transitive and the ergative perspectives. After fully discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the opposing viewpoints of these scholars, this paper suggests extending the agency system to include analytic and synthetic, which interact with the causation system to form analytic causation, supporting the idea of a comprehensive causation system within the transitivity system. Finally, the paper suggests future avenues for research, endorsing the incorporation of corpus-based analyses to complement qualitative approaches in understanding causative constructions fully.

VL  - 12
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download