Luận văn a contrastive study on grammatical subject as a clause element in english and in vietnamese from perspective of systemic functional grammar

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI UNLVERSLTY OF LANGUAGES AND LNTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYEN TH] HONG HANH A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON GRAMMATICAL SUBJECT A

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI UNLVERSLTY OF LANGUAGES AND LNTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYEN TH] HONG HANH

A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON GRAMMATICAL SUBJECT

AS A CLAUSE ELEMENT IN ENGLISH AND IN

VIETNAMESE FROM PERSPECTIVE OF SYSTEMIC- FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR

mệnh đề trong tiêng Anh và tiéng Việt dưới góc độ

ngũ pháp chức năng hệ thông)

MLA Miner Programme Thesis

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15

HANOI-2010

FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON GRAMMATICAL SUBJECT

AS A CLAUSE ELEMENT IN ENGLISIT AND IN

VIETNAMESE FROM PERSPECTIVE OF SYSTEMIC- FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR

( Nghiên cứu dỗi chiếu về chủ ngữ ngữ pháp như là một yếu tố

mệnh đề trong tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt đưới góc độ

ngữ pháp chức năng hệ thông)

M.A Minor Programme Thesis

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15

Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Ngo Dinh Phuong

HANOL2H0

3, Scope of the study

4, Method of the study

5 Design of the study

Chapter 1: Theoretical Orientations

1.1 Introduction

4.2, Theories of systemic- functional grammar as distinguished from other formal

1.3, Definition of grammatical subjcct

1.3.1 From traditional perspective

2.2, Structure of the mood

2.2.1 Subject and finite

2.2.2, Meaning of subject and finite

2.3, Identifying subjects and finites

2.4.1 The declaratives

2.4.2 The interrogatives

Chapter 3.4 contrastive analysis on the grammatical subject in

‘Vietnamese on the view of Systemic- Functional Grammar

3.4.4 Exclamafive 3.5 Summar:

‘The history of linguistics has seen many different grammatical approaches, such as traditional grammar, structural grammar, and transformational- generative grammar, each

of which defines its own objectives Of the grammatical approaches, traditional grammar

sees erammar as a set of rules which specify all grammatical structures of the language in this approach there is a main focus on making a distinetion betwoen grammatical and

‘uungrammatical sentences Sentences are considered as the largest units in the grammatical system of a language and they are used to illustrate different grammatical rules ‘Ihe primary concern of this approach is on the forms of grammatical structure rather than thir aieanings of uses in contexts Because of its earlier foundation, traditional grammar has greatly influenced on linguistics and language teaching

Another approach that also has a great influence on language research and teaching is

functional grammar The theory of functional grammar was originally introduced by

MAK Halliday in the early 1960s Systemic functional linguistics sees language as a system of communication and analyses grammar lo discover how it is amganized ta

exchange meanings The primary concem is with the function of structures and with their

meanings in context All languages take place in the context Rather than studying the distinction between grarnmatical and tmprannnatical forms, the focus of this approach is on the appropriateness of a form in a particular context Functional yrarumar has boon slusticd

by many grammarians like Halliday(1985, 1994), Bloor (1994), Eggins (1994), Thomson (1996), Morley(1985) etc In Vietnamese there are some functional studies that should be

counted are Cao Xuân Hạo (1991 Tiếng Việt

sơ thảo ngữ pháp clntc năng, Nguyễn Thị

Quy (2002) Ngữ pháp chức năng tiếng Piệt, Hoàng Văn Vân (2003) Ngữ pháp kính

nghiệm của củ tiếng Việt: Miều tả theo quan điểm chúc năng hệ thẳng

Personally, the writer finds functional grammar very interesting as it offers a full study

on language and language teaching which focuses on communication This is a very useful way to teach and leam English he intention of this study is to illuminate the charactcristics of grammatical subject in English and lo compare it with Vietnamese

language to have a fully understanding of this term However, due to the limitation of

time, the writer is not able to cover all aspects of grammatical subject in the two languages What the writer would like to do is to study grammatical subject in English m comparison with that in Vietnamese, The result of this study contributes to facilitation of the teaching and leaning of English,

2 Aims:

Within the framework of a M.A minor thesis, the study is aimed at

» Presenting, describing and anslyving the grammatical subjcot in English anđ in

‘Vietnamese in the light of systemic- functional grammar

* Identifying the similarities and differences between grammatical subject in English

and its equivalent in Vietnamese in term of mood structure

» Making some suggestions for teaching and learning grammatical subject to teachers and leamers of English

In order lo rsavh the target, the following research questions arc posed

L What is the grammatical subject?

2 What are the similarities and differences of the grammatical subject in English and its cquivalenees in Victnamesc?

‘The writer also would like to find out the implications of this study in teaching and learning grammatical subject (including the identification of it) to teachers and learners of English,

3, Scope of the study

‘the study does not cover all aspects of functional grammar but limits itself to a minor aspool af fimotional grammar, The main focus is on grammatical subjoel in English and im

‘Vietnamese viewed fiom perspective of the systemic- funetional grammar

‘To explicit the grammatical subject it is essential to study it in mood structure in which

the subject is lacaled Other aspeets such as thermic rheme are not included in this study The rescarch is confined to the desciiption, analysis and comparison of the grammatical subject in term of position in kinds of sentences

4, Method of the study

This study is primarily concemed with comparing grammatical subject between English and Vietnamese ‘The research methods used in the study are description, comparison and analysis The descriptive and analytic is uscd in description of grammatical subject in

English and Vietnamese ‘Ihe comparative is used in the comparison of grammatical subj

in the two languages

A number of examples are taken from many sources in The English and Vietnamese languages, ‘They are analyzed to identify the similarities and differences between grammatical subject.in English andin Vietnamese,

5, Design of the study

‘The thesis is divided into three parts:

Part A: Tho Introduction: presents the rationale of the study, the ain

and the design of the study

Part B: Development: consists of four chapters

seupss, muthods,

Chapter 1: provides the thearstical background of the study, functional grammar, the itotion of grammatical subject in two aspects of grammar, kinds of subjects and three lines

of meaning in the clause

Chapter 2: investigates the grammatical subject in English on the view of systemic

functional grammar

Chapter 3: presents the systemic functional comparison between grammatical subject in English and in Vietramese

Part C: Conclusion: summarizes the whole study and offers some implications for

language teaching and learning

influence on grammatical subject in this stady

1.2 Theories of systcmie- functional grammar as distinguished from other formal grammar

Over the history, the study of lanpuage has been approached from different points of view

Traditional grammar views language as a system of interrelated categories It attempts

to create rulcs about how people usc languages Its aim is to provide rules for comrccting what are offered to as grammatical errors ‘This theory are criticized for paying too much allention to details of language ard ils description of language seems to be imadequate for language teaching

Deseriptive grammar arises in the early 1970s with the publication of “A

comprehensive grammar of the Tglish language”, (Quirk and Greanbaum, 1972)

‘This granunar aims to duscribe the grammatical system of language, tal is, whal sped

of the language “unconsciously” know, which enables them to speak and understand language It is believed to provide good ground for deeper studiss in other later grammars such as lransformational — generative and systemie- fimetional grammar

‘The Transformational- Generative grammar, developed by Chomsky (1968) makes a distinction between “surface structure” and “deep structure” of language It is a “logical specification of the syntactic knowledge which the learner necds to produce grammatical

sentences”, (Bell, 1981:107)

‘fraditional, descriptive, transformational- generative grammar emphasizes on format aspools of language, the primary eoncem is with the forms of grarmmuatieal structures rather than meanings or their uses in context, Another approach, called Systemic- Functional

Grammar, rather than insisting on a clear distinction between grammatical and ungrammaltical forms, focuses ơn the approprialcness of a form for a particular

communicative purpose This approach was originally developed by M.A.K Halliday in the 1960s and has now become a major approach in linguistics, Halliday, in his work “An introduction to Functional Grammar” (fist published in 1985) explains that his grammar is functional rather than formal, a language is “a system of meaning” People use language to express meaning The study of grammar focuses on how meanings are bnilt up through wording The form of grarmnar relates to the meanings that are eaded This grammer pays attention to both form and meaning This theory of grammar approaches language from semantic and functional point of view Halliday develops analysis of language on the sonmnlie fimetions These functions, lonned by Halliday as “metafunetions” of language consist of ideational, interpersonal, and textual function They exist in all languages as they reflect the role of human language in general

Ideational function means that language is used to talk about our experience of the world, to desotibe entitics and help us to understand, organize and express pcrecptions

1.3, Definition of grammatical sulbject

1.3.1 From traditional perspective

Providing an adequate definition of the notion of a subject is difficult as it depends on grammnatical theories thal may vary from language lo limguagc However, many granmnarians try to detine subject and one of the most common definition is that the

13

subject is what (who) the sentence is about and the predicate tells something about the subjeol Quirk ez all (1972: 34) defines subject: “the subject of the sentence has a close general relation to “what is being discussed”, the “theme” of the sentence with the normal implication that sometiting new (the predicate) is being said about a “subject” that has

already been introduced in earlier sentence”

My father works hard

Playing sports helps us healthier

1.3.2 From systemic functional grammar

The notion of subject, that is basic to tradition of grammulical analysis, is a faritiar tenm, Halliday(1994; 30) defines a subject with tee functions in accordance with three definitions

@ whichis concer of the message

đi) — which something is being predicated

đi) the doer of the action

‘These three definitions are not synonymous they are defining đifforent concepts, From these definitions, we can arise a question, “is there a subject to cover all three different

ameanings at one and the same time?” Halliday (1994: 31) gave an example to clarify this

question “The duke gave my aunt this teapot” tn this example, “the duke” is the Subject in all three senses, It is the concer of the message, The truth of the statement is on him, He is the doer of the action “gave”

However, not all clausos have onc clamont covering three definitions of subject, Far example; “This teapot my aunt was given by the duke” (Halliday 1994; 31), We can not identify which is the subject of this sentence on the three definitions, “The duck” is still the doer of the action but “shis teapot” is now what the message is concemed about The truth

of the statement isin “my aad”, not “the duke”

1.4, Kinds of subjcct

With the HaHiday's definition of subject above, in some clauses we can not identify a

img all thre

“grammatical subject” and “logical subject” These terms were used by Halliday (1994:31)

to precisely identify subject in all clauses:

1.4.2, Grammatical subject: meant “that which something is predicated” It was called

“grammatical” because at that thue the construction of Subjccl and Predicatz was thought

of as a formal grammatical relationship; it was seen to detemmine other grammatical feattues and its concord of person and number with the verb, but it was not thought to express amy partionlar moaning

1.4.3, Logical subject meant “doer of the action” It was called “logical” in the sense this term had had from the seventeenth century, that of “having to do with relations between things”, as opposed to “grammatical” relations, which were relations betwesn symbols

Those three concepts arc not separated, but they arc merely different aspeets of onc and belong to the same notion ‘They are interpreted as three distinct ftmctions in a clause

In the example given by [alliday(1994:31) “The duke gave my aunt this teapot”, all these three fimetions can be conflated on to one another, as shown in Figure 1 or they may be separated as in Figure 2 below

This teapot my aunt was given by the duke

Psychological subject | Grammatical Logical subject

predicated “I'he duke” must be logical subject as it is the doer of the action ‘These notions can be raplaced by three labels which relate Lo the finetions concerned

Psychological Subject: Theme

Grammatical Subject: Subject

Logical subject: Actor

We can now relabel the example given by Halliday “The duke gave my aunt this teapot” in term of ‘Theme, Subject, Actor as in the following figure

“This teapot my aunt was given by the duke

Theme Subject ‘Actor

Figure 4: Theme, Subject, Actor are separated

‘There may be other possible combinations in which the roles of Subject are conflated, as shown in Fig.5 below

Theme Subject

Actor

Figure 5: Different conflations of Subject, Actor and Theme

1.5 Three lines of meaning in the clause

‘As the writer pointed out earlier that in functional gramunar, we essentially equate meaning with ftmetion llalliday suggested three ways of looking at the clause ‘The fizst, involving such functions as Subject, is described in Halliday’s grammar as the Clause as Exchange The Subject is the warranty of the exchange between speaker and listener It is the element the speaker makes responsible for the validity of what he is saying ‘(his relates

to the interpersonal muctafunclion as I have mentioned catlicr The second, involving such role as Actor, is the Clause as Representation and relates to the ideational metatunction A

clause has the meaning as a representation The Actor is the active participant in the

process of human experience Tis the one that doas the deed The third, which involves the function Theme, is the Clause as Message and relates to the textual metalimetion A clause

‘has meaning as a message and the ‘Theme is the point of departure for the message It is the

Glemont the speaker selects for “grounding” whal he is going an lo say Those thre headings: Clause as a message, clause as exchange, clause as a representation, refer to three distinct kinds of meaning that are embodied in the structure of a clanse Theme, Subject and Actor do not ovcur as isolates Fach occurs in assaciation with other funotions Grom the same strand of mvaning,

1.6 Conclusion

To sum up, this chapter has mentioned some findamental and theoretical concepts relevant to the purpose of the study We have studicd the definitions of grammatical subject dom traditional grammar and fiom systemic functional grammar Some kinds of subjec! baszd on Tlalliday’s view have been represented, According to alliday, there are three fiuetions of subject: psychological subject, grammatical subject and logical subject

‘These functions can also be labeled as ‘Theme, Subject and Actor They are three different functions in the clause that represent three strands of meaning of clause: ‘Theme functions int the structure of Clause as a tressage, Subject funetions in the structure of clause as an exchange, Actor functions in the structure of the clause as a representation, However, only grammatical subject is mentioned and discussed in this study Mowever, not all these three

Jabels are studied, in the next chapter, only Subject in relation with realization of the clause

as exchange is mentioned and discussed

Chapter 2 Grammatical subject in English on the view of systemic functional grammar

2.1, Introduction

In this chapter, an attempt is made to look at grammatical subject in English It

focuscs on investigating (i) the structure of the meod, đi) Identification of subject, and

(iii) mood in some kinds of sentences In functional, mood and subject have a close yelationship They are nol separaled because mood always conlains subjecl That is the

xeason why I investigate subject in term of mood

2.2, Structure of the mood

Halliday interprets clauses in their function as an exchange and he divides the clause into two parts: The mood and the residue The mood is made of Subject and Finite:

2.2.1, Subject and finite

Subject and finite are closely linked together and they are crucial to the structural realization of the mood

2.2.2, Meaning of subject and finite

Mood plays a special role in carrying out the interpersonal finctions of the clause In order to understand what this role is, we need lo examine the meanings expressed by the

Subject and Finite, and then to see how they work together as Mood

Subject and finite have a great significance in the English clause Halliday looks at

their meanings in clause, The Subject, as defined by Halliday (1994: 76), “supplies the res!

of what it takes to form a proposition: something by reference to which the proposition can

be affirmed or denied”, and the finite “has the function of making the proposition finite It

‘brings the proposition down to canh số (hai il is something that can be argusd about”

In traditional terms, the Subject is the entity of which something is predicated in the vest of the clause This is a powerfull insight which has beon applicd in most approaches to gramanatical description In these approaches, the sentence is seen as being “about” the Subject However, in functional approach, the choice of a particular entity as Subject expresses only one of three possilte kinds of “aboutness” In whal sense can we ses

“aboutness’ as an interpersonal meaning? In the example, “she was punished by the teacher”, “the teacher” is the entity involved in the punishing- that is, “the teacher” is the Actor Therefore, if we think of the event boing described, the clause tells us about whal the teacher did, On the other hand, we can also look at the clause in term of exchange between the speaker and the listener One way of doing this is by examining the kind of response that the listonơr can make to the information given The response will show us how the listener is interpreting the purpose of the speaker’s message Therefore, the speaker will put up for negotiation something about “she”, not about “the teacher” The subject here must be “she”, not “the teacher”, The Subject expresses the entity that the speaker wants to make responsible for the validity of the proposition being mentioned earlier in the clause, The clause is “about” the Subject from the interpersonal perspective

‘The meaning of the Finite emerge from the discussion of Subject: the Finile makes ii possible to negotiate about the validity of the proposition The basis function of the Finite

is to orient the listener towards the kind of validity being claimed for the proposition

Tualtiday refers to the Finile as Finite Verbal Operator which he identifies two kinds: G) Temporst Finite Verbal Operator: Those thal make the proposition of time (present, pasl

or future), and (ii) Finite Modal Operators; those that propose the speaker's judgment of the probabilities, or the obligation involved in what he is saying Kor example, in “My fricnd has given me a book”, the Subject is “my Bicnd” thal, specifies the onlity, realizes the success ar failure of the proposition, the Finite is “has” that specifies the reference to positive and present time

2.3, Telentifying subjects and finite

19

can establish the Subject and Iinite Á tag question repeats two elements in the Mood at the end of the clause The pronoun ar noun in the tag refers back ta the Subject of the clause and the Finite is made explicit, even if it is fused with the lexical verb in the clause Let us look at figure 6 below

her job

Figure 6: Tags showing Subject ani Finite

Subjects can be identified by other formal characteristics:

@ Subjects are typically noun groaps Less typically, corlain kinds of clauses can

also fimotion as subjects These include that- clauses, Wh- clauses, ta — F inf clauses, and V-ing clauses This can be illustrated as in Figure 7 below:

How he did it is obvious

Really understanding this aspect of graumuas needs 2 fot of work

Subject Finite

Figure 7: Clauses function as subjects

Gi) Five pronouns have special subject forms: J, he, she and they (as opposed to me,

him, her, ws and them) For example

(2.1) They didn'treally believe her

Subject

(2.3) She didn’t really believe them

Subject

Gil) In declarative mood clauses, the subject is normally the noun group (er nominal

(26) He wrote to her 2 months ago

Gi) Only Finite is marked for lens ‘appears’ in the example

(2.7) Bveryday, she appears at the bridge across the river

Git) Only Finite is marked for mumber agreement, that is, their form changes according to

‘the mumber and person of the Subject, for example:

(2.8)The dogs are sa lovely

(2.9)The dog is so lovely

2.4, Mood in some kinds of English sentences

2.4.1 The declaratives

In declarative, the structure is Subject + Finite in which the finite is always the first constituent of a verb group and the remaining constituents of the verbal group fimetions as Prodicalor, for example

(2.10) You shouldn't behave like a child

You shouldn't behave like a child

Subject Finite Predicator Complement

Mood Residue

Figure 3: mood structure In declarative of (2.10)

(2.11) [think she ix a good doctor Sontenos (2.11) is a complex sentences consisting of two clauses The mood structure af the sentence (2.11) is illustrated in Figure 9

(present) (present) Mood Residue | mood residue

(2.121What do you expect me to do?

(2.13) Why did you go there?

(2.14) How many are there?

‘The mood structure of the examples above are illustrated in Fig below

Why đã you po there?

What do you expect me to do?

How many arc there?

Finile Subject

[Mood

Figure 10: Wh interrogative with known subject of (2.12), (2.13), (2.14)

However, there are some Wh- interrogatives that have the Wh- element as subject like

who, whal, which as shown in the examples below

(2.15) Who is the mon in the black glasses?

(2.16) Who went out with you last night?

(2.17)Which is vour favourite subject?

Let us took at the mood struchurc of those above sentences anulyrad in Fig 11

Who is the inan in the black glasses?

Who (past) went out with you last night?

Which Is favourite subject?

Subject Finite Complement

(2.18) Have you met her hefore?

(2.19) Do they have anything, in common?

(2.20) Can he paint well enough?

Figure 12 below illustrates the mood structure of the Yes/No interrogatives in sentences (2.18), (2.19), (2.20)

Have you act her before?

Do they have anything in common?

The imperative clauses arc realized by a Predicator in the Vorb (basc) form of the

‘verb, with no explicit Subject or Finite In imperative clauses, the marked form has no

mood The subject of a command is not, specified,

(“you’), There are two types of imperatives in English that is exclusive imperatives - the one we take the second person * you” as the base form and inclusive imperatives — the one

ince il can only be the addresses

we take the first person “ you and me” as the base form

2.4.3.1 Exclusive imperatives

Imperatives are narmally used to ask the other person fo cary out the action, In exchsive imperatives, we take the “second person” — “you as the base form, There ars marked forms of imperatives in which the Subject may appear and the finite may also be used for emphasis and unmarked forms in which there is no Subject The finite may appear inv unmarked imperatives but it is used only to signal negative polarity

question (for oxample: closs the door, will you?)

Let us see Figure 13 below,

Come home soon

‘Tell her as soon as possible

Predicator Complement Adjunct

Figure 13: Unmarked imperative clauses

+ Unmarked negative:

In negative imperatives, the finite may appear in unmarked imperative but it is used only to

signal nogative polarity, soc Figure 14 botow:

Don't be afraid of him

Don’t listen to her

Finite (subject) predicator Complement

Figure 14: Unmarked negative imperatives

In interpersonal texms, an imperative is presented as not open to negotiation (which does not mean that the command will actually obeyed) and thus most of the functions of the finite are irrelevant: a command is absolute (there are no imperative forms of the modal verbs), and there is no need Io speciy time televance sines there is no choice (an imperative can only refer to future time) The finite is used to signal negative polatity,

b Marked imperatives

Thers ars marked forms of imperatives in which the Subject may appear, and the Finite may also be used for emphasis

+ Marked positives: in this type of imperative, the mood element consists of subject only

A grammatical subject appcars as the potential performer of the action It can be a second person “you” or third person like somebody/someone, ete In both cases, the subject is the addressee, whether listener or reader

You listen tome!

You tury up!

Suibjecl Predicalor Adjunet

Mood Residue

Figure 15: Murked positive imperatives with “yau”

An imperative with “you” is syntactically identical to a declarative one and can only

be distinguished fiom the latter by the stress on “you” in spoken language In declarative clause the “you” is nat stressed,

A third person subject (somebody, someone, nobody, etc.) is used when the speaker wants the action to be carried out by a group of person (everybody) or by a single unspecificd number of the group (somebody), The lack of a third person concord with the

verb (Somebody call a doctor’), not (Somebody calls) indicates that the subjects are addre

Somebody give uc a hand

Subject predicalor complemant

Mood Residue

Figure 16: Marked positive imperatives with “someone”

Another type of marked imperatives is the marked form for polarity in which the mood dlement consisis of finite only (no subject) This type of imperative is creaied by the addition of finite “do” before the predicator

Another one is the marked imperatives with the Finite “do” and the Subject ‘This imperative is used for emphasis

Do you slop laughing !

Finite Subject Predicator

Mood Residue

Figure 18: Marked posttive imperative with “da” and Subject

~+ Marked negative

The first one is the marked form for person in which the mood element consists of finite

“don’l” and the Subject

Don’t you call me an idiot!

Finite Subject Predicator

Mood Residue

Figure 19: Marked negative imperative with “don't” and Subject