Justification of the study
Grammatical metaphor, particularly nominalization, is a key concept in Systemic Functional Grammar, as highlighted by Halliday's research (1985, 1988, 1994), which shows its significant role in shaping scientific discourse Halliday's systemic functional perspective categorizes nominalization as a crucial syntactic feature in political discourse, influencing the enactment and legitimization of power However, its complexity can create challenges for readers and listeners in grasping the intended meanings Our thesis, titled “Nominalization as Grammatical Metaphor in Political Discourse in English and Vietnamese from the Perspective of Systemic Functional Grammar,” is motivated by the need to address the lack of research on this topic Understanding nominalization's nature and functions can enhance the clarity of political speeches in both languages Furthermore, we explore the interplay between language, power, and ideology, emphasizing that the ideological dimensions of language should be a focal point in modern social science, as linguistic choices are closely tied to the power dynamics they reflect.
Aims and Objectives of the study
The aim of this study is to make an inquiry into the nature of nominalization in English and Vietnamese in general
This study highlights the significance of nominalization in political discourse, emphasizing its crucial role in shaping the message content within this specialized genre It advocates for a focused approach to understanding nominalization's functions and impacts in political communication.
In carrying out the study this way, the following questions are raised for exploration
1 What is the Nature of Nominalization in English and in Vietnamese?
2 What are the Linguistic Structure and the Functions of Nominalization in English and Vietnamese Political Discourses?
3 What are the Linguistic and Cultural Similarities and Differences between
Nominalization in English political discourse and that in Vietnamese one?
This research aims to shed light on the intricacies of political speeches, focusing on the linguistic techniques used by the powerful to influence the less powerful By evaluating these linguistic aspects, readers will gain insights into how language shapes political discourse Additionally, the study will explore the similarities and differences in the use of nominalization between English and Vietnamese, enhancing understanding of cross-cultural communication in politics.
Scope of the study
This study investigates nominalization in English and Vietnamese, focusing on the linguistic structures that reveal similarities and differences between the two languages Additionally, it analyzes the role of nominalization in political speeches in both languages, examining how it enhances the metafunctions of discourse, contributes to overall meaning, and reflects the speakers' ideologies.
This study employs a descriptive method to identify and analyze the phenomenon of nominalization in English and Vietnamese political discourses By comparing and contrasting these languages, the researcher utilizes statistical methods to evaluate the data qualitatively and quantitatively The inductive approach taken in this research facilitates the collection of relevant data, highlighting nominalization as a fundamental linguistic process in both languages.
In the exploration of nominalization in political discourse, the systemic functional theory as developed by Halliday (1994), Dik (1997), Matthiessen (1995), and other systemicists is adopted as the theoretical framework
The paper includes three parts namely Part A- Introduction, Part B- Development and Part C-Conclusion Part B is divided into four chapters:
Chapter 1 explores theoretical background of Systemic Functional Grammar, the concept of Grammatical Metaphor and the Language of Political Discourse
In chapter 2, the emphasis is on Nominalization in English and Vietnamese as a general description
Chapter 3 examines the concept of nominalization within political discourse in both English and Vietnamese, featuring a case study that analyzes speeches delivered by President Bush and President Nguyen Minh Triet.
Chapter 4 conducts a comparative and contrastive analysis of nominalization in English and Vietnamese, highlighting both similarities and differences This analysis aims to provide valuable insights that can inform teaching practices and translation strategies.
PART B : DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) views text as a form of social interaction, emphasizing language as a system of meaning potential realized through various structures Rather than focusing on rigid rules, SFL prioritizes communicative behavior and meaning-making within cultural contexts, providing a framework for understanding social interactions Additionally, systemic functional grammar offers a deep analysis of language based on its reality-representational and communicative functions Halliday identifies these functions as metafunctions—ideational, interpersonal, and textual—which illustrate how language is shaped to fulfill human needs.
The ideational metafunction is essential for understanding and articulating our perceptions of the world and consciousness It encompasses experiential and logical meanings on the semantic plane Experiential meanings, at the clause level, represent processes, participants, and circumstances, as analyzed by Halliday in his study of English.
The transitivity system accounts for experiential meanings in clauses by offering choices of process types and configurations of participants, processes, and circumstances linked to each process type Meanwhile, logical meanings are expressed through relationships of coordination (parataxis) and subordination (hypotaxis) among clauses and other structural units Analyzing clauses in terms of processes, participants, and circumstances yields constituency structures, whereas logical meanings relate to interdependency structures An example of this can be seen in the experiential analysis of a clause.
Who has cleaned the floor?
The interpersonal metafunction focuses on the interaction between the speaker and the addressee, utilizing grammatical resources to enact social roles and facilitate dialogic interaction This includes functions such as giving or demanding information, expressing intentions, assessing probabilities, and conveying attitudes, which prioritize social interaction over content In analyzing interpersonal meanings, the clause is structured as Subject, Predicator, Complements, and Adjuncts, emphasizing its role as a unit of exchange.
Who has cleaned the floor?
The textual metafunction is articulated through the system of theme, which shapes the clause's character as a message, making it contextually relevant (Halliday 1994: 37) This structure comprises two key elements: Theme and Rheme The Theme acts as the starting point of the message, typically aligning with the initial element(s) of the clause, while the Rheme contains the rest of the message Additionally, these elements can be categorized as Given, which identifies the subject of the clause, and New, which provides additional information related to the Given An analysis of this textual perspective can further illustrate these concepts.
Who has cleaned the floor?
The relationship between theme and rheme is crucial, as speakers can leverage contextual conditions to enhance their communication By skillfully utilizing thematic and information structures, they can create a remarkable range of rhetorical effects.
The relationship of these three functions, which are in the discourse- semantic stratum, is called “metafunctional resonance” by Halliday (1994)
Functional Grammar views metaphors as variations in meaning expression rather than mere word usage, focusing on how meaning is conveyed and how grammar is structured to achieve communicative goals This perspective highlights the transference of representation across different grammatical categories, leading to what Halliday (1994) terms Grammatical Metaphor Grammatical metaphor involves substituting one grammatical class or structure for another, thereby expanding the semantic potential of language, as discussed by Matthiessen (1995), and allowing for meanings to be expressed through forms that originally served different purposes, as noted by Thompson (1996).
(a) the index dropped surprisingly sharply (b) a surprisingly sharp drop in the index
According to Halliday and systemic Functionalists, metaphor is a lexicogrammatical phenomenon arising from the realignment between semantic and grammatical units, resulting in a complex interplay between semantics and lexicogrammar This relationship encompasses both congruent and incongruent, or metaphorical, realizations Notably, there are always distinct semantic features that differentiate grammatically metaphorical forms from their non-metaphorical counterparts (Halliday, 1985).
Halliday (1994) divides grammatical metaphor into metaphors of mood (including modality) and metaphors of transitivity In terms of semantic functions, these are, respectively, interpersonal metaphors and ideational metaphors
Thompson (1996) classifies grammatical metaphor into logical and experiential metaphors, interpersonal metaphors and textual metaphors
In the following sections we will adopt Halliday‟s view in classifying grammatical metaphors into interpersonal and ideational metaphors
Ideational grammatical metaphors, also known as metaphors of transitivity, involve the grammatical variation between congruent and incongruent forms within transitivity configurations These configurations can be analyzed based on their functional structure, extending the expression of ideational meanings beyond their default encoding Typically, ideational meanings are expressed through clauses for processes, adjectives for qualities, and nouns or noun phrases for entities Metaphorical expressions can be interpreted in two ways: either at face value or through their congruent form, as noted by Halliday.
1994: 346) In order to bring out the metaphorical nature of an incongruent expression, it is compared to an equivalent congruent realization For example:
The year the villa was completed saw the end of 20 years of war with
In the year the villa was completed 20 years of war with
Circumstance: Temporal Actor Process: Material
Grammatical metaphor often emerges through nominalization, which transforms clausal patterns into nominal forms This process is crucial as it realigns all other elements of the message, significantly impacting the overall meaning Halliday emphasizes the importance of nominalization in understanding this shift in language structure.
“thinginess”- as a category of ideational metaphor Halliday (1994: 352) points out the role of nominalization as follows:
Nominalizing is a crucial technique for crafting grammatical metaphor by transforming verbs and adjectives into nouns This process allows actions and qualities to be rephrased metaphorically, shifting their role from Processes or Attributes within a clause to functioning as Things in a nominal group.
