Shell nouns and textual patterning

In abstract discourse such as that found in academic writing, positions of prominence are associated with macro- and hyper-Themes, and macro- and hyper- News (Martin, 1992), which establish a hierarchical structure for the text. Shell nouns play an important role in hyper-Themes (Martin, 1992; 2008; Ravelli, 2004) and in hyper-News (Martin, 1992). Martin, for example, notes the significance of grammatical

90

metaphor and Winter’s (1977) vocabulary 3 nouns in hyper-Themes and hyper-News, and Martin and Rose (2003) highlight the importance of referring to discourse as Thing to frame the beginning and ends of a story embedded in another text. They argue that it is the act of naming that helps manage the transition between the two genres by providing scaffolding, and they refer to such nouns as metadiscouse (Martin & Rose, 2003: 188; 2008: 119, 254-255). However, as discussed in section 3.3.1., not all “names” are shell nouns. That is to say, not all “names” are semiotic abstractions; some may be semiotic objects (e.g. letter, extract) without the ability to project although they may construe the Sayer with a verbal Process. This distinction does not, however, undermine the argument that shell nouns are a useful resource in hyper- and macro-Themes and in hyper- and macro-News.

Ravelli (2004) argues that the core function of semiotic abstractions and grammatical metaphor in hyper-Themes is to introduce a shift from familiar to more abstract and analytical levels of discussion, thus foregrounding the “processes of technicalizing and rationalizing” (Ravelli, 2004: 124). Semiotic abstractions/shell nouns are a valuable resource for hyper-Themes because they can point both backwards, by distilling information, and forwards, by predicting future development (Ravelli, 2004; Francis, 1994), but their presence alone is insufficient to compose a successful hyper- Theme; they need to appear in certain colligational patterns, in particular relational Process clauses, which Hoey (1998, cited in Ravelli, 2004) refers to as “micro-wording choices”. This dual function is illustrated in figure 3.7. While the lexicalisation of the shell noun is not shown in the example, the shell noun functions cataphorically.

An example of a legal control that affects management practices

(to previous paragraph)

can be seen in reference to a Dutch law. (to current paragraph)

Head noun (shell noun)

Post modifier (lexically specific and cohesive)

Retrospective connection

Prospective connection

Theme/Given Rheme/New

Figure 3.9 Dual facing of semiotic abstraction/shell noun in hyper-Theme (adapted from Ravelli, 2004: 120)

A clear example of a shell noun functioning in a hyper-Theme can be found in Hood (2010) in her work on the genre of research article introductions (3.42). The shell noun is in bold and its lexicalisation or meaning is underlined.

91

3.42 His methodology showed certain other refinements. First, he excluded overseas students. Such students tend to be older than average and also to fare worse academically (Woodley 1979), thus influencing any age/performance relationship. Secondly, he used two measures of performance; the proportion leaving without obtaining a degree and the degree results of those taking final examinations. Finally, he weighted the degree class obtained according to its rarity value in each faculty. (Hood, 2010: 144)

In 3.42 the shell noun refinements cataphorically predicts its lexicalisations, which are clearly signalled by the conjunctive Adjuncts First, Secondly and Finally. The example also illustrates Martin and Rose’s (2003) claim that hyper-Themes often involve evaluation. The contribution of shell nouns to evaluation from a discourse semantics perspective will be developed in section 3.5.2.

In Ravelli’s (2004) analysis of the hyper-Themes in history and management essays, she found that both disciplines used semiotic abstractions to signal the move to more abstract levels of discussion, but that history essays favoured ‘clear’ grammatical metaphor, i.e. material rather than semiotic abstraction, in hyper-Themes of enhancing paragraphs while management essays favoured semiotic abstractions in hyper-Themes of extending paragraphs. Semiotic abstractions in history often served as an intermediary to introduce nominalisations of Processes whose congruent realisation had appeared in a previous paragraph. An example of such a sequence from Ravelli’s (2004: 122) analysis is given in 3.43.

3.43 They [the Dutch] chose to rule through the local regent (§ 2) this notion of indirect rule (§3).

As Ravelli rightly states, the nominal group with the semiotic abstraction as Head is analogous with, rather than parallel to the antecedent clause. In fact, this notion of indirect rule does shift the grammatical metaphor indirect rule to a more abstract level. This becomes apparent if the antecedent clause is rewritten as an embedded clause rather than a prepositional phrase, either with directed reference in 3.43’ or undirected reference in 3.43’’. In both cases the meaning is more specific than the original wording this notion of indirect rule.

3.43’ this notion that the Dutch chose to rule through the local regent 3.43’’ the notion that the Dutch chose to rule through the local regent

92

Halliday (1988/1993; 1989/1993) notes how a grammatical metaphor realised as a nominal group loses some of the detail of a congruent reading. In this case, presenting the information as Given, the demonstrative this as Deictic signals to the reader that he/she must retrieve information from the co-text, and the modifier Dutch is inferred rather than explicitly realised. A more appropriate gloss might be “this notion of indirect rule, such as that in which the Dutch chose to rule through the local agent”, or “this notion of indirect rule, i.e. that the Dutch chose to rule through the local agent", where the fact clause is an appositive elaboration. Following Schmid (2000), it can be argued that in combination with the Deictic this, the use of notion in 3.43 creates a temporary concept around the antecedent clause and is therefore functioning as a shell noun, the grammatical metaphor in the Qualifier re-lexicalising the congruent realisation of the antecedent clause and specifying the ideational meaning of the shell noun, i.e. filling the semantic gap of the shell noun (figure 3.8). The use of shell nouns in this way – i.e. specified by prepositional phrases with a nominalisation – for temporary concept formation has been found by Aktas and Cortes (2008). It also suggests that the ideational meaning of a Qualifier to a shell noun may contribute to field.

They [the Dutch] chose to rule through the local regent (§ 2)

Actor mat. Process Circumstance

this notion of indirect rule (§3) Deictic Head Qualifier

Figure 3.10 Reconstrual of clause as Qualifier to shell noun

Hood (2008) makes similar claims with regard to concept formation in her analysis of the process of re-instantiation from a source text to notes to a summary. She argues that shell nouns are used to “despecify” meanings while still committing the nominal group to a general ideational meaning such as circumstantial, factual or linguistic. This is in keeping with Halliday’s (1998) claim that assigning an entity to a class is a theoretical operation that involves abstraction.

As noted in section 3.4.3, the discourse organising function of shell nouns has been related to internal conjunction because the shell nouns are organising text, not field (Martin, 1992: 416). Martin develops a system for internal conjunctive relations across clause complexes. The main nodes of the system network are comparative relations, additive relations, consequential relations, and temporal relations. Martin

93

(1992) notes that textual metaphors – shell nouns – express a meta-message relation. Their contribution to internal conjunction is shown in his analysis of a revised short text from social studies (figure 3.9). The shell nouns are highlighted in bold.

I think Governments are necessary at different levels for a number of reasons INTERNAL CONJUNCTION

For example, they make laws, without which people would be killing themselves INTERNAL CONJUNCTION

and help keep our economic system in order.

Let me begin by pointing out that the Federal government fixes up problems that occur in the community.

Another example is that State Government looks after schools; INTERNAL CONJUNCTION

this prevents vandalism and fighting.

As a final point the Local Government is important to look after rubbish: INTERNAL CONJUNCTION

otherwise everyone would have diseases.

As a result of these factors, Governments at several administrative levels are necessary. INTERNAL CONJUNCTION

Figure 3.11 Shell nouns and internal conjunction (adapted from Martin, 1992: 416-417)

In this text another example and As a final point would be classed as temporal relations, successive ordering and terminating respectively, while a number of reasons and As a result of these factors would be classed as consequential relations. Reasons in the first clause, which functions in a hyper-Theme, points forwards to and is lexicalised by the following five clause complexes. Two other shell nouns – example and point – appear in textual Themes and contribute to the thematic development of the paragraph. The last shell noun – factors – refers anaphorically to the reasons presented in the previous clause complexes, distilling them while reclassing reasons as factors. As Martin notes, there is no hyper-New.

The above overview shows that shell nouns contribute to textual patterning in the instantiation of a text, both at a more local level and a higher structural level. At a local level, the resources of reference – combining a specific Deictic with a shell noun – move the argument forward. At higher levels, shell nouns – often in relational Process clauses – compose hyper-Themes, which may then be expanded with or without shell nouns by means of the resources of internal conjunction. Similarly, they may be used to signal hyper-News, bringing information to together from one or more clauses.

94

Although the function of shell nouns has been noted in internal conjunction, they also crop up in external conjunction, but their contribution to the text is either unexplored or dismissed. In fact, some conjunctive Adjuncts include a semiotic abstraction that could be seen to be functioning as a shell noun, e.g. as a result, as a consequence, for that purpose, for that reason, in that event, in that case, at this moment. Consider examples 3.44 and 3.45.

3.44 S02: Do they tend to pay; how do they – S04: Per isse. – S02: Per issue. Well in that case do they pay after the issues come out? – S04: I think so. (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004: 360)

3.45 Now prices have sunk for secondary schools and experienced secondary inspectors are shifting into primary and special schools with minimal training. As a result, primary schools and teachers are being judged ‘failing’ by inspectors who have never taught younger children, but only watched a couple of lessons on video during their training! (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. 547) It could be argued that in 3.44 and 3.45, case and result exemplify Schmid’s (2000) characterising function: in 3.44, the noun characterises the preceding information [they pay] per issue as a condition upon which the following clause is dependent, while in 3.45, the noun labels and signposts the following clause complex as an outcome of changes in the education system. For Halliday and Hasan (1976: 256- 257), the use of a prepositional phrase containing a noun such as reason, purpose or result makes it possible to distinguish among the specific kinds of causal conjunctive relations, which is not possible with the general so, the simplest form of expression of a causal conjunction. The link between these causal conjunctive Adjuncts and lexicogrammatical patterns for shell nouns identified by Schmid (2000) as key is apparent in the rewrites of 3.44 and 3.45 below.

3.44’ S02: Do they tend to pay; how do they – S04: Per isse. – S02: Per issue. Well, if the case is that they pay per issue, do they pay after the issues come out? – S04: I think so.

3.45’ Now prices have sunk for secondary schools and experienced secondary inspectors are shifting into primary and special schools with minimal training. The result of this situation is that primary schools and teachers are being judged ‘failing’ by inspectors who have never taught younger children, but only watched a couple of lessons on video during their training!

95

Despite the apparent link between the causal conjunctive Adjuncts discussed above, it is not particularly helpful to consider them as examples of shell nouns. Moreover, Schmid (2000: 25) notes that the link between a nominal group with a shell noun as Head and its lexicalisation is weaker in indefinite nominal groups than definite nominal groups.

In their discussion of conjunctive or discourse Adjuncts, Halliday and Hasan (1976: 230-233) note that some prepositional expressions may require a reference item, e.g. in spite of, while for others such a reference item is optional, e.g. as a result. They argue that only when the reference item – either demonstrative this, that or noun as Head – is anaphoric, is the Adjunct cohesive by means of conjunction. They provide the following example (Halliday & Hasan, 1976: 231).

3.46 The captain had steered a course close in to the shore. As a result,

As a result of this, they avoided the worst of the storm. As a result of this move,

As a result of his caution,

In this example, the shell noun move refers anaphorically to the preceding clause. Halliday and Hasan (1976: 232) argue that the reference item, often a general noun such as move, “does no more than make explicit the anaphoric function of the whole phrase” and because it is the conjunctive relation that provides the link and not the reference item, any referring item in a prepositional expression is simply included in the conjunctive Adjunct. By contrast, the conjunctive Adjunct As a result of his caution is not cohesive by means of conjunction because the pronominal Deictic his is cohesive by means of identity of reference.

In fact, Halliday and Matthiessen (2004: 79) argue that discourse/conjunctive Adjuncts construe no experiential role in the clause; they are merely textual, often appearing as textual Theme. Yet, at the stratum of discourse semantics, the textual role of a conjunctive Adjunct qualified by a nominal group with shell noun as Head is clear, and the choice of shell noun may add interpersonal meaning. This becomes apparent in a rewrite of the example 3.46.

96

3.46’ The captain had steered a course close in to the shore. As a result of this mistake, they ran aground on a reef.

Like move, the shell noun mistake encapsulates the preceding clause, but this time the captain’s steering close to the shore is assessed negatively. The choice of shell noun clearly opens up a wide range of possibilities for introducing interpersonal meaning in the conjunctive Adjunct. Previous work that broaches on their contribution to interpersonal meaning at the stratum of discourse semantics will be reviewed in the following section.