Problems With The Authors' Perspectives On Context

 Doran, Martin & Herrington (2024: 178):

In this paper, we draw attention to two key developments since that time that arise from viewing the register variables of field, tenor, and mode from multiple perspectives. These are the perspectives from 

(i) realisation, where the register variables field, tenor, and mode are reconstrued as resources for making meaning; and 

(ii) instantiation, involving a reconsideration of register from a multifunctional perspective on knowledge building (mass), social relations (association), and context dependency (presence).

Reviewer Comments:

[1] To be clear, from the perspective of realisation, field, tenor and mode are at the level of context, whereas resources for making meaning are at the level of language. In reconstruing context as language, the authors confuse distinct levels of symbolic abstraction. This alone is sufficient to invalidate their model.

[2] To be clear, from the perspective of instantiation, context is the cline from culture (potential) to situation (instance), and field, tenor and mode are the metafunctional perspectives on context. On the other hand, register, from the perspective of instantiation, is a point of variation in language, between system (potential) and text (instance).

[3] To be clear, in taking a 'language-based approach to cognition', SFL models 'knowledge' as meaning. Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: ix-x):

It seems to us that our dialogue is relevant to current debates in cognitive science. In one sense, we are offering it as an alternative to mainstream currents in this area, since we are saying that cognition "is" (that is, can most profitably be modelled as) not thinking but meaning: the "mental" map is in fact a semiotic map, and "cognition" is just a way of talking about language. In modelling knowledge as meaning, we are treating it as a linguistic construct: hence, as something that is construed in the lexicogrammar. Instead of explaining language by reference to cognitive processes, we explain cognition by reference to linguistic processes.