Misunderstanding Tenor And Context-Metafunction Resonance

Doran, Martin & Herrington (2024: 188-9):

As Poynton (1990) has shown, variables in terms of contact (how close one is to another person) and status (the degree of ‘equality’ or ‘hierarchy’ in the relationship) can in fact be linked to manifestations of language having to do with how reciprocal the sets of choices are between people (status) and how many meanings can be shared (contact).

As we will discuss in Section 3.2 below, these choices are not restricted to the interpersonal metafunction, but in fact impinge upon choices in all metafunctions. Thus while these dimensions can be more clearly associated with patterns of language, we once more face the issue that this approach erodes the metafunction/context resonance upon which SFL’s model of language and context is constructed. Accordingly, we will propose below that these dimensions be interpreted as principles of instantiation, rather than as tenor options within the realisation hierarchy.

… Doran et al. (2024) propose a new model of tenor as a resource for enacting social relations. This model works to make clear the links between tenor and the interpersonal systems of language, and so maintain SFL’s context/metafunction resonance, as well as providing a map of resources that are used across situations to negotiate social relations and realise distinct genres.

Reviewer Comments:

[1] Here the authors extend their misunderstanding of 'context-metafunction resonance' from field to tenor. To be clear, the notion of context-metaphor resonance does not mean that a tenor variable only has implications for interpersonal choices. As Halliday explained, tenor decides the range of interpersonal choices. What this means is that a specific tenor is identified, that is, distinguished from others, by the interpersonal choices that realise it, rather than by ideational or textual choices.

[2] To be clear, this new model of tenor misunderstands tenor as the interpersonal language that realises it. That is, in terms of symbolic abstraction, it misconstrues the Value as the Token. And confusing levels cannot 'make clear the links between tenor and the interpersonal systems of language'.