[Xmca-l] That on That

[David Kellogg]

 When most of us speak, we try to "home in" on context--that is, we try to
listen to what we are saying not only from the point of view of the speaker
but also from the point of view of the hearer--who is part of the context
of situation--and we therefore try to elaborate, to exend, and to enhance
what we are saying from that point of view. Because speaking is a process
of realizing or completing thinking--not simply expressing some thought
that exists already in the mind--this process of transition from the
speaker's point of view to that of the hearer can be traced in the
lexicogrammar through what Halliday calls the textual metafunction.
There are two systems which govern the textual metafunction--which allow us
to turn our own words into an experiencing of our own words. One is the
system of Theme which is mostly realized in word order, and the other is
the system of Information which is largely realized through tonic stress).
In word order, the speaker must manage a transition from Theme (the
starting point of the speaker) to Rheme (the endpoint, where the speaker
hands over to the hearer. In stress, the speaker must go from unstressed
from Given (information that is shared with the hearer) to stressed
New (information which is being shared). The variation between "a" and
"the" which Rod noted is just one example of this double transition: If I
say "once upon a time there was a man (stressed); the man (unstressed) was
a president", then "a man" is Rheme, and New iinformation in the first
clause, but it is Theme and Given information in the second). Another
example is the difference between "it" which can be used as Theme and as
Given, and "that" which is used for Rheme and New: we can say "Look at
THAT!" but we say "LOOK at it!"
There are some interesting exceptions to this rule, though. That is, there
are people who cannot seem to home in on context--who do not listen to
themselves speak and do not manage to auto-adjust by taking in the hearer's
point of view. As a consequence, they do not become more coherent as they
speak, but less so.  Here's an example.
"I think the me—I think it’s terrible. You wanna know the truth? I think
it’s a disgrace. What’s going on in this country. I think it’s a disgrace.
The memo was sent to…Congress; it was declassified; Congress will do
whatever…they’re going to do, but I think it’s a disgrace what’s happening
in our country. And when you look at that and you see that and so many
other things what’s (sic) going on….uh lotta people should be ashamed of
themselves and much worse than that. So I sent it over to Congress; they
will do whatever they’re going to do; whatever they do is…fine; it was
declassified and let’s see what happens. But a lot of people should be
ashamed. Thank you very much."
The speaker begins with the most common theme in English: "I". There is
nothing particularly "egocentric" about this: it naturally follows on from
the question  which the hearer just asked the speaker. But when the speaker
arrives at the Rheme, which should be "memo", something happens. "It" is
indicative--it should refer to the memo. So it appears that the speaker is
saying that the memo is terrible. But that wasn't actually what the speaker
meant. The speaker tries, heroically, to take the hearer point of view in
the next clause, with an empty phrase "You wanna know the truth". But he
then follows this up with a statement which, if we follow the chain of
endoporic reference, actually says that the memo is a disgrace. In order to
avoid this implicature, the speaker avoids "homing in" on context and
instead makes it broader--what's going on in this country." But then back
to the memo. You must say something about the memo, because that was what
the question was about. So you say something that is actually entirely
Given information--without any New at all. But the hearer is expecting
something New. One must say something new. So "That". "That on That".

David Kellogg

Recent Article in *Mind, Culture, and Activity* 24 (4) 'Metaphoric,
Metonymic, Eclectic, or Dialectic? A Commentary on “Neoformation: A
Dialectical Approach to Developmental Change”'

Free e-print available (for a short time only) at

http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/YAWPBtmPM8knMCNg6sS6/full