- Email: [email protected]
Verb and noun number in english: A functional approach
English for Specific Purposes, Vol. 12, pp. 95-99, 1993 PergamonPress Ltd. Printed in the USA.
0889-4906/93 $6.00 + .00 Copyright © 1993 The American University
Reviews VERB AND NOUN NUMBER IN ENGLISH: A FUNCTIONAL APPROACH. Wallis Reid. London: Longrnan, 1991, xii + 388 pp.
Reviewed by David Banks The idea that subjects agree with verbs is so entrenched in the thinking behind linguistics, both pure and applied, that it seems incontrovertible. It is simply one of those basic grammatical facts of language. Yet we are all aware of the difficulties this simple "fact" causes for the writers of pedagogical grammars, and the teachers of that grammar. Once the student has gone beyond an elementary level of language, the fact that the simple grammatical rule breaks down in a significant minority of cases has to be faced up to by teachers and students, and we are into the familiar area of exceptions and irregular forms. The book sets out to show that this area of language is more systematic than grammatical rules would have us believe, and does so by suggesting that it is precisely those grammatical rules that are at fault, and that at least in our theoretical thinking, they should be jettisoned in favour of a semantic approach to the question of agreement between subjects and verbs. The book, however, remains a theoretical discussion, so does not touch on the possible effects this might have on teaching practice. For some readers, particularly those in Europe or Australasia, the book's subtitle, A Functional Approach, may well have echoes of Halliday and the British systemic tradition, of the more recent functional linguistics of Dik and his collaborators in Holland, or even of the older French school and Martinet. Reid is not working specifically within any of these traditions, though there are obviously points of contact with any functional approach. His frequent use of systemic is in some ways different to the use made of that term in the British tradition. The book falls basically into four parts. Chapter 1 is introductory, and explains the sign-based (semantic) approach which Reid is going to use. Chapters 2, 3, and 4 consider the question of number in English nouns, and chapters 5, 6, and 7 that of noun-verb agreement. Chapters 8, 9, and 10 are to some extent supplementary, dealing with the effects and implications of the approach. In order to explain the sign-based approach, Reid gives, as an example, a study of the auxiliary do. He argues that do is a sign with the semantic value IMPLIED POSSIBILITY, AFFIRMED. Although presented simply as an example of the way sign-based theory can be used, the little study of do is a gem in itself. In the three chapters which deal with noun number, which he terms the Entity Number System, Reid argues that there is a single semantic system, a systemic choice between ONE and MORE THAN ONE which can be applied to any noun. This does away with the need for traditional categories such as 95
96
Reviews
countable and uncountable, which in any case always leave a number of unwelcome exceptions when used to explain noun number. Although the choice is usually determined by the nature and number of the entity designated, it is always possible for the speaker to modulate his choice for purposes of communication. On the vexed question of animal plurals, he devises a six-point scale, where the speaker may switch from ONE to MORE THAN ONE in passing from one point to another; different speakers may switch at different points for different animals. The argument is amply illustrated throughout with a fascinating array of examples. The author recognizes two nouns which seem to resist his analysis, sheep and deer. Sheep seems to be the more tenacious of the two, and the argument that this is due to the prescriptive pressure of school grammar is a rare lame point in what is generally a convincing argument. Agreement between subject and verb, the Focus N u m b e r System, provides the nub of the book. Reid's basic argument is that the question of number is resolved independently for the entity (subject) and occurrence (verb). Although in the vast majority of cases this will correspond to the traditional notion of agreement, his objective is to find a single semantic rule that will cover the area without leaving the usual embarrassing array of irregularities. The Focus Number System selects the values ONE or MORE THAN ONE on the basis of the number of entities in focus as it relates to the occurrence; there is no reason in principle why this should not differ from the choice in the Entity Number System itself. Cases of mismatch are difficult to account for in a standard grammatical approach, but the semantic framework proposed provides a way of accounting for all examples. The three final chapters of the book draw out the implications of the approach presented. The various combinations of the two systems provide part of the textual resonance, or cohesion, of a message. The textual resonance is in a complementary relationship with the personal expression of the speaker. Each language has its own distribution of sounds, its acoustic asymmetry, which enables a hearer to distinguish between languages, even those he does not know. The number systems contribute to the acoustic asymmetry of English, and they could not be altered without changing the way English sounds. Any reader of a book of this type will come across some details which seem doubtful. Here are a few of my own reservations: . In his application of the Entity Number System to oats, Reid claims that the opposition operates between the concept of the individual grain, oat, as against a massed aggregate and varieties, oats (p. 110). This misses the point that oat can be used to indicate a single variety, as in these two examples: A spring oat bredfrom the cross Marne x Abed Minor... A spring oat selectedfrom Sun H.
(Descriptions of cereal varieties, NationalInstitute of AgriculturalBotany) 2. In the discussion of the results of a questionnaire relating to the use of singular and plural forms for animals, there is a change in the way the
Reuews
97
results are presented (p. 140). I feel it would have been better to use the same mode of presentation throughout. 3. Reid claims (p. 177) that in: John enviedMary her money,
.
John has greater control over the occurrence than Mary because of its initial position. This ignores the fact that the semantic nature of envy makes the initial participant more of a patient than an agent. In the comparision of nasal sounds in English and French (p. 361), it would appear that we are to interpret sounds as being restricted here to consonants. French does, of course, have four nasal vowels.
However, I hope it is evident that these comments are significant in their insignificance. They relate only to details of Reid's general argument and imply at most only minor modification of the illustration or presentation. As one might expect from a major publishing house, errors of a typological nature are rare. I noticed only two minor errors: imputs for imputes (p. 131) and twi~for two (p. 361). Language teachers are frequently put off reading books on linguistics because they associate them with turgid, obscure jargon and find them unrelated to their everyday professional preoccupations. It is unfortunately true that it is all too rare to find a linguistics book of quality which can be read with pleasure. The present work is one of those rare exceptions. The rich amount of detail which the author provides to illustrate his argument is a constant delight, and the work is written in a clear, readable fashion, with a minimum of technical terms. I would be the first to admit that my attempt to give some idea of the content of the book within the scope of a short review fails to do justice to its quality. Moreover, although this book is not going to provide immediate solutions to teaching problems, I am convinced that it is of value to practicing teachers. I am sure that we are stuck with the simple grammatical approach for beginners, but once beyond that stage, the choice seems to be between the catalogue of irregularities and some sort of semantic approach. Reid provides a framework within which the supposed irregularities of the number system become comprehensible. Obviously, no teacher is going to teach this in the way Reid presents it, but the teacher who has this at his disposal has an explanatory tool which can be adapted for pedagogical purposes in the classroom. If you are a language teacher whose interest in language is more than a bread and butter occupation, then I recommend that you read this book. If you are an ESP researcher, then I recommend that you test the theory and discover the characteristics of the texts of your specialty.
David B a n k s is a Maitre de Conf6rences at the Universit6 de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France, where he teaches English linguistics. He edits ESP France Newsletter.
0889-4906/93 $6.00 + .00 Copyright © 1993 The American University
Reviews VERB AND NOUN NUMBER IN ENGLISH: A FUNCTIONAL APPROACH. Wallis Reid. London: Longrnan, 1991, xii + 388 pp.
Reviewed by David Banks The idea that subjects agree with verbs is so entrenched in the thinking behind linguistics, both pure and applied, that it seems incontrovertible. It is simply one of those basic grammatical facts of language. Yet we are all aware of the difficulties this simple "fact" causes for the writers of pedagogical grammars, and the teachers of that grammar. Once the student has gone beyond an elementary level of language, the fact that the simple grammatical rule breaks down in a significant minority of cases has to be faced up to by teachers and students, and we are into the familiar area of exceptions and irregular forms. The book sets out to show that this area of language is more systematic than grammatical rules would have us believe, and does so by suggesting that it is precisely those grammatical rules that are at fault, and that at least in our theoretical thinking, they should be jettisoned in favour of a semantic approach to the question of agreement between subjects and verbs. The book, however, remains a theoretical discussion, so does not touch on the possible effects this might have on teaching practice. For some readers, particularly those in Europe or Australasia, the book's subtitle, A Functional Approach, may well have echoes of Halliday and the British systemic tradition, of the more recent functional linguistics of Dik and his collaborators in Holland, or even of the older French school and Martinet. Reid is not working specifically within any of these traditions, though there are obviously points of contact with any functional approach. His frequent use of systemic is in some ways different to the use made of that term in the British tradition. The book falls basically into four parts. Chapter 1 is introductory, and explains the sign-based (semantic) approach which Reid is going to use. Chapters 2, 3, and 4 consider the question of number in English nouns, and chapters 5, 6, and 7 that of noun-verb agreement. Chapters 8, 9, and 10 are to some extent supplementary, dealing with the effects and implications of the approach. In order to explain the sign-based approach, Reid gives, as an example, a study of the auxiliary do. He argues that do is a sign with the semantic value IMPLIED POSSIBILITY, AFFIRMED. Although presented simply as an example of the way sign-based theory can be used, the little study of do is a gem in itself. In the three chapters which deal with noun number, which he terms the Entity Number System, Reid argues that there is a single semantic system, a systemic choice between ONE and MORE THAN ONE which can be applied to any noun. This does away with the need for traditional categories such as 95
96
Reviews
countable and uncountable, which in any case always leave a number of unwelcome exceptions when used to explain noun number. Although the choice is usually determined by the nature and number of the entity designated, it is always possible for the speaker to modulate his choice for purposes of communication. On the vexed question of animal plurals, he devises a six-point scale, where the speaker may switch from ONE to MORE THAN ONE in passing from one point to another; different speakers may switch at different points for different animals. The argument is amply illustrated throughout with a fascinating array of examples. The author recognizes two nouns which seem to resist his analysis, sheep and deer. Sheep seems to be the more tenacious of the two, and the argument that this is due to the prescriptive pressure of school grammar is a rare lame point in what is generally a convincing argument. Agreement between subject and verb, the Focus N u m b e r System, provides the nub of the book. Reid's basic argument is that the question of number is resolved independently for the entity (subject) and occurrence (verb). Although in the vast majority of cases this will correspond to the traditional notion of agreement, his objective is to find a single semantic rule that will cover the area without leaving the usual embarrassing array of irregularities. The Focus Number System selects the values ONE or MORE THAN ONE on the basis of the number of entities in focus as it relates to the occurrence; there is no reason in principle why this should not differ from the choice in the Entity Number System itself. Cases of mismatch are difficult to account for in a standard grammatical approach, but the semantic framework proposed provides a way of accounting for all examples. The three final chapters of the book draw out the implications of the approach presented. The various combinations of the two systems provide part of the textual resonance, or cohesion, of a message. The textual resonance is in a complementary relationship with the personal expression of the speaker. Each language has its own distribution of sounds, its acoustic asymmetry, which enables a hearer to distinguish between languages, even those he does not know. The number systems contribute to the acoustic asymmetry of English, and they could not be altered without changing the way English sounds. Any reader of a book of this type will come across some details which seem doubtful. Here are a few of my own reservations: . In his application of the Entity Number System to oats, Reid claims that the opposition operates between the concept of the individual grain, oat, as against a massed aggregate and varieties, oats (p. 110). This misses the point that oat can be used to indicate a single variety, as in these two examples: A spring oat bredfrom the cross Marne x Abed Minor... A spring oat selectedfrom Sun H.
(Descriptions of cereal varieties, NationalInstitute of AgriculturalBotany) 2. In the discussion of the results of a questionnaire relating to the use of singular and plural forms for animals, there is a change in the way the
Reuews
97
results are presented (p. 140). I feel it would have been better to use the same mode of presentation throughout. 3. Reid claims (p. 177) that in: John enviedMary her money,
.
John has greater control over the occurrence than Mary because of its initial position. This ignores the fact that the semantic nature of envy makes the initial participant more of a patient than an agent. In the comparision of nasal sounds in English and French (p. 361), it would appear that we are to interpret sounds as being restricted here to consonants. French does, of course, have four nasal vowels.
However, I hope it is evident that these comments are significant in their insignificance. They relate only to details of Reid's general argument and imply at most only minor modification of the illustration or presentation. As one might expect from a major publishing house, errors of a typological nature are rare. I noticed only two minor errors: imputs for imputes (p. 131) and twi~for two (p. 361). Language teachers are frequently put off reading books on linguistics because they associate them with turgid, obscure jargon and find them unrelated to their everyday professional preoccupations. It is unfortunately true that it is all too rare to find a linguistics book of quality which can be read with pleasure. The present work is one of those rare exceptions. The rich amount of detail which the author provides to illustrate his argument is a constant delight, and the work is written in a clear, readable fashion, with a minimum of technical terms. I would be the first to admit that my attempt to give some idea of the content of the book within the scope of a short review fails to do justice to its quality. Moreover, although this book is not going to provide immediate solutions to teaching problems, I am convinced that it is of value to practicing teachers. I am sure that we are stuck with the simple grammatical approach for beginners, but once beyond that stage, the choice seems to be between the catalogue of irregularities and some sort of semantic approach. Reid provides a framework within which the supposed irregularities of the number system become comprehensible. Obviously, no teacher is going to teach this in the way Reid presents it, but the teacher who has this at his disposal has an explanatory tool which can be adapted for pedagogical purposes in the classroom. If you are a language teacher whose interest in language is more than a bread and butter occupation, then I recommend that you read this book. If you are an ESP researcher, then I recommend that you test the theory and discover the characteristics of the texts of your specialty.
David B a n k s is a Maitre de Conf6rences at the Universit6 de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France, where he teaches English linguistics. He edits ESP France Newsletter.