Functional Grammar: Functional grammar, based on systemic linguistics, emphasizes the

way spoken and written language operate in different social situations. In particular, it is
very useful in showing how texts work beyond the level of the sentence, how different texts
are structured, and how language varies to suit the purpose of the users. It takes on a
descriptive approach and focuses on groups of words that function to make meanings.
In his classic book an Introduction to Functional Grammar, Halliday (1994) points out that
functional grammar is so-called because its conceptual framework is a functional one rather
than a formal one. It is functional in three distinct senses: in its interpretation (1) of texts,
(2) of the system, and (3) of the elements of linguistic structures.

In the first sense, functional grammar is designed to account for how the language is used.
Every text (everything that is said or written) unfolds in some context of use. Over tens of
thousands of generations of constant use, language has shaped into a system which can
satisfy human needs. Therefore, “A functional grammar is essentially a ‘natural’ grammar,
in the sense that everything in it can be explained, ultimately, by reference to how language
is used” (Halliday, 1994, p. xiii). In the second sense, the fundamental components of
meaning in language are functional components.

According to the analysis of Halliday, all languages are organized around two kinds of
meanings, the ‘ideational’ (to understand the environment), and the ‘interpersonal’ (to
act on the others in it). Combined with these two is a third component, the ‘textual’, which
breathes relevance into the other two. These three components are called metafunctions
in the terminology of FG theory. In the third sense, each element in a language is explained
by reference to its function in the total linguistic system. Accordingly, “a functional
grammar is one that construes all the units of a language – its clauses, phrases and so on. In
other words, each part is interpreted as functional with respect to the whole” (Halliday,
1994, p. xiv).
Based on Halliday’s model, Thompson (1996) explains the three metafunctions of
functional grammar in an informal way as follows:
1) We use language to talk about our experience of the world, including the world in our
minds, to describe events and states and the entities involved in them.
2) We also use language to interact with other people, to establish and maintain relation
with them, to influence their behavior, to express our own viewpoint on things in the world,
and to elicit or change theirs.
3) Finally, in using language, we organize our messages in ways which indicate how they fit
in with the other messages around them and with the wider context in which we are talking
or writing.

Therefore, functional grammar, based on cultural and social contexts, is very useful for
describing and evaluating how language can be used to write and speak more appropriately
and effectively. Using functional grammar can help us to read more carefully and critically.

Based on current books on functional grammar, its key concepts include: functions and
systems, hierarchical ranking of units, word order, word groups, functions of the
sentence, theme, mood, transitivity, and the clause complex.
The major and important concepts will be explained in the following section.

Functions and Systems: Functional grammar looks at how language works in terms of the
functional relationships of its constituent parts, and systems of choice which we make
whenever we use language. The term “functional” is used because it describes the approach

1
which sees grammatical categories in terms of their communicative functions. Its system
network is like a computer program. When we start to run the program, the computer
presents us with a “menu” of possible functions which the program can perform. After we
select one of these functions, we will have sets of options to choose from. Let’s take the
following language “menu” as an example.

Statement
Question
Exclamation
Greeting
Request
Suggestion

Once we choose to form a question, we then have a range of possible interrogative options
in English, such as starting with Wh-, How, Do/Does, Will/Would, or with some other verbs
by making inversions. Or we could simply let intonation and context do the job and retain
the basic word order of a statement.
Hierarchy of Linguistic Units: These functions are seen to operate at different levels of
organization in the language, and may be identified in terms of the constituent parts which
go to form larger units. This implies a segmental principle of organization, in which larger
units may be seen as being formed from smaller units and smaller units being combined to
form the larger units. Take the following clause as an example:
The little boys are working very hard on the lawn.
Here, two morphemes “boy” and “s” form one word “boys”. Two morphemes “work” and
“ing” form one word “working”. Three words “the”, “little” and “boys” constitute a word
group which is called nominal group. In this clause, there are four word groups in all: nominal
group (the little boys), verbal group (are working), adverbial group (very hard), and
prepositional group (on the lawn).
Thus, in functional grammar, a clause is the highest grammatical unit, made up of one or
more groups; each group is made up of one or more words, and each word is made up of
one or more morphemes, the morpheme being the minimal unit. This rank scale is the
fundamental concepts in functional grammar.
Clause and Sentence: Although most books on functional grammar do not contribute a
particular chapter to the concept of clause, it is of great importance. A clause is the highest
unit of functional grammar. However, for EFL students, it is difficult to make a clear
distinction between a clause and a sentence. Therefore, a comparison between a sentence
and a clause has its significance in learning and using grammar.
In traditional grammar, a sentence is a self-contained syntactical unit, and is traditionally
divided into two parts, subject and predicate. In addition, traditional grammar sentences
can be classified into three kinds: a simple sentence, a compound sentence, and a
complex sentence.
Compared with a sentence, a clause is a grammatical unit that includes, at minimum, a
predicate and an explicit or implied subject, and expresses a proposition. Based on the
definition of Halliday (1994), a clause is a composite entity, which is constituted not of one

2
dimension of structure but of three (subject, actor, and theme). Each of the three functions
construes a distinctive meaning. He labels them ‘clause as message’, ‘clause as exchange’,
and ‘clause as representation’. Therefore, the concept of a clause is quite different from
that of a sentence. Discussion of their differences will make a long story. Here, we just
compare their structures, which can be seen from the following examples.
Theme
The system of theme belongs to the textual metafunction of the language. It is concerned
with the organization of information within individual clauses and through this, with the
organization of the larger text. Besides, every clause is organized as a message related to
an unfolding text. The system of theme organizes the clause to show what its local context
is in relation to the general context of the text it serves in.
In Working with Functional Grammar, Martin, Matthiessen and Painter (1997) explain that
This local context or point of departure is called theme. The rest of the message of the
clause is what is presented against the background of the local context—it is where the
clause moves after the point of departure. This is called Rheme. The clause as message is
thus organized into Theme + Rheme. (And) the theme is realized by initial position in the
clause and Rheme that follows.

Theme Rheme
John’s friend came to see me yesterday.
Last night a girl was drowned in this river.
Friends like that, i can do without.
Mood
The system of mood belongs to the interpersonal metafunction of the language and is the
grammatical resource for realizing an interactive move in dialogue (Martin, Matthiessen &
Painter, 1997). It governs the basic structural features of the sentence—whether the
sentence chooses between declarative, interrogative or imperative forms. Thus, the mood
system is the part of grammar which is most inherently linked with the roles which speakers
adopt in the use of language.
In these interactive exchanges, we have to assume which roles may be appropriate when
we are required to express requests for services or information, to provide information or
service for someone else, to give instructions and warnings, to make demands, or to pay
compliments, etc. For example, each of the following alternatives has a different
interactional status and each embodies an alternative mood choice:

Example Mood
He came from a Southern city of China. Declarative
Did he come from a Southern city of China? Interrogative: Yes/No
Who came from China? Interrogative: Wh-
Where did he come from?
Don’t do that again. Imperative

Transitivity: The system of transitivity belongs to one mode of the ideational metafunction,
that is, the experiential one. It is a resource for construing our experience in terms of
configuration of a process, participants and circumstances. Thompson (1996) analyzes that
when using language to interact with people, we clearly use it to talk about the world,
either the external world, things, events, etc., or our internal world, thoughts, beliefs,
feelings, etc. When we look at how language works from this perspective, we are focusing

3
primarily on the content of a message. When we account for the content meanings, it is the
role of experiential perspective in the grammar to allow us to do so.
Altogether, the system of transitivity discriminates six different types of process in English.
The three major ones are material, mental, and relational, each with a small set of
subtypes. Also, there are three further process types, the behavioral, verbal, and
existential. These six kinds of clause are illustrated in the following table.

Process type Example clause (process in bold)

Material The boy made a box.
Mental She liked classical music.
Relational Mary was strong.
Behavioral She laughed
Verbal He replied.
Existential There was a house over there.

Differences in Nature between Functional Grammar and Traditional Grammar

As a new model of grammar, functional grammar is quite different from traditional
grammar. Functional grammar focuses on the way language is put together so that meaning
is communicated for particular purposes, and looks at a language as a system of meaning,
while traditional grammar is concerned with the ways words are organized within sentences
and looks at a language as a set of rules. In other words, functional grammar is different
from traditional grammar in that it focuses on language as a meaning-making resource rather
than as a set of rules (Schleppegrell, 2004).
Also, functional grammar provides us with tools for describing how language is used in
varying, real-life contexts, and for understanding why a text is the way it is (Martin,
Matthiessen & Painter, 1997). It respects speakers’ rights to make up their own minds about
how they choose to talk, and it makes speakers explicitly aware of the choices they have
available. On the other hand, traditional grammar is a prescriptive one, telling you what
you can and cannot say and provides rules for correcting what are often referred to as
grammatical errors. In addition, functional grammar is concerned with how the various bits
of language in a text work together as part of a larger system in order to construct meaning,
while traditional grammar is concerned with identifying the functions of words and word
groups within sentences, without demonstrating how they contribute to the overall meaning
in a text. At the same time, functional grammar is concerned with how language is used in
a range of cultural and social contexts, while traditional grammar is mainly concerned with
how to use language correctly in writing and speech.
In analyzing sentence and word, Halliday (1994) points out that traditional grammar stops
at the sentence and there is a sense in which this does form an upper bound. However, for
functional grammar, in terms of rank, there is no fixed upper limit. It treats the clause as
the basic unit, while traditional grammar regards the sentence as the basic unit.
Besides the above analyzed differences between functional grammar and traditional
grammar, there are still great differences between them, including the areas they cover,
and terminology they use. However, the fundamental difference is that functional grammar
is a meaning-based, descriptive one, and traditional grammar is a form-based, prescriptive
one. In the field of language teaching and learning, their purposes and applications are thus
quite different.