REPÚBLICA BOLIVARIANA DE VENEZUELA

UNIVERSIDAD PEDAGÓGICA EXPERIMENTAL LIBERTADOR

INSTITUTO PEDAGÓGICO DE BARQUISIMETO
DR. “LUIS BELTRÁN PRIETO FIGUEROA”

The role of systemic-functional

grammar in language teaching and
learning

Participant:
Francis Chacon
CI: 5191511
Subject: English Grammar
Facilitator: Astrid Castejón Palencia
Specialty: Inglés

January, 2025
 INTRODUCTION

Systemic-functional grammar (GSF), developed by linguist Michael Halliday,

has emerged as a significant approach in language teaching and learning. Unlike
traditional grammars that focus on the formal structure of language, GSF places
emphasis on the use of language in specific social contexts.

This approach is based on the idea that language is not just a system of
grammatical rules, but a tool for constructing meaning and performing
communicative functions. In this essay, we will explore how GSF can enrich the
teaching and learning processes of languages, its fundamental concepts such as
metafunctions, genres and language functions.

It also discusses the different schools of thought and methodological

approaches that can complement or contrast with the GSF, as well as the
contradictory arguments that come together in its application.
 Systemic-functional grammar has emerged as a significant approach in
language teaching and learning. Unlike traditional grammars that focus on fixed rules
and syntactic structures.

Halliday (2014) defines systemic-functional grammar as a theoretical approach

to language, which focuses on its functioning as a system of meanings and how it is
used in specific social contexts.

On the other hand, Saussure (cited by Martínez, 2024) states that,

Each individual receives the language and develops it in the community

in which he or she grows up. The individual is unable to change and
influence this language since it is abstract and is different from the use of
the language that each individual makes (p. 19).

These theories are reinforced in the exhibitions published by ISFLA (2010)

where it is stated that,

“Systemic-functional linguistics (LSF) is a theory of language focused on the

notion of language function. While LSF takes into account the syntactic
structure of the language, it places the function of the language as the central
element (what the language does and how it does it), rather than more
structural approaches, which place the elements of the language and their
combinations as elements central. LSF begins in the social context and
analyzes how language acts on and is limited by this social context.”
 Given this exposition, it is considered that the GSF uses language as a social
resource for the construction of meanings, based on three metafunctions of language,
which Halliday classifies into three categories: the ideational metafunction, the
interpersonal metafunction and the textual metafunction:

1. Ideational metafunction: It refers to how we represent experiences and realities

through language. In the classroom, this involves teaching students to construct
complex meanings and express ideas effectively, learning to use language to describe,
narrate and explain the real world.

2. Interpersonal metafunction: This function addresses the social relationships

established through language, emphasizing the importance of communicative
interactions, allowing students to develop skills for meaning and establishing
relationships. In a classroom, this can manifest through interactions between students
and teachers, where meanings are negotiated and social identities are constructed.

3. Textual metafunction: It focuses on how we organize discourse so that it is

coherent and cohesive. In pedagogical terms, this involves teaching students to
structure their linguistic productions in a logical and fluid way, including aspects such
as writing texts.

For its part, the GSF allows us to understand language in specific social
contexts, one of the key concepts is "language genres", which refers to the different
forms and types of discourse that are used in various communicative situations, which
are:
1. Narrative Genre: It is used to tell stories or relate events, its structure includes
elements such as the introduction, development and conclusion. In language teaching,
it can be used to develop creative writing and reading comprehension skills.

2. Expository Genre: This genre focuses on informing or explaining concepts, it is

common in academic and scientific texts. In language learning, it helps students
organize their ideas and present arguments clearly.

3. Argumentative Genre: It is used to persuade an explanation for or against an idea,

it encourages critical thinking and the ability to debate, essential skills in language
learning.

4. Instructional Genre: Includes manuals, recipes and guides. This genre is useful
for teaching specific vocabulary and grammatical structures related to actions and
procedures.

5. Descriptive Genre: It focuses on describing people, places or things. It helps

students build their vocabulary and improve their ability to create mental images
through language.

|Each genre has particular characteristics and structures, which implies that its
teaching must adapt to these specificities.

On the other hand, The GSF, based on the premise that language is a social
resource used to perform communicative functions, highlights three main functions of
language:
1. Ideational: Refers to how language represents experiences, ideas and
concepts, representing actions, events and states.

 Relevance in teaching: Helps students construct meanings and express their

thoughts and experiences, promoting the ability to narrate, describe and argue.

2. Interpersonal: This function focuses on interactions between speakers, it

allows establishing social relationships, expressing attitudes, emotions and
manners.

 Relevance in teaching: It is crucial to develop effective communication

skills, where students analyze meanings, ask questions and express opinions.

3. Textual function: Refers to how language is organized to create coherent and

cohesive texts. It involves the structure of speech and the use of connectors.

 Relevance in teaching: Facilitates the understanding of different types of

texts (narrative, descriptive, argumentative) and helps students structure their
own textual productions.

4. Metafunctional function: The GSF considers that these functions are not
independent; They interact with each other to create complete meaning.

 Relevance in teaching: Promotes a holistic view of language learning, where

students can see the different elements of language and integrate them into
their daily use.

Given the above, it can be stated that functional grammar focuses on the
relationship between language and its social environment, contextualizing what has
been argued to the schools of thought in language teaching, we can deduce that there
are contradictions, as is the case of grammar. traditional and the structural approach,
in relation to the communicative approach and constructivism, which is why, to
exemplify in a clear and simple way, a comparison is made below with other Schools
of Thought:

1. Traditional Grammar:

o Focus: Focuses on grammatical rules and syntactic structures.

o Method: Teaching through memorization of the rules and analysis of
sentences.
o Limitations: It may be disconnected from the real use of language, it
does not consider the social context or communicative functions.

2. Structuralist Approach:

o Approach: Analyze language as a system of signs and structures.

o Method: It focuses on the description of linguistic structures without
linking them to their practical use.
o Limitations: Lack of attention to meaning and how language is used
in specific contexts.

2. Communicative Approach:

o Approach: Prioritizes effective communication and the use of

language in real contexts.
 o Method: Activities focused on interaction and practical use of the
language.
o Similarities with Systemic-Functional Grammar: Both approaches
value the context of the language, although systemic-functional
grammar is more detailed about how meanings are constructed.

2. Constructivism:

o Approach: It is based on the idea that students construct their own

knowledge through experiences.
o Method: Active learning, where students participate in meaningful
activities.
o Relationship with Systemic-Functional Grammar: Both approaches
promote contextualized learning, but systemic-functional grammar
offers more specific tools to analyze how meanings are constructed
within those contexts.
 CONCLUSION

Michael Halliday has revolutionized the way we understand and teach

languages. Unlike traditional approaches that focus on grammatical structure
and memorization of rules, Systemic-Functional Grammar proposes a view of
language as a dynamic system that is used to construct meaning in specific
social contexts.

This approach is not only relevant to theoretical linguistics, but also

has significant implications for language teaching and learning.

In the context of language teaching and learning, Systemic-Functional

Grammar offers a valuable perspective that contrasts with other schools of
thought, generating debates about its effectiveness and application in
educational settings.
 REFERENCES

International Association for Systemic Functional Linguistics – ISFLA. (2010).

Information on Systemic Functional Linguistics. [Online website]. Available
in: http://www.isfla.org/Systemics/definition.html Fecha de consulta:
03/02/2025.

M.A.K., Halliday and Christian M.I.M., Matthiessen (2014). Introduction to

functional grammar fourth edit on. [Online book]. Consulted on February 3,
2025 at:
https://linguisticstudentindonesia.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/
2020/09/m.a.k.-halliday-christian-m.i.m.-matthiessen-hallidays-introduction-
to-functional-grammar-2014-routledge-libgen.lc_.pdf

Martínez Lirola, M. (2024). Aspectos esenciales de la Gramática Sistémica

Funcional. [Online book]. Consulted on February 3, 2025 at:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/16368536.pdf