Margaret Berry
Text analyst, academic, teacher and friend
Article outline
- 1.Theme: The writer’s priority
- 2.Exchange structure: A metafunctional approach
- 3.The middle ranks of grammar: Group and phrase
- 4.Concluding remarks
- Acknowledgements
-
References
References (54)
References
Berry, Margaret. 1975. An
introduction to systemic linguistics: I. Structures and
systems. London: Batsford.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1977. An
introduction to systemic linguistics: II. Levels and
links. London: Batsford.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1979. A
note on Sinclair and Coulthard’s classes of acts including a comment on comments. Nottingham
Linguistic
Circular 81. 49–59.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1981a. Systemic
linguistics and discourse analysis: A multi-layered approach to exchange
structure. In Malcolm Coulthard & Martin Montgomery (eds.), Studies
in discourse
analysis, 120–145. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1981b. Towards
layers of exchange structure for directive
exchanges. Network 21. 23–32.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1981c. Polarity,
ellipticity and propositional development: Their relevance to the well-formedness of an exchange. (A discussion of Coulthard
and Brazil’s classes of move.) Nottingham Linguistic
Circular 101. 36–63.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1995. Thematic
options and success in writing. In Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Thematic
development in English
texts, 55–84. London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 1996. What
is Theme? A(nother) personal view. In Margaret Berry, Christophe Butler, Robin Fawcett & Guowen Huang (eds.), Meaning
and form: Systemic functional interpretations. Meaning and choice in language. Studies for Michael
Halliday, 1–64. Norwood: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2013a. Contentful
and contentlight subject themes in informal spoken English and formal written
English. In Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds.), Systemic
functional linguistics: Exploring
choice, 365–383. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2013b. Towards
a study of the differences between formal written English and informal spoken
English. In Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds.), Systemic
functional linguistics: Exploring
choice, 365–383. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2016b. On
describing contexts of situation. In Wendy L. Bowcher & Jennifer Y. Liang (eds.), Society
in language, language in
society, 184–205. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2017a. Stratum,
delicacy, realisation and rank. In Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds.), The
Routledge handbook of systemic functional
linguistics, 4–14. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2017b. Challenging
moves and supporting moves in discourse. In Stella Neumann, Rebekah Wegener, Jennifer Fest, Paula Niemietz & Nicole Hutzen (eds.), Challenging
boundaries in linguistics: Systemic functional
perspectives, 255–280. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2019. The
clause: An overview of the lexicogrammar from part I – SFL: the
model. In Geoff Thompson, Wendy Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schonthal (eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of
SFL, 92–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, Margaret. 2021. Inequalities
in status: how do they show in discourse and what can be done about
them. Lingua 2611. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic
structures. The Hague: Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davies, Florence. 1994. From
writer roles to elements of text: Interactive, organisational and
topical. In Leila Barbara, Mike Scott & Antonieta Celani (eds.), Reflections
on language
learning, 170–183. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davies, Florence. 1997. Marked
Theme as a heuristic for analysing text-type, text and
genre. In Jordi Pique & David J. Viera (eds.), Applied
languages: Theory and practice in
ESP, 45–71. Universitat de Valencia: Servei de Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidse, Kristen. 2021. Exchanging
propositions in the epistemic domain and actions in the deontic domain. Symposium #5: Roundtable in honour of Margaret
Berry. ESFLC
2021. September 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidse, Kristen, Lise Fontaine & Miriam Taverniers. 2019. Introduction. Functions
of
Language 26 (1). 5–12. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, Robin P. 1980. Cognitive linguistics and social
interaction: Towards an integrated model of a systemic functional grammar and other components of a communicating
mind. Heidelberg: Julius Groos & Exeter University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, Robin P. 2010. Alternative architectures for systemic
functional linguistics: How do we choose? Discussions in functional approaches to
language. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fontaine, Lise & Anne McCabe. 2021. Conversations
with Margaret Berry on class, type and categories. Symposium #5: Roundtable in honour of
Margaret Berry. ESFLC
2021, September 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fontaine, Lise & David Schönthal. 2019. The
rooms of the house: Grammar at group rank. In Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of systemic functional
linguistics, 118–141. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Forey, Gail. 2004. Workplace
texts: Do they mean the same for teachers and business people? English for Specific
Purposes 23(4). 447–469. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Forey, Gail. 2009. Projecting
clauses: Interpersonal realisation of control and power in workplace
texts. In Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Text
type and
texture, 151–174. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Forey, Gail. 2021. Bridging
theory and impact on learning: The explicit teaching of Theme and Rheme in primary
schools. Symposium #5: Roundtable in honour of Margaret Berry. ESFLC
2021, September 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Forey, Gail & Geoff Thompson (eds.). 2009. Text
type and
texture. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fries, Peter. 1995a. A
personal view of Theme. In Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Thematic
development in English
texts, 1–19. London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fries, Peter. 2009. The
textual metafunction as a site for a discussion of the goals of a linguistics and techniques of linguistic
analysis. In Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Text
type and
texture, 70–93. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gardner, Sheena. 2004. Four
critical features of teacher-guided reporting in infant science and literacy contexts. Language
and
Education 18 (5). 361–378. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gardner, Sheena. 2006. Centre-stage
in the instructional register: Partnership talk in primary EAL. International Journal of
Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism 9 (4). 476–494. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gardner, Sheena. 2008. Transforming
talk and phonics practice: Or, how do crabs clap? TESOL
Quarterly 421. 261–284. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gardner, Sheena & Aizen B. T. Yaacob. 2009. CD-ROM
multimodal affordances: Classroom interaction perspectives in the Malaysian English literacy
hour. Language and
Education. 23 (5). 409–424. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1959. The language of the Chinese “Secret
History of the Mongols”. Publications of the Philological Society
XVII. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1961. Categories of the theory of
grammar. Word 17 (2). 241–292. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s
introduction to functional
grammar. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, James R. 1992. Theme, method of development in
existentiality: the price of reply. Occasional Papers in Systemic
Linguistics 61. 147–184.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, James R. & David Rose. 2007. Working
with
discourse. London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, James R., Michelle Zappavinga & Paul Dwyer. 2009. Negotiating
shame: Exchange and genre structure in youth justice
conferencing. In Ahmar Mahboob & Caroline Liposkvy (eds.), Studies
in applied linguistics and language
learning, 41–72. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martinez-Insua & Ana Elina. 2017. On
the contentfulness of Themes in English historical medical
texts. In Stella Neumann, Rebekah Wegener, Jennifer Fest, Paula Niemietz & Nicole Hützen (eds.), Challenging
boundaries in linguistics: Systemic functional
perspectives, 111–132. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martinez-Insua & Ana Elina. 2019. Scientific
writing and contentfulness of Subject Themes: How science was explained to (lay)
audiences. Journal of
Pragmatics 1381. 216–230. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 1992. Interpreting the textual
metafunction. In Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds.), Advances
in systemic linguistics: Recent theory and
practice, 37–81. London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mukherjee, Sarah-Jane. 2016. Children’s
meaning making in classroom role-play at 4–5 years: A systemic functional linguistic
investigation. PhD Unpublished. The Open University, England.
Mukherjee, Sarah-Jane & Margaret Berry. 2021. Problems
of analysis in work on exchange structure. Symposium #5: Roundtable in honour of Margaret
Berry. ESFLC
2021, September 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rose, David. 2014. Analysing
pedagogic discourse: An approach from genre and register. Functional Linguistics. 1 (11). 1–32. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sinclair, John & Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards
an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and
pupils. London: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taverniers, Miriam. 2021. Speech
function and mood as seen through metafunctional fractals. Symposium #5: Roundtable in honour
of Margaret Berry. ESFLC
2021, September 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ventola, Eija. 1987. The
structure of social interaction. London: Frances Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wickens, Paul. 2000. Computer-based
learning and changing legal pedagogical orders of discourse in UK higher education: A comparative critical discourse analysis
of the TLTP materials in Law. PhD dissertation. University of Warwick, England. Available at [URL]
Zappavinga, Michelle & James R. Martin. 2018. Discourse
and diversionary justice: An analysis of youth justice
conferencing. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)