Problems With A Tenor System Known As Positioning

Doran, Martin & Zappavigna (2025: 32):

The following section will explore this by introducing resources in a tenor system known as POSITIONING. As a general starting point, we will make a distinction between two choices available for speakers in dialogue. The first involves tendering meanings, where something is put forward to be negotiated or developed. This choice is in some sense prospective – it ‘looks forward’ in conversation, tabling a position for others to react to. The second choice involves rendering, by proffering some sort of opinion on what has been put forward. This option is in a sense retrospective – it ‘looks backward’, by reacting to meaning. In their simplest manifestations, tendering and rendering can be done in sequence in a dialogue. This is illustrated by Kristy and her mother in example (1). Arrows are used to indicate the connection between tender/render pairs.

Reviewer Comments:

[1] As previously explained, the tenor system of POSITIONING is a cognitive approach to the exchange structure of interpersonal semantic system of SPEECH FUNCTION. That is, it is semantics misunderstood as context, and formulated on the basis of assumptions that are inconsistent with the approach of SFL Theory. The system's two choices, tendering vs rendering, are the authors' rebrandings of initiating vs responding moves in an exchange.

[2] To be clear, in this exchange, which is language not tenor — the tenor is who is taking part: mother and daughter — the tendering moves are (initiating) statements and the rendering moves are (responding) acknowledgements. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 137):