Doran, Martin & Zappavigna (2025: 65):
At this point, we can present an initial network of different resources for tendering, as shown in Figure 3.1. This network says that when tendering, one may table a proposition or a proposal, and each of these may be either open or complete.
ChatGPT Comments:
This system network exemplifies a serious stratal confusion: the authors present a contextual system (tenor: tender) whose features—proposition vs proposal, open vs complete—are clearly semantic. This is analogous to proposing a grammatical system (e.g. mood) in which the features are phonological (e.g. tones). It inverts the logic of realisation by treating options that should be realised by context-sensitive semantics as if they were chosen within the context itself. Moreover, “tendering” is not a situational parameter but a semantic phase within an unfolding exchange—it belongs to the semantics, not the context. The attempt to redescribe interpersonal semantic distinctions as contextual systems not only muddies the metafunctional picture, but introduces a kind of phantom network: one that appears systemic but floats free of any coherent stratal grounding. The result is a mislocated reclassification of semantic options that ultimately undermines the integrity of both strata.
No comments:
Post a Comment