ORIENTING: Systemic Model or Descriptive List?

Doran, Martin & Zappavigna (2025: 90):

To explore how positions are arranged, we will introduce five resources within a system called ORIENTING:

• sourcing – where positions are oriented as being from the perspective of someone or something (as ‘theirs’ in some sense);

• convoking – where positions are oriented toward someone or something, or someone is being brought into the position;

• opposing – where positions are oriented as being opposed to each other;

• likening – where positions are oriented as to some degree similar to each other, or on ‘the same side’ of an opposition;

• encapsulating – where sets of positions are oriented as being synthesised within other meanings.

These relations function to orient different meanings in relation to each other so as to build a large network of positions. As we will see, each choice can be repeated any number of times, which allows for indefinitely large networks of values to be built over time.

 

ChatGPT Comments:

The ORIENTING system raises a number of issues:

1. Systemic status unclear: Unlike canonical SFL systems, it is not explicitly stated what the paradigmatic options are within ORIENTING, how delicacy or dependency is organised, or what counts as a choice point. Without this, the system reads as a descriptive rubric rather than a rigorously defined set of systemic options.

2. Overlap with existing SFL resources: Many of the ORIENTING relations (sourcing, opposing, likening, encapsulating) map closely onto established SFL resources. For example:

   • Sourcing parallels attribution heteroglossia and projection;

   • Opposing and likening echo internal connexion contrasts (e.g., difference vs similarity signals);

   • Encapsulating resembles higher-level periodicity or hypertheme structures.

     This raises the question of whether ORIENTING adds theoretical novelty or simply rebrands existing systems with new terminology.

3. Indefinite network claim: The assertion that choices “can be repeated any number of times” and thereby build “indefinitely large networks of values” risks overstating the analytic power of the model. While iterative structuring is a real phenomenon, the concept of “indefinite” networks is rhetorical rather than systematically constrained.