Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository

If we contend, as Halliday expectedly does, that the text is
basically a semantic unit, it follows that a componential analysis of
the text, must be administered from a semantic perspective. The
phonological, lexical, and syntactic structures should be analytically
studied as being functionally contributive to the explication of the
text's semantic significance. In this context, Halliday brings in yet
another notion, that is, the text is both "a woduct and a process".
(ibid, p10) A text is a product in the sense that it is an output, a
palpable manifestation of a mental image that can be studied and
recorded, having a certain construction that can be represented in
systematic terms. It is a process in the sense that it is a continuous
movement through the network of meaning potential which involves a lot
of choice - and decision-making. Halliday does not only view the text
as a basically semantic unit, but also as an instance of social
interaction. In its social-semiotic perspective, a text is an object
of social exchange of meanings. Halliday merges semiotics with both
sociology and linguistics. In this perspective, the texp is a sign
representation of a sociocultural event embedded in a context of
situation. By context of situation, I mean the semio-socio-cultural
environment in which the text unfolds. Text and context are so
intimately related that neither concept can be comprehended in the
absence of the other.
Let us recall once again, for the sake of comparative analysis, the
concept of 'sentencehood' as opposed to that of 'texthood'. Several
attempts were made, and are still made, to set fast and sharp
50