m aking meaning”. The term “functional” indicates that the approach concerns
with meaning, as opposed to formal grammar, which focuses on word classess such as: nouns and verbs, typically without reference beyond the individual
clause. Gerot and Wignell 1994: 6 explain that systemic functional grammar
views language as a resource for making meaning. This grammar attempts to describe language in actual use and so focuses on texts and their contexts. They
are concerned not only with the structures, but also with how those structures construct meanings.
Halliday 1994: xiii states that the fundamental components of meaning in language are functional components. All languages are organized around three
kinds of meaning of experiental, interpersonal, and textual meaning. These principal components of meaning or metafunctions are embodied.
In systemic functional grammar, language is analyzed in three different ways. They are semantics, phonology, and lexicogrammar. Systemic Functional
Grammar presents a view of language in terms of both structure grammar and words lexis.
From all the definitons of systemic functional grammar above, it can be concluded that systemic functional grammar is the study of how the grammar is
used in language and how the grammar constructs the meaning, by considering the language as the resource.
2.2 Texts
Halliday and Hasan say that a text is a unit of language in use1976: 1. A
text‟s form can be either spoken or written, dialogue or monologue. It may be anything from a single proverb to a whole play, from a momentary cry for help to
an all-day discussion on a committee. A text is a harmonious collection of meanings appropriate to its context. This unity of purpose gives a text both texture
and structure. Texture comes from the way the meanings in the text fit coherently with each other, in much the same way as the threads of a piece of fabric or carpet
are woven together to make a whole. Structure refers to the way that most pieces of language in use will contain certain obligatory structural elements appropriate
to their purpose and context.
2.3 Meaning
According to Halliday1985:xiii,..all languages are organised around three kinds of meaning: interpersonal meaning, experiential meaning, and textual
meaning. They can be explained as follows.
a. Experiential meanings or ideational meanings are meanings about phenomena or about thing living and non living, abstract and concrete, about
goings on what the doings. These meanings are realized in wordings through participants, processes, and circumstances. Meanings of this kind are most
centrally influenced by the field of discourse. b. Interpersonal meanings
are meanings which express a speaker‟s attitudes and judgements. These are meanings for acting upon and with others. Meanings
are realized in wordings through what is called mood and modality. Meanings of
this kind are most centrally influenced by the tenor of discourse. c. Textual meanings express the relation of language to its environment,
including both the verbal environment, what has been said or written before cotext and the non verbal, situational environment context. These meanings
are realized through patterns of theme and cohesion. Textual meanings are most centrally influenced by mode of discourse.
2.4 Interpersonal Meaning
