The System of Mood

3. WH-interrogative is realized through either of the two: a Subject before Finite if the WH-element is the Subject; b Finite before Subject if the WH-element is not Subject Complement or Adjunct. Who sent you here? SubjectWH- ‘past’ Finite Residue Mood Figure 4: Structure of Interrogative Mood with the WH-element as Subject Where have you been? AdjunctWH- Finite Subject Mood Residue Figure 5: Structure of Interrogative Mood with the WH-element as Adjunct In addition to Subject and Finite, there is actually another constituent which is analyzed as the Mood element namely the mood Adjunct. However, unlike Subject and Finite which are the main components of Mood element which together realize the mood selection, mood Adjunct is analyzed as part of the Mood rather for the reason that it acts directly on the Mood constituent Eggins, 2004. a Subject Matthiessen et al. 2010 describe the Subject as the constituent in the Mood element which is invested with modal responsibility for the validity of the proposition or proposal realized by the clause. For example, in “He ate my banana”, the Subject ‘He’ is responsible for the proposition of the clause to function, and that the speaker who said the utterance considers “He did ate” as the case for which the listener then acknowledges. The Subject is typically realized by nominal group noun or pronoun that is in the nominative case, and that displays person and number concord with the finite verb Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. It is also known as being the pronoun in a tag. b Finite Finite expresses the deicticity of the process in interpersonal meaning, by reference to either speaker-now primary tense or speaker judgement modality Halliday, 1985a2002. These references of tense and modality enable the Finite to function as making the proposition arguable Eggins, 2004. An example is ‘didn’t’ in “They didn’t come to your house yesterday, did they?” In the example, the Finite ‘didn’t’ is noticeably separated from the verbal operator showing negative polarity, while in many cases it may be fused into a single verbal operator as in “They came to your house yesterday, didn’t they?”. In the latter example, the Finite ‘did’ is fused with the Predicator ‘come’ and thus both Finite and Predicator are analyzed as parts of the verbal operator ‘came’. As seen in the previous example of ‘didn’t’, Finite also known to typically specify polarity Halliday and Matthiessen et al. 2010. c Mood Adjunct There are generally three types of Adjunct based on the theory of metafunction Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004: the one which is interpersonal in function, including Mood Adjunct and Comment Adjunct; the one which functions as circumstance in the experiential metafunction namely the Circumstantial Adjunct; and the one which is located in the clause with respect to the textual metafunction, the Textual Adjunct. These types of Adjunct and its analysis in the mood structure are presented more comprehensively in Figure 6 below. Figure 6: Types of Adjunct Matthiessen et al., 2010 As the figure presents, the only type of Adjunct which is analyzed as part of the Mood is the mood Adjunct. Similar to other types of Adjunct, mood Adjunct is realized by adverbial or prepositional group. The neutral location of mood Adjunct in the clause is before or just after the Finite verbal operator Matthiessen et al., 2010. Halliday and Matthiessen 2004 note that mood Adjunct is closely associated with the meanings construed in the mood system which include those of modality, temporality, and intensity, each of which respectively leads to further classification of Adjunct of modality, Adjunct of temporality, and Adjunct of intensity. Adjunct textual: conjunctive Adjunct [outside Mood + Residue] experiential: circumstantial Adjunct [part of Residue] interpersonal: modal Adjunct mood Adjunct [part of Mood] comment Adjunct [outside Mood + Residue] 1. Adjunct of modality Adjunct of modality expresses probability such as ‘probably’, ‘possibly’, ‘certainly’, ‘perhaps’, ‘maybe’ and usuality such as ‘usually’, ‘sometimes’, ‘always’, ‘never’, ‘ever’, ‘seldom’, ‘rarely’. Adjunct of modality is presented in more detail below in the section of Modality. 2. Adjunct of temporality Adjunct of temporality relates either to the time set by the speaker such as ‘eventually’, ‘soon’, ‘once’, ‘just’, or to the expectation concerning the time in question for example ‘still’, ‘already’, ‘no longer’, ‘not yet’ Matthiessen et al., 2010. 3. Adjunct of intensity Adjunct of temporality relates either to the degrees of expectation such as ‘entirely’, ‘almost’, ‘totally’, ‘hardly’, or to the counter-expectancy such as ‘even’, ‘actually’, ‘really’ exceeding, ‘simply’, ‘merely’, ‘only limiting. 2 Residue Residue can be understood simply as part of the clause which does not constitute the Mood element in the mood structure Matthiessen et al., 2010. This definition implies that there are actually some parts of the clause which do not belong to the mood structure, or in other words, they are neither part of the Mood elements nor the Residue. Regarding the distinction between the Residue and those other parts existing together with the mood elements, Matthiessen et al. 2010 add that the Residue does not include elements that do not represent the proposition or proposal such as Vocative, Expletive, comment Adjuncts, or conjunctive Adjuncts. The position of Residue in the mood structure is less essential to the argument of the clause than is the Mood element Eggins, 2004. The constituents of Residue encompass Predicator, Complement, and circumstantial Adjunct. a Predicator Predicator represents the verbal elements in the Residue, that is, after the Finite is excluded. It is realized by the verbal group as exemplified in “I’ve been trying to tell you everything”, where the Predicator includes ‘been trying to tell’. According to Halliday and Matthiessen 2004, there are four functions of Predicator in the clause as listed below: 1. It specifies time reference other than reference to the time of the speech event secondary tense, such as ‘been willing to’ in ‘have been willing to’. 2. It specifies the voice active or passive, such as ‘seen’ in ‘was seen’. 3. It specifies the process action, event, mental process, relation that is being discussed Eggins, 2004; Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004, such as ‘seen’ in ‘was seen’ which represents the mental process ‘seeing’. 4. It specifies other aspects and phases such as ‘seeming’, ‘trying’, ‘hoping’, as exemplified by the conative phase ‘try to’ in ‘have been trying to tell’. b Complement According to Halliday and Matthiessen 2004: 123, in the mood structure “any nominal group not functioning as Subject will be a Complement”. It has the potential of being Subject but is not Halliday, 1994. This potential is reflected in the passive variant of a clause in which the Subject is derived from the Complement when the clause is in its active voice, such as ‘a book’ in “Mr Andrew borrowed a book from the school library”. In passive voice, the Complement functions as Subject as in “The book was borrowed by Mr. Andrew from the school library”. In traditional grammar, Complement covers both the complements and objects Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. c Circumstantial Adjunct As opposed to Complement, an Adjunct is the constituent in the Residue which does not have the potential of being Subject and typically realized by adverbial or prepositional group Halliday, 1994. For example, in “We’ll leave tomorrow by train”, ‘tomorrow’ is an Adjunct realized by adverbial group, while ‘by train’ is an Adjunct realized by prepositional group. 3 Constituents outside the mood structure As mentioned earlier, there are some parts of the clause which do not belong either in Mood or Residue, or in other words, they do not belong in the mood structure. These parts of the clause may relate to the structure of other function such as the textual or conjunctive Adjunct in the textual metafunction, or to other aspects of the mood instead of representing neither proposition nor proposal such as comment Adjunct, Vocative, and Expletive. a Comment Adjunct Comment Adjunct, together with the mood Adjunct, actually contributes to the interpersonal metafunction. It is only that compared to the mood Adjunct, the comment Adjunct is less closely tied to the grammar of mood with respect to its restriction on the indicative clause and that the burden of the comment may be either ideational or interpersonal Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. In the ideational type, the comment Adjunct expresses speaker’s attitude to the proposition as a whole, for example, ‘obviously’, ‘arguably’, ‘presumably’, ‘hopefully’. Meanwhile in its interpersonal type, it expresses speaker’s attitude to the particular speech function such as ‘honestly’, ‘seriously’, ‘frankly’, ‘personally’. Due to its scope of expressing the proposition as a whole, instead of just the Finite, the comment Adjunct is considered to operate outside the mood + residue structure Halliday in Eggins, 2004. b Conjunctive Adjunct Conjunctive Adjunct is another type of Adjunct which is not included in the mood structure, rather it is textual in function and originally contributes to the structure of textual metafunction, thus it is also known as the textual Adjunct. Conjunctive Adjunct “set up a contextualizing relationship with some other typically preceding portion of the text” Halliday, 1994: 83-84. It is realized by conjunction group as exemplified in “I want to surprise everyone, so I came earlier this morning” where the conjunctive Adjunct is represented by ‘so’. Furthermore, Eggins 2004: 164 specifies another type of Adjunct in relation to textual Adjunct which is called continuity Adjunct which function is “merely signal that the speaker will be saying more”, such as ‘well’ in “Well, then can you do it for me?” c Vocative and Expletive Vocative is a feature of a dialog which is used by the speaker to enact the participation of the addressee Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. It is identifiable as name which is used to directly address the person named Eggins, 2004 such as ‘Abdul’ in “I wonder what do you think about this case, Abdul.” Meanwhile the vocative enact the participation of the addressee, the Expletive is used by the speaker to enact his own current attitude or state of mind, exemplified by Halliday and Matthiessen 2004 in “God, mine’s terrific”, in which ‘God’ is the expletive.

c. Mood Types

With the speech function vary according to the speech roles and commodities being exchanged, the mood which grammaticalizes each different speech function also has its distinctive structure which is different to each other, making up the selection of typical mood types for different speech functions. Some of the mood types, such as the declarative, yesno-interrogative, and WH- interrogative have been introduced earlier, are shown to have different structure especially those of the order of the Subject and Finite. Each of these mood types are presented in more detail as follows. 1 Declarative Declarative is an indicative mood type which realizes the speech function of statement. It is characterized by the order of Subject before Finite. Declarative is also known as the only mood type to have ideational comment Adjunct Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. As a mood type realizing a statement, declarative clause functions as giving information. It is also notable that Finite and Predicator in declarative are often fused, or in some cases when they are separated, it shows an emphasis or makes up the empathic version of the clause Lock, 1996 such as in “I did go to the party last night.” 2 Yesno-interrogative Yesno-interrogative or also known as polar interrogative is one of the two mood types which realizes the speech function of question, the other being the WH-interrogative. As the term implies, polar interrogative demands information about the polarity of a proposition realized by the clause Matthiessen et al., 2010. The structure of polar interrogative basically begins with the Finite which is then followed by the Subject. This sub-type of interrogative can be answered simply by a ‘yes’ or ‘no’, or sometimes also followed by a declarative consisting of only the Subject and the Finite from the question, together with the negative marker ‘notn’t’ when relevant Lock, 1996 such as “Yes, it is” or “No, it doesn’t.” 3 WH-interrogative Another mood type in the sub-types of interrogative is the WH- interrogative, which function is to “specify the entity that the questioner wishes to have supplied” Halliday, 1994: 85. It is called the WH-interrogative for it uses the Wh-element ‘What’, ‘Who’, ‘Where’, ‘When’, ‘Why’, ‘How’ to select the kind of information, participant, or circumstance which is demanded Matthiessen et al., 2010. This is reflected in the WH-element’s nature which is always conflated with one or another of the three functions of Subject, Complement, or Adjunct Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. The structure of the WH-interrogative then depends on which of the three functions it is conflated Halliday, 1994. If the WH-element is conflated with Subject, that is, realized by ‘Who’, the order is Subject Finite, with the WH-element becoming the Subject. If it is conflated with Complement or Adjunct, the order is WH-element Finite Subject with the WH-element is part of the Residue. 4 Imperative As opposed to the indicative mood variants which concern with the exchange of information, the imperative deals with the exchange of goods-- services and realizes both the speech functions of command and offer Matthiessen et al., 2010. Following the nature of exchanging goods--services, the imperative mood type only involves the Subject of ‘you’ or ‘me’. However, these Subjects are normally not part of the structure in the unmarked form of imperative, as well as it eliminates Finite. The existence of Subject and Finite in imperative shows markedness of the person and polarity respectively, otherwise an unmarked imperative may consist of only a Predicator or Predicator and other elements of the Residue Halliday, 1994; Lock, 1996. For example, ‘Sit’ is an unmarked form of an imperative for which a Subject can be added to show markedness for person as in “You sit,” or a Finite addition to show markedness for polarity as in “Do sit,” or “Don’t sit.” It can also have both Subject and Finite such as in “Don’t you sit,” which shows emphasis on person in negative polarity. Additionally, imperative mood type may include a mood-tag such as in “Finish your assignment, will you?” In the case of an offer, the imperative regards the first person system ‘me’ as the Subject and comes with the addition of ‘let’. For example “Let me drive you home,” or with a marked polarity, “Do let me drive you home.” Imperative also regards the person system of both you and me and realizes it with let’s such as in “Let’s dance,” or with a marked polarity, “Let’s not dance,” ‘Let’s’ here is analyzed as Subject Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004. 5 Absence of Mood Construction: Minor Clause Minor clause or clausette, is the type of clause in which the mood structure of Mood and Residue are never present, but is able to realize minor speech functions such as exclamations, calls, greetings, and alarms Matthiessen et al., 2010. Examples of minor clause are “Wow”, “Ouch”, “Terrific” exclamations, “John”, “You there”, “Sir” calls, “Hi”, “Good morning”, “Cheers” greetings, “Watch out”, “Help”, “Careful” alarms. Their brevity are not the result of ellipsis, it is only that they “have never selected a Subject or