85

Chapter4

SomeGrammaticalProblemsin ScientificEnglish* M.A.K.Halliday * This chapter is taken from the Auscralian Review of Applied Linguistics:GenreandSystemicFunctionalStudies,1989,Series5,6,pp.13 37. In any typical group of science students there will be some who find themselvesindifficultywhofindthedisciplinesofphysics,orbiology,or mathematics forbidding and obscure. To such students, these subjects appear decidedly unfriendly. When their teacher tries to diagnose the problems the studentsarehaving,itisusuallynotlongbeforethediscussionbeginstofocuson language.Scientifictextsarefoundtobedifficulttoread;andthisissaidtobe becausetheyarewritteninscientificlanguage,ajargonwhichhastheeffect ofmakingthelearnerfeelexcludedandalienatedfromthesubjectmatter. Thisexperienceisnotconfinedtothosewhoarestudyingtheirsciencein English.Itoftenhappensinotherlanguagesalsothatscientificformsaredifficult tounderstand.ButhereIshallbeconcentratingonEnglish;anditisimportantto stressthatitisnotonlyESL,(EnglishasaSecondLanguage)studentswhofind problemswithscientificEnglishsoalsodomanyforwhomEnglishisthe mothertongue.Myimpressionisthat,whilethesetwogroupsthoseforwhom English is mother tongue and those for whom it is second language may respondtoscientificEnglishindifferentways,itislargelythesamefeaturesthat causedifficultiestoboth.Forexample,apileupofnounsasinformrecognition lateralitypatterns,or glasscrackgrowthrate,ishardtounderstandbothfor ESL andforELi(Englishas aFirstLanguage)studentsofscience.Thetwo groupsmayusedifferentstrategiesfordecodingthesestructures;butdecoding strategiesvaryaccordingtootherfactorsalso,forexampletheageofthelearner. InsofarasscientificEnglishpresentsspecialproblemsofitsown,distinctfrom thoseofothervarietiesofEnglish,theproblemsseemtobemuchthesamefor everybody. Inanycase,intodaysmultilingualcitiessuchasBirmingham,Torontoor Sydney, there is no clear line between first and secondlanguage groups of learners. A typical secondarylevel science class may include monolingual Englishspeakersatoneend,studentswhohavehadalmostnoexperienceof Englishattheotherend,withtheremainderspreadoutallthewayalongthe continuum in between. In this situation the teacher is forced to think of the problem in terms which apply to all. But this perspective is also relevant to countriessuchasthoseofsouthandsoutheastAsia,wherethestudentswillhave beentaughtusingavarietyofdifferentlanguagesastheirmediumofinstruction. Oncetheirattentionhasbeendirectedontothelanguage,scienceteachers usuallythinkofthedifficultiesfirstinlexicalterms:thatis,asdifficultiesof vocabulary.Thisiswhatisimpliedbythetermjargon,whichmeansabatteryof difficulttechnicalterms.Thewordjargonoftencarriesafurtherimplication, namelythatsuchtermsareunnecessaryandthesamemeaningcouldhavebeen conveyedwithoutthem,intheeverydaylanguageofordinarycommonsense.And thisis,infact,oneviewofscientificlanguage:somepeoplethinkthatitisan85

unnecessary,moreorlessritualisticwayofwriting,andthatsciencescientific conceptsandscientificreasoningcouldjustaswellbeexpressedineveryday, nontechnicalterms.TheyrefertothisotherkindoflanguageasplainEnglish, simplewordsandthelike. Wecouldcontrastthisviewwiththeoppositeopinion,whichisthatscience istotallydependentonscientificlanguage:thatyoucannotseparatesciencefrom howitiswritten,orrewritescientificdiscourseinanyotherway.Accordingto thisview,learningscienceisthesamethingaslearningthelanguageofscience. Ifthelanguageisdifficulttounderstand,thisisnotsomeadditionalfactorcaused bythewordsthatarechosen,butadifficultythatisinherentinthenatureof scienceitself.Itisthesubjectmatterthatisthesourceoftheproblem. Usuallywhensensiblepeoplecanholdsuchoppositepointsofview,the realityliessomewhereinbetween;andthisiscertainlythecaseinthisinstance.It wouldnotbepossibletorepresentscientificknowledgeentirelyincommonsense wordings;technicaltermsarenotsimplyfancyequivalentsforordinarywords, andtheconceptualstructuresandreasoningprocessesofphysicsandbiologyare highly complex and often far removed, by many levels of abstraction, from everydayexperience.Hencethelanguageinwhichtheyareconstructedisbound tobedifficulttofollow.Atthesametime,itisoftenmademoredifficultthanit need be; the forms of scientific discourse can take over, imposing their own martiallaw,sothatwritersgetlockedintopatternsofwritingthatareunneces sarilycomplicatedandexpressthemselvesinhighlytechnicalwordingevenin contextswherethereisnomotiveforit.Thisisthepointwherewecanjustifiably talkaboutscientificjargon:wherethewriterisfollowingafashionbywhichhe seeks(unconsciously,inalllikelihood)togiveextravaluetohisdiscourseby markingitoffasthediscourseofanintellectualelite. Itisimportanttoarriveatabalancedviewonthisquestion,becausewenot onlyneedtoidentifywhattheproblematicfeaturesofscientificEnglishare;we alsoneedtotryandexplainthemtoshowwhatfunctionsthesethingshavein thediscourseasawhole,andwhytheyhaveevolvedaspartofthelanguageof science.Thiswillhelpustoknowwhether,inanyparticularpassage,thefeatures thatmadeitdifficulttounderstandweremotivatedornotinotherwords, whetherthereissomegoodreasonwhythetexthasbeenwrittenthewayitis. Mightitbepreciselywherethecomplexityisnotmotivatedwheretherewas noreasonforthewritertohaveadoptedthatparticularwordingatthatstagein theargumentthatthestudentsarefindingdifficulties?Itwilltakecareful, wellinformedclassroomresearchtoenableustoanswerthislastquestion;but wecansuggestsomeexplanations,ofageneralkind,forwhytheseproblematic featuresarefoundinscientificwriting.Thelanguageofscience,howevermuchit maybecomeamatterofconvention,orawayofestablishingthewritersown prestigeandauthority,isnot,inorigin,anarbitrarycode. Butinordertounderstandwhyscientificwritingbecamedifficultincertain ways,weshallneedtogetridofourobsessionwithwords.Thedifficultylies morewiththegrammarthanwiththevocabulary.Inthelastresort,ofcourse,we cannotseparatethesefromeachother;itisthetotaleffectofthewording wordsandstructuresthatthereaderisrespondingto,andtechnicaltermsare partofthisoveralleffect.Neverthelesstechnicaltermsarenot,inthemselves, difficult to master; and students are not particularly dismayed by them. It is usuallytheteacherwhoputstechnicaltermsinthecentreofthepicture,because vocabularyismuchmoreobvious,andeasiertotalkabout,thangrammar.But ~he generalizations we have to make, in order to help students cope with scientificwriting,aremainlygeneralizationsaboutitsgrammar.Theproblems withtechnicalterminologyusuallyarisenotfromthetechnicaltermsthemselves butfromthecomplexrelationshipstheyhavewithoneanother.Technicalterms cannotbedefinedinisolation;eachonehastobeunderstoodaspartofalarger framework,andeachoneisdefinedbyreferencetoalltheothers.85

Ishallsuggestsevenheadingswhichcanbeusedforillustratinganddis cussingthedifficultiesthatarecharacteristicofscientificEnglish: 1 interlockingdefinitions 2 technicaltaxonomies 3 specialexpressions 4 lexicaldensity 5 syntacticambiguity 6 grammaticalmetaphor 7 semanticdiscontinuity Thisshouldnotbetakenasadefinitivelistingofcategories;allthesefeatures could be organized in different ways, or subdivided further, and more could certainlybeadded.ThesearesimplytheheadingsthatIhavefoundusefulasa frameworkforworkingontheproblem.Inwhatfollows,Ihavedrawnonvarious sources, but particularly on the work of my colleagues in Sydney: Charles Taylors (1979) study of the language of highschool textbooks, with special reference to the problems of secondlanguage learners; Martin and Rotherys (1986)discussionofwritinginprimaryschools;Wignell,MartinandEggins (Chapter8)analysisofgeographytextbooksatjuniorandsecondarylevel;and LouiseRavellis(1985)treatmentofgrammaticalmetaphor.Myownanalysisof scientific texts, reported on in a lecture series at the National University of Singapore,includedmaterialfromfourdifferentpointsoforigin:secondaryand upperprimary science and mathematics textbooks from Australia; science lecturesrecordedattheUniversityofBirminghaminEngland;writingsfromthe Scienqfic American; and for a historical survey, works by Chaucer, Newton, Priestley,Dalton,DarwinandClerkMaxwell.Ifounditnecessarytoundertake thiskindofhistoricalstudyinordertoinvestigatehow,andespeciallywhy,the featuresthatwerecausingsuchproblemsofunderstandingtodayhadthemselves originallyevolved. Figure4.1:InterlockingDefinitionsofFiveTechnicalTerms

85

InterlockingDefinitions Here isanexampleofhowaseriesofdefinitionsispresentedtochildrenin upperprimaryschool:2 Acircleisaplanecurvewiththespecialpropertythateverypointonitisat thesamedistancefromaparticularpointcalledthecentre.Thisdistanceis calledtheradiusofthecircle.Thediameterofthecircleistwicetheradius. Thelengthofthecircleiscalleditscircumference. Herecircle,centre,radius,diameterandcircumferenceallfigureinaseriesof interlockingdefinitions.Withinthisset, circle,centre and radius aremutually defining:theyareallusedtodefineeachother,throughtheintermediaryoftwo othertermswhichareassumedtobealreadyknown,namelydistanceandplane curve.Theremainingterms,diameterandcircumference,arethendefinedeach byreferencetooneofthefirstthree;andheretwoothertermsareassumedtobe knownandmastered,namelylengthandtwice.Thepatternofdefinitionsisasin Figure 4.1. Now, there are certain difficulties here which are specific to this example:thenotionsofplanecurve,ofeverypointonacurve,andofthe lengthofacircle.Likewise,anyexamplechosenwouldprobablypresentspecial problems of its own. But at the same time the overall semantic structure is strikinglycomplex;andthisissomethingthatmaybefoundanywhereinmaths andsciencetextbooks.Thelearnerhasfirsttoreachanunderstandingofacluster of related concepts, all at the same time, and then immediately use this understandinginordertoderivemoreconceptsfromthefirstones.Notethat theserelationshipsaresetupbymeansofagrammaticalconstruction

Figure4.2:KindsofClimate(Superordination) tropical subtropical climate~temperate boreal cold polar highland dry

whichfacesbothways:aisdefinedasx,xiscalledabothofwhichmay occurinthesameclause,ashappensinthefirstsentenceoftheextract: aisdefinedasanxwhichhasfeatureywhichiscalledb Furthermorethehingeelementyisitselffairlycomplexgrammatically: withthespecialpropertythateverypointonitisatthesamedistancefroma particularpoint85

Thuswhileatechnicaltermposesnogreatprobleminitselfthereisnothing difficultaboutthe word diameter, anditsdefinition twicetheradius iseasy enough to understand provided you know what the radius is a technical constructionofthiskind,inwhichthetermsinterlockandareusedtodefineeach other, does present the learner with a considerable intellectual task. Writers sometimes try to make the task simpler by adding further definitions, not realizingthatinaconstructofthiskindthegreaterthenumberofthingsdefined theharderitbecomestounderstand. TechnicalTaxonomies Thesearerelatedtothelastheading;butthecomplexityisofadifferentkind.In the natural sciences, technical concepts have little value in themselves; they derivetheirmeaningfrombeingorganizedintotaxonomies.Suchtaxonomiesare not simply groups of related terms; they the highly ordered constructions in whicheverytermhasadefinitefunctionalvalue.AsWignell,MartinandEggins point out below in their study of the language of high school geography, a technicaltaxonomyistypicallybasedontwofundamentalsemanticrelationships: aisakindofofx(superordination)andbisapartofy(composition).Thusin theirexampleofclimate,climateisdividedintocertainkinds(Figure4.2),andis composed of certain parts (Figure 4.3). It will be seen that the first is an either/orrelationship:everyclimateiseithertropicalorsubtropicalor...;the secondisaboth+andrelationship:everyclimateisbothtemperatureandsolar radiationand....(Wehavetostretchthemeaningofeitherandbothhereso thattheyarenolongerlimitedtojusttwo.)

Figure4.3:PartsofClimate(Composition) Climate

solarradiation temperature pressuresystems atmosphericmoisture

Threeproblemscan arise withsuchconstructions. Thefirstisthat these taxonomiescanbecomeverycomplicated,withmanylayersoforganizationbuilt intothem.Thesecondisthattheyareusuallynotmadeexplicit;thereareoften neitherlistsnordiagrams(thefiguresabovedonotappearinthetextbook),sothe studentislefttoworkthemoutfor himselffromreadingthetext.Thethird problemisthatthecriteriaonwhichthesetaxonomiesaresetupcanalsobe extremelycomplex,sothattheyneedtobedescribedandexplainedinsome detail. Itwouldbepossibletomakethereadingmattermorelearnerfriendlyby dealingsystematicallywiththesethreeproblemsinturn:firstintroducingthe termsintheirtaxonomicorder(e.g.,therearefivekindsofclimate,namely.. .),thensettingthemoutinlistsordiagrams,andfinallydescribingeachcategory and,wherepossible,explainingit.Inpractice,thefirstandthirdstepsareusually taken together, with the second one being left out; as a result, the way the taxonomy is presented is often grammatically very confusing, with no clear patternofthemeandinformationrunningthroughit.Forexample,85

ONECELLEDORGANISMS.Someorganisms,suchastheameba andothersinthecultureyouexamined,arecomposedofonlyonecell. Theseorganismsaresaidtobeunicellular.Livinginwater,these animalsareinclosecontactwiththefood,water,andoxygentheyneed.A onecelledanimaltakesinitsownfood.Alongwiththisfood,theanimal also takes in some water. Additional water enters the animal cell by diffusion.Thenormalmovementofthecytoplasmcarriesthefood,water, andoxygenthroughoutthecell.Wastematerialsareeliminateddirectlyto theoutside of thecell. Mostonecelledorganismscansurviveonlyina wateryenvironment. Itisverylikelythatthewriterofthispassagehasbeentryingtomakeitmore interestingforthereaderbyvaryingtheorderandthemannerofpresentingthe categoriestobelearnt:thekindsoforganism,thepartsoftheorganismandso on. Thus every clause begins with a new theme: some organisms, these organisms,livinginwater,aonecelledanimal,additionalwater,thenormal movement of the cytoplasm, waste materials, most onecelled organisms. Unfortunately,whilethiskindofvariationmaybeanadmirablegoalforaliterary text,ifscientifictextsarewritteninthiswaytheyaremuchhardertoreadandto learnfrom.Itisverydifficulttoconstructtherelevanttaxonomiesonthebasisof thiskindofwriting.

SpecialExpressions Someexpressionsusedinmathematicallanguagehaveaspecialgrammaroftheir own,forexamplesolvingtheopensentenceoverD.Hereitistheexpressionas awholethatgetstobedefined,ratherthananyparticularwordinit: IfDisthedomainofavariableinanopensentence,theprocessoffinding thetruthsetiscalledsolvingtheopensentenceoverD. Thisistechnicalgrammar,ratherthantechnicalterminology;itisnotparticu larlyproblematiconceithasbeenexplained(providedthelearnerdoesnotask whathappensifDisnotthedomainofavariableinanopensentence). This kind of special grammar is more common in mathematics than in science;mathematicianshaveoftenhadtostretchthegrammaralittleinorderto saywhattheywant.AlreadyinIsaacNewtonswritingswefindsomeverylong nominalconstructions,likethefollowingfromtheTreatiseonOptics: TheExcessesoftheSinesofRefractionofseveralsortsofRaysabovetheir common Sine of Incidence when the Refractionsare made out of divers denserMediumsimmediatelyintooneandthesamerarerMedium,suppose ofAir,... allofwhichismerelytheSubjectoftheclause.Thiskindofstretchingofthe grammarislessusualinscientificdiscourse.However,thelanguageofscience hasbroughtitsowninnovations,stretchingthegrammarinwayswhichareatfirst sightlessobviousbutwhich,partlybecausetheyarelessobvious,tendtocause greaterdifficultiesofcomprehension.Hereisanexamplefromanupperprimary schooltextbook: Yourcompletedtableshouldtellyouwhathappenstotheriskofgettinglung85

cancerassmokingincreases. The table is,ofcourse,atableoffigures;thatisunderstood.Buthowdoesa tabletellyousomething?tablesdonottalk,eventablesoffigures.Andwhat kindofanobjectisarisk,suchthatwecanaskwhathappenstoit?Andwhat doessmokingincreasesmean:thatmoresmokeisputoutbysomecombustion process?Whatkindofrelationshipisbeingexpressedbytheas:doesitmean while(time),because(cause),orinthesamewaythat(manner)? Whatisbeingillustratedhereisnot,inface,asinglephenomenon.Itisaset of interrelated phenomena: features which tend to go together in modern scientificwriting,formingakindofsyndromebywhichwerecognizethatsome thingiswritteninthelanguageofscience.Butalthoughthesefeaturescommonly gotogether,inordertounderstandtheproblemstheyposetoastudentwewill needtoseparatethemout;andthiswilloccupythenextthreeheadings.Thepres entsectionwillserveasabridgeleadingintothem,becausewhenweseethemin theirhistoricalperspectivetheydoconstituteaspecialmodeofexpressionthat evolvedinscientificdiscourse,althoughwearenowsousedtothemthatweno longerthinkofthemasspecial.Itisonlywhentheyoccurinafairlyextreme formthattheystandout,asinthefollowing(takenfromanabstract):3 [These results] are consistent with the selective perceptual orientation hypothesisifitisassumedthatbothwordrecognitionandconcurrentverbal memoryproducemoreleftthanrighthemisphereactivationandthatinthe caseofmixedlistsinthepresentstudythisactivationhadnotdissipatedon formrecognitiontrials. LexicalDensity Thisisameasureofthedensityofinformationinanypassageoftext,according tohowtightlythelexicalitems(contentwords)havebeenpackedintothegram maticalstructure.Itcanbemeasured,inEnglish,asthenumberoflexicalwords perclause. Inthefollowingexamples,eachofwhichisoneclause,thelexicalwordsare inboldtype;thelexicaldensitycountisgivenattheright: (a) Butweneverdidanythingverymuchinscienceatourschool. 2 (b) Myfatherusedtotellmeaboutasingerinhisvillage. 4 (c) Aparallelogramisafoursidedfigurewithitsoppositesides parallel. 6 (d) Theatomicnucleusabsorbsandemitsenergyinquanta, or discreteunits. 8 Inanypieceofdiscoursethereisobviouslyagreatdealofvariationinthelexical densityfromoneclausetothenext.Buttherearealsosomegeneraltendencies. Ininformalspokenlanguagethelexicaldensitytendstobelow:abouttwolexical wordsperclauseisquitetypical.Whenthelanguageismoreplannedandmore formal,thelexicaldensityishigher;andsincewritingisusuallymoreplanned than speech,written language tendstobe somewhat denser than spokenlan guage,oftenhavingaroundfourtosixlexicalwordsperclause.Butinscientific writingthelexicaldensitymaygoconsiderablyhigher.Herearethreeclauses withalexicaldensityof1013,allfromScient(ficAmerican(December,1987): (e) Griffithsenergybalanceapproachtostrengthandfracturealso suggestedtheimportanceofsurfacechemistryinthe mechan icalbehaviourofbrittlematerials. 1385

(f) Theconicalspacerenderingofcosmicstrings gravitational propertiesappliesonlytostraightstrings. 10 (g) Themodelrestsonthelocalizedgravitationalattraction exertedbyrapidlyoscillatingandextremelymassive closed loopsofcosmicstring. 13 When the lexical density goes up to this extent, the passage becomes difficult to read. Of course, the difficulty will also depend on the particular lexicalitemsthatareusedandonhowtheyaredistributedinthegrammatical structure; but the lexical density is a problematic factor in itself. In much scientificwriting,almostallthelexicalitemsinanyclauseoccurinsidejustone ortwonominalgroups(nounphrases);compareexamples(e)(g)above,where thisappliestoallexceptoneineachcase(suggested,applies,rests).Perhapsthe hardestexamplestoprocessarethosewhichconsistofstringsoflexicalwords withoutanygrammaticalwordsinbetween,suchas Griffithsenergybalance approach,cosmicstringsgravitationalproperties;likewisethosecitedatthe beginningofthepaper, formrecognitionlateralitypatterns and glasscrack growthrate. Evenwherethewordsthemselvesareperfectlysimpleandwell known, asinthelastofthesefourexamples,theexpressionsarenoteasyto understand.Anotherexamplewastheincreasinglungcancerdeathrate,which appearedinthesamepassageastheexamplequotedinthelastsection.Here, however, another factor contributes to the difficulty, that of grammatical ambiguity;andthisleadsusintoournextheading. SyntacticAmbiguity Considerexamplessuchasthefollowing: (h) Increasedresponsivenessmaybereflectedinfeedingbehaviour. (j) Lungcancerdeathratesareclearlyassociatedwithincreasedsmoking. (k) Higherproductivitymeansmoresupportingservices. All have a very simple structure: a nominal group, functioning as Subject, followedbyaverbalgroup,followedbyanothernominalgroup with(intwo instances) a preposition introducing it. If we focus attention on the verbal expressions,maybereflected(in),are...associated(with),means,wefindthat theyareambiguous;andtheyareambiguousintworespects.Inthefirstplace, wecannottellwhethertheyindicatearelationshipofcauseorofevidence.Isone thingbeingsaidtobetheeffrctofanother,orisitmerelytheoutwardsignofit? Forexample:in(h),doesthefeedingbehaviourdemonstratethatresponsiveness hasincreased,ordoesitchangeasaresultoftheincrease?Inthesecondplace, supposingthatwecanidentifyarelationshipofcause,westillcannottellwhich causeswhich.In(k),forexample,ishigherproductivitybroughtaboutbymore supportingservices,ordoesitcausemoresupportingservicestobeprovided?It mayseemobvioustothewriter,andalsotoateacher,whichmeaningisintended; butitisfarfromobvioustoalearner,andteacherandlearnermayinterpretthe passagedifferentlywithouteitherofthembeingawarethatanotherinterpretation waspossible. Theexpressionareassociatedwith,in(j),canalsofaceineitherdirection: eithercauseorarecausedby.Wemayknowthatsmokingcausescancer,and hencethatthemoreyousmoke,themorelikelyyouaretodiefromcancerofthe lung.Butthissentencecouldmeanthatlungcancerdeathratesleadtoincreased smoking:perhapspeoplearesoupsetbyfearoflungcancerthattheyneedto smoke moreinordertocalmtheirnerves.Itisevenpossiblethatthewriter85

wantednottocommithimselftoachoicebetweenthesetwointerpretationsof thestatistics.Butwhenwestarttoexplorethemeaningofthisexamplemore carefully,wefindthatitcontainsagreatdealmoreambiguityinadditiontothat whichwehavealreadyseenintheverb. Forexample,whatdoes lungcancerdeathrates mean?Is ithowmany peoplediefromlungcancer,orhowquicklypeoplediewhentheygetlung cancer?Orisitperhapshowquicklypeopleslungsdiefromcancer?Anddoes increasedsmokingmeanpeoplesmokemore,ormorepeoplesmokeoris itacombinationofthetwo,morepeoplesmokemore?Havingreachedsome understandinguptothispoint,suchasmorepeoplesmoke..morepeopledieof cancer,westilldonotknowwhethertheyarethesamepeopleornotisitjust thesmokerswhodiemore,oreveryoneelseaswell?Nordoweknowwhether thesituationisrealorhypothetical:isitbecausemorepeoplearesmoking,so morearedying,orifmorepeoplesmoked,morewoulddie?ifwecombineall thesepossibilitieswehavealreadyreachedsomefiftypossibleinterpretations, most of which were quiteplausible; they are genuine alternatives faced bya humanreader,notfancifulsimulationsofsomecomputerizedparsingprogram. Wheredoesthisambiguitycomefrom?Itarisesfromvarioussources.We havealreadyreferredtopolysemousverbslikemean,beassociatedwith;there are probablybetween1,000and2,000verbsof thisclassinuse inscientific English.Butthemaincauseofambiguityisthatclausesareturnedintonouns. Thatistosay,somethingthatwouldinspokenEnglishbetypicallyexpressedasa clauseisexpressedinsteadasagroupofwordscentringonanoun.IfIsayMary announcedthatshehadaccepted,Iammakingitclearwhodidwhat;butifI say theannouncementofMarysacceptance,youcannottell:whetherMary made the almouncement herself or someone else did; whether Mary was accepting (something) or being accepted; whether she had accepted/been accepted already or would accept/be accepted in the future. Thus the single nominalgrouptheannouncementofMarysacceptancecorrespondstomany differentwordingsintheformofaclause: Maryannouncedthatshe would accept,theyannouncedthatMaryhadbeenaccepted,andsoon.Agreatdeal ofsemanticinformationislostwhenclausalexpressionsarereplacedbynominal ones. Scientific writing uses very many nominal constructions of this kind, typicallyincombinationwithverbsofthetypeillustratedin(h)(k)above.Both thesefeaturesare,aswehaveseen,highlyambiguous,althoughweusuallydonot recognizetheambiguityuntilwetrytorewordthepassageinsomeotherform. Hereisafurtherexample: (1) Thegrowthofattachmentbetweeninfantandmothersignalsthefirst stepinthedevelopmentofthechildscapacitytodiscriminateamongst people. Possiblerewordingsofthismightbe: When If aninfantand its a mother starttogrow growmore

attachedtooneanother,

thisshowsthat thisisbecause

thechild

istaking hastaken85

becoming distinguishing thefirststepstowards becomingmore capableof preferring

onepersonfrom/toanother.

Combiningtheseweget2~=128possibleinterpretations.ButinthisinstanceI finditdifficulttooptforanyoneofthem;noneoftherewordingsseemstobe particularlyconvincing. GrammaticalMetaphor Thehighlexicaldensityandtheambiguitydiscussedinthelasttwosectionsare bothbyproductsofaprocessIshallrefertoasgrammaticalmetaphor.Thisis likemetaphorintheusualsenseexceptthat,insteadofbeingasubstitutionofone wordforanother,aswhenwesayyouretalkingtripeinsteadofyouretalking nonsense, it is a substitution of one grammatical class, or one grammatical structure,byanother;forexample,hisdepartureinsteadof hedeparted.Here thewords(lexicalitems)arethesame;whathaschangedistheirplaceinthe grammar. Instead of pronoun he + verb departed, functioning as Actor plus Processinaclause,wehavedeterminer his + noun departure, functioningas DeicticplusThinginanominalgroup.4 Otherexamplesare herrecentspeech concernedpoverty insteadof shespokerecentlyconcerningpoverty;glass crack growth rate instead of how quickly cracks in glass grow. Often the wordsmaychangeaswellasthegrammar,asinthelastexamplewhere how quicklyisreplacedbyratewedonotusuallysayglasscrackgrowthquick ness;buttheunderlyingmetaphorisinthegrammar,andthelexicalchanges followmoreorlessautomatically I am not suggesting that there will always be some absolute, non metaphoricalformtowhichthesegrammaticalmetaphorscanberelated;meta phorisanaturalhistoricalprocessinlanguageandmodesofexpressioninvolving differentdegreesofmetaphorwillalwaysexistsidebyside.Wecanoftentake twoorthreeorevenmorestepsinrewordingagrammaticalmetaphorinaless metaphorical,morecongruentform;forexample,wemightsaythatcrackingis reallyaprocesssomethinghappeningratherthanathing,sothatcracksin glass,withcracksasanoun,isametaphorforglasscrackswithcracksasverb. Asanotherexample. (m) [The36classonlyappearedonthistrain]intimesofreducedloading, orenginefailure. couldberewordedaswhenloadingswerereduced,ortheenginefailed;butwe mightthenrewordthefirstpartoveragainaswhentheloadwassmallerorever whenfewergoodswerebeingcarried. What is the nature of this rewording? One way of thinking of it is by imaginingtheageofthereader,orlistener.Intalkingtoa9yearold,wewould neversayintimesofenginefailure;wewouldsaywhenevertheenginefailed.85

Noticethatwehavenothadtosimplifythevocabulary;therearenodifficult words in the first version it is the grammar that is difficult for a child. Similarlywewouldchangeslowdowntheglasscrackgrowthratetomakethe cracksinglassgrowmoreslowly,orstopthecracksinglassfromgrowingso quickly. What we are doing, when we reword in this way, is changing the grammar(withsomeconsequentialchangesinvocabulary)bymakingityounger. Childrenlearnfirsttotalkinclauses;itisonlylaterandonlywhentheycan alreadyreadandwritewithfacilitythattheyareabletoreplacetheseclauses withnominalgroups. Asfaraswecantell,thisalsoreflectswhathappenedinthehistoryofthe language.InEnglish,andotherlanguagesofEurope,theolderpatternisthe clausalone;anditisbasedoncertainprinciplesofwordingwhichwemight summarizeasfollows: 1 processes(actions,events,mentalprocesses,relations)areexpressedby verbs; 2 participants(people,animals,concreteandabstractobjectsthattakepart inprocesses)areexpressedbynouns; 3 circumstances(time,place,manner,cause,condition)areexpressedby adverbsandbyprepositionalphrases; 4 relationsbetweenoneprocessandanotherareexpressedbyconjunctions. Forexample: thecastactedbrilliantlysotheaudienceapplaudedforalongtime [noun][verb][adverb][noun][verb][prepositionalphrase] Ifthisisnowrewordedmetaphoricallyas: thecastsbrilliantactingdrewlengthyapplausefromtheaudience [noun][verb][noun][prepositionalphrase] anumberofchangeshavetakenplace.Theprocessesactedandapplaudedhave been turned into nouns, acting and applause; the participant the cast has becomeapossessive,while theaudience hasbecomepartof aprepositional phrase.Thecircumstances brilliantly and foralong time havebothbecome adjectivesinsidenominalgroups;andtherelationbetweenthetwoprocesses, showingthatoneofthemcausedtheother,hasbecomeaverb,drew.Thismakes itsoundasthoughactingandclappingwerethings,andasiftheonlyeventthat tookplacewasthecauserelationbetweenthem(actingdrewapplause).All thesechangesillustratewhatismeantbygrammaticalmetaphor. Thiskindofmetaphorisfoundparticularlyinscientificdiscourse,andmay haveevolvedfirstofallinthatcontext.Itisalreadybeginningtoappearinthe writingsoftheancientGreekscientists;fromthemitiscarriedoverintoclassical LatinandthenintomedievalLatin;andithascontinuedtodevelopbuttoafar greater extent in Italian, English, French, German, Russian and the other languagesofEuropefromtheRenaissanceonwards.Andalthoughithasspread acrossmanydifferentregisters,orfunctionalvarieties,oflanguage,inEnglishat leastthemainimpetusforitseemstohavecontinuedtocomefromthelanguages ofscience. Whydidscientificwriters,fromIsaacNewtononwards,increasinglyfavour suchamodeofexpression?oneinwhich,insteadofwritingthishappened, sothathappened,theywritethiseventcausedthatevent?Thesewerenot arbitraryorrandomchanges.Thereasonliesinthenatureofscientificdiscourse.85

NewtonandhissuccessorswerecreatinganewvarietyofEnglishforanewkind ofknowledge;akindofknowledgeinwhichexperimentswerecarriedout; generalprinciplesderivedbyreasoningfromtheseexperiments,withtheaidof mathematics;andtheseprinciplesinturntestedbyfurtherexperiments.The discoursehadtoproceedstepbystep,withaconstantmovementfromthisis whatwehaveestablishedsofartothisiswhatfollowsfromitnext;andeachof thesetwoparts,boththetakenforgrantedpartandthenewinformation,hadto bepresentedinawaythatwouldmakeitsstatusintheargumentclear.Themost effectivewaytodothis,inEnglishgrammar,istoconstructthewholestepasa singleclause,withthetwopartsturnedintonouns,oneatthebeginningandone attheend,andaverbinbetweensayinghowthesecondfollowsfromthefirst. Ihavewrittenaboutthehistoryofthisdevelopmentelsewhere,with illustrationsfromsomeoftheearliertexts(Chapter3).WhatIampresentinghere isaverysimplifiedaccount;thereare,obviously,countlessvariationsonthe patterndescribedabove.Neverthelessthesevariantsallderivefromthebasic principleoforganizinginformationintoacoherentformthatsuitedthekindof argumentationthatcametobeacceptedasscientific.Hereisacontemporary example,takenfromtheScient~icAmerican: Theatomicnucleusabsorbsandemitsenergyonlyinquanta,ordiscrete units.Eachabsorptionmarksitstransitiontoastateofhigherenergy,and eachemissionmarksitstransitiontoastateoflowerenergy. Noticehow,inthesecondsentence,eachclauseconsistsof(i)atakenfor grantedpart,nominalizingwhathasbeensaidbefore(theatomicnucleus absorbsenergy~eachabsorption;theatomicnucleusemitsenergy* eachemission);(ii)anewinformationpart,pointingforwardtowhatisto come,andalsonominalized(itstransitiontoastateofhigher/lowerenergy); and(iii)therelationbetweenthem,intheformofaverb(marks).Frequentlythe takenforgrantedpartsummarizesthewholeofalongpreviousdiscussion;for example,thesamearticlecontainsthesentence: Thetheoreticalprogramofdevisingmodelsofatomicnucleihasofcourse beencomplementedbyexperimentalinvestigations. Thishasexactlythesamepattern;butherethetakenforgrantedpart(the theoreticalprogram...atomicnuclei)isreferringbacktomanyparagraphsof precedingtext. Ifwerewordthesesoastotakethemetaphorout,theentirebalanceofthe informationislost.Forthelastexamplewemightwrite: Wedevisedmodelsofatomicnuclei,inaprogramoftheoretical [research],andinadditionofcourseweinvestigated[thematter]by doingexperiments. Butthiswouldgiveustoindicationthatthefirstpartwasasummaryofwhathad gonebefore,orthatthelastpartwasgoingtobetakenupanddevelopedinwhat followed.Whatisequallyimportant,itwouldfailtomakeitclearthateachstep devising theoretical models and investigating experimentally is to be understood as a unity, a single phenomenon rather than an assembly of componentparts. Itwouldbewrongtogivetheimpressionthatindevelopingthisfavourite typeofclausestructure,andthegrammaticalmetaphorthatmadeitpossible,the scientistswereguidedbyanyconsciousplanning.Theywerenot.Newtonandhis contemporariesdiddiscussthebestwaysofconstructingascientificpaper,and theytriedtoregulatetheuseofvocabularyforbuildingelaboratetaxonomies, especiallyinbiology(andtakenuplateroninchemistry);buttheywerenot85

awareoftheirownuseofgrammar,andtheseformsevolvednaturallyinresponse to pressure from the discourse.5 It is only when we analyse this discourse grammatically, using a functional grammar, that we can appreciate how the patternsrelatetowhatthescientistsweretryingtoachieve. Ihavenotpresentedthedetailedgrammaticalanalysishere;itwouldneed toomuchspace.Butitishelpful,Ithink,tobringoutthenatureofgrammatical metaphor,andthesenseinwhichtheseformscanbesaidtobemetaphorical, becausealmosteverysentenceinscientificwritingwillcontainsomeexampleof it, and it does present problems to the learner. This is partly a question of maturity:studentswellintosecondaryschoolmaystillfinditdifficulttocompre hend,eveniftheyhavebeeneducatedthroughoutinEnglishmedium.6Forthose whoaretakingupEnglishjustasalanguageforscienceandtechnology,the problemmaybegreaterorlessdependingonthedegreeandkindofgrammatical metaphorfoundinthelanguage(s)theyhaveusedasmediumofeducationbefore. Itseemslikelythatpartofthedifficultyarises,however,becausethesemeta phorical expressions are not just another wayof saying the same thing. In a certainsense,theypresentadifferentviewoftheworld.Aswegrewup,using our language to learn with and to think with, we have come to expect (unconsciously,untilourteachersstartedtogiveus lessonsingrammar)that nounswereforpeopleandthings,verbsforactionsandevents.Nowwefindthat almosteverythinghasbeenturnedintoanoun.Wehavetoreconstructourmental imageoftheworldsothatitbecomesaworldmadeoutofthings,ratherthanthe worldofhappeningeventswiththingstakingpartinthemthatwewere accustomedto.Someoftheproblemmayevenbeideological:thestudentmay wanttoresistthisviewofrealitythathefeelsisbeingimposedonhimbythe languageofscience.Itisworthnoting,intheconnections,thatthescientists themselvesarenowbecomingdissatisfiedwiththelanguagetheyuseintheir writings.Theytoofeelthat:thasgonetoofarinthisdirection,andthatifthey aretocontinuetodevelopnewideasinsciencetheywillneedtoreturntoless nominalizedformsofexpression.7 SemanticDiscontinuity Thisismyfinalheading;Iamusingittopointoutthatwriterssometimesmake semanticleaps,acrosswhichthereaderisexpectedtofollowtheminorderto reacharequiredconclusion.Letmediscussjustoneexample: In the years since 1850, more and more factories were built in northern England.Thesootfromthefactorysmokestacks graduallyblackened the lightcolouredstonesandtreetrunks. Scientists continuedtostudythepeppermothduringthistime.They noticedthedarkcolouredmothwasbecomingmorecommon.By1950,the darkmothsweremuchmorecommonthanthelightcolouredones. However, strong antipollution laws over the last twenty years have resulted in cleaner factories, cleaner countryside and an increase in the numberoflightcolouredpeppermoths. Thefirsttwoparagraphsareratherstraightforward;butinthethirdparagraph, problems arise. Taken as a whole, it is a typical example of the structure describedinthelastsection:twoprocesses,withalogicalconnectionbetween them.Thesenseisahappened,soxhappened,expressedmetaphoricallyinthe formofhappeningacausedhappeningx(strongantipollutionlaws haveresultedincleanerfactories...).Wemightrewordthispartas:85

Overthelasttwentyyears,[thegovernmenthavepassed]stronglawsto stop[people]polluting;sothefactories[havebecome]cleaner. Wesawabovethatthemainreasonforchoosingthemetaphoricalformwas thathappening a wassomethingthathadbeenpresentedbefore,andsohere wasbeingreferredtoasawhole,asakindofpackageorsummaryofwhatwasto betakenforgrantedandusedasapointofdepartureforthenextstepintheargu ment.However,inthisinstancehappeningahasnotbeenpresentedbefore;thisis thefirsttimewehaveheardofanyantipollutionlaws.Sothereaderhasto: discoverthatitisnewinformation;decodeit;anduseitasasteppingoffpoint forunderstandingsomethingelse. Butletussupposethatthereaderhascopedwiththisdifficultassignment. Henowcomestohappeningxandfindsthatthisisacoordinationofthree processes, all of them presented metaphorically: cleaner factories, cleaner countrysideandanincreaseinthenumberoflightcolouredpeppermoths. Rewordingthis,hebeginstounderstand: the factories have become cleaner, the countryside has become cleaner,andtherearemorelightcolouredpeppermothsthanbefore. thatis,themothshavealsobecomecleaner:onlyafewofthemarenowaffec tedbydirtintheair.Butthatisnotatalltheintendedmessage.Whatthereader issupposedtodoistoinsertanotherlogicalrelationshipbetweeneachpairof theseresultingprocesses,andthendrawahighlycomplexconclusionfromthem: thefactorieshavebecomecleaner,[so]thecountrysidehasbecome cleaner,and[so]therearegettingtobemoreofthelightcolouredpepper moths[becausetheydontshowupagainstcleantrees,andthereforedonot geteatenbythebirdsasmuchastheydidwhenthetreesweredirty]. Inotherwords,thelearnerisexpectedtoworkoutforhimselftheprincipleof naturalselection. Thisisaparticularlyproblematicexample.Thelanguageishighlymetaphor ical, in the sense of grammatical metaphor; the first part of the sentence is misleading because it suggests that we know about the strong antipollution lawsalready,andinthesecondpartthereaderisrequiredtoperfomtwocom plicatedsemanticleapsinsertingthetwocausalconnectives,andworkingout theimplicationsofthesecondone.Butitisnotuncommontofindsemantic discontinuitiesofonekindoranotherinscientificwriting;thespecialisthasno troublewiththembutforlearnerstheyareanadditionalhazard.Ofallthe kindsofdifficultydiscussedinthesefewpages,thisistheoneateachercando leasttowardshelpingstudentstosolve.Theteachercangiveafewillustrations, andwarnthestudentstobeontheirguard;buteveryinstanceseemstobeunique, anditishardtofindanygeneralprinciplesbehindthemall. Conclusion Most of thefeaturesdescribedunderthesesevenheadingscouldinprinciple occurindependentlyofeachother.Buttheyareallcloselyrelated,and,excepting perhapsthosementionedunderSpecialExpressions(inmathematics),theytend toclustertogetherascharacteristicsofscientificdiscourse.Ihavetriedtoshow thattheyarenotarbitrarythattheyevolvedtomeettheneedsofscientific method,andofscientificargumentandtheory.Theysuittheexpert;andbythe sametokentheycausedifficultytothenovice.Inthatrespect,learningscienceis85

thesamethingaslearningthelanguageofscience.Studentshavetomasterthese difficulties; but in doing so they are also mastering scientific concepts and principles. At the same time, it must be said that many of those who write in the languageofsciencewriteitverybadly.Theyleaveimplicitthingsthatneedtobe madeexplicit,createmultipleambiguitiesthatcannotreadilyberesolved,and usegrammaticalmetaphorbothinappropriatelyandtoexcess.Thelanguagethus becomesaformofritual,awayofclaimingstatusandturningscienceintothe prerogative of an elite. Learners who complain that their science texts are unnecessarilydifficulttoreadmaysometimesbeentirelyjustified.Andweare allfamiliarwiththosewho,notbeingscientists,haveborrowedthetrappingsof scientificlanguageandareusingitpurelyasalanguageofprestigeandpower thebureaucraciesandtechnocraciesofgovernmentsandmultinationalcorpora tions.8 Inbureaucraticdiscoursethesefeatureshavenoreasontobethereatall, becausethereisnocomplexconceptualstructureorthreadoflogicalargument. Buttheyservetocreatedistancebetweenwriterandreader,todepersonalizethe discourseandgiveitaspuriousairofbeingrationalandobjective. Inmyviewthebesttoolwehaveforfacinguptothiskindoflanguage, criticizingitwherenecessarybutaboveallhelpingstudentstounderstandit,isa functionalmodelofgrammar.Thisenablesustoanalyseanypassageandrelateit toitscontextinthediscourse,andalsotothegeneralbackgroundofthetext: whoitiswrittenfor,whatisitsangleonthesubjectmatter,andsoon.Gram maticalanalysisisafairlytechnicalexercise,andnotsomethingthatstudentscan beexpectedtoundertakeforthemselvesunlesstheyarespecializinginlanguage. But science teachers (provided they can be persuaded to discard traditional prejudicesaboutgrammar!):mayfinditinterestingandrewardingtoexplorethe language of their own disciplines; and also, where this applies, to compare scientificEnglishwithscientificregistersthathaveevolved,orarenowevolving, inthemajorlanguagesoftheregioninwhichtheywork. Notes I SeeentriesintheReferencesforTaylor(1979),MartinandRothery1986, Ravelli(1985).Primarytextsforthehistoricalsurvey,asindicatedinChapter 3 above, were Geoffrey Chaucer, A Treatise on the Astrolabe 1391; Isaac Newton, Optics (1704):JosephPriestley, TheHistoryandPresentStateof Electricity (1767); John Dalton, A New System of Chemical Philosophy (1827); Charles Darwin, The Or~gin of the Species (1859); James Clerk Maxwell, An Elementary Treatise on Electricity (1881). Texts from the Scient~ficAmericanwereHamiltonandMaruhn,Exoticatomicnuclei(July 1986);MichalskeandBunker,Thefracturingofglass,Vilenkin,Cosmic strings(December1987).FortheUniversityofBirminghamstudiesseeKing (inprep.).AsketchofsomefeaturesofthegrammarofscientificEnglishis contained in Chapter 3 above; the work from which the present paper is mainlyderivedwaspresentedinlectureforminHalliday(1986). Sourcesfortheupperprimary/lowersecondaryscienceandmathematics textsquotedinthispaperareMcMullenandWilliams(1971);Intermediate Science Curriculum Study, (1976); Parkes, Couchman and Jones (1978); Vickery,Lake,McKennaandRyan(1978).Thetaxonomiesofclimateare fromSale,FriedmanandWilson(1980). FromtheAbstracttoHellige(1978). FortheanalysisofthegrammarseeHalliday(1985a),Chapters5and6. For the evolution of the scientific article see Bazerman (1988). For an account of the work of the scientific language planners at the time of85

2

3 4 5

Newton,seeSalmon (1966,1979). 6 See Lemke (1982, 1983) for the results of a detailed investigation of the teaching of science in American high schools. For discussion of science educationinBritain,withreferencetothelanguageofscience,seeWhiteand Welford(1987). 7 ThispointisdiscussedbrieflyinChapter6below. 8 For an analysis of the nature and function of technocratic discourse see Lemke(199Gb).

85