The Conceptualization of Genre in Systemic Functional Linguistics

Hesham Suleiman Alyousef, Asma Mohammed Alyahya


Abstract—Genre constitutes the rhetorical features of a text and the semiotic communicative purpose(s) it serves. It has marveled Systemic Functional Linguistics’ (SFL) scholars as to whether it should be treated as an aspect of the situational context (register) or as a distinct cultural semiotic system that correlates with texture- i.e. the three register categories of field, tenor, and mode. This paper aims to review the conceptualization of genre in the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) tradition. Whereas Halliday associates genre with mode, Martin coordinates the three register variables of field, tenor, and mode in relation to social purpose. The elements of a schematic structure are generated by genre networks, which in turn preselect particular values of field, tenor and mode in a given culture. Both Halliday's context of situation and Martin’s context of culture levels are dynamic connotative semiotic systems through which new meanings are created by the three processes of semogenesis. Genre is conceived as a distinct cultural semiotic system, rather than an aspect of ‘mode’, that correlates with texture. Martin later avoided the intertextual glosses context of culture and context of situation since Halliday used them for instantiation, and not supervenience. The three register variables of language organize information at the level of genre into coherent texts. Modelled as register and genre, the stratified model of context configures meanings not only through discourse semantics, lexicogrammar, and phonology but also through the prosodic phases of evaluation. Halliday calls this model appliable linguistics since it enables us to develop a powerful model of language that is both “theoretical” and “applied” (Mahboob & Knight, 2010).
Keywords: Appliable linguistics; genre; language metafunctions; mode; register; systemic functional linguistics (SFL);


genre; Systemic functional linguistics (SFL); register; mode; language metafunctions

Full Text:




Alyousef, H. S. (forthcoming). Grammatics for Ameliorating Reading Comprehension Skills: A Social Semiotic Approach. In P. Mickan & I. Wallace (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Education Curriculum Design. Oxford, UK: Routledge (Taylor & Francis).

Bartlett, T. (2012, August 25). Regard as process type. Message posted to the Sys-Func Digest, archived at

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique. Lanham, U.S.: Rowman & Littlefield.

Bhatia, V. (1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.

Bitzer, L. F. (1992). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 25(1), 1-14.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-41.

Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: Univ of California Press.

Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. London & New York: A&C Black.

Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (2000). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Continuum.

Coe, R. M. (2002). The new rhetoric of genre: Writing political briefs. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives (pp. 197-207). NJ, U.S.: Lawrence Erlbaum Mahwah.

Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. Newtown, NSW: Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.

Dressen-Hammouda, D. (2013). Ethnographic approaches to ESP research In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (pp. 501-518). Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Eggins, S., & Martin, J. R. (1997). Genres and register of discourse. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process (Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, 1.) (Vol. 1). London, U.K.: Sage.

Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 321-332. doi:

Freedman, A. (1993). Show and tell? The role of explicit teaching in the learning of new genres. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(3), 222-251.

Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (2003). Genre in the new rhetoric. London, UK: Routledge.

Gregory, M. (1967). Aspects of varieties differentiation. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 177-198.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). The notion of “context” in language education. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Text and Context in Functional Linguistics (pp. 1-24). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London & New York: Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148-164. doi:

Hymes, D. (1967). Models of the interaction of language and social setting. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 8-28. doi:

Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 693-722. doi:

Kołata, J. (2010). The reformulation of genre and register analysis. Styles of Communication, 2(1), 50-74.

Lukin, A., R. Moore, A., Herke, M., Wegener, R., & Wu, C. (2011). Halliday's model of register revisited and explored. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 4(2), 187-213. doi:

Macken-Horarik, M., & Adoniou, M. (2008). Genre and Register in Multiliteracies. In B. Spolsky & F. M. Hult (Eds.), The Handbook of Educational Linguistics (pp. 367-381). Singapore: Blackwell Publishing.

Mahboob, A., & Knight, N. K. (2010). Appliable linguistics. London & New York: Continuum.

Martin, J. R. (1985). Process and text: two aspects of human semiosis. In J. Benson & W. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse (Vol. 1: selected theoretical papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop). Norwood: Ablex.

Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins

Martin, J. R. (1997). Analysing genre: functional parameters. In. JR Martin. In F. Christie & J. Martin (Eds.), Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School (pp. 3-39). London: Cassell: Continuum.

Martin, J. R. (1999). Modelling context: A crooked path of progress in contextual linguistics. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Text and Context in Functional Linguistics: Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (Vol. 169, pp. 25-62). Amsterdam/Phildelphia: John Benjamins.

Martin, J. R. (2009). Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20(1), 10-21. doi:

Martin, J. R. (2011). Systemic funcational linguistics. In K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (Eds.), Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis (pp. 101-119). London/New York: Continuum.

Martin, J. R. (2012, August 17). Regard as process type. Regard as process type. Message posted to the Sys-Func Digest, archived at

Martin, J. R. (2014). Evolving systemic functional linguistics: beyond the clause. Functional Linguistics Journal, 1(1), 3.

Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). The place of genre in learning: Current debates, 3545.

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2009). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London, UK: Equinox.

Martin, J. R., & Rothery, J. (1980). Writing project report. Sydney: University of Sydney: Linguistics Dept.

Matthiessen, C. (2007). The “architecture” of language according to systemic functional theory: developments since the 1970s. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen & J. Webster (Eds.), Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective (Vol. 2, pp. 505-562). London: Equinox.

Miller, C. R. (2015). Genre as social action (1984): Revisited 30 years later (2014). Letras & Letras, 31(3), 56-72. doi:

Moore, J., & Schleppegrell, M. (2014). Using a functional linguistics metalanguage to support academic language development in the English Language Arts. Linguistics and Education, 26, 92-105. doi:

O’Hallaron, C. L., Palincsar, A. S., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2015). Reading science: Using systemic functional linguistics to support critical language awareness. Linguistics and Education, 32, 55-67. doi:

Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the Language Learning Classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Rose, D. (2014). Analysing pedagogic discourse: an approach from genre and register. Functional Linguistics, 1(1), 11. doi:

Sawyer, W., & Watson, K. (1987). Questions of genre. In I. Reid (Ed.), The Place of Genre in Learning: Current Debates (pp. 46-57). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University: Centre for Studies in Literary Education.

Starfield, S. (2011). Doing critical ethnographic research into academic writing: The theory of the methodology. In D. Belcher, A. M. Johns & B. Paltridge (Eds.), New directions in English for specific purposes research (pp. 174-196). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings: Cambridge University Press.

Ventola, E. (1987). The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters: Pinter Pub Ltd.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats