Phạm trù dạng trong tiếng Việt: Mô tả theo lí thuyết chức năng hệ thống
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
1
RESEARCH
THE CATEGORY OF VOICE IN VIETNAMESE:
A SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION
Hoang Van Van*
VNU University of Languages and International Studies,
Pham Van Dong, Cau Giay, Hanoi, Vietnam
Received 1 October 2020
Revised 5 November 2020; Accepted 12 January 2021
Abstract: This article is a functional description of the category of voice – arguably, one of the most
slippery notions in the grammar of Vietnamese that seems to resist any satisfactory treatment. The theoretical
framework employed for describing and interpreting the category is Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL).
Three questions which form the basis of this study are: (1) “Does the system of VOICE exist in Vietnamese?”; if
so, (2) “What are the delicate options available in the environment of VOICE in Vietnamese?”; and (3) “How
can these delicate options be distinguished from the SFL perspective?” The answers to these questions show that
unlike formal grammatical descriptions, VOICE exists in Vietnamese as a system; the environment of VOICE
opens up a number of delicate options; and these delicate options can be distinguished along the three
metafunctions: experiential, interpersonal, and textual. The answers to these questions also show that SFL is a
highly relevant framework for describing and interpreting the system of VOICE in Vietnamese: SFL helps us
investigate the category from a number of dimensions, enabling us to have a more comprehensive view of it. The
study contributes to the application of SFL to the description of Vietnamese grammar - a non-Indo-European
language, opening up new potentials for a comprehensive approach to the description of a Systemic Functional
Grammar of Vietnamese for research, application, and teaching purposes.
Key words: voice in Vietnamese, ergativity, transitivity, mood, theme
voice, although the issue has been occasionally
raised at seminars and conferences on
Vietnamese linguistics and Vietnamese language
teaching about whether or not this category
exists in Vietnamese, it is under-researched. In
reviewing the literature, it is evident that almost
no systematic research on voice has ever been
conducted. It is either mentioned in passing in
some Vietnamese textbooks for foreigners (e.g.
Bouchet, 1912; Nguyen, 1979) or briefly
described in some grammar books, implicitly
using some single aspect of formal grammars as
the theoretical framework (e.g. Nguyen, 1977;
Diep, 1987, 2013). One of the consequences is
that their descriptions of voice in Vietnamese
appear to be superficial and inadequate; and, to
make matters worse, an exhaustive and
coherent application of a particular linguistic
model to the description of voice in Vietnamese
has not been possible. This is the reason why in
this article we will attempt a description and
interpretation of the category of voice in
Vietnamese, using SFL as the theoretical
framework. Our study consists of five main
sections. Section one introduces the topic.
1. Introduction*
The study of Vietnamese, since the
introduction of traditional and formal Western-
styles of linguistics, has been hampered by the
perception that “In Vietnamese, there are no
articles, nouns, pronouns, verbs; there are no
genders and numbers either, only words; these
words are all mono-syllabic and in general
invariable; their meanings are changed by the
positions of the words which precede or follow
them, i.e. by their functions or positions in the
sentence”1 (Grammont & Le, 1911, pp. 201-2;
as cited in Nguyen, 1977, p. 14). With regard to
_______
*
Tel.: 84-946296999
1
Ibid., p. 14. This passage, which I have translated here
for presentation, appears in the Vietnamese original as
follows:
Trong tiếng Việt không có mạo từ, danh từ, đại từ, động
từ, cũng không có giống, số, mà chỉ có những từ không
thôi; những từ này đều là đơn âm tiết, nói chung không
biến đổi, ý nghĩa của chúng được thay đổi hay được xác
định nhờ những từ đặt trước hay theo sau, nghĩa là, nhờ
chức năng, vị trí của chúng trong câu.
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
2
Section two provides an overview of some
formal conflicting views on voice in
Vietnamese. Section three is concerned with
data collection procedure and presentation of
illustrative examples. Section four, drawing on
insights from the studies by Halliday (1985,
1998, 2012, and elsewhere) and Halliday and
Matthiessen (2014), describes and interprets in
some detail the system of VOICE and its
delicate options in Vietnamese. Finally, Section
five summarises what has been explored and
recommends the relevance of the SFL theory to
description of Vietnamese grammar.
(1952), Diep (1987, 2013) hold that the
category of voice does exist in Vietnamese.
They mention (in passing) that the distinction
between what has been traditionally referred to
as the active and passive voice rests on two
conditions which generally coincide: (a) the
difference in the structure corresponding to the
active and passive voice in the clause and (b)
the occurrence of the two traditionally called
common passive verbs bị (suffer, sustain,
undergo) and được (get, obtain, receive).
Simplifying somewhat, the different structures
corresponding to the active and passive voice in
Vietnamese, using the terminology of formal
grammar, can be represented respectively as
follows (note: NP = noun phrase; V = verb):
2. Voice in Vietnamese: Conflicting views
Formal grammarians of Vietnamese are not
unanimous in looking at the category of voice
in Vietnamese. To date, there have been three
contradicting views about whether or not the
category is applicable to the language. Some
grammarians such as Truong (1867), Bui
(1a) [active]
NP1 + V (main) + NP2
[active]
NP2 + V1 (passive) + NP1 + V2 (main) [passive]
These contrasting constructions can be
exemplified again in formal terms by the following
clauses taken from Nguyen (1977, p. 132).
Giáp
Giap
NP1
đánh
beat
V(main)
con
ngựa
horse
generic classifier
NP2
Giap beat(s) the horse.
(1b) [passive]
Con
generic classifier
NP2
ngựa
horse
bị
Giáp
Giap
NP1
đánh
beat
V2(main)
V1(passive)
The horse is/was beaten by Giap.
it must be said that the Vietnamese verb is
without the category of voice.
However, there are some grammarians (e.g.,
Bouchet, 1912; Cordier,1932, Tran et al., 1960;
Emeneau, 1951; Le, 1980; Thompson, 1985)
who, drawing mostly on the classical Western
view, have expressed doubts about the
existence of voice in Vietnamese. They argue
against the need to recognise this category. To
quote Emeneau (1951, pp. 63-4):
Emeneau (ibid., p. 73) continues to state:
Tense, mode, and voice, [...] are not the
categories of the Vietnamese verb; nor are
aspect, number and person of the subject
and object. The verb has its class meaning:
it occurs and can occur as the nucleus of a
predicate and cannot occur as the subject of
a predicate or as object of a verb, except
when the verb of the predicate is là (be).
Of the Vietnamese verb in general, it may
be said, as Yuen Ren Chao said for Chinese
(Mandarin Primer, p. 35): “there is no
distinction of voice in Chinese.” Besides
what looks like syntactically expressed
voice (“direction of action”) in the familiar
Indo-European sense (“active” : “passive”,
Vietnamese has the type of direction […],
with object but no subject, and the types of
construction […] in which a verb is
followed by and object and that in which it
is followed by another verb in series. None
of these involve formal change in verb, and
In a similar vein, Thompson (1985, p. 217)
claims:
An important way in which Vietnamese
verbs differ from English verbs is that they
do not in themselves imply a clear notion of
“voice” in the grammatical sense. In
English a (transitive) verb must be either
active or passive. No such distinction is
necessary in Vietnamese. As a matter of
fact, the actor or the goal or object of
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
3
Vietnamese verbs are regularly not formally
marked; these relationships are generally
clear from the context, and if they are not
there are ways in which they can be made
clear; the point is that they need not be, and
in the vast majority of Vietnamese
sentences such classifying devices are not
used. The device which indicates that a
preceding focal complement is actually a
goal or object of the action […].
non-inflectional language, verbs in Vietnamese
do not change in form to distinguish between
the active and passive voices as those in many
Indo-European languages. Further, it has been
argued that the two most common forms bị and
được (see examples (1a) and (1b) above), which
have been referred to as the ‘passive particles’
(Emeneau, 1951; Thompson, 1985), are, to use
the traditional terminology, ‘fully notional verbs’
(Nguyen, 1977, p. 196). In many respects, they
can still be used as transitive verbs (Nguyen,
1979, p. xii) in the sentence. Examples (2) and (3)
serve to illustrate the point (note: NP = noun
phrase; VP = verb phrase; A = Adverb):
Thus, the rejection of the category of voice
in Vietnamese is said to be justified by the fact
that voice is the category of the verb, and that
because Vietnamese is an isolating/analytic or
(2)
Bác
uncle
Hai
Hai
bị
suffer
VP
một
one
phát
generic classifier
NP2
súng lục
pistol
NP1
Uncle Hai got a gun shot.
(3)
Quân
Quan
NP1
được
get/receive
VP
điểm
mark
tốt
good
NP2
Quan got a good mark.
(structure) to express the passive meaning
(Nguyen, 1977; Diep, 2013). Below I shall
reproduce two more examples taken from
Nguyen (1977, p. 207) to show how the voice
contrast in Vietnamese is explained as seen
from the point of view of the third position:
The fact that bị and được can and do
function as fully notional verbs has resulted in
the third position which holds that although
Vietnamese does not employ functional or
morphological means, it uses syntactic means
(4)
Pha (...)
Pha (…)
NP1
bưng
bring
mâm
tray
NP2
lên
up
A
VP
Subject
Predicate
Object
Adverbial modifier
Pha brought the food tray into the house.
(5)
(…)
mâm
cơm
bưng
bring
lên,
up
tray
rice
NP2
Object
VP
Predicate
A
Adverbial modifier
(…) the food tray was brought into the house,
According to Nguyen (Ibid.), in clause (4)
Pha is the actor, bưng (brought) is the verb
expressing an action, and mâm (the food tray) is
the object which is affected by the action
expressed by the verb bưng. From the point of
view of syntactic structure, this would be
represented by the formal grammarian as
Subject + Predicate + Object + Adverbial
modifier of place. There is, however, an
inversion of syntactic order in (5). In (4) mâm
(the food tray), which is NP2, follows the verb
bưng (brought) and functions as the Object;
however, in (5) mâm cơm (the food tray) which
is still said to be NP2 functions as the Subject
and precedes the verb bưng. Nguyen claims that
the inversion of the order of the NP expressing
the Object in clause (4) so that it acts as the
Subject and precedes the verb in clause (5)
indicates that the clause is passive. Nguyen
(1977, p. 208) states:
In sentence 1 (= clause 4 here) the actor (of
the action) and the subject (of the sentence)
are conflated; this permits us to say that the
verb bưng expresses the active meaning. In
sentence 2 (= clause 5 here), however, the
noun mâm cơm, which expresses the object
(in clause 4), functions as the subject. So it
would be justified to say that this sentence
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
4
is a passive one. The passive meaning,
3. Data collection and descriptive strategies
which is expressed by the whole syntactic
structure as such, is not confined to the
form of the verb but to the whole structure
of the sentence.2
3.1. Data collection
Voice is a grammatical category construed
at the rank of the clause. A clause, as always, is
part of a text. It follows that the illustrating
material in this study should be text-based, with
examples taken from natural texts (both written
and spoken). Ideally, every example should be
the whole text; but in practice this ideal is
unattainable. So in order to exemplify, I scour
short extracts or passages from complete texts
which are understandable even apart from their
contexts; and from these extracts, I choose the
target clauses as examples for illustration.
In this study, the majority of examples are
authentic. They are taken from a variety of
genres: folk poetry, poems, short stories, and
grammar books of Vietnamese. I have decided
not to base the study on a particular corpus,
because a grammatical aspect of the clause is
concerned not just with the actual or observed
examples but with the possible examples as
well (cf. Chomsky, 1965).
Some other examples are my own; they are
provided based on my knowledge as a
competent native speaker of Vietnamese. This
was made necessary for two reasons. First,
when a number of grammatical points need to
be illustrated in one and the same example
(clause), often it is difficult to find an instance
in a given collection of texts. This does not
mean that the imaginary example cannot occur,
but simply because of ‘the vast complexity of
language’ (cf. Palmer, 1980, p. 8), it would take
a grammarian a lifetime to scour the texts for it
while as a native speaker of the language he or
she knows very well that the example in
question is a ‘good’ clause in his or her
language. And secondly, when I wish to
compare an example with a possible variant,
such agnate pair(s) is/are also unlikely to occur
in the language, but it seems that to search for
such a minimally contrasting pair would be
taking the use of authentic examples to
unnecessary extremes.
Nguyen’s
consideration
of
the
active/passive distinction in terms of the
different functions the subject plays in the
sentence is crucial. It suggests that voice in
Vietnamese is a feature of the clause, not of the
verb, thus reflecting the specificity of
Vietnamese as a non-inflectional language
where verb form does not show whether a verb
is active or passive. Further, what seems to be
of theoretical importance is that his view
represents a shift in focus from looking at the
category of voice in Vietnamese totally from
the point of view of the internal morphological
structure of the verbal group (leading as a result
to the claim that voice does not exist in
Vietnamese) to viewing it from the point of view of
the syntactic structure of the clause (leading as a
result to the claim that voice exists in Vietnamese):
in other words, the emphasis has shifted from
(verb) morphology to (clause) syntax.
As can be seen from the above overview,
scholars studying Vietnamese grammar have
different views on the category of voice; some
say that voice does exist in the language, while
others hold that voice does not. What should be
noted here is that those who recognize the
existence of the voice base their interpretations
only on one-faceted formal criterion. One of the
consequences is that the picture of voice in
Vietnamese appears to be inadequate. What is
really needed is a comprehensive and coherent
functional, social model of language that can help
describe and interpret this important grammatical
category in Vietnamese. This remark takes us to
the next section where we will be concerned with
the description and interpretation of voice in
Vietnamese from the SFL perspective.
_______
2
Ibid., p. 208. This passage, which I have translated here
for presentation, appears in the Vietnamese original as
follows:
As the majority of examples are taken from
natural texts, they sometimes contain elements
which are irrelevant to the point under
discussion. In some instances, in order to avoid
Trong câu 1, chủ thể của hoạt động và chủ ngữ của câu
trùng với nhau, và điều đó cho phép ta khẳng định được
rằng động từ bưng lên có ý nghĩa chủ động. Còn ở câu 2,
danh từ biểu thị đối tượng lại làm chủ ngữ của câu. Vì vậy
có thể khẳng định rằng câu này có ý nghĩa bị động. Những
ý nghĩa bị động biểu thị bằng cả một cấu trúc cú pháp như
vậy không phải là dạng bị động của riêng động từ mà là ý
nghĩa bị động của cả câu.
overload
of
information
not
needed
immediately, what we have done is (i) to ‘tidy
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
5
up’ the original example by removing the
irrelevant elements, and (ii) to expand the
elements of an elliptical example, so as to
remove ellipsis. It is hoped that these ‘editing’
steps, taken minimally, in no way invalidate the
suitability of the examples, especially where the
grammar of voice is concerned.
brackets (…): Actor (Ac), Agent (Ag), Medium
(Med), and so on. In contrast, names of systems
are capitalised throughout: TRANSITIVITY for
the system of TRANSITIVITY, MOOD for the
system of MOOD, and so on.
The presentation of an illustrative example is
organised as follows: each individual example is
numbered in Arabic numeral which is enclosed in
round brackets, followed by the source of data or
the origin of the example which is enclosed in
square brackets […] (see Appendix); the first line,
which is italicised, provides the Vietnamese
wording; the second line gives English inter-
glosses; the third line provides the configuration of
functions of the elements in the clause and appear
in bold type (where there is limited space, these
functional labels are presented in abbreviated forms,
but where there is enough space, they are presented
in full); and the fourth represents an idiomatic
translation into English. For non-Vietnamese
speakers so far as the grammar is concerned, it is the
inter-glosses that are more relevant and not the
idiomatic translation, as the idiomatic translation is
an attempt to convey the meaning and not the
grammatical relations within the Vietnamese clause.
Below is an instance of how an example is presented
(note: [TĐ] = Tản Đà):
3.2. Presentation of illustrative examples
As this study is concerned only with a
category of the clause of Vietnamese grammar,
two notes of caution should be introduced before
we could start. First, in the the SFL model
(Halliday, 1967a, 1967b, 1968, 1970, 1978, 1985,
1998; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014; and many
others), the clause is recognized as a simultaneous
representation of three different strands of
meaning: experiential, interpersonal and textual,
realized at once in the system of transitivity
(experiential), mood (interpersonal), and theme
(textual). This suggests that in starting to examine
the category of voice from the transitivity
system, we have to presuppose the existence of
other two systems such as mood and theme3 in
Vietnamese. However, at some point when
there is a need to bring out more clearly an
issue concerning the category of voice some
reference will be made to them and other
aspects of the grammar of Vietnamese. Further,
as mood and theme have not been extensively
described in Vietnamese from the SFL
(0) [TĐ]
Lá
thu
rơi rụng
fall
đầu
head
ghềnh
chute
leaf autumn
Actor/Medium
Process:
material
Circumstance:
location
perspective,
while
recognizing
the
shortcomings of taking these for granted, we
have generally assumed that functions such as
Subject, Predicator, Complement, Adjunct,
Theme, Rheme, Given, and New at least at the
primary level of delicacy resemble those in
English. And secondly, because the description
of the category of voice in Vietnamese
presented in this study is written in English, it
should be presented in a way so that not only
Vietnamese but also English readers can
understand it. To fulfil this goal, glosses and
symbols used in the article are presented as
follows: in the descriptive and explanatory text,
the initial letter of the names of functions is
capitalized; e.g., Actor, Goal, Beneficiary, etc.
When they are introduced for the first time,
they appear in bold type and are usually
followed by abbreviations enclosed in round
Autumn leaves fell on top of the chute.
3. Voice in Vietnamese: A systemic
functional description and interpretation
3.1. The notions of transitivity and ergativity
We begin to explore the category of voice in
Vietnamese with the examination of the notions of
transitivity and ergativity because these notions have
been the central topic of discussion of both formal
and functional scholars (e.g. Svartvik, 1966;
Fillmore, 1968; Lyons, 1979; Palmer, 1980; Kaplan,
1995; Collins Cobuild, 1996; Diep, 1987, 2013;
Nguyen, 1977; Nguyen, 1979; Halliday, 1976, 1985,
1998; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014; Matthiessen,
1995; Davidse, 1992; Hoang, 1997, 2012, and many
others). Of the two notions of transitivity and
ergativity in Vietnamese, ergativity has not yet
been explored in the SFL model. Therefore, as a
basis for exploring ergativity, it would be useful
to start with the notion of transitivity. Consider
the following examples taken from Hoang
(2012).
_______
3
The Vietnamese transitivity system and its delicate
subsystems such as material, behavioural, mental, verbal,
relational, and existential have been described by Hoang
(1997, 2012).
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
6
(6) [NM]
Hắn
He
(15) [NHT]
đến
come
Tôi
I
là
be
Nhâm
Nham
Actor Process: material
Identified/Token
Process:
relational
Identifier/Value
He came.
I’m Nham.
(16) [CD]
(7) [NM]
Hắn
đánh
Tuyết
Trên
giời
có
đám mây
xanh
he
beat
Tuyet
on
sky
have
cloud
blue
Actor Process: material Goal
Circumstance
Process:
existential
Existent
He beat Tuyet.
(8) [TDP]
There is a blue cloud in the sky.
Ông già
thở dài
The above examples are intended to
demonstrate two important points. First, they
are the process types which have been
recognized in the experiential grammar of
Vietnamese (see Hoang, 1997, 2012), of which
(6) and (7) are material processes; (8) and (9)
behavioural processes; (10) and (11) mental
processes, (12) and (13) verbal processes, (14)
and (15) relational processes, and (16) is an
existential process. Secondly, of these
processes, (6), (8), (10), (12), (14), and (16)
involve one participant referred to respectively
as Actor in (6), Behaver in (8), Senser in (10),
Sayer in (12), Carrier in (14) and Existent in
(16); and (7), (9), (11), (13), and (15) involve
two participants referred to respectively as
Actor and Goal in (7), Behaver and
Phenomenon in (9), Senser and Phenomenon
in (11), Sayer and Target in (13), and
Identified/Token and Identifier/Value in (15).
The fact that a process may involve one or two
participants has constituted a basis for the
distinction which is traditionally captured in
grammars by the terms ‘intransitive’ and
‘transitive’. The traditional claim that an
intransitive clause has one participant, and a
transitive clause has two poses some problem,
since the second half of the generalisation does
not hold because of the parameter of VOICE.
Consider the following set of material clauses:
(17a)
Mr old
sigh
Behaver Process: behavioural
The old man sighed.
(9)
Mẹ
mother
Behaver Process: behavioural Phenomenon
The mother looked at her son.
(10)
Nga
Nga
Senser Process: mental Circumstance
Nga thought interminably.
(11) [NM]
Tuyết
Tuyet
nhìn
look
con
son
nghĩ
think
miên man
interminably
yêu
love
tôi
I
Senser Process: mental Phenomenon
Tuyet loved me.
(12)
Họ
thắc mắc
complain
về
chính sách
policy
Circumstance
they
about
Sayer Process: verbal
They complained about the policy.
(13) [NMC]
Toà án
kết tội
accuse
kẻ giết người
murderer
Target
court
Sayer Process: verbal
The court accused the murderer.
(14) [TH]
Con
generic
classifier
(verbless)4
chim
gáy
hiền lành
bird crowing
gentle
Carrier
Attribute
Cửa
mở
The turtle-dove is gentle.
door
open
Actor Process: material
The door opened.
(17b)
_______
4 Several features of verbs in Vietnamese are quite different from those of
verbs in English. The class does include a great majority of words which
may be translated by English verbs. A large number of forms which are
most conveniently rendered by English adjectives following some form of
the verb ‘be’: thus Con chim gáy hiền lành means (The turtle-dove is
gentle), Tôi vui (I am happy), Cô ấy buồn (She was sad), and so forth. The
meaning ‘be’ seems to represent an integral part of the semantic range of
thissort of verb (formoredetail, see Thompson, 1985).
Cường
mở
cửa
door
Cuong
open
Actor Process: material Goal
Cuong opened the door.
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
7
(17c)
Cửa
door passive particle (Cuong)
Goal Actor
được
(Cường)
mở
open
Process: material
The door was opened (by Cuong).
(17a) is traditionally known as an
intransitive clause; (17b) is a transitive and
active clause; and (17c) is a transitive and
passive clause. Thus, according to the analysis
the transitive clause has two possible patterns:
active and passive. However, it should be noted
that the Actor, Cường in (17b) is still
introduced as the Actor in (17c) though is now
preceded by the form được, traditionally known
in Vietnamese linguistic scholarship as ‘passive
particle’. The active/passive contrast is
applicable only if the clause is transitive, and
while it is possible for the Actor to occur
overtly in either case as (17b) and (17c) show,
when the clause is passive, the participant that
is obligatory is Goal, not Actor, a situation that
is indicated in (17b) and (17c) by putting the
Actor, Cường, in round brackets. Let us refer to
the perspective presented above as the transitive
analysis. Halliday (1967a, 1967b, 1968, 1976,
1998, 2012), Halliday and Matthiessen (2014),
and Matthiessen (1995) have pointed out that
there does exist an alternative perspective on
clause organization. They refer to it as the
ergative perspective. What is ergativity and
what distinguishes it from transitivity?
“The root of the grammar of the nuclear
TRANSITIVITY of processes and participants are
two simultaneous systems, PROCESS TYPE and
AGENCY” (Matthiessen, 1995, p. 206). The
former is specifically related to the transitive
model and the latter, to the ergative one.
Halliday (1970, p. 157, 1998, p. 167) and
Halliday and Matthiessen (2014, p. 347) claim
that these two alternative perspectives on clause
organization are very widely distributed;
possibly all languages display both, in different
mixtures, with perhaps one or the other as the
more dominant.
can also be interpreted as the participant being
‘affected’ (Halliday, 1970, p. 157) by the
action. However, the action does not have to
stop at the Actor^Process combination. It can
be extended to or directs itself on to a Goal as
cây (tree) in Gió rung cây (The wind shook the
tree). In such an instance, we have a transitive
clause realised by a structural configuration of
Actor^Process^Goal, where Goal now is that
which is to be interpreted as the participant
being affected by the process. Whether the
structure is Actor^Process as Cây rung (The
tree shook) or Actor^Process^Goal as Gió rung
cây (The wind shook the tree), cây (the tree)
still functions as something at which the action
rung (shook) directs. Thus, if asked: Cái gì thế?
(What happened?) or Cái cây làm sao thế?
(What happened to the tree?), it would be
reasonable to be told in response either that Nó
(cái cây) rung (It [the tree] shook) or that Gió
rung nó (The wind shook it [the tree]). In the
first case, the action of shaking is represented as
confined to the tree; in the second case, the
action of shaking extends from the wind to the
tree. Thus the transitivity model is based on
‘extension’. Its basic question is ‘whether the
action extends beyond the actor or not’ (cf.
Halliday, 1968, p. 185; Halliday, 1976, 1998;
Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014).
With the ergative system, the picture is
quite different. The ergative system is said to be
typically generalised and cuts across the various
process types (Halliday, 1998, p. 164;
Matthiessen, 1995, p. 206). To use Davidse’s
(1992, p. 109) expression, the ergativity system
realizes an ‘INSTIGATION OF PROCESS model’.
In this model, there is one participant that is the
key figure in the process - the Medium (Med),
defined by Halliday (1998, p. 163) as ‘one
through which the process is actualised, and
without which there would be no process at all’.
A clause is middle (mid) if the process is
presented as ‘internally instigated’ (Davidse,
1992, p. 109) or ‘self-engendering’ (Halliday,
1998, p. 164; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 342):
only the key participant and the process are
expressed in it. Thus, Cửa mở (The door
opened), Cây đổ (The tree fell), and Cây rung
(The tree shook) are all middle clauses and have
The transitive system realises a ‘PROCESS
AND EXTENSION model’ (Davidse, 1992, p. 108;
see also Halliday, 1977, 1998, 2012; Halliday
& Matthiessen, 2014; Hoang, 1997, 2012). Its
point of departure (taking the material process
as representative) is that the Actor is engaged in
the process. If the action ends with the Actor as
in Cây rung (The tree shook), then we have an
intransitive clause realised by a structural
configuration of Actor^Process, where Actor
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
8
the
same
structural
configuration of
the same structural configuration of
Agent/Instigator^Process^Medium. So unlike
the transitive model, the ergative model is based
on ‘causation’. Its basic question is ‘whether the
cause/instigation is external to the action or not’
(Halliday 1968, 1970, 1998; see also Matthiessen,
1995; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014; Hoang,
1997, 2012). Below is a schema representing the
two alternative models of transitivity and
ergativity in Vietnamese.
Medium^Process. In contrast, a clause is
effective (eff) if the process is represented as
‘externally instigated’ (Davidse, ibid., p. 109);
it is represented as if there were an external
Agent (Ag), or Instigator, causing the process
to happen. Thus Gió rung cây (The wind
shook the tree), Cường mở cửa (Cuong
opened the door), and Hắn đánh Tuyết (He
beat Tuyet) are all effective clauses and have
Figure 1
Transitive and Ergative Patterning in Vietnamese
As can be seen in Figure 1, each model has its
own form of organisation. In the transitive model,
the process is inherently accompanied by the
obligatory Actor and the optional Goal which is
indicated by the notation . In the ergative model,
on the other hand, the obligatory participant that is
centrally involved in the Process is the Medium
and the optional one is the Agent. Halliday (1998,
pp. 165-66) and Halliday and Matthiessen (2014,
pp. 343-44) have shown, in relation to English
which can also be applicable to Vietnamese, that
the ergative function of Medium - ‘the nodal
participant throughout the system’ (Halliday, 1998,
p. 165; Halliday and Matthiesen, 2014, p. 343) -
turns up in all types of process. It is equivalent to:
Actor in middle material process; e.g.
Behaver in behavioural process; e.g.
(20) [TDP]
uống
cả ngày
Họ
they
drink
whole day
Medium/
Behaver
Process:
behavioural
Circumstance
They drank the whole day.
Senser in mental process; e.g.
(21)
thích
thoải mái
comfort
Người
già
people
old
like
Medium/
Senser
Process:
mental
Phenomenon
Old people like comfort.
Sayer in middle verbal process; e.g.
(22)
nói
về
lịch sử
Ông ấy
(18)
Thằng bé
he
talk
about history
ngã
Medium/
Sayer
Process:
verbal
Circumstance
little boy
fall
Medium/ Actor Process: material
He talked about history.
Target in effective verbal process; e.g.
(23)
The little boy fell.
Goal in effective material clause; e.g.
(19)
Nhiều người
many people
Agent/ Sayer
ca ngợi
praise
Process:
verbal
ông
he
Thằng bé
đá
quả bóng
little boy
kick
ball
Medium/Target
Agent/ Actor
Medium/ Goal
The boy kicked the ball.
Many people praised him.
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
9
Carrier in attributive relational process; e.g.
(24)
Initiator when the Actor is present in
effective material process; e.g.
(28)
dữ
Hổ
Tiger
fierce
làm
cây
rung
Gió
Medium/ Carrier Attribute
wind
make
tree
shake
A tiger is fierce.
Identified in identifying relational process;
Agent/
Initiator
The wind made the tree shake.
Actor
Process:
material
e.g.
Phenomenon in effective mental process of
the encoded type (from Phenomenon to
consciousness); e.g.
(25)
Cô
Ms
Chi
Chi
là
be
giáo viên
teacher
Identifier
Medium/
Identified
Process:
relational
(29)
làm
hài
cha
mẹ
Lời của cô
Ms Chi is the teacher.
Existent in existential process; e.g.
(26) [CD]
lòng
nói ta
word of she make please father mother
Agent/
Phenomenon
Process:
mental
Medium/
Senser
Trên
giời
có
đám mây
xanh
Her words pleased her parents.
on
sky
have
cloud
blue
Circumstance
Process:
existential
Medium/ Existent
Sayer in effective verbal process; e.g.
(30) [NHT]
There is a blue cloud in the sky.
In contrast, Agent appears as a function
only where the process is instigated by an
external agency. It is equivalent to:
Actor in effective material process; e.g.
(27)
Thằng
generic
classifier
Agent/ Actor
hỏi
ask
Process:
verbal
Quyên
Quyen
Medium/
Receiver
Sư Thiều
Monk Thieu
Agent/
Sayer
Monk Thieu asked Quyen.
Carrier in attributive relational process; e.g.
(31) [HT]
Con
đốt
đền
temple
Trứ
hiền lành
chim
gáy
Tru
burn
generic
classifier
bird crowing
gentle
Process:
material
Medium/Goal
Agent/ Carrier
Medium/
Attribute
Tru burned the temple.
The turtle-dove is gentle.
Attributor when the Carrier is present in attributive relational process; e.g.
(32)
Trời
sky
làm hoa quả
make fruit
chóng
quick
chín
ripe
nóng
hot
Agent/ Attributor
Carrier Circumstance Attribute
Hot weather made fruits ripe quickly.
Identifier/Token in identifying relational process; e.g.
(33) [NHT]
Tôi
là
Nhâm
I
be
Nham
Agent/ Identified/ Token Process: relational Identifier/ Value
I am Nham.
Assigner in identifying relational process; e.g.
(34)
bầu
thày
Năm
là
nhà giáo
ưu tú
Họ
they
elect
teacher
Nam
be
teacher meritorious
Agent/ Assigner
Identified/ Token Process: relational
Identifier/ Value
They elected Mr Nam meritorious teacher.
Two other additional participants
recognised in the transitive model are also
recognised in the ergative model and are given
the same labels: Range and Beneficiary. Range,
defined as “scope or domain of the process”
(Matthiessen et al., 2010, p. 170) or a restatement
of the process itself (Halliday, 1967a, 1968,
1998), often enters into the clause as a nominal
group. It can be assigned a different label in a
different clause type. Thus, Range is equivalent to:
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
10
Range in middle material process; e.g.
(35)
Verbiage - “the content or kind of saying”
(Halliday, 1998, p. 167) - in verbal process; e.g.
(39)
Thày Năm
chơi
cờ
father Nam
play
chess
Anh
gọi
hai
li
rượu
Agent/Actor Process: material Range
Father Nam plays chess.
(36)
he
Agent/
Sayer
call
Process:
verbal
two glass wine
Verbiage
He ordered two glasses of wine.
Attribute in attributive relational process; e.g.
(40)
Họ
nhảy
một điệu
rất
lạ
nhảy
they
dance
one dance very strange
Agent/ Process:
Actor material
Range
Cô
Chi
là
be
một cô giáo
tốt
Ms. Chi
one
Ms
good
They danced/performed a very strange dance.
Behaviour in behavioural process; e.g.
(37)
teacher
Attribute
Agent/
Carrier
Process:
relational
Ms. Chi is a good teacher.
Identifier/Value in identifying relational
process; e.g.
(41)
Bọn trẻ
children
đang
aspectual
marker
nghe
listen
nhạc
music
Agent/
Behaver
Process:
behavioural
Range/
Behaviour
Cô
Chi
là
giáo viên
The children are listening to music.
Phenomenon of the ‘thích (like) type’ in
mental process; e.g.
Ms
Identified/
Token
Chi
be
teacher
Identifier/
Value
Process:
relational
(38)
Tuyết
Tuyet
Agent/
Senser
Ms Chi is the teacher.
thích
like
Process:
mental
tôi
I
In contrast, Beneficiary, defined as “one
that stands to gain” (Halliday, 1998, p. 167),
may enter into the clause either directly as a
nominal group or indirectly as a prepositional
phrase. It can be equivalent to:
Range/
Phenomenon
Tuyet liked me.
Recipient in material process; e.g.
(42) [Recipient as direct participant]
Tôi
gửi
một
món
quà
mẹ
tôi
I
send
mother
I
one generic classifier present
Agent/ Actor Process: material
Recipient
Medium/Goal
I sent my mother a present.
(43) [Recipient as indirect participant]
Tôi
gửi
một
one generic classifier present to mother
Medium/Goal Recipient
món
quà
cho
mẹ
tôi
I
I
send
Agent/ Actor Process: material
I sent a present to my mother.
Client in material process; e.g.
(44)
Hắn
he
vẽ
paint
bức
generic classifier picture for mother
Medium/ Goal Client
tranh
cho
mẹ
Agent/ Actor Process: material
He painted a picture for his mother.
Receiver in verbal process; e.g.
(45) [NHT]
Sư
Thiều
hỏi
Quyên
monk Thieu
ask
Quyen
Agent/ Sayer Process: verbal Receiver
Monk Thieu asked Quyen.
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
11
Beneficiary in relational attributive process; e.g.
(46)
Phần thưởng này
là
dành cho
anh
reward this
be
reserve for brother
Medium/ Carrier Process: relational
Beneficiary
This reward is for you.
an effective clause can be only transitive. And
thirdly, voice can be interpreted either from the
TRANSITIVE or the ERGATIVE system.
Transitively, a clause is intransitive when it has
one participant (the Actor in a material process,
for instance), and the voice is active as Thày
Năm in Thày Năm đi vào (Father Nam came
in). In contrast, a clause is transitive when it has
two participants - an Actor and a Goal, and the
voice may be active as Cậu bé and quả bóng in
Cậu bé đá quả bóng (The boy kicked the ball)
or passive as Quả bóng and cậu bé in Quả
bóng được cậu bé đá (The ball was kicked by
the boy). And ergatively, a clause is middle
when it has no feature of agency; the clause is
active; and it may have one participant - the
Medium as Cậu bé in Cậu bé ngã (The little
boy fell), or two participants - the Medium and
an ‘additional entity’ which is not Goal because
it “exists independently of the process and
indicates the domain over which the process
takes place” (Halliday, 1998, p. 146) referred to
as Range as đàn ghi ta (guitar) in Anh ta chơi
đàn ghi ta (He played the guitar). In contrast, a
clause is effective when it has the feature of
agency, and the clause can be either active (or
operative) as in Con chó đuổi con mèo (The dog
chased the cat) or passive (or receptive) as in
Con mèo bị con chó đuổi (The cat was chased
by the dog).
4.2. Voice in Vietnamese: A multifunctional
interpretation
The above discussion demonstrated that
Vietnamese shows up in both the transitive and
ergative systems, and each of these systems
allows a more delicate systemic contrast. Figure
2 below shows the ergative and transitive as
two concurrent systems with the system of
process type for the Vietnamese clause: the
ERGATIVE system is the entry condition for the
options of middle v. effective, and the
TRANSITIVE system is the entry condition for
the options of intransitive v. transitive. The
rationale for including both in the network is
that they represent two complementary, not
mutually exclusive, perspectives on clause
organisation.
Figure 2
Ergative and Transitive Systems: Primary
Choices
However, looked at from
a
wider
environment, it can be seen that the choice of
voice is not just a matter of the experiential
metafunction; it is a matter of the interpersonal
and textual metafunctions as well (cf. Halliday,
1998, p. 167; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014). In
what follows, we will argue that the explanation
of voice requires reference to all the three
metafunctions.
The active v. passive choice is, in effect, a
textual resource in the sense that it allows
certain thematic possibilities, which in its
absence would not be available. This remark
concerns in particular the question of unmarked
v. marked theme where unmarked theme refers
to unusual or normal theme and marked theme
implies unusual or abnormal theme. Taking the
major material declarative clause as the starting
Figure 2 is intended to show three points.
First, the system of PROCESS TYPE is the
entry condition for the six clause options of
material, behavioural, mental, verbal, relational,
and existential; the ERGATIVE system is the
entry condition for the options of middle v.
effective; and the TRANSITIVE system is the
entry condition for the options of intransitive v.
transitive. Secondly, a middle clause can be
either intransitive (indicated by the notation #)
or transitive (indicated by the notation *), while
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
12
point, the constituent functioning as Subject
will also have the function of unmarked Theme,
(47a) [active voice]
so long as it is the first constituent with an
experiential and interpersonal function as in:
Anh ấy
sẽ
hoàn thành
luận án
dissertation
Goal
năm
year
Circumstance
Adjunct
sau
after
he
aspectual marker
complete
Actor
Subject
Process: material
Predicator
Complement
Theme (unmarked)
Given
Rheme
New
He will complete his dissertation next year.
The conflated realisation of these three
functions - Actor/Subject/unmarked Theme - by
the same constituent construes a specific kind of
point of departure. An unmarked Theme
construes a point of departure which is not in
contrast to any other, and typically does not
(47b) [active voice]
function as New information. The conflation of
Theme in a declarative clause with any element
other than Actor/Subject will make the Theme
marked, in the sense that it will construe a point of
departure that is in some sense contrastive and/or
presents New information as for example in:
Luận án
dissertation
Goal
anh ấy
he
Actor
Subject
sẽ
hoàn thành
năm
sau
aspectual marker
complete
year
after
Process: material
Circumstance
Adjunct
Complement
Theme (marked)
New
Predicator
Rheme
Given
His dissertation he will complete next year.
(47c) [active voice]
Năm
sau
anh ấy
sẽ
hoàn thành
complete
luận án
dissertation
Goal
year
after
he
aspectual marker
Circumstance
Adjunct
Theme (marked)
Given
Actor
Subject
Process: material
Predicator
Rheme
Complement
New
Next year he will complete his dissertation.
Note that the voice in all three clauses
above is active. However, it is possible to
choose as an unmarked Theme in a declarative
clause something other than the constituent
with the conflated function of Actor/Subject. In
this case, however, the voice of the clause must
be passive, for voice is a resource for re-
(47d) [passive voice]
ordering of the experiential functions, with the
result that with different voice choices, different
experiential functions will conflate with
different interpersonal ones. In particular,
Subject in the passive clause will be conflated
with Goal, and Actor may or may not be
present as in:
Luận án
dissertation
Goal
sẽ
được
(anh ấy)
he
hoàn thành
complete
năm
year
sau
after
asp. marker pass. marker
Actor
Subject
Process: material Circumstance
Complement
Theme (unmarked)
Given
Predicator
Adjunct
Rheme
New
His dissertation will be completed next year.
At this point, a question raised for
exploration here is: How can the active and
passive voice be distinguished? To facilitate the
discussion, let us produce below two examples
and analyse them in terms of
TRANSITIVITY, MOOD, and THEME:
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
13
(48a)
Cường
nấu
cơm
này
ngon
Cuong
cook
rice
this
delicious
Actor/Agent
Subject
Theme (unmarked)
Process: material; effective Goal/Medium Circumstance
Predicator Complement Adjunct
Rheme
Cuong cooked this rice well.
(48b)
Cơm
này
được
(Cường)
Cuong
nấu
cook
ngon
delicious
rice
this
passive maker
Goal/Medium
Subject
Theme (unmarked)
Actor/Agent Process: material; effective Circumstance
Adjunct Predicator Adjunct
Rheme
This rice was well cooked (by Cuong).
Clause (48a) is transitive and active, and
clause (48b) is transitive and passive. If these
clauses are compared, it will be noted that they
differ from each other in a number of respects.
From the point of view of recognition, there is
a re-ordering of the participants in the passive
version. Cường, which is Actor/Agent and stands
at the head of clause (48a), is still Actor/Agent but
has moved to precede the Process in (48b); and
cơm này (this rice), which is Goal/Medium and is
preceded by the Process in clause (48a), is still
(48c)
Goal/Medium but has moved to the head of
(48b). This re-ordering of participants in the
passive clause has opened up the different
possibilities of conflation with lexicogrammatical
functions that are realisationally related to the
interpersonal and textual metafunctions. Thus,
instead of Actor/Agent as Subject/Theme where
Theme is unmarked in clause (48a), we have
Goal/Medium as Subject/Theme so that Theme is
still unmarked in (48b). This is in contrast to an
agnate clause such as
Cơm
này,
Cường
nấu
ngon
rice
this
Cuong
cook
delicious
Goal/Medium
Complement
Theme (marked)
Actor/Agent Process: material; effective Circumstance
Subject
Predicator
Rheme
Adjunct
This rice, Cuong cooked well.
where Goal/Medium/Complement are
brought to the head of the clause, and
Theme is conflated with them: when
Goal/Medium/Complement are conflated with
Theme, Theme is no longer unmarked: it
construes a point of departure which in some
sense highlights it. The fact that there is a re-
ordering of participants in the passive voice and
this re-ordering opens up the different
possibilities of conflation with Subject and
Theme, leaving the thematic choices of the
clause unmarked, is important: the definition
criterion for the passive voice in Vietnamese is
precisely the construal of Goal as the speaker’s
(48d)
point of departure without implying any
highlighting for the information to which the
element refers.
From the point of view of grammatical
structure, (48b) can be distinguished from (48a)
in two respects. First, like (48a), Actor/Agent
Cường is present as a direct participant in
(48b); however, unlike (48a), it is not conflated
with Subject/Theme but is mapped on to
Actor/Agent which is part of Rheme. Further,
the presence of Actor/Agent in (48a) seems to
be obligatory while the presence of Actor/Agent
in (48b) may be optional. Thus, it is possible to
say either as (48b) or as the following:
Cơm
này
được
nấu
cook
ngon
delicious
rice
this
passive marker
Goal/Medium
Process: material; effective
Predicator
Circumstance
Adjunct
Subject
Theme
Rheme
This rice was well cooked.
The second distinction between a passive
clause and an active one has to do with the
difference in the internal structure of the verbal
group realising the Process in the passive
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
14
clause. In (48a) the Process is realised by the verb
nấu (cooked); in (48b), however, the Process is
realised by a verbal group which consists of the
same verb form nấu (cooked) and the traditionally
known ‘passive particle’, or ‘passive verb’ được.
The above discussion suggests that there are
both semantic and lexicogrammatical grounds
for distinguishing the active from the passive
voice in Vietnamese. The active/passive
distinction can be represented in Figure 3.
Figure 3
The System of VOICE in Vietnamese: Active and Passive
(50)
Tuyết
Tuyet suffer he
Tuyet was beaten by him.
‘Desirable’ and ‘undesirable’ can be
distinguished
lexicogrammatical grounds. Semantically,
desirable refers to the meaning of ‘benefiting’
which has the feature of [+pleasant]. In
contrast, undesirable refers to the meaning of
‘suffering’ which has the feature of [-pleasant].
Lexicogrammatically, each of these options is
realised by a different form: desirable is
realised by the form được which means
‘benefit’, ‘gain’, ‘obtain’, or ‘receive’, and
undesirable is realised by the form bị which
means ‘suffer’, ‘sustain’, or ‘undergo’. The
4.3. được and bị: passive particles?
hắn đánh
beat
bị
In English, the construction of be + V-en
constitutes the main choice of passive, which
seems to be attitudinally neutral. Thus we can
have I am given; You are given, She is given, I
was given, You were given, She was given,
which are all attitudinally neutral seen from the
point of view of the speaker, and it seems no
further distinction can be made. In Vietnamese,
however, the choice of passive constitutes the entry
condition for two more delicate systemic options
having the feature of [+attitude: judgement]
(Martin & White, 2005, p. 35), which can be
referred to as ‘desirable’ v. ‘undesirable’. These
options can be exemplified in (49) and (50):
(49)
on
both
semantic
and
Cơm
Cường nấu
ngon
được
desirable/undesirable
represented in the following system network:
contrast
can
be
rice benefit Cuong cook deliciously
The rice was well cooked by Cuong.
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
15
Figure 4
The System of VOICE in Vietnamese: Desirable and Undesirable
Figure 4 claims that in Vietnamese the
choice between desirable v. undesirable
(realised by được and bị respectively) is
applicable if and only if the clause has feature
[+passive]. This is obviously not true in the
light of examples (2) and (3) above. There is
however a difference between the use of được
(52) transitive/middle/active
and bị in an active clause as opposed to a
passive. This can be clarified by a consideration
of the following examples:
(51) intransitive/middle
Thằng bé
ngã
bị
little boy
suffer
fall
The little boy fell.
Mình
ăn một
bữa
sáng
ngon
được
self/I benefit eat one generic classifier morning delicious
I had a delicious breakfast.
(53) transitive/effective/active
Anh
mất một
chiếc
ô
trắng
bị
he suffer lose one generic classifier umbrella white
He lost a white umbrella.
Compare now (51) - (53) with the following:
(51a) intransitive/middle
absence of được and bị: in the active clause the
presence of được or bị has the effect of making
it marked.
Thằng bé
ngã
boy
fall
The fact that desirable/undesirable may be
present in all types of clause and that, except in
the case of passive, their presence in clauses
with the [+active] feature makes them sound
marked suggests two points: (i) được and bị are
not passive particles per se but function in that
capacity, and (ii) it may be possible to establish
a separate system to account for the markedness
of the presence of desirable/undesirable in
clauses with the [+active] feature in
Vietnamese. This system may be called
MARKEDNESS, and the terms of the system
are ‘neutral’ and ‘marked’. The features
‘marked’ and ‘passive’ act as disjunctive entry
conditions for the systemic choice between
‘desirable’ and ‘undesirable’: that is to say, the
The boy fell.
(51a) transitive/middle/active
Mình ăn một
self/I eat one generic morning delicious
classifier
I had a delicious breakfast.
(51c) transitive/effective/active
Anh mất một
bữa
sáng
ngon
chiếc
generic
classifier
ô
trắng
he lose one
umbrella white
He lost a white umbrella.
It will appear clear that (51a), (52a) and
(53a) are neutral while (51), (52), and (53)
sound somewhat marked. This difference in
marking can be attributed to the presence or
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
16
choice between the last two systemic features is
applicable either in the environment of
‘passive’ or in the environment of ‘marked’ (for
detail about semantic system network in SFL, see
Hasan, 1996). The system of MARKEDNESS
with its more delicate choices in concurrence with
the systems of PROCESS TYPE, ERGATIVE,
and TRANSITIVE is represented in Figure 5.
Figure 5
The System of MARKEDNESS and its More Delicate Choices
clause, rather than that of the verb. But, in
5. Concluding remarks
answering the second and the third questions,
“What are the delicate options available in the
environment of VOICE in Vietnamese?”, and
“How can these delicate options be
distinguished from the SFL perspective?”, we
differ markedly from formal grammarians.
Offering a new approach to the description and
interpretation of the Vietnamese voice – the SF
approach, we have thus achieved new findings:
first, VOICE in Vietnamese constitutes a
system that runs across all types of ranking
clause, and this system opens up a number of
delicate choices: middle v. effective, if effective
is chosen, it will allow two more delicate
choices: active v. passive (voice), and if passive
is chosen, it will further allow two more
delicate choices: desirable v. undesirable. And
secondly, these delicate choices can be
distinguished along the three metafunctions of
language: experiential (realized in transitivity
and ergativity), interpersonal (realized in
mood), and textual (realized in theme). It is
clear from our research that to have a
comprehensive picture of any grammatical
category, we really need a multifunctional
approach. And it is precisely this
In this article, we have made an attempt to
outline a description of one of the most
important categories in the grammar of
Vietnamese which does not seem to have
received adequate attention from the
Vietnamese linguistic scholarship: the category
of voice. We began our discussion by
presenting three formal contradicting views
about whether or not voice is applicable to the
language. Then drawing on insights from SFL,
we have described and interpreted this category
of voice in Vietnamese. We first examined
voice in relation to the two alternative
experiential perspectives: transitivity and
ergativity. Then, using these perspectives as the
basis, we took a step further, interpreting voice
from a multifunctional approach, intertwining
the experiential function with the interpersonal
and the textual ones in the clause. In answering
the first question “Does voice exist in
Vietnamese?”, we share the idea of some
formal grammarians (e.g. Truong, 1867; Bui,
1952; Nguyen, 1977; Nguyen, 1979; and Diep,
1987, 2013; and others) that voice does exist in
Vietnamese, and that it is a feature of the
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
17
Halliday (Ed.), Aims and perspectives in linguistics
(pp. 32-49). Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
multifunctional approach that has justified the
relevance of SFL to our study: by describing
and interpreting the system of VOICE in
Vietnamese from the SFL perspective, we are
able to understand many features which
otherwise remain arbitrary or obscure.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The
interpretation of language and meaning. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to Functional
Grammar (1st ed.). Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). An introduction to Functional
Grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014).
Halliday’s introduction to Functional Grammar (4th ed.).
Routledge.
References
Vietnamese
Hasan, R. (1996). Ways of saying: Ways of meaning (C. Cloran,
D. Butt & G. Williams, Eds.). Cassell.
Bùi Đức Tịnh (1952). Văn phạm Việt Nam [A grammar of
Hoang, V. V. (1997). An Experiential Grammar of the
Vietnamese clause: A functional description [Doctoral
dissertation, Macquarie University].
Vietnamese]. Nhà xuất bản Phạm Văn Tươi.
Diệp Quang Ban (1987). Câu đơn tiếng Việt [The simple
sentence in Vietnamese]. Nhà xuất bản Giáo dục.
Hoang, V. V. (2012). An Experiential Grammar of the
Vietnamese clause. Vietnam Education Publishing House.
Diệp Quang Ban (2013). Ngữ pháp Việt Nam [A grammar
of Vietnamese]. Nhà xuất bản Giáo dục.
Kaplan, J. (1995). English grammar: Principles and facts
Halliday, M. A. K. (2012). Dẫn luận ngữ pháp chức năng [An
introduction to Functional Grammar] (Hoàng Văn Vân
dịch) (tái bản lần thứ hai). Nhà xuất bản Đại học Quốc gia
(2nd ed.). Prentice Hall, Inc.
Le, D. N. (1980). Modality in English and Vietnamese:
A systemic comparison [Unpublished master’s thesis].
University of Sydney.
Nguyễn Kim Thản (1977). Động từ trong tiếng Việt
[Verbs in Vietnamese]. Nhà xuất bản Khoa học xã hội.
Lyons, J. (1979). Introduction to theoretical linguistics.
Cambridge University Press.
Trần Trọng Kim, Bùi Kỷ, & Phạm Duy Khiêm (1940).
Việt-Nam Văn-Phạm [A grammar of Vietnamese]
(tái bản lần thứ tám). Nhà xuất bản Tân Việt.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of
evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1995). Lexicogrammatical
cartography: English systems. International Language
Sciences Publishers.
English
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teresa, K., & Lam, M. (2010). Key
terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. Continuum.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. The
M. I. T. Press.
Nguyen, D. H. (1979). 201 Vietnamese Verbs. Barron’s
Collins Cobuild (1996). Grammar patterns 1: Verbs.
Educational Series.
HarperCollins Publishers.
Palmer, R. F. (1980). The English verb (8th ed.). Longman.
Davidse, K. (1992). Transitivity/Ergativity: The Janus-headed
grammar of actions and events. In M. Davies & L.
Ravelli (Eds.), Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent
theories and practices (pp. 105-35). Pinter Publishers.
Shore, S. (1992). Aspects of Systemic Functional Grammar of
Finnish [Doctoral Dissertation, Macquarie University].
1.1.129.1396&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Emeneau, M. B. (1951). Studies in Vietnamese
(Annamese) grammar. University of California Press.
Svartvik, J. (1966). On voice in the English verb. Mouton.
Thompson, L. C. (1985).
A Vietnamese Reference
Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T.
Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1-88).
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Grammar. Mon-Khmer Studies Journal, 13-14, 1-367.
French
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967a). Notes on transitivity and theme
in English, Part 1. Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 37-81.
Bouchet, A. (1912). Cours elementaire D’annamite.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967b). Notes on transitivity and theme
Imprimerie d'Extrême-Orient.
in English, Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 199-244.
Cordier, G. (1932). Cours de la langue Annamite. Annee
preparatoire: Grammaire et exercises. (N.Pub).
Halliday, M. A. K. (1968). Notes on transitivity and theme
in English, Part 3. Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 179-215.
Grammont, M., & Le, Q. T. (1911). Études sur la langue
Annamite. In Mémoires de la société de linguistique
de Paris (Vol. 17). Imprimerie Nationale.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Language structure and
language function. In J. Lyons (Ed.), New horizons in
linguistics (pp. 140-65). Penguin.
Truong, V. K. (1867). Abrégé de Grammaire Annamite.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1976). Halliday: System and function
in language (G. Kress, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
Imprimerie Impériale.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1977). Ideas about language. In M. A. K.
H. V. Van / VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2021) 1-18
18
Appendix
Sources of Data for Illustration
[NB]
=
=
=
=
=
=
Nguyễn Bản (1995). Tầm tã mưa ơi. Trong Những truyện ngắn hay (tr. 79-104). Nxb Công an nhân dân.
Nguyễn Huy Thiệp (1993). Thương nhớ đồng quê. Trong Truyện ngắn hay (tr. 176-197). Nxb Văn học.
Nguyễn Kim Thản (1977). Động từ trong tiếng Việt. Nxb Khoa học Xã hội.
Nguyễn Minh Chính (1993). Mẹ chồng tôi. Trong Truyện ngắn hay (tr. 199-223). Nxb Văn học.
Nguyễn Một (1996). Tha Hương. Văn nghệ trẻ, (18).
Tản Đà (1920). Cảm thu, tiễn thu. Thi viện. Truy cập ngày 20-8-2020 tại
ti%E1%BB%85n-thu/poem-vNz_E1BYhJPvwrJfcXPkPw
[NHT]
[NKT]
[NMC]
[NM]
[TĐ]
[TH]
[TDP]
=
=
Tô Hoài (1995). Tuyển tập Tô Hoài. Nxb Văn học.
Trần Duy Phiên (1995). Ngõ đạo miền hoang dã. Trong Những truyện ngắn hay (tr. 145-188).
Nxb Công an nhân dân.
PHẠM TRÙ DẠNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT:
MÔ TẢ THEO LÍ THUYẾT CHỨC NĂNG HỆ THỐNG
Hoàng Văn Vân
Trung tâm Nghiên cứu giáo dục ngoại ngữ, ngôn ngữ và quốc tế học,
Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ, ĐHQGHN,
Phạm Văn Đồng, Cầu Giấy, Hà Nội, Việt Nam
Tóm tắt: Bài viết này mô tả phạm trù dạng - một trong những khái niệm ngữ pháp khó nắm bắt nhất trong
ngữ pháp tiếng Việt dường như chống lại bất kì cách xử lí thoả đáng nào. Khung lí thuyết được sử dụng để mô tả
và giải thích phạm trù này là Ngôn ngữ học chức năng hệ thống. Ba câu hỏi hình thành nên cơ sở của bài viết
này là: (1) “Hệ thống DẠNG có tồn tại trong tiếng Việt không?”; nếu có thì (2) “Các sự lựa chọn tinh tế có sẵn
trong môi trường của phạm trù DẠNG trong tiếng Việt là gì?”; và (3) “Các sự lựa chọn tinh tế này được phân
biệt như thế nào nhìn từ quan điểm Ngôn ngữ học chức năng hệ thống?” Câu trả lời cho ba câu hỏi này cho thấy,
khác với các các mô tả của ngữ pháp hình thức, DẠNG tồn tại trong tiếng Việt như là một hệ thống; môi trường
hệ thống DẠNG mở ra một số sự lựa chọn tinh tế; và những sự lựa chọn tinh tế này có thể được phân biệt theo
ba siêu chức năng ngôn ngữ: siêu chức năng trải nghiệm, siêu chức năng liên nhân, và siêu chức năng văn bản.
Nghiên cứu cũng chỉ ra rằng Ngôn ngữ học chức năng hệ thống là khung lí thuyết rất phù hợp để mô tả và giải
thích phạm trù DẠNG trong tiếng Việt: Lí thuyết chức năng hệ thống giúp chúng ta nghiên cứu phạm trù ngữ
pháp từ nhiều chiều kích khác nhau, giúp chúng ta có một cái nhìn toàn diện hơn về phạm trù đó. Nghiên cứu
này góp phần vào việc ứng dụng lí thuyết Ngôn ngữ học chức năng hệ thống vào mô tả ngữ pháp tiếng Việt -
một ngôn ngữ phi Ấn-Âu, mở ra tiềm năng mới cho một cách tiếp cận toàn diện đối với việc mô tả ngữ pháp
tiếng Việt theo lí thuyết Ngôn ngữ học chức năng hệ thống, phục vụ cho các mục đích nghiên cứu, ứng dụng và
giảng dạy.
Từ khoá: hệ thống DẠNG trong tiếng Việt, khiến tác, chuyển tác, thức, đề ngữ
18 trang
23900
Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Phạm trù dạng trong tiếng Việt: Mô tả theo lí thuyết chức năng hệ thống", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- pham_tru_dang_trong_tieng_viet_mo_ta_theo_li_thuyet_chuc_nan.pdf
