'Dare' As Finite vs Event

The unmarked Mood tag of the first clause is dare they?

The unmarked Mood tag of the second clause is would they?

See Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 574): 'risk doing', 'venture to do'.

'Forget' As Material Process

In the following clause, 'forget' serves the same function as the verbal group complex 'forget to bring', and so serves as a material Process:

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 568):

It is the secondary group, or last secondary group if there is more than one, that realises the process type of the clause…

See also Robin Fawcett On 'Forget' + Location

Hypotactic Elaborating Verbal Group Complexes: Reality-Phase

(The) Glaxo Exhibit: Theme, Transitivity & Mood

hypotactic extending verbal group complex of conation:

Here not is interpreted as a formal or written variant of the Finite negative element n't, rather than a distinct modal Adjunct, on the basis that the unmarked Mood tag would be should she? rather than shouldn't she?. See Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 175-6).

The lexical choice of see adds a 'mental' feature to the material Process.

The additional participant rôle of Behaver is explained by Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 576, 577):

The extending complex is a two-part process, in which the Subject fills a dual participant role: Behaver (in the conative component) plus Actor, or some other role, in the happening itself.

'Autorise' & 'Permettre'

Cette démarche autorise l'agence à les rayer de ses listes.

This approach authorises the agency to delete them from its lists.

Pour permettre à ces demandeurs d'emploi seniors de subsister jusqu'à leur retraite, plusieurs types d'allocation sont prévus.

To enable these senior job seekers to survive until their retirement, several types of allowance are provided.

In English, these are the primary verbal groups of hypotactic enhancing causative (modulation) verbal group complexes. See Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 580, 582-4).

In hypotactic verbal group complexes, it is the (last) secondary verbal group that realises the PROCESS TYPE. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 568):

It is the secondary group, or last secondary group if there is more than one, that realises the process type of the clause, e.g. [material:] she seemed to mend it, [behavioural:] she seemed to laugh, [mental:] she seemed to like him, [verbal:] she seemed to tell us, [relational:] she seemed to be nice.

So, in these instances, both authorises to delete and enable to survive are material Processes. Although survive means 'continue to exist', unlike existential Processes, but like material Processes, it takes a Range participant, Scope, as in they survived the ordeal, and its unmarked present tense is the present in present, not the simple present.

Process Realised By Verbal Group Complex: Enhancing Causative: Modulation

See Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 580, 582-4).

Non-Targeting Verbal Clause With Agent

He	limited ('caused')	himself	to say	only	the necessary
Prompter*	Process:	Sayer	verbal		Verbiage
	α	→	x β

* The term 'Prompter' is one suggestion for the Agent of such verbal clauses.