Operative vs Receptive Material Clauses

Discontinuous Nominal Group Complex (The Soldiers He Smiled At … Most Of 'Em)

“Good morning, good morning!” the General said

When we met him last week on our way to the line.

Now the soldiers he smiled at are most of 'em dead,

And we're cursing his staff for incompetent swine.

“He's a cheery old card,” grunted Harry to Jack

As they slogged up to Arras with rifle and pack.

But he did for them both by his plan of attack.

The nominal group most of 'em elaborates the the nominal group the soldiers he smiled at by clarifying it. The interdependency relation is paratactic, because either nominal group can serve as Carrier in its own right.

Again, the motivation is textual, not just in conforming to the rhythm of the poem, but because the elaborating nominal group in this position forms a single information unit, with most as the focus of New. But this has the added effect of making dead the focus of New in a following one-word information unit. In this way the poet makes his point by giving maximum textual prominence to both most and dead, together with the previous focus smiled at within the Theme.

// 1 ‸ Now the / soldiers he / smiled at are // 1 most of them // 1 dead //

Discontinuous Nominal Group (Woman … With Stab Wounds)

The motivation for displacing the Qualifier in this news story headline is textual: to make it the unmarked focus of New information, so that the Phenomenon/Subject is assigned two peaks of textual prominence: Theme and New.

Note also that the clause has no Finite or Medium through whom the Process is actualised.

Borderline Cases Between Identifying And Verbal Processes: Indeterminacy

The difference between an identifying clause and a verbal clause is that an identifying clause construes a relation of identity between participants, whereas a verbal clause construes a 'signal source' that projects a locution (wording) into semiotic existence. An identifying clause construes different levels of symbolic abstraction, Token and Value, whereas a verbal nexus construes different orders of experience, projecting (first-order) and projected (second-order). Often verb substitution — e.g. 'is' for identifying, 'say' for verbal — can differentiate the types, but there are still instances of indeterminacy, e.g.

Non-Finite Clause: Theme, Transitivity And Mood

Beneficiary, Purpose Or Qualifier?

The first interpretation assumes that the prepositional phrase can be thematised:

for postgraduate studies, we need to develop good academic writing skills

The second interpretation assumes that it cannot.

The interpretation of the prepositional phrase as Beneficiary (Client), is ruled out by the impossibility of omitting the preposition:

* we need to develop postgraduate studies good academic writing skills

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 237):

The two functions of Recipient and Client resemble one another in that both construe a benefactive role; they represent a participant that is benefitting from the performance of the process, in terms of either goods or services. The Recipient is one that goods are given to; the Client is one that services are done for. Either may appear with or without a preposition, depending on its position in the clause (gave John the parcel, gave the parcel to John); the preposition is to with Recipient, for with Client.

Postscript:

The indeterminacy in this (constructed) clause arises from the nature of the grammatical metaphor deployed. A more coherent rendering of the metaphor would be:

we need to improve the academic writing skills of students undertaking postgraduate studies

Note also the incoherence of

we need to develop good academic writing skills for (the benefit of) postgraduate students

where the postgraduate students are construed as benefiting from someone else's improved writing skills.

'Must' & 'Have To': Obligation & Probability

Both 'must' and 'have to' can realise high value obligation or probability, the latter form evolving from an earlier conative function; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 145, 572-3, 583).

 modulation: obligation (high value)

she	must	go
Theme	Rheme
Actor	Process: material
Subject	Finite	Predicator
Mood		Residue

she	has	to go
Theme	Rheme
Actor	Process: material
Subject	Finite	Predicator
Mood		Residue

modalisation: probability (high value)

she	must	have gone
Theme	Rheme
Actor	Process: material
Subject	Finite	Predicator
Mood		Residue

she	has	to have gone
Theme	Rheme
Actor	Process: material
Subject	Finite	Predicator
Mood		Residue

Un/Marked Themes In Positive And Negative Imperative Clauses

Positive Imperatives

unmarked Theme:

let's	go	home
Theme: unmarked	Rheme
Subject	Predicator	Adjunct

keep	quiet
Theme: unmarked	Rheme
Predicator	Complement

marked Theme:

you	keep	quiet
Theme: marked	Rheme
Subject	Predicator	Complement

do	keep	quiet
Theme: marked		Rheme
Finite	Predicator	Complement

Negative Imperatives

unmarked Theme:

don't	let's	quarrel	about it
Theme: unmarked		Rheme
Finite	Subject	Predicator	Adjunct

don't	argue	with me
Theme: unmarked		Rheme
Finite	Predicator	Adjunct

marked Theme:

don't	you	argue	with me
Theme: marked		Rheme
Finite	Subject	Predicator	Adjunct

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 103):

Theme in imperative clauses.
The basic message of an imperative clause is either ‘I want you to do something’ or ‘I want us (you and me) to do something’. The second type usually begins with let’s, as in let’s go home now; here let’s is clearly the unmarked choice of Theme. But with the first type, although the ‘you’ can be made explicit as a Theme (e.g. you keep quiet!, meaning ‘as for you, ... ’), this is clearly a marked choice; the more typical form is simply keep quiet, with the verb in thematic position. The function of the verb, in the mood structure (clause as exchange), is that of Predicator; here, therefore, it is the Predicator that is the unmarked Theme. 

In negative imperatives, such as don’t argue with me, don’t let’s quarrel about it, the principle is the same as with yes/no interrogatives: the unmarked Theme is don’t plus the following element, either Subject or Predicator. Again there is a marked form with you, e.g. don’t you argue with me, where the Theme is don’t you. There is also a marked contrastive form of the positive, such as do take care, where the Theme is do plus the Predicator take.

(The Fact That) The Bus Is 10 Minutes Late

The bus is 10 minutes late. This means that we won't be able to make it.

this (the fact that the bus is 10 minutes late)	means ('entails')	that we won't be able to make it
Token: reason	Process: identifying	Value: result

i.e. resolving the reference reveals this as a circumstantial relational clause of cause, which means it is metaphorical.  A more congruent agnate is:

Because the bus is 10 minutes late, we won't be able to make it.