FG from its inception 31- FG 1 - 1978 to 1989
5.1. The Theoretical Framework
The first monograph devoted entirely to Functional Grammar (Dik 1978a)
appeared ten years after Dik’s dissertation. Dik writes:
In this book I develop a theory of Functional Grammar with the following
main distinguishing properties: (i) it is conceived from a functional point of
view on the nature of language: that is, one in which a language is regarded
as an instrument of social interaction; (ii) it makes crucial use of functional
notions of three different levels: the semantic, the syntactic, and the prag-
matic levels; ...Consequently, the functional paradigm (1978a: 1) must deal with two
rule systems: those that govern verbal interaction, ‘pragmatic rules’, and
those that govern the formation of linguistic expressions, ‘semantic,
syntactic, and phonological rules’. Both sets are “social in nature” (1978a:
- with the linguistic rules being “instrumental with respect to” the verbal
interaction rules (1978a: 2).
We therefore discern three notions of functionalism: language as a
whole is functional with respect to social interaction (the functional para-
digm); individual linguistic expressions within a language are functional
with respect to their uses in particular instances of verbal interaction; and
the individual components of linguistic expressions are functional with re-
spect to other components in the expression (cf. Nichols 1984).
Dik (1978a: 6–9) argues that in addition to descriptive adequacy as
found in generative grammar, FG 1 adheres to three standards of explana-
tory adequacy: pragmatic, psychological, and typological (cf. Butler 1991).
He writes (1978a: 6) that “[w]e want a Functional Grammar to reveal those
properties of linguistic expressions which are relevant to the manner in
which they are used, and to do this in such a way that they can be related to
a description of the rules governing verbal interaction”. Unfortunately, to
date there has been little formalization of such pragmatic ‘rules’. Inadver-
tently, Dik created the problem of verbal interaction (PR3) by setting an
agenda for Functional Grammar that was never satisfied.
Dik (1978a: 15) introduces three basic categories – nouns, verbs, and
adjectives – which he describes as “basic predicates along the lines of Bach
(1968)”.^11 These three types of lexical predicates are embedded in a predi-
cation containing a predicate frame and optional satellites. The central