and under infusion, for example,
Prices have sky-rocketed (high degree of vigour) The water dribbled from the tap (low degree of vigour)
Such metaphors typically involve de-lexicalisation. In the terms employed in the literature on metaphor they are, to greater or lesser degrees, ‘dead’,
‘dormant’, ‘inactive’ or ‘conventionalised’.
3.19.8 The grammar of intensification – summary
In summary, then, the semantics of intensification is one by which:
● theintensification(up-scaling/down-scaling) applies to either qualities (slightly greedy, very greedy) or verbal processes (reduced it slightly, reduced it greatly);
● theintensificationis realised either via an isolated lexeme (slightly, very, greatly), via semantic infusion (happy^ecstatic; trickled^poured) or via repetition (laughed and laughed and laughed);
● the realisation is either figurative (crystal clear, came out like a jack in box, prices sky-rocketed) or non-figurative (very clear, greatly reduced, moved rapidly);
● in the case of isolated intensifications, the realisation is either grammatical (very easy, greatly reduced) or lexical (amazingly easy, crystal clear, moved rapidly);
● lexical intensifications of qualities are typically attitudinal – for example, amazingly, dreadfully, ridiculously, though at least some figurative locutions are less so – for example, ice cold;
● lexicalintensificationsof processes are not typically attitudinal – for example, moved swiftly, stared intently, with a few exceptions – for example,prices fell dramatically.
The combinations of these features which operate for the scaling of qualities is demonstrated in Table 3.6, and for the scaling of processes in Table 3.7 following.
Table 3.6 Feature combinations for quality intensifications [Qualities]
repetition infusion isolation
grammatical lexical
non- figurative figurative
a deplorable, contended^happy ^ slightly greedy^ dreadfully dirt poor disgraceful, joyous relatively greedy^ poor (attitudinal);
despicable act very greedy (attitudinal) ice cold(non-
attitudinal)
Table 3.7 Feature combinations for process intensifications [Processes]
repetition infusion isolation
non- figurative grammatical lexical
figurative
non-
figurative figurative we laughed likes^ prices slightly reduce^ move slowly^ came out like and laughed loves^ inched up^ greatly reduce move rapidly a jack in a and laughed adores; prices sky- (non-attitudinal); box(non-
trickles^ rocketed fell dramatically attitudinal);
flows, (attitudinal) wander about
gushes like Brown’s
cows (attitudinal)
scope in time and space (ie how widely distributed, how long lasting) and proximity in time and space (ie how near, how recent).
The semantics of this sub-system are complicated by the fact that the quantified entity can be either concrete (eg large shark, many sharks, nearby sharks) or abstract (eg a large problem, many problems; a few anxi- eties, a slight fear; a great success, her many betrayals). Often these abstract entities will convey attitudinal meanings. For example:
(affect) I have many worries about your performance. / A huge sense of relief overwhelmed me. / I have a tiny little concern as regards her design sense
(judgement) There is vast corruption in this government. / His one small moral weakness is towards … / He’s got a great talent for playing
150 The Language of Evaluation
the guitar / I do seem to have a small talent for explaining things to people of all ages
(appreciation) The many beauties of the Nile valley. / There is a slight problem with your essay / There are a few problems with your essay.
The abstractions, of course, construe as entities values which might oth- erwise have been construed either as qualities or as processes. For example.
a slight concern[quantified entity] versusslightly concerned[intensified quality/process]
a huge success [quantified entity] versus very successful [intensified quality]
her many betrayals [quantified entity] versus frequently betrayed [process with high value of usuality]
Following Halliday, such formulations are classified as ‘grammatical metaphors’ in that they involve one category (a quality or a process) being presented as if it were another category (a thing/entity). (See Chapter 1 section 1.2.2 for further discussion.) Accordingly, such formu- lations construe semantically complex categories in which one layer of meaning (the semantic status of the category as quality or process) is laid over another layer of meaning (the lexicogrammatical status of the category as noun).
What this means is that formulations such as a huge disappointment/
a slight concern involve quantification when viewed from the per- spective of the lexicogrammar (reckonings of the size of ‘entities’) but intensificationfrom the perspective of the discourse semantic meanings being made. We give preference to the lexicogrammar and classify such as instances of graduation: quantification(rather than of intensification) in recognition of the fact that there is a subtle difference of meaning between the assessment of some behaviour as, for example, a huge dis- appointment(quantification) rather than as hugely disappointing(intensi- fication). However, it is still necessary to recognise the special
‘grammatically metaphorical’ nature of this type of quantification. In some analyses it may be useful to identify them as instances of intensi- ficationviaquantification, or intensificationasquantification.
3.20.1 Modes of quantification: number, mass and extent
Quantificationsgraduate with respect to imprecise reckonings of number (eg a few, many), imprecise reckonings of mass or presence (eg small,
large; thin, thick; light, heavy; dim, bright) and imprecise reckonings of extent in time and space, with time and space being measured with respect to proximity (eg near, far; recent, ancient) or distribution (eg long-lasting, short-term; wide-spread, sparse). A system network for quantification is provided in Figure 3.7.
3.20.2 Quantification: isolation and infusion
Quantification is typically via an isolated term acting as a modifier of the graduated entity – eg many, large, heavy, near, recent, long-lasting.
Nevertheless, there are locutions which are analogous with the infusing formulation we observed under intensificationin that the estimation of quantity is carried, not by a modifier, but by the noun head itself.
For example:
[number]
Canon unveils a throng of digital imaging products (versus many digital imaging products)
The trickle of enquiries rapidly became a stream (versus ‘a few enquiries soon became many enquiries’)
mass (presence):
a tiny problem, small, large, huge, gigantic number:
a few problems, many, a multitude,
EXTENT QUANTIFICATION
PROXIMITY
DISTRIBUTION
time
recent arrival, ancient betrayal
space
nearby mountains, distant mountains time
long-lasting hostility,short battle space
wide-spread hostility, narrowly-based support Figure 3.7 Force: quantification
152 The Language of Evaluation
[mass–size]
he’s a mountainof a man (versus ‘he’s a large man.’) she’s a slipof a girl (versus ‘she’s a small girl’) [extent]
I see a paucityof talent in this country
There was a profusionof pink at the Alexandra Blossom Festival 3.20.3 Quantification: metaphor
As the examples just listed demonstrate, these infusions often involve metaphor which, once again, is to greater or lesser degrees delexicalised (ega trickle of enquiries, a mountain of a man). But metaphor is also to be found in isolating locutions. For example,
Very shortly we were struggling through mountainous seas
The combinations of these features which operate for quantification are set out in Table 3.8.
3.21 Force (intensification and quantification),