The Question Of How Biological Systems Carry Out Recognition Events Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 64):

First, we have to ask how biological systems carry out recognition events — how, without the transfer of preexisting, specifically coded messages, a biological system nonetheless specifically distinguishes one thing from another.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, answering this question involves a theoretical reconstrual of how experience is construed, in terms of the material domain of ideational meaning; that is, in terms of biological material processes and biological relational processes.

Moreover, Edelman's TNGS and Halliday's SFL share the same epistemological foundation: the "world" is not inherently "a labelled place", independent of "labelling" systems.

Development vs The Rules Of Development Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 51, 52):

We have to ask how this process [development] constrains evolution — how the rules of development, which themselves evolved, can only be realised in particular ways. …

But why deviate to such issues as shape and form? And why concern ourselves with cells, molecules, and DNA? The straightforward answer is that the rules by which embryos are built govern the way that brains are built.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, this confuses a (first-order) phenomenon with a (second-order) metaphenomenon; that is: the process of development with the rules that model the process.

The evolution of development is a (first-order) biological evolution, whereas the evolution of the rules of development is, properly, a (second-order) semiotic evolution — an evolution in the scientific model.

Accordingly, the rules that describe development do not govern development anymore than a map that describes a landscape governs a landscape.

Moreover, in terms of interpersonal meaning, the rules that describe development are rules in the sense of modalisation (probability/usuality), rather than modulation (obligation).

Edelman's Individual "Soul" Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 40):

In considering our minds, we must also consider both our kinship with and our differences from other species. As I discuss in chapter 16, one difference is that each of us has an individual "soul" based on language. Whatever we find out about the properties of language, however, the sad fact is that neither psychology nor biology will permit the transmigration of souls.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, 'an individual "soul" based on language' is Edelman's higher-order consciousness.  From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, because language is a social semiotic system distributed across members of a linguistic community, each individual consciousness is a uniquely developed individuated variant of the collective consciousness afforded by the language of the community.

Gestalt Phenomena Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Edelman (1992: 39):

 

Figure 4-2 Gestalt phenomena 

These figures are from Gætano Kanizsa's work and show how context-dependent perception is. … As Kanizsa put it, "seeing and thinking are clearly distinguishable activities. With these pieces we can imagine a cube (figure on the bottom left), but it is very difficult to see it." Notice, however, that the cube is completed (figure on the bottom right) behind the three opaque stripes and becomes perceptually present.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, this demonstrates that visual perception is a construal of experience as perceptual meaning, which, in humans is correlated with the meaning of language — in this case: 'cube', 'stripe', 'triangle', 'circle', etc.