The Notion Of Intermodal Convergence

Martin & Zappavigna (2019: 6):

In their work on intermodal relations in children’s picture books (Painter and Martin 2012; Painter et al. 2013) Painter and her colleagues suggest a model involving degrees of convergence between verbiage and image. The model is organised by metafunction – degrees of concurrence for ideational meaning, degrees of resonance for interpersonal meaning and degrees of synchronicity for textual meaning (for illustrative text analysis see Martin 2008, Painter and Martin 2012). The relevant terminology is presented in Table 2 below.

Martin & Zappavigna (2019: 5):

Martin & Zappavigna (2019: 7): 

We have drawn on this terminology to deal with two dimensions of the relation between language and paralanguage introduced by Cléirigh as ‘linguistic body language’ and ‘epilinguistic body language’.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, the model of intermodal relations in

• Painter and Martin (2012)
• Painter, Martin and Unsworth (2013)
• Martin (2008)

merely proposes that the semogenesis in two modes is similar ("convergent") or different by degrees; cf. the secondary school mantra 'compare and contrast'. In SFL terms, this is simply the enhancement relation of comparison.  The superficiality of the model is only thinly disguised by giving different names to the same concept across metafunctions:

• ideational concurrence (i.e. 'agreement or consistency');
• interpersonal resonance (i.e. 'agreement');
• textual synchronicity (i.e. synchrony: 'simultaneous action, development, or occurrence').

[2] It will be seen in future posts that drawing on this terminology to rebrand Cléirigh's work involves both theoretical misunderstandings and internal inconsistencies.