Editing Functional linguistics

{{Short description|Approach to linguistics}}
{{About|functionalism in humanistic linguistics|functionalism in sociobiological linguistics|evolutionary linguistics}}
{{Linguistics|Theoretical frameworks}}
[[File:SFL parse.png|thumb|A [[Systemic functional grammar]] (SFG) analysis of the [[clause]] 'we love this man'. This clause consists structurally of a [[verb]] and two [[Nominal group (functional grammar)|nominal groups]], and functionally of a 'senser', 'mental process' and 'phenomenon'. In SFG, these functions are the result of semantic choices made in the [[transitivity (grammar)|Transitivity]] system.|350x350px]]
'''Functional linguistics''' is an approach to the study of [[language]] characterized by taking systematically into account the speaker's and the hearer's side, and the communicative needs of the speaker and of the given language community.<ref name="Daneš_1987"/>{{Rp|5–6}}<ref name="Hladký2003"/> Linguistic functionalism spawned in the 1920s to 1930s from [[Ferdinand de Saussure]]'s systematic [[Structural linguistics|structuralist]] approach to language (1916).

Functionalism sees functionality of language and its elements to be the key to understanding [[linguistic]] processes and structures. Functional theories of language propose that since language is fundamentally a tool, it is reasonable to assume that its structures are best analyzed and understood with reference to the functions they carry out. These include the tasks of conveying [[Semantics|meaning]] and [[Pragmatics|contextual information]].

Functional theories of grammar belong to [[structural linguistics|structural]]<ref name="butler2003">{{cite book |last=Butler|first=Christopher S. |title=Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories, part 1 |publisher=John Benjamins |date=2003 | url=https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/270688/mod_folder/content/0/v.%20e%20vi.%20Butler%20-%20Structure%20and%20Function.pdf?forcedownload=1 | access-date=2020-01-19 |isbn= 9781588113580}}</ref> and, broadly, [[humanism|humanistic]] linguistics, considering language as being created by the community, and linguistics as relating to [[systems theory]].<ref name="Daneš_1987"/><ref name="Itkonen_1999">{{cite journal|last=Itkonen|first=Esa|year=1999|title=Functionalism yes, biologism no|journal=Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft|volume=18|issue=2|pages=219–221|doi=10.1515/zfsw.1999.18.2.219|s2cid=146998564|doi-access=free}}</ref> Functional theories take into account the [[context (language use)|context]] where linguistic elements are used and study the way they are instrumentally useful or functional in the given environment. This means that [[pragmatics]] is given an explanatory role, along with [[semantics]]. The formal relations between linguistic elements are assumed to be functionally-motivated. Functionalism is sometimes contrasted with [[Formalism (linguistics)|formalism]],<ref name="butler2005">{{cite journal |last1=Butler |first1=Christopher S. |title=Functional approaches to language |journal=Pragmatics & Beyond |series=New Series |date=2005 |volume=140 |pages=3–17 |doi=10.1075/pbns.140.04but|isbn=978-90-272-5383-5 }}</ref> but this does not exclude functional theories from creating grammatical descriptions that are [[Generative grammar|''generative'']] in the sense of formulating rules that distinguish grammatical or well-formed elements from ungrammatical elements.<ref name="butler2003"/>

[[Simon Dik]] characterizes the functional approach as follows:

{{Blockquote|
In the functional paradigm a language is in the first place conceptualized as an instrument of social interaction among human beings, used with the intention of establishing communicative relationships. Within this paradigm one attempts to reveal the instrumentality of language with respect to what people do and achieve with it in social interaction. A [[natural language]], in other words, is seen as an integrated part of the [[communicative competence]] of the natural language user. (2, p.&nbsp;3)}}

Functional theories of grammar can be divided on the basis of geographical origin or base (though it simplifies many aspects): European functionalist theories include Functional (discourse) grammar and Systemic functional grammar (among others), while American functionalist theories include Role and reference grammar and West Coast functionalism.<ref name="butler2005"/> Since the 1970s, studies by American functional linguists in languages other than English from Asia, Africa, Australia and the Americas (like Mandarin Chinese and Japanese), led to insights about the interaction of form and function, and the discovery of functional motivations for grammatical phenomena, which apply also to the English language.<ref>Van Valin (2003) pp.324–5, 329</ref>

==History==
===1920s to 1970s: early developments===
The establishment of functional linguistics follows from a shift from structural to functional explanation in 1920s [[sociology]]. Prague, at the crossroads of western European [[structuralism]] and [[Russian formalism]], became an important centre for functional linguistics.<ref name="Daneš_1987">{{cite book |last=Daneš |first=František |editor-last=Dirven |editor-first=R. | editor-last2=Fried |editor-first2=V. | title=Functionalism in Linguistics |publisher=John Benjamins |date=1987 |pages=3–38 |chapter=On Prague school functionalism in linguistics |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dKpLAwob95wC |isbn= 9789027215246}}</ref>

The shift was related to the [[Organicism|organic analogy]] exploited by [[Émile Durkheim]]<ref name="Hejl 2013">{{cite book |last=Hejl |first=P. M. |editor-last=Maasen |editor-first=Sabine |editor2-last=Mendelsohn |editor2-first=E. |editor3-last=Weingart |editor3-first=P. | title=Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors |publisher=Springer |date=2013 |pages=155–191 |chapter=The importance of the concepts of "organism" and "evolution" in Emile Durkheim's division of social labor and the influence of Herbert Spencer |isbn=9789401106733}}</ref> and [[Ferdinand de Saussure]]. Saussure had argued in his ''Course in General Linguistics'' that the 'organism' of language should be studied anatomically, and not in respect with its environment, to avoid the false conclusions made by [[August Schleicher]] and other [[social Darwinism|social Darwinists]].<ref name="Saussure_1959">{{cite book |last=de Saussure |first=Ferdinand |title=Course in General Linguistics |place=New York |publisher=Philosophy Library |date=1959 |orig-year=First published 1916 |url=https://monoskop.org/images/0/0b/Saussure_Ferdinand_de_Course_in_General_Linguistics_1959.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190808231716/https://monoskop.org/images/0/0b/Saussure_Ferdinand_de_Course_in_General_Linguistics_1959.pdf |archive-date=2019-08-08 |url-status=dead |isbn=9780231157278 |author-link=Ferdinand de Saussure |accessdate=2020-07-07 }}</ref> The post-Saussurean [[Structural functionalism|functionalist]] movement sought ways to account for the 'adaptation' of language to its environment while still remaining strictly anti-Darwinian.<ref name="Sériot_1999">{{cite book |year=1999|author-last=Sériot | author-first=Patrick | editor-last1=Hajičová |editor-last2=Hoskovec| editor-last3=Leška | editor-last4=Sgall | editor-last5=Skoumalová| title=Prague Linguistic Circle Papers, Vol. 3| publisher=John Benjamins | chapter=The Impact of Czech and Russian Biology on the Linguistic Thought of the Prague Linguistic Circle|pages=15–24 |isbn=9789027275066 }}</ref>

Russian émigrés [[Roman Jakobson]] and [[Nikolai Trubetzkoy]] disseminated insights of Russian grammarians in Prague, but also the [[evolutionary theory]] of [[Lev Berg]], arguing for [[teleology]] of language change. As Berg's theory failed to gain popularity outside the [[Soviet Union]], the organic aspect of functionalism diminished, and Jakobson adopted a standard model of functional explanation from [[Ernst Nagel]]'s [[philosophy of science]]. It is, then, the same mode of explanation as in biology and social sciences;<ref name="Daneš_1987" /> but it became emphasised that the word 'adaptation' is not to be understood in linguistics in the same meaning as in biology.<ref name="Andersen_2006">{{cite book |last=Andersen |first=Henning|editor-last=Nedergaard |editor-first=Ole |title=Competing Models of Linguistic Change : Evolution and Beyond |publisher=John Benjamins |date=2006 |pages=59–90 |chapter=Synchrony, diachrony, and evolution |isbn= 9789027293190 }}</ref>

Work on functionalist linguistics by the Prague school resumed in the 1950s after a hiatus caused by World War II and Stalinism. In North America, [[Joseph Greenberg]] published his 1963 seminal paper on language universals that not only revived the field of [[linguistic typology]], but also the approach of  seeking functional explanations for typological patterns.<ref name="Newmeyer2001"/> Greenberg's approach has been highly influential for the movement of North American functionalism that formed from the early 1970s, which has since been characterized by a profound interest in typology.<ref name="Newmeyer2001"/> Greenberg's paper was influenced by the Prague School and in particular it was written in response to Jakobson's call for an 'implicational typology'.<ref name="Newmeyer2001">[[Frederick Newmeyer|Newmeyer]] (2001) ''[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4176644 The Prague School and North American Functionalist Approaches to Syntax]'', in Journal of Linguistics, Mar., 2001, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Mar., 2001), pp. 101–126</ref> While North American functionalism was initially influenced by the functionalism of the Prague school, such influence has been later discontinued.<ref name="Newmeyer2001"/>

===1980s onward: name controversy===
The term 'functionalism' or 'functional linguistics' became controversial in the 1980s with the rise of a new wave of [[evolutionary linguistics]]. [[Johanna Nichols]] argued that the meaning of 'functionalism' had changed, and the terms formalism and functionalism should be taken as referring to [[generative grammar]], and the [[Interactional linguistics|emergent linguistics]] of [[Paul J. Hopper|Paul Hopper]] and [[Sandra Thompson (linguist)|Sandra Thompson]], respectively; and that the term ''structuralism'' should be reserved for frameworks derived from the [[Prague linguistic circle]].<ref name="Nichols_1984">{{cite journal |last=Nichols |first=Johanna |date=1984 |title=Functional theories of grammar |journal=Annual Review of Anthropology  |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=97–117 |doi=10.1146/annurev.an.13.100184.000525 }}</ref> [[William Croft (linguist)|William Croft]] argued subsequently that it is a fact to be agreed by all linguists that form does not follow from function. He proposed that functionalism should be understood as autonomous linguistics, opposing the idea that language arises functionally from the need to express meaning:

<blockquote>"The notion of autonomy emerges from an undeniable fact of all languages, 'the curious lack of accord ... between form and function'"<ref name="Croft_19953">{{cite journal|last=Croft|first=William|date=1995|title=Autonomy and functionalist linguistics|journal=Language|volume=71|issue=3|pages=490–532|doi=10.2307/416218|jstor=416218}}</ref></blockquote>

Croft explains that, until the 1970s, functionalism related to semantics and pragmatics, or the '[[Semiotics|semiotic]] function'. But around 1980s the notion of function changed from semiotics to "external function",<ref name="Croft_19953"/> proposing a [[Neo-Darwinism|neo-Darwinian]] view of language change as based on [[natural selection]].<ref name="Croft_2006">{{cite book|last=Croft|first=William|title=Competing Models of Linguistic Change: Evolution and Beyond|publisher=John Benjamins|year=2006|editor-last=Nedergaard Thomsen|editor-first=Ole|pages=91–132|chapter=The relevance of an evolutionary model to historical linguistics|series=Current Issues in Linguistic Theory|volume=279|doi=10.1075/cilt.279.08cro|isbn=978-90-272-4794-0}}</ref> Croft proposes that 'structuralism' and 'formalism' should both be taken as referring to generative grammar; and 'functionalism' to [[Usage-based models of language|usage-based]] and [[cognitive linguistics]]; while neither [[André Martinet]], [[Systemic functional linguistics]] nor [[Functional discourse grammar]] properly represents any of the three concepts.<ref name="Croft_1995">{{cite journal |last=Croft |first=William |date=1995 |title=Autonomy and functionalist linguistics |journal=Language |volume=71 |issue=3 |pages=490–532 |doi=10.2307/416218 |jstor=416218 }}</ref><ref name="Croft_2015">{{cite book |last=Croft|first=William |editor-last=Wright |editor-first=James|year=2015| title=International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences | chapter=Functional approaches to grammar |publisher=Elsevier |isbn= 9780080970875 }}</ref>

The situation was further complicated by the arrival of [[Evolutionary psychology|evolutionary psychological]] thinking in linguistics, with [[Steven Pinker]], [[Ray Jackendoff]] and others hypothesising that the human [[language faculty]], or [[universal grammar]], could have developed through normal [[evolution]]ary processes, thus defending an [[adaptation]]al explanation of the [[Origin of language|origin]] and evolution of the [[language faculty]]. This brought about a functionalism versus formalism debate, with [[Frederick Newmeyer]] arguing that the evolutionary psychological approach to linguistics should also be considered functionalist.<ref name="Newmeyer_1999">{{cite book |year=1999|author-last=Newmeyer | author-first=Frederick | editor-last1=Darnell|editor-last2=Moravcsik| editor-last3=Noonan | editor-last4=Newmeyer | editor-last5=Wheatley| title=Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, Vol. 1| publisher=John Benjamins  | chapter=Some remarks on the functionalist–formalist controversy in linguistics|pages=469–486 |isbn=9789027298799 }}</ref>

The terms functionalism and functional linguistics nonetheless continue to be used by the Prague linguistic circle and its derivatives, including [[Société internationale de linguistique fonctionnelle|SILF]], [[Copenhagen School (linguistics)#Danish functional school|Danish functional school]], Systemic functional linguistics and Functional discourse grammar; and the American framework [[Role and reference grammar]] which sees itself as the midway between [[Formal linguistics|formal]] and functional linguistics.<ref name="VanValin_1992">{{cite book |last=Van Valin|first=Robert D. Jr. |year=1992| title=Advances in Role and Reference Grammar |publisher=John Benjamins |isbn=9789027277510 }}</ref>

==Functional analysis==
Since the earliest work of the Prague School, language was conceived as a ''functional system'', where term ''system'' references back to De Saussure structuralist approach.<ref name="Daneš_1987" /> The term function seems to have been introduced by [[Vilém Mathesius]], possibly influenced from works in sociology.<ref name="Daneš_1987"/><ref name="Hladký2003">Hladký, Josef (ed.) 2003. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=tWg9AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA60 Language and Function: To the memory of Jan Firbas]'', pp.60–61</ref> Functional analysis is the examination of how linguistic elements function on different layers of linguistic structure, and how the levels interact with each other. Functions exist on all levels of grammar, even in phonology, where the [[phoneme]] has the function of distinguishing between lexical material.
* Syntactic functions: (e.g. [[Subject (grammar)|Subject]] and [[Object (grammar)|Object]]), defining different perspectives in the presentation of a linguistic expression.
* Semantic functions: ([[Agent (linguistics)|Agent]], [[Patient (linguistics)|Patient]], [[Recipient (linguistics)|Recipient]], etc.), describing the role of participants in states of affairs or actions expressed.
* Pragmatic functions: ([[Topic–comment|Theme and Rheme]], [[Topic (linguistics)|Topic]] and [[Focus (linguistics)|Focus]], [[Predicate (grammar)|Predicate]]), defining the informational status of constituents, determined by the pragmatic context of the verbal interaction.

==Functional explanation==

{{See also|Structural_linguistics#Structural_explanation|label 1=Structural explanation}}

In the functional mode of explanation, a linguistic structure is explained with an appeal to its function.<ref name="Couch_2011">{{cite web |url=https://www.iep.utm.edu/func-exp/ |title=Causal role theories of functional explanation |last=Couch |first=Mark |website=The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=2020-06-11 |issn=2161-0002}}</ref> Functional linguistics takes as its starting point the notion that communication is the primary purpose of language. Therefore, general phonological, morphosyntactic and semantic phenomena are thought of as being motivated by the needs of people to communicate successfully with each other. Thus, the perspective is taken that the organisation of language reflects its use value.<ref name="Daneš_1987" />

Many prominent functionalist approaches, like [[Role and reference grammar]] and [[Functional discourse grammar]], are also [[linguistic typology|typologically oriented]], that is they aim their analysis cross-linguistically, rather than only to a single language like English (as is typical of formalist/generativism approaches).<ref>Van Valin (2003) p.331</ref><ref>Everett, C. (2016) ''[https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110720297-006/html RRG and the Exploration of Syntactically Based Relativistic Effects]'' in Fleischhauer, J., Latrouite, A., & Osswald, R. (2016) ''Explorations of the syntax-semantics interface'' (pp. 57–76). düsseldorf university press.</ref>

===Economy===
{{Main|Economy (linguistics)}}

The concept of economy is metaphorically transferred from a social or economical context to a linguistic level. It is considered as a regulating force in language maintenance. Controlling the impact of [[language change]] or internal and external conflicts of the system, the economy principle means that systemic coherence is maintained without increasing energy cost. This is why all human languages, no matter how different they are, have high functional value as based on a compromise between the competing motivations of speaker-easiness (simplicity or ''inertia'') versus hearer-easiness (clarity or ''energeia'').<ref name="Vicentini_2003">{{cite journal |last=Vicentini |first=Alessandra |date=2003 |title=The economy principle in language. Notes and observations from early modern English grammars |journal=Mots. Words. Palabras. |volume=3 |pages=37–57 |citeseerx=10.1.1.524.700 }}</ref>

The principle of economy was elaborated by the French structural–functional linguist [[André Martinet]]. Martinet's concept is similar to [[George Kingsley Zipf|Zipf]]'s [[principle of least effort]]; although the idea had been discussed by various linguists in the late 19th and early 20th century.<ref name="Vicentini_2003"/> The functionalist concept of economy is not to be confused with [[Minimalist program#Economy|economy in generative grammar.]]

===Information structure===

{{See also|Functional sentence perspective|Information structure}}
 
Some key adaptations of functional explanation are found in the study of information structure. Based on earlier linguists' work, [[Prague Linguistic Circle|Prague Circle]] linguists [[Vilém Mathesius]], [[Jan Firbas]] and others elaborated the concept of theme–rheme relations ([[topic and comment]]) to study pragmatic concepts such as sentence focus, and givenness of information, to successfully explain word-order variation.<ref name="Firbas_1987">{{cite book |last=Firbas |first=Jan |editor-last=Dirven |editor-first=R. | editor-last2=Fried |editor-first2=V. | title=Functionalism in Linguistics |publisher=John Benjamins |date=1987 |pages=137–156|chapter=On the delimitation of the theme in functional sentence perspective |isbn= 9789027215246}}</ref> The method has been used widely in linguistics to uncover word-order patterns in the languages of the world. Its importance, however, is limited to within-language variation, with no apparent explanation of cross-linguistic word order [[Linguistic universal|tendencies]].<ref name="Song_2012">{{cite book |last=Song|first=Jae Jung |title=Word Order |publisher=Cambridge University Press |date=2012|isbn=9781139033930}}</ref>

===Functional principles===
Several principles from pragmatics have been proposed as functional explanations of linguistic structures, often in a [[Typology (linguistics)|typological]] perspective.
*Theme first: languages prefer placing the theme before the rheme; and the subject typically carries the role of the theme; therefore, most languages have subject before object in their basic word order.<ref name="Song_2012" />
*Animate first: similarly, since subjects are more likely to be [[Animacy|animate]], they are more likely to precede the object.<ref name="Song_2012" />
*Given before new: already established information comes before new information.<ref name="Payne_1987">{{cite journal |last=Payne |first=Doris |date=1987 |title=Information structuring in Papago narrative discourse |journal=Language |volume=63 |issue=4 |pages=783–804 |doi=10.2307/415718 |jstor=415718 }}</ref>
*First things first: more important or more urgent information comes before other information.<ref name="Payne_1987" />
*Lightness: light (short) constituents are ordered before heavy (long) constituents.<ref name="Haberland&Heltoft_1992">{{cite book |last1=Haberland |first1=Hartmut |last2=Heltoft |first2=Lars|editor-last1=Matras |editor-first1=Y | editor-last2=Kefer |editor-first2=M |editor-last3=Auwera |editor-first3=J V D | author1-link=Hartmut Haberland | title=Meaning and Grammar: Cross-linguistic Perspectives |publisher=De Gruyter |date=1992 |pages=17–26|chapter=Universals, explanations and pragmatics |isbn= 978-3-11-085165-6}}</ref>
*Uniformity: word-order choices are generalised.<ref name="Haberland&Heltoft_1992" /> For example, languages tend to have either prepositions or postpositions; and not both equally.
*[[Functional load]]: elements within a linguistic sub-system are made distinct to avoid confusion.
*Orientation: role-indicating particles including adpositions and subordinators are oriented to their semantic head.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Austin |first=Patrik  |year=2021 |title=A semantic and pragmatic explanation of harmony |journal=Acta Linguistica Hafniensia |volume=54 |issue=1 |pages=1–23 |doi=10.1080/03740463.2021.1987685 |s2cid=244941417 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

==Frameworks==
There are several distinct grammatical frameworks that employ a functional approach.

*The structuralist functionalism of the [[Prague school (linguistics)|Prague school]] was the earliest functionalist framework developed in the 1920s.<ref>Newmeyer, Frederick. (2001). The Prague School and North American functionalist approaches to syntax. Journal of Linguistics vol. 37. 101 – 126</ref><ref>Novak, P., Sgall, P. 1968. On the Prague functional approach. Trav. Ling. Prague 3:291-97. Tuscaloosa: Univ. Alabama Press</ref>
*[[André Martinet]]'s Functional Syntax, with two major books, ''A functional view of language'' (1962) and ''Studies in Functional Syntax'' (1975). Martinet is one of the most famous French linguists and can be regarded as the father of French functionalism. Founded by Martinet and his colleagues, [[Société internationale de linguistique fonctionnelle|SILF]] (''Société internationale de linguistique fonctionnelle'') is an international organisation of functional linguistics which operates mainly in French.
*[[Simon C. Dik|Simon Dik]]'s [[Functional discourse grammar|Functional Grammar]], originally developed in the 1970s and 80s, has been influential and inspired many other functional theories.<ref>Dik, S. C. 1980. Studies in Functional Grammar. London: Academic</ref><ref>Dik, S. C. 1981. Functional Grammar. Dordrecht/Cinnaminson NJ: Foris.</ref> It has been developed into Functional Discourse Grammar by the linguist [[Kees Hengeveld]].<ref>Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan (2010), Functional Discourse Grammar. In: Bernd Heine and Heiko Narrog eds, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 367–400.</ref><ref>Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan (2008), Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</ref>
*[[Michael Halliday]]'s [[systemic functional grammar]] (SFG) argues that the explanation of how language works "needed to be grounded in a functional analysis, since language had evolved in the process of carrying out certain critical functions as human beings interacted with their ... 'eco-social' environment".<ref>Halliday, M.A.K. forthcoming. Meaning as Choice. In Fontaine, L, Bartlett, T, and O'Grady, G. Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Cambridge University Press. p1.</ref><ref>Halliday, M. A. K. 1984. A Short Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold</ref> Halliday draws on the work of [[Karl Bühler|Bühler]] and [[Bronislaw Malinowski|Malinowski]], as well as his doctoral supervisor [[John Rupert Firth|J.R. Firth]]. Notably, Halliday's former student [[Robin Fawcett]] has developed a version of SFG called the "Cardiff Grammar" which is distinct from the "Sydney Grammar" as developed by the later Halliday and his colleagues in Australia. The link between Firthian and Hallidayan linguistics and the [[process philosophy|philosophy]] of [[Alfred North Whitehead]] also deserves a mention.<ref>See David G. Butt, Whiteheadian and Functional Linguistics in [[Michel Weber]] and Will Desmond (eds.). ''[https://www.academia.edu/279955/Handbook_of_Whiteheadian_Process_Thought Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought]'' (Frankfurt / Lancaster, Ontos Verlag, 2008, vol. II); cf. Ronny Desmet & Michel Weber (edited by), ''[https://www.academia.edu/279940/Whitehead._The_Algebra_of_Metaphysics Whitehead. The Algebra of Metaphysics. Applied Process Metaphysics Summer Institute Memorandum]'', Louvain-la-Neuve, Les Éditions Chromatika, 2010.</ref>
*[[Role and reference grammar]], developed by [[Robert Van Valin]] employs functional analytical framework with a somewhat formal mode of description. In RRG, the description of a sentence in a particular language is formulated in terms of its semantic structure and communicative functions, as well as the grammatical procedures used to express these meanings.<ref>Foley, W. A., Van Valin, R. D. Jr. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press</ref><ref>Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. (Ed.). (1993). ''Advances in Role and Reference Grammar''. Amsterdam: Benjamins.</ref> 
*[[Copenhagen school (linguistics)#Danish functional school|Danish functional grammar]] combines [[Ferdinand de Saussure|Saussurean]]/[[Louis Hjelmslev|Hjelmslevian]] [[structuralism]] with a focus on [[pragmatics]] and [[discourse]].<ref>Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth; Michael Fortescue; Peter Harder; Lars Heltoft; Lisbeth Falster Jakobsen (eds.). (1996) Content, expression and structure: studies in Danish functional grammar. John Benjamins Publishing Company.</ref>
*[[Interactional linguistics]], based on [[Conversation Analysis]], considers linguistic structures as related to the functions of e.g. action and [[turn-taking]] in interaction.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Couper-Kuhlen |first1=Elizabeth |last2=Selting |first2=Margaret |year=2001 |title=Studies in Interactional Linguistics |publisher=John Benjamins}}</ref>
*[[Construction grammar]] is a family of different theories some of which may be considered functional, such as Croft's Radical Construction Grammar.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Croft |first1=William |title=Radical construction grammar: syntactic theory in typological perspective |date=2001 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |isbn=9780198299547}}</ref>
*[[Relational Network Theory]] (RNT) or Neurocognitive Linguistics (NCL), originally developed by [[Sydney Lamb]], may be considered functionalist in the sense of being a [[Usage-based models of language|usage-based model]]. In RNT, the description of linguistic structure is formulated as networks of realizational relationships, such that all linguistic units are defined only by what they realize and are realized by. RNT networks have been hypothesized to be implemented by [[cortical minicolumns]] in the human [[neocortex]].

==See also==
* [[Theory of language]]
* [[Functional grammar (disambiguation)]]
* [[Thematic relation]]
* [[Morphosyntactic alignment]]
* [[Linguistic typology]]

==References==
{{Reflist|33em}}

==Further reading==
* Van Valin Jr, R. D. (2003) ''Functional linguistics'', ch. 13 in ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=rl8LDiR11nYC The handbook of linguistics]'', pp.&nbsp;319–336.

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Functional Theories Of Grammar}}
[[Category:Grammar frameworks]]
[[Category:Theories of language]]
[[Category:Systems theory]]
[[Category:Cybernetics]]

[[it:Grammatica funzionale]]