An SFL analysis of multimodality in the coursebook english for water resources

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
----------o0o----------

NGUYỄN THỊ LAN

AN SFL ANALYSIS OF MULTIMODALITY IN THE COURSEBOOK
“ENGLISH FOR WATER RESOURCES”
“T

P
”

A

N

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Linguistics
Code : 8220201.01

HANOI – 2018

.


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

----------o0o----------

NGUYỄN THỊ LAN

AN SFL ANALYSIS OF MULTIMODALITY IN THE COURSEBOOK
“ENGLISH FOR WATER RESOURCES”
P

“T
”

A

N

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field

: English Linguistics

Code

: 8220201.01

Supervisor : Ass .P f.D . L

HANOI – 2018

Q

Đ ng


DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP

I hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it are my own
and have been generated by me as the result of my own original research. I
confirm that:
 This work was done wholly while I am in candidature for a
Master degree at this University;
 This thesis has never been submitted partially or wholly for a
degree or any other qualification at this University or any other
institution;
 Where I have consulted the published work of others, this is
always clearly attributed;
 Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is
always given. With the exception of such quotations, this thesis
is entirely my own work;
 I have acknowledged all main sources of help;
 Where the thesis is based on work done by myself jointly with
others, I have made clear exactly what was done by others and
what I have contributed myself.
I am fully aware that should this declaration be found to be false,
disciplinary action could be taken and penalties imposed in accordance with
University policy and rules.
Hanoi, 2018
Author

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would have never been able to finish my thesis without the guidance
of my supervisor, help from my friends and support from my family.
Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to
Assoc.Prof.Dr. Lam Quang Dong, my supervisor, for his support, enthusiasm,
helpful advice and comments during the time of conducting this research.
Without his enthusiastic

assistance and instructions, it would have been

impossible for the thesis to be completed.
Secondly, I am also grateful to all lecturers of the Faculty of PostGraduate Studies for their useful lessons which have inspired me and guided
my research.
Furthermore, my thanks also go to my colleagues at Bac Bo Water
Resources College who have helped me during the course.
Finally, I would like to thank all my friends and my family for their
love, support and encouragement which help me complete this thesis.

ii


ABSTRACT

Nowadays, studies of multimodal communication have grown
rapidly to become a new trend of the 21st century. This multimodal analysis of
the course book “English for Water Resources” fits in with that trend and is
significant to teaching and learning ESP. The analysis is based on a combined

framework of Halliday‟s SFL and Kress and Leeuwen‟s Multimodality
theory. The purpose of the study is to discover how multimodality is
expressed in this material and thereby to find out the strengths and overcome
weaknesses. Qualitative methods are applied to this study for the discussion
of the verbal aspects that focus on Field, Tenor, Mode and in terms of
representational, interactive, compositional meaning for visual elements. In
analytic processing, verbal elements are represented by various linguistic
devices, mainly material and relational processes. Besides, images create full
and new meanings for written texts, help readers understand the whole text
easily.
Results from this analysis will help the teachers and designers improve
the quality of the book as well as the quality of teaching and learning when
using the book.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP ........................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................... iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................ vii
PART A: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................... 1
1. Rationale of the study........................................................................................... 1
2. Aims of the study .................................................................................................. 2
3. Research questions ............................................................................................... 2
4. Scope of the study ............................................................................................... 2

5. Methods of the study ............................................................................................ 3
6. Organization of the thesis .................................................................................... 3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT........................................................................... 4
CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................... 4
1.1. Communication ................................................................................................. 4
1.2. Multimodality theory ........................................................................................ 5
1.3. Systemic Functional Linguistics ...................................................................... 8
1.4. Review of previous research ............................................................................ 9
CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ....................... 11
2.1. Data collection ................................................................................................. 11
2.2. Procedures ........................................................................................................ 12
2.3. Analytical frameworks .................................................................................... 13
2.3.1. Halliday‟s Systemic Functional Linguistics. ............................................ 13
2.3.2. Kress and van Leeuwen‟s Multimodal theory .......................................... 14
iv


CHAPTER III: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ......................... 17
3.1. General information ........................................................................................ 17
3.2. Findings ............................................................................................................ 18
3.2.1. Analysis of the verbal elements based on SFL ......................................... 18
3.2.2. Analysis of the visual elements based on Multimodality theory ............ 30
PART C: CONCLUSION............................................................................. 39
1. Main findings .............................................................................................. 39
2. Limitations and suggestions for future research ............................................. 41
REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 42
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. I

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

SFL

: Systemic Functional Linguistics

ESP

: English for Specific Purposes

WRM

: Water Resources Management

WRC

: Water Resources College

vi


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1: Summary of Transitivity Processes ........................................................... 19

Table 1: The frequency of visual modes ..........................................................11
Table 2: Material Process .......................................................................................... 19
Table 3: Relational- Attribute Processes ................................................................... 23
Table 4: Relational-identifying Processes ................................................................. 24

Table 5: Illustration of the Mood of the texts ........................................................... 28
Table 6: Summary of 8 pictures based on Multimodality ........................................ 37

vii


PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
Today, in the period of industrialization and modernization, human life
has greatly improved. Thus the ways people communicate have also
dramatically changed and developed. It is highly possible that since their
appearance as human, people communicated with one another through other
visual means such as images, sounds, graphics, or colors before they
developed their own languages. Today, advancements in multimedia
technology of the 4th industrial revolution have created possibilities for
integrating different modes into textbooks. “English for Water Resources” is
one among such textbooks. However, “English for Water Resources” is a very
difficult technical material to be selected for teaching and learning at Water
Resources College. So, the task of designers, educators is how to help
students have the ability to read and understand specialized materials as well
as create more motivations in learning. The different communication
channels, also known as multimodality/ multimodal communication,
including writing, images, graphs, tables, etc., must be put to use as a
necessary tool to support teaching. Therefore, using of multi-mode
communication methods has great significance, not only consolidate source of
knowledge but also create skills formation and develop students' thinking.
How multimodal communication has been used in practice, especially in
the course book “English for Water Resource”. What are the advantages and
disadvantages of this use to promote to achieve higher results? Need to
improve the multi-literacy for students how to understand and exploit

information from polynomial means? This has given me the desire to conduct
a small study entitled "An SFL analysis of multimodality in the course-book
“English for Water Resources ".
1


2. Aims of the study
As self-evident in the title, the study “An SFL analysis of multimodality
in the course-book “English for Water Resources” analyzes multimodality in
the course book “English for Water Resources” so as to identity the strong
points and weak points of the book in this aspect, i.e. how information is
rendered in various modes, including verbal signs, images, graphs, inter alia,
as well as the interaction and mutual support among these modes. Results
from this analysis will help the author and other concerned stakeholders
improve the quality of the book, improve the quality of teaching and learning
by teachers and learners when using the book.
3. Research questions
To deliver those aims, the study seeks answers to the following questions:
1. What are the verbal elements based on SFL employed in the
coursebook “English for Water Resources” ?
2. What are the visual elements based on Multimodality theory
employed in the coursebook “English for Water Resources”?
3. What are the strengths and weaknesses concerning multimodality in
the course book?
4. Scope of the study
The study is based on six lessons in the course book “English for
Water Resources”, 1st edition, written by teachers in the English Department,
Water Resources University in 2008. However, the researcher cannot cover
aspects of language use; only focus on transitivity processes, tenses, mood to
identity the language features and some typical images based on

Multimodality theory to recognize the meanings and functions as well as the
relationship between verbal and visual modes in the coursebook.
2


5. Methods of the study
This study is based on the SFL theoretical framework of multimodality
to analyze multimodality in the course book and classify the modes into the
concrete groups as verbal texts, images, pictures, tables.
The descriptive method is used in the description of lay-out, distribution,
writing, images and tables in the course book. The analysis method is based
on the SFL framework.
6. Organization of the thesis
This thesis consists of three parts, apart from References, Appendices
and other necessary components of an M.A thesis:
Part A: Introduction
Presents the rationale of the study, aims, research questions, scope,
methods of the study and the organization of the thesis.
Part B: Development
- Chapter I: Literature Review - reviews related analyses of textbooks
using SFL multimodality framework and discusses the theoretical background
relevant to issues of the study.
- Chapter II: Methodology and Procedures - describes the textbook and
analytical procedures applied in the study.
- Chapter III: Data Analysis and Discussion - presents findings to
answer the research questions.
Part C: Conclusion
Summarizes the key issues and findings as well as the limitations of the
study and makes suggestions for further research.

3


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW
The chapter I will review related literature and present basic concepts of
multimodality as well as systemic functional linguistics to establish a
theoretical framework for the analysis of the course book “English for Water
Resources”. The concepts chosen to be discussed are communication,
multimodality, meta-functions.
1.1. Communication
Communication has an important role in our life. There are many
different definitions of communication. According to Keyton (2011),
communication can be defined as the process of transmitting information and
common understanding from one person to another. So communication is the
process of conveying information from a sender to a receiver with the use of a
medium thanks to which both the sender and receiver understand the
communicated information in the same way.
Today, the different categories of communication include spoken
communication, written communication, and visualizations. Spoken/oral
communication may be face-to-face, over the telephone, radio or television
and other media. In communication process, a sender encodes a message and
then uses a medium/channel to send it to the receiver who decodes the
message. In his/her turn, the receiver processed the information, and sends
back appropriate feedback/reply using a medium/channel which could be the
same as or different from the first one used by the sender. This is called twoway communication.
However, written communication such as letters, e-mails, books,
magazines, the Internet or via other media may not ensure instant interaction.
Written communication involves any types of message that makes use of the
4

written words. It also means one-way communication because the receiver
listens to or reads the texts but may not respond instantly. Visualizations like
graphs and charts, maps, pictures, images and other visualizations can also
communicate messages.
From the above definitions, we can see that all texts are multimodal.
According to Kress and Van Leeuwen (1996) the written text is no longer
structured by linguistic means, through verbal connection and verbal cohesive
devices only but also visually, through layout, through the spatial arrangement
of blocks of text, of pictures and other graphic elements on the page.
1.2. Multimodality theory
Multimodality is widely discussed by many famous linguists and
semioticians. It means the combination of different semiotic modes.
Multimodality has developed as a theory throughout the history of writing.
The idea of multimodality has been studied since the 4th century B.C.E.,
when classical rhetoricians alluded to it with their emphasis on voice, gesture,
and expressions in public speaking. However, the term was not defined with
significance until the 20th century. During this time, an exponential rise in
technology created many new modes of presentation. Since then,
multimodality has become standard in the 21st century, applying to various
network-based forms such as art, literature, social media and advertising. John
A. Bateman says in his book Multimodality and Genre (2008: 1), “Nowadays
that text is just one strand in a complex presentational form that seamlessly
incorporates visual aspect around and sometimes even instead of, the text
itself.” Multimodality has quickly become “the normal state of human
communication”.

5

In its most basic sense, multimodality is a theory of communication and
social semiotics. Multimodality describes communication practices in terms
of the textual, aural, linguistic, spatial, and visual resources or modes used to
compose messages. However, in terms of media, multimodal communication
is the use of different modes to create a product. Thus, everything from the
layout of images to the organization of the content creates meaning. This is
the result of shifting from the isolated documents that people use as the most
basic source of communication to the images used increasingly in the digital
age. Although it was not until the twentieth century that multimodal
communication was drawing the attention of research as a field of academic
study, all communicative activities, reading, writing or works from past to
present, always have been multimodal.
Even though discussions of multimodality consist of medium and mode,
these two terms are not synonymous. Gunther Kress's study on multimodality
(1996) is a canonical work in writing studies, and he defines mode in two
ways. In the first way, a mode “is a socially and culturally shaped resource for
making meaning (2010:79). Image, writing, layout, speech, moving images
are examples of different modes.”
In the second way, “semiotic modes, similarly, are shaped by both the
intrinsic characteristics and potentialities of the medium and by the
requirements, histories and values of societies and their cultures” (1996: 34).
Thus, every mode has a different modal resource, which is historically and
culturally situated and which breaks it down into its parts, because “each has
distinct potentials and limitations for meaning.” For example, breaking down
writing into its modal resources would be syntactic, grammatical, lexical
resources and graphic resources. Graphic resources can be broken down into
font size, type, etc.
6

These resources are not deterministic, however, in Kress‟s theory
(2010:114), “mode is meaningful: it is shaped by and carries the deep
ontological and historical/social orientations of a society and its cultures with
it into every sign. Mode names the material resources shaped in long histories
of social effort”.
A medium is the substance in which meaning is realized and through
which it becomes available to others. Media include video, image, text, audio,
etc. Socially, media include semiotic, sociocultural, and technological
practices such as films, newspapers, billboards, radio, television, theater, a
classroom, etc. Multimodality makes use of the electronic medium by creating
digital modes with the interlacing of images, writing, layout, speech, and
video. Media have become modes of delivery that take the current and future
contexts into consideration.
Because multimodality is continually evolving from a solely print-based
to a screen-based presentation, the speaker and audience relationship evolves
as well. Due to the growing presence of digital media over the last decade, the
central mode of representation is no longer just text; recently, the use of
imagery has become more prominent. In its current use for internet and
network-based composition, the term “multimodality” has become even more
prevalent, applying to various forms of text such as fine arts, literature, social
media and advertising.
An important related term to multimodality is multiliteracy, which is the
comprehension of different modes in communication not only to read text, but
also to read other modes such as sound and image. Whether and how a
message is understood is accredited to multiliteracy.

7

In short, the theoretical foundation of social semiotic approach to
multimodal theory has its root in the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL).
Olowu (2012) submits that: Kress and Van Leeuwen‟s contribution to the
field of semiotic lies in their recognition of visual language as an underrated
of communication which up till now has been subordinate to verbal language.
They suggest that as technology facilities, the sharing of visual information, a
way and means of understanding visual communication is more important
than ever.
1.3. Systemic Functional Linguistics
Since the 1970s, there have been many new works in linguistics which
study the nature of communication in the human society and emphasize
functional aspects of language, such as the works of Halliday (1994), Brown
& Yule (1983).
According to Brown & Yule (1983), language serves two main
functions: interactional and transactional functions. Systemic-Functional
Linguistics (SFL) is an approach to linguistics that considers language a
social semiotic system. It is developed by Michael A. K. Halliday. SFL tries
to explain how people use language in real situations and how language is
structured to construe different meanings. Halliday states that linguistics is the
study of how people exchange meaning through the use of language. Halliday
developed a theory of the fundamental functions of language into three
metafunctions: ideational, interpersonal, and textual.
The ideational meaning relates to how people represent in language their
experiences in the world. This function often refers to the expression of
content. There are two subtypes: experiential function and logical function in
the ideational function.

The interpersonal meaning is about how people
8

position themselves and other people. It relates to the relationship between
speaker/ writer and reader/ listener. The textual meaning relates to the way
people‟s ideational and interpersonal meanings are organized and structured
into a coherent text.
Besides Halliday‟s views, Kress and Van Leenwen (1996), based on
SFL, also talk about three types of meaning: representational meaning,
interactional meaning, compositional meaning. Represention is the same as
ideational metafunction while interaction is similar to the interpersonal
element and composition to the textual meaning.
We can summarize that human society always uses a variety of modes
of representation. Each mode has different representation potentials, different
potentials for meaning-making.
1.4. Review of previous research
Research that applies multimodal approach remains an insignificant
figure in Vietnam. The article “The role of image in Vietnamese textbooks for
the teaching of English as a foreign language” is written by Prof. Lens
Unsworth (Australian Catholic University) and Doctor Ngo Thi Bich Thu
(University of New England, Australia) is one of those few. This article
mainly analyzes the relationship between the images and language in the
English textbook based on Kress and van Leenwen‟s framework in Reading
Images - The Grammar of Visual Design.
Moreover, this material “English for Water Resources” also was
studied by Lam Thi Lan Huong with the topic “ESP at HN Water Resources
university - Recommendation and suggestion for the current courses in 2005.
Later, Abuya E. John (2013) studied the topic “Reading Meaning through the
Visual Images: Social Semiotic Approach to TELL Magazine in Nigeria. This
9

study has shown that the visual images: pictorials, colour, signs, posture,
distance to convey meaning in print media especially, news magazines that
need to attract the attention of the public. All these topics will be fundamental
for the researcher.
In short, in the chapter 1 the researcher has presented basic definitions
of multimodal communication and has described features of SFL and
Multimodality theory. Some previous research are presented briefly in this
part. It is very necessary for the researcher to conduct the analysis of the
study.

10


CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES

2.1. Data collection
Data for this study is drawn from the course book “English for Water
Resources” which is designed by English Faculty of Hanoi Water University
in 2008. The aims of this material are to teach ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) to technical students. Although this document is not widely
distributed, we are in the irrigation sector, so the exchange of material is
evident. It is clear that the analysis of multimodality based on SFL framework
will help the students for their learning, as well as to evaluate the
effectiveness in terms of quality of the material.
The beginning of the material is about water resources management, then
about hydrology, next fluid mechanics, the science of strength of materials,
irrigation history, and types of dams. Thus, the course book chosen analysed
mainly used verbal elements, in other words this material is used a lot of
words channel. In general, the distribution of units in the length of the course
provides a balance in the amount of knowledge as well as progress of the

course. However, these themes are virtually unconnected logically.lBesides
using verbal elements, there are 28 cases using visual modes in the material
“English for Water Resources”. They are divided into 3 groups as follows.
Table 1: The frequency of visual modes
Types of
modes
Frequency

Images
21(75%)

Tables
5 (17%)

Diagrams/
graphs
2 (8%)

Total
28 (100%)

Statistical results show that the author has distributed the multimodal
modes in an unequal way. For example, the images are the most used
11


accounting for 75%. Other visual modes as tables, diagrams or graphs appear
with very little low frequency. Besides, it can see that the writings are used
mainly in this material, especially in readings. The researcher will focus
primarily on the verbal and images channels in this thesis.

2.2. Procedures
To collect data for this study, the researcher was conducted as follows:
Firstly, the researcher collected the primary material “English for Water
Resources” which was published at the Ha Noi Water University and
Halliday‟s Systemic Functional Grammar.
Secondly, for the primary material, the researcher read and analyzed
the overview of document. It includes 6 lessons with the different topics. For
the secondary document, determining the requirement of topic “an SFL
analysis of multimodality in the course book “English for Water Resources”,
the researcher analyzes concepts to establish the theoretical framework. So
some concepts of communication, multimodality are indicated in the works of
Keyton (2011), Kress and van Leeuwen (1996), Len Unsworth (2008/2014).
Systemic functional Linguistics framework is the appropriate choice for
study, in parallel with Kress and van Leeuwen‟s theoretical framework.
Thirdly, the researcher identifies what is the multimodal form of
communication used in the material. Then, the statistical data and
classification of multimodal methods is used in the material into specific
groups as writings, images, tables, so on.
Fourthly, based on the statistical data and classification above, the
researcher conducted an analysis on three functions of SFL.
Finally, based on the results of analysis, the researcher proposes some ideas to
develop the advantages that current course book has achieved as well as to
overcome existing shortcomings.
12


2.3. Analytical frameworks
2.3.1. Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics.
SFL divides the functions of language into three

aspects

meta-

functions: ideational, interpersonal, textual. In this study the researcher
focuses on meaning of clause through the system of transitivity. In the
transitivity system there are six processes: material, relational, mental, verbal,
behavioral, and existential process.
Halliday determines three components in the process: the process itself,
the participant, and the circumstances. Process is typically realized by verbal
group, whereas participant is realized by nominal group; circumstance is
realized by adverbial group or prepositional phrase.
Material Process
Material processes are processes of “doing” or “happening”, which
concern with “our experience of the material world”. There are two
participants: Actor and Goal. These processes may belong to different
impacts: intransitive or transitive. Besides, there are also some additional
participants involved: Scope, Recipient, Client and Attribute.
Relational Process
Relational processes is the process of being, having and being at. There
are three types: intensive, circumstantial, and possessive. Relational process
consists of two modes: attribute and identifying.
Mental Process
Mental process is process of “sensing. There are 2 main participants:
Senser and Phenomenon. The mental process can be divided into four
subtypes “perceptive”, “cognitive”, “desiderative” and “emotive”.

13

Behavioral process
Behavioral processes are of “physiological and psychological behavior”
(typically human). The participant here is labeled as Behaver – is a
“conscious being”.
Existential process
Existential processes represent that something exists or happens. The
participant is labeled as Existent. The existent may be a phenomenon or an event.
Verbal process
Verbal process is the process of “saying”. The participants in these
processes: Sayer, Receiver, Verbiage, Target.
2.3.2. Kress and van Leeuwen’s Multimodal theory
Based on the theory of SFL, Kress and van Leeuwen figure out that all
semiotic modes may present three meta-functions: representational meaning,
interactional meaning, compositional meaning.
Firstly, representational meaning is about how the image conveys
aspects of the real world through identifying the represented participant
and processes. The participant can be either people, things, places while
processes can be conceptual or narrative structure. The conceptual process
is described as the process of „being‟ or „having‟ and the narrative process
is described as the process of „happening‟ or „doing‟ (Kress and van
Leeuwen, 1996, 2006). The conceptual processes represent “participants in
terms of their more generalised and more or less stable and timeless
essence, in terms of class, or structure” (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996:79).
There are three kinds of conceptual process: classification, analytical
and symbolical. The classification is one of the most popular conceptual
which classifies people, places, and things into groups to show what they
14


have in common and justifies their membership of a certain class. Symbolic

structure is found in images to portray the identity of a participant. In this
structure, the participant is a carrier, while identity is the symbolic
attribute. Symbolic attributes “are made salient in the representation such
as their size, position, colour, use of lighting; they are pointed out by
means of gesture; they look out of place in the whole; they are
conventionally associated with symbolic values” (Jewitt and Oyama,
2001:144). Besides, the analytical structure is portrayed in terms of a partwhole structure where the whole would be the carrier and the parts are the
possessive attributes. The aim is “to identify the carrier and allow the
viewers to scrutinize the carrier‟s possessive attributes” (Kress and van
Leeuwen, 2006:89). In short, the representation is resources for
recognizing the ideational metafunction of systemic functional linguistics.
Secondly, interactional meaning is concerned with the representation
of social relations between the viewer and the subject being represented. The
ways to realize the interpersonal meaning are contact, distance, camera angle.
Contact is established between participants when the represented participants
connect with the viewers through eyelines and gestures such that images can
mean to „offer‟ or „demand‟. For „demand‟ images, the represented
participant‟s gaze (and gesture, if present) seem to demand the viewer of the
image to “enter into some kind of imaginary relation with him or her” (Kress
and van Leeuwen, 2006:118). In „offer‟ images, the represented participant,
usually non-human, is the item of display whereby it seems to offer
information to the viewers. Thus, the image becomes the object of the look
unlike in „demand‟ images where the viewer is the object.
Social distance between images and viewers of images is determined
through the different ranges of shots as close-up shot, medium shot, long shot.
Thus distance reflects different relations. The vertical camera angle is an
15


important element in images. It can be described through a high angle or low

angle shot. A high angle shot is used to signify that the viewers have power
over the represented participants as opposed to a low angle shot which
signifies that the represented participants have the power. However, if “the
picture is at eye level, then the point of view is one of equality and there is no
power difference involved” (Kress and van Leeuwen 2006: 140). Thus,
interaction is the resource that realises the interpersonal metafunction in SFL.
In this study, interaction is used to examine the relationship between the
images and the readers of the material.
Thirdly, composition also has an important role. Kress and van Leeuwen
(1996:177) proposes three crucial criteria in composition; information value,
salience and framing. “Information value is the placement of elements
(participant and syntagms that relate them to each other and to the viewer)
endows them with the specific informational values attached to the various
zones of the images such as left and right, top and bottom, centre and margin.
Salience is made to attract the viewer‟s attention to different degrees, as
realized by such factors as placement in the foreground or background, size
relative, contracts in tonal or colour, differences in sharpness, etc. Framing is
the presence or absence of framing devices which create dividing lines, or by
actual frame lines disconnect or connects elements of the image, signifying
that belong or do not belong together in some sense. Three principles of
composition also apply to composite visuals which combine text and image.
To sum up, the researcher has given to data collection, types of data
and data analysis techniques. Besides, steps for conducting the study are
given in detail. Then, the researcher has discribed theoretical framework of
Halliday‟s SFL and Kress Leeuwen‟s Multimodality theory to establish
analysis framework.

16