International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online) Vol. 6 No. 3; May 2017 Australian International Academic Centre, Australia Systemic Functional Theory: A Pickax of Textual Investigation Taofeek Dalamu Department of English, University of Lagos, Akoka, Yaba, Nigeria E-mail: lifegaters@yahoo.com Received: 21-11-2016 Accepted: 16-01-2017 Advance Access Published: March 2017 Published: 01-05-2017 doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.3p.187 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.3p.187 Abstract The study examines Systemic Functional Theory (SFT) as a tool of examining text, and perhaps, text of any dimension as long as it falls within the grammatical organs of the clause. The author provides explanations for the theory from its relevant source(s). The chronological appreciation involves the efforts of Saussure, Firth, Malinowski, Hjelmslev, etc. However, Halliday’s insight seems prominent and upon which Systemic Functional Theory receives a global status that it has assumed today. Halliday constructs numerous concepts e.g. lexicogrammar, processes, cohesion, coherence, system, system network with background from traditional grammar and sociological tokens. In addition to that, the three metafunctions are characterized as its core operational concepts. Out of these, the mood system serves as the instrument of analysis of Psalm one utilized in this endeavor as a case study. Although the clauses fall within the profile of the indicative and imperative, the study reveals that some of the structures are inverted in order to propagate the intended messages. To that end, there are inverted indicative clauses expressed as inverted declarative statements, inverted imperative questions and inverted negativized polarity. In sum, Systemic Functional Theory is a facility for explaining different shapes of texts. Keywords: Clause, Mood system, Systemic Functional Theory, Text, Three Metafunctions 1. Introduction Language, either spoken or written, is an embodiment of meaning-making. The purpose of language construction and dissemination from one source to another is to perform one or more functions among its users. That is, among social actors executing a communicative project in society. It means that when meaning is aborted from language as an interactional facility the essence of its manifestation becomes a bit of mess. Language, a powerful magic (Firth 1958:185), is a weave of texts in multifaceted ways. The nature and texture of a processed text depend largely of the addresser and addressees, the topic on course, the setting, the knowledge of the language in use, the objective of its use, etc. Irrespective of the context that characterized the text, text remains the custodian of semantic influences in any language. That is why linguists (e.g. Halliday & Hasan 1985) are highly interested and their insistence in investigating texts in order to explicate their contents in relation to meaning. The analysis of the text of a language cannot be done haphazardly; it must be procedural. This demand gives rise to theoretical machinery that have the capacity to serve as utilitarian tools of analysis. Therefore, linguistics theories have been designed to play crucial roles in the realms of textual considerations. In a more succinct way, Ferdinand de Saussure created an endless path for linguistics investigations through appropriate theoretical concepts. Some of the most prominent of de Saussure’s concepts are syntagmantic, paradigmatic, la langue, parole, sign, signifier and signified. This pioneering effort, in the world of linguists, has constructed what de Beaugrande (1991:2) refers to as a theoretical balance sheet. Among others, Edward Sapir, Leonard Bloomfield, Kenneth Pike, Louis Hjelmslev, Roman Jakobson, John Austin, John Firth and Noam Chomsky have contributed immensely to linguistics concepts of textual examinations. Of significance is the effort of Michael Halliday in the constructs of linguistics terminology and applications. Halliday’s insightful thoughts motivate Ravelli to argue that, One of the most exciting features of the systemic functional theory (henceforth: SFT), is the extent to which one can actually say relevant and useful things about what is happening in language, that is, the extent to which you can do something with analysis’ (Ravelli 2001: 27). Ravelli has found that there are ‘exciting features’ in SFT and these features are tools that could strongly assist researchers in generating meaning, to a large extent, from any form of text engagements. The pivotal relevance of these features, so to say, is hanging on the systemic three ‘goal posts’ which are widely known as Metafunctions. Each metafunction wears a linguistic lens at which it sees meaning in its own perspective via a separate but distinct ‘semiotic address’ (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004: 62) of one or more systems in a particular cell. The three dimensions of meanings that the metafunctions harmoniously generate in a text have made the text to be understood as an amalgamated entity of meaning derivatives. Flourishing Creativity & Literacy