Iv - University of Salford Institutional Repository

demarcation lines between a sentence and a text. No consensus exists
among linguists, particularly sentence-grammarians, as to a generally
accepted definition of the sentence. This has led to the emergence of
different criteria for sentencehood. One example will suffice to
exemplify the sentence-grammarians' scepticism with regard to the
formulation of an acceptable, clear-cut definition of the sentence.
For instance, de Beaugrande, (1980, pll) views the sentence as "(1) the
expression of a complete thought; (2) a sequence of speech units
followed by a pause; (3) a structural pattern with specified formal
constituents." Inconsistency in treating the sentence as a grammatical
pattern and, as occasion arose, a logical statement, has created a
duality foreign to natural langauge. The sentence is a purely
grammatical entity analysable only at the level of syntax. Studied in
isolation with no relevance to or connectedness with preceding or
succeeding sentences, the sentence ceases to function and operate as an
instance of language. The text is the only linguistic unit which is
most qualified to operate and function as "an instance of living
language", to quote Halliday's words.
De Beaugrande, on the other hand, distinguishes between a sentence
and a text. A sentence is 'grammatical' or 'ungrammatical' in the
sense that it conforms to the traditional norms of grammar or departs
from them. A text is 'acceptable' or 'non-acceptable' according to a
complex gradation, not a binary opposition, and contextual motivations
are always relevant. (de Beaugrande, 1980, p12). In this sense, a
sentence cannot survive outside its pertinent socio-cultural
neighbourhood. Unless motivated by an ad hoc linguistic situation to
51