Đặc điểm của tham thể trong câu hành vi tiếng Việt và tiếng Anh

 politics. (Bronte, 1847)
(56) He wanted to talk about Daisy. (Fitzgerald, 1925)
There is some trouble to analyze (54) and (55) in terms of Range – “Verbiage” or Circumstance 
– “Matter”. There appear only two possibilities of interpreting them: either Range-Verbiage or 
Circumstance – Matter. 
(55a) 
Colonel Dent and Mr. Eshton argue on politics
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Range-Verbiage
Or (55b)
Colonel Dent and Mr. Eshton argue on politics
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Cir - Matter
28 KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰSố 08 - 7/2017
v LÝ LUẬN NGÔN NGỮ
(56a) 
He wanted to talk about Daisy
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Range-Verbiage
Or (56b) 
He wanted to talk about Daisy
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Cir - Matter
To shoot the troubles, we are inclined to Range-Verbiage interpretation. It is highly likely that 
“politics” and “Daisy” in (55) and (56) should be treated as Range-Verbiage since we examine these 
two examples from a viewpoint that prepositions in English in these two cases are firmly fixed with 
processes and play roles in processes. Nevertheless, the situation is less ambiguous in Vietnamese. 
For examples
(57) Người ta bàn ra tán vào rất nhiều về việc công Xuân Tóc Ðỏ của chúng ta. (Vũ Trọng Phụng, 1938)
(58) Bà than thở về chiến tranh, sinh ra khó làm ăn. (Nam Cao, 1956)
In (57) and (58), “việc công Xuân Tóc Ðỏ của chúng ta”, “chiến tranh” are preceded by preposition 
“về”. The question is whether preposition “về” is bound to verbs to form: Process “bàn ra tán vào 
về” + Range – Verbiage “việc công Xuân Tóc Ðỏ của chúng ta” or it is fixed to noun phrases to 
form: Process “bàn ra tán vào” + Circumstance – Matter “về việc công Xuân Tóc Ðỏ của chúng ta”. 
Compared to English prepositions, Vietnamese prepositions are independent of process and freely go 
within the clauses. That is to say they do not combine with verbs to make phrasal verbs in Vietnamese. 
From this perspective, (57) and (58) should be interpreted as follows.
Người ta bàn ra tán vào rất nhiều về việc công Xuân Tóc Ðỏ của chúng ta.
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Circumstance - 
Manner
Cir - Matter
Bà than thở về chiến tranh, sinh ra khó làm ăn.
Behaver Process: Verbal – behavioral Cir - Matter
Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, p. 265) argue that Target construes the entity that is targeted by 
the process of saying. Now that Verbal-behavioral processes are partly like verbal processes, this 
function is still available in both English and Vietnamese behavioral clauses. For examples,
(59) He said the conductor had insulted Rosemary. (Fitzgerald, 1937)
(60) They insulted me as coarsely as they could in their little way. (Bronte, 1847)
(61) Sometimes she praised his work. (Lawrence, 1919)
(62) John Reed hated his school, and abused his master. (Bronte, 1847)
(63) Nó chửi tất cả làng Vũ Đại. (Nam Cao, 1957)
The lexico-grammar and semantic roles of Range are briefly illustrated in figure 2. 
29KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰSố 08 - 7/2017
LÝ LUẬN NGÔN NGỮ v
5. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN TERMS OF LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL 
CHOICES AND FUNCTION OF PARTICIPANTS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
The analysis of collected data revealed some similarities and distinctive differences between 
English and Vietnamese behavioral clauses. At lexico-grammatical level, it is clear that both English 
and Vietnamese participants are realized by nouns or noun phrases. In terms of the function of 
participants in behavioral clauses, there are different kinds of participant roles within two typical 
models of behavioral in English and Vietnamese in table 3 and 4.
Table 3: English and Vietnamese behavioral clauses with one participant.
Participant Process
Behaver
Behavior
Behavioral process
Table 4: English and Vietnamese behavioral clauses with two participants.
Participant 1 Process Participant 2
Behaver Behavioral process Range - Behavior
Behaver Mental - behavioral process Range - Phenomenon
Behaver Material - behavioral process Range - Scope
Behaver Verbal- behavioral process Rang - Verbiage/Target
However, there are some distinctive features in interpreting participants in English and Vietnamese 
behavioral clauses in terms of ideational meaning. Firstly, trouble occurs when analyzing Range-
30 KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰSố 08 - 7/2017
v LÝ LUẬN NGÔN NGỮ
Phenomenon or Circumstance-Location in 
Behaver^Mental-behavioral process^Range – 
Phenomenon modal. This is attributable to the 
favored grammatical construction – Phrasal 
verbs in English. Functional analysts must 
make a decision on whether they are Range 
- Phenomenon or Circumstance – Location. 
The situation is less complex in English since 
phrasal verbs are not common in Vietnam. Last 
but not least, we face the problem of interpreting 
process^Range – Verbiage modal because of the 
tremendous numbers of phrasal verbs in English. 
6. CONCLUSION
In this paper, an attempt has been made to 
examine participants in English and Vietnamese 
in terms of lexico-grammatical realization 
and participant roles. A qualitative method 
is adopted to interpret them. It is safe to say 
that there is a very wide range of participant 
meanings. The analysis of collected data revealed 
some similarities and distinctive differences 
between English and Vietnamese participants in 
behavioral clauses. We interpret and identify two 
typical kinds of English and Vietnamese lexico-
grammatical realization of participants: nouns 
and noun phrases and two participant roles: 
Behaver and Range (Behavior, Phenomenon, 
Scope and Verbiage/Target). Behaver often has 
function of agent of the process in both English 
and Vietnamese behavioral clauses since it is 
about a person or an animal having behaviors, 
usually endowed with consciousness while 
Range often occurs after the processes and is 
considered the second participants in behavioral 
clauses. The contrastive analysis between English 
and Vietnamese circumstances in this study 
shows that there is a borderline of Range and 
circumstances in English due to the prevalence 
of English phrasal verbs whilst there is no trouble 
in analyzing and labeling Vietnamese Range. It 
is hoped that functional analysts should take 
these distinctive features into consideration when 
interpreting behavioral clauses./.
References:
1. Nam Cao (1943), Lão Hạc, NXB Văn học, 
Hà Nội.
2. Nam Cao (1956), Sống mòn, NXB Văn 
học, Hà Nội.
3. Nam Cao (1957), Chí Phèo, NXB Văn 
học, Hà Nội.
4. Tô Hoài (1941), Dế mèn phiêu lưu ký, 
NXB Kim Đồng, Hà Nội. 
5. Thạch Lam (2004), Tuyển tập truyện ngắn 
Thạch Lam, NXB Giáo dục, Hà Nội.
6. Kim Lân (1962), Vợ nhặt, NXB Văn học, 
Hà Nội.
7. Vũ Trọng Phụng (1938), Tuyển tập Vũ 
Trọng Phụng, Tập 1, NXB Văn học, Hà Nội.
8. Võ Quảng (1974), Quê Nội, NXB Kim 
Đồng, Hà Nội
9. Ngô Tất Tố (1937), Tắt đèn, NXB Văn 
học, Hà Nội.
10. Nguyễn Ngọc Tư (2011), Cánh đồng bất 
tận, NXB Trẻ, Hà Nội,
11. Trang Trang (2012), Mưa nhỏ hồng trần, 
truy cập ngày 12/3/2017, <https://books.google.
com.vn/>.
12. Nguyễn Thị Tú Trinh, Phan Văn Hòa, 
Trần Hữu Phúc (2017), “Some suggestions on 
how to identify and classify behavioral processes 
in English and Vietnamese”, VNU Journal of 
Foreign Studies, Vol.33, No.3, pp. 1-13.
13. Hoàng Văn Vân (2012), An experiential 
grammar of the Vietnamese clause, Ha Noi, 
Vietnam Education Publishing House.
13. Bloor, T.& Bloor, M. (1995), The 
Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan 
Approach, Edward Arnold.
14. Eggins, S. (1994), An introduction into 
Systemic Functional Linguistics, London and 
New York: Continuum.
15. Fontaine, L. (2013), Analyzing English 
31KHOA HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ QUÂN SỰSố 08 - 7/2017
LÝ LUẬN NGÔN NGỮ v
CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPANTS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE 
BEHAVIORAL CLAUSES
NGUYEN THI TU TRINH, PHAN VAN HOA, TRAN HUU PHUC
Abstract: This article is devoted to interpreting the characteristics of participants in behavioral 
clauses in English and Vietnamese in terms of lexicogrammatical structures and ideational 
meanings within the framework elaborated by Halliday and Matthiessen (2004); Martin et 
al (1997) as well as making comparisons of them. Attention has been paid to interpreting a 
wide range of lexicogrammatical choices and strands of function of participants. Each type of 
participants is interpreted (i) structurally according to rank, and (ii) semantically according to 
ideational meaning. Analysis of participant’s characteristics is conducted on six English and ten 
Vietnamese 19th and 20th century novels and short stories. The conclusion points out some new 
results and suggests some practical applications.
Keywords: participants, behavioral clauses, functional grammar.
Received: 24/5/2017; Revised: 12/6/2017; Accepted for publication: 28/6/2017
Grammar: A Systemic Functional Introduction. 
Cambridge University Press.
16. Fowler, R. (1996), On critical linguistics. 
Texts and practices: Readings in critical 
discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
17. Halliday M.A.K. & Matthiessen, 
C.M.I.M. (2000), Construing experience 
through meaning: a language-based approach 
to cognition, Open linguistics series, Continuum 
International.
18. Halliday, M.A.K. & Matthiessen, 
C.M.I.M. (2004), An introduction to Functional 
Grammar. 3rd ed. London, Arnold.
19. Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C. & Painter, 
C. (1997), Working with Functional Grammar. 
London: Edward Arnold.
20. Bronte, C. (1847), Jane Eyre, Smith, 
Elder & Co, of London, England.
21. Fitzgerald, F. S. (1925), The Great 
Gatsby, Scribner, New York.
22. Fitzgerald, F. S. (1937), Tender is the 
night, Scribner, New York.
23. Lawrence, D.H. (1915), The Rainbow, 
Collector’s Library, China.
24. Lawrence, D.H (1919), Sons and Lovers, 
Dover publications, Inc, New York.
25. Lawrence, D.H (1920), Women in love, 
Dover publications, Inc, NewYork.