David Rose On Projection

David Rose wrote to sys-func on 3 February 2015 at 12:50pm:

How many projections?

Tony Abbott won't deny that Julie Bishop declined his request for a commitment not to challenge.

And he replied 5 February 2015 at 16:25pm:

One but it projects an exchange, realised lexically in a single clause

Tony Abbott won't deny that

A1 Julie Bishop declined

A2 his request

A1 for a commitment

A1 not to challenge

Even the projecting ‘deny' implies a K2/K1 exchange

How to render as congruent grammar?

Blogger Comment:

The clause that Julie Bishop declined his request for a commitment not to challenge is not a ranking clause that is projected by the clause Tony Abbott won't deny.  Instead, as Bob Hong had already suggested, it is a pre-projected fact, and so is embedded as a constituent, Verbiage, in a clause simplex.  See analysis here.

Reasoning:

(a) The clause can be rendered as Tony Abbott won't deny the fact that Julie Bishop declined his request for a commitment not to challenge.

(b) The clause that Julie Bishop declined his request for a commitment not to challenge is not projected into semiotic existence by the clause Tony Abbott won't deny.

For the projection distinction between hypotaxis and embedding, see here.