Alternatively (and I think I would prefer this), one could think of this as being some sort of physical action which resulted in our being in this situation. This would give something like:
I
|
got
|
us into this
|
Actor
|
Material process
|
Result
|
I
|
'm gonna get
|
us out
|
Actor
|
Material process
|
Result
|
Blogger Comments:
[1] Trivially, this flouts the descriptive convention of capitalising the function, Process, rather than its subtype, material.
[2] This conflates participant (us) and circumstance (into this, out) into a circumstance of Cause: result, realised by a nominal group. On a material reading of such clauses, the conflation is of Goal and Location. (On a relational reading, the conflation is of Carrier and locative Attribute.)
Interestingly, the conflation arises from confusing result, in the sense of a type of circumstance, with the (locative) outcome of a material Process; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 225-36).
As a consequence, both clauses are misinterpreted as intransitive instead of transitive, and the Actor as Medium instead of Agent.
[2] This conflates participant (us) and circumstance (into this, out) into a circumstance of Cause: result, realised by a nominal group. On a material reading of such clauses, the conflation is of Goal and Location. (On a relational reading, the conflation is of Carrier and locative Attribute.)
Interestingly, the conflation arises from confusing result, in the sense of a type of circumstance, with the (locative) outcome of a material Process; see Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 225-36).
As a consequence, both clauses are misinterpreted as intransitive instead of transitive, and the Actor as Medium instead of Agent.
