(242）This Regulation shall not apply to any concentration which was the subject of an agreement or announcement or where control was acquired within the meaning of Article 4 (1）before the date of this Regulation’s entry into force and it shall not in any circumstance apply to any concentration in respect of which proceedings were initiated before that date by a Member State’s authority with responsibility for competition.
Examples (237）and (238）are from PS.In Example (237), the MSA always is high-valued, lifting the median value of the MV should upward.Hence, compromising occurs.In Example (238), the MSA just is low-valued, pulling the median value of the MV would downward.Here, compromising also occurs.
Examples (239）and (240）are from JI.In Example (239), the MSA maybe is low-valued, retaining or emphasizing the low value of the MV can.Similar situation occurs with the MSAs possibly and still and the MV can in Example (240).
Example (241）is from AW.In this example, the MSA of course is related to confidence, retaining or emphasizing the high value of the negated MV cannot.
Example (242）is from LR.In this example, the MSA in any circumstance belongs to the category of reasoning, retaining or emphasizing the high value of the MV shall.
In brief, Examples (237)-(242）illustrate the findings about the relationship between value adaptation and the interpersonal meaning of value as well as that between contextual factors and MSAs.
6.2 Clausal positions of MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts
MSAs may occur clause-initial, clause-medial or clause-final.When occurring clause-initial or clause-final, some MSAs tend to become comment adjuncts, whose function is to comment on the propositions or subjects of the clauses concerned.Of course, some MSAs occurring clause-medial can be comment adjuncts as well.Table 6.2 shows the percentages of clausal positions of MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts in four genres.
As those MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts are used to comment on the propositions or subjects of the clauses concerned, their clause-initial positions contribute to the foregrounding of interpersonal meanings, whereas their clause-final positions highlight the backgrounding of interpersonal meanings.Table 6.2 is significant in 4 aspects.
First, a bigger percentage of MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts occur clause-initial (45.89%）than clause-medial (34.78%）and clause-final (19.33%）in PS.It seems that such MSAs foreground stance in PS.
Second, like PS, a bigger percentage of MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts occur clause-initial (52.63%）than clause-medial (33.83%）and clause-final (13.54%）in JI.It seems that such MSAs foreground stance in JI.
Third, the percentage of MSAs occurring clause-initial and serving as comment adjuncts (66.67%）is much bigger in AW in comparison with that in PS (45.89%）or JI (52.63%).This seems to indicate that MSAs serving as comment adjuncts foreground stance more heavily in AW than in PS or JI.
Fourth, unlike PS (45.89% vs.19.33%), JI (52.63% vs.13.54%）and AW (66.67% vs.11.90%), the percentages of MSAs occurring clause-initial and clause-final and serving as comment adjuncts are almost equal in LR (36.36% vs.36.40%).To some extent, the percentage of MSAs occurring clause-final in this sense is even bigger.This seems to show that MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts background stance more heavily in LR than in PS, JI and AW.
In general, it is found that there is a close relationship between genre and the clausal positions of MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts.The foregrounding and backgrounding of stance through the MSAs functioning as comment adjuncts depend on generic demands.Of the four types of text that are investigated, AW is the genre where stance is most evidently shown by means of clause-initial MSAs, whereas in LR stance is revealed by a balance between clause-initial and clause-final MSAs.LR is a genre that does not focus much on negotiations, while AW stresses dialogues between different academic roles.
Clause-initial MSAs act as marked themes in SFL and hence are loaded with interactive value in the mood structure.Clause-final MSAs express afterthoughts or help to conceal authority, as expounded in Chapter 5.Clause-medial positions are conventional for MSAs.Thus, in terms of cognition, pragmatics and evaluation, the distributions of MSAs in Table 6.2 are justified.
MSAs serving as comment adjuncts vary in items from genre to genre.Generally speaking, they occur as described below:
A.In PS, the frequently occurring MSAs serving as comment adjuncts include: of course, at least, eventually, naturally, surely, clearly, personally, and hopefully.
B.In JI, the frequently occurring MSAs serving as comment adjuncts are: of course, particularly, perhaps, maybe, at least, in fact, certainly, technically, theoretically speaking, realistically, frankly, and ideally.
C.In AW, the frequently occurring MSAs serving as comment adjuncts include: of course, at least, in fact, taken together, so to speak, strictly speaking, fundamentally, generally, supposedly, naturally, in one’s view, in this (that）sense (way）and in some cases.
D.In LR, the frequently occurring MSAs serving as comment adjuncts include: in particular, at least, as soon as possible (practicable), on a legal (de facto）basis, in this (that）case, in such a case, in any event, accordingly, in advance, as a general rule and in no event.
There is some overlap in these genres, but there are also exceptions.For instance, on a de facto basis is normally used in LR rather than in other genres; hopefully occurs more frequently in PS, JI and AW than in LR; taken together is normally used in AW only.
Consider the following:
(243）Hopefully, at the end, I’ll have something that will be important to other people too.
