Mood Structure Analysis and Thematisation Patterns in Niyi Osundare’s “My Lord, Tell Me Where to Keep Your Bribe”

One of the theories that seek to unravel how the human language functions is the Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG). SFG achieves its uniqueness by seeking to develop a theory about language as a social process and an analytical methodology for detailed and systematic description of language patterns (Eggins, 2004). Given its suitability for the analysis of any text, SFG was used in this study for the analysis of the poem “My Lord, Tell Me Where to Keep Your Bribe”. Though SFG shows how three different strands of meanings (ideational, interpersonal and textual) are expressed in the structures of clauses, the focus of analysis was on the grammar of textual and interpersonal meanings, hence the thematic and Mood structure analyses of the poem. The thematisation patterns identified in the poem included the use of textual themes (for inter-clause cohesive purposes), interpersonal themes (for the assignment of Mood labels to clauses) and topical themes, which altogether enabled the poet bring into thematic prominence the major issues of worry to an average Nigerian who had always thought judges and the courts of law should be immune from corruption. The Mood structure analysis showed the poet’s conscious choices of the indicative Mood, with alternating options of interrogative and declarative clause types. Overall, the SFG-based analysis showed how the poet made conscious paradigmatic choices and arranged them into linear (syntagmatic) structures to make the different meanings conveyed in the poem.


Introduction
The analysis of texts (written and spoken) using acceptable analytical theories and frameworks is one of the major pre-occupations of linguists. The word "text" has been defined in linguistics in various ways. Halliday & Hasan (1976, p. 1) describe a text as "any passage, spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole". Beaugrande & Dressler (1981) define text as a communicative occurrence which meets seven standards of textuality. They enumerated the standards of textuality to include cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality, and intertextuality. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014) in their description of a text maintain that "when people speak or write, they produce text; and text is what listeners and readers engage with and interpret". They proceed to define text succinctly as "any instance of language, in any medium, that makes sense to someone who knows the language" (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 3). Textual analysis has often been carried out with different motives and from different academic disciplines including law, linguistics, sociology and psychology. In linguistics, there are different perspectives on the analysis of texts, one focusing on text as an object in its own right, and two, focusing on text as an instrument for finding out about something else (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014).
The analysis of written and spoken texts has often come from different linguistic perspectives. There are studies on the analysis of patterns of language in use and the ways in which these relate to social and cultural patterns (Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008) with the adoption of the sociology based Ethnography of Communication (Hymes, 1972;Hymes, 1974;Gumperz & Hymes, 1982). This analytical framework is used to discover the varieties of forms and functions available for communication, and the ways such forms and functions are part of different ways of life (Schiffrin, 2007). There are studies that have adopted Conversational Analysis (CA) for textual analysis, particularly for spoken texts, with the aim of looking at the actions that form the interactions of people through language (Sacks, 1992) and, according to Schiffrin (2007, p. 232), "how language both creates and is created by social context". Other linguistic dimensions of textual analysis include phonological, grammatical, pragmatic, and, of recent, forensic analysis, all of which have produced one form of contribution or another to knowledge. In short, the objectives of undertaking textual analyses can be as varied and numerous as the number of scholars conducting such analyses.
One of the theories and analytical frameworks frequently adopted for textual analysis is Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG), a postulation of Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday, a British-born Australian linguist. Though the linguistic model has its foundation in Halliday's publication of 1961 titled "Categories of the Theory of Grammar", it became prominent and more novel after his publication of An Introduction to Functional Grammar in 1985. Halliday (1985 describes the theory as one, "by which a language, or any other semiotic system, is interpreted as networks of interlocking options… whatever is chosen in one system becomes the way into a set of choices in another". SFG deals largely with the structural organization of English clauses, yet Halliday's interest is substantially on the meanings of language in use in the "textual processes of social life", or "the sociosemantics of texts", (Eggins, 2004, p. 2). Halliday (1994) further explains that: … the aim has been to construct a grammar for purposes of text analysis: one that would make it possible to say sensible and useful things about any text, spoken or written, in modern English, (p. xv).
As a further description of the framework and contrasting it with other theories of language, Halliday & Matthiessen (2014) maintain, that: Systemic theory gets its name from the fact that the grammar of a language is represented in the form of system networks, not as an inventory of structures. Of course, structure is an essential part of the description, but it is interpreted as the outward form taken by systemic choices, not as the defining characteristic of language (p. 23).
The general assumptions on which SFG operates as Eggins (2004, p. 3) notes are that language is "functional, semantic, contextual and semiotic". Following from this, SFG and systemicists focus on how people use language (that is, how they negotiate texts to make meanings) in different contexts, and how language is structured to be able to convey interactants' desired meanings. Thus, for Halliday and SFG, as Fontaine (2013, p. 5) explains, "the ways in which we can create meanings through language are organized through patterns of use", with language seen as a "system of options". Central to SFG is the focus on the clause as the basic unit of analysis, with the postulation that the clause is multi-functional, having three types of meanings expressed in it. These three types of meaning are ideational (that is, construing experience function) elsewhere referred to as experiential (Thompson, 2004), interpersonal (enacting social relationships function) and textual ("creating discourse" function), technically described by Halliday (1985), Halliday & Matthiessen (2004) and Halliday & Matthiessen (2014), Butt et al. (2003 as the metafunctions of language. As Hasan (2009) explains, the metafunctions are not hierarchical. They are of equal status and are all woven into language use.
Generally, SFG views language as a resource which humans use to express meanings in contexts. The resources inherent in language which are used to convey meanings are the lexical (words) and grammatical (combinatorial possibilities of words to form larger units) resources. Halliday & Matthiessen (2014) refer to lexis and grammar as "two poles of a single (lexicogrammar) cline" (p. 64), with lexis operating on the paradigmatic axis and grammar operating on the syntagmatic axis. These two axes define the different relations between linguistic signs: syntagmatic relations, being relations along the axis of chain, and one by which "signs can go together in sequences or structures", and paradigmatic relations, being relations along the axis of choice, are the relations by which signs stand in opposition to other signs that might have occurred in its place (Eggins, 2004, p. 190).
As contexts of language use vary from situation to situation, so do the choices of language resources vary. For example, a courtroom communication between a lawyer and an accused person will involve a set of questions and answers, whereas a story-telling session between an adult and some children will involve narrations and less of questioning. These are two different communicative contexts with two different communicative goals. The communicative goal in courtroom communication is fact-finding and propositional confirmation-denial, whereas it is informative education in a story-telling communicative context. The same language resources cannot be used to achieve these communicative goals, hence the evolution of different registers for each of the communicative situations. SFG therefore predominantly accounts for how speakers and writers use lexical and grammatical resources to achieve meanings. Thompson (2004)   A paradigmatic relation that exists among constituents of clauses involves systems. The basic system consists of an entry condition and a set of two or more signs in opposition, of which one and only one must be chosen (Eggins, 2004, p. 194). Thus, in using language, humans make conscious paradigmatic choices among mutually exclusive options and arrange them in patterned syntactic structures to achieve meanings.
Thematisation, on the other hand, is argued to be the line of meaning "that gives the clause its character as message" (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 88). If clauses are used to convey messages, then it is believed that such message has a pattern of organization, wherein a distinct status is assigned to one part of the clause (theme), and that part combines with all other parts of the clause (Rheme) to make the complete message that is conveyed by the clause. Halliday & Matthiessen (2004, p. 64) describe the Theme as "the starting-point for the message: It is what the clause is going to be about". They further explain (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p. 89) that the Theme is the element that serves as "the point of departure for the message, that is, that which locates and orients the clause within its context"; and it is "what sets the scene for the clause itself and positions it in relation to the unfolding text" (p. 90). As Eggins (2004) notes, the identification of the Theme is based on information order in the clause, that is, which information unit comes first and which others follow. There are three basic types of Themes. These include topical themes, where a Transitivity function can be assigned to the elements that occupy the first position ( Simply take each clause in a text and assign a label of interpersonal, textual or topical to the elements at the beginning. If the first element is a topical element, you call that THEME, and all the rest of the clause is RHEME. If other elements (interpersonal, textual) come before the topical element, you include them in the THEME, up to the end of the first topical element (Eggins, 2004, p. 308).
c) The contestants have filled in and submitted their nomination forms.

The Material Studied and Method of Analysis
The text chosen for analysis is (the Nigerian) Niyi Osundare's "My Lord, Tell Me Where to Keep Your Bribe". Niyi Osundare is a Nigerian, poet, dramatist and literary critic. The poem is a 24-stanza satirical reaction to the shocking discovery of some Nigerian judges' involvement in corruption in October 2016. The judiciary, of which judges are principal agents, is believed to be the last hope of the common man. Judges are expected to be unbiased, fair and just in the discharge of their duties. The Nigerian public was therefore astonished about the newspaper reports of allegations of corruption and particularly with evidence-based reports of illicit keeping of huge amounts of ill-gotten money in hard and local currencies in roof-tops and other ridiculous non-banking places by the judges. Each of the cases was promptly investigated and the judges involved were being prosecuted in the courts of law. Though the shocking discovery was greeted by reactions on the print and electronic media, Niyi Osundare's satirical poem was the first literary reaction. The poem was published after few days of the press reports, and it was widely circulated on the social media.
The poet's thematic pre-occupation is the satirisation of Nigerian judges, their deep involvement in corruption and subversion of justice, the ridiculous places they keep ill-gotten wealth, and the enormous enervating effect of biased judgements and corrupt judiciary on national development. To be able to convey these broad messages, the poet has used selected lexical and grammatical resources of English in systematic and conscious ways. Broadly, the Systemic Functional Grammar was used as analytical framework for the study, but the main focus was the analysis of the interpersonal meanings and logical meanings of the clause. With this in mind, the whole text was first analysed into component clauses, and for each of the clauses, the thematic structure was analysed, followed by the Mood structure analysis following Halliday & Matthiessen (2014), Eggins (2004) and Thompson (2007)  The first clause above (clause 8) is a clause simplex. To realise the clause-as-message function of the clause, the lexico-semantic resources are organized into the Theme (which consists of Theme 1 Shall and Theme 2 I) and the Rheme, which comprises all other constituents of the clause. The clause is an interrogative yes-no clause, so the Theme includes the Finite operator Shall, an interpersonal Theme. But since the Finite operator is not an element in the experiential structure of the clause (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014), the Theme extends over to the Subject I, which serves as the topical theme. In terms of the modal structure, the Mood is realised by the Finite Shall and the Subject I, while the Residue comprises the Predicator element give, Complement element a billion and the Adjunct to each of your paramours the black, the light, the Fanta-yellow. The structure of the Mood is Finite ᶺ (followed by) Subject, thus realizing a yes-no interrogative.
The second clause (Clause 36) is also a clause simplex, though the Subject Just one judgement sold to the richest bidder contains an instance of embedding (sold to the richest bidder) as post-Head modifier. In terms of the thematic structure, the Subject of the clause Just one judgement sold to the richest bidder is the Theme, the point of departure and the information unit first projected, while all other clausal constituents (including the Predicator will catapult, the Complement Judge and Lawyer and the Adjunct to the Billionaires Club) make-up the Rheme. The Theme here is conflated with the Subject, and it is therefore unmarked. In terms of the Mood structure, the Subject of the clause, Just one judgement sold to the richest bidder and the Finite will constitute the Mood Block while the Residue comprises the Predicator catapault, Complement Judge and Lawyer and the Adjunct to the Billionaires Club. The modal structure is Subject ᶺ the Finite, and this structure makes the clause a declarative one.

Clause Components
The poem was analysed into 48 clause simplexes. A clause simplex is one that can stand independently and convey complete semantic sense (Dahunsi, 2016) as opposed to a clause complex, where two or more clause are linked together by means of some logico-semantic relation (parataxis and hypotaxis). Some of the clauses are listed below.

Thematic Analysis
The thematic analysis of the poem shows the various themes and the theme types used by the poet to convey the overall message of the poem as well as a clause-by-clause conveyance of meaning. Presented in Table 1 are the details of the themes in the poem. In all, there are ten (10) textual themes, which are used generally as elements of cohesion, and specifically to relate the clauses in which they appear to the preceding clauses. These are or (4 times), and (4 times), and but (2 times). There are two unique patterns in the poet's choices of textual themes in the poem. The first unique pattern is the sequential order of the textual themes. All the four uses of or follow one another sequentially without any other type coming between them (clauses 3, 5, 7 and 10). All the four (except the last) uses of and follow one another sequentially (clauses 13, 25, 33), and the two uses of but also follow each other sequentially (clauses 38 and 43) without any other textual theme type coming between them. The second uniqueness is the fact that all the ten textual themes are conjunctive adjuncts, and none is continuity adjunct (such as oh, no, well, yea etc.).  Topical Themes  Interpersonal Themes  Textual Themes  My Lord (clauses 1, 12,14,15,31) do (clauses 2, 3) or (clauses 3, 5, 7, 10) I (clauses 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11) shall (clauses 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11) and (clauses 13, 25, 33, 44) They (clause 9, 39, 43, 46, 47) will (clauses 5) but (clause 38, 43) Lucky bank bosses (clause 13) The last hope of the common man (clause 16) A terrible plague (clause 17 There are nine interpersonal themes in the poem, all occurring between clause 2 and clause 11. The Interpersonal themes are used to give the clauses where they occur Mood labels. They also make the clauses interrogative as against declaratives or imperatives. The constituents that can function as Interpersonal theme include unfused Finite (can, shall, would, have etc.) and Modal Adjuncts (which include mood adjuncts, vocative adjuncts, polarity adjuncts and comment adjuncts). The observed pattern in the poem is complete choices of unfused Finite, which includes do (2 times), shall (6 times) and will (1 time).
All the clauses have topical themes. These include nominal Subjects such as My Lord (unmarked themes) in clauses 1, 12, 14, 15 and lucky bank bosses (clause 13); pronominal Subjects such as I (in clauses 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 etc.), it (clause 5) and they (clause 9); rankshifted clause as Subject Just one judgement sold to the richest bidder (clause 36). There are instances of marked themes in clauses where the Adjunct element comes first in the information order such as Behind the antiquated wig and the slavish glove, the penguin gown and the obfuscating jargon (clause 19), Behind the rituals and roted rigmaroles (clause 20), Behind the prim-and-proper costumes of masquerades (clause 21), For sale to the highest bidder Interlocutory and perpetual injunctions (clause 22), Come Sunday (clause 43) etc. In clauses 18, 23 and 24, the Predicator elements occupy the (topical) thematic position (Besieged, protect, enshrine) making them marked themes in each case.
One very important feature that makes the thematisation pattern very unique is the recurrent grammatical structure that spans through some groups of clauses in the poem. This is structural parallelism and its predominance in the against the dramatized imaginary (powerless) accused person I; the places where the great quantum of illicitly gotten wealth of the judges were kept such as The roof of judges' houses (clause 30); the satirized legal costumes of judges such as Behind the antiquated wig and the slavish glove… (clause 19), Behind the rituals and roted rigmaroles (clause 20), Behind the prim-and-proper costumes of masquerades (clause 21) and the bastardised electoral system that leads to politicians' fraud and judges' corruption-prone miscarriage of justice in favour of the rich such as (in bold) Election Petition Tribunals (clause 25) and Scoundrel vote-riggers (clause 26).

Paradigmatic Choices, Thematisation and the Realization of Authorial Intention
The intention of the poet in the poem is to expose the corrupt practices of judges in Nigeria. In the course of that, however, the poet ridicules the judges, lampoons them and condemns such heinous acts, which fell far beneath the expectations of the Nigerian and global public. This authorial intention was achieved through conscious lexical selections and paradigmatic choices, and by structuring the lexical choices into units that fit into the thematic structures of the poem. Four broad issues are presented in the poem. These are the issue of corruption in the judiciary, the corrupt judges, the unconventional ways of keeping their (the judges') loot, and the effect of these heinous acts on the well-being of Nigeria. The poet's paradigmatic choices are strategic. In painting corruption as heinous, he chooses words with negative denotation and connotation (such as your bribe, corruption, heavy booty, this sudden booty, the loot, insolent impunity, injunctions for sale, a fraction of the loot etc.).
In the poet's presentation of the judges, there is some irony in his choices of words. He calls the judges my Lord and my most honourable Lord repeatedly. This is a literary ploy and an irony to lampoon the judges who are expected to be honourable but are "dishonourable" in conduct. To further reinforce his presentation of the dishonourable conduct of the judges, the poet chooses series of negative epithets (such as your paramours, rapacious judges, venal lawyers, buyable Bench, conniving bar, pliant judges) and refers to them as jobbers and Monsters of Mammon. Each time the poet repeats some words in the poem, it is a rhetorical strategy for emphacis, and in such cases, the words have both denotative and figurative uses.
For example, the repeated uses of Behind (in clauses 19, 20 and 21) is not merely a physical locational description but is a way of visualizing the giving and taking of bribe, which in the Nigerian context, is understood to be money taken from behind (because it is illegal and illicit). This is why the poet thematises (marked theme) the Adjunct element with behind as headword in each of the three clauses. In his presentation of the judges' properties, the poet uses some adjectives (such as venerable chambers, immaculate mansion, capacious water tank, well laundered backyard, lofty roof etc.). The intention here is to make these properties questionable in terms of the legitimacy of the source from which they were acquired. To describe the effect of a corruption-ridden judiciary on the nation, the poet employs some metaphors, by describing the country as a huge corpse, and by referring to corruption as a terrible plague that has besieged the land and as some stench choking the land.
In essence, the poet has carefully made lexical and paradigmatic choices to express the messages and meanings he intends to convey. He uses negative words to express negative experience about corruption and the judges. He employs the use of derogatory epithets to describe the judges, and chooses superfluous adjectives to describe questionable things (like judges' properties and possible places where they keep their loot). All these paradigmatic choices are systematically combined together to form groups (Nominal groups, Verbal groups, Adverbial groups etc.) and are thematically structured to foreground aspects of poetic meanings and messages that need prominence.

Mood Analysis
The poem is composed first as an imaginary dialogue between a judge and an accused person, and later as a monologue with the poet expressing his feelings and opinions on Nigerian judges and the Nigerian judiciary. The poet's voice represents the imaginary accused person while the imaginary judge has no voice. With the first part of the poem seen as a communicative exchange between two persons, some relationship is enacted through language in the course of the exchange. In clauses 2 to 11, the poet takes on the speech role of giving, with information as the commodity of exchange. This is why he uses questions as the move type, to ask for some information from the imaginary listener (the judge). Though the structure of the clauses here show that the poet is asking for information from the judge, the poet is also functionally seeking direction and permission from the judge as to where the bribe should be put. In the remaining part of the poem, the poet takes on the speech role, also of giving, and with information as commodity of exchange between him and the reader. However, he uses statements as the move type, to express his feelings and opinions about the satirized judges and the Nigerian judiciary.
It is the Mood in the clauses that realise this relationship. All the 48 clauses in the poem contain the modal element (Subject and Finite), thus making the Mood indicative. From this broad type, the variation of the modal element produces different clause types: declaratives, yes-no interrogatives and Wh-interrogatives. The poet employs the Finite ᶺ (followed by) Subject modal structure for nine (9) clauses (clauses 2 to 8, and clauses 10 and 11). This structure generates yes-no interrogatives such as Do I drop it… (clause 2), do I carry the booty… (clause 3), shall I burry it… (clause 4), will it breathe better… (clause 5) etc. The poet also chooses the present forms of the Finite in each case (shall, will, do etc.). He also employs the Subject ᶺ Finite structure, which realizes the declarative clauses in the poem. A total of thirty-four (34) clauses have this structure, with examples in They will surely know… (clause 9), My Lord, it will take the fastest machine… (clause 12), lucky bank bosses may help themselves (clause 15) etc.
The Finite elements are realised in two different ways: one, by making choices of Finite verbal operators (shall, a positive, future temporal operator; and will, a positive, median modal operator); and two, the fusion of the Finite element with the Predicator with examples in crime (Subject) pays (Finite fused with Predicator pays-clause 34), They (Subject) kill (Finite fused with Predicator kill-clause 39). The poet's consistent use of the present forms of the Finite (and Predicator, for example: old antics connive, corruption stands, a terrible plaque bestrides, lucky bank bosses may help, shall I, will it, etc.) is also noteworthy. These are paradigmatic choices to create some sense of immediacy and expectations, as against the past forms of the Finite, which would have signaled some remoteness and staleness of actions in the poem. The present tense form of the verbal groups in the poem also indicates consistency of continuity of the judges' corrupt habits.
The poet has limited himself to the choices of interrogatives and declaratives, and has realised these by varying the Subject-Finite order. This Subject-Finite variation leads to different grammatical and clausal structures, and these structural differences give way to differences in meanings, thus differentiating for example questions from commands, or statements from questions. Obviously, in terms of the Mood structure, the poem has two different sections with the first section (clauses 2-11) being only for a list of questions for the imaginary judge, questions that ridicule and mock the judge for being corrupt, and most importantly for the kinds of places where corrupt judges were alleged to have been keeping their ill-gotten wealth (venerable chambers, immaculate mansion, capacious water tank, laundered backyard, septic tank etc.).
The interrogative clauses in this part of the poem also indicates a master-servant relationship between the accused person (who is shown as helpless and who needs some favour from the judges) and the judges (who are presented as being in a position to help the accused). From clauses 12 to 43, the poet makes declarations on the judges, the legal system, the shocking compromises in the judiciary and the effect of a corrupt judicial system on the nation. To be able to convey these messages and meanings, the poet makes paradigmatic choices at each level of clause constituents, and systematically arranges these choices in linear syntactic structures to convey different kinds of meaning for each clause in the poem.

Conclusion
A textual analysis of the poem titled "My Lord, Please Tell Me Where to Keep Your Bribe" has been carried out using the Systemic Functional Grammar as analytical framework. With focus on two (textual and interpersonal) of the three strands of meaning (ideational, interpersonal and textual) conveyed in the clause, SFG has enabled us to unravel how meanings are made in the poem by making lexical and paradigmatic choices and arranging them into different kinds of grammatical structures to convey different types of meanings. An exploration of the grammar of textual meaning in the poem provided useful insight into how the information and messages in each clause have been organized in a way that clearly shows which chunk of information is given thematic prominence. The patterns of thematisation have shown the poet's choices of the textual, interpersonal and topical themes. While the textual themes help to situate and relate clauses in contexts of occurrence, the interpersonal themes help to assign Mood label to clauses where they occur, thus ultimately enabling the definition of role and social relationship between the persons involved in the dialogue. The topical themes are the elements of the clause that carry a Transitivity function (of circumstance, actor etc.), and each of the clauses in the poem has a topical theme. An exploration of the grammar of interpersonal meaning in the poem also provided insight into how paradigmatic choices are made and how such choices are arranged into different grammatical structures to make different semantic senses. Through the Mood structure analysis, we were able to see how different grammatical structures (Finite-Subject variations) help to enact social relationships and how speech roles are assigned, leading to the discovery of both questions and statements as the basic exchange moves used in the poem.

Thematic analysis
The "last hope of the common man" has become the last bastion of the criminally rich topical Theme Rheme

Mood analysis
The "last hope of the common man" has become the last bastion of the criminally rich