18. ‘Consistency’ Means ‘Mutual Fit’

Consistent meaning-making is meaning-making that fits in the context of other meaning-making. Metafunctionally, this is experiential meaning-making fitting in the context of other experiential meaning-making: construals of experience fitting other construals of experience; logical meaning-making fitting in the context of other logical meaning-making: logical relations (between construals of experience) fitting other logical relations (between construals of experience); interpersonal meaning-making fitting in the context of other interpersonal meaning-making: valuings (of construals of experience) fitting other valuings (of construals of experience); textual meaning-making fitting in the context of other textual meaning-making: saliences (of valuings and construals of experience) fitting other saliences (of valuings and construals of experience).



ChatGPT revised:

Consistency as Contextual Fit in Meaning-Making

Consistent meaning-making is meaning-making that fits — that coheres within the context of other meaning-making. Each metafunctional dimension brings its own type of fit, its own kind of consistency:

  • Experiential consistency is about construals of experience fitting with other construals of experience. It concerns whether the ways experience is represented hold together across time and context.

  • Logical consistency is about logical relations among construals of experience fitting with other logical relations. It concerns the systematicity of reasoning: how well inferential or implicational links hold across a network of meanings.

  • Interpersonal consistency is about evaluative stances — valuings of construals of experience — fitting with other such valuings. It concerns the coherence of attitudes and judgements over time, across contexts and interlocutors.

  • Textual consistency is about patterns of salience — what is made prominent or backgrounded — fitting with other such patterns. It concerns the coherence of attentional framing: how relevance is construed across texts or episodes of semiosis.

Each dimension of meaning-making provides a context for interpreting the others. Consistency is not about mechanical repetition, but about meaningful alignment — about how each act of semiosis harmonises with the broader symphony of meaning in which it participates.