There appearsto be a widespread consensus among educational researchersfrom diverse discipline
backgroundsthat literacy and literacy pedagogy can no longer be discussed in terms oflanguage
alone, and thatreconceptualizing literacy and literacy education at least needsto incorporate the
role ofimagesin an increasing range of different types of texts. It is also the case thatsyllabifor
the teaching of English in governmentschoolsin most Australian Statesrequire studentsto learn
about the role ofimagesin their comprehension of various kinds of texts and, to a lesser extent,
their composition of textsfor a variety of purposes. Although there is a tendency for work on the
meaning-making resources of images and language to be compartmentalized in separate categories
for‘reading’ and ‘viewing’, the incorporation of attention to the role of imagesin textsseemsto be
uncontentiousin contemporary English teaching. What is and haslong been contentiousin English
teaching in Australia, the United Kingdom and North America isthe role of metalanguage – the
type of grammar, its purpose in the curriculum and approachesto itsteaching. Today in the
national curriculum for England and in English syllabi in Australian States, grammar isrequired to
be taught. Forthe most part traditional grammarterminology has been retained, although some
Australian States also incorporate functional grammatical conceptsfrom systemic functional
linguistics(SFL),sometimes known as Hallidayan linguistics(M.A.K. Halliday & Matthiessen,
2004; Martin, 1992). Today, there appearsto be little contention regarding this aspect of English
curricula, and syllabi use technical grammatical terms, which it is expected will be mediated to
studentsto both inform their learning and also to constitute part ofthe knowledge they will acquire
in the form of learning outcomes. Substantialsupport documents and appendicesto syllabi are
provided with very technical accounts of grammatical content to facilitate teachers’ and students’
explicit use of thismetalanguage (Education, 1995; NewSouthWalesBoardofStudies, 1998). No
such comparable resourcing ofthe descriptions of visual meaning-making systems deployed in
images and in textsincluding images and language isincluded in English syllabi and associated
support documents. Of course, compared with the long (an competing) traditions ofscholarship in
the formulation of grammars of English and their variable (and competing) application in literacy
pedagogy, work on ‘grammatical’ accounts ofthe meaning-making resources of imagesisin its
infancy – and those dealing with meaning-making at the intersection ofimage and language are just
in the process of conception. In thissituation some educators have demonstrated the productive use
of articulating functional grammatical descriptions of language and analogous descriptions of a
‘grammar of visual design’in dealing with image/text relationsin English teaching. Howeverthere
would stillseem to be reluctance on the part ofsome English teachersto adopt a systematic
metalanguage deriving from a grammar of visual design as an analytic, interpretive and pedagogic
tool, asindeed some have been reluctant to explore such potential in the use of functionally orientated approachesto grammatical descriptions of language (now expressed in some syllabi
largely in the terminology oftraditional grammar). In the light ofthe increasingly multimodal
nature of our textual habitat, now frequently reflected in English syllabi, this chapter invites English
teachersto re-examine the pedagogic potential ofmetalanguage by considering recentstudies of
newsstories, advertisements and illustrated literary texts, which draw on functional grammatical
analyses of language and image in seeking to explicate a metalanguage of image/language
interaction.
To contextualize thisinvitation the second part ofthis chapter briefly outlines commonly expressed
views among researchers about the need forre-conceptualising literacy in termsimage/text
relations, then reviewsthe approachesto image/text relationsin a number of Australian State
English syllabi. The third section considersthe application of Kress and van Leeuwen’s(1996)
grammar of visual design (extrapolated from SFL)to work in English teaching with media and
literary texts. The focusis on the ready articulation of this visual grammar with an approach to
English grammarinformed by the underlying theoretical basis of SFL, the latter description now
characterising a number of English syllabi, professional development programsforteachers,
classroom curriculum materials, and the teaching practice of a significant number of English
teachersin Australia. The fourth section ofthe chapter draws on research from variousstudies
dealing with functionalsemiotic accounts of media and literary textsto describe an emerging
account of image/language interaction and an associated metalanguage. In concluding we will note
other contextsin which the meaning-making resources of image/language interaction need to be
more systematically theorized,such as online textsthat make use not only of written language and
static images but also spoken language, and dynamic imagesincluding video segments. Beyond
this, we will note that the current contexts ofimage/language interaction will continue to change
with the ongoing and exponential changesin the nature and affordances of information and
communication technologies. Concomitantly the meaning-making potential offuture contexts of
language/image interaction (in combination with sound and othersemiotic systems) will continue to
change. In orderto critically and effectively negotiate the use ofthese constantly emerging new
affordances we will need an appropriate and evolving metalanguage derived from theories of
intersemiosisthat have continuous change at their core. The work required for the formulation of
such a metalanguage would be most appropriately undertaken through collaborative projects
involving teachers and researchersinterfacing socialsemiotic theory and practical pedagogy.