Luận văn a contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in english and vietnamese conversation

Metharlology of the sludy Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNTYERSITY, ITANOT UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUTIES:

FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES

3 Ci we

‘TRAN TH] KHUONG LIEN

A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF NOMINAL SUBSTITUTION IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE

CONVERSATION

(Phân tích dỗi chiếu phép thế đanh tir trong ngôn bản hội thoại

tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt)

MINOR PROGRAXI THESIS

Kicld: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15

Hanoi, 2011

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOL

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

ca Ox

TRAN TIT KITUONG LIEN

A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF NOMINAL SUBSTITUTLON LN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE

CONVERSATION

( Phân tích đối chiếu phép thể đanh từ trong ngôn bản hội thoại

tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt)

1, Rationale of the study

2 Aims and objectives of the study

2.1 Aims

2.3 Research questions

3 Scope of the study

4 Methodology of the study

5 Organization of the study

Chapter 1 Theoretical BackgrouniL

LL The theories of discourse

LLL The concept of discourse

L.L.2 Discourse and Sentence

1.1.3 Discourse and T@XL ác nhi

1.1.4 Discourse analysis

L.L.S Spoken and Written Discourse

1.2 The theories of conversation

1.2.1 The concep! of conversation

1.2.2 Why is Conversation Analysis important

1.3 Cohesion

1.3.1 The concep† of cohesion aeeeneee

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

The history of linguistics has seen the everlasting development of different approaches to linguistics and language teaching, each of which defines its own tasks, scopes and objectives Traditionally, linguists have been conecmed with the phonological, lexical and syntactical features and studied sentences which are preferably taken out of context, Resides, the focus of traditional practice of language leaching and learning has been on the analysis of single senlanees, normally al the levels of phonology, vocabulary and grammar,

Later, with the view that incomplete sentences can still make sense when occuring

in some particular context, according to (Cook 1989: ix) complete understanding of stretches

of language can only be cblained if they are considered “in their full textual, social and psychological context” linguists have shifted their attention from complete sentences to discourse

In common with coherences, echesion takes an active role in building up discoursc, in general, and of couse, conversation as @ genre of discourse, in particular Truly, Halliday and Hasan (1976) make a detailed classification of the cohesive devices in English These aulhors distinguish between grammatical and lexical cohesion According to them, grammatical cohesion embraces four different devices: reference, ellipsis, substitution and lexical In Vietnam, it seems that all the issues related fo substitution especially Nominal

substilution in conversation are still in fimited exploration Tt is casy to find thal substitution

in Vietnamese is still a concept which has bean needed receive much Vietnamese researchers” exploration, Searching for the study of substitution, we only can see in Tran

Ngoc Thern’s work (1985), more reeently, Diep Quang Ban's (1998) These authors’ effort

seems to be made to give a very general and basic concept of substitution as well as types of

it in Vietnamese Thus, we might wonder whether substitution, and within the minor thesis, nominal substitution actually works in Viemamese conversation Furthermore, in recent years, reference, ellipsis, and lexical have been closely studied in contrastive with Vietnamese, within the framework of minor thesis a careful and profound study of English and Vietnamese nominal substitution is, theoretically speaking, equally important and necessary,

Because of the above mentioned reasons, my final thesis entitled: “Contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Viemamese conversation” I do hope that this

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

1.3.2 Coherence and cohesion

1.3.3 Cohesion within the sentence and discourse

1.4 Types of Cohesion

1.5 Substitution

1.5.1 The concept of substitution

1.8.2 Substitution Cohesionand Discourse

1.6.ConfrastiveAnalvsis

1.6.1 Definition

1.6.2 Why using CA in this thesis?

Chapter 2 A contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in Engtish and

Vietnamese conversation discourse

2.1 General features of English and Vietnamese nominal structure

3.2 The implication of the study for teachings and tearing of English,

3.3 Limitation of the study

3.4, Suggestions for further sludy

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

1.3.2 Coherence and cohesion

1.3.3 Cohesion within the sentence and discourse

1.4 Types of Cohesion

1.5 Substitution

1.5.1 The concept of substitution

1.8.2 Substitution Cohesionand Discourse

1.6.ConfrastiveAnalvsis

1.6.1 Definition

1.6.2 Why using CA in this thesis?

Chapter 2 A contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in Engtish and

Vietnamese conversation discourse

2.1 General features of English and Vietnamese nominal structure

3.2 The implication of the study for teachings and tearing of English,

3.3 Limitation of the study

3.4, Suggestions for further sludy

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

The history of linguistics has seen the everlasting development of different approaches to linguistics and language teaching, each of which defines its own tasks, scopes and objectives Traditionally, linguists have been conecmed with the phonological, lexical and syntactical features and studied sentences which are preferably taken out of context, Resides, the focus of traditional practice of language leaching and learning has been on the analysis of single senlanees, normally al the levels of phonology, vocabulary and grammar,

Later, with the view that incomplete sentences can still make sense when occuring

in some particular context, according to (Cook 1989: ix) complete understanding of stretches

of language can only be cblained if they are considered “in their full textual, social and psychological context” linguists have shifted their attention from complete sentences to discourse

In common with coherences, echesion takes an active role in building up discoursc, in general, and of couse, conversation as @ genre of discourse, in particular Truly, Halliday and Hasan (1976) make a detailed classification of the cohesive devices in English These aulhors distinguish between grammatical and lexical cohesion According to them, grammatical cohesion embraces four different devices: reference, ellipsis, substitution and lexical In Vietnam, it seems that all the issues related fo substitution especially Nominal

substilution in conversation are still in fimited exploration Tt is casy to find thal substitution

in Vietnamese is still a concept which has bean needed receive much Vietnamese researchers” exploration, Searching for the study of substitution, we only can see in Tran

Ngoc Thern’s work (1985), more reeently, Diep Quang Ban's (1998) These authors’ effort

seems to be made to give a very general and basic concept of substitution as well as types of

it in Vietnamese Thus, we might wonder whether substitution, and within the minor thesis, nominal substitution actually works in Viemamese conversation Furthermore, in recent years, reference, ellipsis, and lexical have been closely studied in contrastive with Vietnamese, within the framework of minor thesis a careful and profound study of English and Vietnamese nominal substitution is, theoretically speaking, equally important and necessary,

Because of the above mentioned reasons, my final thesis entitled: “Contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Viemamese conversation” I do hope that this

study will be useftd for learners when invesligsting cơnversation in Inglish as well as in

‘Victnamse to support for successful communication:

2 Aims and abjective of the siuly

- providing teachers of inglish with useful materials abont the knowledge of Ns

2.2 Objectives

To achicve these aims, the rescarch tries to

- re- examine some aspects of English substitution and nominal substitution in detail so as

to establish the descuiptive framework for a contrastive analysis,

- investigate all the possible linguistics means of nominal substilulion in Vietnamese conversation discourse and at the same time find out possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese nominal substitution,

- give same suggestions lo apply to the leaching and leaming of English,

2 What are the eqnivalent linguistics means used for nominal substitution in

Vietnamese conversation in contrast with these in English conversation?

3 Scope of the study

Since this study examines nominal substitation as a cohesive device, only substitution across sentences is taken into account Because of the hited time and knowledge, this study is

only focused on some domains as follows:

- Orly nominal substitution in English and its cquivalent oxnassions in Vietnamese

conversation are investigated

~ I will take into consideration many cascs of nominal substitution so the data used for illustration exemplification are taken from various sources

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

study will be useftd for learners when invesligsting cơnversation in Inglish as well as in

‘Victnamse to support for successful communication:

2 Aims and abjective of the siuly

- providing teachers of inglish with useful materials abont the knowledge of Ns

2.2 Objectives

To achicve these aims, the rescarch tries to

- re- examine some aspects of English substitution and nominal substitution in detail so as

to establish the descuiptive framework for a contrastive analysis,

- investigate all the possible linguistics means of nominal substilulion in Vietnamese conversation discourse and at the same time find out possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese nominal substitution,

- give same suggestions lo apply to the leaching and leaming of English,

2 What are the eqnivalent linguistics means used for nominal substitution in

Vietnamese conversation in contrast with these in English conversation?

3 Scope of the study

Since this study examines nominal substitation as a cohesive device, only substitution across sentences is taken into account Because of the hited time and knowledge, this study is

only focused on some domains as follows:

- Orly nominal substitution in English and its cquivalent oxnassions in Vietnamese

conversation are investigated

~ I will take into consideration many cascs of nominal substitution so the data used for illustration exemplification are taken from various sources

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

1.3.2 Coherence and cohesion

1.3.3 Cohesion within the sentence and discourse

1.4 Types of Cohesion

1.5 Substitution

1.5.1 The concept of substitution

1.8.2 Substitution Cohesionand Discourse

1.6.ConfrastiveAnalvsis

1.6.1 Definition

1.6.2 Why using CA in this thesis?

Chapter 2 A contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in Engtish and

Vietnamese conversation discourse

2.1 General features of English and Vietnamese nominal structure

3.2 The implication of the study for teachings and tearing of English,

3.3 Limitation of the study

3.4, Suggestions for further sludy

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study

1.3.2 Coherence and cohesion

1.3.3 Cohesion within the sentence and discourse

1.4 Types of Cohesion

1.5 Substitution

1.5.1 The concept of substitution

1.8.2 Substitution Cohesionand Discourse

1.6.ConfrastiveAnalvsis

1.6.1 Definition

1.6.2 Why using CA in this thesis?

Chapter 2 A contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in Engtish and

Vietnamese conversation discourse

2.1 General features of English and Vietnamese nominal structure

3.2 The implication of the study for teachings and tearing of English,

3.3 Limitation of the study

3.4, Suggestions for further sludy

study will be useftd for learners when invesligsting cơnversation in Inglish as well as in

‘Victnamse to support for successful communication:

2 Aims and abjective of the siuly

- providing teachers of inglish with useful materials abont the knowledge of Ns

2.2 Objectives

To achicve these aims, the rescarch tries to

- re- examine some aspects of English substitution and nominal substitution in detail so as

to establish the descuiptive framework for a contrastive analysis,

- investigate all the possible linguistics means of nominal substilulion in Vietnamese conversation discourse and at the same time find out possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese nominal substitution,

- give same suggestions lo apply to the leaching and leaming of English,

2 What are the eqnivalent linguistics means used for nominal substitution in

Vietnamese conversation in contrast with these in English conversation?

3 Scope of the study

Since this study examines nominal substitation as a cohesive device, only substitution across sentences is taken into account Because of the hited time and knowledge, this study is

only focused on some domains as follows:

- Orly nominal substitution in English and its cquivalent oxnassions in Vietnamese

conversation are investigated

~ I will take into consideration many cascs of nominal substitution so the data used for illustration exemplification are taken from various sources

study will be useftd for learners when invesligsting cơnversation in Inglish as well as in

‘Victnamse to support for successful communication:

2 Aims and abjective of the siuly

- providing teachers of inglish with useful materials abont the knowledge of Ns

2.2 Objectives

To achicve these aims, the rescarch tries to

- re- examine some aspects of English substitution and nominal substitution in detail so as

to establish the descuiptive framework for a contrastive analysis,

- investigate all the possible linguistics means of nominal substilulion in Vietnamese conversation discourse and at the same time find out possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese nominal substitution,

- give same suggestions lo apply to the leaching and leaming of English,

2 What are the eqnivalent linguistics means used for nominal substitution in

Vietnamese conversation in contrast with these in English conversation?

3 Scope of the study

Since this study examines nominal substitation as a cohesive device, only substitution across sentences is taken into account Because of the hited time and knowledge, this study is

only focused on some domains as follows:

- Orly nominal substitution in English and its cquivalent oxnassions in Vietnamese

conversation are investigated

~ I will take into consideration many cascs of nominal substitution so the data used for illustration exemplification are taken from various sources

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.4 The theories of discourse

1.1.1 The concept of discourse

IL dogs nol sccm rational to use the Isrrt “serdeneo' in comnmumicalion ‘The analysis

on senlenee had beon focused until the beginning of 1950s by linguistics But in 1952, a famous linguist Zellig Ilarris, one of the earliest discourse analysts, published an arhcle entilled “Discourse Analysis” in Language Magacine He stated a new opinion exp ng thal tie most complete unit of language is đỉscoursc, nol a senlence Obviously, it is

impossible to make the language in use exist in isolation from its users and the context in which it is being used if you want to achieve successful communication Therefore, the

conccpt of discowse has becn paid considerable attention to by several linguists since 1952

‘The most straightforward definition of discourse is the one often found in textbooks for

siudents of tinguistics: “Language alove the senlence” (Carneron 2001: 10)

According to Cook (1989: 6) discourse is “stretches of language perceived lo be meaungfid,

unified and purposeful" in his point of view, the kind of language, language has been used 1o communicate somelhing and is fell lo be coherent (and may, or may nol, happen Lo correspond fo a coreel sentence or @ series of correel, sentences) — language in use, for

communication is called discourse Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a lengthy legal case Cook (198910) also argues that “What matters is not its

conformity to rules, but the fact that ut communicaies and is recognized hy tts receivers as

coherent" Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus to be used to communicate with

one person in a way that another person does not have the necessary knowledge to make

sense of The study of discourscis often referred to as discourse analysis

1.1.2 Discourse and Sentence

It is obvious that we have two different kinds of language as potential objects for study Th

mules of language work according to Cook (1989) Sharing the same idea with Cook, Brown

enlance is abstricled in order to teach a Tangunga or litcracy, or lo study how the

& Yule (1983) state that the sentence is just a grammatical unit and it is quite abstract

bacause it has no prodncers and no Tzccivers — that is lo say, it oan cxisl independently of

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

study will be useftd for learners when invesligsting cơnversation in Inglish as well as in

‘Victnamse to support for successful communication:

2 Aims and abjective of the siuly

- providing teachers of inglish with useful materials abont the knowledge of Ns

2.2 Objectives

To achicve these aims, the rescarch tries to

- re- examine some aspects of English substitution and nominal substitution in detail so as

to establish the descuiptive framework for a contrastive analysis,

- investigate all the possible linguistics means of nominal substilulion in Vietnamese conversation discourse and at the same time find out possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese nominal substitution,

- give same suggestions lo apply to the leaching and leaming of English,

2 What are the eqnivalent linguistics means used for nominal substitution in

Vietnamese conversation in contrast with these in English conversation?

3 Scope of the study

Since this study examines nominal substitation as a cohesive device, only substitution across sentences is taken into account Because of the hited time and knowledge, this study is

only focused on some domains as follows:

- Orly nominal substitution in English and its cquivalent oxnassions in Vietnamese

conversation are investigated

~ I will take into consideration many cascs of nominal substitution so the data used for illustration exemplification are taken from various sources

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

The history of linguistics has seen the everlasting development of different approaches to linguistics and language teaching, each of which defines its own tasks, scopes and objectives Traditionally, linguists have been conecmed with the phonological, lexical and syntactical features and studied sentences which are preferably taken out of context, Resides, the focus of traditional practice of language leaching and learning has been on the analysis of single senlanees, normally al the levels of phonology, vocabulary and grammar,

Later, with the view that incomplete sentences can still make sense when occuring

in some particular context, according to (Cook 1989: ix) complete understanding of stretches

of language can only be cblained if they are considered “in their full textual, social and psychological context” linguists have shifted their attention from complete sentences to discourse

In common with coherences, echesion takes an active role in building up discoursc, in general, and of couse, conversation as @ genre of discourse, in particular Truly, Halliday and Hasan (1976) make a detailed classification of the cohesive devices in English These aulhors distinguish between grammatical and lexical cohesion According to them, grammatical cohesion embraces four different devices: reference, ellipsis, substitution and lexical In Vietnam, it seems that all the issues related fo substitution especially Nominal

substilution in conversation are still in fimited exploration Tt is casy to find thal substitution

in Vietnamese is still a concept which has bean needed receive much Vietnamese researchers” exploration, Searching for the study of substitution, we only can see in Tran

Ngoc Thern’s work (1985), more reeently, Diep Quang Ban's (1998) These authors’ effort

seems to be made to give a very general and basic concept of substitution as well as types of

it in Vietnamese Thus, we might wonder whether substitution, and within the minor thesis, nominal substitution actually works in Viemamese conversation Furthermore, in recent years, reference, ellipsis, and lexical have been closely studied in contrastive with Vietnamese, within the framework of minor thesis a careful and profound study of English and Vietnamese nominal substitution is, theoretically speaking, equally important and necessary,

Because of the above mentioned reasons, my final thesis entitled: “Contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Viemamese conversation” I do hope that this

1.3.2 Coherence and cohesion

1.3.3 Cohesion within the sentence and discourse

1.4 Types of Cohesion

1.5 Substitution

1.5.1 The concept of substitution

1.8.2 Substitution Cohesionand Discourse

1.6.ConfrastiveAnalvsis

1.6.1 Definition

1.6.2 Why using CA in this thesis?

Chapter 2 A contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in Engtish and

Vietnamese conversation discourse

2.1 General features of English and Vietnamese nominal structure

3.2 The implication of the study for teachings and tearing of English,

3.3 Limitation of the study

3.4, Suggestions for further sludy

vil Symbols and Abbreviations

CA Cantrastive Analysis

Table 1.1: Type of Cohesion

Table 1.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

‘Table 2: Lnglish personal pronouns

Table 3: The English third person pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Table 4: The English possessive pronouns and their Vietnamese equivalent

‘Vable 5: ‘The substitute one/ones and their Vieinamese equivalents

Table 6: The indefinite onc/some and ils Vienamesc oquivalenls,

‘Table 7: Do the same and the Vietnamese equivalent

Table &: linking verb plus the sane and their Vieinamese equivalents

- Tam going to deal with nominal substitution occured in the written transcription of this conversation, nol in a Lape —recarded conversation

4 Metharlology of the sludy

Since the main purpose of the study is lo contrast nominal substitution in English conversation and Vietnamese conversation, the result of which will be exploited for language leaming and teaching, CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS (C.A) is used as the major method of the study I will take English language as the base language and Vietnamese as the comparative language

Besides, systemization and generalization are also used as sub-methods to support C.A method Thus, in ths comparative analysis of examples in both English and Vietnamese, translation is the main technique given to highlight the similarities (or

of Thay arise cases where some nominal substilution occurs only in

differences) in the nominal substilution in the (wo languages During the proc

in English and Vietnamese

1

bal nol Teast, discnssions wilh my supervisor and colleagucs, parsonal teaching

experience are also the greal contribution to the sludy

5 Orgunizatian of the stuily

As for the design of the study, it is composed of three main parts as follows

Part A is Introduction, which presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study Part B is the DEVELOPMENT, which consists of two chapters Chapter 1 shows the theoretical background of basic and necessary

notions that are related ta nominal substitution and conversation discourse ‘These issues are

made clear on the basis of the generalization of different linguists’ viewpoints In Chapter 2 which is the focus of my study | conduct my contrastive analysis of nominal substitution in English and Vietnanese conversation in order lo provide learners with the competence iu understanding and using effectively the language of conversation Part C the Conclusion represents the review of the study with concluding remarks and suggestions for further study