Cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of selected short stories by olivier henry

The study deals with the types of cohesive devices used in theopening paragraphs of selected short stories by Olivier Henry.. Halliday & Hasanframework of cohesion was used to analyze th

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

COHESIVE DEVICES

IN THE OPENING PARAGRAPHS OF SELECTED SHORT STORIES

BY OLIVIER HENRY

(PHƯƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT TRONG ĐOẠN MỞ ĐẦU TRUYỆN NGẮN

CHỌN LỌC CỦA OLIVIER HENRY)

ĐỖ THỊ NGỌC TÚ

Hanoi, 2016

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

M.A THESIS

COHESIVE DEVICES

IN THE OPENING PARAGRAPHS OF SELECTED SHORT STORIES

BY OLIVIER HENRY

(PHƯƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT TRONG ĐOẠN MỞ ĐẦU TRUYỆN NGẮN

CHỌN LỌC CỦA OLIVIER HENRY)

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project

report entitled ‘Cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of selected short stories by Olivier Henry’ submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master in English Linguistics Except wherethe reference is indicated, no other person’s work has been used without dueacknowledgement in the text of the thesis

Hanoi, 2016

Do Thi Ngoc Tu

Approved bySUPERVISOR

Date:………

My sincere acknowledgement also go to all my lecturers and officers

of Faculty of Graduate Studies, Hanoi Open University, who havefacilitated me with the best possible conditions during my whole course ofstudying

Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to my family, my friends forthe sacrifice they have devoted to the fulfillment of this academic work

The study deals with the types of cohesive devices used in theopening paragraphs of selected short stories by Olivier Henry Theobjectives of study are to identify and to derive the types of cohesivedevices dominantly used in the opening paragraphs of selected short stories.The data are taken from selected short stories from online edition Thisresearch is conducted by using descriptive method Halliday & Hasanframework of cohesion was used to analyze the frequent use of two aspects

of cohesive devices, namely grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion.The result of the cohesive devices shows that reference and repetition arethe most frequently used followed by conjunctions and substitutions Thestudy will become a useful tool for teachers of English to improve theirteaching and will serve as a good reference for those who love stories byOlivier Henry in particular and literary works in English in general for a goodacademic writing

Ad.Conj.: Additive Conjunction

Cau Conj.: Causal Conjunction

Temp Conj.: Temporal Conjunction

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 2.1: Type of Cohesion 16

Table 2.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion 17

Table 2.3: Demonstrative reference 22

Table 4.1: Grammatical cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs 43

Table 4.2: Lexical Cohesive Devices in the opening paragraphs of short stories by O Henry .53

Graph 4.1 Frequency of occurrence of grammatical cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of O Henry’s stories 65

Graph 4.2 Frequency of occurrence of lexical cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of O Henry’s stories 66

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Certificate of originality i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract iii

List of abbreviations iv

List of tables and figures v

Table of content vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale for the research 1

1.2 Aims of research 3

1.3 Objectives of research 4

1.4 Scope of research 4

1.5 Significance of research 4

1.6 Organizational structure of thesis 5

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Review of previous studies 6

2.1.1 Previous studies overseas 6

2.1.2 Previous studies in Vietnam 7

2.2 Review of theoretical background 9

2.2.1 The concepts of text and discourse 9

2.2.2 Concepts of Cohesion 13

2.2.3 Cohesive devices 15

2.2.4 Paragraphs and Opening paragrahs 32

2.3 Summary 36

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 37

3.1 Research-governing orientations 37

3.1.1 Research questions 37

3.1.2 Research setting 37

3.1.3 Research approach 37

3.1.4 Criteria for intended data collection and data analysis 38

3.2 Research methods 38

3.2.1 Major methods vs supporting methods 38

3.2.2 Data collection techniques 39

3.2.3 Data analysis techniques 39

3.3 Summary 40

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 42

4.1 Findings 42

4.1.1 Grammatical Cohesive Device in the opening paragraphs of O Henry’s stories 42

4.1.2 Lexical Cohesive Device in the opening paragraphs of O Henry’s stories 52

4.1.3 Cohesive devices of the opening paragraphs in the relation with other parts of short stories 57

4.1.4 Brief description of O Henry’s style in writing opening paragraphs63 4.2 Discussion 64

4.3 Implications 67

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 69

5.1 Recapitulation 69

5.2 Concluding remarks 70

5.3 Limitations of the study 71

5.4 Suggestions for future research 72

REFERENCES 73

APPENDICES 75

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale for the research

One form of written language that is useful to convey knowledge tothe people is discourse A discourse should have requisite as a good text.Beugrande and Desseler (1981:3-10) state that a text is a communicationoccurrence which meets seven standards of textuality The requisites of agood text are intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality,intertextuality, coherence and cohesion

A good discourse has some factors Some of those factors are

described in terms cohesion or ties which exist within text Gutwinsky

(1976:26) in Tarigan states that cohesion is a syntactical organization, and is

a ‘container’ where the sentences are arranged in harmony intensively toproduce discourse.” In other words, cohesion is the grammatical and lexicalrelationship within a text or sentence that holds a text together and gives its meaning

Text cohesion in the broadest sense is a universal feature shared by alllanguages (Hoey 1991, Halliday & Hasan 1976, Nunan 1993) Cohesivedevices play an essential role in producing and interpreting texts Linguistsagree that text belonging to different registers vary in cohesive ties as well.For instance, literary texts allow a wider use of synonyms while technicaltexts give preference to lexical repetition in order to avoid ambiguity(Buitkiene 2005) Ellipsis and substitution are more common in moreinteractive types of discourse (Berzlanovich 2008) Conjunction is afavoured cohesive link by academic discourse (Verikaite 2005) Moerover,even literary texts themselves present differences in the distribution of

cohesive devices It is determined by the writer’s style of writing.Furthermore, a text of the source language and its translation into the targetlanguage exhibit interesting cases in the distribution of cohesive ties.

Cohesion is an important factor of discourse which has attracted a lot

of attention from linguists The most significant research on cohesion is

“Cohesion in English” by Halliday and Hasan (1976) Cohesion isconsidered one of the most challenging aspects of translation, as anylanguage has its own unique manners in which it employs cohesive devices

in the creation of a cohesive text Each language has its own patterns toconvey the interrelationships of persons and events; there is not anylanguage that these patterns may be ignored, if the translation is to beunderstood by its readers (Callow, 1974) The topic of cohesion has alwaysappeared as the most useful constituent of discourse analysis that is applied

to translation English and Vietnamese have different grammatical andlexical structures, and it is only natural that they pose great difficulties andchallenges for a translator to deal with, especially in the field of literature

Literature, which plays a very important role in our spiritual life, hasbeen greatly developing as a consequence of high living standards As amatter of fact, there have been more and more people choosing to work inliterary field and their efforts have created so many famous works It is open

to questions as to which factors have to be taken into consideration to make

a successful work? How important are those factors to the completion of acoherent and cohesive text? Added to this, the knowledge of cohesion andcoherence are actually regarded as the crucial aspects of the language usage

As a one form of written discourse, opening paragraphs of shortstories should be composed in a well-formed text in order to give muchinformation to the readers They have to be united and connected between

sentences as well as the concept of cohesiveness so that the readers canunderstand the intended information easily.

William Sydney Porter, whose pen name was Olivier Henry or O.Henry was an American short story writer He has been recognized amongthe greatest American authors by his great devotion to American literature.With the huge and unique collection of short stories, he is deserved to becalled “one of the greatest masters of modern literature", said StephenLeacock Nearly 200 short stories published have gained the notice of thepublic as well as created the lasting popularity of O Henry’s literary style

He also employs cohesive devices in his short stories in making cohesiveeffect to the short stories So, it helps the readers to understand the unity ofthe text easier

Those reasons mentioned above are the most important ones that have

encouraged the author to conduct “Cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of selected short stories by Olivier Henry” as the topic of this

study Based on the detailed classification of cohesive devices in English byHalliday and Hasan (1976), this study provides a close analysis of particularcohesive devices in order to identify whether opening paragraphs have agood cohesive relation or not The study is also expected to be a goodreference for those who love stories by O Henry in particular and literaryworks in English in general for a good academic writing

1.2 Aims of research

The study aims at investigating the prevailing cohesive devices in theopening paragraphs of selected short stories by O Henry so as to apply inteaching and learning English

1.3 Objectives of research

The main objectives of the thesis are as follows:

- To identify the types of cohesive devices used in the openingparagraphs of selected short stories by O Henry

- To investigate how frequently the cohesive devices are used in theopening paragraphs of selected short stories by O Henry

- To discover O Henry’s style in writing the opening paragraphs

- To suggest some implications of the findings for the teachingVietnamese learners of English to learn the cohesive devices in a better way

1.4 Scope of research

The analysis which is done by the writer is the field of discourseanalysis All materials were taken from selected short stories by O Henryfor his diversity in using cohesive devices The types of cohesive devicesare derived from the theory of Halliday and Hasan (1976)

In this case, the writer would like to scope this thesis only about theanalysis of cohesive devices: grammatical and lexical cohesion found in theopening paragraphs of 100 selected short stories by O Henry It is hopedthat the outcome of this research thesis, to some extent, would be able tomake a certain contribution to enhance the quality of English writing skills

of students at the University of Hai Duong

1.5 Significance of research

This analysis is expected to be able to give some significance bothpractically and theoretically It is expected that this analysis is practicallyvery significant for better understanding about the very basic principles ofcohesive devices Analysis of these cohesive links within a text gives ussome insight into how writers structure what they want to say and shows

how one sentence or paragraph relates with another sentence Thus, it helps

us to understand the unity of the text easier

Further, this analysis is theoretically also expected to be useful as onereference for the readers who are interested in analyzing the same subject

1.6 Organizational structure of thesis

Within the scope mentioned above, the study consists of fivechapters:

Chapter 1 is the INTRODUCTION that presents rationale, aims,scope, significance, research questions, organizational structure of the study

Chapter 2 is the LITERATURE REVIEW that discusses thetheoretical background of the study, in which the definition of text anddiscourse, cohesion and coherence as well as cohesive devices are presented

Chapter 3 is the METHODOLOGY that concentrates on detail of theresearch questions and research approach with various methods andtechniques employed for conducting the whole thesis

Chapter 4 is the FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION that describes andanalysis the prevailing cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs ofselected short stories by O Henry, and his style in writing the openingparagraphs

Chapter 5 is the CONCLUSION that summarizes the main pointspresented in the thesis, the limitations of the study as well as suggestions forfurther research

Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review serves two main purposes Firstly it gives areview of previous studies related to discourse analysis in general andcohesive devices in particular Secondly it presents and discusses thetheoretical background which guide and inform this research

2.1 Review of previous studies

Cohesive devices which are an important factor in discourse analysis

by English as well as a foreign language speaker have attracted the greatattention of linguistics all over the world Hence, it is no surprise that a largenumber of studies on English cohesive devices in terms of various fields oflanguage have been undertaken

2.1.1 Previous studies overseas

There are some researches analyzing cohesion using theory fromHalliday and Hasan (1976) The first is a work by Morley He presentsabout the lexical cohesion and rhetorical structure This article looks at thisargument-structuring function of lexical cohesion first by considering singletext using the techniques of classical discourse analysis and then by usingthe methodology of corpus linguistics to examine several million words oftext In his research, he analysis the lexical cohesion in several headlinesnewspaper and point out the register before analyze the lexical cohesion Healso uses the theory by Halliday and Hassan (1976)

Another study that relates to this research is a study done by RosalinaLBN.Tobing (2008) “The use of cohesive devices in selected short stories ofErnest Hemingway” In his research, he focuses on the types of cohesivedevices occurred in selected short stories of Ernest Hemingway and thefrequency of each type of cohesive devices is used

Another study that relates to this research is a study done by Teichand Frankhouse (2005) They present a system for linguistic exploration andanalysis of lexical cohesion English text They use semantic concordanceversion of the Brown Corpus which comprises 352 texts Each text wasdivided into paragraphs, sentences and words Their work is based onHalliday and Hasan theory (1976:2), “cohesion is defined as the set oflinguistic means we have available for creating texture” Based on theiranalysis, they found ten types of lexical cohesion, such as synonymys,hyponyms, hypernyms, cohypernyms, cohyponyms, meronyms,comeronyms, coholonyms, and antonyms.

The last research is conducted by Stokes (2004) This analysisinvestigates the appropriateness of using lexical cohesion analysis toimprove the performance of Information Retrieval (IR) and NatureLanguage Processing (NLP) application that deals with documents in thenews domain Stokes explores the effect of lexical cohesion analysis onNew Story Gisting (ex: a type of summarization that generates a news storytitle or headline) In his analyzing, he used the theory proposed by Hallidayand Hasan (1976) He found that lexical is property text that is responsiblefor the present of semantically related vocabulary in written and spokendiscourse The types of lexical cohesion which are found such as repetition,synonym, and collocation

2.1.2 Previous studies in Vietnam

In Vietnam, a number of linguists and researchers have made greatcontributions to the study of discourse analysis Nguyen Thien Giap (2000)mentions a set of different aspects as context and semantics, informationstructures, especially discourse and discourse analysis He particularlyemphasizes the necessity of coherence and cohesion in creating a clear andcomprehensible discourse/text Do Huu Chau (2001) points out some of the

communicative factors deciding the successful communication, they aresituational context, language and its varieties, and discourse He also definesdiscourse as a continuous stretch of talk, normally larger than an utterance

to make the conversation a coherent unit

Together with these theoretical studies relating to discourse anddiscourse analysis, some practical ones on this topic have been conducted so

far, such as the master thesis “An Analysis of Coherence and Cohesion and

a Contrastive Analysis of Lexical Cohesive Devices in English and Vietnamese” by Phuong To Tam (2003) The data for this thesis is from a

chapter (chapter 5) on International Trade in the textbook “InternationalBusiness – An integrated Approach” (1998) The attention of the study ispaid to considering contrastive analysis of lexical cohesive devices(including reiteration and collocation) in English (source language) in theoriginal textbook and their equivalents in Vietnamese (target language) inthe translation version The author then attempts to collect data in bothEnglish and Vietnamese to see the frequencies, similarities and differences

of each device and sub-device of lexical cohesive devices in the discourse ofboth languages

The next research in another M.A thesis by Le Thi Mai Hien (2004)

entitled “An Analysis of Cohesive Devices in English Application Letter”.

The process of researching on twenty English application letters has enablesher to reach the results of the frequency of occurrence of lexical cohesivedevice The data present repetition in English application letter alsooccupies the first position among the four kinds of reiteration with up to53.4% Different from English sales letters, super ordinates rank the secondwith a considerably higher percentage, 24.9% compared with 11%.Synonyms and Near-synonyms account for nearly the same portion, which

is respectively 10.4% and 11.3%

The next research conducted by Nguyen Thi Hoa (2011) “A contrastive study of grammatical cohesive devices in English and Vietnamese” has pointed out the similarities and differences in grammatical

cohesive devices in English and Vietnamese The results of this researchhelp teachers of English and students avoid making mistakes in usinggrammatical cohesive devices and translating between these two languages

The last research review is Cao Thi Huyen Nga (2012) entitled “An analysis of cohesive devices in the ESP textbook on accounting at the University of Labor and Social Affairs” This study is mainly aimed at

analyzing cohesive devices in the reading texts on Accounting at ULSA,finding out teachers’ attitudes towards cohesion teaching” The analysisreveals that lexical cohesive devices are used more often in the textbooksthan grammatical cohesive devices The data from interview indicates thatthe teachers often teach cohesion in class but they cannot cover all types of cohesion

Although several studies which analyze cohesion and coherence havebeen carried out, there is no evidence that any researchers have conducted astudy relating to cohesive devices in the opening paragraphs of short stories

in general, and those by O Henry in particular as this study aims to explore.Therefore, in this study, the matter of cohesive in the opening paragraphs ofshort stories by O Henry is taken into consideration with the aim at helpinglearners of English create their own writing products coherently; as a result,improve their academic essay writing

2.2 Review of theoretical background

2.2.1 The concepts of text and discourse

The concepts of text and discourse have always presented a degree of

confusion Different linguists treat the two terms differently The conceptswere sometimes regarded as identical, sometimes opposed, or even

unconnected Due to conventional linguistics, both of them were developed

in different scientific contexts The necessity for research program on both

text and discourse occurred when a significant amount of independent

analysis appeared

Linguists refer to a text as “any passage, spoken or written, ofwhatever length thatforms aunified whole” (Halliday and Hasan, 1976:1) Inorder to create a text as a unifiedwhole, itis necessary to know what makestext coherent Firstly, it can be said that text is not defined by its size, it isnot a grammatical unit and it differs from a sentence As observed earlier acollection of random sentences cannot be regarded as the text, it can be saidthat “in its deep structure, the text is a sequence of mutually related clauses,which after the application of appropriate textualizing operations, are turnedinto text sentences” (Valeikaand Buitkienė, 2006:168) Furthermore in order

to create mutually connected sentences the meaning that is semantic relation

of the words is important, because words and context are in separable If wetake any word for example, we can make predictions about the textualenvironment it can occur, and if we know something about the environment,then we can make predictions about the words which are likely to occurthere (Stubbs, 2002:100) The main conclusion, however, is that themeaning and logical relation of words and sentences are important whencreating a coherent text That is why the text is not composed of sentences it

is realized by sentences (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 1-2)

The word “text” refers to any instance of language, in any medium,that makes sense tosomeone who knows the language We can produce text,when we speak or write Halliday and Hasan (1976:1) purpose that text can

be in the form of spoken or written A spoken language is in the forms ofconversation, speech, storytelling, while written language is reflected in theforms of newspaper, magazine, book

Fadjrin (2011:3) states that cohesion is the most important thingneeded in cohesiveness of a text or discourse, including in the journalistictext It shows that cohesion helps the process of understanding a text byusing its connective so that the information will be easy to understand.Within a text, if an item previously mentioned isreferred to again anddependent with another element, it is considered a tie or cohesive device.The cohesive devices are tools that when used appropriately enable thewriter tohang sentences and text segments together (Fakeuade andSharndama, 2012:300-318) Cohesive device or types of cohesion consist offive such as reference,conjunction, substitution, ellipsis, and lexicalcohesion Cohesive device will help the participants in interpreting a text.

For Bell (1991) a text must possess:

a Generic structure (it must belong to a recognizable genre or register);

b Textual structure (it must reflect the selection of options from thesame systems, theme and information);

c Internal cohesion

His definitions are as follows:

“Text: the formal product of selections of options from the themesystems of the grammar; a unit which carries the semantic sense of theproposition (the prepositional content and locutionary force of the speechacts) through sentences which are linked by means of cohesion”

Discourse: a communicative event which draws on the meaningpotential of the language (and other systems of communication) to carrycommunicative value (the illocutionary force) of speech acts throughutterances which are linked by means of coherence”

The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and AppliedLinguistics (1998) defines discourse as follows: “Discourse is a general

term for example of language use, i.e language has been produced as theresult of an act of communication.” Sharing the same concern, many otherlinguists have so far given definitions of discourse Widdowson (1979)states: “Discourse is a use of sentences to perform acts of communicationwhich cohere into larger communicative units, ultimately establishing arhetorical pattern which characterizes the pieces of language as a whole as akind of communication.” Whereas Crystal (1992: 25) says: “Discourse is acontinuous stretch of language larger than a sentence, often constituting acoherent unit such as a sermon, argument, joke or a narrative.” Quitedifferently from the others, Halliday and Hasan (1976) give a simpledefinition: “We can define text (discourse) in the simplest way perhaps bysaying that it is language that is functional.”

Linguists have paid much attention to the distinction between adiscourse and a text since confusion of these two terms may result in thefailures of discourse analysis Even though that the distinction is not alwaysclear and the two terms are used interchangeably by some linguists As inthe above-mentioned definition of discourse by Halliday and Hasan, “text”

is employed to refer to “discourse”; they see “text” as a “semantic unit”characterized by cohesion The two authors state: “A text is a passage ofdiscourse which coherent in these two regards: it is coherent with respect tothe context of situation, and therefore consistent in register; and it iscoherent with respect to itself, and therefore cohesive” (1976: 23) For someother linguists, “text” is used for writing and “discourse” for speech Thethird group of linguists like Brown & Yule, Nunan, Widdowson, and Cooksee discourse as a process and text as a product Brown & Yule argue thattext is the representation of discourse and the verbal record of acommunicative act

In this study, we would like to take Widdowson’s viewpoint of thedifference and the interrelationship between the two as the base: “Discourse

is a communicative process by means of interaction Its situational outcome

is a change in state of affairs: information is conveyed, intentions madeclear, its linguistic product is Text.” (1984: 100)

2.2.2 Concepts of Cohesion

Cohesion, based on Halliday and Hasan (1976) “cohesion theory asthe major characteristic of coherence considering linguistic properties of thelanguage, gives a sequence of sentences a coherent texture Cohesion occurswhere the interpretation of some elements in the discourse is dependent onthat of another” Halliday and Hasan (1976, p vii) pointed out that cohesion

is one of the linguistic system's major resources for text construction Infact, cohesion represents the presence of explicit cues in the text that allowreaders/listeners to find semantic relations within it as part of linguisticsystem enhancing the semantic potentials of text A text is meaningful onlywhen elements referring to each other in the text set up a relation Therelation can be set up through reference, substitution, ellipsis, andconjunction as grammatical and lexical cohesion So, the grammar andlexicon are two forms of cohesion These cohesive devices used by speakersand writers in order to express meaning based on the interpretations of thelisteners and readers provide semantic relations for the semantic units whoseinterpretations they facilitate Cohesion depicts how meaning-basedrelationship is set up by lexical and syntactic features These explicit lexicaland syntactic features are known as cohesive devices, signaling therelationship in sentences and paragraphs Halliday and Hasan (1976)introduced five different types of cohesive devices in order to provide aguideline for studying and judging the cohesion and coherence of writing:(a) reference (i.e., the indication of information from elsewhere such aspersonals, demonstratives, and comparatives), (b) substitution (i.e., the

replacement of one component by another), (c) ellipsis (i.e., the omission of

a component), (d) conjunction (i.e., the indication of specific meaningwhich presupposes present items in the discourse, such as additive,adversative, casual, and temporal), and finally (e) lexical cohesion (i.e., therepetition of the same orrelative lexical items) They contended that throughanalyzing the use of cohesive devices, one could evaluate or assess writingquality from the perspective of coherence

Cohesion is the term used to describe the structural, grammatical andlexical means by which sentences and paragraphs in the texts are linked andrelationships between them established The basic concept that is employed

in analyzing the cohesion of a text on the basis of the presented framework

of cohesion by Halliday & Hasan is that of the tie It is a complex notion

which comprises not only the cohesive element by itself but also that which

is presupposed by it The notion is interpreted as a relation between thesetwo elements The relation may be anaphoric, with the presupposed elementpreceding, or cataphoric, with the presupposed element following

According to Halliday &Hasan (1976), other cohesive relations are:

1 Exophoric relation is found outside the text, i.e in the situation

2 Paraphoric relation points to the information that is in the other text.

3 Homophoric relation is a self- interpreting relation Entities are

unique under certain circumstances

While analyzing cohesion, two facts about ties have to be taken

into consideration In the first place, any sentence may have more than onetie in it In the second place, the distance between cohesive items may beimmediate, i.e the presupposed item may be in the immediate precedingsentence; or remote, i.e the presupposed item may be not in theimmediately preceding sentence Also, the presupposed item may include amediated tie Distance between ties is relevant in terms of analysis ofcohesion (Halliday & Hasan 1976)

In English, the basic means of establishing cohesion are throughthe use of pronouns, determiners, conjunctions, and adverbials to substitute,repeat, refer or omit items across a text and others, and lexical cohesivedevices Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some element in thetext is dependent on that of another The one presupposes the other, in thesense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by shift to it When thishappens, a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, thepresupposing and the presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integratedinto a text (Halliday &Hasan 1976: 4).

According to Halliday & Hasan in their book Cohesion in English, language can be expressed through the concept of cohesion The

concept of cohesion is a semantic one, it refers to relations of meaning thatexist within the text and that define it as a text Cohesion is a semanticrelation between an element in the text and some other element that iscrucial to the interpretation of it

A text should be a unified whole; it is not just a collection ofunrelated sentences Therefore, to make a text as a unified whole, thereshould be a device to tie it together The device is cohesive devices

2.2.3 Cohesive devices

Cohesive devices are the tool of cohesion to create unity of meaningwithin atext Millward in Muslimah’s thesis (2007:13) says that cohesivedevices are certain words or phrases and their location within the discoursewill activate a set of assuptions to the meaning of what has gone beforehand

or will generate a set of expectations to what may follow (Muslimah,2007:13) From that statement, it can be concluded that cohesive devices arewords or phrases which their meaning are dependent on the other words orphrases either precede them In another word, their meaning are related toeach other

Connor (1984) defines cohesion as the use of explicit cohesivedevices that signal relations among sentences and part of a text (Rahman,2013: 2) This means that the use of cohesive devices enables readers andlisteners to capture the connectedness orthe meaning between what precedesand what follows It also shows that cohesive device is important.

Cohesive devices are the ones used to stick one clause to another in asentence and one sentence to another in a paragraph and make the textcommunicative According to M.A.K Halliday and Ruqaiya Hasan, thereare two main types of cohesion: grammatical, referring to the structuralcontent, and lexical, referring to the language content of the piece Fivegeneral categories of cohesive devices that create coherence in texts can beidentified are: reference, ellipsis, substitution, lexical cohesion and conjunction

Logical cohesion is on the border-line of the grammatical and lexical,the set of conjunctive elements can probably be interpreted grammatically interms of systems

According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), the classification ofcohesion is based on the linguistic form The types of cohesion dependeither on semantic relation in the linguistic system or on lexico-grammaticalrelations In other words, the cohesive relation can be interpreted as beingeither lexico-grammatical in nature or semantic It can be made clearer inthe following description:

Table 2.1: Type of Cohesion Nature of cohesive relation Type of cohesion

Reference, substitution and ellipsis are clearly grammatical; lexicalcohesion, as the name implies, lexical Conjunction is on the borderline ofthe grammatical and the lexical; the set of conjunctive element can probably

be interpreted grammatically in terms of systems, and some conjunctiveexpressions involve lexical selection However, it is better to put it in thegroup of grammatical cohesion as it is mainly grammatical with a lexicalcomponent inside Consequently, we can refer to grammatical cohesion andlexical cohesion as follows:

Table 2.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

2.2.3.1 Grammatical cohesive devices

Grammatical cohesion is constructed by the grammatical structures,each component tie each other Halliday and Hasan (1976) classifygrammatical cohesion into 4 major classes: Reference, Substitution, Ellipsisand Conjunction

a Reference

Reference is one of the most extensively used cohesive devices intexts Therefore, we will have a closer look at the definition of reference andwhat characterizes this particular type of cohesion

Reference is a well researched area within linguistics According toLyons (1969: 424), “this term was introduced into linguistics to name therelationship which holds between words and things, events, actions, and thequalities they stand for” (cited in Verikaite 1999: 47) The development oflinguistics has broadened the meaning of reference Salkie (1995: 5) claimedthat it includes “a relation between the meaning of a word and itsenvironment, which can be either a real world or the text”

Every language has particular items which have the feature ofreference They make reference to something else for their interpretation InEnglish it is personals, demonstratives and comparatives These items showthat information indicates something else It shows the relationship between

a word and what it points to in the real world (Baker, 1992:181) The mainfeature that characterizes reference is that the information signals forretrieval The identity of particular thing that is being referred to has areferential meaning and cohesion is found then the same thing occurs asecond time Reference has the semantic feature of definiteness orspecificity Because of that there has to be reference to the context ofsituation Referencing items do not have to match the grammatical classthey must have semantic properties (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 31)

There is referential cohesion in every language, they are in their ownright, they make reference to something else for their interpretations”(Haliday and Hasan, 1976) There are three types of reference in English.They are personal, demonstrative and comparative items which have theproperty of reference (…), instead of being interpreted semantically.

Haliday and Hasan (1976) make a clear distinction betweensituational and textual reference by contrasting Exophora, or Exophoricreference with Endophora or Endophoric reference as a general name forreference within the text

Exophoric reference looks outside the text to the situation in which

the text occurs for the item which is being refer to (Paltridge and Burton, 2000)

E.g

We are at the supermarket and we’ll be here for about another hour.

In this example, “The” and “here” are only instances of exphoricreference if the name of the restaurant has not already been referred toearlier in the text (Paltridge and Burton, 2000)

Endophoric reference is textual reference referring to an item which

is identified in the text

E.g

"If a man has talent and can't use it, he's failed."

"If a man has talent and can't use it, he's failed."

In this example, “he” a man; “it” talent.

A reference item may be either exophoric or endophoric If it isendophoric, it may be anaphoric or cataphoric

Anaphoric reference signifies a word or phrase that refers to another

or phrase used earlier in a text (Paltridge and Burton, 2000)

"No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother."

In this example, “herself” & “she” woman.

Cataphoric reference describes the use of a word or phrase that

refers to another word or phrase which is used later in a text (Paltridge andBurton, 2000)

E.g

When I told them I got the first prize, my parents smiled happily.

In this example, “them” refers to my parents.

Halliday and Hasan (1976) divide referential cohesion into three types: personal, demonstrative and comparative

sub-When characterizing reference, “It is often considered important informal semantics that the expression used to refer to an entity must, in itsdescription, be true of the entity That is, if an individual is referred to bythe expression must be true of the individual in order for correct reference totake place” (Brown & Yule 1996: 205) However, when we analysediscourse, we are interested not in the correct reference but in the success ofreference Successful reference can only be achieved if three conditions aremet In the first place, the speaker must have linguistic competence, i.e thespeaker and the addressee must know the language in which theycommunicate In the second place, the speaker must have the cognitiveability That is she/ he must have enough factual knowledge about thereference Thirdly, the speaker must have pragmatic willingness tocommunicate the total knowledge he has about the referent But this ofcourse may not always be the case; the speaker may wish to keep someinformation from us (Yule 1996: 17)

Nevertheless, Halliday & Hasan (1976) define reference as a casewhere the information to be retrieved is the referential meaning, the identity

of the particular thing or class of things that is being referred to Thecohesion lies in the continuity of reference, whereby the same thing entersinto the discourse a second time Reference is a semantic relation Itincludes language elements that refer to something else for interpretation.They are different from lexical ties by their directionality Lexical cohesivepatterns do not depend on each other for their interpretation They belong toopen systems while reference and, at the same time, substitution itemsentirely depend on their items for their interpretation and have nodefinitional meaning in themselves They are members of closed system

There are certain items in every language which have the property ofreference Reference is realized by personal pronouns, demonstratives, andthe definite article (Ellis 1992; Toolan 2002; Halliday & Hasan 1976;Nunan 1993) In order to get a better view of reference, different types ofreference will be defined below:

Personal references are reference by means of function in the speech

situation, through category of person in form of personal pronouns anddeterminers Here is the table showing the system of personal reference

Speaking of morphological features of the personal and possessive

pronouns, it is important to notice that “such forms as I, you, we have no noun antecedents at all; only he – him, she – her, it –it, they – them have The same holds for my, your, our; only his, her, its, their have noun

antecedents” (Valeika & Buikiene 2003; 127) As a result, the personalpronouns I, you and we are exophoric and fulfill deictic function Theymake reference to the roles of listener and speaker which are outside thetext References made outside the text are exospheric while reference madewithin the text are endophoric (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 48)

In many languages, pronoun usage encodes deixis Traditionally,pronouns are thought of being as noun substitutes But most subclasses ofpronouns perform quite a different function, i.e deictic function From anetymological point of view, the term ‘deixis’ originates in the notion ofgestural reference (Lyons 1996: 303)

Demonstrative references are references by means of location, on a

scale of proximity, through determiners and adverbs The following table

shows the system of demonstrative reference:

Table 2.3: Demonstrative reference

Grammatical function Modifier/Head Adjunct Modifier

this thesethat those

Here [now]

There then The

(Source: Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 38)

According to Halliday & Hasan (1976: 57), demonstrative reference

is defined as a form of verbal pointing It is made on the basis of proximity.The referent is identified by locating it on the scale of proximity

Nunan (1993: 23) states that “various referential devices enable thewriter or speaker to make multiple references to people and things within a text”

Consequently, demonstrative reference is reference by means oflocation, on the scale of proximity Here belong determiners or adverbs thatrefer to locative or temporal proximity (here, now, this, these) or distance(there, then, that, those) For example:

The clerks in the office jumped about like sailors during a storm [ ]

There was a self-possessed young lady connected with these access

The demonstrative there refers back to in the office and indicates the

location of an object that is participating in the process

The demonstrative here, there, now, and then point directly to the location of a process or time As regards the remeaning demonstratives (this, that, these, those), they refer to the location of person or object that is

participating in the process

An interesting point about the demonstratives this and that have to bementioned “These items can represent a single word or phrase, much longerchunks of text- ranging across several paragraphs or even several pages”(Nunan 1993: 23; Toolan 1998; Halliday & Hasan 1976)

Patterns of demonstrative reference as well as other cohesive devicesconstitute part of the research of the present paper Similarities anddifferences of the usage of demonstrative reference are presented in thefollowing parts of the research

Comparative references are indirect references by means of identity

or similarity They are expressed through adjectives and adverbs and serve

to compare items within a text

b Substitution

Substitution is a process within a text as the replacement of one item

by another According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), since substitution is agrammatical relation, a relation in the wording rather than in the meaning,the different types of substitution is defined grammatically rather thansemantically (1976: 88) There are three types of substitution:

Nominal Substitution

In English the most typical cases of nominal substitutes are: one, ones and the same The nominal substitutes one/ ones always function as Head of

a nominal group and can substitute only for an item which is in itself Head

of a nominal group Moreover, they presuppose a particular noun, usuallythe one that is found in the preceding text

The same can also function as a nominal substitute The main

difference between the substitutes one/ ones and the same is that the latterpresupposes an entire nominal group including any modifying elements Forexample:

If only I could remember where it was that I saw someone putting away the box with those candles in I could finish the decorations now – You mean the little coloured ones? (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 91)

Verbal Substitution

The verbal substitute in English is do which operates as Head of a

verbal group in the place that is occupied by the lexical verb The latteralways takes the final position in the group For example:

He never really succeeded in his ambitions He might done, one felt, had it not been for the restlessness of his nature (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 113)

Clausal Substitution

In clausal substitution the entire clause is presupposed, and thecontrasting element is outside the clause The clausal substitutes may takepositive form so or negative no For example:

Is there going to be an earthquake? – It say so

(Halliday & Hasan 1976: 130)

c Ellipsis

One more way of establishing cohesion is through the use of ellipsis.

According to Nunan (1993; 25); ellipsis is when some essentialstructural element is omitted from a sentence or clause and can be recovered

by referring to an element in the preceding text

Ellipsis occurs when an element which can be recovered by referring

a preceding element in the text is omitted (Paltridge and Burton, 2000)

Haliday and Hasan (1976) claim that “Ellipsis can be interpreted asthat form of substitution in which the item is replaced by nothing”

The scholars claim that an elliptical item is one which, as it was,leaves specific structural slots to be filled from elsewhere This is verysimilar to presupposition by substitution The only difference is that insubstitution the slot is occupied by some substitutes whereas in the ellipsisthe slot is empty This is the reason why we often say that ellipsis issubstitution by zero

Like in substitution, the presupposed item is present in the precedingtext in ellipsis, i.e ellipsis is an anaphoric relation

Likewise substitution, ellipsis is of three types (Halliday & Hasan)

Nominal ellipsis is ellipsis within the nominal group The structure,

as Halliday & Hasan (1976) claim is that of Head with optical modification;the modifying elements include some which precede the head and somewhich follow it, referred to as Premodifier and Postmodifier Head is usually

a common noun, proper noun or pronoun expressing the thing

For example: The flat has a sitting room, a dining room and a bed room Each has a window overlooking the park.

In the sentence, the word ‘room’ that is supposed to be placed afterthe word ‘each’ has been elimunated There is nominal ellipsis relation sincethe eliminated word is noun

Verbal Ellipsis is ellipsis within the verbal group An elliptical

verbal group presupposes one or more words from a previous verbal group

In the verbal group, there is only one lexical element, and that is the verbitself

For example: They haven’t finished the pictures If it had been, I would have bought it.

In this sentence, the word ‘finished’ that is supposed to be placedafter ‘it had been’ has been eliminated There is verbal ellipsis relation sincethe eliminated word is verb

Clausal Ellipsis is the omission of the whole clause This type of

ellipsis prevails in dialogues or in other rejoinder sequences, i.e where morethan one speaker is involved The attention is paid to the response.According to Quirk et al (1982: 266), ellipsis in dialogue occurs in variouscombinations

For example: Do you come back today? This evening.

(Halliday & Hasan 1976: 184)

In this sentence, the clause ‘I come back’ has been eliminated There

is clausal ellipsis relation since the eliminated item is clausal group

d Conjunction

According to Halliday & Hasan (1976: 320), conjunction is based onthe assumption that there are in the linguistics system form of systematicrelationship between sentences They are a number of possible connected toone another in meaning Conjunction consists of four types, namely:

Additive Conjunction expresses a continuous explanation of the

statements or preceding sentence It is signaled by and, or, further, inaddition, furthermore, additionally, alternatively, for insurance, or else, etc

For example: From a marketing view point, the popular tabloid encourages the reader to read the whole page instead of choosing stories And isn’t that way any publisher wants? (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 294)

In this sentence, ‘and’ expresses additive conjunction since it givesaddition information from the second sentence to the first sentence.

Adversative Conjunction expresses a contrary meaning between

preceding sentences and following sentences It is signaled by but, only,instead, yet, in fact, though, anyhow, nevertheless, on the contrary,however, in any either case, etc

For example: I’m afraid I’ll be home late tonight However, I won’t have to go until late tomorrow.

In this sentence, ‘however’ in the second sentence expressesadversative conjunction since it shows contradictive meaning with the firstsentence

Causal Conjunction reflects cause relation between preceding andfollowing sentences It is signaled by because, hence, thus, consequently, forthis reason, so from this appears, etc

For example: Chinese tea is becoming popular in restaurant and coffee shop This is because of growing belief that it has several health – giving properties (Halliday & Hasan 1976:257)

In this sentence, ‘because’ express causal conjunction since it showscaused effect relation between first sentence and second sentence

Temporal Conjunction reflects to the relation between two

sentences There is one sequence in time, the one is subsequent to the other

It is signaled by then, finally, soon, afterward, at last, at once, since, afterthat, an hour later, etc

According to Halliday and Hasan, the relation between the theses oftwo successive sentences may be simply one of sequence in time: the one is

subsequent to the other This temporal relation is expressed by words suchas‘then’, ‘and then’, ‘next’, ‘afterwards’, ‘after that’,‘sequentially’ and anumber of other expressions Halliday and Hasan believe that the temporalrelation may be mademore specific by the presence of an additionalcomponent in the meaning, as well as that of succession in time.

For example: Brick tea is a blend that has been compressed into a cake It is taken mainly by the minority groups in China First, it is ground

to a dust Then it usually cooked in milk.

Causal Conjunction

Causal conjunctions are used to express a cause or a reason It issignal by as a result, consequently, so, for this purpose, on account of this,otherwise, under circumstance

According to Halliday and Hasan, the simple form of causal relation

is expressed by the words ‘so’, ‘thus’, ‘hence’, ‘therefore’,‘consequently’,and a number of expressions like ‘as a result (of that)’,‘because of that’,

‘inconsequence (of that)’ All these words and expressions regularlycombine with initial ‘and’ Under the heading of causal relations, Hallidayand Hasan include the specific ones of result, reason and purpose These arenot distinguished in the simplest form of expression; ‘so’, for example,means ‘as a result of this’, ‘for this reason’, and ‘for this purpose’ Whenexpressed as prepositional phrases, on the other hand, they tend to be distinct

Halliday and Hasan believe that the distinction between the externaland internal types of cohesion tends to be a little less clear-cut in the context

of causal relations than it is in the other contexts, because the notion ofcause already involves some degree of interpretation by the speaker Thesimple forms ‘thus’, ‘hence’, and ‘therefore’ all occur regularly in aninternal sense, implying some kind of reasoning orargument from a premise;

in the same meaning we find expressions like ‘arising out of this’,

‘following from this’,‘it follows that’, ‘from this it appears that’

2.2.3.2 Lexical cohesive devices

Lexical cohesion determines the instantial meaning or text meaning

of the item, a meaning that is unique to each specific instance It providesgreat deal of hidden information that is relevant to the interpretation of theitem concerned (Halliday & Hasan, 1976: 289) Lexical cohesion occurswhen two words in a text are semantically related in some way They arerelated in terms of their meaning

"In order to complete picture of cohesive relations it is necessary totake into account also lexical cohesion This is the cohesive effect achieved

by the selection of vocabulary", (Halliday and Hasan, 1976:274) It meansthat cohesion in a text composed by selection vocabulary and lexicalcohesion is part of cohesion that concerns with connection word used.Based on Halliday and Hasan explanation, they divide the lexical cohesioninto two categories, reiteration and collocation

a Reiteration

Reiteration is a form of lexical cohesion which involves the repetition

of lexical item, at one end of scale; the use of a general word to refer back to

a lexical item, at the other end of the scale and a number of things inbetween use of a synonym, near synonym, or superordinate (Halliday andHasan, 1976:278)

Repetition

Repetition is to refer back to preceding word Repetition is a part oflexical cohesion that involves that repetition of lexical item

For example: A conference will be held on national environment policy At this conference the issue of salivation will pay an important role.

(Renkema, 1993:39)

The word ‘conference’ is repeated in next sentence It is categorize asrepetition because the meaning of ‘this conference’ is still related with ‘aconference’ at first sentence

Synonyms and near synonyms

Synonymy is the experiential meaning of the two lexical items which

is identical; this does not mean that there is total overlap of meanings,simply that so far as one kind of meaning goes, they ‘mean the same’

For example: You could try reversing the car up the slope The incline

is not all that steep, (Nunan,1993:29)

Synonym is a broad category According to Cruse (2000: 156), wordswhose semantic similarities are more salient than their differences aresynonyms For Saeed (1997) synonyms are different phonological wordswhich have the same or very similar meanings For examples, couch/ sofa,toilet/ lavatory, large/ big, etc

According to Lyon, synonym means two or more form are beassociate with the same meaning In above sentence The word ‘slope’ and

‘incline’ has the some meaning The author used different words but hassome meaning in order to makes the variation in the text

Super ordinate

According to Halliday and Hasan (1976: 278) superordinateis a namefor more general class It is used to refer to a word which has generalproperties, not the specific one

For example: I said there's someone I'm waiting for if it's a day, a month, a year

The relation between the word “a day” , “a month”, “a year” in thissentence can be classified as superordinate In this case, “ a year” is thesuperordinate of “a day” and “a month” Because “a day” and “a month”are parts of “a year”

b Collocation

Collocation is the second type of lexical cohesion and deals with therelationships between words on the basis of the fact that these often occur inthe same surroundings By this type of cohesion the readers backgroundknowledge about the subject in hand plays an important role in theperception of lexical-collocational relationships These canbe text as well ascontext-bound, which means that words and phrases related in the text donot necessarily relate in any other texts as well

Halliday andHasan (1976) recognize collocation as an important part

of creating cohesion inconnected text They argue the case of collocation asfollows: The cohesive effect depends not so much on any systematicrelationshipas on their tendency to share the same lexical environment, tooccur incollocation with one another In general, any two lexical itemshaving similar patterns of collocation – that is, tending to appear in similarcontext - will generate a cohesive force if they occur in adjacent sentences(Halliday & Hasan 1976: 286)

According to Renkema (1993:39-40), "Collocation deals with therelationship between words on the basis of the fact that these often occur in