English funny stories a discourse analysis = (phân tích diễn ngôn truyện cười tiếng anh)

In this thesis, the author discusses the different notions of two elements of discourse analysis: thematic structure and cohesion first and then the use of these elements in English funn

VINH UNIVERSITY

FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT

**********

ENGLISH FUNNY STORIES - A DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

(Phân tích diễn ngôn truyện cười tiếng Anh )

GRADUATION THESIS Field: English linguistics

VINH UNIVERSITY

FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT

**********

TRẦN THỊ NGUYỆT

ENGLISH FUNNY STORIES - A DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

(Phân tích diễn ngôn truyện cười tiếng Anh )

GRADUATION THESIS Field: English linguistics

VINH - 2012

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

For the completion of this study, I have been fortunate to receive invaluable contributions from many people

First of all, I would like to express my greatest gratitude to Mrs Vo Hong Minh, my

supervisor, for her excelllent suggestions, valuable materials, unflagging encouragement, and detailed correction that help me to fulfill this study

I am also grateful to my teachers in the Department of Foreign Languages for their helpful suggestions and encouragement which help me overcome difficulties in the process of my study

My warmest thanks go to my family and my good friends who are willing to help me and always by my side, encourage me to complete my work.

ABSTRACT

The importance of English funny stories as a useful means of language teaching and learning has stimulated the author in the study In this thesis, the author discusses the different notions of two elements of discourse analysis: thematic structure and cohesion first and then the use of these elements in English funny stories In addition, the study is concerned with the application of discourse analysis as well as English funny stories in teaching and learning English

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: Examples of theme and rheme in the structure of clauses……… 9

Table 2 : General statistics of selected materials……… 21

Table 3 : The statistic of theme in English funny stories……… 22

Table 4 : The first example for theme and rheme in complex sentences……… 26

Table 5: The second example for theme and rheme in complex sentences……….26

Table 6 : The analysis of grammatical cohesive devices in English funny stories…… 27

Table 7 : The statistic of three types of reference……… 27

Table 8: The analysis of types of conjunction in English funny stories……… 31

Table 9 : The statistic of reiteration in English funny stories……… 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i

ABSTRACT ii

LIST OF TABLES iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

PART A : INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims and objectives of the study 1

3 Scope of the study 2

4 Methods of the study 2

5 Design of the study 2

PART B : DEVELOPMENT 4

CHAPTER ONE: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 4

1.1 Theory of discourse 4

1.1.1 Concept of discourse 4

1.1.2 Discourse and text 5

1.1.3 Discourse context 6

1.2 Discouse analysis 7

1.3 Thematic structure 8

1.3.1 Theme and rheme 8

1.3.2 Types of theme 9

1.4 Cohesion 10

1.4.1 Concept of cohesion 10

1.4.2 Cohesion and coherence 11

1.4.3 Types of cohesion 11

1.4.3.1 Grammatical cohesion 12

1.4.3.1.1 Reference 12

1.4.3.1.2.Substitution 14

1.4.3.1.3 Ellipsis 15

1.4.3.1.4 Conjunction 16

1.4.3.2 Lexical cohesion 18

1.4.3.2.1 Reiteration 18

1.4.3.2.2 Collocation 20

CHAPTER TWO: AN ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH FUNNY STORIES 21

2.1 Some gerneral features of English funny stories 21

2.1.1 Characters in English funny stories 21

2.1.2 Language in English funny stories 21

2.2 General statistic of selected materials 21

2.3 Thematicsation 22

2.3.1 Unmarked theme 22

2.3.2 Marked theme 23

2.3.3 Theme in different mood of a clause 24

2.3.3.1 Theme in declarative clauses 24

2.3.3.2 Theme in interrogatice clauses 25

2.3.3.3 Theme in imperative clauses 25

2.3.4 Theme in the complex sentences 26

2.4 Cohesion 26

2.4.1 Grammatical cohesion 27

2.4.1.1 Reference 27

2.4.1.2 Substitution 29

2.4.1.3 Ellipsis 30

2.4.1.4 Conjunction 30

2.4.2 Lexical cohesion 33

2.4.2.1 Reiteration 33

2.4.2.1.1 Repetition 34

2.4.2.1.2 Synonym & near synonym 35

2.4.2.1.3 Superordinate and general word 36

2.4.2.2 Collocation 36

CHAPTER THREE : FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS 37

3.1 The findings 37

3.1.1 The thematic structure 37

3.1.2 Cohesive devices 37

3.1.2.1 Grammatical cohesion 37

3.1.2.2 Lexical cohesion 38

3.2 Implications for teaching and learning 38

PART C : CONCLUSION 42

1 Recapitulation 42

2 Limitations and some suggestions for further research 42 REFERENCES

APPENDIX

PART A : INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

In traditional linguistic research there are many works on text analysis, which focus only

on the formal properties of language divorced from their communicative functions Modern linguistic tendency of research focuses on discourse analysis, which is functional analysis of discourse involving the analysis of language in use It can be said that language in the works of discourse analysis has been studied in both form and meaning in distinctive situations and contexts Emphasizing as above, it is to be noted that discourse analysis, although a challenge to researchers and learners, has attracted much of their attention

Funny stories play an important role in social interaction A humorous story can break the tension in an awkward conversation Public speakers frequently begin their speeches with

a funny story to put their audience at ease Laughter may also relieve stress and distract people from pain Moreover, funny stories can be also seen as a means of teaching and learning English we read them not only to entertain but also learn some grammatical features as well as vocabulary However, there is still little study on this kind of stories

For all reasons above, we have decided to choose " English funny stories - a discourse analysis " to be the title of the thesis

2 Aims and objectives of the study

The object of the thesis is to study the structure and style as well as some grammatical and lexical categories of english funny stories

The study aims at:

Firstly, having an analysis of the usage of theme and rheme in funny stories

Secondly, finding out cohesive devices used in funny stories

Lastly, suggesting some practical applications of discourse analysis in teaching and learning English

To realize these aims, the author poses the following research questions:

1 What types of theme are used and how do the writers use thematic structure in English funny stories?

2 What types of cohesive devices are used in English funny stories and their functions?

3 Scope of the study

Our research deals with some aspects of discourse analysis including theme and rheme, cohesive devices including grammatical and lexical cohesion mainly provided by Halliday and Hasan (1976)

The data analyzed in this thesis are 10 English funny stories available in the book “ Nu cuoi nuoc anh”( 2007) which are very popular with the Vietnamese reader, especially, the students

4 Methods of the study

To meet the aims and objectives of the study:

First of all, 10 English funny stories are carefully collected They are popular, especially, easy for everybody to understand

Second, these stories will be described and analysed in terms of dicourse analysis

Third, the data obtained will be dealt with in order to reach some conclusions on the usage of some linguistic features in discourse

Moreover, in this thesis we use the quantitative method and inductive approach based on

a collection of sample stories

5 Design of the study

The thesis is comprised of three part: introduction, development and conclusion

Part A : Introduction

Like other thesises, this part provides some information about the purposes and reasons

of choosing the topic ; aims and objectives; scope; methods and design of the study

Part B: Development This part consists of three chapter

Chapter one: Theoretical background

In this chapter, the author gives theoretical background of the study They are some notions related to discourse like discourse, discourse analysis and cohesive

devices

Chapter two: Discourse analysis of English funny stories

This chapter explores some discourse features of English funny stories and discuss the findings of theme and rheme and cohesion

Chapter three: Implications

In this chapter the author suggests some implications for better learning and teaching

Part C : Conclusion

The final part of the thesis is conclusion This part conludes the issues addressed and put forward some issues which have not been mentioned in the thesis as well as some suggestions for further research

PART B : DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER ONE : THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.1.Theory of discourse

1.1.1 Concept of discourse

Since its introduction to modern science, the term 'discourse' has taken various, sometimes very broad meanings Traditionally, discourse has been treated as "a continuous stretch of (especially spoken) language larger than a sentence…a discourse is

a behavioural unit which has a pre-theoretical status in linguistics…" (Crystal 1991: 106) According to this definition discourse is primarily seen as spoken language (a language

act: parole)

Discourse, according to Zellig Harris (1951), who first used the term, is a sequence of the

utterances He observes that: “Stretches longer than one utterance are not usually

considered in current descriptive linguistics.[…] the linguist usually considers the interrelations of elements only within one utterance at a time This yields a possible description of the material, since the interrelations of elements within each utterance (or utterance type) are worked out, and any longer discourse is describable as succession of utterances, i.e a succession of elements having the stated interrelations This restriction means that nothing is generally said about the interrelations among whole utterances within a sequence.”

Grenoble (2000), explaining Harris’s definition of discourse, states that: “Harris

interestingly enough ruled out the kind of study which discourse analysis aims to do He

is of the view that linguistic research focuses on the elements within an utterance; discourse can be considered as a sequence of utterance Harris argues that the study of the interrelations between utterances within a discourse; the scope of a discourse analysis required much more information than the theoretical apparatus of that time could handle While this held true for 1950s and 1960s, roughly, but 1970s saw an emerging body of different approaches including pragmatics, conversation analysis, textual linguistics, and relevance theory.”

Through reading, in my opinion, the answer to the question 'What is discourse?' can be seen clearly in Cook's (1989: 44) explanation: "discourse is like a moving film, revealing

1.1.2 Discourse and text

“Discourse” and ‘text’ are very trendy words referring to very trendy concepts Although linguistic theorists define the terms ‘discourse’ and ‘text’ in a number of different ways, they still have something in common Some linguists maintain that the two terms can be used interchangeably According to Widdowson (1979) text is sentences in combination whereas discourse is the use of sentence for communication

By contrast, some other linguists draw a clear and explicit distinction between the terms

Widdowson (1984: 100) claims that: “Discourse is a communicative process by means of

interaction Its situational outcome is a change in a state of affairs: information is conveyed, intention made clear, its linguistic product is text” According to Crystal

(1992: 25), discourse is considered to be “a continuous stretch of (especially spoken)

language large than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit, such as a sermon, argument, joke or narrative Text is a piece of naturally occurring spoken, written or signed language identified for purposes of analysis”

In fact, it is sometimes impossible to make a clear-cut distinction between discourse and text However, the study will be based on the approach developed by Halliday and Hasan

(1985: 10):”text (discourse) can be defined in the simplest way perhaps by saying that it

is language that functional By functional we simply mean language that is doing some job in some context as apposed to isolated words or sentences that I might put on the blackboard So any instance of living language that is playing some part in a context of situation, we shall call it a text It may be either spoken or written or indeed in any other medium of expression that we like to think of”

According to the view of Halliday and Hasan, the term “text” is used to refer to any written record of communicative event and regarded as the product of discourse, so

‘discourse’ and ‘text’ can be often used interchangeably to denote the same subject matter

1.1.3 Discourse context

The concept of context has been extensively studied by different linguists from different aspects, such as pragmatics and systemic-functional linguistics In the framework proposed by Halliday, the concept of context consists of three aspects: context of culture, context of situation and co-text Context of culture and context of situation are outside of language itself Co-text, also known as linguistic context, is certainly inside of language itself There is a close interdependent relationship between language and context Context determines and is constructed by the choice of language On the one hand, language, when considered as a system its lexical items and grammatical categories—is related to its context of culture While the specific text and its component parts are related to its context of situation To be specific, context of culture is related to genre, context of situation is related to register, and co-text to the discourse itself

Context of situation consists of three aspects: field, tenor and mode Field refers to what

is happening, to the nature of social action that is taking place It answers such questions

as what it is that the participant is engaged in Tenor refers to who is taking part, to the nature of the participants, their status and roles: what the relationship between communicators, including permanent and temporary relationships Mode refers to what role the language plays, what it is that the participants are expecting the language to do for them in that situation: the symbolic organization of the text, the status that it has, and its function in the context, including the channel and also the rhetorical mode, what is being achieved by the text in terms of such categories as persuasive, expository, didactic and the like Collectively the three aspects of situational context are called register

Context of situation is closely related to various texts Certain situational context asks for certain text and in return, certain text creates certain context In the process of communication, the meaning system is largely determined by the three aspects of situational context: ideational meaning by field, interpersonal meaning by tenor and textual meaning by mode (Baker, 2000: 9)

1.2.Discourse analysis

It is said that discourse is related to many disciplines The principal concern of discourse

analysis is to examine how any language produced by a given participants

whether spoken or written is used in communication for a given situation in a given

setting Thus, discourse analysis is concerned with written and spoken forms Discourse

devices also help to string language elements

The organization of stretches of language greater than a sentence [It] can focus on

conversation, written language, when searching for patterning of the language

Discourse analysis must determine the units of these larger stretches of language, how

these units are signalled by specific linguistic markers, and/or the processes involve in

producing and comprehending larger stretches of language

(Fine, 1988:01)

Yule (1996) asserts that discourse structure is very important It focuses on the main

elements that can form a well-stretched text These structural connections between

sentences create cohesion Moreover, the study of discourse is based especially on a

pragmatic view where the background knowledge, beliefs and expectations are taken

into consideration; i.e., what the speakers or writers have in mind

Another definition of discourse analysis is quoted from (Allen and Corder 1974: 200)

“discourse analysis is taken to be the investigation into the formal devices used to

connect sentences together”

In my opinion, discourse analysis examines how stretches of language, considered in

their full textual, social, and psychological context, become meaningful and unified for

their users It is a rapidly expanding field, providing insights into the problems and

processes of language use and language learning, and is therefore of great importance to

language teachers Traditionally, language teaching has concentrated on pronunciation,

grammar, and vocabulary, and while these remain the basis of foreign language

knowledge, discourse analysis can draw attention to the skills needed to put this

knowledge into action and to achieve successful communication

1.3 The thematic structure

The thematic structure of a discourse plays a crucial role; it is organization of events, the way theme or topic is realized in a text; this is the reason why the systemic analysis of the textual structures of news begins with an explication of notions like theme or topic

1.3.1 Theme and Rheme

The Theme-Rheme structure can be identified in both written discourses and spoken narratives and anesdotes, and a story is the combination of both as it is a story written

down and conversation are included

Theme and Rheme is the one favored by Halliday (1968, 1985), whose insights in this area form a very important part of this paper

Theme and Rheme are two terms which represent the way in which information is distributed in a sentence The definition of Theme given by Halliday (1985, p.38) is that Theme is given information serving as “the point of departure” of a message The given information is the information which has already been mentioned somewhere in the text,

or it is shared or mutual knowledge from the immediate context In other words, Theme typically contains familiar, old or given information Theme provides the settings for the remainder of the sentence – Rheme Rheme is the remainder of the message in a clause in which Theme is developed, that is to say, Rheme typically contains unfamiliar or new information New information is knowledge that a writer assumes the reader does not know, but needs to have in order to follow the progression of the argument The boundary between Theme and Rheme is simple: Theme is the first element occurring in a clause; the remainder clause is Rheme For example:

(1)

1 The two Indians

2 Across the bay

3 What she had felt

stood waiting

they found the other boat

he never knew

Table 1: Examples of theme and rheme in the structure of clauses

From the examples we can see that the initial place has an enormous importance in a clause Whatever is chosen to be in the first place will influence a reader’s interpretation

of everything that comes next Accordingly, in cohesive writing, ‘given’ information in a clause needs be presented in Theme position, which acts like a signpost signaling a reader where the meanings have come from and where they are going to The new information needs to be located in Rheme position The balance and movement of a clause between Theme and Rheme is an essential component in composing a cohesive text

1.3.2 Types of theme

Another aspect of concerning Theme-Rheme structure is the classification of Theme Brown and Yule ( 1983 : 133) has some ways of dividing theme such as single and multiple, predicated and unpredicated theme However, in this thesis we will mention to two subtypes of theme: Unmarked theme and Marked theme

Halliday(1994:4) points out that the unmarked Theme is the default choice and the subject is usually “chosen as Theme unless there is a good reason for choosing something else” He continues to define marked Theme as “a Theme that is something other than the Subject” For examples:

(2) One day, the small man came home very excitedly.( Marked theme)

(3) Mr.Johnson was a rich old man.( Unmarked theme)

1.4 Cohesion

1.4.1 Concept of cohesion

The term cohesion has been defined in various ways The concept of cohesion refers to relations of meaning that exist within the text, and that defines it as a text

Cohesion may be crudely defined as the way certain words or grammatical features of a sentence can connect that sentence to its predecessors (and successors) in a text (Hoey 1991:3) A text is in part organized and created by the presence in each sentence of these elements that require the reader to look to the surrounding sentences for their interpretation Phenomena that had resisted satisfactory handling within sentence-bound grammars, such as pronominalization, ellipsis, and sentence conjunction were found in such studies to be not only well handled once textual factors were taken into account but capable in turn of casting light on the nature of text itself

Halliday and Hasan (1976:4) state that the concept of cohesion is a semantic one; it refers

to relations of meaning that exist within the text, and that define it as a text Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some elements in the discourse is dependent on that of another The one presupposes the other, in the sense that it cannot be effectively decoded without recoursing to it When this happens, a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, the presupposing and the presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integrated into a text

Halliday and Hasan (1976:5) also argue that cohesion is part of the system of a language The potential for cohesion lies in the systematic resources of reference, ellipsis and so on that are built into the language itself The actualization of cohesion in any given instance, however, depends not merely on the selection of some option from these resources, but also on the presence of some other element which resolves the presupposition that this set

up

In this thesis, we use the definition of Halliday and Hasan According to them, the organization of text (which they term texture) is made up (in large part) of relationships among semantic and grammatical items referred to as cohesive ties in the text

1.4.2 Cohesion and coherence

Cohesion and coherence are terms used in discourse analysis and text linguistics to describe the properties of written texts Many linguists have discussed the question of cohesion and coherence But their opinions on these two notions differ Some (such as

Crystal, 1985) think that cohesion realizes the relation between meaning and its super forms and coherence realizes the relation between meaning and the context Some (such

as Brown & Yule, 1983) think that when people interpret a discourse they do not need textual markers (cohesive ties), and they assume that the discourse is coherent and make the interpretation under this assumption Some (such as Wang Zongyan, 1992) think that cohesion is the lexical and grammatical devices in a text and coherence is the effect realized by these devices Still some (such as Widdowson, 1978) think that cohesion is the explicit relationship between propostions of sentences and coherence is the relationship between illocutionary acts of utterances In this paper I refer to cohesion as anything at the semantic level that makes parts of communicative elements related, and refer to coherence as anything at the pragmatic level that makes parts of communicative

elements related

In summary, the relation between coherence and cohesion is one focus of linguists in discourse analysis These two aspects of discourse are interrelated: cohesion is seen as one of the ways of indicating coherence Despite the fact that both cohesion and coherence have the function of binding the text together by creating the sequence of meanings, cohesion, manifested by cohesive devices, does not guarantee coherence, which is best seen as the feeling that the discourse hang together and that it makes sense

1.4.3.1.1 Reference

One of the options that grammar of English offers creating surface links between sentences is reference Halliday and Hassan (1976) point out that reference features can not be semantically interpreted without referring to some other features in the text Pronouns is the most common linguistic element regarded as referring devices in a textual environment However, there are other linguistic elements used to fulfill the same function such as: articles, demonstratives and comparatives

Reference can be accounted as “exophoric” or “endophoric” functions This is because simply when we refer to a given item, we expect the reader to interpret it by either looking forward, backward and outward Exophoric involves exercises that require the reader to look out of the text in order to interpret the referent The reader, thus, has to look beyond or out of the text with a shared world between the reader and the writer

“Exophoric reference directs the receiver ‘out of ‘the text and into an assumed shared world” For example:

When walking out at night, a person might point to the moon and say to a friend, ‘Look at

that’ In this case, that refers to an entity which is identifiable in the situation of

utterance

The word “that” here is an example of exophoric reference or reference outside the text

Endophoric function refers to the text itself in its interpretation Brown and Yule (1983: 192) point that “where their interpretation lies within a text they are called ‘endophoric’ relations” Endophoric reference is classified into cathaphoric and anaphoric reference Cataphoric refers to any reference that “points forward” to information that will be presented later in the text For example:

(4) When she arrived, Susan was very surprised to find the door open

In the above example, the pronoun “ she” is a cataphoric reference because it refers to the noun “ Susan” that is introduced later on in the text

The second type of endophoric reference, and by far the most common, is called anaphoric reference This type is looking backward in the sense that the named item appears first and the pronoun appears second

Example:

(5) All this year’s students passed It was very gratifying

The word “It” in the second sentence refers to ‘All this year’s students passed’ and it is called “ anaphoric” reference

Halliday and Hasan (1976:37) also state that there are three types of reference: personal, demonstrative, and comparative Personal reference is a reference by means of function

in the speech situation, through the category of person Demonstrative reference is a reference by means of location, on a scale of proximity Comparative reference is the indirect reference by means of identity or similarity

Personal reference

What is known as personal reference depends on the use of personal pronouns (I, she, he,

it, they, me, etc), possessive adjectives (my, your, their, etc), and possessive pronouns

(mine, yours, theirs) For example:

(6) Rose left school when she was seventeen years old and went to a college for a year to learn to type She passed her examinations quite wel and then went to look for work She was still living with her parents

( Nụ Cười Nước Anh (2007):147)

Comparative reference uses adjectives like same, other, identical, better or their adverbial counterparts identically, similarly, less, and so on, to forge links with

previously mentioned entities For example:

(8) There were two wrens upon a tree

Another came, and there were three

( Halliaday and Hasan, 1976:31)

1.4.3.1.2 Substitution

Substitution is used where a speaker or writer wishes to avoid the repetition of a lexical item and is able to draw on one of the grammatical resources of the language to replace the item Halliday and Hassan (1976) state that substitution takes place when one feature (in a text) replaces a previous word or expression

For instance:

(9) I left my pen at home, do you have one?

In this example, “one” is replaced or substituted for “pen”

It is important to mention that substitution and reference are different in what and where they operate, thus substitution is concerned with relations words whereas reference is concerned with relations of meaning Substitution is a way to avoid repetition in the text itself; however, reference needs to retrieve its meaning from the situational textual occurrence In terms of the linguistic system, reference is a relation on the semantic level, whereas substitution is a relation on the lexicogrammatical level, the level of grammar and vocabulary, or linguistic form (Halliday and Hassan 1976: 89)

We can substitute nouns, verbs or clauses Kennedy (2003) points out there are three types of substitution: nominal, verbal, and clausal substitution

Nominal substitution

In nominal substitutes, one, ones and same can stand in place of Nominal Groups and Head Nouns, as in the examples below :

(10) ‘Would you like some sandwiches?’

‘Please pass the ones with cucumber in.’

Verbal substitution

The verb or a verbal group can be replaced by another verb which is “do” This

functions as a head of verbal group, and it is usually placed at the end of the group Here are two examples:

(11) ‘I don’t know the meaning of half those long words, and, what’s more, I

don’t believe you do either.’

(12) ‘We met in Brazil Do you remember?’

‘Yes, we must have done.’

“Do” in the first sentence substitutes for “know the meaning of half those long

words” And “done” in the second sentence substitutes for “met in Brazil”

The relation between substitution and ellipsis is very close in the sense that ellipsis is

“substitution” by zero What is essential in ellipsis is that some elements are omitted from the surface text, but they are still understood Thus, omission of these elements can

be recovered by referring to an element in the preceding text Harmer defines it: “(…) words are deliberately left out of a sentence when the meaning is still clear” (Harmer, 2004:24) Let’s consider the following example:

(14) John found (0) and sold a valuable stamp

(A University Grammar of English,2003:266)

It appeared that the structure of the second clause indicates that there is something left

out “a valuable stamp”, the omission of this feature kept the meaning still clear and there

is no need of repetition

Carter (2000:182) states that “ellipsis occurs in writing where usually 30 functions

textually to avoid repetition where structures would otherwise be redundant”

Ellipsis takes place in similar grammatical environments to substitution Thus, we have nominal, verbal and clausal ellipsis

Nominal ellipsis: means ellipsis within the nominal group, where the omission of

nominal group is served a common noun, proper noun or pronoun

Example…:

(15) Mary has washed the dishes, (0) dried them, and (0) put them in the cupboard

( A University Grammar of English,2003:261)

In this example, the omission is concerned with “Mary”

Verbal ellipsis: refers to ellipsis within the verbal group where the elliptical verb

depends on a preceding verbal group

Example:

(16) Have you been working?

Yes, I have [0]

Here, the omission of the verbal group depends on what is said before and it is concerned

with “been working”

Clausal ellipsis: clausal ellipsis functions as verbal ellipsis, where the omission refers to

a clause

Example:

(17) They will be arriving before the show begins or after (0)

In this example the omission falls on the “the show begins”

1.4.3.1.4 Conjunction

Conjunction is achieved to have grammatical cohesion in texts which show the

relationship between sentences They are different from other cohesive ties that they

reach the meaning by using other features in the discourse Because as Nunan (1993)

points out, they use features to refer to the other parts of the text in order to make

relationships between sentences extremely understood Halliday and Hassan describe it as

follows:

“In describing conjunction as a cohesive device, we are focusing attention not on the

semantic relation as such, as realized throughout the grammar of the language,but on

one particular aspect of them, namely the function they have of relating to each other

linguistic elements that occur in succession but are not related by other, structural

means”

(Halliday and Hassan, 1978: 227)

Halliday and Hasan (1976:238) handle conjunctions under four main headings: additive, adversative, causal and temporal

Additive conjunction

Additive conjunction serves to further the discourse topic It differs from the paratactic relation of coordination by introducing the new clause as an extra piece of information, perhaps reinforcing what has already been said

For example:

(18) The party got to the summit and had their lunch And they had time for a rest

afterwards

Here, the first “and” coordinates the propositions “the party got to the summit and had

their lunch” The second “and”, however, introduces a supplementary idea

Adversative conjunction

Adversative conjunction is explained as introducing an item of information which is

‘contrary to expectation’ The expectation may be derived from the content of what is being said, or from the communication process, the speaker-hearer situation

(21) First, he forgot his money, then he forgot his keys

Previously he had never absent for a day

1.4.3.2 Lexical cohesion

Lexical cohesion is the second type of cohesion marked in Halliday and Hasan’s model Lexical Cohesion is a group of words which is lexically cohesive when all of the words are semantically related It refers to the author’s usage of words with related meaning

Crystal (1995: 118) states that to study lexicon of English, accordingly, is to study all aspects of the vocabulary of the language

According to Morris and Hirst, “lexical cohesion is the result of chains of related words

that contribute to the continuity of lexical meaning”

Lexical cohesion is the central device for making texts hang together experientially, defining the aboutness of a text ( Halliday and Hasan, 1976) Typically, lexical cohesion makes the most substantive contribution to texture According to Hasan (1984) and Hoey (1991), around forty to fifty percent of a text’s cohesive ties are lexical

“Lexical cohesion does not deal with grammatical and semantic connections but with connections based on the words used” (Renkema, 1993:39) This definition can be

employed in the thesis And, two types of lexical cohesion are distinguished into : reiteration and collocation

1.4.3.2.1 Reiteration

According to Tran Ngoc Them (1985: 106) “Lexical reiteration is a form of lexical

cohesion in which the two cohesive items refer to the same entity and event” As defined

by Halliday & Hasan (1976: 319) “Reiteration is the repetition of a lexical item, or the

occurrence of a synonym of some kinds, in the context of reference; that is, where the two occurrences, have the same reference Typically, therefore, a reiterated lexical item is accompanied by a reference item, usually “the” or a demonstrative The complex consisting of “the” plus reiterated lexical item is therefore cohesive by reference But since reiteration is itself cohesive in its own right, as shown by the fact that cohesion takes place even where there is no referential relation”

Reiteration can also occur through the use of word that is systematically linked to a previous one The items of reiteration may be a repetition, a synonym or near synonym,

a hyponym or superordinate and a general word

A synonym refers to a word or expression that has the same or nearly the same meaning

as another in the same language (Halliday and Hasan, 1976)

(25) Did you try the steamed buns?

Yes; I didn’t like the things much

collocation as follows: “the cohesive effect depends not so much on any systematic

relationship as on their tendency to share the same lexical environment, to occur in collocation with one another In general, any two lexical items having similar patterns of collocation – that is, tending to appear in similar context – will generate a cohesive force

if they occur in adjacent sentences” (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 286)

In conclusion, this chapter has dealt with the theory related to discourse analysis as Theme- rheme structure and cohesive devices Cohesive devices includes two main

types: grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion All of them will be discussed in the next chapter of the thesis

CHAPTER TWO : DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH FUNNY STORIES

2.1 Some gerneral features of English funny stories

Funny story is a kind of short story, based on a funny phenomenon that causes to laugh for the readers

2.1.1 Characters in English funny stories

The characters in some other types of prose like novel, fairy story has their own life However, the characters in funny stories only appear in a certain situation in daily life rather than has their own fate in others like novels,…

Moreover, unlike in some novels or fairy stories, the characters often carry the extraordinary acts in unusual circumstances, the characters in funny stories only exhibit a behavior that is contrary to common sense in the normal situation

2.1.2 Language in English funny stories