Description
www.eltemario.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja, 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 UNIT 29 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS AND ARTICULATION. COHESION AND COHERENCE. ANAPHORA AND CATAPHORA. CONNECTORS. DEIXIS. OUTLINE 1. INTRODUCTION. 1.1. Aims of the unit. 1.2. Notes on bibliography. 2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS AND ARTICULATION OF DISCOURSE. 2.1. On defining the term discourse. 2.2. Related notions. 2.2.1. The notion of text linguistics. 2.2.2. Sentence vs. Utterance. 2.2.3. Speech acts. 2.2.4. Communicative context. 2.3. On defining discourse analysis. 2.3.1. The seven standards of textuality. 2.3.2. The role of syntax, semantics and pragmatics. 2.3.3. Oral vs. written discourse. 2.3.4. The analysis and articulation of discourse. 3. COHESION. 3.1. Definition. 3.2. Types of cohesive devices. 3.2.1. Grammatical devices. 3.2.1.1. Substitution. 3.2.1.2. Ellipsis. 3.2.1.3. Reference: anaphora, cataphora and deixis. 3.2.1.4. Conjunctions. 3.2.2. Lexical devices. 3.2.3. Graphological devices. 4. COHERENCE. 4.1. Definition. 4.2. Main features. 5. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING. 5.1. The Communicative Approach: a basis for discourse analysis. 5.2. New directions in discourse analysis. 6. CONCLUSION. 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY. 1/33 www.eltemario.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja, 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 1. INTRODUCTION. 1.1. Aims of the unit. The main aim of Unit 29 is to examine discourse analysis and its articulation by means of sucñh devices as anaphora and cataphora, connectors and deixis. Our aim is to offer a broad account in descriptive terms of the notion of discourse and discourse analys is and its importance in society, and especially, in the language teaching community, from its origins to present-day studies. This presentation will start by offering the most relevant bibliography in this field as a reference for the reader, and by presenting our study in six chapters. Chapter 2 will offer an account of the analysis and articulation of oral and written discourse, it is relevant to introduce first a theoretical framework which shall develop our understanding of central concepts related to their linguistic nature. So we shall review (1) the definition of the term ‘discourse’, (2) related notions such as (a) the notion of text linguistics, (b) sentence vs. utterance, (c) a definition of speech act and (d) the notion of communicative context in order to frame (3) the definition of ‘discourse analysis’ and its main features, such as (a) the seven standards of textuality, (b) the role of syntax, semantics and pragmatics, (c) general considerations in oral and written discourse and finally, (d) the main elements in the analysis and articulation of discourse. Chapters 3 and 4 will offer then an insightful analysis and description of the elements in the analysis and articulation of discourse, that is, cohesion and coherence respectively. Chapter 5 will be devoted to present the main educational implications in language teaching regarding discourse analysis. So, we shall examine the model for a Communicative Approach which is considered to be a basis for discourse analysis and new directions in this respect. Chapter 6 will offer a conclusion to broadly overview our present study, and Chapter 7 will include all the bibliographical references used to develop this account of discourse analysis. 1.2. Notes on bibliography. An influential introduction to the analysis of discourse is based on relevant works of Cook, Discourse (1989); van Dijk, Text and Context (1984); Brown and Yule, Discourse Analysis (1983) and notes on the articulation of discourse regarding cohesion and coherence are namely taken from 2/33 www.eltemario.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja, 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Beaugrande and Dressler, Introduction to Text Linguistics (1988) and, still indispensable, Halliday and Hasan, Cohesion in English (1976). Classic works on the influence of semantics, pragmatics and sociolinguistic on discourse analysis, include van Dijk, Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse (1981); Hymes, Communicative Competence (1972) and Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach (1974); Halliday, Explorations in the Functions of Language (1975)and Spoken andWritten Language (1985); and Searle, Speech Act (1969). The background for educational implications is based on the theory of communicative competence and communicative approaches to language teaching are provided by Canale, From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy (1983); Canale and Swain, Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing (1980); Hymes, On communicative competence (1972). In addition, the most complete record of current publications within the educational framework is provided by the guidelines in B.O.E. (2002); the Council of Europe, Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European Framework of reference (1998); Hedge Tricia, Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom (2000); and Celce-Murcia & Olshtain, Discourse and context in language teaching (2000). New directions on language teaching is provided by the annual supplement of AESLA 2001 (Asociación Española de Lingüística Aplicada). 2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS AND ARTICULATION OF DISCOURSE. In order to offer an account of the analysis and articulation of oral and written discourse, it is relevant to introduce first a theoretical framework which shall develop our understanding of central concepts related to their linguistic nature. So we shall review (1) the definition of the term ‘discourse’, (2) related notions such as (a) the notion of text linguistics, (b) sentence vs. utterance, (c) a definition of speech act and (d) the notion of communicative context in order to frame (3) the definition of ‘discourse analysis’ and its main features, such as (a) the seven standards of textuality, (b) the role of syntax, semantics and pragmatics, (c) general considerations in oral and written discourse and finally, (d) the main elements in the analysis and articulation of discourse. 3/33 This means that semantic coherence of sentence sequences should be complemented with coherence at the pragmatic level of speech act sequences. the latter introducing the notions of speech acts. Hence it must be borne in mind that a pragmatic theory cannot be limited to an account of single speech acts.eltemario. paragraphs and texts. could be said to be appropriate with respect to that context’. ‘a speech act is accomplished by an utterance in some context.www. (3) ‘speech acts’ and (4) ‘communicative context’. 1988). ‘Discourse’ then represents ‘the complex picture of the relations between language and action in communicative contexts’ which account for the functions of utterances with underlying textual structures’ (van Dijk. 4/33 . Then we shall deal with sequences of utterances which interchange in order to establish relations of social interaction either in spoken or written language in communicative events (utterance pairs and responses in letters. complex and compound) in grammatical terms. (2) ‘sentence vs.2.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. At this level. In other words. Up to here. 1981). we have encountered some notions which need to be examined in order to fully understand our current analysis on the pragmatics of discourse. Yet. which had a rapid growth in the 1970s: the former confronting with data and problems of actual language use. utterances in terms of meaning and use in connected discourse. felicity conditions and context. Related notions. The term ‘discourse’ comes into force when we deal with the highest grammatical level of analysis in the rank scale. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 2. following van Dijk (1981). that is. utterance’. and such an utterance does not necessarily consist of one single sentence. that is. expressed by single sentences. On defining the term discourse. thus (1) ‘text linguistics’. realized by sequences of sentences of discourse and conversation. but also must explain the structure of speech act sequences and general speech acts. greetings and telephone conversations). when uttered in some context. 2. a pragmatically text grammar should specify the conditions under which whole discourses. language does not occur in solitary words or sentences (simple. which are considered to be ‘larger stretches of language higher than the sentence’ (Aarts.1. The origins of the term are to be found within the fields of sociolinguistics and pragmatics. but in sequences of sentences. dating from Ancient Greece and Rome through the Middle Ages up to the present under the name of text linguistics or discourse. for instance. and also to be indeterminate since it is often difficult to decide where one sentence begins and another start (partic ularly in spoken language). elegance. cohesion. Rethoric still shares several concerns with the kind of text linguistics we know today. the discovery of appropriate expressions for ideas (elocution). complex or compound). that is. many fields have approached the study of texts: linguistics (from grammar. the use of texts as vehicles of purposeful interaction (oral and written). Sentence vs. the oldest form of preoccupation with texts and the first foundation for the analysis of texts and its articulation is drawn from the notion of text linguistics which has its historical roots in rethoric.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja.2.1. clarity. language does not occur in solitary words or sentences but builds texts in sequences of sentences. 1988). the variety of texts which express a given configuration of ideas. Yet. but the most important fields are sociology (which explores conversational studies and gives way to discourse analysis). Yet. As stated above. style). and memorization prior to delivery on the actual occasion of speaking. connectors) and pragmatics (speech acts. utterance. semantics (coherence. anthropology (different speech acts in different cultures). appropriateness. rethoric was based on grammar (on the study of formal language patterns in Greek and Latin) and logic (on the construction of arguments and proofs). an utterance is defined in terms of meaning and use in 5/33 .2. psychology (speaker and hearer behaviour). literary studies (text types) and so on. In the Middle Ages. morphology and phonology). it is considered to be the highest unit in the rank scale (either simple. stylistics (correctness. 2. the arrangement of ideas (disposition). The notion of text linguistics. The notion of text linguistics designates ‘any work in language science devoted to the text as the primary object of inquiry’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. This means that a sentence is defined in grammatical terms. 1984). In fact.www. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 2.eltemario. the arranging of ideas and its disposition within the discourse and the judgement of texts which still depends on the effects upon the audience. Traditional rethoricians were influenced by their major task of training public orators on the discovery of ideas (invention). contexts) which shape the text into a pragmatic coherent structure (van Dijk.2. 4. in terms of its communicative function. for instance. that is. language use and extralinguistic functions.www. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 connected discourse. or blaming). oral or written. commissives (to commit ourselves to some future actions by promising and offering).com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. This sequence of utterances usually takes place in a communicative context. through baptizing. A context must have a linguistically relevant set of characteristics for the formulation. We may classify the intention of the speaker (statements. 6/33 .2. The term context is defined as ‘the state of affairs of a communicative situation in which communicative events take place’ (van Dijk. conditions and rules for the adequate use of utterances. we can relate the type of intention to the utterance type. directives (to try to get people to do things by means of commanding and requesting). Speech acts. We can say an utterance is a stretch of language (oral or written) which may vary in extension from a single word to a whole book. it must be ‘appropriate’ and‘satisfactory’ for the given utterance. imperative or exclamative respectively). One of the speech acts basic characteristics is undoubtely the establishment of a special kind of social interaction between ‘speaker’ and ‘hearer’ where the former tries to change the mind of the actions of the hearer by producing an utterance. naming. commands and exclamations) according to the kind of sentences he states (declarative. appointing or sacking).2.3. Similarly. The speech act theory holds that the investigation of structure always presupposes something about meanings. questions. and finally. 1981).eltemario. 2. expressives (to express our feelings and attitudes by thinking. declaratives (to bring about changes through our utterances by means of bringing about correspondence between the propositional content and reality. the speech act used depending on its purpose and language function. 2. that is. forgiving. According to Searle (1969) speech acts (and therefore purposes) are divided into assertives (to tell people how things are by stating). interrogative. Communicative context. 2. 1988). and conversely. As stated above. speaking face to face vs. Many studies have been conducted on how people take turns in speaking and on the mechanisms which combine texts as single contributions into discourses as ‘sets of mutually relevant texts directed to each other’.www. and also ‘informativity’ (the selection of contributions to conversation). may not be actually ‘acceptable’ in concrete communicative situations. In the present section we shall review the main features in the analysis of discourse analysis: (1) the seven standards of textuality. 2. (2) the role of syntax. pragmatic standards such as the attitudes of producers by means of such devices as ‘intentionality’ (the goal-directed use of conversation) and receivers by means of ‘acceptability’ (inmmediate feedback). On defining discourse analysis. 7/33 . Hence we may introduce the term ‘communicative’ so that an event may be successful if a given context changes into a specific new context (i. (3) general considerations in oral and written discourse and finally.1. second ly. the integration of sociology is of vital importance to a science of texts since it ‘has developed an interest in the analysis of conversation as a mode of social organization and interaction’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. syntactic and sematic well-formed utterances may change from oral contexts to written ones. Generally speaking. The seven standards of textuality. two semantic standards: ‘cohesion’ (how the components of a surface text are mutually connected within a sequence) and ‘coherence’ (how the concepts and relations which underlie the surface text are mutually accessible and relevant). we may say that conditions for morphonological.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. semantics and pragmatics.3.e. Thus utterances which are formally appropriate with respect to their contexts. Discourse analysis reveals then major factors about the standards of textuality (either oral or written) by exploring first. The term ‘discourse analysis’ is also called ‘the study of conversation’. speaking on the phone).eltemario. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 The notion of context is rather static when it is merely used to refer to a state of affairs. (4) the main elements in the analysis and articulation of discourse.3. According to Rivers (1981). and ‘informativity’ (the selection of contributions to conversation). Then in a text pragmatics explores the attitudes of producers by means of such devices as ‘intentionality’ (the goal-directed use of conversation) and receivers by means of ‘acceptability’ (inmmediate feedback). usually related to semantics. that is. effectiveness and appropriateness can immediately regulated any disregard for the demands in the text. sentences and clauses) and the logical relationship between them in a text by means of coherence and cohesion. semantics and pragmatics. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 The communicative setting is described in terms of ‘situationality’ (particularly direct communicative context. intonation contours) and ‘intertextuality’ (text types in operation. we know who is 8/33 . syntax and semantics were studied with little regard for the ways people used grammar and meaning in communication and the use of language was relegated to the field of pragmatics. whereas when we communicate a message orally. semantics explores the relationship between syntactic structures (and therefore grammatical categories building phrases.eltemario. writing a language comprehensibly is much more difficult tha n speaking it. On the other hand. intonation contours) and ‘intertextuality’ (text types in operation. Nowadays. that is. how to frame your text in regard to other people’s texts in the same discourse). written discourse.3. having as a result the whole text under the shape of a pragmatic coherent discourse. she says.3. 2. For many years. The role of syntax.3. the questions of use (pragmatics) are freely treated in syntax and semantics and the notions of ‘cohesion’ and ‘coherence’.2. Oral vs. can be also helpful when studying a text only if they deal with how connections and relations are actually set up among communicative contexts. When we write. the communicative setting is described in terms of ‘situationality’ (particularly direct communicative context. how to frame your text in regard to other people’s texts in the same discourse).www.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. In addition. we are like communicating into space if we do not know the recipient of our piece of writing. Moreover. the regulative principles of efficiency. 2. its effectiveness depends upon whether it makes a strong impression and has a good potential for fulfilling an aim. as speech is the language of immediate communication. However. we shall concentrate on cohesion and coherence as they establish intrasentential and intersentential links in written and oral discourse. The analysis and articulation of discourse was virtually limited to relations within the sentence up to the third quarter of this century. Therefore.3.4. Thus. 2. When examining writing (as the way of making contact at a distance). The analysis and articulation of discourse. Following Byrne (1979). speaking and writing. 9/33 . It was thought that relations beyond the sentence involved a complex interplay of linguistics with other concerns such as rhethoric. most linking devices will also occur in the spoken language although less frequently than in writing where they are essential for the construction of a coherent text. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 receiving the message. we shall namely focus on the construction of longer texts and their coherence. 1988). Then. and pragmatics. cohesion and effectiveness.eltemario. and other linguists whose work extended and embraced stylistics and other aspects of textual studies . but not to the extent to which some resources apply directly to the nature of the two channels. we can establish similar resources for both speaking and writing at a linguistic level. There are also at least three more regulative principles that control textual communication: the efficiency of a text is contingent upon its being useful to the participants with a minimum of effort. literary critics and social anthropologists began to shed light on this issue from the constructs evolved by de Saussure. share similar features as well as differ in others regarding the nature of each category. and its appropriateness depends upon whether its own setting is in agreement with the seven standards of textuality (Beaugrande & Dressler. We are dealing here once again with a traditional division of language into the two major categories of speech and writing. We observe that both categories.www. thus on its grammar and lexis. we cannot forget graphological devices which compensate for the absence of oral feedback and paralinguistic devices that exist in oral communication.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. the Prague School. aesthetics. In other words. These two elements are defined as the ‘presupposing’ and the ‘presupposed’.eltemario. In this example. intra-text linking devices are connected to extra -textual reference. The term ‘cohesion’ concerns the ways in which the components of the surface text (the actual words we hear or see) are mutually connected within a sequence of utterances (Beaugrande & Dressler. It must be borne in mind that in spoken English certain types of grammatical cohesion are in their turn expressed through the intonation system (i. Hence in this chapter we shall only analyse two of the seven standards of textuality: cohesion and coherence. The first elements may be found in the text but its location in the text is in no way determined by the second element. Moreover. together with a grammatical approach when necessary on morphonological and phonological features. it is ‘a semantic relation between an element in the text and some other element that is crucial to the interpretation of it’. the lexicogrammatical (forms: grammar and vocabulary) and the phonological and orthographic one (expressions: sounding and writing).www. Definition. 1988). 10/ 33 .e. 1976) and then (2) a brief analysis of coherence. 3. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 In the following sections then we shall approach the analysis and articulation of discourse from the disciplines of syntax. COHESION. The notion of ‘cohesion’ is expressed through the stratal organization of language which can be explained as a multiple coding system comprising three levels of coding: the semantic one (meanings). that is. described ‘cohesion’ as a semantic concept that refers to relations of meaning that exist within a text. the second sentence not only shows the cohesive device of ellipsis with ‘She didn’t mean to’ but also with by the ellipsis of conjunction since the adversative meaning of ‘but’ is expressed by the rising-falling tone. connectors and deixis (following Halliday & Hassan. Did she hurt your feelings? She didn’t mean to). Both of them may be structurally related to each other or may be not. Halliday and Hasan. in their ground-breaking work Cohesion in English (1976). cataphora. pragmatics and namely semantics.1. We shall start by offering (1) an analysis of cohesion where we shall include the concepts of anaphora.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. 3. 2.1.eltemario. we shall include in our study a third type that. punctuation. conjunction and reference. 3. and it is well known its relation to the second of the textuality standards. for example in order to enhance coherence. It is within grammatical cohesion that we find different types of relations: substitution.2. collocation). coherence. foot notes.1. deixis as a subtype of reference and ellipsis. These two cohesive relations are thought of as processes within the text: substitution as ‘the replacement of one item by another’. connectors and deixis’. Types of cohesive devices. connectors under the heading of conjunction and finally. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 3. ellipsis. It is relevant to mention first that anaphora and cataphora will be examined under the heading of reference . but the rest makes reference to the terms ‘anaphora and cataphora. ellipsis.2. tables of contents and indexes) since most of them deal with form and structure of different types of texts. although last is not the least. Thus the concept of cohesion accounts for the essential semantic relations whereby any passage of speech or writing is enabled to function as text.www. Substitution. 3. headings. Yet. we find two main types of cohesive devices considered as general categories of cohesion: grammatical cohesion (substitution. Since cohesion is expressed partly through the grammar and partly through the vocabulary. but also for reasons of economy (e. Cohesion has been a most popular target for research. saving time and alleviating conceptual work load by using anaphoric devices like generalisations and pro-forms). Essentially the two are the same process since 11/ 33 . and ellipsis as the omission of an item. We refer to graphological devices (orthography. and are part of the semantic relations established in a text. all speakers make extensive use of them. reference) and lexical cohesion (reiteration.1. Grammatical cohesion. Note that the first two items are not included in the title of this study.g.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. Since cohesive markers are important for the understanding of oral and written texts. conjunction. The cohesive device of ‘substitution’ is very similar to that of ‘ellipsis’. this one. The verbal substitute in English is the verb ‘do’. Secondly.e. However.e. I have work to do. person. In addition to functioning as the verbal substitute. To these. and.e. We may find different types of substitution which are defined in grammatical terms rather than semantically. Mary sounded the same) and general nouns such as ‘thing. in Modern English it appears as lexical verb (i. Here the verb ‘do’ is the substitute for the verb ‘come’. He made one very good point). For instance. The criterion is the grammatical function of the substitute item so the substitute may function as a noun. verbal substitution regularly extends across sentence boundaries. that is. my old one is also hopeless). so we shall devote a section to each.eltemario.www. the verb ‘do’ may occur in other contexts. Similarly. Are there any biscuits in the box? -Yes. according to Halliday & Hasan (1976). or as a clause.e. I like those white boots-Which ones?).e. in the place that is occupied by the lexical verb’ and is always placed at the end of the sentence (i. Other related items are the word ‘the same’ (i. The words didn’t come easily as they used to do). and clausal (so. This thing never works-Don’t worry. which operates ‘as head of a verbal group. 1976). 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 ellipsis can be interpreted as ‘that form of substitution in which the item is replaced by nothing’. too). as a pro-noun (i. Yet. let’s do 12/ 33 . within nominal substitution. John sounded really sorry-Yes. One never knows what may happen). the mechanisms involved in the two are rather different.e. creature’ (i. fairly complex. I can see some at the bottom). Note that the substitute may differ from the presupposed item in number (i. ones. it is relevant to ment ion that the word ‘one’ may also function as personal pronoun (i. verbal substitution . cardinal number (i.e. same). In addition. a verb.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. (At the library) I will take this book.e. and also.e. verbal (do). and can substitute only for an item which is itself Head of a nominal group (i. correspond the three types of substitution: nominal (one. ‘substitution’ is different from ‘reference’ in that the former is a grammatical relation whereas the latter is a semantic one. simply ‘substitution by zero’ (Halliday & Hasan. The ones she really loves are her cousins).. at least in the case of ellipsis. the substitute ‘one/ones’always functions as Head of a nominal group.. not): • First. indefinite article (i.e. www. and another way of referring to ellipsis is in fact as ‘something understood’ meaning ‘going without saying’ (i. First. Is there going to be an earthquake?-It says so/Have they failed?-I hope not). simply ‘substitution by zero’ (Halliday & Hasan.e. she doesn’t). Ellipsis. the presupposed element may be in the quoted form. It does no harm). that is. She brought some biscuits. we find conditional structures which are frequently substituted by ‘so’ and ‘not’ again. indirect questions and commands.e. perhaps not’. 13/ 33 . 1976). Usually the words used as substitutes are ‘so’ and ‘not’ (i. Everyone seems to be innocent. as a pro-verb (i. There are three environments in which clausal substitution may take place: report.e. and finally. Does she sing?-No.1.e. If so.eltemario. in reported clauses. said Anita). is considered as a process. ‘The trial cannot proceed’. we have clausal substitution and in this type. I believe so/I hope not). said he). condition (conditional clauses) and modality (modalized clauses). 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 the accounts). • Finally. 3. especially following ‘if’ but also in other forms such as ‘assuming so. Then the reported clause that is substituted by ‘so’ or ‘not’ is always declarative. There is no substitution for interrogative or imperative. The structural mechanisms involved in ellipsis are fairly complex and hence. He said the trial could not proceed-Yes. and Cristine some fruit).2.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. Secondly. the cohesive device of ‘ellipsis’ is very similar to that of ‘substitution’ and. that is. ‘unsaid’ implies ‘but understood nevertheless’. that is.e. what is presupposed is not an element within the clause but an entire clause.e. no doubt he’ll be condemned). As stated above. general verb (i. on the contrary. suppose not’ (i. What was she doing?- She wasn’t doing anything) and verbal operator (i. It is defined as ‘the omission of an item’ or ‘that form of substitution in which the item is replaced by nothing’. The discussion of ellipsis is related to the notion that it is ‘something left unsaid’ where there is no implication that what is unsaid is not understood.e. ‘so’ and ‘not’ may occur as substitutes for clauses expressing modality (i. whatever the mood of the presupposed clause (i. (in reported clauses).2. ‘May I give you a call?’-‘Well. it shows different patterns from those of substitution. therefore. direct speech (i.e.e. • Secondly. that was my fourth’. same. usually adjectives (other. post-deictics. negative. polarity: positive vs. and so on) as in ‘I’ve used up your knife. See how they eat! =where ‘they’ may be three children. passive.e.e. An elliptical verbal group presupposes one or more words from a previous verbal group. some. It is defined by Halliday & Hasan (1976) as ‘the case where the information to be retrieved is the referential meaning. that is. I have).-No. both. different. usual. non-finite. and finally. which is another well researched area within linguistics. the identity of the particular thing or class of things that is being referred to. Have you been running? -Yes. Can I have another?’. non-specific deictics (each. no.2. a) as in ‘Have some wine-Where?I can’t see any’. in anaphoric relation.1. We may distinguish two different structural possibilities in which ellipsis is a form of relation between sentences by means of • First. all. four horses.www. ellipsis is a relation within the text. every. whereby the same thing enters into the discourse a second time’ (i. cataphora and deixis. etc). usually determiners (demonstrative.e. neither. and the cohesion lies in the continuity of reference. past vs. 3.3. numeratives. The third type of grammatical cohesion is reference. identical. How did you enjoy the show?-A lot (of the show). nominal ellipsis.e. We may omit specific deictics. that is.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. as premodifier and postmodifier respectively (i. possessive and definite article -the) as in ‘The men got back at midnight. that is ellipsis within the verbal group (i. 14/ 33 . tense: present vs. any. thanks. future). verbal ellipsis. it is defined as ‘a verbal group whose structure does not fully express its systemic features (finiteness: finite vs. He ate four oysters and yet another four) where the modifying elements include some which precede the head and some which follow it. cardinals and indefinite quantifiers) as in ‘Have another chocolate. usually numerals or other quantifiying words (ordinals. In technical terms. ether. Reference: anaphora. regular. and in the great majority of instances the presupposed item is present in the preceding text. epithets. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Like substitution. voice: active vs. Both were tired’. ellipsis within the nominal group (i.eltemario. which are typically fulfilled by adjectives (comparatives and superlatives) as in ‘Apples are the cheapest in autumn). First. since the identity of the conceptual content being kept current is made plain in advance. situational reference would be the prior form. to presuppose what has already gone rather than what is to follow. and in its most normal form it is simply the presupposition of something that has 15/ 33 . that is. alike substitution and ellipsis (which were subjected to very strong grammatical conditions.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. ‘Anaphora is the most common directionality for co-reference. we may distinguish between anaphoric reference (referring to the preceding text) or cataphoric reference (referring to the text that follows). By then. The typical direction as we shall see later is the anaphoric one.www. if endophoric. Cohesion as we have said is not a structural relation. reference is not constrained to match the grammatical class of the item it refers to. by contrast to substitution and ellipsis. for the substitute to be of the same grammatical class as the item for which it substitutes). there is a logical continuity from naming through situational reference (referring to a thing as identified in the context of situation) to textual reference (referring to a thing as identified in the surrounding text) and hence a significant opposition in the system between pointing back (anaphora) and pointing forwards (cataphora). 1988). Here we find the two items to be developed in the title: anaphora and cataphora. it is relevant to have a special term for situational reference.e. anaphora is the cohesive device that uses a pro-form after the co-referring expression (i. Yet. Then. in other words.eltemario. in this case. Thus. exophora or exophoric reference (reference that must be made to the context of the situation) in contrast with endophoric reference (reference that must be made to the text of the discourse itself). Let us consider these in turn. hence it is unrestricted by sentence boundaries. Secondly. Thus the direction may be anaphoric (with the presupposed element preceding) or cataphoric (with the presupposed element following). It is natural after all. reference is a semantic relation as well as directional. • Anaphora. Hence. This means that first. anaphora may be troublesome if there is a lengthy stretch of text before the pro-form appears. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 As stated before. the original elements could have been displaced from active storage and other candidates may be mistakenly called’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. We asked Bob to sing a Christmas carol and so he sang). it does not imply any kind of structural relation between them. Where it does not. or it is interpreted through being compared with the referent. reference is the relation between an element of the text and something else by reference to which it is interpreted in the given instance. The colon is used solely to signal the cataphora. thing or place is revealed later through the discourse (i. the cataphoric reference is often signalled in writing with a colon: but although this has the effect of uniting the two parts into a single orthographic sentence.e. this being one of its principal functions’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. 16/ 33 . with a presupposing item presupposing something that has gone before it’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. So far we have considered cohesion purely as ‘an anaphoric relation. possessive. But this presupposition may go in the opposite direction. Nobody knew them but Rose and Charlie soon became well-known at that place). demonstrative) or other categories such as determiners (the).e. it is the cohesive device which has forward reference instead of back-reference by means of possessive. As stated before.e.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. This cohesive device places the identity of someone or something at the beginning of the text (oral or written) and through the discourse it is referred to by means of other grammatical categories such as pronouns (i. ‘the presupposed element may. • Cataphora. with the presupposing element following and then we shall refer to as cataphora. possessive. 1988). In the former case. In this case. interrogative). definite and personal pronouns and adjectives. demonstrative. adjectives (i. • Types of reference: deixis. In other words.www. This form of presupposition. consist of more than one sentence. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 gone before. where the interpretation involves identifying.eltemario. 1988). the reference item functions as a deictic item which is always specific. The interpretation may take two forms: either the reference item is interpreted through being identified with the referent in question. whether in the preceding sentence or not. which are mentioned first and the identity of the person. pointing back to some previous items is known as anaphora. and often does. personal. whose. in first person narrative.eltemario. and includes the three classes of personal pronouns. First. personal reference is ‘reference by means of function in the speech situation. all reference items of this type are specific. in advertising and in official documents among others (i. or an object or unit of text). I haven’t. not the specification itself. pronouns. 1988): personal. on a scale of proximity’ (determiners or adverbs that refer to locative or temporal proximity or distance. o Personal reference.e. 17/ 33 . 1988). where it is itself an element of the text (if anaphoric). possessive determiners (possessive adjectives) and possessive pronouns (i. because their interpretation depends on identity of reference. I don’t want to see her). that of person. the addressee. The category of personals represent a single system. other persons or objects. and finally. Dear Daniel: How are you?). or difference. determiners that refer to the speaker. In other words. or that are neutral).www.e. which. must necessarily also be specific. This does not imply that the referent. or express a particular comparison).com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. Let’s take a photo of it). throught the category of person’ (nouns. secondly. comparative reference which is ‘indirect reference by means of identity or similarity’ (adjectives or verbs expressing a general comparison based on identity. and for cohesive purposes the identification must be specific’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. I can see a star. Thus deixis is achieved by means of the following types of reference in nominal groups (Beaugrande & Dressler. A reference item then can relate anaphorically to any element whether specific or not (i. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Then deixis is defined as ‘the identifying function in the nominal group. Haven’t you spoken to Anne yet? – No. The interrogatives (who.e. Hence the set of reference items includes all the specific deictics (pronouns and determiners) except the interrogatives. demonstrative and comparative. what) cannot be cohesive since they contain only a request for specification. Personals referring to the speech roles (speaker and adresseee) are typically exophoric (we=you and I) in letter-writing. what. demonstrative reference is ‘reference by means of location. we deal with comparison in terms of likeness and unlikeness without respect to any particular property by means of a certain class of adjectives and adverbs (i. I would never have believed it.eltemario. difference) or as epithet (comparatives). Comparative reference may be described in terms of ‘general’ and ‘particular’ comparison. In the case of the demonstratives. those. after that. usually at the beginning of a clause (i. etc). fast. there are many expressions containing a demonstrative that occur as adjuncts.e. far. then). 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 However. deictic.www. there are certain differences in meaning between the functions of modifier and head since a demonstrative functioning as head is more like a personal pronoun (i. here. o Demonstrative reference. far’. So far personal reference can be also achieved by cataphoric reference by means of personal pronouns.e. Demonstrative reference is essentially a primary form of verbal pointing which may be accompanied by demonstrative action. in that case. Pick this up!). that being so. which refer forward to succeeding elements to which they are in no way structurally related (i. These items are called ‘adjectives of comparison’ and ‘adverbs of comparison’. They’ve accepted the whole scheme).e. Also. they become anaphoric in quoted speech (specially in written la nguage and narrative fiction). that is. that. identity. This includes ‘he. o Comparative reference. in the form of a gesture indicating the object referred to (i.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. these. good). That’s my brother). the speaker identifies the reference by locating it on a scale of proximity regarding place (here/there) or time (now/then) as in ‘Come here!/Come now!’ or ‘This vs. similarity. The adjectives function in the nominal group either as deictic (i. at this moment. Thus we find two subtypes: neutral (the) and selective (near. now. Personals referring to other roles (persons or objects other than the speaker or addressee) are typically anaphoric. there. it and they’ and also the third person component of ‘we’ when present. That is a big garden=near vs.e. 18/ 33 . When we refer to ‘general comparison’. identical. So.e.e. she. this. They are not primarily devices for reaching out into the preceding (or following) text. conjunctive expressions. They function either as numerative (more. instead of. or therefore. one. by virtue of their specific meanings. 1988). This is usually achieved by the use of conjunctions (included in the title of the unit).1. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 On the other hand. in consequence). The same principles operate with comparison as with other forms of reference: it may be anaphoric. or it may be cataphoric or even exophoric. second conjunctive relations and finally. The resulting prepositional group will then function as a cohesive adjunct and hence we distinguish three types of conjunctive adjuncts: 19/ 33 . but they express certain meanings which presuppose the presence of other components in the discourse as well as the text structure. We may distinguish three varieties of presenting conjunctions in a text. causality and temporality. ‘Conjunctive elements are cohesive not in themselves but indirectly. by means of a large number of conjunctive expressions: because. while . too. then. and therefore cohesive. other conjunctive items called continuatives. Frequently occurring relationships are addition.2. Conjunction is a relationship which indicates how the subsequent sentence or clause should be linked to the preceding or the following sentence or parts of sentence.e. conjunctive expressions involve the presence of a preposition which governs the reference item (i. First.4. we move into a different type of semantic relation which is a specification of the way in which what is to follow is systematically connected to what has gone before’ (Beaugrande & Dressler. 3.eltemario. first) or as epithet (comparatives). as a result of. With conjunction. if we refer to ‘particular comparison’ we compare in terms of quantity and quality by means of adjectives and adverbs. as always. within the nominal group.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja.www. Conjunctions. but not as deictic. Subordination links works when the status of one depends on that of the other. thus. so many. • First of all. The adjectives function. as. since. com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. besides that. • Secondly. in just this way) and (b) dissimilar (on the other hand. whereat). o Finally. anyway. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 o first.. When are considering cohesive relations. next). as a result. So he tried to apologize) and temporal (i.. prepositional expressions with ‘that’ or other reference item (as a result of that. the ‘and’ type and the ‘or’ type which can be in turn. There is no uniquely correct inventory of the different types of conjunctive relations. as he thought. And in all this time he said nothing). by the way).www. and also. add to this. in other words. in addition. and . thus). causal (i. either.. appositive relations which can be (a) expository (that is. each of which would highlight different aspects of the facts grouped in four categories: additive (i. for example. adversative (i. moreover. compound adverbs (ending in – ly: accordingly. then. (b) negative (nor. conversely). too). additionally. 20/ 33 . different classifications are possible. by contrast. on the contrary. or else).e. o First. (4) Comparative relations which can be (a) similar (likewise. besides. (3) Complex additive relations.eltemario. she didn’t forgive him) (Beaugrande & Dressler. so. positive or negative: (1) Simple additive relations which are classified as (a) additive (and. not . in the same way. adverbs: simple adverbs (but. also called emphatic. instead) and prepositional phrases (on the contrary. Yet he was aware of his own mistake). actually) and compound adverbs (there/where-: therefore.. in addition to). (2) Complex additive relations. neither) and (c) alternative (or. in addition to that). conjunctive relations involve the phenomena we group under the heading of conjunctions. I mean.e. or also called ‘afterthought’ which are de-emphatic because they reduce the weight acorded to the presupposing sentence and to its connection with what went before (incidentally. similarly. 1988). instead of that.. we can group them in the form of coordination. o Secondly. other compound adverbs (furthermore. (5) Finally. can be classif ied into (a) additive (furthermore. and another thing) and (b) alternative (alternatively). and . Then.e. additive conjunctions are embodied in the form of coordination. to put it another way) and (b) exemplificatory (for instance. not.e.. He was fired from work. like ‘yet’. we find cohesion in the following cases: (1) Proper adversative relations (meaning ‘in spite of’) are classified into (a) simple (yet. only). However.e. in point of fact). to tell the truth. on the contrary). because of that) which are regularly combined with initial ‘and’ (.but’) are classified into (a) correction of meaning (instead. rather. or from the communication process. she didn’t want to leave her city).e.e.e. at any rate.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 o Secondly. Yet he didn’t say anything). any/either way.. They left early in the morning. in consequence of that. (b) containing ‘and’ (but) and (c) emphatic (however. adversative conjunctions refer to a relation that is ‘contrary to expectation’. As a result. ‘therefore’ has the same potentialities as ‘however’. (4) Dismmissive adversative relations are those which are generalized adversative relations (meaning ‘no matter. (b) correction of wording (at least. which may be derived from the content of what is being said. thus. consequently. nevertheless. accordingly) and a number of expressions (as a result of that. despite this.e.. as a matter of fact.. the speaker-hearer situation. initial position and between commas (i. still’) and are classified into (a) dismissal or closed relations (in any/either case. Under the heading of causal relations are included the specific ones of result (i. he joined a charity organization). reason (i.. so ...eltemario. rather. he got depressed). that is. actually. whichever) and (b) dismissal or open-ended relations (anyhow.and the consequence of his behaviour was terrible). for instance. however that may be). therefore.e. (2) Contrastive relations (meaning ‘as against’) are expressed by means of avowal (in fact. in any case.www. o Thirdly. They occur under different positions. occurs initially or in the first part (i. With this intention. he started to find another job) and purpose (i. as in the additive. They argued so he felt really bad). though. I mean). hence. ‘thus’. all the same). (3) Corrective relations (meaning ‘not.. On account of this. causal relations are expressed by simple forms (so. Then we find the following relations of the causal type: 21/ 33 . ‘so’ occurs only initially unless following ‘and’ (i. thereupon. this time. (3) Reversed causal relations are simple items (for.. (b) emphatic (in that case. which may be simply one of sequence in time (then): the one is subsequent to the other (and then. (c) repetitive (next time. simultaneously) and (c) preceding (earlier. thus. therefore) and (b) emphatic (consequently.. (f) terminal (by this time.. aside/apart from this).eltemario. presently. here) and (b) reversed polarity (otherwise.next. subsequently). (2) Complex temporal relations can be (a) immediate (at once. that being the case....second. with this in mind/view. up till that time. at last. first.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. on another occasion.. (b) interrupted (soon. (5) Respective relations (meaning ‘with respect to’) may be (a) direct (in this respect/connection.in the end).. next. at first.. arising out of this) and (c) purpose (for this purpose. just before). in consequence of this. then’) may be (a) simple (then). afterwards.. in other respects. (2) Specific causal relations such as (a) reason (for this reason. on this occasion.. later.www. hence. on this basis).. on account of this. with this intention. the previous moment). five minutes earlier). some time earlier. under those circumstances).. it follows from this. with regard to this. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 (1) General causal relations (meaning ‘because. (4) Conditional relations (meaning ‘if. 22/ 33 . eventually). because of this).. after a time. five minutes later. (c) generalized (under the circumstances) and (d) reversed polarity (otherwise. on a previous occasion). temporal conjunctions refer to the relation between the theses of two successive sentences. before then/that. so’) are classified into (a) simple (so. o Finally. (4) Sequential and conclusive relations are (a) sequential (first. to this end).then. after that. accordingly. We may establish the following classification: (1) Simple temporal relations are classified into (a) sequential (and then. until then) and (g) punctiliar (next moment. (b) simultaneous (just then... all this time). in such an event. (3) Conclusive relations may be (a) simple (finally.. (e) durative (meanwhile. because). in the end. under the circumstances). (b) result (as a result of this.finally. next. at the same time..) and (b) conclusive (at first. previously). afterwards.. on which. formerly). first. (d) specific (next day. after that). at this point/moment. the last time. . 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 (5) Temporal relations can be (a) sequential (then. a new incident in the story. What are we doing now?). In its tonic form.www.. to conclude with) and (b) conclusive (finally. a new role or attitude being taken on by the speaker and so on (i. No matter if you don’t want to visit her.. next. (2) ‘of course’.Well. it means ‘you should have known that already’ (i. heretofore).. anyway). This item usually occurs at the beginning of a response in a dialogue (i. it is). if it is reduced. Everything is just as it was!-Of course. to get back to the point. as a final point.e. briefly) and (b) resumptive (to resume..finally. Did you enjoy the trip?. the meaning is 23/ 33 .then. Did you sign your contract?-Of course). (6) Temporal relations which involve correlative forms are (a) sequential (first.next. They are grouped according to their particular external relation (adversative. secondly) and (b) conclusive (finally.eltemario. to begin with. open your eyes!).e. it is deictic and not cohesive (i. here) and (c) future (from now on. henceforward). first. If it is tonic. (7) ‘Here and now’ relations (mainly used in reported speech) may refer to the (a) past (up to now.. a new point in the argument. It is typically used to disarm someone into accepting something the speaker knows he is likely to reject. (8) Finally.e. it means ‘I accept the fact’ (i. it serves to indicate that what follows is in fact a response to what has preceded and hence is purely cohesive in function. first.in the second place. but if not. If tonic.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. Are you ready?-Now when I tell you.e. • Finally. in short..e. (3) ‘well’. it has a dismissive meaning (no matter under which circumstances). up to this point. there are other ways of expressing conjunctive relations called continuatives. temporal and so on) or their internal relation (closely linked to the external one). In this case. However. Its use derives from its meaning under an adversative relation (i. I am going to see her anyway). (4) ‘anyway’.. that is. hitherto.secondly. in the first place. summary relations may be (a) culminative (to sum up. We refer to items such as (1) ‘now’.. to conclude with). it means the opening of a new stage in communication. in conclusion). Although these items do not express any particular conjunctive relation are nevertheless used with a cohesive force in the text.e. If not. (b) present (at this point. I might say yes).. When tonic. Often.www. ‘to come back to the point’ (i. They’ll think you are mean. 24/ 33 .eltemario..’ (i. that is. If not. (6) ‘after all’. Anyway. synonymy.e. using semantically close items. 3. You needn’t apologize.2. Because lexical cohesion in itself carries no indication whether it is functioning cohesively or not.g. metonymy (part vs.e. (7) The final cohesive device is that of intonation.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. e. "congress" and "politician". First of all. If not.e. surely). it means ‘after everything relevant has been considered. After all nobody could have known what would happen). I won’t go with you.e. Lexical cohesion does not deal with grammatical or semantic connections but with connections based on the words used. She couldn’t remember anything. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 resumptive. "sheep" and "wool". Lexical cohesion. This car is not so bad after all). It is achieved by selection of vocabulary. that is.. antonymy whereas collocation is any pair of lexical items that stand to each other in some recognisable lexico-semantic relation. ‘am I right in my understanding of what’s just been said?’ (i. it has what is basically the cohesive equivalent of the same meaning. this is marked by tonic prominence. whole). what remains is. the usual meaning is ‘in addition to’ and ‘in spite of’ (i. anaphoric items in English are phonologically non-prominent but if the cohesive relation is to be brought into focus of attention. it always requires reference to the text. and "college" and "study". – Nobody will think that.2.e. reiteration includes repetition. Cohesive elements relate the sentence to something that has gone before it. Thus the falling and the falling-rising intonation pattern are considered as expressing forms of conjunctive relations. it was not important). hyponymy. it invites the hearer to assent the proposition being enunciated by demanding an answer (i. (5) ‘surely’. they are anaphoric and there no new content to them. There are two types of lexical cohesion: reiteration and collocation. Now. – Surely?). to some other lexical item to be interpreted correctly. In its tonic form. according to Quirk et al (1972) punctuation serves two main functions. and secondly. students are encouraged to acquire the habit of consulting a dictionary in order to ensure an adequate mastery of spelling. 3. and addition of verbal markers as gerunds. and as a result. semicolons. foot notes. tables of contents and indexes. The importance of correct spelling is highlighted when Byrne says that most of us are obliged to consult a dictionary from time to time so as not to be indifferent to misspelling. Therefore. This device covers different word categories. headings. The interpreter sometimes adds coherence to the text by adding cohesion markers.eltemario. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Like in the case of synonymous reference. brackets and the use of interrogative and exclamative marks. learners tend to overlook the relevance of punctuation when producing a text.3. past tenses or third person singular in present tenses. and in relation to t his term. Moreover. Moreover. As most of them deal with form and structure of different types of texts. Secondly. collocational relation exists without any explicit reference to another item.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. Byrne (1979) states that the mastery of the writing system includes the ability to spell. full stops. punctuation is concerned with purely visual devices. rules of suffixation. Graphological devices With respect to graphological resources. but mainly. It is worth noting that punctuation has never been standardised to the same extent as spelling. Firstly. but now the nature of relation is different: it is indirect. more difficult to define and based on associations in the reader mind. among which we may mention 25/ 33 .www. and will be further developed as part of a subsequent section. or items in a list by commas). punctuation. Learners must be encouraged to pay attention to the few areas where conventions governing the use of the visual devices as fairly well established. such as capital letters. inverted commas. orthography is related to a correct spelling. we shall primarily deal with orthography and punctuation in this section. the separation of successive units (such as sentences by periods. prefixation. Firstly. native and non-native speakers alike. hyphens. and spelling becomes a problem for many users of the language. Byrne claims for the use of the dictionary as the relationship between sound and symbol in English is a complex one.2. we are mainly dealing with visual devices as we make reference to orthography. commas. the specification of language function (as when an apostrophe indicates that an inflection is genitive). 26/ 33 . for instance. or location between its concepts and sentences. 4. situationality and intertextuality.1. 4. A coherent text is a semantically connected. A condition on this continuity of sense is that the connected concepts are also related in the real world. expressing relations of closeness. or through the employment of the user-centred textuality standards of intentionality. time. both from a theoretical and a practical point of view to retain this distinction between surface and content. 1988). thus the concepts and relations which underlie the surface text. In a coherent text. the use of commas to enumerate a sequence of items. But it is necessary. students must try to understand the relevance of the use of capital letters as a mark of sentence boundary. Coherence is a purely semantic property of discourse. The term cohesion is often confused or conflated with coherence. Thus. and that the reader identifies the relations. informativity. The term coherence concerns ‘the ways in which the components of the textual world. which the reader must interpret. while cohesion is mainly concerned with morpho-syntactic devices in discourse. Definition.2. are mutually accessible and relevant’ (Beaugrande & Dressler.www. there are direct and indirect semantic referential links between lexical items in and between sentences. integrated whole. markers and clues in the speakers’ text. and the use of inverted commas to highlight a word or sentence. 4. the use of question and exclamation marks to express requests or attitudes. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 letters and filling in forms as part of a sociocultural educational aim. COHERENCE. A text must be coherent enough for the interlocutor to be able to interpret. thus. causality.eltemario. Main features. It seems probable that this coherence can be achieved either through cohesion. acceptability.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. The Communicative Approach: a basis for discourse analysis. and strategies for effective communication. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 These markers are defined as all the devices which are needed in writing in order to produce a text in which the sentences are coherently organised so as to fulfil the writer’s communicative purpose. This issue is the aim of an ethnography of communication theory in order to approach a foreign language from a pragmatic 27/ 33 . we must trace back to the origins of the assessment model of communicative competence as a basis for the analysis and articulation of discourse.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. In the 1980s. and condition expressed by the use of short utterances. The key was to considere language as social behaviour. Upon this basis. repetition and allusion to drawn the reade r’s attention. Canale and Swain (1980) or Chomsky (1957) levelled their contributions and criticisms at structural linguistic theories claiming for more communicative approaches on language teaching. antithesis. comparison (similes). such as those of addition. Regarding the educational implications of discourse analysis in language teaching. and sociolinguists on foreign and second language teaching. seeing the primary goal of language teaching as the development of the learner's communicative competence. Hence learners were considered to need both rules of use to produce language appropriate to particular situations. contrast (antithesis). onomatopoeias. we may mention from a wide range of rethorical devices the use of imagery and symbolism.www. consequence. hyperbole. This communicative approach emerged in the 1970s and 1980s as the work of anthropologists. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING. which became to be known as the Communicative Approach or simply Communicative Language Teaching.1. prominence was given to more interactive views of language teaching. 5. and cacophony and slang to make the piece of writing lively and dynamic. where interactive processes of communication received priority. and exemplification (imagery and symbolism). Scholars such as Hymes (1972). alliteration and the use of short utterances for rhythm and effect. Byrne (1979) claims that they refer to words or phrases which indicate meaning relationships between or within sentences. 5. sociologists.eltemario. result. similes and metaphors. Halliday (1970). Within the context of textual analysis. the introduction of cultural studies is an important aspect of communicative competence as communicating with people from other cultures involves not only linguistic appropriateness but also pragmatic appropriateness in the use of verbal and non-verbal behavior. usage refers to the manifestation of the knowledge of a language system and use means the realization of the language system as meaningful communicative behavior.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. the pragmatic competence as it also deals with the knowledge the learner has to acquire the sociocultural rules of language. what to talk about with whom. strategic competence. synonyms. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 and linguistic point of view and the key theory for the development of our present study. Yet. Hymes stated the four competences at work regarding the elements and rules of oral and written discourse are as follows: linguistic competence. we refer to the extent to which a given meaning is represented in both verbal and non-verbal form that is proper in a given sociolinguistic context. speaking and writing. discourse competence. It is important to highlight that language is both productive and receptive. and fluency (Hedge 2000). the analysis of discourse. reading. proposed by Widdowson (1978) have to do with the discourse competence . Cohesion deals with how utterances are linked structurally and facilitates interpretation of a text by means of cohesion devices. sentence-grammar semantics and phonology (Canale and Swain.www. 28/ 33 . where these meanings may be literal meanings. Discourse analysis is primarily concerned with the ways in which individual sentences connect together to form a communicative message. and attitudes. as it deals with linguistic and non-linguistic devices in the oral and written interaction involving all knowledge of lexical tiems and of rules of morphology. Secondly.eltemario. the analysis of discourse. This competence enables a speaker to be contextually appropriate or in Hymes’s words (1972). When we deal with appropriateness of form. Here. First. such as pronouns. 1980). to know when to speak. This competence addresses directly to the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different genres (Canale and Swain 1980) by means of cohesion in form and coherence in meaning. syntax. when not. communicative functions. ellipsis. coherence refers to the relatioships among the different meanings in a text. and therefore. the linguistic competence. Thirdly. where and in what manner. conjunctions and parallel structures to relate individual utterances and to indicate how a group of utterances is to be understood as a text. comprises all the so-called four skills: listening. Regarding the rules of discourse. pragmatic competence. it is defined in terms of the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings (Canale and Swain 1980). the rules of use and usage. when. The verbal part of communicative competence. personal. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Finally.eltemario. Regarding writing skills. filling forms. in particular. Writing and oral skills in discourse articulation are mentioned as one of the aims of our current educational system (B.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. It is stated that students will make use of this competence in a 29/ 33 . providing experiences for contact with language in context proved difficult for foreign language teachers as they were forced to rely on textbooks and classroom materials in teaching language. professional or educational fields. circumlocution. 5. official papers).www. we come to the fourth competence at work. motivation and involvement are enhanced by means of new technologies. New directions in discourse analysis. hesistation. guessing as well as shifts in register and style. there is an emphasis on significance over form regarding how to deal with discourse types. avoidance. advertisements. Otherwise. repetition. Present-day approaches deal with a communicative competence model in which first. the strategic competence. 2002). there is a need to create classrooms conditions which match those in real life and foster acquisition. the Spanish Educational System which establish a common reference framework for the teaching of foreign languages where students are intended to carry out several communication tasks with specific communicative goals within specific contexts. feeling themselves really in the language. we have to recreate as much as possible the whole cultural environment in the classroom for us to make the articulation of discourse fluent and effective. Thus. foreign language activities are provided within the framework of social interaction.O. This may be achieved by paraphrase. encouring reading and writing (letters. (Canale 1983) where verbal and nonverbal communication strategies may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient competence. Some of this motivational force is brought about by intervening in authentic communicative events. From a practical perspective in education.E. However.2. The success partly lies in the way the language becomes real to the users. This is to be achieved within the framework of the European Union educational guidelines through the European Council (1998) and. Hedge (2000) points out that strategic competence consists of using communication strategies which are used by learners to compensate for their limited linguistic competence in expressing what they want to say. and secondly. nowadays new techonologies may provide a new direction to language teaching as they set more appropriate context for students to experience the target culture. such as Comenius projects and Plumier projects. sociolinguistic competence. but also discourse competence. and phonology. and interactional role of a foreign language as a multilingual and multicultural identity. Besides. narrative fiction and frequency on cohesion devices in English texts. the Plumier project uses multimedia resources in a classroom setting where learners are expected to learn to interpret and produce meaning with members of the target culture. and establish personal relationships which may lead to keep in contact through writing skills. receptive (oral and written comprehension within verbal and non-verbal codes). thus.eltemario. The role of writing and oral skills in our present society is emphasized by the increasing necessity of learning a foreign language as we are now members of the European Union. We may also find research on intercultural communication where routines and formulaic speech are under revision of contrastive analysis between English and Spanish. and interactional competence. 30/ 33 .www. Current research on Applied Linguistics shows an interest on writing skills. the emphasis is nowadays on the use of multimedia and computers as an important means to promote a foreign language in context. we need to communicate with other countries at oral and written levels. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 natural and systematic way in order to achieve the effectiveness of communication through the different communication skills. and as such. strategic competence.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. productive (oral and written communication). among others. The Ministry of Education proposed several projects within the framework of the European Community. CONCLUSION. Written patterns are given an important role when language learners face the monumental task of acquiring not only new vocabulary. syntactic patterns. Both projects are interrelated as students put in practice their writing and reading skills by means of keeping in touch through e-mails with their friends and read their messages. This effectiveness of communication is to be achieved thanks to recent developments in foreign language education which have indicated a trend towards the field of intercultural communication. such as on the pragmatics of writing. apart from fostering the oral skills. 6. The first project is envisaged as a way for learners to experience sociocultural patterns of the target language in the target country. However. eltemario. to make them discourse analysts (see Celce-Murcia & Olshtain. by learning in context. Therefore. By exploring natural language use in authentic environments. 31/ 33 . To sum up. but also for a critical assessment of our own cultural situation. students can study speech acts by searching information on Internet about a job application.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. have a limited experience with a variety of interactive practices in the target language. second language learners are likely to rely on the strategies and expectations acquired as part of their first language development. address patterns. Without knowledge and experience within the discourse and sociocultural patterns of the target language. Language represents the deepest manifestation of a culture. opening and closings of museums. learners gain a greater appreciation and understanding of the discourse patterns associated with a given genre or speech event as well as the sociolinguistic factors that contribute to linguistic variation across settings and contexts. The assumptions of discourse analysis we have reviewed in this study are then important not only for understanding written and oral discourse patterns and the conditions of their production. that is. such as reading a complaint sheet. One problem for second language learners is not to acquire a sociocultural knowledge on the foreign language they are learning. including those taken over from the group of which they are part. and people’s values systems. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Students need opportunities to investigate the systematicity of language at all linguistic levels.www. For example. we may say that language is where culture impinges on form and where second language speakers find their confidence threatened through the diversity of registers. One way that teachers can include the study of discourse in the second language classroom is to allow the students themselves to study language. play a substantial role in the way they use not only their first language but also subsequently acquired ones. writing a letter to a department store. 2000). and therefore. which may be inappropriate for the second language setting and may lead to communication difficulties and misunderstandings. genres and styles that make up the first language speaker’s day to day interaction. or writing a letter to an English person with the appropriate written patterns. one of the goals of second language teaching is to expose learners to different discourse patterns in different texts and interactions. or other aspects of speech events. especially at the highest level of written discourse. Teaching. Yule. Longman. 1975. Brown. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 1980. 1976.º 112/2002. 32/ 33 . E. Pride and J. Currículo de Bachillerato en la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia. D. Cook. London. de 13 de septiembre. (2000).K. M. Cambridge University Press. 1983. de 13 de septiembre. On communicative competence. Decreto N. B. Discourse Analysis. M.eltemario. Cohesion in English . K. Guy. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.O.K. B.E.Hymes. Sociolinguistics. M. 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 7. Assessment. 1972. Victoria: Deakin University. Halliday.. Currículo de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria en la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia. 1983. Discourse and context in language teaching. and R. Beaugrande. 1989. London: Edward Arnold. 2002. Longman. 269-93. Canale.www. Language and Communication. in J.º 113/2002. 1985. B. Halliday. 2002. R. Spoken and Written Language.A. Richards and R. Hasan. 1988. New York: Cambridge University Press. Celce-Murcia. Discourse. & Dressler. & Olshtain. G. Consejería de Educación y Cultura. From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy.A. A Common European Framework of reference. BIBLIOGRAPHY. Schmidt (eds. Canale.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. and M. pp. M. Introduction to Text Linguistics. M.A. Halliday.). Consejería de Educación y Cultura. In J. London: Longman. Swain. Decreto N. and G.E.. W.). M. Holmes (eds.O. Explorations in the Functions of Language. Oxford University Press. Applied Linguistics 1 (1). Council of Europe (1998) Modern Languages: Learning. Fernández-Villanueva. T. Marta.www. J. Santamaría. Carmen. Elsa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. Trabajos en Lingüística Aplicada . 2003 Temario Específico – Tema 29 Hedge Tricia (2000) Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom (OUP). 1974. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.com Oposiciones Secundaria – Inglés © Mª Dolores Pérez Raja. R. T. London: Longman. Universidad de Alcalá. Tejedor. Hymes. La Lingüística Aplicada a finales del Siglo XX. Hymes. (1969). Searle. Naves.eltemario. 2001. Mouton publishers. Oliver y Tragant. 1984. Isabel. D. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 1981. 33/ 33 . Carmen. van Dijk. On communicative competence. D. Mª Luz. Speech Acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Ensayos y propuestas. Strunk. 2001. Universidad de Barcelona. Cristina y Valero. Teresa. van Dijk. Revistas de la Asociación Española de Lingüística Aplicada (AESLA): De la Cruz. Celaya. 1972.
Copyright © 2024 DOKUMEN.SITE Inc.