a comparative study of lexical cohesive devices through some english and vietnamese fables = nghiên cứu so sánh các phương tiện liên kết từ vựng thông qua một số truyện ngụ ngôn anh và việ

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
…………………………………


BUI THUY ANH



A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES
THROUGH SOME ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE FABLES
(NGHIÊN CỨU SO SÁNH CÁC PHƯƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT TỪ VỰNG
THÔNG QUA MỘT SỐ TRUYỆN NGỤ NGÔN ANH VÀ VIỆT)



MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
Field : English liguistics
Code: 602215





Hanoi, April, 2009

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
…………………………………

BUI THUY ANH


A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES
THROUGH SOME ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE FABLES
(NGHIÊN CỨU SO SÁNH CÁC PHƯƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT TỪ VỰNG
THÔNG QUA MỘT SỐ TRUYỆN NGỤ NGÔN ANH VÀ VIỆT)


MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
Field : English liguistics
Code: 602215


Supervisor : TRẦN XUÂN ĐIỆP (Ph.D)


II

TABLE OF CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
PART I : INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………… 1
1. Rational………………………………………………………………………….1
2. Aims of the study……………………………………………………………… 2
3. Scope of the study……………………………………………………………….2
4. Methods of the study…………………………………………………………….2
5. Design of the study…………………………………………………………… 3
PART II: DEVELOPMENT

Chapter 1 : Literature Review and Theoreretical background
1.1. Literature Review……………………………………………………………4
1.2. Theoretical background
1.2.1. Discourse and discourse analysis……………………………………….6
1.2.1.1. The concept of discourse……………………… ………………………6
1.2.1.2. Discourse and text…………………………….……………………… 7
1.2.1.3. Discourse analysis…………… ……………………………………….7
1.2.2. Theories of genres………………………………………………………………8
1.2.2.1. Definition of genre……………………………………………………………8
1.2.2.2. Genre versus register……………………………………………………… 10
1.2.2.3. Common discourse genre……………………………………………………13
1.2.3. Fables as a genre of discourse…………………………………………………15
1.2.3.1. Definitions of Fables……………………………………………………… 15
1.2.3.2. General characteristics of fables…………………………………………….16
1.2.4. Cohesion and coherence………………………………………………………16
1.2.4.1. Cohesion versus coherence………………………………………………….16
1.2.4.2. Cohesion and discourse structure……………………………………………16
1.2.4.3. Types of cohesion………………………………………………………… 17
1.2.4.3.1. Grammatical cohesion…………………………………………………….18
1.2.4.3.2. Lexical cohesion………………………………………………………… 19

III

Chapter 2: A comparative study of Lexical cohesive devices through some
English and Vietnamese fables
2.1. Lexical reiteration…………………………………………………….…… … 22
2.1.1. Repetition………………………………………………………………….…22
2.1.2. Synonymy……………………………………………………………………27
2.1.3. Antonymy………………………………………………………….…………29
2.1.4. Superordinate and general word…………………………………….……… 29

2.2. Collocation…………………………………………………………….……… 30
2.3. Concluding remarks on lexical cohesion……………………………………….32
PART III: CONCLUSION
1. Recapitulation of major ideas…………………………………………….……36
2. Implications……………………………………………………………………36
3. Suggestions for further studies……………………………………… ……….37
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………… ………38
APPENDIX
1



Part I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale

It is clear that acquiring a language is not only limited to knowing about its
grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary. Producing a grammatically correct
sentence is not sufficient to use a language to communicate successfully with other
people. It is very important for language learners to know how to use our linguistic
competence in a larger unit of communication, i.e. language in use, or in other
words, a discourse, in order to convey our ideas to learners as well as to obtain
others.
Several linguists such as Brown and Yule (1983), Halliday and Hasan (1976),
Hatim and Mason (1990), Cook (1989), Swales (1990), etc… have been interested
in the concepts of discourse and discourse analysis. In their view of points,
discourse can be shown through different genres, which are shown in terms of a set
of features which we perceive as being appropriate to a given social occasion
(Hatim and Mason, 1990). Each genre of discourse possesses its own discourse
features.
A fable is ― a traditional short story that teaches a moral lesson, especially one with

animals as characters‖ ( Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary). Although fables
are short and simple, they own their typical features distinguished from other
genres of discourse such as an article or a speech. But in fact, English fables are not
still paid attention to despite the fact that they represent great potentials for
teaching language to learners. With all the reasons above, the author would like to
choose ― Analysis of lexical cohesive devices in English and Vietnamese Fables as
the topic of this study. I do hope that the results of this study are of practical value.

2. Aims of the study
The main aims of the thesis are as follows:
 To identify lexical cohesive devices used in English and Vietnamese Fables.
2



 To compare lexical cohesive devices through some English and Vietnamese
Fables

3. Scope of the study:
This study will firstly deal with theoretical background of discourse especially
coherence, cohesion and cohesive devices. The attention of the study will be
secondly paid to considering study of lexical cohesive devices through some
English fables and their equivalents in Vietnamese Fables. Our efforts are to collect
data in both English and Vietnamese to see the frequencies and differences and
similarities of each device and sub-device of lexical cohesive devices in the
discourse in both languages.

4. Methods of the study
To attain the aims of the study, the research will conduct the following activities:
 Firstly, data including relevant theories and fables for analysis will be

collected. Relevant theories will be extracted from various linguistic books
written by several linguists, such as Cook (1989), Hatim and Mason (1990),
Swales (1990), Simpson (1997), Toolan (1998), ect. English fables and
Vietnamese fables which are unavailable in printed books in Viet Nam, will
be collected from Internet Sources.
 Secondly, relevant theories will be presented on the ground of several
linguists, viewpoints.
 Then, 30 selected fables (15 English fables and 15 Vietnamese Fables) will
be comprehensively investigated for lexical cohesive devices so as to find
out the most typical cohesive devices used in English and Vietnamese
Fables.
 After all, based on the results of the analysis, some concluding remarks can
be generalized and some implications for teaching and learning English
fables can be proposed.
Three successive methods chosen for the best results are descriptive,
analytical and comparative.
3




5. Design of the study
Within the scope mentioned above, the study consists of three main parts:
introduction, development and conclusion.
Part 2 is divided into three chapters. In the first chapter, Literature Review,
theoretical knowledge of lexical cohesive devices and English Fables are presented.
The second chapter , also the main one of the study, deals with the study of lexical
cohesive devices through some English and Vietnamese fables in the last chapter,
we attempt to present some findings and implications.

4



Part II: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
This chapter deals with literature review and theoretical topics such as concepts of
discourse, cohesion & coherence, cohesive devices, register and genre, fables which are
relevant to the purpose of the study.
1.1. LITERATURE REVIEW
As a genre of discourse in traditional literature, fables are brief stories which take abstract
ideas of good and bad, wisdom and foolishness. Because of their relative simple structure
and moralizing characters, fables have become popular not only adults but also children.
They can be used as a means of education by entertainment and as a convenient disguise
for manifestation of political and social convictions. English fables, however, have not
received attentions, despite the fact that they represent great potentials for teaching

language to learners, especially learners at the elementary level. Actually, they have not
been studied systematically. There have not been many considerable researchers carrying
out the study of English Fables. The first research was an M.A. thesis named ― Some
Discourse Features Of English Fables‖ by Nguyen Thi Thao ( 2005). After examining 45
selected fables, Thao comes to the following conclusions:
The structure of fables is relatively simple, consisting of normally three components: the
Orientation, the Event Chain and the Coda. The development of the story is illustrated as
one-way track as follows:
Orientation Event Chain Coda
If all the three components are available, they are likely to be arranged in supposed order,
hardly ever can we see two of them exchange positions with each other. It means that the
Event Chain never precedes the Orientation, or the Coda never appears before the Event
Chain.
An ideal fable realizes all these components. However, it is proved from the analysis that
the first and the final components are optional ones, which may or may not exist in English
fables. Frequently, a fable lacks either or event both of the two components, so that the
5



story commences from Initiating Events, the Sequent Event and destinates at the Final
Event.
In terms grammatical cohesion, Reference and especially Personal Reference, account for
the highest frequencies of use. This can be explained by the fact that fables, are, at least,
stories in which characters interact with one another. This raises the need of the use of
personal reference to refer to these animals
Lexical cohesion such as repetition, collocation, synonyms,antonyms, general word and
superordinate play an indispensable part in fables. Among these lexical cohesive devices,
repetition contributes the biggest proportion in English Fables.
With respect to conjunctions, addictive relation serves the most active role to describe

sequence of the events.
In summary, it is noticeable that several studies on cohesive devices and particularly
lexical cohesive devices have been carried out in many discourses and genres, while there
is only one researcher showing her interest in English fables. She gave a detailed analysis
to how some discourse features of English fables. A study of lexical cohesive devices
through some English and Vietnamese fables has not been paid attention. For these
reasons, this study is carried with the hope that the result of the study is helpful for the
application of English fables to teach English to Vietnamese fables.








6



1.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
1.2.1. Discourse and Discourse analysis
1.2.1.1. The concept of discourse
The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (1998) defines
discourse as follows: ―Discourse is a general term for example of language use, i.e.
language has been produced as the result of an act of communication‖. Sharing the same
concern, many other linguists have so far given definitions of discouse. Crystal( 1992:25)
claims that discourse is ― a continuous stretch of ( especially spoken) language than a
sentence, often constituting a coherent unit, such as a sermon, an argument, a joke or a
narrative.‖ Widdowson (1979) states: ―Discourse is a use of sentences to perform acts of

communication. Cook (1989) says that discourse is ― stretches of language perceived to be
meaningful, unified and purposeful‖. In his point of view, discourse may be composed of
one or more well-formed grammatical sentences- and indeed it often is- but it does not
have to be. There can be some grammatical mistakes in a discourse, which do not affect the
overall structure and meaning of the discourse. Discourse treats the rules of grammar as a
resource, conforming to them when it needs to, but departing from them when it does not.
Discourse can be anything from a conversation to a great novel or a legal case. Cook also
argues that ― What matters is not its conformity to rules, but he facts that it communicates
and is recognized by its receivers as coherent.‖ Discourse is supposed to be meaningful
and thus to be used to communicate with one person in a way that another person does not
have the necessary knowledge to make sense of.
According to Hatim and Mason (1990), discourse is ― a matter of expression of attitude‖
and is ― a mode of speaking and writing which involves the participant in adopting a
particular on certain areas of socio-cultural activity: racial discourse, scientific discourse,
domestic discourse‖ Discourse, therefore, are not independent of language, though they
reflect non-linguistic phenomena. They also confirm that certain syntactic and (far more
commonly) semantic features correlate with certain discourses.
To sum up, the majority of linguists seem to have the same view when defining the
concept of discourse . Their definitions, though expressed in different ways, all emphasize
the two most important aspects of a discourse:
7



- The structure of a discourse: a discourse is a well-formed organization
above the level of a sentence;
- The function of a discourse : a discourse serves as a means of
communication.
1.2.1.2. Discourse and Text
Linguists have paid much attention to the distinction between a discourse and a text since

confusion of these two terms may result in the failures of discourse analysis. Even though
that the distinction is not always clear and the two terms are used interchangeably by some
linguists. As in the definition of discourse by Halliday and Hasan, ―text‖ is employed to
refer to ―discourse‖; they see ―text‖ as a ―semantic unit‖ characterized by cohesion. The
two authors state: ―A text is a passage of discourse which coherent in these two regards: it
is coherent with respect to itself , and therefore consistent in register; and it is coherent
with respect to itself, and therefore cohesive‖ (1976: 23). For some other linguists, ―text‖ is
used for writing and ―discourse‘ for speech. The third group of linguists like Brown &
Yule, Nunan, Widdowson, and Cook see discourse as a process and text as a product.
Brown & Yule argue that text is the representation of discourse and the verbal record of a
communication act.
There is disagreement about the meanings of the two terms discourse and text. However,
all linguistics agree that both text and discourse need to be defined in terms of meaning and
that coherent text/ pieces of discourse are those that form a meaningful whole. Easily,
discourse is a general tem to refer to all acts of verbal communication, whereas a text is
simply a verbal record of the whole communicative process (that is discourse) in which
many situational factors are involved; it can be written and spoken, and there is no limit to
the size of a text. Thus, the text is a purely linguistic, formal object, while discourse has
both linguistic and non-linguistic properties.
1.2.1.3. Discourse Analysis
Discourse analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship between language and
the context in which it is used. This has been developed from the works of different
disciplines in the 1960s, including linguistics, semiotics, psychology, anthropology and
8



sociology. Discourse analysis study language in use: written texts and spoken data of all
kinds under the approach different from those old grammarians. There have been
numerous interpretation to what is meant by Discourse analysis.

British discourse analysis was mainly influenced by M.A.K . Haliday‘s functions approach
to language. Haliday‘s framework emphasized the social function of language and the
thematic and informational structure of speech and writing. De Beaugrande (1980) Haliday
and Hasan (1976) as well as Prague School of linguistics in pointing out the link between
grammar and discourse.
Yule (1996: 139) states: ―In the study of language, some of the most interesting question
arise in conection with the way language is ‗used‘, rather than what its components are
(…) We ware, in effect, asking how it is that language-users interpret what other language
users intend to convey. When we carry this investigation further and ask how it is that we ,
as language-users, make sense of what we read in texts, understand what speakers mean
despite what they say, recognize connected as opposed to jumbled or incoherent discourse
and successfully take part in that complex activity called conversation, we are undertaking
what is known as discourse analysis.‖
As can be noticed clearly, the term ―discourse analysis‖ is very ambiguous. For the sake of
research, we would like to take the definition from Hoa‘s (2000) An Introduction to
Discourse Analysis as the base of our study: Discourse analysis is considered ―as a study
of how and for what purposes language is used in a certain context of situation and the
linguistic mean to carry out these purposes‖.
1.2.2.Theories of genres
1.2.2.1 Definition of genre:
The term genre has been used for many years to refer to different styles of literary
discourse, such as sonnets, tragedies and romances. It highlights the fact that different
styles of discourse can be identified by their overall shape of generic structure. In recent
times, the term has been adapted by functional linguists to refer to different types of
communicative events (Martin, 1984; Swales, 1990). A communicative event is defined as
―a piece of oral or written interaction, which contains a complete message; the event itself
9

may involve oral language (for example, a sermon, a casual conversation), or written
language (for example, a poem, a newspaper headlines)‖ (Nunan, 1993:117). The
functional linguists argue that language exists to fulfill certain functions, and that these
structure emerges as people communicate with one another-that is, it will have certain
predictable stages. The communicative purpose will also be reflected in the basic building
blocks of the discourse-that is, the words and grammatical structures themselves. In other
words, different types of communicative events result in different types of discourse, and
each of these will have its own distinctive characteristics. Some events result in sermon,
others in political speech and casual conversation will be different, each discourse type will
share certain characteristics which will set it apart from other discourse types.
According to Webster‘s Third New International Dictionary genre is a ―distinctive type or
category of literary composition”. Linguists hold different views about the definition of
genre. Martin (1985:250), cited in Swales (1990), offers a relatively simple definition with
illustrations about genre:”Genres are how things get done, when language is used to
accomplish them. They range from literary to far from literary forms: poems, narratives,
expositions, lectures, seminars, recipes, manuals, appointment making, service encounters,
news broadcasts and so on. The term genre is used here to embrace each of the
linguistically realized activity types which comprise so much of our culture.” Martin‘s
definition, however, does not reveal much clearly the nature of genre, and how each genre
differs from one another.
According to Kress (1985:19), cited in Hatim and Mason (1990:69), genres are
“conventionalized forms of texts which reflect the functions and goats involved in
particular social occasions as well as the purposes of the participants in them,” From a
socio-semiotic point of view, this particular use of language is best viewed in terms of
norms which are internalized as part of the ability to communicate.
Hatim and Mason (1990:140) claim that:”genres are viewed in terms of a set of features
which we perceive as being appropriate to a given social occasion”. In other words, the
conventions of the social occasion are the key factor in determining genres; and there is a
relationship between elements of lexis, grammar, etc. and the social occasion associated
which particular genres.

10



Swale (1990) reviews, how genres are perceived from different perspectives, namely
folklore, literary, linguistic and rhetoric. In his point of view, the concept of genres appears
to be “a fuzzy concept, a somewhat loose term of art”. He also discovers that, different as
the definitions by several linguists are, they also indicate something of a common stance,
the components of which can be summarized as follows:
- A distrust of classification and of facile or premature prescriptivism
- A sense that genres are important for integrating past and present
- A recognition that genres are situated within discourse communities
- An emphasis on communicative purpose and social action
- An interest in generic structure
1.2.2.2. Genre versus Register:
The relationship between genre and the longer established register has paid much attention
to. They are actually two related concepts, and it is not always easy to discriminate one
from another.
The concept of Register is regarded as ―a useful tool with which to make comparisons
between different genre of language‖ (Simpson, 1997:10). Gains and Redman (1986)
shares a completely the same definition and some illustrations about registers, such as the
language of economics, of medicine, baking, law, etc.
It is necessary to classify the difference between a register and a dialect. A dialect is a
linguistic variety that is indentified according to the user of language: it reveals important
information about the characteristics of their speaker-their social and regional background.
Dialects are distinguished from one another by differences in grammar and lexis. A
register, on the other hand, is defined according to the use to which language is being put;
in other words, a register shows what a speaker or writer is doing with language at a given
moment. In more formal term, a register is a fixed pattern of vocabulary and grammar
which co-occurs with and is conventionally associated with a specific context.

Registers are often discussed in term of three features of context known as field, tenor, and
mode. Halliday (1978) states that ―there are three aspects in any situation that have
linguistic consequences: field, mode, and tenor of discourse”:
11



- Field (or reference to ―what is going on‖): is the kind of language use which
reflects the purposive role, or the social function of the text. Field equals the
setting and purpose of the interaction.
- Mode: refers to the medium of the language activity or the channel chosen
to communicate, i.e. whether it is spoken or written. It is the manifestation
of the nature of language code being used.
- Tenor: relays the relationship between the addresser and the addressee; this
may be analyzed in terms of basic distinctions of formality on a scale of
categories, which range from formal to informal, such as : polite-colloquial-
intimate.
With reference to the mutual relation between genre and register, Martin (1985), cited in
Swales (1990:40), suggests the three-way distinction: genres are realized through registers,
and registers in turn are realized through language. He argues that genres constrain the
ways in which register variables of field, tenor and more can be combined in a particular
society. Genres also comprise a system for accomplishing social purposes by verbal means.
Couture (1968), cited in Swales (1990:41) explains that registers impose constraints at the
linguistic levels of vocabulary and syntax, whereas genre constraints operate at the level of
discourse structure. For Couture the two concepts need to be kept apart: genres (research
report, explanation, business report, etc.) are completable structured text, while registers
(language of scientific reporting, language of newspaper reporting, bureaucratic language,
etc.) represent more generalizable stylistic choices.
The relationship between genre and register can be best revealed through Halliday‘s model
of discourse analysis, which is cited in Munday (2001:90):

Sociocultural environment

Genre


Register
(field, tenor,mode)
12




Discourse semantics
( ideational, interpersonal, textual )


Lexicogrammar
( transitivity, modality, theme-rhyme, cohesion)

Figure 1: Halliday’s model of discourse analysis
Halliday‘s model represents a close interrelation relation between the surface-level
realizations of the linguistic functions and the sociocultural framework . The rows in the
figure show the direction of influence. The genre ( the conventional text type that is
associated with a specific communicative function) is conditioned by the sociocultural
environment and itself has an direct influence on the other elements in the framework. The
first of these is register concluding three variable elements ( field, tenor,and mode ). Each
of these variables is associated with a strand of meaning. These trands, which together
form the discourse semantics of a text, are the three metafunctions: ideational,
interpersonal and textual. The metafunctions are realized by the lexicogrammar, that is the
choice of wording and structure.

 Field: associated with ideational meaning, which is realized via transitivity patterns
( verb types, active/passive structures, participants in the process, ect)
 Tenor: associated with interpersonal meaning, which is realized via patterns of
modality.
 Mode: associated with textual meaning, which is realized via the thematic and
information structure ( mainly the order and structuring of elements in a clause) and
cohesion ( the way the texts hangs together lexically, including the use of ellipses,
collocations, repetitions, ect.)
Generally, it is no doubt that context influences the choice of register, and certain
registers are appropriate only on to a certain context. Genres have ― complementary‖
13



register, and communicative success with the text may require ― an appropriate
relationship to systems of genre and register‖ ( Couture, 1986: 86)
1.2.2.3. Common discourse genres:
It is supposed that discourse is divided into two main categories: spoken ( or oral) genre
and written genre. The tradition division of language into the spoken and the written is
clearly and sensibly based on a difference in production and reception: we use our mouths
and ears for one, and our hands and eyes for the other.
With reference to oral discourse, the sub-division of this broad category may result in a
variety of text-types, some of which are: oral narrative, jokes, unrehearsed conversation,
oral poetry, speeches, lectures, songs, ect. Spoken discourse is regarded as less planned and
orderly, but more open to intervention by the receiver. There are some kinds of spoken
discourse, however- like lessons, lectures, interviews, trials, ect ; which have significantly
features in common with written discourse.
In the case of written discourse, Hevey and Higgins (1992), cited in Lien ( 2003) , states
that ― there are so many different varieties‖, which they suggest as follows:
 Theoretical/ religious genres, of which the subject matter implies the

existence of a ― spiritual world‖, which has its own external realities and
unsharable truths
 Theoretical/ philosophical genres, having as their subject matter a ― world‖
of ideas, which are understood to exist independently of the individual
minds that think them; and it is reasoning but not fictional imaginination or
spiritual faith that helps realize these genres.
 Empirical/ descriptive genres: genres of this category purport to treat of the
real objective world as it is experienced by observers.
 Persuasive/ prescriptive genres, aiming at influencing readers to behave in
 textually prescribed ways; this aim can be pursued through various means:
explicit and helpful instructions, orders, rules, ect.
14



 Literary/ fictional genres, whose text must be about ― fictive‖, imaginary
world of events and characters created autonomousely in and through the
text themselves, and beyond the physical world‘s control outside.
It is clear that literary genres differ from the other genres in linguistic and imaginative
qualities: literary genres are built on imaginative thinking, symbolic language while other
genres focus attention on logical thinking and logical language.
Simpson (1997:13) states that although certain communicative contexts regularly predict
certain registers, a notable exception is literacy communication. Literature is simply not a
register of language. It is a typical feature of literary discourse to shake itself free of the
structures imposed by register. Moreover, literary discourse has the capacity to assimilate
and absorb different registers and this results in complex and multilayered patterns of
communication Bakhtin ( 1986: 62), cited in Simpson ( 1997), introduces the concept of
secondary genres and claims that : “ Secondary ( complex) speech genres – novels,
dramas, ect. arise in more complex and comparatively highly developed and organized
cultural communication ( primarily written) that is artistic, scientific, sociopolitical, and so

on. During the process of their formation, they absorb and digest various primary ( simple)
genres that have taken form in unmediated speech communion.”
1.2.3. Fables as a genre of discourse
1.2.3.1. Definition of fables:
A fable is ― a brief allegorical narrative, in verse or prose, which illustrates a moral thesis
or satirizing human beings; the characters of a fable are usually animals who talk and act
like people while retaining their animal traits‖.( The Columbia Electronics Encyclopedia)
According to Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, a fable is ― a traditional short story
that teaches a moral lesson, especially one with animals as characters‖
Fables are short stories which takes abstract ideas of good and bad, wisdom and
foolishness and make them concrete. Fables have some characteristics. Characters in fables
are usually animals, or sometimes inanimate objects which behave as human-beings.
15



Characters are flat, and stand for one human trait. Plot is very brief with one incident. The
story teaches a moral lesson, which may or may not be expressed in a proverb or maxim
The varying corpus denoted Aesopica or Aesop's Fables includes most of the best-known
western fables, which are attributed to the legendary Aesop, supposed to have been a slave
in ancient Greece around 550 BC. Many familiar fables of Aesop include ―The Crow and
the Pitcher,‖ ―The Hare and the Tortoise,‖ and ―The Lion and the Mouse.‖
Hundreds of fables were composed in ancient India during the first millennium BC, often
as stories within frame stories. These included Vishnu Sarma's Panchatantra, the
Hitopadesha, Vikram and The Vampire, and Syntipas' Seven Wise Masters, which were
collections of fables that were later influential throughout the Old World The most
famous fables from the Middle East were the One Thousand and One Nights, also known
as the Arabian Nights.
Fables had a further long tradition through the Middle Ages, and became part of European
high literature. During the 17th century, the French fabulist Jean de La Fontaine (1621–

1695) saw the soul of the fable in the moral — a rule of behavior. Starting with the
Aesopian pattern, La Fontaine set out to satirize the court, the church, the rising
bourgeoisie, indeed the entire human scene of his time. La Fontaine's model was
subsequently emulated by Poland's Ignacy Krasicki (1735–1801),Russia's Ivan Krylov
(1769–1844) and Spain's Félix María de Samaniego (1745-1801).
In modern times, the fable has been trivialized in children's books. Yet it has also been
fully adapted to modern adult literature. For instance, James Thurber used the ancient style
in his books, Fables for Our Time and The Beast in Me and Other Animals. In England, the
tradition of the fable was continued in the 17
th
and 28
th
century by John Dryden and John
Gay. The use of the fable in the 20
th
century can be seen in James Thurber‘s “ Fables of
our times” (1940) and in George Orwell‘s political allegory, ― Animal Farm‖ (1945). In
the United States, the American poet Marianne Moore wrote poems quiet similar to fables
in their use of animals and animal traits to comment on human experience; she also
published an excellent translation of ― The fables of La Fontaine” ( 1954). And there are
plenty of other well-known fabulists.
16



Fables become worldwide due to their simple structure and moralizing characters, fables
have gained enormous popularity. They are also seen as a means of education by
entertainment and as convenient disguise for manifestations of political and social
convictions.
1.2.3.2. General characteristics of fables:

Fables, as a genre of discourse in traditional literature, brief stories which take abstract
ideas of good and bad, wisdom and foolishness and make them concrete. Fables own the
following characteristics:
- Characters are animals, inanimate objects behaving like human-beings.
- Characters are flat and stand for one human trait.
- Plot is very brief, with one incident.
- The story is a lesson which may or may not be expresses in a proverb or
maxim.
1.2.4. Cohesion and coherence
1.2.4.1 Cohesion vs Coherence
Cohesion, a term used by Halliday and Hasan (1997), refers to the various linguistic means
– the grammatical, lexical, phonological relationship between different elements of a text.
Thus, this relationship may be between different parts of a sentence of different sentences
in other words, they ― stick together‖ to make up a sentence or into larger units of
paragraphs or chapters or discourse.
Coherence refers to the relationship in which various elements in a text mesh together
properly into a coherent whole. In other words, as Nunan (1993) coherence is ― the feeling
that sequences of sentences or utterances seems to hang together and make sense‖.
In fact, cohesion and coherence have a close relationship in making a perfectly
communicative text. To be more exact, cohesion contributes to the successful coherence of
a text and coherence is something created by the reader in the act of reading the text. In
short, although coherence and cohesion, in essence, is difference from each other they are
closely link with one another. They present the very essential elements that make coherent
17



text or discourse different from random sentences or utterance. Coherence is embodied by
a system of cohesion devices and cohesion is mainly used to embody coherence.
1.2.4.2. Types of Cohesion

According to Halliday and Hasan ( 1976), the classification of cohesion is based on the
linguistic form. The type of cohesion depends either on semantics relation in the linguistic
system or on lexico – grammatical relations. In other words, the cohesive relation can be
interpreted as being either lexicogrammatical in nature and semantic. It can be made
clearer in the following description.
Nature of cohesive relation
Types of cohesion
Relatedness of form
Relatedness of reference
Semantic connection
Substitution and ellipsis; lexical collocation
Reference; lexical reiteration
Conjunction

Figure 2: Type of cohesion
( Sourse: Halliday and Hasan, 1976:304)
Reference, substitution and ellipsis are clearly grammatical; lexical cohesion, as the name
implies, lexical. Conjunction is on the borderline of the grammatical and the lexical; the set
of conjunctive element can probably be interpreted grammatical in terms of systems, and
some conjunctive expressions involve lexical selection. However, it is better to put it in the
group of grammatical cohesion as it is mainly grammatical with a lexical component
inside. Consequently, we can refer to grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion as
follows




18

Grammatical cohesion
Lexical cohesion
Reference
 Exophoric
 Endophoric
+ Personal
+ Demonstrative
+ Comparative
Substitution
 Norminal
substitution
 Verbal substitution
 Clausal substitution
Ellipsis
 Norminal ellipsis

Conjunction
 Additive
 Adversative
 Causal
 Temporal
 Others
Reiteration
 Same word/
repetition
 Synonym/ near
synonyms
 Superordinates
 General words

Collocation

1.2.4.2.1. Grammatical cohesion
Reference
In the view of Halliday and Hasan ( 196:23), reference is a semantic relation and ― since
the relationship is on the semantic level, the reference item is in no way constrain to match
the grammatical class of the item it refers to‖. The two scholars also distinguish situational
and textual reference by contrasting exophora and endophora. Then they conclude that
reference items may be exophoric or endophoric; and if endophoric, they may be anaphoric
and cataphoric.
Substitution
Substitution is a relation in the wording rather than in the meaning and within the text. It is
the use of substitute word or phrase to avoid repetition. Most of the substitutes are pro-
forms within sentences, which can be used across sentences. There are three types of
substitution: norminal, verbal and clausal substitution.
Ellipsis
19



Ellipsis is an omission of certain elements from a sentence or a clause and can only be
recovered by referring to an element in the proceeding text. The former is non-cohesive
and the latter is cohesive. Elliptical cohesion always appears anaphoric. Ellipsis can be
repetition. This is quite similar to substitution in terms of three types: norminal ellipsis,
verbal ellipsis, and clausal ellipsis.
Conjunction
Conjunction differs from substitution, ellipsis and reference in the fact that it is not a
device for reminding the readers of previously-mentioned entities, actions and states of
affairs. It is not on the kind of anaphoric relation. It is, however, a truly cohesive device
because it signal relationship that can only be understood through reference to other parts

of the text. There are four types of conjunction: temporal, causal, additive and adversative.
1.2.4.2.2. Lexical cohesion
Besides grammatical cohesion, lexical cohesion has a vital role in creating a discourse. It is
clearly admitted that vocabulary does increase the textuality of discourse. Lexical cohesion
occurs when vocabulary item in a discourse are semantically related in some way. In other
words, they are related in terms of meanings. Halliday and Hasan ( 1976) divided lexical
cohesion into two main categories: reiteration and collocation
a. Reiteration
Reiteration has an appearance of systematic relationships between or among lexical items
in the text. The concept of reiteration provided by Halliday and Hasan (1976;319) is as
follows:
Reiteration is the repetition of a lexical item, or the occurrence of a synonym of
some kind, 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 show by the fact that cohesion takes place even where there is no referential
relation………
20



From the complete concept above, reiteration can be regarded as a form which involves the
repetition of a lexical item, at one end of the scale, the use of a general word of a preceding
item, at the other end of the scale, and the number of thing in between- the use of
synonym, antonym and superordinate and general words:
Repetition
Repetition is the way we repeat exactly a lexical item mentioned previously in the text.
Thus, repetition aims at logical emphasis, which is necessary to fix the attention of the
readers on the key words or phrases of the utterances.

Synonym
Synonymy means that two or more words have the same meaning. Many new words in
English appear very close in meaning to each other. ―Begin‖ and ― start‖; ― worship‖ and ―
adore‖ are just a few hundreds of words that seem to be frequently interchangeable without
loss of meaning.
Antonym
Antonym is a word which is of the same part of speech and apposite in meaning to another
word. But this definition is not adequate as words may be opposite in meaning in different
ways, and some words do not have exact opposites.
Super-ordinate and general words
Super-ordinate in texts means that the later noun is synonymous with the previous one in
the sense of higher level of generality. General words are, according to Halliday and
Hasan, cohesive only when they have the same referent as whatever they are presupposing
, and when it is accompanied by reference item ― the‖ or one of the demonstratives ― this‖,
― that‖,‖these‖, ―those‖.
b. Collocation
Collocation is known as a tendency to co-occur in the lexical environment without
depending on any semantic relationship.
21



Collocation, as defined in Collius Cobuild English language Dictionary, is the way that
some words occurs regularly whenever another word is used. Besides, many linguistics
also gave their definitions. According to Mc.Cathy (1990:158) collocation is a binding
force between the words of language or collocations are the likelihood of co-utterance
between words. Under Richards and others ( 1992:62) collocation refers to the restrictions
on how words can be used together.
Within the scope of this minor thesis, we would like to focus on the analysis of only lexical
cohesive devices used in English and Vietnamese fables.