A study of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in some written discourses from the course book “english for chemistry”

A study of grammatical and lexical cohesive
devices in some written discourses from the
course book “english for chemistry”

Phạm Thị Vân Annh


Trường Đại học KHXH&NV
Luận văn ThS. Chuyên ngành: Enlish Linguistics; Mã số: 60 22 15
Người hướng dẫn: Dr. Trần Xuân Điệp
Năm bảo vệ: 2009


Abstract: The aim of this study is to give an overview of theoretical background of discourse
and discourse analysis; cohesion, coherence and cohesive devices; concept of ESP and ESP
discourse. Moreover, the author would like to describe and analyze grammatical and lexical
cohesive devices in the course book of English for Chemistry for second year students in Faculty
of Chemistry at Hanoi University of Education. The author wishes that the findings of the study
will be applied to the teaching and learning of English for Chemistry.The study consists of three
main parts of which the first part presents the rationales, scope, methodology. The following part
with two main chapters. Chapter one gives the theoretical background of the studies with
theories related to discourse and discourse analysis, cohesion and coherence, ESP. Chapter two
provides an analysis of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in some written discourses
taken from the textbook of EC used for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE
In the final part, recapitulation, implications, limitations of the study and suggestions for further
research are presented.

Keywords: Tiếng Anh; Ngữ pháp; Từ vựng; Hóa học.

Content:

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

List of tables

List of abbreviations

Part A: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………
1
1. Rationale………………………………………………………………………
1
2. Aims of the study………………………………………………………… …
2
3. Scope of the study………………………………………………………… …
2
4. Methods of the study……………………………………………………… …
2
5. Design of the study……………………………………………………………
2
Part B: DEVELOPMENT…………………………………………………………
4
Chapter 1: Literature review and theoretical background ……………………
4
1.1 Literature review………………………………………………………… …
4
1.2. Theoretical background………………………………………………….…

4
1.2. 1. Discourse and discourse analysis…………………………………… …
5
1.2.1.1. Concept of discourse………………………………………………….…
5
1.2.1.2. Discourse and text…………………………………………………….…
5
1.2.1.3. Spoken and written discourse……………………………………………
5
1.2. 1. 4. Discourse analysis…………………………………………………….…
6
1.2.1.4.1. Context in discourse analysis…………………………………………
6
1.2.1.4.2. Register and Genre in discourse analysis………………………….…
7
1.2. 2. Cohesion and Coherence…………………………………………………
8
1.2. 2.1. Cohesion vs. Coherence…………………………………………………
8
1.2. 2.2. Aspects of Coherence……………………………………………………
8
1.2. 2. 2.1. Topical Coherence………………………………………………… …
8
1.2. 2. 2. 2. Logical Coherence………………………………………………….…
9
1.2. 2. 3. Types of Cohesion…………………………………………………….…
9
1.2. 2. 3. 1. Grammatical Cohesion…………………………………………… …
9
1.2. 2. 3. 2. Lexical Cohesion………………………………………………… …

12
1.2. 3. English for Specific Purposes (ESP)……………………………………….
13


v
1.2. 3. 1. Concept of ESP……………………………………………………….…
13
1.2. 3. 2. Characteristics of ESP discourse…………………………………… …
14
1.2.4. Summary……………………………………………………………………
14
Chapter 2: Analysis of Grammatical and Lexical Cohesive Devices in some
written discourses from the course book “English for Chemistry”……………….
16
2.1. An overview of the analysis……………………………………………………
16
2.2. Analysis of Grammatical and Lexical Cohesive Devices in some written
discourses from the course book “English for Chemistry”………………………
16
2.2.1. Grammatical cohesive devices………………………………………………
17
2.2.1.1. References……………………………………………………………….…
18
2.2.1.1.1. Anaphoric reference………………………………………………….…
18
2.2.1.1.2. Cataphoric reference………………………………………………….…
21
2.2.1.1.3. Exophoric reference……………………………………………………
23

2.2.1.1.4. A comparison of anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric reference………
23
2.2.1.2. Conjunction………………………………………………………………
24
2.2.1.3. Substitution…………………………………………………………… …….
27
2.2.1.4. Ellipsis………………………………………………………………….…
28
2.2.1.4.1. Nominal Ellipsis…………………………………………………… …
28
2.2.1.4.2. Verbal Ellipsis……………………………………………………… …
29
2.2.1.4.3. Clausal Ellipsis……………………………………………………….…
30
2.2.2. Lexical cohesive devices………………………………………………
31
2.2.2.1. Reiteration…………………………………………………………… …
31
2.2.2.1.1.Repetition…………………………………………………………… …
32
2.2.2.1.2.Synonym…………………………………………………………… …
35
2.2.2.1.3.Super-ordinate and general………………………………………….…
35
2.2.2.2. Collocation……………………………………………………………………
37
2.2.2.2.1. Lexical collocation

2.2.2.2.2. Grammatical collocation

2.2.3. Summary……………………………………………………………
41
PART C: CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………
42
1. Recapitulation……………………………………………………………
42
2. Implications……………………………………………………………
43
2.1. Implications for teachers and students of EC…………………………………….
43


vi
2.2. Suggestions for materials design…………………………………………………
44
3. Limitations of the study…………………………………………………………….
44
4. Suggestions for further research…………………………………………
44
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………….
45
Appendix I

Appendix II

Appendix III

Appendix IV

Appendix V

Appendix VI




1
PART A: INTRODUCTION

1. RATIONALE
Cohesion plays an important role in the comprehension of a written discourse. This
is due to the fact that comprehension is a process that occurs within the reader and is at
least partially dependent on cohesion and coherence. Cohesion is used to show how
sentences which are structurally independent of one another may be linked together.
Cohesion exists within a text and is not the same as coherence, which is something the
reader establishes in the process of reading. The importance of cohesion in text is major
since it provides semantic continuity and permits coherence and comprehensibility. The
more explicit cohesive relationships are, the easier a text is to understand. The coherence
of a text can be created through lexical and grammatical cohesive links and other cohesive
factors. When a reader is able to see how these cohesive factors contribute to the linking of
sentences and ideas in a text, he not only can understand the text but can produce the text
more easily as well.
However, recognizing the relations within the text to obtain coherence is not easy
for learners of English, especially non-English major students. Most of them find it
difficult to understand and produce a text. This is because of the insufficient awareness of
both teachers and learners in teaching and learning English, i.e. learning English is learning
vocabulary and grammar. Moreover, students often learn words in isolation, not in
combinations. Meanwhile, in order to understand a reading text, the readers need to pay
attention to not only vocabulary and grammar but also other factors that create links
between the ideas in the text, i.e cohesive devices.

Since a better understanding of cohesion undoubtedly helps teachers and students
improve their teaching and learning. As a teacher of English in general and of EC in
particular, I decided to study some discourse features of EC texts to help improve the
effectiveness of teaching and learning of EC at HNUE. Due to the limitation of time and
knowledge, my study just focuses on grammatical and lexical cohesive devices which are
used in written discourses of EC.

2
The texts used for this study are taken from the EC course book used for second
year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE. The course book was designed by our ESP
teachers and was confirmed in 2008. It contains six units, from unit 1 to unit 6. We take six
reading texts from these six units as written discourses of EC from which we analyze
grammatical and lexical cohesive devices.
2. AIMS OF THE STUDY
The aims of the study are:
- giving an overview of theoretical background of discourse and discourse
analysis; cohesion, coherence and cohesive devices; concept of ESP and ESP
discourse.
- describing and analyzing grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in the
course book of EC for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE.
The findings are expected to be applied to the teaching and learning of EC.
3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Within the framework of a minor M.A thesis, the study just mainly focuses on
grammatical and lexical cohesive devices, their frequency of occurrence, in the six reading
texts of EC taken from the textbook used for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry
at HNUE.
4. METHODS OF THE STUDY
Description, analysis, statistics are the principal methods used in this study to
identify grammatical and lexical cohesive devices, their frequency of occurrence in some
written discourses of EC.

5. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The study includes three main parts: Introduction, Development, and Conclusion.
Introduction presents the rationale, the scope, the methodology and the design of the
study.
Development consists of two chapters:

3
- Chapter 1: gives the theoretical background of the study with the theories related to
three main sections: discourse and discourse analysis, cohesion and
coherence, ESP.
- Chapter 2: provides an analysis of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in some
written discourses taken from the textbook of EC used for second year
students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE.
Conclusion provides a recapitulation of the study, implications to teachers and students in
improving the teaching and learning of EC, limitations of the study and suggestions for
further research.

45
REFERENCES

1. Allwright, R. L. (1990). What do we want teaching materials for? In R. Rossner and R.
Bolitho, (Eds.), Currents in language teaching. Oxford University Press
2. Anthony, L. (1997). ESP: What does it mean? ON CUE. azaki-
med.ac.jp/~cue/pc/anthony.htm Retreived April 6, 2008, from the World Wide
Web
3. Brown, G. and Yule, G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press
4. Carter, D. (1983). Some propositions about ESP. The ESP Journal, 2, 131- 137
5. Celce-Murcia, M. & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and Context Language Teaching.
Cambridge University Press
6. Cook, Guy (1989). Discourse. Oxford University Press
7. Crystal, D. (1992). Introducing Linguistics. London: Penguin
8. Dudley-Evans, T.,& St John, M. (1998). Developments in ESP: A multi-disciplinary
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Eggins, S. (1994). An Introduction to Systematic Functional Linguistics. Cont- London.
10. Firth, J.R. (1957). Papers in Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press
11. Gains, R and Redman, S. (1986). Working with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
12. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold
13. Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. (1989). Language, Context and Text: Aspect of
Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
London: Longman Group Limited
14. Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman
15. Hutchinson,T. and Water, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learning
Centred Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge:

Cambridge University.
17. Mc Carthy, M. (1997). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University
18. Nunan, D (1993). Introducing to Discourse Analysis. Penguin

46
19. O'Neill, R. (1990). Why use textbooks? In R. Rossner and R. Bolitho, (Eds.), Currents
in language teaching. Oxford University Press
20. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. (2000), Oxford University Press.
21. Tannen, D. (1982). Oral and literate strategies in spoken and written narratives.
Language, 58(1), 1-21
22. Yule, G. (1996). The study of language, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Hoang VanVan. (2006). Introducing analysis. Education Publishing House.