THEME CONNECTING COHESIVE DEVICES IN HEADLINES AND LEADS OF ENGLISH ONLINE ARTICLES ABOUT OBESITY WITH REFERENCE TO VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY
I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report
entitled “Theme – connecting cohesive devices in headline and leads of English
online articles about obesity with reference to Vietnamese equivalents”
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in
English Linguistics. Except where the reference is indicated, no other person‟s work
has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the thesis.
Hanoi, 2018

TRAN THI THU TRANG
THEME-CONNECTING COHESIVE DEVICESTran
IN HEADLINES
AND LEADS
Thi Thu Trang
OF ENGLISH ONLINE ARTICLES ABOUT OBESITY WITH REFERENCE TO
VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS

(CÁC PHƢƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT CHỦ ĐỀ GIỮA TIÊU ĐỀ VÀ LỜI DẪN TRONG

by BÉO PHÌ VÀ TƢƠNG ĐƢƠNG
CÁC BÀI BÁO ĐIỆN TỬ TIẾNGApproved
ANH VỀ BỆNH
SUPERVISOR
TRONG
TIẾNG VIỆT)

M.A THESIS
Assoc. Prof, Dr. Nguyen Thi Thanh Huong

Field: English Language

Date:……………………

Code: 8220201

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. HOÀNG TUYẾT MINH

Ha Noi, 2018

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper could not have been completed without the help, encouragement
and support from a number of people who all deserve my sincerest gratitude and
appreciation.
First and foremost, my deepest thanks are due to my supervisor Assoc.
Prof, Dr. Nguyen Thi Thanh Huong for her invaluable advice, generous assistance
and continual encouragement in completion of this study. Her continual
encouragement, careful reading, critical comments and patient guidance made my
work more enjoyable and easier.
My thanks also go to all lecturers of the Faculty of Graduated Studies,
Hanoi Open University who taught me valuable lessons.
I would also like to send my thanks to all my informants for their willing
participation in the study. I greatly appreciate their generosity with their time and
efforts in filling in the questionnaire. Without them this paper could not have been
possible.
Last but not least, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my
family members who have constantly supported, inspired and encouraged me to

complete the graduation paper.

ii


CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP .............................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ..........................................................................vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................. vii
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................ viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 9
1.1 Rationale for the research...................................................................................... 9
1.2 Aim of the study .................................................................................................. 10
1.3 Objective of the study ......................................................................................... 10
1.4 Research question................................................................................................ 10
1.5 Scope of the study ............................................................................................... 10
1.6 Methods of the study ........................................................................................... 10
1.7 Design of the study.............................................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................. 12
2.1.Review of previous studies ................................................................................. 12
2.1.1.Previous studies overseas ................................................................................. 12
2.1.2 Previous studies in Vietnam ............................................................................. 13
2.2 Review of theoretical background ...................................................................... 13
2.2.1 The concepts of headline and lead ................................................................... 13
2.2.2 The relationship between the headline and lead ............................................. 15
2.3 Theoretical framework ....................................................................................... 17
2.3.1. Concepts of Cohesion ...................................................................................... 17
2.3.2. Concepts of cohesive devices.......................................................................... 19
2.3.3 Classification of cohesive devices ................................................................... 19

2.3 Thematic cohesion .............................................................................................. 31
2.3.1 Theory of Reiteration ....................................................................................... 31
2.3.2 Theory of Collocation ...................................................................................... 32
2.3.3 Theory of Substitution...................................................................................... 32
2.3.4 Theory of Ellipsis ............................................................................................. 32
2.3.5 Theory of Conjunction ..................................................................................... 33

iii


2.4 News .................................................................................................................... 33
2.4.1 Definition ......................................................................................................... 33
2.4.2 Characteristics of news .................................................................................... 33
2.4.3 Health news ...................................................................................................... 34
2.4.4 General introduction to English newspaper agencies ...................................... 34
2.5 Summary ............................................................................................................ 35
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 36
3.1 Subjects ............................................................................................................... 36
3.2 Instruments .......................................................................................................... 36
3.3 Procedures ........................................................................................................... 36
3.4 Statistical Analysis .............................................................................................. 37
3.5 Summary ............................................................................................................. 37
CHAPTER 4 TYPICAL THEME-CONNECTING COHESIVE DEVICES IN
HEADLINES AND LEADS OF ENGLISH ONLINE ARTICLES ABOUT
OBESITY AND VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS ................................................. 39
4.1 Theme – connecting cohesive devices in headline and leads of selected articles
with reference to Vietnamese equivalents ................................................................ 39
4.1.1 Topic-maintaining cohesive devices in headlines and leads of selected English
articles and Vietnamese equivalents ......................................................................... 39
4.1.2 Topic-developing cohesive devices in headlines and leads of selected English

articles and Vietnamese equivalents ......................................................................... 50
4.2 Similarities and differences between theme-connecting cohesive devices in
headlines and leads of selected English articles and Vietnamese equivalents.......... 64
4.2.1 Similarities between theme-connecting cohesive devices in headlines and
leads of selected English articles and Vietnamese equivalents ................................ 64
4.2.2 Differences between theme-connecting cohesive devices in headlines and
leads of selected English articles and Vietnamese equivalents ................................ 65
4.3 Implication for teacher and leaner when reading and translating health news in
English and Vietnamese ............................................................................................ 67
4.4 Summary ............................................................................................................. 68
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 69
5.1 Summary of Findings .......................................................................................... 69
5.2 Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 70
5.3. Limitations of the study ..................................................................................... 70

iv


5.4. Recommendations for Further Study ................................................................ 71
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 72
APPENDIX ............................................................................................................... 74

v


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Diagram 2.2 : The function and the relationship between the headline and lead

16

Table 2.1: Type of Cohesion
Table 2.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

20
20

Table 4. 1: Repitataion exact words/ phrases
Chart 4.1: Repetition changing word order in the sentence of the elements
Table 4.2: Repetition and abbreviation of name

36
37
38

Chart 4.2: Meaning expressions of compound or string of words in the headline
and the lead

39

Chart 4.3 : Repetition in headlines and leads
Table 4.3: Synonym in selected articles
Table 4.4 :Meronym in selected articles
Chart 4.4 : Superordinate in selected articles
Chart 4.5: Antonym in selected articles

40
44
47
48
49

Chart 4.6: Developing core sentences by using clause(s)
Chart 4.7: Developing core sentences

51
52

Chart 4.8: Appositive for expanding noun phrases
Chart 4.9: Premodifiers of expanding noun phrase
Chart 4.10: Relative clause of expanding noun phrase
Chart 4.11: Adding words of expanding noun phrase
Chart 4.12: Frequency of occurrence of topic-maintaining devices
Chart 4.13: Frequency of occurrence of lexical cohesive devices in topicdeveloping
Chart 4.14: Frequency of occurrence of grammatical cohesive devices in topicdeveloping

53
54
54
56
57

vi

58
58


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Adj
Compar/super

N

Adjective
Comparative/ superlative
Noun

NP
Pre.P

Noun Phrase
Preposition Phrase

Proper N
Sent

Proper Noun
Sentence

V

Verb

VP

Verb Phrase

vii


ABSTRACT

In this research, the writer analyzes theme-connecting cohesion devices
between the headlines and the leads in some article about obesity. This research is
aimed to know kinds of grammatical and lexical cohesion appear in news text, to
know the dominant cohesion devices which are used, and to know the degree of
cohesiveness.
The writer uses a qualitative method in this research. He uses Halliday and
Hasan‟s theory of cohesion to find out the grammatical and lexical cohesion device
utilized in the text, then he counts the dominant cohesion devices which appear in
the text, finally he measures the degree of cohesiveness. The writer intends to find
out what grammatical cohesive devices (reference, substitution, ellipsis, and
conjunction) and lexical cohesive devices (repetition, synonym, antonym, hyponym,
meronym, and collocation) are in the article and their contribution in making the
article coherent and unified. The data in this study is collected from three sources:
BBC, The Guardian and Reuters with 150 articles and translated Vietnamese
versions in order to discover general and particular characteristics of these
newspapers‟ style. The result of this research shows that cohesion devices both
grammatical and the lexical has the highest and lowest occurrence, The cohesion
through the grammatical cohesive which has the highest occurrence is
superordinate. Apart from grammatical cohesion, for the lexical cohesion, the writer
found some repetition of the identical word is used at the same number of article on
three source and it is the highest occurrence lexically. The study recommends
further studies on conducting a comparative analysis of English and translated
Vietnamese version.

viii


CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rationale for the research
Nowadays, the widespread use of the Internet has made it possible for people to

update news anywhere and anytime through online newspapers. Apparently, online
newspaper is a crucial part of our life as it keeps us well-informed about what is
happening around us within one click. An enormous amount of news on daily newspapers
provides us with the latest national and international events on a wide range of topics
such as: health, business, sports, education, society, politics, culture, etc. News not only
helps to increase our knowledge but also serves as a source of entertainment. With this in
mind, the author has made an attempt to do research concerning with news, staying focus
on online news due to the ubiquitous of the Internet.
Additionally, as an English teacher at Nam Dinh University of Nursing, the author
has many chances to approach health English and takes interest in teaching health
English to students in general and English majors in particular. In an effort to improve
health English to students, the author has adopted authentic materials including health
online news which proves to be very effective and convenient in class. Besides, students
are also encouraged to spend time reading health online news at home as it is very
beneficial to them in many ways. The most recognizable benefits involve the increased
knowledge and extended vocabulary in health. However, students often encounter a lots
of troubles in comprehending the news. Thus, understanding cohesive devices between
headlines and leads give students more insight into how writes organize what they want
to say.
Furthermore, the writer has the ambition to make a distinction of the cohesive
devices used in health news between English and Vietnamese online newspapers with the
aim to figure out the similarities and differences of health news in both languages. Thus,
the study entitled “ Theme – connecting cohesive devices in headline and leads of
English online article about obesity with reference to Vietnamese equivalents” was
conducted to achieve this aim. The findings of the study will hopefully lay a solid
foundation to both teachers and learners in the mastery of health English news; more
importantly, create background for translation between the two languages and
consequently, enhance the teaching and learning of health English.

9

1.2 Aim of the study
To help learners understand the connection in headlines and leads on English and
Vietnamese online articles about obesity and give some implications for language
teaching, learning and translating cohesive devices in headlines and leads of English and
Vietnamese online articles about obesity.
1.3 Objective of the study
To figure out the types of cohesive devices on English and Vietnamese online
articles about obesity.
To identify the roles and the connection between headlines and leads in English and
Vietnamese online articles about obesity.
To give some implications for language teaching, learning and translating cohesive
devices in headlines and leads of English and Vietnamese online articles about obesity.
1.4 Research question
In order to achieve the aforementioned aims, the study is intended to find out the
answer to three following research questions:
1) What are the typical types of cohesive devices used for connecting theme between
headlines and leads of English and Vietnamese online articles about obesity?
2) How to apply the results of the study in teaching, learning cohesive devices and
translating headlines and leads of English online articles about obesity into Vietnamese?
1.5 Scope of the study
Currently, online newspapers offer a large amount of sections namely: Politic,
Technology, Health, Business, Sport, Entertainment, etc. However, within the framework
of this thesis, the author‟s aim is only to focus on the use of cohesive devices in Health
section, particularly those about one of the most dangerous diseases of modern society,
obesity. This study investigates 150 articles selected from typical English online
newspapers and translated Vietnamese versions in order to discover general and particular
characteristics of these newspapers‟ style. As stated above, the focus of the study work
towards the similarities and differences of cohesive devices used in health news on English

and Vietnamese online newspapers.
1.6 Methods of the study
In the completion of the study, a variety of methods has been adopted, among which
the main methods are qualitative and quantitative. In this particular study, the researcher
used the qualitative approach owing to its suitability in social research and the fact that it
10


can be applied in the subjects. In addition, the rationale behind the choice of the
qualitative approach is centered in its strengths. It is flexible and emphasizes people‟s
lived experiences, their perceptions, their assumptions and their presuppositions as
connected the world around them. ). In qualitative research, the researcher collects data
right from the participants. In this study, the researcher collected data from documentary
study.
1.7 Design of the study
Within the scope mentioned above, the study consists of five chapters:
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION presents rationale, aims, scope, method, research
questions, organizational structure of the study.
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW discusses the theoretical background of the
study, in which the definition of headline, lead, cohesion and coherence as well as
cohesive devices are presented.
Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY concentrates on detail of the research questions and
research approach with various methods and techniques employed for conducting the
whole thesis.
Chapter 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION describes and analysis the cohesive
devices in headline and leads of English online article about obesity with reference to
Vietnamese equivalents
Chapter 5 CONCLUSION summarizes the main points presented in the thesis, the
limitations of the study as well as suggestions for further research.

11


CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review serves two main purposes. Firstly it gives a review of previous
studies related to discourse analysis in general and cohesive devices in particular.
Secondly it presents and discusses the theoretical background which guide and inform
this research.
2.1.
Review of previous studies
Cohesive devices which are an important factor in discourse analysis by English as
well as a foreign language speaker have attracted the great attention of linguistics all over
the world. Hence, it is no surprise that a large number of studies on English cohesive
devices in terms of various fields of language have been undertaken.
2.1.1. Previous studies overseas
There are some researches analyzing cohesion using theory from Halliday and
Hasan (1976). The first is a work by Morley. He presents about the lexical cohesion and
rhetorical structure. This article looks at this argument-structuring function of lexical
cohesion first by considering single text using the techniques of classical discourse
analysis and then by using the methodology of corpus linguistics to examine several
million words of text. In his research, he analysis the lexical cohesion in several headlines
newspaper and point out the register before analyze the lexical cohesion. He also uses the
theory by Halliday and Hassan (1976).
Another study that relates to this research is a study done by Abdul Rohim (2009),
entitled “Cohesion Analysis on the Jakarta Post‟s Editorial”, concludes the result of the
research that reference is the highest occurrence for grammatical cohesion, especially
personal reference and repetition is the highest occurrence for lexical cohesion.
Another study that relates to this research is a study done by Nurul Laili Mariani
Fadjrin (2011), entitled “An Analysis of Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion on The
Journalistic Text of VoAnews.com”, describes the result of the research that found

grammatical device; reference, substitution, ellipsis and conjunction, and lexical device;
repetition, synonym, near synonym, superordinate, general word and collocation.
Another study that relates to this research is a study done by Anna Khoirunnisa
(2011), entitled “An Analysis of Cohesion on Editor‟s Note in U.S News and World
Report Magazine”, shows the differences in using grammatical cohesion, lexical cohesion

12


devices and degree of cohesiveness in each text. Text one is the fewer cohesive than text
three and text three is fewer than text two.
2.1.2 Previous studies in Vietnam
In Vietnam, a number of linguists and researchers have made great contributions to
the study of discourse analysis. Nguyen Thien Giap (2000) mentions a set of different
aspects as context and semantics, information structures, especially discourse and
discourse analysis. He particularly emphasizes the necessity of coherence and cohesion in
creating a clear and comprehensible discourse/text. Do Huu Chau (2001) points out some
of the communicative factors deciding the successful communication, they are situational
context, language and its varieties, and discourse.
The next research conducted by Nguyen Thi Hoa (2011) “A contrastive study of
grammatical cohesive devices in English and Vietnamese” has pointed out the similarities
and differences in grammatical cohesive devices in English and Vietnamese. The results
of this research help teachers of English and students avoid making mistakes in using
grammatical cohesive devices and translating between these two languages.
The last research is M.A thesis by Le Thi Mai Hien (2004) entitled “An Analysis of
Cohesive Devices in English Application Letter”. The process of researching on twenty
English application letters has enables her to reach the results of the frequency of
occurrence of lexical cohesive device. The data present repetition in English application
letter also occupies the first position among the four kinds of reiteration with up to
53.4%. Different from English sales letters, super ordinates rank the second with a

considerably higher percentage, 24.9% compared with 11%. Synonyms and Nearsynonyms account for nearly the same portion, which is respectively 10.4% and 11.3%.
2.2 Review of theoretical background
2.2.1 The concepts of headline and lead
2.2.1.1 The concepts of headline
The headline is an integral part of the news story. It is meant to arouse the reader‟s
interest and make him read the whole article. In a way, the headline has to ”sell” the story
to the reader. Since the headline is usually the first thing that a person reads in a news
article, it provides a framework for the reading process and steers the reader in a certain
direction. As Fries (1987) notes, the reader begins to read the text with the headline.
Thus, after reading a headline such as ”Houseprices up”, he has some expectation of what

13


the following lines will be about, and he will do everything possible to connect these
lines to the headline [11, 61].
Headlines are somewhat different from the rest of newspaper language. Mårdh
classifies headlines as belonging to block language, which is characterised by heavily
modified noun phrases by grammatical units lower than the sentence and by the omission
of words that have low information value, such as articles and the finite forms of the verb
be. Werlich (1976) disagrees with the second point, asserting that sentence headlines are
common in news stories [29, 27]. As far as readability is concerned, a headline must be
short enough to be read quickly but still long enough to give the facts comprehensibly
(Mårdh 1980) [20, 87]. According to Mårdh‟s study, the average length of a newspaper
headline is about seven words [20, 88]. Mårdh states that the fact that passive
constructions are longer and less lively than the active are reasons for avoiding them.
However, the principle of putting the most important information first may overrule the
use of the active voice. Mårdh illustrates this with the headlines.[20, 176].
The headline summarises the most important and relevant information of the story.
Van Dijk (1988a) states that the headline, along with the lead, expresses the main topics

of the text. Together they signal a preferred general meaning of the text to the reader) [9;
36, 40, 53]. In Bell‟s view, the headline, unlike the lead, is an independent unit: ”It
simply abstracts the story, it does not have to begin it. While the lead may carry new
information which does not recur in the story proper, the headline is entirely derivable
from the story. In most cases it can be derived from the lead alone” [3, 187].
It should be noted that the headline reflects the writer‟s perspective, and the reader
may instead pay more attention to another aspect of the story which he finds more
relevant (Bülow- Møller 1989) [6, 42]. Brown & Yule (1983) aver that there are several
possible headlines for any text [5, 73]. Consequently, the headline of a piece of text
should not be equated with the topic but viewed as one possible expression of it [4,139].
Some headlines may express secondary topics (Bell 1991, 189; van Dijk 1987b,
209). When this happens, Bell says that the news values of the story are re-weighted.
Van Dijk calls headlines of this kind ”biased”. Headlines expressing the main topic and
headlines expressing a secondary topic correspond to Mårdh‟s terms summary head and
connotative head, respectively. A summary head is a neutral summary of the news
story, whilst a connotative head focuses on one interesting or sensational aspect of the

14


story [20, 16]. Bülow-Møller (1989) remarks that the headline does not have to be a
summary of the text, even if it reflects the main topic. [6, 42].
2.2.1.2 The concepts of lead
The most important information of the news article is supposed to lie at the
beginning. The lead paragraph formulates the most important points of the story.
Like the headline, the lead is supposed to attract the reader‟s interest so that he goes
on reading the text. This is why Pape & Featherstone (2005) consider the lead to be the
most important paragraph in a news article [23,28-29]. Just as the most important facts
are raised into the lead, within the lead itself the most important information is put at the
beginning, not at the end of the paragraph (Bell 1991) [3, 176].

As for the structure of leads, Werlich (1976) asserts that, in its strictest form, only the
very first sentence of the news article summarises the whole story [29.70]. It can be said,
however, that the lead need not always be expressed in a single sentence, but may also
consist of more than one sentence. Nevertheless, Werlich receives support from van Dijk
(1988a) who characterises the lead sentence as one complex sentence the function of which
is to express the macrostructure of the story.
Therefore, the syntax of lead sentences has several tasks: to give the summary of the
story, to express a number of schematic categories and to organise this information so
that it is syntactically well-formed. Bell lists brevity, clarity and newsworthiness as the
values of the lead, which conflicts with van Dijk‟s view to some extent. In Bell‟s opinion,
leads should be full on information, yet as short as possible and easily comprehended [3,
176].
As Brown & Yule (1983) observe, the beginning point is the initial textual context
for all that follows in the text and will, accordingly, have an effect on the reader‟s
interpretation of what comes next [5, 125]. Bell (1991) regards the lead as a directional
summary, meaning that it is also part of the story. The lead has a dual function: ”It must
begin to tell the story as well as summarizing it. . . . It must provide a springboard for
telling the whole story, not just a summary” [3, 183]. According to Bell, the lead often
contains information that is not repeated in the rest of the article [3,184].
2.2.2 The relationship between the headline and lead
Headlines and leads share some important similarities. The following chart
illustrates this:
15


Chart 2.2: The relationship between the headline and lead
LEAD

HEADLINE

INFORMATIO N

As chart 2.2 shows, the task of the headline and lead in a prototypical news story is
to give the most central, essential and relevant information of the story. Since the headline
is practically always the shorter of the two, it cannot convey as much information as the
lead, so it can only express the very core of the important information. Thereby, the
headline might be described as the ultimate summary or ”super-summary” of the story. As
Bell puts it, ”The headline is an abstract of the abstract. The lead pares the story back to
its essential point, and the headline abstracts the lead itself” [3, 150]. This means that the
information in the headline is usually contained in the lead, too, as can be seen from
Chart. The lead can also include other central pieces of information besides the absolute
most important information.
Due to their summary-like nature and their position as the initial elements in the
news article, the headline and lead orient the story in a specific direction. Again, the
headline, being the shorter item, orients the story in a stricter way than the lead. Bell
concurs with this view:
“The lead focuses the story in a particular direction. It forms the lens through which the
remainder of the story is viewed. This function is even more obvious for the headline.” [3, 152].
In the final analysis, the lead summarises the story and focuses it in a specific direction, and the
headline summarises and focuses the story even more.
16


2.3 Theoretical framework
2.3.1. Concepts of Cohesion
Cohesion, based on Halliday and Hasan (1976) “cohesion theory as the major
characteristic of coherence considering linguistic properties of the language, gives a
sequence of sentences a coherent texture. Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of
some elements in the discourse is dependent on that of another”. Halliday and Hasan
(1976) pointed out that cohesion is one of the linguistic system's major resources for text

construction. In fact, cohesion represents the presence of explicit cues in the text that
allow readers/listeners to find semantic relations within it as part of linguistic system
enhancing the semantic potentials of text. A text is meaningful only when elements
referring to each other in the text set up a relation. The relation can be set up through
reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction as grammatical and lexical cohesion. So,
the grammar and lexicon are two forms of cohesion. These cohesive devices used by
speakers and writers in order to express meaning based on the interpretations of the
listeners and readers provide semantic relations for the semantic units whose
interpretations they facilitate. Cohesion depicts how meaning-based relationship is set up
by lexical and syntactic features. These explicit lexical and syntactic features are known
as cohesive devices, signaling the relationship in sentences and paragraphs. Halliday and
Hasan (1976) introduced five different types of cohesive devices in order to provide a
guideline for studying and judging the cohesion and coherence of writing:
1) reference (i.e., the indication of information from elsewhere such as personals,
demonstratives, and comparatives),
2) substitution (i.e., the replacement of one component by another),
3) ellipsis (i.e., the omission of a component),
4) conjunction (i.e., the indication of specific meaning which presupposes present
items in the discourse, such as additive, adversative, casual, and temporal), and finally
5) lexical cohesion (i.e., the repetition of the same or relative lexical items). They
contended that through analyzing the use of cohesive devices, one could evaluate or assess
writing quality from the perspective of coherence.
Cohesion is the term used to describe the structural, grammatical and lexical means
by which sentences and paragraphs in the texts are linked and relationships between them
established. The basic concept that is employed in analyzing the cohesion of a text on the
17


basis of the presented framework of cohesion by Halliday & Hasan is that of the tie. It is a
complex notion which comprises not only the cohesive element by itself but also that

which is presupposed by it. The notion is interpreted as a relation between these two
elements. The relation may be anaphoric, with the presupposed element preceding, or
cataphoric, with the presupposed element following.
According to Halliday &Hasan (1976), other cohesive relations are:
1)
Exophoric relation is found outside the text, i.e. in the situation
2)
3)

Paraphoric relation points to the information that is in the other text.
Homophoric relation is a self- interpreting relation. Entities are unique under

certain circumstances.
While analyzing cohesion, two facts about ties have to be taken into consideration. In
the first place, any sentence may have more than one tie in it. In the second place, the
distance between cohesive items may be immediate, i.e. the presupposed item may be in
the immediate preceding sentence; or remote, i.e. the presupposed item may be not in the
immediately preceding sentence. Also, the presupposed item may include a mediated tie.
Distance between ties is relevant in terms of analysis of cohesion (Halliday & Hasan
1976).
In English, the basic means of establishing cohesion are through the use of pronouns,
determiners, conjunctions, and adverbials to substitute, repeat, refer or omit items across a
text and others, and lexical cohesive devices. Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of
some element in the text is dependent on that of another. The one presupposes the other,
in the sense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by shift to it. When this happens,
a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, the presupposing and the
presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integrated into a text (Halliday &Hasan 1976)
[12, 4].
According to Halliday & Hasan in their book Cohesion in English, language can be
expressed through the concept of cohesion. The concept of cohesion is a semantic one, it

refers to relations of meaning that exist within the text and that define it as a text.
Cohesion is a semantic relation between an element in the text and some other element
that is crucial to the interpretation of it.
A text should be a unified whole; it is not just a collection of unrelated sentences.
Therefore, to make a text as a unified whole, there should be a device to tie it together.
The device is cohesive devices.
18


2.3.2. Concepts of cohesive devices
Cohesive devices are the tool of cohesion to create unity of meaning within atext.
Millward in Muslimah‟s thesis (2007) says that cohesive devices are certain words or
phrases and their location within the discourse will activate a set of assuptions to the
meaning of what has gone beforehand or will generate a set of expectations to what may
follow (Muslimah, 2007). From that statement, it can be concluded that cohesive devices
are words or phrases which their meaning are dependent on the other words or phrases
either precede them. In another word, their meaning are related to each other.
Connor (1984) defines cohesion as the use of explicit cohesive devices that signal
relations among sentences and part of a text (Rahman, 2013). This means that the use of
cohesive devices enables readers and listeners to capture the connectedness orthe meaning
between what precedes and what follows. It also shows that cohesive device is important.
Cohesive devices are the ones used to stick one clause to another in a sentence and
one sentence to another in a paragraph and make the text communicative. According to
M.A.K. Halliday and Ruqaiya Hasan, there are two main types of cohesion: grammatical,
referring to the structural content, and lexical, referring to the language content of the
piece. Five general categories of cohesive devices that create coherence in texts can be
identified are: reference, ellipsis, substitution, lexical cohesion and conjunction.
Logical cohesion is on the border-line of the grammatical and lexical, the set of
conjunctive elements can probably be interpreted grammatically in terms of systems.
2.3.3 Classification of cohesive devices

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

19


Table 2.1: Type of Cohesion
Nature of cohesive relation

Type of cohesion

Relatedness of form Relatedness Substitution and ellipsis; lexical collocation
of reference
Semantic connection

Reference; lexical reiteration
Conjunction

(Source: Halliday and Hasan, 1976)
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 grammatically 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:
Table 2.2: Grammatical and Lexical Cohesion

Grammatical cohesion

Lexical cohesion

Reference

Conjunction

Reiteration

 Exospheric

 Additive

 Same word/repetition

 Endophoric
- personal
- demonstrative
- comparative

 Adversative

 Synonym/near synonyms

 Causal

 Superordinates

 Temporal

 General words

 Others

Collocation

Substitution

 Noun + Noun

 Nominal substitution

 Adjective + Noun

 Verbal substitution

 Verb + Noun

 Clausal substitution

 Noun + Preposition

Ellipsis

 Adjective + Preposition

 Nominal ellipsis

 Adverb + Adjective

 Verbal ellipsis

 Verb + Preposition

 Clausal ellipsis

(Adapted from Haliday and Hasan, 1976)

20


2.3.3.1 Grammatical cohesive devices
Grammatical cohesion is constructed by the grammatical structures, each
component tie each other. Halliday and Hasan (1976) classify grammatical cohesion
into 4 major classes: Reference, Substitution, Ellipsis and Conjunction.
1) Reference
Reference is one of the most extensively used cohesive devices in texts.
Therefore, we will have a closer look at the definition of reference and what
characterizes this particular type of cohesion.
Reference is a well-researched area within linguistics. According to Lyons
(1969), “this term was introduced into linguistics to name the relationship which holds
between words and things, events, actions, and the qualities they stand for” [18, 424].
The development of linguistics has broadened the meaning of reference. Salkie (1995)
claimed that it includes “a relation between the meaning of a word and its environment,
which can be either a real world or the text”.
Every language has particular items which have the feature of reference. They
make reference to something else for their interpretation. In English it is personals,
demonstratives and comparatives. These items show that information indicates
something else. It shows the relationship between a word and what it points to in the

real world (Baker, 1992) [1, 181]. The main feature that characterizes reference is that
the information signals for retrieval. The identity of particular thing that is being
referred to has a referential meaning and cohesion is found then the same thing occurs a
second time. Reference has the semantic feature of definiteness or specificity. Because
of that there has to be reference to the context of situation. Referencing items do not
have to match the grammatical class they must have semantic properties (Halliday and
Hasan, 1976) [12, 31].
There is referential cohesion in every language, they are in their own right, they
make reference to something else for their interpretations” (Haliday and Hasan, 1976).
There are three types of reference in English. They are personal, demonstrative and
comparative items which have the property of reference (…), instead of being
interpreted semantically.
Haliday and Hasan (1976) make a clear distinction between situational and
textual reference by contrasting Exophora, or Exophoric reference with Endophora or
Endophoric reference as a general name for reference within the text
21


Exophoric reference looks outside the text to the situation in which the text
occurs for the item which is being refer to.
E.g.
We are at the supermarket and we‟ll be here for about another hour.
In this example, “The” and “here” are only instances of exphoric reference if the
name of the restaurant has not already been referred to earlier in the text.
Endophoric reference is textual reference referring to an item which is
identified in the text.
E.g.
"If a man has talent and can't use it, he's failed." "If a man has talent and can't use
it, he's failed." In this example, “he”
“it”

A reference item may be either exophoric or endophoric. If it is endophoric, it
may be anaphoric or cataphoric.
Anaphoric reference signifies a word or phrase that refers to another or phrase
used earlier in a text.
E.g.
"No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she
will or will not be a mother."
In this example, “herself” & “she” is woman.
Cataphoric reference describes the use of a word or phrase that refers to
another word or phrase which is used later in a text.
E.g.
When I told them I got the first prize, my parents smiled happily.
In this example, “them” refers to my parents.
Halliday and Hasan (1976) divide referential cohesion into three sub- types:
personal, demonstrative and comparative.
When characterizing reference, “It is often considered important in formal
semantics that the expression used to refer to an entity must, in its description, be true of
the entity. That is, if an individual is referred to by the expression must be true of the
individual in order for correct reference to take place” (Brown & Yule 1996) [5, 205].
However, when we analyse discourse, we are interested not in the correct reference but in
the success of reference. Successful reference can only be achieved if three conditions are
22


met. In the first place, the speaker must have linguistic competence, i.e. the speaker and
the addressee must know the language in which they communicate. In the second place,
the speaker must have the cognitive ability. That is she/ he must have enough factual
knowledge about the reference. Thirdly, the speaker must have pragmatic willingness to
communicate the total knowledge he has about the referent. But this of course may not
always be the case; the speaker may wish to keep some information from us (Yule 1996)

[31, 17].
Nevertheless, Halliday & Hasan (1976) define reference as a case where the
information to be retrieved is the referential meaning, the identity of the particular thing
or class of things that is being referred to. The cohesion lies in the continuity of
reference, whereby the same thing enters into the discourse a second time. Reference is
a semantic relation. It includes language elements that refer to something else for
interpretation. They are different from lexical ties by their directionality. Lexical
cohesive patterns do not depend on each other for their interpretation. They belong to
open systems while reference and, at the same time, substitution items entirely depend
on their items for their interpretation and have no definitional meaning in themselves.
They are members of closed system.
There are certain items in every language which have the property of reference.
Reference is realized by personal pronouns, demonstratives, and the definite article (Ellis
1992; Toolan 2002; Halliday & Hasan 1976; Nunan 1993). In order to get a better view
of reference, different types of reference will be defined below:
Personal references are reference by means of function in the speech situation,
through category of person in form of personal pronouns and determiners. Here is the
table showing the system of personal reference.
Speaking of morphological features of the personal and possessive pronouns, it is
important to notice that “such forms as I, you, we have no noun antecedents at all; only
he – him, she – her, it –it, they – them have. The same holds for my, your, our; only his,
her, its, their have noun antecedents” (Valeika & Buikiene 2003). As a result, the
personal pronouns I, you and we are exophoric and fulfill deictic function. They make
reference to the roles of listener and speaker which are outside the text. References
made outside the text are exospheric while reference made within the text are
endophoric (Halliday & Hasan 1976) [12, 48].
In many languages, pronoun usage encodes deixis. Traditionally, pronouns are
23

thought of being as noun substitutes. But most subclasses of pronouns perform quite a
different function, i.e. deictic function. From an etymological point of view, the term
„deixis‟ originates in the notion of gestural reference (Lyons 1996) [18, 303].
Demonstrative references are references by means of location, on a scale of
proximity, through determiners and adverbs.
According to Halliday & Hasan (1976), demonstrative reference is defined as a form
of verbal pointing. It is made on the basis of proximity. The referent is identified by
locating it on the scale of proximity. [12, 57]
Nunan (1993) states that “various referential devices enable the
writer or speaker to make multiple references to people and things within a text”. [21, 23].
Consequently, demonstrative reference is reference by means of location, on the
scale of proximity. Here belong determiners or adverbs that refer to locative or temporal
proximity (here, now, this, these) or distance (there, then, that, those).
E.g.
The clerks in the office jumped about like sailors during a storm. [...]
There was a self-possessed young lady connected with these access
The demonstrative there refers back to in the office and indicates the location of an
object that is participating in the process.
The demonstrative here, there, now, and then point directly to the location of a
process or time. As regards the remaining demonstratives (this, that, these, those), they
refer to the location of person or object that is participating in the process.
An interesting point about the demonstratives this and that have to be mentioned.
“These items can represent a single word or phrase, much longer chunks of text- ranging
across several paragraphs or even several pages” (Nunan 1993; Toolan 1998; Halliday &
Hasan 1976).
Patterns of demonstrative reference as well as other cohesive devices constitute part
of the research of the present paper. Similarities and differences of the usage of
demonstrative reference are presented in the following parts of the research.
Comparative references are indirect references by means of identity or similarity.
They are expressed through adjectives and adverbs and serve to compare items within a

text.
2) Substitution
Substitution is a process within a text as the replacement of one item by another.
24


According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), since substitution is a grammatical relation, a
relation in the wording rather than in the meaning, the different types of substitution is
defined grammatically rather than semantically [12,
substitution:

88]. There are three types of

a) Nominal Substitution
In English the most typical cases of nominal substitutes are: one, ones and the same.
The nominal substitutes one/ ones always function as Head of a nominal group and can
substitute only for an item which is in itself Head of a nominal group. Moreover, they
presuppose a particular noun, usually the one that is found in the preceding text.
The same can also function as a nominal substitute. The main difference between the
substitutes one/ ones and the same is that the latter presupposes an entire nominal group
including any modifying elements.
E.g.
If only I could remember where it was that I saw someone putting away the box
with those candles in I could finish the decorations now.
b) Verbal Substitution
The verbal substitute in English is do which operates as Head of a verbal group in the
place that is occupied by the lexical verb. The latter always takes the final position in the
group.
E.g.
He never really succeeded in his ambitions. He might done, one felt, had it not been

for the restlessness of his nature.
c) Clausal Substitution
In clausal substitution the entire clause is presupposed, and the contrasting element
is outside the clause. The clausal substitutes may take positive form so or negative no.
E.g.
Is there going to be an earthquake? – It say so
3) Ellipsis
One more way of establishing cohesion is through the use of ellipsis.
According to Nunan (1993; 25); ellipsis is when some essential structural element is
omitted from a sentence or clause and can be recovered by referring to an element in the
preceding text.
Ellipsis occurs when an element which can be recovered by referring a preceding
25