(Luận văn thạc sĩ) an analysis of cohesive devices in reading texts in english 11

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CANDIDATE’S STATEMENT ………………………………………………………… i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………… ii
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………..

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………… iv
ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………………………… vii
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………….. viii
PART 1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….. 1
1. Rationale……………………………………………………………………………. 1
2. Aims of the Study…………………………………………………………………... 1
3. Scope of the Study…………………………………………………………………. 2
4. Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………… 2
5. Methods of the Study……………………………………………………………….. 2
6. Design of the Study…………………………………………………………………. 3
PART 2: DEVELOPMENT ……………………………………………………………

4

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………. 4
1. Discourse and Discourse Analysis………………………………………………… 4
1.1. The Concept of Discourse…………………………………………………… 4
1.2. Text and Discourse ………………………………………………………….. 4
1.3. Spoken and Written Discourse……………………………………………….. 5
1.4. Discourse Analysis…………………………………………………………… 6
1.5. Context in Discourse Analysis………………………………………………. 6

1.6. Register and Genre in Discourse Analysis…………………………………..

7

2. Cohesion…………………………………………………………………………… 7
2.1. The Concept of Cohesion……………………………………………………. 7
2.2. Cohesion vs. Coherence……………………………………………………… 8
2.3. Aspects of Cohesion…………………………………………………………. 8
2.3.1. Topical Cohesion………………………………………………….. 8
2.3.2. Logical Cohesion…………………………………………………... 9
2.4. Types of Cohesion…………………………………………………………… 10
2.4.1. Grammatical Cohesion ……………………………………………. 10


v
2.4.1.1. Reference………………………………………………... 10
2.4.1.2. Substitution……………………………………………… 11
2.4.1.3. Ellipsis…………………………………………………… 12
2.4.1.4. Conjunction……………………………………………… 12
2.4.2. Lexical cohesion…………………………………………………… 13
2.4.2.1. Reiteration……………………………………………….. 14
2.4.2.2. Collocation………………………………………………. 14
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 16
1. An Overview of the English Textbook 11………………………………………… 16
1.1. The Role of the English Textbook in English Language Teaching…………. 16
1.2. Description of the English Textbook 11…………………………………….. 16
2. Research Methodology ……………………………………………………………. 17
2. 1. Materials for Analysis………………………………………………………. 17
2.2. Methods of the Study………………………………………………………... 17
2.3. Data Collection Procedures………………………………………………….

19

2.4. Data Analysis Procedures…………………………………………………… 20
CHAPTER 3: MAJOR FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION………………………… 21
1. Grammatical Cohesion ……………………………………………………………. 21
1.1. Reference ……………………………………………………………………. 21
1.1.1. Anaphoric Reference………………………………………………. 22
1.1.2. Cataphoric Reference……………………………………………… 24
1.1.3. Exophoric Reference………………………………………………. 25
1.2. Substitution………………………………………………………………….. 25
1.3. Ellipsis……………………………………………………………………….

26

1.4. Conjunction………………………………………………………………….. 28
2. Lexical Cohesion…………………………………………………………………… 30
2.1. Reiteration……………………………………………………………………. 30
2.2. Collocation…………………………………………………………………… 33
2.2.1. Lexical Collocation………………………………………………… 33
2.2.2. Grammatical Collocation………………………………………….. 35
3. Summary…………………………………………………………………………..

36

PART 3: CONCLUSIONS ……………………………………………………………… 37
1. Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………….. 37


vi

2. Suggestions………………………………………………………………………… 38
2.1. Suggestions for English Teachers and Learners ……………………………. 38
2.2. Suggested Cohesion Exercises for English Teachers and Learners…………. 39
3. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies………………………………….. 40
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………… 42
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I ……………………………………………………………………. I
APPENDIX II ……………………………………………………………………. VIII
APPENDIX III……………………………………………………………………. XII
APPENDIX IV……………………………………………………………………. XIII
APPENDIX V……………………………………………………………………. XV
APPENDIX VI……………………………………………………………………. XXVI
APPENDIX VII……………………………………………………………………. XLI
SOURCE OF DATA……………………………………………………………………... XLVI


vii

ABBREVIATIONS

Adj:

Adjective

Adv:

Adverb

N:

Noun

Prep:

Preposition

Quant:

Quantifier

V:

Verb


viii

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: The percentage of different types of reference.

20

Table 2: The percentage of different types of reference words for anaphoric ties.

21

Table 3: The percentage of different types of reference words for cataphoric ties.

23

Table 4: The percentage of different types of reference words for exophoric ties.

24

Table 5: The percentage of substitution in English 11.

24

Table 6: The percentage of ellipsis in English 11.

26

Table 7: The percentage of conjunction in English 11.

27

Table 8: The percentage of reiteration in English 11.

30

Table 9: The percentage of lexical collocation in English 11.

33

Table 10: The percentage of grammatical collocation in English 11.

34

1

PART 1: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
It is undeniable that English has become an international language and has been widely used
in many countries in the world. In Vietnam, English is regarded as the most important
foreign language and taught as a compulsory subject in most schools throughout the
country. As a result, English has been paid much attention to by both English teachers and
English learners.
English students nowadays have to master all four skills including reading, speaking,
listening and writing. Among these, reading is considered to be very important because it
helps students to get materials such as new words, structures and background knowledge for
other skills. To learn reading well, it is necessary for students to comprehend sufficient
language base, one of which is the cohesive devices in the text. By mastering cohesive
devices, students can even interpret the text with inadequate vocabulary.
Because of all reasons mentioned above, this small study on discourse analysis of cohesive
devices is decided to be carried out with the source of data taken from reading texts in the
English textbook 11. This research is hoped to help 11th grade students in learning reading
in particular and in learning English in general. Moreover, English teachers are also hoped
to pay more attention to cohesive devices in their teaching process on account of its
benefits.
2. Aims of the Study
The study aims:
- to describe and analyze lexical and grammatical cohesive devices in the new
English textbook 11;
- to give some suggestions for teaching reading skill for 11th grade students.
In order to achieve the aims stated, the study is meant to find out the answers to the two
following research questions:

2
1. What are the grammatical and lexical cohesive devices used in reading texts in
English textbook 11?
2. How can the findings help English teachers and 11th grade students to improve
reading skill?
3. Scope of the Study
Because of the lack of time and the paper size, it is unable for all the issues of discourse to
be analyzed. The study focuses on the grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in reading
texts in the new English textbook 11.
The new English textbook “Tieng Anh 11”, which refers to “English 11” for convenience, is
published by Educational Publisher firstly in 2006. English 11 contains sixteen units, in
each of which, there are five parts: reading, speaking, listening, writing and language focus.
Reading is put at the beginning of each unit, this proves its importance. In this minor study,
sixteen reading passages in sixteen units are analyzed in terms of grammatical and lexical
cohesive devices. Then, some significant and practical suggestions for 11th grade English
students and teachers are given with the hope to improve the reading learning and teaching
process.
4. Significance of the Study
This study aims at investigating cohesive devices of reading texts in English 11 in the light
of discourse. Hence, it contributes to verifying the correctness and significance related to
linguistic theories in discourse analysis by analyzing discourse in one specific textbook. In
addition, the practical significance of the study is to help 11th grade students and teachers in
reading skill by applying the knowledge of cohesion. Because of the widely application of
English 11 in education system throughout the country, the suggestions from this study are
much more valuable.
5. Methods of the Study
The descriptive, statistical and analytical methods are used in this study. The descriptive
method is used to describe theories related to cohesion and to build up a framework for the
study. Then the statistical method is applied in order to list and number the cohesive devices

3
in sixteen reading passages in English 11. Finally, analytical method is restored to analyze
the collected data in terms of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices. Basing on the data
analysis, necessary comments and suggestions are made.
6. Design of the Study
The minor thesis consists of three parts:
- Part 1 is The Introduction which gives rationale, aims, scope, significance and methods of
the study.
- Part 2 is The Development which is divided into three chapters:
+ Chapter 1 is Literature Review.
+ Chapter 2 is Methodology.
+ Chapter 3 is Major Findings and Discussions.
- Part 3 is The Conclusion which states some conclusions of the study and several
suggestions for English teachers and learners and gives recommendations for further
research.


4

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Discourse and Discourse Analysis
1.1. The Concept of Discourse
Discourse is defined in various ways by different scholars and authors. The classical
definition of discourse as derived from formalist assumptions is that discourse is “language
above the sentence or above the clause” (Stubbs 1983: 1). Schiffrin, D (1994: 20) shares the
same idea; he defines discourse in two ways: a particular unit of language and a particular
focus. In the other words, discourse is above sentences and it focuses on language use.
Crystal (1992: 25) defined discourse more clearly by stating that “discourse is a continuous

stretch of language larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit such as sermon,
argument, joke or narrative.” David Nunan (1993: 5) also adds by writing that “discourse
can be defined as a stretch of language consisting of several sentences which as perceived as
being related not only in terms of the ideas they share but also in terms of the jobs they
perform within the discourse. That is, in terms of their functions.”
Although there are a lot of different definitions of discourse, the definition given by
Halliday and Hasan is regarded as the simplest and the clearest to follow. According to
Halliday and Hasan (1976: 38), discourse is language that is functional. It means that
discourse is “language in use”.
1.2. Text and Discourse
In the view of Brown and Yule (1983: 6), “text” is regarded as a technical term; it refers to
the verbal record of a communicative act. By this mean, the text may be differently
presented in various forms of editions, with different types, on different papers’ size;
however, it is still assumed to be the same text. Halliday and Hasan define a text as a
semantic unit which focuses on meaning instead of on its form. In their view, a text does not
consist of sentences; it is realized by, or encoded in, sentences.
To understand what a text is in the most detailed distinction, it is a good way to compare it
with discourse. Many linguists have defined text and discourse differently. According to


5
Widdowson (1979), text has cohesion while discourse has coherence or Cook (1989) see
discourse as a process and text as a product. Crystal (1992: 72) distinguishes text and
discourse by its use, text should be used only for writing but discourse for speech.
On the other hand, many linguists think that text and discourse cannot be made a clear
distinction. In the view of Halliday and Hasan (1976: 23), “text” is employed to refer to
“discourse”; they see “text” as a “semantic unit” characterized by cohesion. They state: “A
text is a passage of discourse which coherent in these two regards: it is coherent with
respect to the context of situation and therefore consistent in register; and it is coherent with
respect to itself, and therefore cohesive”. Sharing the same ideas, Brown & Yule (1983)

support that text is the representation of discourse and the verbal record of a communicative
act. In other words, they all view the notion of text is the representation of discourse, text is
the form of discourse and they have a close relationship.
Although some linguists try to set “text” and “discourse” apart, it is undeniable that the term
“text” and “discourse” refer to the same subject matter. In this study, the term discourse will
be used without difference from text. They both refer to any written record for
communicative functional purposes.
1.3. Spoken and Written Discourse
Spoken and written discourses are distinguished in terms of modes for expressing linguistic
meaning and various functions. Spoken and written discourses represent different modes for
expressing linguistic meaning. In the view of Cook (1989: 50), spoken discourse is
changeable and less planed. It can be produced and processed “on line”. Receivers, by this
way, are open to make an intervention to spoken discourse. Written discourse, on the other
hand, is well-structured and permanent. In writing process, writers are unable to go back
and change or restructure his words.
Spoken and written language can be also distinguished by different functions. According to
Brown and Yule (1983: 13), the function of spoken language is mainly to establish and
maintain human relationship whereas written language has functions to store information
from time and space and to permit words and sentences to be examined out of their original
contexts. In other words, spoken discourse is concerned with interactional use meanwhile
the latter with the transactional use.


6
1.4. Discourse Analysis
In the view of Brown and Yule (1983: viii), discourse analysis is understood and defined in
various meanings. They say that the term discourse analysis is concerned with a broad range
of activities including many disciplines from sociolinguistics, philosophical linguistics to
computational linguistics. To be clearer, Brown and Yule (1983: 1) write, “the analysis of
discourse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As such, it cannot be restricted to

the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes of functions which these
forms are designed to serve human affairs”. It means that analysis of language cannot be out
of the analysis of its purposes and functions. Language has to be understood in its functions
or its uses.
McCarthy, M (1991: 5) shares the same idea with Brown and Yule (1983) by stating that
“discourse analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship between language and
the contexts in which it is used.” It can be referred that language cannot be outside the
context in which it makes sense.
Discourse analysis, in short, is language in context. To understand discourse analysis, it is
essential to understand and interpret a text.
1.5. Context in Discourse Analysis
Discourse analysis is language in context, hence, context has a very important role in
discourse analysis. There are a numerous of definitions of context. According to Nunan, D
(1993: 7), context is the situation in which discourse is embedded. Context may be
understood as all factors and elements that are non-linguistic and textual which affect
spoken or written communication interaction.
Eggins (1994: 30) sees context in terms of three variables: (a) what is talked about; (b) what
the relationship between the communicators is; and (c) what the role of the language plays.
However, in the view of Malinowski (1923) and Halliday M.A.K (1985: 52) context is
divided as “context of situation” and “context of culture”. Context of situation is the
environment which affects text meaning and it can be seen and discussed as human issues.
On the other hand, context of culture which is different from one county to others is difficult
to realize and understand.


7
1.6. Register and Genre in Discourse Analysis
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976: 41), register is language variety according to use.
Register is featured by “field”, “tenor” and “mode”. Three linguistic consequences can be
seen as “field, mode and tenor”. Field which is related to what language is being used and

talked about, deals with subjects involved in the text such as persons and things. Mode
specifies the medium and channel of communication. Two basic modes are spoken and
written. Tenor is concerned with the role of interaction. Tenor reflects relationship between
participants taking part in communication.
The concept of genre is defined in terms of culture context. Eggins (1994: 32) defines genre
as follow:
Genre, or context of culture, can be seen as more abstract, more general – we can
recognize a particular genre if we are not sure exactly what the situational context
is. Genre, then, can be thought of as the general framework that gives purpose to
interactions of particular types, adaptable to the many specific contexts of situation
that they get used in.

It means that participants can give the framework of the situation basing on his cultural
knowledge. Genre and register, to some extent, share the same features and characteristics.
2. Cohesion
2.1. The Concept of Cohesion
Cohesion is defined in the relation with text. It is concerned with the grammatical and
lexical relationship among different factors in a text. Cohesion is the surface relation. It
connects and hangs words together in order to create a text. According to Halliday and
Hasan (1976, as cited in Hoa, 2000) “A text has texture and this is what distinguishes it
from something that is not a text … the texture is provided by cohesive relation.” It means
that cohesion creates the texture in a text, in other words, creates the text. Hoa (2000: 23)
shares the same idea by stating that “cohesion refers to the formal relationship that causes
text to cohere or stick together.”


8
2.2. Cohesion vs. Coherence
Both cohesion and coherence mean sticking together, however, the difference between them
is rather significant. Cohesion is a formal network which connects or links many parts of a

text together by grammar or words. Meanwhile, coherence is the connections which bring
interpretation of linguistic messages. The elements of the messages are seen to be connected
with or without formal linguistic connectors. The reader or the hearer not only look at the
literal meaning of the messages but look at the intended meanings which underlie into the
text. Hoa (2000: 23) and Mc Carthy (1991: 23) both regard coherence as a type of semantic
or rhetorical relationship which underlies the text.
Obviously, cohesion and coherence both make perfectly communicative text by connecting
and hanging the text together. While coherence is the “content cohesion” which is created
by receivers in the act of reading or hearing, cohesion is created by writers or speakers in
the act of writing or speaking. Cohesion, seen on the surface of the text and produced by
grammatical and lexical links, contributes to the coherence of a text.
2.3. Aspects of Cohesion
Cohesion is a means to create coherence in a text and it has to make every sentence, every
phrase and every paragraph contribute to the meaning of the whole piece. In written
discourse, coherence is more difficult to obtain because writers lack the nonverbal clues to
inform their message. Therefore, writers must make their writing more explicit and much
more carefully planned by making use of cohesion which can be understood in terms of
topical and lexical.
2.3.1. Topical Cohesion
Topic is concerned with the description of sentence structure which contains the topic or
theme and the comment or rheme. Theme, which is often put in the front of clause,
conveying known information, serves as the point of the departure of the message. Theme
may be realized by a nominal group, a prepositional phrase, an adverbial group or even a
clause and it may be single or multiple, marked or unmarked.


9
While information in theme is common shared knowledge; rheme or the comment which is
the remainder of the message brings new information. Theme and rheme help connect and
stick sentences in a meaningful text to create topical cohesion.

2.3.2. Logical Cohesion
Hoa, N (2000: 28) indicates that “logical cohesive devices are also powerful sentence
connectors. They demonstrate the logical relationships holding between sentences, thus
creating or expressing cohesion.” Cohesive devices can be divided into some types as
follows:
- And: The word “and” is used to connect sentences or clauses cohesively.
- Enumeration: Enumerators are used to indicate a list of what is being said. Common
words are seen such as first, second,… next, to begin with, to start with, for one thing,…for
another thing, for final point…
- Addition: It is expressed by two classes of additive conjuncts: reinforcing conjuncts: also,
too, furthermore, moreover, then, in addition, above all, and what is more, neither, nor,
either… and equative conjuncts: equally, likewise, similarly, in the same way…
- Transition: There are some words or phrases in this type: Now, with reference to, with
respect to, with regard to, incidentally, by the way…
- Summation: Summation as a cohesive device generalizes or sums up what has been
discussed or said earlier. Some conjuncts are used such as then, all in all, in conclusion, to
sum up, in a nutshell…
- Apposition: It refers back to the previous sentences. Some items are seen such as: namely,
in other words, for example, for instance, that is, that is to say, another way of putting it is,
an example could be, etc.
- Result: It indicates the results or consequences of what was mentioned or said in the
preceding sentences. Some items are seen such as: consequently, hence (formal), so
(informal), therefore, thus (formal), as a result


10
- Inference: It is used to infer some things stated earlier. Some items are used such as: Else,
otherwise, then, in other words, in that case.
- Reformulation or replacement: It introduces another way of saying the same thing by
means of such conjuncts: Better, rather, in other words, or again…

- Contrast: Contrast is to introduce information which is contradictory to the previous
information. Some items are seen such as: Instead, then, on the contrary, in/by contrast, by
comparison, on the other hand
- Concession: It signals the unexpected, surprising information in the view of known information.
It contains some words such as anyhow (informal), anyway (informal), besides, else, however,
nevertheless, still, through, yet, in any case, at any rate, etc. some adverbials are also employed as
concession for example, actually, admittedly, certainly, really = “this at least is true”
- Comparison: The comparison markers are often found in adjectives and adverbs
including more, as, less, least
2.4. Types of Cohesion
2.4.1. Grammatical Cohesion
2.4.1.1. Reference
In the view of Halliday and Hasan (1976: 32), 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 or
cataphoric. Anaphoric reference occurs when the writer refers back to someone or
something that has been previously identified, to avoid repetition. It points listeners or
readers backward to previous entity to understand the text. In contrast, cataphoric items
point listeners or readers forward to the text to identify elements which it refers. It refers to
something introduced in the abstract before it is identified. Exophoric is different from these
two types by describing generics or abstracts without ever being identified. It means that
readers and hearers cannot look at the interpretation of exophoric reference in the text. In


11
this case, the interpretation lies outside the text. It lies in the context of situation. However,
both or all participants can understand exophoric reference items regardless of cultural
background.

Reference items in English include three types. The first type is personal reference which is
by means of function in speech and situation through the category of person. It is expressed
by pronouns he, she, it, me, them, etc or determiners such as his, her, your, etc. The second
type is demonstrative reference which is by means of location on a scale of proximity
including that, there, those, then, etc. The last one is comparative reference which is by
means of identity or similarity and is expressed through adjectives and adverbs such as
same, identical, equal, identically, similar, else, different, other, etc. Study the example of
Halliday (1994: 312) as follow:
E.g.

Peter, Peter, pumpkin eater,
Had a wife and couldn’t keep her
He put her in a pumpkin shell
And there he kept her very well

In this example, the words “he” and “her’ are understood by referring backward to Peter and
his wife and the word “there” can be referred backward to “a pumpkin shell”. Halliday use
anaphoric reference in terms of personal and demonstrative type.
2.4.1.2. Substitution
Substitution is defined by Halliday and Hasan (1976: 89) as “a relation between linguistic
items, such as words or phrases and in terms of linguistic level, it is a relation on the lexicogrammatical level, the level of grammar and vocabulary”. In simpler words, substitution is
the replacement of an expression by another in a text to avoid repetition. Sharing the same
idea, Hoa (2000: 24) regards substitution as “a device which shows the relation between
sentences, where it is derivable to avoid repetition.” Halliday & Hassan divides substitution
into three main types namely: nominal, verbal and clausal substitution.
Firstly in respect to nominal substitution, substitute words are used to replace the head of a
nominal group. In English, nominal substitution is realized by one, ones and same. In
addition, all, any, each, either, neither, some and none can behave in the same way.
Secondly, in terms of verbal substitution, verbal substitute in English is do. It operates as a
head of a verbal group in which it can be occupied by the lexical verb. The position of the

12
verbal substitution do is always final in the group. Finally, in clausal substitution, what is
presupposed is not an element within the clause but an entire clause. The linguistic items
used as substitutes in English are so and not. They are commonly used after verbs: think,
hope, assume, guess, suppose… Look at some examples of Halliday (1994: 317-321):
E.g.

I’ve lost my voice
- Get a new one.

E.g.

Have the children gone to sleep?
- I think they must have done.

E.g.

If you’ve seen them so often, of course you know what they’re like.
- I believe so.

In these examples, the word “one” is used to substitute for the noun “my voice”, “done” for
the verbal clausal “gone to sleep” and “so” for the clause “I know what they’re like”
2.4.1.3. Ellipsis
Ellipsis can be interpreted as the form of substitution in which the item is replaced by zero
or nothing. In Halliday and Hasan’s point of view (1976: 142), ellipsis is “the omission of
certain elements from a sentence, allowed by context.” In ellipsis, something is omitted in a
structure but the missing part can always be retrieved from another structure. Like
substitution, ellipsis can be studied in terms of nominal, verbal and clausal. Firstly, ellipsis

within the nominal group is divided into five types: specific deictic, non-specific deictic,
post-deictic, numerative and epithets. Secondly, ellipsis in verbal group is shown by the
presence of mood but the absence of residue. Lastly, clausal ellipsis takes the presupposing
clause as a basic structure where ellipsis occurs in constituents like the subject, complement,
predicator and adjunct. The missing part can be retrieved from the corresponding
presupposed structure in another sentence. The whole sentence can be omitted in this way.
In the following example taken from Halliday (1994: 318), a clause is omitted, so it is called
clausal ellipsis.
E.g.:

Can you row?
- Yes. [I can row]

2.4.1.4. Conjunction
Conjunction is concerned with the use of formal markers to relate or connect clauses,
sentences or paragraphs together. It is different from reference, substitution and ellipsis
because it does not point readers or listeners to previously pointed entities or state of affairs.


13
Conjunction, in contrast, signals the ways to connect sentences together. According to Cook
(1989: 21), “conjunctions are words or phrases which explicitly draw attention to the type of
relationship between one sentence and clause and another”. In simpler words, conjunctions
are used to connect sentences and clauses together into one text.
Halliday and Hasan (1976: 242-243) divide conjunction into four types including additive,
adversative, casual and temporal. Firstly, additive relation is the relation of adding
meaning among sentences. Common conjunctions used in this relation listed by Halliday
and Hasan (1976) include: and, also, moreover, in addition, besides, etc. Secondly,
adversative relation means “contrary to expectation”. When the speaking process is
expressed, the listener or the hearer tends to expect some kind of information to be said,

however, in this type the information appears in the opposite way. Typical adversative
conjunctions are but, yet, though, however, on the contrary, etc. Thirdly, casual relation
consists of two elements: cause and effect. In most of situations, course will come before
the effect, however, in reality; people sometimes put the effect first and then come to the
causes. This kind of relation is expressed by some items such as: so, hence, therefore,
however, consequently… Lastly, temporal relation creates a unified and tied discourse. On
the other words, discourse appears as a process of an episode with the development of a
time sequence. There are three main types of temporal relation namely simple, complex and
conclusive temporal relation.
2.4.2. Lexical cohesion
Apart from grammatical cohesion, lexical cohesion plays an important role in developing
textuality of discourse and creating cohesion in a text. Lexical cohesion is one of the most
significant features of cohesion. According to Van (2006: 80-81), the concept of lexical
cohesion was first defined in terms of collocation by Firth (1957), and then it was developed
by Halliday and Hassan (1976). Eggins (1994: 101) and Halliday (1985) share the same
point of view by supposing that lexical relation analysis is a way of systematically
describing how words in a text relate to each other, how they cluster to build up lexical sets
or lexical strings. Lexical relation is the selection of items that are related in some ways to
those that have gone before. The followings are subtypes of lexical cohesion:


14

2.4.2.1. Reiteration
Reiteration is regarded as a significant feature of textuality. Mc Carthy (1991: 65) writes
that “reiteration means either restating an item in a later part of discourse by direct
repetition or else reasserting its meaning by exploiting lexical relations”. Reiteration can be
divided into five subtypes, namely repetition, synonym or near-synonym, super-ordinate
and general words.
Repetition: refers to the same lexical item with the same meaning occurring more than one

time in the same discourse. Repeated items are different from forms to the entities they
denote. If the repetition is used too much, the text will become monotonous and easy to
follow.
E.g.: Algy met a bear. The bear was bulgy.
(M. A. K. Halliday, 1994: 330)

Synonymy: refers to the relation between different words bearing the same meaning or
nearly the same meaning for a particular person, object, process or quality. Because it is not
easy to find two words which have the same meaning, near-synonym tends to occur more
often than synonym.
E.g.: He was just wondering which road to take when he was startled by the noise from
behind him. It was the noise of trotting horses… he dismounted and led his horse as quickly
as he could along the right-hand road. The sound of the cavalry grew rapidly nearer….
(M. A. K. Halliday, 1994: 331)

Super-ordinate: is the relation between a class and a subclass or a lower term and an upper
term. Super-ordinate is termed hyponym and two lower terms is named co-hyponym.
General word: there are some general words serving as lexical cohesion and they fall on
major noun classes, such as “human nouns”: people, person, man, woman, child, boy, girl;
“object nouns”: thing, object; “place nouns”: place.
2.4.2.2. Collocation
Collocation occupies an important role in lexical items to create cohesion in a text. In fact,
words seldom stand alone, but tend to combine together and relate to each other. According
to Halliday and Hassan (1976) “Word combination” or “word co-occurrence” is known as
collocation which brings a particular sense or meaning.


15
Collocation has two subtypes: grammatical collocation and lexical collocation. The first
one usually contains a lexical content word and a grammar function word. There are four

main types of grammatical collocation: V + Prep, Adj + Prep, N + Prep, Prep + N. The
second one is restricted by word pairs. Lexical collocation do not contain preposition but
consist of various combinations of nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs. They can be seen
in following common patterns: Adj + N, Quant + N, V + N, N + V, V + Adv, V + Adj, V
+ V, Adv + Adj, N + N.


16

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
1. An Overview of the English Textbook 11
1.1. The Role of the English Textbook in English Language Teaching
Textbooks are seen as a type of teaching and learning materials. They are considered to be a
key component in most language programs because of their function as a guide-map which
helps learners know exactly what they have learned, what they are going to learn, and what
they should revise for achievement exams. Hence, textbooks, in the view of Hutchinson and
Torres (1994) and Sheldon (1988), are the core of a language program or a language course
and offer a variety of different benefits to both students and teachers.
English textbooks, like textbooks in general, are a vital tool in the hand of English teachers
and they have to know how to use it and how useful it can be. English textbooks give
primary supplements to teachers to plan their lessons appropriately and perfectively. Thanks
to them, English teachers can know the focus of the lessons and examinations. Students can
comprehend the basic knowledge and skill as acquired.
1.2. Description of the English Textbook 11
The new English textbook “Tieng Anh 11” or “English 11” was written by a group of
lecturers of the University of Languages and International Studies (Vietnam National
University, Hanoi) and firstly published in 2006. The syllabus of English 11 is the
continuation of English 10.
English 11, including sixteen units for two semesters, follows the theme-based approach
and is developed on six broad themes, that is, You and me, Education, Community, Nature

and Environment, Recreation and People and Places. Each theme, in its turn, is broken into
subthemes or topics which are used as titles for sixteen units in English 11. The titles for
sixteen units in English 11 are friendship, personal experiences, a party, volunteer work,
illiteracy, competitions, world population, celebrations, the post office, nature in danger,
sources of energy, the Asian Games, hobbies, recreation, space conquest, the wonders of
the world.


17
In each unit, there are five parts: reading, speaking, listening, writing and language focus.
Reading skill is put at the beginning of each unit with the aim at introducing the topic and
the language content of the unit and helping students with speaking, listening, writing skill
and language focus part. Reading texts, from 260 words to 320 words in length, are
presented as a monologue or a dialogue to provide students with language base such as
words and structures which are vital to other skills.
2. Research Methodology
2. 1. Materials for Analysis
All materials used for analyzing in this study are extracted from sixteen reading texts in
English 11. These reading texts, which are put at the beginning of each unit, are rather short
and simple in terms of language use. Despite of its simplicity, in each reading texts, there
are a number of new words and structures for 11th grade students to acquire. Many kinds of
reading exercises are designed to check students’ use of language. In addition, through the
teaching process, the researcher realizes that the contents of most texts are familiar to
students, however, there are some passages unfamiliar to them such as Illiteracy, Source of
Energy, Space Conquest and the Wonders of the World. In other words, the variety in the
content of reading texts may be challenging to students.
2.2. Methods of the Study
This study aims at investigating the frequency of the use of cohesive devices in reading
texts in English 11 to obtain the data for the study, some steps below are followed.
Steps 1: Determine the Research Topic

Through the teaching process, the researcher realizes that 11th grade students have to meet
with lots of difficulties and problems in learning reading. Despite many problems in reading
skills, the knowledge of cohesion seems to confuse them most. Students tend to solve texts
by reading words by words or words in isolation and they have difficulties in capturing the
overall or the main meaning of texts. For this reason, the researcher has decided to carry out
the study on the topic of cohesion in reading passages in English 11.


18
Step 2: Determine and Define the Research Questions
The researcher begins with a review of the literature review to determine what prior studies
have determined about this issue and uses the literature review to define the questions for
the study. The two research questions solved in this study are:
1. What are the lexical and grammatical cohesive devices used in reading texts in
English textbook 11?
2. How can the findings help English teachers and 11th grade students to improve
reading skill?
Step 3: Build the framework for the study
The researcher has consulted a lot of books and studies related to the theories of discourse
in general and the theories of cohesion in particular. These theories are used to build up the
framework for this study. Although there are a lot of different opinions or views of scholars
and researchers on cohesion, the theories of Halliday and Hassan (1976) are regarded as the
basic to follow.
Step 4: Collect the Data
After the framework is built, the researcher starts collecting the data for the study. Firstly,
all sixteen reading passages in English 11, which are put in Source of Data part for
referring, are collected to assure the reliability and validity of the data. Secondly, these
reading passages have been analyzed in terms of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices
relying on the given framework. With respect to grammatical cohesive devices, the
frequency of use of reference, substitution, ellipsis and conjunction has been solved

meanwhile with respect to lexical cohesive devices, the frequency of use of reiteration and
collocation has been dealt with. All the data collected from analyzing process has been
presented in ten tables (consulting lists of tables for details).
Step 5: Analyze the Data
The researcher studies ten tables of the data collected from collecting process. Ten tables
present the percentage of different types of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices. Each
table is analyzed basing on the percentage of each type and some illustrations are given,


19
then some comments on the common features of cohesion in reading texts in English 11 are
drawn out.
Step 6: Give Conclusions and Suggestions for 11th Grade Students in Learning
Reading
On capturing the overall picture of cohesive devices used in the reading passages in English
11, the researcher can draw some conclusions. These conclusions are given basing on the
data analysis. At the end of the study, some suggestions and exercises on cohesion are given
to all 11th grade students and teachers for consulting.
2.3. Data Collection Procedures
After deciding on the research topic, research questions and building the study framework,
the researcher has taken time to collect the data. The methods of descriptive and statistical
have been used to gather the data. The descriptive and statistical methods are used to list,
number and describe all grammatical and lexical cohesive devices consisting items of
reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, reiteration and collocation. The frequency of
occurrence of each type through sixteen reading passages is summed up and illustrated
respectively in seven Appendices for referring.
After gathering the data in these appendices, the author has to divide them into many
subtypes and number the times of occurrence of each subtype. Firstly, different types of
reference is illustrated and drawn in the table 1. Besides, reference is understood in
concerned with three subtypes namely anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric. The

percentage of anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric reference are shown in the table 2, 3 and
4 in succession. Secondly, percentage of substitution and ellipsis are numbered and put
respectively in the table 5 and 6 in respect to three types: nominal, verbal and clausal.
Thirdly, percentage of four subtypes of conjunction: additive, temporal, clausal and
adversative is presented at the table 7. Fourthly, items in reiteration such as repetition,
synonym, super-ordinate and general word are drawn at the table 8. Finally, table 9 and
table 10 express 12 types of lexical and grammatical collocation. In short, there are ten
tables illustrating all important figures for this study and necessary analysis and discussion
are drawn basing on these figures.


20
2.4. Data Analysis Procedures
Analytical method has been restored to when dealing with data. This step is regarded as the
most important since it is the source for discussion and suggestion parts. To find out the
significant features of each type of cohesion in English 11, the figures of each table have
been analyzed. In the process of analyzing each table, the author has given the percentage of
frequent occurrence with respect to each type of cohesive devices and then some
discussions and suggestions have been stated. Thanks to outstanding features of cohesion in
each type, 11th grade students are able to solve lots of reading exercises.