Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
Output file VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES POST GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT ĐOÀN THỊ HỒNG THANH AN ANALYSIS OF LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN AESOP’S[.]
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES POST-GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT ĐOÀN THỊ HỒNG THANH AN ANALYSIS OF LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN AESOP’S FABLES (PHÂN TÍCH PHƯƠNG TIỆN LIÊN KẾT TỪ VỰNG TRONG TRUYỆN NGỤ NGÔN CỦA ÊZỐP) M.A THESIS Field: English Linguistics Course: K17 (2008- 2010) Code: 602215 Supervisor: NGUYỄN THÚY HƯƠNG, M.A Hanoi, September 2010 z TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1: INTRODUCTION Rationale Aims of the study Scope of the study Methods of the study Organization of the study PART 2: DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1: Theoretical background 1.1 1.2 Theory of discourse 1.1.1 Definition of discourse 1.1.2 Discourse versus Text 1.1.3 Discourse analysis 1.1.4 Discourse context 1.1.4.1 Context 1.1.4.2 Register 1.1.4.3 Genre Cohesion 10 1.2.1 The concept of cohesion 10 1.2.2 Cohesion versus Coherence 11 1.2.3 Cohesion and discourse structure 12 1.2.4 Types of cohesion 12 1.2.4.1 Grammatical cohesion 13 1.2.4.2 Lexical cohesion 14 1.3 The narrative structure 15 1.4 Fables and its properties 16 1.4.1 Definition of fables 16 1.4.2 General characteristics of a fable 17 1.4.3 Generic structure of a fable 18 z 1.5 Introduction about Aesop and Aesop‟s fables 19 Chapter 2: Previous studies on lexical cohesive devices 21 Chapter 3: Lexical cohesive devices in the English version of Aesop’s fables 23 3.1 Reiteration 23 3.1.1 Repetition 23 3.1.2 Synonyms and near synonyms 27 3.1.3 Superordinates 28 3.2 Collocation 30 3.2.1 Lexical collocation 30 3.2.2 Grammatical collocation 32 3.3 Some concluding remarks 34 PART 3: CONCLUSION Conclusion 36 Limitations 36 Implications 37 Suggestions for further studies 38 REFERENCES 39 APPENDIXES Appendix 1: 25 chosen Aesop‟s fables for analysis of lexical cohesive devices Appendix 2: Number of occurrence of lexical cohesive devices in 25 chosen Aesop‟s fables for analysis z PART 1: INTRODUCTION Rationale The concept of discourse analysis was first studied in the late 1970s and 1980s from different aspects and views of linguists It has been paid much attention to by linguists since its appearance Halliday and Hasan (1976) put the emphasis on the social functions of language Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson (1974), whose exemplary study of turn-taking in ordinary conversation made a first seminal contribution to the understanding of the sequential organization of interaction Then the concept continued to attract the attention of the late twentieth century‟s linguists such as Cook (1989), Hatim and Mason (1990), Swales (1990), Simpson (1997), etc Through linguistic history, discourse analysis is found important in providing insights into various aspects of language in use and therefore of great value to language teaching In reality, traditional language teaching seems to deal merely with pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary of a language whereas the ability to produce a grammatically correct sentence is not sufficient to use a language for powerful communication Discourse analysis came into being to put such knowledge of language into action for communicating more successfully Cohesion and coherence, as sub-concepts of discourse analysis are greatly essential in discourse construction and comprehension for communication It is believed that the linguistic features of great importance and interest are those of generic structure and cohesion The belief comes from the fact that these two factors make influential contribution in defining a genre of discourse As a component of cohesion, lexical cohesion is therefore worth being investigated Fable which is defined as “a traditional short story that teaches moral lessons, especially one with animals as characters” ( Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary, 2000: 470) is a genre of discourse Of all the great authors of fables, Aesop is the earliest and best known His short and simple fables own their typical features distinguished from other genres of discourse such as an article or a speech Apart from its contribution to discourse as a genre, fables are considered the valuable authentic materials that play a very important part in students‟ cultural enrichment, language enrichment as well as personal involvement In language teaching, they represent great potentials for learners, especially learners at the z elementary level Short and simple as fables are, they consequently seem to be the most suitable authentic material for students‟ language proficiency at low level in rural areas For all these reasons, this research is carried out with the hope that an analysis of lexical cohesion devices in Aesop‟s fables is helpful for the application of fables in English teaching and learning in Vietnam Aims of the study The research is intended to explore lexical cohesive devices as one discourse feature in Aesop‟s fables To be more specific, it aims at: Identifying lexical cohesive devices used in Aesop‟s fables Realizing the role and contribution of lexical cohesive devices in constructing a fable Scope of the study The concept of cohesion is large This study only focuses on the lexical cohesive devices and explores the process in which coherence is achieved in the formal written genre of fables Short and simple fables of Aesop are studied to work out typical lexical cohesive devices used in such genre of discourse Data analyzed in the study is taken from 25 of Aesop‟s fables chosen at random that were translated into English by Laura Gibbs for World‟s Classics in 2002 Methods of the study To attain the aim of the study, the research is conducted in the following steps: First, data necessary for the study are collected Relevant theories are read and extracted from books of great linguists such as Halliday and Hasan (1976), Cook (1989), Brown and Yule ( 1983), Hatim and Mason ( 1990), Swales (1990) Aesop‟s fables are also collected to serve the purpose of analyzing lexical cohesive devices used Second, a framework of lexical cohesive devices is set up in order to find out the defining characteristics of fables as a genre of discourse This is done on the ground of several linguists‟ relevant theories and their viewpoints z Third, three previous studies on lexical cohesive devices used in other genres of discourse are reviewed for comparison with the use of lexical cohesive devices in fables Then, 25 selected fables are analyzed in terms of lexical cohesive devices: reiteration and collocations All the 25 fables are comprehensively analyzed to identify the lexical cohesive devices used; their frequencies of occurrence are counted to make out the significance level of each device to fables Last, some conclusions are drawn based on the data analysis and some implications for English teaching at elementary level are also proposed The study is approached in both inductive and deductive ways; the three successive methods chosen for the study can be named as descriptive, analytical and comparative Organization of the study The study is composed of three parts: Introduction, Development and Conclusion The Introduction part presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, methods and organization of the study The Developments part consists of three chapters: Chapter discusses the theoretical background related to discourse analysis The concepts of discourse and discourse analysis, the concept of genre and the distinction between genre and register are made clear The theoretical knowledge of cohesion and fables are also mentioned in this chapter Chapter reviews some previous studies on similar issue Chapter focuses on the analysis of lexical cohesive devices employed in Aesop‟s fables The conclusion part reviews the study and ends it with some findings, implications for teaching and learning, and suggestions for further studies z PART 2: DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1: Theoretical background 1.1 Theory of discourse 1.1.1 Definition of discourse Since its introduction to modern science the term 'discourse' has taken various, sometimes very broad meanings Originally the word 'discourse' comes from Latin 'discursus' which denotes 'conversation, speech' The concept of discourse has been discussed for a long time and linguists have different ways of understanding and defining it To begin with, Widdowson (1979:98) defines “discourse is a use of sentences to perform acts of communication which cohere in large communicative unit, ultimately establishing a rhetorical patterns which characterizes the piece of language as a whole as a kind of communication” Meanwhile, according to Cook (1989) “discourse is stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, unified and purposeful” His viewpoint was later shared with by Crystal (1992:25) who states that “discourse is a continuous stretch of (especially spoken) language larger than a sentence, often constituting a cohesive unit such as a sermon, an argument, a joke or a narrative” In Cook‟s view, such stretches of language can only be obtained if they are considered “in their full textual, social, psychological context” In basic sense, it may be defined as “the language in use for communication” hence, discourse is supposed to be meaningful (Cook, 1989) There also exist a number of other linguists‟ viewpoints on discourse In 1990, Hatim and Mason contributed another definition that implied discourse is “a matter of expression of attitude”; “a mode of speaking and writing which involves the participants in adopting a particular on certain area of socio-cultural activity: racial discourse, scientific discourse, domestic discourse Then, seven years later, in 1997, in the book called “Language through literature”, Simpson claimed discourse is “the term reserved for the highest level of linguistic organization in language study” It is also stated to refer to the “structure and function of language beyond the level of sentence” by him To summarize, the concept of discourse is still under discussion, but basically, the majority of linguists share a common view when defining it It can be noted that their definitions are expressed in different ways but all emphasize the two most important aspects of z discourse regarding its structure and function In terms of structure, a discourse is a wellformed organization above the level of a sentence; in terms of function, a discourse serves as a means of communication 1.1.2 Discourse versus Text The distinction between the word “discourse” and “text” is still in controversy As observed, three trends of reasonizing have emerged to clarify the controversial distinction: For some linguists, these two terms seem to be used almost interchangeably; Some see discourse as a process and text as a product; and in others‟ view text is used for writing and discourse for speech Following the first trend is Halliday and Hasan (1976) who simply state: “we can define text (discourse) in the simplest way perhaps by saying that it is language that is functional” They view text as employed to refer to discourse and see text as a “semantic unit” characterized by cohesion In their viewpoint, “a text is a passage of discourse which is 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” (1976:23) Brown and Yule, Widdowson and Cook are the followers of the second trend To prove his points, Brown and Yule (1983:3, cited in Nunan, 1993:6) argue that text is “the representation of discourse and the verbal record of a communication act” Then, Widdowson(1983:100) continues to point out the difference and the interrelationship between the two as: “discourse is a communicative process by means of interaction Its situational outcome is a change in state of affairs: information is conveyed, intentions made clear, its linguistic product is text” In favor of the third trend is Crystal (1992: 72) who insists discourse is a “continuous stretch of (especially spoken) language larger than a sentence, whereas a text is “a piece of naturally occurring spoken, written or signed discourse identified for purposes of analysis” In conclusion, there remains a disagreement about the meaning of the terms “discourse” and “text” It is, however, most agreed that both discourse and text need to be defined in terms of “meaning” and that coherent text/piece of discourse are those that form a meaningful one To put it in another way, discourse is a general term to refer to all the act of verbal communication, whereas text is simply a verbal record of the whole communicative process (that is discourse) in which many situational factors are involved, it can be both z written and spoken, and there is no limit to the size of the text- “a text consists of one word or it may be of considerable length” (Swales, 1990) Accordingly, text is purely linguistic, formal object while discourse has both linguistic and non-linguistic property 1.1.3 Discourse analysis The first modern linguist who commenced the study of the relation of sentences and coined the name 'discourse analysis', which afterwards denoted a branch of applied linguistics, was Zellig Harris , an American linguist (Cook 1989:13) The emergence of this study is a result of not only linguistic research, but also of researchers engaged in other fields of inquiry, particularly sociology, psychology, anthropology and psychotherapy Hence, it is seen as “a new branch of linguistics which grew out of the work in different disciplines in the 1960s and early 1970s, including linguistics, philosophy, logic, semiotics, psychology, anthropology” (Van, 2000) A significant contribution to the evolution of discourse analysis has been made by British and American scholars In Britain the examination of discourse turned towards the study of the social functions of language A thorough account of communication in various situations such as debates, interviews, doctor-patient relations, paying close attention to the intonation of people participating in talks as well as manners particular to circumstances was the first concern of British scholars Americans, on the other hand, focused on examining small communities of people and their discourse in genuine circumstances and on conversation analysis inspecting narratives in addition to talks and the behavior of speakers as well as patterns repeating in given situations Being identified and studied properly in a large scale and continuously, discourse analysis is understood as a primarily linguistic study examining the use of language by its native population whose major concern is investigating language functions along with its forms, produced both orally and in writing Moreover, identification of linguistic qualities of various genres, vital for their recognition and interpretation, together with cultural and social aspects which support its comprehension, is the domain of discourse analysis To put it in another way, the branch of applied linguistics dealing with the examination of discourse attempts to find patterns in communicative products as well as their correlation with the z circumstances in which they occur, which are not explainable at the grammatical level (Carter, 1993:23) It was in 1973 that Discourse analysis was dealt perfectly and correctly in M.A.K Halliday‟s functional approach to language His approach is completely influential in British discourse analysis with the emphasis on the social function and the thematic and informational structure of speech and writing 1.1.4 Discourse context 1.1.4.1 Context In common sense, the Webster‟s Dictionary defines a context as “the whole situation, the background or the environment relevant to a particular event, personality, creation, etc…” It is said to refer to the condition in which something exists or occurs Linguistically, this is a part of a discourse surrounding a word or passage that helps make its meaning clear The concept of context was first noticed in 1923 by Malinowski, an anthropologist when he introduced the two terms “Context of situation” and “Context of culture” According to him, Context of situation refers to the environment of the context, including verbal environment and the situation in which the text occurred while Context of culture deals with the whole cultural background behind the participants in the interaction His idea was later taken up by Firth (1957) who placed great emphasis on the “social context” He saw the context of situation as crucial determinants of utterance meaning Likewise, when reporting the study of Malinowski (1923) Halliday and Hasan (1976) focused on context of situation and described how it determines the kinds of meaning that are expressed with the general concepts of field, mode and tenor For some scholars, context seems just to be the minimal stretch of language that helps to understand what is written or spoken Halliday (1994:5) concluded that context “refers to the events that are going on around when people speak and write” Guy Cook (1994) observes that context can be used in both a broad and a narrow sense: in the narrow sense, it refers to knowledge of factors outside of the text under consideration; in the broad sense it refers to knowledge of these factors and to knowledge of other parts under consideration, sometimes referred to as “co-context” The role of context in discourse analysis was, as a result, then realized David Nunan (1993:7) defines: “Context refers to the situation z ... chosen Aesop‟s fables for analysis of lexical cohesive devices Appendix 2: Number of occurrence of lexical cohesive devices in 25 chosen Aesop‟s fables for analysis z PART 1: INTRODUCTION Rationale... hope that an analysis of lexical cohesion devices in Aesop‟s fables is helpful for the application of fables in English teaching and learning in Vietnam Aims of the study The research is intended... etc Through linguistic history, discourse analysis is found important in providing insights into various aspects of language in use and therefore of great value to language teaching In reality,