a study of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in some written discourses from the course book english for chemistry = nghiên cứu phương tiện liên kết ngữ pháp và từ vựng thông qua một số văn bản

LIST OF GRAPHS IN THE STUDY Figure 1: Grammatical and lexical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence Figure 2: Grammatical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence Figure 3: Anap

POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

PHẠM THỊ VÂN ANH

A STUDY OF GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN SOME WRITTEN DISCOURSES FROM THE COURSE

BOOK “ENGLISH FOR CHEMISTRY”

(Nghiên cứu phương tiện liên kết ngữ pháp và từ vựng thông qua một số

văn bản trong giáo trình “Tiếng Anh chuyên ngành Hóa Học”)

MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS ENLISH LINGUISTICS CODE: 602215

HANOI - 2009

POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

PHẠM THỊ VÂN ANH

A STUDY OF GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN SOME WRITTEN DISCOURSES FROM THE COURSE

BOOK “ENGLISH FOR CHEMISTRY”

(Nghiên cứu phương tiện liên kết ngữ pháp và từ vựng thông qua một số

văn bản trong giáo trình “Tiếng Anh chuyên ngành Hóa Học”)

MA MINOR THESIS ENLISH LINGUISTICS CODE: 602215

Supervisor : Dr Trần Xuân Điệp

HANOI - 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

List of tables

List of abbreviations

Part A: INTRODUCTION……… 1

1 Rationale……… 1

2 Aims of the study……… … 2

3 Scope of the study……… … 2

4 Methods of the study……… … 2

5 Design of the study……… 2

Part B: DEVELOPMENT……… 4

Chapter 1: Literature review and theoretical background ……… 4

1.1 Literature review……… … 4

1.2 Theoretical background……….… 4

1.2 1 Discourse and discourse analysis……… … 5

1.2.1.1 Concept of discourse……….… 5

1.2.1.2 Discourse and text……….… 5

1.2.1.3 Spoken and written discourse……… 5

1.2 1 4 Discourse analysis……….… 6

1.2.1.4.1 Context in discourse analysis……… 6

1.2.1.4.2 Register and Genre in discourse analysis……….… 7

1.2 2 Cohesion and Coherence……… 8

1.2 2.1 Cohesion vs Coherence……… 8

1.2 2.2 Aspects of Coherence……… 8

1.2 2 2.1 Topical Coherence……… … 8

1.2 2 2 2 Logical Coherence……….… 9

1.2 2 3 Types of Cohesion……….… 9

1.2 2 3 1 Grammatical Cohesion……… … 9

1.2 2 3 2 Lexical Cohesion……… … 12

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

1.2 3 1 Concept of ESP……….… 13

1.2 3 2 Characteristics of ESP discourse……… … 14

1.2.4 Summary……… 14

Chapter 2: Analysis of Grammatical and Lexical Cohesive Devices in some written discourses from the course book “English for Chemistry”………

16 2.1 An overview of the analysis……… 16

2.2 Analysis of Grammatical and Lexical Cohesive Devices in some written discourses from the course book “English for Chemistry”………

16 2.2.1 Grammatical cohesive devices……… 17

2.2.1.1 References……….… 18

2.2.1.1.1 Anaphoric reference……….… 18

2.2.1.1.2 Cataphoric reference……….… 21

2.2.1.1.3 Exophoric reference……… 23

2.2.1.1.4 A comparison of anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric reference……… 23

2.2.1.2 Conjunction……… 24

2.2.1.3 Substitution……… …… 27

2.2.1.4 Ellipsis……….… 28

2.2.1.4.1 Nominal Ellipsis……… … 28

2.2.1.4.2 Verbal Ellipsis……… … 29

2.2.1.4.3 Clausal Ellipsis……….… 30

2.2.2 Lexical cohesive devices……… 31

2.2.2.1 Reiteration……… … 31

2.2.2.1.1.Repetition……… … 32

2.2.2.1.2.Synonym……… … 35

2.2.2.1.3.Super-ordinate and general……….… 35

2.2.2.2 Collocation……… 37

2.2.2.2.1 Lexical collocation 2.2.2.2.2 Grammatical collocation 2.2.3 Summary……… 41

PART C: CONCLUSION……… 42

1 Recapitulation……… 42

2 Implications……… 43

2.1 Implications for teachers and students of EC……… 43

2.2 Suggestions for materials design……… 44

3 Limitations of the study……… 44

4 Suggestions for further research……… 44

REFERENCES……… 45

Appendix I

Appendix II

Appendix III

Appendix IV

Appendix V

Appendix VI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ESP: English for Specific Purposes

GE: General English

EC: English for Chemistry

HNUE: Hanoi National University of Education

N: Noun

Adj: Adjective

V: Verb

Prep: Preposition

LIST OF TABLES IN THE STUDY

Table 1 : Grammatical and lexical cohesive devices – Absolute count Table 2 : Grammatical cohesive devices – Absolute count

Table 3 : Frequency of occurrence of anaphoric reference

Table 4 : Frequency of occurrence of cataphoric reference

Table 5 : A comparison of anaphoric, cataphoric cataphoric reference Table 6 : Conjunction - Absolute count

Table 7 : Frequency of occurrence of ellipsis

Table 8 : Lexical cohesive devices – Absolute count

Table 9 : Frequency of occurrence of repetition

Table 10: Number of occurrence of topic words

Table 11: Frequency of occurrence of lexical collocations

Table 12: Frequency of occurrence of grammatical collocations

LIST OF GRAPHS IN THE STUDY

Figure 1: Grammatical and lexical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence Figure 2: Grammatical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence

Figure 3: Anaphoric, cataphoric cataphoric reference- Frequency of occurrence Figure 4: Frequency of occurrence of conjunction

Figure 5: Lexical cohesive devices – Frequency of occurrence

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 RATIONALE

Cohesion plays an important role in the comprehension of a written discourse This

is due to the fact that comprehension is a process that occurs within the reader and is at least partially dependent on cohesion and coherence Cohesion is used to show how sentences which are structurally independent of one another may be linked together Cohesion exists within a text and is not the same as coherence, which is something the reader establishes in the process of reading The importance of cohesion in text is major since it provides semantic continuity and permits coherence and comprehensibility The more explicit cohesive relationships are, the easier a text is to understand The coherence

of a text can be created through lexical and grammatical cohesive links and other cohesive factors When a reader is able to see how these cohesive factors contribute to the linking of sentences and ideas in a text, he not only can understand the text but can produce the text more easily as well

However, recognizing the relations within the text to obtain coherence is not easy for learners of English, especially non-English major students Most of them find it difficult to understand and produce a text This is because of the insufficient awareness of both teachers and learners in teaching and learning English, i.e learning English is learning vocabulary and grammar Moreover, students often learn words in isolation, not in combinations Meanwhile, in order to understand a reading text, the readers need to pay attention to not only vocabulary and grammar but also other factors that create links between the ideas in the text, i.e cohesive devices

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

The texts used for this study are taken from the EC course book used for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE The course book was designed by our ESP teachers and was confirmed in 2008 It contains six units, from unit 1 to unit 6 We take six reading texts from these six units as written discourses of EC from which we analyze grammatical and lexical cohesive devices

2 AIMS OF THE STUDY

The aims of the study are:

- giving an overview of theoretical background of discourse and discourse analysis; cohesion, coherence and cohesive devices; concept of ESP and ESP discourse

- describing and analyzing grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in the course book of EC for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE The findings are expected to be applied to the teaching and learning of EC

3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Within the framework of a minor M.A thesis, the study just mainly focuses on grammatical and lexical cohesive devices, their frequency of occurrence, in the six reading texts of EC taken from the textbook used for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry

at HNUE

4 METHODS OF THE STUDY

Description, analysis, statistics are the principal methods used in this study to identify grammatical and lexical cohesive devices, their frequency of occurrence in some written discourses of EC

5 DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The study includes three main parts: Introduction, Development, and Conclusion

Introduction presents the rationale, the scope, the methodology and the design of the

study

Development consists of two chapters:

- Chapter 1: gives the theoretical background of the study with the theories related to

three main sections: discourse and discourse analysis, cohesion and coherence, ESP

- Chapter 2: provides an analysis of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in some

written discourses taken from the textbook of EC used for second year students in Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE

Conclusion provides a recapitulation of the study, implications to teachers and students in

improving the teaching and learning of EC, limitations of the study and suggestions for further research

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL

BACKGROUND

1.1 LITRERATURE REVIEW

For several years, the analysis of cohesion in texts has been a key topic in the study

of discourse Cohesion refers to the relations of meaning that exists within a text It is part

of the system of language which has the potentials for meaning enhancement in texts

In Vietnam, many studies of discourse features of written discourses of different disciplines have been conducted For example, in 2004, cohesive devices in application letters was studied by Le Thi Mai Hien This study found that cohesion proved to be a decisive factor for successful application letters In the same year, a study of cohesive devices in information and communication technology (ICT) advertisements was carried out by Nguyen Thi Bich Lien She found that all kinds of cohesive devices were used in the discourse and that discourse analysis of cohesive devices could help a lot in translating ICT ads correctly Moreover, a study of cohesive devices in Electronics and Communications conducted by Mai Thi Loan in 2006 shown that lexical cohesion is used much more often than grammatical cohesion.…

In sum, all these studies have found that cohesion plays an important role in cohering the ideas in the texts which help readers understand the texts easily However, no study of cohesive devices in EC texts has been conducted so a study of how cohesive devices are used in EC texts is needed to be carried out to improve the teaching and learning of EC

1.2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This part deals with theoretical topics such as concepts of discourse, discourse context, cohesion and coherence, cohesive devices, register and genre which are relevant to the purpose of the study as well as the background of ESP in general

1.2.1 Discourse and discourse analysis

1.2.1.1 The concepts of discourse

In the history of linguistics, many linguists have so far given definitions of discourse Each of them has his own idea about discourse, however, I would like to pay attention to the definitions that are appropriate to the purpose of my thesis

Crystal (1992:25) defines discourse as follows: “Discourse is a continuous stretch of language larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit such as sermon, argument, joke or narrative” Mc Cathy (1997) states that discourse are the study of the relationship between language and the contexts in which it is used Cook (1989:156) has an other way to define: “Discourse is stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, unified and purposive”

1.2.1.2 Discourse and Text

There seems to be two different ideas around the terms „discourse‟ and „text‟ Some linguists assume „discourse‟ and „text‟ are different concepts Cook (1989:158) assumes that discourses are stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, unified and purposive whereas text is a stretch of language interpreted formally without context For some other linguists, „text‟ is used for writing and „discourse‟ is for speech

However, Halliday and Hasan (1989) state “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” Moreover, Brown and Yule (1983: 6) argue that text is the representation of discourse and the verbal record of a communicative act

1.2.1.3 Spoken and Written discourse

Spoken and written discourses are different from each other in terms of forms and functions Meanwhile written discourse complies of complete sentences with subordination, rich lexis and frequent modifications via adjectives and adverbs, spoken contains incomplete sentences Furthermore, written discourse, compared with spoken discourse, is more complex, elaborate, and explicit It differs from face-to-face interaction

in the manner that coherence is constructed Tannen (1982) has noted that “cohesion is

established in spoken discourse through paralinguistic and non-verbal channels (such as intonation, gesture, and eye-gaze), while cohesion is established in writing through lexicalization and complex syntactic structures which make connectives explicit” (p 3) A writer apparently should learn to make us of appropriate signaling expressions to assist reader in organizing their comprehension of the text Meyer (1982) has evidenced that when signaling devices are employed to label relationship in text, there is a facilitating effect on reading comprehension for native speakers

In sum, although spoken and written discourse have the general function of communication, they serve various functions, the former concerned with the establishment and maintenance of human relationship (interactional use) and the latter with the working out and transferring of information (transactional use) (Brown and Yule,1983:13)

This study focuses on the written discourse only, specifically, written discourse of

EC In order to analyze a discourse, it is necessary to look into the disciplines of Discourse Analysis

1.2.1.4 Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is the study of the relationship between language and the context

in which it is used Yule(1996) states that “…we, as language users, make sense of what

we read in texts, understand what speakers mean despite what they say, recognize connected as opposed to jumbled or incoherent discourse, and successfully take part in that complex activity called conversation, we are undertaking what is known as discourse analysis” Therefore, in order to understand or interpret the message of a spoken or written discourse we need to analyze it basing on the disciplines of Discourse Analysis One of the key factors that contributes to the making of a discourse is Context, the next are Register and Genre

1.2.1.4.1 Context in discourse analysis

Discourse analysis is fundamentally concerned with the general principles of interpretation by which people normally make sense of what they hear and read In trying

to derive a text‟s meaning, language users actually relate the text to the situation, environment or context in which it is found Consequently, context is an important aspect

in discourse analysis According to Celce-Murcia (2000:11), context is all the factors and

elements that are non-linguistic and textual but which affect spoken or written communicative interaction Linguists have mentioned various types of context, but here, I just pay attention to two main types, that is context of situation and context of culture

Context of situation

Context of situation is an integral factor in discourse analysis Many linguists agree that a text can be understood or interpreted thoroughly only when the context of situation is referred to In Malinowski‟s viewpoint, context of situation refers to the environment of the text According to Eggins (1994:30), context of situation is usually discussed in three variables: what is talked about; what the relationship between the communicators is; what role the language plays

Context of culture

In order to have an adequate understanding of the meaning of a text, it is necessary

to provide not only information about the immediate environment but also the total cultural background as Malinowski stated “If you are not a member of the culture, you cannot understand what is meant”

1.2.1.4.2 Register and Genre in discourse analysis

The term „register‟ is used as a general term for situational varieties According to Halliday (1985), a register may be defined as a variety of language used in a particular context Gain & Redman (1986) point out that “Register are varieties of language defined

by their topics and context of use” namely the language of economics, law, finance, banking, medicine, etc

Halliday and Hasan (1989) use the terms „field‟, „mode‟, „tenor‟ as the features of register The three terms can be defined as follows:

Field: refers to what is happening and what language is being used to talk about Mode: specifies the medium and channel of communication The two basic modes are spoken and written

Tenor: refers to the type of role interaction, the set of relevant social relations, permanent and temporary, among the participants involved In other words, tenor refers to who is taking part, their statuses and roles

Discourse is not only understood through register but genre as well Eggins (1994:32) considers that genre or context of culture can be seen as more abstract, more general It 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

1.2.2 Cohesion and Coherence

Coherence, as Nunan (1993), is the feeling that sequences of sentences or utterances hang together and make sense

Although cohesion and coherence are different from each other, they have a close relationship in making a perfectly communicative text Cohesion contributes to the successful coherence of a text and coherence is something created by the reader in the act

of reading the text

1.2.2.2 Aspect of coherence

1.2.2.2.1 Topical coherence

Topical coherence is one kind of content cohesion of discourse in which all the sentences are about the same topic That means only one specific topic is discussed throughout a written discourse to achieve the coherence of the discourse Moreover, the topic is maintained through devices that help to repeat it

Topical coherence concerns the terms Theme and Rheme Theme is expressed by the left-most constituent of the sentence It refers to what the speaker nominates as the subject of what he will talk about in the Rheme The functions of a Theme are to connect back or link to previous discourse and to serve as a starting of departure for further development of discourse Moreover, Halliday and Hasan (1976: 38) states that “the Theme is the starting point for the message; it is the ground for which the clause is taking off” and “if the message is organized as a Theme-Rheme structure… the Theme should be

at the beginning, rather than at the end or at some other specific points” The Theme is not necessarily a nominal group It may be an adverbial group or prepositional phrase Or sometimes in English the Theme is announced explicitly by means of some expression like

as for…, with regard to…, about…

1.2.2.2.2 Logical coherence

Logical coherence is an important aspect of a discourse as it leads to the appropriate interpretation of a discourse or a text All segments of a discourse are considered logical only when they together constitute and maintain a closely dialect logical semantic relationship

Logical coherence is determined by logical cohesive devices such as addition, enumeration, transition, summation, opposition result, inference, reformulation, replacement, contrast, concession and comparison

1.2.2.3 Types of Cohesion

According to Halliday and Hasan in their seminar work (1976), there are five categories of cohesive devices that signal cohesion, including reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and lexical ties The cohesion theory of Halliday and Hasan proposed that these linguistic signs play the main part in the development of coherence of a text In other words, they make explicit the logical relations that are already present in the mental process of the writer The types of cohesion can be divided into two main types: grammatical and lexical cohesion

1.2.2.3.1 Grammatical cohesion

Grammatical cohesion may be defined as the surface making of semantic links between clauses and sentences in written discourse and between utterances and tunes in

speech These links can be grouped in four types: reference, ellipsis, substitution and conjunction

a Reference

Reference is a relation on semantic level It is used to avoid repetition Halliday and Hasan (1976:32) states that “instead of being interpreted semantically in their own right, they make reference to something else for their interpretation”

Reference can be divided into: anaphoric, cataphoric, exophoric, personal, demonstrative, and comparative reference Each of them is presented by either pronouns (eg he, she, it, him, her…) or the article „the‟

Anaphoric reference is a cohesive device which points the reader or listener backwards to

a previously mentioned entity, process or state of affairs

- Hydrogen, the first element in the periodic table, is a very widely distributed

element Its most important compound is water, H 2 O

The possessive adjective its refers back to Hydrogen This is an anaphoric reference

Cataphoric reference is a cohesive device which points the reader or listener forwards

- It is the lightest of all gases, density being about 1/14 that of air It does not

support respiration, but is not poisonous Hydrogen is a good conductor of heat as compared with other gases

The pronoun it refers forwards to Hydrogen

Exophoric reference is a kind of reference which refers to the situation

Personal reference is reference by means of function in speech situation and through the

category of person It can be expressed by pronouns: he, his, she and determiner the

Demonstrative reference is a form of verbal pointing by the speaker who identifies the

referent by locating it on the scale of proximity in terms of space and time It is expressed through determiners: this, that, these, those and adverbs: here, there

Comparative reference serves to compare items within a text in terms of identity and

similarity It is expressed through words such as same, identical, equal, identically, addition, other, different, else, differently, otherwise, better, more, so, less, equally

b Substitution

Substitution is the use of substitute word or phrase to avoid repetition According to Halliaday and Hasan “substitution is the 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 other word, substitution is a process of replacement

of one item by another within a text There are three types of substitution: nominal, verbal

and clausal Nominal substitutes are: one, ones, same, verbal substitute consists: do, clausal substitutes include: so, not

c Ellipsis

Ellipsis is the omission essential structure elements from a sentence or clause, and the missing part can always be retrieved from another structure within a sentence or beyond a sentence The purpose of using this device is not to burden the text with needless substitution or repetition Like substitution, ellipsis can be studied in terms of nominal, verbal and clausal

d Conjunction

Conjunction differs from reference, substitution, and ellipsis in that it is not a device for reminding the reader or listener of previously mentioned entities, actions, and states of affairs In other words, it is not what linguistics calls an anaphoric relation However, it is a cohesive device because it signals relationships that can only be fully understood through reference to other parts of the discourse There are four types of conjunction recognized in English: adversative, additive, temporal, and causal

Adversative: however, nevertheless, in fact, on the other hand, on the contrary, yet, though, etc

- A large number of artificial carbon compounds unknown in nature have been produced in the laboratory However, all these compounds, both natural and artificial,

have certain distinct characteristic properties

Additive: and, furthermore, in addition, besides, in other words, for instance, likewise, thus, etc

- Acids and bases, two classes of chemical compounds that display generally

Temporal: then, after that, finally, at last, until then, next, just then, etc

- Firstly, organic compounds are more sensitive than inorganic compounds to

physical and chemical influences

1.2.2.3.2 Lexical Cohesion

In order to understand completely cohesive relations in discourse analysis, it is necessary not only to take into account grammatical cohesion but also lexical cohesion This is the cohesive effect achieved by the selection of vocabulary Lexical cohesion arises from the semantic connections between words Halliday and Hasan (1976: 288) divided lexical cohesion into two main categories: Reiteration and Collocation

Reiteration: In Cohesion in English (1976:278), Halliday and Hasan define reiteration as

follows: Reiteration is a form of lexical cohesion which involves the repetition of a lexical item, the use of a general word to refer back to a lexical item, and a number of things in between – the use of a synonym, near-synonym, or super-ordinate

From the definition above, we can see clearly that reiteration involves repetition, synonym, near synonym, antonym, super-ordinate, and general words Those can be explained through examples as follows:

- Repetition:

- When groups of atoms combine as a subunit, the subunit is usually treated

as a single symbol

- Synonym:

- When heated in air, organic compounds burn away completely: the carbon disappears in the form of carbon dioxide, the hydrogen and oxygen vanish

as water vapour, and the nitrogen escape in the form of the free element

Collocation: In recent years collocation has emerged as an important category of lexical

cohesion and it is fast becoming an established unit of description in discourse analysis as collocation is believed to be the most powerful force in the creation and comprehension of all naturally occurring text J.R Firth (1957) defined collocation as „the company words keep their relationship with other words‟ Another definition might be „the way words combine in predictable ways‟

1.2 3 English for Specific Purpose (ESP)

1.2.3.1 Concept of ESP

Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) states that “A key feature of ESP work is to research into how spoken and written texts work In order to understand how these texts work, we need to understand how they are used within a particular discipline or profession, and how they attempt to persuade their audiences of the validity of their claims and arguments”

As for a broader definition of ESP, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) theorize, "ESP is

an approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to content and method are based

on the learner's reason for learning" (p 19) Anthony (1997) notes that, it is not clear where ESP courses end and general English courses begin; numerous non-specialist ESL

instructors use an ESP approach in that their syllabus are based on analysis of learner needs and their own personal specialist knowledge of using English for real communication

1.2.3.2 Characteristics of ESP discourse

Anthony (1997) notes that there has been considerable recent debate about what ESP means despite the fact that it is an approach which has been widely used over the last three decades At a 1997 Japan Conference on ESP, Dudley-Evans offered a definition The definition he and St John postulate is as follows:

Absolute Characteristics

 ESP is defined to meet specific needs of the learner

 ESP makes use of the underlying methodology and activities of the discipline it serves

 ESP is centered on the language (grammar, lexis, and register), skills, discourse and genres appropriate to these activities

Variable Characteristics

 ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines

 ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different methodology from that of general English

 ESP is likely to be designed for adult learners, either at a tertiary level institution or

in a professional work situation It could, however, be for learners at secondary school level

 ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students

 Most ESP courses assume some basic knowledge of the language system, but it can

be used with beginners

1.2.4 SUMMARY

In this chapter, the theoretical foundation for my study has been discussed, i.e concept of discourse, distinction between spoken discourse and written discourse, cohesion and coherence, context, register and genre in discourse analysis, cohesive devices such as

topical, logical, grammatical and lexical cohesive devices I also attempted to look at the

definition of ESP, characteristics of ESP discourse

CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN SOME WRITTEN DISCOURSES OF EC

2.1 An overview of the study

As a matter of the fact that cohesive devices take a very active role in the construction of discourse They are responsible for making the sentences of a text seem to hang together, indicated by the use of semantically and grammatically related words Therefore, it is useful for students to master them if they clearly understand the role of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in making the text coherent Understanding the important role of cohesive devices, I decided to do a research on them with the hope to help my students learn English more easily and more effectively

The study aims at exploring the frequency of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices through the data collected from the course book analysis The course book being

analyzed in this research is “English for Chemistry” published in 2008 and it is used for

second year students at Faculty of Chemistry at HNUE

The study is performed basing on statistical tool, then table and chart demonstrations are used to analyze the statistical data From which we can find out the frequency of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices used in the course book

2.2 ANALYSIS OF GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN SOME WRITTEN DISCOURSES FROM THE COURSE BOOK “ENGISH FOR CHEMISTRY”

The overall picture of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices in six written discourses of EC is shown in the following table:

Types of cohesive devices Number of items Total

Grammatical cohesive devices 224

485 Lexical cohesive devices 261

Table 1: Grammatical and lexical cohesive devices – Absolute count

53.80%

Grammatical cohesive devices Lexical cohesive devices

Figure 1: Grammatical and lexical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence

As can be shown in the table 1, there are 485 items of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices employed in six reading texts of EC Among them, lexical cohesive devices are more widely used than grammatical cohesive devices with 53.8% and 46.2% respectively The percentage of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices is shown in figure 1 above

2.2.1 Grammatical cohesive devices

Grammatical cohesion has four types: Reference, Substitution, Ellipsis, and Conjunction The occurrence of these cohesive devices can be represented in the following table:

Grammatical cohesive devices Number of items Total

0.50% 2.30%

27.60%

69.60%

Reference Conjunction Substitution Ellipsis

Figure 2: Grammatical cohesive devices - Frequency of occurrence

It is noticeable from the table 1 that all grammatical cohesive devices are employed

in the EC reading texts with the total of 224 items However, the occurrence percentage of each type is different from each other

According to the result shown in the figure 2, the highest occurrence frequency belongs to reference and conjunction (69.6% and 27.6% respectively) Substitution and ellipsis rarely occur in the EC reading texts (0.5% and 2.3% respectively) This may result from the characteristics of EC, which is required to be accurately and clearly stated otherwise it can lead to ambiguity and misunderstanding Moreover, the language of EC is the language of science which is quite complicated and difficult to understand It requires the readers not only knowledge inside but also outside the texts to understand the particular things mentioned in the texts In other words, the meaning of the texts is the referential meaning, the readers need to refer to both the previous and the later parts of the texts to understand the exact meaning of a particular item That is why reference is used with the highest percentage

reference contains different types of markers depending on the behavior of its elements These markers are: definite article, personal pronoun, demonstrative pronoun, personal determiner, demonstrative adverb, comparative adverb and comparative adjective The following table shows the data of anaphoric reference in the six reading texts on EC

Types of markers Number of items Frequency of occurrence (%) Total

Table 3: Frequency of occurrence of anaphoric reference

Looking at the table 3, it is obvious that definite article (the) takes up the largest part, 66 (70.2%) items There is a truth that definite article (the) is mostly used to refer to

an object or person that has been previously introduced so there is a common belief that the typical function of “the” is the anaphoric one and that the main function of definite article

is to refer to something mentioned earlier in the text That is why definite article “the” is the most popular anaphoric reference word in EC reading texts Here are some examples of definite article “the”:

- Chemistry is the study of matter, its chemical physical properties, the chemical and physical changes it undergoes, and the energy changes that accompany those processes Matter is any thing that has mass and occupies space The changes that matter undergoes always involve either gain or loss energy (Unit 1)

- No one can say with certainty how many organic compounds are known Estimates now approach one million In any case, the above estimate is impressive when we consider that the total inorganic compounds known probably do not exceed 50,000 (Unit 5)

Personal determiner and personal pronoun rank the second in frequency with the percentages being (9.5% and 7.4% respectively) However, the percentages of personal determiner and personal pronoun are much smaller than the percentage of definite article The personal determiners „its‟, „their‟ and the personal pronoun „it‟, „they‟ are often used in

EC texts to refer to the items previously mentioned in the texts as in the following examples:

- Chemistry is the study of matter, its chemical physical properties, the chemical and physical changes it undergoes (Unit 1)

- The study of chemistry involves matter, energy, and their interrelationship (Unit 1)

- Analytical chemists detect traces of toxic chemical in water and air They also develop methods to analyze human body fluids for drugs, poisons, and levels of medication (Unit 1)

( personal determiner “its” refers back to the word “matter” and “their” refers to the words “matter, energy” ; personal pronoun “it” refers to the word “ matter” and “they” refer to the word “analytical chemists”).

Next comes demonstrative pronoun with 8 (8.5%) items The percentage of demonstrative pronoun is quite small but it cannot be denied that the occurrence of demonstrative pronoun also contributes to the coherence of a text This is due to the fact that demonstrative pronoun regularly refers anaphorically to something that has been said before

It refers to the location of something, typically some entity-person or object that is participating in the process Take the following examples as an illustration:

- When aqueous (water) solutions of an acid and a base are combined, a neutralization reaction occurs This reaction is characteristically very rapid and generally produces water and a salt (Unit 6)

- Thus water, with molecules composed of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, is written as H 2 O; hydrogen peroxide, with two atoms of each of these elements, is H 2 O 2 (Unit 2)

(The words „this‟ and „these‟ in the above examples are demonstrative pronouns)

It is surprising that demonstrative adverb, comparative adjective, comparative adverb account for very small percentage of anaphoric reference in the reading text,

ranging from 1.06% to 2.1% This is perhaps because of the nature of the written discourses of English for Chemistry to be simple, concise and specific for the readers to understand clearly

In brief, from the analysis above, we can see that definite article is the anaphoric reference used the most often in EC texts, and then come personal pronoun and personal determiner Demonstrative adverb and comparative adjective are used the least This is due

to the features of English language itself and also the specific features of EC

2.2.1.1.2 Cataphoric reference

Cataphoric reference is also a cohesive device which contributes to the coherence

of the text It draws us further into the text in order to identify the elements to which the reference items refer Cataphoric reference is represented by markers: definite article, personal pronoun, demonstrative pronoun, personal determiner, demonstrative adverb, comparative adverb and comparative adjective

The frequency of occurrence of cataphoric reference is shown in the following table:

Types of markers Number of items Frequency of occurrence (%) Total

Table 4: Frequency of occurrence of cataphoric reference

It seems that in EC texts the definite article „the‟ not only plays an important role in making the readers notice backward to the previous items but also encourages them to draw attention forward to the later part of a text As shown in the table 4, definite article still takes up the highest percentage (80.5%) and surprisingly, there are no use of personal pronoun, personal determiner, demonstrative adverb and demonstrative pronoun Here are some examples of definite article:

- Modern understanding of acids and bases began with the discovery in 1834 by the English physicist Michael Faraday that acids, bases, and salts are electrolytes (unit 6)

- Biochemistry is the study of life at the molecule level and the process associated with life such as reproduction, growth, and respiration.(Unit 1)

(Definite articles „the‟ in the above examples refer readers forward to the later part, so they are cataphoric reference)

Comparative adverb is used sometimes in the texts with the percentage of 13.8%

The common comparative adverbs used in EC texts are „such‟, „similarly‟, „then‟ as in the

Finally, comparative adjective occurs only twice (5.5% ) in the six reading texts

- Usually an organic formula stands for more than one substance Such substances

of the same molecular formula are called isomeric.(Unit 5)

- Organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon and a few of the other elements, mainly hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (Unit 5)

(comparative adjective „other‟ refers to hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen; “same” refers to

“formula” so they are cataphoric)

2.2.1.1.3 Exophoric reference

Exophoric reference is a kind of reference which refers to the situation Halliday (1985:312) confirmed that “Reference first evolved as an “exophoric” relation: that is, as a means of linking “outwards” to some person or object in the environment” Moreover “ Exophoric reference contributes to the creation of the text, in that it links the language with the context of situation; but it does not contribute to the integration of one passage with

another so that the two together form the parts of the same text It is not text-internal, not contribution to the cohesion of a text, however, it helps to make sense in the context

In the six written discourses of EC, exophoric reference appears quite often with 26 (20%) items among 130 reference items This can be explained by the fact that Chemistry

is a science so it requires the readers much knowledge about science to understand it Meanwhile, exophoric reference refers to „the context of situation‟ or the worlds outside the texts Exophoric reference can be found in these examples:

- Although the acid must still contain hydrogen, the Brønsted-Lowry theory does not require an aqueous medium.(Unit 6)

In this example, the in “the Brønsted-Lowry theory” is an exophoric reference It

directs us to a theory that may be familiar to the people who specialize in Chemistry

- Early in the nineteenth century chemists found that all the so-called natural organic compounds contain carbon as the constituent element (Unit 5)

In the above example, the in “the nineteenth century” refers to a period of time in the past, hence is exophoric The in “the so-called natural organic compounds” is

exophoric as it is not text-internal

2.2.1.1.4 A comparison of anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric reference

Types of reference Number of items Frequency of occurrence (%) Total

23.07%

60.20%

Anaphoric Cataphoric Exophoric

Figure 3: Anaphoric, cataphoric, exophoric reference- Frequency of occurrence

As can be shown from the figure 3, anaphoric reference occurs with the highest frequency among referential ties (60.2%) This indicates that the one of the main characteristics of reading texts on EC is that it requires readers to refer back to the previously mentioned sentence to be able to fully understand the texts

Cataphoric reference ranks the second in frequency with the percentage of 23.07% This frequency implies that in order to get a full comprehension of the EC texts, the readers do not only come back but also come forwards further in the texts to identify elements to which the reference items refer

One interesting thing is that exophoric reference also appears quite often in the six

EC texts despite the lower percentage than anaphoric and cataphoric reference (16.6%) Such occurrence explains another feature of the EC, that is, Chemistry is a science so it requires readers much knowledge outside to understand the texts

2.2.1.2 Conjunction

Conjunction is another cohesive device which makes texts coherent McCarthy (1991, p.46) states that “A conjunction does not set off a search backward or forward for its referent, but it does presuppose a textual sequence, and signals a relationship between segments of the discourse”

According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), there are different types of conjunctions such as Additive, Adversative, Causal, Temporal and others In this analysis, we just focus

on the occurrence of the four main types mentioned above

Conjunctions are represented in the following table:

Types of conjunction Number of items Frequency of occurrence

Figure 4: Frequency of occurrence of conjunction

There are 62 conjunctions in the six reading EC texts Among them, Additive accounts for the highest frequency with 49 items (79.03%) Moreover, the word “and” is the main additive conjunction used in the texts This can be understood that “and” plays the main function in adding information in the EC reading texts Here are some examples:

- When aqueous (water) solutions of an acid and a base are combined, a neutralization reaction occurs This reaction is characteristically very rapid and generally produces water and a salt

- Organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon and a few of the other elements, mainly hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen Substances containing no elements other than carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen are known by the hundred thousands, and their number is being continually increased as a result of organic chemical research

Apart from “and”, the word “moreover” is employed only once in the six EC reading texts

- At the present time a number of the natural organic compounds have been synthesized by artificial processes Moreover, a large number of artificial carbon compounds unknown in nature have been produced in the laboratory

Adversative conjunction ranks the second with much lower number of items: 5 (8.06%) Contrasting, illustrating and proving the fact are considered as the main functions

of adversative words However, scientific language often serves the functions of providing and listing accurate information, so that expression of contrasting is reduced In the six EC

reading texts, some adversative conjunctions are used such as: whereas, although, but, however, conversely

- The theory applies to aqueous solutions exclusively, whereas many acid-base reactions are known to take place in the absence of water (Unit 6)

- Although the acid must still contain hydrogen, the Brønsted-Lowry theory does not require an aqueous medium (Unit 6)

- Neutrons are about the same size as protons but their mass is slightly greater (Unit 3)

- The negative charge is the opposite of the positive charge, and, like the opposite poles of a magnet, these opposite electric charges attract one another Conversely, like charges (negative and negative, or positive and positive) repel one another (Unit 3)

Temporal conjunction takes up small percentage among all conjunctions, only 4 items (6.4%) Surprisingly, these temporal conjunctions are only used in one unit that is unit 5 The temporal words are firstly, secondly, thirdly, fourthly These temporal

conjunctions are used to link stages in the text and show the sequence of events For example:

- Firstly, organic compounds are more sensitive than inorganic compounds to physical and chemical influences… Secondly, organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon and a few of the other elements, mainly hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen… Thirdly, the inorganic molecule may usually be presented by a very simple molecular formula… Fourthly, with few exceptions, an inorganic molecular formula represents one substance only

In this example, temporal words firstly, secondly, thirdly, fourthly are used to show

the sequence of characteristics of organic and inorganic chemistry

Causal conjunctions are used to express a cause or a reason The frequency of causal conjunction in the six EC reading texts is the same as temporal conjunction with 6.4% In

the EC texts, some kinds of causal conjunction are used such as thus, because of, since

- Chemistry is a broad area of study covering everything from the basic part of

an atom to interaction between huge biological molecules Because of this, chemistry encompasses the following specialties

- Since molecules are made up of atoms in simple whole-number ratios, molecular composition can be expressed by means of element symbols, with subscript numbers used to indicate the relative number of atoms of each element Thus water, with molecules composed of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, is written as H2O

In brief, among four types of conjunctions, additive proves to be the highest in frequency Adversative, causal and temporal are used with much lower percentage This suggests that the distinguishing feature of reading texts on EC is adding more information

2.2.1.3 Substitution

The study of the six EC reading texts has shown really surprising results Verbal and clausal substitution marks zero in the statistic data Nominal substitutes one, ones and same always function as Head of a nominal group and can substitute for a Head of a

nominal group However, in the six EC reading texts, we realize only one substitute ones

as in the example below:

- At the present time a number of the natural organic compounds have been synthesized by artificial processes Moreover, a large number of artificial carbon compounds unknown in nature have been produced in the laboratory However, all these compounds, both natural and artificial, have certain distinct characteristic properties, which distinguish them from the inorganic ones (Unit 5)

The substitute “ones” in the above example replaces the Head “compounds”, so we

consider it as a substitution

2.2.1.4 Ellipsis

McCarthy (1991) states: “Ellipsis is the omission of elements normally required by grammar which the speaker/writer assumes are obvious from the context and therefore need not be raised” Ellipsis is like substitution since both involve referring back to something earlier in the text In other words, elliptical cohesion always appears anaphoric

It can be studied in terms of nominal ellipsis, verbal ellipsis and clausal ellipsis Frequency

of occurrence of ellipsis can be shown in the following table:

Types of Ellipsis Number of items Frequency of occurrence (%) Total

missing and replaced by one of the other elements (deictic, numerative, epithet, or classifier), which functions as Head In general English, it is considered that Deictic and Numerative are very frequent, Epithet is much less frequent and Classifier is very rare In

EC reading texts, we can also not realize the occurrence of elliptical epithet, classifier and numerative This may be due to the feature of scientific language or specifically, the language of Chemistry that it requires the conciseness Meanwhile, classifier is usually a noun and it functions as head, it would be itself interpreted as the thing Moreover, epithet

is usually an adjective It is the fact that the choice and frequency of adjectives is highly dependent on the use of nouns The higher the frequency of noun, the higher the frequency

of adjective collocated with it Adjective rarely stands alone and functions as head Therefore, the absence of classifier, leading to no attendance of epithet In language of science, the occurrence of Deictic is considered quite often Deictic, according to Halliday and Hasan (1976), are mostly of the class determiner, demonstrative, possessive, and indefinite determiners The deictic elements can be divided into specific deictics (demonstratives, possessives and the) and non-specific (each, every, any, either, no, neither, some, a, all and both)

While dealing with the six EC reading texts, we can see the occurrence of Deictic with demonstrative “those” only once (20%) as in the following example:

- Some organic molecular formulate are equally simple, such as those of formaldehyde (CH 2 O), urea (CH 4 ON 2 ), and oxalic acid (C 2 H 2 O 4 ) (Unit 5) This sentence contains an ellipsis of the word “molecular formulate”

As the feature of scientific language is that it must be clear and concise so the content words like nouns or verbs often carry the main message and they are not omitted from the texts Therefore, lexical ellipsis is not used in the written discourses of EC