ƒTEMA 29: ANÁLISIS Y ARTICULACIÓN DEL DISCURSO.

COHESIÓN Y
COHERENCIA. ANÁFORA Y CATÁFORA. LOS CONECTORES. DEIXIS.

1. INTRODUCTION
2. DISCOURSE ANALYSIS: CONNECTING TEXT AND CONTEXT
2.1. Essential definitions and conceptual limits
3. COHESION AND COHERENCE
3.1. Cohesion
3.1.1. External resources
3.1.2. Internal cohesion
3.2. Coherence
4. ANAPHORA AND CATAPHORA

4.1. User-centered notions

4.2. Standards based in other communication elements
5. CONNECTORS
6. DEIXIS
7. CONCLUSION
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. INTRODUCTION
This unit aims at providing a detailed account of how discourse is articulated in the English
language. In order to examine this issue, two major parts will be considered:

First, a brief introduction to the study of the analysis and articulation of discourse will be
provided. The second part attempts to offer an in depth description of both coherence and
cohesion. It is within this section where we shall approach the concepts of anaphora, cataphora,
connectives and deixis.

2. ANALYSIS AND ARTICULARION OF DISCOURSE

Discourse is a domain of language use, structured as a unity by common assumptions. At this
level, language does not occur in solitary words in grammatical terms, but in connected
meaningful utterances. Discourse is not created by individual chunks, but rather by units that are
interconnected logically through cohesion and coherence, and linguistically through anaphors,
cataphors and connectors.

The main difference between Linguistics and Discourse Analysis is that the former focuses on
language as a phenomenon in itself, studying the formal properties of language per se, while the

1
 latter focuses on situational, context-dependent language. Language is, therefore, linked to the
purposes or functions that make it exist as a single unit.

Traditionally language teaching has concentrated on pronunciation, grammar, and

vocabulary, and while discourse analysis can draw attention to the skills needed to put this
knowledge into action and to achieve successful communication.

Zellig Harris coined the term “Discourse Analysis” and claimed that we must look beyond
formal rules operating within the sentence. We should consider the people who use the language
and the world in which it happens. Thus, what gives UNITY to the discourse in the context.

As such, Discourse Analysis, is a broad field which comprises a large number of subfields
including these principles:

Principles

 Beaugrande and Dressler noticed the need of some principles that link TEXTUALITY to the
production process itself, what they called regulative principles, namely:

1. Efficiency: How much effort is put to produce and / or receive the text?
2. Effectiveness: Was it successful?
3. Appropriateness: Did it conform to sociolinguistic rules of adequacy?

 Grice, on his part, established four maxims defining the ideal conditions for a text to be
meaningful. These are:

1. Quantity: Make your contribution as informative as required.

2. Quality:make a true contribution.
3. Relation: Be relevant.
4. Manner: Avoid obscurity of expression and ambiguity, be organise

 Speech Acts developed by Searle:

- Assertive: express belief about the truth of a proposition ( suggesting, putting forward…)
- Directive: make the addressee perform an action ( inviting, asking, ordering, advising…)
- Commissives: speaker commits to do something in the future ( planning, promising…)
- Expressives: speaker expresses feelings about a situation (thanking, welcoming,
congratulating…)

2
 3.COHESION

It brings the text together and gives it meaning. It is the way in which the components of the
SURFACE text are connected within a sequence of utterances.

It’s the quality that makes a text appear CONNECTED and UNIFIED, capable of creating
meaning because there are some structures that facilitate the process of INFERENCE.

3.1. External resources

As regards the external resources for cohesion, we have to distinguish three different types:

1. Semantic cohesion: reference.

Halliday and Hasan defined reference as “ the case where the information to be retrieved is
the referential meaning, and the cohesion lies in the continuity of reference, whereby the same
thing enters into the discourse a second time”.

A specific kind of reference is “co-reference”, which is the process when the reader
identifies that two different linguistic items are pointing at the same extra-textual reality

There are two different types of reference:

a) Exophoric reference: the reference process takes us away from the text, into the
situational context. By looking outside we know if the text is cohesive.
b) Endophoric reference: The text contains the clues to make the referential connections,
so we move towards something that has or will be mentioned.

This can be subdivided in two types of reference:

b.1) Anaphoric reference: The element has already been mentioned before: The cat is
on the mat. It is sleeping (it = the cat).

b. 2) Cataphoric reference: The element is yet to be mentioned: It is the food that you
have to find; Brave as heroes, they went to battle.

Finally, we have to say that Hallyday and Hasan listed and classified the linguistic items
fulfilling this deictic function, and these are:

1) Personal pronouns: (subject, object, possessive adjs and possessive pronouns) I, you, he, she, me,
ours, yours, his…

3
2) Demonstrative adjectives and pronouns: this, these, that, those, here there.
3) Article the: it can be considered as a discreet form of reference, as it implies proximity or
familiarity.
4) Comparative items: An adjective or adverb used to compare is making itself a connection with at
least two more elements in the text: Mary is taller than Peter.
5) Adverbials such as likewise or similarly also increase the scope of reference by involving a
plurality of items in the proposition.

2. Grammatical cohesion.
There are several different techniques to achieve grammatical cohesion in a text. These are,
roughly speaking, the following:
1) Substitution: it implies the replacement of one item with another one. There are three kinds of
substitution:
a) Nominal substitution: I have food and you have some, too.
b) Verbal substitution: I´ll do it when I can (i.e. when I can do it).
c) Clausal substitution: Did she come? I think so (i.e. I think she came).

2) Ellipsis: omission, there are two sentences and the latter depends on the former, because the
speaker chose not to repeat a literal stretch of a sentence. This is very common in spoken
discourse for the concept of linguistic economy.. Again, there are three types of ellipsis:

a) Nominal: Which skirt should I buy? The cheapest (i.e. the cheapest skirt).
b) Verbal: You don´t like Mary, do you? (i.e. do you like Mary?).
c) Clausal: Have you bought it? Maybe (i.e. maybe I have).

3) Conjunction: according to Halliday and Hasan, sentences can be juxtaposed in different

logical relations by means of connectors. They distinguish four categories:
a) Additive: and, or…
b) Adversative: but, however, nevertheless...
c) Causal: because, since, due to…
d) Temporal succession: then, afterwards, later…

4
 3. Lexical cohesion.
Lexical continuity is essential in achieving cohesion and to assume, at first sight, that a stretch of
language could be considered a unit. For instance, if various words belonging to the same lexical
field are displayed in a text, the mind of the reader can start elaborating hypothesis on what the
message conveyed is. Lexical cohesion phenomena will fall under two categories:

a) Reiteration:
1) Literal repetition of a lexical item.
2) Synonyms: eat - endeavor, although there are never perfect synonyms for the same
situation.
3) Hyponym-superordinate: tree – oak.
4) Converses: lend – borrow.
5) Part-whole relations: head – person (e.g. the head of State)
6) Register variation: Those nutrients (this food) will benefit you (will be good for
you).

b) Collocation: collocation refers to the likelihood for a word to appear in conjunction

with another one.
1) Hyperonym- hyponym.
2) Close sets that the speaker expects to see together: the months of the year.
3) Idiomatic phrases: Too many cooks spoil the broth.
4) Antonyms: husband and wife.

3.2. Internal cohesion

The assumption behind internal resources is that both old and new information will be
presented in a logical way that connects with the informational intention of the act of
communication. In this respect, the concepts of theme and rheme as developed by Hallyday will
prove extremely useful to understand why messages are developed in one way or another.

Theme can be equated with topic and refers to the information that serves as point of
departure. This means that it is generally shared and known by all parties involved in the
communication act.

5
 Rheme is the focus, the aspect that is new and fully informational. In English the focus
tends to come always at the end of the sentence, although we may introduce it at the beginning for
emphatic purposes through cleft sentences. (It was in June when I came to England)

4. COHERENCE

It is the way a text establishes links in meaning. It is a semantic property of discourse. The relation
among the elements will be either self-evident or require the reader’s input, depending on the
degree of textuality. The semantic property is formed by the interaction between the text and the
reader’s interpretation (previous knowledge)

Coherence can be achieved by:

- Use of cohesive devices (repetition, connectors…)

- Linking sentences to get a unified passage
- The reader’s previous cultural knowledge.

All in all, a text can be coherent without cohesion. A text that is cohesive without coherence,
however, is hardly a text.

5. ANAPHORA AND CATAPHORA.

Anaphora is an instance of an expression referring to a previous linguistic referent present

in the text. In general, an anaphoric expression is represented by a pro-form or some kind of
deictic. As opposed to this, cataphora is an instance of an expression referring to a later linguistic
referent present in the text, it is anticipating the element to come. Thus, both anaphora and
cataphora are endophoric referents, as opposed to the exophoric referents, which refer to the
outside world and which have already been explained. But let us give you some examples here:

Anaphora: The children were gaily playing. They were happy, after all.

Cataphora: Brave as they were, the soldiers fought till death.

6. CONNECTORS

These are commonly referred to as connectors or linking words. Roughly speaking, we can
establish the following types:

6
 1) Adding: as well as, in addition to, not only, besides, furthermore, in addition,
moreover, what´s more, on top of that, to make matters worse.
2) Contrast: however, nevertheless, all the same, although, while, even though, despite,
inspite of, on the contrary, none the less, as opposed to, whereas, in contrast.
3) Reason/result: as a result, accordingly, thus, hence, consequently, for that reason.
4) Generalizing: Broadly speaking, on the whole, by and large.
5) Starting: For a start, first of all, in the first place, for one thing.
6) Stating reality: to be honest, to tell the truth.

7. DEIXIS

The term “deixis” refers to those words that link discourse to the specific boundaries
within the elements of communication. All messages require certain cues, from space, time or
situation to be understood properly, and this function is performed by deictic words.

We can distinguish several types of deixis:

1. Personal deixis: Personal deixis identifies the participants in communication, and thus
contains pronouns, adjectives and reflexives: I, me, m, mine, myself…
2. Spatial deixis: links discourse to a specific scenario. On the other hand, special deixis
can be conveyed by a large number of resources, such as:

a. Gestural deixis: pointing or indicating with your head or finger.

b. Symbolic deixis: For example, in a sentence like Are you there?, the phatic
there is empty and refers more to the ability to establish communication. It
has no real reference in the outside world.
c. Anaphoric and cataphoric deixis: These types of deixis use linguistic
referents to design elements that have already appeared or that are to appear
later on in the text: Mary is blond and she has blue eyes.
d. Demonstratives: Demonstratives in English, as opposed to Spanish have only
two degrees of distance: this / that.

3. Temporal deixis: Temporal deixis connects discourse with the time in which it was
produced. We can distinguish:

 Adverbs: recently, yesterday, tomorrow, next…

 Measurement expressions: three days ago, last month…

7
 4. Emphatetic deixis: speakers incorporate how they feel in communication, both
linguistically and socially. This may influence their way to address manners, their use
of vocatives or their register.

5. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this chapter has tried to analyze questions of cohesion and coherence, and
how these are manifested and created in English texts. Several processes, such as anaphora and
cataphora, deixis or connectors have been explained. However ,we should not forget the context in
which we are and, as a result, we must always use these contents in our teaching of English in
secondary schools, where these mechanisms will render our student´s speech much more coherent,
unified and natural, thus being an essential part of our teaching process.