Transcript She hid Bob then cooked it, whose sister rose prices. They

Cohesion, Coherence and
Discourse
She hid Bob then cooked it, whose
sister rose prices, which liked very
much itself , however Sheila wanted.
The electric appliances, including the
Kangaroo and the astronaut,
notwithstanding, snow-boarded up
the slope sadly, swam in the road
glady, flew under the sea madly.
Texts as ‘language events’
Self-contained
Well formed
Hang together (cohesion)
Make sense (coherent)
Clear purpose
Recognizable text types
Appropriate context of use
Follow expected pattern (schema)
Cohesion and Coherence
‘impeccably well formed [language] is typical of
casual spontaneous speech (including children)’
Halliday 1985:35
• Cohesion – hanging it all together
• Coherence – getting the message across
(including pragmatic function)
Cohesion
•
•
•
•
•
•
Grammatical cohesion
Syntactic cohesion
Lexical cohesion
Semantic cohesion
Cohesive links
Cohesive devices
Grammatical cohesion
In the following texts identify the different kinds or
errors
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Jane like make fun English upper classes
No one make any reply. She then yawn again, throw aside her
book, and cast her eyes round the room in quest of some
amusement; when hear her brother mention a ball to Miss
Bennet, she turn suddenly towards him and say, …
The brother of Jane is the teacher of my daughter.
To obtain informations on the musics used in the programme
please write to our informations service. For advices on how to
write musics for TV programmes please get in touch with our
advices service.
she made not the smallest objection to his joining in the
society of the neighbourhood
• Typical natural language presents a high rate
of ungrammatical text, so the study of
ungrammaticalities cannot be ignored.
Parsing on Ungrammaticality
K.K. Yong and C. Huyck (UK)
Paper presented at AI and soft computing 2004
BUT – texts still understandable even if not grammatically cohesive. (– cfr Grice’s maxims –
can be flouted, so can grammar rules. All evidence that we strive to make sense of nay kind
of text (unless it is English people trying to udnerstand foreign tourists!)
Syntactic cohesion
1. Has come yesterday John.
2. The sister of the girlfriend of the teacher
of my brother is the teacher of my sister.
3. Not only he was rich, but handsome, too.
Lexical cohesion - 2
•
•
•
•
•
Synonymy (the plan, thr project, the proposal)
Antonymy (good/bad, hot/cold, married/unmarried)
Hyponomy (furniture(superordinate)- table, chair, bed (co-hyponyms))
Paraphrasis ("Wilfing" - or surfing the web without any real purpose - )
Semantic field (weather – cold, sun, rain, temperature, windy, forecast )
• Collocations (patches of fog, join the army, have a party, sharp increase)
• Lexical chunks (If I were you, I don’t know, Best wishes, )
Semantic cohesion
• She came into the room. He braked
suddenly and the car swerved violently and
crashed into the bus shelter. They were
happy to be there together, but sorry the
children weren’t there to enjoy the scene.
Even though it might have been better to
buy the bigger size, in case the children had
a growth spurt.
Semantic cohesion - 2
• A series of sentences may be well-formed
grammatically, but lack semantic cohesion,
and therefore does not meet the basic
criteria to be considered a text. Semantic
links between successive sentences are
fundamental to cohesion and coherence.
There must be thematic progression (see
Halliday below)
Cohesive devices
• Verb tenses
• Referring expressions (anaphoric, cataphoric
and exophoric reference)
• Rhetorical questions
• Repetition (words and structures)
• Parallelism (+ the rule of three)
• Semantic fields (lexical cohesion)
• Substitution (Do you like pizza? Yes, I do. )
• Ellipsis (What are you doing? Playing chess )
• Conjunctions
Parallelism
And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of
New Hampshire.
Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New
York.
Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of
Pennsylvania.
Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of
Colorado.
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of
California.
But not only that:
Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of
Mississippi.
From every mountainside, let freedom ring.
Conjuncts
• Conjuncts have a fundamental role in the cohesion of a
text and may have various functions
• Listing/Enumerative (indicating that what follows is a
list of propositions) To start with, First, Second, Third
• Additive (giving extra information, exemplifying a
point, emphasising a point ) Too, also, in addition, for example,
moreover etc
• Summative (summing up, or concluding, on the
preceding phrases/sentence(s)) To sum up, to conclude, in a word/
nutshell
• Appositive (rephrasing the preceding sentence) in other
words, what I mean is,
Conjuncts - 2
• Resultative/inferential/causal (indicating that the content of
the sentence is a result of the events expressed in the
preceding sentence/paragraph and relations of cause and
effect/outcome) therefore, thus, as a consequence
– As a consequence of this approach, we have equal numbers of mean and women as
head of unit.
• Antithetic/adversative (contrasting the previously
mentioned idea) but, though, alternatively, on the other hand, however
• Concessive (indicating that the content of the sentence
"exists" despite the content in the preceding sentence)
however, while, despite, even though
• It is very cold. I went for my morning walk, however.
• Temporal (indicating temporal relation between the
contend of the sentence and the preceding sentence)
while, during, ever since, next, later, finally
Coherence
Texts can be perfectly cohesive but incoherent
Are these sentences coherent? If not, why not?
1. Which of you people is the fish?
2. Two seventy-nines, one medium sixty-three, three
elevens, a mild forty-three, oh and what’s the thirty
three?
3. Give bob ball. Give ball. Give Bobby ball. Give.
4. They know what the house thinks.
5. if the visible of sprite 5 then go to the frame
Coherence - 2
• “… language in use, for communication – is called
discourse; and the search for what gives discourse
coherence is discourse analysis.”
• Cook 1989: 6
• “Discourse can be anything from a grunt or single
expletive, through short conversations and
scribbled notes right up to Tolstoy’s novel, War
and Peace, or a lengthy legal case.
Schemata
• Write out different schemata for the
following text types:
• Legal document
• Business letter
• Novel
• Newspaper article
• Joke
• Job interview
• Buying a ticket at the train station
Schemata - 2
• We rely on our knowledge of the world
(presuppositions) when interpreting situations.
This includes cultural knowledge, linguistic
knowledge and social knowledge.
• Different views as to how these suppositions work
(Lakoff vs Fullmore and Keenan vs Jackendoff)
• Cultural conditions
Form to Function
• “To connect their knowledge with the
language system people se reasoning, and
pragmatic theories go some way towards
explaining how people reason their way from
the form to the function and thus construct
coherent discourse from the language they
receive” Cook, p42-43
• The interaction between knowledge,
reasoning, and language is crucial to
understanding discourse
Language functions - Jakobson
• Emotive function (from ‘Ugh!’ to ‘Awesome’)
• Directive function ( with the purpose of affecting
the behaviour of the addressee)
• Phatic function (to open the discourse and
monitor it’s reception)
• Poetic function (including advertising slogans)
• Referential function (conveying information)
• Metalinguistic function (to talk about language)
• Contextual function (to signpost the discourse)
Micro-functions
• Each of the above macro-functions can be broken
down into subcategories, e.g.
»
»
Directive function
•
»
orders
requests
requests for action
requests for information
pleas
questions
prayers
requests for help
requests for sympathy
requests for forgiveness
» Adapted from Cook, 1989, p 27
» This list is not meant to be exhaustive and categories
can be broken down further.
• NB. Discourse can have more than one
function
Conversational Principles
•
•
•
•
•
Grice’s Maxims – cooperative principle:
Be true (maxim of quality)
Be brief (maxim of quantity)
Be relevant (maxim of relevance)
Be clear (maxim of manner)
• Akmajian et al refer to these as Conversational presumptions and
divide sincerity and truthfulness – the former refering to the
speaker’s belief in what he/she is saying.
Politeness Principle
• As social beings our ultimate aim is to
interact with other people, i.e. social
cohesion. In order to achieve this we obey
certain unwritten rules regarding politeness.
In other words, whenever possible we avoid
being rude (not always – depending on
context see below)
Breaking rules
• Cooperative principles are often violeted –
or ‘flouted’ in Grice’s terminology. For
example with hyperbole, metaphor, irony,
sarcasm, double entendre etc. Or in the case
of politicians, most maxims are routinely
flouted.
• However, the addressee must have
sufficient knowledge of the
language/context/culture to be able to know
when the maxims are being purposely
flouted.
Appropriacy
• Discourse should be appropriate to the
context
• Depends on power relations
• Social expectations
• Prior knowledge of social conventions
required
The Appropriate Way to Greet
the PM???
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5189048.stm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xq3DobSCKQ
Inappropriate use of language can have
repercussions far wider than expected.
Catch phrases live much longer than
international declarations in the
public’s mind
• Has 'Yo Blair' been replaced? Bumbling Berlusconi
becomes Bush's new BFF*
BFF =
Best Friend Forever in chatroom speak
Daily Mail14.10.08
Analysing Texts and Contexts –
Top Down
Someone (Who by) communicates to
someone else (Who for), who may or
may not respond, about something
(What), somewhere (Where), at a
certain moment in time (When), using
a chosen means (How), for some
reason/purpose (Why)
Contexts and Register
• The register of language depends
on the context of the text –
whatever the medium and the
participants
Register and language
• Register can affect all features of language:
vocabulary, syntax, phonology, morphology,
pragmatics and/or different paralinguistic
features such as pitch, volume and
intonation in spoken English.
Degrees of formality
• There are not merely two kinds of register
(formal and informal), nor are there clear
boundaries between x kinds of register, but
rather a continuum from highly formal to
highly informal (aka vulgar!).
Register, varieties and dialect
• Discourse highly complex – context must also take
into account such things as geographical varieties
(including dialects), social class, age, and even time
(e.g. the language used in an historical novel)
• Once again there are no clear boundaries:
– When does a variety become a dialect?
- At what age should one stop using the language of
‘youth’?
- Are there more formal and less formal varieties of
dialects?
- idiolects – idiosyncracies
http://www.mediaplayer.telegraph.co.uk/?item=A5DD96A9-6983-49E2-85A6-C693A20B4872
Kinds of Meaning
• There are often two types of meaning:
• Semantic meaning (literal meaning)
depending on the words used
• Pragmatic meaning which depends on the
context in which the words occur
• Sometimes the two may coincide – often
they do not
“There’s a dead bird on the
steps.”
• Literal/semantic meaning
• Pragmatic function
referential function
remove it
Infering meaning - 3
• The meaning has to be the same for both speakers
(Lakoff – semantic presuppositions, assumptions about
context; Fillmore - set of conditions, presupposition that
the context is appropriate; Jackendoff – shared
presuppositions, presumption that the hearer has the
same presuppositions – see Akmajian et al p 346)
• The presupposition must match the context. In the case
of the ‘snack’ Calvin has not thought about the context –
perhaps soon before dinner and with a mother who cares
about diet… Calvin’s presuppositions and those of his
mother are not the same.
Infering meaning - 3
Dick Cheney walks into the Oval Office and sees
The President whooping and hollering.
"What's the matter, Mr. President?" The Vice
President inquired.
"Nothing at all, boss. I just done finished a
jigsaw puzzle in record time!" The President
beamed.
"How long did it take you?"
"Well, the box said '3 to 5 Years' but I did it in a
month!"
A Question
• If the same words can mean
completely different things in
different contexts, how does the
addressee know whether to
interpret words literally or nonliterally?
Answer
• Linguistic knowledge alone is not enough to
interpret discourse when Grice’s maxims
are being flouted – i.e. when an utterance
has non-literal meaning.
• We choose the most likely meaning
according to our expectations and world,
cultural, and linguistic knowledge
Ambiguity
• We choose the most likely meaning
according to our expectations and world,
cultural and linguistic knowledge
Context and Register –
Halliday
• Halliday (1964) identifies three variables
that determine context and as a result
register: field (the ‘what’ of the discourse,
i.e. the subject matter and the nature of the
discourse), tenor (the ‘who’ of the
discourse, i.e. the participants and their
relationships) and mode (the ‘how’ i.e. the
type of communication, e.g. spoken or
written).
• This is but one linguist’s terminology –
other linguists use other terms.
Context and Register –
Hymes (1)
• Hymes (1972) identified other components of a context:
- participants (speaker audience)
- message form
- message content
- setting (where/when)
- medium of communication (spoken, written etc)
- intent of communication (purpose)
- effect of communication (outcome)
- the key (tone/register)
- the genre (text type)
- the norms of interaction (expectations)
Context and Register –Hymes (2)
To help you remember
S – Setting and Scene
P – Participants
E – Ends
A – Act Sequence
K – Key
I – Instrumentalities
N – Norms
G – Genre
Context and Register –
House (based on Crystal and Davey)
• House (1981 & 1997) talked about different
‘dimensions’: 3 dimensions for the ‘language user’ and 5
dimensions for ‘language use’
User
Use
- geographic origin
- medium
- social class
- participation
- time
- social role relationship
- social attitude
- province
- member of sub-group??
- cultural and social relationships
Power relations
• Much of the register of an interaction is
dictated by the power relations between the
interlocutors. Both participants must,
however, have the same understanding of
this power relationship if the rights and
obligations of the participants are to be
respected. If not this can result in either
offence or embrassment. This knowledge is
often culture-bound. Compare power
relationships in Eastern cultures with those
in the Western world.
Underlying forces
• The force of what is said can vary
depending on how the language is used.
• Austin and Searle’s Speech act theory:
• Locution – the information conveyed
• Illocution – the act performed
• Perlocution – the main aim of the discourse
(the upshot)
Discourse
Top down
social relationships
shared knowledge
discourse type
discourse structure
discourse function
schemata (ritual and repertoire)
cohesion
grammar and lexis
sounds and letters
bottom up
(Adapted from Cook, 1989, p80)
Bibliography
• Cook, G (1989) Discourse Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Cutting, J. (2002) Pragmatics and Discourse: A resource book for students
• Halliday, M.A.K. (1964) ‘Comparison and translation’. In M.A.K. Halliday,
M.McIntosh and P. Strevens, The linguistic sciences and language teaching.
London: Longman.
• Halliday, M.A.K. (1985) ‘Dimensions of discourse analysis: grammar’ in T.
A. van Dijk (1985) Handbook of Discourse Analysis vol 2 London: academic
Press
• House, J. (1981) 1997) A Model for Translation Quality Assessment.
Tuebigen: Gunter Narr Verlag
• Hymes, D. (1972) ‘Models of the Interaction and Social Life’ in Gumperz, J.
J. and Hymes, D. (1972) Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of
Communication New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.
• McCarthy, M. (1991) Discourse analysis for Language Teachers Cambridge:
CUP
• Thornbury, S. (2005) Beyond the Sentence: introducing discourse analysis
London: Macmillan