Scarica Discourse Analysis ch 6 e più Slide in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
6 Discourse grammar
Chapter overview
{ 6.1 Grammar from a discourse perspective 128 i
] 6.2 The texture of a text 130 :
Î 6.3 Cohesion ond discourse 130 |
6.4 Reference 131
6.5 Lexical cohesion 133
6.6 Collocation 137
6.7 Conjunclion | 139
| 6.8 Substitution and ellipsis 141 |
6.9 Patterns of cohesion: a sample analysis 142
6.10 Theme und rheme 145
6.11 Thematic progression 148 i
6.12 Focusing on cohasion in student lexts 150
6.13 Discussion questions 152
| 6.14 Data analysis projects 152
6.15 Directions for further reading 153
In recent years discussions of grammar have moved from sentence-
hased perspectives to more of a discourse-based perspective. Hughes
and McCarthy (1998), for example, have argued that traditional
explanations of grammar do not adequately capture grammatical
selection in longer, real-world texts. As they have shown, a number of
linguistic items show quite different patterns of use when looked at
from a discourse perspective. Linguists such as Halliday and Hasan
have also done work in the area of discourse grammar, although from
rather a different perspective. Their intcrest has been in patterns of
grammar and vocabulary that combine to tie meanings in the text
together as well as connect the text to the social context in which it
occurs; that is, items that combine together to make the text cohesive
andgive it unityoftexture. Thischapterdiscusses both theseviews of
discourse grammar, starting with the first ofthese perspectives.
Grammar from a discourse perspective
A number
oflinguistic
items suchas
it, thisandthat
have beenshown
tohave
quitedifferentpatterns
ofusewhen
lookedatfrom
a discourse, _
ratherthana sentence
perspective.
McCarthy(1994)
foundthatitoften
signals reference toacontinuing orongoingtopic in atext,rather than
just something inside or outside the text, as more traditional expla-
nations mightsuggest. This often indicates theraising ofanewtopic or
a new focus in the current topic, and that has a distancing or mar-
ginalizing function in a text, ratherthan just demonstrative functions.
McCarthy (1998) has also found similar differences in relation ta the
use of tenses such as the past perfect, the use of be to with future
meaning, and other language items such as wh-cleftconstructions (as
in ‘What you need is ...').
Celce-Murcia has, for some time, argued forcontextual analyses
that lonk at grammatical form in relation towhere, why and how fre-
quently it is used inwritten and spoken discourse rather than in iso-
lated sentences. She makes asimilarargument to McCarthy about this
and that showing how, in extended texts, this and that function in
ways other than just pointing to somcthing (Celce-Murcia 1997). She
also showshowtenscand aspect choices differinextended discourse.
Celce-Murcia and Olshtain (2000) discuss how be going to and will,
when looked at from adiscourse perspective, showdifferentfunctions
other thanjust the expression offuture time. Theyfound ‘be going to’
is typically used when English speakers narrate future scenarios,
which they then fullow with acontracted form of‘will’, forexample.
They also found the present simple is often used alongside ‘will' to
add descriptive details to
the future event being recounted.
i. Grammar anddiscourse from a contextual perspective
Hilles (2005) describes the process of examining grammar and dis-
course from a contextual perspective. Thefirst stage in thisprocess is
tomakea decision as towhat aspect of languageto investigate. Agood
starting pointfor this isthe differencebetween what ESLtextbooks tell
students they should say and what itseems that native speakers of the
language actually do say. It may be that different ESL texts present
different views on the use of the language item, or (hat expert speakers
differ in their view of how the particular language item should be used.
%
‘which book' she is referring to when she says ‘the book’s tough-love
message’. [f a reader is not sure what is being referred to, they will
typically read back in the text to find the answer.
ii. Cataphoric reference
Cataphoric reference describes an item which refers forward to another _
word or phrase which is used later in the text. In the following
example, from the same extract, the identity of the italicized item
follows,rather than precedes. the reference item. It is thus anexample
of cataphoric. rather than anaphoric, reference:
[t seems everyone's read that self-help book: Greg Behrendt and Liz
Tuccillo’s He’s Just Not That Into You. (Cooper 2005: S38)
Inthis case, the readerknows the item beingreferred tois yet tocome
in the lext and reads forward to find the meaning of‘that".
iii. Exophoric reference
Exophanric reference looks outside the text to the situation in which the
text occurs for the identity of the item being referred to. The following
example from Chapter 3 illustrates this. Both speakers clearly know
what book is being referred to in this conversation (Monica’s Story).
‘You' and ‘your' are also examples of exophoric rcfercnce. Both
speakers know, from outside the text, who these items are referring to:
Customer: What kind of book would you say this is? Where would
you put it on your bookshelves?
iv. Homophoric reference
Homophoric reference is where the identity of the item can be
retrieved by reference to cultural knowledge, in general, rather than the
specific context of the text. An example of this, again from the review
of He’s Just Not That Into You, follows:
First intheUS, thenall over the world,womenbecame convertsto
the book’s tough-love message. (Cooper 2005: S38)
This is different from thefinaluse of‘the’ in this sentence. Tu answer
‘which book’ we know it is the one being discussed in the text. We
know, however, from our cultural knowledge ‘which’ United States
and ‘which’ world are being referred to in the text.
132
o
v. Comparative and bridging reference
Further types of reference include comparative and bridging reference.
With comparative reference, ‘the identity of the presumed item is
retrieved not because it has already been mentioned (or will be men-
tioned) in the text, but because an item with which it is being com-
pared has been mentioned' (Eggins 2005: 98). ‘Others’ and ‘opposite’ in
the following extracts are examples of this:
When it was published late last year, Oprah sang its praises, tearful
women called it ‘the Bible’, and others declared it had changed
their lives forever.
The book assumes all men are confident, or that if they really like a
girl, they'll overcome their shyness. The opposite is true.
(Cooper 2005: S38)
These are a little more complex than the other kinds of reference just
described. The author proceeds, however, on the assumption that we
will know ‘which’ people and that we will know ‘which’ opposite she
is referring to. i
A bridging reference (Martin and Rose 2003} is where an item
refers to something that has to be inferentially derived from the text or
situation; that is, something that has to be presumed indirectly. In the
following example we are not told which ‘blokes’ Stuart is referring to.
The author presumes that we can indirectly derive this:
Stuart agrees. ‘I was hopeless’, he says with a laugh. ‘I'm just not
oue of those blokes that finds approaching women easy.’
(Cooper 2005: S38)
Each of these forms of reference makes a contribution to the texture of a
text and the ways in which we interpret the text as we read it, The
same is true of the relationship between vocabulary items in the text:
that is, lexical cohesion, the subject of the next section of this chapter.
6.5 Lexical cohesion
Lexical cohesion refers to relationships in meaning between lexical
items in a text and, in particular, content words and the relationship
between them. The main kinds of lexical cohesion are repetition,
synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, meronomy and collocation.
i. Repetition
Repetition refers to words that are repeated in a text. This includes
words which are inflected for tense or number and words which are
iv. Hyponymy and meronymy
Halliday (1990) describes two kinds of /exical taxonomies that typi-
cally occur in texts: superordination and composition. These are words
whicheare in a ‘kind of relationship with each other (superordination)
and words that are in a ‘whole-part’ relationship with each other
(composition). In the previous texts, Jen and Stuart are ‘part of the
lexical item ‘couple’ whereas He's Just Not That Into You is a ‘kind of’
self-help book. The relationship between ‘Jen’ and ‘couple’ is an
example of meronymy. The relationship between ‘self-help book’ and
He’s Just Not That Into You is one of hyponymy.
v. Hyponymy
Hyponymy, then, refers to classes of lexical items where the relation-
ship between them is one af ‘general-specific’, ‘an example of® or in a
‘class to member’ type relationship. This relationghip could be repre-
sented diagrammatically as shown below in Figure 6.1. In this exam-
ple, He's Just Not That Into You, I'm Okay, You're Okay, You Can Let
Go Now: It's Okay to Be Who You Are and Ready or Not, Here Life
Comes can also be described as co hyponyms of the superordinate torm
‘self-help books’.
He's Just Not That Into You
l’m Okay, You're Okay
Self-help books' You Can Let Go Now: [t's Okay to Be Who You Are
Ready or Not, Here Life Comes
Be Honest: You’re Not That Into Him Either
Figure 6.1 Hyponymy
vi. Meronymy
Meronymy is where lexical items are in a‘whole to part’relationship
with each other,such as therelationship between ‘Jen’ and ‘Stuart’ in
relation to the item ‘couple’. *Jen’ and ‘Stuart’ are co-meronyms ofthe
superordinate
item“couple’. Theserelationships could berepresented
diagrammatically
as_follows:
Couple
Jen Stuart
Figure 6.
Meronymy
Further examples ofthesekinds ofrelationships, drawn fromresearch
reports in the area ofenvironmental studies, areshown below.
Hyponomy
springwheat
r
/ wheat
ficld grown crops N comn
sorghum
Figure 6.
Further example of hyponymy (Paliridge 1998 265)
In
each kind of
relationship,
an understanding
ofone
itemin the
taxonomymay depend on an understanding of other itoms and on the
organization and relationship between the items in the taxonomy. As
Halliday (1990: 19) points out, these taxonomies ‘can become very
complicated, with manylayers of organisation built into them’. There
is also the problem that these relationships
are usually not
made
explicit with the result that, if someone does not already
know the
relationship between the items, they are left to work it out from the
SO
rainwater
atmospheric
pollution
Figure 6. Taxonomicalrelationships (Paliridge
1998: 266}
‘real-estate fruit and vegetables'. Or that we can say ‘fresh fruit and
vegetables’ but not (with the same meaning) ‘fresh real-estate agents’.
This knowledge of collocation is another way in which a text has the
property of texture.
Camellia
/ Virginia
forest pepperweed
species Carolina
geranium
evening
primrose
hardwood
white spruce
i. Expectancy relations
A further kind of relationship, related to collocation, is expectancy
relations. This occurs where there is a predictable relationship
between a verb and either the subjecl vr the object of the verb. These
relations link nominal elements with verbal elements (e.g. love/book,
waste/time) as in the previous example. They can also link an action
with a participant (e.g. ask/guy) or an event with its location (e.g.
dating/sites) as in the following examples. Expectancy can also refer to
the relationship between individual lexical items and the composite
nominal group that they form (e.g. art/classes, life/drawing, online/
dating):
Art classes
You can do just about anything in the name of art. Try asking a cute
guy ta sit as your model, and if he still doesn’t take the hint. you
can literally draw him a picture. Take a free life-drawing class at
the ArtHouse Hotel.
Online dating :
Hand out as many kisses as you like — virtual ones, that is. Dating
sites are all about being proactive and choosing your best match.
(Sun-Herald, 6 February 2005, p. $38)
6.7 Conjunction
A further way in which language contributes to the texture of a text is
through the use of conjunction. Conjunction refers to words, such as
‘and’, ‘however’, ‘finally’ and ‘in conclusion’ that join phrases, clauses
or sections of a text in such a way that they express the ‘logical-
semantic’ relationship between them. They are a further important part
of discourse knowledge that both speakers and writers, and readers
and listeners, draw on as they both produce and interpret spoken and
written discourse.
Conjunctions are described by Halliday and Hasan (1976) under
the groupings of additive, adversative, causal and temporal conjunc-
tions. Martin (1992), and Martin and Rose (2003), extending Halliday
and Hasan’s work in this area, discuss conjunctions under the cate-
gories of additive, comparative, temporal and consequential conjunc-
tions. Martin and Rose’s work on conjunction is summarized in Table
6.1.
Additive conjunctions include ‘and’, ‘or’, ‘mareover’, ‘in addi-
tion’ and ‘alternatively’. That is, they draw on the notion of ‘addition’
in both a positive and a contrastive sense.
Comparative conjunctions include ‘whereas’, ‘but’, ‘on the other
label the stages
of text (such as ‘in
conclusion’ and ‘finally’),
items
which announce the
goal of the discourse
(such as ‘my aim here
is
to...")anditemswhich
announceachange
in topic(suchas‘well’and
‘now’). Frame
markers, along with conjunction
and other markers
of
thiskind, lead
the reader ofatext to ‘preferred
interpretations’ of
the
text as well as help form convincing
and coherent
texts ‘by relating
individual propositions
toeachotherand
to othertexts’ (Hyland 1998:
442). These items play an
important role in holding
a text together.
Second language writers, for
example, often under-use,
over-use, or
misuse conjunctive
items in their texts
in comparison with native
speakers
who tend to use them
more sparingly (Basturkman
2002;
Thorubury 2005).
6.8 Substitution and ellipsis
A further way in which texture is achieved in a text is through the use
of substitution and ellipsis.
i. Substitution
With substitution, a substitute form is used for another language item.
phrase or group. It can involve substituting an item for a noun. In the
following example, ‘one’ substitutes for the noun ‘hook’:
Try reading this book. That one’s not very good.
It can involve substituting an item for a verb. In this example ‘done’
substitutes for the verb group ‘had dinner’:
A: Has he had dinner yet?
B: He must have done. There’s no food in the fridge.
An item may also subslitule for a clause. In the following example, ‘so’
substitutes for the clause ‘you're still happy™
A: That’s great to hear you're still happy.
B: Oh yes very much so.
ii. Ellipsis
With cllipsis some essential element is omitted from the text and can
be recovered by referring to a preceding element in the text. Ellipsis
may involve the omission of a noun or noun group, a verb or verbal
group, or a clause. In the following extract, from a radio call-in show,
there are examples of ellipsis in each of the caller's responscs. In the
Discourse analysis
caller's first response the main clause ‘I want to say’ is ellipsed. In the
second response ‘It was over’ is ellipsed. In the final response a whole
clause is omitted (‘they usually are silly') and the main clause of the
next two dependent clanses (‘I want to say’) are omitted. These are
ellipsed as the caller's responses build on the content of what has been
said before and are, thus, not necessary for an understanding of what
the caller wants to say. Indeed, including these items would be
unnatural in this kind of interaction:
Announcer: Gary, what did you want to say to Allison
tonight?
Caller: li want to say] that I'm very sorry for the fight we
had the other night.
Announcer: What was that over?
Caller: {It was over] something rather silly actually
Anuouncer: They usually are, aren’t they?
Caller: Yeah [they usually are silly] and [I want to say]
that I love her very much and [l want to say that]
we'll have to stick it through, you know?
iii. Differences between reference, ellipsis and substitution
It is important to point out differences between reference and ellipsis-
substitution. One difference is that reference can reach a long way back
in the lext whereas ellipsis and substitution are largely limited to the
immediately preceding clause. Another key dilference is that with
reference there is a typical meaning of co-reference. That is, both items
typically refer to the same thing. With ellipsis and substitution, this is
not the case. There is always some difference between the second
instance and the first. 1f a speaker or writer wants to refer to the same
thing they use reference. 1f they want to refer to something different
they use ellipsis-substitution (Halliday 1985).
6.9 Patterns of cohesion: a sample analysis
Figures 6.6 and 6.7 are an analysis of the following two paragraphs of
A. A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh (1965) in terms of lexical cohesion and
the main reference chains in this section of the text. These two para-
graphs open A. A. Milne’s book:
Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump,
on the back of his head, behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he
knows, the only way of coming downstairs, but sometimes he feels
that there really is another way, if only he could stop bumping for a
moment to think of it ... And then he feels perhaps there isn’t.
74
EdwardBear coming downstairs you
’ % w back of Î
anaphoric
j f anaphoric
the back of his head
anaphoric
I exophoric
i
anaphoric f
hî comparative anaphoric
!
anaphoric |
another way |
4 anaphoric I
it
anaphoric
exophoric
Figure6.7 Reference:
Winnie-the-Pooh
(Paliridge2000:
thirdchain arean example of the same item bump, or the final case a
grammatical variation on bump (bumping).
There are four main reference chains in this section of the text
(see Figure 6.7). In the first chain, once the item Edward Bear is pre-
sented, all the other reference itews in this chain (his and he) are
examples
of anaphoric
reference.
Thatis, theyall
referbackto
Edward
Bear. In the second chain, the first itrefers tocoming downstairs on the
back of his heud. Another way makes a comparison with
coming
downstairs
on the back
ofhis head so
is an example of
comparative
reference.
The next item
in the chain,
if, refers to
this other way
(of
coming downstairs).
Thethirdand
fourth reference
chainsin this
textare alittlemore
complex
forreaders
tofollow. The
readerneeds
toknowwho
theyou
isbeing
referredtoin
thetext.Thefirst
youisthereader
of thetextso
is
thus
exophoric. You,
here, refers
to someone outside
the text (the
reader).
Thefollowingyou
andIrefer tothe
sameperson, the
reader,so
areboth
anaphoric. They
refer back to the
first mention of
the reader
andnow
gobackiu(he
text,not outside
it.Thetwoinstances
oflatthe
beginning of
the second paragraph,
however,
refer to
someone com-
pletely
different—the
authorof thetext,
A. A. Milne.
Thefinal [in this
extract takesthe
readerbackto
thepreviouschain.
Thatis,Irefers
once
moretothe reader
of thetext.In
thiswaytheauthor
of thetext
involves
the reader
rightfromthebeginning,
byaddressingthem
directly.This,
together with the
subject matter
of the text, accounts
for our
[eeling
thatthe
story is being read
aloudto someone,
most likely
a child, the
you in the text. As Cook
explains, referring
expressions
thus:
fulfil
a dualpurposeaf
unifyingthe text
(theydependonsome
of
the suhject matter
remaining the
same). and ofeconomy
because
they save us from
having to repeat
the identity of what
we are
talkingabout again
andagain.
(Cook 1989: 18)
Theme
and rheme
Two further
elements that contribute
to the texture
of a text is the
relationshipbetween
theme and
rhemeina clause
and itscontribution
tothefocus
and flowofinformation
in atext.
An understanding
ofthis
is important, especially
for the writing
of successful student
texts.
Resoarch
has shown that
different academic
disciplines
present
information
in different
ways. Part of this
is related to
which infor-
mation
isgiven prominence,
or thematized,
in thetext.
Arts students,
forexample, have
been found
to moreoften qualify the
assertions
they
make about
other peoplc’s
work in their texts
than, say, do science
students.
They do
this,especially,
through what they say
in the theme
components
of their texts
{North 2005).
Themeis the
startingpoint of a
clause; that
is,whatthe
clauseis
‘about’. The
remainder of the clause
is
the rheme. Thus,
in the
sentence
‘Hiragana represents the
46 basissounds
of the Japanese
language’, the
themeis
‘Hiragana’.
Therest of
the sentence
is the
rheme;
thatis,what
the sentence has
to say about
Hiragana.
In this
instance ‘Hiragana'
isa topical
theme. Conjunctions such as
and
ii. Interpersonal theme
Interpersonal
theme refers to an
item that comes before
the rheme
which indicates the relationship
between participants in
the text, or
the position or
point of view that is
being taken in the clause.
The
following
example from a student
essay (North 2005)
shows an
example
of a textual theme, an
interpersonal theme and a
topical
theme.
Here the interpersonal theme
expresses uncertainty about
the
proposition that follows:
Table 6.4 Example of textuol theme
Textual theme Interpersonal T;pÌ;el Rheme
theme theme
However ... it seems unlikely that
Descartes would deliberately challonge
the Church
An interpersonal theme
can express probability (e.g.
perhaps),
usuality
(e.g.sometimes),typicality
(e.g.generally) orobviousness
(e.g.
surely). It can also express
opinion (e.g. to my mind),admission
(e.g.
frankly), persuasion (e.g. believe
me), entreaty (e.g. kindly),
pre-
sumption (e.g. no doubt), desirability
(e.g. hopefully) or prediction
(e.g. as expected) (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004).
Patterns oftheme and rheme combine
ina text togiveit
asenseof
thematic development.
Thetheme ofa clause,
for example, may
pick up, or repeat, the meaning
from a preceding theme. This
leads
to a pattern oftheme reiteration,
wherethe theme of
each
clause
is the same. Zigzagor linear
theme is where the rheme
of
one clause is picked
up in the theme
of the next clause. These
patterns
may also be combined
into multiple/split
rheme
patterns.
iii. Multiple theme
The following extract from the review of He's Just Not That Into You
shows a further example of textual, interpersonal and topical themes.
Itis an example of multiple
theme. That is, there
ismore than a single
thematic element in theTheme componentof the clause.
Table 6.5 Multiple themes
Textual theme Interpersonal Topical Rheme
theme theme a
Because, of course, " the dating is a clumsy dance of blunders
game and misunderstandings.
6.11 Thematic progression
The notions of theme and rheme are also employed in the examination
of thematic progression, or method of development of texts (Fries
2002). Thematic progression refers to the way in which the theme of a
clause may pick up, or repeat, a meaning from a preceding theme or
rheme. This is a key way in which information flow is created in a text.
There a number of ways in which this may be done. These are dis-
cussed below.
i. Constant theme
One example of thematic progression is theme reiteration or constant
theme. In this pattern, ‘Theme 1’ is picked up and repeated at the
beginning of next clause, signalling that each clause will have some-
thing to say about the theme. In Table 6.6, there are two sets of constant
theme. The thematic progression of this text is shown in Figure 6.8.
Table 6.6 Theme reiteration/constant theme (based on Cornbleet and
Carter 2001: 3)
Theme Rheme
Text can be used for both spoken and written language.
It usually refers to a stretch, an exiract or complete piece of writing or
Discourse is a much wider term.
It can be used to refer to languoî in action, such as legal discourse, which
has characteristic patterns of language.
