Cohesion In English Language

At the beginning the author puts emphasis on how native speakers of a language decide if a text is a combination of unrelated sentences or is it a whole unified sentence based on hearing or reading it by the native speakers. The book ‘Cohesion in English’ showed the differences that identify the two aspects of the text, a unified whole and collection of unrelated sentences. It is informed that there are empirical factors which are text characteristics, they should be found in order to save as basis in the text. In a grammatical unit consistency is formed by a sentence supported by a clause to a group of clauses. A text is highly regarded as an exclusive semantic unit in the meaning related by a sentence or clause, however, it does not only

As a result, the cohesion concept accounts for the essence, relations of semantics through any passage of writing or speech allows to function as text, it can be also systematized by classifying it into a small number of categories, reference, ellipsis, substitution, conjunction and lexical cohesion. And each one stands by its own theoretical basis to prove more of a practical meaning by describing and analyzing texts. Each category represents particular features, omission, occurrences, constructions and repetitions, which commonly have the property of giving information about the interpretation of the text or passage dependent on something elsewhere can be verbally explicit, and it is where the cohesion lies within the text.

Moreover, there are other semantic types of relation which are does not follow this concept’s association, in the other hand, the one that does embody is very important since it is commonly used to every cohesion kind, by that it is what makes a text a

For example:

[3:4] I shoot the hippopotamus

With bullets made of platinum

Because if I use leaden ones

His hide is sure to flatten 'em.*

The head of the nominal group bullets, and bullets made of platinum and ones is head of the nominal group leaden ones. The previous two nominal groups indeed do not have the same function in the clause, however it may have any open function to its nominal group. Moreover, do is the verbal substitute and it operates as a verbal item positioned final in the group by the lexical verb. To illustrate from Alice, the form do is the substitute word: [3: 56] a. ….the words did not come the same as they used to do.

b. ‘I don 't know the meaning of half those long words, and, what’s more. I don 't believe you do either! ' What substitutes for came is do (a), and for know is the meaning of half those long words.

Apparently, as shown in the previous example [3:56] the presupposed items were all in the same sentence. In addition, the substitution is not cohesive by itself, but it is also verbal substitution which extends regularly across the sentences