SHEIKHBAHAEE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
THE RELATIOHSHIP BETWEEN USE OF COHESIVE
DEVICES AND COMPOSITION QUALITY: A CASE
STUDY OF IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
IN TEACHING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
By
ALIREZA AMELI
Supervisor
Dr. A. AFGHARI
OCTOBER 2011
Sheikhbahaee University
School of Foreign Languages
Department of English
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CONTENT, FORMAT AND QUALITY OF
PRESENTATION OF THE THESIS SUBMITTED BY
ALIREZA AMELI
ENTITLED:
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF COHESIVE
DEVICES AND COMPOSITION QUALITY: A CASE STUDY
OF IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
M.A. IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING IS ACCEPTED AND APPROVED BY
THE THESIS COMMITTEE.
SUPERVISOR: DR. A. AFGHARI
INTERNAL EXAMINER: DR. K. AFZALI
EXTERNAL EXAMINER: DR. GH. R. ZAREI
DEAN OF GRADUATE SCHOOL: DR. S. M. H. FEIZ
Table of Contents
Chapter
Page
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………….…....1
1.2 Statement of the Problem……………………………………………....2
1.3 Research Question...…………………………………………………...3
1.4 Significance of the Study……………………………………………....3
1.5 Definition of Terms……………………………………………….........4
1.6 Outline of the Thesis………………………………………………...…5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Definition of Cohesion…………………………………………………6
2.2 Differences between Cohesion and Coherence………………….……..9
2.3 Cohesive Devices...................................................................................11
2.3.1 Grammatical Cohesion……………………………………….....12
2.3.1.1 Reference.......................................................................12
2.3.1.2 Ellipsis and Substitutions………………………..….....16
2.3.1.3 Conjunctive Relations…………………………………18
2.3.1.4 Lexical Cohesion…………………...............................23
2.4 Academic Writing……………………………………………………...28
2.5 Previous Research on Cohesion in Essay Writing……………………..30
2.5.1 Distribution of Cohesive Ties in Essay Writing………………...31
2.5.2 Cohesion and Writing Quality…………………………………..38
Table of Contents
Chapter
Page
2 (Continued)
2.6 Cohesion and Teaching EFL Writing……………………………….....42
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………....46
3.2 Design of the Study…………………………………………………....46
3.3 Participants…...………………………………………………………...48
3.4 Instrumentation………………………….…………………………......48
3.5 Procedures………………………………………………………...…....49
3.5.1 A Sample Analysis of Cohesive Ties Distributed
Across one Text……………………………………………..……...….50
4. RESULTS
4.1 Introduction……………………………………………………….……54
4.1.1 An Overview of the Cohesive Ties in Descriptive and
Opinion Essays…………….………………………………………….54
4.1.1.1 Reference……………………………………………...55
4.1.1.2 Conjunction……………………………………….…...57
4.1.1.3 Lexical Cohesion………………………………...…….63
4.1.2 Results of Essay Evaluation………….………………………….66
4.1.3 The Use of Cohesive Devices in Relation to the
Quality of Writing…………………………………………………...…67
Table of Contents
Chapter
Page
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
5.1 Overview………………………………………………………..…..…70
5.2 Cohesive Ties in Descriptive and Opinion Essays………………….…71
5.2.1 Reference Category…………………………………………......71
5.2.2 Conjunction Category……………………………………….......71
5.2.3 Lexical Category……………………………………….…..…...73
5.3 Conclusion ……………………………………………………….…....74
5.4 Implications of the Study……………………………………….……..77
5.4.1 Pedagogical Implications…………………………………….…77
5.5 Limitations of the Study………………………………………………78
5.6 Suggestions for Further Research…………………………………..…78
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………..80
APPENDIX A………………………………………………….…………86
APPENDIX B……………………………………………….……………87
APPENDIX C…………………………………………...……………..…89
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis would not have been possible without the contributions of the following
people. First and foremost, I owe my gratitude my thesis supervisor, Dr. Afghary, for his
warm encouragement, guidance and support from the initial to the final stage. He always
worked hard and actively in order to provide me with in depth knowledge of the subject.
The completion of the thesis would not have been possible without his assistance.
In addition, I would especially like to thank all of my teachers and friends,
especially Dr.Tahririan, Dr.Zarei, Dr.Talebinezhad, and Dr. Kosha at Sheikhbahae
University for their kindness, assistance and encouragement.
Finally, I am indebted to my beloved parents, whose love, encouragement,
understanding and support are always with me in whatever I do.
List of Tables
Table
Page
1-3 The Frequency of Cohesive Ties in Descriptive Essay 4…………....……….51
2-4 Cohesive Ties Used in Descriptive Essays…………………………...………55
3-4 Cohesive Ties Used in Opinion Essays………………………………...…….55
4-4 Reference Use in Descriptive Essays……………………………………..….55
5-4 Reference Use in Opinion Essays…………………………………………....56
6-4 Conjunction Use in Descriptive Essays……………………………………...58
7-4 Conjunction Use in Opinion Essays………………………………………....58
8-4 Extension Conjunction Ties in Opinion Essays………………….……….….61
9-4 Extension Conjunction Ties in Descriptive Essays……………….……….....62
10-4 Elaboration Conjunction ties in Descriptive Essays ……………………….62
11-4 Elaboration Conjunction Ties in Opinion Essays…………………………..62
12-4 Enhancement Conjunction Ties in Descriptive Essays……………………..63
13-4 Enhancement Conjunction Ties in Opinion Essays………………….……..63
14-4 Lexical Cohesion Use in Descriptive Essays…………………………….…64
15-4 Lexical Cohesion Use in Opinion Essays…………………………………...64
16-4 Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, and Other Statistics
Related to the Descriptive Essay Scores…………………………………………66
17-4 Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, and Other Statistics
Related to the Opinion Essay Scores…………………………………………......67
18-4 Correlation between Essays Scores and Cohesive Devices in
Descriptive Essays………………………………………………………………..68
19-4 Correlation between Essays Scores and Cohesive Devices in
Opinion Essays………………………………….………………….…………...…68
I
Abstract
This study investigated the use of cohesive features in descriptive and opinion essays
written by Iranian university students, using both quantitative and qualitative
methods. Fifty essays were collected from twenty five university students majoring
TEFL and assessed by three raters. Halliday and Hasan's (1976) taxonomy of
cohesive devices and their framework for analysis were used. The findings indicated
that the students had employed a variety of cohesive devices with different
frequencies in their writing. Lexical devices were the most frequently ones used
comprising 68.49 % of all ties in descriptive essays and 70.42% in opinion essays,
followed by the reference category constituted of 25.02% of all ties in descriptive
essays and 23.33% in opinion essays. Finally, the conjunction category with 6.49% of
ties for descriptive essay and 6.25% for opinion essays was the last frequent ones.
There was no statistically significant relationship between the number of cohesive ties
used and the quality of writing.
Key words; Cohesive ties, Writing quality, Cohesion, Coherence
List of Abbreviations
ACCD………………………………………….. Academic
BNC…………………………………………….British national corpus
COCA ………………………….………………Corpus of contemporary of America
English
SPOK……………………………………………Spoken
FIC ………………………………………………Fiction
MAG……....………………………………….….Magazine
III
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
A functional grammar is a conceptual framework that looks at language from the
perspective of how it is used. A language can be viewed as a system of meanings where
the realization of meanings is expressed through grammatical and lexical forms. In
recognition of this view, discourse analysis is a study of language that sheds some light
on how, and why, the text means what it does (Halliday, 1994). Thus, the subject of
discourse analysis is a text that is formed to express some meanings and those meaning
relations constitute texture. Texture in the context of functional grammar is a matter of
how meanings are realized through structure and cohesion. Cohesion is the object of
interest in this thesis, as it shows how meaning relations in the text contribute to its unity.
Cohesion is concerned with lexico-grammatical ties that show relations between
messages in the text, and texture within the text is created through the use of such
cohesive ties (Halliday & Hasan, 1989). The study of cohesion provides an insight into
how texts are organized and meanings are expressed through investigating the patterns of
cohesion that help to understand the text in terms of its representation of ideas. For
example, patterns of lexical cohesion make the reader focused on the field of the passage,
patterns of reference devices ease the reader’s track of entities mentioned in the passage,
and patterns of conjunctive relations show the purpose of the passage (Martin & Rose
2007, pp. 18-20). Hence, investigation of the text as regards the use of cohesive ties
shows how meanings are realized and contribute to the consistency of that text. Cohesion
1
can be analyzed within any text; however the analysis of cohesive devices in the EFL
academic texts plays an important and extensive role. This is due to the fact that this
aspect of texture in essay writing reveals how students organize their texts by showing
meaning relations between sentences. Thus, Halliday and Hasan’s (1976) theory on
cohesion is particularly applicable in the EFL field, where looking at the patterns of
cohesion in students’ essays, reveals how students face the meanings in the text in order
to create a piece of writing that express an intended message. Since the theory of cohesion
in terms of the texts of EFL learners is new to Iranian teachers and learners, this thesis
seeks to gain a deeper view of how this concept is applied in essays written by Iranian
students.
1.2
Statement of the problem
Writing plays an important role in our personal and professional lives. It, by
definition, is an act of communication, a purposeful means of addressing an audience and
is currently viewed in academic circles as more than just a tool for communication.
Therefore, the ability to convey meaning proficiently in written texts is a critical skill for
academic and professional success. Indeed, college freshmen’ writing skills are among
the best predictors of academic success (Geiser & Studley, 2001), and even outside of
academia, writing skills continue to be important and are an important attribute of
professional competence (Light, 2001). However, many students, particularly those
attempting to write in their second language, rate writing activities among the least
enjoyable or beneficial for learning English (Barkhuizen, 1998; Spratt, 2001). As such,
2
developing a better understanding of characteristics of good writing is an important
objective, both for theoretical and practical reasons.
The misuse of cohesive devices has been identified as a common problem faced by EFL
writers. In terms of the communicative nature of writing, cohesion is regarded as an
essential textual component not only for creating organized texts, but also for rendering
the content comprehensible to the reader. Many researchers have explored the connection
between the use of cohesive devices and the quality of writing produced.
In order to gain further insight into this area of debate, this study will investigate Iranian
EFL learners’ use of cohesive devices and the relationship between the number of
cohesive devices used and the writing quality.
1.3
Research Question
The present study intends to investigate whether there is any relationship between
the use of cohesive devices and the quality of writing in descriptive and opinion essays.
To this end, the following question was formulated:
Is there any relationship between the use of cohesive devices and the quality of
writing in descriptive and opinion essays?
1.4
Significance of the study
Writing is one of the most authentic and interactive ways of transferring thoughts
and ideas to others. Halliday (1985) refers to writing as an explanatory act, requiring great
judgment. The ability to express one’s ideas in writing in a foreign language coherently
and accurately is a major achievement that even many native speakers of English never
3
truly master (Celce- Murcia, 2001). Learning to write a text clearly and efficiently is a
long process that requires much practice and sometimes explicit and formal instruction.
For students who have not yet acquired all the skills needed to translate their ideas into a
coherent text, writing is a difficult task (Halliday, 1985).
So, this study will provide English writing teachers with opportunity to see how the EFL
learners use cohesive devices in their writings whilst comparing and contrasting the
various devices used. Additionally, the findings of this study are expected to give
contribution to the field of discourse analysis in the part of cohesive devices. It is also
expected to enrich our understanding, both in theoretical and applied terms, of Halliday
and Hasan`s theory in building the cohesion in written text.
1.5
Definition of terms
A series of key words used in this study are defined below:
1.5.1 Cohesion
A linguistic system that extends through the text and binds together larger chunks of
discourse, as well as forming smaller discourse units (Halliday, 1976).
1.5.2 Academic Writing
The forms of expository and argumentative prose used by university students and
researchers to convey a body of information about a particular subject. (Heinnemann,
2006).
4
1.5.3 Definition essay (Descriptive essay)
A type of formal essay in which the writer defines a word, term, or concept in depth
by providing a personal commentary (Northland, 2011).
1.5.4 Opinion essay (Argumentative essay)
A type of formal essay which presents the author's point of view on a particular
subject, supported by reasons and examples. (Writing an opinion essay, 2011)
1.6 Outline of the thesis
This study is organized in five chapters:
In chapter one, introduction, the problem under study will be introduced;
significance of the study and research questions will be presented as well. In chapter two,
literature review, will be discussed. In chapter three, the method of the study, some
information about the participants, as well as the procedure of data collection and
analyses will be introduced. In chapter four, results and findings of the study will be
discussed and finally in Chapter five, conclusion and some implications based on the
findings of the study will be presented.
5
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
LITERATURE REVIEW
In this chapter, initially the fundamental ideas concerning cohesion as a textforming device by presenting the definition of cohesion and the difference between
cohesion and coherence will be discussed. Secondly, the basic terminology connected
with the concept of cohesion, with a focus on Halliday and Hasan's view of cohesion, will
be elaborated on, as a base measure of coherence. Thirdly, we will have an overview of
the importance of academic writing in scholarly advancement and also discuss previous
research on cohesion in essay writing by reviewing related studies on distribution of
cohesive devices in essay writing as well as the relationship between cohesion and
writing quality. Finally, an overview of cohesion and its relation to teaching EFL writing
will be presented.
2.1
Definition of cohesion
Cohesion is a very important issue in the discipline of linguistics. It plays a crucial
role in text analysis, thus it (in the context of academic texts) requires a precise definition.
Various definitions of cohesion have been offered by researchers and linguistics.
Bamberg states that cohesion "describes a linguistic system that extends through the text
and binds together larger chunks of discourse, in addition to forming smaller discourse
units" (quoted in Palmer 1999, p. 63). Reinhart defines cohesion as "'the overt linguistic
devices for putting sentences together [which comprise] connectedness [in a text]' or
linear concatenation'" (quoted in Stoddard, 1990, p. 13). Hoey (1991) gives another
6
definition that cohesion is the way certain words or grammatical features of a sentence
can connect that sentence to its predecessors in a text. Markel (1984) provides a definition
of cohesion as it elevates a random collection of sentences to the status of a text, and in
the process imparts meaning, insight, and purpose to those sentences. He claims that
without cohesion, the text can hardly be said to exist at all, for cohesion provides the
textual means for initiating comprehension and sense. The above definitions of cohesion
seem to indicate that this concept is complex but it is possible to agree on some common
aspect of cohesion, namely that cohesion is like a glue sticking elements to hold a text
together (Gabrielatos, 1999, p.16).
One of the most popular views on cohesion is that of Halliday and Hasan's model.
Halliday and Hasan (1976) propose that “cohesion refers to the range of possibilities that
exist for linking something with what has gone before" (1976, p.10). Also, they claim that
"cohesion is part of the system of a language" and it is a semantic concept that regards
meaning relations in the text. For the cohesion to take place the interpretation of some
elements in the discourse needs to depend on the other one. In simple terms cohesion is
about the relations between two elements, the presupposing and the presupposed. The
cohesive relations are established only if there are two items linked with each other, and
such items have a cohesive force. These elements that are cohesively related create a tie.
The notion of a tie is central in the analysis of cohesive properties of a text by providing a
systematic account of patterns of texture (Halliday and Hasan, 1976, pp. 3-5). Halliday
and Hassan add that cohesion is "a relation in the system" where the writer opts for "sets
of possibilities" to make the text "hang together". Also cohesion is viewed "as a process
7
in the text" which means "it is the instantiation of this relation in the text" (1976, pp. 1819).
A text is a meaningful unit composed of experiential, logical, and textual meanings,
and the role of cohesion is to provide texture by being one of the concepts that help to
create a text. However, Halliday and Hasan stress that cohesion is not a sufficient part of
creating a text but a necessary "text-forming component", thus, there are other
components, such as information structure or thematic patterns. They assert that
"cohesion expresses the continuity that exists between one part of the text and another",
and thus has a crucial role in creating a text (Halliday and Hasan 1976, pp. 298-299).
Conner (1984) simplifies cohesion as one aspect of what forms textually in a text.
Stoddard (1990) in her book, Text and Texture: Patterns of Cohesion, suggests that
one way to give unity to a text as well as to provide pattered predictability that fulfills
reader expectations and thereby eases the processing of a text is use of cohesion.
Moreever, redundancy can be reduced using cohesion because texts would be redundant
without the use of cohesive ties.
Stoddard (1990) identifies six properties of cohesion. She postulates that the
cohesive elements are perceived as patterns of cohesion with regard to number, distance,
directionality, re-entry, intersection, and type. These may relate to functions of the
cohesion as outlined above. For example, if the number of cohesive ties is greater per
node, then the text would be perceived as more unified. Also, the distance between the
ties should not be kept too long to avoid a difficulty in the interpretation of these links.
The other aspect of cohesion is directionality, which is concerned with the position of the
cohesive elements. This means they may occur before or after the node unless the reader's
8
expectations are fulfilled. Also, to be cohesive, the ties need to show "a repetitive
pattern". The repetition of ties contributes to the unity of the text, which creates texture.
Additionally, when the cohesive patterns intersect, the cohesion ties are easier to process.
The other property of cohesion is the choice of the type of ties on the part of the writer,
which contribute to the perception of the texture of a text. It is the writer who makes the
availability of patterns for the writer. (pp. 20-23).
Cohesive relations may be grammatical or lexical. Halliday and Hasan (1976)
distinguish types of grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion, but it should be kept in
mind that the distinction between cohesion expressed through grammar or vocabulary is
the matter of degree.
Those cohesive relations may occur within or between sentences. However,
cohesive relations within sentence are not as striking as between the sentences because
cohesion across sentences is more conspicuous since cohesive ties are the only source of
texture, and within the sentence there are also structural relations. Thus, the analysis of
intersentence cohesion is worthwhile since this description reveals variable aspects of
cohesion (Halliday & Hasan, 1976).
It is important in the text analysis to take into account what items from the sentence
enter into cohesive relations and what kind of a tie is involved.
2.2
Differences between cohesion and coherence
Some linguists state that cohesion and coherence differ somehow because some
texts may not show explicit cohesive ties and still be coherent but some texts that contain
9