text vs nontext_2.ppt

8/13/2019 TEXT vs NONTEXT_2.ppt

1/38

Text and discourse linguistics, 2008 1

From NONTEXT to TEXT

What is text?

Silvia IRIMIEA, PhD


2/38


According to Crombie Winifred (1985) a text represents an uninterrupted larger orsmaller group of clauses and sentences, which are within the domain of an overalltopic.

Halliday and Hasan (1976: I) offered a definition of text, that may well serve as a

point of departure for any prospective text exploration. They went further thanCrombie in their definition of text, suggesting that a text is any passage (oflanguage), spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole.

Therewith they overtly defined the text as a unified whole, introducing the concept oftexture, i.e. the quality or the property that distinguishes a text from a nontextandholds the clauses together.

Susanne Eggins (1996: 85) states that the

discoursepart of the discourse semantic label describes the different types of

texture that contribute to making text: the resources the language has forcreating text.


3/38


TEXTURE

In an attempt to clarify the concept of texture, Eggins supplies the following example

of conversation:

A: What time is it, love?

B: Julie left her car at the station today.

Despite the fact that the above quoted text makes little or no sense to others, itmakes perfect sense to the interactants or participants in the conversations, as

much of the text was omitted because of the participants familiarity with the topic

discussed and the shared situational context that provides for the missing

informational gap. Henceforth, Bs full answer would have made the text more

intelligible:

B: I know Julies late, but we shouldnt be worried because she left her car at thestation today and caught the train, instead of driving in to work.


4/38


Susanne Eggins quotes

the ethnomethodologists (Schegloff and Sacks 1973/74, Sacks, Schegloff andJefferson 1974, and Schegloff 1981) interest in conversations,

the claim that noempirically occurring utterance ever occurs outside, or external tosome specific sequence. Whatever is said will be said in some sequential context

(Atkinson and Heritage, 1984), and their notion of sequential implicativeness ((Schegloff and Sacks 1973/74), thus

explicating that language is inexorably tied to linear sequence,

wherebyone part of a text(a sentence or a turn at talk) must follow another

part of the text (the next sentence or turn at talk)(Eggins, 1991).

This leads to the conclusion that each part of the text creates the context within which thenext bit of the text is interpreted - thus, practically everything that is said/written will be

interpreted against the background of what was said/written previously.

Grammatical coherence and paragraph properties


5/38


6/38


As defined by Halliday and Hasan (1976: 23) coherencerefers to the way a group of

clauses or sentences relate to the context. Since context can be further expressed in

terms of two levels: context of culture(i.e. genre) and context of situation, i.e. register,

there are two recognizable types of coherence:

- situational or registerial coherence, and- generic coherence.

A text has situational coherencewhen the sentences and/clauses of the text could or

may occur within the framework of one thinkable or imaginable situation.

Similarly, a text has generic coherenceif or when it can be recognized as a particulargenre, i.e. when the text itself displays a structure that is recognizably and commonly

used as a standard structure, a schematic structure, and where each part/component of

the text represents an element in the unfolding of the communicative (linguistic) event.

Coherence


7/38


Cohesion

Eggins turns again to Halliday and Hasan, whom she quotes:

Cohesion occurs where the INTERPRETATION of one element in thediscourse is dependent on that of another. The one PRESUPPOSES the other,in the sense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by recourse to it.

When this happens, a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, thepresupposing and the presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integratedinto a text(1976: 4).

This explanation states clearly that there are elements in a text that are semantically tied,

and the existence of such semantic tieswill certify that a text is a text. The presence of

the tie makes at least one item in the text depend on another item for its interpretation. In

the event the clauses are self-contained and such ties are unnecessary or nonexistent,the clauses or sentences that hang together represent a nontext.


8/38


Despite its generic coherence, the example below is lacking both situational coherenceand internal cohesion:

1. Once upon a time there was a little white mouse called Tiptoe. 2. The boys livedin a large, red-brick house with a thatched roof at the end of the longest street in

town. 3. That morning, Mrs Smooks left her home in a great hurry. 4. But, too late,William realized that the car had no breaks. 5. So they ran and they ran them anymore[].

Reversibly, the sentences displaylexical links(cheese, dairy products, milk, calcium,

vitamins), which generate a lexical chain:

1. The little white mouse sniffed the cheese carefully. 2. Camembert is a soft,French cheese. 3. The French consume a lot of dairy products. 4. Isnt milk animportant source of calcium? 5. You know of course that vitamin deficiencies canlead to feelings of fatigue and listlessness.


9/38


The unconnectednessof clauses in a supposed text is also accounted for by a fewother factors as well, such as

participants/interactantsbrought in the text and

activities/actionsrecounted.

Another example given by Eggins shows how referential cohesion or reference

patternsare achieved at the level of participants.

1. Michael took the book out of the glovebox and gave it to Jane. 2.It had a terrible smell

about it. 3. He coughed and said: Thanks. 4.She asked if it was pretty. 5.Together they

cooked.

This example lacks lexical cohesion, as the lexical items used do not exhibit any closer

ties:

1 book glovebox take give

2 smell terrible

3 coughed said

4 asked pretty

5 cook

Unconnectedness


10/38


Referential cohesion or reference patterns, lexical links

Referential cohesion or reference patterns

Example

Michael Jane the book

it He it

she

they both

lexical links

Example

1. I had always wanted to see Paris. 2.However, you can imagine how

excited I was once we got there. 3.We had to do some sightseeing. 4. And

unfortunately it was cold and wet. 5. Meanwhile we went to the Louvre

instead. 6. Prior to that it had fined up. 7. In addition we were exhausted by 6

oclock.

Lexical links: Paris, sightseeing, the Louvre


11/38


Existence of a realistic (social) purpose

Eggins gives yet another example, which apparently fulfills all requirements the otherexamples have failed to meet.

Mark offered Lisa the box of chocolates. 2. She took two out of the box. 3.Placing down one on her saucer, 4. she started eating the other. 5. These aredelicious, sha said. 6. Are they? he replied. 7. Then why dont you takeanother? he suggested. 8. I will, she replied. 9. And so she did.

At the same time the example is defective in not having a (realistic) purpose.


12/38


(

Participants: Simon, Diana, Stephen, George, Sue)Si: How how did- have you given blood before?

Di: 36 times

St: It makes me go all funny just thinking about it

G: You have never done it, obviously

St: Oh no

Di: 1. No I do it because I had a daughter who when she was 2 days old needed bloodtransfusion cause she was getting sort of premature jaundice and things. 2. This wasin Geneva. 3. And they rang me up on the Sat- this was Saturday night and saidYouve got to come in and have your blood tested against donors. 4. And therewere these wonderful Swiss men whod left their dinner you know 8 oclockat nightand come in there to give blood to my daughter. 5. And I was really impressed andyou know how. 6.I had to give blood to be tested to see if it was compatible withtheirs. 7. And I had[]. 9. It was very exciting. 10. I stayed up all night and watchedthis um operation taking place. 11. And fortunately her umbilical artery hadntclosed

so because I mean all the other things would have been minute!S: So tiny!

Di: So they a could actually do it through the umbilical artery or whatever. 13. So I saidOK,you know, bea blood doner after that. 14. but in Switzerland they give you acognac. 15. Here they give you tea and bikkies.


13/38


Texture

This extract represents a text because it has texture, which in turn is recoverablethrough:

1. an identifiable narrative/recount structure on the pattern Abstract(once upon a time Ihad a sick daughter), Orientation(it happened in Geneva), Action(I had my bloodtested, the Swiss doners came and gave blood), Complicating action(they had tooperate on this tiny baby), Resolution(but they could still do the operation),

Evaluation(so I decided to be a blood doner), Coda(but its different in Switzerland.2. situational coherence3. cohesion accomplished through: participants, same lexical items that form lexical

links, semantic

links or reference ties, logical relations expressed through adequate conjunctions

4. the text has been assigned an entertaining function, suggested and indicated bythe participants

conventionalized remaining silent and listening to the speaker until the Coda isreached, which

signals the end of the recount.


14/38

At the end of the argumentation, Eggins admits that text is not a black-and-whitecategory, but rather a hardly definable one. In this respect she suggests acontinuum of textness along which any stretch of language/text/discourse to beexamined should be positioned.

text nontext

+texture -texture



15/38


COHESIONTypes of COHESION IN TEXTS

Sentences hang together= cohesive

Types of cohesion

Semantic cohesion: ties Lexical cohesion: lexical ties- chains

= semantically related words that run through the text (skin, soap, cleansing lotion,cleanser, water, after-cleansing astringent)

+ synonyms (fresher, cleaner)

+ antonyms (dirt- clean, under control-out of control)

+ substitution by one/ones


16/38


COHESIONTypes of COHESION IN TEXTS

Grammatical cohesion:

Reference:

In the text

Outside the text

Take it from us. Use Johnsons Clean and Clear as a one-step cleanser..(referenceto Johnsons

It actually tingles on your skin to tell you its working (refers to the reader)

The technical name for language that makes direct connection to thematerial world= deixis(adjective: deictic)

Substitution of clause elements, substitution-by-zero

Substitution:And whats even better, it does this without drying. (removes more of the

dirt, oil, and make-up that can lead up to spots)so and not- substitute for whole clauses, as in:

Will it rain?- I Think so. (I think it will rain)

Will it rain?- I Think not.


17/38


Substitution can operate at the level of individual words as well: one/ones- stand fornouns or noun phrases

So-clause substitution:

Is it important that a gin comes from London? The ones that dont, seem to

think so. (The gins that dont come from London seem to thin that it s important that a gin comes from London.)

Substitution-by-zero= ellipsis (leaving out elements that can be retrieved fromelsewhere)

It actually tingles your skin to tell you its working. Not that it needs to. (the reader issupposed to fill in the blank)

Linkers (conjuncts)

Comparatives:And whats even better..(presupposes a previous mention-director indirect)

Tense:consistency in the use of tense


18/38


Rhetorical cohesion

Question-answer

Parallelism= where sentences echo one another (repetition)

Its not your music.

Its not your handshake.

Its not your clothes.

Its your watch that says most about who you are.

Contrast: in literary texts (three lines contrast with the last line-subversion)


19/38


ANALISING COHESION IN TEXTS

Reference

Referencerefers to how the writer/speaker introduces participants and then keepstrack of them once they are in the text.

I had a daughter who needed a blood transfusion when she was 2 days old causeshe was getting premature jaundice and things.

Whether known or not the presence of participants in a text must be signaled by the

writer/speaker. Therefore the participants in a text are either

presented(introduced as new to the text) or

presumed(in which case we need to presume their identity from somewhere

in the text) through:

the definite article: the

demonstrative pronouns: that , these, those

pronouns: he, she, it, they


20/38


The identity of a presuming reference item may be retrievable from a number ofcontexts:

a) the general context of culture. This is retrieved from shared context

homophoric reference

b) the immediate context of situationexophoric reference

c) from within the textendophoric referenceanaphoric reference(the referent has appeared at an earlier point)

cataphoric reference(the referent will be provided subsequently)

esphoric(the referent appears in the phrase immediately following

the presuming referent item (within the same

nominal group/noun phrase)


21/38


Nominalization

The use of certain nouns= nominalization

Nouns that are typically used to nominalize actions and events includeprocesses,

situation,and way.

Ideas can referred to by using words like idea, theory and viewpoint.

In addition, words like: explanation, criticism, proposal, suggestionetc are used torefer to what has been said or written.

Since we had come across the idea together we decided to write it together.

Much of that process seems vague now, but I remember the day before we

started.


22/38


Lexical relations

The cohesive resourc eof lexical relations refers to how the writer/speaker uses

lexical items(nouns, verbs, adjectives , adverbs) to relate the text to its area of focus

Lexical relations analysis derives from observing that there are certain expectancyrelations between words.

LRA is a way of systematically describing how words in a text relate to each other,

how they cluster together to build up lexical sets or lexical strings

LR represent an important element in creating text cohesion


23/38


Lexical relations

They operate between

open- class items(nouns, main verbs, adverbs, and adjectives)

closed-class items (prepositions, pronouns, articles, auxiliary verbs etc)

There are two main kinds of lexical relations that may exist between words:

taxonomicrelations between class/subclass, part/whole

- words that are taxonomically related may be related eitherthrough classificationor meronymy

classificationthe relationship between a superordinate termand its members, I.e. hyponyms

co-hyponomy- when two(or more) lexical items are bothmembers of the same superordinate class

class/subclasssubclassification

contrast- two or more items encode a contrastrelationship

similarity- the lexical items express the same meaning


24/38


similarity through:

synonymy(when two words restate each other)

repetition(when an item is repeated)

composition is the part/whole relationship between lexical items which

are:

meronymy

co-meronymy

expectancy - relations between the process verb and the doer/ affected

participant


25/38


LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS: Conjunctive relations

Halliday(1985: 302-9):

Elaborationa relation of re-statement or clarification

My daughter had jaundice. I mean she was as yellow as butter. Extension - a relation of either addition or variation

I have a daughter. And I have 3 sons.

Enhancementways by which one sentence can extend over the

meaning of another, in terms of time, comparison, cause, condition,

concession.

Diana donated blood. Whereupon her daughter recovered rapidly.


26/38


Enhancement relationships

Comparative conjunctions: likewise, similarly, in a different way

Causal conjunctions: so, then, therefore, consequently, henceConditional conjunctions: in that case, otherwise, under the

circumstances, if not

Concessive conjunctions: yet, still, though, despite this, however, even

so, all the same, nevertheless


27/38


Explicitly expressed relationships

Implicitly expressed relationships(through the juxtaposition of

sentences)

Diana donated blood. She wanted to help her daughter.

External logical relations- they may refer to external(real world)

logical relations

Internal (rhetorical) organization of events of the writer in the text

Martin(1992): conjunctive relations in a text form a conjunctive

reticulum


28/38


LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS:Conjunctive relations

1 Shares in Parmalat, the Italian

global food group, fell by more than

50% after a three-day suspension

A Pool, brook, stunning views, lush

groves. Comfort, privacy.

2 Doctor Foster went to Gloucester

in a shower of rain

B They may be recovered via the

lodge on payment of the current fee.

3 Magical Provence: modernisedfarmhous in medieval village.

C Add Spice Paste and stirr well.

4 Shockingly, 10 passengers on a

flight are at risk of DVT.

D The company had been plagued

by apparent balance sheet

discrepancies.

5 Bicycles parked other than in the

racks provided are liable to be

impounded.

E We are blocking the pavement.

Thank you.

6 Boil water in a saucepan. F Scoll flight socks can halp prevent

you being one of them.

7 To all smokers:Please cross the

road to smoke.

G He stepped in a puddle/Right up

to his middle/and never went there

again


29/38


LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS: Conjunctive relations

According to Scott Thornbury there are

Additive: the second sentence gives details or specifies the statement in

the 1stsentence, as in 3-A

Adversative: the second sentence claims to solve the problem: 4-F, 5-B

Causal: 1-D, 7-E

Temporal: 2-G, 6-C


30/38


31/38


The topic

-becomes the launch pad of the message

-is typically realized by a noun phrase(grammatical subject)

The comment= the new information

-the tendency to place new information at the end= end-weight


32/38


Conversational structure

Spoken texts display texture

Patterns of lexical relationships

Conjunction(conjunctive relationships)

Reference Conversational structure

Conversational structure= how the interactants negotiate the exchange

of meanings in dialogue

- it involves:

- The choice of speech functions

- The type of exchange structure


33/38


Speech functions

Speech= Sequence of moves

Each move performs a speech function or a speech act

Basicinitiating speech functions are:

Offer (as in Would you like another chocolate?)

Command (Pass the chocolates, please.)Statement (I love chocolates.)

Question (Which chocolates do you like best?)


34/38


Responding speech functions either support or

confront the initiating SF

SF are:accepting vs declining

complying vs refusing to comply

acknowledging vs disagreeing

answering vs disavowing


35/38


Would you like another chocolate? Offer

Yes, please accept

No, thanks. Decline

Pass the chocolates, please command

Here you are. ComplyGet them yourself. Refuse

I love chocolates. Statement

Do you? Acknowledge

I bet you dont really disagree

Which chocolates do you like best? QuestionDark ones. Answer

Wouldnt have a clue. disclaim


36/38


Exchange structures

Sequences of speech functions constitute negotiated exchanges

The minimal exchange = two speech functions: offer- accept, question-

answerseveral move-structures - include:

preparatory moves

following-up moves

Some exchanges move directly to completion

Others include dynamic moves:

clarifications and

challenges


37/38


Speech acts theory

Speech acts

Joan Mulholland(1991)

every time someone speaks three events take place: an utteranceis made(alocution), a speech act of discursive power or intendedinfluence over others occurs(with illocutionary force); and an effecton the listener is generated(perlocutionary effect)

Locution:

contributors: rhythm+

prosodic features(tone, pitch, loudness, pacing andpauses) related to the speakers personality andattitude


38/38

T t d di li i ti 2008 38

illocutionary force= the combination of

the denotative value of the words used

use of garmmatical forms

circumstances of the actroles and status of the speaker and hearer

prosodic features

text vs nontext_2.ppt

Documents