VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGE AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES
= = = = = = = = = = =

BÙI THỊ NGA COHESIVE DEVICES IN READING TEXTS IN
THE BOOK “TIẾNG ANH 12 – BAN CƠ BẢN”

(Phương tiện liên kết trong các bài đọc
trong sách giáo khoa Tiếng Anh 12 – Ban cơ bản)

M.A. MINOR THESIS
Field: Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15


HÀ NỘI, 2011

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration page……………………………………………………………………… i
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………ii
Abstract.………………………………………………………………………………iii
Table of contents…………………………………………………………………… iv
Abbreviation ……………………………………………………………………… vi
List of tables and charts………………………………………………………………vii
PART A: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale 1
2. Aims of the study 2
3. Scope of the study 2
4. Significance of the study 2
5. Method of the study 3
6. Design of the study 3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
1.1. Discourse 5
1.1.1. The concept of discourse 5
1.1.2. Discourse and text 5
1.1.3. Spoken and written discourse 6
1.1.4. Discourse analysis 7

v
2.1.2.3. Adversative conjunction 24
2.1.2.4. Causal conjunction 24
2.1.3. Substitution 25
2.1.4. Ellipsis 26
2.2. Lexical cohesion 28
2.2.1. Reiteration 28
2.2.2. Collocation 30
2.2.2.1. Lexical collocation 31
2.2.2.2. Grammatical collocation 33
2.3. Summary of cohesive devices in the textbook 34
CHAPTER 3: IMPLICATION FOR TEACHING ENGLISH 36
3.1. Teaching cohesion through teaching reading 36
3.1.1. In terms of grammatical cohesion 36
3.1.1.1. Teaching conjunctions through teaching reading 36
3.1.1.2. Teaching reference through teaching reading 37
3.1.1.3. Teaching collocation 37
3.1.1.4. Teaching reiteration through teaching reading 38
3.1.2. Teaching cohesion through teaching writing 39
3.1.2.1. Teaching grammatical cohesion through teaching writing 39
3.1.2.2. Teaching lexical cohesion through teaching writing 39
PART C: CONCLUSION 40
1. Major findings 40
2. Suggestions for further study 41
REFERENCE 42
SOURCES OF DATA……………………………………………………………… 44
APPENDIX I:…………………………………………………… ………………… I
APPENDIX II: VI
APPENDIX III: VII
APPENDIX IV……………………………………………………………………… X

many people have done researches on linguistics and discourse analysis; yet, no suggestions
have been given to high school teachers and students so that they can do tasks relating to
cohesion more successfully.
2. Aims of the study
The study aims to
- describe and analyze lexical and grammatical cohesive devices in the new English
textbook 12
- give some suggestions for teaching reading skill for 11
th
grade students.
The following research questions are raised for exploration while carrying out the study:
1. What are the cohesive devices used in the textbook “Tiếng Anh 12 – Ban Cơ
Bản” for grade - 12 students general throughout Vietnam?
2. How can the findings help teachers and their students in the teaching and
learning the textbook for grade 12 students?
3. Scope of the study
Within the limited time and knowledge, only grammatical and lexical cohesion in the
textbook “Tiếng Anh 12” for grade - 12 students general throughout Vietnam edited by
Hoang, V.V et al (2010), Education Publication House are observed.
4. Significance of the study
 Theoretical significance: It is hoped to prove the existing ideas on cohesion to
satisfy the individual’s question and, to some extent, hopefully to open a new way of
revising and preparing for candidates of the GCSE examination and the entrance
examination to university.
 Practical significance: This research gives out some practical applications, such as
combining linguistic theory and practice in analyzing written English discourses in the
researched textbook.
5. Method of the study

- 2 -

- 3 -
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Discourse
1.1.1. The concept of discourse
According to Halliday and Hasan (1989:38), discourse is seen differently in the simplest
way as a text and that “it is language that is functional.” McCarthy (1991: 5), on the other
hands, puts discourse in the relationship between language and the contexts in which it is
used. Crystal, in the book “Introduction to linguistics” (1992:25) considers discourse to be
“a continuous stretch of language larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit
such as sermon, argument, joke, or narrative.”
1.1.2. Discourse and text
In the view of Halliday and Hasan (1976: 23), “text” is employed to refer to “discourse”;
they see “text” as a “semantic unit” characterized by cohesion. Sharing the same ideas,
Brown & Yule (1983) support that text is the representation of discourse and the verbal
record of a communicative act. In other words, they all view the notion of text is the
representation of discourse, text is the form of discourse and they have a close relationship.
1.1.3. Spoken and written discourse
Brown and Yule (1983:13), moving on the same route, differentiate spoken discourses from
written ones in terms of their various functions: the first is used for the establishment and
maintenance of human relationships (interactional use) and the second for the working out
of and transference of information (transactional use).
1.1.4. Discourse analysis
Yule (1996: 139) state in his book study of language

Halliday and Hasan in “Cohesion in English” (1976: 4-5) see cohesion as “part of the
system of language”, more exactly as “a semantic one” which refers to “relations of
meaning that exist with the text and that defined it as a text.”
1.2.2. Cohesion vs. Coherence
Cohesion is a formal network which connects or links many parts of a text together by
grammar or words. Meanwhile, coherence is the connections which bring interpretation of
linguistic messages.
1.2.3. Aspects of cohesion
1.2.3.1. Topical cohesion
What topical cohesion concerns about is Theme and Rheme.
1.2.3.2. Logical cohesion
Logical cohesion, in Nguyen, H’s view (2000:28), is also powerful sentence connectors.
1.2.4. Types of cohesion
In his book An A-Z of ELT: a dictionary of terms and concepts used in English Language
Teaching, Thornbury (2006:32) confirms Halliday and Hasan’s idea that by means of
grammar and lexical, cohesion can help connect texts, either spoken or written. The two
types of cohesion, grammatical and lexical, can be classified as follows:
Grammatical cohesion
Lexical cohesion
Reference
Substitution
Ellipsis
Conjunction
Reiteration

Collocation

- 5 -
Table 1.2: Grammatical and lexical cohesion
1.2.4.1. Grammatical cohesion

length. - 6 -
CHAPTER 2: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
OF TEXTBOOK OBSERVATION
2.1. Grammatical cohesion
2.1.1. Reference
2.1.1.1. Anaphoric reference
Anaphoric reference means referring to backwards. In this study, reference takes up 357
items. The table below summarizes different patterns of reference in reading texts in the
book.
Anaphoric reference
Number of items
Percentage (%)
Total number
Definite article
166
46.5
357
Personal pronoun
93
26.05
Personal determiner
61
17.09
Demonstrative pronoun
22
6.16
Comparative adjective

2.1
Demonstrative pronoun
3
2.1
Personal pronoun
1
0.73
Personal determiner
1
0.73
Table 2.2: Different types of reference words for cataphoric ties
2.1.1.3. Exophoric reference
Exophoric reference
Number of items
Percentage (%)
Total number
Personal pronoun
75
45.72
164
Definite article
59
35.98
Personal determiner
22
13.42
Comparative adjective
7
4.27
Demonstrative adverb

stands at the lowest position. Causal items account for only 3.81 %. The details of each type
are discussed in the following texts.
2.1.2.1. Additive
The high percentage of additive items means that the reading texts in “Tiếng Anh 12”
mostly provide students with knowledge by adding information, rather than stating causes
and effects, or contrasts.
2.1.2.2. Temporal conjunction
Temporal conjunction totals 38 items in all texts. The most common temporal words belong
to the simple temporal relations, such as “before” (6 times), “after” (6 times), “since” (2
times), “then” (1 time), specific complex temporal relations like “three years later,”, “at the
same time,” etc. Sequence words such as “first,” “second” are not widely used. This may be
because the texts in the textbook mostly narrate the events to give students information
rather than describe them in order.
2.1.2.3. Adversative conjunction
Adversative conjunction is often used to contrast ideas, illustrate and prove the facts. Yet,
the main purpose of the reading texts in the textbook is to provide information.
Consequently, the expression of contrast is reduced maximum. There are only 27 cases of
adversative conjunction.
2.1.2.4. Causal conjunction
Causal conjunction stands at the end of the scale with only 12 times of occurrence. The
reading texts in the textbook do not focus on any phenomenon; hence, the fact that they
contain few signals of cause and effect is understandable.
2.1.3. Substitution
In the textbook for final year students at upper secondary school, there are only 11 cases of
substitution in total. Their frequency occurrence is expressed in the following chart:

- 8 -
0
20
40

lexical one.
2.2. Lexical cohesion
2.2.1. Reiteration
. The chart below shows the percentage of each type

- 9 -
General words, 8.9
Synonyms, 12.13
Repetition, 70.07
Superordinate, 8.9
General words
Synonyms
Repetition
Superordinate
Chart 2.4: The percentage of reiteration in the textbook
From this pie chart, we can see that there is a big hole between repetition and the other
types. Its percentage of frequency is up to 70.07 %. Synonym, which includes 35 pairs of
synonym words, is the second most fluent reiteration item. Superordiate and general
words, as being counted, are used equally in 16 texts with 25 items for each type.
2.2.2. Collocation
Collocation totals 605 items in all 16 reading texts. In term of structure, collocation can be
divided into grammatical collocation and lexical collocation. Study the following chart to
have a general picture for these two:

58.35
41.65
0
20
40
60

2.84
V + Adj
8
2.27
V + V
6
1.70
Adv + V
6
1.70
Adv +Adj
3
0.09
N + V
3
0.09

- 10 -
Table 2. 4: Different patterns of lexical collocation
It can be seen the table that collocations with noun is more preferred than ones with verbs.
Adj + N and N + N are the two highest frequency items with the percentage of 32.39 % and
23.30 % respectively. While V + N pattern comes at the third position with 22.44 %, N + V
one accounts for only 3 items, equally to 0.09 %. The other patterns, Quant + N, V + Adv,
V + Adj, V+ V, Adv + V, Adv + Adj, Adj + V, make up of small parts in the reading texts.
However, they are not unimportant in helping students grasp the texts.
2.2.2.2. Grammatical collocation
There are 252 items of grammatical collocation, which accounts for 41.65 % of all
collocations in the 16 units under study. The specific patterns of grammatical collocation are
presented in the table below
Types of grammatical collocation

54.15
Lexical cohesion, 45.85
Grammatical cohesion
Lexical cohesion

It can be seen from the chart that grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion almost have
the equal number of items in the textbook. This means that they stand at the same position
of importance.
A closer view at types of grammatical and lexical cohesion can be expressed in the
following tables:

- 11 -
Types
Number of items
Percentage
Reference
658
62.67
Conjunction
315
30
Ellipsis
66
6.28
Substitution
11
1.05
Table 2.6: Different types of grammatical cohesion
Types
Number of items
- 12 -
CHAPTER 3: IMPLICATION FOR TEACHING ENGLISH
IN PREPARATION FOR EXAMINATIONS
3.1. Teaching cohesion through teaching reading
3.1.1. In terms of grammatical cohesion
3.1.1.1. Teaching conjunctions through teaching reading
The first kind of exercise is that teacher can supply a text with discourse markers omitted
and replaced by gaps. Similarly, teachers can also give a text as above but do not list the
omitted markers and ask students to find ones themselves to fill in the gaps. Another
exercise which enforces students to study at home is through replacing. Students are
provided with the list of conjunctions. At home, they have to find some sentences
containing some of these conjunctions in the reading texts. Students, then, are required to
replace these conjunctions by all acceptable other conjunctions as long as the sentences are
meaningful. Games can be also applied as warm-up activities.
3.1.1.2. Teaching reference through teaching reading
The most common question to find out the referents is “what does….refer to?” or “what can
be used to replace for {pronouns}?” Teachers can design multiple choice items to the
mentioned questions, in order that students are made acquainted with the examinations.
Another activity is mostly for making students become aware of reference pronouns.
Teachers can put students in small groups. Teachers choose a reading text, maybe among 16
reading texts from the textbook or another book for secondary students, as long as this text
contains various references. Teachers, then, ask students to read the text and circle all
reference pronouns in it.
3.1.1.3. Teaching collocation
Teaching vocabulary is an indispensable part. Teachers can take advantage of this part to

1. Major findings
Of all six subtypes of two categories grammatical and lexical cohesion, reference and
collocation are the most outstanding ones. They are, respectively, followed by conjunction,
reiteration, ellipsis and substitution. In preparing for the examinations, teachers should
equip students with knowledge about these devices, and provide students with practice
relating to these cohesive items, especially reference, collocation, conjunctions and
reiteration.

2. Suggestions for further study
It is, firstly, suggested that more exercises on cohesive devices are designed. Then, to
develop further with the topic of cohesion in the reading texts in “Tiếng Anh 12,” the
following aspects are suggested:
1. Discourse features of the reading texts in the textbook “Tiếng Anh 12”
2. Logical cohesive devices in the textbook “Tiếng Anh 12”