Logical Semantic Relation Data Description 1. Taxis

38 Table.7. Distribution of Logical Semantic Relation Combined with Systems of Interdependence Logical Relation Text A Text B Paratactic Elaboration 2 - Hypotactic Elaboration 6 9 Paratactic Extension 6 3 Hypotactic Extension 4 6 Paratactic Enhancement 1 1 Hypotactic Enhancement 8 5 Paratactic Locution 5 6 Hypotactic Locution 13 3 Paratactic Idea - - Hypotactic Idea - 1 Combined with systems of interdependence, the logical semantic relations reflect a competitive number among the texts. Text A, with a bigger number of clause complexes, shows a hypotactic locution as the highest number seen in 13 clause complexes whereas paratactic locution gets a half through 5 clauses. The second place goes to hypotactic enhancement through clause complexes while paratactic enhancement only goes through 1 clause complex. Paratactic elaboration is less contributive showed in only 1 clause complex. Hypotactic elaboration in 6 clause complexes presents an equal number as paratactic extension in 5 clause complexes. On the other hand, hypotactic extension shows a less number in 4 clause complexes. Overall, there is no any idea relation appeared on text A. 39 Hypotactic elaboration in text B leads the distribution through 7 clause complexes. There is no paratactic elaboration identified. The number of hypotactic extension in 6 clause complexes is two times of paratactic extension in 3 clause complexes. It also happens for hypotactic locution. It occurs in 3 clause complexes. Otherwise paratactic locution occurs in 6 clause complexes. Hypotactic enhancement is seen in 4 clause complexes while paratactic enhancement is seen only in 1 clause complex. Hypotactic idea only appears in 1 clause complex while paratactic idea does not at all.

4.2. Findings

The analysis produces a clear identification on the number of clause relations found in the two articles. In text A, 24 of 30 sentences are found to have logical semantic relations and interdependences. This number is more compared to text B which has 17 of 30 sentences. Nevertheless, the exact number of logical semantic relation and interdependence can be more because some sentences contain more than two ranking clauses. The followings are the answers of the analysis:

4.2.1. Interpretation of Taxis

The analysis of taxis systems is presented into two parts based on the category. Both parataxis and hypotaxis occur in each article or news text. The following is the number of interdependence relation: 40 Table.8. Distribution of Taxis Relation Interdependence Text A Text B Parataxis 31,11 29.41 Hypotaxis 68,89 70.59 Both paratactic and hypotactic relations play their significant role in those two text. From the result above, it is undeniable that the portion of hypotactic links is bigger than paratactic ones. The comparative percentage of each text shows an evenly close number from any interdependence category. This number describes that the use of hypotactic links is two times from the use of paratactic links in text A, and almost three times in text B. It is also known that hypotactic relation is the dominant interdependence appeared in the analysis. It means that both texts use more clause complexes which utilize subordinate or dependent clauses to either expand or project. Further comparative presentation between the two texts is explained on the representative analysis below: a Paratactic Relation Table.9. Distribution of Paratactic Relation Interdependence Text A Text B Parataxis 14 31,11 10 29.41 Text A has more paratactic relation compared to text B although the difference is not significant. It shows that text A has little more clause complexes