Cohesion Lexical Strings TEXT 1 Cohesion Lexical Strings TEXT 2

67

12. Cohesion Lexical Strings TEXT 1

Figure 4.1 Lexical String of Text 1 1 2 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 5e 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b 7c 8a The Jakarta Post Rep The Jakarta Post Rep Jakarta Syn The city Smoking Rooms Rep Smoking Rooms Rep Public Places Rep Public Places Buildings Rep Buildings Rep Buildings Rep Buildings Rep Buildings Rep Smoking ban Non-smoking area ant Smoke Rep Smoke Rep Smoke BPLHD Syn His office Ridwan P. Syn He People Rep People 68 8b 8c 8d 8e 9a 9b 9c 10 11a 11b 11c 11d 11e 11f 12a 12b 13a 13b Smoking Rooms Rep Smoking Rooms Rep Public places Mer Buildings Syn Smoking area Rep Rep smoke Rep Rep BPLHD Syn Ridwan Syn He Rep He Syn Ridwan Syn They Syn People Syn They Syn 69 13c 13d 14a 14b 14c 14d 14e 14f 15 16 17a 17b 17c 17d 18 19a 19b Rep The City Public closed area C0-hyp Rep Buildings Rep Buildings Rep Buildings The ban Non-smoking area smoke Rep Ridwan Syn He People 70 20a 20b 20c 21a 21b 21c 22 23a 23b 24a 24b 25 The Jakarta Post Rep The City 549 public buses minivan co-hyp Half of 60 city malls Rep Smoking ban Syn The ban commit to user 71 71

13. Cohesion Conjunctive Relation Text 1

Figure 4.2 Conjunctive Relation of Text 1 Internal and impadd 1 2 3 4 5a 5b 5c 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b 7c 8a 8b 8c 8d 8e 9a 9b 9c 10 11a 11b 11c 11d 11e 11f 12a 12b 13a 13b 13c 13d 14a 14b 14c 14d 14e 14f 15 16 External Exptemp Exploc Exppurp Exp opp Exprea Exploc Exptemp Exploc Exppurp Expopp Expadd Exploc Exploc Expcond Exppurp Exptemp after that to but because that when that to but and that that although to after The Jakarta Post Headlines Jakarta to scrap smoking rooms in public places and buildings Indah Setiawati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | The city will extend the smoking ban in public after finding that smoking rooms in buildings do not stop The Jakarta Environment Management Board his office would revise the 2005 gubernatorial to do this. “People working in the buildings can still smoke, but they will have to smoke outside the buildings,” he said Monday. He said the smoking free regulation would be imposed on all because a laboratory test found that the non-smoking areas were contaminated when they were available. The 2005 bylaw on air pollution control states that people are not allowed to smoke at all in five types of facilities, namely public transportation, healthcare buildings, schools, children’s areas and places of worship. In offices and public spaces, including malls, restaurants, terminals airports and train stations. but he was confident the entertainment and food industry would comply once they knew the rules. He said according to a survey by BPLHD and the Swisscontact Indonesia Foundation with the University of Indonesia Demography Institute The survey said 93 percent of the respondents were aware of and 60 percent of them stated that the non-smoking areas regulation should prohibit people to smoke in public closed that 62 percent of the respondents would still although they would not be allowed to smoke after the ban is imposed,” Ridwan said. The survey, held from October to November in 2009, involved 747 respondents living in five municipalities in the city. The survey comprised 65 percent females and 34 percent males aged 20-49 years old with education background of Senior High School and above. commit to user 72 72 and impadd 17a 17b 17c 17d 18 19a 19b 20a 20b 20c 21a 21b 21c 22 23a 23b 24a 24b 25 Exppurp Exppurp Exploc Exppurp to to that to The BPLHD, he said, would make an assessment to measure “the level of compliance” of building owners to encourage implementation. A building will then be given one of four “We will also publish data on buildings that breach the regulation in the mass media. We hope prestige and shame will be more effective than law enforcement,” he said. Tulus Abadi from the Indonesian Consumer Protection Foundation YLKI said the city should impose stern sanctions to make this work. “Publishing information on buildings violating the regulations in the media will only affect them for a while. The city should impose sanctions with a financial impact, like revoking permits,” he told The Jakarta Post. YLKI found there were violations of the smoking ban in 89 percent of 549 public buses and minivans surveyed in July 2009. In 2008, the foundation found violations of the ban in half of 60 city malls. commit to user 73 73 Text 2 a. Contextual Configuration The text entitled Should We Be Smoke-free? was taken from News column in the London Evening Standard online newspaper published on October, 27 2003 by Ross Lydall. The title and the whole text are written in Times New Roman font with different size and then they are written in black color. The structure consists of the name of the newspaper, web address, title and writer, illustration and the last is the text itself. The illustration of the text tells about the debate of smoking ban in public places in London, certainly whether the society should follow the footstep of New York to campaign banning the smoking and to rule the ban of smoking in all public places. Meanwhile, the text generally describes about the effort of government and some opinions from the participants.

b. Data Description

1. MOOD system Table 4.7 MOOD System of Text 2 MOOD system Clause number Total Indicative: Declarative: Proposition 3, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d, 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 10a, 10b, 10c, 10d, 11, 12a, 12b, 12c, 12d, 12e, 13a, 13b, 13c, 13d, 14a, 14b, 14c, 14d, 14e, 15, 16, 17a,17b, 17c, 18, 19, 19b, 19c, 19d, 19e, 19f, 20a, 20b, 20c, 21, 22a, 22b, 23a, 23c, 24a, 25, 26, 27a, 27b, 27c, 28. 61 100 Indicative: declarative: proposal - - - Indicative: Interrogative: - - - commit to user 74 74 proposal Imperative: Proposal - - - Total 61 100 Table 4.7 shows that text 2 applies indicative; declarative; proposition 100. 2. Clause System Table 4.8 Type of Clause of Text 2 Type of Clause Clause number Total Minor Ellipsis 1, 2, 4 3 11 Major: Simplex 3, 5, 11, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 25, 26, 28. 11 39 Complex 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 23, 24, 27. 14 50 Total 28 100 Table 4.8 shows that text 2 consists of complex clauses 50, simplex 39 and Minor clauses 11. 3. Type of Interdependence and Logico-Semantic Relation Table 4.9 Type of Interdependence and Logico-Semantic Relation of Text 2 Type of Logico- Semantic Relation Type of Interdependency Hypotactic Paratactic Projection - Locution “ 8c-8d=1, 9a-9b=1, 12c-12d=1, 14a- 14b=1. 19d-19e=1, 23a- 23b=1, 27a-27b=1. - Idea ‘ - - Expansion - Elaboration = 8b-8c=1, 14b-14c =1, 17b-17c=1, 19a- 19b=1, 22a-22b=1, 27b-27c=1. - - Extension + 7c-7d=1, 9c-9d=1, 19e-19f=1, 20b- commit to user 75 75 12b-12c=1, 14c- 14d=1, 19b-19c=1 20c=1 - Enhancement x 7a-7b=1, 8a-8b=1, 9b-9c=1, 10a-10b=1, 10b-10c=1, 10c- 10d=1, 12-12b=1, 12d-12e=1, 13a-13b, 13b-13c=1, 13c- 13d=1, 14d-14e=1, 17a-17b=1, 24a- 24b=1. 6a-6b=1, 7a-7c=1, 20a-20b=1, 23b- 23c=1. Table 4.9 shows that text 2 has four hypotactic locutions, three paratactic locutions, six hypotactic elaborations, five hypotactic extensions, two paratactic extensions, fourteen hypotactic enhancements and four paratactic enhancements. 4. Nominal Groups Table 4.10 Nominal Groups of Text 2 Nominal clause Clause number total Complex 8ai, 9ai, 10div, 11ii iii, 13di, 14ci, 14eii, 15iii, 17ci, 18ii, 19ai, 22ai ii, 25 i ii, 26iii, 27bi. 18 27. 28 Simplex 3, 4, 5, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d, 8b, 9b, 9c, d, 10a, 10b, 10c, 12a, 12b, 12c, 12d, 12e, 13a, 13b, 13c, 14a, 14b, 16, 17a, 19b, 19c, 19d, 19e, 19f, 20a, 22b, 20c, 23a, 23b, 23c, 24a, 24b, 27a, 27b, 28. 48 72. 72 Total 66 100 Table 4.10 shows that text 2 is dominated by simplex nominal groups 72.72 and followed by complex nominal groups 27.28. 5. Verbal Groups commit to user 76 76 Table 4.11 Verbal Groups of Text 2 Nominal clause Clause number Total Complex 12d, 14b, 14c, 16, 20a 5 8.06 Simplex 3, 5, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d, 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 11, 12a, 12b, 12c, 12e, 13a, 13b, 13c, 13d, 14a, 14d, 14e, 15, 17a, 17b, 17c, 18, 19a, 19b, 19c, 19d, 19e, 19f, 20b, 20c, 21, 22 a, 22b, 23a, 23b, 23c, 24a, 24b, 25, 26, 27a, 27b, 27c, 28. 57 91.94 Total 62 100 Table 4.11 shows that text 2 mostly consists of simplex verbal groups 91.94 and followed by complex verbal groups 8.06 . 6. Modality 1. Modulation There is no modulation in text 2 because all of the clauses only have mood system which consists of indicative, declarative functioning proposition. 2. Modalization 3 Should we be smoke- free… medium probability 6b Should smoking be banned… medium probability 10b the London Health Commission will begin… Medium probability 11 the result from internet poll… will be passed to… Medium probability. 17a the poll will give Londoners… Medium probability 20a we want to give them… Medium probability 20c whether smoking should or should not be allowed… medium Probability commit to user 77 77 24a it would be a real improvement if smoking… Medium Probability 27b to say that a person cannot smoke in a public… Low Probability. 7. Polarity In this text II have positive and negative polarity since the text contains the finite elements, they are: 7a the debate is set to split the capital… positive polarity 8a the biggest-ever survey about the contentious issue is launched this week positive polarity 9b that seven out of 10 are bothered by other… positive polarity 9c while around out of 10 have left or avoided a restaurant or pub as a result positive polarity 12a though The Mayor doesn’t have the power to introduce… negative polarity 12d he says he is committed to working with partner… positive polarity 16 In the UK, they are also being considered by… positive polarity 19b which was set up by the Mayor three years ago… positive polarity 19d smoking is something that affects all Londoners whether they smoke or not positive polarity 21 arguments are already raging in London’s bars positive polarity 22b which has smoking and no- smoking zones… positive polarity 23b I don’t like being surrounded by smoke negative polarity 25 even smokers I know don’t like the smell of smoke when they are eating negative polarity 27b to say that a person cannot smoke in a public place is, in my opinion… positive polarity 28 obviously, that isn’t fair negative polarity commit to user 78 78 From the finding above, text 2 has four negative polarities and eleven positive polarities. 8. Descriptive and Attitudinal Lexis 1. Descriptive Lexis Public places 6b, 8d, 12e, 27b, 27c The capital 7b Public buildings 7d Research 8b People 8d, 9b Survey 9a Seven areas 18 Public health 19a, 19c Londoners 19e Smoking and non-smoking zones 22b Real improvement 24a 2. Attitudinal Lexis We follow in the footsteps of New York 7c The contentious issue 8a Support a ban 8d Widening no smoking areas or introducing bans 10d Smoking ban 12b, 15 Mayor ability 13c Arguments 21 Infringement 27b Obviously 28 9. Metaphors 1. Ideational Metaphors 7 The debate is set to split the capital… commit to user 79 79 8b following research which shows that three out of four … 9 The Mori survey, commissioned by pressure group Smoke Free London, also showed that 10b the London Health Commission will begin … 13a The Government could also decide … 15 The survey follows the introduction of smoking bans … 17 The poll will give Londoners the chance to say what level… 2. Interpersonal Metaphors 3 should we be smoke-free? 6 … should smoking be banned from public places? 7 should we follow in the footsteps of New York and ban smoking in all public buildings? 14 … I look forward to hearing what the public wants done about smoking in enclosed public places… 20 We want to give them the chance to have their say on whether smoking should or should not be allowed in a range of public settings. 10. Technicality and Nominalization a. Technicality Debate 7a Survey 8a, 9a Research 8b Internet 11 Mayor 13c Liberties 27b b. Nominalization Smoking 6b, 7d, 14c, 24b Decision 11 commit to user 80 80 Government 13a Restrictions 13d, 17c Non-smoking zones 22a Smoking zones 22a Improvement 24a Infringement 27b Developer 26 11. Text Structure and Genre Table 4.12 Text Structure of Text 2 Clause Activity sequence Rhetorical function Text structure 3, 6 Asking the readers about the smoking ban that –should we Londoners be smoke- free or smoking be banned from public places? Announce the title by giving question to the readers. Title 7 Stating the issue about the debate held in London with the issue- should we follow in the footsteps of New York and ban smoking in all public buildings? Giving more detail about the main point of issue by giving the question to the readers whether they support or not. Issue 8-9 Stating the big survey by Mory survey about the Londoner’s vote that three out of four people support a ban in public places and seven out of ten people are bothered by other people’s smoke. Giving the information many Londoners agree to follow the smoking ban. 10 Stating by the London Health Commission will hold a vote on the possibility of widening no smoking areas or introducing bans across Giving the information about the effort to promote the smoking ban in public. commit to user 81 81 the city. Supporting Point 11-14 Stating by the Big Smoke Debate that introducing Ken Livingstone, first mayor of London who work to cut smoking in public places. Giving the information about the effort which done by Mr. Livingstone to support the smoking ban. 15-16 Stating the survey by introducing the smoking ban in New York, San Francisco and UK. Giving more detail by showing the example about the place which are considered by smoking ban to support the point of the argument 2. 17-18 Stating based on the polling that Londoners will give the chance to choose the level restriction in seven areas; cafes, restaurants, pubs, and bars. Giving more information to support the point of the argument 2 19 Stating by Len Duvall of LHC was set up by the Mayor Ken Livingstone to improve public health-smoking is something that affects all Londoners whether they smoke or not. Giving more information about Len Duval who help Ken Livingstone to promote the health by avoiding the smoking. 20-22 Stating by Len Duval about the chance that will be given to Londoners to decide whether they are allowed smoking or not, especially in bars. Giving more information to support the point of the argument 3 23-25 Stating by one of the Londoners –Miss Hollamby- she does not like being surrounded by smoke particularly in restaurant and she Giving more detail by giving the example to support the smoking should be banned in public places. It support commit to user 82 82 state that some smokers also do not like the smell of smoke when they are eating. the point of argument 3 26-28 Stating by the other Londoners namely Dominic Woods, a properly developer that he disagree if the smoking is banned in public places, it is not fair. Giving the information by showing the opposition point to support free smoking in public places. Contrastive point. Table 4.12 shows that text 2 is belong to the Discussion Genre. It contains the title clause 3, 6, the issue 7 the arguments that support the issue clause 8-25 and attract the issue 26-28. The writer does not present a recommendation as the conclusion of the text. 83

12. Cohesion Lexical Strings TEXT 2

Figure 4.2 Lexical Strings of Text 2 1 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 7a 7b 7c 7d 8a 8b 8c 8d 9a 9b Smoke Rep Smoking Rep We Syn The capital Rep We Banned Co-hyp Ban smoking Hyp Ban Public Places Co-hyp Public Buildings Rep Public Places Co-hyp The debate Co-hyp NewYork Ant Survey Co-hyp Mory survey 3 out of 4 people Mer 7 out of 10 4 out of 10 84 9c 9d 10a 10b 10c 10d 11 12a 12b 12c 12d 12e 13a 13b 13c 13d 14a 14b 14c 14d Smoking Rep smoking Syn Government Rep Bans Rep Smoking ban Co-hyp Restaurant Or pub Rep Public places Co-hyp Enclosed public places The big smoke debate London Mer Ant Mory result Syn The result Hypo Londoners Mer The city Co-hyp 2 million smokers Hyp The public LHC co- hyp Ken L. Syn The mayor Syn He rep He Syn The mayor Co- hyp Mr. L. Smoking area Ant 85 14e 15 16 17a 17b 17c 18 19a 19b 19c 19d 19e 19f 20a 20b 20c 21 22a 22b Rep Smoking Rep Smoke Rep Smoking Rep Rep We Rep A ban NY SF Ant UK Co-hyp hyp Londoners Syn They Rep They Rep Londoners Rep They Syn Them Syn Their Co-hyp Mer Len D. Non-smoking zone Tammy H. Syn 86 23a 23b 23c 24a 24b 25 26 27a 27b 27c 28 Smoke Rep Smoking Rep Smoke Rep Smoke Syn It Rep Banned Syn That Smokers Mer Person Co-hyp The smoking side Miss H. Syn I Rep I Property deliver Syn Mr. woods commit to user 87 87

13. Cohesion Conjunctive Relation text 2