LEXICAL COHESION IN MATH BILINGUAL TEXT BOOK OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL.
LEXICAL COHESION IN MATH BILINGUAL TEXT BOOK
OF JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
DWI MAYA NOVITRI
Registration Number: 8126111006
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2016
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
All praises belong to Allah, who has commanded us to spread peace to all
man kind and also who gave health, chance and capability to the writer to finish
the thesis. May peace and blessing of Allah be upon Prophet Muhammad SAW
who introduced us good behaviours.
Foremost, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude to her
advisers, Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd and Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed., TESP for
the continuous support and guidance to finish the thesis, for their
patience,
motivation, enthhusiasm, and immense knowledge given to the writer. Moreover,
the writer would like to express her thanks to the examiners, Prof. Amrin Saragih,
M.A., Ph.D, Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S for
their suggestions, comments and questions for the thesis improvement. Their
guidance helped her all the time of research and writing of this thesis. Besides her
advisers and examiners, she would like to thank to all lecturers of English Applied
Linguistics Program for their encouragement and insights.
Sincere are expressed to her parents, Darmaji and Elfi Farida S.Pd. Her
special thanks also go to her brothers Chairul Devialdi SE and Muh. Arief
Trimanda for their support, love and care. Special thanks for her husband to be
Mahpuddin, S.Pd.I for his motivation and care to the writer,Last but not least, her
thanks to her friends especially of
English Applied Linguistics Programs
Ismayani S.Pd, Elvida Wahyuni S.Pd M.Hum , Marina Sari Rambe S.Pd M.Hum,
Mahya Humairah S.Pd M.Hum,Indri Harmaili S.Pd,Muhammmad Mahfuz S.Pd.I
M.Hum, Hiskia Manurung M.Hum for their support and suggestions.
Finally, the writer hopes that the readers will give any comments, respons,
and corrections for the mistakes of this thesis. The writer realizes that this thesis is
still far from being perfect. May this thesis be useful and may it be one of the
references for the next research and enhance our knowledge. May Allah SWT
bless us forever. Amin ya Rabbal ‘alamin
Medan, 14th January 2016
The Writer
ABSTRACT
DWI MAYA NOVITRI. Registration number: 8126111006. Lexical Cohesion
in Math Bilingual Text Book of Junior High School. A Thesis. English
Applied Linguistic Study Program. Postgraduate School. State University of
Medan. 2016.
The objectives of this study are to derive the pattern of cohesive relation in math
bilingual textbook and to reason for the contextual elements encapsulating the
pattern. The data are collected by using documentary technique in lexical
cohesion only. The source of data was taken from Mathemathics for Junior High
School year VII which is published by Yudhistira. There are three topics were
studied that represented from whole topics, they are Integers, Algebra and
Applications and Planes. The sentences were analyzed by using cohesion theory
by Halliday and Hasan (1976). After that, the data were presented by using
Sudaryanto (1993) analysis. It began from identifying the data that are needed for
this research, classifying the data based on the lexical cohesive in pragmatic, and
analyzing the data based on the theory that is used. The findings are (1) Lexical
Cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book is dominated by repetition (2) Repetitions
occurred to emphasize the previous explanation and explore them in detail
explanation (3) Collocations in Math Bilingual textbook occurred to make the
contrast between two terms hence the explanation is clearer. It is often occur as
antonym or pairs (4) Super ordinates in Math Bilingual textbook occur to inform
part of a term in Math (5) Synonyms in Math Bilingual textbook are used to give
another name and to explain its terms, symbol or a pattern (6) There are two
genres in these data, they are Explanation and Procedure. As a result, the lexical
cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book has a pattern which consist of four
elements in lexical cohesion, they are: Repetition, Synonym, Super Ordinate and
Collocation. From all elements, the dominant element of lexical cohesion was
repetition both in Bahasa (36.50%) and English (39.74%). In addition, The four
element of Lexical cohesion occurred in Math Bilingual Text book have the main
purpose to build the reader understanding about the explanation and information
of terms, kinds or elements, and symbols.
ABSTRAK
DWI MAYA NOVITRI. NIM: 8126111006.Lexical cohesion in Math
Bilingual Text book of Junior High School. Thesis. Program Linguistik
Terapan Bahasa Inggris. Pasca Sarjan. Unimed. 2016.
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendapatkan pola dari leksikal kohesif
dalam buku Matematika Bilingual dan untuk menemukan penyebab konteks
elemen-elemen yang berada didalamnya. Data dikumpulkan melalui teknik
dokumen. Sumber data diambil dari buku Mathemathics for Junior High School
kelas VII yang diterbitkan Yudhistira. Ada tiga topik yang diteliti yang mewakili
keseluruhan topik yaitu integral, aljabar dan aplikasinya dan bangun datar.
Kalimat-kalimat tersebut kemudian dianalisis melalui teori kohesi oleh Halliday
and Hasan (1976). Kemudian data yang telah dianalisis disusun dengan
menggunakan analisis yang dikemukankan oleh Sudaryanto (1993). Yang pertama
sekali data diklasifikasikan berdasarkan tipe-tipe leksikal kohesif, kemudian data
tersebut dianalisis berdasarkan teori yang digunakan. Penemuannya adalah (1)
pola leksikal kohesif dalam buku Matematika Bilingual, baik yang menggunakan
bahasa Indonesia maupun yang berbahasa Inggris memiliki keseluruhan tipe
leksikal kohesif yaitu repetisi, sinonim, super ordinat, dan kolokasi. Repetition
merupakan tipe yang dominan dikedua bahasa. Repetisi digunakan dalam buku
tersebut untuk lebih menekankan penjelasan istilah pada kalimat sebelumnya dan
menjelaskannya lebih detail sesudahnya. Kolokasi digunakan untuk membuat
penjelasan istilah dalam buku Matematika Bilingual lebih kontras dengan
menampilkan lawan istilah (antonim). Selain melalui antonimm, kolokasi juga
timbul dalam bentuk pasangan kata. Sementara itu, Super ordinat digunakan
untuk menginformasikan bagian-bagian dari istilah yang dimaksud serta sinonim
digunakan untuk menampilkan istilah lain atau definisi dari istilah sebelumnya (2)
pola yang timbul dalam kalimat-kalimat tersebut berupa genre explanation dan
procedure. Leksikal kohesif dalam buku Matematika Bilingual memiliki pola
yang terdiri dari empat tipe (elemen) yaitu repetisi (pengulangan), sinonim
(persamaan), super ordinat and kolokasi. Dari keseluruhan elemen, repetisi
merupakan tipe yang dominan baik dalam bahasa (36.50%) maupun dalam bahasa
Inggris (39.74%). Kemudian, keempat elemen tersebut terdapat dalam buku
Matematika Bilingual bertujuan untuk membangun pemahaman pembaca (siswa)
mengenai istilah-istilah dalam matematika, jenis-jenis, elemen-elemen serat
simbol-simbol.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………
i
ABSTRAK……………..……………………………………………
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………
iii
TABLE OF CONTENT…………………………………………………………
v
LIST OF TABLE………………………………………………………………… vii
LIST OF APPENDICES…………………………………………………………
viii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………. 1
1.1 The Background of the Study…………………………………… 1
1.2 The Focus of the Study………………………………………….. 5
1.3 The Problems of the Study………………………………………. 5
1.4 The Objectives of the Study……………………………………... 5
1.5 The Significance of the Study…………………………………… 6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………. 7
2.1 Textual Function……………………...………………………… 7
2.2 Cohesion………………………………………………………… 9
2.2.1 Lexical Cohesion…………………………………………. 15
2.2.2 Grammatical Cohesion…………………………………… 18
2.3 Linguistic Pattern……………………………………………….. 22
2.4 Clause Complex………………………………………………..
25
2.5 Related Studies…………………………………………………
25
2.6 Conceptual Framework………………………………………...
28
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD…………………………………………. 32
3.1 Research Design………………………………………………..
32
3.2 The Data and Source of Data…………………………………..
32
3.3 Technique of Collecting Data………………………………….
33
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis………………………………
33
3.5 Trustworthiness of the Study…………………………………..
33
CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS, FINDING, AND DISCUSSION………….
35
4.1 Data Analysis………………………………………………….
35
4.1.1 The Pattern of Lexical Cohesion in Math Bilingual Text Book35
4.1.2 The Reason of Employing the Pattern in Math Bilingual Text Book 42
4.2. Findings……………………………………………………….
43
4.3. Discussion…………………………………………………….
44
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS…………………………
51
5.1 Conclusions……………………………………………………
51
5.2 Suggestions……………………………………………………
51
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………….
53
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………….
56
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Lexical Cohesion: Repetition (in English)………………………..… 58
Appendix 2 Lexical Cohesion: Synonym (in English)…………………………..
62
Appendix 3 Lexical Cohesion: Super Ordinate(in English)……………………..
63
Appendix 4 Lexical Cohesion: Collocation (in English)………………………… 65
Appendix 5 Lexical Cohesion: Repetition (in Bahasa)…………………………..
67
Appendix 6 Lexical Cohesion: Synonym (in Bahasa)…………………………… 73
Appendix 7 Lexical Cohesion: Super Ordinate (in Bahasa)……………………… 74
Appendix 8 Lexical Cohesion: Collocation (in Bahasa)………………………….. 75
Appendix 9 Data in Bahasa……………………………………………………….. 79
Appendix 10 Data English……………………………………………………….. 95
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
Language can be expressed in spoken and written. When two people
speaking it is easy for them to deliver their thought and ideas because it supported
by gestures. On the other hand, in written form, the text should be coherence in
order to make the readers understand what the writer means. Both of spoken and
written deal with communication instead. Communication deals with transferring
information between people. Thompson states that communication covered all of
human language into their daily activity.
“Communication is such a well-integrated part of our day to day existence
that people tend to take it for granted, rarely passing to consider what it
involves or just how important it is. Communication concerns to share and
deliver a message between people. People are able to gain the information
by reading (Thompson: 2003)”
When people read a magazine, a book, an article, they need to find out the
meaning and the goal of the text. Generally, in a text, the readers try to find out
the ties between sentences to get the point of the text. The term cohesion is
sometimes confused with coherence which has to do with sense. Osisanwo (2005)
explains that cohesion differs from coherence. He illustrates with these sentences:
(a) He phoned the police
(b) The midnight guests had come
(c) He phoned the police bec ause the midnight guests had come
The sentences (a) and (b) are coherent but not cohesive. The sentence (c) is
cohesive and coherent.The cohesive device used in the sentence is because. It
gives the reason why the police was phoned. Thus, this makes a complete text.
The parts are well connected and its meaningful. Conjunction acts as a cohesive
tie between clauses or sections of text in such a way as to demonstrate a
meaningful pattern between them, though conjunctive relations are not tied to any
particular sequence in the expression. Therefore, among the cohesion forming
devices within text, conjunction is the least directly identifiable relation.
Conjunctions can be classified according to four main categories: additive,
adversative, causal and temporal. Additive conjunctions act to structurally
coordinate or link by adding to the presupposed item and are signaled through
and, also, too, furthermore, additionally, etc. Additive conjunctions may also act
to negate the presupposed item and are signaled by nor, and...not, either, neither,
etc. Adversative conjunctions act to indicate contrary to expectation and are
signaled by yet, though, only, but, in fact, rather, etc. Causal conjunction
expresses result, reason and purpose and is signaled by so, then, for, because, for
this reason, as a result, in this respect, etc. The last most common conjunctive
category is temporal and links by signaling sequence or time. Some sample
temporal conjunctive signals are then, next, after that, next day, until then, at the
same time, at this point, etc. The use of a conjunction is not the only device for
expressing a temporal or causal relation. For instance, in English a temporal
relation may be expressed by means of a verb such as follow or precede, and a
causal relation by verbs such as cause and lead. Moreover, temporal relations are
not restricted to sequence in real time; they may also reflect stages in the text
(expressed by first, second, third, etc.) Examples: time-sequence:
After the battle, there was a snowstorm.
They fought a battle. Afterwards, it snowed.
The battle was followed by a snowstorm.
Cohesion covered text, texture and tie. The connection between one
sentence and the others are related by conjunction. The texture deals with
coherency and sequences to build cohesion. A text has texture, and this is what
distinguishes it from something that is not a text. Text in narrative has its own
language features such as using past tense, action verb, thinking verb, conjunction
such as after, so, and so forth. Texture in science text and social text are different.
Social texts describe language clearly, but in science especially math, symbolic
also exist. It usually use the word plus symbolized by +, equal symbolized by =
and so forth. For example integers are the numbers which consist of whole
numbers and negative numbers (the opposite of natural numbers) such as -3, -2, 1, 0, 1, 2, 3......
The words on bracket refer to negative numbers in the sentence. The
explanation of the word in bracket available in order to tie the explanation
previously about natural number in integers. The concept of tie makes it possible
to analyze a text in terms of its cohesive properties and gives a systematic account
of its patterns of texture. Tie can further show the relationship between cohesion
and the organization of written texts into sentences and paragraphs. However,
cohesion occurs in texts where the interpretation of some elements in the
discourse is dependent on that of another. The relation between clause the integers
and consist of whole numbers and negative numbers… related by using which
known as conjunction.
Bilingual lessons are a promising opportunity to enable pupils to acquire
greater foreign language competence within the school context. Bilingual covered
some subjects in school teaching learning process such as Biology, Geography,
Math, etc. The phenomenon is take place in the text of bilingual text book which
has strong relationship to the sociocultural context. Even though any discussion
on mathematics lessons cannot really ignore the sociocultural context of this
school subject, this is even more the case for bilingual mathematics lessons. The
language used in the textbook should be comprehensible. One of the language
functions, as mentioned by Halliday (1994) is needed to attain cohesion and
coherence in arranging text, as a result, the reader or hearer is easy to understand
the text. It is hoped that reading texts in the text book serve a good cohesive ties.
In a text, there is relationship between one sentence to the other sentences or one
clause to the other clauses which build coherency.
The success of teaching and learning at school is much endorsed by the
use of good teaching materials in class (Nunan, 2003: 8). Textbook is one of
teaching materials that is used as the main resources of teaching and learning.
Many students find difficulties in comprehending English text in their reading.
They do not find the real message from the text promptly. It can be caused by
lacking of knowledge of the world in English. It has been suggested that effective
readers have to be able to understand the relationship between the parts of a text.
The quality of the English textbooks used by students in secondary schools
constantly requires improvement. A number of efforts have been done to meet the
quality expected. In terms of learning materials, for instance, the compulsory
textbooks used, the exercises for reading are given more priority or portion
compared with materials or exercises for other language skills. Thus, it is no doubt
to say that students reading ability in English written texts must be much more
improved.
In this study the writer would like to find out the cohesive device in Math
bilingual textbook. Understanding the lesson from text book especially for
bilingual students is depend on cohesion. In this case, the writer choose math
bilingual book because the writer interest in studying the language of math which
often used symbols. Therefore, the writer would like to study about cohesion
especially to analyze pattern of lexical cohesion in the textbook of the seventh
grade student. It was chosen because the process of understanding bilingual text
book is begun from here.
1.2 The Focus of the Study
The study focuses on lexical cohesion. The pattern covers the type of
lexical cohesion. Lexical cohesion covered reiteration and collocation. The text
will be taken from Math Bilingual text book at the seventh grade.
1.3 The Problems of the Study
As Math bilingual textbook that will be analyzed of its cohesive, the writer
presents some problems as follow:
1) What is the pattern lexical cohesion in math bilingual textbook?
2) Why is the pattern employed in math bilingual textbook?
1.4 The Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are formulated as follows:
(1) to derive the pattern of cohesive relation in math bilingual textbook
(2) to reason for the contextual elements encapsulating the pattern
1.5 The Significance of the Study
(1) The researchers will have foundation, reference, or alternative view of
research on the realization of cohesion in text or specifically English
textbooks.
(2) The students/researchers who study about cohesion can add up more
horizons in theories of cohesion.
(3) The students and teachers, especially in junior higher level, will have good
understanding of a good book viewed from cohesive devices and their uses
in right context.
(4) English teachers will be selective to decide which textbook will be used in
class by considering the cohesive devices used in the textbook.
(5) The government can improve the quality of textbooks by especially paying
attention to the text quality in relation to cohesion use.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
After analysis all the data the conclusion can be drawn:
(1) The types of Lexical cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book consist of two
types (reiteration and collocation). Reiteration consist of repetition, synonym
and super ordinate. Therefore, there were four elements in lexical cohesion,
they are: Repetition, Synonym, Super Ordinate and Collocation. In Bahasa,
repetition was 36.50%, synonym 15.87%, super ordinate 17.46% and
collocation 30.15%. In English, repetition was 39.74%, synonym 17.94%,
super ordinate 21.74% and collocation 20.51%. The dominant element of
lexical cohesion was repetition both in Bahasa (36.50%) and English
(39.74%).
(2) The reason why the pattern occurred because the genre of math bilingual text
book were explanation and procedure. Explanation conveyed
5.2 Suggestions
With reference to the conclusions, there are some suggestions needed to be
considered.
(1) It is suggested for those who want to take types of lexical cohesion study,
they are able to investigate the features of the text. They may take the
different object of the research such as from text book, students’ essay,
advertisements, literary work like novels or short stories, television show,
radio program, or the others so that it will make the research to be more
interesting.
(2) It is suggested that the writer should be concerned about the pattern of text
book used in presenting their idea. The findings of this research is able to
used as a reference to give better understanding for the future researcher,
provide additional information and comparison that might be relevant to
the study.
REFERENCES
Bogdan and Biklen. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Needham Heights:
Allyn and Bacon
Baker, M. 1992. In Other Words: A Course Book on Translation. London: Routledge
Bex, T 1996. Variety in Written English. Texts in Society. Societies in Text.
Routledge. London and NewYork.
Rukmini. 2003. Narrative Gravity: Conversation, Cognition, Culture. Oxford:
Oxford University Press,
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1989. Discourse Analysis. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Cook, M. P. 2006. Visual Representation in Science Education: The Influence of
Prior Knowledge and Cognitive Load Theory on Instructional
Design Principles. Science Education. 90(6), 1073-1091.
De Beaugrande, R. and Dressler, W. U. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics.
London: Longman.
Donald, A.
2009. Introduction to Research in Education, New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston
Eggins, S. 2004. Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London:
Continuum. Lincoln and Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry.
California: Sage Publication
Flowerdew, John and Mahlberg, Michaela. 2009. Lexical Cohesion and Corpus
Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gerot, Linda, and Peter Wignell. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar.
Sydney: Gerd Stabler.
Gutwinski, W. 1976. Cohesion in Literary Texts. The Hague: Mouton
Hadley, I. L. 1987. Understanding Cohesion—Some Practical Teaching
Implications. Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in
English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman
group Ltd.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978 Language as social semiotic. The social interpretation of
language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward
Arnold
Hameed. 2008. Cohesion in Texts: A Discourse Analysis of a News Article in a
Magazine Diyala University/College of Education
Hamill, L. 2010 Journal The Interplay of Text, Symbols, and Graphics in
Mathematics Education. Canada
Hoey, Michael. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Markels, Robin Bell. 1984. A New Perspective on Cohesion in
Expository Paragraphs. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern
Illinois University Press.
Lincoln and Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. California: Sage Publication
Meaney, T. 2005. Mathematics as Text. In A. Chronaki & I. M. Christiansen
(Eds.) Challenging Perspectives on Mathematics Classroom
Communication. Charlotte NC: Information Age.
Northcut, K. M. 2007. The relevance of Feenberg’s critical theory of technology
to critical visual literacy: The case of scientific and technical
illustrations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.
37(3), 253-266.
O’Halloran K. L. 2005. Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism, Visual
and Images. London: Continuum.
Olatunde, J.A. 2002. “Cohesion as an Aspect of Textuality in vacancy
Advertisement‟ in Newspapers, in Babatunde, S.T. And Adeyanju,
D. S (eds). Language, Meaning and Society. Ilorin: Hytee press &
Publishing. pp 312-313.
Osisanwo, W. 2005. Introduction to Discourse Analysis and pragmatics. Lagos:
Femulus Fetop Publishers.
Presmeg, N. 2006. A semiotic view of the role of imagery and inscriptions in
mathematics teaching and learning. In J. Novotná , H. Moraová, M.
Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.). Proceedings of the 30th Conference
of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Education, Prague, Czech Republic. Vol. 1. (pp. 19-34). Prague:
Charles University.
Renkema, Jan. 1993. Discourse Studies: An Introductory Textbook. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Rolka, K. Proceeding of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the
Phsycology of Mathematics Education (Bilingual Lesson and
Mathematical World Views a German Perspective), University of
Duisburg
Rohim. 2009. Cohesion Analysis on The Jakarta Post’s Editorial. A Thesis.
Jakarta: Letters and Humanities faculty, state Islamic University
Syarif Hidayatullah
Rolka, E. 2004. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for
the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2004 Vol 4 pp 105–112
Bilingual Lessons and Mathematical World Views – A German
Perspective. German: University of Duisburg
Saragih, A. 2012. Variation and Functional Varieties of Language. Medan: The
State of University of Medan
Saudin, H. 2013. Thesis the Realization of Cohesive Devices in the Students’
Argumentative Writing Perfomance. Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia
Setia, E 2008. Klausa Kompleks dan Variannya. Departemen Sastra Inggris
Fakultas Sastra Universitas Sumatera Utara Medan
Tanskanen S. K. 2006. Collaborating towards coherence: Lexical cohesion in
English discourse. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins
Thompson, N. 2003. Communication and Language: A Handbook of theory and
Practice. New York: Pagrave Macmillan
Van Djik, A T. 1992. Text and Context Explorations in the Semanticss and
Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.an Djik, A T. 1992.
Text and Context Explorations in the Semanticss and Pragmatics of
Discourse. London: Longman.
OF JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
DWI MAYA NOVITRI
Registration Number: 8126111006
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2016
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
All praises belong to Allah, who has commanded us to spread peace to all
man kind and also who gave health, chance and capability to the writer to finish
the thesis. May peace and blessing of Allah be upon Prophet Muhammad SAW
who introduced us good behaviours.
Foremost, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude to her
advisers, Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd and Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed., TESP for
the continuous support and guidance to finish the thesis, for their
patience,
motivation, enthhusiasm, and immense knowledge given to the writer. Moreover,
the writer would like to express her thanks to the examiners, Prof. Amrin Saragih,
M.A., Ph.D, Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S for
their suggestions, comments and questions for the thesis improvement. Their
guidance helped her all the time of research and writing of this thesis. Besides her
advisers and examiners, she would like to thank to all lecturers of English Applied
Linguistics Program for their encouragement and insights.
Sincere are expressed to her parents, Darmaji and Elfi Farida S.Pd. Her
special thanks also go to her brothers Chairul Devialdi SE and Muh. Arief
Trimanda for their support, love and care. Special thanks for her husband to be
Mahpuddin, S.Pd.I for his motivation and care to the writer,Last but not least, her
thanks to her friends especially of
English Applied Linguistics Programs
Ismayani S.Pd, Elvida Wahyuni S.Pd M.Hum , Marina Sari Rambe S.Pd M.Hum,
Mahya Humairah S.Pd M.Hum,Indri Harmaili S.Pd,Muhammmad Mahfuz S.Pd.I
M.Hum, Hiskia Manurung M.Hum for their support and suggestions.
Finally, the writer hopes that the readers will give any comments, respons,
and corrections for the mistakes of this thesis. The writer realizes that this thesis is
still far from being perfect. May this thesis be useful and may it be one of the
references for the next research and enhance our knowledge. May Allah SWT
bless us forever. Amin ya Rabbal ‘alamin
Medan, 14th January 2016
The Writer
ABSTRACT
DWI MAYA NOVITRI. Registration number: 8126111006. Lexical Cohesion
in Math Bilingual Text Book of Junior High School. A Thesis. English
Applied Linguistic Study Program. Postgraduate School. State University of
Medan. 2016.
The objectives of this study are to derive the pattern of cohesive relation in math
bilingual textbook and to reason for the contextual elements encapsulating the
pattern. The data are collected by using documentary technique in lexical
cohesion only. The source of data was taken from Mathemathics for Junior High
School year VII which is published by Yudhistira. There are three topics were
studied that represented from whole topics, they are Integers, Algebra and
Applications and Planes. The sentences were analyzed by using cohesion theory
by Halliday and Hasan (1976). After that, the data were presented by using
Sudaryanto (1993) analysis. It began from identifying the data that are needed for
this research, classifying the data based on the lexical cohesive in pragmatic, and
analyzing the data based on the theory that is used. The findings are (1) Lexical
Cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book is dominated by repetition (2) Repetitions
occurred to emphasize the previous explanation and explore them in detail
explanation (3) Collocations in Math Bilingual textbook occurred to make the
contrast between two terms hence the explanation is clearer. It is often occur as
antonym or pairs (4) Super ordinates in Math Bilingual textbook occur to inform
part of a term in Math (5) Synonyms in Math Bilingual textbook are used to give
another name and to explain its terms, symbol or a pattern (6) There are two
genres in these data, they are Explanation and Procedure. As a result, the lexical
cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book has a pattern which consist of four
elements in lexical cohesion, they are: Repetition, Synonym, Super Ordinate and
Collocation. From all elements, the dominant element of lexical cohesion was
repetition both in Bahasa (36.50%) and English (39.74%). In addition, The four
element of Lexical cohesion occurred in Math Bilingual Text book have the main
purpose to build the reader understanding about the explanation and information
of terms, kinds or elements, and symbols.
ABSTRAK
DWI MAYA NOVITRI. NIM: 8126111006.Lexical cohesion in Math
Bilingual Text book of Junior High School. Thesis. Program Linguistik
Terapan Bahasa Inggris. Pasca Sarjan. Unimed. 2016.
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendapatkan pola dari leksikal kohesif
dalam buku Matematika Bilingual dan untuk menemukan penyebab konteks
elemen-elemen yang berada didalamnya. Data dikumpulkan melalui teknik
dokumen. Sumber data diambil dari buku Mathemathics for Junior High School
kelas VII yang diterbitkan Yudhistira. Ada tiga topik yang diteliti yang mewakili
keseluruhan topik yaitu integral, aljabar dan aplikasinya dan bangun datar.
Kalimat-kalimat tersebut kemudian dianalisis melalui teori kohesi oleh Halliday
and Hasan (1976). Kemudian data yang telah dianalisis disusun dengan
menggunakan analisis yang dikemukankan oleh Sudaryanto (1993). Yang pertama
sekali data diklasifikasikan berdasarkan tipe-tipe leksikal kohesif, kemudian data
tersebut dianalisis berdasarkan teori yang digunakan. Penemuannya adalah (1)
pola leksikal kohesif dalam buku Matematika Bilingual, baik yang menggunakan
bahasa Indonesia maupun yang berbahasa Inggris memiliki keseluruhan tipe
leksikal kohesif yaitu repetisi, sinonim, super ordinat, dan kolokasi. Repetition
merupakan tipe yang dominan dikedua bahasa. Repetisi digunakan dalam buku
tersebut untuk lebih menekankan penjelasan istilah pada kalimat sebelumnya dan
menjelaskannya lebih detail sesudahnya. Kolokasi digunakan untuk membuat
penjelasan istilah dalam buku Matematika Bilingual lebih kontras dengan
menampilkan lawan istilah (antonim). Selain melalui antonimm, kolokasi juga
timbul dalam bentuk pasangan kata. Sementara itu, Super ordinat digunakan
untuk menginformasikan bagian-bagian dari istilah yang dimaksud serta sinonim
digunakan untuk menampilkan istilah lain atau definisi dari istilah sebelumnya (2)
pola yang timbul dalam kalimat-kalimat tersebut berupa genre explanation dan
procedure. Leksikal kohesif dalam buku Matematika Bilingual memiliki pola
yang terdiri dari empat tipe (elemen) yaitu repetisi (pengulangan), sinonim
(persamaan), super ordinat and kolokasi. Dari keseluruhan elemen, repetisi
merupakan tipe yang dominan baik dalam bahasa (36.50%) maupun dalam bahasa
Inggris (39.74%). Kemudian, keempat elemen tersebut terdapat dalam buku
Matematika Bilingual bertujuan untuk membangun pemahaman pembaca (siswa)
mengenai istilah-istilah dalam matematika, jenis-jenis, elemen-elemen serat
simbol-simbol.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………
i
ABSTRAK……………..……………………………………………
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………
iii
TABLE OF CONTENT…………………………………………………………
v
LIST OF TABLE………………………………………………………………… vii
LIST OF APPENDICES…………………………………………………………
viii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………. 1
1.1 The Background of the Study…………………………………… 1
1.2 The Focus of the Study………………………………………….. 5
1.3 The Problems of the Study………………………………………. 5
1.4 The Objectives of the Study……………………………………... 5
1.5 The Significance of the Study…………………………………… 6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………. 7
2.1 Textual Function……………………...………………………… 7
2.2 Cohesion………………………………………………………… 9
2.2.1 Lexical Cohesion…………………………………………. 15
2.2.2 Grammatical Cohesion…………………………………… 18
2.3 Linguistic Pattern……………………………………………….. 22
2.4 Clause Complex………………………………………………..
25
2.5 Related Studies…………………………………………………
25
2.6 Conceptual Framework………………………………………...
28
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD…………………………………………. 32
3.1 Research Design………………………………………………..
32
3.2 The Data and Source of Data…………………………………..
32
3.3 Technique of Collecting Data………………………………….
33
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis………………………………
33
3.5 Trustworthiness of the Study…………………………………..
33
CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS, FINDING, AND DISCUSSION………….
35
4.1 Data Analysis………………………………………………….
35
4.1.1 The Pattern of Lexical Cohesion in Math Bilingual Text Book35
4.1.2 The Reason of Employing the Pattern in Math Bilingual Text Book 42
4.2. Findings……………………………………………………….
43
4.3. Discussion…………………………………………………….
44
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS…………………………
51
5.1 Conclusions……………………………………………………
51
5.2 Suggestions……………………………………………………
51
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………….
53
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………….
56
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Lexical Cohesion: Repetition (in English)………………………..… 58
Appendix 2 Lexical Cohesion: Synonym (in English)…………………………..
62
Appendix 3 Lexical Cohesion: Super Ordinate(in English)……………………..
63
Appendix 4 Lexical Cohesion: Collocation (in English)………………………… 65
Appendix 5 Lexical Cohesion: Repetition (in Bahasa)…………………………..
67
Appendix 6 Lexical Cohesion: Synonym (in Bahasa)…………………………… 73
Appendix 7 Lexical Cohesion: Super Ordinate (in Bahasa)……………………… 74
Appendix 8 Lexical Cohesion: Collocation (in Bahasa)………………………….. 75
Appendix 9 Data in Bahasa……………………………………………………….. 79
Appendix 10 Data English……………………………………………………….. 95
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
Language can be expressed in spoken and written. When two people
speaking it is easy for them to deliver their thought and ideas because it supported
by gestures. On the other hand, in written form, the text should be coherence in
order to make the readers understand what the writer means. Both of spoken and
written deal with communication instead. Communication deals with transferring
information between people. Thompson states that communication covered all of
human language into their daily activity.
“Communication is such a well-integrated part of our day to day existence
that people tend to take it for granted, rarely passing to consider what it
involves or just how important it is. Communication concerns to share and
deliver a message between people. People are able to gain the information
by reading (Thompson: 2003)”
When people read a magazine, a book, an article, they need to find out the
meaning and the goal of the text. Generally, in a text, the readers try to find out
the ties between sentences to get the point of the text. The term cohesion is
sometimes confused with coherence which has to do with sense. Osisanwo (2005)
explains that cohesion differs from coherence. He illustrates with these sentences:
(a) He phoned the police
(b) The midnight guests had come
(c) He phoned the police bec ause the midnight guests had come
The sentences (a) and (b) are coherent but not cohesive. The sentence (c) is
cohesive and coherent.The cohesive device used in the sentence is because. It
gives the reason why the police was phoned. Thus, this makes a complete text.
The parts are well connected and its meaningful. Conjunction acts as a cohesive
tie between clauses or sections of text in such a way as to demonstrate a
meaningful pattern between them, though conjunctive relations are not tied to any
particular sequence in the expression. Therefore, among the cohesion forming
devices within text, conjunction is the least directly identifiable relation.
Conjunctions can be classified according to four main categories: additive,
adversative, causal and temporal. Additive conjunctions act to structurally
coordinate or link by adding to the presupposed item and are signaled through
and, also, too, furthermore, additionally, etc. Additive conjunctions may also act
to negate the presupposed item and are signaled by nor, and...not, either, neither,
etc. Adversative conjunctions act to indicate contrary to expectation and are
signaled by yet, though, only, but, in fact, rather, etc. Causal conjunction
expresses result, reason and purpose and is signaled by so, then, for, because, for
this reason, as a result, in this respect, etc. The last most common conjunctive
category is temporal and links by signaling sequence or time. Some sample
temporal conjunctive signals are then, next, after that, next day, until then, at the
same time, at this point, etc. The use of a conjunction is not the only device for
expressing a temporal or causal relation. For instance, in English a temporal
relation may be expressed by means of a verb such as follow or precede, and a
causal relation by verbs such as cause and lead. Moreover, temporal relations are
not restricted to sequence in real time; they may also reflect stages in the text
(expressed by first, second, third, etc.) Examples: time-sequence:
After the battle, there was a snowstorm.
They fought a battle. Afterwards, it snowed.
The battle was followed by a snowstorm.
Cohesion covered text, texture and tie. The connection between one
sentence and the others are related by conjunction. The texture deals with
coherency and sequences to build cohesion. A text has texture, and this is what
distinguishes it from something that is not a text. Text in narrative has its own
language features such as using past tense, action verb, thinking verb, conjunction
such as after, so, and so forth. Texture in science text and social text are different.
Social texts describe language clearly, but in science especially math, symbolic
also exist. It usually use the word plus symbolized by +, equal symbolized by =
and so forth. For example integers are the numbers which consist of whole
numbers and negative numbers (the opposite of natural numbers) such as -3, -2, 1, 0, 1, 2, 3......
The words on bracket refer to negative numbers in the sentence. The
explanation of the word in bracket available in order to tie the explanation
previously about natural number in integers. The concept of tie makes it possible
to analyze a text in terms of its cohesive properties and gives a systematic account
of its patterns of texture. Tie can further show the relationship between cohesion
and the organization of written texts into sentences and paragraphs. However,
cohesion occurs in texts where the interpretation of some elements in the
discourse is dependent on that of another. The relation between clause the integers
and consist of whole numbers and negative numbers… related by using which
known as conjunction.
Bilingual lessons are a promising opportunity to enable pupils to acquire
greater foreign language competence within the school context. Bilingual covered
some subjects in school teaching learning process such as Biology, Geography,
Math, etc. The phenomenon is take place in the text of bilingual text book which
has strong relationship to the sociocultural context. Even though any discussion
on mathematics lessons cannot really ignore the sociocultural context of this
school subject, this is even more the case for bilingual mathematics lessons. The
language used in the textbook should be comprehensible. One of the language
functions, as mentioned by Halliday (1994) is needed to attain cohesion and
coherence in arranging text, as a result, the reader or hearer is easy to understand
the text. It is hoped that reading texts in the text book serve a good cohesive ties.
In a text, there is relationship between one sentence to the other sentences or one
clause to the other clauses which build coherency.
The success of teaching and learning at school is much endorsed by the
use of good teaching materials in class (Nunan, 2003: 8). Textbook is one of
teaching materials that is used as the main resources of teaching and learning.
Many students find difficulties in comprehending English text in their reading.
They do not find the real message from the text promptly. It can be caused by
lacking of knowledge of the world in English. It has been suggested that effective
readers have to be able to understand the relationship between the parts of a text.
The quality of the English textbooks used by students in secondary schools
constantly requires improvement. A number of efforts have been done to meet the
quality expected. In terms of learning materials, for instance, the compulsory
textbooks used, the exercises for reading are given more priority or portion
compared with materials or exercises for other language skills. Thus, it is no doubt
to say that students reading ability in English written texts must be much more
improved.
In this study the writer would like to find out the cohesive device in Math
bilingual textbook. Understanding the lesson from text book especially for
bilingual students is depend on cohesion. In this case, the writer choose math
bilingual book because the writer interest in studying the language of math which
often used symbols. Therefore, the writer would like to study about cohesion
especially to analyze pattern of lexical cohesion in the textbook of the seventh
grade student. It was chosen because the process of understanding bilingual text
book is begun from here.
1.2 The Focus of the Study
The study focuses on lexical cohesion. The pattern covers the type of
lexical cohesion. Lexical cohesion covered reiteration and collocation. The text
will be taken from Math Bilingual text book at the seventh grade.
1.3 The Problems of the Study
As Math bilingual textbook that will be analyzed of its cohesive, the writer
presents some problems as follow:
1) What is the pattern lexical cohesion in math bilingual textbook?
2) Why is the pattern employed in math bilingual textbook?
1.4 The Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are formulated as follows:
(1) to derive the pattern of cohesive relation in math bilingual textbook
(2) to reason for the contextual elements encapsulating the pattern
1.5 The Significance of the Study
(1) The researchers will have foundation, reference, or alternative view of
research on the realization of cohesion in text or specifically English
textbooks.
(2) The students/researchers who study about cohesion can add up more
horizons in theories of cohesion.
(3) The students and teachers, especially in junior higher level, will have good
understanding of a good book viewed from cohesive devices and their uses
in right context.
(4) English teachers will be selective to decide which textbook will be used in
class by considering the cohesive devices used in the textbook.
(5) The government can improve the quality of textbooks by especially paying
attention to the text quality in relation to cohesion use.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
After analysis all the data the conclusion can be drawn:
(1) The types of Lexical cohesion in Math Bilingual Text book consist of two
types (reiteration and collocation). Reiteration consist of repetition, synonym
and super ordinate. Therefore, there were four elements in lexical cohesion,
they are: Repetition, Synonym, Super Ordinate and Collocation. In Bahasa,
repetition was 36.50%, synonym 15.87%, super ordinate 17.46% and
collocation 30.15%. In English, repetition was 39.74%, synonym 17.94%,
super ordinate 21.74% and collocation 20.51%. The dominant element of
lexical cohesion was repetition both in Bahasa (36.50%) and English
(39.74%).
(2) The reason why the pattern occurred because the genre of math bilingual text
book were explanation and procedure. Explanation conveyed
5.2 Suggestions
With reference to the conclusions, there are some suggestions needed to be
considered.
(1) It is suggested for those who want to take types of lexical cohesion study,
they are able to investigate the features of the text. They may take the
different object of the research such as from text book, students’ essay,
advertisements, literary work like novels or short stories, television show,
radio program, or the others so that it will make the research to be more
interesting.
(2) It is suggested that the writer should be concerned about the pattern of text
book used in presenting their idea. The findings of this research is able to
used as a reference to give better understanding for the future researcher,
provide additional information and comparison that might be relevant to
the study.
REFERENCES
Bogdan and Biklen. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Needham Heights:
Allyn and Bacon
Baker, M. 1992. In Other Words: A Course Book on Translation. London: Routledge
Bex, T 1996. Variety in Written English. Texts in Society. Societies in Text.
Routledge. London and NewYork.
Rukmini. 2003. Narrative Gravity: Conversation, Cognition, Culture. Oxford:
Oxford University Press,
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1989. Discourse Analysis. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Cook, M. P. 2006. Visual Representation in Science Education: The Influence of
Prior Knowledge and Cognitive Load Theory on Instructional
Design Principles. Science Education. 90(6), 1073-1091.
De Beaugrande, R. and Dressler, W. U. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics.
London: Longman.
Donald, A.
2009. Introduction to Research in Education, New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston
Eggins, S. 2004. Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London:
Continuum. Lincoln and Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry.
California: Sage Publication
Flowerdew, John and Mahlberg, Michaela. 2009. Lexical Cohesion and Corpus
Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gerot, Linda, and Peter Wignell. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar.
Sydney: Gerd Stabler.
Gutwinski, W. 1976. Cohesion in Literary Texts. The Hague: Mouton
Hadley, I. L. 1987. Understanding Cohesion—Some Practical Teaching
Implications. Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in
English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman
group Ltd.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978 Language as social semiotic. The social interpretation of
language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward
Arnold
Hameed. 2008. Cohesion in Texts: A Discourse Analysis of a News Article in a
Magazine Diyala University/College of Education
Hamill, L. 2010 Journal The Interplay of Text, Symbols, and Graphics in
Mathematics Education. Canada
Hoey, Michael. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Markels, Robin Bell. 1984. A New Perspective on Cohesion in
Expository Paragraphs. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern
Illinois University Press.
Lincoln and Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. California: Sage Publication
Meaney, T. 2005. Mathematics as Text. In A. Chronaki & I. M. Christiansen
(Eds.) Challenging Perspectives on Mathematics Classroom
Communication. Charlotte NC: Information Age.
Northcut, K. M. 2007. The relevance of Feenberg’s critical theory of technology
to critical visual literacy: The case of scientific and technical
illustrations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.
37(3), 253-266.
O’Halloran K. L. 2005. Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism, Visual
and Images. London: Continuum.
Olatunde, J.A. 2002. “Cohesion as an Aspect of Textuality in vacancy
Advertisement‟ in Newspapers, in Babatunde, S.T. And Adeyanju,
D. S (eds). Language, Meaning and Society. Ilorin: Hytee press &
Publishing. pp 312-313.
Osisanwo, W. 2005. Introduction to Discourse Analysis and pragmatics. Lagos:
Femulus Fetop Publishers.
Presmeg, N. 2006. A semiotic view of the role of imagery and inscriptions in
mathematics teaching and learning. In J. Novotná , H. Moraová, M.
Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.). Proceedings of the 30th Conference
of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Education, Prague, Czech Republic. Vol. 1. (pp. 19-34). Prague:
Charles University.
Renkema, Jan. 1993. Discourse Studies: An Introductory Textbook. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Rolka, K. Proceeding of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the
Phsycology of Mathematics Education (Bilingual Lesson and
Mathematical World Views a German Perspective), University of
Duisburg
Rohim. 2009. Cohesion Analysis on The Jakarta Post’s Editorial. A Thesis.
Jakarta: Letters and Humanities faculty, state Islamic University
Syarif Hidayatullah
Rolka, E. 2004. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for
the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2004 Vol 4 pp 105–112
Bilingual Lessons and Mathematical World Views – A German
Perspective. German: University of Duisburg
Saragih, A. 2012. Variation and Functional Varieties of Language. Medan: The
State of University of Medan
Saudin, H. 2013. Thesis the Realization of Cohesive Devices in the Students’
Argumentative Writing Perfomance. Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia
Setia, E 2008. Klausa Kompleks dan Variannya. Departemen Sastra Inggris
Fakultas Sastra Universitas Sumatera Utara Medan
Tanskanen S. K. 2006. Collaborating towards coherence: Lexical cohesion in
English discourse. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins
Thompson, N. 2003. Communication and Language: A Handbook of theory and
Practice. New York: Pagrave Macmillan
Van Djik, A T. 1992. Text and Context Explorations in the Semanticss and
Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.an Djik, A T. 1992.
Text and Context Explorations in the Semanticss and Pragmatics of
Discourse. London: Longman.