on some factors. Some of those factors are described in terms of cohesion, or the ties and connections that exist within a text.
20
The term of cohesion is familiar in the study of language because the establishment of cohesive relation between two or more elements in a text is a
necessary component. Cohesion is a part of the system language and it is the most important thing needed in the cohesion of a text. The term cohesion has been
defined in various ways.
According to Kushartanti, cohesion is elements of language that will make a text be united by connecting each other semantically.
21
That statement is in line with the simple definition of Haliday and Hasan which states that cohesion
is a semantic relation of meaning that exists within a text.
22
It means that cohesion has function to relate one part of a text and another part of the same text.
Therefore, Renkema defines cohesion as the connection which results when the interpretation of a textual element is dependent on another element in a text.
23
To sum up, the writer concludes that cohesion is semantic concept that refers to language relevance within a text. As a tie to link one sentence to another,
cohesion refers to the surface relations among the sentences that create a text. Thus, it will help readers to sort out meaning and usage of a text.
2. Types of Cohesion
In guiding principle of language, grammar is used to express the general meaning of language and vocabulary is used to express the specific meaning.
Cohesive relation is suitable for that pattern. Therefore, cohesion is expressed partly through grammar and partly through vocabulary.
24
In other words, cohesion refers to the grammatical and lexical elements on the surface of a text which can
20
George Yule, The Study of Language. Fourth Edition, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 143.
21
Kushartanti, et al, loc. cit.
22
M.A.K. Halliday and Ruqaiya Hasan, Cohesion in English, London: Longman Group Ltd.,1976, p. 4.
23
Jan Renkema, Discourse Studies: an Introductory Textbook, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, Co., 1993, p. 35.
24
Halliday and Hasan, op. cit., p. 5.
form connections among parts of the text.
25
Based on the statement, cohesion is divided into two types: grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion.
Halliday and Hasan explain that grammatical cohesion is a semantic element connecting that marked by grammatical tools. Grammatical cohesion
devices are reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. Meanwhile, lexical cohesion is the cohesive effect achieved by the selection vocabulary.
26
Lexical cohesion refers to the rule played by the selective of vocabulary in organizing
relations within a text. Furthermore, Halliday and Matthiessen in their book argue that lexical cohesion operates within lexis and is achieved through the choice of
lexical items. Lexical cohesion is divided into two main categories: reiteration and collocation.
27
In conclusion, the grammatical cohesion refers to a combination of terms sentences that form grammatical aspect, and the lexical cohesion refers to a
combination of terms among sentences that form lexical component. Grammatical cohesion is divided into four kinds. They are reference, substitution, ellipsis, and
conjunction. While lexical cohesion is divided into two kinds; they are reiteration and collocation.
3. Grammatical Cohesion Devices
Halliday and Hassan as cited in Meyer’s book provide the basic categories of grammatical cohesion pointing into four categories and referring as
reference, substitution, ellipsis and conjunction.
28
These categories have a theoretical basis and specific types of grammatical cohesion which has also
provided a practical means for describing and analyzing a text.
25
Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen, Collaborating towards Coherence: Lexical Cohesion in English Discourse
, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 2006, p. 13.
26
Halliday and Hasan, op. cit., p. 274.
27
M.A.K. Halliday and Christian Matthiessen, An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Third Edition, London: Arnold, 2004, p. 535.
28
Charles F.Meyer, Introducing English Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 102.
