Submitted to the Board of Examiners in Partial Fulfillments of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd) English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
AN ANALYSIS OF COHESION AND COHERENCE OF
THE DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS
(A Study of the Fourth Semester Students of English Education Department
of
State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga)
A GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners in Partial Fulfillments of the
Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty
of
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
Compiled by:
FUAD MA’RIFATULLAH
12309004
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN)
SALATIGA
2016
MOTTO
If you fee l tired to learn, so, you don’t feel tired face of ignorance
(Fuad Ma’rifatullah)
A dream doesn’t became a reality through magic,
it takes a lot of determination and hard work to make it
to the top
(Fuad Ma’rifatullah)
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this graduating paper to: 1.
My loving parents for their countless pray and endless support 2. My brother (Zakky Fawaid) and my sister (Kunti Nadia Salma) whom I am not okay without them. I am so thankful to have you all
3. My special people in my life that always gives me support and pray for reach my dream.
ACKNOLEDGMENT
In the name of Allah, The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful, The Lord of Universe. Because of His blessing, the writer could finish this graduating paper.
Secondly, may peace and salutation be upon our prophet Muhammad SAW who has guided mankind from the darkness into the lightness.
However, this success would not be achieved without those supports, guidance, advice, help, and encouragement from individual and institution, and the writer somehow realizes that an appropriate moment for him to deepest gratitude for:
1. Dr. Rahmat Hariyadi, M.Pd. as the Rector of State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga 2. Suwardi, M. Pd, as the Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty 3. Noor Malihah, Ph.D. as the Head of English Education Department 4. Rr Dewi Wahyu Mustikasari, S. S, M. Pd as the writer’s counselor who has educated, supported, directed and given the writer advices, suggestions, and recommendations for this graduating paper from beginning until the end 5. Nur Mutmainnah, M. Pd, thank you for allowing the writer to collect and use the texts of her students
6. All the lecturers in English Education Department 7.
All the staffs that have helped the writer in processing of graduating paper administration
8. All students of the fourth semester students of English Education Department
ABSTRACT
Ma’rifatullah, Fuad. 2016. Register Number Student: 123 09 004. “An Analysis of
Cohesion and Coherence of descriptive text (A Study of the Fourth Semester Students of English Education Department
State institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga
”The research of this study is formulated as follows: 1) What types of
cohesive devices are correctly used in descriptive texts composed by the fourth
semester student at State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga?, 2) What types of
coherence devices are correctly used by the students in their descriptive texts?. This
study use descriptive qualitative approach. Based on the data or the texts that
composed by a fourth semester students, the result shows that 1) The types of
cohesion are reference (70.92%), substitution (0.35%), ellipsis (0%), conjunction
(14.53%), reiteration (12.76%), and collocation (1.41%). 2) The Types of coherence, are repeat key noun (13.95%), Using Consistent Pronoun (77.51%), and using the transition of signal (8.52%).
Keywords: Discourse, Descriptive text, Cohesion, Coherence.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER.......................................................................................................... i DECLARATION……………........................................................................ ii ATTENTIVE
COUNSELOR NOTE…......................................................... iii STATEMENT OF CERTIFICATION…………………………………….. iv MOTTO…………………………………………………………………….. v DEDICATION……………………………………………………………... vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………..... vii ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………... x LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………. xii LIST OF DIAGRAMS……………………………………………………... xiii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of Study………………………………………………… 1 B. Problems of Study …………………………….................................... 4 C. Objectives of the Study……………………………………………..... 5 D. Significance of the Study…………………………………………….. 5 E. Limitation of the Study........................................................................ 6 F. Definition of the Key Terms……………………………………......... 6 G. Organization of Study……………………………………………...... 7
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUR A. Previous of Studies…………………………………………………... 9 B. Discourse Analysis…..…………………….………………………….12
C. Concept of Cohesion…………………………………………………. 13
D. Types of Cohesion…………………………………………………… 14
1. Grammatical Cohesion………………………………………..... 14
2. Lexical Cohesion……………………………………………….. 29
E. Concept of Coherence………………………………………………... 30
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHOD A. Research Design…............................................................................... 36 B. Population and Sample………………………………………………. 36 C. Object of Study……………………………………………………… 38 C. Method of Data Collection…………………………………………… 38 D. Technique of Data Analysis………………………………………….. 39 E. Code of Analyze Coherence and Cohesion Devices…………………..40 CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Types of Cohesive Devices Used in Descriptive Text ...…………...... 42 B. Types of Cohesive Devices Used in Descriptive Text……………..... 48
CHAPTER V: CLOSURE A. Conclusions…………………………………………………………... 56 B. Suggestions…………………………………………………………... 56 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………...... 59 APPENDICES
LIST OF TABLES Table.2.1. Table of the Categories of Personal Reference………………… 15 Table.2.2. Categories of
Demonstrative Reference………………………... 16 Table.2.3. Classifications of Additive Conjunction……………………….. 24 Table.2.4. Classifications of Adversative Conjunction……………………. 25 Table.2.5. Classifications of Causal Conjunction…………………………. 27 Table.2.6. Classificat ions of Temporal Conjunction………………………. 28 Table.2.7 Table Transition Signal of Coherence…………………………… 35 Table.4.1. Table of Reference……………………………………………… 43 Table.4.2. Table of Substitution……………………………………………. 44 Table.4.3. Table of Ellipsis………………………………………………… 44 Table.4.4. Table of Conjunction…………………………………………… 45 Table.4.5. Table of Lexical Cohesive Devices…………………………….. 46 Table.4.6.Table of Cohesive Devices……………………………………… 47 Table.4.7. Table of Logical Order………………………………………….. 52 Table.4.8. Table of Types
Coherence devices……………………………... 52 LIST OF DIAGRAMS Diagram 4.1 Diagram of Cohesive Devices……………………………….. 47 Diagram 4.2 Diagram of Coherence Devices………………………………. 53
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study The language is very important in making people accepted by society. In
the Qur'an Allah tells the people to in order to understand the language of any group. Do not get people to preach to someone, but that person does not understand what people say. Because truly Allah sends His messenger with the language.
Surah Ibrahim 4:
ُُۚءٓاَش َي نَم يِد ۡهَي َو ُءٓاَشَي نَم ُ َّللَّٱ ُّل ِضُيَف ۡۖۡمُهَل َنِ يَبُيِل ۦِهِم ۡوَق ِناَسِلِب َّلَِّإ ٍلوُسَّر نِم اَنۡلَس ۡرَأ ٓاَم َو . ٤ ُميِكَحۡلٱ ُزي ِزَعۡلٱ َوُه َو
“And we never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. Then Allah sanded whom He will astray, and guides whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise”, (Ali, 1983:174).
The above verse refers to the importance of language that is to deliver a message. In delivering a message, a part of language system named cohesion is used to make the message meaningful. People need cohesion and coherence to communicate with other people by using both formal situation and informal situation, either by using grammatical cohesion or by using lexical cohesion.
In the context of English language teaching as a foreign language taught in Indonesia, the teaching and learning of English especially writing subject demands to use both cohesion and coherence in a text. Moreover the university students are expected to be able to express their ideas both in non- academic writing and academic writing such as writing an essay, an article and a thesis as their final project which applies the usage of cohesion and coherence.
Richards and Renandya (2002: 30) say that: “There are four basic language skills in English such as listening, speaking, reading and writing.
Those are important skills in learning Engl ish. From those skills, “writing is considered as the most difficult skill for L2 learners to master”. Based on that statement, the difficulty in writing is not only on how to generate and organize the ideas, but also how to translate the ideas into the readable text.
Relating to the difficulty of writing above, the students should pay more attention in writing and on how to express the ideas, thoughts, and opinions in the written form.
Moreover, as it is stated in the previous paragraph, writing is one of the important skills in English. There are some reasons relating to the importance of writing skill for the students. The first is to lead the students to the academic success in the school. By developing the writing skill, students will gain benefit in writing their paper or essay assignments from a single paragraph and building multi-paragraphs essay. Then, the other reason for the students is to develop their critical thinking so that they will have confidence in writing academic papers. By having good critical thinking in writing skill, they will be confident to put the ideas into the paper and write their papers easily in several pages long.
The writer will analyze of the text made by the students. Then the texts are analyzed by discourse analysis.
Based on the definition of syntax as Richards and his friends (1985: 284 & 285) say that
: “it is the study of how words combine to form sentences and the rules which gove rn the formation of sentences”. It’s mean that writing which has the syntactic activity for moving of thoughts or assumptions in mind to written form in a paper such as in a sentence or some sentences is not easy, particularly until making a correct text which has cohesion and coherence devices.
This study deal more about discourse analysis. Murcia (2000: 3) states that discourse analysis is useful for drawing attention to the language skill, which put users’ knowledge of phonological, grammatical and lexical resources into action whenever language users achieve successful communication. Discourse analysis is academic discipline which studies about how language is used in real condition or situation. In discourse analysis actually the data are text (written or spoken text). Discourse analysis also has many aspects to consider, one aspect is cohesion, which can be defined as interconnection of some of parts (sentences) in text, caused by internal factor.
The importance of studying cohesion and coherence, is to create a good and systematic text, and to make us easily understand what information is delivered in it. Cohesive and coherence devices help students carry over a thought from one sentence to another, from one idea to another, or from one paragraph to another with words or phrases. Cohesive and coherence devices link your sentences and paragraphs together smoothly so that there is no abrupt jump or break between ideas. Furthermore, cohesive and coherence devices help the reader accurately understands and follows the writer’s thought.
Besides many kinds of text, the writer chooses the descriptive text as the object of the study because the descriptive text is the text which describes about a place, an animals, people, or thing so that the reader can be see and imagine something that written by the authors.
Based on the explanation above, in this study the writer would like to identify cohesion and coherence devices on the descriptive texts composed by the students ’ of English Education Department State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga.
B. Problems of the Study
A research problem is one that a researcher would like to research. The problems of the study are formulated as follows:
1. What are the types of coherence devices correctly made by the fourth semester students’ of English Education Department of IAIN Salatiga? 2. What are the types of cohesion devices correctly made by the fourth semester students’ of English Education Department of IAIN
Salatiga?
C. Objectives of the Study
In line with the problems stated above, the writer formulates the objectives of the study as follows:
1. To know the types of coherence devices that correctly used in text made by the fourth semester students’ of English Education Department of IAIN Salatiga 2. To identify the types of cohesion devices that correctly used in text made by the fourth semester stud ents’ of English Education
Department of IAIN Salatiga D.
Significances of the Study 1. Theoretical benefit
This result of the study is expected to be input in teaching learning process especially for teaching writing subject.
2. Practical benefits a.
The study is intended to be one consideration for English lecturers in applying any strategy or increasing any technique of teaching English, especially writing subject.
b.
The study can help students by giving valuable input about coherence and cohesion devices in creating the text.
E. Limitation of this Study
The writer tries to identify the grammar, capitalization and punctuation of the texts. In order that, the sentences which are well structured are analyzed. The sentences which are not well structured are not analyzed, except to identify the logical order, the rules above are not used.
F. Definition of the Key Terms
Definition of the key terms are defined as follow in order to avoid the ambiguity and misunderstanding or misinterpretation about the terms which are used in this study and also to make this study be clear for the reader.
1. Discourse analysis is useful for drawing attention to the language skill, which put users’ knowledge of phonological, grammatical and lexical resources into action whenever language users achieve successful communication. Discourse analysis is academic discipline which studies about how language is used in real condition or situation. In discourse analysis actually the data are text (Murcia, 2000:3) 2. Descriptive text is creates an impression in reader’s mind of event, a place, a person or thing, the writing will be such that it will set a mood or describe something in such detail that if the reader saw it, they would recognize it, descriptive writing will bring words to life and makes the text interesting (Keraf, 2000:352).
3. Cohesion is the devices available to help link information in
writing and help the text flow and hold together. From those definitions, it is known that cohesion in the text related to the connection between texts to another text (Knapp and Megan, 2005: 47).
4. Coherence is the arrangement of ideas in a clear and logical way.
When a text is unified and coherent, the reader can easily understand the main points. In other words, coherence means that the paragraph is easy to read and understand because the supporting sentences are in some kind of logical order and the ideas are connected by the use of appropriate transition signals (Zemach and Rumisek, 2003, 2005: 82).
G. Organization of the Study
This study consists of five chapters. The first chapter is the introduction which consists of description on the background of the study, Problems of the study, objectives of the study, significances of the study, scope and limitation of the study, definition of the key terms, and organization of the study. The second chapter presents review of preview of studies and related literature. Then, chapter three presents method of the study that consists of research design data, population and sample, object of study, method of data collection, method of data analysis and coding of analyze. The writer analyzes the data in chapter four and finally the writer provides conclusion and suggestion in chapter five.
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Previous Studies A previous study is considered as a helpful element in conducting
research. For example, a journal which is usually accompanied by a summary of theories relevant to a particular theme can be used and developed into a major theory in thesis writing. Furthermore, by looking at journals or previous studies, someone can easier arrange his type of research methodology if those studies have the same or similar types with his research. As references, in this study, the writer takes three previous studies: the first is a study by Suwandi, Zia Hisni Mubarak, Hamzah, Desmawati Radjab and Ayub, Seken K, suarnajaya W.
The first is study conducted by Suwandi (2015:1) which investigated the writing of the abstract, therefore should be concise and the logical relation among sentences is clear, coherent and cohesive. However, many of the students still find difficulties in making their writing coherent due to their limitation in understanding the cohesive devices and their application in their writing abstracts of the final project reports of the undergraduate students of PGRI University Semarang, Indonesia. Its objectives are (1) to reveal the micro-level coherence, how each sentence is connected to the other to make logical relations and (2) to discover the macro-level coherence, the right use of cohesive devices like conjunction, reference, substitution or ellipsis so as to make the whole text coherent. Several abstracts of the students’ final projects were selected randomly to be analyzed. Since it is a qualitative research, the data were in the level of words or sentences. The result shows that the abstracts analyzed have not satisfactorily achieved coherence though some cohesive devices like reference, conjunctions, ellipsis which are used to link one sentence to the other. Some grammatical mistakes are also found such as the plural forms, active-passive voice.
The second study is done Suarnajaya (2012:1) with the research the subjects investigated were 30 second grade students of SMAN 1 Labuapi.
There were two kinds of data collected: written and verbal data. In collecting the data, the students were given a writing task and the students and the English teacher were interviewed. The data were analyzed qualitatively based on Halliday and Hasans` theory of cohesion (1976) and Topical Progression Analysis of Lautamatti (1978) in Hoenisch (2009) and Almaden (2006). The results of study were (1) the students used the five types of cohesive devices to serve the coherence of their writings of which reference 40.84% with personal reference as the dominant use. Lexical cohesion was used 37.99% dominated with repetition. Then, it was followed by conjunction 19.60 %, ellipsis 1.35%, and substitution 0.29%; (2) the topical progression used was parallel progression with the percentage 56.84%, sequential progression 24.19%, and extended parallel progression 18.25%; (3) some problems in coherence of students` writings were reference, conjunction, lexical cohesion, tenses, auxiliary `to be`, passive voice, infinitive, gerund, subject-verb agreement, noun, preposition, and text structure. The result of the study indicates that cohesion and coherence have to be the emphasis in teaching writing and the English teachers have to be competent in evaluating the coherence of students` writings.
The third study entitled Majohar (2013:1) which identified to students under study in creating cohesion and coherence in their English narrative writings. This study was designed as qualitative study. This study was conducted on 30 students of the ninth grade in SMP Negeri 2 Banjar. The data were collected through students’ narrative writings, students’ questionnaire and teachers’ interview. The data were analyzed by using the theory introduced by Halliday and Hasan (1976). The analysis was concerned with: grammatical cohesion (reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction), lexical cohesion (reiteration and collocation) and aspect of coherence that were found in the students’ writings. The results of this study show that (a) the students produced the five types of cohesive devices to serve the coherence of their writings of which reference 70.77% with personal reference as the dominant use. Then, it was followed by conjunction 28.51%, substitution 0.57%, ellipsis 0.14%, lexical cohesion was used 137 item dominated with repetition 78%; (b) the students’ produced coherence of the narratives through the development of themes, and the generic structure; (c) some problems of coherence identified were the problems with reference (personal, demonstrative), conjunction (additive, adversative, causal, temporal) and limited choice of lexical item.
The different researches toward the writer’s is the research does not identify the problem, errors, and ability the students writing of the texts with cohesion and coherence devices. However, researches identify the problems, errors, and ability the students writing of the texts with cohesion and coherence devices.
B. Discourse Analysis
According to Brown and Yule (1983:1), say that “discourse analysis is the analysis of l anguage in used”. It means that discourse is analysis of language that is used by people both spoken and written. Boey (1975:117) states that “discourse is analysis is a recent development of language in Britain.
It studies the use of language in discourse, the manner which organizes the content of any subject and linguistic expression. It is part of the growing interest that linguistic are showing in the communicative properties of language and the functioning of language in social context.
Discourse analysis focuses on natural structure which is found in spoken language, as many find in discourse like conversation, interview, comment and utterance (Cristal, 1987:298). Its mean that discourse analysis just focus on speaking not writing like explained from brown that focus the speaking and writing language.
Stubbs (1983:30) state that “whereas linguistics studies language, discourse analysis can study the actual mechanism by which communication, understanding and interaction are maintained”. Expressed more generally, this means that discourse analysis must be concerned with ways in which information is selected to be known and shared as knowledge, taken for granted and not selected at all. It is therefore concerned, not just with whether statements are true or false but with states of information and differential access to information. From explanation above, the writer concludes that a discourse analysis is study about the use of language that is used by people both spoken and written texts in a social context. Therefore, they will understand what massage that is transferred well.
C. Concept of Cohesion
Halliday and Hasan (1976:3) say that: “The concept of cohesion is semantic one, it refers to relation of meaning that exist within a text, and to define it as a text. Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some elements in the discourse depends on that of another, the one presupposes the other, in the sense that it cannot be effectively decoded accept by resource to it. When this happens a relation of cohesion is set up, and the presupposed are there by at least potentially into a text”.
Cohesion is a semantic relation between sentence elements which presupposes an element in another sentence. Thus it is difficult to interpret a sentence when it is isolated from the context in which it occurs, as the sentence the hardly interpretable (Artawa, 2004:18). Its mean that relation sentence with likens another sentence, so very difficult to be explained.
D. Types of Cohesion
There two types of cohesive devices: they are grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion (Halliday and Hasan, 1976:31), that are:
1. Grammatical Cohesion
Grammatical cohesion is divided into four types: reference, substitution, ellipsis and conjunction.
1) Reference
Halliday and Hasan, 1976:31 say that: “Reference is the specific nature of the information that is signaled for retrieval. In case of reference, the information to be retrieved is the referential meaning, the identity of the particular thing or class of things that is being referred to; the cohesion lies in the continuity of reference, whereby the something enters into the discourse a second time.
According to Lyons (1968:44), “the relationship that holds between word and things is relationship of reference: word refer to thing”. Its mean that the reference the word refers to something that to be a subject or something.
In discourse analysis, “reference is treated as an action on the part of the speaker or writer, (Brown & Yule, 1983:28)”. It’s mean that an action on the speaker or writer as part from of the text. Finnegan (1999:203), states that “reference concern the ability of linguistic expressions to refer to real entities. It’s mean concern the ability from expressions to refer something.
Reference may be endophora and exophora is reference that lies in the inside of the text. Endophora is divided into anaphora and cataphora. Endophora is reference, which refers to preceding text; cataphora is reference, which refers to following text.
In addition, exophora is reference which lies outside the text in the context of situation.
Type of Reference is divided into three parts: personal, demonstrative, and comparative reference.
a.
Personal Reference Personal reference is reference by means of function in the speech situation, thought the category of person (Halliday
& Hasan, 1976:37). Its mean personal reference refer to the person or something.
Table 2.1. Categories of Personal ReferencePersonal Possessive Possessive Person pronoun determiners pronoun
Subject Object
I Me My Mine First
We Us Our Ours Second You You Your Yours
He Him His His She Her Her Hers
Third They Them Their Theirs
It It Its Its Example:
(1). My Husband and I are leaving. We have seen quite enough of this unpleasant.
(Halliday and Hasan, 1976:50) From example above, there are two kinds of personal reference which is my as the possessive determiners that refer to the speaker. I and we shows personal pronoun. I refer to the speaker and we refer to my (speaker’s) husband and the speaker (1).
b.
Demonstrative Reference Demonstrative reference is reference by means of location on scale of proximity. It is essentially a form of verbal pointing, as said before the speaker identifies the referent by locating it on scale of proximity (Halliday and Hasan, 1976:37). Its mean refer to the place or location that the people identify.
Table 2.2. Categories of Demonstrative Reference Proximity Singular Plural AdverbNear That These Here (now) Far This Those There, then Neutral The
Example: (2). Last year we went to Devon for a holliday. The holliday we had, there was the best we‟ve ever had.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:73) The demonstrative reference in example above is there which has the function of far proximity. It refer to Devon that is located far from the speaker now. In addition it is the indirect speech. c.
Comparative Reference Comparative reference is indirect reference by means of identity or similarity (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:37). There are two kinds of comparative reference: General and Particular comparison.
a) General Comparison
General comparison expresses likeness between things. The likeness may take the form of identity, where „two things‟ are, in fact, the same thing; or of similarity where two things like each other. (Halliday & Hasan, 1076:77)
The kinds of general comparison: i) Identity: same, equal, identical, identically. Example: We have received exactly the same report was submitted two months ago. ii) Similarity: such, similar, so, similarly, likewise. Example:
There are other qualities than conviviality needed for his job. iii) Deference: other, different, else, differently, otherwise. Example:
Find a number equal to the square of the sum an of digits.
(Halliday and Hasan, 1976:78) All the examples in (3) consist of general comparison reference. In (a) same means, the report is like the report that was submitted two months ago. Same is identity general comparison. In (b) other is the comparative reference in a form of difference. It means there are additional qualities needed for this job. In (c)
equal is identity general comparison, which means the
number that, same to the square of square of the sum of its digits.
b) Particular Comparison
Particular comparison expresses comparability between things in respect of a particular property. The property in question may be a matter of quantity or of quality. (Haliday & Hasan, 1976:80)
Example: a.
There were twice as many people there as last time.
b.
He’s a better man than I am.
c.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dream of in your philosophy.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:82) As in (a) is the enumerative comparative reference. It refers to the people who were there last time. In (b), better is particular comparison which better is an epithet. (c) Is enumerative comparison reference which
more refers to (the things) that are dreamt of in your philosophy.
2) Substitution
Substitution is as the replacement of one item by another. It is a relation in wording rather than in the meaning. It is also a relation within the text. “A substitute is a sort of counter, which is used in place of the repetition of a particular item (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:88- 89)”.
Chojimah (2014 :10), states that “substitution, which corresponds to the verb to substitute, is the replacement of a word or a group of words with a word which is apparently not related to the replaced words”. It mean that one word stand for an entire structure.
Type of Substitution is divided into three types; there are nominal, verbal, clausal substitution.
a.
Nominal Substitution Nominal substitution is expressed by the using of word one, ones, and same. Example: Mummy will you buy me a bus? I want the red one. (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:99)
From example above, the nominal substitution is one. It substitutes bus.
b.
Verbal Substitution The substitution form in the verbal group is do, with the usual morphological scatter do, does, did, doing, done.
This operates as head of a verbal group, in the place that is occupied by lexical verb, and its position is always final in the group. (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:112) Example:
(6).a. Does Granny look after you every day? She can’t
do at weekends, because she has to go to her own house.
b. Have they removed their furniture? They have
done the desks, but that’s all so far.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:114) In (a) do substitutes look after the addressee (you), and done in (b) substitutes removed.
c.
Clausal Substitution Clausal substitution is a type of substitution in which what is presupposed is not an element within the clause but an entire clause. The clausal substitution is so and not (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:130). Example: (7). is the mango ripe? – It seems so.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:134) In (7), the so presupposes the whole of the clause this is mango ripe . (8). Ought we to declare our winnings? – It ssays not.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:133) In (8), not substitutes for we ough not to declare our winnings .
3) Ellipsis
Ellipsis is simply substitution by zero. The starting point of the discussion of ellipsis can be the familiar notion that it is„something left unsaid (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:142).
Ellipsis is also the omission of an item. It can be interpreted as that form of substitution in which the item is replaced by nothing (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:88).
Type of Ellipsis is divided into three types; there are nominal, verbal, and clausal ellipsis.
a.
Nominal Ellipsis Nominal ellipsis is ellipsis within the nominal group
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:147). Example: (9). would you like to hear another verse?
- – I know twelve more.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:143) The nominal ellipsis is twelve more. It presupposes the preceding sentence. It can be interpreted as I know twelve
more another verse .
b.
Verbal Ellipsis Verbal ellipsis is the omission of an item within the verbal group (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:167). Example:
(10). A. What are you doing?
B. Thinking.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:178) The verbal ellipsis in conversation above is verb
thinking . An omission here is I am doing thinking. Thinking in B can only be interpreted as I am thinking.
c.
Clausal Ellipsis Clausal ellipsis is the omission of an item within the clausal. Example:
(11). who taught you to spell? – Grandfather did.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:199) The clausal ellipsis is did. Here is omission of the verb and the complement the clause that is omitted is taught
you to spell .
4) Conjunction
Conjunctive elements are cohesive not in themselves but indirectly by virtue of their specific meaning; there are not primarily devices for reaching out into the preceding (or following) text, but they express certain meaning which presuppose the presence of other components in the discourse. (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:226). Types of conjunction divided into two types: a.
Additive
The additive relation is somewhat different from coordination proper, although it is no doubt derivable from it.
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:244)
Additive relation is expressed by using of the word and,
incidentally, by the way
(Halliday & Hasan, 1976:243) Example:
on the other hand, by contrast
Dissimilar:
likewise, similarity, in the same way
Comparison: Similar:
for instance, thus.
Exemplif icat oty:
is, I mean, in other word
Appositi on: Exposito ry: this
Complex, de
emphatic:
Afterthoug
ht:
or, furthermore, similarly, in addition. It can be seen in the
table below.alternatively
Alternative:
furthermore, in addition, besides
Complex,
emphatic:
Additive:e: or, or else.
Alternativ
nor, and.Not.
Negative:
And, and also.
Table 2.3.Classifications of Additive Conjunction
External/ Internal Internal (unless otherwise specified) Additive Additive, simple: Additive:(12). in the next railroad stations the names of many railroad are followed by small numerals. These are time-table numbers indicating the table in which a given station is shown in the rail road’s representation. For example, under Danbury, Ct., is shown “N. Y. New Harvard H., 12.” This means Danbury is found on the time-table no. 12 of that railroad. (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:248)
From text above, the additive conjunction is for example which is included as exemplification and this means which is included as expository.
b.
Adversative
Adversative relation is contrary to expectation that may be derived from the content of what is being said, or from communication process, the speaker-hearer situation. (Halliday & Hasan, 1976:250)
Adversative relation is expressed by using of word but,
however, on the other hand, nevertheless. It can be seen on the
table below:
Table 2.4. Classifications of Adversative
Conjunction
External/ Internal (unless otherwise internal specified) Contrasti Correctio Dismissal: Advers Adversative ve: n Of Closed: in ative‘proper’: Avowal: meaning: any case, Simple:
in fact, instead, in either Yet, though, actually, rather, on case, only. as a the which,
Containing
matter of contrary ever way it
‘and’:
fact Of is but
Contrast wording: Openen Emphatic: ive ded: in
at least, however,