Analysis of Cohesive Devices in a Short Text: „Whiskey. No water. No Ice.“ by Tom Hart
Abstract
The aim of this paper was two-fold. Primarily, based on literature review, it presented various takes on what makes a text and what makes it cohesive. Secondly, it reports the results of the cohesion analysis performed on a short drama by Tom Hart. This drama was written as a submission for the London Royal Court Theatre competition “100 Word Play”. The author used the model of analysis of a dramatic dialogue proposed by Halliday and Hassan. The dramatic dialogue here is characterized as a speaking text, for the stage; therefore, the stage directions were excluded from the analysis as para-linguistic phenomena.
The results of the analysis revealed immediate ellipsis of anaphoric direction as the most common cohesive device in 47 percent of the text. Second in frequency are referencing mechanisms, and finally lexical devices and connectors. The analysis noted only one usage of verbal substitution. Furthermore, the analysis exposed the use of parallelisms, both lexical and structural, which are not predicted by the model. However, these instances were explained by Hoy’s model of complex lexical repetition.
As text linguistics finds its use in writing in foreign language, it is recommended that the future research comparatively analyze cohesive devices in original and translated text for the purpose of raising awareness of different ways of building a text in different languages. In addition, the author suggests future analysis to include the coherence of a dramatic dialogue with stage directions as they contribute to the understanding of the text.References
Adorján, M. (2013). Explorations in Lexical Repetition Analysis: The Outcomes of Manual vs. Computer Automated Research Methods. WoPaLP, 7(1), 1–28.
Alonso, P. (1991). The Literary Text Type: Notes on a Method of Analysis Based on Text Linguistic and a Practical Application to Katherine Mansfield’s “The Garden Party”. Atlantis, 13(1/2), 65–92.
Bailin, A. & Grafstein, A. (2016). Readability: text and context. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Beaugrande, R. D. & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman Paperback.
Cook, G. (1990). Discourse. Oxford: OUP
Couto, J., & Minel, J. L. (2009). Text Linguistics and Navigation: Questions about Text. Belgian journal of linguistics, 23(1), 91–102.
Glovacki-Bernardi, Z. (1990). O tekstu. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman Group.
Hart, T. (2012). Whiskey. No Water. No Ice. Royal Court Theater: 100 Word Plays. Доступно на: http://100wordplays.com/post/21568877320/whiskey-no-water-no-ice
Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mann, B. (2002). What is dialogue coherence? Dialogue Macrogame Theory [website]. University of California. Доступно на: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~billmann/dialogue
Мразовић, П. (2009). Граматика српског језика за странце. Београд: Књижара Зорана Стојановића.
Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse Analysis: An Introduction. London: Continuum.
Panasenko, N. (2013). Semantic Structure of Literary Text. Studia Anglica Resoviensia, 10(1), 38–50.
Poulimenou, S., Stamou, S., Papavlasopoulos, S., & Poulos, M. (2014). Short Text Coherence Hypothesis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 22(3), 1–20.
Taboada, M. T. (2004). Building coherence and cohesion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2010). Promoting Cohesion in EFL Expository Writing: A Study of Graduate Students in Thailand. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(16), 1–34.
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at: