A. LOGICAL COHESION: It is done by using sentence connecters.

B. GRAMMATICAL COHESION

REEFERENCE
The term reference is traditionally used in semantics to define the relationship between a
word and what it points to in the real world.
Implies that the information is to be retrieved through the reference item is the referential meaning
(pronouns and determiners – personal, demonstrative and demonstrative)

(a) Use of pronominal forms to replace noun phrases

Napoleon was a great soldier. He was also a great administrator.
John bought a new car. It cost a lot of money, but it goes a lot better than his old one.
John and Mary are going on holiday to brazil. Their friends are very envious.
He decided to take some heavy shoes with him. He thought that these would be useful in
case he went walking.

(b) Use of pronominal forms to replace adverbials (noun phrases of time and
place)
He left the following day. He knew then that he was not coming back.
We called on them soon after breakfast. We should have realised that this was a bad
time for a visit.* (* Noun phrases are also used as replacives. For example: John was born
just before the war. At that time his parents lived in London)
I decided to take my books back to the library. When I got there, I found it was closed.

(c) Use of pronominal forms to replace clauses or sentences.

Some students work all night just before an exam. This is a great mistake.
John has just resigned. It was quite unexpected.
Notice that in the examples above the pronominal forms all refer back to something
previously mentioned. They may also refer forward. For example:
This is what you should do. You should be very frank.
My advice is as follows. Be very frank.
(d) Use of determiners (the, this, that, etc.) to refer back to a previous noun
phrase
Thieves broke into a jeweler’s shop in North Street last night. The thieves entered the
shop through a small back window.
I bought a pocket calculator last year. That calculator has proved very useful.
Former and latter are used to refer back to one of two previous noun phrases:
John and Tom both took part in the play. Only the former has had any real experience of
acting. The latter had never even been on the stage before.

(e)Verbal substitution: Have the children gone to sleep? I think they must have done it

LEXICAL DEVICES
Lexical device differs from the other cohesive elements in text in that it is non-grammatical.
Lexical cohesion refers to the “cohesive effect achieved by the selection of vocabulary” We
could say that it covers any instance in which the use of a lexical item recalls the sense of
an earlier one.
It refers to the ties created between lexical elements, such as words (e.g. rabbit), groups
(e.g. the velveteen rabbit), and phrases (e.g. get up steam) (Halliday 537). These lexical
ties can occur over long passages of text or discourse.

(a) Repetition of key words

These particular train services are not used very much by commuters. As a rule,
commuters tend to travel much earlier.

(b) Use of synonyms to avoid repetition

These cars were first made in 1972. When they were first produced, they were not very
popular.
If you have any thoughts on the subject, please let me know. I shall be interested to hear
your ideas.

(c) Use of a construction implying whole part or part-whole relationship

You will need to take some tools with you. You can get a hammer, a saw and a
screwdriver from most big department stores.
Large cars and lorries are not advised to use this route. These vehicles should take the
other road.

(d) Use of related word forms

Seven people have been arrested so far. The arrests were made late last night.

(e) Use of parallel structures

It is possible that the plan will succeed. It is equally possible that it will fail
Lexical Cohesion
Lexical cohesion refers to the ties created between lexical elements, such as words (e.g.
rabbit), groups (e.g. the velveteen rabbit), and phrases (e.g. get up steam) (Halliday 537).
These lexical ties can occur over long passages of text or discourse. The primary
paradigmatic types of lexical cohesion (meaning words of the same type or class) are
repetition, synonymy, hyponymy, and meronymy.
Repetition: using the same word over again, but not restricted to the same morphological
form (572).
E.g. using run (V), run (N), ran, running, runner, etc., all within the same text.
Synonymy: using words that are in some way synonymous, or, in the case of antonymy, in
some way antonymous.
E.g. Synonyms: sound-noise; Antonyms: sound-silence
Hyponymy: one word represents "a class of thing and the second either a super class or a
subclass, or another class at the same level" (574)
E.g. tree- oak, pine, elm
Meronymy: words that refer to parts of a whole.
E.g. tree- trunk, branch, leaf

There is a different type of lexical cohesion that occurs at the syntagmatic level (the level of syntax): 
Collocation: refers to the tendency of words to co-occur. For example, when one sees the noun pipe in a
sentence, it is more probable that the verb to smoke will also appear in the sentence (577). In another
example, the noun bicycle could more likely occur with the verb to ride then any random verb.
 

Implies that the information is to be retrieved through the reference

Reference item is the referential meaning (pronouns and determiners – personal,
demonstrative and demonstrative)

Refers to the process of replacing one expression by another (e.g. Did

Substitution
Grammatical Susie finish her homework in time? – I don’t think so.

Cohesion Designates the process of substituting something by nothing (e.g. How

Ellipsis
many potatoes do you want, Sir? – Four [], please.

Covers the use of adjunct-like elements to mark the semantic

Conjunction relationships (e.g. He didn’t study much. Nevertheless, he passed all his
exams.

Lexical Reiteration Repetition Suggests the lexical item is repeated

Cohesion General* Synonymy Relates lexical items which have the same meaning

Constrasts between a term which is the opposite of

Antonymy
another

Hyponymy Relates specific and general lexical items, such that the
former is included in the latter
 Meronymy Relates parts and wholes

Textual cohesion

As we already mentioned, an authentic translation involves more than just translating sentences,
however grammatically accurate. One has also to bear in mind the interaction between these sentences,
and the semantic and stylistic implications of this interaction.
Besides the thematic and information structure of a text, another important element is textual
cohesion.

Cohesion can be defined as the property that distinguishes a sequence of sentences that form a
discourse from a random sequence of sentences. It is a series of lexical, grammatical and other relations
which provide links between the various parts of a text. In studying cohesion we should make a
distinction between “linguistic cohesion” and “pragmatic cohesion” or coherence.

Consider the following exchanges:

(a)John likes Helen.

(b)She, however hates him.

(c)Do you have coffee to go?

(d)Cream and sugar?

In the first case the link between (a)

and (b) is provided by
pronominalization, which is a purely
linguistic link; in the second, the
connection between (c) and (d)
depends on knowledge and experience
of the real world.

Linguistic presupposition and pragmatic presupposition differ in a similar manner. While in linguistic
presupposition the information can be extracted from the linguistic context, in the case of pragmatic
presupposition, the information is deduced from outside the linguistic context.
Example:

John gave his brother two books.

Linguistic presupposition: John has a brother.

Possible pragmatic presupposition: John’s brother likes books.

We shall start from linguistic cohesion.

Halliday and Hasan have identified five kinds of cohesive devices in English:

Reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and lexical cohesion

Reference

The term reference is traditionally used in semantics to define the relationship between a word and
what it points to in the real world, but in Halliday and Hasan’s model it simply refers to the relationship
between two linguistic expressions.

In the textual sense, though, reference occurs when the reader/listener has to retrieve the identity of
what is being talked about by referring to another expression in the same context.

References to the “shared world” outside a text are called exophoric references.

References to elements in the text are called endophoric references.

Only the second ones are purely cohesive, although both of them are important to create texture.

There are times when the reference is not explicit in the text itself, but it is obvious to those in a
particular situation. This is called exophoric reference.

     For he's a jolly good fellow

      And so say all of us.

As outsiders, we don’t know who the he is, but, most likely, the people involved in the celebration are
aware of the he that is being referred to, and therefore, can find texture in the sentences.

Another type of reference relation that is not strictly textual is co-reference.

A chain of co-referential items such as Mrs Thatcher → the Prime Minister → The Iron Lady → Maggie
reveals that co-reference is not strictly a linguistic feature but depends on real-world knowledge. You
need some external information to realize that the terms refer to the same person.

At the level of textual co-reference, there is a continuum of cohesive elements that can be used for
referring back to an entity already mentioned. This continuum goes from full repetition to pronominal
reference, through synonym, superordinate and general word.

I saw a boy in the garden.The boy (repetition)was climbing a tree. I was worried about the child
(superordinate).The poor lad (synonym)was obviously not up to it. The idiot (general word) was going to
fall if he (pronoun)didn’t take care.

Patterns of reference can vary considerably both within and across languages. Within the same
language, text type seems to be an important factor in determining the choice of pattern.
Each language has general preferences for some patterns of reference as well as specific references
according to text type.
Endophoric referencing can be divided into three areas: anaphoric, cataphoric, and esphoric.

Anaphoric refers to any reference that “points backwards” to previously mentioned information in text.

Cataphoric refers to any reference that “points forward” to information that will be presented later in
the text.

Esphoric is any reference within the same nominal group or phrase, a NP

that “is formally definite but in fact realizes presenting 
rather than presuming reference" (pseudo-definite NP in unmarked existential constructions).

Vaguely, he saw the form of a man.

In  a  room  outside  the  court  he 

talked  with  the  French  prosecuting 
counsel.

For cohesion purposes, anaphoric referencing is the most relevant as it “provides a link with a preceding
portion of the text”.

Functionally speaking, there are three main types of cohesive references: personal, demonstrative, and
comparative.

Personal reference keeps track of function through the speech situation using noun pronouns like “he,
him, she, her”, etc. and possessive determiners like “mine, yours, his, hers”, etc.

All languages have certain linguistic items which they use as a reference in the textual sense.
In English the most common are personal pronouns (subject and object), determiners and
possessives.

Third person pronouns are often used to refer back, and sometimes forward, to a participant
that has already been introduced or will be introduced into the discourse.

The prime minister has resigned. He announced his decision this morning.

Wash and core six cooking apples. Put them into a fireproof dish.

These are both cases of endophoric reference which signals to the reader that he or she needs
to look back in the text to find its meaning.

Unlike English, which tends to rely heavily on pronominal reference in tracing participants, Italian, which
inflects verbs for person and number (like French, Spanish and German), generally seems to prefer
lexical repetition or co-reference.

Demonstrative reference
Demonstrative reference keeps track of information through location using proximity references like
“this, these, that, those, here, there, then, and the”.

I always drink a lot of beer when I am in England. There are many lovely pubs there.

This is not acceptable.

Comparative reference

Comparative reference keeps track of identity and similarity through indirect references using adjectives
like “same, equal, similar, different, else, better, more”, etc. and adverbs like “so, such, similarly,
otherwise, so, more”, etc.

A similar view is not acceptable.

We did the same.

So they said.

Substitution and ellipsis

Whereas referencing functions to link semantic meanings within text, substitution and ellipsis differ in
that they operate as a linguistic link at the lexicogrammatical level. Substitution and ellipsis are used
when “a speaker or writer wishes to avoid the repetition of a lexical item and draw on one of the
grammatical resources of the language to replace the item”.

Substitution

There are three general ways of substituting in a sentence: nominal, verbal, and clausal. In nominal
substitution, the most typical substitution words are “one and ones” . In verbal substitution, the most
common substitute is the verb “do” which is sometimes used in conjunction with “so” as in “do so”.

Let's go and see the bears. The polar ones are over on that rock.

Did Mary take that letter? She might have done.

In clausal substitution, an entire clause is substituted.

If you’ve seen them so often, you

get to know them very well.
I believe so.
 Everyone thinks he’s guilty. If so, no doubt he’ll resign.

We should recognise him when we see him.

Yes, but supposing not: what do we do?

Ellipsis

Ellipsis (zero substitution) is the omission of elements normally required by the grammar which the
speaker/writer assumes are obvious from the context and therefore need not be raised.

If substitution is replacing one word with another, ellipsis is the absence of that word, "something left
unsaid". Ellipsis  requires retrieving specific information that can be found in the preceding text.
There are three types of ellipsis too: nominal, verbal, and clausal.

(a) Do you want to hear another song? I know twelve more [songs]
(b) Sue brought roses and Jackie [brought] lilies.
(c) I ran 5 miles on the first day and 8 on the second

A translator needs only be aware that there are different devices in different languages for creating
“texture”. This has clear implications in practice. Usually what is required is reworking the methods of
establishing links to suit the textual norms of the target language and of each genre.

Discourse markers and conjunctions

A third way of creating cohesion is through discourse markers and conjunctions. Discourse markers are
linguistic elements used by the speaker/writer to ease the interpretation of the text, frequently by
signalling a relationship between segments of the discourse, which is the specific function of
conjunctions. They are not a way of simply joining sentences. Their role in the text is wider that that,
because they provide the listener/reader with information for the interpretation of the utterance; that is
why some linguists prefer to describe them as discourse markers.

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, amongst 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
signalled through “and, also, too, furthermore, additionally”, etc. Additive conjunctions may also act to
negate the presupposed item and are signalled by “nor, and...not, either, neither”, etc.
Adversative conjunctions act to indicate “contrary to expectation” and are signalled by “yet, though,
only, but, in fact, rather”, etc.

Causal conjunction expresses “result, reason and purpose” and is signalled 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 signalling 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.

A more comprehensive list of conjunctions

could be the following:

Some languages (like Italian) tend to express relations through subordination and complex structures.
Others (like English)prefer to use simpler and shorter structures and present information in relatively
small chunks.

Whether a translation has to conform to the source-text pattern of cohesion will depend on its purpose
and the freedom the translator has to reorganize information.

Lexical Cohesion

Lexical cohesion differs from the other cohesive elements in text in that it is non-grammatical. Lexical
cohesion refers to the “cohesive effect achieved by the selection of vocabulary” We could say that it
covers any instance in which the use of a lexical item recalls the sense of an earlier one.

The two basic categories of lexical cohesion are reiteration and collocation.

Reiteration is the repetition of an earlier item, a synonym, a near synonym, a superordinate or a

general word, but it is not the same as personal reference, because it does not necessarily involve the
same identity.
After the sequence:
I saw a boy in the garden.The boy (repetition)was climbing a tree. I was worried about the child
(superordinate).The poor lad (synonym)was obviously not up to it. The idiot (general word) was going to
fall if he (pronoun)didn’t take care.

We could conclude by saying: “Boys can be so silly”. This would be an instance of reiteration,
even though the two items would not be referring to the same individual(s)

As we have already seen, collocation pertains to lexical items that are likely to be found
together within the same text. It occurs when a pair of words are not necessarily dependent upon the
same semantic relationship but rather they tend to occur within the same lexical environment.

Examples

Opposites (man/woman, love/hate, tall/short).

Pairs of words from the same ordered series (days of the week, months, etc.)

Pairs of words from unordered lexical sets, such as meronyms:

part-whole (body/arm, car/wheel)

part-part (hand/finger, mouth/chin)
or
co-hyponyms (black/white, chair/table).

Associations based on a history of co-occurrence (rain, pouring, torrential).

John drove up in his old estate wagon. The car had obviously seen a lot of action. One hubcap was
missing, and the exhaust pipe was nearly eaten up with rust.

Lexical cohesion is not only a relation between pairs of words. It usually operates by means of lexical
chains that run through a text and are linked to each other in various ways.
The notion of lexical cohesion provides the basis for what Halliday and Hasan call instantial meaning.
The importance of this concept for translators is obvious. Lexical chains do not only provide cohesion,
they also determine the sense of each word in a given context.
For example, if it co-occurs with terms such as “universe, stars, galaxy, sun”, the word “earth” must be
interpreted as “planet” and not as “ground”.

In a target text, it is not always possible to reproduce networks of lexical cohesion which are identical to
those of the source text, for example because the target language lacks a specific item, or because the
chain is based on an idiom that cannot be literally translated. (ex. It was raining cats and dogs and the
dogs were barking). In this case one has to settle for a slightly different meaning or different
associations.

Cohesion is also achieved by a variety of devices other than those we have mentioned. These include,
for instance, continuity of tense, consistency of style and punctuation devices like colons and semi-
colons which, like conjunctions indicate how different parts of the text relate to each other.
In the approach to text linguistics by de Beaugrande & Dressler (1981), text, oral or printed, is
established as a communicative occurrence, which has to meet seven standards of textuality. If any of
these standards are not satisfied, the text is considered not to have fulfilled its function and not to be
communicative.

Cohesion and coherence are text-centred notions. Cohesion concerns the ways in which the components
of the surface text (the actual words we hear or see) are mutually connected within a sequence.
Coherence, on the other hand, concerns the ways in which the components of the textual world, i.e. the
concepts and relations which underlie the surface text, are relevant to the situation. 

The remaining standards of textuality are user-centred, concerning the activity of textual
communication by the producers and receivers of texts:

Intentionality concerns the text producer’s attitude that the set of occurrences should constitute a
cohesive and coherent text instrumental in fulfilling the producer’s intentions.

Acceptability concerns the receiver’s attitude that the set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive
and coherent text having some use or relevance for the receiver.

Informativity concerns the extent to which the occurrences of the text are expected vs. unexpected or
known vs. unknown.

Situationality concerns the factors which make a text relevant to a situation of occurrence. 

Intertextuality concerns the factors which make the utilisation of one text dependent upon knowledge
of one or more previously encountered texts.

The above seven standards of textuality are called constitutive principles, in that they define and create
textual communication as well as set the rules for communicating.

There are also at least three regulative principles that control textual communication: the efficiency of a
text is contingent upon its being useful to the participants with a minimum of effort; its effectiveness
depends upon whether it makes a strong impression and has a good potential for fulfilling an aim; and
its appropriateness depends upon whether its own setting is in agreement with the seven standards of
textuality.