English
Texture in Text: A Discourse Analysis of a News Article Using Halliday and Hasan’s Model of Cohesion
Paul A. CRANE
1. Introduction The study and analysis of actual language in use is the goal of text and discourse analysis. Michael Halliday, one of the linguists credited with the development of systemic linguistics and functional grammar, defines text as any authentic stretch of written or spoken language. According to Halliday (1994: xiv) the historical study of linguistics first involved studying the morphology of language followed by studying the meaning of words at the sentence level. Ultimately the goal of such analysis was to find the meaning of the forms of language. However, in Halliday’s view, the reverse approach is more meaningful: “A language is interpreted as a system of meanings, accompanied by forms through which the meanings can be expressed.” Beyond the grammar and lexis of language, understanding the mechanisms for how text is structured is the basis for his work. What makes any length of text meaningful and coherent has been termed texture. Texture is the basis for unity and semantic interdependence within text and a text without texture would just be a group of isolated sentences with no relationship to one another. Eggins (1994: 85) refers to the term put forth by Schegloff and Sacks
(1973/74) “sequential implicativeness” which proposes that language follows a linear sequence where one line of text follows another with each line being linked or related to the previous line. This linear progression of text creates a context for meaning. Contextual meaning, at the paragraph level is referred to as “coherence” while the internal properties of meaning is referred to as “cohesion”. Coherence has both “situational” coherence when field, tenor, and mode can be identified for a certain group of clauses and “generic” coherence when the text can be recognized as belonging to a certain genre. Cohesion relates to the “semantic ties” within text
Paul A. CRANE
1. Introduction The study and analysis of actual language in use is the goal of text and discourse analysis. Michael Halliday, one of the linguists credited with the development of systemic linguistics and functional grammar, defines text as any authentic stretch of written or spoken language. According to Halliday (1994: xiv) the historical study of linguistics first involved studying the morphology of language followed by studying the meaning of words at the sentence level. Ultimately the goal of such analysis was to find the meaning of the forms of language. However, in Halliday’s view, the reverse approach is more meaningful: “A language is interpreted as a system of meanings, accompanied by forms through which the meanings can be expressed.” Beyond the grammar and lexis of language, understanding the mechanisms for how text is structured is the basis for his work. What makes any length of text meaningful and coherent has been termed texture. Texture is the basis for unity and semantic interdependence within text and a text without texture would just be a group of isolated sentences with no relationship to one another. Eggins (1994: 85) refers to the term put forth by Schegloff and Sacks
(1973/74) “sequential implicativeness” which proposes that language follows a linear sequence where one line of text follows another with each line being linked or related to the previous line. This linear progression of text creates a context for meaning. Contextual meaning, at the paragraph level is referred to as “coherence” while the internal properties of meaning is referred to as “cohesion”. Coherence has both “situational” coherence when field, tenor, and mode can be identified for a certain group of clauses and “generic” coherence when the text can be recognized as belonging to a certain genre. Cohesion relates to the “semantic ties” within text