Conjunctions, Substitution, Ellipsis & Cohesion

Cohesion ➔ creation of “texture” (logical connectedness) in a text.
Devices already covered:
- Reference system (pronouns, articles, demonstratives, etc.).
- Lexical cohesion (a type of semantic cohesion) created through semantic relations among lexical items.
- Types: repetition, synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, meronymy, collocation.
- Within collocation:
- Expectancy relations.
- Lexical bundles (identified through corpus studies).
Corpus = large body of texts from the same genre (e.g., university textbooks, dissertations).

“Conjunction” in this course ≠ only coordinating or subordinating conjunctions.
Encompasses any lexical item that joins words, phrases, clauses, sentences, or entire texts and simultaneously signals a logical–semantic relation.
Includes:
- Coordinators (FANBOYS).
- Subordinators (although, when, whereas, etc.).
- Transitions / conjunctive adverbials (however, meanwhile, in addition, furthermore, on the other hand, etc.).

Conjunctions guide readers/listeners toward the intended interpretation ➔ coherence.
They reveal argumentative stance, attitude, and logical flow (“logicality”).

Different scholars label the same items differently:
- “Text connectives” (Vande Kopple, 1985).
- “Textual markers” (Crismore, Markkanen & Steffensen, 1993).
- “Frame markers” (Hyland, 2005).
- Professor’s own term: “connective adjuncts.”
Despite terminological diversity, the functional core is consistent: organising and linking discourse.

Additive
- Positive sense: and, also, moreover, furthermore, in addition, besides.
- Contrastive–additive sense: or, alternatively.
- Note: some linguists oppose treating or/alternatively as additive, preferring a separate “choice” category.
Comparative (positive & negative)
- Positive/similarity: likewise, equally.
- Negative/contrast: whereas, but, on the other hand.
- Alternative nomenclature: some authors reserve “contrastive” for the negative trio and “comparative” for the positive duo.
Temporal
- while, when, after, meanwhile, then, finally, at the same time.
- Function: chronological sequencing and time anchoring.
Consequential
- so that, because, since, thus, if, therefore, in conclusion, in this way.
- Further subdivided (Table 6.1 / p. 124):
  - Cause: because, since.
  - Means: thus, in this way.
  - Condition: if, provided that, unless.

“so” vs. “so that”
- so = resultative (“as a result”).
- so that = purposive (“in order to”).
Examples:
- “I was tired, so I did not go to the university.”
- “Charles washed the vegetables well so that he would not get sick.”

Coordinators (especially and, but) are acceptable within sentences.
At the start of new sentences: preferred to substitute with transitions for an academic tone.
- and ➔ moreover, in addition.
- but ➔ however, on the other hand.
Over-use of conjunctions = stylistically weak; use judiciously.

Sequence material: first, next.
Label stages: in conclusion, finally.
Announce discourse goal: my aim here is to…
Announce topic shift: well, now.
Relationship to lexical bundles: fixed, corpus-identified strings (e.g., “my aim here is to”) can be both bundles and frame markers.
Function: steer readers toward “preferred interpretations,” ensure coherence, enhance persuasiveness.

Purpose: avoid redundancy; maintain texture.
Requires an antecedent.
Types & Examples
- Nominal: “Try reading this book. That one isn’t very good.”
- Verbal: A: “Has he had dinner yet?” B: “He must have done.”
- Clausal: A: “That’s great to hear you’re still happy.” B: “Oh yes, very much so.”
Distinction from anaphoric reference: uses special pro-forms (one, do/done, so) rather than pronouns/articles.

Omission of recoverable material; relies on prior context.
Also establishes cohesion through economy.
Levels
- Nominal ellipsis: “The first train and the second have arrived.”
- Verbal ellipsis: “John can play the guitar, and Mary the violin.”
- Phrasal ellipsis: “Fred took a picture of you, and Susan of me.” / “He has done it before, which means he will again.”
- Clausal ellipsis: “Who has been hiding the truth? Billy.”
Spoken-discourse illustration (radio call-in): large clauses omitted yet intelligible due to shared discourse knowledge.

Similarity: all can be anaphoric (require antecedent).
Key difference: distance.
- Reference pronouns/articles can point back over long stretches (paragraphs).
- Substitution & ellipsis are local ➔ antecedent usually in the same clause or adjacent clause.

Edward Bear ➔ he / his (anaphoric).
It (anaphoric to “way of coming downstairs”).
you (reader) = exophoric on first mention, anaphoric on subsequent mentions.
I (author) similar pattern.
Definite article with qualifier (esphoric): “the back of his head.” (identity supplied by following qualifier, no earlier mention required).
Comparative reference: “another way” (contrasted with bumping).

Master full range of conjunctions; vary usage in compositions.
Distinguish semantic classes; match item to intended relation.
Prioritise transitions/ frame markers for formal academic prose.
Avoid overuse; insert only when logical connection is not already obvious.
Recognise substitution & ellipsis as grammatical yet discourse-level cohesion strategies.
During textual analysis, track both lexical chains and reference chains for a comprehensive view of cohesion.

(Numbers shown in LaTeX as requested)