DA Module 02 Modes of Discourse, Audience, and Communicative Purpose
DA Module 04 Theme, Rheme, and the Flow of Information
Discourse Analysis Module 3: Cohesion and Coherence — How Texts Hold Together
⚡ Module Overview
Grammatical cohesion, lexical chains, and the construction of continuity
Readers and listeners usually experience a text as connected rather than as a random series of sentences.
That connectedness is partly created through visible linguistic ties:
- pronouns refer to participants;
- conjunctions signal relationships;
- repeated or related words sustain topics;
- omitted material can be recovered from surrounding discourse.
However, formal connections do not automatically make a text meaningful.
Cohesion concerns the linguistic resources that connect parts of a text.
Coherence concerns the meaningful whole constructed by producers and interpreters.
In this module, you will examine:
- grammatical cohesion;
- reference and participant tracking;
- substitution;
- ellipsis;
- conjunction;
- lexical cohesion;
- lexical chains;
- the relationship between cohesion and coherence.
The goal is not simply to identify cohesive devices. The goal is to explain how particular linguistic choices support—or fail to support—the communicative work of a text.
🎯 Essential Understandings
- How do grammatical and lexical choices create continuity across extended discourse?
- Why can a text be cohesive without being coherent—or coherent with relatively few explicit ties?
❓ Guiding Questions
- How do reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction link clauses and sentences?
- How do repetition, synonymy, superordination, and collocation form lexical chains?
- When does a cohesive device clarify relationships?
- When can it create ambiguity or unnecessary repetition?
- How can teachers help learners use cohesion as a meaning-making resource rather than as a connector checklist?
✅ Learning Outcomes
By the end of this module, you should be able to:
- Identify and classify grammatical cohesive ties in authentic written and spoken texts.
- Construct and interpret lexical-chain maps across paragraphs or turns.
- Distinguish cohesion from coherence.
- Explain how contextual knowledge contributes to interpretation.
- Evaluate the effectiveness and appropriateness of cohesive choices across genres.
- Design a brief noticing or revision activity for ELT learners focused on connected discourse.
🧠 Key Concepts and Vocabulary
Cohesion
Observable linguistic ties that connect elements within a text.
Coherence
The meaningful unity interpreters construct from:
- textual organization;
- context;
- knowledge.
Reference
The use of an expression whose interpretation depends on another element or on the context.
Anaphoric Reference
Reference backward to a previously mentioned element.
Remember: anaphoric = look back.
Cataphoric Reference
Reference forward to an element introduced later.
Remember: cataphoric = look forward.
Exophoric Reference
Reference to something in the situation outside the text.
Remember: exophoric = look outside the text.
Substitution
Replacement of a linguistic item with another form such as:
- one
- do
- so
Ellipsis
The omission of material that can be recovered from the surrounding discourse.
Conjunction
A resource for signaling relationships such as:
- additive;
- adversative;
- causal;
- temporal.
Lexical Cohesion
Continuity created through semantic relationships among lexical items.
Lexical Chain
A sequence of semantically related words that develops or sustains a discourse topic.
1️⃣ Cohesion Is a Resource, Not a Guarantee
Cohesion refers to explicit or recoverable relationships among elements of a text.
Resources such as:
- pronouns;
- repeated words;
- conjunctions;
- omitted material
signal that one part of a text should be interpreted in relation to another.
These resources can:
- reduce unnecessary repetition;
- help readers track participants;
- maintain objects and events;
- signal logical relationships.
Coherence is broader.
It concerns whether a discourse can be interpreted as a meaningful whole.
Cohesive but Not Coherent
The seminar begins at nine. It has four wheels. Therefore, the reading was difficult.
This example contains:
- a pronoun;
- a connector.
Yet the propositions do not form a meaningful relationship.
Coherent with Few Explicit Cohesive Ties
Doorbell. Dog barking. I’ll get it.
There are few formal linguistic connections.
Nevertheless, shared situational knowledge allows us to infer a coherent sequence.
Key Principle
Adding more connectors does not necessarily improve coherence.
Coherence may depend on:
- topic development;
- genre organization;
- shared knowledge;
- reference clarity;
- logical consistency.
Cohesive devices should express relationships that already make sense rather than hide a weak relationship beneath however or therefore.
2️⃣ Reference and Participant Tracking
Reference directs the interpreter toward:
- a person;
- an object;
- an event;
- a location;
- a proposition.
Reference can be realized through:
personal pronouns;
demonstratives;
comparative forms;
definite noun phrases.
Anaphoric Reference
María submitted the transcript. She also attached the coding key.
She points backward to María.
Cataphoric Reference
Although he was nervous, Daniel began the presentation clearly.
he points forward to Daniel.
Exophoric Reference
Put it over there.
The meaning of it and there depends on the physical or situational context.
Reference Chains
A participant may be:
- introduced with a full noun phrase;
- maintained through a pronoun;
- reidentified with a noun phrase when ambiguity becomes possible.
Effective reference balances economy and clarity.
Possible Problems
Too much repetition may sound mechanical.
Too many pronouns may:
- overload the reader’s memory;
- create competing antecedents;
- make participant tracking difficult.
Analytical Question
Trace each referring expression and ask:
Can the reader confidently recover its referent?
3️⃣ Reference in Spoken Discourse
Reference that appears vague in a transcript may be perfectly understandable in the original interaction.
Spoken interaction may rely on:
- gesture;
- gaze;
- physical surroundings;
- shared visual context.
For this reason, transcripts sometimes need contextual notes.
The words alone do not always represent the complete communicative event.
4️⃣ Substitution
Substitution replaces an item with another linguistic form rather than simply referring to the same item.
Nominal Substitution
I need a blue marker. Do you have one?
one substitutes for a marker.
Importantly, it does not mean the exact marker previously mentioned.
Compare Reference and Substitution
Substitution
I need a blue marker. Do you have one?
→ another member of the category marker
Reference
I bought a blue marker. I put it on my desk.
→ the same marker
Verbal Substitution
A: Did Elena finish the report?
B: Yes, she did.did substitutes for finished the report.
Clausal Substitution
A: Do you think the class will be canceled?
B: I think so.so substitutes for the proposition:
the class will be canceled
Negative Clausal Substitution
A: Will the exam be postponed?
B: Probably not.not represents the negative version of the proposition.
5️⃣ Ellipsis
Ellipsis occurs when recoverable material is omitted.
A: Who finished the coding?
B: Ana did.The complete meaning is:
Ana finished the coding.
However, finished the coding does not need to be repeated because the preceding question makes it recoverable.
Ellipsis is particularly common in interaction because participants share an immediately available discourse context.
6️⃣ Conjunction and Logical Relationships
Conjunction signals relationships among propositions.
Common relationships include:
Additive
→ adds information
Adversative
→ contrasts expectations or ideas
Causal
→ expresses reason, result, or purpose
Temporal
→ orders events
Explicit Causal Relationship
Because the clip was noisy, we replayed it.
The causal relationship is explicitly marked.
Implicit Causal Relationship
The clip was noisy. We replayed it.
The reader can infer causality even without an overt connector.
Go Beyond Counting Connectors
Do not simply identify or count connectors.
Ask:
- What relationship does the producer appear to signal?
- Is that relationship actually justified?
- How does the linguistic choice fit the genre?
Spoken and Written Discourse
Spoken discourse may use:
- and
- so
- but
- then
- anyway
quite flexibly for both logical and interactional purposes.
Academic writing may use more differentiated signals.
However, excessive connector variety can obscure rather than improve meaning.
🔗 Conjunction Examples
Adversative
The students completed the survey; however, they forgot to submit their written reflections.
Temporal
We reviewed the vocabulary, and then we listened to the recording.
Causal
The professor explained the concept again because several students were confused.
Additive
The students read the article and discussed the main ideas in pairs.
Concessive
Although the assignment looked easy, it took several hours to complete.
Additive
The class practiced identifying references. In addition, they analyzed examples of substitution.
Result
The internet connection failed; therefore, the teacher changed the activity.
Temporal
Before the students began writing, they created an outline.
Contrast
The first group supported the proposal, but the second group disagreed.
Additive
Students can use the library databases. Moreover, they can ask the librarian for research assistance.
Result
The students did not understand the instructions, so the teacher demonstrated the activity.
Temporal
After the discussion ended, each student wrote a short reflection.
Concession
The results were promising; nevertheless, additional research was necessary.
Sequence
The class finished the first activity. Next, they compared their answers with a partner.
7️⃣ Lexical Cohesion and Topic Development
Lexical cohesion arises through relationships among content words.
Repetition
Repeating an important term keeps a concept visible throughout a text.
Synonymy and Near-Synonymy
Related words provide variation while helping maintain topic continuity.
Superordination
A general category can connect with its members.
Example:
assessment
- quiz
- project
- portfolio
Collocation
Words may belong to the same field or situation.
Example:
classroom
- teacher
- learner
- task
- feedback
- rubric
8️⃣ Building a Lexical-Chain Map
A lexical-chain map traces semantic relationships across a text.
Step 1
Identify recurring topic words.
Step 2
Group semantically related expressions.
Step 3
Identify where chains:
- begin;
- continue;
- intersect;
- disappear.
Step 4
Interpret what the pattern reveals.
A strong chain may indicate:
- topic continuity;
- paragraph focus.
A sudden break may indicate:
- a purposeful shift;
- an undeveloped idea;
- an incoherent digression.
Competing chains may indicate:
- comparison between concepts;
- movement between theory and application.
🧭 Lexical Choice Also Frames Reality
Lexical cohesion is not simply a strategy for avoiding repetition.
Compare describing an event as:
- a protest;
- a disturbance;
- a demonstration;
- a riot.
Each expression activates a different evaluation.
Likewise, AI might be described as:
- a tool;
- a collaborator;
- an assistant;
- a threat;
- a shortcut.
These lexical choices influence interpretation.
Lexical cohesion therefore contributes to:
- stance;
- categorization;
- the construction of social reality.
9️⃣ Teaching and Revising Cohesion
Learners often receive lists of connectors detached from actual discourse.
A more useful approach begins with relationships and meaning.
Students can:
sort sentences into a logical sequence;
explain relationships between sentences;
compare possible linguistic signals;
trace reference chains;
locate unclear referents;
revise selectively;
build lexical chains before drafting.
Revision Should Move from Meaning to Form
Use this sequence:
1. Purpose and macrostructure
Does the text have a recognizable communicative purpose and organization?
2. Paragraph focus and progression
Does each part develop appropriately?
3. Local cohesion
Examine:
- reference;
- lexical continuity;
- logical relations.
This prevents cosmetic editing from replacing conceptual revision.
🔎 A Worked Micro-Analysis
Consider a short paragraph about peer feedback.
Step 1: Trace Reference
Circle expressions that refer to:
- participants;
- drafts;
- comments.
Draw arrows from:
- pronouns;
- definite noun phrases
to their likely referents.
If an expression could point to more than one referent, mark the ambiguity.
Step 2: Analyze Conjunction
Underline conjunctions.
For each one, identify:
- the relationship it signals;
- whether that relationship is actually supported by the propositions.
Step 3: Build Lexical Chains
One possible chain:
feedback → comments → suggestions → revision → response
Another:
students → peers → writers → partners
Examine:
- where the chains overlap;
- where they continue;
- where one disappears.
Step 4: Diagnose Problems
If the paragraph feels disconnected, determine whether the problem is:
- a missing link;
- an unclear referent;
- an undeveloped topic;
- a logical gap.
Step 5: Write an Analytical Statement
Use three parts:
1. Name the cohesive pattern.
2. Cite the textual evidence.
3. Explain its effect on coherence and audience processing.
📖 Sample Text: Grammatical Cohesion
On Tuesday afternoon, Laura met her classmates in the library to prepare their group presentation. She had already completed the introduction, but the other students still needed to finish their sections. Laura showed the group her notes and asked everyone to check them before they continued.
“Who finished the slides for the results section?” Laura asked.
“David did,” Ana replied.
David opened his laptop and showed the group the slides. Ana liked the design, but she thought one of the graphs was difficult to understand. “Maybe we should replace it with a simpler one,” she suggested. David agreed and searched for another graph.
The group also needed a charger for the classroom projector. Laura had forgotten hers, so she asked, “Does anyone have a charger?”
“I have one,” Ana said.
The students worked for another hour. However, they still needed to practice the presentation. They decided to meet again the next morning because everyone had an early class nearby. Before leaving, Laura uploaded the final slides to Teams, and she sent the group a message with the link.
Cohesion to Notice
Reference
Laura → She
notes → them
Ellipsis
“Who finished the slides?” → “David did.”
Substitution
“replace it with a simpler one”
“Does anyone have a charger?” → “I have one.”
Conjunction
- but the other students…
- However, they still needed…
- because everyone had…
- …Teams, and she sent…
✏️ Student Task: Find the Cohesive Ties
Read the sample text again without looking at the answer key.
Identify:
- at least two examples of reference;
- one example of ellipsis;
- two examples of substitution;
- at least three conjunctions.
For each example:
1. Identify the expression.
2. Explain what it refers to, replaces, omits, or connects.
3. Explain how that relationship contributes to the cohesion of the text.
🔄 Review: 12 Features of Discourse
The module also revisits the 12-feature framework from the previous module.
These features should be treated as dimensions rather than rigid categories.
1. Mode
A student leaves a voice message instead of sending a written text.
2. Spontaneity
“Well, um, I’m not sure… maybe we could meet after class?”
3. Planning
“Today I will explain three causes of language variation: region, social identity, and context.”
4. Permanence
A university policy posted as a PDF can be saved and reread, unlike an unrecorded hallway conversation.
5. Interactivity
A: Did you understand the assignment?
B: Not completely. What does the last question mean?
A: I think it asks us to compare the two texts.
6. Lexical Density
“The implementation of multilingual educational policies requires institutional coordination and sustained professional development.”
7. Deixis
“I’ll meet you here tomorrow after she finishes class.”
8. Paralinguistic Features
“That was a great presentation.”
[smiles, nods, and speaks enthusiastically]
9. Genre
Examples include:
- job application letter;
- news report;
- classroom lecture;
- recipe;
- group chat message.
10. Communicative Purpose
“Please upload your assignment by Friday at 8:00 p.m.”
Purpose: instructing or reminding students to complete an action.
11. Audience
To a friend:
“Hey, wanna meet later?”To a department chair:
“Would you be available to meet this afternoon?”12. Hybrid Discourse
“Hi everyone 👋 The room has changed to 204. See you there in ten minutes!”
This is written discourse with conversational and immediate characteristics.
Key Principle
These features operate on continua.
Discourse may be:
- spoken yet highly planned;
- written yet highly interactive;
- written yet spontaneous;
- hybrid across several dimensions.
🧩 Module Review
Before finishing Module 3, check whether you can:
- distinguish cohesion from coherence;
- identify reference;
- distinguish anaphoric, cataphoric, and exophoric reference;
- distinguish reference from substitution;
- identify nominal, verbal, and clausal substitution;
- recognize ellipsis;
- classify conjunctions according to the relationships they signal;
- explain why a connector does not automatically create coherence;
- identify lexical cohesion;
- build a lexical chain;
- explain how lexical choices contribute to topic development and stance;
- trace participant reference across a text;
- diagnose ambiguity;
- explain the effect of a cohesive pattern instead of merely labeling it;
- revise cohesion by moving from meaning to form.
🧭 Final Takeaway
A connected text is more than a text with connectors.
Cohesion gives readers and listeners linguistic evidence for connecting:
- participants;
- ideas;
- events;
- propositions;
- lexical topics.
But coherence depends on more than visible ties.
When analyzing discourse, ask:
What is connected?
How is it connected?
Can the reader recover the relationship?
Does the relationship make sense?
What does the cohesive choice contribute to the larger communicative purpose?
The analytical goal is not simply to find cohesive devices.
It is to explain how visible linguistic ties contribute to meaning—and where they do not.