The notion of DA

1. In the Name of GodIn the Name of God

2. Discourse AnalysisDiscourse Analysis
Chapter 1Chapter 1
The Notion of Discourse AnalysisThe Notion of Discourse Analysis
Discourse vs. pragmaticsDiscourse vs. pragmatics
By:By:
Somayeh JavanbakhtSomayeh Javanbakht

3. 1.1. What is discourse analysis?What is discourse analysis?
'I only said "if"!' poor Alice'I only said "if"!' poor Alice
pleaded in a piteous tone.pleaded in a piteous tone.
The two Queens looked atThe two Queens looked at
each other, and the Red Queeneach other, and the Red Queen
remarked, with a little shudder,remarked, with a little shudder,
'She says she only said "if"-''She says she only said "if"-'
'But she said a great deal'But she said a great deal
more than that!' the Whitemore than that!' the White
Queen moaned, wringing herQueen moaned, wringing her
hands. 'Oh, ever so much morehands. 'Oh, ever so much more
than that!‘than that!‘
Lewis Carroll:Lewis Carroll: throughthrough thethe Looking the GkassLooking the Gkass

4. 1.1 A brief historical overview1.1 A brief historical overview
Discourse analysis is concerned with theDiscourse analysis is concerned with the
study of the relationship betweenstudy of the relationship between languagelanguage
and theand the contextscontexts in which it is used.in which it is used.

5. It grew out of work in different disciplines in the 1960s andIt grew out of work in different disciplines in the 1960s and
early 1970s, including linguistics, semiotics, psychology,early 1970s, including linguistics, semiotics, psychology,
anthropology and sociology. Discourse analysts studyanthropology and sociology. Discourse analysts study
language in uselanguage in use: written texts of all kinds, and spoken data,: written texts of all kinds, and spoken data,
from conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk.from conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk.
semioticssemiotics nn semioticsemiotic adj /;semi"ãtûks /adj /;semi"ãtûks /
1 the theory of SIGNS1 the theory of SIGNS
2 the analysis of systems using signs or signals for the2 the analysis of systems using signs or signals for the
purpose of communicationpurpose of communication (semiotic systems).(semiotic systems). The mostThe most
important semiotic system is human language, but there areimportant semiotic system is human language, but there are
other systems, e.g. Morse code, SIGNother systems, e.g. Morse code, SIGN
LANGUAGE, traffic signalsLANGUAGE, traffic signals

6.  At a time when linguistics was largely concerned withAt a time when linguistics was largely concerned with
the analysis of single sentences, Zellig Harris publishedthe analysis of single sentences, Zellig Harris published
a paper with the titlea paper with the title 'Discourse analysis'Discourse analysis' (Harris 1952)' (Harris 1952)
 Harris was interested in theHarris was interested in the distributiondistribution of linguisof linguistictic
Elements in extended texts, and the links between theElements in extended texts, and the links between the
text and its social situationtext and its social situation, though his paper is a far cry, though his paper is a far cry
from the discourse analysis we are used to nowadays.from the discourse analysis we are used to nowadays.
 Also important in the early years was the emergence ofAlso important in the early years was the emergence of
semiotics and the French structuralist approach to thesemiotics and the French structuralist approach to the
study of narrative.study of narrative.
 InInthethe 1960s, Dell Hymes provided a sociological1960s, Dell Hymes provided a sociological
perspective with the study of speech in its social settingperspective with the study of speech in its social setting
(e.g. Hymes 1964).(e.g. Hymes 1964).

7.  The linguistic philosophersThe linguistic philosophers suchsuch as Austin (1962),as Austin (1962),
Searle (1969) and Grice (1975) were also influential inSearle (1969) and Grice (1975) were also influential in
thethe study of language asstudy of language as social actionsocial action, reflected in, reflected in
speech-act theoryspeech-act theory andand thethe formulation offormulation of
conversational maxims, alongside the emergence ofconversational maxims, alongside the emergence of
pragmaticspragmatics, which is the study of meaning in context, which is the study of meaning in context
(see Levinson 1983;Leech 1983).(see Levinson 1983;Leech 1983).
pragmaticspragmatics nn pragmaticpragmatic adjadj
the study of thethe study of the use of languageuse of language in communication,in communication,
particularly the relationships between sentences andparticularly the relationships between sentences and
the contexts and situations in which they are used.the contexts and situations in which they are used.

8.  British discourse analysis was greatly influenced by M.British discourse analysis was greatly influenced by M. A.A.
K. Halliday's functional approach to language (e.g.K. Halliday's functional approach to language (e.g.
Halliday 1973), which in turn has connections with theHalliday 1973), which in turn has connections with the
Prague School of linguists.Prague School of linguists.
 Halliday's framework emphasizes theHalliday's framework emphasizes the social functionssocial functions ofof
language and thelanguage and the thematic and informational structurethematic and informational structure ofof
speech and writing.speech and writing.
 Also important in Britain were Sinclair and CoulthardAlso important in Britain were Sinclair and Coulthard
(1975) at the University of Birmingham, who developed a(1975) at the University of Birmingham, who developed a
model for the description of teacher-pupil talk, based on amodel for the description of teacher-pupil talk, based on a
hierarchy of discourse units.hierarchy of discourse units.
 Other similar work has dealt with doctor patient,Other similar work has dealt with doctor patient,
interaction, service encounters, interviews, debates andinteraction, service encounters, interviews, debates and
business, negotiations, as well as monologues.business, negotiations, as well as monologues.
 Novel work in the British tradition has also been done onNovel work in the British tradition has also been done on
intonation in discourse.intonation in discourse.

9.  TheThe BritishBritish work has principally followedwork has principally followed structural-structural-
linguisticlinguistic criteria, on the basis of the isolation of units,criteria, on the basis of the isolation of units,
and set of rules defining well-formed sequences ofand set of rules defining well-formed sequences of
discourse.discourse.
 AmericanAmerican discourse analysis has been dominated bydiscourse analysis has been dominated by
work within thework within the ethnomethodological traditionethnomethodological tradition, which, which
emphasizes the research method of close observationemphasizes the research method of close observation
of groups of people communicating in natural settings.of groups of people communicating in natural settings.
It examines types of speech event such asIt examines types of speech event such as
 StorytellingStorytelling
 greeting rituals and verbal duels in different culturalgreeting rituals and verbal duels in different cultural
and social settingsand social settings (e.g.(e.g. Gumperz and Hymes 1972).Gumperz and Hymes 1972).

10.  What is often calledWhat is often called conversation analysisconversation analysis within thewithin the
American tradition can also be included under theAmerican tradition can also be included under the
general heading of discourse analysis.general heading of discourse analysis.
 In conversational analysis, the emphasis is not uponIn conversational analysis, the emphasis is not upon
building structural models but on thebuilding structural models but on the close observationclose observation
of the behaviorof the behavior of participants in talk and on patternsof participants in talk and on patterns
which recur overwhich recur over a wide range of natural dataa wide range of natural data..
 The work of Goffman (1976; 1979), and Sacks,The work of Goffman (1976; 1979), and Sacks,
Schegloff and Jefferson (1974) is important in the studySchegloff and Jefferson (1974) is important in the study
of conversational norms, turn taking, and other aspectsof conversational norms, turn taking, and other aspects
of spoken interaction. Alongside the conversationof spoken interaction. Alongside the conversation
analysts, working within the sociolinguistic tradition,analysts, working within the sociolinguistic tradition,
Labov's investigations of oral storytelling have alsoLabov's investigations of oral storytelling have also
contributed to a long history of interest in narrativecontributed to a long history of interest in narrative
discourse.discourse.

11.  The American work has produced a large number ofThe American work has produced a large number of
descriptions ofdescriptions of discourse typesdiscourse types, as well as insights into, as well as insights into
thethe social constraints of politeness and face-preservingsocial constraints of politeness and face-preserving
phenomena in talk, overlapping with British work inphenomena in talk, overlapping with British work in
pragmaticspragmatics..
 Also relevant to the development of discourse analysis asAlso relevant to the development of discourse analysis as
a whole is the work of text grammarians, working mostlya whole is the work of text grammarians, working mostly
with written language.with written language.
 Text grammariansText grammarians see texts as language elements strungsee texts as language elements strung
together in relationships with one another that can betogether in relationships with one another that can be
defined. Linguists such as Van Dijk (1972), Dedefined. Linguists such as Van Dijk (1972), De
Beaugrande (1980), Halliday and Hasan (1976) haveBeaugrande (1980), Halliday and Hasan (1976) have
made a significant impact in this area. The Prague Schoolmade a significant impact in this area. The Prague School
of linguists, with their interest in the structuring ofof linguists, with their interest in the structuring of
information in discourse, has also been influential.information in discourse, has also been influential.
 Its most important contribution has been to show theIts most important contribution has been to show the linkslinks
between grammarbetween grammar

12. Discourse analysis has grown into a wide-rangingDiscourse analysis has grown into a wide-ranging
and heterogeneous discipline which finds its unity inand heterogeneous discipline which finds its unity in
the description of languagethe description of language above the sentenceabove the sentence and anand an
interest in the contexts and cultural influences whichinterest in the contexts and cultural influences which
affect language in useaffect language in use..
 It is also now, increasingly, forming a backdrop toIt is also now, increasingly, forming a backdrop to
research inresearch in Applied LinguisticsApplied Linguistics, and second language, and second language
learning and teaching in particularlearning and teaching in particular..

13. Form and functionForm and function
 The famous British comedy duo, Eric Morecambe andThe famous British comedy duo, Eric Morecambe and
Ernie Wise, started one' of their shows in 1973 with theErnie Wise, started one' of their shows in 1973 with the
following dialogue:following dialogue:
(1.1) Ernie: Tell 'em about the show.(1.1) Ernie: Tell 'em about the show.
Eric (to the audience): Have we got a show for youEric (to the audience): Have we got a show for you
might folks! Have we got a show for you! (asidemight folks! Have we got a show for you! (aside
to Ernie) Have we got a show for them?to Ernie) Have we got a show for them?

14.  This short dialogue raises a number of problems forThis short dialogue raises a number of problems for
anyone wishing to do a linguistic analysis of it; not leastanyone wishing to do a linguistic analysis of it; not least
is the question of why it is funny (the audience laughedis the question of why it is funny (the audience laughed
at Eric's question to Ernie).at Eric's question to Ernie).
 Most people would agree that it is funny because EricMost people would agree that it is funny because Eric
isis playing with a grammatical structureplaying with a grammatical structure that seems to bethat seems to be
ambiguousambiguous: 'Have we got a show for you!' has an: 'Have we got a show for you!' has an
inverted verb and subject.inverted verb and subject.
 Inversion of the verb and its subject happens onlyInversion of the verb and its subject happens only
under restricted conditions in English; the most typicalunder restricted conditions in English; the most typical
circumstances in which this happens is when questionscircumstances in which this happens is when questions
are being asked, but it also happens in exclamationsare being asked, but it also happens in exclamations
(e.g. 'Wasn't my face red!').(e.g. 'Wasn't my face red!').

15.  So Eric's repeated grammaticalSo Eric's repeated grammatical formform clearly undergoesclearly undergoes
a change in how it isa change in how it is interpretedinterpreted by the audienceby the audience
between its second and third occurrence in thebetween its second and third occurrence in the
dialogue. Eric's inverted grammaticaldialogue. Eric's inverted grammatical formform in its first twoin its first two
occurrences clearly has theoccurrences clearly has the functionfunction of an exclamation,of an exclamation,
tellingtelling the audience something,the audience something, notnot asking themasking them
anything, until theanything, until the humoroushumorous momentmoment when he beginswhen he begins
to doubt whether they do have a show to offer, at whichto doubt whether they do have a show to offer, at which
point he uses thepoint he uses the samesame grammatical form to ask Ernie agrammatical form to ask Ernie a
genuine question.genuine question.
 ThereThere seems,seems, then, to be a lack of one-to-onethen, to be a lack of one-to-one
correspondence between grammatical form andcorrespondence between grammatical form and
communicative function; the inverted form in itself doescommunicative function; the inverted form in itself does
not inherently carry an exclamatory or a questioninginherently carry an exclamatory or a questioning
function.function.

16.  By the same token, in other situations, an' uninvertedBy the same token, in other situations, an' uninverted
declarative form (subject before verb), typicallydeclarative form (subject before verb), typically
associated with 'statements', might be heard as aassociated with 'statements', might be heard as a
question requiring an answer:question requiring an answer:
A: You're leaving for London.A: You're leaving for London.
B: Yes, immediately.B: Yes, immediately.
 So how we interpret grammatical forms depends on aSo how we interpret grammatical forms depends on a
number of factors, some linguistic, some purelynumber of factors, some linguistic, some purely
situational.situational.
 One linguistic feature that may affect our interpretationOne linguistic feature that may affect our interpretation
is theis the intonationintonation..

17.  In the Eric and Ernie sketch, Eric's intonation was asIn the Eric and Ernie sketch, Eric's intonation was as
follows:follows:
Eric (to the audience): Have we got a SHOW forEric (to the audience): Have we got a SHOW for
you tonight folks!you tonight folks!
Have we got a SHOW for you! (aside to Ernie)Have we got a SHOW for you! (aside to Ernie)
HAVE we got a show for them?HAVE we got a show for them?
 Two variables in Eric's delivery change. Firstly, theTwo variables in Eric's delivery change. Firstly, the
tone contour,tone contour, i.e. the direction of his pitch, whether iti.e. the direction of his pitch, whether it
rises or falls, changes (his last utterance,rises or falls, changes (his last utterance, 'have we got'have we got
a show for thema show for them' ends' ends --inin a rising tonea rising tone).).

18.  Secondly, his voice jumps to a higherSecondly, his voice jumps to a higher pitch levelpitch level
(represented here by writing(represented here by writing havehave above the line).above the line).
Is it this which makes his utterance a question? NotIs it this which makes his utterance a question? Not
necessarily.necessarily.
ManyMany questionsquestions havehave onlyonly falling tonesfalling tones, as in the, as in the
following:following:
A: What was he wearing?A: What was he wearing?
B: An anorak.B: An anorak.
A: But was it his?A: But was it his?
 So the intonation does notSo the intonation does not inherentlyinherently carry the functioncarry the function
of question either, any more than the inversion ofof question either, any more than the inversion of
auxiliary verb and subject did.auxiliary verb and subject did.

19.  Grammatical forms and phonological forms examinedGrammatical forms and phonological forms examined
separately areseparately are unreliableunreliable indicators of function; when theyindicators of function; when they
are taken together,are taken together, andand looked at inlooked at in contextcontext, we can come, we can come
to some decision about function. So decisions aboutto some decision about function. So decisions about
communicative function cannot solely be the domain ofcommunicative function cannot solely be the domain of
grammar or phonology.grammar or phonology.
 Discourse analysis isDiscourse analysis is notnot entirely separate from the studyentirely separate from the study
of grammar and phonology, but discourse analysts areof grammar and phonology, but discourse analysts are
interested in a lotinterested in a lot moremore than linguistic forms. Theirthan linguistic forms. Their
concerns include how it is that Eric and Ernie interpretconcerns include how it is that Eric and Ernie interpret
each other's grammar appropriately (Ernie commands Ericeach other's grammar appropriately (Ernie commands Eric
to tell the audience, Eric asks Ernie a question, etc.),to tell the audience, Eric asks Ernie a question, etc.), howhow
it is that the dialogue between the two comics is coherentit is that the dialogue between the two comics is coherent
and not gobbledygook,and not gobbledygook, whatwhat Eric and Ernie's roles are inEric and Ernie's roles are in
relation to one another, andrelation to one another, and whatwhat sort of 'rules' orsort of 'rules' or
conventions they are following as they converse with oneconventions they are following as they converse with one
another.another.

20.  Eric and Ernie's conversation is only one example (andEric and Ernie's conversation is only one example (and
a rather crazy one at that) of spoken interaction; mosta rather crazy one at that) of spoken interaction; most
of us in a typical week will observe or take part in aof us in a typical week will observe or take part in a
wide range of different types of spoken interaction:wide range of different types of spoken interaction:
phone calls, buying things in shops, perhaps anphone calls, buying things in shops, perhaps an
interview for a job, or with a doctor, or with aninterview for a job, or with a doctor, or with an
employer, talking formally at meetings or in classrooms,employer, talking formally at meetings or in classrooms,
informally in cafés or on buses, or intimately with ourinformally in cafés or on buses, or intimately with our
friends and loved ones.friends and loved ones.
 These situations will have their own formulae andThese situations will have their own formulae and
conventions which we follow; they will have differentconventions which we follow; they will have different
ways of opening and closing the encounter, differentways of opening and closing the encounter, different
role relationships, different purposes and differentrole relationships, different purposes and different
settings.settings.

21.  Discourse analysisDiscourse analysis is interested in all these differentis interested in all these different
factors andfactors and triestries to account for them in a rigorousto account for them in a rigorous
fashion with a separate set of descriptive labels fromfashion with a separate set of descriptive labels from
those used by conventional grammarians.those used by conventional grammarians.
 The first fundamental distinction we have noted isThe first fundamental distinction we have noted is
betweenbetween language forms and discourse functionslanguage forms and discourse functions; once; once
we have made this distinction a lot of other conclusionswe have made this distinction a lot of other conclusions
can follow, and the labels used to describe discoursecan follow, and the labels used to describe discourse
need not clash at all with those we are all used to inneed not clash at all with those we are all used to in
grammar. They will in factgrammar. They will in fact complement and enrich eachcomplement and enrich each
otherother..

22. 1.3 Speech acts and discourse1.3 Speech acts and discourse
structuresstructures
 So far we have suggested that form and function haveSo far we have suggested that form and function have
to be separated to understand what is happening into be separated to understand what is happening in
discourse; this maydiscourse; this may bebe necessary to analyse Eric andnecessary to analyse Eric and
Ernie's zany dialogue,Ernie's zany dialogue, but why discourse analysis?but why discourse analysis?
 Applied linguists and language teachers have beenApplied linguists and language teachers have been
familiar with the termfamiliar with the term functionfunction for years now; are wefor years now; are we
not simply talking about 'functions' when we analysenot simply talking about 'functions' when we analyse
Eric and Ernie's talk? Why complicate matters with aEric and Ernie's talk? Why complicate matters with a
whole new set of jargon?whole new set of jargon?
jargonjargon nn
 speech or writing used by a group of people who belong to a particularspeech or writing used by a group of people who belong to a particular
trade, profession, or any other group bound together by mutual interest,trade, profession, or any other group bound together by mutual interest,
e.g.e.g. the jargon of law, medical jargon.the jargon of law, medical jargon.

23.  In one sense weIn one sense we areare talking about 'talking about 'functionsfunctions': we are': we are
concerned as much withconcerned as much with whatwhat Eric and Ernie areEric and Ernie are doingdoing
with language as with what they arewith language as with what they are sayingsaying..
 When we say that a particular bit of speech or writing is aWhen we say that a particular bit of speech or writing is a
requestrequest or anor an instructioninstruction or anor an exemplificationexemplification we arewe are
concentrating onconcentrating on whatwhat that piece of language isthat piece of language is doingdoing,, oror
howhow the listener header is supposed to react; for thisthe listener header is supposed to react; for this
reason, such entities are often also calledreason, such entities are often also called speech acts..
 Each of the stretches of language that are carrying theEach of the stretches of language that are carrying the
force of requesting, instructing, and so on is seen asforce of requesting, instructing, and so on is seen as
performing a particular act; Eric's exclamation wasperforming a particular act; Eric's exclamation was
performing the act of informing the audience that a greatperforming the act of informing the audience that a great
show was in store for them. So the approach toshow was in store for them. So the approach to
communicative language teachingcommunicative language teaching that emphasizes thethat emphasizes the
functions orfunctions or speech actsspeech acts that pieces of language performthat pieces of language perform
overlaps in an important sense with the preoccupations ofoverlaps in an important sense with the preoccupations of
discourse analysts.discourse analysts.

24.  We are all familiar with course books that say things like:We are all familiar with course books that say things like:
'Here are some questions which can help people to'Here are some questions which can help people to
remember experiences which they had almost forgotten:remember experiences which they had almost forgotten:
""Have you ever . . . ?",Have you ever . . . ?",
"Tell me about the time you . . . ?","Tell me about the time you . . . ?",
"I hear you once . . . ?","I hear you once . . . ?",
"Didn't you once . . . ?',"Didn't you once . . . ?',
"You've . . ., haven't you?”"You've . . ., haven't you?”
 Materials such as these are concerned with speech acts,Materials such as these are concerned with speech acts,
with what is done with words, not just the grammaticalwith what is done with words, not just the grammatical
and lexical forms of what isand lexical forms of what is said.said.

25.  But when we speak or write, we doBut when we speak or write, we do notnot just utter ajust utter a
string of linguistic forms, without beginning, middle orstring of linguistic forms, without beginning, middle or
end, and anyway, we have already demonstrated theend, and anyway, we have already demonstrated the
difficulty of assigning a function to a particular form ofdifficulty of assigning a function to a particular form of
grammar and/or vocabulary.grammar and/or vocabulary.
 If we had taken Eric's words 'have we got a show forIf we had taken Eric's words 'have we got a show for
you' and treated them as a sentence, written on a page,you' and treated them as a sentence, written on a page,
it would have beenit would have been impossibleimpossible to attach a functionalto attach a functional
label to it with absolute certainty other than to say that inlabel to it with absolute certainty other than to say that in
a large number of contexts this would most typically bea large number of contexts this would most typically be
heard as a question.heard as a question.

27.  Discourse analysisDiscourse analysis is thus fundamentally concerned withis thus fundamentally concerned with
the relationship betweenthe relationship between language and the contextslanguage and the contexts of itsof its
useuse. And there is more to the story than merely labelling. And there is more to the story than merely labelling
chains of speech acts.chains of speech acts.
 Firstly, as we have said, discourses have beginnings,Firstly, as we have said, discourses have beginnings,
middles and ends. How is it, for example, that we feel thatmiddles and ends. How is it, for example, that we feel that
we are coming in in the middle of this conversation andwe are coming in in the middle of this conversation and
leaving it before it hasleaving it before it has ended?ended?

28.  A:A: Well,Well, trytry this spray, what I got, this is the biggest theythis spray, what I got, this is the biggest they
come.come.
B: Oh.. .B: Oh.. .
A:A: . . .. . . tittletittle make-up capsule.make-up capsule.
B: Oh, right, it's likeB: Oh, right, it's like thesethese inhalers, isn't it? ,inhalers, isn't it? ,
A:A: AndAnd I,I, I've found that notI've found that not soso bad since I've been usingbad since I've been using
it, and it doesn't make you so grumpy.it, and it doesn't make you so grumpy.
B: This is up your nose?B: This is up your nose?
A: Mm.A: Mm.
B: Oh, wow! It looks a bitB: Oh, wow! It looks a bit sortsort of violent, doesn't it? Itof violent, doesn't it? It
works well,works well, does it?does it?

29.  Our immediate reaction is that conversations canOur immediate reaction is that conversations can oftenoften
begin with well, but that there is something odd aboutbegin with well, but that there is something odd about 'try'try
this spray . . .this spray . . .'. Suggesting to someone 'try'. Suggesting to someone 'try X'X' usually onlyusually only
occurs in response to some remark or event or perceivedoccurs in response to some remark or event or perceived
state of affairs that warrants intervention, and suchstate of affairs that warrants intervention, and such
information is lacking here.information is lacking here.
 Equally, we interpret B'sEqually, we interpret B's finalfinal remark, 'It works well,remark, 'It works well,
does it?' as expecting a response from A. In addition,does it?' as expecting a response from A. In addition, wewe
might say that we do not expect people to leave themight say that we do not expect people to leave the
question ofquestion of whetherwhether something is a fitting solution to asomething is a fitting solution to a
problem that has been raisedproblem that has been raised danglingdangling in the air; this wein the air; this we
shall return to in sectionshall return to in section 1.101.10 when we look at writtenwhen we look at written
text.text.
 The difficulty is notThe difficulty is not only theonly the attaching of speech-act-attaching of speech-act-
labels to utterances.labels to utterances.

30.  The main problem with making a neat analysis of theThe main problem with making a neat analysis of the
aboveabove extractextract is that it is clearly theis that it is clearly the 'middle''middle' of something,of something,
which makes some features difficult to interpret.which makes some features difficult to interpret.
For instance, -why does A say well at the beginning ofFor instance, -why does A say well at the beginning of
his/her turn? What are 'these inhalers'? Are they inhalershis/her turn? What are 'these inhalers'? Are they inhalers
on the table in front of the speakers,? Or ones weon the table in front of the speakers,? Or ones we allall knowknow
about in the shops? Why does A change from talking aboutabout in the shops? Why does A change from talking about
'this spray' to that in a short space of the dialogue?'this spray' to that in a short space of the dialogue?

31.  The dialogue is structured in the sense that it can beThe dialogue is structured in the sense that it can be
coherently interpreted and seems to be progressingcoherently interpreted and seems to be progressing
somewhere, but we are in thesomewhere, but we are in the middlemiddle of a structureof a structure
rather thanrather than witnessing thewitnessing the complete unfoldingcomplete unfolding of theof the
whole.whole.
 It is in this respect, the interest in whole discourseIt is in this respect, the interest in whole discourse
structures, that discourse analysis adds somethingstructures, that discourse analysis adds something
extraextra to the traditional concern with functional speechto the traditional concern with functional speech
acts.acts.

32. The scope of discourse analysisThe scope of discourse analysis
 Discourse analysis isDiscourse analysis is notnot only concerned with theonly concerned with the
description and analysisdescription and analysis of spoken interaction. Inof spoken interaction. In
addition to all our verbal encounters we daily consumeaddition to all our verbal encounters we daily consume
hundreds of written and printed words: newspaperhundreds of written and printed words: newspaper
articles, letters, stories, recipes, instructions, notices,articles, letters, stories, recipes, instructions, notices,
comics, billboards, leaflets pushed through the door,comics, billboards, leaflets pushed through the door,
and so on.and so on.
 We usually expect them to be coherent, meaningfulWe usually expect them to be coherent, meaningful
communications in which the words and/or sentencescommunications in which the words and/or sentences
are linked to one another in a fashion that correspondsare linked to one another in a fashion that corresponds
to conventional formulae, just as we do with speech;to conventional formulae, just as we do with speech;
therefore discourse analysts are equally interested intherefore discourse analysts are equally interested in
thethe organization of written interactionorganization of written interaction..

33. 1.5 Spoken discourse: models of1.5 Spoken discourse: models of
analysisanalysis
 One influential approach to the study of spokenOne influential approach to the study of spoken
discourse is that developed at the University ofdiscourse is that developed at the University of
Birmingham, where research initially concerned itselfBirmingham, where research initially concerned itself
with the structure of discourse in school classroomswith the structure of discourse in school classrooms
(Sinclair and Coulthard 1975).(Sinclair and Coulthard 1975).
 The Birmingham model is certainlyThe Birmingham model is certainly notnot the only validthe only valid
approach to analyzing discourse, but it is a relativelyapproach to analyzing discourse, but it is a relatively
simple and powerfulsimple and powerful model which has connxions withmodel which has connxions with
the study ofthe study of speech actsspeech acts such as were discussed insuch as were discussed in
section 1.3 but which, at the same time, tries to capturesection 1.3 but which, at the same time, tries to capture
the larger structures, the 'wholes' that we talked about inthe larger structures, the 'wholes' that we talked about in
the same section.the same section.

34.  Sinclair and Coulthard found in the language ofSinclair and Coulthard found in the language of
traditional native-speaker school classrooms a rigidtraditional native-speaker school classrooms a rigid
pattern, where teachers and pupils spoke according topattern, where teachers and pupils spoke according to
very fixed perceptions of their roles and where the talkvery fixed perceptions of their roles and where the talk
could be seen to conform to highly structuredcould be seen to conform to highly structured
sequences. An extract from their data illustrates this:sequences. An extract from their data illustrates this:
(T(T == teacher, Pteacher, P == any pupil who speaks)any pupil who speaks)
T: Now thenT: Now then . . .. . . I've got some things here, too.I've got some things here, too.
Hands up. What's that, what is it?Hands up. What's that, what is it?
P: Saw.P: Saw.
T: It's a saw,T: It's a saw, yesyes this is a saw. What dothis is a saw. What do wewe do withdo with aa
saw?saw?
P: Cut wood.P: Cut wood.
T: Yes. You're shouting out though. What doT: Yes. You're shouting out though. What do wewe do withdo with
a saw?Marvelette.a saw?Marvelette.

35. P: Cut wood.P: Cut wood.
T: We cut wood. And, erm, what doT: We cut wood. And, erm, what do wewe do with ado with a
hacksaw, this hacksaw?hacksaw, this hacksaw?
P: Cut trees.P: Cut trees.
T:T: Do we cut trees with this?Do we cut trees with this?
P: No. No.P: No. No.
T:T: Hands up. What do we do with this?Hands up. What do we do with this?
P: CutP: Cut wood.wood.
T: Do we cut wood with this?T: Do we cut wood with this?
P: No.P: No.
T: What do we do with that then?T: What do we do with that then?
P: Cut wood.P: Cut wood.

36. T:T: We cutWe cut woodwood with that. What do we do with that?with that. What do we do with that?
P: Sir.P: Sir.
T: Cleveland.T: Cleveland.
P: Metal.P: Metal.
T: We cut metal. Yes we cut metal. And, er, I've got thisT: We cut metal. Yes we cut metal. And, er, I've got this
here. What's that? Trevor.here. What's that? Trevor.
P: An axe.P: An axe.
T: It's an axe yes. What do I cut with the axe?T: It's an axe yes. What do I cut with the axe?
P: Wood, wood.P: Wood, wood.
T: Yes I cut wood with the axe. Right . . . Now then, I'veT: Yes I cut wood with the axe. Right . . . Now then, I've
got some more things here . . . (etc.)got some more things here . . . (etc.)
(Sinclair and Coulthard(Sinclair and Coulthard 1975: 93-4)1975: 93-4)

37.  This is only a short extract, but nonetheless, a clearThis is only a short extract, but nonetheless, a clear
pattern seems to emerge.pattern seems to emerge.
 The first thing we notice, intuitively, is that, althoughThe first thing we notice, intuitively, is that, although
this is clearly part of a larger discourse (a 'lesson'), inthis is clearly part of a larger discourse (a 'lesson'), in
itself it seems to have a completeness. A bit ofitself it seems to have a completeness. A bit of
business seems to commence with the teacher sayingbusiness seems to commence with the teacher saying
'Now then . . .', and that same bit of business ends'Now then . . .', and that same bit of business ends
with the teacher saying 'Right. . . Now then'.with the teacher saying 'Right. . . Now then'.

38.  The teacher (in this case a man) in his planning andThe teacher (in this case a man) in his planning and
execution of the lesson decides that the lesson shallexecution of the lesson decides that the lesson shall
be marked out in some way; he does not just run onbe marked out in some way; he does not just run on
without a pause from one part of the lesson towithout a pause from one part of the lesson to
another. In fact he gives his pupils aanother. In fact he gives his pupils a clear signalclear signal ofof
the beginning and end of this mini-phase of thethe beginning and end of this mini-phase of the
lesson by using the wordslesson by using the words nownow thenthen andand rightright in ain a
particular way (with falling intonation and a shortparticular way (with falling intonation and a short
pause afterwards) that make them into a sort ofpause afterwards) that make them into a sort of
'frame' on either side of the sequence of questions'frame' on either side of the sequence of questions
and answers.and answers.

39.  FramingFraming movemove is precisely what Sinclair and Coulthardis precisely what Sinclair and Coulthard
call the function of such utterances.call the function of such utterances.
 The two framing moves, together with the question andThe two framing moves, together with the question and
answer sequence that falls between them, can be calledanswer sequence that falls between them, can be called
aa transactiontransaction,, which again captures the feeling of whatwhich again captures the feeling of what
is being done with language here, rather in the way thatis being done with language here, rather in the way that
we talk of a 'transaction' in a shop between awe talk of a 'transaction' in a shop between a
shopkeeper and a customer, which will similarly be ashopkeeper and a customer, which will similarly be a
completed whole, with a recognizable start and finish.completed whole, with a recognizable start and finish.
However,However, framing move and transactionframing move and transaction are only labelsare only labels
to attach to certain structural features, and the analogyto attach to certain structural features, and the analogy
with their nonspecialist meanings should not be takenwith their nonspecialist meanings should not be taken
too far.too far.

40.  A job interview is another situation where variousA job interview is another situation where various
phases of the interview are likely to bephases of the interview are likely to be markedmarked by theby the
chairperson or main interviewer saying things likechairperson or main interviewer saying things like
'right', 'well now' or 'okay', rather in the way the'right', 'well now' or 'okay', rather in the way the
teacher does. Notice, too, that there is a fairly limitedteacher does. Notice, too, that there is a fairly limited
number of words available in English for framingnumber of words available in English for framing
transactions (e.g. right, okay, so, etc.), and notice howtransactions (e.g. right, okay, so, etc.), and notice how
some people habitually use the same ones.some people habitually use the same ones.

41. 1.6 conversations outside the1.6 conversations outside the
classroomclassroom
 So far we have looked at talk in a rather restrictedSo far we have looked at talk in a rather restricted
context: the traditional classroom, where roles arecontext: the traditional classroom, where roles are
rigidly defined and the patterns of initiation, responserigidly defined and the patterns of initiation, response
and follow-up in exchanges are relatively easy toand follow-up in exchanges are relatively easy to
perceive, and where transactions are heavily marked.perceive, and where transactions are heavily marked.
 The classroom was a convenient place to start, asThe classroom was a convenient place to start, as
Sinclair and Coulthard discovered, but it is not the 'real‘Sinclair and Coulthard discovered, but it is not the 'real‘
world of conversation. It is a peculiarworld of conversation. It is a peculiar place,place, aa placeplace
where teachers ask questions to which they alreadywhere teachers ask questions to which they already
know the answers,know the answers, wherewhere pupils (at least youngerpupils (at least younger
pupils) have very limited rights as speaker, andpupils) have very limited rights as speaker, and wherewhere
evaluation by the teacher of what the pupils say is aevaluation by the teacher of what the pupils say is a
vitalvital mechanismmechanism in the discourse structure.in the discourse structure.

42.  But using the classroom is most beneficial for QW purposesBut using the classroom is most beneficial for QW purposes
since one of the things a model for the analysis ofsince one of the things a model for the analysis of
classroom talk enables us to do is evaluate our own outputclassroom talk enables us to do is evaluate our own output
as teachers and that of our students.as teachers and that of our students.
 For the moment it is more important to examine the claimFor the moment it is more important to examine the claim
that thethat the exchange modelexchange model might be useful for the analysis ofmight be useful for the analysis of
talktalk outsideoutside the classroom. If it is, then it could offer athe classroom. If it is, then it could offer a
yardstick for the kind of language aimed at inyardstick for the kind of language aimed at in
communicative language teaching and for all aspects of thecommunicative language teaching and for all aspects of the
complex chain of materials, methodology, implementationcomplex chain of materials, methodology, implementation
and evaluation, whatever our order of priority within thatand evaluation, whatever our order of priority within that
chain.chain.

43.  Conversations outside classroom settings vary in theirConversations outside classroom settings vary in their
degree of structuredness, but even so, conversationsdegree of structuredness, but even so, conversations
that seem at first sight to be 'free' and unstructuredthat seem at first sight to be 'free' and unstructured
can often be shown to have a structure; what will differcan often be shown to have a structure; what will differ
is the kinds of speech-act labels needed to describeis the kinds of speech-act labels needed to describe
what is happening, and it is mainly in this area, thewhat is happening, and it is mainly in this area, the
functions of the parts of individual moves, thatfunctions of the parts of individual moves, that
discourse analysts have found it necessary to expanddiscourse analysts have found it necessary to expand
and modify the Sinclair-Coulthard model.and modify the Sinclair-Coulthard model.

44.  . Let us begin with a real example:. Let us begin with a real example:
(Jozef (J) is a visiting scholar from Hungary at an English(Jozef (J) is a visiting scholar from Hungary at an English
department in a British university. He has established adepartment in a British university. He has established a
fairly informal and relaxed relationship with Chris (C), afairly informal and relaxed relationship with Chris (C), a
lecturer in the department. He pops into Chris's room onelecturer in the department. He pops into Chris's room one
morning.)morning.)
CC: Hello Jozef.: Hello Jozef.
J: Hello Chris . . . could you do me a great favour.J: Hello Chris . . . could you do me a great favour.
C: Yeah.C: Yeah.
J: I'm going to book four cinema tickets on the phone and they need a credit cardJ: I'm going to book four cinema tickets on the phone and they need a credit card
number . . . could you give me your credit card number . . . they only acceptnumber . . . could you give me your credit card number . . . they only accept
payment by credit card over the phone.payment by credit card over the phone.
C: Ah.C: Ah.
JJ: I telephoned there and they said they wouldn't do any: I telephoned there and they said they wouldn't do any
reservationsreservations
C: 1C: 1 without a card.C: 1C: 1 without a card.
J: Yes and I could pay you back in cash.J: Yes and I could pay you back in cash.
C: Yes . . . sure . . . no problem at all.C: Yes . . . sure . . . no problem at all.
J: YesJ: Yes

45. C: MmC: Mm . . .. . . I've got this one, which is an Access card.I've got this one, which is an Access card.
J: And I just tell them your number.J: And I just tell them your number.
C:C: [[ You tell them my number.You tell them my number. . .. . this one here.this one here.
J: And they tell me how much.J: And they tell me how much.
C: That's rightC: That's right . . .. . . that's allthat's all . . .. . . that's my name there and thatthat's my name there and that
number.number.
J: YesJ: Yes . . .. . . and I can settle it.and I can settle it.
C: Yes and bring it back when you're done.C: Yes and bring it back when you're done.
J: YeahJ: Yeah . . .. . . 1'11 just telephone then.1'11 just telephone then.
C: RightC: Right . . .. . . okay.okay.
j: Thanks Chris.j: Thanks Chris.
C: Cheers.C: Cheers.
(Jozef leaves the room.)(Jozef leaves the room.)
(Author's data 1988)(Author's data 1988)

46.  This is not like the classroom. Jozef and Chris are moreThis is not like the classroom. Jozef and Chris are more
or less equals in this piece of interaction, therefore eachor less equals in this piece of interaction, therefore each
which enjoy the right towhich enjoy the right to initiate, respond and follow up ininitiate, respond and follow up in
their exchangestheir exchanges..
 It is not merely a question-and-answer session;It is not merely a question-and-answer session;
sometimes they inform each other and acknowledgesometimes they inform each other and acknowledge
information.But their talk isinformation.But their talk is notnot disorganized; there aredisorganized; there are
patterns we can observe. The sequence begins and endspatterns we can observe. The sequence begins and ends
with framing mechanisms not entirely unlike the 'right'with framing mechanisms not entirely unlike the 'right'
and 'now then' of the classroom: after the initial greeting,and 'now then' of the classroom: after the initial greeting,
Jozef pauses and his voice moves to a higher pitch:Jozef pauses and his voice moves to a higher pitch:
could you do me . . . (etc.)could you do me . . . (etc.)
J: Hel.10 Chris . . . tJ: Hel.10 Chris . . . t
 For the moment it is sufficient to record it as a signal of aFor the moment it is sufficient to record it as a signal of a
boundary in the talk, in this case marking off the openingboundary in the talk, in this case marking off the opening
from the main business of the conversation.from the main business of the conversation.

47.  Starting the main business, Jozef then begins a longStarting the main business, Jozef then begins a long
sequence, all of which is concerned with eliciting a favorsequence, all of which is concerned with eliciting a favor
from Chris.from Chris.
 He does not immediately ask his question but in hisHe does not immediately ask his question but in his
initiating move gives the background to it first ('I'm goinginitiating move gives the background to it first ('I'm going
to book four. . . etc.'). This speech act we shall call ato book four. . . etc.'). This speech act we shall call a
starter, after which comes the main part of the elicitationstarter, after which comes the main part of the elicitation
('could you give me . . . etc.').('could you give me . . . etc.').
 Jozef expands his elicitation with several commentsJozef expands his elicitation with several comments
('they only accept payment. . . etc.'), during which he is('they only accept payment. . . etc.'), during which he is
supported by a sort of grunt from Chris ('ah') and ansupported by a sort of grunt from Chris ('ah') and an
occasion where Chris completes Jozefs words for him,occasion where Chris completes Jozefs words for him,
as if he has predicted what Jozef wanted to say ('withoutas if he has predicted what Jozef wanted to say ('without
a card'). Jozef s long elicitation ends with 'and I coulda card'). Jozef s long elicitation ends with 'and I could
pay you back in cash'. Chris then responds "Yespay you back in cash'. Chris then responds "Yes
sure . . . etc.') and Jozef follows up with 'yes'.sure . . . etc.') and Jozef follows up with 'yes'.

48. The fact that Jozef says so much in asking the favor isThe fact that Jozef says so much in asking the favor is
because he is potentially inconveniencing Chris, and hebecause he is potentially inconveniencing Chris, and he
thus has to prepare the ground carefully; this relationshipthus has to prepare the ground carefully; this relationship
between what is said and factors such as politeness andbetween what is said and factors such as politeness and
sensitivity to the other person is taken up in section 5.2.sensitivity to the other person is taken up in section 5.2.
So, complex though it is, we have initiation-response-So, complex though it is, we have initiation-response-
follow-up sequences here that form meaningful exchangesfollow-up sequences here that form meaningful exchanges
just like the classroom ones.just like the classroom ones.

49. What we have here, which we would not expect in theWhat we have here, which we would not expect in the
classroom, are Chris's verbal supports; we should beclassroom, are Chris's verbal supports; we should be
very surprised to hear in a classroom of young children:very surprised to hear in a classroom of young children:
T: NowT: Now . . . :[. . . :[ have some things here.have some things here.
Ps (in chorus): Oh yesPs (in chorus): Oh yes . . .. . . ah-ha.ah-ha.
T: Used for cutting things.T: Used for cutting things.
Ps: Oh, really?Ps: Oh, really?

50. But we can pare Jozef and Chris's exchangeBut we can pare Jozef and Chris's exchange downdown to iitsto iits
basis .basis .
J:J: //// Could you give me your credit card number and I'B payCould you give me your credit card number and I'B pay
you inyou in
cash.cash. //
C: Yes sure no problem.C: Yes sure no problem. //
J: Yes.J: Yes. /I/I

51.  It now begins to look a little more manageable, and in itIt now begins to look a little more manageable, and in it
we can see the difference in complexity between awe can see the difference in complexity between a simplesimple
speech act and elaborated onesspeech act and elaborated ones of the kind demanded byof the kind demanded by
politeness, which can be difficult for the learner withpoliteness, which can be difficult for the learner with
limited linguistic resources in anlimited linguistic resources in an L2.L2.
 We can also see the difference betweenWe can also see the difference between bare exchangesbare exchanges
of the kind often found in course books and the way, inof the kind often found in course books and the way, in
natural discourse, that speakers support and completenatural discourse, that speakers support and complete
one another's moves, how they follow up andone another's moves, how they follow up and
acknowledgeacknowledge repliesreplies, and other features that we have not, and other features that we have not
yet discussed.yet discussed.
 It is in this way, by usingIt is in this way, by using descriptive categoriesdescriptive categories such assuch as
the exchange and its sub-components, that discoursethe exchange and its sub-components, that discourse
analysis enables us to describe actual performances, toanalysis enables us to describe actual performances, to
delimit targets more accurately in language teaching anddelimit targets more accurately in language teaching and
to evaluate input and output in the teaching/learningto evaluate input and output in the teaching/learning
process.process.

52.  This extract also serves as a reminder of the form andThis extract also serves as a reminder of the form and
function problem raised in section 1.2. Some of Jozef sfunction problem raised in section 1.2. Some of Jozef s
declarative forms are heard by Chris as questionsdeclarative forms are heard by Chris as questions
requiring a confirmation (or correction if necessary):requiring a confirmation (or correction if necessary):
J: And l just tell them your number.J: And l just tell them your number.
CC : [: [ You tell them my numberYou tell them my number . . .. . . this one here.this one here.
J: And they tell me how much.J: And they tell me how much.
C: That's rightC: That's right . . .. . . that's allthat's all . . .. . . (etc.)(etc.)
C: Yes and bring it .back when you're done. /C: Yes and bring it .back when you're done. /
J: Yeah // . . . I'll just telephone then.J: Yeah // . . . I'll just telephone then.

53.  The double slashes in Jozefs turns come after the follow-ups toThe double slashes in Jozefs turns come after the follow-ups to
Chris's answers and before new initiating moves. TheChris's answers and before new initiating moves. The
conversation finally ends with a framing move similar to theconversation finally ends with a framing move similar to the
teacher's ('right . . . okay'), and an expression of thanks.teacher's ('right . . . okay'), and an expression of thanks.
 Obviously there are numerous other features in theObviously there are numerous other features in the
conversation (intonation, gesture, etc.) which make us moreconversation (intonation, gesture, etc.) which make us more
confident in our analysis, and we shall return to the mostconfident in our analysis, and we shall return to the most
central of these later, but this short conversation should at leastcentral of these later, but this short conversation should at least
serve to illustrate that even apparently loosely structured talkserve to illustrate that even apparently loosely structured talk
adheres to norms and is regularly patterned. It is this type ofadheres to norms and is regularly patterned. It is this type of
patterning that can be as useful to the language teacher as thepatterning that can be as useful to the language teacher as the
regular patterns of syntax are in clauses and sentences.regular patterns of syntax are in clauses and sentences.
 So far we have looked only at one model for the analysis ofSo far we have looked only at one model for the analysis of
spoken interaction, the Sinclair-Coulthard 'Birmingham'spoken interaction, the Sinclair-Coulthard 'Birmingham'
model.model.

54.  We have argued that it is useful for describing talk in and out ofWe have argued that it is useful for describing talk in and out of
the classroom; it captures patterns that reflect the basic functionsthe classroom; it captures patterns that reflect the basic functions
of interaction and offers a hierarchical model where smaller unitsof interaction and offers a hierarchical model where smaller units
can be seen to combine to form larger ones and where the largecan be seen to combine to form larger ones and where the large
units can be seen to consist of these smaller ones.units can be seen to consist of these smaller ones.
 The bare bones of the hierarchy (or rank scale) can be expressedThe bare bones of the hierarchy (or rank scale) can be expressed
as follows:as follows:
TRANSACTIONTRANSACTION
EXCHANGEEXCHANGE
MOVEMOVE
ACTACT

55.  The lowest rank is what we have referred to asThe lowest rank is what we have referred to as 'speech acts';'speech acts';
Sinclair and Coulthard simply call them acts, but for ourSinclair and Coulthard simply call them acts, but for our
general purposes, any fine distinction the terminologygeneral purposes, any fine distinction the terminology
might suggest is unimportant. Sinclair and Coulthard'smight suggest is unimportant. Sinclair and Coulthard's
model is very useful for analysing patterns of interactionmodel is very useful for analysing patterns of interaction
where talk is relatively tightly structured, such as betweenwhere talk is relatively tightly structured, such as between
doctors and patients(see Coulthard and Ashbydoctors and patients(see Coulthard and Ashby 1975),1975), but allbut all
sorts of complications arise when we try to apply the modelsorts of complications arise when we try to apply the model
to talk in more informal, casual,to talk in more informal, casual, and spontaneousand spontaneous
contexts.contexts.

56. 1.7 talk as a social activity1.7 talk as a social activity
 Doctor-patient talk, it is relatively easy to predict whoDoctor-patient talk, it is relatively easy to predict who
will speak when, who will ask and who will answer,will speak when, who will ask and who will answer,
who will interrupt, who will open and close the talk,who will interrupt, who will open and close the talk,
and so on. But where talk is more casual, and amongand so on. But where talk is more casual, and among
equals, everyone will have a part to play in controllingequals, everyone will have a part to play in controlling
andand monitoring the discourse, and the picture will lookmonitoring the discourse, and the picture will look
considerablyconsiderably moremore complicated.complicated.

57. 1.8 written discourses1.8 written discourses
 With written texts, some of the problems associatedWith written texts, some of the problems associated
with spoken transcripts are absent: we do not have towith spoken transcripts are absent: we do not have to
contend with people(contend with people( all speakingall speaking at once, the writerat once, the writer
has usually had time to think about what tohas usually had time to think about what to saysay andand
how to say it, and the sentences are usually wellhow to say it, and the sentences are usually well
formed in a way that the utterances of natural,formed in a way that the utterances of natural,
spontaneous talk are not. But the overall questionsspontaneous talk are not. But the overall questions
remain the same:remain the same:
 whatwhat norms or rulesnorms or rules do people adhere to whendo people adhere to when
creating written texts?creating written texts?
 Are texts structured according to recurring principles, isAre texts structured according to recurring principles, is
there a hierarchy of units comparable to acts, movesthere a hierarchy of units comparable to acts, moves
and exchanges, and are there conventional ways ofand exchanges, and are there conventional ways of

58.  As with spoken discourse, if we do find suchAs with spoken discourse, if we do find such
regularities, and if they can be shown as elements thatregularities, and if they can be shown as elements that
have different realizations in different languages, orhave different realizations in different languages, or
that they may present problems for learners in otherthat they may present problems for learners in other
ways, then the insights of written discourse analysisways, then the insights of written discourse analysis
might be applicable, in specifiable ways, to languagemight be applicable, in specifiable ways, to language
teaching.teaching.

59. The resources available for grammatical cohesion can beThe resources available for grammatical cohesion can be
listed finitely and compared across languages forlisted finitely and compared across languages for
translatability and distribution in real texts. Textstranslatability and distribution in real texts. Texts
displaying such cohesive features are easy to find, suchdisplaying such cohesive features are easy to find, such
as this one on telephones:as this one on telephones:
(1.23) If you'd like to give someone a phone for Christmas,(1.23) If you'd like to give someone a phone for Christmas,
there are plentythere are plenty
to choose from. Whichever you go for, if it's to be used on theto choose from. Whichever you go for, if it's to be used on the
BTBT
[British Telecom] network, make sure[British Telecom] network, make sure it'sit's approvedapproved -- look forlook for
thethe
label with a green circle to confirm this. Phones labelled withlabel with a green circle to confirm this. Phones labelled with
a reda red
triangle are prohibited.triangle are prohibited.
(Which? December 1989: 599(Which? December 1989: 599))

60.  The italicized items are all interpretable in relation toThe italicized items are all interpretable in relation to
items in previous sentences. Plenty is assumed toitems in previous sentences. Plenty is assumed to
mean 'plenty of phones'; you in the first and secondmean 'plenty of phones'; you in the first and second
sentence are interpreted as the same 'you*; whicheversentence are interpreted as the same 'you*; whichever
is interpreted as 'whichever telephone'; it isis interpreted as 'whichever telephone'; it is
understood as the telephone, and this as 'the fact thatunderstood as the telephone, and this as 'the fact that
it is approved'. These are features of grammaticalit is approved'. These are features of grammatical
cohesion, but there are lexical clues too: go for is acohesion, but there are lexical clues too: go for is a
synonym of choose, and there is lexical repetition ofsynonym of choose, and there is lexical repetition of
phone, and of label.phone, and of label.

61. 1.9 Text and Interpretation1.9 Text and Interpretation
 MarkersMarkers of various kinds, i.e. the linguistic signals ofof various kinds, i.e. the linguistic signals of
semantic and discourse functions (e.g. in English thesemantic and discourse functions (e.g. in English the
on the verb is a marker of pastness), are very muchon the verb is a marker of pastness), are very much
concerned with theconcerned with the surfacesurface of the text. Cohesiveof the text. Cohesive
markers are no exception: they create links acrossmarkers are no exception: they create links across
sentence boundaries and pair and chain togethersentence boundaries and pair and chain together
items that are relateditems that are related (e.g.(e.g. byby daringdaring to the sameto the same
entity).entity).
 But reading a text is far more complexBut reading a text is far more complex than that: wethan that: we
have to interpret the ties and make sense of them.have to interpret the ties and make sense of them.
MakingMaking sensesense of aof a isis m actm act ofof interpretationinterpretation
 that depends as much on what we asthat depends as much on what we as mad-mad-
trs'brhgtr,raexttrs'brhgtr,raext as what the author puts into it.as what the author puts into it.

62.  Interpretation can be seen a set of procedures and theInterpretation can be seen a set of procedures and the
approach to the analysis of texts that emphasizes theapproach to the analysis of texts that emphasizes the
mental activities involved in interpretation can bemental activities involved in interpretation can be
broadly called procedural.broadly called procedural.
 procedural approaches emphasize the role of theprocedural approaches emphasize the role of the
reader in actively building the world of the text, basedreader in actively building the world of the text, based
on his/her experience of the world and how states andon his/her experience of the world and how states and
events are characteristically manifested in it.events are characteristically manifested in it.
 The reader has to activate such knowledge, makeThe reader has to activate such knowledge, make
inferences and constantly asses interpretation in theinferences and constantly asses interpretation in the
light of the situation and the aims and goals of-& text aslight of the situation and the aims and goals of-& text as
the reader perceives them.the reader perceives them.

63. The incident occurred ia Cairns, Queengland and the boy'sThe incident occurred ia Cairns, Queengland and the boy's
mother, Mrs Kathy Dryden said:mother, Mrs Kathy Dryden said:
'It was like a horror movie. It was a hot night'It was like a horror movie. It was a hot night
and Bartholomew was lying under a mosquitoand Bartholomew was lying under a mosquito
net. He suddenly started screaming.net. He suddenly started screaming.
'We rushed to the bedroom to find a huge'We rushed to the bedroom to find a huge
snake trying to strangle him. It was coiledsnake trying to strangle him. It was coiled
around his arms and neck and was going downaround his arms and neck and was going down
his body.'his body.'
Mrs Dryden and bet husband, Peter, tried toMrs Dryden and bet husband, Peter, tried to
stabstab thethe creature with knives but the python bitcreature with knives but the python bit
the boy several times before escaping.the boy several times before escaping.
(from(from The Birmingham Post,The Birmingham Post, 12 March 1987, p. 10)12 March 1987, p. 10)

64. 1.10. larger patterns in text1.10. larger patterns in text
 The clause-relational approach to text also concernsThe clause-relational approach to text also concerns
itself with larger patterns which regularly occur initself with larger patterns which regularly occur in
texts. If we consider a simple text like the following,texts. If we consider a simple text like the following,
which is concocted for the sake of illustration, we canwhich is concocted for the sake of illustration, we can
see asee a pattern emerging which is found in hundreds ofpattern emerging which is found in hundreds of
texts in a wide variety of subject areas and contexts:texts in a wide variety of subject areas and contexts:
Most people like to take a camera with them when they travelMost people like to take a camera with them when they travel
abroad. But all airports nowadays have X-ray securityabroad. But all airports nowadays have X-ray security
screening and X rays can damage film. One solution to thisscreening and X rays can damage film. One solution to this
problem is to purchase a specially designed lead-linedproblem is to purchase a specially designed lead-lined
pouch. These are cheap and can protect film from all but thepouch. These are cheap and can protect film from all but the
strongest X rays.strongest X rays.

65.  Hoey (1983) analyses such texts in great detail, as wellHoey (1983) analyses such texts in great detail, as well
as some other common text patterns. These largeras some other common text patterns. These larger
patterns which maypatterns which may bebe found in texts (and indeed whichfound in texts (and indeed which
maymay constitute the whole text) are the objects ofconstitute the whole text) are the objects of
interpretation by theinterpretation by the
 The first sentence presents us with aThe first sentence presents us with a situationsituation and theand the
second sentence with some sort of complication orsecond sentence with some sort of complication or
problem,problem, The third sentence describes aThe third sentence describes a responseresponse toto
the problem and the final sentence gives a positivethe problem and the final sentence gives a positive
evaluationevaluation of the response. Such a sequence ofof the response. Such a sequence of
relations forms arelations forms a problem-solutionproblem-solution pattern, andpattern, and
problem-solution patterns are extremely common inproblem-solution patterns are extremely common in
texts.texts.

66. 1.11 conclusion
 We have seen in this chapter that discourse analysisWe have seen in this chapter that discourse analysis
is a vast subject area within linguistics, encompassingis a vast subject area within linguistics, encompassing
as it does the analysis of spoken and written languageas it does the analysis of spoken and written language
over and above concerns such as the structure of theover and above concerns such as the structure of the
clause or sentence. In this brief introduction we haveclause or sentence. In this brief introduction we have
looked at just some ways of analyzing speech andlooked at just some ways of analyzing speech and
writing and just some aspects of those particularwriting and just some aspects of those particular
models we have chosen to highlight. There is ofmodels we have chosen to highlight. There is of
course a lot more to look at. For example, we have notcourse a lot more to look at. For example, we have not
considered the big question of discourse in its socialconsidered the big question of discourse in its social
setting.setting.

67. The End!The End!