Email this article 
Hide
Show all
A Contrastive Analysis of the Links of Textuality in Abstracts Written by Persian and English Writers in Clinical Psychology Journals
Abstract
It is generally agreed today that lexical cohesion is one of the fundamental elements of the text texture achieved through lexical semantic relations dominating the arrangement of propositional units in a text. Accordingly, this study sought to compare and contrast the textual links or lexical cohesive devices enlisted in the psychological abstracts written by Persian and English writers. To this end, 40 abstracts from Persian and English articles, 20 in each language, published in clinical psychology journals were randomly selected. The framework serving as tertium comprationis for analyzing lexical cohesion markers was derived from Halliday and Hasan’s (1976) model [Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman]. A frequency count analysis was employed to gauge the number of occurrences of cohesive links in the selected corpus. The results revealed that lexical links of synonymy and repetition were more frequent than other cohesive devices in both English and Persian abstracts.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Behjat, F. (2009). Cohesive devices in English novels and their corresponding Persian translations. Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, 1 (3), 107-118.
Dahl, T. (2000). Text summarization: From human activity to computer program. The problem of tacit knowledge. Hermes, Journal of Linguistics, 25, 113-131
De Beaugrande, R., & Dressler, W. U. (2004). Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman Education Press.
Ercan, G., & Cicekli, I. (2008). Lexical cohesion based topic modeling for summarization. Proceedings of the Cicling, 2008, 582-592.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. Boston: Addison Wesley.
Gonzalez, M. (2011). Lexical cohesion in multiparty conversations. Language Sciences, 33 (1), 167-179
Gutwinski, W. (2007). Cohesion in Literary Texts. The Hague: Mouton.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd Ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Hasan, R. (1984). Coherence and cohesive harmony. In J. Flood (Eds.), Understanding Reading Comprehension: Cognition, Language, and the Structure of Prose (pp. 181-219). Newark: International Reading Association.
Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Johns, A. M. (1980). Cohesion in written business discourse: Some contrasts. The ESP Journal, 1(1), 35-44.
Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, Ph. M., McNamara, D.S., & Graesser, A.C. (2004). Variation in language and cohesion across written and spoken registers. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society ( pp. 843-848), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
MacMillan, F. (2007). The role of lexical cohesion in the assessment of EFL reading proficiency. Arizona Working Papers in SLA and Teaching, 14, 75-93.
McCarthy, M., & O’Dell, F. (2005). English Collocations in Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mirshekaran, I. (2003). Lexical cohesion in Persian narrative and expository text types. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
Mirzapour, F., & Ahmadi, M. (2011). Study on lexical cohesion in English and Persian research articles: A comparative study. English Language Teaching, 4 (4), 245-253, doi:10.5539/elt.v4n4p245
Mohebbi, B. (1998). A contrastive analysis of ellipsis in English texts and their translation equivalents in Persian. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
Sahragard, R. (1992). Lexical cohesion in English and Persian. Paper presented at Tabriz- Baku 1st Conference on Language Teaching Issues, Tabriz. Iran
Taboada, M. T. (2000). Collaboration through talk: the interactive construction of task oriented dialogue in English and Spanish. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Madrid, Spain.
Tanskanen, S.-K. (2006). Collaborating Towards Coherence: Lexical Cohesion in English Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamin.
Van Dijk, T. (1977). Coherence, Text and Context: Exploration in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.
Veisi, A. (2002). Lexical cohesion in English and Kurdish in contrast. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
Yankova, D. (2006). Semantic relations in statutory texts: A study of English and Bulgarian. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 19, 189-222.
Yarmohammadi, L. (1995). Fifteen Articles in Contrastive Linguistics and the Structure of Persian: Grammar, Text, and Discourse. Tehran: Rahnama Publications.
Zhang, D. L., & Liu, R. S. (2003). Yupian lianguan yu xianjie lilun de fazhan ji yingyong (The development of the theory of text coherence and cohesion and its application). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Zhu, Y. S., Zheng, L. X., & Miao, X. W. (2001). Yinghan yupian xianjie shouduan duibi yanjiu (A contrastive study of cohesion in English and Chinese). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.4p.136
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
2012-2023 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature
To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.