brightsunnygirl

Just another WordPress.com site

Skip to content
 Home
 About
← Theoretical Framework ( Preposition )
Theoretycal Framework ( Interrogative Sentence ) →

Theoretical Framework ( Conjunction )

Posted on December 18, 2010by brightsunnygirl

Scientific paper must be supported by

theory. Writing a paper, we have to follow the procedure objectively and scientifically.
One of the aspects that support a validity of a paper is theoretical framework. The
theories be used in analyzing the data presented in this study are based on the
linguistic features namely cohesion theory proposed by Halliday and Hasan in the
book entitled Cohesion in English (1976). This specifically focuses on conjunction as
one organic relation of cohesive devices.
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), in ordinary language there are certain
elementary logical relations in existence. This kind of relations are expressed in
linguistic structure in the form of coordination, opposition, etc, and corresponding to
these, there are certain text forming relation represent semantic links between the
elements that are constituent of text. Thus, they are encoded in the form of looser,
more flexible linkages between the components of a text.

Beside the theory proposed by Halliday and Hasan (1976), theory proposed by David
Nunan in the book entitled Introducing Discourse Analysis (1993) is also applied in
this study as a supporting theory.
2.3.1 Types of Conjunction
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976:238), there are four types of conjunction;
they are additive, adversative, causal, and temporal. In the following section all types
conjunction are described :

a. And in all this time he met no one. (Additive)

b. Yet he was hardly aware of being tired. (Adversative)
c. So by night time the valley was far below him. (Causal)
d. Then, as dusk fell, he sat down to rest. (Temporal)
Those are very simple overall framework which does not eliminate the complexity of
the facts. The reason of showing this framework is to make it possible to handle a text
without unnecessary complication.

The different types of conjunctive relations that enter into cohesion are not the
same as the elementary logical relations that are expressed through the structural
medium of coordination. The conjunctive relations are textual; they represent the
generalized types of connection that we recognize as holding between sentences.
These depend in the last resort on the meaning that the sentences, express, and
essentially these are two kinds: experiential, (representing, the linguistic
interpretation of experience), and interpersonal, (representing participation in the
speech situation). It means that the phenomena of conjunctive relations which can be
grouped into four categories that may occur in either ‘internal’ or ‘external’ context.
This distinction, which derives from the functional basis of the semantic system,
determines the locus of conjunction; the conjunction may be located in the
phenomena that constitute in the context of what is being said (external), or in the
interaction itself, the social process that constitutes the speech even (internal). Now
this is the types of conjunction will be given below.

1. Additive
The additive relation is somewhat different from coordination proper,
although it is no doubt derivable from it. Considering cohesive relations, and,
or, and nor type can be grouped under the heading of additive. Coordination is said
to be realized in the form of a particular structural relation since it is incorporated
into linguistic structure (Halliday and Hasan, 1976; 233). While additive indicates
something rather looser and less structural than what it meant by coordinate. Hence,
If coordinate relation is structural, the additive relation is cohesive. The correlative
pairs, such as both … and, either … or, and neither … nor do not occur in general with
cohesive function and they restricted to structural coordination within the sentence.
The reason is that a coordinate pair functions as a single unit.
And, or, and nor may express either the external or the internal type of
conjunctive relation. For example and, in the additive context, in fact, there may be
no very clearly difference between the two (external or internal); but when and is
used alone as a cohesive item, as a distinct from and then, etc, it often seems to have
the sense of ‘there is something more to be said’, which is clearly internal in terms
(Halliday and Hasan 1976; 245).
Example:

(1) “While you’re refreshing yourself,” said the Queen, “I’ll just take the
measurements.”And she took a ribbon out of her pocket, marked in inches…(Halliday
and Hasan, 1976: 235)
On the other hand, here and does link two different facts, which makes it external,
but at the same time, it may serve to convey the speaker’s intention that they should
be regarded as connected in some way, for example:
(2) Was she in a shop? And was that really- was it really a sheep that was sitting on
the other side of the counter? (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 245)
The summary of the conjunctive relation of the additive type with example of each:

a. Simple additive relations (external and internal):

Additive : and, and also, and… too.

Negative : nor, and … not, not either, neither.

Alternative : or, or else.

b. Complex additive relations (internal): emphatic

Additive : further (more), moreover, additionally, beside that, add to this,

in addition.
Alternative : alternatively.
c. Complex additive relations (internal): de-emphatic
Afterthought : incidentally, by the way.
d. Comparative relations (internal):

Similar : likewise, similarly, in the same way, in (just) this way.

Dissimilar : on the other hand, by contrast conversely.
e. Appositive relations (internal):
Expository : that is, I mean, in other words, to put it another way.
Exemplificatory : for instance, for example, thus.

1. Adversative
Contrary to expectation as the basic meaning of the adversative relation
derived from the content of what is being said or from the communication process,
and the speaker -hearer situation. For example:

(1) All the figures were correct; they’d been checked. Yet the total came out wrong.
(Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 250)
Contrastive sense is shown with conjunction but and however.
For example:

(2) All this time Tweedledee was trying his best to fold up the umbrella, with himself
in it … But he couldn’t quite succeed, and it ended in rolling over, bundled up in
umbrella with only his head out. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 250)
(3) He’s not exactly good- looking. But he’s got brains. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976:
252)
(4) ‘I see you’re admiring my little box,’ the Knight said in a friendly tone. ‘… You see
I carry it upside-down, so that the rain can’t get in.’ ‘But the things can get out,’ Alice
gently remarked. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 252)
(5) … it swept her straight of the seat, and down among the heap of
rushes. However, she wasn’t a bit hurt, and was soon up again. (Halliday and Hasan,
1976: 251)
(6) She failed. However, she’s tried her best. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 252)

The adversative relation also has its internal aspect. Here the meaning is still
‘contrary to expectation’; but the source of expectations is to be found not in what the
presupposed sentence is about but in the current- hearer configuration, the point
reached in the communication process.

For example:

(7) ‘… you might catch a bat, and that’s very like a mouse, you know. But do cats eat
bats, I wonder?’ (Halliday and Hasan, 1976: 253)
The summary of conjunctive relations of the adversative type:

a. Adversative relations ‘proper’ (‘in spite of external and internal)

Simple : yet, though, only.
Containing : but.
Emphatic : however, nevertheless, despite this, all the same.
b. Contrastive relations (‘as against’) (external):

Simple : but, and.

Emphatic : however, on the other hand, at the same time, as against that.
c. Contrastive relations (‘as against’) (internal):

Avowal : in fact, as matter of fact, to tell the truth, actually, in point of

fact.
d. Corrective relations (‘not… but’) (internal):

Correction of meaning: instead, rather, on the contrary.

Correction of wording: at least, rather, I mean.
e. Dismissive (generalized adversative) relations (‘no matter…still’) (external
internal):

Dismissal, closed : in any case, in either case, whichever.

Dismissal, open-ended : anyhow, at any rate, in any case.

1. Causal
So, thus, hence, consequently, accordingly, therefore and a number of expressions
like as a result (of that), because of that, in consequence, are the causal relation
expression. All the example of causal are regularly combined with
initial and. Thus so occurs only initially, unless it is followed by and. There are three
specific relations under the heading of causal relations. They are ‘result,
reason, and purpose’. The simple form of expression such as so means, as a result,
for this reason, for this purpose. Except, they are expressed as prepositional phrases,
they are not distinguished.
The simple form thus, hence, and therefore all occur regularly in an internal
sense which is implying some kinds of reasoning or argument from a premise. The
word sooccurs frequently in another meaning, also internal, that is shared
with then; it is a statement about the speaker’s reasoning processes: T conclude from
what you say (or other evidence)’ (Halliday and Hasan 1976: 257)
Other type of conjunctive relations will be under the general heading of causal
that is the conditional type. The two of them are closely related, where the causal
means a therefore b, while the conditional means possibly if so, then. The simple
form of expression of conditional relation, meaning ‘under the circumstances’, is the
word then.
The summary of relations of causal type includes:

a. Causal relations, general (‘because…, so’) (external and internal)

Simple : so, thus, hence, therefore.

Emphatic : consequently, accordingly, because of this.
b. Causal relations, specific:

Reason : (mainly external)/or this reason, on account of this. (Internal) it follows

(from this), on this basis.
Result : (mainly external) as a result (of this), in consequence (of this).
(Internal) arising out of this.
Purpose : (mainly external) for this purpose, with this mind/view, with this
intention.
(Internal) ,’o this end.
c. Reversed causal relations:

Simple : for, because.

d. Conditional relations (‘if…, then’) (external and internal)

Simple : then.
Emphatic : in that case, that being the case, in such an event, under those
circumstances.
Generalized : under the circumstances.
Reserved polarity: otherwise, under the circumstances.
e. Respective relations (“with respect to’) (Internal)

Direct : in this respect/ connection, with regard to this, here.

Reserved polarity: otherwise, in other respects, aside/ apart from this.

1. Temporal
The temporal relations are the relations between two successive sentences.
Their relation in external terms, as content may be simply one of the sequences in
time. The one is subsequent to the other. This temporal cohesion is expressed in its
simple form by then.
The other expressions of temporal relationship besides then and end then are next,
afterwards, after that, subsequently, following, later, since. Halliday and Hasan
(1976; 261) stated that the presence of an additional component also make temporal
relation more specific in the meaning, as well as succession in time.
a. then + immediately (at once, thereupon, on which)

b. then + after an interval (soon, presently, later, after a time)

c. then + repetition (next time, on other occasion)

d. then + a specific time interval (next day, five minutes later)

In the sense of simultaneous there are at present, at this point,

simultaneously, at the same time, meantime, meanwhile, in the mean time, now,
presently, then relative,and when.
Temporal relation may occur in correlative form that is an anaphoric time
expression in one sentence anticipating the anaphoric one that is to follow. The
typical anaphoric temporal is: first, first of all, at first etc. And the expectation will
follow that is an item such as next, then, second, or finally:
The example as follow:

(1) Brick tea is blend that has been compressed into a cake. It is taken mainly by the
minority groups in China. First, it is ground to a dust. Then it is ‘ usually cooked in
milk. (Nunan: 1993:27)
Still under the heading of temporal relation, there is included the sense of ‘to
return to the point’ which is called resumptive. This resumptive relation is an internal
one, expressed by phrases such as anyway, to resume, or to come to the point
The distinction between the external and the internal type of temporal relation
is fairly easy to identify. In the internal type, the successivity is in the communication
process, not in the events being talked about. The meaning ‘next in the course of
discussion’ is typically expressed by the words next, then, or .secondly, etc, and the
culmination of the discussion is expressed by: finally, or in conclusion. The summary
of the conjunctive relations of the temporal types include:
a. Simple temporal relations (external)

Sequential : (and) then, next, afterwards, after that, subsequently.

Simultaneous : (just) the, at the same time, simultaneously.
Preceding : earlier, before, then/that, previously.
b. Complex temporal relations (external)

Immediate : at once, thereupon, on which, just before.

Interrupted : soon, presently, later, after a time, sometime earlier, formerly.
Repetitive : next time, on another occasion, this time, on this occasion, the last
time, on a previous occasion.
Specific : next day, five minutes earlier.
Durative : meanwhile, all this time.
Terminal : by this time, up till that time, until time.
Punctiliar : next moment, at this point/moment, the previous moment
c. Conclusive relations (external)

Simple : finally, at last, in the end, eventually.

d. Sequential and conclusive relations (external): correlative forms

Sequential : first… then, first… next, first… second.

Conclusive : at first… finally, at first:., in the end.
e. Temporal relations (internal)

Sequential : then, next, secondly…

Conclusive : finally, as a final point, in conclusion.
f. Temporal relations (internal) correlative form

Conclusive : …finally, …to conclude with.

g. ‘Here and now’ relations (internal)

Past : up to now, up to this point, hitherto, heretofore at this point, here.

Present : at this point.
Future : from now on, henceforward.
h. Summary relations (internal)

Culminative : to sum up, in short, briefly.

Resumptive : to resume, to get back to the point, anyway.
2.3.2 Function of Conjunction
Beside, Stern (2003: 101) proposed that the function of conjunction is to join any of
the following language units such as word, clause, sentence, and phrase to another.

1. Conjunction joins one words to another

For data: smile but sad

1. Conjunction joins one clause to another

For data: I saw a doctor because I felt unwell

1. Conjunctions joins one sentence to another

For data: it was raining, so I did not go out

1. Conjunctions joins one phrase to another

For data: the bus and the cab got terible accident

Stern (2003) also proposed that a major use of conjunctions is to join sentence parts
that are clauses. When we use of conjunction in this way, it is often possible to choose
between putting the conjoined clause (headed by the conjunction) first and putting it
second. Because the beginning of the sentence is the most prominent, your choice will
depend on which clause you want the reader or listener to focus on.

2.3.2.1 The Subclasses of Conjunction and Their Functions

Based on stern (2003: 103), there are two subclasses of conjunction, and one of them
has three subdivision, they are:

1. Coordinating Conjunctions
A. Coordinating conjunctions (in bold below) are conjunction that join small
scale units of language such as words and phrases. Such as: and, but,
either….or, neither….nor.
For example:

We gave flowers and fruits

word word
We visited our teachers but not all of them.
phrases phrases
 1. Coordinating conjunctions also join clauses. The clauses headed by a
coordinating conjunction (underlined) are called a “coordinate clause”. For
examples:
I cooked and they washed the dishes.
main clause coordinate clause
I was happy so I bought a chocolate.
main clause coordinate clause
I know her but I don’t like her.
main clause coordinate clause

According to Stern (2003), the main coordinating conjunctions and conjunction

groups are:and, but, so, yet, still, or, neither, nor, than, either….or, neither….nor, not
only….but also, as well as.
1. Subordinating Conjunctions
According to Stern (2003), subordinating conjunctions are the conjunctions that join
clauses to each other. But the two clauses are not equal. One is the main clause (also
called a super ordinate clause). The other headed by the subordinating conjunction is
the subordinate clause. Stern(2003: 104) also states that in the sense that the
subordinate clause, together with its subordinating conjunction, cannot Stern alone
but must be join in any one of three functions (conjunction underlined) for example:

1. As a noun clause:
What she doesn’t understand won’t hurt her.
subject of won’t hurt main clause

1. As an adjective clause
You have something that I would like to borrow.
main clause modifies something
1. As an adverb clause
When she is gone I feel sad.
modifies feel main clause
Stern (2003) also gives the explanation about the three subdivisions of subordinating
conjunctions that joined the three clauses above, they are:

1. Nominal Conjunction is the subordinating conjunction that used to join the

main clause with a noun.
For example:
 I have got what was mine
main clause noun clause
The subordinate clause (what was mine) acts as a noun because it is the object of the
verbtook. The main nominal conjunctions are: whoever, whatever, who, whom,
which, that, when, where, how, what, why, whether.
1. Adjectival conjunction is the subordinating conjunction that used to join an
adjective (bolded) with main clause.
For example:

I helped my mother who was cocking.

main clause adjective clause
The subordinate clause (who was cocking) acts as an adjective because it modifies the
nounmother.
The main adjectival conjunctions are: who, that, whom, when, whose, where, which.

1. Adverbial Conjunction is the subordinating conjunction that used to join an

adverb with an adverb clause.
For example:

I washed when I got home

main clause adverb clause

The subordinate clause (when I got home) acts as an adverb of time that modifies the
verbwashed.
The main adverbial conjunctions are: after, because, until, although, before, unless,
since, though, if, when, whenever, as, while, wherever.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

← Theoretical Framework ( Preposition )

Theoretycal Framework ( Interrogative Sentence ) →
Leave a Reply

 Recent Posts
 Theoretycal Framework ( Interrogative Sentence )
 Theoretical Framework ( Conjunction )
  Theoretical Framework ( Preposition )
 Welcome!!
 Hello world!
 Recent Comments

Mr WordPress on Hello world!

 Archives
 December 2010
 Categories
 Uncategorized
 Meta
 Register
 Log in
 Entries RSS
 Comments RSS
 WordPress.com
brightsunnygirl
Blog at WordPress.com.

 Follow
