Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied LinguisticsVol. 76 (1987) ► pp.1–24
Textual Cohesion in Hindi
A Comparative Study
The purpose of this paper is to summarize some preliminary research on textual cohesion in Hindi. The study of linguistic cohesion attempts to isolate linguistic devices used to ‘link’ sentences in a discourse. The present study was undertaken to find out exactly what cohesion devices are used in Hindi and how the linking texture of Hindi discourses differs from that of English.
Although both Hindi and English use some of the same cohesion devices, there are both quantitative and qualitative differences in their textures. This paper focuses on Hindi-particular cohesion devices and on devices differentially exploited to Hindi and English.
An example of a Hindi particular cohesion device is ‘Adjective Promotion’. The differential exploitation of the device of co-referential NP provides an example of the second type of difference between the two languages. Hindi uses it far more frequently than English.
Our results also provide evidence for the hypothesis that parallel sublanguages of Hindi and English are more alike in their cohesive texture than are different sub-languages of either of these two languages. ‘Stylistic contact’ in the domain of more technical sublanguage may provide an explanation for this.
Our study shows not only what some of the Hindi-particular cohesion devies are but also how a large number of shared cohesion devices are differentially exploited by different languages and what sorts of trade-offs are made amongst the major types of cohesion devices (semantic, syntactic, morphological, and lexical).
References (17)
Bellert, Irena (1970) : On a condition of the coherence of texts. Semiotica 2:335–363.
Dijk, Teun A. van (1972) : Some aspects of text grammars. The Hague, Mouton. 
Dittmar, N. (1976) : Sociolinguistics. London, Edward Arnold.
Fillmore, C.J. (1973) : May we come in? Semiotica 91:97–116.
Ford, A. and R. Singh (1979) : On Non-nominal Anaphora. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 111:227–234.
Grice, H.P. (1975) : Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, vol. 31, 41-58, P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (eds.). New York, Seminar Press.
Gutwinski, Waldimar (1974) : Cohesion in literary texts : a study of some grammatical and lexical features of English discourse. The Hague, Mouton.
Halliday, M.A.K., and R. Hassan (1976) : Cohesion in English. London : Longman Group (English Language Series 9).
Kittredge, R. (1978) : Textual cohesion within sublanguages : implications for Automatic Analysis and Synthesis. Paper presented at the seventh International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 1978). Berger, Norway.
(1982) : Variation and Homogeneity of sublanguages. To appear in Kittredge and Lahrberger eds. Sublanguages : Studies of Language in Restricted Semantic Domains. De Grayter.
Labov, W.M. (1970) : The study of language in its social context. Studium générale 231:30–87.
Longacre, R.E. (1978) : Why we need a vertical revolution in linguistics. The Fifth Lacus Forum, 247–270.
Sachs, H. (1972) : Conversational analysis, mimeo.
Searle, J. (1969) : Speech Acts : an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Singh, R. (1977) : A note on supra-syntactic interference. ITL 371:95–103.
Trudgill, P. (1974) : The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge : Cambridge University Pres.
Williams, E. (1977 : Discourse and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 8; 1:101–139.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Patry, Richard & Nathan Ménard
2009. Problèmes d’orientation référentielle dans l’analyse de la cohésion. Revue québécoise de linguistique 21:2 ► pp. 145 ff. 
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.