b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics
- From: "Eduard C Hanganu" <eddhanganu AT hotmail.com>
- To: jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net
- Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics
- Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:02:48 -0500
Dear Clay:
I don't know what is your working definition of "cohesion, " but I suspect that it is rather limited. You have to remember that without text cohesion there is no coherence, logicality and relevance in the text, that actually without cohesion there is no text (see Odlin, 2000 in "Language Transfer.") Take a look at Halliday and Hasan's (1976) lenghty discussion on "Cohesion in English." On page 10, when they discuss 'cohesion and discourse structure,' they state:
"Cohesion refers to the range of possibilities that exist for linking something with what has gone before. Since this linking is achieved through relations in MEANING (we are excluding from consideration the effects of formal devices such as syntactic parallelism, metre and rhyme), what is in question is the set of meaning relations which function in this way: the semantic resources which are drawn on for the purpose of creating text. And since, as we have stresssed, it is the sentence that is the pivotal entry here - whatever is put together within one sentence is ipso facto part of a text - we can interpret cohesion in practice, as the set of semantic resources for linking a SENTENCE with what has gone before."
If I understand the paragraph correctly, it is not the mechanical (morphological and syntactic) devices that create cohesion in a text, but the semantic resources that 'glue' phrases and sentences together and produce meaning. These ' semantic resources' are essential because without meaning there is no text, no communication, no message.
Eduard
From: "C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
To: hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:13:57 -0700
On 8/17/04 12:09 PM, "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org> wrote:
>
> Some texts like Ecclesiastes, and parts of Proverbs, may be made up of a
> separate short discourses thrown together with no real cohesion. But at
> least we can assume that each such discourse is intended to make sense.
Peter,
Discourse segments at every level can have general cohesion but lack
cohesion in some details. I was recently working on a crux in Luke 4:22
(off-topic) where cohesion breaks down in the last clause of the verse.
Trying to force cohesion onto this last clause causes more problems than it
solves. I can't grab an OT example from memory.
I am not talking about random collections of words.
greetings,
Clay Bartholomew
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics
, (continued)
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, C. Stirling Bartholomew, 08/17/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Peter Kirk, 08/17/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Peter Kirk, 08/16/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Peter Kirk, 08/17/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics,
C. Stirling Bartholomew, 08/17/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, C. Stirling Bartholomew, 08/17/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Peter Kirk, 08/18/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics,
Peter Kirk, 08/19/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Yigal Levin, 08/20/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics, Peter Kirk, 08/20/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.