Coherence without cohesion?

[John Bateman]

> uncomfortable with the Hallidayan distinction between
> cohesion and coherence. It is my belief that naturally occuring texts (i.e.
> not constructed two sentence microtexts) are dripping in cohesive devices,
> and that our sense of coherence is created by observing how those devices
> cluster. The reader is not aribtrarily assessing whether a text hangs
> together, but is being led by the nose by the writer to construct the
> intended internal mental representation of the relations between
> propositions.

this *is* (apart from the word "mental") the Hallidayan distinction
between
cohesion and coherence. Cohesion leads you by the nose, but only
coherence
lets you drink. Words like "arbitrary" don't (and shouldn't) play a big
role in functional linguistics of any persuasion.

John B.

--
John Bateman
FB10, Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaften
Universität Bremen
28334 Bremen, Germany.

Tel: +49/421-218-9483
Fax: +49/421-218-4283 (or 218-7801)
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~bateman