Email this article 
Hide
Show all
A Contrastive Study of Cohesion in Arabic and English Religious Discourse
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the use of cohesion in Arabic and English religious spoken texts. Twelve texts, delivered by some of the most eloquent Imams, were analyzed in light of the model proposed by Halliday & Hasan (1976). The study reveals that lexical cohesion is the most dominant type of cohesion in Arabic religious discourse, whereas it is grammatical cohesion which dominates English religious discourse. Although both languages prefer the use of reference, conjunctions and lexical repetition, Arabic uses lexical repetition, collocation and personal pronouns more often than English. A major contribution of the present study is that it captures new cohesive devises employed in Arabic religious discourse other than proposed by Halliday & Hasan (1976): rhyming patterns and parallelism.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ali, M., & Ahmed A.. (2006). Word repetition in the Qur’an: translating form or meaning?. Journal of King Saud University, 19, 17-34
Al-Kafaji, R. (2005). Variation and recurrence in the lexical chains of Arabic and English texts. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 40, 5-25.
Aziz, R. (2012). Parallism as a cohesive device in English and Arabic prayers: Contrastive Analysis. Al Austaz Journal, 20, 353-371.
Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. New York: Cambridge University.
Carter, R. (2008). Working with texts: A core introduction to language analysis. London: Routledge.
Cook, G. (1989). Discourse. Oxford: OUP.
Cook, G. (1994). Discourse and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
De Beaugrande, R. (1980). Text, discourse, and process: Toward a multidisciplinary science of texts. Norwood, N.J.: ABLEX Pub. Corp.
De Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics. London: Longman.
De Beaugrande, R. (1984). Text production-toward a science of composition. O. F. (ed.): Roy University of Florida, 11.
Firth, J. (1957). Papers in Linguistics (1934-1951). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flowerdew, J., & Mahlberg, M. (Eds.). (2009). Lexical Cohesion and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam, NLD: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gary, N. (1976). A discourse analysis of certain root transformations in English. Reproduced by the Indiana University Linguistics Club: Bloomington, Indiana.
Gazallah, H. (2001). Cohesion in translation: The importance of sentence connectors (English-Arabic).Turjuman,10(2), 73-78.
Graesser, A., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(2): 193-202.
Halliday, M. A. (1994). Functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday M. A. K. (2004). An Introduction to functional grammar. London: Oxford University Press Inc.
Halliday, M. A.K. & Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. New York: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. Pearson Educated Limited.
Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huneety, A. (2009). Cohesion in religious and literary Arabic texts. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University.
Johnstone, B. (2002). Discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell publishers.
Kennedy, C. (2003). Ellipsis and syntactic representation. In Schwabe, K, & Winkler, K, (eds). The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures:29-53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Longacre, R. E., & Levinsohn, S. (1978). Field analysis of discourse. Current trends in textlinguistics, 103, 22.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: CUP.
Olshtain, E. & Haskel-Shaham, I. (2012). A discourse approach to second language teaching. In I. Haskel et al. (Eds.), Mizimrat Halashon – Essays in Language Education: 366-387. Jerusalem: The Ministry of Education.
Paltridge, B. (2012). Discourse analysis: An introduction, 2nd (ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Rashdan, I. (2007). Cohesion in the Holy Quran. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University.
Rasheed, S., & Abid, A. (2016). A Comparative study of lexical cohesive devices used by L1 and L2 Urdu speakers’ Language in India 16 (4): 190-217. .
Stubbs, M. (2002). Two quantitative methods of studying phraseology in English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(2): 215–44.
Valeika, L., Verikaitė, D. (2010). An Introduction course in linguistic pragmatics. Vilnius: Vilnius University Press.
Van Dijk, T. (1992). Discourse and the denial of racism. Discourse & Society, 3(1), 87-118.
Vujević, V. M. (2012). Ellipsis and substitution as cohesive devices. http://www.ffuis.edu.ba/media/publikacije/radovi/2012/05/28/31_Vera_Vujevic.pdf
Wardat, A. (2010). Cohesion and coherence in his majesty king Abdullah II's English and Arabic speeches. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.3p.116
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.