Paragraph Structure in Arabic 
and English Expository Discourse 
by 
Shehdeh Ismail Fareh 
B.A., University of Jordan, 1976 
M.A., University of Jordan, 1984 
M.Phil., University of Kansas, 1987 
Submitted to the Department of 
Linguistics and the Faculty of the 
Graduate School of the University 
of Kansas in partial fulfillment of 
the requirements for the degree of 
Doctor of Philosophy 
Dissertation Committee 
Chairman 
Member 
Member 
Date Defended: August 19, 1988 
ABSTRACT 
The purpose of this study was to compare and 
contrast Arabic and English paragraph structures in 
expository discourse. The analysis covered three aspects 
essential to a full description of paragraph structure, 
namely, tagmemic or thematic patterns, logical relations 
holding between propositions on the one hand, and between 
themes and rhemes on the other, and finally lexical 
cohesive devices. 
A sample of forty expository paragraphs was selected 
from each language. Thirty of these paragraphs were 
randomly selected, while ten were, more or less, parallel 
in content. The analysis was carried out within the 
framework of tagmemeics as it was developed by Pike and 
Pike ( 1977) . 
The results indicate that themes, in both Arabic and 
English, tend to be developed deductively rather than 
inductively. The mono-level thematic pattern, i.e., the 
given paragraph has one theme) is the most frequent in 
both languages. However Arabic shows a stronger tendency 
for marking themes both internally and externally. 
English shows a stronger tendency for expressing themes 
in initial propositions. Conjunctions in Arabic seem to 
have a role or marking themes but it is not the case in 
English. 
i 
As far as logical relations are concerned, the 
additive was found to be the most frequent inter-
propositional relation in both languages. However, 
English showed more preference than Arabic to the 
explanatory theme-rheme relation, while the mixed pattern 
is the most frequent in Arabic. In Arabic, unlike 
English, connectives tend to function as markers of 
logical relations. Finally there are differencews 
between Arabic and English in making use of lexical 
cohesive devices to achieve cohesion in texts. English 
shows a stronger tendency to use the same word to create 
cohesion in texts. Arabic, on the other hand, shows more 
preference for the use of collocation. 
ii 
To my sincere wife and dear children. 
iii 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
I would like to express my gratitude and 
appreciation to my advisor Professor Akira Yamamoto for 
his remarkable patience and guidance. I am also indebted 
to the other members of my dissertation committee: 
Professor Kenneth Miner, and Professor M. Hendersen for 
their invaluable help throughout my study. 
My thanks are also due to my typist Mrs. Beth Abu-
Ali. 
Finally, I wish to express my thanks and 
aprreciation to my wife and children for their patience 
and encouragement. 
iv 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Acknowledgments iv 
Table of contents v 
List of tables viii 
Guide to Phonetic Symbols ix 
Chapter Page 
1. Introduction 1 
Significance of the study 6 
Scope of the study 10 
Paragraph structure 11 
Logical relations 13 
Lexical cohesion 15 
2. Theoretical models of discourse analysis 24 
The structural approach 25 
The generative approach 26 
The systematic approach 28 
The procedural approach 31 
The tagmemic approach 32 
Analysis of discourse types 34 
Narrative discourse 36 
Expository discourse 42 
Narrative versus expository discourse 48 
Contrastive discourse analysis 50 
v 
Chapter Page 
3. Theoretical framework 58 
Tagmeme 61 
Hierarchy 77 
Context 85 
4. Methodology and procedure 88 
Selection of texts 90 
Analysis of texts 91 
Analysis of logical relation 96 
Analysis of lexical cohesion 103 
5. Analysis 105 
Tagmemic analysis 106 
Analysis of logical relations 149 
Lexical cohesion 193 
6. Results and Discussion 202 
Quantitative analysis 202 
Distribution of themes 203 
Theme-marking devices 216 
Logical relations 228 
Markers of logical relations 236 
Lexical cohesion 242 
vi 
7. Conclusions and Implications 245 
Pedagogical Implications 250 
Sources of Sample Arabic Paragraphs 254 
Appendix A (Arabic Sample Paragraphs) 255 
Sources of Samples English Paragraphs 285 
Appendix B (English Sample Paragraphs) 287 
References 302 
vii 
LIST OF TABLES 
Table Page 
1. Quantitative aspects of sample paragraphs 
in Arabic and English 203 
2. Frequency and percentage of thematic patterns 
in Arabic sample paragraphs 206 
3. Distribution of primary and secondary themes 
in the sample Arabic paragraphs 206 
4. Frequency and percentage of initial and 
non-initial themes in the Arabic sample 
paragraphs 208 
5. Frequency and percentage of thematic patterns 
in Arabic and English 211 
6. Distribution of primary and secondary themes 
in the sample English paragraphs 212 
7. Percentages of initial/non-initial themes in 
in Arabic and English samples 213 
8. Internal and external theme-marking devices 
in Arabic 218 
9. Internal and external theme-marking devices 
in English 222 
10. Frequency and percentages of marked and 
unmarked themes in Arabic and English 224 
11. Frequency and percentages of prepositional 
relations in the Arabic and English samples 231 
12. Frequency and percentages of theme-rheme 
relations in Arabic and English sample 
paragraphs 235 
13. Frequency and percentages of lexical cohesive 
devices in Arabic and English 243 
viii 
GUIDE TO PHONETIC SYMBOLS 
9 voiced pharangeal fricative 
' glottal stop 
s_ voiceless alveolar velarized fricative 
z_ voiced alveolar velarized fricative 
dh voiced dental fricative 
sh voiceless palato-alveolar fricative 
dh voiced dental velarized fricative 
th voiceless dental fricative 
t_ voiceless alveolar velarized stop 
h_ voiceless pharyngeal fricative 
x voiceless uvular fricative 
gh voiced uvular fricative 
j voiced alveo-palatal affricate 
q voiceless uvular stop 
ix 
Chapter 1 
Introduction 
Until recently discourse analysis has been 
considered peripheral to all the most important 
theoretical principles of linguistics. This can be 
attributed to a number of factors, chief among which is 
the absence of a comprehensive theory that can handle 
complexities beyond the level of the sentence. Many 
linguists, for reasons of convenience, did not get 
invovled in linguistic analysis of language samples that 
exceed the level of the sentence. They even considered 
discourse analysis impossible or belonging to other 
fields such as rhetoric. Some others were under the 
influence of of the theoretical limitations fundamental 
to certain theories of linguistics which kept followers 
within the boundaries of the sentence. The 
structuralists, for example, have focused their 
linguistic research on the analysis of elements, forms, 
and structures at or below the level of the sentence. 
This trend of analysis was explicitly stated in 
Bloomfield's dictum (1933:170) that "each sentence is an 
independent linguistic form, not included by virtue of 
any grammatical construction in any larger linguistic 
form." In this sense, a sentence is interpreted by means 
of cues from the grammatical structure of the sentence. 
1 
Chomsky, in his transformational generative model of 
grammar, further advanced Bloomfield's view stating that 
a grammar of a language should aim at accounting for only 
acceptable sentences in that language. He defined 
language as "a set of sentences each finite in length and 
constructed out of a finite set of elements" (1957:83). 
Chompsky's linguistic analysis, even in his later work, 
did not go beyound the level of the sentence. 
Ostensibly, such a view of language is inimical to 
the study of how larger chunks of language are 
constructed or how texts are organized and developed. 
Today, the situation has drastically changed. 
Linguists have become increasingly aware of the 
inadequaceis of sentence grammar. Language to them is no 
longer a composite of sentences that are interpretable 
with reference to linguistic forms only. Longacre 
(1983:xv), for example, criticized linguistics as having 
been restricted to analyzing sentences out of context. 
He indicates that many problems related to ambiguity, 
reference, anaphoric use of pronouns, aspect, and tense 
might arise as a result of strictly following such an 
approach. 
In their article "Transitivity in grammar and 
discourse, " Hopper and Thompson ( 1980:251-299) note that 
properties and functions of transitivity, as a 
2 
morphosyntactic device, are discourse determined. They 
found that high transitivity and low transitivity 
correlate with the discourse notions of foregrounding and 
backgrounding respectively. This means that a sentence 
which provides the main points of the discourse, or 
foregrounding, is usually characterized by being high on 
the scale of transitivity, while the sentence which is at 
a lower level of the scale of transitivity generally 
denotes backgrounding, the part of the discourse that 
provides the supporting points. 
The claim being made here is that the functions and 
properties of morphosyntactic devices such as 
transitivity and aspect are discourse determined. The 
authors presented an example from Swahili in which the 
prefix 'li-' on the verb indicates the past tense in 
narration. But, in a verb sequence in a narrative, only 
the first verb is prefixed with 'li-'. The other verbs 
are marked with the prefix 'ka-' which is restricted to 
narrating single consecutive events. That is to say, it 
has the function of tracking the story line. For 
determining the function of these devices, one ought to 
go beyond the level of the sentence. Grimes (19 75:97) 
specifically supports this notion saying: 
Our grasp of grammar has changed 
sufficiently in the past decade that 
instead of simply saying that a 
3 
language has for example, thirty-two 
clause types, we can now ask 
legitimately what the various clauses 
are for and by tracing their pattern 
of use within a discourse we can get 
an answer. 
Conducting linguistic analysis at the discourse level has 
been further advanced by Gerald Sanders ( 1970 : 72 ) who 
argues that words, morphemes, or phrases cannot 
constitute a natural domain for any scientific theory 
about language. Sanders says that all discussion of such 
subsentential elements are included in grammars of 
sentences, which in turn cannot constitute a natural 
domain for any commprehensive language theory as well. 
Sanders concludes that the natural domain for any 
language theory must be the discourse and not the 
sentence. Sanders says that a grammar of English can 
only be adequate if it explicitly accounts for the 
ability of the native speaker to recognize the 
grammaticality of sequences like: 
a. Did Mary eat the apple? Yes, she did. 
and the ungrammaticality of 
b. Did Mary eat the apple? Yes, they did. 
Another argument that Sanders raised against 
sentence grammar is its inadequacy in handling the 
semantic properties and relations of sentences such as 
paraphrase ambiguity and entailment. He argues that 
4 
synonymy is not only a relation between words, phrases 
and sentences, but also between sets of sentences such as 
the following: 
a. Cleopatra will go to Karnak. Cleopatra will see 
Caesar at Karnak. 
b. Cleopatra will go to Karnak. She will see 
Caesar there. 
The motivations for discourse grammar stems from the fact 
that sentences cannot be a natural domain for any 
adequate language theory, especially after extensive 
evidencing of the inadequacies associated with sentence 
grammar. A grammar of any language, as Chompsky views 
it, must account for and characterize the linguistic 
competence of the native speakers of that language. A 
major component of this competence is the ability of the 
native speaker to distinguish between utterances that are 
acceptable and those that are not. This ability is not 
confined to any length or complexity of utterances. A 
native speaker is supposed to pass grammaticality 
judgments not only on words, phrases and sentences, but 
also on discourses of any length. This is what Morgan 
(1981:196) refers to as 'discourse competence'. 
Grimes (1975:5) recommends that linguists work with 
discourse and suggests that the magnitude of the subject 
matter should not be a barrier. He says: 
5 
Progress in scienfic thinking always 
implies distinguishing between 
generalizations that can be broadened 
on the one hand and kinds of 
comple xity that can be left out of 
consideration on the other . . . the 
answer to complexity is not to give 
up the whole thing, but to find 
generalizations and simplifying 
assumptions that put their finger on 
the essential factors behind the 
complexity. 
The point that Grimes is trying to convey is that 
discourse analysis is not much more intractable than that 
the complexity of phonology or syntax. He indicates that 
linguists have come up with some generalizations about 
handling such complexities, and that similar ones can be 
made at the level of discourse by conducting several 
studies that examine the different aspects of discourse 
structure and organization in different languages. 
Significance of Study 
Research in rhetoric (e.g. Kaplan 1966, 1967, 1972, 
Gumperz and Gumperz 1981, and Gleason 1968) suggests that 
it is culture-based in the sense that different languages 
have different organizational patterns and structures. 
These differences are usually reflected in the writing of 
foreign language learners. Kaplan (1972:401) states: 
Foreign students who have mastered 
syntactic features have still 
demonstrated inability to compose 
adequate themes, term papers, theses, 
and dissertations. Instructors have 
written, on foreign students papers, 
comments such as "The material is all 
here, but it seems somehow out of 
focus," or "lacks organization, or 
lacks cohesion." And these comments 
are essentially true. 
Kaplan indicates that the reason for such a weakness in 
composition is that foreign language learners employ 
rhetorical and organizational patterns of their native 
languages that violate the expectations of native 
teachers. He concluded that contrastive rhetoric must be 
taught in the same sense in which contrastive grammar is 
presently taught. Kaplan (19 7 2:400-410) puts it 
explicitly: 
It is necessary to arrive at accurate 
descriptions of paragraph orders 
other than those common to 
English...more detailed descriptions 
are required before any meaningful 
c o n t r a s t i v e systems can be 
elaborated. 
The present study is an attempt to describe the 
structure of the paragraph, lexical cohesion and logical 
relations in both Arabic and English expository texts. 
It is significant in many respects. 
First, I do not know of any published study of the 
major features of Arabic expository texts. Therefore, 
there is a pressing need for such a study. Secondly, it 
provides a basis for indentifying what features of 
discourse facilitate and interfere with learning writing 
in an unrelated foreign language such as English. Once 
facilitating and interfering aspects are identified, they 
can be better handled in curriculum planning and better 
taught through the devising of special exercises. 
Thirdly, it has direct implications for teaching 
writing skills to Arab learners when learning Arabic or 
English, and to non-Arabic speaking students when 
learning Arabic as a foreign langugage. Learning writing 
in a language involves more than learning the grammatical 
structures and vocabulary. It involves understanding 
textual relations through the use of cohesive devices, 
distinguishing main ideas from supporting ones, 
developing themes or topics coherently. Morrow 
(1977:152-157) refers to such kinds of skills as 
"enabling skills," which are different for each learning 
task, while Enkvist (1982:130) calls them "text 
strategies," ways in which information is presented and 
developed in written texts. These strategies are part of 
what Hymes (1979:5-20) refers to as "communicative 
competence," or a knowledge of how sentences are used in 
performing communicative acts in culturally appropriate 
situations. Hymes (1979:15) explicitly says that "There 
are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would 
be useless." Once these strategies and skills have been 
identified and better understood, they can be better 
8 
taught through particularly designed exercises for 
paragraph development. 
Fourthly, writing can be better assessed if the 
skills and strategies involved are identified. The 
results of this study might be essential to testing 
composition and evaluating the quality of writing, since 
part of the difficulty in evaluating writing lies in 
knowing what aspects to evaluate, such as: 
grammaticality of sentences, cohesion, logical relations, 
or topic development in a text. Furthermore, identifying 
different features of texts adds to the validity of 
writing tests since we will have a better and more 
explicit idea of what features to test. Keith Morrow 
(1979:152-157) argues that a communicative test involves 
the answers to many questions such as: 
What are the performance operations we want to 
test? 
What are the enabling skills involved in these 
operations? 
Finally, it is only through the description of language 
specific discourses that a theory of discourse can be 
developed. 
9 
Scope of Study 
This study is an attempt to describe: 
1) the structure of the paragraph in Arabic and English 
expository discourse, 
2) the logical relations or 'sentence roles' that hold 
between the functional parts of the paragraph, and 
3) the lexical cohesive devices in both languages. 
The study is based on a number of assumptions. Some 
of these assumptions are pertinent to the tagmemic 
framework. In the tagmemic view, grammar is 
hierarchial ly structured from the morpheme to the 
discourse with intermediate levels such as word, phrase, 
clause, sentence, and paragraph. In analyzing the 
structure of paragraphs and discourses, tagmemics looks 
for "functional slots," or tagmemes and sets of possible 
exponents. Furthermore, tagmemics assumes that there are 
specific types of paragraph and discourse. This 
assumption can readily be rejected by looking at a 
variety of paragraphs in which one may find different 
types of discourse in one paragraph. But tagmemics 
confirms its standpoint by admitting recursion on the 
level of the paragraph and discourse. This means that an 
expository paragraph, for example, may be embedded in a 
narrative type of paragraph. On the other hand, a 
discourse of a certain type may be embedded into another 
10 
different genre. A discourse consists in a sequence of 
hierarchically organized elements, the functional parts 
of which, especially those of a paragraph, are linked 
together in a statable manner charateristic of each type 
of paragraph. 
Another assumption of this study is that perfecting 
the techniques of writing a paragraph is essential to and 
indispensible for learning to write, since a discourse is 
a composite of coherently linked paragraphs. Knowing the 
logic of combining sentenes, the principles of coherence 
and cohesion, is expected to improve the quality of 
writing in any language. In addition, the knowledge of 
these writing skills enables us to test and evaluate them 
more efficiently and with more validily at the levels of 
recognition and production. 
Paragraph Structure 
The present study recognizes the paragraph as a unit 
of discourse that is composed of more than one sentence. 
It usually develops an idea or topic or part of one. 
There might be one or more paragraphs, not necessarily 
the same type, embedded in the main paragraph. This 
characteristic has been referred to by Longacre, among 
others, as "recursion." In writing, a paragraph is 
usually marked by indenting the first sentence. 
11 
An attempt will be made in this study to describe 
the structure of the expository paragraph in Arabic and 
English in terms of the number of the constituent parts, 
or tagmemes, and the types of tagmemes: peripheral, or 
nucleus, or recursion. A classification of paragraph 
types will be attempted in the light of these parameters 
and the logical relations that hold between the 
constituents as well. 
As far as paragraph type is concerned, Becker (1965) 
states that there are two major patterns in expository 
writing. In the first major type, a paragraph consists 
of three functional slots: T (topic), R (restriction), 
and I (illustration). These slots can be expounded in 
different ways. The T-slot, for example, can be filled 
by a simple proposition or a proposition that implies 
contrast or comparison. The second major pattern is the 
PS pattern; P (problem), and S (solution). Similarly, 
Richard and Karis Mansen (19 7 6:196-216) classified 
Guajiro paragraphs into two major types: binary and 
open-ended. They observed that an explanatory paragraph 
is the binary type. It consists of a Text tagmeme, plus 
and Expository tagmeme. 
12 
Logical Relations 
The concept of logical relations, as it is used in 
this study, is based on the system of logical relations 
devised by Milic (1969). This term has been referred to 
as "meaning relationships" by Jones and Faulkner (1966), 
"semantic relationships" by Becker (1965), and "sentence 
roles" by Larson (1967), Winterwood (19 70), and Cooper 
(1983). 
Milic (1969:21) described eight logical relations 
that hold between sentences in a text. These relations 
are: 
Initial: the first sentence of a paragraph 
Additive: a proposition that has no organic relation 
with its predecessor 
Adversative: a proposition which changes the 
direction of the argument 
Alternative: a p r o p o s i t i o n which may be 
substituted for the previous one 
Explanatory: a restatement, definition, or 
expansion of the previous proposition 
Illustrative: an instance or illustration 
Illative: a conclusion 
Causal: the cause for a preceding conclusion. 
Sentences are classified into one of these 
relations, according to their relationships to each 
13 
other. For example, a proposition or a sentence is an 
Alternative if it can be substituted for the previous 
one. 
The type of logic intended in these relations is not 
the same as formal logic, for as Milic (1969:21) states, 
"Formal logic may be ineffective rhetorically, and 
fallacious logic, it has often been seen, may be 
rhetorically persuasive." What the term 'logic' refers 
to in this study is the relationship between one sentence 
or proposition and the next. 
It has frequently been noted that each discourse 
genre has a pertinent type of linkage. Unlike narrative 
which is chronologically oriented, expository prose is 
logically oriented. In this respect, the present study 
is an attempt to investigate the logical relations that 
hold between sentences or propositions that function as 
exponents of tagmemes, and between tagmemes themselves in 
Arabic and English expository paragraphs. In discussing 
sentence roles, Larson (1967:16) observed that "Each 
sentence in any paragraph accomplishes or should 
accomplish an identifiable task, a piece of work in 
cooperation with the sentences that surround it." 
Larson suggested that these roles could be precisely 
described and he offered a list of seventeen of these 
roles. Winterwood ( 1975:229) suggested a list of seven 
14 
roles, namely, coordinate, obversative, causative, 
conclusive, alternative, inclusive and sequential. He 
argues that these relationships between T-units exist in 
any coherent stretch of discourse and they can be 
expressed or implied. Many other theorists seek to 
explain the relationships between sentences in a text, 
e.g., Tuen Van Dijk (Text and Context: 1977), Robert de 
Beaugrand (Text, Discourse, and Process: 1980) and the 
most complete explanation is that of Halliday and Hassan 
(Cohesion in English:1976). 
Lexical Cohesion 
The concept of cohesion has been fully developed by 
Halliday and Hassan (1976). They identify it as a 
semantic concept that is a part of the whole system of a 
language. It refers to a set of relations or linguistic 
devices that are present within a text and by means of 
which texture is achieved. 
A text is not a composite of randomly sequenced 
sentences. There are certain relationships holding 
between successive sentences in a discourse. The exact 
nature of these relationships is indicated by formal 
devices. These devices can be grammatical, lexical or in 
spoken language intonational. In their book, (1976), 
Halliday and Hassan in a lengthly discussion of textual 
15 
cohesion, divide cohesive devices into two major 
categories: grammatical and lexical. The major interest 
of this study is in lexical cohesive devices, but since 
lexical cohesion is a part of the whole system of 
cohesion, it might be appropriate to give a brief account 
of the other cohesive devices. Grammatical cohesion 
involves the following categories: 
1) Reference: language can be used to make 
reference of two types. 'Exophoric' reference refers is 
concerned with the relationship between the linguistic 
sign or form and the real-world object that it is used to 
refer to. When someone says, "my house," or "your car," 
for example, he refers to entities in the real world. 
This type of reference does not play a primary role in 
textual cohesion and organization. 'Endophoric' 
reference, on the other hand, is concerned with the 
relationship between a bit of language and another. In 
the sentence, "John loves his wife because she helps him 
save his money," both "John" and "wife" normally have 
exophoric reference while "his, she" and "him" normally 
have endophoric reference. They refer to other 
linguistic elements already mentioned in the text. 
2) Ellipsis: this is the complete elimination of 
a segment of a text under certain restrictions. Halliday 
and Hassan (1976:196) observe that the function of 
16 
ellipsis is "...to create cohesion by leaving outf under 
definite rules, what can be taken over from the preceding 
discourse." 
3) Conjuction: conjunction is another text-
forming device that differs from other types of cohesion 
in the sense that conjunctive elements are not cohesive 
in themselves, but by virtue of their meanings. They 
presuppose the presence of other elements in the 
discourse. They specify the way in which following 
elements are connected with preceding ones. Halliday and 
Hassan (1976:242) summarize four major types of 
conjunctive relations: addition, adversative, causal, 
and temporal. 
4) Substitution: the fourth type of cohesion is 
substitution which simply means the replacement of one 
element by another. It is a relationship between 
linguistic elements such as words or phrases. For 
example, in the sentence "My car is very old. I'd better 
buy a newer one," the word "one" is a substitute for 
"car." 
Turning now to lexical cohesion, one can realize the 
importance of vocabulary in the process of composing. 
Lexical cohesion has received great attention by 
composition researchers and theorists. In her book 
Errors and Expectations, Mina Shanghnessy (1977) devoted 
17 
a long chapter to discussing different types of 
vocabulary errors and their sources. On the other hand, 
other scholars have considered the role that lexical 
items play in discourse from a different perspective. 
Halliday and Hassan (1976) examined the role of lexical 
items as a text-creating device. They used the term 
lexical cohesion to refer to the semantic relationships 
that are created by the use of certain lexical items in 
texts. Lexical cohesion becomes more important in 
expository discourse that is subject-matter oriented. 
This means that the appropriate choice of lexical items 
plays a role in creaating texture, probably more 
important than the role of other cohesive devices. 
Another motive for the selection of lexical cohesion 
for analysis in this study is the lack of studies 
conducted in this field. This is what Shaughnessy 
(1977:320) emphasizes. She states: 
As part of this explosion of academic 
deiscourse, I am recommending, we 
need above all else to take a closer 
look at vocabulary, which is of 
course critical to the development of 
complex concepts, the maturation of 
syntax, and the acquisition of an 
appropriate tone or register. This 
is probably the least cultivated 
field in all of the composition 
research, badly, or barrenly, treated 
in texts and not infrequently 
abandoned between the desks of 
reading teachers and writing 
teachers. 
18 
It is obvious that Shanghnessy calls for more research in 
the lexicon of academic writing. 
In this respect, Halliday and Hassan (1976:274-292) 
propose two major types of lexical cohesion: reiteration 
and collocation. In both categories the interpretations 
of a lexical item is facilitated by the presence of 
another one preceding it. According to Halliday and 
Hassan, reiteration is a phenomenon in which one lexical 
item refers back to another one to which it is related by 
having a common referent. The clearest instance of 
lexical cohesion is where the same lexical item is 
repeated in adjacent sentences. This type of reiteration 
is usually referred to as repetition. For example, in 
"She was at the party last night, the party that she was 
looking forward to for a long time," the repetition of 
the noun phrase "the party" in the second sentence 
connects it with the preceding one having the same 
lexical item. Lexical cohesion can also be achieved by 
repeating the same lexical item not necessarily in the 
immediately following sentence. The two sentences 
containing the two lexical items can be interrupted by 
one or more sentences. The distance depends on the 
ability of the reader to associate a lexical item with 
another preceding occurrence of the same item. This 
statement of lexical cohesion achieved by repetition has 
19 
to be qualified. Not every repeated lexical item need be 
cohesive. The cohesive force of a lexical item is 
influenced by its relative frequency in the whole 
linguistic system. An item that has a high degree of 
frequency and which can fit into many collocational sets 
has a very slight degree of cohesion in any of these 
sets. But the item that has very restricted collocation 
usually contributes more to the cohesion of the text in 
which it occurs. 
The occurrence of a particular lexical element in a 
sentence and its synonym or near-synonym in another 
following sentence is another type of cohesive 
repetition. In this case, both synonyms have the same 
referent, and this is what makes them cohesive. A third 
type of reiteration is the occurrence of a lexical item 
in a sentence and its hyponym or superordinate in a 
following sentence. For example, in "John's sister is a 
spinster. She is an unfortunate woman," the word "woman" 
is a hyponym of spinster, and its this relation of 
hyponomy that makes the text cohesive. 
The last type of reiteration as a lexical cohesive 
device is the use of general nouns such as man, people, 
creation, etc. In brief, reiteration has four subtypes, 
(a) the same word (repetition), (b) a synonym or near-
synonym, (c) a hyponym, or (d) a general noun. 
20 
The phenomenon of reiteration or repetition has 
recently been emphasized by Philip Alan Quick (1985), 
Wruter and Hoey (1983), Grimes (1972), and Longacre 
(1976). Quick (1985) classified repetition into two 
major categories or functions: prominence and cohesion. 
In her article "The Semantics of Redundancy," Hohulin 
(1984:1-15) expresses the possibility of using repetition 
universally. She says: 
Each language has strategies for 
linking information to make a text 
coherent. Redundancy may be one of 
those linking strategies. 
In this study, the cohesive lexical strategies in 
expository Arabic and English prose will be identified. 
There are types of lexical cohesion that are not achieved 
by the repetition of the same item, synonym, 
superordinates or using a general noun. They are due to 
the use of lexical items that can be associated with a 
larger lexical set. Gutwinski (1976:81) refers to these 
sets as "co-occurrence groups". Halliday (1967:220) 
states: 
The lexical set is identified by 
privilege of o c c u r r e n c e in 
collocation, just as the grammatical 
class is identified by privilege of 
occurrence in structure; the set is a 
grouping of items with similar 
tendencies of collocation. 
21 
The members of each set stand in different relations with 
each other for the purpose of providing cohesion to the 
text in which they occur. For example, the words 'love, 
hate, like,' and 'dislike' may be classified into one 
collocation set. 
Despite the amount of research that has been 
conducted to investigate the characteristics of written 
composition produced by foreign language learners, 
relatively few studies have been conducted to examine the 
organizational structures and the use of cohesive devices 
characteristic of writing in the students native 
languages based on their performance in the target 
language specifically in Arabic. 
Purpose of the Study 
The purpose of this study is three-fold: 
1. Describing the tagmemic structure of both Arabic 
and English expository paragraphs. In this description, 
the functional parts or tagmemes will be identified, and 
their markers and exponents will be specified as well. 
Similarities and differencess between Arabic and English 
will be identified with respect to these aspects. 
2. Describing how Arabic and English employ lexical 
cohesion, an important text-creating device in 
maintaining continuity in discourse. In this respect, 
22 
all types of lexical cohesion described by Halliday and 
Hassan (1976) will be studied. They include reiteration 
with four subtypes and collocation. 
3. Describing the logical relations holding between 
sentences in paragraphs according to the system developed 
by Milic (1969). Milic (1969:21) examined the manner in 
which sentences or propositions are combined with each 
other by means of a set of eight categories of logical 
relations: INITIAL, ADDITIVE, ADVERSATIVE, ALTERNATIVE, 
EXPLANATORY, ILLUSTRATIVE, ILLATIVE, and CAUSAL. This is 
what Longacre (1976:200) refers to as "logical linkage," 
the basic organizational pattern of expository prose that 
is concerned with the ordering of elements by importance 
of effect. According to Becker (1965:169), the 
functional parts, continuity between them, and semantic 
relations are the basic parameters for describing the 
structure of paragraphs and them discourses in the 
tagmemic approach. 
23 
Chapter 2 
Theoretical Models of Discourse Behavior 
Introduction 
Different approaches to discourse analysis emerged 
as a result of the attempt to expand linguistic analysis 
beyond the sentence. Although these approaches have 
something in common, they still differ in two major 
dimensions. The first is the size of the unit posited 
for analysis. In the structural approach, for example, 
the sentence has been considered the maximum unit with 
morphemes, phrases, and clauses as its major components. 
Harris (1964:356) notes that 
...almost all the results (of 
conventional linguistic analysis) lie 
within a relatively short stretch, 
which we may call a sentence. That 
is, when we can state a restriction 
on the occurrence of element A in 
respect to occurrence of element B, 
it will almost be the case that A and 
B are regarded as occuring within the 
same sentence. 
Other approaches consider a given text as the 
maximum unit with sentences and paragraphs as subunits. 
In what follows, I will briefly describe five common 
approaches to discourse analysis. 
24 
The Structural Approach 
Harris was the pioneer in modern American 
linguistics who attempted to extend linguistic analysis 
beyond the level of the sentence. In his article (1952) 
entitled "Discourse Analysis," he presents a 
distributional method for analyzing connected speech or 
writing. This formal method depends on the occurrence of 
morphemes as distinguishable elements and examines the 
interrelationships between them in a text. Different 
texts may exhibit different patterns of morpheme 
distribution. Morphemes occurring in almost identical 
environments are classified under the same distributional 
class called an "equivalence class" (1952:7). For 
example, if an element A occurs before M and another 
element B occurs before M, we can classify A and B in the 
same equivalence class (A=B). The essential requirements 
for this analysis is a knowledge or morpheme boundaries. 
It makes no use of the meaning of morphemes, nor does it 
make use of non-linguistic factors that might affect the 
structure of discourse such as the intention of the 
speaker, the audience, or the context of the situation. 
Furthermore, Harris's distributional method does not 
account for intersentential relationships, nor does it 
attempt to account for certain textual features such as 
reference, ellipsis and semantic relationships between 
25 
sentences. It also neglects meaning and as Prince 
(1978:192) comments, it is adequate only for simple 
texts, because equivalence relations may be dissimilar in 
complex texts. According to Harris (19 63:7) discourse 
analysis is "a method of seeking in any connected 
discrete linear materia1 ... some global structure 
characterizing the whole discourse or large sections of 
it." Structure, in this view, refers to patterns of 
occurrences of segments of the discourse in relation to 
each other. The approach considers discourse as a 
linearly organized structure without admitting the 
presence of hierarchy between discourse constituents . 
However, this method was expanded more efficiently by 
transformational grammarians, chief among whom is 
Chompsky. 
The Generative Approach 
The transformational generative approach to the 
study of language structure, led by Chomsky (1957, 1965), 
motivated some linguists who were dissatisfied with 
considering the sentence as the largest analyzable unit, 
to explore the structure of larger entities than the 
sentence such as the paragraph and discourse. 
Working within the theoretical framework of 
transformational generative grammar, Derssler (1970), 
26 
Ruhl ( 1973 ), Grimes ( 1975 ), and Van Dijk ( 1972, 1985) 
postulate the existence of deep and surface semantic 
structures for discourse. The reason for postulating 
such structures is the fact that cohesive devices and 
logical relations that maintain continuity in texts are 
not necessarily present or overt, yet these texts are 
still coherent to native speakers. This means that 
relationships and linkage devices need not be overtly 
expressed in the surface structure. Van Dijk (1972:34-
43) argues that intersentential relations that determine 
linear continuity or coherence in texts must be described 
in terms of abstract relations between deep semantic 
representations holding among underlying sequences of 
sentences. He justifies the postulation of semantic deep 
structures by noting that text grammar is supposed to be 
a formal model for the competence of native speakers that 
goes beyond their ability to produce, interpret, process, 
and paraphrase utterances at the level of the sentence. 
Van Dijk (1972:132) refers to this type of competence as 
textual competence. 
Similarly, Grimes (1975:186-206) presented the 
underlying relationships between predicates and their 
arguments by reducing sentences to propositions at the 
deep structure to which a number of transformations are 
applied to derive the surface structure. 
27 
The generative approach has been employed by Grimes 
and Glock (1970:400-423) in their analysis of Saramacean 
travel narrative. They posited a semantic deep structure 
that shows the relations between events, event settings, 
and participants in the event. The relationship between 
semantic deep and surface structures of texts, however, 
is vague; more research has to be done to determine this 
relationship. Much less is known about the 
transformations required to derive surface structures 
from deep ones in texts. Hendricks (1972:88) and Reiser 
(1978:12) express their dissatisfaction with what has 
been done to relate the microstructures (surface) with 
the macrostructures (deep). They also observe that the 
interaction of the transformations remains unclear. 
The Systematic Approach 
Systematic linguistics was established by Halliday 
in a series of articles (1961, 1964, 1967a, 1967b) and it 
was fully developed in the jointly-authored book with 
Ruguayia Hassan (1976) entitled Cohesion in English. 
This school of linguistics developed from 'scale and 
category' linguistics originated by J.R. Firth's earlier 
work which was mainly concerned with the sociology of 
language. It derives its name from the category of 
system in the description of language which is composed 
28 
of a series of systems. Berry (1975b:141) defines the 
system as "a list of choices which are available in the 
grammar of a language." For example, in English, there 
is a system of tense with the choices between past, 
present and future; there is a system of mood with the 
choices between declarative (making a statement), 
interrogative (asking a question), and imperative (giving 
a command). 
In this approach, texts are analyzed in relation to 
two basic concepts: the internal structure and the 
external structure. The internal structure of texts can 
be achieved by three text-building resources . The 
intersentential cohesion is defined by Halliday and 
Hassan ( 1976 :18) as "the set of possibilities that exist 
in the language of making a text hang together: the 
potential that the speaker or writer has at his 
disposal." 
These cohesive possibilities include: reference, 
substitution, conjunction, ellipsis, and lexical 
cohesion. The internal structure is not only influenced 
by intersentential cohesion, but also by intrasentential 
cohesion that is mainly concerned with the relationship 
of words within the sentence. Finally, there is the 
discourse structure manifested in the structure of larger 
units such as paragraphs, section, narrative, and poems. 
29 
According to Halliday and Hassan ( 1976 : 326-327 ) the 
discourse structure is the larger structure that is a 
property of the forms of discourse themselves, the 
structures that is inherent in such concepts as 
narrative, prayer, folk-ballad, formal correspondence, 
sonnets, operating instructions, television drama and the 
like. 
From an external perspective a text cannot be a text 
unless it is appropriate to a particular context of 
situation in which it functions. Factors such as the 
intentions of the speaker or writer and the nature of the 
audience restrict the linguistic choices open to the 
writer or speaker. 
Most of the work done in the framework of this 
approach was based on literary texts and dialogues. 
Tierney and Mosenthal (1981) conducted a study to explore 
the relationship between Halliday and Hassan's concept of 
cohesion and textual coherence. They concluded that the 
cohesion of texts cannot be considered an index of 
textual coherence. 
Although this approach seems promising and 
insightful, it does not escape criticism. Butler 
(19 8 5:150-151) states that Halliday's account of 
discourse structure as described in Halliday's ( 1984a) 
paper entitled "Language as Code and Language as 
30 
Behavior," is too programmatic to be really useful. In 
an attempt to revive and expand Halliday's account of 
discourse structure, Martin (1981a) expanded the semantic 
speech functions network and rejected Halliday's social 
contextual level. 
The Procedural Approach 
In the procedural approach advocated by Beaugrande 
and Dressier (1981:3-12), a text is a "commmunicative 
occurrence" which meets seven standards of textuality, 
otherwise it is a non-text. These standards can be 
categorized into two groups: text-centered notions and 
user-centered notions. 
Text-centered notions include: (a) cohesion: the 
ways in which components of a text are mutually connected 
within a sequence. It depends on grammatical 
dependencies such as reference and conjunctions. (b) 
Coherence: the ways in which the components of the 
textual world, i.e., the configuration of concepts and 
relations which underlie the surface text, are mutually 
accessible and relevant. 
A text has to meet user-centered standards as well. 
These include the following notions: 
a. Intentional ity: the intention of a text 
producer to produce a cohesive and coherent text. 
31 
b. Acceptability: the ability of the receiver of 
a text to accept the intended text so that it can be used 
in communicative interaction. 
c. Informativity: the extent to which a text or 
part of it is known or unknown, expected or unexpected by 
the receiver. 
d. Situationality: the factors which make a text 
relevant to a particular situation. 
e. Intertextua1ity: factors that make the 
participant's utilization of a particular text depend 
upon his knowledge of other existing related texts. 
This approach deals with texts in terms of 
utilization, that is, how people produce and use or 
receive texts in different situations. In other words, 
the procedural approach is conncerned with how texts 
function in human interaction, and with the factors that 
affect discourse units and types. 
The Tagmemic Approach 
The tagmemic theory was founded by Kenneth L. Pike 
in a series of his first publications on this approach 
(1954, 1955, 1960, 1967a). It was later developed in the 
jointly-authored book with his wife Evelyn Pike, entitled 
"Grammatical Analysis" (1977), and in the works of Pike's 
32 
followers such as Longacre (1968, 1972, 1978), and Alton 
Becker (1965, 1977, 1979). 
This theory derives its name from the concept of the 
'tagmeme' which Pike (1977:33) defines as "a constituent 
in a construction seen from the point of view of its four 
general features (Pike 1982:75, 1983b:9). 
This theory is based on certain assumptions and 
principles, chief among which is the assumption that 
language is an integral part of man's total behavior. 
Language occurs in context. It consists of units within 
units. Smaller units are contained in larger ones in 
hierarchical levels. This hierarchy is manifested at the 
phonological, grammatical, and referential levels. The 
assumption of the hierarchical structure of language is 
what makes the tagmemic theory especially applicable to 
discourse analysis. 
Tagmemics has been extensively used in discourse 
analysis studies in many languages. Longacre (1968) 
studied the structure of discourse, paragraph and 
sentence in some selected Philippine languages. Mary R. 
Wise (1971) conducted a study to identify the 
participants in discourse in Nomatsiguenga, a 
representative of the Campa languages of the pre-Andine 
group of Arawakan languages. She examined the types of 
33 
units beyond the sentence that provide some cues for the 
identification of participants in discourse. 
Linda Jones and Ned Coleman (1979) conducted a 
discourse-based study of tense and mode in Kickapoo, an 
Alqonquian language. They found that the functions of 
tense and mode are discourse determined. 
Since this study will be conducted within the 
framework of tagmemics, its basic assumptions and 
concepts will be treated more fully in the chapter on 
theoretical background. 
Analysis of Discourse Types 
In the last three decades, individual scholars and * 
small groups of researchers have attempted to address 
linguistic problems at levels of higher than that of the 
sentence. Grimes (1975:28) states that discourse 
analysis studies have been done for more than seventy 
languages. This line of research was led by linguists 
such as Kenneth Pike, Longacre, Grimes, Halliday, 
Dressier and Van Dijk. 
Pike and his group focused on the discourse 
structure of some Peruvian and Brazilian languages . 
Longacre and his group, on the other hand, analyzed the 
discourse of many languages of the Philippines, Mexico, 
New Guinea, and the indiginous languages of Panama, 
34 
Columbia, and Ecuador- Gleason, Tabor, and Cromack 
worked on some African languages such as Sango, Fulani 
and Kate of New Guinea. Grimes guided many studies on 
Paressi of Brazil, Chuave of New Guinea, Kalinga, Ivatan, 
and Mamanwa of the Philippines. Grimes edited "Papers on 
Discourse" (1978), a collection of field studies dealing 
with different aspects of discourse phenomena in 
different languages. The purpose of these studies was to 
establish the discourse patterns in different languages 
for the sake of reshaping the theory of language. 
Another result of these studies was the establishment of 
a typology of discourse types. Longacre (1968), for 
example, was able to differentiate several types of 
discourse in the Philippine languages, chief among which 
are: narrative, procedural, expository, dramatic and 
oratory. He confirmed that each type or genre has its 
own distinguishing features. 
The narrative genre received more attention in those 
studies than other types of discourse probably because 
this genre exists in almost all languages. It is 
unlikely to be influenced by outside factors from other 
cultures; and above all, the narrative is the clearest 
and most readily analyzable genre. This emphasis on the 
narrative is reflected in the works of Longacre (1968), 
Grimes (1978), and Jones ( 1979 ). More than half of 
35 
Grimes's "Papers on Discourse," dealt with different 
aspects of narrative discourse; almost all the articles 
in Jones's (1979) "Discourse Studies in MesoAmerican 
Languages" were based on particular features of narrative 
prose. 
Fruitful insights into the study of other types of 
discourse have been gained from the analysis of the 
narrative genre. It might be helpful to review briefly 
the analysis of the two major types of discourse, namely, 
narrative and expository. In the following sections, I 
will summarize the distinguishing features of each genre 
and the point of contrast between them. 
Narrative Discourse 
Linguists analyze narrative discourse to achieve 
different goals. Firstly, the narrative is a good domain 
for studying and describing linguistic phenomena such as 
anaphora, topicalization, tense and aspect. The 
functions and properties of these devices are usually 
discourse determined, that is, they can be better 
analyzed and understood at the discourse level than at 
lower levels. In this respect, McArther (1979:116) 
examined the role of aspect in distinguishing Aguacatec 
discourse types. He notes that each Aguacatec aspect is 
a combination of two semantic features, and has 
36 
particular grammatical restrictions- The affix 'ja', for 
example, indicates a completed state or condition and it 
is used in independent clauses, which the suffix '-1' 
indicates incomplete definite events and it is used in 
dependent clauses. Furthermore, he observed that aspect 
plays an essential role in distinguishing between primary 
and secondary events in narrative discourse. 
Similarly, in describing time reference in Godie, 
Lynell Marchese (1979:72) observes that the incompletive 
aspect is the predominant one in folktales and 
narratives. It is used when the speaker provides 
background information about customs and settings as well 
as events. 
The second major goal of analyzing narrative is to 
arrive at the general outline or structure of this genre 
that differentiates it from other types. This involves 
identifying and describing the units of discourse, 
determining the organizational patterns, recognizing the 
peak or the climax, establishing the roles of 
participants, noticing how tense changes and how a 
discourse begins and ends. Along these lines, Bishop, 
Reid, Button, and Longacre (1968) described the structure 
of the Totonac narrative. Longacre's works (1968, 1972, 
1976 ) were the most complete investigations conducted 
within the tagmemic framework. In his analysis of some 
37 
Philippine languages, Longacre (1968:3-15) specified the 
identifying features of the narrative genre as follows: 
1. Chronological Orientation 
The essence of narrative discourse is chronological 
sequence or tense orientation. Narration means to 
narrate past events, or to tell a story which can be 
real-life or folktale. This pattern of writing is 
dominant in hsitory and biography. In describing tense 
orientation in Bontoc narrative discourse, Lawrence Reid 
(1970:111-112) states that: 
Narrative discourse is oriented 
towards past time. Even though this 
is the tense orientation, a large 
proportion of the verb forms in the 
sentence nuclei are not past, but are 
interpreted as past, because it is a 
narrative discourse. 
2. Person Orientation 
Narrative discourse is chiefly oriented towards the 
first person especially when the narrator is recounting 
his own activities, or towards the third person when the 
narrator is telling a story or describing activities of a 
third person. This feature of person orientation affects 
the choice of pronouns in a narrative. Reid (1970:111) 
observes that in Bontoc narrative only third person 
pronouns occur throughout a text, apart from the 
exponents of direct quotations. 
38 
3. Longacre ( 1968:5-7, 56) postulated a tagmemic 
formula for the structure of narrative at the discourse 
level and at the level of the paragraph as shown in (a) 
and (b) respectively: 
(a) +Apperature, ^Episode, +Denonement, +Anti-
Denonement, ^Closure, +Finis (+ indicates an obligatory 
tagmeme; + indicates option). 
(b) ^Setting ( +Build+upj_ • . . +Build upn) ^Terminus 
With these variations in the formulae, Longacre (1968:5) 
claims that they indicate the tagmemes in any type of 
narrative discourse or paragraph. 
At the discourse level, the tagmeme that initiates a 
narrative is termed "apperature" or stage. Its purpose 
is to open the discourse, to introduce the participants, 
and to mark time and location, that is to say it provides 
the general setting for the narrative. The apperature 
tagmeme is followed by a series of optional episodes that 
may culminate in the climax or denoument of the 
narrative. These episodes are followed by either a 
closure tagmeme that provides a final commentary on the 
participants or concludes the event in the narrative. 
The component tagmemes of a narrative fall into two 
major categories: nuclear and peripheral. Nuclear 
tagmemes, such as episode, denonement, and anti-
denonement are obligatory in that one or more of these 
39 
tagmemes must be present to form the backbone of the 
narrative. Peripheral tagmemes, on the other hand, such 
as apperature, closure, and finis, are optional. 
The presence or absence of the nuclear tagmemes 
determine three types of narrative discourse: 
(a) Episodic which consists of a series of episodes 
that do not culminate in a recognizable climax. The 
nuclear tagmeme of this subtype of narrative is the 
episode. 
(b) Mono-climatic discourse consists of a number of 
episodes that build up into a single climax. 
(c) Di-climatic narrative consists of a climax and 
an anti-climax or second climax (Longacre 1968:7; Reid 
et.al. 1968:109-123). 
Using very different labels for describing the 
constituents of narrative, Labov and Woletzky (1967:12-
44) outlined the overall structure of narration as 
follows: 
1. Orientation which is almost always equal to 
Longacre's apperture tagmeme. 
2. Complication: series of events. 
3. Evaluation: the part of the narrative which 
reveals the attitude of the narrator by emphasizing the 
relative importance of some narrative units as compared 
to others. 
40 
4. Resolutions the portion of the narrative that 
follows the evaluation. 
5. Coda: a functional device that relates the 
temporal perspective to the present, or device that gives 
a narrative a present relevance. 
A tagmemic formula was also posited by Longacre 
( 1968) for the structure of the paragraph. The nuclear 
tagmeme of the narrative paragraph consists of a number 
of build-up tagmemes. The setting and terminus tagmemes 
are peripheral. 
To complete the analysis of discourse structure, 
Longacre (1968) and Reid (19 6 8:112-113) recognized 
several types of cohesion or linkage. 
1. Chaining linkage: a type of textual linkage 
that maintains the chronological sequence in discourse. 
According to Longacre ( 1968 : 56 ), this cohesive device 
consists of repeating, paraphrasing, or referring to, at 
the onset of a subsequent sentence, a part or the whole 
of the preceding sentence. This repeated material forms 
what Longacre calls the 'ground' for the novel material 
which he refers to as the 'figure'. 
2. Grammatical linkage involves the use of 
grammatical markers that imply a sequential activity such 
as: then, later, before, having done that, etc. 
41 
3. Anaphora and deletion: the use of pronouns to 
replace nouns or noun phrases. 
4. Lexical association: Longacre does not say 
much about textual linkage. Instead, he quoted what 
Shirly Abbot comments for Ata Manoba: 
This linkage comes via the Dramatics 
Personae by (1) continuity of a 
specific Dramatis Persona...(2) 
continuity through the conversation 
of the Dramatis Personae (Longacre 
1968:13-14). 
Expository Discourse 
Exposition is one of the major forms of 
communication which is more important than other types to 
most people. It simply means exposing information or 
ideas; its basic function is to explain or expound a 
topic. In the introduction to his book Patterns of 
Expositions, Decker (1966) indicates that expository 
writing may utilize other types of prose such as 
narrative, description, classification, analysis, 
comparison, and contrast. 
Longacre (1968:26-32) identified certain features of 
expository discourse. Unlike the narrative, in which the 
events are chronologically sequenced, expository 
discourse is not chronologically oriented. The time 
dimension doses not strikingly influence the discourse 
42 
structure. Person orientation is not an identifying 
feature, either. Instead, expository discourse is 
oriented towards the subject matter. It is essentially 
impersonal. No formal tagmemic formula was posited by 
Longacre for this type of discourse. However, Longacre 
(1968:26-29) specified the overall structure of this 
genre as consisting of three tagmemes: the introduction 
tagmeme that introduces the main topic of the discourse; 
the nuclear tagmeme, which forms the body of the 
discourse and which is usually expounded by explanatory 
paragraphs; and the conclusion tagmeme, which is 
expounded by a sentence or an explanatory paragraph. 
At the paragraph level, Longacre (1968:109) 
postulates a general formula for what he refers to as 
'explanatory paragraphs'. The formula is: 
+Prelim (+Text, jjSxpo, +Reason, ^Warning) ^Terminal, 
(nuclear tagmemes are bracketed). 
The optional preliminary and terminal tagmemes are 
like the introduction and the conclusion tagmemes at the 
discourse level. The only obligatory tagmeme is the 
paragraph in the text which is usually the topic sentence 
of the paragraph. This tagmeme is followed by a series of 
exposition tagmemes that expound it in more detail. The 
linearity of the paragraph structure formula is 
significant since the Text tagmeme usually precedes its 
43 
supporting details; the Reason tagmeme may follow the 
Text tagmeme directly. It can be expounded by sentences 
that are paraphrases of cause margin in the previous 
sentence which is regularly indicated by the word 
' because' (Longacre 1968 :118). The Result tagmeme is 
expounded by a sentence whose cause margin paraphrases 
the text. The following examples, adapted from Longacre 
(1968:121), makes clear the relationship between the 
Text, Reason and Result tagmemes. 
FIGURE | GROUND 
1. Wow, what a beautiful 
place that is at 
Nasulit TEXT 
RESULT 
2. No wonder they chose Because it is really a 
to live there. beautiful place there 
at Nasuli. 
In this example, sentence (1) is the text, and 
sentence (2) is the result, and sentence (3) is the cause 
margin of the result (2), and in the meantime, (3) 
explains (1) . 
The Warning tagmeme is usually rare in expository 
paragraphs and is usually understood from the context. 
The frequency of the constituent tagmemes of the 
expository paragraphs and the relationship among them 
44 
lead to different types of expository paragraphs. In his 
analysis of the Philippine languages, Longacre (1968:133-
141) identified two types of explanatory paragraphs: the 
coordinate, and the antithetical. The former consists of 
more than one Text tagmeme that are not antithetical. 
Linkage between these tagmemes is usually achieved by 
conjuction or juxtaposition. The latter type involves 
two tagmemes that stand in opposition to each other. 
Linkage between two tagmemes is usually accomplished by 
an adversative such as 'but'. 
In analyzing Paez discourse, paragraph, and sentence 
structure, Gerdel (1976:332) posits the following 
tagmemic formula for antithetical paragraphs: 
(+Thesis, ^-Antithesis ) , +Terminus. 
He also identified several other types of paragraph such 
as the descriptive, parallel, contrast and reason. 
Composition researchers and theorists have been 
interested in the analysis of different aspects of 
expository discourse for the purpose of facilitating the 
teaching of composition and for establishing the 
identifying features of each discourse genre. For 
example, Christensen (1963, 1965), Becker (1965), Jones 
(1977), Knneavy (1969, 1971), and Sandra Stotsky (1983) 
have concerned themselves with the linguistic and 
rhetorical aspects of expository discourse. Becker 
45 
( 1965:237-242) proposes a tagmemic approach to the 
analysis of expository paragraphs. He identifies two 
major patterns of paragraphing in expository discourse. 
A paragraph of the first type consists os three slots: 
Topic (T), Restriction (R)f and Illustrative (I). The 
topic is usually stated in the T-slot, defined or 
restricted in the R-slot, and described or illustrated at 
the lower level of generality in the I-slot. 
The slots in the TRI pattern can be filled in 
several ways. The T-slot, for instance, can be filled 
with a simple proposition, or a sentence that implies 
comparison or contrast, while the R-slot usually provides 
a more detailed definition of the T-slot. The I-slot, on 
the other hand, is often expounded by illustrative 
examples. Each slot with its potential fillers 
constitutes a tagmeme at the paragraph level. 
The second type of expository pattern consists of 
two slots: the Problem (P) and the Solution (S). The P-
slot is commonly filled by a question or a statement of a 
problem that is solved in the S-slot. The S-slot may be 
extended to form a TRI pattern. 
These two expository patterns are the major types 
which Becker (1965:240) refers to as 'kernel' patterns. 
All other types or variations result from four kinds of 
46 
operations: deletion, reordering, addition, and 
combination of slots. 
Not only did Becker specify the major types of 
paragraphs, but he also described the formal markers of 
tagmemes in paragraphs. These markers can be: 
(a) graphic: indention and other punctuation 
marks, 
(b) lexical signals of two types: equivalence 
classes whose domain might extend over a slot or more, 
and lexical transitions that include words like 'but' and 
'and', for example, that introduces the I-slot, 'in other 
words,' that usually introduces the R-slot, 
(c) grammatical signals including verb sequences 
and shift in tense, 
(d) phonological markers invovling things like 
shifts in pitch, tempo, and volume. 
In his article "A Generative Rhetoric of the 
Paragraph," Christensen (1965) observes a great 
similarity between the structure of a sentence and that 
of a paragraph. The topic sentence of a paragraph is 
parallel to the basic clause of a sentence and the 
supporting sentences of a paragraph and parallel to 
single work modifiers and subordinate and relative 
clauses. According to Christensen (1965:145), a 
paragraph is "a sequence of structurally related 
47 
sentences that are related to each other by coordination 
and subordination." 
Each sentence in a paragraph should be subordinate 
or coordinate to a preceding onef otherwise, it breaks 
the sequence. Another study that shows more interest in 
expository writing was conducted by Sandra Stotsky (1983) 
on the types of lexical cohesion proposed by Halliday and 
Hassan (1976) and proposed some more types. The purpose 
of the study was the development of teaching vocabulary 
in academic discourse. 
Narrative vs. Expository Discourse 
In this section, I will summarize the identifying 
features of narrative and expository genres. These types 
of discourse differ in factors such as time orientation, 
person orientation, distinctive tagmemes, and means of 
linkage. The following chart shows the basic differences 
between narrative and expository prose. 
48 
NARRATIVE EXPOSITORY 
1. 1/3 person No necessary person 
reference (usually 3rd 
person) 
2. Actor or Agent-
oriented Subject-matter oriented 
3. A completed time 
encodes as past or 
present 
Time is not focal 
4. Chronological linkage Logical linkage 
Adapted from Longacre (1974:358, 1976:200). 
The chart shows a clear contrast between the two 
genres. Narrative discouse is usually oriented towards 
first or third person, while person orientation in 
exposition is not necessary, it usually is in third 
person. Narrative prose is agent or participant 
oriented, but exposition is subject-matter or theme 
oriented. Narrative discourse moves in accomplished time 
that is usually represented by the past tense form or the 
historical present, while time in expository prose is not 
focal. Unlike expository prose which is characterized by 
logical linkage, narrative discourse is identified by its 
chronological succession of events. Expository prose 
gives priority to logical linkage probably because it is 
concerned with explanation and paraphrases that provide 
the basis for logical linkage which requires logical 
movement from theme to theme. Finally, narrative 
49 
discourse has a plot, while in expository writing, the 
explanatory tagmemes are basic. 
In this study, an attempt will be made to 
investigate the structure of Arabic and English 
expository paragraph with respect to three basic aspects 
of paragraph structure: 
a. the contituent tagmemes will be identified, 
b. the relationships between them will be 
specified, and 
c. the lexical cohesive devices that contribute to 
the cohesion of texts will be analyzed to see how they 
are used in each language, what types are preferred or 
more dominant, and what types exist in one language 
rather than in the other. 
vl Contrastive Discourse Analysis 
It is generally recognized that foreign language 
learners encounter many difficulties in writing in the 
target language. Many contrastive studies were conducted 
to analyze the syntactic and lexical errors produced by 
foreign language learners. However, such difficulties 
can be overcome more readily than the difficulty foreign 
language learners encounter in the organization of whole 
written work or discourse. Kaplan (1966:401) states that 
many learners of English as a foreign language who have 
50 
mastered English grammatical structures are still unable 
to develop themes in compositions or larger written 
samples . Their writing still shows organizational 
defects in cohesion, coherence, and still violates the 
expectations of native speakers of English. 
The foreign language learners' competence in 
discouse organization may be influenced by several 
factors, chief among which is the interference or 
negative transfer from their mother tongue. Before any 
judgment is passed to which the influential factor is, a 
contrastive analysis of discourse organization ought to 
be carried out between the learners' native language and 
the target language they are learning. 
In a widely quoted work on foreign language 
learners' academic writing, Kaplan (1966:399-418) claims 
that the difficulties in composition encountered by 
foreign students of English are due to cross-cultural 
differences. He states that deviations from the expected 
patterns of organization in foreign language learners' 
writing stems from negative transfer from the rhetorical 
pattern and organization of their native tongues. 
To support his claims, Kaplan (1966) conducted a 
large-scale study in which he analyzed more than six 
hundred expository compositions written by ESL learners 
from different linguistic backgrounds such as Arabic, 
Korean, French, and Russian. Based on the analysis of 
compositions written by Arabs, Kaplan concluded that the 
Arabic paragraph is characterized by different types of 
parallelism. On the other hand, oriental writing has the 
feature 'indirection'. This means that the main point in 
a paragraph is never hit directly. Digression also 
characterizes the French, Spanish, and Russian 
paragraphs. 
All these types of paragraph patterns stand in 
contrast to the pattern in English which is dominantly 
linear and direct. An English expository paragraph 
usually begins with a statement of topic followed by a 
series of supporting statements that develop the central 
theme and relate it to the subsequent ideas. In 
discussing the relationship between sentences, Kaplan 
(1966:404) notes that in English, subordination rather 
than coordination, is a sign of maturity of style. This 
is what makes the Arabic paragraph seem odd to native 
English speakers. Kaplan (1966:410, 1972:64) graphically 
represented the different patterns of paragraph 
organization as follows: 
English Scmiric Oriental Romuncc Russian 
52 
These generalizations concerning paragraph structure 
and development in other languages remain hypothetical 
unless they are supported by analytical studies of 
discourse written by native speakers in their own 
languages. The compositions that Kaplan used in his 
research do not necessarily reveal anything about the 
organziation and rhetorical patterns of discourse 
characteristic of the subjects' native languages. 
In subsequent research based on Kaplan's approach, 
Hinds (1983:184-195) notes that Kaplan correctly 
identifies an alien schema for orientals and shows that 
there is a major rhetorical pattern in Japanese that does 
not exist in English. This style is called 'ki-shoo-ten-
ketsu' (Hinds 1983:183). In this pattern, 'ki' 
introduces the topic, 'shoo' develops the topic, 'ten' 
forms an abrupt transition, and 'ketsu' forms the 
conclusion. Hinds demonstrates that the use of this 
pattern is negatively evaluated by native speakers of 
English. 
In comparing English and German expository writing, 
Michael Clyne (1983:38-49) observes that English 
expository prose is linear and lacks redundancy, whereas 
German prose is more digressive because of the 
grammatical structure of the language that allows 
53 
multiple embedding where verbs accumulate at the end of a 
sentence. 
In the same volume, Kachru (1983:50-77) compares 
Hindi and English narrative and expository paragraph 
structure. He states that unlike English, Hindi shows a 
greater degree of tolerance for digressions that have a 
linking function between episodes in paragraphs. Unlike 
Clyne, he attributes this digression in expository prose 
to sociocultural factors. Kachru concludes that Indian 
English texts present difficulties to native speakers of 
English partly because of the different paragraph 
structure that Hindi has, and the different cohesive 
strategies such as the use of tense, reference, and 
ellipsis. Furthermore, he observes that deletion or 
ellipsis is the favored anaphoric device in Hindi. 
Marathi, like Hindi, accroding to Pandharipandi 
(1983:128), is characterized by what may native speakers 
of English consider as 'a circular paragraph' pattern 
with many digressions. A Marathi paragraph usually 
begins with a hypothesis followed by arguments to either 
prove or disprove that hypothesis. The last part of the 
paragraph confirms or opposes the validity of that 
hypothesis. 
Tsao (1983:99-177) compared and contrasted Mandarin 
Chinese and English textual cohesion, textual coherence 
54 
and stylistic preferences in both languages. Using 
Halliday and Hassan's system of cohesion, Tsao found 
striking differences between English and Chinese in the 
use of cohesive devices, reference, ellipsis, and 
substitution. Co-referentiality in English is usually 
indicated by pronominalization while Chinese prefers 
deletion. A Chinese learner of English is expected to 
use zero-pronouns in many contexts where deletion is not 
acceptable in English. The pronoun 'it' in Mandarin is 
chiefly used to refer to animals only. If a Chinese 
speaker needs to refer to inanimate objects, he uses two 
other strategies: lexical repetition of the reference 
which is in the subject position, and a zero pronoun if 
it occurs in other positions. Tsao (1983:110) agrees 
with Mo ' s (1 9 8 2 ) view of the Chinese paragraph 
development which involves four steps: 'chi' indicates 
the beginning or the introduction of the topic, 'cheng' 
elucidates the topic, 'juan' indicates a turn to another 
point, and 'he' which provides the closing or the 
conclusion. It is 'juan' that makes the Chinese 
paragraph indirect to native speakers of English, because 
it involves a change of mood, tone, topic, time, or 
grammatical subject. 
Although all the above mentioned studies support 
Kaplan's hypothesis of the relativity of rhetoric, other 
55 
researchers do not accept it as an absolute- Mohan and 
Lo (1985:515-535) do not agree that all difficulties in 
writing a foreign language can be predicted by comparing 
and contrasting the rhetoric and discourse organization 
of the learner's native language with those of the target 
language- They also note that the Chinese classical style 
of writing is now old-fashioned and has been replaced by 
the spoken language style, which is similar to that of 
English. What is more important that transfer, in the 
author's view, is the developmental factors and 
appropriate instruction in teaching composition. 
In her unpublished thesis, Sistrunk (1987) concludes 
that the errors produced by Arabic speaking learners of 
English subordination are mainly developmental. However, 
neither Mohan's nor Sistrunk's studies denies the role 
that negative transfer plays in the process of foreign 
language learning. 
This review shows that differences among languages 
are present not only at the sentential level but also 
beyond it, that is, at the discourse level. These 
differences have been identified between English and many 
other languages for pedagogical and theoretical purposes 
as well. I have not found a single contrastive study 
between Arabic and English at the discourse level. 
Accordingly, this study is in order and will contribute 
56 
to the relatively new developing field of contrastive 
discourse analysis as it is an attempt to describe the 
rhetorical patterns and organization of Arabic discourse 
written by professional Arabs, not English compositions 
written by Arabic speaking students. 
57 
Chapter 3 
Theoretical Framework 
This study is based on the tagmemic theory as 
developed by Pike (1967, 1977, 1982). The theory derives 
its name from the concept of 'tagmeme', which was 
originally used by Bloomfield (1933) in a rather 
different sense. Tagmemics is based on a number of 
theoretical assumptions. Language, in this view, is not 
abstracted from life; it is not an abstract mathematical 
system, but a component or system within the whole system 
of human behavior. Pike (19 67) emphasizes the need for 
having an integrative theory that deals with verbal and 
non-verbal aspects of human behavior as a unified human 
activity. He states: "Language is a phase of human 
activity which must not be treated in essence as 
structurally divorced from the structure of non-verbal 
human activity (p.26)." 
Another assumption of this model is that language is 
trimodally structured. Every unit of human behavior, 
verbal or non-verbal, can be described in terms of three 
modes: the feature mode, the manifestation mode, and the 
distribution mode. Each unit of behavior has certain 
characteristics or properties that can be used in 
identifying and contrasting it with other units. These 
identificational and contrastive features or properties 
58 
are what make a unit of behavior distinct from others 
(the feature mode). For example, the English phoneme /k/ 
can be identified by the features of being voiceless, 
velar, aspirated stop. It contrasts with /g/ in the 
features of voicing and aspiration. Since these two 
units are conceived by native speakers as different 
units, they are said to be emically (phonemically) 
different. 
A unit can also be described in terms of its 
distribution or occurrence as a unit belonging to a 
particular class or system, and in terms of its 
relationships with other units in that system (the 
distribution mode). In the above example, the phoneme 
/k/ has the distribution as a member of a class of sounds 
called 'stops' that can occur initially, medially and 
finally, and it can cluster with only a restricted number 
of consonants. 
Finally, within the same emic unit, there might be 
variations or different manifestations that are referred 
to by Pike and Pike (1981:2) as "etic" differences. 
These different realizations of a unit can help provide a 
fuller description of that unit (the manifestation mode). 
For example, the phoneme /k/, in English, can be 
manifested as aspirated, unaspirated, fronted or 
retracted. 
59 
These three modes are reflected in language in its 
hierarchical structure at various levels. For example, 
the English phoneme /t/ has the identifying features (the 
feature mode) of being voiceless, alveolar and stop. It 
can be realized as aspirated, non-aspirated, glottalized, 
dental or as a flap (the manifestation mode). It has the 
distribution as a member of a class of sounds called 
'stops' that can occur initially, medially, and finally. 
Tagmemics also postulates that language itself is 
hierarchically structured. There are three simultaneous 
and parallel hierarchies: the phonological, grammatical, 
and referential. These hierarchies are simultaneous in 
the sense that each hierarchy stems from the same shared 
substance. In other words, these hierarchies are not in 
a one-directional sequence with phonology at the bottom 
and syntax at the top. The tagmemic hierarchies are 
parallel in the sense tha they are equally important and 
each one is distinct from the other. The concept of 
hierarchy means that constituents at each level are 
contained in larger ones. In this respect, tagmemics 
recognizes units beyond the level of the sentence. For 
example, a text can be viewed as a hierarchical 
structure. At the lowest level, word or morphemes are 
joined together to form larger structures such as 
60 
sentences, which, in turn, are put together to form 
paragraphs, sections and whole texts. 
In the following section, I will explain the 
fundamental concepts around which tagmemics revolves. 
Tagmeme 
The tagmemic theory derives its name from the 
concept of the tagmeme. This term is derived from the 
Greek word 'tagma' which means 'arrangement'. It was 
first used by Bloomfield ( 1933: 166-167) to refer to the 
smallest meaningful unit of grammatical form. For 
example, the utterance 'Come!' consists of two 
grammatical forms: the infinitive form of the verb and 
the exclamatory final pitch. Each unit with the meanings 
associated with it is called a tagmeme. However, the 
tagmeme has been used in a rather different sense in 
tagmemics. Pike and Pike (19 82:459) define the tagmeme 
as "a constituent of a construction described in terms of 
four general features: slot, class, role, and cohesion." 
The slot, i.e., the place of occurrence and 
prominence of a constituent or tagmeme within the whole 
structure, can be nucleus or margin. The margin can be 
further subdivided into pre-margin and post-margin. This 
division is based on the occurrence of the margin 
constituent relative to the nucleus tagmeme. A pre-
61 
margin precedes the nucleus, while a post-margin follows 
it. The post-margin tagmeme may consist of a subordinate 
theme that occupies the nucleus slot, preceded or 
followed by margin tagmemes. These degrees of nuclearity 
and marginality are referred to by Pike and Pike 
(1982b:18) as "degrees of prominence." 
The second feature is that of the class. The form 
or the type of construction which fills the slot is 
indicated in this cell, that is, it specifies what or who 
is in the slot. Knowing the class of items that can 
occur in a certain place helps characterize the whole 
structure since there are characteristic types of 
structures in each place or slot. In the story of The 
Rich Young Man that is analyzed later in this section, 
the pre-margin and post-margin tagmemes are both 
expounded by sentences that can be categorized under the 
class of independent declarative sentences. The types of 
constructions in a class can be further subcategorized 
into categories based on transitivity, mood, and voice. 
These fillers differ from level to level. Pike and Pike 
(1982:404-409) mention different types of fillers at 
different levels. At the sentence level, for example, 
the types of constructions that may fill a class cell 
include subtypes of sentences such as independent 
declarative sentences that initiate speech or 
62 
conversation, interrogative sentences, imperative, or a 
dependent clause that provides a minimum response to an 
initiating sentence. At the higher level of the 
paragraph, the fillers of a class can be sentences of any 
kind or sentence clusters. A still higher level such as 
that of monolog, which is the development of a theme by 
one speaker, the types of constructions used as fillers 
of a class are different. They include types like 
narrative, lecture, sermon, poem, or epic as a nucleus; 
and an initiating speech or a paragraph type as pre-
margin . 
The third cell of a tagmeme is that of role. This 
feature specifies the function of the unit in relation to 
other parts of the whole structure. In other words, this 
cell answers the question "Why is this unit used?" 
Unlike the slot-cell which has three categories, i.e., 
pre-margin, nucleus, and post-margin, the role slot can 
have different categories depending on the function that 
each constituent may serve in relation to the nucleus 
tagmeme. For example, the nucleus tagmeme of a paragraph 
may have the role of introducing the primary theme, and 
the post-margin tagmeme may have the role of developing 
the primary through illustrative or explanatory 
sentences. Roles may differ from one level to another. 
At the paragraph level, for example, the nucleus tagmeme 
63 
may provide the primary theme or present a problem while 
the marginal slot may have the role of developing the 
primary theme through illustration, expansion, causal 
relation, or solution. Pike and Pike (19 82:397-409) 
extensively showed the relations between the four cells 
of a tagmeme at different levels starting from the word 
level up to the monolog level. At the monolog level, on 
the other hand, the nucleus may be said to have the role 
of story-telling, or presenting the climax. 
The fourth feature of the tagmeme is cohesion in 
which each constituent governs or is governed by others. 
In this cell, the cohesive devices that link constituents 
together are entered. 
The cohesion cell of the tagmeme with all the 
features entered into it shows the appropriateness of the 
textual unit to other units in the whole structure. 
Since the tagmeme is a ' unit-in-context' the cohesive 
cell cannot be isolated from other cells such as slot and 
role. The interaction between slot and role is cohesive. 
For example, the slot-cell shows the position of a 
tagmeme or constituent in relation to other units in the 
whole structure. The location of the nucleus tagmeme 
determines the location of the other tagmemes. There 
would be no pre-margin if there were no nucleus. 
64 
The post-margin is so labelled because it occurs 
after a nucleus. Similarly, in the role-cell, there 
would be no development or illustration tagmeme if there 
were no primary theme or topic to be developed or 
illustrated. In this sense, a linguistic unit or 
constituent acquires its meaning when it is described in 
relation to other units. 
Another type of cohesion that is relevant to this 
study is the cohesion based on the roles of sentences and 
the relation between these roles. The semantic roles of 
propositions proposed by Milic (1969:21) show how 
cohesion can be maintained by the inferred roles that 
propositions or sentences have in a certain text. A 
sentence can be an alternative, illustrative, additive, 
explanatory, illative or be in causal relationship to the 
preceding one. These semantic relations provide cohesion 
and coherence to a text. Cohesion can be overtly marked 
by a conjuction or an anaphoric expression as well. 
The four cells of the tagmeme are shown in the 
following chart. 
65 
SLOT | CLASS 
Where is the item in 
the including whole? What items can be appropriately substitutable 
in a slot? 
ROLE COHESION 
What is the relationship 
of the set of items to 
other sets in the 
including whole? 
How is a tagmeme or 
part of it tied to 
other units? 
Adapted from Pike and Pike (1982:75, 1983b:8). 
The tagmeme was later defined by Pike and Pike 
(1983b:8) as "a unit-in-context" with its four mutually 
dependent features. A member of a class fills a slot 
which has a specific role in a particular context, spoken 
or written. The four-celled tagmeme was originally used 
to describe grammatical units or constituents, and it was 
later employed by Pike and Pike ( 1982 ), and Longacre 
(1982) to describe larger units of discourse. The 
constituents of discourse such as sentences, sentence 
cluster, paragraph or strings of paragraphs can be 
described in terms of discourse level slots. A 
discourse, for example, is a string of paragraphs, and a 
paragraph slot is filled by a sequence of related 
sentences. 
Since this study employs the tagmemic principles in 
the analysis of paragraph structure in Arabic and English 
expository discourse, a sample tagmemic analysis for the 
66 
structure of a story and an expository paragraph will be 
provided as an illustration. The short story of The Rich 
Young Man is quoted from Pike and Pike (1983:10-11). 
1. Once a man came to Jesus. 2. 
"Teacher," he asked, "What good must 
I do to receive eternal life?" 3. 
"Why do you ask me concerning what is 
good?" answered Jesus. 4 . . There is 
only One who is good. 5. Keep the 
commandments if you want to enter 
life." 6. "What commandments?" he 
asked. 7. Jesus answered: "Do not 
murder; do not commit adultery; do 
not steal; do not lie; honor your 
father and mother; and love your 
neighbor as yourself." 8. "I have 
obeyed all these commandments," the 
young man replied. 9. "What else do 
I need to do?" 10. Jesus said to 
him, "If you want to be perfect, go 
and sell all you have and give the 
money to the poor, and you will have 
riches in heaven; then come and 
follow me." 11. When the young man 
heard this he went away sad, because 
he was very rich. 
This short story can be divided into three major 
tagmemes at its highest level. The introductory tagmeme 
that has the function of establishing the setting (time, 
place, and participants) is manifested in the first 
sentence. The nucleus tagmeme which forms the main body 
of the story is expounded in sentences 9-10. The closure 
tagmeme which provides the conclusion for the story is 
manifested in the last sentence. Following Longacre's 
(1968) formulation of tagmemic structure, this story, at 
the highest level of discourse structure, can be formally 
67 
represented as follows: [ ^ Preliminary ^Nucleus 
•Closure]. Pike and Pike ( 1982) analyze the story into 
two formulas which may be further subdivided into lower 
level constituents as follows: 
1. Story = + Pre Mar Ind. Dec./Sent.1 
Setting 1. SAHN > 
2. StTM > 
3. StSpc > 
4. StPrc Pnt > 
1. Once a man came to Jesus. 
+ Nucleus Conver. 2-10 
Interaction 2. > StTM 
3. > StSpc 
4. > StPrc Pnt 
2-10. Teacher ... follow me. 
+ Post Margin Ind.Dec./Sent.11 
Outcome 2. > StTm 
3. > StSpc 
4. > StPrc Pnt 
11. When the young man heard 
this, he went away sad, because he 
was very rich. 
2. Conversation = 
• Nucleus 
Problem 
Intial Resolved 
Exchange (2)-(5) 
5. Top > (Topic) 
6. Del. R e d u n 
(Deletion 
Reduncdances) 
2-5. Teacher...enter life. 
68 
Sequential (6)—(8) 
+ Margin 
Development 
Resolved 
Exchange 
(9)-(10) 
5. > Top 
6. > Del. Redun. 
6-8. What...replied. 
9-10. What else...follow me. 
SAHN: Speaker-Addressee-
Here-Now Axis 
Story Time 
Story Space 
Story Participant 
Topic 
Deletion Redundancies 
StTM: 
StSpc: 
StPrc Pnt: 
Top: 
Del-Redun: 
Two of the highest level formulas of The Story of the 
Rich Young Man, Pike and Pike 1982:376. 
The chart shows the two major formulas with their 
constituent tagmemes. The story formula consists of 
three major constituents: the pre-margin tagmeme, 
manifested in the first sentence, serves to provide the 
setting of the story; the nucleus tagmeme, expounded in 
sentences 2-10, presents the problem and resolution of 
the story; the post-margin tagmeme, shown in sentence 11, 
represents the conclusion or the closure of the story. 
The conversation formula includes the nucleus tagmeme 
that presents the problem, and the post-margin tagmeme 
that develops and concludes the story. 
69 
The chart also displays each tagmeme with its four 
component cells: slot, class, role, and cohesion. The 
nucleus tagmeme of the story occurs after the pre-margin 
tagmeme (slot). It is manifested in sentences 2-10, 
which are either interrogative, imperative or declarative 
(members of the class cell). The slot with its fillers 
serves to provide the main topic of the paragraph 
represented in the interaction between the young man and 
Jesus (role). The fourth cell shows how the constituents 
of this tagmeme hang together or to other tagmemes 
(cohesion). The symbol > preceding the second sentence 
indicates that it is governed by the base line of time 
margin indicated in the preceding sentence. The third 
sentence is governed by the story space that provides a 
period of reference or the location of participants, 
therefore it is entered in the cohesion cell preceded by 
the symbol >. When this symbol is placed on the right of 
a constituent, it indicates that this constituent governs 
the occurrence of a tagmeme or part of it. The term 
"govern" is used here to indicate that the governed 
constituent is motivated by the governing constituent. 
That is to say, it maintains the theme line of the 
paragraph in which it occurs. The cohesion system 
proposed by Pike and Pike (1982:392-393) consists of 
twenty-nine features. This renders the system too 
70 
complicated for an analysis to be pedagogically useful. 
A simple system of cohesion based on sentence relations 
or roles will be adopted and explained in more detail in 
a later section of this chapter. 
The tagmemic structure of this story can also be 
shown in a hierarchical upside-down tree diagram with 
branches showing the parts, and nodes representing the 
unifying structures. Each node is labelled with the 
class of structure occurring in that node. In the 
following tree diagram, the label above the branching 
line represents the slot of the unit in the containing 
grammatical construction, while the one below it 
represents the role or the function of that unit. The 
terminal nodes are filled with the appropriate actual 
parts from the story. 
71 

The tree can be read as follows: the story consists of 
three tagmemes: the pre-margin, the nucleus and the 
post-margin. The pre-margin has the role of establishing 
the setting and it is manifested by an independent 
declarative sentence- The nucleus tagmeme that follows 
the pre-margin functions as interaction and is filled by 
interrogative or declarative statements. The nucleus 
tagmeme is followed by two margin tagmemes developing the 
theme of the conversation. The third major tagmeme is 
the post-margin which provides the outcome and is 
expounded by an independent declarative statement. 
Expository paragraphs can be analyzed in a similar 
way. The following analysis is based on a paragraph 
written by Roger Revelle ( 1970) and quoted by Kane and 
Peters ( 1986: 173). 
1. In many ways, the quality of our 
environment has deteriorated with 
each new advance of the gross 
national product. 2. Increases in 
electric power production mean the 
burning of more coal and fuel oil, 
and hence the discharge of more 
sulpher dioxide into the air. 3. 
The growth of the paper industry has 
brought a vast increase in trash. 4. 
The production of new automobiles and 
the discard of old ones has resulted 
in unsightly piles of hulks. 5. The 
growth of urban a u t o m o b i l e 
transportation is choking both the 
mobility of the city and the lungs of 
city dwellers. 
73 
This short expository paragraph consists of one 
major theme represented in the first sentence. The topic 
is then developed by illustrative examples. In tagmemic 
terms, this paragraph consists of two major consitituent 
tagmemes: the nucleus and the post-margin. The nucleus 
tagmeme is manifested in the first sentence which is an 
independent declarative statement. This sentence 
represents the main theme of the paragraph. The post-
margin tagmeme is expounded by the independent 
declarative statements 2-5. Each constituent of the 
post-margin tagmeme contributes to the development of the 
major theme expressed in the nucleus tagmeme. The 
pattern of development that this paragraph represents is 
one of the most common and effective ways of generating 
an expository paragraph. A tagmemic formula for the 
structure of this paragraph would be as follows: 
SLOT CLASS 
+ Nucleus Independent 
Declarative 
Sentence (1) 
ROLE COHESION 
Primary Theme In many ways... product > 
1. In many ways ... national product. 
74 
SLOT CLASS 
+ Post-Margin Independent 
Declarative 
Statement (2-5) 
ROLE COHESION 
Development through 1. > 2-5 
illustration. 2. Lexical Collocation 
[environment, trash, air, 
dwellers.] 
3. Hyponymy: national 
p r o d u c t s . . . p a p e r 
industry... 
The tagmemic structure of this paragraph can also be 
represented in a tree diagram as follows: 
Paragraph 
Nucleus Post-Margin 
Theme 
Independent 
Declarative 
Sentence (1) 
In many ways ... product. 
Development 
Through 
Illustration 
Sentence Cluster 
Independent 
Declarative 
Sentences 2-5 
I n c r e a s e s in 
city dwellers. 
The analysis of the preceding expository paragraph 
shows that it consists of one major theme around which 
the whole paragraph is developed. The theme of the 
75 
paragraph is developed through illustration since each 
constituent of the post-margin tagmeme provides an 
illustrative example of the many ways in which the 
environment deteriorates. The two major tagmemes of this 
paragraph are shown with their four cells: slot, class, 
role and cohesion. 
In the above-analyzed expository paragraph, the 
nucleus tagmeme governs the constituents of the post-
margin tagmeme. The post-margin tagmeme maintains 
cohesion to the nucleus tagmeme through two basic 
devices. Each constituent of the post-margin tagmeme is 
logically related to the primary theme, e.g., there is a 
particular type of logical relation, illustration between 
the second sentence and the first. The same relation 
holds between the rest of the sentences and the first 
one. All the constituents of the post-margin tagmeme are 
related to the theme expressed in the nucleus tagmeme. 
The second cohesive device that links the post-margin to 
the nucleus is lexical collocation. The words and 
phrases "sulpher dioxide into the air, paper industry-
trash, piles of hulks", and "dwellers" collocate with the 
word "environment" in the nuclues tagmeme. This shows 
that logical relations and lexical collocation are the 
major cohesive devices that tie together the constituents 
of this expository paragraph. Cohesive devices are not 
76 
always overt. Unity of theme can maintain cohesion 
between constituents that may otherwise look incohesive, 
and it may be expressed through logical relations between 
propositions as well. 
Hierarchy 
Pike and Pike (1982:3) define the concept of 
hierarchy as the relationship in which "small units are 
found within larger ones, and these in turn in still 
larger units". These part-whole relations are 
characteristic of the three tagmemic hierarchies: the 
phonological, referential and grammatical. 
Grammatical Hierarchy: this is concerned with the 
distribution of lower-level grammatical units into higher 
level units. For example, morphemes in English link 
together to form the higher level of words which are in 
turn strung together to form phrases, clauses, sentences, 
paragraphs and texts. Pike and Pike (1982:4) 
characterize grammatical hierarchy as follows: 
When types of specific, dictionary 
(lexical) items or sequences of items 
serve as parts of larger units made 
up of such items, the relation of the 
included parts to types of including 
patterns (and, through the including 
whole, to each other) makes up a 
grammatical hierarchy... 
77 
This part-whole relationship means that higher-level 
units, and higher-level units can be analyzed into their 
lower-level immediate constituents. According to Pike 
and Pike ( 1982:20), the list of levels that make up a 
grammatical hierarchy are from larger to smaller: 
conversation, exchange, or minimum dialog, monolog, 
paragraph or sentence cluster, sentence, clause, phrase, 
word, morpheme cluster, morpheme. 
The linguistic units or the levels that build up the 
grammatical hierarchy starting from the smallest 
(morpheme) to the largest (conversation) can be grouped 
into pairs, each of which can provide the same meaning. 
For example, an exchange indicates a type of social 
interaction, and so does the conversation. Since both 
the exchange and the conversation mean the same thing, 
'social interaction', they can be grouped together. Pike 
and Pike (1982:23) show the paired grammatical levels 
with their meanings in the following chart: 
78 
MEANING 
UNIT 
MINIMUM UNIT E X P A N D E D 
Social 
Interaction 
Exchange Conversation 
Theme-
Development 
Paragraph/Sentence 
Cluster 
Monolog 
Proposition Clause Sentence 
Term Word Phrase 
Lexical 
Package 
Morpheme Morpheme 
Cluster 
Chart of Paired Grammatical Le els. 
The second type of part-whole hierarchy is the 
referential hierarchy. This type is the largest and the 
most complex of the three hierarchies. It is concerned 
with what speech can refer to, and it is what Pike and 
Pike (1983b:35) call "communication referents". In 
discussing the referential hierarchy, Pike and Pike 
(1982:321) define it as follows: 
The etics of such a referential 
hierarchy is whatever any person in 
the world does or can talk about .. . 
the linguistic referential hierarchy 
of human beings deals only with items 
which are or have been talked about 
by humans , in some part of their 
present or past culture. 
Like the grammatical tagmeme, the referential tagmeme 
consists of four features: slot, class, role and 
79 
cohesion. Referential class answers the question of what 
is happening, and who or or what is involved in those 
events. In other words, referential class consists in 
the different ways of talking about one concept; or the 
different referring expressions used for the same 
referent. Referential slot specifies the place or the 
creation of these events in terms of time and space and 
shows their prominence relative to other constituents or 
events in the whole structure. The role feature of the 
referential tagmeme explains why those events or actions 
took place. Finally, the cohesion feature shows how the 
tagmeme can be understood as an integrative part of the 
whole. Cohesion can be achieved by having a particular 
universe of discourse in mind. A proposition can be 
considered true or false according to our assumptions 
about the universe of discourse; it is true or false 
insofar as it is compatible or incompatible with a 
particular universe of discourse (Pike and Pike 1982:321-
335, 1982:100-103, 1983b:35-37). The four-celled 
referential tagmeme can be displayed as follows: 
80 
SLOT CLASS 
Where is the item on the 
including wave? Who or What, specifically, is the form of the action: 
or the specific individual 
or thing performing it? 
ROLE COHESION 
Why is the action 
performed—to do what, 
with what purpose? 
Or what is the role 
identity of the actor or 
item? 
How does this item relate 
ro others within the system 
how does it govern them or 
how is it governed by them? 
Pike and Pike (1982:325). 
Despite the fact that both the referential and 
grammatical hierarchies have some features in common, 
they are still different. In a narrative paragraph, for 
example, the grammatical constituents are arranged in a 
linear structure; that is, a main clause may precede or 
follow its subordinate clause. But the referential 
structure of the same paragraph indicates the 
chronological order of events regardless of their 
grammatical display. When one says "Mary came home, then 
she watched a movie", the order in which the events are 
told and their happening order are the same, but when the 
order of the clauses is reversed, the grammatical 
structure is reversed but the referential structure 
remains the same. Another difference between reference 
and grammar lies in the semantic relations between 
81 
consitituent in grammatical and referential structures. 
The relation between grammatical units are "general 
relations" such as actor, patient,...whereas reference is 
concerned with the "encyclopedic or specific character of 
the event" (Pike and Pike 1981 :27). Finally, in the 
referential hierarchy, unlike the grammatical one, there 
is room for handling truth and falsity. To clarify this 
point, Pike and Pike (1981:27) gave an example of a 
simple mathematical equation 'nine plus four equal one'. 
This equation is grammatically acceptable but 
unacceptable in terms of reference since it violates the 
ordinary rules of mathematics. It becomes acceptable 
only when one is referring to a clock. 
Another type of hierarchy which is not part of the 
part-whole type is that of taxonomy. In this type, units 
are grouped according to shared features into manageable 
classes in terms of specific-generic relations. Higher 
level (generic) constituents are more general than the 
lower (specific) consitituents. In a tagmeme, for 
example, the highest level margin which has the function 
of developing the nucleus, may have more specific 
functions at lower levels such as illustration, 
comparison or contrast. Themes in a tagmeme may also be 
of two types: primary (general) and secondary (more 
specific). These specific-generic relations may be 
82 
utilized as covert devices for maintaining the cohesion 
of constituents. 
Taxonomic hierarchy is also important in describing 
expository discourse because unlike narrative discourse 
which is chronologically oriented, expository discourse 
is subject-matter oriented and there might be more than 
one nucleus slot in a tagmeme where the former introduces 
the primary theme, while the latter provides the 
secondary theme. In such a case, the higher level and 
lower level tagmemes could be in generic-specific 
relationship to each other. This agrees with what 
Christensen (1965:145) observes about the levels of 
generality of sentences in a paragraph: "when sentences 
are added to develop a topic or subtopic, they are 
usually at a lower level of generality". 
The third type of part-whole hierarchy is the 
phonological hierarchy which is defined by Pike and Pike 
(1982:3) as "the relation of sounds to their containing 
(including) syllables, stress groups, pause groups and 
rhetorical periods". Since the study is not concerned 
with phonology, I will not go into the details of the 
phonological hierarchy. 
The concept of the hierarchical structure of 
language is not a unique contribution of Pike. 
Structural linguistics, for example, posits a one-
83 
directional sequence of linguistic levels with phonology 
at the bottom and syntax at the top of the hierarchy. 
However, the hierarchies posited by Pike are distinct and 
equally important. Each hierarchy begins with the 
minimal structural unit that is included into larger 
units. In this sense, units are related to each other 
not only in terms of sequence but also in terms of 
layerings. The three hierarchies share one common aspect 
of language which is the lexical substance. The 
following display shows how the three hierarchies 
intersect: 
Pike and Pike (1982:323, 1983b:109). 
84 
Context 
The third major concept of tagmemics is context. 
Pike and Pike (1983b:8) define the tagmeme as a 'unit-in-
context'. This reflects their emphasis on the importance 
of context in the analysis of language. According to 
Pike and Pike (1982:440) context is defined as "the 
setting of a unit in its phonological, grammatical, or 
referential surroundings". 
A linguistic unit has form and meaning. Form is the 
linguistic manifestation of a unit and sequential 
arrangement or occurrence of a unit in relation to other 
units in the language. Meaning, on the other hand, is 
the impact of that form on the hearer's behavior or 
perception. This relationship between form and meaning 
is called "form-meaning composite" (Pike and Pike 
1982:2). Context is clearly noticed in the four-celled 
tagmeme. The slot describes the occurrence of the form 
in relation to other forms, i.e., textual context; the 
class cell shows what type of constructions can fill that 
context whereas the meaning of the form or construction 
is shown in the role slot. The slot and the class cells 
provide the formal properties of the construction while 
the role and cohesion cells provide its meaning and 
specify the manner in which it is related to other parts 
in the whole structure. 
85 
The notion of the universe of discourse is relevant 
in discussing the concept of context since language does 
not take place in a cultural vacuum but is related to a 
certain time, place and situation. Pike and Pike 
( 1982 : 461) define the concept of universe of discourse 
as : 
The temporary frame of reference, 
topic, style, genre, discipline, or 
general situation in which a 
linguistic unit occurs, and which 
leads to cohesion in relating events 
or propositions in various ways which 
leave parts of the whole compatible 
with each other. 
The type of genre, expository or narrative, may 
affect the choices of constructions or words in a certain 
context. Discourse genres differ from each other in 
terms of person, orientation and linkage. 
The last concept of tagmemics is that of 
perspective. Pike and Pike (1982:5) characterize three 
types of perspective. The normal or "static" perspective 
reflects the view of an observer of the world or of a 
whole as made up of discrete elements or particles, while 
in the dynamic or wave perspective, the observer 
considers these discrete elements or events as a whole 
composed of those particles. Finally, in the relational 
perspective, the observer may focus on the relationships 
between units. 
86 
It has become clear that tagmemics has certain 
characteristics that make it more applicable to discourse 
analysis than other modes of linguistic analysis. It 
recognizes linguistic units beyond the level of the 
sentence such as sentence cluster, paragraph, section, 
and whole texts. These units are hierarchically 
structured in the sense that small (lower-level) 
constituents are contained in larger (higher-leve1) 
structures. Discourse units, in this model, are 
discourse level slots which can be filled by a sentence 
or a sequence of sentences at the paragraph level, a 
paragraph at a higher level, or by a text of a particular 
type, i.e., expository, narrative, at the discourse or 
genre level. These discourse units are related to each 
other not merely in terms of sequence, but in terms of 
layerings. That is to say, the larger units can be 
determined partly in terms of thier smaller or lower-
level constituents. 
Language in tagmemics is not an abstract 
mathematical system and it must not be detached from the 
culture and context in which it is used. 
This study assumes that expository discourse has an 
identifiable structure of its own, but it differs cross-
linguistically because expository discourse, like any 
other aspect of language, does not occur in a cultural vacuum. 
87 
Chapter 4 
Methodology and Procedure 
Introduction 
Contrastive analysis is fundamental to the 
development of a general theory of language and to the 
full characterization of specific languages. Studies in 
contrastive linguistics have been conducted chiefly at 
the lexical, phonological and syntactic levels within the 
boundaries of the sentence. However, linguists in the 
last three decades have realized the importance and 
necessity of extending the scope of contrastive analysis 
to a level higher than that of the sentence. Most of the 
studies that compare and contrast language structure at 
the discourse level have been conducted on expository 
essays or compositions written by high school or 
university level students. Kaplan (1966) based his 
generalizations on English compositions written by 
native speakers of other languages. Nathaniel Norraent 
(1984) based his analysis of organizational structures 
and cohesive devices on compositions written by native 
and ESL Chinese, English, and Spanish students. Idris 
(1982), on the other hand, investigated thematic 
structures and logical relations in English and Malay 
expository texts. 
88 
There are, however, obvious advantages of any 
discourse analysis study based on compositions. The 
researcher can obtain data on any topic he prefers. He 
can also guarantee that the texts or the samples of his 
research are parallel in content, a matter that 
simplifies the analysis, meets the objectives of the 
study, and provides a stronger basis for drawing more 
valid generalizations. 
The shortcomings of depending chiefly on students' 
compositions ought not to be overlooked. Contrastive 
analysis involves identifying the similarities and 
differences at the phonological, syntactic, and lexical 
levels. The composition of a foreign language learner 
does not necessarily reflect the rhetorical and 
organizational patterns existing in his or her native 
language. Therefore, any conclusion or generalization 
about the student's native language may not be valid. 
The organizational patterns exhibited in a student's 
composition may not be the result of interference. They 
might reflect the temporary competence of the foreign 
language learner in the process of learning the target 
language. This is what has been called "idiosyncratic 
dialect" (Corder 1971), "approximative system" (Nemser 
1971), and "interlanguage" (Selinker 1972 ). By and 
large, these terms refer to the unique characteristics of 
89 
the language of the foreign language learner at a certain 
stage which conforms to neither the systems or norms of 
the learner's mother tongue nor to those of the target 
language. Thus, the deviations that occur in students' 
compositions might be erroneously accounted for in terms 
of mother tongue negative transfer. 
Since this study will investigate professionally 
written texts in Arabic and English, it is expected to 
circumvent the disadvantages of the approach based on 
students' compositions. Professionally written texts 
have, most probably, undergone revision by their own 
authors and editing by others. Therefore, they are 
closer to the accepted organizational and rhetorical 
norms and patterns of the language they represent. 
Selection of Texts 
Forty paragraphs from the expository discourse of 
each language are chosen for analysis in this study. 
They are selected from pre-university and university 
textbooks. The texts from which the sample is chosen are 
assumed to reflect the organizational and rhetorical 
patterns in each language. The texts were chosen 
according to four conditions. They have to be written by 
professional native speakers of each language. This 
condition will partially avoid the influence of other 
90 
cultures that might be reflected in the organization of 
texts. In conjunction with this condition, another 
precaution was taken into consideration, namely, these 
texts must not be translated from other languages. 
Furthermore, these texts must not have undergone any 
process of simplification. Simplified texts were 
rejected because they might have lost or gained some 
sentence connectives, they might have undergone a process 
of lexical change, that is, deleting a vocabulary item, 
or substituting one for another. Finally, portions of 
these simplified texts might have been deleted. 
Therefore, simplified texts do not necessarily reflect 
the organizational and rhetorical structure of the 
original ones. 
Analysis of Texts 
This study investigates three major features of 
paragraph structure, namely, partitioning a paragraph 
into functional slots or tagmemes, specifying semantic 
roles or logical relations holding between sentences and 
tagmemes in a paragraph, and determining the lexical 
cohesive devices that maintain cohesion and continuity 
between the constituents of a paragraph. Each of these 
three features is indespensible for providing a complete 
description of paragraph structure. The exclusion of any 
of these features will render an incomplete or distorted 
description of paragraph structure. 
The following procedures will be followed in the 
analysis of texts: 
1. Basis of analysis: 
The analysis of paragraphs in this study is based on 
the notion that expository paragraphs can be divided into 
functional slots or tagmemes that can stand in several 
orders or relationships with each other. These 
functional parts may consist of more than one sentence. 
The constituents of a paragraph stand in a particular 
relationship to each other. Any structure that does not 
stand in a certain relationship with a preceding or 
following one will be considered a violation of the 
conventions of paragraph patterning. Cohesion between 
the constituents of the paragraph is maintained through 
several devices, chief among which is lexical cohesion. 
2. Basis of identifying paragraphs: 
In this study, paragraphs are identified on the 
basis of graphic indicators. Paragraphs can be easily 
identified because they are typographically indented. A 
paragraph is an arbitrary discourse unit that consists of 
a sequence of related sentences. Kaplan (1972:91) notes 
that: 
92 
The paragraph is admittedly an 
a r b i t r a r y u n i t and s i n c e 
paragraphing, like punctuation, is a 
feature only of the written language, 
then it seems reasonable that, like 
punctuation, the amount of variation 
possible must be finite, and the 
patterns of variation must be 
d e t e c t a b l e and subject to 
description. 
Another distinction has to be made at the level of the 
paragraph. It is the identification of nucleus tagmemes 
that serves to provide the primary theme of the paragraph 
and the marginal tagmemes that may introduce the nucleus 
tagmeme, or develop the major theme (post-margin). 
Christensen (1965:145) defines the paragraph as "a 
sequence of structurally related sentences". According 
to Christensen, this means that a paragraph consists of a 
set of sentences related to one another by coordination 
or subordination. One of the sentences, usually the 
first, expresses the topic of the sentence and the rest 
of the sentences are in coordinate or subordinate 
relationship to the thematic sentence. Pike and Pike 
(1982:452) define the paragraph as "the minimum unit in 
which a theme is developed". It might be appropriate, at 
this point, to define theme. 
A good deal of work on theme within linguistics has 
been done by a number of European linguists who are 
93 
indebted to the Prague School of linguistics. Linguists 
like Firbas, Dahl, and Halliday study theme within the 
sentence. They do not go beyond the sentence to larger 
units of discourse such as paragraphs and whole texts. 
Jan Firbas (1974:24) defines theme as "an element or 
elements carrying the lowest degree(s) of communicative 
dynamism". By the term 'degree of communicative 
dynamism', Firbas means the extent to which the 
linguistic element contributes towards the development of 
communication. In the light of this definition, theme is 
the element or elements that carry the highest degree of 
communicative dynamism. 
Halliday (19 67:211-212) defines theme and rheme on 
the basis of the clause. He states that theme is "what 
comes first in the clause". Theme is what is being 
talked about or the point of departure for a message in a 
clause. Rheme is, then, the part of the clause that 
highlights the theme. Jones (1977:2) defines theme, in 
general terms, as "minimum generalizations" of a text 
that can be overtly stated in a sentence or more, or it 
can be obscured and has to be restated in one's own 
statement. This process of extracting the theme from a 
text is referred to as synthesizing theme. This general 
definition of theme was later refined by Jones (1977:7) 
to mean "referential prominence". This tagmemic concept 
94 
refers to the main idea which is usually expressed in the 
nuclear consitituent of a text. It has become obvious 
that tagmemics, unlike other models of linguistics, 
studies themes at levels higher than that of the 
sentence. This feature of tagmemics makes it more 
appropriate for the purpose of this study that 
investigates the structure of linguistic units larger 
than the sentence. 
The division of information in a paragraph into 
theme and rheme agrees with the tagmemic approach of 
investigating discourse structure. Tagmemic analysis of 
paragraphs posits two basic constituents of a paragraph: 
the nucleus tagmeme that serves to provide the primary 
theme, and the post-margin tagmeme that develops or 
highlights the primary theme via different means such as 
illustration, explanation, or comparison and contrast. 
Furthermore, the assumption that paragraphs have themes 
is in accord with the hierarchical structure of language, 
another basic assumption underlying this study. In this 
study, I will base the tagmemic analysis of paragraphs on 
the assumption that themes exist at levels beyond that of 
the sentence such as the levels of paragraphing sections, 
and whole texts. 
95 
Analysis of Logical Relations 
Each sentence plays a role in developing the general 
theme of the text in which it occurs . Sentences in a 
paragraph perform identifiable tasks or roles that can be 
determined by analyzing the relationships between these 
sentences. A complete description of paragraph 
structure and pattern cannot be achieved without 
specifying the role that each sentence has in relation to 
the other surrounding sentences. 
Investigating logical relations between sentences 
becomes more important when analyzing expository prose, 
the major concern of this study. Unlike sentences in 
narrative discourse which are chronologically arranged, 
sentences in expository prose are logically sequenced. 
Kane and Peters (1976:3-4) observe that the subject of an 
exposition is organized by logic and not in time or 
space. They say that although an expository writer may 
...appeal to our emotions, he is more 
likely to appeal to our reason by 
using evidence and logic...He will do 
well to remember that his primary 
purpose ... is to explain by logic 
and to show relations (1976:3-4). 
The logical relations between sentences in a paragraph, 
together with other cohesive devices, provide cohesion to 
the whole text. 
96 
The model of analyzing logical relations in Arabic 
and English expository prose is based on that of Milic 
(1969). Milic investigated the manner in which sentences 
are combined with each other by meaans of eight 
categories of logical relations, and a system of logical 
diagrams. The concept of logic as used by Milic is not 
concerned with logic in the formal sense, but with the 
semantic role of holding between one proposition or 
sentence and another surrounding one. This sense of 
logic is a reflection of logical relations in natural 
language. Halliday and Hassan (1976:320) emphasize this 
notion saying that: 
There are certain elementary logical 
relations inherent in ordinary 
language;... These logical relations 
are embodied in linguistic structure, 
in the form of coordination, 
opposition, modification, etc. 
Milic (1969:21 defined the eight logical categories with 
the symbol for each category as follows: 
( ) Initial, the first sentence of a paragraph. 
(+) Additive, a proposition which has no organic 
relation with its predecessor (and). 
(-) Adversative, a proposition which changes the 
direction of the argument (but). 
(0) Alternative, a proposition which may be 
substituted for the previous one (or). 
97 
( = ) Explanatory, a restatement, definition or 
expansion of the previous proposition 
(that is). 
(X) Illustrative, an instance or illustration 
(for example). 
( : ) Illative, a conclusion (therefore) . 
(!) Causal, the cause for a preceding conclusion 
(for). 
In the analysis of text sentences the following 
steps will be followed: 
1. Reduction of each text sentence to one or more 
propositions, that is, reducing it to its basic minimum 
form that represents the content of the sentence. This 
process is referred to by Milic (1969:18) as 
'propositional reduction'. 
2. Dropping all sentence connectives so that the 
interpretation of propositions might not be influenced 
by these connectives. Milic (1969:21) argues 
Writers often use logical connectives 
rhetorically, to suggest connections 
which may not really implicit in the 
argument itself. Others may use them 
decoratively or habitually. 
3. The semantic role of each sentence in both 
languages will be determined by native speakers of each 
98 
language. This procedure makes generalizations more 
valid and less arbitrary. 
The following paragraph is analyzed as an 
illustrative example to show how the method works: 
1. If anyone wants to exemplify the 
meaning of the word "fish," he cannot 
choose a better animal than a 
herring. 2. The body, tapering to 
each end, is covered with thin, 
flexible scales, which are easily 
rubbed off. 3. The taper head, with 
its underhung jaw, is smooth and 
scaleless on the top; the large eye 
is partly covered by two folds of 
transparent skin, like eyelids—only 
immovable and with the slit between 
them vertical instead of horizontal; 
the cleft behind the gill-cover is 
very wide and when the cover is 
raised, the large red gills which lie 
underneath it are freely exposed. 4. 
The rounded back bears the single 
moderately long dorsal fin about its 
middle. 
—Thomas Henry Huxley: "The Herring" 
in Brook & Warren (1972:63). 
This expository paragraph can be reduced to the 
following propositions: 
1. The best example for the word fish is a 
herring. 
2. The body of the herring is covered with easily 
rubbed off scales. 
3. The head is smooth and scaleless on the top; the 
eye is covered by transparent skin; the cleft is 
99 
very wide; the large gills are freely exposed when 
the cover is raised. 
4. The back bears the dorsal fin about its middle. 
The role that each proposition plays in developing the 
topic of the paragraph can be clearly shown in the 
following logical diagram: 
In this diagram sentence (2) is in illustrative relation 
to (1), and similarly sentences (3) and (4) are also in 
illustrative relation to sentence (1). It is obvious 
that the dominant pattern of development in the above 
paragraph is illustration. 
Milic's model of analysis examines the relationship 
between one sentence and another which precedes it. This 
study will examine the tagmemic structure of paragraphs, 
and tagmemes may consist of more than one sentence or 
proposition. Therefore, a few modifications to Milic's 
model are essential for the purpose of this study. It is 
assumed in this study that paragraphs have a tagmemic 
structure, and the constituent tagmemes of a paragraph 
A B C D 
1. 
2. 
3. 
4 . 
( ) 
(X) 
(X) 
(X) 
100 
may be expounded by one or more sentences. In such a 
case, the logical relation between the constituent 
tagmemes, rather than between the sentences, has to be 
identified. A tagmeme may have the role of providing the 
main theme or topic of a paragraph, another tagmeme may 
develop, compare, introduce or add to that basic tagmeme. 
To show the relations between the constituent tagmemes of 
a paragraph, a logical diagram showing the relationship 
between tagmemes, rather than between sentences, has to 
be devised with numbers indicating the tagmeme, and 
letters showing the logical relationship between 
tagmemes. For example, Huxley's paragraph, mentioned 
above, can be divided into two tagmemes. The nucleus 
tagmeme, expounded in the first sentence, has the role of 
providing the primary theme of the paragraph. The post-
margin tagmeme, manifested in sentences (2), (3), and (4) 
illustrates the nucleus tagmeme. The structure of this 
paragraph can be shown in the following chart: 
Tagmeme Role Logical Relation 
Number A B C D 
1 Primary Theme -> 
2 Development X 
A = Theme-Statement (->) P = Primary Theme 
B = Explanatory Relation I - Introduction 
C = Illustration S = Secondary Theme 
D = Illative T = Transitional 
101 
The role 'Initial' assigned by Milic to initial sentences 
is replaced in this study by the role theme-statement. A 
second modification to Milic's model concerns the role 
'Initial' that he assigns for the first sentence in the 
paragraph. This role has to be replaced by the 
functional role of the first sentence in the whole 
paragraph. The initial sentence might be a transitional 
one, an introduction or orientation to the main topic, or 
it can be the topic sentence that fills the slot of the 
nucleus tagmeme. The role 'Initial' in Milic's model 
does not seem to play a role in developing the paragraph 
or maintaining its cohesion. In this study, the first 
sentence might affect the cohesion of the whole paragraph 
especially if it represents the major theme of the 
paragraph in which it occurs. In such a case, the 
initial sentence has slot, class, role and cohesion 
features. It will be entered in the cohesion cell 
followed by the sign '>', which means that it governs the 
following sentences that can be a response or an 
expansion to that sentence. 
The logical relations between sentences and tagmemes 
will be determined according to the procedures described 
above. This analysis will also show whether these 
relations are explicitly marked, and if so how they are 
marked. 
102 
Analysis of Lexical Cohesion 
Lexical cohesion is a non-grammatical text-creating 
device. In written discourse, lexical cohesion is more 
frequent than other types of cohesive devices. Many 
studies (Crowhust 1981, King and Rentel 1981, in Cooper 
1983 : 295 ) confirm that older students use more lexical 
ties per T-unit than other grammatical cohesive devices. 
Cooper (1983:245) emphasizes the role of lexical ties in 
discourse. He says 'lexical ties appear to be 
particularly telling, and it may be that future studies 
could focus here'. Lexical cohesive devices were 
discussed in more detail in chapter one. 
The analysis of lexical cohesion, in this study, 
will be carried out according to the following procedure: 
1. Each paragraph will be carefully examined for 
any occurrence of lexical cohesion. 
2. These occurrences will, then, be analyzed and 
classified into general types according to the 
relationship between any pair of lexical ties. For 
example, two lexical items might be synonyms, simple 
repetition of each other, they might share the same 
morpheme, (derived from the same root), or they can 
be members of the same collocational set. The 
analysis might reveal other types of lexical 
103 
cohesion that are present in a language rather than 
the other. 
3. Similarities and differences between Arabic 
and English lexical cohesive types will be 
identified quantitatively, that is, frequency tables 
will be made to compare and contrast each type of 
lexical cohesion in both Arabic and English. 
In this chapter, I have summarized the procedures 
that will be followed in the analysis of paragraphs, 
logical relations, and lexical cohesion. More relevant 
details will be presented in the chapters on analysis and 
discussion of findings. 
104 
CHAPTER 5 
Analysis 
Before starting the analysis, I feel it is 
appropriate to restate the objectives of this study. It 
is an attempt to identify and describe the tagmemic 
structure of paragraphs in Arabic and English expository 
prose. The constituent tagmemes of each paragraph will 
be identified, their markers and exponents will be 
specified, the types of logical relations holding between 
them will be determined, and their roles and the manner 
in which they maintain cohesion with each other will be 
investigated as well. The ultimate goal of this analysis 
is two-fold: to arrive at patterns of paragraph 
developments by means of which expository discourse may 
be described for both Arabic and English, and to specify 
the differences and similarities between both languages 
with regard to paragraph patterns and rhetorical 
organizations. 
Another important aim of this study is to examine 
how both languages make use of lexical cohesion. The 
different types of lexical cohesion and the frequency of 
each type will be determined in both Arabic and English 
expository prose. Finally, to provide an overall picture 
of paragraph structure and organization, I will analyze 
the logical relations (the semantic roles) of the 
105 
constituent sentences of each paragraph. Logical 
relations holding between sentences are essential for 
maintaining cohesion in any spoken or written passage. 
The following section provides a tagmemic analysis 
of sample paragraphs in Arabic and English. 
Tagmemic Analysis 
The analysis of paragraphs into tagmemes is based on 
the assumption that paragraphs are identifiable discourse 
units that can be analyzed into smaller constituents. In 
the tagmemic analysis, a paragraph can be analyzed into 
two major parts: the nucleus tagmeme that provides the 
primary theme of the paragraph, and the post-margin 
tagmeme that serves to develop or highlight the primary 
theme through several means such as explanation, 
illustration, comparison or contrast. The post-margin 
tagmeme may include a theme of a lower level usually 
referred to as the secondary theme. This thematic 
structure which recognizes the fact that a secondary 
theme may be embedded into a larger theme is in 
accordance with the tagmemic structure concept of 
hierarchical structuring of language. 
However, there are other patterns of thematic 
organization in paragraphs as was explained by Jones 
106 
(1977). These thematic patterns include the following 
possibilities: 
a. P + Ri + R2 ... Rn = monolevel 
b. S + Ri + Rn ... + S + Ri + ... Rn = Equal-level 
c. P + S + Ri ... Rn = multilevel 
d. P + S + Ri ... + Rn + S + Ri + . . . Rn = both (b)-
(c) . 
P = primary theme 
R = rheme 
Rl = one rheme 
Rn = any number of rhemes 
S = secondary theme 
Pattern (a) represents a paragraph that consists of 
a primary theme developed by a series of rhemes. That is 
to say, this pattern involves a nucleus tagmeme that is 
supported by a post-margin tagmeme consisting of a 
sequence of sentences; the function of each is to expand 
the primary theme in a certain manner such as 
explanation, causation or illustration. This type of 
paragraph pattern is referred to as the monolevel because 
it consists of one thematic unit. Pattern (b) involves 
two equally-important thematic units. Each secondary 
theme is expounded by a series of rhemes. In tagmemic 
terms, this pattern consists of a nucleus tagmeme that 
107 
provides a theme of a certain type of generality, and it 
is supported by one or more rhemes. The post-margin 
tagmeme, in this pattern, involves an equally-general or 
important theme that is developed by a number of rhemes 
as well. Type (c) represents a paragraph consisting of 
themes at different levels: a primary theme that is 
expressed in the nucleus tagmeme, and a secondary theme, 
more specific than the primary theme, is contained in the 
post-margin tagmeme. Type (d) is a combination of types 
(b) and (c). 
These thematic patterns show that there can be no 
paragraph without a theme. If a paragraph consists of 
two secondary themes then the primary theme has to be 
synthesized from the secondary themes in that paragraph. 
Determining the nucleus tagmeme that provides the 
primary theme of a paragraph is a subjective process. 
However, there are some principles that help in 
identifying a primary theme from a secondary one or from 
its supporting details. Besides the researcher's 
intuition and experience in identifying the major theme 
from its supporting details, there is the qeneral-to-
specific principle. A proposition with a more general 
content usually expresses a higher level of thematicity. 
In analyzying a paragraph, the researcher should be aware 
of the propositions that provide examples, explanations, 
108 
illustration, causation or illation. These propositions 
are usually of a lower degree of thematicity. 
Christensen (1965:145) notes "when sentences are added to 
develop a topic or subtopic they are usually at a lower 
level of generality." This indicates that specifying the 
semantic role of each sentence facilitates the process of 
identifying major themes from supporting details. 
Another essential principle in identifying thematic 
units is the consideration of grammatical devices used 
for highlighting themes. Jones (1977:169) discussed 
three basic types of theme-highlighting devices in 
English: word order, special constructions, and 
repetition. 
Word order is important in indicating theme. The 
more prominent item is usually fronted in the sentence. 
Ordering can take place at the level of the sentence and 
at higher levels as well. 
Theme can also be highlighted by using special 
constructions such as questions, clefting, psuedo-
clefting and topicalization (Jones 1977:177). Finally, 
repetition of words, phrases, or the use of synonyms may 
indicate thematicity. The recurrence of a concept 
through repeating the same word, its synonym or 
paraphrase, indicates that this concept forms a primary 
theme. 
109 
In addition to the above principles, I will seek the 
opinion of native speakers of Arabic and English in 
identifying the major theme of each paragraph in 
respective languages. Furthermore, I will employ another 
technique for discovering themes. Jones (1977:227-236) 
developed a diagramming method that proved useful in 
determining themes. This method is called the blocking 
chart. It is based on the general-to-specific and on 
repetition principles. It also makes use of the 
grammatical devices that may have a function in 
highlighting the theme or introducing it. Constructing a 
blocking chart requires the following steps: 
1. Dividing the chart into three columns: the 
first includes the propositions, the second contains the 
grammatical devices, and the third is specified for the 
key concept derived from the propositions. 
2. Dividing the text into propositions: This 
procedure involves reducing the text to its component 
propositions or clause—like chunks. Jones divides the 
texts into clause-like chunks. 
3. Noting the grammatical devices occurring in the 
text. Each grammatical device will be placed across the 
proposition in which it occurs. These devices include 
things like conjunctions and other connectives. 
110 
4. Choosing the key concepts in each proposition 
and placing them in the column of the key concepts. Two 
or more concepts will be selected from each proposition, 
one from the first part of the proposition and another 
from the last part. These concepts are the key words or 
the basic ideas in each proposition; they are usually 
indicated by using nouns. In this study, I will use 
verbs in addition to nouns whenever I feel that the verb 
in a certain proposition has an important linking 
function between the two parts of the proposition. The 
purpose of recording the key concepts in each proposition 
is to note the repeated items and concepts that help in 
highlighting themes and their supporting details. 
5. Finally, noting paraphrase equivalences 
occuring in the key concepts. This means that a 
paraphrase equivalence is a case when a particular term 
in the key concepts is referred to by another term that 
may or may not have any relationship with it outside the 
context of the text, such as referring to 'a strong man7 
as a 'monster,' in a certain situation. 
To illustrate the steps of this technique, I will 
analyze a few paragraphs from Arabic and English texts. 
The following paragraph was written by Qasim Amin, who is 
known for his writing on the role of women in society. I 
will try to transliterate the Arabic passage and provide 
111 
a glossed translation of each word, followed by 
appropriate English translation. 
A. 1. 
l.sabaqa a£Sar9u-l'sala:mi: kulla 
preceded law-Islamic every 
£ari:9atin siwaha fi: taqrirr 
law other in establishing 
musa:wa:t almarati lil-rajul, 2.fa 
equality the-woman to-the-man by 
'91ana hurriyyataha wa 
declared freedom-her and 
'stiqla:liha: yawama karnat 
independence-her when was-she 
fi hazi:z_ 91'nhita:t_ 9inda 
in bottom humiliation in 
jami:9 'l'umam, 3.wa xawwalqha: 
all nations and entitled-her 
kulla huqu:q 'l'insa:n, 4.wa 
all rights man and 
'9tabara laha: kafa:'tan 
considered for-her competence 
Sar9iyyah la tanqusu 9an 
legal no less than 
kafa:'ati-rrajuli fi: jami:9 
competence-of-man in all 
'1'ahwa:1 flmadaniyyati min 
aspects civil from 
bay9in wa ^ira'in wa hibatin 
sellng and purchase and gift 
wa was_iyyatin min ghayri 'an 
and legacy with out that 
112 
yatawaqqafa tasrrufuha 9ala: 
depend behavior-her on 
'dhni 'abi:ha 9aw zawjiha: 
permission father-her or husband-her 
5.wa ha:dhihi-lmazaya: 'llati: lam 
and these-the-merits which not 
tasil 'ila: ' iktisa : biha: hatta 
reach to gaining-it until 
1 'a:n ba9zu-nnisa:'i-lgharbiyyat-
now some-women-western 
kullaha: taShad gala: 'anna min 
all-it witness on that from 
9usu:l-£s 'ari:gati-ssamha:' 
basics law-forgiving 
'ihtira:mu-lmar'ati wa ttaswiyati 
respect-the-woman and equality-her 
baynaha wa bayna-rrajul. 
between-her and between-the-man. 
6.bal 'inna £ari:9tina: balaghat 
Moreover that law-our exaggerated 
f i-rrifqi bi-lmar'ati 
in-kindness with-the-woman 
7.fawaza9at gahna: ahma:l-lma9i:$ah, 
exempting off-her burdens-lifef 
8.wa lam tulzimha: bil'i£tira:ki 
and not oblige-her in-participating 
fi nafaqati-lmanzil wa tarbiyati-
in expenses-the house and bringing up 
1'awal:d 9.xilafan liba9zi-£Sara'i9i 
children unlike to-other-laws-
lgharbiyyah 'allati: sawwat bayna-
western which equated between 
113 
rrajuli walmar'ati fi:lwajibati 
the-man and-the-woman in duties 
faqat^  10.wa mayyazati-rrajuli fi-
only and favored-man in 
lhuqu:q. 
rights. 
l.The Islamic law preceded all other 
relgions in establishing equality 
between women and men, 2.by declaring 
her freedom and independence when she 
was greatly humiliated in all 
nations. 3. It granted her all the 
rights of man, 4.and legally 
considered her equal to man in all 
civil aspects such as selling, 
purchasing, gifts and legacy without 
the need for her father's or 
husband's permission. 5.These merits 
that have been obtained by only a few 
Western women so far, prove that 
respecting the woman and equating her 
with the man is one of the basics of 
this religion. 6.Furthermore, our law 
exaggerated in being kind to women. 
7.It exempted her from the burdens of 
life, 8.and it did not commit her to 
share the expenses of the house and 
the upbringing of the children, 
9. unlike some other western 
legislative systems which equated 
women with men in duties only, 10.and 
favored men in the rights. 
The blocking chart for this paragraph will be as 
follows: 
Propositions 
Grammatical 
Devices 
Key 
Concepts 
1. Islamic law esta-
blished equality be-
tween men and women 
Islamic law.. 
equality. 
114 
Propositions 
Grammatical Key 
Devices Concepts 
2. It declared her 
independence fa 
3. and entitled her wa = and 
with all the rights 
of man. 
4. and legally con-
sidered her as com- wa 
petent as man in all 
civil aspects of life. 
5. These merits prove wa 
that this forgiving These 
law respects women merits 
and equates them with 
men. 
6. Our law exaggerated 
in being kind to women 
7. It exempted her 
from the burdens of 
life 
bal=further 
more 
fa 
8. and it did not 
demand that she share 
the expenses of the 
house and children, 
9. unlike some Western 
laws that equate 
women with men in 
duties only 
10. and favored man 
in rights. 
wa 
xilafan 
unlike 
wa = and 
It (Islam)... 
independence. 
It (Islam)... 
rights of man. 
It...competence. 
These merits... 
respect of 
equality. 
[merits = declar-
ing freedom, en-
titling women... 
being competent.] 
[forgiving law = 
Islamic law.] 
Our law...kind-
ness to women. 
It (Islam)... 
burdens. 
It (Islam)... 
non-sharing 
expenses. 
Western laws 
non-equality 
of rights. 
Man...rights. 
115 
The construction of this blocking chart was done 
according to the steps explained earlier. In brief, 
these steps are: 
a. Dividing the text into propositions and 
recording them in their respective column. 
b. Identifying the grammatical devices in each 
proposition and recording them in the column of 
grammatical devices. 
c. Determining the basic concepts in each 
proposition and writing them in the third column. 
d. Noting any paraphrase equivalences and putting 
them in square brackets. 
For example, the first sentence, typographically 
indented and with a period at the end, has been divided 
into four conjoined sentences or propositions 1-4. The 
second proposition is connected with the first by the 
conjuction 'fa', which is recorded in the column of 
grammatical devices. The basic concepts of the first 
proposition are: 1. The Islamic law and the equation of 
men to women. Two paraphrase equivalences were noted in 
this paragraph. The first is equating All these merits 
with the merits mentioned in each of the preceding 
propositions, namely, declaring independence and freedom, 
entitling women with all the rights of man, being as 
competent as man. The second paraphrase equivalence is 
116 
manifested in the use of the term forgiving law for 
Islamic law. 
The previous procedures make the text ready for the 
second major step, which is thematic analysis. The first 
step in identifying themes is examining the key concepts 
column for patterns of repetition. For example, the 
concept Islamic law is repeated in the form of pronominal 
reference in the first five propositions. Besides these 
repetitions, there are two paraphrase equivalences 
mentioned above in the same set of propositions. At this 
point, one can hypothesize that propositions 1-5 make one 
thematic unit. Further support of this hypothesis comes 
from examining the set of propositions in terms of the 
general-to-specific principle. As far as this principle 
is concerned, we can observe that proposition (1) is more 
general than the following four since it is further 
developed in each of the following propositions that 
explain how women were made equal to men, the content of 
proposition (1). For example, proposition (2) states 
that the Islamic law declared the freedom and 
independence of women. Proposition (4) states that women 
are considered legally as competent as men. Another clue 
supporting the thematic unity of propositions (l)-(5) is 
represented in proposition (5), which is introduced by 
the summative phrase "and all these merits" referring to 
117 
the three preceding propositions. Furthermore, 
proposition (5) restates the principle of equality 
between men and women, which is expressed in the first 
proposition. All these indications prove the hypothesis 
that propositions (l)-(5) form one thematic unit. 
The second thematic unit in this paragraph is 
represented by the propositions (6)-(10). If we examine 
the key concepts column, we will find that the term our 
law is repeated in the first three propositions 
indicating that they belong to one thematic unit. 
Proposition (6) establishes the primary theme of being 
kind to women. Propositions (7) and (8) explain in more 
detail how kindness to women was realized. Therefore, 
propositions (7)-(10) are a step lower in generality than 
proposition (6). This movement from general-to-specific 
establishes proposition (6) as the primary theme of this 
thematic unit and propositions (7)—(10) as supporting 
details. It can also be noted that this theme is 
reinforced by contrast represented in the propositions 
(9) and (10) starting with unlike. 
If we examine the relationship between proposition 
(1) and (6), we will notice that proposition (1) is more 
general than proposition (6) since proposition (1) 
involves a general theme in which proposition (6) can be 
contained. The analysis leads us to divide this 
118 
paragraph into one primary theme and a secondary one. 
Each of these two themes is developed through a number of 
explanatory statements. 
In tagmemic terms, this paragraph can be represented 
in a tree diagram as follows: 
119 
paragraph 
Nucleus 
Nucleus 
Primary Theme 
Sentence Cluster 
Margin 
Development 
via 
Explanation 
Sentence 
Cluster 
2-5 
Post-Margin 
Sentence Cluster 
Nucleus / ^^Post-Margin 
Secondary Development 
Theme 
Declarative 
Sentence 
Sentence 
Cluster 
6 7 - 1 0 
The above analysis of this expository paragraph shows 
that it consists of two major tagmemes containing the 
primary and secondary themes, the two major consitituents 
around which the whole paragraph is developed. Briefly, 
the nuclues tagmeme provides the primary theme that is 
developed via the explanatory propositions in the margin 
tagmeme of the first thematic unit. The post-margin 
tagmeme consists of a nucleus tagmeme that presents the 
secondary theme and a post-margin tagmeme that develops 
the secondary theme through two explanatory statements 
(7) and (8), and two other contrastive statements, the 
second part of proposition (8) and proposition (9). 
The thematic structure of this paragraph can be 
displayed in another method developed by Jones (1977:250-
259), which she refers to as 'dominance display'. In 
this display, the sentence that represents the highest-
level theme is located above the sentence that represents 
the theme of the lower degree. A dominence display of 
themes in the preceding paragraph would be as follows: 
Sentence 1 
Sentence 6 
121 
This diagram can also be drawn by replacing the 
sentence numbers with a brief statement of its content as 
follows: 
Islam equates women with men. 
Islam supports kindness to women. 
Before starting the analysis of another paragraph, 
some observations are in order. 
1. This paragraph consists of ten propositions 
connected to each other by conjunctions. Each sentence, 
except the first, is introduced by a conjunction such as 
wa (and), fa (and, by), and bal (but, moreover). The 
functions of these conjunctions and the semantic roles of 
the conjoined sentences will be discussed later in the 
analysis of logical relations. 
2. The paragraph consists of a primary theme that is 
developed by four rhemes, and a secondary theme that is 
developed by three rhemes. Therefore, the development of 
rhemes in this paragraph is of the pattern: 
P = R1#..Rn + S + Ri-..Rn 
3. The repetition of certain terms in a portion of a 
text may indicate the thematic unity of that portion. 
Repetition may be in the form of repeating the same 
words, by using pronominals or by the use of parallel 
122 
equivalence. For example, the term Islamic law is 
repeated pronominally in propositions (2), ( 3) , and (4) 
and there is a parallel equivalence in proposition (5). 
4. The use of summative expressions or phrases may help 
highlight thematic units especially when a summative 
expression comes at the end of this unit. In the 
paragraph analyzed above, the phrase and all these merits 
in proposition (5) is an indicator that the preceding 
propositions form one thematic unit. 
5. A primary or secondary theme may be highlighted or 
reinforced by contrasting it with other notions. This 
can be clearly seen in the highlighting of the secondary 
theme of the above analyzed paragraph by contrasting our 
law, the secondary theme, with other Western laws. This 
shows that contrast is a possible theme-highlighting 
device. 
6. More theme-highlighting devices can be pointed out 
particularly with regard to the function of conjunctions 
and their role in determining the semantic relations 
between sentences. However, these matters will be 
thoroughly discussed later in the analysis of logical 
relations. 
7. A primary theme can be externally signalled. That 
is to say, there are clues or theme-highlighting devices 
that exist in other propositions rather than in the 
123 
proposition that expresses the primary theme. These 
external devices include signals such as the use of 
summative expressions as is the case in proposition (5). 
The same procedures of identifying theme will now be 
applied to the following English paragraph (E.l). 
1. In many ways, the quality of our environment 
has deteriorated with each new advance of the 
gross national product. 2. Increases in 
electric power production mean the burning of 
more coal and fuel oil, 3. and hence the 
discharge of more sulpher dioxide into the air. 
4. The growth of the paper industry has brought 
a vast increase in trash. 5. The production of 
new automobiles and the discard of old ones has 
resulted in unsightly piles of hulks. 6. The 
growth of urban automobile transportation is 
choking both the mobility of the city and the 
lungs of city dwellers. 
A blocking chart for this paragraph can be 
constructed as follows: 
E.l 
Propositions 
Grammatical 
Devices 
Key 
Concepts 
1. The quality of our 
environment deteriora-
ted with new advances 
of national products. 
Deterioration 
of the environ-
ment ...new 
national pro-
ducts . 
2. Increases in elec-
tric means burning more 
coal and oil. 
Electric power 
production... 
burning of coal 
and oil. 
3. Burning of coal and and hence 
oil leads to discharge 
of sulpher dioxide 
into the air. 
Burning of coal 
and oil... 
discharge of 
sulpher dioxide. 
124 
Propositions 
Grammatical Key 
Devices Concepts 
4. The growth of paper Paper industry... 
industry increased the trash. 
trash. 
5. Producing new auto- Producing and 
mobiles and discarding discarding auto-
old ones resulted in mobiles ...piles 
unsightly piles of of unsightly 
hulks. hulks. 
[Deterioration of 
env i ro nme n t 
more sulpher 
dioxide in air, 
more trash, piles 
of hulks.] 
6. Growth of automobile Increase of auto-
transportation resulted mobile transport-
in choking the city and its ation chokes the 
dwellers. city and the 
dwellers. 
[Gross national 
p r o d u c t = 
electric power, 
p a p e r 
industry...] 
Examining the key concepts in the blocking chart, we 
can realize that the paragraph starts with a 
generalization or an abstraction that is manifested in 
the first sentence, namely the relationship between the 
environment's deterioration and advances in gross 
national products. This abstraction is translated into 
concrete and visible illustrative examples in sentences 
125 
2-6 . Each proposition provides a real example of how 
growth of gross national products affect the environment. 
For example, propositions (2)-(3) shows how the increase 
in electric power production (a national product) 
negatively affects our environment by discharging sulpher 
dioxide into the air (deterioration). The author further 
illustrates the two basic concepts of the first sentence 
in propositions (4)-(6). The use of paraphrase 
equivalences is the major means of linking the sentences 
of this paragraph together. It is evident from the text 
that the term increases in electric power, in proposition 
(2), is to be understood as a paraphrase of the term new 
advances of national products in proposition (1). On the 
other hand, the expression discharge of sulpher dioxide 
into the air is a paraphrase equivalence of deterioration 
of the environment. I have recorded these paraphrase 
equivalences between square brackets in the key concepts 
column of the blocking chart. These paraphrases support 
the hypothesis that this paragraph forms one thematic 
unit with the primary theme expressed in the first 
sentence. A further support of the hypothesis of 
thematic unity of this paragraph comes from examining the 
levels of generality in the paragraph according to the 
general-to-specific principle. It is obvious that 
proposition (1) is a generalization that develops into 
126 
more specific illustrative examples manifested in 
propositions (2)-(6). 
The analysis of the above paragraph shows that it 
consists of two basic tagmemes, the nucleus tagmemes, 
expounded in sentence 1, provides the major theme—and 
the post-margin tagmeme, manifested in sentences 2-6, 
develops the primary theme via illustration. The 
tagmemic structure of this paragraph can be shown in the 
following tree diagram: 
This analysis leads to the following observation: 
1. This paragraph is a good example of developing a 
theme through specific illustrative examples. 
2. Unlike the previous Arabic paragraph in which each 
sentence was linked with the preceding one by a 
Paragraph 
Independent 
Declarative 
Sentences 
Sentences 2-6 
In many ways... 
national product. 
Increases in electric power 
...city dwellers. 
127 
conjunction, this paragraph has no conjunctions at 
sentence boundaries and cohesion is mainly lexical. 
3. Sentences that provide the nucleus tagmeme are 
usually more general and abstract than the supporting 
statements. 
4. The supporting illustrative examples are specific 
and pertinent instances of the assertion made in the 
primary theme. This is a technique which handles a 
generalization with specific illustrations and exemplify 
an abstraction by a concrete example. 
5. Sentences in a paragraph can hang together without 
using any overt grammatical devices existing in the text. 
Cohesion in such a case is maintained through other means 
such as lexical devices and maintaining the theme line. 
6. The organizational pattern of this paragraph is 
P + Ri + ... Rn 
Therefore, it is of the monolevel type in which a theme 
is developed through a number of rhemes. Themes, 
however, might have different patterns of development and 
might be signalled by various clues as can be seen in the 
following English paragraph, (E.31). 
E. 31 
1. A parallel view states that 
language at first consisted of 
emotional ejaculations of pain, fear, 
surprise, pleasure, anger, and so on. 
2 . This theory—that the earliest 
manifestations of language were 
128 
"cries of nature" that man shared 
with animals—was the view proposed 
by Jean Jacques Rousseau in the 
middle of the eighteenth century. 3. 
Rousseau, a founder of the Romantic 
movement, became concerned with the 
nature and the origin of language 4. 
while seeking to understand the 
nature of the "noble savage." 5. Two 
of his treatises deal with the origin 
of language. 6. According to him, 
both emotive cries and gestures were 
used by man, 7. but gestures proved 
to be too i n e f f i c i e n t for 
communicating, 8. and so man invented 
language. 9. It was out of the 
natural cries that man "constructed" 
words. 
The following blocking chart facilitates identifying the 
thematic units of this paragraph. 
Propositions 
Grammatical 
Devices 
Key 
Concepts 
1. Language consisted a parallel 
of emotional ejacula- view 
tions of pain, fear, 
surprise... 
Language... 
emotional 
ejaculations. 
2. This theory viewing 
language as cries of 
nature was proposed by 
Rosseau. 
this This theory... 
Rousseau. 
[This theory = 
the view that 
language con-
sisted of emo-
tional ejacu-
lations . 
3. Rousseau was concern-
ed with the nature of 
language. 
Rosseau.. 
nature of 
language. 
129 
Propositions 
Grammatical Key 
Devices Concepts 
4. He sought to under-
stand the nature of the 
noble savage. 
5. Two of his treati-
ses deal with the 
origin of language. 
6. Emotive cries and 
gestures were used by 
man. 
while Understand... 
the nature of 
the noble savage, 
His treatises... 
origin of 
language. 
Emotive cries... 
man. 
7. Gestures proved in-
efficient for communi-
cation. 
but Gestures... 
communication. 
8 . Man invented and so 
language. 
9. Man constructed clefting 
words out of natural 
cries. 
Man...language. 
Words...natural 
cries. 
Checking the key concepts in the propositions, one 
can see the repetition of terms in propositions (1), (6), 
(9). The term emotional ejaculations is repeated in 
proposition (2) as cries of nature, emotive cries in (6), 
and as natural cries in (9) . These repetition patterns 
form the basis for the first hypothesis that propositions 
(1), (2), (6), (7), (8) and (9) make one thematic unit or 
block. For further confirmation of this hypothesis, the 
grammatical devices column can be examined. The 
occurrence of the expression A parallel view at the 
beginning of proposition (1) indicates the introduction 
130 
of a new theme parallel to a previous one discussed in 
the preceding paragraph. Moreover, proposition (2) 
restates the view in proposition (1) by providing more 
information. And this indicates that proposition (2) is 
a step down in thematicity. Another grammatical device 
that highlights the general theme is the cleft 
construction in proposition (9), which picks out an 
element and brings it into special focus. The 
highlighted element in this construction is the natural 
cries which is a paraphrase equivalence of emotional 
ejaculations in proposition one. At this point in the 
analysis, it can be safely determined that this paragraph 
is developed around one theme that is expressed in 
proposition (1). The theme of this paragraph is restated 
in proposition (2) and further developed through 
explanation in propositions (6), (7), (8). It is 
reconfirmed in the cleft construction in proposition (9) 
as well. 
At this point of the analysis, one may ask about the 
status of propositions (3), (4) and (5). It is obvious 
that these three propositions provide information about 
Rosseau. This information can be provided in a footnote 
or placed in parentheses since it is not directly related 
to the theme of the paragraph. Therefore, they can be 
131 
deleted without causing any distortion of the content of 
the paragraph. 
However, one can argue that since these three 
propositions show a break in the repetition patterns, 
they can be considered as a thematic unit of secondary 
status. It is true that secondary themes introduce new 
terms, but their content can still be subordinated to 
that of the primary theme. That is to say, a secondary 
theme provides an idea that is at a lower level of 
generality than that of the primary theme. In light of 
this argument, I considered propositions (3), (4) and (5) 
digression from the theme line of the paragraph. 
In tagmemic terms, this paragraph consists of a 
nucleus tagmeme that provides the primary theme and a 
post-margin tagmeme that develops the nucleus tagmeme 
through explanation. The structure of this paragraph can 
be shown in the following tree diagram: 
Paragraph 
Nucleus Post-Margin 
Primary 
Theme 
Development 
via Explanation 
Independent 
Declarative 
Statement 
Sentence Cluster 
A parallel view...and so on. (2, 6, 7, 8, 9) 
132 
The following observations can be drawn from the above 
analysis. 
1. Thematicity can be highlighted by one or more of the 
following theme-highlighting devices: 
a. Internal devices: expressions which are 
used in the same proposition that provides the 
primary theme. For example, the expression A 
parallel view in sentence (1) indicates that a 
new theme parallel to a preceding one is being 
introduced. 
b. External highlighting devices: expressions 
or special constructions which are used in 
other propositions within the paragraph rather 
than the proposition in which the primary theme 
is manifested. The cleft construction in 
proposition (9) picks out a particular element 
and brings it into a focal position. The 
clefted element "the natural cries", which can 
be considered as a paraphrase equivalent to 
"emotional ejaculations" in proposition (1), is 
intended to be taken as a reminder of the 
thematic propostion (1). 
2. Restating an idea or the content of a proposition 
indicates its importance and puts it at a higher level of 
133 
thematicity. This is clear in proposition (2) that 
restates proposition (1) making it more prominent. 
3. A thematic unit may be interrupted by one or more 
digressive or paranthetical sentences as it is the case 
with propositions (3), (4) and (5). 
Themes may not be overtly expressed in a paragraph. 
In such a case, they have to be synthesized from the 
content of the whole paragraph as can be seen in the 
analysis of the following Arabic paragraph A.31. 
1. wa 9indama 'ihtamma 9ulama:'u-l 
and when became-interested scientists 
anthropolo jya, bidirasat 'as_l 'allugha 
anthropology in-studying origin language 
2. dhahaba-lba9zu 'ila: 'anna-1'insa:na-lqadi:m 
went-some to that-man past 
9indama hatwal 'an yuqallida ma yasma9ahu min 
when tried that imitate what hear-he from 
'aswati-lhayawanat wal-bi:'ah min hawlihi, 
sounds-animals and-the-environment from around-him 
min huna: bada'ati-llughat. 
from here started-language. 
3. wa 'i9taqada lba9zu-l'a:xar 'anna 'ssu:rati-
and believed some-other that picture-
1'u:la lillughati ka:nat gibarah gan 'aswat la 
first for-language was something of sounds non 
'uradiyyah sadarat 9anil-'insan bisu:ratin 9afwiyya 
voluntary produced from-the-man in-a-way involuntary 
4. thumma 'axadhat tatatawwar tilka-'ssaraxa:at 
and-then started developing that-cries 
134 
9alla 'ira;diyya hatta 'asbahat lughatan laha 
non voluntary until became a-language for-it 
qawa9iduha wa 9aswa:tuha:-lxa:ssah 
rules-it and sounds-special 
5. wala:kinna ha:dhihi-lum9taqada:t hawla 'aslu-
but these-beliefs about origin-
llaghati qad thabata xata;uha: fi: zaw'i ma 
of-language had proven wrong-it in light what 
kaSafat 9anhu-ddira:sa:ti-tahli:liyyati lillughati-
uncovered from-it-studies-analytic of-language-
lmu9a: s_irah 
contemporary 
6. wallati: 'akkadat 'anna lughata mujtama9in ma 
and-which assured that language society any 
tatakawwan min 'aswa:tin wa kalima:tin wa jumal, 
consists of sounds and words and sentences 
7.wa kullaha: 9ibarah 9an rumu:zin ta9assufiyyatin la 
and all-it is symbols arbitrary no 
9ilaqata bayna-lkalimati wa-S£ay' 9aw-lfikrah 
relationship between-words and-thing or-idea 
'allati: tadulla 9alayha: 
which indicate to-it 
8. fa-19ila:qatu bayana kalimat hisa:n wa-
and-then-relationship between word horse and-
lhayawanu 'allatii: tadullu 9alayhi 9ila:qah 
the-animal which indicate to-it relation 
ramz iyyah ta9assuf iyyah, 
symbolic arbitrary 
9. wa yanSa'u-lfardu fi-lumjtag wa 
and lives-he-the individual in society and 
yata9allaum 9an 'usratihi majmu9atan min 'arrumusz 
learn-he from family-his number of symbols 
135 
'allati yutliquha:-lmajtama9 liddala:lati 9ala-
which use-it-society indicate to-
1'a£ya:' 'almuhi:tah, wa 9ala:-19ila:qa:t 
things surrounding and to relation 
9alijtima9iyyati, wa-l'afka:r, 
social and-the ideas 
10. wa la: yastati:9-Ifardu 'an yughayyiraha: 'aw 
and not able-the-individual that change-it or 
yahi:da 9anha:, 
deviate from-it 
11. li'annahu biha:dha: qad yas9ubu 9attafa:hum 
because-he by-this may become-hard communication 
ma9 zumala'ihi fi-lmjutama9, 
with friends-his in-the-society 
12. wa lidha:lika fa'inna-llughata tu9addu rumu:zan 
and because then-that-language considered symbols 
tagassufiy yatan muttafaqun 9alayha min qibali 
arbitrary agreed on-it from by 
mujtam9in ma: 
society any 
13. wa tanhasiru wadhi:fatu-llughati fi-9tiba:riha 
and limited functions-of-language in-considering-it 
wasi: latan lil'ittisa:! wa-tta9a:wun bayna 
means for-communication and-cooperation among 
'afradi mujtama9in ma, 
individuals society any 
14. fa 9an tari:qiha yastati:9u-lfard naqla 
by of means-it can-individual transfer 
xibratih wa maharatih lil'a:kari:n 
experience and skill-his for-others 
15. wa 'an yunassiqa bayna xibra:tih 
and that coordinate between experiences-his 
136 
wa xibra:t wa 'a9ma:l ghayrih. 
and experiences and activities others. 
1. And when anthropologists became interested in studying 
the origin of language, 2. some of them claimed that 
language started when man tried to imitate the sounds of 
animals and the cries of nature around him, 3. others 
believed that the earliest manifestations of language 
were involuntary voices 4. that later developed until it 
became a language with its grammar and sounds, 5. but 
these beliefs about the origin of language had been 
proven wrong in the light of the results of analytical 
studies of modern languages, 6. which emphasized that 
language is an entity composed of sounds, words and 
sentences, 7. and all of these components are arbitrary. 
For example, the relationship between the word horse and 
the animal it refers to is arbitrary, 8. the individual 
lives in a society and learns from his family a number of 
conventional signs used by people to refer to the 
surroundings, to the social relations, and to the ideas, 
9. and he cannot change it or deviate from it, 10. 
because it will be difficult for him to communicate with 
his friends, 11. therefore, language is considered as a 
conventional arbitrary system of symbols used by a 
particular society, 12. and the only function of language 
is to be used as a means of communication among people, 
13. by means of language an individual can transmit his 
experience and skills to others, 14. and he can 
coordinate between his experiences and those of others. 
A blocking chart for this paragraph will be as 
follows: 
Propositions 
Grammatical Key 
Devices Concepts 
1. Anthropologists 
became interested in 
the origin of language. 
interest anthropologists 
...the origin of 
language. 
2. Some claimed that 
language started as an 
imitation of the cries 
of nature. 
the origin of 
language... 
imitation of the 
cries of nature. 
137 
Propositions 
Grammatical Key 
Devices Concepts 
3. Others believed that 
language started as in-
voluntary cries. 
4. These cries and-then 
developed until it 
became a language. 
5. These views but 
have been proven wrong 
in the light of modern 
analytical studies. 
6. Modern analytical and 
studies emphasized 
that language is com-
posed of arbitrary 
sounds, words and 
sentences. 
7. And these components and 
are arbitrary. 
8. For example, the 
relationship between for example 
the word horse and 
the animal it refers 
to is arbitrary. 
9. An individual and 'wa' 
learns a number of 
symbols used by his 
society to refer to 
certain things 
10. He cannot and 'wa' 
change nor can he 
deviate from them 
(symbols). 
the origin of 
language...in-
voluntary cries, 
these cries... 
language. 
these views 
wrong... by 
modern studies. 
modern studies., 
language...arbi-
trary sounds, 
words, sentences. 
these compon-
nentss...arbi-
trary. 
relationship... 
arbitrary. 
an individual 
learning... 
social symbols. 
He [an individu-
al] . . .impossibil-
ity of changing 
[social symbols] 
...imposibility 
of deviating from 
[social symbols]. 
138 
Propositions Grammatical Key Devices Concepts 
11. He might find it 
difficult to 
communicate. 
12. Therefore, lan-
guage is a conven-
tional arbitrary 
system. 
13. Language is only 
used as a means of 
communication and 
cooperation among 
the members of a par-
ticular society. 
14. By means of lan-
guage an individual 
can transmit his skill 
and experience to 
others. 
because 
al] 
therefore 
walidhatlika 
fa 
'wa 
He [an individu-
•.difficulty 
communicating. 
language... 
conventionally 
arbitrary. 
language...means 
of communication 
...means of 
cooperation. 
language...trans 
mission of skill 
. . .transmissions 
of experience. 
15. By means of lan-
guage he can coordinate 
his experiences and 
those of others. 
'wa' language...coor-
dination of one's 
experiences... 
coordination of 
experiences of 
others. 
Examining the key concept column of this blocking 
chart, one can hypothesize that propositions (l)-(4) form 
one thematic unit. Proposition (1) introduces the 
general theme which is the interest of anthropologists in 
language origin. Propositions (2) and (3) provide 
specific illustrations of that general theme. 
Proposition (4) summarizes propositions (2) and (3). The 
139 
hypothesis that propositions (l)-(4) make up one thematic 
unit is further supported by the following three 
considerations. The first is the repetition patterns in 
propositions (2), (3), and (4): cries of nature, 
involuntary cries, and these cries. The second 
indication is the summative expression in proposition 
(5) , these views about language origin, which indicates 
that the preceding propositions make up one unit; that is 
why the judgment of being wrong is passed on them. The 
above hypothesis can now be safely accepted. Moving on to 
proposition (5), one can observe a shift in the 
repetition patterns. New items are introduced indicating 
a shift to another theme. In an examination of the key 
concepts of propositions (5)-(14), one can see that there 
is something common among propositions (5)-(12). The 
relationship between the linguistic sign and its 
reference is the prominent idea. The notion of 
arbitrariness is repeated in propositions (6) and (7), 
and paraphrased in (8). Propositions (9)-(11) emphasize 
the social and conventional nature of language. Finally, 
proposition (12) summarizes propositions (5)-(11). This 
gives rise to the hypothesis that propositions (5)-(12) 
block into another themataic unit. In addition to the 
preceding theme—highlighting devices, repetition, and 
the use of new terms, additional confirmation of the 
140 
thematicity of propositions (5)—<12) comes from the 
illative proposition (12) which concludes what has been 
said in statements (5)-(11). 
For further testing of this hypothesis, the 
grammatical devices column is examined. The occurrence 
of the conjunction 'wala:kin', "but" at the beginning of 
proposition (5) puts the theme expressed in the preceding 
proposition in contrast with the theme being introduced. 
All these evidences prove that propositions (5)—(12) 
block into one thematic unit. 
Checking the rest of the items in the key concepts 
column, one notices the introduction of a new set of 
terms such as means of communication in proposition (13), 
transmission of skills in (14), and coordination of 
experiences in (15). Furthermore, the term language is 
repeated in each of the propositions (13), (14), and 
(15). These two considerations might indicate that the 
last three statements block into a third thematic unit. 
They explain the basic functions of language. 
I have, so far, divided the paragraph into three 
thematic units. The first is manifested in propositions 
(1) - (4) . It is stated in the first statement, namely, 
the interest of anthropologists in the origin of 
language. The second theme is manifested in proposition 
(6) with proposition (5) functioning as an introduction 
141 
to (6), and developed by propositions (7)-(12). The 
theme is the conventional arbitrariness of language. The 
third unit is shown in the last three propositions that 
deal with the basic social function of language. 
The relationship between the first and the second 
themes does not seem to be a matter of being primary or 
secondary. Each thematic unit presents a different view 
of language. They are connected to each other by the 
conjunction 'wala:kin', which seems to indicate that 
these two themes are parallel, and neither of them has 
primary precedence over the other. In such a case, when 
the general theme of the paragraph is not overtly stated 
in any one statement, it has to be synthesized from the 
meaning of the whole text. The synthesized theme can be 
"views on the nature of language". This means that the 
first two themes are secondary to the synthesized primary 
theme. This hypothesis is confirmed by an examination of 
the paragraph according to the general-to-specific 
criterion. Neither of the first two themes can be said 
to be more general than the other. Each one seems to be 
at an equal level of generality. 
At this point, we are left with the third 
hypothesized thematic unit that is manifested in 
propositions (13)-(15). One might consider it as another 
secondary theme, but the relationship between this theme 
142 
and the synthesized theme is weak. Furthermore, the last 
three statements of this thematic unit do not play any 
role in developing the primary theme. The third theme, 
however, can be related to the second theme of 
conventional arbitrariness, i.e. the social conventional 
nature of language. If this is the case this kind of 
theme is a specific development of the second theme— 
i.e., the second theme has its own secondary theme. The 
author could have ended his paragraph with proposition 
(12). Therefore, the last three statements are both 
digression from the main theme of the paragraph and a 
transition to the following paragraph. For further 
confirmation of this conclusion, I checked the paragraph 
that follows this one in its original text. I found that 
the following paragraph is about another function of 
language. This led me to believe that this thematic unit 
has a transitional function. 
The above analysis of this paragraph shows that it 
consists of two tagmemes. The nucleus tagmeme, which is 
expounded in propositions (l)-(4), provides a secondary 
theme. The post-margin tagmeme, manifested in 
propositions (5)-(15), consists of two functional units 
(5-12) and (13-15). The first, shown in propositions (5)-
(12), functions as a second secondary theme, while the 
second (13-15) is a digression and weak transition to the 
143 
following paragraph. The following tree diagram shows 
the tagmemic structure of this paragraph. 
144 
Sentence Cluster 
1-4 
Nucleus 
Secondary 
Theme 
^Post-Margi 
' Rheme 
Sentence 
1 2-4 
paragraph 
Sentence Cluster 
5-11 
Pre-Margi 
Sentence Cluster 
12-14 
Post-Margin Nucleus 
Secondary Rheme 
v . , . . Theme Introduction 
Digression 
7-11 12-14 
The tree diagram shows the structure of the 
paragraph based on its constituents and the relations 
among them, but it does not show the hierarchical 
structure of themes in this paragraph. Both themes are 
secondary and at the same level of generality. The 
following dominance display of themes in this paragraph 
will show their hierarchical structure: 
Primary Synthesized Theme 
Secondary Theme 1 Secondary Theme 2 
Imitation of natural Arbitrariness of 
cries. symbols. 
This diagram shows that there is a primary synthesized 
theme at the top of the hierarchy that dominates two 
equal-level secondary themes. Therefore, themes in this 
paragraph are hierarchically structured. 
In light of the analysis of this paragraph, the 
following observations can be noted: 
1. Thematic organization of this paragraph is of the 
equal-level type. That is to say, there are two 
secondary themes at the same level of generality. 
2. Some conjunctions have thematic significance. The 
conjunction 'wala:kin', or "but" introducing proposition 
(5) contrasts propositions (l)-(4) with proposition (6). 
146 
The preceding analysis has shown that both of the themes 
connected by 'wala:kin' are secondary and at equal-levels 
of generality. Therefore, we can conclude that the 
discourse function of the conjunction 'wala:kin' is to 
contrast equal-level themes. The relationship between 
these two secondary themes is coordinate rather than 
subordinate. 
3. The primary theme of a paragraph does not 
necessarily have to be explicitly stated in any 
proposition of a paragraph. In such a situation, the 
primary theme has to be synthesized from the meaning of 
the whole text. 
4. If a paragraph does not have an explicitly stated 
primary theme, then the secondary themes are most likely 
at the same level of generality, that is, at equal-
level . 
5. A paragraph may end in a thematic unit that cannot 
be subsumed as a low-level theme under the primary theme. 
This thematic unit is a digression and it many also be a 
transition. Christensen (1965:145) states: 
A sentence that is not coordinate 
with any sentence above it or 
subordinate to the next above it 
breaks the sequence. The paragraph 
has begun to drift from its moorings, 
or the writer has unwittingly begun a 
new paragraph. 
147 
6. Subordinate clauses may play a role in determining the 
main theme of a unit as is the case in proposition (6) 
that provides the theme of the second thematic unit. 
This observation disagrees with what Milic (1969:18) 
suggested in that subordinate clauses should be omitted 
in the process of propositional reduction since they 
contain subordinate ideas. This observation also rejects 
what Silva (1981:351) claimed in that the information 
contained in relative clauses is never "the main thrust 
of communication." Gass and Ard (1981:353) state that 
what Silva claims is not always true. The main thrust of 
communication might be contained in subordinate clauses. 
Furthermore, they note that the hearer plays an important 
role in determining "the main thrust of communication. " 
The preceding analysis of the sample paragraphs 
shows how themes can be identified; they also show the 
theme-rheme relationship between constituents in a 
paragraph. They do not, however, show the specific 
logical or semantic relations holding between the 
propositions in a paragraph. In the following section, I 
will analyze the relations between themes and rhemes on 
the one hand, and the relations between propositions on 
the other. 
148 
Analysis of Logical Relations/Semantic Roles 
The preceding section was devoted to the analysis of 
thematic and tagmemic structure of paragraphs. 
Identifying thematic units in a paragraph is not the only 
factor in achieving a complete discription of paragraph 
organization. In order to complement thematic analysis 
and to provide a more complete description of paragraph 
structure, an attempt will be made in this section to 
analyze the logical relations that exist between 
sentences and themes (or tagmemes) in a paragraph. This 
analysis of semantic roles is based on the assumption 
that the relations between sentences can be described or 
identified by means of a limited set of categories. The 
set of logical relations proposed by Milic (1969) will be 
utilized in identifying the relationships holding between 
sentences and between themes. Milic's logical relations 
have been introduced and briefly defined earlier in 
Chapter 4. An attempt will now be made to present these 
relations in more detail and with illustrative examples 
from the sample paragraphs in both Arabic and English. 
Milic's system of logical relations consists of 
eight categories which are: Initial ( ), Additive ( + ), 
Adversative (-), Alternative (0), Explanation ( = ), 
Illustrative (X), Illative (:), and Causal (!). 
149 
The Initial Relation ( ): this relation marks the 
first sentence of the paragraph- According to Milic, 
this relation does not seem to have any significance in 
the development of the paragraph other than indicating 
the first proposition. However, it is assumed in this 
study that initial sentences have roles. They might 
introduce the primary theme of a paragraph, or they might 
function as a pre-margin to a nucleus tagmeme. In the 
analysis of whole texts, initial sentences might have a 
transitional function as well. The following are 
examples of initial sentences in both Arabic and English. 
A. 1 
sabaqa-££ar9u-l'islarmi: kulla Sari:9atin 
preceded-law the-Islamic every law 
siwah fi: taqrir:r musa:wa:t 'almar'ati 
other in establishing equality the-woman 
lilrajul 
to-man 
The Islamic law preceded all other religions in 
establishing equality between man and woman,— 
A.31 
wa 9indama 'ihtamma 9ulama'u-l 
and when became interested scientists 
anthropolojya bidirasat 'si 'allugha 
anthropoloy in studying origin the-language 
150 
And when anthropologists became interested in 
studying the origin of language... 
E.31 
In many ways, the quality of our environment has 
deteriorated with each new advance of the gross 
national product. 
E. 2 
A parallel view states that language at first 
consisted of emotional ejaculations of pain, fear, 
surprise, pleasure, anger, and so on. 
All these examples of initial sentences have the 
function of introducing the primary theme of their 
paragraphs, and more importantly, play a role in 
maintaining cohesion in paragraphs. In Pike's terms, a 
sentence might govern a following in the sense that the 
first sentence initiates a speech or a conversation and 
the following sentence might be a response to its 
antecedent. 
Initial sentences might have roles other than being 
topic sentences. In the following portion of paragraph 
(A.3), the initial sentence occupies the position of pre-
margin and functions as an introduction to the primary 
theme manifested in the second sentence. 
151 
A.3 
'annabiyyu muhammad huwa 'awwalan nabiyya-
the-prophet Mohammad he first prophet 
l'isla:m, 9alayhi unzila hadha:-ddi:nu-lkari:m 
Islam him revealed this-religion-generous 
wa biwa:sitatihi 'intaSara fi maSariqi-'arzi wa 
and by-means-of-whom spread in easts-earth and 
magharibiha. wa qad balagha 'atharu hardha:-
wests-its and had reached effect this 
ddi:n kulla na:hiyatin min nawa:hi: 
religion every aspect of aspects 
thaqa:fatina-19arabiyyah 
culture-our-the-Arabic 
Prophet Mohammad is , in the first 
place, the prophet of Islam, to whom 
this religion was revealed, and by 
means of whom it propogated in the 
east and the west. This Religion had 
affected all aspects of Arabic 
culture. 
The Additive Relation ( + ); this relation has been 
described by Milic ( 1969:21) as a proposition that has no 
"organic relation" with the sentence preceding it. But, 
he did not explain what he meant by the term "organic 
relation". However, one can infer from the definition of 
the additive relation that it refers to the situation 
where two propositions are not directly related in 
content, but they can be subsumed under one major theme. 
The sentence that has the role of additive relation is 
usually connected with the previous by a conjunction such 
152 
as 'and, moreover, furthermore', and 'in addition to'. 
An additive proposition adds further information to that 
given in its predecessor. 
Unlike the explanatory relation, the additive does 
not define, restate, or expand its predecessor. That is 
to say, it does not add information by subordinating 
itself to the preceding one. It implies a coordinate 
relation rather than a subordinate one. An example of 
the additive relation can be seen in (Al), analyzed 
above, proposition (6), is in additive relation to 
proposition (1). The conjunction 'bal', "moreover", at 
the beginning of proposition (6) indicates its addition 
to the preceding theme. Another example of the additive 
relation can be seen in the Arabic paragraph (A. 3) in 
which proposition (6) is in additive relation to 
proposition (4). Proposition (6) is preceded by the 
conjunction 'wa' "and". More examples of additive 
relations will be pointed out in the analysis of more 
paragraphs later in this chapter. 
The Adversative Relation (-)s this relation 
expresses a change in the direction of the argument. 
That is to say, a proposition is in adversative relation 
to a preceding one if it introduces a new argument that 
deviates from the line of argument proposed in a 
preceding proposition. The typical connective that 
153 
indicates this relation is but. However, there are other 
connectives used as markers of this relation, e.g. , 
nevertheless, although, despite the fact that, etc. An 
example of the adversative relation can be seen in the 
following English paragraph (E.3). 
E. 3 
1. Education has always presupposed 
authority—the rightful authority, in 
respect of teaching, of those who 
know over those who don't know. 2. It 
has lost its authority because its 
practitioners have lent themselves to 
the production and perpetuation of 
deadly error. 3. Authority stripped 
of its rightfullness is authoritari-
anism. 4. The young are right in 
repudiating authoritarianism. 5. But 
they are mortally wrong if they think 
that they will improve their situ-
ation by replacing their elders' 
authoritarianism with their own. 
In this paragraph, proposition (5) is in adversative 
relation to (4), since it deviates from the line of 
argument presented in proposition (4). The connective 
that provides a clue for this relation is 'but'. The 
relationship between these two propositions is that of 
coordination rather than subordination. 
The Alternative Relation (0): this relation 
describes a proposition which can be substituted for the 
previous one. The proto-type connective is or. An 
instance of this relation can be seen in the English 
154 
paragraph (E4), in which proposition (4) reads: or it can 
compress its body and stretched its legs obliquely to 
gain stability, like the giraffe is an alternative to 
proposition (2) which reads: It may make its legs short 
and thick, like the rhinocerous (see Appendix B, E.4). 
The Explanatory Relation (=): this relation 
describes a relation between two propositions where the 
second restates, explains, expands or defines part or all 
of a preceding proposition. The explanatory proposition 
is usually introduced by a connective such as: that is, 
this means, in other words, that is to say, etc. The 
following are examples of this relation. In order to 
better understand the explanatory function of a 
proposition, its preceding one is included here. 
E. 5 
Preceding Proposition: 
For the first part, he has to bring 
the body into the proper relations to 
the particular sport involved. 
3 
Explanatory Proposition: 
[expansion] 
This means that he has to analyze the 
various factors of a peak performance 
for each boy on the team... 
3 
A.5 
Preceding Proposition: 
155 
xa1aqa-11ahn-1hawa'a fi-lkawan 
created-God-the-air in-universe 
da9amati muhimmatah min da9a'im 
pillar important from pillars 
'alhayhat 
life. 
God made air in the universe one of 
the basics of life. 
Explanatory Proposition: 
fa law lam yaxliq 'allah 
and then if not created God 
'alhawa' lama ka:nat huna:ka 
the-air no was there 
'arya:hun wa la 'amtar wa la 
winds and no rains and no 
zaba:b 
fog 
Had God not created air, there would 
have been no winds, no rain and no 
fog... 
The Illustrative Relation (X): this relation 
specifies the role of a proposition that gives a specific 
example or an illustration of a preceding one. This 
relation is usually marked by connectives such as 'for 
example', 'for instance', 'an illustration of,' etc. The 
following are examples of the illustrative relation: 
156 
E. 10 
Preceding Proposition: 
The first and most obvious result of 
the technological revolution has been 
to increase the amount of wealth in 
the form of material things which can 
be produced in a given time by a 
given population. 
Illustrative Proposition: 
For example, in 1913, there was 
produced in Great Britian, several 
billion yards of cotton cloth for 
export alone. 
The following is another example from Arabic. 
A. 15 
Preceding Proposition: 
wa mag hadha fa 'inna 'al'isla:m 
and with this that Islam 
la yaharrim 'al'intiga:9 bittajarubi-
not prohibit benefiting with-experiences 
IbaSariyyah fi: kulli ma yamass 
human in all what offend 
'aslan min 'usu:l 'a$Sari:9ah. 
basic from basics law 
Nevertheless, Islam does not prohibit 
making use of the experiences of 
humanity as long as they do not 
oppose the fundamentals of religion. 
Illustrative Proposition: 
fala haraj fi: 'al'intifa:9 bitagjarub 
then harm in benefiting with-experiences 
157 
'albaSar fi: 'alha:ja:t ' al' ijtima:9iyyah 
human in the-needs social 
almutajaiddidah wa zabtiha: biwasai'il 
renewal and control by-means 
'albahth 'almutajaddidah 
research the renewal 
For example, there is no harm in using people's 
experiences in specifying the renewed social 
needs and controlling them by the renewed needs 
of research. 
In the above examples the illustrative relation is 
introduced by a connective. It is for example in the 
English example, and fa. which has the same meaning in 
Arabic even though it is a conjunction. The relationship 
between the illustrative proposition and the preceding 
one is that of subordination despite the fact that it is 
syntactically coordination in the Arabic example. 
Syntactic and semantic coordination and subordination 
will be elaborated on later in this chapter. 
The illustrative relation, however, can be found 
between propositions without being connected to each 
other by any type of connective as is the case in the 
English paragarph (E.l) in which propositions (2)-(5) 
illustrate the theme and provide specific instances 
without being introduced by any marker of this relation. 
158 
E. 1. 
Preceding Proposition: 
In many ways, the quality of our 
environment has deteriorated with 
each new advance of the gross 
national product. 
Illustrative Proposition: 
Increases in electric power 
production mean the burning of more 
coal and fuel oil. 
The Illative Relation (:): this relation is posited 
when a proposition provides a conclusion for a preceding 
argument. The illative proposition usually comes in the 
form of a summary, a concluding remark, or an opinion of 
the writer. The proto-typic connective that introduces 
this relation is therefore. Other connectives are also 
used such as 'as a result', 'consequently', 'in 
conclusion', and 'thus'. A conclusion can also be made 
without being introduced by any connective—the following 
are examples of the illative relation. 
A.25 
Preceding Theme: (synthesized) 
mawqifi-1'isla:m min 'arriq 
The attitude of Islam towards slavery 
159 
Illative Proposition: 
wa lidha:lika kullihi yumkinu-
and because-of-that all-it able 
lqawl bitmi'na:n 'anna-lmujtama9 
say with-conf idence that-the-society 
'al'islami: lam ya9rif 9ahda 9arriq 
Islamic not know era slavery 
wa la 9ahdal-'iqta: 9 . . . 
and no feudalism... 
Because of all of that, it can be 
confidently said that the Islamic 
society did not recognize the era of 
slavery and feudalism, and it did not 
recognize their traditional features 
in any part of its history. 
The following English paragraph provides another 
example of the illative relation. 
E. 20 
1. To know a person's language is to 
understand his culture, for langauge 
grows out of and reflects culture. 2. 
The Tzeltal tribe in Mexico, for 
instance, has twenty-five different 
words for expressing the idea to 
carry. 3. Tzeltal speakers can 
indicate by one word each of these 
concepts: carrying on the shoulder, 
carrying on the head, carrying in a 
bundle, carrying in the palm of the 
hand, or carrying in a container. 4. 
To carry rolled up is expressed by 
bal; to carry coiled up is ch'et; to 
carry with tongs is lut. 5. We know 
from his language that the Tzeltal 
does a lot of carrying. 
160 
In this paragraph, proposition (5) sums up the argument 
expressed in propositions (2)-(4), and thus, it functions 
as a conclusion. 
Finally, the Causal Relation ( 1 ) is posited when a 
proposition provides the cause for the preceding one. 
The proposition that provides the cause is usually 
introduced by a connective such as 'for', 'because', 'the 
reason is,' and 'since'. Sometimes no connective is 
used. In the following paragraph, proposition (8) is in 
causal relation to proposition (7). Similarly, 
proposition (9) is in causal relation to (8). Although 
propositions (8) and (9) are not introduced with a 
connective indicating causal relation, their 
propositional meanings offer reasons for choosing to be a 
cop. 
E. 17 
1. People insist that it is unfair to 
generalize about the police. 2. The 
good cop is held up for public 
inspection and he is supposed to be 
the example of law-enforcement 
officers everywhere. 3. Just as the 
one rabbi, priest or minister who 
goes to Alabama to demonstrate is 
supposed to represent the whole 
church. 4. The one beautiful cop in a 
neighborhood will stand out. 5. He 
has pride in his job. 6. He is 
sensitive to human problems and knows 
how to talk to the person on the 
street corner. 7. He has not chosen 
his job because he couldn't get hired 
any place else. 8. He is a cop 
161 
because he wants to be; 9. perhaps 
his father and grandfather before him 
had devoted their lives to law 
enforcement. 
Another example of causal relation can be seen in 
the following Arabic paragraph. 
A.26 
1.wa 'amma 'ansa:ru-ljadi:d fttri:qu 
and that supporters-new the-road 
'amamahum mu9wajjatun multawiyah, 
in-front-of-them winding not-straight 
2.taqu:um fi:ha: 9iqabun la takardu 
there-is in-it obstacles no about 
tuhsa: 3.wa hum la yakaduina yamzurn 
counted and they not about go 
'ilia: fi 'ana:tin wa rayth huma: 
in slowness and slowness they (dual) 
'ila:l-but'i 'aqrabu minhuma 'ila 'ssur9ah 
to-slowness closer than-they to speed 
4.dha:lika 'annahum la ya'xudhu:n 'anfusahum 
because they(dual) no move-on themselves 
bi'i:man wa la 'itmi'na:n... 
with-faith and no confidence 
1. And while the proponents of the 
new, the road ahead of them is 
winding, 2. full of innumerable 
obstacles. 3. And they can hardly 
move on except with great care and 
deliberation which are closer to 
slowness than to speed. 4. For they 
do not move on with faith and 
confidence, 5. or they have not been 
granted this faith and confidence. 
162 
In this paragraph, proposition (4) is in causal 
relation to proposition (3), (2) and (1) as well. 
Proposition (4) gives the reason or the cause for the 
slow and careful movements of the supporters of the new. 
It also accounts for their winding way which is full of 
obstacles. More examples of these relations will be 
given later in this chapter. 
However, we can, at this stage, categorize the above 
illustrated logical relations into two groups in terms of 
the constituents they relate. The first group of 
relations include the additive, alternative, and 
adversative relations that hold between equal-level 
constituents or propositions. That is to say, they are 
at the same level of generality and no one can be 
subsumed under the other. These egual-level elements are 
described by Christensen (1965) as coordinate relations. 
The second group, on the other hand, includes the 
illustrative, explanatory, illative and causal relations. 
These roles usually hold between elements that can be 
described as being in superordinate-subordinate 
relations. This means that one proposition is at a 
higher level of generality than another. For example, an 
illustrative sentence can be said to be in subordinate 
relation to the superordinate proposition it illustrates. 
163 
These relations will be described in more detail in the 
following section. 
In what follows, I will analyze the logical 
relations that are obtained between themes or tagmemes in 
the paragraphs analyzed earlier and in six more 
paragraphs. It might be appropriate, at the outset, to 
briefly describe the procedures for analyzing logical 
relations. The first step is to reduce the text into 
propositions. Then, the role of each proposition is 
determined by asking the proper question. For example, 
a proposition has an additive role if the answer to the 
question posited for eliciting the additive relation is 
positive, and so is the case with all of the other 
relations. The following are the seven relations with 
questions posited for eliciting each relation: 
1. Additive (+): 
Does the proposition provide further argument or 
information that cannot be subordinated to the 
previous theme? 
2. Alternative (0): 
Can a proposition be used as a substitute for a 
preceding one? 
3 . Adversative (-): 
Does a proposition change the direction of a 
preceding one by providing information that is in 
164 
contrast with it or does it deviate from the line of 
argument proposed in a previous one? 
4. Explanatory (a): 
Does a proposition restate, define or expand all or 
part of a preceding proposition or theme? 
5- Illustrative (X): 
Does a proposition provide a specific example to 
illustrate a previous theme? 
6. Illative {:): 
Does a proposition provide a generalization, 
conclusion or result of a theme? 
7. Causal (!): 
Does it provide a reason or cause for a theme? 
These questions will be used in eliciting the role 
of each statement. Connectives will be used as clues to 
form initial assumptions about the relations that will be 
confirmed or possibly rejected by obtaining answers to 
those questions. 
The last step in the analysis of logical relations 
is constructing a logical diagram which helps in 
identifying the pattern of development used in each 
paragraph. 
I will now analyze the logical relations that hold 
between sentences in the first English paragraph (E.l) 
165 
analyzed at the beginning of this chapter. This 
paragraph consists of the following propositions: 
1. The quality of the environment has deteriorated 
with each new advance of the gross national 
product. 
2. Increases in electric power means burning more coal 
and oil. 
3. Burning of coal and oil leads to discharge of 
sulpher dioxide into the air. 
4. The growth of the paper industry increased the 
trash. 
5. The producing of new automobiles and discarding 
old ones resulted in unsightly piles of hulks. 
6. Growth of automobile transportation resulted in 
choking the city and its city dwellers. 
It has been determined eariler that the first 
proposition or the nucleus tagmeme provides the primary 
theme of the paragraph. Proposition (2) answers the 
question posited for the illustrative relation since it 
provides a specific example to illustrate the theme. 
Therefore, it is in illustrative relation to proposition 
(1). Bach of the other propositions, (3)-{5), answer the 
same question and thus, they are in illustrative relation 
to the primary theme manifested in the first statement. 
Milic's logical diagram can show the relation between a 
166 
proposition and a preceding one. That is to say, it 
displays the logical relation between individual 
sentences in a paragraph. It does not consider the 
relationship between groups of sentences that may have a 
unified function such as representing a theme (nucleus 
tagmeme) or a rheme (post-margin). This incompatibility 
between Milic's logical analysis and tagmemic or thematic 
analysis calls for some modification or adaptation to 
this system. In order to display the logical relation 
between tagmemic units in a paragraph, the following 
thematic relations chart is proposed: 
Thematic Unit P R 
Proposition Number 1 2 - 4 
Relation (=) 
This chart consists of three rows. Thematic units 
such as primary theme (P), rheme (R) or secondary theme 
will be included in the first row. The second row will 
display the number of propositions through which the 
thematic unit is manifested in the paragraph. Finally, 
the logical relation existing between thematic units will 
be shown in the third row. I will illustrate how the 
thematic relations chart works in paragraph E.l. 
167 
Thematic Unit P R 
Proposition Number 1 2 - 5 
Relation (X) 
The chart indicates that the paragraph consists of two 
thematic units: a primary theme, manifested in 
proposition (1), and a rheme, represented in propositions 
(2)-(5). It also shows that the logical relations 
between the rheme and the theme is illustrative. 
Therefore, the illustrative relation symbol (X) is placed 
in the relation row between the theme and the rheme. Not 
only can logical relations be identified between thematic 
units, but also between propositions. For this purpose, 
Milic's logical diagram would be appropriate. The 
following is a logical diagram of the same paragraph 
(E.l). 
A B C D 
1. (P) 
2. (X) 
3. (X) 
4. (X) 
5. (X) 
The numbers in this diagram are the numbers of the 
propositions. The symbols placed horizontally along the 
four columns (A, B, C, D) stand for the logical value of 
each proposition. Initial propositions are placed in 
168 
column A, with their appropriate roles specified, 
explanations in B, illustratives in C, and illative in D. 
When a proposition is one of the other four relations 
(additive, causal, alternative, adversative), its logical 
value is entered in the column containing the value of 
the presupposed proposition. For example, if proposition 
(3) in the above diagram were in additive relation to 
proposition (1), the additive symbol ( + ) would have been 
placed under column A, opposite number (3). 
The above diagram mainly shows the semantic role of 
each proposition with regard to its relation to the 
primary theme manifested in proposition (1). But, if we 
examine the relationship between propositions (2)-(5), we 
will be able to assign a different role to each 
proposition. These propositions can be said to be in 
additive relation to each other since each one singles 
out a particular advance of national products and shows 
its effect on the environment. They can all be subsumed 
under some general topic. This shows that a proposition 
may have two simultaneous roles. These roles have to be 
displayed in two different diagrams. The fact that a 
proposition may have a dual role was confirmed by Larson 
( 1967:17) . He states: 
...a sentence can fill two or more 
roles simultaneously, especially if 
it contains more than one important 
169 
p r e d i c a t i o n . Even sentences 
containing only one predication can 
sometimes play two roles, one 
referring directly to the previous 
sentence, the other acting as a step 
forward, introducing ideas in later 
sentences. 
Another observation about the logical analysis of 
paragraph E.l is that the dominant relation between the 
theme and its rheme is the illustrative, while the 
relation between the exponents of the rheme (post-margin 
tagmeme) is additive. This relation, as mentioned 
earlier, implies coordinate rather than subordinate 
relation between consitituents. A final observation is 
that neither the illustrative nor the additive relation 
is signalled by a connective or a conjunction. The non-
existence of conjunctions or connectives to signal a 
relation emphasizes the role of asking the appropriate 
question to elicit the role of a proposition. It also 
indicates that conjunctions are not the only logical 
device factors in determining the semantic relation of 
the sentences. 
The previous procedure for analyzing logical 
relations will now be applied to the Arabic paragraph 
(A. 1) , thematically analyzed and translated earlier in 
this chapter. 
The semantic roles of the sentences in paragraph A.l 
can be shown in the following logical diagram: 
170 
A B C D 
1. 2. 
3. 
4 . 
5. 6. 
7. 8. 
(P) 
(S) 
(-) 
( = ) («) 
( = ) ( = ) 
(O 
(P): primary theme, (S): secondary theme. 
The diagram shows that this paragraph is basically 
developed via explanation. Propositions (2), (3), and 
(4) are in explanatory relation to the primary theme 
since each one of them further explains the primary 
theme. The secondary theme is also developed via 
explanation. The semantic roles of each statement were 
determined on the basis of its function or relation with 
respect to the primary. The relations between a sentence 
and its predecessor might not be the same as it is 
between this proposition and the thematic statement. For 
example, proposition (3) is in explanatory relation to 
proposition (1), but it is in additive relation to (2). 
The semantic roles between each sentence and the 
preceding one can be seen in the following diagram. 
171 
A B C D 
1. 2. 
3. 
4 . 
5 . 
6 . 
7 . 8. 
(P) 
(O (S) 
( = ) 
( + ) 
( + ) 
( = ) 
( + ) 
The above analysis shows the inadequacy of Milic's 
logical diagram to incorporate the dual function of 
sentences. 
Since this study is concerned with the tagmemic 
structure of paragraphs and the relationship between the 
constituent tagmemes, the above diagrams are not adequate 
for displaying the logical relations between thematic 
units or tagmemes. Therefore, the thematic relations 
chart was devised to display the logical relations 
between themes as follows: 
Thematic Units P R S R 
Proposition Number 1 2-5 6 7-8 
Relation (=) (=) (=) 
The chart indicates that paragraph A.1 consists of 
two thematic units; a primary theme, manifested in the 
first proposition, and a secondary theme manifested in 
proposition (6). Each of these two themes is developed 
172 
by a post -margin tagmeme which functions as a rheme. The 
chart further shows the logical relations between these 
thematic constituents. The relation between the primary 
theme and its rheme is marked explanatory since 
propositions (2)-(5) expand the primary theme by 
providing more explanatory information; that is why I 
placed the explanatory relation symbol (=) between the 
primary theme (P) and the rheme (R). The relation 
between the secondary theme (S) and its rheme (R) is also 
marked explanatory for the same reason. Therefore, the 
symbol ( = ) appears between (S) and (R) in the chart. 
Determining the relationship between the secondary 
theme and the primary one was not that easy. The most 
plausible hypothesis concerning the relation between 
these two thematic units can be formulated as follows: 
1. The relation between the primary theme and the 
secondary themes is additive. This hypothesis is based 
on the presence of a syntatic signal. The sixth 
proposition that represents the secondary theme is 
introduced by the connective bal which might be 
translated into English as "furthermore" or "moreover". 
Syntactically speaking, the proposition introduced by bal 
is in additive relation to the previous one. This means 
that the two propositions are in coordinate relationship 
and thus cannot be subsumed within each other. But 
173 
examining the content of the secondary themef one can see 
a direct relationship between this thematic unit and the 
preceding one. The first theme explains how Islam 
equated women with men, and ends in the conclusion that 
equality of women to men and respecting women are one of 
the basics of Islam. Meanwhile, the second theme, 
starting with proposition (6), expands part of the 
propositional content of the preceding theme, namely 
respecting women. Any proposition that expands or 
restates part or all of the content of a previous one 
stands in explanatory relation to that unit. This leads 
to the rejection of this hypothesis, and to the 
acceptance of the following one: 
2. The secondary theme is in explanatory relation to 
the primary theme. For the above considerations, I 
placed the explanatory relation symbol (=*) between the 
primary theme (P) and the secondary theme (S) in the 
thematic relations chart. The theme marker was the use 
of the connective bal at the beginning of proposition 
(6). Since bal is not the only connective in this 
paragraph, a brief discussion of the functions of the 
other connectives used in this paragraph might be in 
order. 
174 
A noticeable feature of this paragraph is that each 
proposition, except for the first one, starts with a 
conjunction. The second proposition starts with fa: 
fa 'a91ana hurriyataha 
and declared-it freedom+her 
In Arabic, f_a is a coordinator that joins two 
syntactically equal elements, whether they are single 
words, phrases or sentences. In paragraph A.l, fa links 
the verb ' a9lana, "declared", with sabaqa, "preceded". 
Both of these verbs are in the perfect tense. But, the 
function of fa. in this paragraph is not merely a simple 
structural linkage. The proposition it introduces is in 
explanatory relation to the preceding one by virtue of 
its propositional content. In this proposition, fa 
functions as the marker of this explanatory relation. It 
expresses the meaning of the connective "that is to say" 
or "by". It cannot be translated as "and" although it is 
the commonly used equivalent of the Arabic conjunctions 
fa and wa. 
It has been stated above that the proposition 
introduced by fa. is in explanatory relation to the 
preceding one, and explanatory propositions are in 
subordinate rather than coordinate relation to the 
proposition they explain. In such a case, fa functions 
as a subordinator and not a coordinator. This duality of 
175 
function leads us to both syntactic and semantic 
considerations. Syntatically, fa is a conjunction that 
conjoins two elements of equal syntactic status. 
However, semantically it may have other functions 
depending on the meaning of the proposition in which it 
is used. It may function as a marker of an explanatory 
relation as is the case in paragraph A.l. It may 
function as a marker of an illative relation, as can be 
seen in the following example from paragraph A. 25 2 
wa kullu 9:la:qat - ul'isla:m bihi 
and all relationship-Islam with-it 
9an ja'a fa wajadahu qa:'iman 
that came it and found-it existing 
fa 9axadha fi: tajfi:f mawaridih 
therefore started in drying sources-its 
All that Islam has to do with 
slavery, is that when it came, 
slavery was already established, 
therefore it started eliminating its 
sources. 
There are two occurrences of fa in this example. 
The first fa conjoins two perfect tense verbs. Besides 
simple linkage, fa has the meaning of sequencing a 
logical arrangement. That is to say, one action follows 
another in a certain sequence that cannot be changed if 
the meaning of the sentence is to be maintained. The 
second instance of fa has the function of marking an 
176 
illative relation. Thus it can be translated into 
English as "therefore" or "and thus". Fa may signal 
other logical relations as well. In the following 
example taken from paragraph A.20, fa is used to indicate 
an adversative relation: 
A.20 
wa hi:n yuzi:lu - l'isla:m 
and when eliminate Islam 
tilka-lhawa:jiz 'aljughra:fiyyah 
that barriers the-geographical 
aw 'al 9unsuriyyati 'allati: 
or the racial which 
taquimu 9alayha: fikrata Iwatan 
establish on-it idea the-nation 
'alqawmiy, fa ' innahu la: yulghi: 
the national, but it is not cancel 
fikrata-Iwatan 9ala-l'itla:q 
idea the nation on at all 
When Islam removes the geographical 
or racial barriers on which the 
notion of the national nation is 
based, it does not at all deny the 
concepts of nation. 
In this example, fa introduces a proposition that changes 
the direction of the preceding one. Therefore, it marks 
an adversative relation. 
The above examples show that the particle fa has 
more than one function despite the fact that it is 
classified as a conjunction in Arabic grammar. The 
177 
discourse functions of fa are more varied/complex than 
its syntactic function, where it is used to indicate 
simple structural linkage. 
The second conjunction used in this paragraph is wa. 
There are five intrasentential occurrences of wa in this 
paragraph. However, in this study, we are interested in 
the intersentential use of this conjunction. The first 
instance of wa is at the beginning of proposition (3). 
This proposition stands in an explanatory relation to 
proposition (1) which expresses the theme. The same 
proposition (3) is in additive relation to the preceding 
one (2). Considering the propositional content of 
propositions (2) and (3) that are connected by wa, one 
notices that they are of equal importance since both of 
them stand in the same relation to the thematic sentence. 
In other words, propositions (2) and (3) are functionally 
equal. The same can be said about the relationship 
between propositions (4) and (1) on the one hand, and (4) 
and (3) on the other. Proposition (4) stands in an 
explanatory function to (1) and in additive relation to 
(3). This shows that proposition (4) is also equally as 
important as (2) and (3). This analysis makes it clear 
that one of the discourse functions of wa is to connect 
equally important propositions. This function of wa is 
obvious also in propositions (8) and (9) in their 
178 
relation to the secondary theme expressed in proposition 
( 6 ) . 
Another discourse function of wa is manifested in 
proposition (5) which sums up the preceding arguments and 
restates the theme. In this use, it can be deleted 
without distorting the structure or the coherence of the 
text. This usage of wa might be due to the fact that it 
is commonly and frequently used at the beginning of 
sentences, paragraphs and chapters to indicate continuity 
of the theme being developed. 
The third conjunction that has a discourse function 
is bal, which introduces proposition (6). This 
connective introduces a secondary theme that is in 
explanatory relation to the primary theme. It is very 
often translated as "but", however, in this paragraph, it 
is better translated into English as "moreover" or 
"furthermore". 
Before examining the other functions of wa and bal 
in other paragraphs, the following observation needs to 
be stated. This paragraph consists of two thematic 
units: the primary theme in proposition (1) and the 
secondary theme in (6). Each theme is developed by a 
sequence of explanatory additive statements, the first of 
which, in each case, is introduced by the conjunction fa 
followed by one or more statements introduced by wa, each 
179 
of which is in additive relation to the preceding 
proposition, but in explanatory relation to the thematic 
proposition- The pattern can be formulated as follows: 
P + fax [explanatory proposition] + wan [additive 
proposition]. 
I will now examine wa and bal in other paragraphs. 
The first striking impression is the use of wa at the 
beginning of many paragraphs. The function of wa in this 
position is to indicate that the general theme is being 
continued and no break is intended, i.e., wa is used in 
these positions as an attention-drawing device to the 
continuity of the general theme. Examples of this 
function of wa can be seen at the beginning of paragraphs 
A.31, 4, 15, 26, 22, and 17. 
Analyzing the logical relations between propositions 
(8) and (7) in paragraph A.14, one can detect a new 
function of wa that introduces proposition (8). 
Proposition (8) is in adversative relation to proposition 
(7) since it changes its direction as can be noticed from 
the prepositional content of each. 
Proposition 7 
fa lastu 'uri:du 'an 'aqu:la albahthu 
do not-I want that say investigation 
I do not want to say "investigation" 
180 
Proposition 8 
wa 'innama 'uri:du 'an 'aqu:l 'a$Sak 
but want-I that say suspicion 
but I want to say suspicion 
The conjunction that signals the adversative 
relation between these two propositions is wa. In this 
context, the best English equivalent of wa is "but". **»—« 
This function of wa is very common in Arabic, especially 
when used before the adversative particle la;kin. 
Wa can also introduce other relations. In paragraph 
A.3, it introduces proposition (12) that functions as a 
generalization or conclusion of the preceding 
propositions. Therefore, wa in this context has the 
discourse function of marking an illative relation as can 
be seen in the following portion of paragraph A. 3. 
Preceding Propositions 
fa-tura:thu 19arabiyy juz'un minna: 
and heritage Arabic part of-us 
Si'na: 'am 'abayna wa huwa fawqa 
liked-we or not-like and it-is furthermore 
dha:lika mayyizatuna: 'allati: natafarradu 
that feature-our which distinguished 
biha: bayna-1'umam 
by-it among nations 
181 
Arabic language is part of us whether 
we like it or not. Furthermore, it 
makes us unique among nations... 
Illative Proposition (12) 
wa lihardha wajaba 9ala kulli 9arabiyy 
and for-this it-is-a-must on each Arab 
'an yahtamma bithaqafatihi-lmaziyah wa 
that take-care with-culture-his-great and 
biba9thiha-ljadi:d 
reviving-it new 
therefore, it is a must on each Arab 
to take care of his past culture and 
its revival. 
It has become obvious that the additive "and" is not 
the only equivalent of Arabic wa, which has various 
functions. In the above example, wa is equivalent to 
"therefore". 
Another basic function of wa can be recognized in 
proposition (2) of A.4, where it introduces a 
circumstancial sentence modifying the pronoun hum, "they" 
(plural, masculine) at the time of the occurrence of the 
action as can be shown in the following. 
182 
A.4 
Proposition 2 
bu9itha 'ilayhim wa hum 'aSaddu ma 
he-was-sent to-them and they very 
yaku:nu:na tafriqatan wa xtila:fan 
were-they disintegrated and scattered 
He was sent to them when they were 
very scattered and disintegrated. 
In such a case, wa is best translated as "when" or 
"at the time when. 
In proposition (3) of the same paragraph, wa is used 
for a different function. This proposition includes 
three sentences; the first two of which are one-word 
sentences. 
A.4 
Propositon 3 
yataha:sadu:n, wa yatana:haru:n 
they-envy-each-other and they-quarrel-with-each-
other 
wa yuha:ribuna ba9zahum ba9zan 
and fight-they each other 
They envy, quarrel with and fight 
with each other. 
Besides its function as a connector of equally important 
elements, wa, in this example, indicates that the actions 
involved in the sentence are simultaneous. This means 
that the three actions of the sentence can be rearranged 
183 
in any order without affecting the meaning of the 
sentence. This function of wa makes it distinct from the 
other common conjunction fct. Wa indicates a simultaneity 
of actions without any implication of logical arrangement 
or sequencing of events, while fa, in one of its 
discourse functions, implies logical arrangement and 
simple linkage as well. The following examples may 
clarify the difference. 
a. daxala ahmad wa ha:ni: 
entered-he Ahmad and Hani 
Ahmad and Hani entered, or 
Hani and Ahmad entered. 
b. daxala ahmad fa ha:ni 
entered-he Ahmad then Hani 
Ahmed entered and then Hani. 
These are some of the discourse functions of wa, 
which is not the only conjunction in the paragraph. 
Another conjunction that was used in paragraph A.l is 
bal, which introduces the secondary theme in proposition 
(6). Bal is usually considered an adversative particle 
and thus it is translated into English as "but". In 
paragraph A.l, bal introduces a secondary theme that is 
in explanatory relation to the primary theme. It also 
amplifies part of the content of the preceding 
proposition, and in this context, bal is the equivalent 
184 
of English "futhermore" or "moreover". The meaning of 
bal is manifested in proposition (7) of paragraph A. 3 and 
proposition (4) of paragraph A. 9 as can be seen below. 
A.9 
Preceding Propos ition (3) 
wa 9alayhi yajuzu lilfardi an 
and therefore allowed to-the-individual that 
yamtalika 'adawart baytihi wa malabisihi 
own tools house-his and clothes-his 
wa 'amwalihi ta:lama: la: yastaghilluha: 
and money-his as-long-as not use-it 
biwa:sitati 9umma:1 
by-means-of workers 
And therefore, the individual is 
allowed to own his own house 
utensils, clothes, and money as long 
as he does not make use of it by 
employees. 
Proposition (4) 
bal rubbama: sumiha lahu bimtila:ki 
moreover probably was-allowed to-him to-own 
maskanihi 'ydan 
house-his as-well 
Moreover, he might be allowed to own 
his own house as well. 
Another function of bal that is related to the 
preceding one can be detected in paragraphs A. 21 and 
A. 10. Bal introduces proposition (6) in pargraph A.10 as 
185 
can be seen below. 
A. 10 
Proposition 5 
fannahzatu sina:9iyyati 9axadat 
and the-renaissance industrial started 
taxtariqu-19a:lam al9arabiyy min 'adnah:h 
spread the-world Arab from nearest-its 
'ila: 'aqsa:h musa:9idatan 'iyya:hu las 
to farthest-its helping it not 
'iala: tanmiyati mawarridihi fahasb 
on developing resources-its only 
The industrial rennaissance spread in 
all parts of the Arab world, helping 
it not only in developing its 
resources... 
Proposition 6 
bal 'iala: tasni:9 ha:dhihi-ththarawati 
but on manufacturing these-resources 
'aydan 
also 
but also in manufacturing them. 
In this example, bal is equivalent to English "also" 
although it does not introduce an adversative relation. 
It serves as an indicator of an additive relation of the 
preceding proposition. It also gives more emphasis to 
the proposition it introduces. 
186 
A more common function of bal is manifested in 
paragraphs A.19, 29, and 30. Proposition (7) of 
paragraph A. 30 is introduced by bal. The analysis of 
logical relations holding between the propositions in 
this paragraph indicates that proposition (7) is in 
adversative relation to proposition (5). Proposition (5) 
states that the teacher must not teach his student any 
controversial issue which he believes to be true, while 
proposition (7) makes it an obligation for the teacher to 
teach his students critical thinking by means of which 
they can make their own judgments. In such contexts, bal 
is best translated into English "but" or "on the 
contrary". 
So far, I have discussed some logical relations 
between propositions and their markers associated with 
these relations. These relations will be displayed in 
the next chapter with tables and charts showing the 
possible indicators and the frequency of each relation. 
In the following section, an attempt will be made to 
analyze the logical relations holding between themes and 
between propositions in English paragraphs. 
The following English paragraph will be analyzed for 
the purpose of identifying its thematic units and the 
semantic roles holding among themes and constituent 
propositions. 
187 
E. 10 
1. The first and most obvious result 
of the technological revolution has 
been to increase the amount of wealth 
in the form of material things which 
can be produced in a given time by a 
given population. 2. For example, in 
19 13 there was produced in Great 
Britian several billion yards of 
cotton cloth for export alone. 3. In 
1750 the total population of Great 
Britian, working with the mechanical 
appliances then available, could have 
produced only a small fraction of 
that amount. 4. A second result of 
the technological revolution is that, 
as machines are perfected and become 
more automatic, man power plays a 
relatively less important part in the 
production of a given amount of 
wealth in a given time. 5. Fifty 
years ago, when all type was set by 
hand, the labor of several men was 
required to print, fold, and arrange 
in piles the signatures of a book. 6. 
Today machines can do it all, and far 
more rapidly, 7. little man power is 
required, except that a mechanic, who 
may pass the time sitting in a chair, 
must be present in case anything goes 
wrong with the machine. 8. And 
finally, a third result of the 
technological revolution is that, 
under the system of private property 
in the means of production and price 
system as a method of distributing 
wealth, the greater part of wealth 
produced, since it is produced by 
machines, goes to those who own or 
control the machines, 9. while those 
who work the machines receive that 
part only which can be exacted by 
selling their services in a market 
where wages are impersonally adjusted 
to the necessities of the machine 
process. 
188 
Constructing a blocking chart for this paragraph 
would reveal that it consists of three thematic units. 
The first is manifested in propositions (l)-(3) with the 
theme expressed in the first sentence. The second 
thematic unit starts with proposition (4) and ends with 
(7). Finally, the third unit is shown in propositions 
(8) and (9). Examining the relationship between these 
three themes, one can observe that they are of equal-
level of generality. Each one explains a result of the 
technological revolution. 
Since these thematic units are related to one 
general topic, they have to be considered as secondary 
themes to a primary one that is not overtly manifested in 
any propositon. Therefore, it has to be synthesized from 
the general meaning of the whole text. It can be 
synthesized as 'The adverse consequences of the 
technological revolution'. The three secondary themes 
are internally marked by expression "the first..., A 
second..., And finally, a third...". They are externally 
signalled as well. Examining each thematic unit with 
respect to the general-to-specefic principle, we can see 
that the first statement in each thematic unit is more 
general than the propositions developing it. For 
example, proposition (1) of the first thematic unit 
provides an abstract statement which is "the increase of 
189 
wealth in the form of material things produced at a 
certain time by a given population", while propositions 
(2) and (3) provide concrete and specific illustrative 
instances of this abstract statement. The case is the 
same in the other thematic units. 
The secondary themes are in an explanatory relation 
to the synthesized primary theme. This means that they 
are in subordinate relation to it. This relation can be 
shown in the following dominance display. 
The results of the technological revolution 
Increase of wealth 
in the form of 
of material things. 
Machines 
reduced the 
need for 
man-power. 
The greater part 
of the wealth 
produced goes to 
the owners of the 
machines. 
The logical relations between themes and rhemes can 
be shown in the following thematic relations chart: 
Thematic Unit P Sx Ri S2 R2 S3 R3 
Proposition No. Syn-
thesized 1 2-3 4 5-7 8 9 
Relation between: 
-themes & rhemes (X) (=) (-) 
-secondary themes (+) (+) 
-P & S ( = ) (=) (=) 
190 
This chart: shows that paragraph E.10 consists of a 
synthesized primary theme and three secondary themes: S^, 
S2 / and S3. Each secondary theme is developed through a 
sequence of propositions functioning as rhemes: R^, R2, 
and R3 . The number of propositions manifesting each 
theme or rheme is shown in the second row below each 
theme or rheme. The third row shows the relation that 
stands between themes and rhemes. For example, the 
relation between the first secondary theme (S^) and its 
rheme (Ri) is illustrative, that is, RI develops SI by 
illustration, thus the illustrative relation symbol (X) 
is placed between and R^. The fourth row shows the 
logical relation between secondary themes. In this 
paragraph, the secondary themes are in additive relation 
to each other. The additive relation symbol (+) appears 
between S^ and S2, and S2 and S3. The last row of the 
thematic relations chart indicates the role of each 
secondary theme in developing the synthesized primary 
theme. Since each secondary theme explains an aspect of 
the primary theme, namely, the effects of the 
technological revolution, they stand in explanatory 
relation to the primary theme. Therefore, the 
explanatory relation symbol (=) appears between the 
primary theme (P) and each of the secondary themes. 
191 
i 
The constituent propositions of the whole paragraph 
may have different roles in relation to each other. The 
following logical diagram shows the relation between the 
constituent propositions of this paragraph: 
A B C D 
1. (Si) 
2. (X) 
3- (+) (X) 4. (S2) 
5- ( = ) 6. (-) 
7- ( = ) 
8- (S3) 9. (-) 
This diagram shows the role of each proposition in 
the paragraph. Some of these propositions may have a 
dual role. For example, proposition (3) has an 
explanatory function with respect to the secondary theme 
expressed in (1), and an additive function in relation to 
proposition (2). 
Some of these relations are signalled by particular 
markers. The three thematic units, for example, are 
signalled by the use of ordinal numerals, i.e., "the 
first, the second" and "the third". The illustrative 
relation is indicated by the connective "for example" in 
proposition (2), but it has no overt marker in other 
propositions. The adversative relation holding between 
proposition (6) and (5) is lexically marked by the use of 
192 
adverbial expressions such as "fifty years ago" and 
"today". The same relation holding between proposition 
(9) and (8) is marked by the conjunction "while". 
The frequency of these logical relations and their 
markers in the other paragraphs will be presented in 
tables in the next chapter. 
To complete the description of paragraph structure, 
an attempt will be made in the rest of this chapter to 
examine the patterns of lexical cohesion in both Arabic 
and English paragraphs. 
Lexical Cohesion 
Lexical cohesion means the utilization of lexical 
resources in creating textual cohesion. Halliday and 
Hassan (1976:274) define lexical cohesion as "the 
cohesive effect achieved by the selection of vocabulary." 
They divide lexical cohesive devices into two main 
categories: reiteration and collocation. Reiteration 
involves the repetition of the same word, the use of a 
synonym or near-synonym, the use of a superordinate, and 
the use of a general word. Collocation, on the other 
hand means the use of lexical items that tend to co-occur 
in a particular context. This type of lexical cohesion 
includes lexical items that are drawn from the same 
ordered series such as the days of the week, or members 
193 
of unordered series such as ceiling, roof, basement, or 
they can be opposites of a certain type. 
Halliday and Hassan's framework for the analysis of 
lexical cohesion will be employed in analyzing the sample 
paragraph in the study. Examining paragraph A.l, 
translated earlier in this chapter, we can find that the 
texture of this paragraph is not only created through 
grammatical devices but also through the use of lexical 
items in certain patterns and relations. In the first 
sentence, for example, we find the lexical item /?SSarq-
ul islami/ repeated through synonymy in proposition (5) 
and (6). It is also contrasted with one of its opposites 
in proposition (8) which is /?S£ara:?iq ?alqharbiyyah/, 
or "western jurisprudence". The lexical cohesive devices 
in paragraph A.l can be displayed in the following chart: 
Proposition Cohesive Type of Presupposed 
Number Item Lexical Item 
Cohesion 
4 'arrajul same word 'arrajul (1) 
5 ha:dhihi-
'Imazaya: 
superor-
dinate 
hurriyyah (2) 
'istiqla:1 (2) 
huqu:q (3) 
5 
kafa'ah (4) 
'SSari:9ah synonym 'a££ar9 (1) 
5 'ilmar'at' 
'rrajul 
'ttaswiyat 
same word 'ilmar'at (1) 
same word 'arrajul (1) 
synonym musa:wa:t (1) 
194 
Proposition 
Number 
Cohesive 
Item 
Type of 
Lexical 
Cohesion 
Presupposed 
Item 
6 Sari:qatina: synonym 'aSSarq (1) 
6 ' ilmarah same word 'ilmarah (1) 
8 nafaqah subor-
dinate 
' ahma:1 (7) 
8 tarbiyah subor-
dinate 
'ahma:1 (7) 
9 'arrajul 
'ilamra'ah 
same word 
same word 
'arrajul (1) 
'ilmar'ah (1) 
10 'arrajul same word 'arrajul (1) 
This chart is divided into four columns. The first 
column lists the proposition number. The second contains 
they lexical cohesive item in each proposition. The 
third specifies the type of lexical cohesion. That is to 
say, is lexical cohesion achieved by repeating the same 
word, or by using its synonym, or by using a subordinate 
word to a superordinate item? Finally, the fourth column 
shows the item which the cohesive item presupposes or 
with which it achieves cohesion. 
The chart shows that there are thirteen lexical 
cohesive items in this paragraph which consists of ten 
propositions. The frequency of lexical cohesive devices 
indicates the role that lexical cohesion plays in 
195 
creating texture in texts. Each two related cohesive 
elements constitute a tie or a relation between two 
elements in a text. Halliday and Hassan (1976:3) define 
a tie as "an instance of cohesion" or "an occurrence of a 
pair of cohesively related items". A pair of related 
items can be contiguous, i.e. following each other 
without any intervening element. This type of tie has 
been called "immediate" by Halliday and Hassan 
( 1976 :332). The second type of tie is what they call an 
"intermediated" tie, where two related items are repeated 
in two sentences that are mediated by one or more 
sentences containing an element such as a pronoun that 
forms a link to the presupposed item. The third basic 
type of tie described by Halliday and Hassan is the 
"remote" tie where the presupposed element is separated 
from the presupposed one by a number of non-mediated 
sentences that do not contain any link between the two 
items. 
An example of immediate ties can be seen in the 
chain of relations between /Sari:9atuna:/ in proposition 
(6) and /'a£Sar9/ in proposition (1). Each of the 
mediating sentences contains either the same cohesive 
item as is the case in proposition (5) or a pronoun 
replacing this item as is the case in propositions (2, 3 
and 4). The cohesive item in these propositions are 
196 
understood rather than expressed. This is a property of 
the morphology of Arabic verbs that can be inflected for 
person. For example, in proposition (2), the perfect 
verb /' a91ana/ means "he (it) announced". The subject of 
this verb is understood as referring to the subject of 
the first proposition. 
Examining the types of lexical cohesion displayed in 
the chart, we notice that the dominant pattern through 
which lexical cohesion is achieved is reiteration through 
the use of the same word, synonyms, and the 
superordinate. 
At this point of the analysis, there appears to be 
two flaws in Halliday and Hassan's framework of analyzing 
lexical cohesion. The first one is related to Halliday 
and Hassan's classification of lexical cohesion created 
by a subordinate item when it follows a superordinate 
word or vice versa. They classify a cohesive tie that is 
created when a superordinate word precedes a subordinate 
item as a case of reiteration ( 1976 :278 ), while this 
relation is classified under collocation when the 
superordinate word follows the subordinate item (p.280). 
Halliday and Hassan fail to offer any justification for 
this classification. Both cases occur in paragraph A.l 
as can be seen in the chart in proposition (5) in 
relation to (2, 3, 4) and the superordinate-subordinate 
197 
relation is manifested in proposition (7) with respect to 
( 8 ) . 
The second flaw lies in their treatment of 
morphologically related lexical items. Halliday and 
Hassan (1976:291) stated "a lexical item is not bound to 
a particular grammatical category, or to a particular 
morphological form..." According to this view, all the 
forms derived from the same root represent a single 
lexical item, and thus can be classified under the 
lexical cohesive device called reiteration or repetition 
of the same word. In paragraph A.l, the word 
/musa:wa:t/, "equality" in proposition (1) and the item 
/taswiyat/, "equating" in proposition (5) are derived 
from the same root but they do not have identical 
meanings. Therefore, they cannot be considered as the 
same word. Derived forms might be better considered as 
separate texture-forming lexical devices. 
Despite these flaws in Halliday and Hassan's scheme 
of dealing with lexical cohesion, it remains more 
adequate than the tagmemic treatment of the same concept. 
Cohesion in tagmemics is a grammatical concept. It is 
the feature of the tagmeme that specifies how a 
constituent governs or is governed by another constituent 
in a text. Pike and Pike (1977:41) state that 
"constituents are cohesive when they control or are 
198 
controlled grammatically by one another." This concept 
of cohesion excludes lexical cohesion that is created by 
the selection of lexical items. 
I will now examine how lexical cohesion creates 
texture in the English paragraph E.l. The following 
chart shows the lexical cohesive items, their type and 
the lexical items they presuppose. 
Proposition Cohesive Type of Presupposed 
Number Item Lexical Item 
Cohesion 
2 Increases 
in electric 
power pro-
duction 
paraphrase new advance 
of the gross 
national 
product (1) 
The discharge paraphrase 
of sulpher 
dioxide into 
the air 
deteriora-
tion in the 
environment 
( 1 ) 
air collocation environment 
3 The growth paraphrase 
of paper 
industry 
new advance 
...(1) 
Increase in paraphrase 
trash 
deteriora-
tion. . . (1) 
4 The pro-
duction of 
piles of 
hulks 
paraphrase deteriora-
tion. . . (1) 
199 
Proposition 
Number 
Cohesive 
Item 
Type of 
Lexical 
Cohesion 
Presupposed 
Item 
5 The growth 
of urban 
choking the paraphrase 
mobility... 
and the lungs 
of the city 
dwellers 
deteriora-
tion. . . (1) 
The chart shows that each of the propositions (2-5) 
of paragraph E.l contains two instances of paraphrase 
equivalences. For example, in proposition (2), the 
phrase "increases in electric power production" is to be 
understood in the context of the paragraph as a 
paraphrase of the phrase "new advance of the gross 
national product" in proposition (1). The second 
instance of paraphrase is in the phrase "the discharge of 
sulpher dioxide into the air" which is to be understood 
as a paraphrase equivalence of deterioration in the 
environment in proposition (1). This analysis shows 
another flaw in the classification of lexical cohesion 
proposed by Halliday and Hassan who consider repetition 
at the word level only. Synonymy and hyponomy are word 
properties. This paragraph shows that synonymy can be at 
a higher level than that of the word. It can be at the 
level of a sentence or phrase. In this case, this 
relation is called paraphrase rather than synonymy. This 
200 
modification agrees with what Linda Jones (1977:232) 
called "paraphrase equivalence" rather than synonymy 
where an expression is to be understood as a paraphrase 
of another preceding expression in a certain context. 
The different patterns of lexical cohesion in both 
Arabic and English will be presented and discussed in the 
following chapter. 
201 
Chapter 6 
Results and Discussion 
In this chapter, I will present the findings of the 
study followed by a discussion based on them. The first 
part includes the results of the tagmemic or thematic 
analysis of the sample paragraphs. The second includes 
the results of the analysis of the logical relations 
holding between propositions on the one hand and between 
themes and rhemes on the other. Finally, the results of 
the analysis of lexical cohesion will be presented in the 
third part. 
The similarities and differences between Arabic and 
English paragraph structures, logical relations and 
lexical cohesion will be presented in the sections 
dealing with each aspect respectively. Before presenting 
the findings, however, it might be appropriate to present 
a quantitative description of the sample paragraphs. 
Quantitative Analysis 
Forty paragraphs were chosen from each language. 
Thirty of these paragraphs (1-30) were randomly chosen, 
and ten (31-40) were more or less parallel in content. 
The following table provides some guantitative 
information about the sample paragraphs with regard to 
202 
the number of propositions and the mean value of 
propositions per paragraph. 
Arabic English 
Random Parallel Total Random Parallel Total 
No. 
of 
para-
graphs 
30 10 40 30 10 40 
Total no. 
of propo-
sitions 288 78 366 244 69 313 
Mean of 
propo-
sitions 
per para-
graph 
9.6 7.8 9.15 8.1 6.9 7.8 
Table 1. Quantitative Aspects of Sample Paragraphs 
in Arabic and English 
This table indicates that Arabic paragraphs tend to 
be longer and have a slightly larger number of 
propositions than the English ones. 
Distribution of Themes in the Arabic and English Sample 
Paragraphs 
As far as themes are concerned, the analysis of the 
Arabic random sample paragraphs (1-30) reveals that 
themes in these paragraphs can be categorized into three 
distinct types. Paragraphs of the first type consist of 
an explicitly stated primary theme which is developed 
203 
through one or more rhematic propositions. This pattern 
is more dominant than the other two. It is represented 
in twenty-five paragraphs, excluding paragraphs A.l, 7, 
14, 18, and 23 (Appendix A). That is to say, the 
percentage of this pattern in the random sample is 83%. 
The second pattern is manifested in the paragraphs 
that have two or more secondary themes that are of equal 
level of generality. Each of these themes may be 
developed through a number of rhemes, although not all 
secondary themes may have rhematic propositions. An 
example of this pattern can be seen in paragraph A. 23 
where the first secondary theme (Proposition 1) has no 
rheme. In this pattern, it is left to the analyst or the 
reader to synthesize the primary theme from the 
paragraph. This pattern of thematic development can also 
be seen in paragraphs A.7, 14, and 18. It forms 13% of 
the whole sample. 
The third pattern is the one in which paragraphs 
have an explicitly stated primary theme with one or more 
rhematic propositions, and one or more secondary themes 
that can be subsumed under the primary theme. That is to 
say, the secondary theme is at a lower level of 
generality than the primary theme. This pattern can be 
seen in paragraph A.l. 
204 
In the parallel paragraphs (31-40), only one 
paragraph (A. 31) has a synthesized primary theme with two 
secondary themes explicitly stated in the paragraph, 
i.e., the second pattern. The other paragraphs (32-40) 
have explicitly stated primary themes that are developed 
through a number of rhemes (i.e., the first pattern). 
Thus, the three basic patterns in the Arabic paragraphs 
(1-40) can be summarized as follows: 
1. P + Ri + R2....Rn = Monolevel 
This pattern is manifested in all the paragraphs (1-40) 
except paragraphs A.l, 7, 14, 18, 23, and 31. This 
pattern is the most dominant and forms 85% of all 
patterns. 
2. Si + R1 + Rn + S2 + Ri - • • Rn = Equal level 
In this pattern, each paragraph has two or more 
explicitly stated secondary themes that are developed by 
any number of rhemes ranging from zero to any number. 
This pattern is less common than the first one. It forms 
12.5% of the entire sample and is manifested in 
paragraphs A.7, 14, 18, 23, and 31. 
3. P + Ri ... Rn + Si + Ri + ...Rn = Multilevel 
Paragraphs of this pattern have explicitly stated primary 
and secondary themes. Among the forty Arabic paragraphs, 
only one (A.l) is developed using this pattern. It is 
205 
the least common pattern in the sample and constitutes 
only 2.5% of the sample. 
The frequency and percentage of these thematic 
patterns can be displayed in the following table. 
Thematic Pattern Frequency Percentage 
Monolevel 34 85.0 
Equal-level 5 12.5 
Multilevel 1 2.5 
TOTAL 40 100.0 
Table 2. Frequency and Percentage of Thematic Patterns 
in the Arabic Sample Paragraphs 
The distribution of primary and secondary themes in 
the sample Arabic paragraphs can be shown in the 
following table. 
Parallel 
F.THibi » S.Thmm • 79U1 ft S.ThOTN ft Toul TOTAL 
22 4 24 • 1 f 35 
3 i 4 l - 1 5 
- i I - - - I 
1 - 1 - - - 1 
(5) - . . . 
- 2 2 - 1 1 3 
(7) - . . . 
- 1 1 - > - 1 
TOTAL 2f 9 35 1 2 11 4* 
Table 3. Distribution of Primary and Secondary Themes 
in the Sample Arabic Paragraphs 
206 
The first column in this table, marked as 
propos it ion number, indicates the number of the thematic 
propositions in each paragraph. The second column 
labelled Primary Theme (P.Theme) provides the number of 
explicitly stated primary themes in initial or non-
initial propositions within paragraphs. Thus, reading 
across the table, twenty-two primary themes and four 
secondary ones are explicitly stated in the initial 
proposition. In the parallel paragraphs, eight 
explicitly stated primary themes are found in initial 
positions. Note that in the actual samples, when the 
primary theme is not in initial position, it is preceded 
by an introductory statement, that is to say, a pre-
margin, the function of such a statement can be either 
transitional or introductory to the primary theme. 
This tabulation can be looked at in terms of the 
location of the thematic propositions in each paragraph, 
namely initial and non-initial. Taking these two 
parameters into consideration, we find that thirty-five 
out of forty paragraphs (87.5%) have overtly stated 
themes in initial propositions. 
The following table shows the frequency (F) and the 
percentages (%) of paragraph initial and non-initial 
themes in the Arabic sample paragraphs. 
207 
Random 
P/S Themes 
Parallel Parallel & 
P/S Themes Random 
F % F % F % 
Initial 26 56.5 9 19.6 35 76.1 
Non-
Initial 9 19 .6 2 4.3 11 23.9 
Table 4. Frequency and Percentage of Initial and Non-
Initial Themes in the Arabic Sample Paragraphs 
This table clearly shows that there is a strong 
tendency among the authors of the sample paragraphs to 
develop their paragraphs through stating the primary 
theme in initial position. Only 23.9% of all these 
themes are expressed in non-initial position. In this 
case, the preceding propositions can be either 
introductory or transitional in function. 
The results of the analysis indicate that Arabic 
expository paragraphs are generally deductively 
developed. This means that there is a preference among 
writers of the sample paragraphs to state a 
generalization at the beginning of their paragraphs to 
introduce their themes regardless of whether they are 
primary or secondary. Then, these generalizations or 
themes are developed through supporting propositions. 
208 
Turning now to the English sample paragraphs, the 
analysis reveals that themes in these paragraphs can be 
classified into the following patterns: 
Paragraphs of the first pattern consist of 
explicitly stated primary themes that are developed 
through one or more rhematic propositions- Thirty-four 
out of forty paragraphs (85%) consist of this monolevel 
pattern, where a primary theme is overtly expressed and 
developed through one or more rhemes without having any 
secondary theme. Like the monolevel pattern in Arabic, 
this pattern is the most common one. It forms 85% of all 
patterns in the sample. This percentage is exactly the 
same as that of the monolevel pattern in Arabic. This 
pattern is manifested in all the English sample 
paragraphs except E.2, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 40. 
In the parallel paragraphs, E.31-40 (Appendix B), 
this pattern is represented in nine paragraphs out of 
ten, that is to say, 90% of all patterns in the parallel 
sample. This percentage is identical to that of the same 
pattern in the Arabic parallel paragraphs. 
The second pattern involves paragraphs in which 
there are one or more secondary themes, that are of equal 
level of generality. Each of these secondary themes may 
be developed through one or more rhematic propositions. 
In such a case the primary theme must be synthesized from 
209 
the content of the paragraph. This pattern is manifested 
in paragraphs E.10,and 16 of the random sample. 
Unlike the Arabic random sample in which this 
pattern is represented by 12.5% of all paragraphs, this 
pattern is manifested in 6.7% of the all the English 
random paragraphs and 5% of the entire sample. 
In the English parallel paragraphs, this pattern is 
not manifested in any paragraph, while in one Arabic 
paragraph (A.31) we found two secondary themes. 
The third pattern involves paragraphs with 
explicitly stated primary themes that are developed 
through one or more rhemes and one or more secondary 
themes of a lower degree of generality. This pattern is 
manifested in two random paragraphs, E.2, and 19, and one 
parallel paragraph, E.40. 
The fourth pattern, which is the least common, is 
represented in paragraph E.13 in which we find a 
development of a theme that is not explicitly stated. 
Thus, the primary theme has to be synthesized. This 
pattern did not occur in the sample Arabic paragraphs. 
The thematic patterns of the English sample 
paragraphs can be summarized as follows: 
1. P + Ri + ... Rn - Monolevel 
2. Si + Ri ... Rn + S2 + Ri ••• Rn = Equal-level 
3. P + Ri + Rn + Si + Ri ... Rn = Multi-level 
210 
4. Ri + Rn... « Monolevel 
The following chart shows the frequency (F) and 
percentage (%) of these patterns in both the Arabic and 
English sample paragraphs. 
Thematic Pattern Arabic English 
F % F % 
Monolevel 34 85.0 34 85.0 
Equal-level 5 12 .5 2 5.0 
Multi-level 1 2.5 3 7.5 
Monolevel with 
Synthesized Theme 0 0 1 2.5 
TOTAL 40 100 40 100.0 
Table 5. Frequency and Percentages of Thematic Patterns 
in Arabic and English 
Thematic propositions may have different 
distributions with respect to the number of the 
propositions manifesting a primary or a secondary theme. 
The following table shows the distribution and frequency 
of themes in the English sample paragraphs. 
211 
Random Parallel 
Prop. 
NO. P.Theme S.Theme Total P.Theme S.Theme Total 
GRAND 
TOTAL 
(1) 26 1 27 9 - 9 36 
(2) 1 1 2 1 - 1 3 
(3) - 1 1 - - - 1 
(4) - 1 1 • • - 1 
(5) - 1 1 - 1 1 2 
(6) - 1 1 - - - 1 
( 7 ) - . . . 
(8) - - - - - 1 
TOTAL 27 6 33 10 1 11 44 
Table 6. Distribution of Primary and Secondary Themes 
in the Sample English Paragraphs 
Table 6 indicates that thirty-six of the explicitly 
stated themes are manifested in the first proposition, 
while only three primary themes are stated in the second 
proposition. 
Keeping the initial and non-initial parameters in 
mind, the following table shows the differences and 
similarities between Arabic and English initial and non-
initial thematic units. 
212 
Arabic English 
Random Parallel Total Random Parallel Total % % % % % % 
Initial 54*3 21.7 76. 1 63.6 20.5 93.1 
Non-
Initial 23.9 23.9 4.5 2.3 6.2 
Table 7. Percentages of Initial/Non-Initial Themes 
in Arabic and English Samples 
The distribution of themes as shown in Table 7 
indicates a great deal of similarity in the ways 
expository paragraphs in both Arabic and English are 
developed. In both languages, there is a strong tendency 
for the first proposition of the paragraph to be thematic 
in function. However, English random paragraphs show a 
higher percentage of initial themes. In this respect, 
Arabic has a stronger tendency for themes to be preceded 
by an introductory proposition or a transitional 
statement. 
It is also clear from Table 7 that the parallel 
paragraphs in both languages have a great deal of 
similarity in the way they are organized. However, there 
are more variations between the random paragraphs in both 
Arabic and English. This observation lends some support 
to the assumption that the difference in content between 
213 
paragraphs might be an important variable in determining 
the structure and organization of paragraphs. 
The findings also reveal that the prominent pattern 
of thematic development in both languages is deductive 
rather than inductive reasoning. This means that a 
paragraph starts with a proposition of a higher degree 
of generality than the following ones which function as 
rhemes that develop the thematic proposition stated at 
the beginning of the paragraph. 
The tendency of the deductive organization of 
paragraphs is also true when a paragraph is of the equal-
level type, that is, when a paragraph has a secondary 
theme at the beginning and another one somewhere else. 
The first secondary theme is normally deductively 
developed unitl a break in the repetition pattern occurs 
where another secondary theme is introduced. For 
example, in the English sample paragraphs, all seven 
instances of secondary themes are deductively developed 
(Appendix B: E.2, 10, 16, 19 and 40). Similarly ten out 
of the eleven secondary themes in the Arabic sample 
paragraphs are developed deductively while one is not 
developed, that is to say, it has no rhemes (Appendix A: 
A.1, 7, 14, 18 and 31). 
This conclusion confirms what Kaplan (1972) has 
hypothesized about English expository paragraphs in that 
214 
they are deductively developed. This appears to be true 
for Arabic expository paragraphs as well. The deductive 
pattern of reasoning seems to be the major preference for 
the authors of the sample paragraphs in both Arabic and 
English. It might be the pattern of thought 
characteristic of expository discourse across languages. 
But, this observation is still premature; it needs to be 
tested in larger expository data written by different 
authors in different languages. 
Another observation needs to be mentioned here. The 
analysis of the structure of paragraphs in the Arabic 
sample shows that digression from the main theme occurs 
in one paragraph only (A.31). Propositions (13-15) of 
that paragraph can be considered to be unrelated to the 
main theme. The author started a new semantic paragraph 
but not the orthographic paragraph. This observation 
indicates the inadequacy of defining the paragraph in 
terms of orthographic indicators. For this reason, 
researchers such as Pitkin ( 1969 ), and Pike and Pike 
(1977) have attempted to redefine the paragraph in terms 
of discourse blocks. A paragraph, in this sense, is a 
semantic unit. Such a concept of the paragraph may or 
may not correlate to the orthographic paragraph. 
A final observation based on the initial/non-initial 
distribution of themes in Arabic and English ought to be 
215 
mentioned as well. A closer examination of the results 
shown in Table 7 revealed some interesting differences 
between Arabic and English paragraph structures. Five 
out of forty-six thematic propositions in the Arabic 
sample are preceded by one or more introductory 
propositions. That is to say, 10.9% of the themes in 
Arabic paragraphs have introductory propositions while 
only 6.8% of the themes in the English sample paragraphs 
are introduced by one proposition. This result indicates 
a stronger tendency among Arabic expository discourse 
writers to use introductions for themes in paragraphs. 
This observation might be considered as an indicator of 
how culture affects the thought patterns of people. In 
Arabic culture, people tend not to be direct in 
requesting or presenting a particular thing. The major 
point of request is usually preceded by an introduction. 
While in English culture, people are more direct in 
hitting the topic which they want to discuss. 
Theme-Marking Devices 
Themes at the level of the paragraph can be 
identified by one or more criteria. The principle of 
general-to-specific is very useful in identifying themes 
of different levels especially when these themes are not 
marked grammatically. A proposition is said to be at a 
216 
higher level of generality if it contains a superordinate 
expression that may have subordinates or hyponyms in some 
of the following propositions. Very often a higher level 
proposition includes a general or abstract term, that has 
a specific or concrete example in one or more of the 
following propositions. For example, in paragraph A.7., 
proposition (1) which was established as a secondary 
theme contains the general term Ma source of annoyance" 
which is illustrated by specific and concrete examples in 
propsitions (2-7). In proposition (2), for example, "the 
bacteria and germs" are given as examples of sources of 
annoyance. This relationship of specific-to-general is 
the major criterion in establishing proposition (1) of 
A.2 as the theme of that unit. 
As discussed earlier in chapter five, themes can be 
grammatically signalled. Grammatical devices include 
things like conjunctions or connectives in general such 
as: but, despite, for example, firstly, in general, etc. 
These grammatical theme-marking devices can be classified 
into two categories, internal and external markers. 
Internal markers are grammatical constructions that exist 
in the thematic proposition itself such as: firstly, 
secondly, the most important factor, but, etc. External 
markers, on the other hand, are constructions that mark a 
theme while they may be in other propositions such as the 
217 
use of a subordinate connective that, while marking the 
proposition in which it occurs as rheme, also marks a 
preceding proposition as theme. These external markers 
include expressions such as: for example, this means, 
that is to say, therefore. 
Another theme signalling device is parallelism in 
the use of enumeration such as firstly, secondly, etc. 
An example of enumeration can be seen in the English 
paragraph E.10. Some other theme-marking devices will be 
mentioned in the discussion of theme markers in Arabic 
and English. 
The following two tables indicate external and 
internal theme-marking devices in both Arabic and English 
sample paragraphs. 
Arabic: 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
No. 
1 fa "by" 
6 bal "moreover" 
4 (enumeration) 
9wwalan 
"firstly" 
1 (enumeration) 
min harhiyatin 
thaniyah 
"secondly" 
1 fa "that 
is to say" 
218 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
No. 
6 1 (topicaliza-
tion) 
7 1 9alarraghmi 
"despite" 
8 la:kin "but" 
(topicaliza-
tion) 
8 2 'amma: "while" Rhetorical 
Question 
(4-6) 
10 1 min madha:hir 
11 2 'innama "but" wa ha:thihi-
s s ima:t 
"and these" 
features " 
12 2 wa minha: 
"and among 
them" 
13 l wa 'awwalu 
14 1 'imma (1) 
"either" 
6 wa 'imma 
"or" (6) 
15 i fa "this 
means" 
18 1 wa huna: wa ha:dha 
malhu:dhha ya9ni: 
"and there "this 
219 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
No. 
3 'amma "while" 
"as far as... 
is concerned" 
(3) 
21 'a:xaru:n 
"other" 
2 3 1 wa min.. . 
"and among" 
2 'amma 
24 1 fa "for 
example" 
25 1 kadhailikal- explanatory 
'amr "similarly" 'fa' 
2 6 1 wa 'amma "but" 
28 1 haythu (2) 
explanatory 
30 1 dha: lika 
'anna "that 
is" 
31 6 wa la:kin "but" 
32 1 explanatory 
'fa' 
33 i mitha: lu 
dha:lik 
"an example 
of..." 
34 1 'amma "but" 
35 2 wa la:kin 
3 8 explanatory 
'fa' (2) 
39 l 'akthar 
220 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
No. 
"the most" 
4 0 1 explanatory 
'fa' (2) 
Table 8. Internal and External Theme-Marking Devices 
in Arabic 
221 
English: 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
enumerations this does 
thirdly mean (2) 
It means (3) 
5 There is no 
contradiction 
in my going to 
say... 
4 1 To turn to 
5 1 For the first This means 
part (2) 
10 1 the first 
4 the second 
8 the third 
20 1 for instance (4) 
21 1 An important 
aspect of 
22 1 An obvious 
23 1 in o t h e r 
words (10) 
24 1 cleft (5) 
2 5 1 the most 
important 
(8) 
26 1 then, (topic-alization) 
29 1 so far as we that is 
can tell (2) 
222 
Paragraph Thematic Internal External 
No. Proposition Markers Markers 
No. 
31 1 A parallel cleft (8) 
view 
32 1 cleft (5) 
3 3 1 but (2) 
34 1 one indicator 
35 1 the most ob-
vious difference 
37 parallelism 
of rhemes 
(2 , 3, 4) 
39 1 also 
Table 9. Internal and External Theme-Marking Devices 
in English 
In tables 8 & 9 paragraphs with unmarked themes are 
not included in the tables for the sake of space. 
However, the frequency (F) and percentage (%) of marked 
and unmarked themes in both Arabic and English will be 
presented in the following table: 
223 
Arabic English F. % F. % 
No. of 
thematic 46 100 44 100 propos itions 
Unmarked 12 26.1 22 50 
Marked: 
Internally 19 41.3 11 25.0 
Externally 11 23.9 7 15.9 
Both 4 8.7 4 9.1 
Total 34 73.9 22 50.0 
Table 10. Frequency and Percentage of Marked 
and Unmarked Themes in Arabic and English 
The Arabic sample paragraphs include forty-six 
thematic propositions of both the primary and the 
secondary levels, while the English sample contains 
forty-four thematic propositions. Twelve of the Arabic 
themes are unmarked. That is to say, 26.1% of the total 
number of themes in Arabic are unmarked. English shows a 
stronger tendency for themes to be unmarked. 
On the other hand, 4 1.3% of the Arabic thematic 
propositions are internally marked while only 25% are 
internally signalled in English. Similarly, 23.9% of the 
Arabic themes are externally marked when compared with 
15.9% in the English sample. This means that externally 
marked themes tend to be more frequent in Arabic than 
they are in English. Table 10 also shows that the 
frequency of externally and internally marked themes is 
higher in Arabic than it is in English. 
224 
That is, the marked themes in Arabic tend to be more 
frequent. The Arabic themes tend to be marked more 
(73.9%) when compared with 50% in English (Table 10). 
To turn now to the theme markers themselves, one can 
notice that Arabic internal theme markers can be 
classified into five general categories: 
1. Connectives: 
The term connective includes conjunctions and other 
expressions that may have a linking function. This group 
of internal markers include expressions such as bal 
'but', 'moreover', 9alarraghmi min 'despite', la:kin 
'but', 'amma- 'whereas', imma 'either', wa'amma 'or' 
In English, unlike Arabic, the results of the 
analysis show that there is no theme which is internally 
marked by a conjunction. This shows that conjunctions in 
Arabic have a thematic function. 
2. Enumeration: 
It is a form of parallelism in structure that is 
achieved through the use of numerals such as: awwalan 
'firstly', etc. These markers are common in English as 
well. 
3. Attention-drawing expressions: 
These are expressions used by the author to draw the 
attention of the reader to an important topic that he is 
going to introduce. They can be expressions that 
225 
indicate importance or specify something out of many 
th ings . Examples of these expressions are: wa huna: 
mula: hadhatun 'and here', 'there is an observation', 
'akthar 'ahammiyah 'more significant', wa min bayni 
had:dhihil 9awa:mil 'and among these factors'. 
Similar expressions are also used in English, such 
as: 'to turn to...', 'an important aspect', 'an obvious 
factor', 'so far as we can tell', 'one indicator', 'the 
most obvious difference'. 
4. Comparative expressions: 
They are expressions that compare what follows with 
what preceded such as: Kadha: likal-' amr 'similarly', wa 
min na: hiyatin'uxra: 'on the other hand, or in the second 
place'. 
These markers are common in English as well, such 
as: 'similarly and a parallel view'. 
5. Topicalization: 
In Arabic nominal sentences, the subject usually 
precedes the predicate, when a sentence is negated by 
using a negative particle such as laysa, it is usually 
placed before the subject. Sometimes, however, the 
subject is preposed for the sake of emphasis or making it 
more prominent. Topicalization is a means by which an 
author indicates that the proposition containing the 
topicalized element is intended to be taken as a theme. 
226 
Examples of topicalization can be seen in the first 
proposition of paragraph A-6 and proposition (8) of 
paragraph A.7. 
Although topicalization is common in English, there 
was only one case, E.26, in which a theme was internally 
marked by this device. 
To turn now to the external markers, we can notice 
that, in Arabic, they are basically connectives. The 
most common is the explanatory conjunction fa that, very 
often, introduces an explanatory relation to a preceding 
proposition. Other examples are general connectives that 
usually indicate the logical relation of the proposition 
they introduce to the preceding one such as wa 
ha:dha:ya 9 n i ; 'this means', mitha s1 dha;1ik 'for 
example', dha:lika'anna 'that is to say', etc. This type 
of expression is common in English as well. They include 
expressions such as: 'for example', 'that is', 'in other 
words','this means', etc. 
In English, however, the use of conjunctions as 
theme markers is much less frequent than it is in Arabic. 
There is only one instance of a conjunction used as a 
theme-marker (proposition (2) of paragraph E.33). But 
English uses cleft constructions more than Arabic. There 
are three instances where a theme is externally marked by 
clefting (E.24, 31, 32), but there is no single case of 
227 
clefting as an external theme marker in the Arabic sample 
paragraphs. 
To sum up the discussion of theme markers, the 
following observations are in order. 
Some of the theme marking devices have a dual 
function. Clefting, for example, is used to emphasize a 
certain element in a sentence while simultaneously 
telling the reader that the emphasized element is to be 
considered as the theme of the paragraph. An example of 
this function is shown in proposition (8) in paragraph 
E.31 and in proposition (5) in paragraph E.32. 
If a theme is unmarked by internal or external 
devices, this does not mean that it is difficult to be 
identified. The general-to-specific principle plays an 
important role in this analysis. The use of summative 
expressions that indicate the thematic unity of the 
preceding propositions is another factor. An example of 
these summative expressions is "all these merits" in A.l. 
Another factor that helps identify a theme is the 
repetition of one or more of the key concepts given in a 
preceding proposition. 
Logical Relations 
In this section, the frequency and percentage of 
logical relations holding between propositions in both 
228 
the English and Arabic sample paragraphs will be 
discussed. The devices marking each relation will be 
identified as well. The logical relations holding 
between thematic propositions, and between themes and 
their rhemes, will also be presented at the end of this 
section. 
The following table (Table 11) shows the frequency 
(F) and percentage (%) of logical relations manifested 
between propositions in both the Arabic and English 
samples. 
The total number of logical relations holding among 
proposition is 294 in Arabic and 231 in English. In both 
Arabic and English, the additive relation is the most 
predominant accounting for (40.1%) in Arabic and (51.9%) 
in English. The percentages of the other relations in 
both languages are below 24%. The second most frequent 
relation in both languages is the explanatory relation 
accounting for 23.5% in Arabic and 20.3% in English. The 
causal and illative relations in Arabic tend to be more 
frequent than their counterparts in English. The least 
frequent relations in both samples is the alternative 
accounting for 1.6% in Arabic and 0.4% in English. 
The reason why the additive relation has the highest 
frequency is that in many Arabic and English paragraphs, 
a theme may be developed through a series of coordinate 
229 
illustrative or explanatory propositions that are in 
additive relation to each other while they are in 
illustrative or explanatory relation to the thematic 
proposition of the paragraph. That is to say, each of 
these propositions has a dual function. The following 
English paragraph illustrates this point. 
230 
Arabic English 
Parallel Random Total Parallel Random Total 
F % F % F % F % F % F % 
Additive 29 9,9 09 30,3 110 40.1 19 0.2 101 43.7 120 51,9 ( + ) 
Adversative 2 0.60 20 6.0 22 7.5 0 3.5 15 6.5 23 10.0 
(-) 
Alternative 2 0.68 2 0.60 4 1.4 0 0 1 0.4 1 0.4 
( 0 ) 
Explanatory 16 5.4 53 10.0 69 23.5 0 3.5 39 16,9 47 20,3 
( = ) 
Illustrative 3 1,0 11 3,7 14 4.0 2 0.9 13 5.6 15 6.5 
(X) 
Illative (t) 3 1.0 26 0.0 29 9.9 5 22 0 3,5 13 5.6 
Causal (I) 6 2,0 22 7,5 28 9.5 1 0,4 11 4,8 12 5,2 
Total 294 100 231 160 
Table 11, Freqxjency and Percentages 
of propositional relations in tlic 
Arabic and English samples 
E. 10 
1. If anyone wants to exemplify the meaning of the word 
"fish", he cannot choose a better animal than a herring. 
2. The body, tapering to each end, is covered with thin, 
flexible scales, which are very easily rubbed off. 3. 
The taper head, with its underhung jaw, is smooth and 
scaleless on the top; 4. the large eye is partly 
covered by two folds of transparent skin, like eyelids— 
only immovable and with the slit between them vertical 
instead of horizontal: 5. the cleft behind the gill-
cover is very wide, 6. and, when the cover is raised, 
the large red gills which lie underneath it are freely 
exposed: 7. The rounded back bears the single 
moderately long dorsal fin about its middle. 
In this paragraph propositions (2-7) are in additive 
relation to each other. But each one is an illustration 
of proposition (1). Based on the inter-propositional 
relations, one can say that the theme of this paragraph 
is developed through addition. But if we consider the 
logical relations between the theme and its rhemes, we 
can identify them as illustration rather than addition. 
Similarly, a theme of an Arabic paragraph might be 
developed via a series of explanatory rhemes conjoined 
with each other by a conjunction such as wa 'and' thumma 
'and then', etc. The first explanatory proposition is 
usually introduced by the conjunction fa followed by one 
or more propositions introduced with wa. 
Thus an analysis based on the inter-propositional 
relations would render all propositions in the series 
being in additive relation to the preceding proposition, 
232 
whereas an analysis based on the relation between themes 
and rhemes would result in all the propositions being in 
explanatory or illustrative relation to the theme. The 
same applies to the case where a theme is developed 
through a series of illatives or causal relations. The 
Arabic paragraphs A.l and 7, among others, illustrate 
this point. 
A better approach to the analysis of logical 
relations is the one that considers the relations between 
themes and rhemes. This approach is more reliable than 
the analysis of the inter-propositional relations in 
identifying patterns of theme development in paragraphs. 
The following table shows the frequency and percentages 
of the relations between themes and rhemes in Arabic and 
English paragraphs. 
Table 12 shows that there are forty-five relations 
holding between themes and their rhemes in Arabic and 
forty-six relations in English. The most frequent theme-
rheme relation in Arabic is the mixed type accounting for 
46.7% of the total number of relations, while in English, 
the explanatory relation has the highest percentage 
accounting for 41.3% of the total number of relations. 
The second most frequent relation in English is the mixed 
type accounting for 37% of the total of relations. The 
third most frequent relation in Arabic is the 
233 
cause/effect relation accounting for 17-8% of the total 
number of relations. Unlike Arabic, English cause/effect 
relation accounts for 8.7%; it is the least frequent 
relation. Finally the illustrative relation shows more 
frequency and higher percentage in English (13%) than its 
counterpart in Arabic accounting for only 6.7%. 
The fact that the explanatory and illustrative 
relations are the predominant relations in English can be 
attributed to the hypothesis that English shows 
preference to subordinate sequences rather than 
coordinate ones. Propositions in subordinate sequences 
are dependent upon each other and they are mainly 
illustrative, explanatory and illative or causal in their 
functions. 
234 
Arabic English 
Random Parallel Total Random Parallel Total 
F % F % F % F % F % F % 
Explanatory 6 17.8 5 11.1 13 28.9 13 20. 3 6 13 19 41.3 
Illustrative 3 6.7 0 0 3 6.7 5 10.9 1 2.2 6 13.0 
Cause/Effect 7 15.6 1 2.2 0 17.0 4 8.7 0 0 4 0.7 
Mixed 16 35.6 5 11.1 21 46.7 13 23.8 4 8.7 17 37.0 
Total 34 75.6 11 24.4 45 100 35 76,1 11 23.9 46 100,0 
Table 12, Frequency and percentages 
of theine-rheme relations in Arabic 
and English sample paragraphs 
On the other hand Arabic tends to show preference to 
the mixed type of sequences over the subordinate ones . 
The mixed type of relations includes different types of 
relations such as explanatory, additive, or adversative. 
This means that there is no one predominant relation over 
the others. 
As far as the parallel paragraphs in Arabic and 
English are concerned, there does not seem to be much 
difference in the frequency and percentage of relations. 
However, no paragraphs in Arabic have the illustrative 
pattern of development, while there is one in English. 
The opposite is true in the cause/effect relation. 
Before turning to the markers of logical relations, 
one observation needs to be stated. The classification 
of theme-rheme relations is based on the most predominant 
relation holding between the thematic proposition and its 
rhemes. There are very few cases of purely an 
explanatory development pattern. Thus the types of 
relations mentioned in table 12 should be read as 
basically explanatory, basically illustrative, etc. 
Markers of logical relations 
The basic criterion for identifying the logical 
relation that a proposition holds to a preceding one 
depends on its propositional content. A proposition 
236 
might explain, illustrate, add to a preceding one, or it 
may be a result or a cause for a preceding one. 
Conjunctions and connectives in general may help in 
identifying logical relations between propositions. 
There are two major types of relations that may hold 
between propositions in a paragraph: subordinate and 
coordinate. 
Subordinate relations include explanatory, 
illustrative, illative and causal relations, while 
coordinate relations, in which propositions are 
independent of each other, include the additive, 
alternative and adversative relations. 
In what follows I will give some of the Arabic 
common markers for each relation. 
1. Additive: 
The additive relation may be marked by connectives 
such as: wa 'and', bal 'moreover', kama: 'and', 'azif 
' ila: dha: Ilk 'in addition to', etc. When there are more 
than one marker in one paragraph; the writer uses 
different markers rather than a particular one. 
2. Adversative: 
It is marked by one or more of the following 
devices: bal 'but', la:kin 'but', ' innama 'but', wa 
'but'. The common meaning of wa is 'and' but it can also 
237 
be used to mean 'but' and thus it introduces an 
adversative relation. 
3. Alternative: 
This relation has the least frequency in both Arabic 
and English. Its typical marker is 'aw 'or'. 
4. Explanatory: 
This relation is usually indicated by the connective 
fa which introduces the first proposition that explains a 
theme. If there is more than one explanatory 
proposition, the second will be introduced by wa 'and' 
and so are the other explanatory propositions following 
the second one. This pattern can be seen in paragraphs 
such as A.l, 2, 3, 4, or 5. Sometimes this relation is 
indicated by the emphatic bal, 'moreover' ha:dha' ya9ni: 
'this means', and 'ayy 'that is to say'. 
5. Illustrative: 
This relation is usually marked by connectives such 
as: mathalan 'for example', mitha:lu dha:lik 'an example 
of that 
6. Causal: 
It is signalled by connectives such as: likay 
'because', li' anna 'because of', fa 'because', and 'wa 
sababu dha:lik 'the reason is'. 
238 
7. Illative: 
Its common markers are: bina:'an 9ala: dha:lik 
'based on that', wa nati:jatu dha:lik 'the result of 
that', and wa liha:dha: 'for this reason'. However, 
these relations are not always overtly marked by a 
connective. The lack of a connective between two 
propositions seems to play a role in creating texture and 
cohesion in Arabic texts. For example, in paragraph 
A. 11, there is no connective between propositions (2) and 
(3). Despite the non-existence of a connective, there is 
a strong relation between the two propositions. 
Actually, proposition (3) restates the content of (2); it 
expresses the same idea of (2). In such a case a 
connective cannot be used to conjoin (3) with (2) because 
we conjoin the same thing to itself. 
Another instance of this point can be seen in the 
relation between propositions (5) and (6) in paragraph 
A. 25, in which (5) expresses the same notion of (4) as 
can be seen below: 
prop. 4 Islam started to eliminate the sources of 
slavery 
prop. 5 It restricted the means of slavery to... 
From these observations, we can conclude that the 
non-existence of a conjunction or the "zero" connective 
239 
has a cohesive power as an indicator of a very close 
explanatory relation between two propositions. 
Another observation, related to the frequency of 
inter-propositional connectives ought to be mentioned 
here. In the Arabic sample paragraphs, 272 out of the 
total of 348 propositions are introduced by connectives. 
This accounts for 78.2% of the total number of 
propositions as compared with 24.3% in English. 
This high frequency of connectives in Arabic texts 
indicates the roles these connectives play in signalling 
the intricate semantic relations of propositions. Their 
absence or misuse will inevitably affect the textuality 
and the acceptability of texts. 
To turn now to the markers of relations in English 
paragraphs, we find the following: 
1. The additive relation is marked by such connectives 
as: 'also' , 'and', 'as well', 'moreover', and 
'furthermore' . 
2. The alternative relation is signalled by its typical 
marker 'or'. 
3. The adversative relation is generally signalled by 
'but', 'however', 'in contrast with', etc. 
4. The explanatory relation is marked by connective 
such as: 'this means', 'that is to say', etc. 
240 
5. The illustrative relation is usually marked by: 'for 
example' , 'for instance, 'one indicator', etc. 
6. The illative relation is generally signalled by such 
connectives as: 'so that', 'consequently', 'as a result', 
and 'therefore'. 
7. Finally, the causal relation is marked by 'because', 
'since', and ' for'. 
These results show that logical relations in English 
are not basically determined by the existence of a 
connective or a conjunction. They are more frequently 
determined by the content of each proposition and the 
role each proposition plays in developing the theme of a 
paragraph. In English, out of the total number of 305 
propositions, only seventy-four are introduced by 
connectives, accounting for 24.3% of the total number, 
while in Arabic the percentage of the propositions 
introduced by connectives is 78.2%. This conclusion 
reveals the importance of connectives as a means of 
creating texture and cohesion in Arabic texts. However, 
cohesion can be achieved by other means such as lexical 
devices. In the following section, an attempt will be 
made to identify the types and frequency of lexical 
cohesive devices in both Arabic and English. 
241 
Lexical Cohesion 
The results of the analysis of lexical cohesive 
devices indicate that Arabic and English make use of one 
or more of a number of lexical cohesive devices with 
different frequencies and percentages. The following 
table shows the frequency (F) and percentage (%) of each 
type of lexical cohesive devices in the random and 
parallel paragraphs in both Arabic and English. 
Table 13 shows six devices through which lexical 
cohesion can be achieved in Arabic and English. The 
first is the repetition of the same word in different 
propositions in a paragraph. This device is the most 
frequent one in both Arabic and English accounting for 
64.8% of the total number of cohesive devices in Arabic 
and 73% in English. The parallel paragraphs show slight 
difference in the percentage of this device. 
In Arabic, the second most frequent lexical cohesive 
device is the use of collocational sets. It accounts for 
11.2%, while in English it accounts for 5.2% which puts 
it in the fifth most frequent device in English. From 
the percentages of the collocation device in both 
languages, we can conclude that Arabic shows a stronger 
tendency than English toward using this device. 
The third most frequent device in Arabic is the use 
of synonyms or repetition through synonymy. It accounts 
242 
Arabic English 
Random Parallel ToLa 1 Random Parallel Total 
F % F % F % F % F % F % 
Same word 190 46.1 77 10.7 267 64.8 196 56,8 56 16,2 252 73.0 
Synonyms 33 8 7 10.7 40 9.7 20 5.0 3 0.9 23 6.7 
llyponymy 6 1 . 6 1 0.2 7 1.7 7 2.0 0 0 7 2.0 
Collocation 41 10 5 1,2 46 11.2 11 3.2 7 2 10 5.2 
Paraphrase 22 5.3 11 2,7 33 8.1 19 5.5 7 2 26 7.5 
Antonyms 18 4,4 1 0,2 19 4.6 17 4.9 2 0.6 19 5.5 
Total 412 100 345 100 
Table 13. Frequency and Percentages 
of lexical cohesive devices in Arabic 
and English 
for 9.7% of the total number, while in English, it 
accounts for 6.7% and this ranks it also in the third 
place. The fourth device is the use of paraphrase 
equivalences as a lexicave device. The difference 
between synonymy and paraphrase is that synonymy is a 
relation between predicates (words) while paraphrase is a 
relation of a higher level, that is, the level of 
phrases. This device accounts for 8.1% of the total 
number of cohesive devices in Arabic and for 7.5% in 
English. Both Arabic and English show almost the same 
tendency toward the use of paraphrase equivalences. 
Examples of this device can be seen in paragraph A. 4 
where proposition (6) is a paraphrase of proposition (2), 
and in paragraph E.32 where the word "rise" in 
proposition (1) is paraphrased as "to take form" in 
proposition (3). 
The fifth most frequent lexical device is the use of 
opposites accounting for 4.6% in Arabic and 5.5% in 
English. Both languages seem to show a similar tendency 
for using opposites. This device is subsumed under 
Collocation in Halliday and Hassan's lexical cohesion 
types. However, antonyms have systematic semantic 
relationships and there is no theoretical justification 
for classifying them as types of collocation as Halliday 
and Hassan ( 1976 :285) suggest. I propose that they be 
244 
considered as a separate lexical cohesive device or 
subsumed under the cohesive devices that have systematic 
semantic relations, such as hyponymy, synonymy and 
antonymy. 
The least frequent lexical cohesive device in both 
languages is the use of hyponyms. It accounts for 1.7% 
of the total number of lexical cohesive occurrences in 
Arabic and for 2% in English. 
245 
Chapter 7 
Conclusions and Implications 
In this chapter, I will briefly summarize the 
results of the study especially those pertinent to the 
differences and similarities between Arabic and English 
in the three areas covered in this study: thematic 
patterns, logical relations, and lexical cohesion: these 
three aspects are essential for a complete description of 
paragraph structure and organization. Although they have 
been discussed separately in the preceding chapters, what 
is crucial is the fact that there is a close relationship 
between them. They complement each other in defining the 
structure and organization of paragraphs. Furthermore, 
identifying the logical relations holding between 
propositions is basic to theme identification at 
different levels. If a proposition, for example, is in 
illustrative relation to a preceding one, then it is at a 
lower level of generality than its antecedent. That is 
to say, the preceding proposition might be identified as 
the theme of the paragraph because of the logical 
relations holding between this proposition and the 
following one. 
Another principle in the identification of themes is 
the use of parallel equivalences or patterns of 
repetition of key concepts in a paragraph. If a lexical 
246 
item in a certain proposition is repeated through 
synonymy, hyponymy or the same word, this leads us to 
hypothesize that the first proposition containing the 
repeated item is a theme of a certain level. 
The relationship between thematic patterns, logical 
relations and lexical cohesion can be observed in the 
definition of 'tagmeme' as a unit in context that can be 
described in terms of four features: slot, class, role 
and cohesion. A proposition may occupy the nucleus 
position in a paragraph (slot), thus expressing the theme 
of the paragraph (role), and it relates to the other 
propositions by one or more cohesive devices (cohesion). 
For example, one or more of its key concepts may be 
repeated to create lexical cohesion. In Pike's terms, 
this proposition is said to govern the following ones. 
From this brief discussion, one can observe the 
relationship and interaction between thematic patterns, 
logical relations, and lexical cohesion in building a 
coherent paragraph. 
These three aspects interact in different manners 
cross-linguistically. This study examined how they 
complement each other in establishing similar or 
different organizational patterns in Arabic and English 
expository discourse. In brief, the similarities and 
247 
differences between Arabic and English can be stated as 
follows : 
1. Arabic paragraphs are significantly longer and 
have a larger number of propositions. 
2. Both Arabic and English tend to show the same 
preference for the monolevel thematic pattern which 
accounts for 85% of the thematic patterns in both 
languages. 
3. Arabic shows more preference for the equal-
level thematic pattern, while English tends to have more 
frequent multi-level thematic patterns. 
4. English has a stonger tendency for themes to be 
manifested in intial positions. 
5. Parallel paragraphs tend to have similar 
preference for theme location both in Arabic and in 
English. 
6. The prominent pattern of thematic development 
in both languages is deductive rather than inductive. 
7. There is a significant difference between 
Arabic and English themes in terms of marking. Arabic 
shows a stronger tendency for themes to be marked both 
internally and externally. 
8. Arabic is significantly different from English 
in the use of interpropositional connectives which are 
248 
used as theme-marking devices in Arabic, but is is not 
the case in English. 
9. Both Arabic and English utilize enumeration, 
attention-drawing devices and comparative expressions in 
almost the same way. 
10. In English, the additive interpropositional 
relation is significantly more frequent. 
11. There is aslo a significant difference between 
the frequencies of the illative and causal relations in 
both languages. These two relations are more frequent in 
Arabic . 
12. There is no significant difference between the 
frequencies of the alternative, explanatory, and 
illustrative interpropositional relation in Arabic and 
English. 
13. There is a significant difference between the 
frequencies of the explanatory theme-rheme relation in 
Arabic and English. In English, this relation is much 
more frequent. 
14. English shows more preference for the use of 
the illustrative relation, while Arabic has a stronger 
tendency for using the cause/effect and mixed patterns of 
theme-rheme relation. Despite this seemingly large 
difference, they are not statistically significant. 
249 
15. In Arabic, connectives play a more important 
role in signalling the intricate logical interprosition— 
al relations. Thus connectives in Arabic seem to be an 
essential standard of textuality. 
16. Logical relations, in English, are more 
frequently dete rmined by the content of propositions 
rather than by connectives. 
17. As far as lexical cohesion is concerned, there 
is a significant difference between the frequencies of 
the same word and collocation in Arabic and English. The 
lexical cohesive device of repeating the same word is 
more frequent in English, while collocation in Arabic is 
more frequent than it is in English. 
These results cannot be taken as absolute because of 
the limitations and difficulties within which this study 
was conducted. 
The analysis of logical relations and themes was not 
completely objective; very often it was subjective and 
impressionistic. Some procedure ought to be developed to 
validate one's own analysis. Another related problem was 
the choice of evaluators. Because no uniform validation 
procedure was employed, their judgements were intuitive 
and impressionistic as well. If more objectivity is to 
be obtained, experienced evaluators ought to be employed 
or else others ought to be trained. 
250 
Furthermore, some difficulties were encountered in 
the analysis; one of which was the reduction of 
orthographic sentences into propositions. In many cases, 
the orthographic sentence contained more than one 
proposition especially when it was complex. 
Finally, despite the fact that the sample paragraphs were 
sufficient in number, more valid and generalizable 
results can be drawn from larger data written by various 
authors. Some of the thematic development patterns can 
be considered as hypotheses that need to be tested in 
larger and more representative samples. 
Despite these limitations and difficulties, the 
findings of this study are useful in formulating 
hypotheses about paragraph structures, especially that of 
Arabic, and are also pedogogically useful and they can be 
utilized in various ways. 
Pedagogical Implications 
The findings of this study appear to suport the 
conclusion that each language has its own organizational 
structure, logical system and patterns of lexical 
cohesion. This confirms the findings of Kaplan (1967, 
1972 ) and Seda ( 1974) that language background affects 
the organizational structure of written texts produced by 
people from different linguistic backgrounds. 
251 
The findings of the present investigation might be 
utilized in different aspects of language pedagogy. For 
example, knowing the similarities and differences between 
the structure of discourse in each language helps the 
teacher identify rapidly and more accurately the sources 
of difficulty his students might encounter at the 
discourse level, and then, appropriate remedial exercises 
and activities might be designed accordingly. Knowing 
the rhetorical structures of written texts in both the 
mother tongue of learners and the target language they 
are learning will inevitably benefit and facilitate 
teaching reading and writing in that language. For 
example, when learning English as a foreign language, 
Arabic-speaking students should be taught that 
propositions are not usually conjoined together by a 
conjunction, but through the semantic role each 
proposition holds in relation to a preceding one. 
Interpropositional conjunctions are much less in English 
than they are in Arabic. Thus it would be inappropriate 
to start each English proposition with a conjunction such 
as 'and'. Arabic learners of English should also realize 
the differences between Arabic and English in terms of 
punctuation. In Arabic, an orthographic sentence may 
consist of three or more propositions that are connected 
with conjunctions, while these propositions could be 
252 
realized in separate sentences in English. In this 
sense, conjunctions in Arabic serve two functions; they 
signal punctuation marks, and mark the logical relation 
between propositions. 
Contrastive discourse studies may provide useful 
insights for course design and material preparation as 
well. These studies reveal the discourse functions of 
connectives. They reveal how logical relations are 
signalled and how themes in paragraphs are marked and 
developed. In Arabic, for example, the connective fa is 
usually used to signal an explanatory relation to a 
preceding proposition. Furthermore, themes in Arabic 
tend to be marked internally, externally or both. All 
these features ought to be included in teaching a foreign 
language if it is to be comprehensive and practical. 
Textbooks can be revised to include patterns of 
paragraph development in the target language and to show 
how they differ from or are similar to those in the 
student's mother tongue. Consequently, theme markers and 
lgoical relations markers can be included in exercises 
for the use of students. 
Futhermore, the findings of a study such as this one 
are necessary for testing the knowledge of second 
language learners. The good language test should be a 
true measure of the students' knowledge and command of 
253 
the language they have been taught. The knowledge of a 
language not only consists of knowing the syntactic 
structure and the lexicon, but also of knowing the 
functions of features of the discourse, of how logical 
relations are marked, and of the different sources of 
achieving cohesion in a language. 
Therefore a language testing instrument cannot be 
complete unless it tests the students' mastery of those 
features. Oiler ( 1979:416) states that if a test is to 
be valid, it has to test: 
a discourse processing task that 
faithfully mirrors things that people 
normally do when using language in 
natrual contexts ... adherence to 
normal uses of language is an initial 
basis for asserting test validity. 
Finally the results of this contrastive discourse 
study are useful in translating Arabic into English, and 
in teaching translation from Arabic into English, or vice 
versa. A major difficulty of translating from Arabic 
into English lies in the proper understanding of the 
discourse functions of Arabic conjunctions in creating 
texture. It is the misconception of the functions of 
Arabic conjunctions as text-forming devices that made 
Kaplan (1966, 1967) suggest that the predominent pattern 
of paragraph development in Arabic is characterized by 
parallelism. Kaplan's claim seems to rely on the fact 
254 
the Arabic provides its speakers with a fairly large 
number of coordinating devices. The present study has 
revealed that the seemingly coordinating devices are in 
fact not semantically coordinating. Very often, fa and 
wa introduce a semantically subordinate proposition to a 
preceding one. 
Consequently, for an English translation of an 
Arabic text to be equivalent, all the above mentioned 
discourse features ought to be taken into consideration. 
This means that teaching translation must go beyond the 
level of single sentences to the level of discourse to 
involve the discourse features that cannot be captured in 
a sentence-based translation. 
255 
Sources of Sample Arabic Paragraphs 
Abdul Rahman, Awatif. 1984. qazaya'ttaba9iyyah. Kuwait: 
National Council for Culture and Arts. 
Abu Ali, Sultan. 1982. Al-as9ar wa taxsis A1 mawarid. 
Al mousa, Nihad. 1987. Kadiyyat Attahawwul ila Al fusha. 
Amman: Dar Al fikr. 
Annadwah Al - Ar abiyyah. 1979. Islam and Hadarah wa dawr 
Al-shabab. Riyadh: Annadwah Al-Arabiyyah. 
Center of the Studies of Arabic Unity. 1981. Al-
kawmiyyah Al-Arabiyyah wa Al-Islam. Beirut: Center 
of the Studies of Arabic Unity.315 
Gassick, Trevor J. Le. (ed. ) . 1979 . Major Themes in 
Modern Arabic Thought: An Anthology. Ann Arbor: The 
University of Michigan Press. 
Hussein, AJbdel Kadir. 1984. Fan Al-Balaghah. Beirut: 
Alam Al-Kutub. 
The Ministry of Education. 1987. Chemistry for the 
Second Secondary Class. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 
. 1987. Readings for the Second Secondary 
Class. 
Qutb Sayyid. 1978. Nahwa Mujtam9 Islami. Cairo: Dar 
Shurook. 
Rashdan, Abdullah. 1984 . 9ilm Al-Ijtima. Amman: Dar Al-
Nashr wa Al-tawzi9. 
The University of Jordan. 1982. Dirasat, 9 (2). 
256 
Appendix A 
J+* J ^ y ^ Jt- 1 
jT - / v j ^'sT 
• • • 
or1 • W J* W w ^ w ^ ^ 
> i^ r - ^ ^ > v^l J! j—' i 
j ^ JU ^  ~ j» j. . y - j \ ^ •u a i* j 
jp j drLrsfc . 
j - J ^  ^ j ^ ^ ^ ^ 
. . . . 
r ^ l > i u - i - V ^ ' j oU^Ll 2 
; J X Jji '^ISLii Ui^ l ii^ s, . SU-JI 
JT Ll /> V-lil J-Vl J^ oU-.- Jp oU-^ l j 
. ijjLJl i-j-Vl oLTA-il J L.UJ 
— j-' w-i ^ j l l J — S U i^ tf 
Jj J Jl i- ^Jl J* ilijil U UU, . oUJ^i 
<:il ^ j-i—l J1 I • : uL-Vl j ' 
•Id ji; itfJS JJIJ J j j J l t j j l j l j Z j . oU&JJ 
w U X U Wl ' ^ i ji* • 
i-iiij-jj —J^u uu ( j x u-u u; 
il ^ vjjil JU. itf^ . jldt JJ LfeiP 
Lf—jU v1 ^ ^ f^1 ^  y^ 1 j iCUJl J1 O>> ^ ^ jl^l ^  JJ 
257 
>.J — ^ w . ^ y , ^ . ^ , ^ 3 
'' ^ ; J ' " ^ -V — - _ . 
* r r * * * - • — " - o ^ 
> JJ., Lu. —ii'. w O V ^ J „ u 
J! - ^ j; . ^ v 
- y j J;> -u-o ^  .g^. _ ^ 
-,1 0,-Jl ^  .••i' j-J' j f i U-.^  J* J 
- —1 ' J . J i-^ Ui^  ' s^-JU -J i J'wijl OU 
. -^ wJ J O 1 O • ^ . J^1 J ^  ^  -J i—-wLi 
258 
J v ^ ;_uj< j./ u: 6 
-> 'J> w J . u 
J ^f ••»'- J V V- — ^  ^ ^ i^J j •L^S'1 /-T.U.V ji 
>.1 'XI. iU*. ^  
259 
r •' --1 UU ' i i A • • i * 
- w* jS ;i _ ' M. , 
w w - . . ^.u 
^ j* j v 
^ - u ^ 
• J w + 
.-VU J* .yj ; ai . ; 
^ .u. . ^  ^ WU, "" ^ ^ 
J* : - ' u! JP j. J ± .UU . ^ J i i j ^ 
—U jl V J. > . U,^, .cTu-i ^  >u/ ^ 
• v! - »'• '-'-» u ^ 
• -V r j; J y / ^ ; 
%J J , " >» , ,, * 
' / J J _— w — . ^ — . W / 1 -»•— • 1 
. - Nl 
• i* > 
v. ^ v-^vi W C- -- 1 0 
Xjn\ J-X i W l Ji> - oW^ Vl j! • 
T ^ r-- ^ ^ ' 
Ji au>- i^ u-iiYij I ^ ^ - ^ J v-^1-' V^ 1 
• v-l — cr—-yj-. ' — 
WJI — ^ w- uil ^ ^ - * 
. ^  C-^1 ^  ^ ^ . U3JU1 OJ-Jl Jiv-jjlj 
260 
le'l r iM^ jil i^ll C T ^ 1 1 
jlJ ^ if - SJJll U^ll O U U iUi-1 Jji 
yi lc"i_ W ^ l ou^i J 
^kii uir, .. ^ouy cr^1 ^ ^ h 
ji sij'^r i^ jji i-jj j-v1 
•^t oli Ol 3 .Juj . . A-i-J.1 J-l^ " 
^ •• cr 1^1 ^  ^ ^ r u 
oi^ iii .L-ti u^oLJ 
. a« U^ , V V J1 
261 
J CiXi j» li* J - ^  13 
. /.oii, wii i • c^i > ~> Ji r - ^  J C^ iJ, 
J ^ . j. ^ ti V MTU* J. ^ 
«u. "^ v* j* lit, . j j. ---J UUu- I — . IC UU^ l 
it- J» If jtf J* V*-1. > • 
ti just ^^ wji j.u.1 j.u j» j dJ ^  iirij. jj+'j-i 
v^ut j ii/i ^  dJj - • ;>i-i ui, . J — ' J+AI 
^ J u jl j, dJi ji '! ^  . 
^ k . j . j ^ UII - v j. ^  ^ y - A -> J1 
j-i. Uj ' T__i 
J JL 
Mr,Jv-
u ^ 
- ' 
XJ| 
J I - . - 1 jui 
J *' * 
( » : ) 
• - -> -
i J j wjU^U f ^ J^. 7 5 
g w Jj J^r ^  ^ U jr ^ 
Lm^dl id-a-V O W ou* j j^J yjUi ^Lci^ l 
U^a^ l J V, c o.uJLl sl^ II Jl.- y* M 
^aL- ul «. V^-V1 -^M^ J*-J j vlib 
J* i JUL1 J ^ J-3 ojUa U^i^ 'l dai" ^  
jl y* L^UrVl oW.1 auji g . 1 . i," 
252 
J*? u* oi 16 
w u J- w- W - ^  Ui V ^iB I v j 
^ ^ J ^ l i/i Vj c ^  "iij 
J*" ^ L jrJ ; ^ ii-i, 
^ j d ii dj. L. C L . ^JLJ ^ 
1 ^ ^ ^ - V . * 
^ y— 1^ V • ys* JJ J o b 
J » y i J «• W^liL «.1 ^ +J* jfAy Iaj^ H 17 
Jl .w 3 ^  J OLA-iW la- J 
^ -Jj • ** ^ * 
^ jfS <>J ^ 
J, J J ^  ^ ^ -uy .'^ J J J 
J ^r^ui -UJ ^ ^ ^ 1 sii^ 
^ # . -•i-./il J wii*, Jl AiU^ L . 
. -j'-'-j-
- j: ~ - i J ^ Wi j* - S 3 
C-r^  ^  I^SL* Uo^ ^ ' ' * . ji v ^ J I m j 
^ ^ % a ^ ^ - ^ -ri . ^  j -sk- ^  - ^  J - ^ 
. J^y . ji ^ ^ ; j ^ Ui, . jiSL Ji jiiL ^  
^ wi; ji . : ^  ^ ^ v ju^ t ^  j 
^ ^ ^j^t • { r. tP. • lit ^  ji jisl 
275 
i. UJL. > v ^ r ^ . 'jj. Jj^ 19 
ial—llj ^ —ijJl jj>Jt ^ ^ J U c-iU* ijLJ • (^ Ai^ uji 
J—u—li *-•..!) «it —;v« ^ juij 
WV (JUdt jZ* jl t-u^*. J, . |JLwJJ J-. <;u 
a--. (-JUili o-u" iji u • jj jc .1 --i'j ^ vi j - ji 
.j>-i J ^ jjo; c-ir jl . j—V> OJJ 
JL V jl J w-ij JU .IjVI Ulj- jt 
llj r—«Jt . dUJu, jJi- ,-JUdl 
—=J1 jl jUiit y • 
j<5» £*_J.yi U- jl jjfl—» V J'jli - -JUtj ^ -j-di 
X»dl » (-"jJt jl —~ J« • Jl J-'Uj-Ji \ — 
'J . j^i—. jt jji>. U JT Ijiv— Y ^fl rJ—It ^ tj wiL-il 
j^u i^ Vi ji ii—Yt u • ilt j;u. j 
LVi ^ U>JI ji ^Ji y:\u\j j JI 
i ^ j j* ^'s-1 ^ Ji/- 2 0 
; Ni - j-^ jB ^ 
—• j* . J^V' J' 
U p - -U ^ ifrlJ- w it ^ -il ii^Iii! v - — - V 
^ tiu - j j j ^ y j > ^ ^ ^ 
; j t ... W r*-^ ^  u v> 
264 
j^-fc j - J ' - i f 2 1 
v j L _ j t f - j . j . V , - ^ ^ t — j * > 1 
^ J,*- J* J <TV>;-U"-' 
w-^v J v V ^ 
- . - (T\| .1 1 J—' 1 —•• . ijui 
J^LIf. 
JO* - CU 
> >• — 1 - 1 J ^ 
. - w-fr 
^ L L i U ^ L ^ L j l ^ w U 2 2 
ur y ^ u j 
ifrbVLT JTw. ^  OU-J1 y 
L^r* OJLI JV 
4-J. ^  —ii . Ljji ^ U a^fl ^wl 
j l jj-fcji d w ' ' fel ...oil — " - * -V|'1; « - I 
vu ^jisr. j-ji .^uii ^.jii ii> jtusj 
JL, V Lio*. 
f) J* - Ji jJ Jl » > > j'y-f 23 
ur i+iti ^ ^ jVi j J^I wui+i-vi, 
J? j** <• (TJvjL-^fj^l JjjOii yijSl t^l . j^ JI jUjl 
ju * fW vj^ /r ii-o-j- v u ^ j( j ^ ^ui jir x-w 
Uii ,: Jji. JU, «JW_- i JU^ t JLdJ Jli U^  
' * * f ' y—i . u— u, t ^ u o j u, ^ ij^ ij wij it 
. ^  VI W X c ^ w —tj—II 
265 
jj—1[f wUJU'. .^U* Ji . J jt. 24 
— — — f ^ j* j— _> j? 
j JU-I .jjk j* V*-^1 J^U JV-'J i;1* i-U' — 
W ^ J? j / dii > / v . >-:>, 
. wvlO OJU^ ' ^ oJ »-L> J Ur^ O^  . 
j j! y . Za/sI' 'OUi 
j *LT j ^} ^ JL*-; '->; ^.S'l J«ju. 
! J oui ^  _ -
^ vJJ- J! j^i ^ jur 25 
J* > Jl J JJ .u, i i OUi ; J il 
^ J ^ U IT . . j J I " V * w ' w ' - * 
Jii w H ; ^  .1 — w^ Jji J i^li ; t/'i 
"^Uj-L- o^ r li" _ tiL-l lT 
(*—. L-i <J J J J--»*-» ^iil) >o_. 
* JJ"**"* ^  ju -,J. VJ*^ J1**3 
b . a_Ul ^  oL-i > >a JJ 51 jb i^Li-Vl A.-U ^ . 
- ^ J, J Ji i-i 
jl ^ ouyi ^ ifi jl : j ^ b Jjfl jX: 4T d!aJ 
jt^  wii* '^-t --o . ^ a* w^w .^u* . -u^ i jLfci 26 
J: W- -ij ji ^ < r ? l—^ ™ ^ ^ -
: / ^ jui < r # > j ^ L ^ T-i cUj . ^  J 
W J m ^ V , Jl^l J^I i-J UJLJi ^  -ui Vj-i^  JU JL« . 
O-ii T J J- ilT .UJUJI 
266 
- -Ui; .u. _ Lijj/J I i a j 27 
Vtj'-" J . ^LJ; J ^ Tu.iy t i i i 
^-al^l j^a J A- WU, SI . i 
^ J* Ujji O^l Uu, : ^ 
w u j>r ^T/I 4 v. o ; ; , ^ n u v i 
pr'V iaUJ wt. JiJ wUw»i 'I t i^ i 
^ ^ J jLJVI ^ J IJ^ Oi j? ju,^ V 
i a L ^ I ^ L ^ I jlybjji^y^jUS 
. i^y ^  Or J ijUil j-Lii .til 
J^ L—j- jJ^JU t'JJl i J^i oi 28 
; i/xil i l - j oJUil j^JlIU jJUJl jTJil 
, • j ji. i jJV sl[ ji <_ . 
-'l i -JjlS" L » Is. —~ — i^ iCl ji^iil ^iw 
V V ^  J jf. j — 3 : ji ^  29 
y* s v-a --L. ^  rJ j ^ U * h 
Vy J^M. J. . i^ jl JUV" J —JL. . ""-' v*, 
wU, ^ i? jj j. Ji. ji* . -r' ju. j» Ji-
. >11 J* j-- ^  JT Ui j. 
267 
j * ^jUll J } ni II i^Uj ^U* 30 
^ ^ <> iji^i j V^ ljij 
U v^ -il WuJIj UUil wU*«Jlj ^ IxLI 
U J ^UJj ^ J^ JU jl ^ jj^ JI 
^ — ^ ^ J -^ iiij w — u j w i wO^ ii ^  
^ JaiL-H wUU^I ^ ^ . Jjjtf y 
J J w U f^pUJ j^J Jj-Lw^  U^ aJw. 
J^ JIJ JULJ ^ •n^ ll wJl 'a^^guUIIj iaULlj 
o^ai ^ UJ wUUii j jSCUj ii^ u^ u ^ ^ 
J1 g -J - j JoJo^  uji ^pi U'wJlJIj ^ U ^ J I 
o > u - UJ* ^  j/* ji>U^ JJ j r n u ^ 
l^i i^ JJlj W'di «»!. -> , j i^p ruii ^  Jit J; '1 J 
J .UD J-,; i-Ua, l^J^^Vi L-a*. 31 
^ c—1. wUJ-i-i w i — . . . • - jJLL jl J,U L-lp -Jjul jL-vil ^ *m J - » J \ -
ijL* o-tf i-J JjVl v - J l jl Juisi^  iiill Ola. 
•jLl: . J^; j i u * ; , - . , jLjVi o-—» ioU V o i ^ i 
wii-i V—"j J »> j^i^ ii - U J 
WUIJ-JI o : • U j UjJ^i. -i L^JI J rf. wlai-JJ 
Ol—^J w y i ^ j JL" U Ui jl oa^f j wUU oUJJ UJJ^il 
i^Uil jl .^ lilj ^ ^ ^ '' J-J W^J ^J-^ J 
i Jo: ^ail jl w-lj i u U - i idJ ^ ^ U .IfcU Ja; 
I^ iiiu j^J! ^  ^ ^ t j J ^ ^ c ^ 1 J 
J OUj ^  j^ LLil t ai la,. AiV . -Vt J > j ' 
. U ^ " L ^ I JJ ^  J ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1C^ 1 1 
^ ^ jj^ ilj JL-T^ J ^  j UI11 ^ 
l i ^ ^ j—- jb -JVJ ^ cr4^ 
. . J jU 
268 
i-uii j ^  ^ .^u- ja g uuJi ^ w J j 32 
> V^i i-—a xu . juji ^ji 
* - > itf . ^ > ^ r , ^ ^Ul'wll 
Vt-1 j-A-il ^ ^ . s J J , jX jf v.yjl 
-X, — . ^ Jif ^  „ j-iLj . L ^ jji 
•i ^ .iji ^ cJ, j ^ ii „ iwJi L^ -
c^—u > W j j v v-y^ Ji 
J] f J U ^ ^ i^Cll oLJrdl u j f 33 
^ ill JLV . p J \ z , J J \ o-
•Vy- jl ^  our «W JJ- j\ c ccJ ^  Jft J^ jJ! 
-j-'jr-i oJV lis . J^i j jLH 
• * 
Jt^—1 J > U A - ^ j V-^-l tCJ U^J 
. i - i i ; ^ ^ ji iLifl^lj 
J ijU-^i i y - JUL* J oU-^ UVl A. r j ; ^jjl J^l U 34 
^ v i ui it • J i ^ j v r - ^ J ^ k Vts* 
UJL- j e-i w^-il Jij-oi 
lit VI v U j — J Uj-^-w v^ 
^ u>, . ^  ^ wtf 
j-wi-p^ il J W ^ . ^ ^ jf ^  OwUl 
— > Jl J ^ 1 <> V^-c* 
Ji.*. J A ^ 
269 
j J at a j j i A l i > J l j j T ^ - r ^ J 3 5 
L * OU>i iUj i - u*uJ« J ^ Otf Jl i M 
y-i .. I S j J i J ] Jilll ^  jL-. Wi 1 -VrW*1 ^ O> 
^ OLiil ju«i J U* r^- J" ^ V J^1-
.4*1 J C.j-11 
j ^  Jl j ^ Jl ^  j UU ij>> ^  Jl iibwJl ail 36 
j— jJhii JLJi j ^u^ui i i ; W j • l-I is 
id-wl olS oLJ ; iiJl U^ il 
J, . o y t > w U i JSL J l+U^ J JL- ^ 
ipj 1 yj aj ^  u, j\j LJ »j JI ^ wji jja^ 
jifSV ^ uJ jis wl. - mi iji^vi ;>-Ji 
wlkLJl ipJ,.J* «_«4Jl j , i i J l wis>i 
Jwl Jul Jt . i—L-JI ijle-i-V' 
W iiU-Jl > i . j l^Vl wUJLJl l^Jy^JI ijsH\j 
JUi j ^ J I j* ^ V I 
•j-—• L^jJi oL-UJl swJf JJ oJbl 
J J*-*-, (^b oUjJ . ^ ^ ^ 
w d ^ - l ijl^VI SUwJl jf_, U^p. , JjJI 
oJis ii k iiji iiii (jai j j x i j ^ / a 
J c - ^ j J c-iJIS Jl> 
270 
Ulll jV ^LJ-I al J^ -J J UUI ^ > 3 7 
tiill JjiiU . liJI I*- jl—VI J^ VI J^J V - X * 
j u r j ' w - UiU. - ^ ^ W i-" ; il 
w jl—Vl il Vj — i -H-Vl slLL: j Jj jl J — ioJ. •ulj jl—lil. 
UUl J-w jl Ju V jl—VI jV J-Jl ^  J jiL- Jl oLiy 
wUi' VI. ryi ^  Vj^ I-Ljv lib • i j-. 
JjVi jl J. . jL-Vl VI ^ ijt Lu Ju-j V, . 
L* ^ v jUiVl JU* VI jlJ^--. V c^ j l j l rr j Ji-il Ji* * J'^ L-
« 
. wUUJ-» ^ jjfljl ^ U v UVu UL-» jLJ^I 
JiilSj , ^ e-lt- ^ii-' J * jali ^  j u . jtf i i j J j 
j l J J i i l i > »L.j . Jl .j&iij ^  J i ^ — . 
l ^ j .I4J v r V s <• SUfcil j lj>> ^ ^ I * < " ^iUS, Jl Jj- iiliil Ji: wl-JT 
iilill 
^ ^ ^j» JjJ j wwJI jS^VI 3 a 
*** V - J i U j /r J . ^ -J Ji-u a ^ v 
> JJIci- ^ uf, jL-f ol^- Jjr V ^ i ^ l ^ J ^ L-0 
> yj? V^blol/ J .jU.^ 2 J^il J^ J15-.l^ bljLit i O 
.^ U-Iu ^ JIj^Vl J < r J jX^ . oj>Vt l^ ijg oLLJl 
vP iui ^ m otiL j. . ujt 
271 
. JUI J IjUil J J X L . J J ^ 39 
J *JU LJoic-i a - U * aui JjaJI c-.W.l ai, 
U^Jt VUI JjJl J U i J ^ j . j^Vl 
U U Jbry Y, . i^l^t ^  l^U jii* of ^  jJl 
v 1 / ' J oUi J ^ l v ^ i JUfl 
vUJj i^'J^  Jr1-^ S-US31 J- ifjjJl U,. 
i^ sai ^ ) u~ii oi^ij ouuu .^ uji i ^ j V-W-J 
. v^ i J ( ^ J 
rvJiilj jJ-1 > SjjJll i^il Jj-JJI ^iUU 40 
^ ,Jj j j l o L j J . J* vJIi J if^ ASCJl 
J> . .. ^ill J -^Jt . wVl c^waJl iJ j * ^ 
vji—^i J y.1- i j * . : 
oljf liLi jia J* J A * . i - jUL Ji -* , 
' 4 (J wVi i-J-iil Jjii jf U» :-LSuIl WjU: ^jUtt" 
j—;» j L U vi ojd i^i ^ uii j-uiij ^ u 
a ^ i r* j^ udij ^  j u i ^ ^Vi ^Ji 
. u : .ji^r ui-j JI ^ j U i j 
272 
Appendix A 
Translation: 
A- 1 
1. The Islamic law preceded all other religions in 
establishing equality between women and men, 2. by 
declaring her freedom and independence when she was 
greatly humiliated in all nations. 3. It granted her all 
the rights of man, 4. and legally considered her equal to 
man in all civil aspects such as selling, purchasing, 
gifts and legacy without the need for her father's or 
husband's permission. 5. These merits that have been 
obtained by only a few Western women so far, prove that 
respecting the woman and equating her with the man is one 
of the basics of this religion. 6. Furthermore, our law 
exaggerated in being kind to women. 7. It exempted her 
from the burdens of life, 8. and it did not commit her to 
share the expenses of the house and the upbringing of the 
children, 9. unlike some other western legislative 
systems which equated women with men in duties only, 10. 
and favored men in the rights. "Major Themes in Modern 
Arabic Thought," p.85. 
A.2 
1. The Arab governments strictLy censors the mass media 
especially the press. 2. Censorship takes different 
forms. 3. It might be sometimes restricted to religious 
topics or to other highly sensitive foreign affairs. 4. 
But it very often includes the topics related to the 
security of those governments. 5. Generally, censorships 
on Arabic newspapers is based on written laws, 6. but it 
very often depends on the government's estimation. 7. In 
the Arab countries, there are laws to be applied in 
emergencies. 8- One prominent type of censorship is the 
pre-censorship, 9. when the material to be published is 
presented to the viewer before it is published, 10. 
another form of censorship is the post-publication type 
which confiscates the copies to be distributed, 11. but 
the most dangerous form of censorship that is common in 
the Arabic press is the one practised by chief editors 
and journalists, "qazarya: 'attaba9iyyah," p.132. 
273 
A . 3 
1. Prophet Mohammad is, in the first place, the prophet 
of Islam, 2. to whom this religion was revealed, 3. and 
by means of whom it propagated in the east and the west. 
4. This religion had affected all aspects of Arabic 
culture. 5. to the extent that we cannot understand all 
old heritage without understanding this religion. 6. and 
this Arabic heritage is part of our present culture, 7. 
it is even the foundation on which it is based. 8. It is 
wrong to abandon this culture and adopt the modern 
western culture, 9. Therefore, Arabic heritage is part of 
us whether we like it or not. 10. Moreover, it is the 
feature that makes us unique among nations, 11. it has 
been plentiful and beautiful enough for us to be proud of 
it. 12. Therefore, it is a must for each Arab who is 
concerned for his old culture to study Islam and respect 
the memory of our prophet. "Major Themes," p.133. 
A.4 
1. Prophet Mohammad, in the second place, unified the 
Arabs and brought them together. 2. He was sent to them 
while they were disintegrated, 3. they felt jealous of 
each other, 4. they quarrelled, 5. they fought each 
other, 6. there was no strong tie to bring them together, 
7. there was nothing common to make them united. 8. 
Therefore, he enlivened them, 9. and so they became 
integrated 10. closer to each other 11. and one united 
body. 12. This spirit permeated through the whole world 
motivating and activating it, 13. and spreading to it its 
civilization. "Major Themes," p.133. 
A.5 
1. God created air as a basic foundation of life. 2. Had 
he not created the air, there would have been no wind, no 
rain, and no fog, 3. and the sky would have been black in 
the day, 4. because its blueness is caused by the 
detraction of the sun rays when they penetrate the air. 
5. Had it not been for the existence of air, we would not 
have been able to hear sounds 6. because the air 
transfers the sound waves, 7. the weather could have been 
very hot during the day and very cold at night, 8. 
because it isolates the surface of the earth. 9. Air is a 
shelter for the earth from comets and meteorites, 10. 
since its friction with the air reduces its speed. 
"Chemistry, " p. 76. 
274 
A. 6 
1. But the oddness of my religion's views is due to its 
being in disagreement with the common views about the 
origin of man. 2. The old belief was different from what 
modern science established. 3. Therefore the religious 
views were compatible with that belief. 4. But, today, 
science has confirmed that man is like other living 
creatures. 5. And so, the old religious views became 
incompatible with the modern scientific view. 6. The 
compromise between these views and science became 
difficult 6. and whatever efforts are exerted to achieve 
this compromise, will be rejected by natural sciences. 
"Major Themes," p.75. 
A. 7 
1. Despite the above mentioned advantages of air, its 
existence can be a nuisance to man. 2. For example, air 
carries the bacteria and germs that infect parts of the 
body. 3. It also spreads bad odors. 4. It helps spreading 
fire in forests, 5. and it also spreads the gasses and 
carbon oxides resulting from those fires. 6. It spreads 
dust and sand storms. 7. It spreads the smoke and other 
gasses produced by volcanos. 8. But these natural factors 
of pollution are very minor compared with the pollution 
caused by man. 9. Chimneys of factories blow out lots of 
smoke into the air. 10. Cars also contribute to the 
pollution of the air through the smoke they produce. 11. 
In addition, the gasses produced by burning the trash. 
12. All these factors contribute to the pollution of the 
air. 13. Their danger increases with the advancement of 
technology 15. because advanced industry is a feature of 
civilization. "Chemistry," p.82. 
A. 8 
1. We have to study the issue of the pre-Islamic poetry. 
2. The way in front of the proponents of the old is clear 
and easy. 3. The problem is easy. 4. Did not the scholars 
of Iraq and the leventine agree that there were many pre-
islamic poets? 5. Did they not agree that those poets are 
known to people by name? 6. Did they not agree that those 
poets produced poetry which was transmitted by people 
until it was recorded? 7. If those scholars unanimously 
agreed on that, we have had to accept it. "Major Themes," 
p. 107. 
275 
A.3 
1. Communism requires the abolition of individual 
ownership. 2. This means that the individual is not 
allowed to own anything that can be developed by workers, 
3. and thus, the individual may own his clothes and house 
utensils. 4. Furthermore, he might be allowed to own his 
house as long as this does not harm other people. 5. The 
purpose of communism is to provide economical freedom 
among people. 6. Therefore, inheritance is abolished 7. 
because its existence is incompatible with the economical 
freedom. "Major Themes," p.113. 
A. 10 
1. Vocational adjustment is a feature of social 
adaptation. 2. By means of vocational adaptation, an 
individual fully adapts himself to his society. 3. The 
need for vocational education increases because of the 
fast developments in the Arabic society. 4. The 
industrial renaissance permeated the whole Arab world 
helping it not only develop its resources by the modern 
technological methods 5. but also to industrialize these 
resources. 6. Therefore, education has to meet the needs 
of this renaissance, 7. by paying more attention to 
vocational training, 8. and encouraging agricultural, 
industrial and and commercial education. "9ilm 
' al' ijtima9," p.86. 
A. 11 
1. It is not the Islamic society that made the Islamic 
law, 2. but it is the Islamic law that made the Islamic 
society. 3. The law defined the features of this society, 
6. It directed and developed the Islamic society, 5. the 
islamic law was not a mere response to temporary and 
local needs, 6.; but it was a godly law for the 
development of humanity, 7. through time and through the 
increase in knowledge, the ideal society develops. 8. 
These features played an important role in defining the 
nature of the Islamic society. "Qutb," p.64. 
A. 12 
1. The industrial government realized the danger of this 
situation. 2. they put forward great programs to study 
the means of preventing pollution. 3. Some of these plans 
remove the impurities, 4. others prevent the sources of 
pollution. 5. Some governments prevented the use of 
276 
certain materials whose use causes pollution. 6. In the 
U.S.A. , for example, the refineries stopped adding lead 
compounds to the gasoline, 7. and this necessitated some 
modifications in the engine of the car. 8. Some 
governments prevent the diesel cars from operating in 
towns, 9. because diesel causes more pollution than 
gasoline. "Readings," p.15. 
A. 13 
1. The first thing that surprises you is that I doubled 
the value of the pre-Islamic poetry, 2. or, say, that I 
was obliged to doubt it, 3. so therefore, I started to 
research, think and read carefully, 4. until I arrived at 
an almost true conclusion 5. that the pre-Islamic poetry 
has nothing to do with the pre-Islamic era. 6. but it was 
made up after the advent of Islam. 7. It is Islamic 
representing the life needs of the Muslims. 8. I am 
almost sure tha what was left of the pre-Islamic poetry 
does not represent the pre-Islamic era at all. "Major 
Themes," p.110. 
A. 14 
1. We have two choices: Either we accept what the old 
said about literature 2. with little criticism that 
allows us to say 3. that Al-asmaiy was right or wrong, 4. 
and Abu Ubaida was successful or not, 5. and Al Kisaiy 
was on the right path or not, 6. or else we suspect and 
investigate what the old said. 7. I do not want to 
suggest research 8. but suspicion. 9. I do not want to 
accept anything the old said without making sure it was 
true. "Major Themes," p.106. 
A. 15 
1. Despite the fact that Islam does not prevent 
benefiting from human experience as long as they do not 
conflict with the Islamic law. 2. For example there is 
not harm in making use of people's experiences in 
specifying the renewed social needs, 3. there is no harm 
in utilizing these experiences in implementing the 
Islamic principles. 4. The principles of Islam are 
constant, 5. but ways they are achieved are changeable. 
6. Therefore, these principles can make use of those 
experiences in any field, provided that they do not 
conflict with any principle. "Qutb," p.139. 
277 
A. 16 
1. The notion of Islam replaces the notion of homeland in 
its good sense. 2. which leads to no exploitation of a 
piece of land at the expense of another one 3. or some 
people at the expense of others. 4. Consequently, the 
land over which Islam prevails belongs to all the people, 
5. and every Muslim is a part of the Muslim community, 6. 
undoubtedly, having faith in this notion does not lead to 
undesirable consequences brought about by competition in 
a certain state of affairs, 7. and the desire to 
propagate a nation does not lead to the evil consequences 
caused by colonialism. "Qutb," p. 97. 
A. 17 
1 . Researchers and those who are interested in education 
in Jordan, noticed that the teachers attachment to their 
career started to weaken in the 1970s. 2. This is due to 
several factors, 3. some are related to the living 
conditions of the teachers. 4. These observations were 
based on personal experiences, 5. complaints of teachers, 
6. the complaints of parents, 7. and the complaints of 
administrators. 8. In addition, the image of the teacher 
began to change in the society. 9. This observation is 
reinforced by the several educational conferences held in 
Jordan to discuss this issue, 10. and by some studies 
related to the acceptance of teachers of their career. 
"Dira:sa:t, " p . 3 1. 
A. 18 
1. There is an observation that should be mentioned, that 
is, people may move from a place to another especially 
bedouins, 2. this means that they change a place for 
another. 3. But as far as language or culture is 
concerned, it is not changed. 4. They do not replace a 
culture by another. 5. But they make some adjustments by 
addition or loss. 6. Their culture and heritage remains a 
distinguishing feature for them. 7. Whoever changes his 
culture by changing his place loses his character. 8. and 
when these people adopt a new culture, they will have a 
new personality- "Alkawmiyah Alarabiyyah, " p.20. 
A. 19 
1. The attitude of the teacher of social education 
towards controversial issues depends on the nature of 
these issues. 2. If these matters are related to national 
278 
or human affairs, the teacher has to teach them to his 
students, 3. because they lead people to be unified. 4. 
But if those issues are not basic or if they are related 
to certain parties, the teacher should bring them up in 
his classes, 5. because he will offend his students and 
his nation. 6. He will offend them the student tend to be 
infleunced by his impressions, 7. what he should do is 
teach his students to think before they judge what they 
hear 8. so as not to believe in whatever they hear, 9. 
and get astray, 10. while his offense to the nation comes 
from widening the gap between groups and parties. "9ilm 
' ali'ijtima:9," p.100. 
A.20 
1. When Islam removes the racial and geographical 
barriers on which the notion of the national homeland is 
based, 2. it does not abolish the notion of homeland at 
all. 3. It keeps the good sense of this concept, 4. the 
sense of cooperation, brotherhood and organization. 5. 
Therefore, the notion of the homeland becomes a thought 
common to all people 6. within which people of diverse 
races and places live together, 7. as if they were from 
the same country; 8. they act like brothers, 9. they 
cooperate among each other for the sake of good to 
themselves and to all humanity. 
A.21 
1. Others think that a nation with several social 
diseases, can be cured by establishing public schools. 2. 
By the fashion known in Europe, 3. so that education will 
be available for everyone in a short period of time. 4. 
Once education is available to everyone, people become 
more unified and more integrated. 5. But this notion is 
hard to be realized, 6. because this great job will only 
be achieved by a powerful leader 7. who forces people to 
do things undesirable to them, 8. so that they will 
appreciate their achievement and will get accustomed to 
perform whatever good is required. 10. This leader needs 
plentiful resources to establish schools and cover its 
expenses. 11. Had the nation these two assets, then it 
would not be considered inferior. "Major Themes," p.53. 
A.22 
1. It is known that standard Arabic spreads by the spread 
of education and culture. 2. But we have noticed that the 
new generations are poor in Arabic despite the 
279 
availability of schools and education. 3. One can also 
notice that colloquial Arabic has infiltrated the mass 
media such as the television and the broadcasting 
stations, 4. and this is a dangerous phenomenon that 
should not be overlooked 5. because forgetting it is a 
crime in the religious and nationalistic senses. 6. 
Therefore, there is no justification for this phenomenon 
to spread. 7. All scholars and religious leaders should 
work together to stop the spread of colloquial Arabic, 8. 
otherwise we will suffer from a disaster that is not 
easily curable. "Islam and Hadarah, " p. . 
A.23 
1 . Among the mysteries of the earth is the high 
temperature inside it. 2. But the age of the air is 
undecided yet. 3. Until recently, people used to think 
that the earth is six thousand years old, 4. and then 
some geologists said that the age of the earth is not 
less than a million years. 5. Nowadays, some say that the 
age of the earth is several billion years. 6. All these 
estimations are not true, 7. and God is right when He 
says we have created the heavens and the earth and what 
is in between them in six days, and we were not fatigued. 
8 . Then the age of the earth is related to the age of the 
heavens, 9. and no one knows that except God. "Readings, " 
p.25. 
A.24 
1. And the proofs for that are many. 2. History is full 
of controversies and fights between people about the 
dominance of a thought over the other. 3. Dominance was 
sometimes to the right and sometimes to the wrong. 4. The 
Islamic nations were like that in the middle ages. 5. The 
situation is still the same in the Arab world: a struggle 
between the right and wrong, 6. a struggle among all 
people in branches of knowledge, 7. to the extend that 
thousands of people went abroad to seek knowledge. 8. 
And, if a well known scholar writes a book, it will be 
published in five or six languages at the same time. wMajor Themes," p.82. 
A.25 
1. Similarly when we consider the attitude of Islam 
towards slavery, 2. we find that slavery is no longer 
apparent as it was before, 3. and all that Islam has to 
do with it is that it found it already existing. 4. 
280 
Therefore, it started eliminating its resources, 5. 
restricting its sources to war captives, 6. and also it 
started wiping it out by establishing the principle of 
social welfare and establishing equality among people, 7. 
moreover Islam made slaves equal to others and even 
allowed some to become leaders. 8. Because of all of 
that, it can be confidently said that the Islamic society 
did not recognize the era of slavery and feudalism 9. and 
it did not recognized their features as well. "Qutb, " 
p. 7 6 . 
A.26 
1. And while the proponents of the new, the road ahead of 
them is winding, 2. full of innumerable obstacles. 3. And 
they can hardly move on except with great care and 
deliberation which are closer to slowness than to speed. 
4. For they do not move on with faith and confidence, 5. 
or they have not been granted this faith and confidence. 
6. God had granted them brains that enjoy suspicion and 
anxiety. 7. They do not want to move on in the history of 
literature without being certain. 8. They don't care 
whether they agree or disagree with the old. "Major 
Themes," p.109. 
A.27 
1. The European societies have known a new system, that 
is, capitalism. 2. They have had this system in later 
times. 3. It started with the crusader in the 11th 
century. 4. That is, after the Europeans had been exposed 
to the social systems in the Islamic countries, 5. and so 
they hated feudalism that was prevailing in Europe. 6. 
And this reason is always neglected by materialistic 
theories, 7. because they do not want the human element 
to be involved in the development of history. 8. It is 
sufficient for them to mention the economical causes 
accompanying the crusaders. "Qutb," p.79. 
A.28 
1. Islam had perpetuated the Arabic language 2. when God 
guaranteed the protection of Koran, which is meaning and 
form, 3. and it cannot be understood unless it is in 
Arabic. 4. Therefore, Arabic should survive, 5. for the 
sake of understanding the Koran. 6. That is why the 
Indian scholar Abdel-Majid Farahi insists on writing in 
Arabic, 7. and when asked about that, he said that he 
wanted his books to survive. "Islam and Hadarah." 
28l} 
A.29 
1. In my studies, I did not mean to deny religions for 
personal reasons 2. and I did not deny them haphazardly 
as many people would think. 3. I did not try to make up 
excuses as others 4. who do not believe in any religion. 
5. They go their own ways 6. so as not to be labeled as 
backwards. 7. They are like someone who became a Muslim 
at noon but died at dusk; so Jesus forsook him and 
Mohammad did not know him. 8. I committed myself to 
science, 9. I mean the natural science that's open to any 
scholar. 10. I really hate every research based on 
abstraction. "Major Themes," p. 77. 
A. 30 
1. There is a close relation between planning at schools 
and at the universities 2. because schools and 
universities provide private and public administrations 
with trained man-power, 3. therefore, it is necessary to 
establish a close link between the planning institutions 
and the educational establishments. 4. This might seem 
easy 5. but meeting the future needs, 6. and achieving 
coordination between the administrative governmental 
offices and the educational establishments, 7. and 
establishing specialized colleges 8. and influencing the 
attitudes of people are all not easy matters, 9. they 
really look impossible at the first impression. 
"Dirasat,M p.105. 
A. 31 
1. And when anthropologists became interested in studying 
the origin of language, 2. some of them claimed that 
language started when man tried to imitate the sounds of 
animals and the cries of nature around him, 3. others 
believed that the earliest manifestations of language 
were involuntary voices 4. that later developed until it 
became a language with its grammar and sounds, 5. but 
these beliefs about the origin of language had been 
proven wrong in the light of the results of analytical 
studies of modern languages, 6. which emphasized that 
language is an entity composed of sounds, words and 
sentences, 7. and all of these components are arbitrary. 
8. For example, the relationship between the word horse 
and the animal it refers to is arbitrary, 9. the 
individual lives in a society and learns from his family 
a number of conventional signs used by people to refer to 
the surroundings, to the social relations, and to the 
282 
ideas, 10. and he cannot change it or deviate from it, 
11. because it will be difficult for him to communicate 
with his friends, 12. therefore, language is considered 
as a conventional arbitrary system of symbols used by a 
particular society, 13. and the only function of language 
is to be used as a means of communication among people, 
14. by means of language an individual can transmit his 
experience and skills to others, 15. and he can 
coordinate between his experiences and those of others. 
"Islam and Hadarah," p.90-91. 
A.32 
1. Arabic nationalism was born as a result of 
distinguishing the Arabic nationalism from the Ottoman 
religious link. 2. The Turkish racial nationalism 
practiced dictatorship on Arabs. 3. Therefore, the Arabic 
nationalism movement had to be accurate in understanding 
the national and the religious links. 4. And it really 
was. 5. These conditions disconnected Arabic nationalism 
from the religious links 7. and put it on the way of 
national liberation. "Alkawmiyah Alarabiyyah, " p.220. 
A.33 
1. Scientific theories aim at explaining the causes for 
the appearance of any phenomenon. 2. For example, it 
tries to explain the development of national income 
through time, 3. or the behavior of people in a 
particular event, 4. or the precipitation in certain 
seasons of the year. 5. If a theory succeeded in this 
explanation, we can then use it in predicting how these 
phenomena will be in the future. Abu-Ali, p.2. 
A.34 
1. Whereas the role of advertisements in threatening the 
freedom of the press in Africa comes from finance. 2. The 
reliance on advertisements as a source of finance enables 
the advertisers to control the content of the newspapers 
unless they are under the control of the government 6. 
and this neutralizes the role of advertisers, 5. although 
this does not eliminate the possibility of encounter 
between the government and the strong advertisers, 6. 
whose pressures aim at distorting the national 
development plans in the African countries. 7. The 
conflict between the government and advertisers increases 
especially when they are representatives of foreign 
companies. "qaza:ya 'attaba9iyyah," p.178. 
283 
A.29 
1. But they go beyond this 2. when they think that 
diglossia goes back to the pre-Islamic era, 3. and Arabs 
had two distinct linguistic levels, 4. the first in the 
common language used for communication among the tribes, 
5. and the second is realized in the local dialect at the 
level of each tribe. Al-Mousa, chapter 2. 
A.36 
1. The national press played an important role in the 
liberation movements in both Asia and Africa. 2. The 
development of the press related to the appearance of the 
national elite. 3. National newspapers in Africa and Asia 
were not only reaction against colonialism, 4. but also a 
symbol for the perfection of national movements. 5. 
Undoubtedly, the laws and restrictions imposed by the 
colonial authorities convinced the national leaders of 
the necessity for establishing national newspapers to 
express the pains and aspirations of the people, 6. 
especially that colonial press used to establish a sense 
of psychological alienation among the national leaders, 
7. It used to remind them of their marginal role 8. and 
convince them that independence is impossible. "qaza:a 
'attaba9iyyah," p.18. 
A.37 
1. Language facilitates and organizes teamwork 2. because 
it requires many factors together 3. and these factors 
are only available in man, 4. such as the brain that 
categorizes things into similar groups, 5. and then it 
adds the sound symbols for each group. 6. The second 
factor is the speech apparatus, 7. in addition to the 
social factors 8. since man has to learn language from 
his family and society. 9. If man lives in isolation, he 
will produce various sounds. 10. These factors are put 
together only in man, 11. while the first and the second 
factors, the brain and the speech apparatus are only 
found in man, 12. that is why man is considered a 
speaking animal, 13. and speech is a distinguishing 
feature of man. 14. Consequently, a society without a 
language is unable to organize any simple teamwork, 15. 
and unable to transfer its experiences to other 
societies. 16. consequently, we can say that language 
plays a role in forming culture, although it is a part of 
it. 17. but it is the most important factor because it is 
284 
the means of transmitting culture from one generation to 
another. "Islam and Hadarah," p.91. 
A.38 
1. Pure monopoly is characterized by having one seller of 
a particular thing. 2. This good must be different from 
all other goods, 3. so as not to be influenced by the 
prices of other goods, 4. and the change of prices will 
not affect the policies of other products. 5. Pure 
monopoly is rare in practicality. 6. It is almost 
restricted to the public utilities such as light, water 
and the telephone services. Abu-Ali, chapter 8. 
A.39 
1 . The broadcasting is the commonest mass media in the 
whole world. 2. The developing countries used it greatly 
in the last two decades. 3. The broadcasting is the only 
public mass medium. 4. There is no other medium that has 
the same effect as that of the broadcasting. "qsza:ya 
'attaba9 iyyah," p.14. 
A.40 
1. The critic is the man who can distinguish the good 
from the bad depending on artistic gift, and long 
experience in literature. 2. He depends on two assets: 
talent and study. 3. The talent is natural in man, 4. it 
can be polished by practice 5. and if the reader wants to 
practice the process of criticism, he must appreciate the 
literary piece then he has to explain and criticize it 7. 
thus appreciating the literary text comes first, 8. then 
knowing it and discovering its mysteries is the second 
step. Hussein, p.37. 
285 
Sources of Sample English Paragraphs 
Book, Cassandra L. et al. (eds.) 1980. Human 
Communication: Principles,, Contexts, and Skills. New 
York: St. Martin's Press. 
Brooks, Cleanth and Robert Warren. 1972. Modern 
Rhetoric . (3rd ed.) New York: Harcourt Brace 
Jovanovich, Inc. 
Brown, Gillian and George Yule. 1983. Discourse 
Analysis. London: Cambridge University Press. 
Clarke, M.J. 1975a. English Studies Series 1. London: 
Oxford University Press. 
. 1975b. English Studies Series 2. London: 
Oxford University Press. 
Decker, Randall E. 1966. Patterns of Exposition 4. 
Boston: Little Brown and Company. 
Escholz, Paul (ed.) 1981. Subject and Strategy. New 
York: St. Martin's Press. 
Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman. 1983. (3rd ed.) An 
Introduction to Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart 
and Winston. 
Glenn, Robert B. et al. (eds.) 1974. Language and 
Culture. Michigan: North Michigan University Press. 
Hogins, J. Burl and Robert E. Yarber. 1967. Reading, 
Writing and Rhetoric. Chicago: Chicago Science 
Research, Inc. 
Hudson, R. A. 198 0. Sociolinguistics. London: Cambridge 
University Press. 
Kane, Thomas S. and Leonard J. Peters. 1976. Writing 
Prose: Techniques and Purposes. New York: Oxford 
University Press. 
Kirszner, Laurie G. and Stephen R. Mandell. 1980. 
Patterns of College Writing. New York: St. Martin's 
Publishers. 
286 
Levin, Gerald. 198 1. Prose Models. New York: Harcourt 
Brace Jovanovich, Inc. 
Quirk, James P. 1976. Intermediate Microeconomics. 
Chicago: Science Research Associates, Inc. 
Ross, Janet and Gladys Doty. 1975. Writing English. 
New York: Harper and Row Publishers. 
Scheidel, Thomas M. 1976. Speech Communication and Human 
Interaction. Dallas: Scott, Foresman and Company. 
Schneider, Clarence E. 1974. Syntax and Style. San 
Francisco: Changdler and Sharp Publishers, Inc. 
Trilling, Lionel, (ed. ) 1970 . Literary Criticism. New 
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. 
287 
Appendix B 
E. 1 
1. In many ways, the quality of our environment has 
deteriorated with each new advance of the gross national 
product. 2. Increases in electric power production mean 
the burning of more coal and fuel oil, and hence the 
discharge of more sulpher dioxide into the air. 3. The 
growth of the paper industry has brought a vast increase 
in trash. 4. The production of new automobiles and the 
discard of old ones has resulted in unsightly piles of 
old hulks. 5. The growth of urban automobile 
transportation is choking both the mobility of the city 
and the lungs of the city dwellers. "Our deteriorating 
environment," in Writing Prose, p.173. 
E. 2 . 
1. Thirdly, I hold it essential for a teacher to be both 
intellectually and morally honest. 2. This does not mean 
being a plaster saint. 3. It means that he will be aware 
of his intellectual strengths, and limitations, 4. and 
will have thought about and decided upon the moral 
principles by which his life shall be guided. 5. There is 
no contradiction in my going on to say that a teacher 
should be a bit of an actor. 6. That is part of the 
technique bf teaching, which demands that every now and 
then a teacher should be able to put on an act 7.--to 
enliven a lesson, correct a fault, or award praise. 8. 
Children, especially young children, live in a world that 
is rather larger than life. "The Personal Qualities of a 
Teacher," in English Studies Series 2, p.74. 
E. 3 
1 . Education has always presupposed authority—the 
rightful authority, in respect of teaching, of those who 
know over those who do not know. 2. It has lost its 
authority 3. because its practitioners have lent 
themselves to the production and perpetuation of deadly 
error. 4. Authority stripped of its rightfulness is 
authoritarianism. 6. Buth they are mortally wrong if they 
think that they will improve their situation by replacing 
their elders' authoritarianism with their own. "The 
ecological problem" in Syntax and Style, p.165. 
288 
E.4 
1. To turn to zoology, suppose that a gazelle, a graceful 
little creature with long thin legs, is to become large; 
2. it will break its bones unless it does one of two 
things. 3. It may make its legs short and thick, like a 
rhinoceros, 4. so that every pound of weight has still 
about the same area of bone to support it. 5. Or it can 
compress its body and stretch out its legs obliquely to 
gain stability, like the giraffe. 6. I mention these two 
beasts because they happen to belong to the same order as 
the gazelle, and both are quite successful mechanically, 
being remarkably fast runners. "On Being the Right 
Size," in Patterns for College Writing, p.129. 
E. 5 
1. For the first part, he has to bring the body into the 
proper relation to the particular sport involved. 2. This 
means that he has to analyze the various factors of a 
peak performance for each boy on the team, on one hand 
things like speed and timing in general, and on the 
other, special aspects of the action belonging to the 
sport, such as passing, line backing, broken field 
running. 3. For the requirements of the game (and the 
position the boy is to play) the coach has to analyze the 
elements and then weld them back together in a fluid 
performance. "What is a Good Coach?" in Modern Rhetoric, 
p.90. 
E. 6 
I. American men don't cry, 2. because it is considered 
unmasculine to do so. 3. Only sissies cry. 4. Crying is a 
"weakness" characteristic of the female, 5. and no 
American male wants to be identified with anything in the 
least weak or feminine. 6. Crying, in our culture, is 
identified with childishness, with weakness and 
dependence. 7. No one likes a crybaby, 8. and we 
disapprove of crying, even in children, discouraging it 
in them as early as possible. 9. In a land so devoted to 
the pursuit of happiness as ours, crying really is rather 
un-American. 10. Adults must learn not to cry in 
situations in which it is permissible for a child to cry. 
II. Women being the "weaker" and "dependent" sex, it is 
only natural that they should cry in certain emotional 
situations. 12. In women, crying is excusable. 13. But in 
men, crying is a mark of weakness. 14. So goes the 
289 
American credo with regard to crying. "American Men 
Don't Cry," in Writing Prose, p.199. 
E . 7 
1. The first peoples of the Americas—we call them 
Indians—had been as inventive as most others on earth. 
2. They had developed extensive networks of trade. 3. 
They moved from one place to another, 4. concentrated in 
some places, 5. avoided others, 6. and pushed weaker 
peoples into peripheral backwaters. 7. They built cities 
8. and destroyed them; 9. created great art and forgot 
it. 10. They spoke complex languages, 11. and developed 
elaborate myths, rituals, and religions. 12. They lived 
their daily lives as most human beings do, 13. eager to 
fulfill themselves, 14. convinced of the singularities of 
their ways of doing things, 15. and annoyed when the 
world outside forced itself upon them. 16. Geniuses among 
them invented tools and technologies, 17. devised ways to 
build with stone and wood and mud, 18. invented games, 
calendars, techniques of record keeping, agriculture, 
textiels, baskets, posts, metallurgy, boats. 19. They had 
elaborate pharmacopeia, laws, medicine, 20. and they 
speculated about the nature of the universe and man's 
place in it. 21. They were self-centered, kind, cruel, 
humanitarian, generous, proud, arrogant, humble, and 
frightened in about the same proportion as others are, 
22. and they expressed themselves and their emotions in 
ways conditioned by their own beliefs, languages, and 
cultures. "The First Peoples of the Americas," in 
Writing Prose, p.202. 
E. 8 
1. The one human activity, other than sex itself, for 
which male specialization is indispensable is armed 
conflict involving hand weapons. 2. On the average, men 
are taller, heavier, and more muscular than women. 3- Men 
can throw a longer spear, 4. bend a stronger bow, 5. and 
use a bigger club. 6. Men can also run faster—toward an 
enemy in attack and away from one in defeat. 7. To insist 
along with some women's liberation leaders that women too 
can be trained to fight with hand weapons does not alter 
the picture. 8. If any primitive group ever trained women 
rather than men as its military specialists, it make a 
big mistake. 9. Such a group surely commited suicide 10. 
because not a single authentic case is known from any 
quarter of the globe. "Primitive War," in Writing Prose, 
p.237. 
290 
E.21 
1. Natural, or innocent, anger is the necessary reaction 
of a creature when its survival is threatened by the 
attack of another creature and it cannot save itself (or 
its offspring) by flight. 2. Such anger, accompanied by 
physiological changes, like increased secretion of 
adrenalin, inhibits fear 3. so that the attacked creature 
is able to resist the threat to its exinction. 4. In the 
case of young creatures that are not yet capable of 
looking after themselves, anger is a necessary emotion 
when their needs are neglected: 5. a hungry baby does 
right to scream. 6. Natural anger is a reflex action, not 
a voluntary one; 7. it is a response to a real situation 
of threat and danger, 8. and as soon as the threat is 
removed, the anger subsides. 9. No animal lets the sun go 
down upon its wrath. 10. Moreover, Lorenz has shown that, 
in fights between the social animals, when, by adopting a 
submissive posture, the weaker puts itself at the mercy 
of the stronger, this inhibits further agression by the 
latter. "Anger," in Writing Prose, p.297-298. 
E. 10 
1. The first and most obvious result of the technological 
revolution has been to increase the amount of wealth in 
the form of material things which can be produced in a 
given time by a given population. 2. For example, in 1913 
there was produced in Great Britian seven billion yards 
of cotton cloth for export alone. 3. In 1750 the total 
population of Great Britian, working with the mechanical 
appliances then available, could have produced only a 
small fraction of that amount. 4. A second result of the 
technological revolution is that, as machines are 
perfected and become more automatic, manpower plays a 
relatively less important part in the production of a 
given amount of wealth in a given time. 5. Fifty years 
ago, when all type was set by hand, the labor of several 
men was required to print, fold, and arrange in piles the 
signatures of a book. 6. Today machines can do it all, 
and far more rapidly; 7. little manpower is required, 
except that a mechanic, who may pass the time sitting in 
a chair, must be present in case anything goes wrong with 
the machine. 8. And finally, a third result of the 
technological revolution is that, under the system of 
private property in the means of production and the price 
system as a method of distributing wealth, the greater 
part of the wealth produced, since it is produced by the 
machines, goes to those who own or control the machines, 
291 
while those who work the machines receive that part only 
which can be exacted by selling their services in a 
market where wages are impersonally adjusted to the 
necessities of the machine process. "The Technological 
Revolution," in Writing Prose, p.241. 
E. 11 
1. Anger as a sin is either futile (the situation in 
which one finds oneself cannot or should not be changed, 
2. but must be accepted) or unneccessary (the situation 
could be mastered as well or better without it). 3. Man 
is potentially capable of the sin of anger 4. because he 
is endowed with memory —the experience of an event 
persists—and with the faculty of symbolization (to him, 
no object or event is simply itself). 5. He becomes 
actually guilty of anger 6. because he is first of all 
guilty of the sin of pride, of which anger is one of many 
possible manifestations. "Anger," in Writing Prose, 
p.298. 
E. 12 
1. If anyone wants to exemplify the meaning of the word 
"fish," he cannot choose a better animal than a herring. 
2. The body, tapering to each end, is covered with thin, 
flexible scales, which are very easily rubbed off. 3. The 
taper head, with its underhung jaw, is smooth and 
scaleless on the top; the large eye is partly covered by 
folds of transparent skin, like eyelids—only immovable 
and with the slit between them vertical instead of 
horizontal; 5. the cleft behind the gill-cover is very 
wide, 6. and, when the cover is raised, the large red 
gills which lie underneath it are freely exposed. 7. The 
rounded back bears the single moderately long dorsal fin 
about its middle. "The Herring,* Modern Rhetoric, p.63. 
E. 13 
1. Thanks to this universality of athletic sports, 2. 
English training is briefer and less severe. 3. The 
American makes, and is forced to make, a long and tedious 
business of getting fit, 4. whereas an Englishman has 
merely to exercise and sleep a trifle more than usual, 
and this only for a brief period. 5. Our oarsman work 
daily from January to July, about six months, 6. or did 
so before Mr. Lehmann brough English ideas among us, 7. 
the English varsity crews row together nine or ten weeks. 
8. Our football players slog daily for six or seven 
292 
weeks; 9. English teams seldom or never "practice" and 
play at most two matches a week. 10. Our track athletes 
are in training at frequent intervals throughout the 
college year 11. and are often at the training table six 
weeks; 12. in England six weeks is the maximum period of 
training, and the men as a rule are given only three days 
a week on the cinder track. 13. To an American training 
is an abnormal condition; 14. to an Englishman it is the 
consummation of the normal. "An American at Oxford," in 
Modern Rhetoric, p.59. 
E. 14 . 
1. Grant was, judged by modern standards, the greatest 
general of the Civil War. 2. He was head and shoulders 
above any general on either side as an over-all 
strategist, as a master of what in later wars would be 
called global strategy. 3. His Operation Crusher plan, 
the product of a mind which had received little formal 
instruction in the higher art of war, would have done 
credit to the most finished student of a series of modern 
staff and command schools. 4. He was a brilliant theater 
strategist, as evidenced by the Vicksburg campaign, which 
was a classic field and siege operation. 5. He was a 
better than average tactician, 6. although, like even the 
best generals of both sides, he did not appreciate the 
destruction that the increasing fire-power of modern 
armies could visit on troops advancing across open 
spaces. "Lincoln and his Generals," in Modern Rhetoric, 
p.59. 
E. 15 
1. There is then this matter of superior education; 2. 
the modern student willingly agrees that he is superior 
and believes that 3. therefore he sees more clearly, 4. 
carries proper banners, 5. is better able to undertake 
correct and elevating action. 6. He grants that he is 
young 7. but is convinced that his superiority to 
previous college generations equips him to lead at a much 
earlier age. 8. He is also a creative thinker (teachers 
of English constantly attack his inability to spell and 
punctuate, but they say little against his creativity); 
9. he sees all the old problems in a new perspective. 10. 
For his own survival, he must get control soon, 11. an 
impluse that is setting campus leaders to a faster 
timetable. 12. After all, their idol, John F. Kennedy 
became president in his 40's. 13. If one of today's 
students exerts enough pressure and keeps his elders 
293 
sufficiently unnerved, he too may become the youngest 
President, 14. and may have a world to take care of. 
"Why Students Revolt," in Reading, Writing, and Rhetoric] 
p.5. 
E. 16 
1. These stories have become the epitome of our own 
fears. 2. We have been inventing machines at a growing 
pace now for about three hundred years. 3. This is a 
short span even in our recorded history, 4. and it is not 
a thousandth part of our history as men. 5. In that short 
moment of time we have found a remarkable insight into 
the workings of nature. 6. We have used it to make 
ourselves far more flexible in our adaptation to the 
outside world than any other animal has ever been. 7. We 
can survive in climates which even germs find difficult. 
8. We can grow our own food and meat. 9. We can travel 
overland and we can tunnel and swim and fly, all in one 
body. 10. More important than any of these, we have come 
nearest to the dream which Lamarck had, that animals 
might inherit the skills which their parents learnt. 11. 
We have discovered the means to record our experience 12. 
so that others may live it again. "Science, the 
Destroyer or Creator" in Reading, Writing and Rhetoric, 
p. 278 . 
E. 17 
1. The people insist that it is unfair to generalize 
about the police. 2. The good cop is held up for public 
inspection 3- and he is supposed to be the example of 
law-enforcement officers everywhere. 4. Just as the one 
rabbi, priest or minister who goes to Alabama to 
demonstrate is supposed to represent the whole church. 5. 
The one beautiful cop in a neighborhood will stand out. 
6. He has pride in his job. 6. He is sensitive to human 
problems 7. and knows how to talk to the person on the 
street corner. 8. He has not chosen his job 9. because he 
couldn't get hired any place else. 10. He is a cop 
because he wants to be; 11. perhaps his father and 
grandfather before him had devoted their lives to law 
enforcement. "The Ghetto Cop," in Patterns of 
Expositions, p.27. 
294 
E. 18 
1. Country music is for the small-town American. 2. 
Country music and its image of America pleases those 
millions of quiet people in traditional, socially 
conservative communities who daily face erosion of the 
values that make their lives meaningful. 3. America is 
moving from the nineteenth century into mass society not 
in a smooth glide, 4. but in a series of painful little 
shocks, 5. and the person most likely to appreciate 
country music is the person for whom those shocks hurt 
most. 6. Country music's function is to replenish the 
system of values that we seem to be losing. "A Rose-
Colored Map,- in Prose Models, p.243. 
E. 19 
1. Happiness is never more than partial. 2. There are no 
pure states of mankind. 3. Whatever else happiness may 
be, It is neither in having or being, 4. but in becoming. 
5. What the Founding Fathers declared for us an inherent 
right, we should do well to remember, was not happiness 
6. but the pursuit of happiness. 7. What they might have 
underlined, could have foreseen the happiness market, is 
the cardinal fact that happiness is in the pursuit 
itself, in the meaningful pursuit of what is life-
engaging and life-revealing, 8. which is to say, in the 
idea of becoming. "Is Everybody Happy?" in Prose Models, 
p. 227 . 
E • 20 
i. To know a person's language is to understand his 
culture, 2. for language grows out of 3. and reflects 
culture. 4. The Tzeltal tribe in Mexico, for instance, 
has twenty-five different words for expressing the idea 
to carry. 5. Tzeltal speakers can indicate by one word 
each of the following concepts: carrying on the shoulder, 
carrying on the head, carrying in a container. 6. To 
carry rolled up is expressed by bal; 7. to carry coiled 
up i» ch'et; 8. to carry with tongs is lut. 9. We know 
form his language that the Tzeltal does a lot of 
carrying. -Language and Culture," in Writing English, 
p.76. 
295 
E . 2 1 
1 . An Important aspect of human uniqueness is the power 
of free will. 2. In his books and lectures, Dr. Van Dusen 
frequently spoke about the exercise of this uniqueness. 
3. The fact that he used his free will to prevent life 
from becoming a caricature of itself was completely in 
character. 4. In their letter, the Van Dusens sought to 
convince family and friends that they were not acting 
solely out of despair or pain. "The Right to Die," in 
Subject and Strategy, p.271. 
E.22 
1. An obvious factor in many instances is the 
geographical one. 2. Shared territory can play an 
important role in the development of a people with a 
conscious identity. 3. It normally provides the context 
in which other factors get an opportunity to emerge. 4. 
In the self-conscious associated with the achievement of, 
or aspiration towards, statehood it plays a significant 
role. 5. Natural boundaries do not of themselves 
constitute nations 6. and the eventual state boundaries 
which operate in the major landmasses owe little enough 
to great natural dividing points. 7. A fixed territory, 
however fixed, is characteristic of most peoples in their 
claim to nationhood. "Is Nationalism Obsolete?" in 
Language and Culture, p.208. 
E. 2 3 
1. Bull fighting is not a sport. 2. It is a tragedy, 3. 
and it symbolizes the struggle between man and the 
beasts. 4. There are usually six bulls to a fight. 5. A 
fight is called a cordia de toros. 6. Fighting bulls are 
bred like race horses, 7. some of the oldest breeding 
establishments being several hundred years old. 8. A good 
bull is worth about $2000. 9. They are bred for speed, 
strength and viciousness. 10. In other words a good 
fighting bull is an absolutely incorrigible bad bull. 
"The Bull Fight as Symbolism," in Patterns of Exposition, 
p.137. 
E.24 
1. Nationalism as we commonly, if rather imprecisely, 
speak of it is a relatively recent phenomenon. 2. Of 
course it can trace it roots far back into prehistory 3. 
and these roots broke surface in a particular way in the 
296 
Jewish tradition to which Christianity and the western 
world is so much indebted. 4. Yet the nationalism which 
now confronts us developed in the nineteenth century with 
its immediate? roots in the American and French 
revolutions. 5. It was this kind of nationalism which 
dominated much of the settlement at the end of World War 
II as well as in the breakdown of colonialism in Africa 
and Asia in subsequent decades. "Is Nationalism 
Obsolete?" in Language and Culture, p.206. 
E. 25 
1. There is nothing to prepare you for the experience of 
growing old. 2. Living is a process, 3. an irreversible 
progression toward old age 4. and eventual death. 5. You 
see men of eighty still vital and straight as oaks; 6. 
you see men of fifty reduced to gray shadows in the human 
landscape. 7. The cellular clock differs from each one of 
us, 8. and is profoundly affected by our own life 
experiences, our heredity, and perhaps most important, by 
the concepts of aging encountered in society and in 
oneself. "Aging in the Land of the Young," in Patterns 
of exposition, p.257. 
E. 26 
1. To define a word, then, the dictionary-editor places 
before him the stack of cards illustrating that word, 2. 
each of the cards represents an actual use of the word by 
a writer or some literary or historical importance. 3. He 
reads the cards carefully, 4. discards some, 5. rereads 
the rest, 6. and divides up the stack according to what 
he thinks are the several senses of the word. 7. Finally, 
he writes his definitions, following the hard-and-
fast rule that each definition must be based on what the 
quotations in front of him reveal about the meaning of 
the word. 9. The editor cannot be influenced by what he 
thinks a word ought to mean. 9. He must work according to 
the cards or not at all. "How Dictionaries are Made," in 
Patterns for College Writing, p.149. 
E.27 
I. Everywhere we turn, we see the syraolic process at 
work. 2. Feathers worn on the head or stripes on the 
sleeve can be made to stand for military leadership? 3. 
cowrie shells or rings of brass or pieces of paper can 
stand for wealth; 4. crossed sticks can stand for a set 
of religious beliefs; 5. buttons, elks' teeth, ribbons, 
297 
spec la 1 stylas of ornamental halrcuttlng or tatoolng, can 
•tand for social affiliations. 6. The symbolic process 
permeates human lifa at tha msot primitive as well as at 
the most civilized levels. -Language as Symbolism,- in 
English Studies Series 1, p.124-125. 
E.28 
1. 'Primitive' is a word that is ofen used ill-advlsedly 
in discussions of language. 2. Many people think that 
'primitive' Is Indeed a term to be applied to languages, 
though only to some languages, 3. and not usually to the 
language they themselves speak. 4. They might agree In 
calling 'primitive' those uses of language that concern 
greetings, grumbles and commands, 5. but they would 
probably Insist that these were especially common In the 
so-called 'primitive' languages'. 6. These are 
misconceptions that we must quickly clear from our minds. 
*'PrImltiveness* in Language,* In English Studies Series 
I., p.107. 
E . 29 
1. So far as we can tell, all hustan languages are equally 
complete and perfect as instruments of comaninlcationt 2. 
that is, every language appears to be as well equipped as 
any other to say the things Its speakers want to say. 3. 
It may or may not be appropriate to talk about primitive 
peoples or cultures, 4. but that Is another matter. 5. 
Certainly, not all groups of people are equally competent 
In nuclear physics or psychology or the cultivation of 
rice or the engraving of Benares brass. 6. But this is 
not the fault of their language. 7. The Eskimos can apeak 
about snow with a great deal swre precision and subtlety 
than we can in English, 8. but this Is not because the 
Eskimo language (one of those sometiems mis-called 
'primitive') is inherently more precise and subtle than 
English. 9. This example does not bring to light a defect 
In English, a show of unexpected 'prlmltiveness'. 10. The 
position is simply and obviously that the Eskimos and the 
English live in different environments. U . The English 
language would be Just as rich in terms of different 
kinds of snow, presumably, if the environments in which 
English was habitually used made such distinction 
important. Pr imltiveness' in Language," in English 
Studies Serlaa I, p.107. 
298 
E. 18 
1. TV broadcasters can no longer plead that they are 
unaware of the potiential adverse effects of such 
programs as Born Innocent. 2. During the last decade, two 
national violence comissions and an overwhelming number 
of scientific studies have continually come to one 
conclusion: televised and filmed violence can powerfully 
teach, suggest--even legit imatize--extreme antisocial 
behavior, 3. and can in some viewers trigger specific 
aggressive or violent behavior. 4. The research of many 
behavioral scientists has shown that a definite cause-
effect relationship exists between violence on TV and 
violent behavior in real life. "How TV Violence Damages 
Your Children," in Subject and Strategy, p.225. 
E. 31 
1. A parallel view states that language at first 
consisted of emotional ejaculations of pain, fear, 
surprise, pleasure, anger, and so on. 2. This theory--
that the earliest manifestations of language were "cries 
of nature" that man shared with animals—was the view 
proposed by Jean Jacques Rousseau in the middle of the 
eighteenth century. 3. Rousseau, a founder of the 
Romantic movement, became concerned with the nature and 
origin of language while seeking to understand the nature 
of the "noble savage."* 4. Two of his treatieses deal with 
the origin of language. 5. According to him, both emotive 
cries and hgestures were used by man, 6. but gestures 
proved to bee too inefficient for communicating, 7. and 
so man invented language. 8. It was out of the natural 
cries that man "constructed" words. "The nature of human 
language," in "An Introduction to Language." 
E. 32 
1. Language alone is not, of course, enough to explain 
the rise of modern nationalism. 2. Even langauge is a 
shorthand for the sense of belonging together, of sharing 
the same memories, the same historical experience, the 
same cultural and imaginative heritage. 3. When in the 
eighteenth centruy, nationalism began to take form as a 
modern movement, its forerunners in many parts of Europe 
were not soldiers and statesmen 4. but scholars and poets 
who sought to find in ancient legends and half forgotten 
folksongs the 'soul' of the nation. 5. But it was 
language that enshrined the memories, the common 
299 
experience and the historical record. "Nationalism, * in 
English Studies Series, p.97. 
E. 33 
I. Scienfic theories differ widely among the physical and 
social sciences. 2. But the theories have the common goal 
of formulating predicitons concerning some aspect of 
reality —pre diet ions that are verified in empirical 
tests - - together with logically consistent explanations 
for the predictions. "The Nature of Scientific Theory," 
in Intermediate Microeconomics, p.2. 
e.34 
1. One indicator of the potency of mass-media persuasion 
can be seen by the increased reliance that professional 
persuaders place on the media. 2. More than $37 billion 
were spent by advertisers in 1977; 3. a 40 percent 
increase over 1 9 72. 4 . Newspapers attract the most 
advertising, followed by television (which is limited by 
the amount of available time; 5. the networks have "sold 
out" every prime-time minute). 6. Typical effects, in 
order of incidence, are maintenance of current shart of 
market (e.g., Hertz Rent-A-Car) , increased rate of 
purchasing through reinforcement of loyal users (e.g., 
McDonald's Restaurants), craton of new demand by 
repositioning old products or introducing new ones with 
appropriate media fanfare (e.g., Miller Lite Beer), and 
conversion of those who prefer a competing brand (e.g., 
the tin-cola campaign). "The Influence of Advertising," 
in Human Communication, p.213. 
E. 35 
I. The most obvious difference between diglossic and 
normal English-speaking societies is that no one in the 
former has the advantage of learning the High variety (as 
used on formal occasions and in education) as his first 
language, 2. since everyone speaks the Low variety at 
home. 3* Consequently, the way to acquire a High variety 
in such a society is not by being born into the right 
kind of family, 4. but by going to school. 5. Of course, 
there are still differences between families in their 
ability to afford education, 6. so diglossia does not 
guarantee linguistic equality between poor and rich, 7. 
but the differences emerge only in formal public 
situations requiring the High variety, rather than as 
soon as a speaker opens his mouth. 8. we shall have more 
300 
to say about the situation in non-diglossic societies in 
6.2 and 6.4. "Varieties of Language," in 
Sociolinquistic, p.54. 
E. 36 
1. The role of the mass media in the manipulation of 
public opinion has received a great deal of anguished but 
misguided attention. 2. Much of the commentary assumes 
that the problem is to prevent the circulation of obvious 
untruths; 3. whereas it is evident, as the more 
penetrating critics of mass culture have pointed out, 
that the rise of mass media makes the categories of truth 
and falsehood irrelevant to an evaluation of their 
influence. 4. Truth has given way to credibility, 5. 
facts to statements that sound authoritative without 
conveying any authoritative information. "Truth in the 
Mass Media," in Writing Prose, p.177. 
E. 37 
1 . The value of the use of language to transmit 
information is well embedded in our cultural mythology. 
2. w* all believe that it is the faculty of language 
which has enabled the human race to develop diverse 
cultures, each with its distinctive social customs, 
religious observances, laws, oral traditions, patterns of 
trading, and so on. 3. We all believe, moreover, that it 
is the acquisition of written language which has 
permitted the development within some of these cultures 
of philosophy, science and literature (see Goody, 1977). 
4. w# all believe that this development is made possible 
by the ability to transfer information through the use of 
language, 5. which enables man to utilise the knowledge 
of his forebears, and the knowledge of other men in other 
cultures» "Linguistic forms and Functions,- in Discourse 
Analysis, p. 2. 
E. 38 
1. A pure monopoly exists when an industry consists of 
only one firm; 2. the pure monopoly firm is the only 
producer and seller of the industry's product. 3. As 
contrasted with the competetive firm, the monopoly firm 
chooses output and an associated price for his product. 
4. The demand curve facing the pure monopolist is the 
industry demand curve. 5. If the law of demand holds, the 
demand curve is downward~sloping to the right; charging a 
higher price for output decreases the number of units 
301 
•old. "Pur® Monopoly," in 
p.340 . 
E . 39 
Intermediate Microeconomics, 
I. The mass media have also been used extensively to 
produce short-term effects in political campaigns. 2. 
They have unquestionably had a major impact on the 
political process in the United States. 3. Candidates 
devote much effort to trying to get their messages on the 
maaa media in the most persuasive form possible. 4. 
Communication consultants play a major role in 
Influencing the ways campaigns are conducted. 5. 
Political campaigns use the mass media in two ways. 6. 
They depend on the mass media to present advertisements 
for their candidate; 7. in this use they are much like 
other advertisers. 8. They also use the mass media to try 
to present a favorable image of the candidate on news 
programs and other special programs. 9. They try to get 
maximum media coverage of the candidate; 10. and they try 
to insure that the candidate will always be seen in the 
most favorable situations. 'Reasons People Use the Mass 
Media," in Speech Communication, p.361. 
E. 40 
1. The intention of judgment Is a salient motive of all 
critical theories. 2. They undertake to say what literary 
exel lence conaists in 3. and how discriminations between 
various degrees of exel lence are to be made. 4. But if 
criticism were confined to its judicial function, it 
would be a far less engaging activity than in fact it is. 
Actually, however, aa has been seen, criticism is 
anterior to any particular act of judgment 6. in that it 
defines the nature of the object to be judged 7. and lays 
out the grounds on which judgment is to proceed. 8. And 
criticism continues after judgment has passed, if by 
judgswnt we mean simply the attribution to a work, or a 
canon of work, of a certain degree of exellence. 9. For 
example, the peculiar exellence of Shakespeare's plays 
was very fully recognned In their own time 10. and the 
first superlative Judgement has really never been 
questioned In a decisive way. 11. Yet the body of 
Shakespeare criticism that has come into being in the 
intervening years Is of such magnitude that Is scarcely 
to be encompassed by a any reader in a lifetime, 12. and 
there is no liklihood of falling off in its rate of 
increase. 13. What is all this activity about? -??" in 
Literary Criticisms, p.10. 
302 
REFERENCES 
ALEGO, J. 1974 (1-9). "Tagmemics: A brief overview," in 
Ruth M. Brend, Advances in Tagmemics. Amsterdam: 
North Holland. 
BECKER, Alton L. 1965. "A Tagmemic Approach to Paragraph 
Analysis." College Composition and Communication 
16( 5): 237-242"! 
1977. The Figure a Sentence Makes, An 
Interpretation of A Classical Malay Sentence. In 
Symposium on Discourse in Syntax, U.C.L.A., 17-21. 
1 979 . "Text-Building, Epistemology, and 
Aestheic in Japanese Shadow Theatre," in A.L. Becker 
and Aram A. Yengoyan (eds.), The Imagination of 
Reality: Essays in Southeastern Asian Coherence 
Systems. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation. 
BERRY, Margaret. 1975b. An Introduction to Systemic 
Linguistics 1; Structures and Systems. London: B.T. 
Batsford Ltd. 
BLOOMFIELD, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, 
Reinehart and Winston. 
BUTLER , S. Christopher. 1985. Systemic Linguistics: 
Theory and Applications. London: Batsford Acacemic 
and Educational. 
CHOMSKY, Noam. 1957. Syntact ic Structures. The Hague: 
Mouton. 
. 19 6 5 . Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. 
Cambridge: MIT Press. 
CHRISTENSEN, Francis. 1963. "A Generative Rhetoric of the 
Sentence. " College Composition and Communication 
24 : ( 3 ) 155-161. 
. 1965. " A Generative Rhetoric of the 
Paragraph." College Composition and Communication 
16(3), 144-156. 
CLYNE, Michael. 1983. "English and German: A Contrastive 
Study," in Kaplan R.E. (ed.), Annual Review of 
Applied Linguistics. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 
303 
COOK-GUMPERZ, J. & J.J. GUMPERZ. 1981. "From Oral to 
Writtenx The Transition to Literacy," in M.F. 
Whiteman (ed. ) , Variation in Writing. Hillsdale, 
N.J.i Erlbaum. 
COOPER, Charles R. 1983. "Procedures for Describing 
Written Texts," in Peter Masenthal et al. (eds.), 
Research on Writing: Principles and Methods. New 
York: Longman. 
CORDER, S. Pit. 1971. "Idiosyncratic Dialects and 
Error Analysis." IRAL 9:147-60. 
DE BEAUGRANDE, Robert. 1980. Text, Discourse and 
Process. Norwoods Ablex. 
Text 
and Wolfgang Dressier. 1981. Introduction to 
Linguistics. London: Longman. 
DECKER, Randall E. 1966. Patterns of Exposition. Boston: 
Little, Brown and Company. 
DRESSLER, Wolfgang. 1970. "Towards a Semantic Deep 
Structure of Discourse Grammar Illustrated from 
Various Indo-European Languages." Papers from the 
Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic 
Society. pp. 202-209. 
ENKVIST, N.E. 1981. "Some rhetorical aspects of 
textlinguistics." 
FIRBAS, Jan. 1974. "Some Aspects of the Czechoslovak 
Approach to Problems of Functional Sentence 
Perspective , " in F. Danes (ed.), Papers on 
Functional Sentence Perspective. The Hague: Mouton. 
FRIES, P. H. 1974 . "Some Fundamental Insights of Tagmemics 
Revisited," in Ruth M. Brend (ed.), Advances in 
Tagmemics. Amsterdam: North Holland. 
GASS, Susan and Josh Ard. 1981. "Reply to Sylvia's 
Comments." TESOL Quarterly 15(3): 352-356. 
GERDEL, Florence L. and Marianna Slocum. 1976. "Paez 
Discourse, Paragraph and Sentence Structure," in 
Robert Longacre (ed.), Discourse Grammar: Studies in 
Indigenous Languages of Columbia, Panama, and 
Ecuador, Pt: 1, Norman: The Summer Institute of 
Linguistics. 
304 
GLEASON, H . A. 1968 . "Contrastive Analysis in Discourse 
Structure/' in James A. Alatis (ed.), Report of the 
Nineteenth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics 
and Language Studies. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown 
University Press. 
GRIMES, Joseph and Naomi Glock. 1970. "A Saramacan 
Narrative Pattern." Language, 46(2): 408-423. 
GRIMES, Joseph E. 1972. "Outlines and Overlays.-
Language, 48(3): 513-524. 
. 19 75. The Thread of Discourse. The Hague: 
Mouton. 
. 1978a. Papers on Discourse. Dallas: The 
Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
GUTWINSKI, W. 1976. Cohesion in literary texts. 
Paris: Mouton. 
HALLIDAY, M.A.K. 1961. "Categories of the theories of 
grammar." Word 17(3):241-92. 
1964. "Descriptive linguistics in literary 
studies" in D.C. Freeman (ed.). 1970. Linguistics 
and Literary Style. New York: Holt, Rinehart and 
Winston. 
HALLIDAY, M.A.K. 1967a. "The Linguistic Study of Literary 
Texts," in Seymour Chatman amd Samuel Levin (eds.), 
Essays on the Language of Literature. Boston: 
Houghton Mifflin. 
. 1967b. "Notes on Transitivity and Theme in 
English." Part 1 in Journal of Linguistics, 3(1):37-
8 1 . 
. 1967c. "Notes on Transitivity and Theme in 
English." Part 2 in Journal of Linguistics, 
3(2):199-244. 
. 1984. "Language as Code and Language as 
Behavior: A Systemic Functional Interpretation of 
the Nature and Ontogensis of Dialogue," in R.P. 
Fawcett et al. (eds.), The Semiotic Systems of 
Culture, Volume 1. London: Francis Pinter. 
305 
* «nd Ruqaiya Hassan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman. 
HARRIS, Zellig. 1952. "Discourse Analysis." Language, 28: 
* 1963. Discourse Analysis Reprints. The Hague: Mouton. 
HENDRICKS, William 0. 1967. "On the Notion Beyond the 
Sentence." Linguistics, 37:12-51. 
• 1972. "Current Trends in Discourse Analysis," 
in Braj B. Kachru & Herbert F.W. Stahlke (eds.), 
Current Trends in Styllstlcs. Edmonton: Linguistic 
Research, Inc. 
HINDS, John. 1983. "Contrastive Rhetoric: Japanese and 
English," in Tuen Van Dijk (ed.), Text, 3{2):181-
195. 
HOHULIN, Lou E. 1984 . "The Semantics of Redundancy." 
Notes on Translation, 104:1-15. 
HOPPER, Paul J. and Sandra A. Thompson. 1980. 
"Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse." Language 
HYMES, D.H. 1979. "On communicative competence." in 
C.J. Brumfit and K. Johnson (eds.). The 
communicative approach to language teaching. 
London: Oxford University Press. 
IDRIS, Abdul Aziz. 1982. An Analysis of the Thematic 
Structure and System of Logical Relations in English 
and Malay Expository Texts. University of Kansas, 
Department of Linguistics, Ph.D. Dissertation. 
JONES, Alexander E. and Claude W. Faulkner. 1966 . 
Writing good prose. New York: Charles Scribner 
Sons. 
JONES, Linda Kay. 1977. Themes in English expository 
discourse. Lake Bluff: Jupiter Press. 
# (ed.). 1979. Discourse Studies in 
Mesoamerican Language. Volume 1. Arlington: The 
Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
306 
and Ned R. Coleman. 1979. "Towards a Discourse 
Perspective of Modes and Tenses in Kickapoo 
Narratives • " in Linda K. Jones (ed.) Discourse 
Studies in Mesoamerican Languages. Vol. 1. 
Arlington: The Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
KACHRU, Yamuna. 1983. "English and Hindi: A Contrastive 
Study, in R.E. Kaplan (ed.), Annual Review of 
Applied Linguistics. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House. 
KANE, Thomas S. 1976. Writing Prose. New York: Oxford 
University Press. 
and Leonard J. Peters (eds.). 1986. Writing 
prose: Techniques and purposes. New York Oxford: 
Oxford University Press. 
KAPLAN, Robert. 1966. "Cultural thought patterns." 
Language 16:1-20. 
. 1967. "Contrastive Rhetoric and the teaching 
of Composition." TESOL 1:10-16. 
. 1972. The Anatomy of Rhetoric. Philadelphia: 
University of Pennsylvania Press. 
KINNEAVY, James E. 1969. "The basic aims of Discourse. 
College Composition and Communication. 5:297-304. 
. 1971. A Theory of Discourse. New York: Norton & 
Co. 
LABOV, William and Joshua Waletzky. 1967. "Narrative 
Analysis: Oral Version of Personal Experience," in 
June Helm (ed.), Essays on the Verbal and Visual 
Arts. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 
LARSON, Richards L. 1967. "Sentences in action: A 
technique for analyzing paragraphs." College 
Composition and Communication. 24:155-161. 
LONGACRE, R.E. (ed.). 1968. Phillip!ne Languages: 
Discourse Paragraph and Sentence Structure. Norman: 
The Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
. 1972. Hierarchy and Universality of Discourse 
Constituents in New Guinea Languages: Discussion. 
Washington: Georgetown University Press. 
307 
a * IV*- Narrative Versus Other Discourse 
Genre, in Ruth M. Brend (ed.)f AdvanTi¥~I^ Tagmemics. Amsterdam: North-Holland. 
«• * 1976a. An Anatomy of Speech Notions Lissie: The Peter de Ridder Press. 
LONGACRE, Robert (ed). 1976. Discourse Grammars: Studies 
in Indigenous Languages of Columbia, Panama, and 
Ecuador, Part 1. Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
• 1977. "A Taxonomic Deep and Surface Structure 
Analysis of 'The Lover and His Lass'," in Teun Van 
Dijk and Janos S. Petofi (eds.), Grammars and 
Descriptions. New York: Walter de GruyteiT 
* 1979. "The paragraph as a grammatical 
unit." in Talmy Givon (ed.). Syntax and Semantics: 
Discourse and Syntax. New York: Academic Press. 
* 1983. The Grammar of Discouse. New York: 
Plenum Press. 
and Francis Woods (eds.) 1976-77. Discourse 
Grammars Studies in Indigenous Languages of 
Columbia, Panama, and Ecuador. Santa Anna: The 
Summer Institute of Linguistics and Related Fields. 
_ and Stephen Levinson. 1978. -Field Analysis 
o f Discourse,- in Wolfgang U. Dressier (ed.), 
Current Trends in Textllnguistlcs. New York: Walter 
de Gruyter. 
MAHCHESE, Lynell* 1978. "Time Reference in Godie.- in 
Joseph E. Grimes (ed.). Papers on Discourse. 
Dallas: The Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
MARTIN, J.R. 1981a. -How many speech acts?- UEA papers 
in linguistics. 14/15: 52-77. 
Mc ARTHUR, Harry S.A. 1979. "The role of aspect in 
distinguishing aquatec discourse types.- in Linda K. 
Jones (ed.). Discourse studies in mesoamerican 
languages» Volume T~. Arlington: The Summer 
Institute of Linguistics. 
MILIC, Louis T. 1969. Stylists and Style: A Handbook with 
Selections for Analysis. New York: Charles Scribner 
and Sons. 
308 
J.c. 1982. -A Study of English Reading 
Comprehension from the Point of View of Discourse 
Function.- English Teaching and Learning. 6(3)i39-
MOHAN, Bernard A. and Winnie Auyeung Lo. 1985. 
'Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and 
developmental factors.- TESOL Quarterly. 19(3):515-
NORROW, K. 1979 . 'Communicative Language Testing: 
Revolution or evolution?' in C.J. Brumfit and K. 
Johnson (eds.). The CosuBunicatlve approach to 
language teaching. London: Oxford University Press. 
MEMSER, William. 1971. "Approximative sytems of foreign 
language learners.' IRAL 9r 115-23. 
NORXAMT, Nathaniel, Jr. 1984. 'Contrastive Analysis of 
Organizational Structures and Cohesive Elements in 
dative and ESL Chinese, English and Spanish 
Writing." Unpublished dissertation. Fordham 
University. 
OLLER, John w. 1979. Language Tests at School. London: 
Longman. 
PAWDHARIPANOE, Rajeshuwari. 1983. 'English and Marathi: A 
Contrastive Study," in R.E. Kaplan (ed.), Annual 
Review of Applied Linguistics. Rowley, 
Ness.:Newbury House. 
PIKE, Kenneth L. 1964a. "Beyond the Sentence." College 
Cowpoaitlon and Co—unication 15: 129-35. 
. 1964b. "Discourse Structure and Tagmemic 
Matrices." Oceanic Linguistics 3: 5-25. 
. 1964c. "A Linguistic Contribution to 
Composition: A Hypothesis." College Composition and 
Comsminlcation 15( 2):82-88. 
. 1965. "Language--Where Science and Poetry 
Meet.' College English, 26:283-292. 
. 1967. Language in Relation to a Unified 
Thoery of the Structure of Human Behavior. The 
Hague: Mouton. 
309 
1982. Linguistic concepts! An Introduction 
to Tagmemics, London* Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,IncI 
1981. Tagmemicsf discourse, and verbal art. Ann Arbori Michigan Studies in the Humanities. 
and Evelyn G. Pike. 1 9 77. Grammatical 
AnalvsIs. Dal las t The Summer I nstitute oT 
Linguistics. 
and Evelyn G. Pike. 1982 . Grammatical 
Analysis. (2nd ed.) Arlington! The Summer 
Institute of Linguistics. 
and Evelyn Pike. 1983. Text and Tagmeme. 
Londoni Francis Pinter Publishers. 
PITKIN, Willis L. 1969. "Discourse Blocs.- College 
Composition and Communication. 20(2)i138-148. 
PRINCE, E.F. 1978. "Discourse Analysis in the Framwork of 
Zellig Harris," in Wolfgang Dressier (ed.). Current 
Trends in Text linguistics , Berlins Walter de 
Gruyter. 
QUICK, Philip Alan. 1986. 'Taxonomy of Repetition." Notes 
on Linguistics 114 j 15-25. 
RE ID, Aileen A., Ruth G. Bishop, Ella M. Button, and 
Robert E. Longacre. (1988). Totonac: From Clause 
to Discourse. Norman: The Summer Institute of 
Linguistics. 
REID, Lawrence. 1 970. Central Bontoc * Sentence, 
Paragraph arid Discourse Part III Normans The Sumeer 
Institute of Linguistics. 
REISER, Hannes. 1978. "On the Development of Text 
Grammar.~ in Wolfgang Oressler (ed.). Current 
Trends in Text 1 inguist ics. New Yorki Walter de 
Gruyter. 
RICHARD and Karis Mansen. 1976. "The Structure of 
Sentence and Paragraph in Guajiro Narrative 
Discourse, " in R.E. Longacre and Frances Woods 
(eds.), Olscourse Grammar; Studies in Indigenous 
Languages of Columbia, Panama, and Ecuador*Santa 
Ana I The Summer Institute of Linguistics. 
310 
RUHL. Cherles. 1973. -Prerequisites for a Linguistic 
Ojecription of Coherence.- Lmquiw Scion c m . 25* 
SANDERS, Cera Id A. 1970. 'On tho natural Domain of 
Creamer.* Llnqulatlca 63.51-123. 
SCLINKER. Larry. 1972. "Interlanguage.- IRAL 10* 219-
SHAUCHNESST, Nina. 1977. 'Some Needed Research in 
2 $ ( 4 t i f i l - C o a , p o t U l o n * n d Co—unlcatlon. 
SILVA, Marilyn N. 1981 "Comments on Susan Gass and 
Joeh Ard, L2 Data* Their Relevance for Language 
Universale.* TESOL Quarteriv 15(3)i351-352. 
SISTRUNK, Sarah A. 1987. Coordination and Subordination 
in Arabic-Speaking Students' English Writing: 
Transfer and Developmental factors. Unpublished M.A. 
thesis. Department of Linguistics, University of 
Kansas. 
STOTSKY, Sandra. 1981. "The Vocabulary of Essay Writings 
Can it be Taught? - College Composition and 
Communication 22 1 3 ( 317-326). 
. 1993. 'Types of Lexical Cohesion in 
Expository writing: Implications for Developing the 
Vocabulary of Academic Discourse." Co 1lege 
Composition and Communication 34(4)»430-446.~ 
TIERNEY. Robert J. and James H. Mosenthal. 1981. The 
ohesion Concept's Relationship to the Coherence of 
e xts. The Center Tor the Study of Reading, 
Technical Report No. 221. 
TRUDGILL, Peter (ed.). 1984. Applied sociolingulstlcs. 
Londons Academic Press. 
TSAO. Fenfu. 1983. "English and Nandarin." in Kaplan, 
R.E. (ed.). Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 
Rowley. Mass.t Newbury House. 
VAN 01JK. Tuen A. 1972. Some Aspects of Text Grassara. 
The Haguei Nouton. 
311 
1977. Text and Context! explorations In the 
Semantics and Pragmatics of Oiscourse. London: 
Longman. 
(ad. ) 1985 . Discourse and Literature. 
Ajaaterdamt John Benjamin's Publishing Company. 
WIMTERWOOD, W. Ross. 1970. 'The Grammar of Coherence." 
Collaoa English 31(8):828-835. 
WISE, Mary Ruth. 1971. Identification of Participants In 
Oiscourse: A Study of Aspects of Form and Meaning In 
Hostel iguenga. Norman: The Summer Institute of 
Linguistics. 
312