EPIGRAPH:

Ne crois pas que le livre te perde de vue, Lecteur. Le tu qui etait passe a` la lectrice, il peut d'une phrase a` l'autre revenir se braquer sur toi. Tu demeures toujours l'un des tu possibls. Qui oserait te condamner a` la perte du tu, catastrophe non moins terrible que la perte de moi? Pour qu'un discours a` la seconde personne devienne un roman, il faut au moins deux tu distincts et concomitants, qui se detachent de la foule des lui, des elle, des eux. _Si Par une Nuit un Voyageu_r
Italo Calvino

(Don't think, dear reader, that the book is losing sight of you. The 'tu' that was passed on to the (female) reader can return from one sentence to the next to stick itself on to you. You will always remain one of the possile 'tu'. Who would dare condemn you to the loss of 'tu' -- a catastrophe no less terrible than the loss of 'moi'. In order for a discourse in the second person to become a novel, one must have a least two distinct and concomitant 'tu', which stand out from the crowd of hims, of hers, of thems.)

1. General considerations:
   1. REFERENCE is the act of using a referring expression to "point to" something in the world (or in one's head).
      There are different types of reference. Here are some of them.

      Deictic reference =3D a referring expression that points to something in the situation of utterance (the time, place, and people present when the speech is uttered). Examples: "here", "now", "I".

      Co-reference =3D a referring expression that points to the same discourse entity as another referring expression that occurs in the text. Examples "he", "it" "one".

      Referring expressions =3D words like "the moon", "the bard" etc. are referring expressions, with no special type (unless they are used to co-refer back to something, as in the sentence "Shakespeare was a great author. The Bard grew up in England"). In their common uses, they are indeed "exophoric" . . . but most referring expressions are exophoric. That's we separate out exophoric from deictic. The former includes all references to things in the world. The latter includes references to things in the world that are present when you're talking. And anaphora (or endophora) is reference to things in the text. Anaphora is a type of co-reference.

   2. COHESION is the internal continuity or network of points of continuity within a text. As Halliday & Hasan say, " The continuity that is provided by cohesion consists, in the most general terms, in expressing at each stage in the discourse the points of contact with what has gone before. =2E.. It is the continuity provided by cohesion that enables the reader or listener to supply all the missing pieces, all the components of the picture which are not present in th text but are necessary to its interpretation."

2. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATIONS
   1. HALLIDAY & HASAN

      H&H identify three types of cohesive relation:

      Nature of cohesive relation	type of cohesion
      (1) relatedness of form	substitution and ellipsis; lexical collocation
      (2) relatedness of reference	reference, lexical reiteration
      (3) semantic connection	conjunction

      Examples:

      1. Examples of relatedness of form:

         substitution: "Nice teapots! I'll take one."
         ellipsis: "Turn on. Tune in. Drop out." ['you' is elided]
         collocation: "John went to the bank. He wanted to swim in the river." ['river' disambiguates 'bank']
         

      2. examples of relatedness of reference: [=3D co-reference]

         exophora: "You, dear reader..."
         anaphora: "I used to have the key. But I lost it."
         cataphora: "It is your turn."
         reiteration: "He speaks only to the Huxleys; the Huxleys speak only to the Darwins; and the Darwins speak only to God."
         "She saw a daffodil. She picked the flower."
         

      3. examples of semantic connection

         examples of conjunction:

         "You tell me that you've got ev'rything you want, *and* your bird can sing, *but* you don't get me, you don't get me! You say you've seen seven wonders, and your bird is green, but you can't see me, you can't see me! When your prized possessions, start to tear you down, *then* look in my direction, I'll be round, I'll be round." [beatles -- example thanks to Lee Campbell]

         H&H also classify comparison as a form of cohesion
         "She's more fun than a barrel of monkeys!"
         "He's as tall as a six foot four inch tree."
         

   2. BROWN & YULE. Brown & Yule believe that a particular kind of reference takes place in discourse: that is, the listener builds a representation or model of what is being spoken about.

      They discuss 5 main systems of cohesion:

      1. reference -- they use the term here to mean a special kind of substitution -- that of pronouns for full referring expressions or proper names
      2. substitution -- other kinds of replacement -- nominal: 'one'; verbal: 'do'; clausal: 'I hope so / I think not'
      3. ellipsis -- null anaphora "who washed the car?" "Daddy [[WASHED THE CAR]]"
      4. conjunction -- additive (and), adversative (but), causative (so), temporal (then)
      5. lexical cohesion -- "The *king* was the *man* for the job because *he* knew how to rule the kingdom and *[[0]]* knew how to be fair". All of the starred items are co-referential. Also reiteration: repetition, synonymy, hyponymy (the daffodil ... the flower).

      Hearers use these systems of cohesion in order to build a discourse model / discourse representation in which entities are established and reference is maintained to them. That is, we use these road markers to add new discourse entities to our mental representation of what is being talked about, to update our understanding of these entities, and to maintain these entities in our consciousness.

      We have to ask ourselves, however, *how* hearers use these systems of cohesion. How do you determine what a cohering (referring) word connects to? Is it in the text? The real world? The imagination? Does it have an identity? Is the identity unique?

      As B&Y point out, it's naive to say that the cohesive devices refer to *something in the text* (eg. just as endophora) as opposed to *co-referring* to something in the world. Because, sometimes our understanding of the entity changes from cohesive device to cohesive device. As shown below:

      "Slice the onion finely, brown in butter, and place in a small dish."
      [This shows problems with simple textual rules for determining the referent: the final elided "it" is not the original onion. Treating the elided "it" as endophora would lead to error.]

      Other problems:

      Sometimes referent is indeterminate: "someone stole my wallet!"
      

      Sometimes referent is nonexistant:
      "no one knows what it's like to be me"
      

      And the cohesive devices must maintain the same discourse entities (rather than, for example, using the same words), as shown below:

      "The car was black. Black english was discussed. The discussion between presidents ended last week. A week has seven days. ..."

      These problems make it difficult to believe H&H's claim that the key to understanding a cohesive device lies in the semantics of the word, or the semantics of the previous word that this item is referring to. And they are pretty convincing in terms of leading us to believe that we (hearers) are constantly updating a dynamic model of the entities in the text and their relationships.

      [some of this summary comes from Lee Campbell's notes]