MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO Lexical Cohesion in Stephen King's

Home , Four Past Midnight, Just After Sunset

MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO FACULTY OF EDUCATION

Department of English Language and Literature

Lexical cohesion in Stephen King’s short stories

Diploma Thesis

Ostrava 2016

Supervisor: Author: doc. Mgr. Olga Dontcheva-Navrátilová, Ph.D. Bc. Štěpán Boček

Prohlášení “Prohlašuji, že jsem diplomovou práci vypracoval samostatně, s využitím pouze citovaných pramenů, dalších informací a zdrojů v souladu s Disciplinárním řádem pro student Pedagogické fakulty Masarykovy university a se zákonem č. 121/2000 Sb., o právu autorském, o právech souvisejících s právem autorským a o změně některých zákonů (autorský zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů.”

Declaration I hereby declare that I wrote this thesis independently and that I used only sources listed in the bibliography section.

______Ostrava, March 2016 Bc. Štěpán Boček

Acknowledgement I would like to express my gratitude to doc. Mgr. Olga Dontcheva-Navratilová, Ph.D. As my supervisor she helped me to write this thesis and gave me valuable advice. I also thank her for her support, time, patience and constructive criticism.

Anotace Diplomová práce analyzuje kohezní prostředky, které autor používá k dosažení koheze ve svých povídkách. Cílem této práce je lokalizovat, popsat a analyzovat prostředky v různých povídkách za využití kvalitativní analýzy textu. Teoretická část zkoumá různé typy kohezních prostředků - opakování, kolokace a lexikální řetězce se svými podkategoriemi. Výzkumná část analyzuje autentické texty a poskytuje popisy a analýzy vybraných části povídek z různých sbírek. Tyto analýzy jsou rozděleny do pěti kategorií- opakování, substituce, kolokace, lexikální řetězce a samotná kvalitativní analýza.

Klíčová slova Koheze, koherence, lexikální koheze, kvalitativní analýza, kolokace, lexikální řetězce, povídky, fikce, lingvistika, lexikologie, současná literatura

Summary The diploma thesis analyses cohesive devices which the author uses in order to achieve cohesion within his short stories. The aim of the thesis is to locate, describe and analyse the devices within different stories by means of qualitative analysis. The theoretical part explores various types of cohesive devices - reiteration, collocation and lexical chains with their subcategories. The empirical part analyses the authentic texts and provides descriptions and analyses of chosen parts of short stories from different collections. The analyses are divided into five categories - repetition, substitution, collocation, lexical chains and the qualitative analysis itself.

Key words Cohesion, coherence, lexical cohesion, qualitative analysis, collocation, lexical chains, short stories, fiction, linguistics, lexicology, contemporary literature

Table of contents

Introduction ...... 7 1 Theoretical part ...... 8 1.1 Cohesion and coherence ...... 8 1.2 Lexical Cohesion ...... 9 1.3 Reiteration ...... 10 1.3.1 Simple and complex repetition ...... 11 1.3.2 Substitution ...... 13 1.3.4 Equivalence ...... 18 1.3.5 Generalization ...... 20 1.3.6 Specification ...... 22 1.3.7 Co-specification ...... 24 1.3.8 Contrast ...... 24 1.4 Collocation ...... 26 1.4.1 Ordered set collocation ...... 27 1.4.2 Activity-related collocation ...... 28 1.4.3 Elaborative collocation ...... 29 1.5 Lexical chains ...... 30 1.5.1 Identity chain ...... 32 1.5.2 Similarity chains ...... 34 2 Empirical Part ...... 37 2.1 Repetition ...... 37 2.1.1 Repetition of adjectives ...... 38 2.1.2 Repetition of pronouns ...... 39 2.1.3 Repetition of nouns ...... 40 2.1.4 Repetition of verbs ...... 41 2.1.5 Repetition of personal names ...... 43 2.2 Substitution ...... 45 2.2.1 Substitution by synonymy ...... 45 2.2.2 Substitution by a pronoun ...... 46 2.2.3 Substitution by hyponymy ...... 47 2.2.4 Various types of substitutions ...... 48 2.3 Collocations...... 50 2.4 Lexical chains ...... 52

3 Qualitative analysis ...... 57 Conclusion ...... 66 List of references: ...... 68 List of sources: ...... 70

Introduction

The diploma thesis explores lexical cohesion in selected works by Stephen King in an attempt to show the importance of lexical choice in contemporary literature. The main aim is to analyze various aspects of the writer´s style and demonstrate why and how often he uses features of cohesion in different short stories. The thesis thus aspires to find different cohesive devices which enable lexical cohesion by analyzing examples taken from different short stories in the collections The Skeleton Crew, Nightmares and Dreamscapes, Different Seasons, Everything´s Eventual, Four past Midnight and Just after Sunset.

King is considered to be one of the most popular and worldwide sold authors in contemporary fiction, writing both novels and short stories. In order to demonstrate the devices used in his writing, more short stories collections are in the scope of this thesis.

Since lexical cohesion has been explored by many scholars and authors over the fifty years, the classification of lexical cohesive devices and the is described in the theoretical part of the thesis and then the different types of devices are analyzed in chosen examples of King´s different short stories. The theoretical part deals with cohesive devises such as reiteration, collocation and lexical chains and their subcategories. The thesis applies a theoretical framework drawing on Halliday and Hasan (1976 and 1989), Hoey (1991) and Tanskanen (2006) and uses a qualitative analysis of lexical cohesion in short stories by S. King.

The thesis undertakes to explore what are the most typical cohesive devices that King uses in order to create a coherent text. An analysies of various passages of different short stories will try to illustrate the different types of lexical cohesion used by King.

1 Theoretical part

1.1 Cohesion and coherence

The concepts of cohesion and coherence have been described by a vast number of scholars such as Halliday and Hasan, Hoey or Tanskanen. Cohesion in general is the linking within text that enables a text to hold together by use of various means of cohesion. Halliday and Hasan (1976) argue that cohesion “refers to relations of meaning that exits within the text and that define it as a text.” (p. 4). Thus the main idea of cohesion in general is to create a text that is to be understood by its readers and Tanskanen (2006) points out that cohesion refers elements of a text which form connections between parts of the text. There have been described two main types of cohesion and they are grammatical and lexical. Grammatical cohesion is based on structural content of text and lexical cohesion, which is under the scope of this thesis, is based on lexical content and background knowledge of the text. Halliday and Hasan (1976) specify the difference between grammar and lexical cohesion as “the more general meanings are expressed by through the grammar, and the more specific meanings through the vocabulary.” (p.5). Moreover, it is necessary to stress that cohesion cannot be described always as only lexical or grammatical. Cohesion according to Halliday and Hasan (1976) is a semantic relation and thus it cannot be implied that it is a purely formal relation.

Coherence, on the other hand, is considered to be an outcome of the cohesion itself. Tanskanen (2006) describes coherence as “outcome of a dialogue between the text and its listener or reader” and she also argues that “cohesion is one of the ways of signaling coherence in texts.” (p.7). It can be said that writers or speakers achieve coherence in their texts or speeches by cohesion, by its various means which can be either grammatical or lexical.

Also Bamberg (1983) underlines the importance of coherence and argues that “writing that lacks coherence will almost certainly fail to communicate its intended message to a reader.” (p.417). Texts that are not coherent cannot convey their message and readers then are not able to follow and understand them. This importance was already mentioned by González (2010) as she argues that “coherent discourse is take to be one where the speakers and addressees can establish a connection among the propositions conveyed,

8 between the text and its context and among the speech acts or (sub)moves intended.” (p. 168).

Thus cohesion enables coherence and thus helps writers create an understandable text which is able to convey its message towards its readers. In the following chapter, lexical cohesion is described in detail.

1.2 Lexical Cohesion

As it has already been stated, lexical cohesion operates with more specific meanings than grammatical cohesion through the vocabulary. Halliday and Hasan (1976) argued that lexical cohesion is basically related to conceptual structures of the text and cohesion signals different relations among different structures. The text is then coherent due to various means of lexis which are bound by different cohesive relations. Stotsky (1983) then argues that lexical cohesion refers to “the semantic relationships created by specific lexical items.” (p. 431) thus the choice of lexis presents the most significant aspect of lexical cohesion itself.

Furthermore, Halliday and Hasan (1976) imply another important aspect of lexical cohesion and they argue that “every lexical item may enter into a cohesive relation, but by itself it carries no indication whether it is functioning cohesively or not.” (p. 288). Thus the relations of lexical cohesion always include more lexical items which are connected by a different cohesive means and a lexical item cannot create cohesion by itself. The importance of lexical items being connected was also mentioned by González (2010) who points out that: “Lexical cohesion concerns the way in which lexical items relate to each other so that textual continuity is created and information is provided about the way lexemes are organized in the discourse.” (p. 168)

Lexical cohesion then focuses on the role of lexis within a text and there have been distinguished various means of cohesion. This thesis follows Tanskanen´s division (2006), which is based on Halliday and Hasan (1976) and the cohesive means that will be analyzed are reiteration, collocation and lexical chains. Furthermore, the subcategories of cohesive devices will be also described in the theoretical part of the thesis and the empirical part of the thesis will show these cohesive means and their relations within

Stephen King´s short stories. The results are then presented through a qualitative analysis of selected cohesive means.

1.3 Reiteration

Reiteration is the first type of lexical cohesion that will be described in this thesis. Examples and definitions provided in this part of the thesis express ideas of Halliday and Hasan (1976), Hoey (1991) and Tanskanen (2006) who brings new insight into lexical cohesion.

Halliday and Hasan (1976) described reiteration as “a form of lexical cohesion which involves the repetition of a lexical item, at one end of the scale.” (p. 278). The issue of repetition is also mentioned by Hoey (1991) as he argues that “Reiteration covers a range of ways in which one lexical item may be understood to conjure up the sense of an earlier item.” (p. 6).

Reiteration is realized when there can be seen some kind of repetition in the text which establishes the continuity of the text. The item which is being repeated is known as reiterated item and according to Halliday and Hasan (1976) it “may be a repetition, a synonym or near-synonym, a superordinate, or a general word; and in most cases it is accompanied by a reference item, typically the.” (p. 278). These types of reiteration will be found and analyzed in the second part of this thesis in authentic texts. They will be examined and quantitative analysis will be performed to show how they are used these types in a practical way. Keenan and Evett (1989) extend the scope of reiteration by including cohesive ties identified by same word matches and inflections derived from the same stem.

This is further developed by Tanskanen (2006) who points out that:

All these devices have the function of reiterating the previous item, either in an identical or somewhat modified form, and this is the basis for creation of a cohesive tie between the items. Often the tie is strengthened by the fact that the items are co-referential. (p. 32).

Thus cohesion can be achieved by establishing cohesive ties based on various reiteration relations. They create cohesion in the text and are divided into the following categories:

1. Simple repetition 2. Complex repetition

3. Substitution 4. Equivalence 5. Generalization 6. Specification 7. Co- specification 8. Contrast (Tanskanen, 2006, p. 49)

The description of these categories in the next part of this theses will be based on Tanskanen (2006) and Halliday and Hasan (1976) and will explain the differences between these relations.

1.3.1 Simple and complex repetition

Repetition is considered to be the most straightforward method of lexical cohesion. As indicated by Ballard (2007) who states that: “Repetition of single words or word groups is a common strategy for giving a text cohesion.” (p. 194). Thus, repetition is more easily found in popular literature texts as well as in spoken discourse. Ballard (2007) also mentions repetition of larger constructions which are less common than repetitions of single word or word groups.

Furthermore, two types of repetition are distinguished and they are simple repetition and complex repetition. According to Tanskanen “Simple repetition occurs when an item is repeated either in an identical form or with no other than a simple grammatical change.” (Tanskanen, 2006, p. 50) Thus, simple repetition does not use any other words to refer to the preceding reiterated item and allowing only slight grammatical changes: “There’s a boy climbing that tree. The boy’s going to fall if he doesn’t take care. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976, p. 279) The additional contracted form ‘s to the noun boy is not considered to form a complex repetition. Further, according to Tanskanen (2006) another typical situation of simple repetition is the repetition of pronouns: you- your etc. These changes are also identified as simple repetition because they do not change the meaning of the text and simple repetition occurs when the lexeme is repeated- irrespective of the inflectional form it takes. Thus the simple repetition is when the lexeme is repeated, irrespective of the inflectional form it takes.

Moreover, Hoey (1991) claims that “simple lexical repetition occurs when a lexical item that has already occurred in a text is repeated with no greater alternation than is entirely explicable in terms of a closed grammatical paradigm“. (p. 55) Assuming only lesser grammatical alternation or not at all, we speak about simple repetition and this method of cohesion is based on respecting the basic unit- a pair.

Complex repetition is defined as a change in the word form and it might also change its grammatical or syntactical meaning in the text. It may share only a lexical morpheme as Tanskanen (2006) points out: that within complex repetition arise more substantial changes as the items may be identified but may function grammatically different or they may only share a lexical morpheme.

Thus, the word or words repeated change their word class, their form and also the lexeme is different. There are many varieties of changes, for instance, Tanskanen (2006) gave an example of change on the basis of derivation on the level of nouns found in one paragraph: cultural determinism- a cultural determinist. In this example an uncountable noun is transformed into a countable one. It also alters the meaning of this phrase as in the latter case the reference is to a person and not to an abstract noun and thus requires the use of the indefinite article a. All these features represent complex repetition of a word, which according to Hoey (1991) occurs “either when two lexical items share a lexical morpheme, but are not formally identical, or when they are formally identical, but have different grammatical functions” (p. 55). The first situation of sharing a lexical morpheme mentioned by Hoey was already described by Tanskanen’s example and the Hoey (1991) provides an example of writer- writing. In this example there can be seen different grammatical function as the latter repetition- the –ing form- is either a nominal gerund or participle in the progressive aspect.

In conclusion, both of the types of repetition are considered to be the most straightforward type of reiteration. The examples mentioned above demonstrated the difference between simple and complex repetition and showed how repetitions can be found in the text and what their role is.

1.3.2 Substitution

The next form of reiteration that is described in this thesis is substitution. According to Halliday and Hasan (1976) substitution is perceived as: “the replacement of one item by another” and also is regarded as “relation in the wording rather than in the meaning.” (p. 88). At this point it is also important to stress out the function of substitution on the linguistic level .And it has only a grammatical function as it does not bring changes to the semantic level. Halliday and Hasan (1976) define substitution as “a relation between linguistic items”, and that “substitution is a relation on the lexicogrammatical level” (p. 89).

Furthermore, ellipsis is considered to be a special type of substitution which is characterized by substitution by nothing. Thus, its goal is not to alternate meaning of the text in any way but mention a former item by another, by its substitute. This category has been part of grammatical cohesion but the substitutive items have very similar function to lexical repetitions.

The typical example is taken from Tanskanen (2006) shows the easily recognizable one- substitution by a pronoun:

“There was nothing wild, feverish or defiant, and nothing unkempt, about the Sylvia Plath who came to me for supervision on the English Moralists from the second or third term of that year 1955-1956. I see her clearly at this moment before my mind’s eye…” (p. 52). This type of substitution is the one that can be found most often both in written and spoken discourse. Moreover, most of substitutions are endophoric of anaphoric type which can be seen in the example mentioned above.

At this point, it is necessary to mention that substitution items function in a very similar way to lexical repetitions. Halliday and Hasan (1976) also mention a term reference which is “the specific nature of the information that is signaled for retrieval.” (p. 31) and that “cohesion lies in the continuity of reference, whereby the same thing enters into the discourse a second time.” (p. 31). Thus the items which are being referred to by other items are labelled as references and they must be made in to the context of situation. Whereas Tanskanen (2006) refers to the Halliday and Hasan´s concept of reference as substitution itself. Tanskanen (2006) also argues that substitution items have similar

13 function to lexical repetitions and furthermore when she discusses the substitution by a pronoun she argues that “the use of a pronoun instead of the lexical form does not undermine this relation, only formulates it in an alternative manner.” (p. 52). Thus it must be mentioned Tanskanen´s and Halliday and Hasan´s concept of substitution differs this thesis provides description of three types of substitution according to Halliday and Hasan (1976) and they are: nominal, verbal and clausal.

Nominal substitution

Nominal substitution represents the actual replacement of one word by another. It is necessary to point out that there is a borderline between substitution and lexical cohesion itself when an item is substituted by for example a general item thing. In this case, we can talk either about nominal substitution or lexical cohesion, namely in the terms of the reiteration type of generalization.

Furthermore, ellipsis is also considered to be a special type of substitution and Halliday and Hasan (1976) argue “that ellipsis can be interpreted as a substitution without a substitute.” (p. 92). In a text, an ellipsis must be fully recoverable- verbatim- to serve its purpose, thus each word or phrase which is omitted must have the ability to be substituted and expressed by the substitutive item.

Nominal substitution is realized by the substitute one/ones. These items carry by themselves a certain degree of difference within particular context. Halliday and Hasan (1976) describes these substitutes as “a carrier of some information which differentiates the instance in which it occurs from the other instance to which it relates by cohesion.” (p.93). One may substitute only the head of a nominal phrase and does not any other defining element of a nominal phrase. Henceforth, the substitute one is always accompanied by a modifying element which defines the particular context. Following example from Halliday and Hasan (1976) shows how the substitute one is used in a text:

I shoot the hippopotamus

With the bullets made of platinum

Because if I used leaden ones

His hide is sure to flatten ´em. (p. 91)

The word bullets is the head of the noun phrase and is substituted by the substitute one. Whereas, in the second line the bullets we are referring to are made of platinum, the substitute one in the next line is accompanied by pre-modifier leaden. Thus, in this case the substitute defines the context as it does not refer to the same element in the first situation- bullets made of platinum- but refers to another type of bullets- leaden ones. As it was mentioned above, the nominal substitution carries a certain degree of difference which can be seen in a particular context.

In conclusion, nominal substitution points up the differences which may arise while using the substitute one/ones. It also enables us to substitute one word with another and to avoid repetition. Furthermore, the importance of ellipsis must be also taken into consideration as it is a special type of a nominal substitution and is being referred to by Halliday and Hasan (1976) as “something left unsaid” but something that is can be understood even with the omission. The next example of a dialogue shows the ellipsis and the words being omitted are put into brackets:

RG: Have you ever taught children? HK: (I have taught children) Only once. That was in London in a private school. RG: Did you like it? HK: Yes (I liked it), it was more or less a private lesson… (Tanskanen, 2006, p. 53-54). Thus the example underlines the fact that the phrases omitted are perfectly understandable and also recoverable from the context itself. The following part of the thesis analyses the second type of substitution- verbal.

Verbal substitution

Verbal substitution is realized by a substitute do. Furthermore, the substitute do operates as a substitute of a Head of a verbal phrase in an utterance it always has the final position. When comparing nominal and verbal substitution, Halliday and Hasan (1976) stress that “In many ways the verbal substitute do is parallel to the nominal substitute one, and it is likely that its evolution in Modern English has followed the analogy of one rather closely.” (p.113).

There is, however, some difference between the use of the substitutes one and do. The nominal substitute one always substitutes only one word which is the head of a noun phrase whereas the substitute do may substitute either the verb itself or a verb and certain other element in a clause. Here is an example of the substitute do which substitutes the verbal phrase: “I don´t know the meaning of half those long words, and, what´s more, I don´t believe you do either!” (p. 112).

The example above indicates that the substitute do replaces the whole phrase know the meaning of half those words and this proves the fact that the function and range of the verbal substitution may be broader than the range of the nominal one.

Furthermore, the substitute do does not always substitute the whole predicate in subject- predicate analysis, it might substitute only a part of it as can be seen in the following example of Halliday and Hasan (1976): “Have they removed the furniture?- They have done the desk, but that´s all so far.” (p.114).

The previous example demonstrates how the verbal substitution can create a new context in. Whereas in the first sentence the main idea is about removing all furniture, the response mentions only the desk thus there can be stated that the substitution substitutes only a part of the predicate and not the whole one.

Lastly, Halliday and Hasan (1976) defines five different types of situations in which the verb do can be used. This chapter of the thesis discussed the use of do in terms of verbal substitution but it might also function as: general word, pro-verb, lexical verb and the operator. These other functions of the verb do not lie beyond the scope of this thesis.

Clausal substitution

The last subcategory of substitution is called clausal. The substituted element is not within a clause but it is a whole clause itself. Words which express this type of clausal substitution are so and not. At this point, it is necessary to stress the fact-according to Halliday and Hasan (1976) - that substitute do is not a clausal substitute as the contrastive element which provides the context of the substitution is located within the same clause. Thus, it can be said that the difference lies in the fact whether the substitution is realized within or outside a clause.

Furthermore, Halliday and Hasan (1976) consider draw also their how clausal substitution is used within different type of clauses etc. reported and conditional. But now, we turn only to the examples of clausal substitution within these types of clauses. Firstly, Halliday and Hasan provide an example from Alice in the Wonderland to demonstrate clausal substitution in a reported sentence:” “…if you´ve seen them so often, of course you know what they´re like.” “I believe so,” Alice replied thoughtfully.” (p.131). In this example, the substitute so replaces the whole clause I know what they´re like in order not to repeat the whole clause and also the word so itself has cohesive function as it connects the clauses together. The word so refers to the whole clause so it does not change any meaning at all and keeps its original one as opposed to the verbal substitution in which the substitute do might refer only to a single or different element.

Another example by Halliday and Hasan (1976) shows clausal substitution within a conditional clause where the particle not is used to perform the substitution: „We should recognize the place when we come to it. - Yes, but supposing not: then what do we do?” (p.134). The negative particle not has thus the same function as the substitute so in positive sentences and again, in this example it substitutes for the whole clause we don´t recognize the place when we come in.

Finally, it should be mentioned that clausal substitution has usually anaphoric function. Halliday and Hasan (1976) point out that “it is difficult to construct exophoric examples, because of the particular nature of the contrastive contexts in which clausal substitution occurs.” (p.141). They also state that the “clausal substitute so is almost always anaphoric, exactly as are all substitutes. Like the other, it may presuppose an element to which it is already structurally related” (p. 139). Thus, clausal substation shares this feature with the other types of substitution and all three types are considered to be anaphoric and perform this function.

In conclusion, this chapter described substitution as one of the types of reiteration and then included analysis and examples of three types of cohesion. Each of the types can be used to substitute a lexical item and in case of clausal substitution the whole clause. In the empirical part of the thesis there will be shown and analyzed different types of substitution which were presented in this chapter.

1.3.4 Equivalence

The next type of cohesion equivalence that is substitution of one item by synonym or near synonym. Yule (2006) states that “Two or more words with very closely related meanings are called synonyms.” (p. 104). Henceforth, the role of lexical cohesion is to supply and substitute particular expressions by words which share the semantic meaning. Also Ballard (2007) implies that words are called synonyms when they tend to have the same meaning thus argues “when words are deemed to have the same meaning, we say they are synonyms, or they are synonymous with each other.” (p. 66). Authors use synonymy to avoid repetition in the text or to refer to one item in more ways.

Moreover, following Yule (2006) synonyms can often be substituted for each other in sentences. But sometimes synonymy is not necessarily total sameness but contextually derived meaning is possible only with one of the synonyms as it could work with a different synonymous word. Nevertheless, consider this example of Yule (2006). Words answer and reply are considered to be synonyms and in these following sentences are interchangeable: What was his reply? and What was his answer? It would be sufficient enough to replace reply in the first sentence by answer in order to achieve the same semantic meaning of the sentence. The second example provides a situation in which these words are not interchangeable. Yule (2006) argues: “There are many occasions when one word is appropriate in a sentence, but its synonym would be odd.” (p. 104). This can be illustrated within the sentence Sandy had only one answer correct on the test. Thus, in this situation the use of reply is not recommended although the words are considered to be synonymous.

Furthermore, Ballard (2007) also provided an example of situation in which synonymous words cannot be used interchangeably. Let´s consider the words sight and vision. In some context, they appear to be synonyms which can substitute for each other: The optician told Liz she had very good sight and The optician told Liz she had very good vision. These two sentences demonstrate the ability of synonyms to replace each other in particular situations. However, Ballad (2007) notes that if we look at another semantic territory of these verbs, there might appear some problems:

1 She looked quite a sight when I saw her yesterday

2 That was a sight for sore eyes

3 She was a vision of loveliness on her wedding day (p. 66).

If we consider Ballard´s explanation, in the first sentence the word sight expresses something unpleasant whereas in sentence two the identical word suggests liking. This underlines the fact, that word sight may be used in either positive or negative meaning. However, word vision which appears in sentence number three has only a positive meaning, thus cannot be used as a synonym to word vision in sentence number one. These examples explained the problems with synonymy and Ballard (2007) continues and states: „Logically, if two words really were identical in meaning, it is likely that one of them would fall from use” (p. 66). This also leads to the point that despite large English lexicon, English does not possess true synonyms.

Furthermore, the also has to be taken into consideration the problem of register. In some registers it is not appropriate to use a synonym of a word even though the synonyms carry the same meaning. Following examples are dealing with this phenomenon and they distinguish between formal and informal use of synonymous words.

The importance of register can be located in these following examples: My colleague has been promoted and The guy I am working with just got a new and better job. Basically, the sentence have the same meaning, and only because of lexis we are able distinguish the difference in register. Whereas, the first sentence would be said in more formal environment, the second sentence is considered to be more casual and informal and would be rather said in familiar environment.

Secondly, Ballard (2007) points out the importance of register in following example:

My younger sister bunked off school yesterday

My younger sister played truant from school yesterday (p. 67).

It is more suitable to choose the first sentence in environment that is known and considered friendly and informal. In contrast, the second sentence might be considered to be belong to more formal register when talking to an authority. The substitution by a synonym, in terms of lexical cohesion, enhances the coherence of the text which makes a text more understandable. Synonyms are also used in order not to repeat the same item and by this various use of lexis authors manage to express different registers in particular contexts. 19

1.3.5 Generalization

The fourth subcategory of reiteration is generalization which is substitution realized by a superordinate item. Tanskanen (2006) argues that generalization “covers the relation between an item and more general item.” (p. 57). This relation is expressed by hyponymy and its hyponymic and hypernymic relations. Hyponymy describes the relations within item of a particular field and shows which items and superordinate- or hypernyms- and subordinate- hyponyms.

Hyponymy also enables us to look into and understand the relations within. Ballard (2007) states that: “Identifying hypernyms and hyponyms can be a useful way of looking at how words are related in terms of more general or more specific meanings, and provide a way of organizing words into sets.” (p. 68). We are able to find specific meanings of a word set and then locate the differences among different words which are considered to be parts of one particular set. In addition, hyponymy demonstrates that some meanings of words are included in their superordinate- ones hyperonyms. Thus, the concept can be demonstrated on examples such as: animal/ dog, flower/rose or vegetable/carrot. The later words in these pairs is captured in their superordinate ones, so following Yule (2006) it can be said that rose is a hyponym of flower and carries the meaning of the rose too- its nature of being a flower.

Furthermore, hyponymy and its relations are typically expressed in hierarchical or tree diagrams in which the relations can be easily identified. The following example of Yule (2006) shows a diagram in practice.

Table 1. Hierarchical diagram. Yule (2006), p.105.

This diagram represents a hierarchical relationship starting with the most general- superordinate- item and continuing with more and more specific examples. Thus, it can be stated that a living thing is a hyperonym to words creature and plant. Furthermore, these two words are also hyperonyms to subordinate words. Namely, creature is a hyperonym to animal and insect, and plant is hyperonym to words vegetable, flower and tree in the diagram. There can be found another example of a relationships between the words creature and flower and it is the fact that they are both co-hyponyms, thus, they share the same superordinate item- in this example living thing.

In conclusion, the diagram underlined the importance of the hyponymy as a tool of lexical cohesion. One item of a text may be substituted by its hyponym or hyperonym by which authors of a text avoid the repetition of the former item and also they create the generalization of the one particular item.

1.3.6 Specification

At this point, the fifth category of reiteration will be described and there will be shown examples of specification. Specification is the opposite relation to generalization which was analyzed in the previous section Tanskanen (2006) argues that specification “refers to the relation between an item and more specific item.” (p. 58). She also provides examples and a typical example of specification can be found in the following paragraph:

“The deceptive nature of the accelerated growth argument occurs also with respect to the other social services. The White Paper tells us that what we want to do in health, education, etc. depends on faster growth.” (p.58). The superordinate phrase the other social services are replaced in the following clause by its subordinate items, namely, health, education. This is again another type of substitution and it is realized by meronymy.

The relationship of meronymy is based on the part-whole relation, thus the subordinate item is just a part of the superordinate one and in terms of lexical cohesion can substitute for the superordinate one. Winston et al´s (1987) table depicts types of meronymy that can be found and analyzed.

Table 2. Six Types of Meronymic Relations with Relation Elemets. Winston et al (1987) p.421.

Firstly,in the table above we can see six different types of meronymic relations and also relation elements within the examples. In each of these examples, the first item is a part of the whole- which is the following word e.g.: handle-cup representing relation of Component/ Integral Object or gin-martini representing relation of Stuff/ Object. Winston et al also provide three relation elements and they are functional, homeomerous and separable and their opposites. The table also shows how each of these relation elements functions in each type of meronymy. For instance, the meronymic relation of Place/ Area is nonfunctional, homeomerous and inseparable. In other words, the example of Everglade- Florida means that these items are not in specific spatial position that supports their functional role considering the whole. Furthermore, the parts are similar to each other and to the whole which they are part of. And lastly, these parts cannot be disconnected as they are connected together.

In conclusion, meronymy is a relation which expresses the relation between an item and its subordinate item. In terms of lexical cohesion, meronymy enables writers to perform a substitution with a subordinate word and is in fact opposite to hyponymy which represents reiteration type of generalization. Thus, by using both hyponymy and meronymy, writers show their range of vocabulary and their ability of using the substitution.

1.3.7 Co-specification

The next type of reiteration which is explored in this thesis is co-specification. This relation represents another type of substitution within lexical cohesion which is performed by substitution by an item which shares the same superordinate item. Tanskanen (2006) speaks of co-specification as a relation “which includes the relation between two items which have a common general item. The earlier studies that have included this relation have referred to it as co-hyponymy or co-meronymy.” (p. 58). Thus, hyponymy and meronymy have already been analyzed in the previous chapters and there have also been provided examples of hyponymic and meronymic relations and the diagrams also showed the items on same levels which can function as co-specification items.

Tanskanen´s (2006) example describes the relation of co-specification: “The farthing has ceased to be a coin of the realm, the halfpenny is on its way…” (p. 58). In this sentence can be found both example of co-specification and a general item of two hyponyms. The farthing and the halfpenny are hyponyms of a word coin which is their superordinate item. Furthermore, the farthing and the halfpenny are also co-hyponyms as they both can be placed on the same level within a hypothetical hierarchical diagram and thus can substitute each other in certain situations.

1.3.8 Contrast

The final type of reiteration which is analyzed in this thesis is contrast. Contrast is expressed by antonymy and the important aspect is that the items which are considered to be antonyms is that they are used in a particular text in a contrasting way. Tanskanen (2006) describes contrast as “relation between an item and another item which has an opposite meaning.” (p. 59)

Thus, contrast is realized by the words which have an opposite meaning and as Ballard (2007) points out: “These usually express extremes of something gradable.” (p. 69). It can be stated one word is at one end of a spectrum whereas its antonym with opposite meaning has its place on the other hand. Ballard (2007) also provides her definition of antonym which is: “A word whose meaning its opposite (usually by being at one extreme

24 of a scale) to that another word with which it might be paired, e.g. black is the antonym of white.” (p. 306).

Antonyms can be divided into three types and: gradable antonyms, non-gradable (complementary) antonyms and reversives (Yule 2006). Firstly, the gradable antonyms represent the comparative construction of sentences like I´m bigger than you and A pony is smaller than a horse. (p. 104). We can see that the words big and small stand on the other ends of the scale and they express on of two possible extremes of a thing.

Secondly, non-gradable antonyms represent a group of antonyms which do not construct a comparative construction. For instance, someone cannot be described as deader or more dead as these adjectives show the final state of someone. Yule (2006) also focuses on the relationship between negatives of these adjectives and points out that “the negative of one member of a non-gradable pair does imply the other member.” (p. 105). This means that someone or something is either described by one member of this pair or by another and thus cannot be described by both at the same time as they exclude each other. The following example shows the relationship between adjectives alive and dead: “My grandparents aren´t alive does indeed mean My grandparents are dead.” (p. 105). Other examples of non-gradable antonyms are pairs as: male/female, married/single etc.

Lastly, the third category of antonyms are so-called reversives. These antonyms do not mean the absolute opposite but they refer to do a reversive action. Yule (2006) provides an example of antonyms dress and undress and states:” while undress can be treated as the opposite of dress, it doesn´t mean “not dress”. It actually means “do the reverse of dress”.” (p. 105). Thus, these antonyms do not stand on the scale at the ends but they express the reversive action of the former antonym of the pair. Other examples are: enter/exit, pack/unpack etc.

In conclusion, there are 6 types of reiteration which are used in lexical cohesion. This part of the thesis provided definitions of these types and gave examples of them as well. As Halliday pointed out that reiteration involves repetition of an lexical item either on the same or the other end of the scale, these types described in the previous chapter give the examples of the repetition either on the same end of the scale- simple and complex repetition, equivalence (synonymy) – and also on the other end of the scale- contrast (antonymy). The next part of the thesis is devoted to the second category of lexical cohesion- collocation.

1.4 Collocation

The following part of the thesis analyses the second type of relations within lexical cohesion, i.e. collocation and also draws on Halliday and Hasan (1976), Hoey (1991) and Tanskanen (2006).

Lexical cohesion performed by collocations is achieved by lexical items which co-occur within a particular field. Hoey (1991) argues that collocation is considered to be a name for a relationship of a lexical item with items that appear more often in its context.

Collocation was described by Jobbins and Evett as “predisposed combination of words, typically pairwise words that tend to regularly co-occur.” The important notion is the fact that they mention more often appearance and regularity of the co-occurrence of items in context as Hoey mentioned.

The concept of co-occurrence was also mentioned by Stotsky (2010) who argues that collocation „refers primarily to the sense of connected discourse created by the close co- occurrence of relatively low frequency words that tend to appear in similar contexts.“ (p. 432). In conclusion, the co-occurrence is essential for establishing a collocation and words which are not often used are typical feature of it.

Tanskanen (2006) points out that “The items occur in similar environments because they describe things or happenings that occur in similar situations.” (p. 60). Thus, the collocation interaction may be again realized by equivalence or generalization but also by words which cannot be described as synonyms or co-hyponyms etc. In contrast it can also be performed by words which do not have anything in common but occur in one particular field.

Furthermore, it is necessary to define when words enter into collocation interaction. Following Halliday and Hasan (1976) who argue that “We can therefore extend the basis of the lexical relationship that features as cohesive force and state that there is cohesion between any pair of lexical items that stand to each other in some recognizable lexicosemantic relation.” (p. 285). There can be stated that words belonging to a particular collocation are to be found within a specific field.

Hoey (1991) describes collocation as not only a statistical fact but also as a psycholinguistical fact as well. He argues that “it is because readers recognize that certain words appear in certain kinds of context.” (p. 154). This proves readers´ ability to anticipate words within one particular context and the collocations serve as cohesive devise and help to create coherence.

Collocations can be divided into two categories according to Morris and Hirst (1991) and the categories are systematic semantic and nonsystematic semantic. Following Nguyen V. C., Nguyen L.M. and Shimazu (2011), the relation of the nonsystematic semantic collocation is actually created between the words or phrases in the discourse which belong to a particular topic which might be difficult to describe without context. For instance paper, contribution and review in the topic of conference are regarded as words belonging to the nonsystematic semantic collocation.

The former relationship represents the most straightforward way and it includes antonyms, members of an ordered set, members of an unordered set and also part-to- whole relationships. Thus this category can be recognized quite easily whereas the later one is problematic. Morris and Hirst (1991) argue that “such collocation relationships exist between words that tend to occur in similar lexical environments.” (p. 22). The nonsystematic semantic emphasizes the descriptions that were provided in the previous paragraphs and stresses out the importance of the co-occurrence of a words from similar field again.

At this point of the thesis, three types of collocations will be mentioned and described. This categories are based on Tanskanen´s (2006) division and the types are ordered set, activity-related collocation and elaborative collocation.

1.4.1 Ordered set collocation

Ordered set collocation is the first of three subcategories and is considered to be the clearest to recognize in a text. According to Tanskanen (2004) it is “closest to the more systematic reiteration relations.” (p. 95). Tanskanen (2006) also argues that this subcategory includes words from ordered sets of lexical items e.g. numbers, colors or days of the week. Thus these words can be easily located in the text and then the

27 collocation can be found and analyzed but as Tanskanen (2006) points out they seem to be quite infrequent in present texts.

The following example from Tanskanen (2006) shows the collocation of time expressions: “The working people of today are the pensioners of tomorrow; the single people of today were the children of yesterday and the parents of tomorrow.”(p. 61). All these expressions today, tomorrow and yesterday belong to one lexical field and thus create a collocation within this sentence which coheres the sentence together.

On the other hand, Renkema (2009) does not agree with Tanskanen and argues that her definition of reiteration and collocation is overlapping. Renkema (2009) points out that ordered set like yesterday- today- tomorrow creates lexical cohesion but argues that these concepts can be linked via meronymy or antonymy not by collocation. He actually states that “pairs like “today-tomorrow” can also be linked via antonymy, for example in a context in which “today” it is still weekend and “tomorrow” is the first workday.” (p. 105). This reaction to Tanskanen´s division just stresses the fact that the interpretation of cohesive relations is subjective and thus leads to variation.

In conclusion, the ordered set collocation can be easily find within a text. It helps the reader to understand the text itself and also creates lexical cohesion within the particular text. The empirical part of the thesis later provides several examples of ordered set collocation within various King´s short stories which are then analyzed.

1.4.2 Activity-related collocation

The next subcategory of collocation described is activity-related collocation. Tanskanen (2006) argues that it is difficult to define and nonsystematic. Furthermore, it is based only on an association between items thus avoids any systematic classification and definition. The words that create an activity-related collocation therefore do not share necessarily a lexical field but an activity. It can be said then that activity-related collocation occurs when “actions, people, places, things and qualities configure as activities.” (Martin 1992, p. 41). Thus in this type of collocation various words from different lexical fields connect together and the tie among them is an action which might involve verbs as well as nouns from particularly distant lexical fields.

Martin (1992) gives an example of an activity-related collocation between words serve- ace. They are bound together by an action in which the former word comes first in order

28 to create the later one. The relationship also includes some degree of cognitivism as people are able to locate the relations between the words. The relationship is a relationship between verb and a noun and also Tanskanen (2006) gives an example of an activity- related collocation with the verb-noun relationship. “… it means of course that they will have the utmost difficulty in paying for their meals in the refectories and that means that the refectories go into deficit if they can´t afford to eat here…” (p. 62). The relationship between the items is based again on the activity as we can actually eat meals.

In contrast of ordered set collocations, activity-related collocations are more difficult to define as they are not constituted of words within one lexical field. The action which bounds them together needs to be found in order to establish an activity-related collocation. The following part deals with the last subcategory of collocation based on Tanskanen´s division elaborative collocations.

1.4.3 Elaborative collocation

The last subcategory of collocation which is described in this thesis is elaborative collocation. Items which are considered to form an elaborative collocation are impossible to define more specifically and according to Hoffman (2012) this definition more subjective than systematic. When defining elaborative collocation Tanskanen (2006) argues that the items might expand on the same topic but are not found within one lexical field and they are not tied together by an action. The semantic connection between expressions can be found in Tanskanen´s (2006) example: “… at the beginning of the Michaelmas term 1955, Sylvia´s first year at Cambridge. I had walked into the Mill Lane lecture room a few minutes early…” (p. 62). The items Cambridge and the Mill Lane lecture room do not belong to one lexical filed thus cannot be defined as ordered-set collocation. They are also not tied together by any activity but on the other hand we feel that they belong together and thus they create an elaborative collocation.

Renkema (2009) argues that:

Elaborative collocation refers to all kinds of lexical linking that can only be explained by using the concept of frame or scenario, like „university-lecture hall,” which is an example of meronymy based on our cultural knowledge about universities, or “Arabs- oil reserves,” which is based on our general world knowledge. (p. 105).

The examples above are according to Renkema connected by our general knowledge of the particular situation. And also by the feeling that has already been mentioned can be substituted by the general knowledge. However, this definition does not apply to all pairs created by elaborative collocation. Both Renkema (2009) and Tanskanen (2006) mention the frame. They help to create cohesion within the text even though they are not visible in the text and as Tanskanen (2006) argues that “Frames thus create a general basis for coherence, but they are conceptual.” (p. 63). The connection in elaborative collocations might not be easily recognized in a text but nevertheless they can be found. They often require some general knowledge of a particular topic as they do not belong to the same lexical filed or are not tied by the same action.

In conclusion, all types of collocations enables lexical cohesion to be created within a text and they make a text cohesive each of them by different means. The differences between ordered- set collocations and reiteration might not always be significant and thus can actually be misinterpreted. Next two types of collocation are based on an association among items and an activity or some general knowledge must be found in order to analyze these kinds of collocations.

1.5 Lexical chains

At this point of the thesis lexical chains will be described. Lexical chains are a group of words which belong to the same lexical field and they help us to interpret the cohesion. The distinction between ordered set collocation and lexical chains is that lexical chains are formed by words which are connected by some lexical cohesive relation- reiteration, collocation etc. Thus items which may be seen as an ordered set may form a lexical chain. In this chapter two types of lexical chains- divided by Hasan (1984) - and their interactions are described. Furthermore, the following table- Fulcher (1989) - shows the types of lexical chains and their feature according to Hasan:

Table 3. Types of cohesive chains. Hasan, R. (1984).

The first notion of lexical chains was introduced by Halliday and Hasan (1976) and was described as something which is created when a cohesive item refers back to an element which also refers back to another element. Thus the role of lexical chains is to establish properly connected piece of text in which can be used different types of reiteration and collocations in order to achieve the cohesion. The following example is taken from DiMarco and shows different cohesive devices in a lexical chain:

1) John has a Jaguar. 2) John loves the car. 3) John works in the garage taking care of the Jaguar.

Thus, the lexical chain consists of words: Jaguar, car, garage and Jaguar and the semantic relations which can be found are: (Jaguar, car) - hyponymy, (car, garage) - collocation, (garage, Jaguar) - collocation. Simple repetition is also used by repeating the word Jaguar. As these examples show, the lexical chain is formed by various semantic relations which help to enable lexical cohesion and form a coherent piece of a text.

The issue of lexical chains was also studied by Morris and Hirst (1991). They argue that “lexical cohesion occurs not simply between pairs of words but over a succession of a number of nearby related words spanning a tropical unit of the text.” (p. 22). This sequence is then called a lexical chain and this definition is based on Halliday and Hasan´s (1976) as the related words refer to other in a particular part of a text. Morris and Hirst (1991) also state that lexical chains do not stop at sentence boundaries as they are able to bound words over the whole text. An example of a lexical chain can be seen in the following example of Morris and Hirst (1991):

In front of me lay a virgin crescent cut out of pine bush. A dozen houses were going up, in various stages of construction, surrounded by hummocks of dry earth and stands of precariously tall trees nude halfway up their trunks. They were the kind of trees you might see in the mountains. (p. 23).

The words which appear in this lexical chain are: virgin, pine, bush, trees, trunks, trees. They all are connected to the lexical field of woods and there can be found different semantic relations among them again. The example also shows us that that different classes are to be located in a lexical chain as virgin is an adjective whereas the rest of the words are nouns.

Lastly, Jayarajan and Deodhare mention in their study the powerful effect of a semantic relation within the members of a lexical chain: “Lexical chains in a text are identified by the presence of strong semantic relations between the words in the text.”

In this section two subcategories of lexical chains are described based on Hasan´s division and they are identity chain and similarity chain. The description of the subcategories draw on Hoey´s (1991) description.

1.5.1 Identity chain

The first subcategory that is going to be described is the identity chain. Hoey (1991) argues that an identity chain “is made up of cohesive ties that all share the same referent(s), whether the ties in question are pronominals, reiterations, or instantial

32 equivalents.” (p. 15). The essential part of an identity chain is that all the items refer to same referent which can be represented by different word classes as well.

Moreover, El-Shiyab (1996) argues that an identity chain is connected with co- referentiality meaning that “every member of a chain refers to the same thing, event, attribute or relation. For example, Adam and he form an identity chain since the relationship between these two items is that of co-reference.” In his example, El-Shiyab shows us a chain quite easy to identify which consists of a proper noun and a pronoun. Both words refer to the same referent thus we speak about an identity chain which agrees with Hoey´s definition of the identity chain.

The following example shows identity chains within several clauses and the range of referents which can be identified in order to create the chain:

1. Once upon a time there lived a young frog. 2. His name was Sniffy. 3. He often sat upon a very soft lily pad, 4. probably because he liked flowers. 5. One day, Sniffy was scrubbing his toes in the pond. 6. He felt something moving in the water. 7. It was his friend, Fluffy. ( Tseng, 2008)

According to Tseng there are five identity chains and they are realized by following words and phrases:

a) Once upon a time, One day b) frog, his name, Sniffy-2X, he-3X, his-2X c) lily pad, flowers d) pond, water e) something, it, friend, Fluffy.

These chains refer to:

a) times which are being referred to by the narrator b) the character of Sniffy

c) flowers d) water e) Sniffy´s friend

Different words in the clauses are used to point to the same referent. The main character has been pointed at by five different expressions and there can be found different types of reiteration- substitution by a pronoun-he, generalization-frog. There is also a possessive adjective his entering the lexical chain concerning Sniffy. The generalization might also be found in lexical chains of flowers and water in which is always more specific word substituted by more general one. Lastly, the lexical chain about Sniffy begins with a cataphoric reference. Firstly, the animal species of the character is introduced and only then its name is mentioned. The whole chain consists again of a pronoun, noun and a proper name.

Furthermore, all these chains are connected together and create within themselves chain interaction which makes the text coherent and easy to understand. Hasan (1984) argues that chain interaction takes place when “two or more members of a chain stand in an identical functional relation to two or more members of another chain.” (p. 212). In conclusion, Tseng´s example provides the chain interaction in which the members share the same relation. This can be seen in using the proper nouns for the characters and also personal pronouns as a use of substitution. This same pattern is found within the two lexical chains- about Sniffy and about his friend.

To conclude, the identity chains shares the feature of referring always to the same referent by various word classes or phrases. This can be achieved by different categories of reiteration or even collocation but the words or phrases must always point to the same referent. The chains also interact and thus create chain interaction in which the members of chains involved must stand in the same relation.

1.5.2 Similarity chains

The second type of lexical chains that is described by Halliday and Hasan as well as Hoey are similarity chains. Hoey (1991) points out that in similarity chains we cannot arise issues of identity. Thus a chain of entities in a writer´s world is formed by the occurrences of a particular word or a phrase and he argues that “if three occurrences arise of someone running away, there will be a similarity chain formed between the occurrences of ran

34 away, irrespective of whether the same person did the running on each occasion.” (p. 15). The similarity chain is then connected by different actions or people which share the same notion, in this case of the phrase run away. In contrast to an identity chain, identities here do not play vital part in forming a chain and emphasis is placed on the occurrence shared by all the referents.

El-Shiyab (1996) argues that a similarity chain can be created in two ways and according to him the two aspects are co-classification and co-extension. By co-classification the author means that members of a chain belong to an identical class. Whereas in co- extension the members refer to something which belongs to the same general field or meaning. Further, the issues of co-classification and co-extension is also described by Taboada (2004). She argues that similarity chains “contain items referring to non- identical members of the same class of things, evets, etc., or to members of related classes of those things and events.” (p. 168). They both agree on the fact that the similarity chains can be created either by co-classification or co-extension and Taboada also stresses out the fact that the items do not refer to the same member as identity chains do, so she also agrees with Hoey´s point of view.

The following example from Halliday and Hasan (1985) provides examples of both identity and similarity chains:

1 Once upon a time there was a little girl

2 and she went out for a walk

3 and she saw a lovely little teddy bear

4 and she took it home

5 and when she got it home she washed it

6 and she had the teddy bear for many many weeks and years. (p. 72).

Firstly, there are two identity chains located in this passage and the first one is found in lines two and five and consists of went out and got….home. They create a similarity chain as they both belong to the same class, in this case, the class of movement. The next similarity chain which can be found consists of verbs from lines four and six took and

35 had. In this context both verbs describe possession so they again belong to the same class and they do not arise identity issues.

There can be also found examples of identity issues and Hoey´s example shows us three- girl, teddy bear and home. The first lexical chain is created by words which refer to the same referent- in this case girl- and the referents are: girl and she. The personal pronoun is repeated six times in the passage and there can be found two reiteration varieties- substitution- girl is substituted by she- and simple repetition.

The second lexical chain refers to the teddy bear and is again realized by the noun phrase itself and its substitution by personal pronoun it. Within this lexical chain there can be found the same categories of reiteration which were described in the first identity chain. Lastly, the third identity chain being mentioned by Hoey in the passage is home which is being referred to only by the noun itself by simple repetition- in lines four and five.

In this chapter were introduced two different types of lexical chains- identity chains and similarity chains. The examples and descriptions were taken from Hoey´s and Halliday and Hasan´s definitions. The differences between the types of chains were shown in preceding examples which also emphasized that more chains- even of both types- might be found within a text.

In conclusion, the theoretical part of the thesis focuses on various means of lexical cohesion that enables a text to be interpreted as coherent. Two main subcategories were introduced and analyzed and description of different authors were provided as well. Firstly, the category of reiteration was depicted, its sub-categories analyzed and the importance of them was shown due to various examples. The second chapter dealt with another mean of cohesion- collocation. In this section three main subcategories were described and the differences among them. In the last chapter the emphasis was put on lexical chains which might be found in any text.

Finally, the theoretical part provides a number of different means of lexical cohesion which were described by different scholars. The following empirical part explores authentic text and provides examples of the cohesive means which were introduced in this theoretical part.

2 Empirical Part

The aim of the empirical part is to provide examples of various means of lexical cohesion which were introduced and analyzed in the theoretical part. The empirical part itself is divided into chapters of reiteration, collocation and lexical chains and each chapter involves subcategories regarding different types of cohesive devices. The following examples were found in different collection of short stories to show how King uses different types of cohesive devices within various short stories. The aim of the analysis is to find out how lexical cohesion is being used in contemporary literature as well. It also explores which types of cohesive devises King used more often than others.

In the first part of the empirical part the thesis focuses on various examples of reiteration found in Stephen King’s short stories. It presents real examples of author’s writing by quantitative analysis of different short stories. This part itself is divided into categories according to the type of cohesion. There are different types of cohesion expressed by both repetition and substitution. The substitution subchapter is in addition divided into categories of substitution performed by: synonym/near-synonym, pronoun, superordinate and more types of substitution within one example.

The next chapter focuses on the topic of collocation and analysis of certain examples and identifying the type of collocation which is used within the examples.

The last chapter of the empirical part provides examples of different similarity and identity lexical chains. Chains analyzed in this part of the thesis are taken from different short stories and give examples of both first and third person narrators.

2.1 Repetition

Firstly, the issue of same words will be discussed and analyzed. This repetition is often used in order to achieve emphasis on the word and to underline its importance in the text. The repetition of the same word also leads to gradation and various word classes can be

37 used. The thesis explores the repetition of adjectives, pronouns, nouns, verbs and general names.

2.1.1 Repetition of adjectives

The first subchapter of the repetition focuses on a simple repetition of different adjectives within different examples. At this point I provide two examples of adjective repetition and analysis of the examples.

The first example below is and adjective black used in different phrases to show the misery and depressing atmosphere the main character is suffering from: „It’s still the afternoon, maybe, or early evening, but black in here, black as your hat, black as a woodchuck’s asshole, black as midnight in Persia, and what’s going on?” (King, 2002, p. 20)

In this example the author used the adjective of a dark color to demonstrate the pessimistic thoughts of the main hero of this story who is lying on a bench in the morgue. The repetition of the adjective is used with different things. Firstly, the author is describing the situation in the room which is without lights and next he shifts his attention to a piece of clothing. Furthermore the author depicts the situation by adding two more examples of things which are black. His choice of words woodchuck’s asshole and midnight in Persia gives the readers an opportunity to imagine the situation that the main hero is experiencing which is actually dark itself. There can be also found a gradation in the phrases the author used starting with one room and finish with the whole area. This all was achieved only by one adjective- in this case black.

The following example- from the story The Road Virus Heads North from collection Everything´s Eventual (2002)-will be used two time in this thesis. Firstly, in order to show the simple repetition of an adjective and secondly in order to demonstrate a substitution of a noun. Thus, this analyses focuses only on the already mentioned simple repetition of an adjective.

He took the picture out of the trunk and looked at it, and it was during the space of the ten seconds when he looked at it without remembering to breathe that he became

38 authentically afraid of the thing, afraid the way you were afraid of a sudden dry rattle in the bushes, afraid the way when you saw… (p. 298)

In this passage of the short story can be found adjective afraid mentioned four times within one sentence. King uses simple repetition in order to demonstrate the feelings of the main character as he is very scared. He does not use a synonym or an ellipsis in this passage as he does not want to disturb the description of the main character´s state of mind and the simple repetition enables the reader to feel the situation as well.

2.1.2 Repetition of pronouns

The repetition of a pronoun is considered to be common in a narrative. A typical case of this simple repetition is the repetition of the pronoun I when the main character is the narrator himself and then the repetition of any other personal pronoun which the narrator refers to.

The following example shows how the pronoun I is used in King´s stories when the main character is the narrator. This paragraph comes from a short story Uncle Otto´s truck from the collection Skeleton Crew and shows how densely it can be used:

I came around the last corner, and just as my uncles little house came into view, I had the oddest hallucination- for a moment I thought that damned truck really was in his dooryard, big and hulking with its red paint and its rotten stake sides. I went for the brake pedal, but before my foot even came down on it I blinked and the illusion was gone. But I knew that Uncle Otto was dead. (King, 1985, p. 587)

This is the typical feature of narrative when the narrator is the main character and King uses this type of repetition quite often. In this paragraph King used reference to the narrator in every sentence to create a complex part of a narrative which is his typical genre. Furthermore, there can be also found simple repetition of the possessive pronoun its in phrases its red paint and its rotten stake sides. This repetition is used when describing the vehicle to help the reader imagine it.

2.1.3 Repetition of nouns

The next part gives examples of simple repetition expressed by the same noun and examples from different short stories will be again provided.

The first example was found in the story collection Just After Sunset in a story called The Things They Left Behind. In this example there is shown the repetition of a general word things in the last paragraph of the story:

It occurred to me that other things might show up, in time. And I´d be lying if I told you I found that possibility entirely unpleasant. When it comes to returning things which people believe have been lost forever, things that have weight, there are compensations. Even if they´re only little things, like a pair of joke sunglasses. (King, 2008, p.252)

The repetition of the word things ties this paragraph together. Due to the repetition the author wanted to emphasize the importance of the objects that were the center of this short story. He also used the simple repetition in the last paragraph of the story to point to the title story which is The Things They Left Behind. Lexical cohesion enabled King in this situation to refer back to the title through the whole story and especially in the end of the story when the reader is able to comprehend the actual importance of the mentioned things. Also, I found this example interesting in terms, that the repetition was performed by a general word which referred to various objects but the meaning of each object was not important for the author, thus he used the general word to refer to them as a whole.

The next example provides a repetition of a specific item which was mentioned in the text and then used in order to make a list of objects. In this case the heroine is desperately looking for a weapon against her opponent: „There was a drawer on this side of the island. She yanked it open, hoping for another knife- for lots of them: carving knives, filleting knives, steak knives, serrated bread knives. She would settle for a goddamned butter knife.” (King, 2008, p.89)

King used repetition to create a list of different types of knives. He could have used ellipsis and omit the word knives or used substitution by one but instead he choose to use the simple repetition to show again the importance of the word itself. Furthermore, the last sentence underlines the fact how deeply was the heroine desperate. This was achieved

40 by a contrast and use of the repetition of knife but a butter one as in the list there were mentioned only sharp knives.

At this point, there is provided one more example- found in a short story Home Delivery from the collection Nightmares and dreamscapes- of simple repetition performed by a noun. In the following example the noun brains is repeated in one complex sentence in order to depict the horrid atmosphere of the situation: “His head fell in two pieces, brains dribbling across the tile like spoiled oatmeal, brains that squirmed with slugs and gelatinous sea worms, brains that smelled like a woodchuck exploded in gassy decay in a high-summer meadow.” (p. 483)

In the example King avoids any kind of substitution and used the noun brains in three different positions always accompanied by a different simile. Thus he allowed readers to imagine the situation in a great detail and vivid atmosphere.

In conclusion the use of simple repetition enables the author to describe the situation in great detail. Moreover, as it was explained in the first example, the simple repetition of the noun might also refer not only to a noun in a complex sentence or a paragraph but might refer back and in this cases to the title itself. On the other hand, simple repetition was found often in the analyzed passages. In the examples, King prefers to use a substitution- usually by a pronoun- and the examples of simple repetition of a noun are not easy to found.

2.1.4 Repetition of verbs

Cohesion can also be expressed by a repetition of a verb. King uses this technique quite often and via this type of repetition he underlines the most important message of the text.

The following example is taken from the novella The Body and shows the use of verb cry in past tense through one paragraph. The first use of the verb cry comes from the beginning of the paragraph: “I cried when I heard, and I cried more at the funeral, and I couldn’t believe that Dennis was gone, that anyone that used to knuckle my head or scare with a rubber spider until I cried.” (King, 1982, p. 178)

Furthermore, the author repeats the verb in the end of the same paragraph: “It took me a long time after that summer to realize that most of the tears I cried were for my mom and dad.” (King, 1982, p.178)

To support the idea of verb repetition the next examples are from different short stories and again demonstrate how King influences his audience by repeating the same verb: “I decided I was going to kill him. I was going to kill him to death. Then I would kill the rest of them- all but Nona.” (King, 1985, p. 498) In the sentences above there can be seen the gradation of the word kill. Firstly, the hero is talking about killing one person, then killing the person more violently and in the end he is talking about more people. King uses this technique again to describe the character’s inner feelings about a particular situation.

Next example that was chosen to demonstrate the repetition of verbs was found in the story Reaper’s Image and the paragraph below is the last one of the story and moreover, the last two sentences actually form different paragraphs:

He waited for Sprangler much like the Bates family must have waited for their son, much like the duchess’s husband must have waited for his wife to return from the sitting room. He stared into the mirror and waited.

And waited.

And waited. (King, 1985, p. 487)

By the use of the simple repetition of the verb waited in different contexts Kings created actually an open ending for this story. He does not provide the readers any evidence that Sprangler will appear again. Thus, this is leading the readers to create their own version of the end of the story and was performed again by the use of simple repetition.

One more example is added to amplify the density of simple repetition of verbs in King´s stories. The repeated verb think occurs in the last paragraph of story Graduation Afternooon and furthermore, there is also a lexical chain regarding music which is realized by the individual performers and by the word music itself:

She thinks about the hike Bruce and his friends won´t be taking. She thinks about the party at Holy Now! They won´t be attending tonight. She thinks about the records by Jay-Z and Beyoncé and The Fray they won´t be listening to- no loss there. And she thinks of the country music her Dad listens to in his pickup truck on his way to and from work. 42

That´s better, somehow. She will think of Patsy Cline or Skeeter Davis and in a little while she may be able to teach what is left of her eyes not to look. (King, 2008, p. 261)

There can be found a lot of cohesive devices through the whole paragraph. Firstly, as it was already mentioned, there is the simple repetition of the verb think in present simple and the only exception is the last sentence in which the author used future simple in order to emphasize that the heroine will think about the other performers in some time, not now. Secondly, there is also a lexical chain expressing music. In this case, author used the authentic names of the singers- Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Patsy Cline and Skeeter Davis- and a band- The Fray- to create a cohesive tie in the paragraph. The author also used the general word music in this case which also ties the other participants of this lexical chain together.

In conclusion, simple repetition of verbs can be found in various short stories in various collection and is used by the author often. By this, King achieves gradation in the stories, he also applies one verb in the whole paragraph to underline its importance, and he also creates a situation which can be understood by each reader differently. Lastly, he uses the single repletion in a whole paragraph with the addition of lexical chains to create a cohesive paragraph with more ties.

2.1.5 Repetition of personal names

At this point the focus is placed on the repetition of personal names. King often repeats personal names of his characters in short stories and due to this issue he puts emphasis on the character, introduces them or use their names in case for the readers not to be confused. Consider these three examples below, which are taken from different stories- Beachworld, Mrs. Todd’s Shortcut and The Monkey:

“It was too bad about Grimes. Grimes was dead. Grimes was now nothing but large chunks and small chunks in the aft storage compartment. Shapiro had looked in and thought: It looks like God decided to eat Grimes.” (King, 1985, p. 453)

The woman raised her hand to Homer. Homer nodded his big, shaggy head to her but didn’t raise his own hand in return. The Todd family had a big summer house on Castle Lake, and Homer had been their caretaker since time out of mind. (King, 1985, p. 259)

“Petey flinched back. The driver motioned to him, impatiently, as if what had almost happened was Petey’s fault, and Petey ran across the parking lot with his collar flapping.” (King, 1985, p. 231)

The examples above demonstrate that King uses this type of lexical cohesion quite often. The first example places emphasis on a main character in order to tell that he has been an important character for the narrator. The second example, taken from Mrs. Todd’s Shortcut introduces a new character, namely caretaker Homer who becomes the main character from this point. In this case, King used the cohesive force of the personal name to show the character to the readers and make him important in the story. Lastly, in the last example is the personal name used to distinguish between two people in the situation. By the repetition of the same personal name King avoids confusion in longer parts of text.

Overall, there might be found a vast number of examples of simple repetition realized by different word classes in King´s short stories collection. It helps the readers not to lose in the plot of the story and I believe that the cohesive force of simple repetition is significant and also easy to comprehend.

I expected to find a lot of examples of repetition of a noun and personal names within King´s short stories and this was proven by the former examples. On the other hand, I did not expect that he would use simple repetition of verbs so often.

2.2 Substitution

The second part of the empirical thesis focuses on examples of different types of substitution within King´s short stories. This chapter is divided into four sections and each section deals with different type of substitution. The first part presents examples of substitution realized by a synonym or near synonym and the following part shows examples of substitution performed by a pronoun. At this point I expect to prove that these two types of substitution would be find in most of the short stories and that they enable the texts to become coherent.

The concept of substitution was described in the theoretical part of the thesis by both Tanskanen and Halliday and Hasan and in the empirical part I use Tanskanen´s definition of substitution in order to analyze various examples.

The next part explores the use of hyponymy in order to create generalization. I believe that this type of substitution would not be used as often as the preceding ones and the last part of this chapter gives examples of more types of substitution used within a single paragraph.

2.2.1 Substitution by synonymy

The following example shows substitution by a synonym. In this case the verb which is replaced is the verb talk and the main hero of the story Mute is describing his actions in the past:

““What did you do?”

“Talked about my wife,” Monette said. Then he stopped and considered. “No, I didn´t. I vented about my wife. I ranted about my wife. I spewed about my wife. I… you see…”” (King, 2008, p. 386) In the first sentence of Monette´s speech he uses ordinary word talked but is the verb substituted by its synonyms with negative meaning. In this case King used these verbs to express the anger and frustration of the main hero about his wife and there can also be seen a gradation in the words: vented- ranted- spewed as the main hero was becoming more and more frustrated and furious. Thus, in this example King used the substitution of the verb in order to express main character´s feelings and attitude towards his wife. 45

2.2.2 Substitution by a pronoun

The following subchapter deals with and shows examples of a typical type of substitution which is substitution by a personal pronoun. This type of substitution can be found in all short stories collections and some examples are provided here to demonstrate the fact that also King often uses this feature of lexical cohesion.

The first example of this type of substitution was found in the collection Nightmares and Dreamscapes (1993) in the short story called Dolan´s Cadillac: “I saw him come and go- Dolan. I watched him stroll into fancy restaurants dressed in a tuxedo, always with a different woman on his arm, always with his pair of bodyguards bookending him.” (p. 13).

In the example the personal pronoun him substitutes the main character who is here called by his surname- Dolan. In this sentence King also used anaphoric references. The first substitution refers to the title of the short story itself as readers already know who he is. Afterwards, King uses the character´s personal name again and then immediately in the following clause he uses the same personal pronoun as anaphora.

In conclusion, this example depicted the use of a substitution realized by a personal pronoun. Following example focuses on the typical type of pronoun substitution performed by anaphoric reference.

This example was found in the same collection but in a story called Dedication and demonstrates the most common way of the substitution realized by pronoun and as anaphora: ““Amen, honey,” Martha said, and although her mouth smiled her eyes did not. On each of the first two toasts she had taken a discreet sip of champagne. This time she drained the glass.” (p. 263).

Firstly is the main character described by her own name Martha and in the following clauses the personal pronoun she refers to her. This example shares the same function as the first one in this subchapter as in both of them the personal pronouns refers to personal names.

2.2.3 Substitution by hyponymy

In the beginning of a short story Graduation Afternoon from the collection Just After Sunset King used substitution but in this case he refers to the word house firstly by cataphoric substitution realized by a general word and later he used anaphoric substitution performed by a more specific word.

“Janice has never settled on the right word for the place where Buddy lives. It´s too big to be called a house, too small to be an estate and the name on the post at the foot of the driveway, Harborlights, gags her.” (p. 253).

The first substitution is the substitution of a house which is done cataphorically by a general word place which can be found in the first clause of this passage. King refers to the same house again with the use of substitution but in this case he substituted the house by a word which has more specific meaning- estate. Thus, in this example the author showed both anaphoric and cataphoric substitutions in three consecutive sentences and also used two different kinds of substitutions of one word.

I also provide another example of substitution which is realized via hyponymy and according to Tanskanen the relationship between the items is generalization of a word as the latter expression is considered to be more general. The following example is from a short story Home Delivery which belongs to the collection Nightmares and Dreamscapes (1993):

Maddie climbed the warped wooden steps of the store the next day and bought four cans of chicken noodle soup that were on the shelf. When she asked Bob Nedeau if he had any more, he said he had a whole damn case of the stuff out back. (p. 457).

Thus the items which belong to the relationship of hyponymy are in this example the phrase chicken noodle soup and stuff. The generalization is used in order to express the fact that the shop assistant is actually not interested in the soup at all. I believe that this type of reiteration is used to indicate the shop assistant’s lack of interest.

In addition, the example provides also another type of substitution. The substituted item is the personal name Bob Nedeau and the personal pronoun is he which King used immediately after the personal name in order to avoid repetitiveness.

In brief, King does not use hyponymy in order to achieve generalization very often as he prefers other types of reiteration relations. However, these example proved that if he tends to use hyponymy as a means of lexical cohesion he uses it well and thus creates coherent texts indeed.

2.2.4 Various types of substitutions

The next example was found in the collection of short stories Everything´s Eventual and was taken from the story with the same name. In the following example, there can be found an example of specification, co- specification as well as generalization of a word car.

How many nineteen-year-old high-school dropouts do you know who have their own houses? Plus a new car? Only a Honda, true, but the first three numbers on the odometer are still zeros, and that´s the important part. It has a CD/tape player, and I don´t slide in behind the wheel wondering if the goddam thing´ll start, like I always did with the Ford, which Skipper used to make fun of. The Assholemobile, he called it. (King, 2002, p. 213)

Firstly, in the second line is an example of specification realized by hyponymy. The word car is being substituted in the following sentence by a Honda which is a subcategory of the general word car. By the specification King wanted to describe the car in more detail and also with the use of indefinite article he stated the not excellent quality of the car.

Secondly, the author refers back to the Honda car by a general word thing, to be more specific- goddam thing. I believe that with this use of the general word which could be find at the top of a hierarchical diagram and also with the use of the negative adjective goddam, King wanted to express the main character´s attitude towards the car.

There can also be found an example of co- specification which is performed by mentioning the other brand of a car- Ford. In this case King compares the previous car owned by the main character with the one he owns now and he used words- car brands- on the same level of a diagram to demonstrate the comparison.

Lastly, the word car is also substituted in the last sentence by a slang expression Assholemobile. This substitution in addition emphasizes the poor quality of main

48 character´s previous car and the attitude is being expressed by this slang and taboo word which is known in the story only between the main character and character called Skipper.

In conclusion, I believe that in this paragraph the lexical cohesion is achieved very well and the whole paragraph coheres due to various means of lexical cohesion. As the article mainly describes main character´s present and previous car, the words which collocate with the topic of cars perform their function and the whole paragraph is understandable due to the choice of proper lexis. The cohesion was achieved by various types of reiteration, namely generalization, specification and co- specification plus substitutions of the word car.

At this point I provide another example of various types of substitutions within one paragraph from a short story called L.T.´s Theory of Pets. In the paragraph there can be found substitution by substitutive one and hyponymy which both refer to one particular word- dog. Furthermore, as I have already mentioned that there is a kind of substituion realized by hyponymy, the hyperonyms are in this example non-existing kinds of dogs:

“She got me that dog because I liked the one on Frasier,” L.T. would say. “That kind of dog´s a terrier, but I don´t remember now what they call that kind. A Jack something. Jack Sprat? Jack Robinson? Jack Shit? You know how a thing like that gets on the tip of your tongue?” Somebody would tell him that dog on Frasier was a Jack Russell terrier and L.T. would nod emphatically. (King, 2002, p.270)

The first substitution might be found in the first sentence when the main character refers to that dog by the substitutive item the one. The substitutive item actually stands here for another dog but in lexical terms, the word which is being substituted is the word dog. Furthermore, the author specifies the breed of the dog by using the word terrier which is a hyponym of the dog. The reference to that dog is performed in the sentence by the use of the phrase that kind of dog by which the main character means the whole breed of the dog, not the dog itself.

Lastly, King is more specific and substitutes the dog by the exact type of terrier even though the following names of dogs are not accurate- A Jack Something, Jack Sprat, Jack Robinson, Jack shit. With the use of these inaccurate names the main character describes his attitude towards the real dog which can be characterized as a negative one which is underlined by the last substitution- Jack shit. King also uses a simple repetition of the

49 breed Jack which is used in all of these inaccurate breeds and finally in the last sentence the proper breed- Jack Russell- was used but not by the main character.

With this example I pointed up that King uses various types of substitutions in one single paragraph. Also, he realized the substitution by the use of hyponymy but with non- existing breeds of dogs which has another function in the story as well.

The last example of more types of substitutions referring to one referent is taken from already mention passage from the story The Road Virus Heads North of a story collection Everything´s Eventual.

He took the picture out of the trunk and looked at it, and it was during the space of the ten seconds when he looked at it without remembering to breathe that he became authentically afraid of the thing, afraid the way you were afraid of a sudden dry rattle in the bushes, afraid the way when you saw… (p. 298)

At the beginning of the article King uses the general noun picture which is furthermore being substituted by it and thing. Firstly, King uses substitution by a pronoun actually three times in a row. Then he uses a general word thing thus creating the relation of hyponymy between words picture and thing. In this example he showed again different types of substitutions used in one paragraph and both substitutions by pronoun and hyponymy enable to text to become coherent.

My aim was to prove that King uses mostly substitutions realized by pronouns and I reckon that I was able to prove this research question. This type of substitution might be found in all his short stories. Surprisingly, he uses substitution realized by hyponymy more often than was expected and I also believe that all examples showed various types of substitutions and proved that also this means of lexical cohesion is used in his works.

2.3 Collocations

The next chapter focuses on the role of collocations in King´s writings and provides examples of different collocation used in his stories.

The first example-taken from a short story Lunch at Gotham Cafe from collection Everything´s Eventual- represents an- according to Tanskanen´s division- activity related collocation and the set in this example that connects the items is a restaurant: “That- the first mention of food since I´d joined them- was just before the bad things started to happen, and I remember smelling salmon from one of the nearby tables.” (p.330).

Within this collocation there might be found three items which belong to one set and which share the same word class which is the aspect of an activity related collocation. The items are food, salmon and tables. They all share the fact of belonging to a restaurant thus they create a collocation and thus enable this part to be coherent as well.

An ordered set collocation was also found in a short story Secret Window, Secret Garden from a collection Four Past Midnight (1990) and in this example the items are again nouns and they both are connected with a personal car: “He started the engine. It ran with the low wheeze characteristic of valves which need to be reground, and the tang of oilsmoke from the old tailpipe polluted the air of the fading afternoon.” (p. 367).

The nouns belonging to one set in this example are engine, valves, oilsmoke and tailpipe which are associated with cars. Furthermore, engine, valves and tailpipe are parts of a car thus their relationship can be stated as hyponymy as their hyperonym is a car itself.

At this point I will provide one more example of an activity related collocation and this items collocate within the topic of music. The following example was found in a short story Sneakers from a collection Nightmares and Dreamscapes (1993):

From 1975 until 1980 or so, the rock industry had lain becalmed in the horse latitudes. Kids spent their money on video games instead of records. For perhaps the fiftieth time since 1955, the pundits announced the death of rock and roll. And, as on other occasions, it proved to be a lively corpse. Video games topped out; MTV checked in; a fresh wave of stars arrived from England; Bruce Springsteen released Born in the USA; rap and hip-hop began to turn some numbers as well as heads. (p. 385)

Firstly, there are certain words which are undoubtedly connected together and function within the already mentioned theme and they are: rock industry, records, rock and roll, MTV, stars, Bruce Springsteen, Born in the USA, rap and hip-hop. Not all the words in within this collocation are nouns-rock industry, records, rock and roll, stars, rap hip-hop- , as it was in the previous examples, and within this collocation can also be found personal

51 names- MTV, Bruce Springsteen- as well as a title of a song itself- Born in the USA. Thus King used different types of words in order to create this collocation and make this paragraph coherent as it is.

There could also be found other words which at the first sight do not collocate within the topic of music but in this paragraph they also belong to the topic and they are: money and pundits. I suppose they both of them do not belong generally to the topic of music but in this example they can be regarded as items within this collocation as well. In the example money are also related to the music as it was not spent on music by children- second line of the example. Furthermore, the words pundits can be associated in this example might be associated to people who review music and it also might have been used ironically to point out the fact that the narrator of the story did not agree with the experts´ opinions.

To summarize the chapter of collocations I would like to point out the fact that King uses collocations in order to create coherent texts but mostly he uses activity related collocations. Within his short stories I was able to find quite a lot of these collocations but the density of other types of colocations is very low. I believe that the author tries to create coherent texts using collocations which are as easy to follow as it can be done and this is another proof of the research question.

In this part of the thesis I wanted to prove that the use of ordered set collocation is used more often in King´s works than elaborative or activity-related ones. This research question was based on Tanskanen and Hoey´s findings but the examples in this section did not support their findings. In King´s works I was able to locate examples of activity related collocation, more often than I expected. Furthermore, there were not found many examples of ordered set and elaborative collocations thus there can be stated that King prefers the use of collocation within which words share the same action rather than belong to a particular set of words.

2.4 Lexical chains

The next chapter of the empirical part deals with lexical chains. Reiteration relations of the items creating a chain are also described and all three examples show different local cohesive chains. Additionally, there is also provided an example of a lexical chain which occurs through the whole short story.

The following example represents a lexical chain concerning the description of a human body. This lexical chain is rather short but shows how the author is able to depict one item only on two lines of a text using only nouns. He uses the words lexis about body parts starting from head and ending with behind in a logical order: “She walks with her head down and her back bent and her butt sticking out, like a dispossessed war-hag starting down a long refugee road.” (King, 2008, p.260) The lexical chain which exists in this example demonstrates that the chains can be actually created even through a very small part of the text. Furthermore, the cohesive effect of this example is empowered by the simple repetition of the possessive pronoun her before each noun thus making this short part cohesive in every aspect. This chain helps the reader to imagine the picture of a woman using only nouns concerning parts of a human body. King also used a simile as he compared the woman to a completely different type of person in order to provide thorough description.

The second example of a lexical chain-an identity chain- shows a rather longer passage than the first one and was taken from a short story N. Taking photographs is the main motive of this paragraph and is realized not only by nouns but also verbs and names. However, this paragraph is rather long, lexical cohesion was achieved thus making this part of the story easily noticeable.

I´m an accountant by trade, a photographer by inclination. After my divorce- and the children growing up, which is a divorce of a different kind, and almost as painful- I spent most of my weekends rambling around, taking landscape shots with my Nikon. It´s a film camera, not a digital. Toward the end of every year, I took the twelve best pix and turned them into a calendar. I had them printed at a little place in Freeport called The Windhower Press. It´s pricey, but they do good work. I gave the calendars to my friends and business associates for Christmas. A few clients, too, but not many- clients who bill five or six figures usually appreciate something that´s silver plated. Myself, I prefer a good landscape photo every time. I have no pictures of Ackerman´s Field. I took some, but they never came out. Later on I borrowed a digital camera. Not only did the pictures come out, I fried the camera´s insides. I had to buy a new one for the guy I borrowed it from. (King, 2008, p. 283-284)

At this point, various ways of achieving cohesion will be described and then the lexical chain will be analyzed. Various types of lexical cohesion occur in this paragraph. There

53 can be found simple repetition of nouns, and simple repetition of a pronoun, substitution by another noun and also by a pronoun.

Firstly, the simple repetition of nouns is the repetition of the noun camera which is located at the beginning of the paragraph but also at the end and also of the noun clients being repeated in the middle of the paragraph. The second example of a simple repetition is the noun divorce which can be found in two consequent clauses at the beginning of the paragraph as well. Lastly, King also repeated the pronoun I of the narrator of the story through the whole paragraph as he often uses the repetition of pronouns in his writing.

Secondly, the substitution of the noun pictures is realized in this article both by synonyms and by a pronoun. King refers to the exact pictures by nouns and they are: taking shots, pix, photo, and pictures. By this he demonstrated his ability to create cohesion due to the substitution by synonyms of the word pictures. Furthermore, he substitutes the pictures by pronouns and he used pronouns them (two times), they and by the determiner some. The determiner some also represents an ellipsis in this case as it is not being followed by any noun.

Moreover, the word camera at the end of the paragraph is substituted by a personal pronoun one and thus creating a substitution in this part of paragraph. The same substitution occurs in the last sentence when King replaces the word camera again but at this point by the personal pronoun it. And also, there is another substitution of the noun camera in the third line. In this case the camera is substituted by the name of brand of cameras itself- Nikon.

In overall, in this paragraph there were found examples of either simple repetition of nouns and personal pronouns and also substitutions concerning different nouns.

Thirdly, in the whole paragraph occur various words of various word classes which represent the main idea of this paragraph- taking photos. King used various devices to create a lexical chain in which can be found lexical cohesion in each line. Firstly, the nouns concerning this identity chain will be stated. Some of them were already mentioned in the paragraphs above and they are: photographer, shots, camera, pix, photo and pictures. In addition, King also used adjectives in this paragraph in this lexical chain: landscape and digital. The first refers to the pictures taken by the narrator and the second one is a pre-modifier of the noun camera. Furthermore, there is also the adjective pricey which in general does not have to refer to the photographs or cameras but in this case the

54 author used it to refer to the process of developing the pictures. Lastly, there can be found verbs which help to create this lexical chain. There are two of them and they are: took and printed.

To summarize this chain, I would like to point out the fact of the use of various word classes. The author managed to create a paragraph that shows a lot of examples of lexical cohesion. Cohesion was achieved by simple repetition of nouns and a pronoun and also by substitution of various words. The author also shows the reader his variability in lexis- mainly by replacemnt of the word pictures. Furthermore, he demonstrated the importance of the cohesion itself as this paragraph is easily understood by the reader due to the lexical chain itself.

The coherence of the whole story N. is performed by more cohesive chains about photographing itself through the whole story. The following examples cohere with the preceding one as they all share the same topic. The second lexical chain was found in the later passage of the short story:

I took another four shots- which makes a total of nine, another bad number, although slightly better than five- and when I lowered the camera and looked again with my naked eye, I saw the faces, leering and grinning and grunting. Some human, some bestial. And I counted seven stones. But when I looked into the viewfinder again, there were eight. (King, S. 2008, p. 291).

This lexical chain is then performed by three different items which share the activity of taking photos and they are took shots, camera, and viewfinder. King actually uses two same words in both examples- shots and camera- and simple repetition might be found in a global point of view of the whole story. To support this fact, I provide another example of a lexical chain which occurs further in the short story:

On my way, I stopped at the place, where I got my pictures developed and saw the ones I´d taken that evening in Ackerman´s Field hadn´t come out. They were just gray squares, as if they´d been fogged by some strong radiation. That gave me pause, but it didn´t stop me. I borrowed a digital camera from one of the guys at the photo shop- that´s the one I fried- and drove out to Motton again, and fast. (King, S. 2008, p. 297).

There can be found several items belonging to the lexical chain and they are noun phrases- place, pictures, digital camera and photo shop as well as a personal pronoun they which

55 substitutes the pictures in this case. King used again the same words as in the previous examples- camera and pictures- and he additionally used substitution by a pronoun and also by a hyponymy- photo shop is cataphorically substituted by place.

Thus these examples proved that this particular short story is coherent on the local level of the story and that potentially can contribute to a coherent interpretation of the text. All examples presented several items that share the same main topic and can be found in different stages of the short story. The chains enable the whole story to be coherent and Kind used various cohesive devices in all of these lexical chains and managed to refer to the shared topic by different lexical choice.

The last example provides analysis of both types of chains. All the items of identity chain refer to the same referent which in this case is a woman. The passage is taken from a story The North Virus Heads North from the collection Everything´s Eventual:

Kinnel glanced up and saw the pretty young thing watching him apprehensively from what she probably hoped was a safe distance. When she saw him looking at her, she turned around and started toward the restaurant building, once more dragging her cocker spaniel behind her and trying to keep as much sway of her hips as possible. (King, 2002).

The words and phrases which are connected with the referent woman are: pretty young thing, she, her cocker spaniel, her and her hips. There can also be found a simple repetition of the pronoun she and the pronoun she also works as a substitute to the phrase pretty young thing.

Secondly, there can be also found another identity chain whose items refer to the main character and the items are Kinnel and him and the reiteration relation between these two items is a substitution by pronoun. It can be argued that King uses this type of reiteration often and this example proved it as both the woman and Kinnel are later referred to by her and him.

Lastly, we are able to find and analyze a similarity chain which is created by the verbs of movement. They both share the notion of movement in any direction and they are turned around and started toward.

In conclusion, lexical identity chains are quite frequent in King´s short stories and he uses various word classes and types of reiteration in order to form a chain. The form of 56 reiteration that is the most common is a substitution by a pronoun which was also found and described in the preceding example. Examples of similarity chains are more difficult to find in his works as it seems King prefers the use of identity chains which are considered to be easier to comprehend.

3 Qualitative analysis

The last part of the thesis explores various means of lexical cohesion within longer parts of King´s short stories. Three examples from different stories- Dolan´s Cadillac, Beachworld and Mrs Todd´s Shortcut- are analyzed in this chapter in order to prove that King´s short stories are coherent not only within a paragraph or a complex sentence but that he also uses various cohesive means in the whole stories and thus creates coherent texts .Furthermore, all examples are actually beginnings of the short stories and were selected to prove that King creates a coherent text from the beginning of a short story. I will demonstrate various types of reiteration and other types of lexical cohesion and I will also comment on their use in these longer parts.

The first example was found in already mentioned short story Dolan´s Cadillac from the collection Nightmares and Dreamscapes (1993). The main character of the story is trying to avenge murder of his wife which was organized by a man called Dolan.

I waited and watched for seven years. I saw him come and go- Dolan. I watched him stroll into fancy restaurants dressed in a tuxedo, always with a different woman on his arm, always with his pair of bodyguards bookending him. I watched his hair go from iron-gray to a fashionable silver while my own simply receded until I was bald. I watched him leave Las Vegas on his regular pilgrimages to the West Coast; I watched him return. On two or three occasions I watched from a side road as his Sedan DeVille, the same color as his hair, swept by on Route 71 toward Los Angeles. And on a few occasions I watched him leave his place in the Hollywood Hills in the same gray Cadillac to return to Las Vegas- not often though. I am a schoolteacher. Schoolteachers and high-priced hoodlums do not have the same freedom of movement; it´s just an economic fact of life. He did not know I was watching him- I never came close enough for him to know that. I was careful. He killed my wife or had her killed; it comes to the same, either way. Do you want details? You won´t get them from me. If you want them, look them up in the back issues of the papers. Her name was Elizabeth. She taught in the same school where I taught and where I teach still. She taught first-graders. They loved her, and I think that some

57 of them may not have forgotten their love still, although they would be teenagers now. I loved her and love her still, certainly. She could laugh. I dream of her. Of her hazel eyes. There has never been another woman for me. Nor ever will be. He slipped –Dolan. That´s all you have to know. And Elizabeth was there, at the wrong place and the wrong time, to see the slip. She went to the police, and the police sent her to the FBI, and she was questioned, and she said yes, she would testify. They promised to protect her, but they either slipped or they underestimated Dolan. (p. 13-14)

Firstly, I will focus on different types of reiteration that were used in this passage. There can be found examples of simple reiteration of a verb, personal pronoun and a noun. The first verbs being repeated is watched, which is used within the whole first paragraph as well as in the second paragraph. The simple repetition underlines the situation that the main character was observing his enemy for a long time and the simple repetition brings importance to this fact.

The next verb which was repeated is teach and was used with two different subjects. Firstly, the narrator is talking about his wife and in the following sentence King uses the same verb with the subject of the narrator himself in order to demonstrate the fact that they both were teachers. Furthermore, this same notion is applied with the simple repetition of the verb love which also used with two different subjects and they both share the same direct object. The last verb repetition was found in the last paragraph and the verb is slip and King used the verb again with different subjects.

King used also substitution with pronouns in this example and the use of personal pronoun I within the whole passage proves the significant role of repetition when a main character is the narrator of a story. However, there can be found also other pronouns which were repeated and they are him and she. King used simple repetition of the pronoun him as a reference only to Dolan himself and the pronoun follows the verb watched in most clauses. In the second part of the passage he also refers to Elizabeth as she in four consecutive clauses. The simple repetition of different pronouns simply proves that it is a very frequent type of cohesive means.

Last word class that was repeated in the example were two nouns- schoolteacher and police and the both were repeated in consecutive sentences. The fact that King did not use a substitution might indicate the importance of the nouns within this passage.

Secondly, there will be provided examples of substitution. King used personal pronoun substitutions in this example quite often and in overall there can be located four different

58 substitutions. The first ones substitute personal names by personal pronouns- Dolan is substituted by he/him and Elizabeth is substituted by she. Most frequently King used anaphoric substitution but at the beginning of the example he used also cataphoric substitution when introducing the character of Dolan. The next two examples of personal pronoun substitution are in the third and the last paragraph and they are: details being substituted by them and police substituted by they.

Interestingly, King also used substitution by contrast realized by an antonym. This type of substitution is not used often within his short stories, however, this example also provides this type. In the second paragraph the noun schoolteachers is substituted in the following clause by a negative expression hoodlums by which King created also contrast.

I would also comment on the role of collocations within this example. King used ordered- set collocations within this example and the first one is created by words which give the reader description of the setting of the story in a geographical point of view. The expressions which collocate in this example are: Las Vegas, Los Angeles, West Coast, Route 71 and Hollywood Hills. The collocation could be also analyzed deeply as West Coast being the most general one and the other expressions belonging to this expression- thus it might be characterized as a relation of hyponymy.

Moreover, there can be found another ordered-set collocation which describes the fact the both the main character and his wife were teachers. The words which collocate are: schoolteachers, first-graders, teenagers, they and school. These words are located within the first and third paragraph of the passage thus they also enable this text to become coherent as a whole.

Lastly, I would mention a lexical chain that is used within this example. Expressions belonging to a particular lexical chain might be found within the whole text again thus I believe that they also play a vital role in order to create a coherent text. The first lexical chain concerns the anti-hero Dolan and the words which belong to this particular chain are: him, Dolan, tuxedo, his arm, pair of bodyguards, his hair, his place and some of these expressions were used more than once in this example. The most significant aspect of this lexical chain is the fact that it spreads through the whole example and some expressions are found in each of the paragraphs. At this point, King manages to create a lexical chain that also enables the beginning of the story to become coherent and understandable for readers.

The second example in which the qualitative analysis will be performed is taken from the beginning of a short story called Beachworld of a story collection Skeleton Crew (1985). The story takes place after a spacecraft crash and at the beginning of the story King introduces the scenery of the story as well as the main characters:

FedShip ASN/29 fell out of the sky and crashed. After a while two men slipped from its cloven skull like brains. They walked a little way and then stood, helmets beneath their arms, and looked at where they had finished up. It was a beach in no need of an ocean- it was its own ocean, a sculpted sea of sand, a black-and-white-snapshot sea frozen forever in troughs and crests and more troughs and crests. Dunes. Shallow ones, steep ones, smooth ones, corrugated ones. Knife-crested dunes, plane- crested dunes, irregularly crested dunes that resembled dunes piled on dunes - dune- dominoes. Dunes. But no ocean. The valley which were the troughs between those dunes snaked in mazy black rat-runs. If one looked at those twisting lines long enough, they might seem to spell words-black words hovering over the white dunes. “Fuck,” Shapiro said. “Bend over,” Rand said. Shapiro started to spit, then thought better of it. Looking at all the sand made him think better of it. This was not the time to go wasting moisture, perhaps. Half-burned in the sand, ASN/29 didn´t look like a dying bird anymore; it looked like a gourd that had broken open and disclosed rot inside. There had been a fire. The starboard fuel-pods had all exploded. “Too bad about Grimes,” Shapiro said. “Yeah.” Rand´s eyes were still roaming the sand sea, out to the limiting line of the horizon and then coming back again. It was too bad about Grimes. Grimes was dead. Grimes was now nothing but large chunks and small chunks in the aft storage compartment. Shapiro looked in and thought: It looks like God decided to eat Grimes, found out he didn´t taste good, and sicked him up again. That had been too much for Shapiro´s own stomach. That, and the sight of Grime´s teeth scattered across the floor of the storage compartment. (p. 452-453). In the following analysis I will provide different cohesive means which King used at the beginning of this short story. Firstly, I will focus on simple repetition. There were found two examples of simple repetition and the first repetition is in the middle part of the example when King repeated the noun dunes six times. The simple repetition enables readers in this case to imagine the background of the story even from the beginning of the short story. Also the repetition of the noun sand in the third paragraph highlights the

60 background and depicts the scenery vividly. The last repetition which describes the scenery of the story might be found in at the end of the first paragraph when the words trough and crests were repeated in a single clause in order to intensify the background.

King also repeated the word ocean three times and he repeated it in two different paragraphs- in the first one and then in the middle of the example. By the repetition in the middle King wanted again to depict the situation of the main characters and he used the word as a contrast to the dunes as all the characters could see was only a sand without any sign of any water.

Simple repetition was also used in the last paragraph of the example and it a simple repetition of a personal name- Grimes. This example had already been analyzed in the chapter of repetition of personal names.

Lastly, there was used always a simple repetition of a personal pronoun they in the first paragraph and King also repeated twice the name of the spaceship itself- ASN/29. Firstly in the opening sentence of the short story and then in the fourth paragraph again to cohere the text by mentioning the spacecraft again.

The next cohesive means which King used in this part of the short story is a substitution and the following examples underline the fact that King uses the substitution often and that the substitution helps him to create a coherent text. The first example was found in the opening and following sentence when King substituted men by personal pronoun they which he used also in the following paragraph of the short story. King used also another substitution realized by a personal pronoun- substitution of the ASN/29 by the personal pronoun it in the fourth paragraph. However, King used also different types of substitution and, interestingly, both of these substitutions actually stand for the word dunes. Firstly, the noun dunes is substituted by the substituted ones in the second paragraph and later King substituted the dunes by a general noun phrase- twisting lines, thus the relationship according to Tanskanen that was used was generalization.

At this point I will focus on collocations within this example. I will prove and demonstrate that when King uses an ordered-set collocation. There was found an example of an ordered-set collocation whose items collocate within the topic of scenery. I believe, that King wanted to depict the particular scenery of this short story straight from the beginning and by this type of collocation he wanted the readers to follow the story easily and moreover, King used only nouns within this collocation. Hence, the items that collocate

61 are: sky, sand, beach, dunes, valley, ocean, bird, horizon and sea and they are to be found within the whole example thus they also participate in creating a coherent text. Finally, even the title Beachworld collocates with these items as it itself describes the scenery of the story as well.

The next collocation which is going to be analyzed is again an ordered-set collocation and the items are also located within the whole example. All of the following items collocate within a field of the space ship which was the main characters´ means of transport. This collocation includes not only nouns but also a personal name which be considered to be part of this collocation. The nouns located within this collocation are: FedShip, helmets, starboard fuel-pads and strorage compartment- that is being repeated in the last paragraph. In addition the name of the ship itself ASN/29 is part of the collocation.

Lastly, I would comment on a lexical chain whose items can be located within the whole passage. The lexical chain comprises any items, actions and people connected to the shared topic- in this case the destruction of the starship itself, which is being described by various lexis within the whole example. The lexical chain is created by the ordered- set collocation that was described in the previous paragraph plus two other nouns men and fire. Men in this situation represents the main characters who were the passengers of the ship and the noun fire was used to state how badly the starship was damaged.

Furthermore, King used three verbs to depict the destruction of the ship. The first and second one is used in the opening sentence- fell out and crashed and in the fourth paragraph King uses another verb- explode. All of them describe action that happened to the ship thus are regarded to be a part of the lexical chain. And the last items which belong to this lexical chain are the personal names of the main characters- Shapiro, Rand and Grimes whose name was repeated more times in the last part of the example.

The lexical chains creates cohesive force in this example and as well as with different repetitions, substitutions and collocations bounds this beginning together and King again enables the readers of the story to comprehend all important information during the first pages. This notion was also found in the previous example- Dolan´s Cadillac- and it will also be analyzed in the last example of qualitative analysis.

The last example is taken from the beginning of the short story Mrs Todd´s Shortcut from the collection Skeleton Crew (1985). In this last example I will prove again that King uses

62 more cohesive devices within a longer passage of a short story. In this beginning of the short story, the main characters and scenery are introduced- King´s technique that can be found in most of his stories:

‘There goes the Todd woman,’ I said. Homer Buckland watched the little Jaguar go by and nodded. The woman raised her hand to Homer. Homer nodded his big, shaggy head to her but didn´t raise his own hand in return. The Todd family had a big summer home on Castle Lake, and Homer had been their caretaker since time out of mind. I had an idea that he disliked Worth Todd´s second wife every bit as much as he´d liked ´Phelia Todd, the first one. This was just about two years ago and we were sitting on a bench in front of Bell´s market, me with an orange soda-pop, Homer with a glass of mineral water. It was October, which is a peaceful time in Castle Rock. Lots of the lake places still get used on the weekends, but the aggressive, boozy summer socializing is over by then and the hunters with their big guns and their expensive nonresident permits pinned to their orange caps haven´t started to come into town yet. Crops have been mostly laid by. Nights are cool, good for sleeping, and old joints like mine haven´t yet started to complain. In October the sky over the lake is passing fair, with those big white clouds that move so slow; I like how they seem so flat on the bottoms, and how they are a little gray there, like with a shadow of sundown foretold, and I can watch the sun sparkle on the water and not be bored for some space of minutes. It´s in October, sitting on the bench in front of Bell´s and watching the lake from afar off, I still wish I was a smoking man. ‘She don´t drive as fast as ´Phelia,’ Homer said. ‘I swan I used to think what an old- fashion name she had for a woman that could put a car through its paces like she could.’ (p. 259-260) At this point of this chapter I will describe and analyze various cohesive means in this beginning of the short story. In this example there are only two examples of simple repetition which is not typical for King and he used different cohesive devices. Nevertheless, two items are being repeated in this passage and the personal name of the main character Homer is being mentioned within the whole example. The second example of simple repetition is found in the second paragraph and King repeated October three times in order to depict the time of this story as soon as possible in the short story.

King furthermore used different types of substitution within the whole passage. Firstly, he substituted the noun phrase the woman by a more general item- the Todd Family in the first paragraph. This type of substitution occurs in King´s short stories often as well as the following type of substitution which is the substitution by a pronoun. This example provides two different substitutions and firstly, the noun clouds was replaced by personal pronoun they and secondly, the personal name ´Phelia was substituted by personal

63 pronoun she. The last example of substitution on this example is at the end of the first paragraph when King substituted the noun wife by a pro-form word- one.

The most significant cohesive means is used within the second paragraph when King depicted the scenery and setting of the story and he used words that belong to an ordered- set collocation. All the following words are nouns and they there are also different reiteration relations among them and they are: lake, summer, October, sky, clouds, water and sun. Firstly, there might be located the relationship between the words lake and water and it is the relationship of hyponymy in which water is the hyperonym. Next example of hyponymy is found among the words sky, clouds and sun. In this relationship, the hyperonym is the sky and clouds and sun are their own co-hyponyms. Thus, in this paragraph, King used an ordered-set collocation in order to create a coherent text and additionally there can be found two relations of hyponymy which enable the text to be even more coherent.

At this point, I will mention the importance of the lexical chain within the whole paragraph as it has a significant role in the cohesion itself. There are two relevant lexical chains that come into interaction at the beginning and at the end of the example. Firstly, there is a lexical chain about the main male character Homer and the words and phrases which belong to this chain are: Homer, big shaggy head, his own hand, caretaker, he and I plus verbs watched, nodded, didn´t raise, had been, disliked, liked, said and think. The items of this lexical chain are to be found within the whole passage as well as the items of the following lexical chain which represents the story´s heroine and they are: the Todd woman, the woman, her, second wife, she and her hand plus a verb raised. These two lexical chains enter an interaction in both the beginning and the end of the story. However, at the beginning of the story both of the characters interact in a physical way when they actually meet, at the end of the example their interaction is realized only by lexis when Homer is talking about the woman.

Lastly, a lexical chain representing the country-side of the story setting might be located within this example. King thus uses both an ordered-set collocation plus this lexical chain when depicting the scenery and background and the items belonging to this chain are: Castle Lake, Castle Rock, Bell´s market, crops and Bell´s with the addition of the items from the previously mentioned collocation. Notably, the names- Castle Lake and Castle Rock- give readers the most general view of the setting as they both are placed in the state

64 of Maine which serves as a setting for a significant number of King´s short stories and novels.

The aim of the qualitative analysis was to demonstrate that King uses various means of lexical cohesion within longer parts of his short stories. Focus was placed on beginning passages of three different short stories that had already been mentioned in this thesis. Various reiteration relations, ordered-set collocations and lexical chains were found and analyzed in each of these examples. I believe I proved how King is capable of creating a complex and coherent text with the use of proper lexis and with the use of different cohesive means which were analyzed in this chapter of the thesis. To support the fact, I also showed which cohesive means are used in the longer parts of his stories and that the lexical cohesion might be found within the whole passages due to various cohesive means.

In all examples, I was able to locate examples of simple repetition, different types of substitutions, ordered-set collocations and lexical chains and their interaction. All of the cohesive means were also found within the passages thus the main research question of the qualitative analysis was proven as King´s stories are coherent with the use of different cohesive devices.

Conclusion

The main aim of the thesis was to locate various means of lexical cohesion in Stephen King´s short stories. Stories were chosen from different collections in order to prove the fact that the author uses various means of lexical cohesion. These means were found within wide range of his works. The examples of different means were found and then analyzed by the use of qualitative analysis.

The thesis itself was divided into a theoretical and empirical part. The theoretical part focused on theoretical framework suggested mainly by Halliday and Hasan, Tanskanen and Hoey. The theory was then applied in order to analyze examples of lexical cohesion in King´s works.

Thus the theoretical part explored the means of lexical cohesion according to the Tanskanen´s typology. The first part of the theoretical part described different types of reiteration, namely- repetition, substitution, equivalence, generalization, specification, co-specification and contrast; the second part focused on different kinds of collocations- ordered set, activity related and elaborative and lastly, the theoretical part analyzed lexical chains a their subcategories- identity chains and similarity chains.

The second part of this thesis includes the empirical part in which examples of various cohesive means were located and then analyzed. Examples of different short stories were used to demonstrate different cohesive means in each example and the subchapters of this part follow the subchapters of theoretical part.

Henceforth, the first subchapter analyzed various repetitions found in King´s short stories and focus was placed on repetition of adjectives, pronouns, nouns, verbs and personal names. All the examples used in this subchapter proved that King often uses repetition in his short stories as a mean of lexical cohesion.

The next subchapter dealt with another reiteration category- substitution. This part of the thesis provided examples of substitution realized by synonymy, substitution by a pronoun, hyponymy and lastly there were analyzed examples in which King used more types of substitution within a short passage of a short story. Following subchapters analyzed collocation and lexical chains in King´s works and also located different examples of both cohesive devices.

Finally, the last chapter of the thesis explored longer examples of King´s short stories and analyzed the passages by qualitative analysis. Three different examples were analyzed and the analyses proved the occurrence of various cohesive devices which King uses in order to create coherent texts.

The thesis then proved that lexical cohesion is used within contemporary literature performed by Stephen King. Due to lexical cohesion King is able to create coherent short stories and almost all of the cohesive means described by Tanskanen and other scholars can be found within his works.

List of references:

Ballard, K. (2007) The Framework of English. London: Palgrave Macmillan Bamberg, B. (1983) “What Makes a Text Coherent?” College Composition and Communication Volume 34, Number 4, 417-429 DiMarco , C. “Where Computer Science, Linguistics, and Biology Meet: Using lexical chaining to analyze biomedical text.” Online document. Retrieved 2nd January 2016 from . El- Shiyab, S. (1996) “Identity chains: Meaning and Function in Texts.” Online document. Retrieved 2nd January 2016 from . Fulcher, G. (1989) “Cohesion and coherence in theory and reading research.” Journal of Research in Reading volume 12 number 2, 146-163 González, M. (2010) “Lexical Cohesion in Multiparty Conversations.” Language Sciences Volume 33, 167-179 Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. Harlow: Longman Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. (1985) Language, context and text: aspects of language in a socialsemiotic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press Hasan, R. (1984) “Coherence and Cohesive Harmony.” in Flood, J. (ed.) Understanding Reading Comprehension. Delaware: International Reading Association Hoey, M. (1991) Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University Press Hoffman, C.R. (2012) Cohesive Profiling. Meaning and interaction in personal weblogs. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company Jayarajan, D. and Deodhare D. “Lexical Chains as Document Feature.”Online document. Retrieved 11th January 2016 from . Jobbins, A.C. and Evett L.J. “Text segmentation using reiteration and Collocation”. Retrieved 14th 11from < http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P98-1100>. Keenan, E. G. and Evett, L. J. (1989) Lexical structure for natural language processing, Proceedings of the 1st International Lexical Acquisition Workshop at IJCAI Martin, J.R. (1992) English Text: System and Structure. Philadelphia, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company Morris, J. and Hirst, G. (1991) “Lexical Cohesion Computed by Thesaural Relations as an Indicator of the Structure of Text”. 1991. Computational Linguistics Volume 17, Number 1 Nguyen, V.C., Nguyen L.M. and Shimazu, A. (2011) “Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing.” Improving Text Segmentation with Non-Systematic

Semantic Relation (Verifiability Award), 304-315. Online document retrieved 23rd March from Renkema, J. (2009) The Texture of Discourse. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company Stotsky, S. (1983) “Types of Lexical Cohesion in Expository Writing: Implications for Developing the Vocabulary of Academic Discourse.“ College Composition and Communication Volume 34, Number 4, 430-446 Taboada, T, M. (2004) “Building Coherence and Cohesion.” Online document. Retrieved 18th January 2016 from .

Tanskanen, S.K. (2006) Collaborating towards Coherence. Philadelphia: John Benjamins B.V. Tanskanen S.K. (2004) “Digital coherence? Patterns of cohesion in face-to-face conversation and e-mailing list messages.” Discourse patterns in spoken and written corpora, 89-110. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company Teng, Ch. (2008) “Multimodal Semiontics: Functional Analysis in Contexts of Education.” Coherence and Cohesive Harmony in Filmic Text, 87-104. London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Winston, M. E., Chaffin, R., & Hermann, D. J. (1987) A taxonomy of part-whole relations. Cognitive Science, 11, 417-444 Yule, G. (2006) The Study of Language. New York: Cambridge University Press

List of sources:

King, S. (2002) Everything´s Eventual. New York: Scribner King, S. (1985) Skeleton Crew. London: Hodder & Stoughton King, S. (2008) Just After Sunset. London: Hodder & Stoughton King, S. (1982) Different Seasons. London: Signet King, S. (1993) Nightmares and Dreamscapes. London: Hodder & Stoughton King, S. (1990) Four Past Midnight. London: Hodder & Stoughton