Coherence and Cohesion in English Discourse

7 Conclusions
In our discussion on coherence in literary discourse we have mainly focused 
on perception of narrative texts such as novels and short stories. In general 
agreement with fundamental theoretical works in the field we have stated that 
a) coherence is a crucial quality of narrative structure (Toolan 2012), b) the 
reader’s response, genre and distinctive features of literature are major issues in 
delineating 
literary discourse (Miall 2002), and c) we have denied the specific 
nature of literary interpretation, claiming that cognitive processing of literary 
discourse is the same as in any other type of discourse (van Dijk 1979). Along with 
these assumptions we propose to consider social contexts and pragmatic aspects 
of narrative structures, taking into account specific characteristics of 
genre and 
register while noting that formal characteristics of text do not guarantee its stable 
meaning. In relation to this, we view the tension between cohesion and coherence, 
which arises from their distinctive nature (purely linguistic vs. contextualized), 
as unnecessary. Cohesion is neither necessary nor sufficient for coherence and it 
is now widely agreed that “coherence is ultimately a pragmatically-determined 
quality” (cf. Toolan 2012). Thus by our work with literary narratives we propose 
an analytical framework which combines effectively methods of textual and 

---

99
discourse analysis, exploring foregrounded (register) features and (rhetoric and 
stylistic) devices at all discourse levels, proceeding from the semantics of the text 
to pragmatic and socio-cultural dimensions of literary discourse (Verdonk 1995). 
Taking a closer look at sentence structures, ambiguity and semantic components 
of lexical items, we have been able to pinpoint specific cases where cohesion can 
be classified as a type of coherence, as well as to exemplify types of coherence 
created on the basis of cohesive links (e.g. co-referencing).
The approach presented draws its theory from three main fields of linguistic 
study. Firstly, the approach of systemic functional linguistics (cf. Halliday 
1978) has been considered. We have reflected on the interpersonal and textual 
functions of language in the definition of 
genre, viewing it as a broader concept 
encompassing 
register and discourse structure (cf. Goatly 2012). Secondly, the 
approach of pragmatics (cf. Leech 1983) and pragmatic stylistics (cf. Leech and 
Short 2007, Clark 2009) has proven highly beneficial in the study of 
inferential 
processes in literary discourse interpretation, revealing in full the complexity 
of problems on the reader’s and the narrator’s part (e.g. reader’s capacity 
and involvement in the meaning-making process, literary value creation and 
appreciation, etc.). Last but not least, the study of cognitive processes in literary 
discourse (cf. van Dijk 1978) and 
cognitive stylistics (cf. Toolan 2012, Jeffries 
and McIntyre 2010) has contributed to the study of coherence by the frame and 
schema theory.
The review of theoretical approaches to coherence and the analytical 
framework proposed in this chapter, supported by the analysed samples of 
literary narratives, enhance a view of coherence as a dominant property of literary 
text. We hope to have demonstrated the role of coherence (and its subtypes) at 
particular discourse levels and to have reflected the constant and close interplay 
between cohesion and coherence in the process of text-building and meaning-
making.