> > The use of a full explicit name to indicate a participant who is already > predominate in the larger discourse reduces the level of cohesion between > the discourse segments. I'm not sure I agree with you here. A reference to a participant is still a cohesive tie, whatever the form. From the textual stand point a full reference to a participant adds another element to the participant chain and thus builds cohesion. > The use of an anaphoric pronoun or zero anaphora to > indicate the same participant forces the reader to "remember" the > participant and thus increases the discourse cohesion between the discourse > segments. Of course there are other good reasons for using a full explicit > noun phrase to name a participant. I was just highlighting one aspect of the > question. > The psychological/cognitive effect of a full reference is not necessarily linked to the textual cohesion. Even with a full reference the reader may have to do some 'remembering' as to what and who the participant is in the discourse. > You have an interesting e-mail address. > Oh? Why is that? > -- Matthew Brook O'Donnell OpenText.org Centre for Advanced Theological Research University of Surrey Roehampton 80 Roehampton Lane London SW15 5SL tel. (0181) 392 3000 ext. 4162 fax. (0181) 392 3491 e-mail: m.odonnell@roehampton.ac.uk http://www.OpenText.org --- B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu