Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 1

The Importance of Writing Structures, Coherence, and Cohesion to

Writing and Reading
Sally Hampton
For a text to be recognized as a text rather than a haphazard collection of sentences, it must
have an orderly and cohesive construction.
John Chapman
Think of cohesion as the experience of seeing pairs of sentences fit neatly together, the way
Lego pieces do. Think of coherence as the experience of recognizing what all the sentences in a
piece of writing add up to, the way lots of Lego pieces add up to a building, bridge, or boat.
Joseph Williams

Writing
The ultimate goal of in-school writing is the expression of ideas and knowledge. Writing well,
more often than not, is essential to academic survival. Essay tests, research papers, college
application letters, Advanced Placement examinations, the ACT, and the SAT all require student
writing proficiency. This primacy of writing proficiency is not misplaced: Writing reveals what
we know; more than anything else it is the measure of our learning. It unlocks the mind and
forces the writer to organize and synthesize thinking.
When Ernest Boyer, then president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching, was asked how to know if a given high school was doing a good job, he answered that
simply having all the seniors write an essay on a subject of their choice and then reading those
essays would reveal more about the quality of the school than would any other measure (Tagg,
1986). What would be learned from this exercise would, of course, go far beyond the declarative
knowledge students could display in that essay.
You would see simply by topic choice what the student thought significant and what
was best ignored.
You would see how the student made sense of the informationhow particular chunks
were woven into clusters and what the overarching ideas were.
You would see the degree to which the student could demonstrate actual understanding
of the content and the amount of depth present in that understanding.
You would see the students facility with languageor not.
You would see the writers thinking.
Think about what a writer has to be able to do. When she writes, she works intensively
with languageat the whole text level, the paragraph level, the sentence level, and the word
level. And at each level she needs tools. She needs genre knowledge to help organize and present
her thinking to structure whole text. She needs facility with paragraphing and syntax to help
layer meaning and create linkages between the ideas she works to express. She needs a good
vocabulary for precise word choice, which is critical to making writing explicit. Additionally,
she needs knowledge of grammatical structures and punctuation to make the writing intelligible
to readers. And finally, she needs to be able to bring everything together and make her whole
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 2
message coherent. Three of these toolsgenre knowledge, cohesion, and coherenceare the
structural underpinnings of text. They guide both readers and writers and should, therefore, be
essential in any ELA curriculum.

Genres and Mid-Level StructuresThe Macrostructure
A writer will organize her thinking in a particular wayamong other options, choose a particular
genreto convey her message in a form that a reader will find intelligible/effective. Genres are
recognizable text types. They are rough templates that writers use to order their thinking.
Moreover, genres are, according to Charles Cooper, types of writing produced everyday in our
culture, types of writing that make possible certain kinds of learning and social interaction . . .
essential to thinking, learning, communication, and social cohesion. The most common school
genres include narrative and some of its subgenres, such as the memoir, the autobiographical
incident essay; the informational genre (exposition) including subgenres of problem/solution,
reports of information and explanations, and argument, including such subgenres as response to
literature, the position paper and the evaluation (Dornan, Rosen, & Wilson, 2003). Genre
knowledge on the part of the writer opens up an array of options that aid in the organization and
generation of text (Graham & Harris, 1993). Genre knowledge on the part of a reader allows that
reader to anticipate where the writer is headed next with her thinking; it allows for anticipation
and ease of understanding.
Understanding of mid-level structures offers similar benefits. Working within the
structure of comparison/contrast or cause and effect, of problem and solution, or
definition/example, gives the writerand the readera predictable template to follow.
While the genre and mid-level structures (macrostructure) of text are the global means of
both organizing and following the writers message, at the sentence and paragraph levels of text
(microstructure) are the propositions (idea units) that link together to make up the web of
meaning intended by the writer (van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983).

Paragraphs and SentencesThe Microstructure
A paragraph is a single sentence or a group of sentences set off as a unit. Paragraphs are
characterized by unitya focus on one main ideaby coherenceall thoughts clearly related to
each otherand by developmentadequate and specific details to elaborate the main idea
(Connors & Lunsford, 1993). Paragraphs are arranged within a text so that their topics cohere.
They are linked by some reference to the preceding paragraph. (The reference itself can be either
explicit or implied). Like the linkages used to join sentences, paragraph linkages are most
typically, repetitions of a key word or term, parallel structures, pronouns, or transitional
expressions.
The sentence brings fragments of information together to become complete ideas. It has
direction and current and momentum. Through the use of parallel structures, coordinate
conjunctions, and subordinate clauses, the writer adds meaning, modifies, elaborates, and moves
from known to new information. Then sentences are conjoined to create paragraphs and the
paragraphs to produce a whole text. De Quincey (Masson, 1889) tells us The two capital secrets
in the art of prose composition are these: first the philosophy of transition and connection; or the
art by which one step in an evolution of thought is made to arise out of another; all fluent and
effective composition depends on the connections; secondly, the way in which sentences are
made to modify each other; for the most powerful effects in written eloquence arise out of this
reverberation, as it were, from each other in a rapid succession of sentences.
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 3
Neither of the secrets that De Quincey describes happen by chance. There exist rules or
contracts, acknowledged understandings that writers adhere to in order to produce text that is
fluent and effective. For example, consider the following: Every sentence following the topic
sentence in a coherent paragraph will usually include known information. Most frequently that
information will be in the subject position of the sentence; new information, the real purpose of
the sentence, will usually come in the predicate. Linguists have found this knownnew
sequence to be so persuasive a feature of prose that it has come to be called a contract. The writer
has an obligation, a contract of sorts, to fulfill expectations in the reader and keep the reader on
familiar ground by connecting each sentence in some way to what has gone before [Kolln,
1999]. This known-new contract is the basis of cohesion and sentence rhythm.

Creating Links Between Sentences and Between Paragraphs
Writers decide to link their sentences with explicit markers, or they decide not to make the link
explicit to readers. Sometimes a link is close by (local); sometimes it is separated by many pages
(global). Sometimes it must be inferred. The path of an authors thinking is marked by these
links, which must be understood by the reader (Langer, 1989). The links are rule-bound, not
idiosyncratic, since to be useful they must be logical and predictable. They make clear the
relationship between the ideas that the writer expects the reader to use in deciphering the texts
meaning. The most important linking structures are cohesive ties.
Cohesive ties fall into five major categories according to Halliday and Hasan (1976).
They are reference made up of personal pronouns, demonstratives, and comparative signals;
conjunction whose subcategories are additive, adversative, cause, and temporal; lexical cohesion
brought about by reiteration and collocation; ellipses, wherein parts of the sentence are left out;
and substitution wherein words are substituted for other structures.
Familiarity with a number of cohesive ties comes naturally to students through oral
language. It is not, for example, unusual to hear a 7- or 8-year-old recount her day by stringing
together a long series of events with and thens. Some of this oral language facility transfers to
writing, but some does not. For example, and then may come naturally, but on the other
hand certainly does not. Much of the actual function of cohesive ties becomes apparent only in
written text and then only when a teacher explains the concept.
Stephen P. Witte and Lester Faigley in 1981 examined the cohesion of low- and high-rated
essays. They found a significant difference in the frequency of ties. Even in the low group they
found a cohesive tie every 4.9 words: (20.4 percent of the words contributing to cohesion.) They
found an astonishing 31 percent in the high-rated essays. Marion Crowhurst (1987) examined
grade levels (6, 10, and 12) and modes (argument and narration), confirmed these high numbers
of total ties with frequencies between 20 and 25 percent at all levels.
A high percentage of the ties that Crowhurst found in narratives signaled time, especially
in the writing of sixth graders. The number of these temporal conjunctions decreased from grade
6 to 10 to 12, but that decrease was due largely to the decreasing frequency of the word then. That
one word accounted for 61 percent of the temporal conjunctions for sixth graders. And in
examining the temporal conjunctions used in argument, Crowhurst reports that even though total
numbers showed no significant difference between grades 6 and 12, word choice was decidedly
different. The sixth graders used only two temporal conjunctions: then and soon. Twelfth graders
developed their arguments with first of all, next, for one thing, meanwhile, all in all, and finally.
Crowhurst reports similar differences in the use of adversative conjunctions, with the sixth
graders relying mainly on but, and the twelfth graders using a much wider range.
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 4
Crowhurst reports that Halliday and Hasans categories of repetition, synonyms, and
collocation also showed significant differences for grade level, with synonyms and collocation
increasing with age: So, its apparent that knowledge of cohesive ties is an important tool for
writers to have.

Reading Comprehension
The role of text structures and cohesion in reading comprehension also important, and its
importance is not a new idea. In fact, the importance of cohesion was an idea afforded much
interest in the mid1980s. However, with its emphasis on the text, rather than the reader,
cohesion was not widely explored during the 1990s when the role of the reader and reading
strategies became the focus of research.
This importance of a students understanding of signal words (lexical ties) and text
structures to a students reading comprehension has been highlighted in Walter Kintschs (1988)
Construction-Integration Model. According to Kintsch, comprehension requires that readers
build a coherent representation of a text. That is, the reader must move through the text, taking in
and adding to information, deciding whats important, figuring out how one piece of information
relates to another (cohesion) and to what the reader already knows, and putting everything
together to develop meaning (coherence). To do this, Kintsch contends that a reader must
simultaneously construct what he calls a textbase and a mental model. Forming the first of these,
the textbase requires a reader to create an idea weban appropriate linkage of the idea units
(propositions) that the writer has put forth.
According to Kintsch, A propositionis used to represent the meaning of a (simple) sentence. A
text, at this level of representation, becomes a network of interconnected propositions.
Propositions are connected in various ways, by referential identityor by other relationships
among propositions, such as implied causal links. The resulting network of propositions is called
the microstructure of the text. The hierarchical macrostructure represents the global
organization of the text in sections and subsections, main points and minor digressions. Micro-
and macro structure together form the textbase. Fluent, cooperative readers usually form textbases
that closely mirror what the author had in mind when turning his or her ideas into words.
While the textbase (propositional level) represents the meaning and organization of the
text, the situation model can go far beyond the text itself. It is the readers understanding in terms
of his or her own goals, interests, and prior knowledge. Most importantly, it integrates the new
text and what the reader knew before by creating links between them. The textbase is a
symbolic, verbal structure; the situation model can be more general, including symbolic, verbal
elements as well as imagery of various kinds and emotional elements.
Notice in Kintschs model the importance of a readers being able to link propositions.
Notice, too, that the structures Kintsch specifies that link propositions are the same structures
used to build cohesion between sentences and coherence between paragraphs: referential
identityorother relationships among propositions, such as implied causal links.
In an effort to illustrate the prevalence of these ties in materials elementary students are
required to read, lets look at the first two paragraphs of a passage fourth grade readers are
required to comprehend for the grade 4 National Assessment of Educational Progress (Arnold,
2004). This is a passage identified as informational text though it begins with a narrative frame
and has several features typical of literary non-fiction, i.e., inverted sentence order and a first
person narrator (we).
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 5
Watch Out for Wombats!
As we rode along the highway sixty miles northeast of Adelaide, Australia, a diamond-shaped
sign suddenly loomed ahead. Watch Out for Wombats, it warned. We peered into the sparse scrub along
the roadside and searched for the brown furry animals. In the distance we spotted a mob of red
kangaroos bounding out of sight, and near the road a crow like bird called a currawong was perched, [but
nowhere did we see any wombats.] However, we later found out that this was not surprising because we
were traveling during midday, and wombats are active mostly at night. It wasnt until we visited the animal
reserve that we finally saw our first wombat and learned more about this funny-looking creature.
We found that there are two types of wombats in Australia: the hairy-nosed wombat, which lives
in Queensland and South Australia, and the coarse-haired wombat, which lives along the southeast
coast. Both have soft brown fur, short ears, and thick-set bodies. They are said to resemble North
American badgers. The hairy-nosed wombat is smaller and has pointier ears compared with its coarse-
haired cousin; otherwise they are very much alike.
When reading the paragraphs above, skillful readers will use a variety of comprehension
strategies simultaneously and effortlessly. They dip seamlessly into a reservoir of strategies that
can be called upon at the exact moment necessary to extract meaning from the text. Louise
Rosenblatt (1978) refers to a transaction between the reader and a text the reader response. The
text contributes a structure, genre, and content to the transaction, while the reader brings his or
her own prior knowledge, reading experiences, and values. When a reading transaction is fluid
and coherent, Rosenblatt calls the resulting, aesthetically pleasing outcome a poem, which is
also unique and personal to its reader. When a student no longer must struggle to decode
meaning from common passages, he or she becomes mentally free to form a personal response to
texts. The student is then able to experience reading as a poem, rather than simply a series of
obstacles. The same paragraphs below, now marked with arrows to show how readers may
struggle with text, remind us that the beauty of experiencing text as a poem remains elusive to
many readers.
As we rode along the highway sixty miles northeast of Adelaide, Australia, a diamond-shaped
sign suddenly loomed ahead. Watch Out for Wombats, it warned. We peered into the sparse scrub along
the roadside and searched for the brown furry animals. In the distance we spotted a mob of red
kangaroos bounding out of sight, and near the road a crow like bird called a currawong was perched, [but
nowhere did we see any wombats.] However, we later found out that this was not surprising because we
1 2 2a 3
4
5
6 7
8 9 10
11 12
14
15
16 17
1 2 2a 3
4
13
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 6
were traveling during midday, and wombats are active mostly at night. It wasnt until we visited the animal
reserve that we finally saw our first wombat and learned more about this funny-looking creature.
We found that there are two types of wombats in Australia: the hairy-nosed wombat, which lives
in Queensland and South Australia, and the coarse-haired wombat, which lives along the southeast
coast. Both have soft brown fur, short ears, and thick-set bodies. They are said to resemble North
American badgers. The hairy-nosed wombat is smaller and has pointier ears compared with its coarse-
haired cousin; otherwise they are very much alike.

Paragraph 1
At the beginning of the text, the reader encounters the pronoun we. This pronoun is exophoric,
not cohesive. It appears throughout the text. Next, but still in the first sentence the reader
encounters the word sign (1). The pronoun it (3) in sentence #2 refers back to sign (1) as does the
italicized Watch Out for Wombats (2).
The word Wombats (2a) is referenced further along by brown furry animals (4). This may
be a difficult link for readers who conceive of the italicized Wombats as part of a sign and not as
a distinct type of animal.
This (5) in sentence #5 refers back to the clause where did we see any wombats. And
creature (7) in the last sentence of the first paragraph refers back to wombat (6), the preceding
noun.

Paragraph 2
In paragraph 2, there is a chain of linkages. Hairy-nosed wombat (9) refers back to types (8) and
which (10) refers back to hairy-nosed wombats (9). Then course-hairy wombats (11) refer back
to types (8) and which (12) refers to coarse haired wombats (11). Both (13) refers back to types
(8). They (14) and they (17) refer back to both (13) and types (8). Hairy nosed wombat (15) is
modified by the comparatives smaller and pointier. Cousin (16) refers back to coarse-haired
wombat (11).

The most frequently employed kind of cohesive tie in this passage is called anaphora. Anaphora
is the linguistic term for a backward acting cue (such as a pronoun), which a reader must
decipher to understand the text. Sometimes the cue is close (local) and so relatively easy for a
reader to understand, as in the following:
8 9
10
11 12
13 14
15
16 17
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 7
(1) and (3): sign/it
(9) and (10): hairy-nosed wombat/which
(11) and (12): course-haired wombat/which
However, anaphoric links can also function to interweave and span quite long chunks of
text. In this case, the reference is global, rather than local, and may be considerably more
problematic to developing readers.
Writers also use longer anaphoric chains to create cohesion. The second paragraph of this
text contains a long anaphoric chain. This anaphoric chainsimply because of its lengthcould
confound a student who struggles to read.
As we rode along the highway sixty miles northeast of Adelaide, Australia, a diamond-shaped
sign suddenly loomed ahead. Watch Out for Wombats, it warned. We peered into the sparse scrub along
the roadside and searched for the brown furry animals. In the distance we spotted a mob of red
kangaroos bounding out of sight, and near the road a crow like bird called a currawong was perched, [but
nowhere did we see any wombats.] However, we later found out that this was not surprising because we
were traveling during midday, and wombats are active mostly at night. It wasnt until we visited the animal
reserve that we finally saw our first wombat and learned more about this funny-looking creature.
Further, anaphora may be problematic to readers when the same pronoun is used to refer
to two different nouns, as is the case with (9) and (10) and (11) and (12).
(2) and (4) and (6) and (7) represent another kind of link. In these two cases, the
reference is between nouns. In both pairs, one noun is more general than the other: (2) and (4):
animals/wombats and (6) and (7): wombat/creature.
Without question, this single example illustrates how understanding the passage requires
understanding the meaning of the ties. For most fourth graders, this understanding is not
problematic. They follow the meaning implicitly, having learned through oral language how
certain cohesive ties work. However, for othersELLs, students not routinely exposed to
academic or literary language, or struggling readers, the links do not facilitate making sense of
the text. If anything, they are confusing or meaningless.
It can be argued, then, that knowledge of cohesive ties is fundamental to both readers and
writers. Yet, in his 1983 work Reading Development and Cohesion, J ohn Chapman (1983) warns
us that one of the most surprising things that recent researchhas shown, is that full
1 2 2a 3
4
5
6 7
Copyright 2005, 2010 by Sally Hampton 8
understanding and the ability to use the ties that go to make up textural cohesion is still being
acquired well after the initial stages of learning to read. Mastery of some of the ties, as shown by
cloze tests, is only achieved by some pupils late in the secondary school. Yet the role of
cohesive ties is not often addressed in reading curricula.
In view of their importance to both reading and writing and to their prevalence in upper
grade texts, it would not seem unreasonable to suggest that the time has come for a closer
examination of the role of text structures and coherence and cohesion in facilitating reading
comprehension and writing development.
References
Arnold, C. (2004). Watch out for Wombats! NAEP 2004 sample reading questions: Grade 4.
Washington, DC: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Chapman, L.J . (1983). Reading development and cohesion. London: Heinemann.
Connors, R.J ., & Lunsford, A.A. (1993). Teachers rhetorical comments on student papers.
College Composition and Communication, 44(2), 200223. doi:10.2307/358839
Crowhurst, M. (1987). Cohesion in argument and narration at three grade levels. Research in the
Teaching of English, 21, 185201.
Dornan, R.W., Rosen, L.M., & Wilson, M. (2003). Within and beyond the writing process in the
secondary English classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1993). Improving the writing of students with learning problems:
Self-regulated strategy development. School Psychology Review, 22(4), 656671.
Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R.K. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction- integration
model. Psychological Review, 95, 163182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
Kolln, M. (1999). Cohesion and coherence. In C.R. Cooper & L. Odell (Eds.), Evaluating
writing: The role of teachers knowledge about text, learning, and culture. Urbana, IL:
National Council of Teachers of English.
Langer, J .A. (1989). The process of understanding literature. Report Series 2.1. Albany: State
University of New York, Center for Learning and Teaching Literature.
Masson, D. (Ed.). (1889). The collected writings of Thomas De Quincey. Edinburgh: Adam and
Charles Black.
Rosenblatt, L.M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary
work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Tagg, J . (1986, March 16). Learning to think the write way. Los Angeles Times, p. 16.
van Dijk, T.A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York:
Academic Press.
Witte, S.P., & Faigley, L. (1981). Coherence, cohesion, and writing quality. College
Composition and Communication, 32, 189204. doi:10.2307/356693