UDC

81’24

Authors

Nadezhda V. Koval’chuk
Rostov State University of Civil Engineering
162 Sotsialisticheskaya St., Rostov-on-Don, 344022, Russian Federation;
e-mail: nadezhda_kovalchuk_2012@mail.ru
Marina S. Volodina
Rostov State University of Civil Engineering
162 Sotsialisticheskaya St., Rostov-on-Don, 344022, Russian Federation;
e-mail: lavender1984@rambler.ru

Abstract

In terms of linguistics, the rhetorical structure theory offers a different, more multidimensional view on text organization than the majority of other conceptions. In particular, this theory sheds light on the close link between textual elements and the category of coherence, which allows us to actually follow the pragmatic and semantic principles of coherent text formation. The primary aim of this theory is to reveal the basis of automatic generation and functioning of the text, as well as its becoming coherent. Thus, the object of investigation is the inner text structure and how this structure manifests itself in the process of text generation and perception. The text itself is understood as a coherent whole consisting of elements related to each other. In the course of research, the text is divided into elements, minimal units of analysis. The rhetorical structure theory is a descriptive linguistic approach to a wide range of phenomena connected with text organization. Text organization is analysed in terms of interrelations between the text parts. This theory explains text coherence by postulating hierarchic, coherent text structures where every part performs a certain function in relation to other text parts. The notion of text coherence, defined through relations inside the text, is acknowledged by many linguists. In contemporary linguistic literature, these kinds of relations are referred to as “relations of coherence”, “discursive relations” or “conjunctive relations”. In the expression of rhetorical relations between the text parts we find the speaker’s hidden intentions. However, the intentions themselves do not define these kinds of relations. In spite of the fact that the existence of such relations is usually marked by lexical or other means, they can manifest themselves even without clear marking. Thereby, a question arises whether these relations really exist in the interlocutors’ consciousness or they are a product of text analysis.

Keywords

rhetorical structure theory, text analysis, effects on the addressee, coherence, nuclear and satellite elements

References

1. Klemenova E.N., Kudryashov I.A. Germenevticheskiy analiz teksta: kognitivnye osnovaniya [Hermeneutic Text Analysis: Cognitive Bases]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental’nykh. issledovaniy, 2013, no. 7, pp. 109–113.
   
2. Volodina M.S. Sredstva formal’noy i smyslovoy svyaznosti v dialogicheskom tekste: dis. … kand. filol. nauk [Means of Formal and Semantic Coherence in a Dialogic Text: Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss.]. Rostov-on-Don, 2014. 155 p.
   
3. Mann W.C., Thompson S.A. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization. Text, 1988, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 243–281.
   
4. Sknar G.D. Tema kak konstituiruyushchiy komponent khudozhestvennogo teksta: pragmaticheskiy i kognitivnyy aspekty: dis. … d-ra filol. nauk [Theme as a Constituting Component of Fiction: Pragmatic and Cognitive Aspects: Dr. Philol. Sci. Diss.]. Rostov-on-Don, 2014. 371 p.
   
5. Varzonin Yu.N. Kognitivno-kommunikativnaya model’ ritoriki: dis. … d-ra filol. nauk [Cognitive and Communicative Rhetoric Model: Dr. Philol. Sci. Diss.]. Tver, 2001. 268 p.
   
6. Pikhnovskiy P.V. Lingvofilosofskie osnovaniya ritoriki i germenevtiki: dis. … kand. filol. nauk [Linguistic and Philosophic Bases of Rhetoric and Hermeneutics: Cand. Philol. Sci. Diss.]. Tver, 2004. 168 p.
   
7. Sanders T., Spooren W., Noordman L. Coherence Relations in a Cognitive Theory of Discourse Representation. Cogn. Linguist., 1993, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 93–133.
   
8. Sanders T., Spooren W. Communicative Intentions and Coherence Relations. Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How to Create It and How to Describe It. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, 1999, pp. 235–250.
   
9. Sanders T., Spooren W., Noordman L. Toward a Taxonomy of Coherence Relations. Discourse Processes, 1992, no. 15, pp. 1–35.
   
10. van Dijk T. Yazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikatsiya [Language. Cognition. Communication]. Blagoveshchensk, 2000. 308 p.