|
A major feature of language is that spoken discourse has prospective
features - it constantly prospects ahead. The scene is set for the
next utterance by the utterance going on at the moment, without
determining exactly what will happen.
Most analysis of text so far has concerned complex patterns emerging,
linking parts of a text to each other. The common sense view is
that people generally forget the actual language but remember the
message. From this, we can ask if we actually need the amount of
linguistic detail in backward references that we find in some texts.
Text has been described as a long string of sentences, which draw
links together.
In his paper, Sinclair proposes that the most important thing is
"What is Happening in the Current Sentence". The meaning
of any word is got from the state of the discourse, and not from
its source. The reader should find a value for a word (referencing
pronoun, proper name or a noun phrase) from the immediate state
of the text, and not have to retrieve it from its source in previous
text.
The state of the discourse is identified with the sentence which
is currently being processed. The previous text (to the current
sentence) is part of the immediate previous experience of the reader
or listener, and is no different to any other previous (non-linguistic)
experience. It will normally have lost the features which were used
to organise the meaning and to shape the text into a unique communicative
instrument. From this perspective, there is nothing to be gained
from tracing back references in the text - nothing will be added
to the current state of the discourse, nor is it important how the
present state of the text was arrived at.
|