Discourse analysis can be characterised as the study of the relationship between
language and the contexts in which it is used. In 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s major shifts in
emphases in linguistics yielded valuable contributions to the study of discourse, both spoken
and written. Many linguists feel that traditional morphological and syntactic tools are not
enough to explain texts and that new discourse tools need to be developed for the study of
communicative texts (Dressier [20], van Dijk [63]).
In the early years of discourse analysis, Harris [31] studied supra-sentential structure
based on a written text, the distribution of linguistic elements in extended texts, and the links
between the text and its social situation. Then, Austin [2], Searle [60] and Grice [26] were
interested in the study of language as social action reflected in speech as theory and the
formulation of conversation maxims, along the emergence of pragmatics, which is the study of
meaning in context. Later on, Halliday [28] establishes a framework which emphasizes the
social functions of language and the thematic and informational structure of speech and writing
while Coulthard’s [16] framework interrelates linguistic form, semantic interpretation and
pragmatic use for the more complete understanding of communicative competence.
Also important in the development of discourse analysis is the work of text
grammarians. Many text grammarians have been hard at work trying to understand the
fundamental properties of texts and some theoretical accounts of them have been proposed.
For instance, van Dijk’s [63] analyses “topic of discourse” to understand the semantic
representation of texts while Kintsch [39] uses propositional analysis.
Another proposition study that holds promise for identifying the role of semantic
presentational structure in texts is McCagg’s [45&46] taxonomy of inferencing. McCagg
developed a systematic way of accounting for propositions occurring in reading comprehension
protocols that are not directly or explicitly stated in the stimulus reading passage. Based upon
detailed analyses of Japanese-speaking ESL students’ recall protocols, McCagg classifies
propositions into text based and reader based, each with a number of subcategories. Although
McCagg’s focus has been limited to the analyses of reading recalls by student writers, the
taxonomy could be used for examining and teaching coherence in students’ writing.
More recently, Cook’s [14] explains the theory of discourse analysis and suggests some
practical relevance to language teaching and learning. McCarthy [47] gives an insight into how
texts are structured beyond the sentence-level; how the structuring of sentences has
implications for units such as paragraphs, and for the progression of whole texts; and how
discourse rules and their realizations (the actual form that reflect those rules) in language differ
from culture to culture. According to McCarthy [47] such grammatical contributions to textuality
as reference, substitution/ellipsis and conjunction functioning as cohesive markers create links
within and between clauses and sentences in written discourse.

According to Bloor [4], readers or listeners make sense of a text by following the
connections between its parts, i.e., by looking for macro patterns and clause relations. It is one
major source of coherence which derives from the relationship of ideas. The use of sequences
typical in English written text, such as hypothetical- real (McCarthy and Carter [48]), can help
the reader infer the nature of a relationship. These sequences have been called clause relations
(Winter [66], Hoey [33] and macro patterns (McCarthy and Carter [48]). Hoey [33] identifies
two other macro patterns pervasive in English: general- particular, i.e., a general statement
followed by a specific example, and preview-detail, i.e., idea and then details.
In addition, a number of different approaches have been taken toward the study of
texts and to determining what constitutes a coherent text as opposed to a sequence which
would not be considered a text. The relationship between coherence and cohesion which have
been identified as two major standards of “textuality” (Beaugrande and Dressler [3]) in a text
plays an essential role in English academic writing. Empirical studies on this relationship indicate
some relationships between writing quality which depends on overall coherence in content,
organization and the quantity of cohesive devices used (Fitzgerald and Spiegel [23], Johnson
[38]).
Regarding cohesion, many studies have been carried out of which the study conducted
by Halliday and Hasan [29] has had a great influence on the understanding and teaching of
coherence features. Halliday and Hasan view coherent text as having two characteristics
somewhat different from those in the traditional definition: cohesion (i.e., ties between
sentences) and register (i.e., coherence with a context). Cohesion is how words and
expressions are connected using cohesive devices which can be categorized into five groups:
reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion. These cohesive devices ‘tie’
sentences together in order to create a meaningful text. It is probable to view this book as a
key work of reference for the study of cohesion.
In Vietnam, a number of linguists have made great contributions to the study of
discourse analysis. Trần Ngọc Thêm [72] and Diệp Quang Ban [69] analyze cohesive devices in
Vietnamese texts in the books “Hệ thống Liên kết Văn bản Tiếng Việt” and “Văn bản và Liên
kết trong Tiếng Việt” respectively. Differently from Trần Ngọc Thêm and Diệp Quang Ban,
Nguyễn Thiện Giáp [70] reports a general view of pragmatics when he mentions a set of such
different aspects as context and semantics, information structures, especially discourse and
discourse analysis.
Beside the works mentioned above, there are some practical studies related to the
topic. For example, Phan Văn Hòa [71] investigates into the conjunction as a means of cohesion
in his Ph.D Thesis “Phương tiện Liên kết Phát ngôn- Đối chiếu Ngữ liệu Anh-Việt”. Hà Ngọc
Công [27] in his B.A graduation course analyzes the positions, syntactic and semantic features
of cohesive devices. His study is just confined to an investigation of conjunctions in
argumentative essays collected from books. In addition, Bùi Thị Ngọc Anh [8] examines English
link words for reason-result in discourse and makes a comparison with the Vietnamese

equivalents. Her research only focuses on the syntactic and semantic features as well as the
discourse functions that reason-result link words perform. Finally, Trần Thị Thùy Hương [62]
focuses on linguistic performance of substitute words as means of cohesion in discourse in
English versus Vietnamese.
Although several studies which analyze cohesion and coherence have been carried out
(Johnson [38] and Phuong To Tam [58]), there is no evidence that any researchers have
conducted a study on organization, cohesion and coherence of current EFL major students’
writing which, otherwise, this study attempts to explore.