Discourse Analysis

Written discourse differ from spoken is several ways, nevertheless, according to Mc Carthy (1991:149) “ are dependent on their immediate context to a greater or lesser degree”. Speech is moredependent on the context since a high frequency of occurrence of deitic words are necessary to be understood, but written discourse in Mc Carthy’s words “may encode a high degree of shared knowledge betweenthe reader and the writer” however the form and structure of written discourse is determined by the factor of who are we writing, for what and what is being communicated.
Who the reader is, what thewriter relationship what the reader is” (Mc carthy 1991:152) play an important roll in the written discourse since the good comprehension of the text will depend on the sahred knowledge, it means, theinformation that the writer brings in the text and the previous knowledge that the reader has about that. Contrary to spoken, written discourse ussulay has time to compose and think as there are manyelements like cohesion, references, fronting devices, context, substitutions and so on, that have to be well placed in the text to give to the reader a good comprehension of it.
That why the purposeof this paper is to mention some of these aspects of the written discourse the are present in this kind of discourse in order to understand its complexity.
There are grammatical connections in both,spoken and written discourse, Mc Carthy (1994). These grammatical connections give coherence to the text and this connections are called references, they “include pronouns, demonstratives, thearticle “the” and items like such a” (Mc Carthy 1994:35). In the text anaphoric reference was found and a good instance of this is “ scientist have taught stroke patients to talk again by getting them tosing words instead of speaking them”. Here, if we want to know what the object pronoun “them” refers to, we have to look backward in the text to find the it makes reference to “words”.
Cataphoric...