D. Particular ways of combining parts of the utterance (linkage)

Much light can be thrown on the nature of / i n k a g e if we do not confine the problem to such notions as coordination and subordination. Most of the media which serve as grammatical forms for combining parts within the sentence have been investigated and expounded in gram­mars with sufficient clarity and fullness. But sentence-linking features within larger-than-the-sentence structures—SPUs, paragraphs and still larger structures — have so far been very little under observation.

The current of fashion at present, due to problems raised by text-linguistics, runs in the" direction of investigating ways and means of combining different stretches of utterances with the aim of disclosing the wholeness of the work. Various scientific papers single out the following media which can fulfil the structural function of uniting various parts of utterances: repetition (anaphora, epiphora, anadiplosis, framing), the definite article, the demonstrative pronouns, the personal pronouns, the use of concord (in number, form of tenses, etc.), adverbial words and phrases (however, consequently, it follows then, etc.), prosodic features . (contrastive tone, the "listing" intonation pattern), parallel construc­tions, chiasmus, sustained metaphors and similes, and a number of other means.1

The definition of means of combining parts of an-utterance,,-rests on the assumption that any unit of language might, in particular cases, turn into a connective. Such phrases as that is to say, it goes without saying, for the which, however, the preceding statement and the like should also be regarded as connectives. It follows then that the capacity to serve as a connective is an inherent property of a great number of words and phrases if they are set in a position which calls forth continuation of a thought or description of an event.

To follow closely how parts of an utterance are connected and to clarify the type of interdependence between these parts is sometimes difficult either because of the absence of formal signs of linkage (asyndeton), or because of the presence of too many identical signs (polysyndeton).

Asyndeton

Asyndeton, that is, connection between parts of a sentence or between sentences without any formal sign, becomes a stylistic device if there is a deliberate omission of the connective where it is generally expected to be according to the norms of the literary language. Here is an example:

"Soames turned away; he had an utter disinclination for talk like one standing before an open grave, watching a coffin slowly lowered." (Galsworthy)

The deliberate omission of the subordinate conjunction because or for makes the sentence 'he had an utter...' almost entirely independent. It might be perceived as a characteristic feature of Soames in general, but for the comparison beginning with like, which shows that Soames's mood was temporary.

Here a reminder is necessary that there is an essential difference between the ordinary norms of language, both literary and colloquial, and stylistic devices which are skilfully wrought for special informative and aesthetic purposes. In the sentence:

"Bicket did not answer his throat felt too dry." (Galsworthy) the absence of the conjunction and a punctuation mark may be regarded as a deliberate introduction of the norms of colloquial speech into the literary language. Such structures make the utterance sound like one syntactical unit to be pronounced in one breath group. This determines the intonation pattern.

It is interesting to compare the preceding two utterances from the point of view of the length of the pause between the constituent parts. In the first utterance (Soames...), there is a semicolon which, being the indication of a longish pause, breaks the utterance into two parts. In the second utterance (Bicket...), no pause should be made and the whole of the utterance.pronounced аз one syntagm.

The crucial p>oblem in ascertaining the true intonation pattern of

a sentence composed of two or more parts lies in a deeper analysis of

the functions of the connectives, on the one hand, and a more detailed

investigation of graphical means—the signals indicating the correct

interpretation of the utterance—, on the other,