The missing linkers
In brief:
- Linkers are rarely used in writing.
- Cohesive devices are very common and almost invisible.
Illustration: Unsplash, author: Sixteen Miles Out
By David Connolly,
AWC consultant, teacher, editor and translator.
English language coursebooks, especially those aimed at exam preparation, invariably, and mistakenly, teach “linking words and phrases”. The main reason for this, which is not related to language use, is that they are easy to teach and easy to test. These linkers do not, however, improve a text.
There are a number of reasons why such linkers are not necessary. Note the use of the word “such”. Cohesion is extremely important, but not in the way you have (probably) been taught. I’m using “linkers” to mean the bad kind of cohesion and “cohesive devices” to mean the good kind. There are a number of reasons why linkers are not necessary and usually detrimental.
Cohesion is making the text a whole unit by joining language together. (Coherence is about joining ideas together. Both words have their origins in Latin, meaning “join together”.) My three watchwords for good writing, academic or otherwise, are clear, concise, and consistent. Using cohesion well can help with all three, but especially the first two.
The public band descriptors for IELTS put it best. The highest band for Coherence and Cohesion says: “Uses cohesion in such a way that it attracts no attention.” It is important to note that we do sometimes use such words and phrases in writing. At the same time, they sound awkward at the beginning of sentences, which, in turn, is where they seem to be most commonly used by the Russian writers I work with. Moreover, this means they attract attention, which is not only bad, but it is also the complete opposite of what we want.
With a spoken text, and in our context imagine listening to a research presentation, the speaker is in charge. They control the speed, pausing, and any repetition. If you want to take notes, it is at the mercy of the speaker. There might be paragraphs and sections, at least in the speaker’s mind, but these are not marked clearly with headings and extra blank lines.
Cohesive devices are rampant in any written text, but they are subtle and unobtrusive. There are four main ones I’d like to discuss briefly here, but please note this is only an outline and not a magic algorithm.
First is repetition. This is especially important in academic writing where key terms are repeated frequently. This is not a sign of bad style, but an acknowledgment that, for example, in a paper on education, a teacher is not the same as a tutor, or that a student is a specific type of learner. If you are talking about a school context, ”teacher" and "student" can and should be repeated. In other types of writing, strict repetition is not as frequently used. In this short text on cohesion, "cohesion", "linkers" and "text" have been repeated frequently, where the use of “piece of writing” would be awkward and potentially confusing — if I haven’t used the word "text", I must mean something different. (clear)
Second is ellipsis. Which is a good example of ellipsis: I did not write, “The second main cohesive device is ellipsis.” You already know that the numbering at the beginning of each paragraph refers to the “four main ones” noted two paragraphs above, and that “ones” refers to cohesive devices. Chains of cohesive devices such as these are common. The crossed-out words are not wrong but can be easily understood from context. (concise)
Third is pronouns. These are generally not a problem with the writers I work with, although using “The great Dutch philosopher” or “the writer of Tractatus Theologico-Politicus" in a paper on Spinoza is convoluted and should be replaced with “Spinoza” or “he”. There is an example of this in the previous paragraph where "ones" refers to the "[the four main] ones" which refers to "cohesive devices". (concise)
Fourth is “the”, aka, the definite article, which is mistakenly found in the grammar section of coursebooks. Unlike “a" — which signifies a singular and therefore countable noun — "the" encodes no grammar. Nor does it have any semantic content. Its only function is a cohesive device. "The" signals to the reader that they can identify the noun referred to. That’s all it does. That’s all it does and it’s the most common word in English by far, which shows how important that role is. For this reason, adjectives are not always necessary; "the results" in our context generally refers to the results of the study I’m reading, "the obtained results" is tautological as there are no "unobtained results". I’m not a Russian expert but just having "results" in Russian could be ambiguous and the adjective plays a similar role to the article in English—making it clear to the reader which results. Until the 1960, articles were considered a type of adjective. (concise)
Yes, using articles is a nightmare (and teaching articles is a nightmare), but being aware of their actual use can help you decide on whether to use one or not. As mentioned, unfortunately I can’t give you a magic algorithm.
These four cohesive devices "attract no attention” in writing. In speaking, they are unstressed and one of them is even nothing at all. Each of these is also more complicated than I have outlined here (of course — it’s language after all), but I hope that I have shown why focusing on “cohesive devices” rather than "linkers" will help you using cohesion more effectively and make you text clearer and more concise.