Contextually Determined Coherence as a Backbone to Discourse Typology

The diversity of discourse types encountered in linguistics presents a significant challenge to establishing a universally applicable classification system. This difficulty underscores the need to refine existing approaches to discourse typologization. The article addresses this gap by developing a comprehensive typology of discourses grounded in the concept of contextually determined coherence. The typology is built upon the coherent connections discernible in discourses, with a specific focus on such formative contexts as thematic topic, authorial agency, communicative intention, mode of formal realization, and scale of dissemination. The empirical material encompasses Russian-language discourses, emphasizing professional spheres: scientific, medical, economic, and media communication. The research employs qualitative methods: systematic observation of discursive practices, in-depth interpretation of coherence, systematization of discourse types, and classification by novel criteria. A key underpinning is the distinction between discourse and text coherence. Discourse coherence is conceptualized as a dynamic, context-dependent system of semantic, communicative, and structural interlinkages exceeding static textual units. The study rigorously defines and conceptually justifies three distinct types of discourse coherence: cognitive-semantic, driven by thematic unity; cognitive-pragmatic, shaped by author and intention; and cognitive-structural, determined by form and scale. Contextually determined coherence is established as a foundational category, emphasizing the essential interconnectedness between the constituents of a discursive system (textual components and the encompassing context) providing a basis for the presented typology. The principal outcome of this research is a novel, hierarchically structured classification of discourses, visually represented as a diagram. This diagram represents the interdependencies between contextual factors and their corresponding discourse types, highlighting major relationships and oppositions. The proposed typology offers considerable practical utility for the analysis and classification of a broad spectrum of real-world discourses, notably in professional communication. It contributes to the theoretical advancement of discourse analysis methodologies and the enhancement of pedagogical approaches in discourse theory in linguistic education. 

1. Anisimova, T.V. (2000). Tipologiya zhanrov delovoj rechi (ritoricheskij aspekt) [Typology of genres of business speech (rhetorical aspect)] [Doctoral Dissertation, Kuban State University]. Krasnodar (in Russian).

2. Asmus, V.F. (1975). Platon [Plato]. Moscow: Mysl (in Russian).

3. Avginenko, A.D. (2021). Tipologiya zhanrov e`kologicheskogo diskursa. [Typology of genres in ecological discourse]. In L.G. Vikulova (Ed.), Nauchnyi start-2021. Sbornik statei magistrantov i aspirantov [Scientific Start – Articles of master students and post-graduates] (pp. 303-306). Moscow (in Russian).

4. Beaugrande, R. de, Dressler, W. (1981). Einführung in die Textlinguistik [Introduction to text linguistics]. Tübingen (in German).

5. Bedanokova, Z.K. (2018). E`vokativnost` kak kognitivno-semioticheskaya i recheyazy`kovaya forma (na primere rossijskoj reklamy`) [Evocativity as a cognitive-semiotic and speech form (based on Russian advertising)] [Doctoral Dissertation]. Tver (in Russian).

6. Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, Th.A. (2007). Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

7. Chafe, W. (1970). Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

8. Chernyavskaya, V.E. (2007). Tekst v kognitivno-diskursivnoj paradigme: k voprosu o gradualnom kharaktere tekstualnosti [Text in cognitive-discursive paradigm: to the question of gradual characteristics of textuality]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Transactions of the Institute for Linguistic Studies, 1, 303-314 (in Russian).

9. Dudnikova, L.V. (2015). K voprosu o svyaznosti diskursa v russkom i franczuzskom yazy`kakh [On the coherence of discourse in Russian and French]. In Inostrannye yazyki i literatura v mezhdunarodnom obrazovatel’nom prostranstve [Foreign languages and literature in international educational space], Ekaterinburg, 2015, March 3: Conference proceedings (pp. 294-299). Ekaterinburg: UMCz UPI (in Russian).

10. Ekshembeeva, L.V., Nurshaikhova, Zh.A., Musaeva, G.A. (2015). Diskurs kak instrument social`ny`kh praktik. [Discourse as a social practices tool]. Voprosy` kognitivnoj lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 1(42), 89-96 (in Russian).

11. Fedorov, A.B. (2013). Mediaobrazovanie i mediagramotnost [Media education and media literacy]. Moscow: Direkt-Media (in Russian).

12. Galperin, I.R. (2005). Tekst kak ob``ekt lingvisticheskogo issledovanija [Text as an object of linguistic research]. Moscow: URSS (in Russian).

13. Gorbakava, L.R. (2022). Termin «diskurs» i tipologiya mediadiskursa [The term “discourse” and the typology of media discourse]. International Journal of Advanced Studies in Language and Communication, 1, 63-70 (in Russian).

14. Grigorieva, V.S. (2007). Kognitivno-pragmaticheskie aspekty` konstruirovaniya diskursa [Cognitive-pragmatic aspects of designing discourse]. Voprosy` kognitivnoj lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 2(011), 46-57 (in Russian).

15. Gunina, E.E. (2021). Yuridicheskij diskurs kak vid institucional`nogo diskursa: podkhody`, koncepcii, tipologii. [Legal discourse as a type of institutional discourse: approaches, concepts, typologies]. Lingvoritoricheskaya paradigma: teoreticheskie i prikladnye aspekty. [Linguorhetorical paradigm: theoretical and applied aspects], 26-2, 95-99 (in Russian).

16. Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London.

17. Hasan, R. (1984). Coherence and cohesive harmony. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension: Cognition, language and the structure of prose (pp. 181-219). Newark: International Reading Association.

18. Kalinichenko, M.O. (2023). Diskursivny`e strategii sportivnogo kommentirovaniya: kogeziya i kogerentnost’ [Discourse strategies of sport comments: cohesion and coherence] [Doctoral Dissertation, Ural Federal University of the first Russian President B.N. Eltsyn]. Ekaterinburg (in Russian).

19. Karamova, A.A. (2017). Tipologicheskij aspekt diskursa [Discourse: a typological aspect]. Kul’tura i tsivilizatsiya [Culture and Civilization], 7(1A), 361-370 (in Russian).

20. Karasik, V.I. (2004). Yazy`kovoj krug: lichnost`, koncepty`, diskurs. [Language circle: personality, concepts, discourse]. Moscow: Gnozis (in Russian).

21. Kazieva, D.A. (2020). Tipologiya pr-diskursa: problema opredeleniya kriteriev differenciacii tekstov. [Typology of pr-discourse: a problem of criteria determining to differentiate texts]. In A.O. Brodzeli (Ed.), Russkoyazychie i bi(poli)lingvizm v mezhkul’turnoi kommunikatsii XXI veka: kognitivno-kontseptualnye aspekty [The Russian language and bi(poli)linguism in intercultural communication in the 21st century: cognitive and conceptual aspects]: proceedings of XII All-Russian scientific and methodological conference with international participation (pp. 116-122) (in Russian).

22. Klementieva, N.N. (2020). K voprosu o probleme tipologii diskursa v sovremennoj lingvistike [On the problem of discourse typology in modern linguistics]. In Aktualnye lingvisticheskie issledovaniya: traditsii i innovatsii [Relevant linguistic research: traditions and innovations]: proceedings of National All-Russian scientific and practical conference to 70 years of V.G. Baltachev, the Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of Foreign Language Department at Izhevsk State Agricultural Academy (pp. 30-39) (in Russian).

23. Kolshanskiy, G.V. (1980). Kontekstnaya semantika [Contextual semantics]. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

24. Konovalova, M.V. (2018). Evokaciya i evokativnoe svojstvo mediadiskursa. [Evocation and evocative properties of mass media discourse]. Litera, 3, 249-256 (in Russian). doi:10.25136/2409- 8698.2018.3.26805

25. Kornienko, E.R. (2019). Diskurs kak kognitivnyj mexanizm [Discourse as a cognitive mechanism]. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philology. Journalism, 19(4), 379-383 (in Russian). https:// doi.org/10.18500/1817-7115-2019-19-4-379-383

26. Kosova, E.I., & Volkova, V.V. (2021). Ponyatie diskursa v sovremennom yazy`koznanii: opredelenie, struktura, tipologiya [The concept of discourse in modern linguistics: definition, structure, typology]. Voprosy pedagogiki [Issues of Pedagogics], 11-2, 243-246 (in Russian).

27. Kozhemyakin, E.A. (2013). Kogerentnost` diskursa [Coherence of Discourse]. Discourse-Pi, 3(13), 123-124 (in Russian).

28. Leontiev, A.A. (1974). Priznaki svyaznosti i celnosti teksta [Indicators of cohesion and coherence in a text]. In Lingvistika teksta: materialy nauch. konf.: v 2 ch. MGPIIYa im. M. Toreza [Text Linguistics: proceedings of the scientific conference in two parts] (pp. 168-172). Moscow: Moscow State Pedagogical Institute of Foreign Languages named after Maurice Thorez (in Russian).

29. Liu, X., & Shi, L. (2022). Issledovanie tipologii diskursivov-adresacij v postroenii russkoyazychnogo nauchnogo diskursa [The study of the typology of discourse-addressing in the construction of Russian-language scientific discourse]. Kultura i tsivilizatsiya [Culture and Civilization], vol. 12, issue 4A, 7-15 (in Russian). doi:10.34670/AR.2022.90.42.001

30. Moskalskaya, O.I. (1981). Grammatika teksta: posobie po grammatike nemetskogo yazyka dlya institutov i fakul’tetov inostrannykh yazykov [Text grammar: German grammar textbook for institutes and departments of foreign languages]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola (in Russian).

31. Murzin, L.M., & Shtern, A.S. (1991). Tekst i ego vospriyatie [Text and its perception]. Sverdlovsk (in Russian).

32. Ponkratenkova, A.V. (2022). Tipologiya rechevykh zhanrov semejnogo diskursa [Typology of speech genres in family discourse]. Vestnik Donetskogo natsionalnogo universiteta. Series D: Filologiya i psikhologiya [Bulletin of Donetsk National University Series D: Philology and Psychology], 2, 40-44 (in Russian).

33. Qin, M. (2023). Kognitivno-pragmaticheskij analiz diskursivny`kh implikatur dramaticheskogo konflikta v perevodnom kinokomedijnom prostranstve E.Ryazanova. [Cognitive-pragmatic analysis of discourse implicatures in drama conflict in translational cinema media space of E.Ryazanov] [Candidate’s thesis abstract, Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia]. Moscow (in Russian).

34. Rickheit, G., Schade, U. (2000). Kohärenz und Kohäsion [Coherence and cohesion]. In K. Brinker, G. Antos, W. Heinemann, S.F. Sager (Eds.), Text- und Gesprächslinguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. 1 Halbband [An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Volume 1] (pp. 275-283). Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter (in German).

35. Romanov, A.A. (1996). Upravlencheskaya kommunikaciya [Communication of management]. Tver: AO Tverenergo (in Russian).

36. Sobolev, V.V. (2019). Politicheskij diskurs v aspekte vydeleniya tipologii i tekstoobrazuyushhikh priznakov [Political discourse in the aspect of highlighting typology and signs of text forming signs]. Zakon i vlast [Law and power], 3, 18-22 (in Russian).

37. Solntseva, E.S. (2021). Beskonechnost svyaznosti v mediadiskurse [Infinity of coherence in mass media discourse]. Teoreticheskaya i prikladnaya lingvistika [Theoretical and applied linguistics], 7(1), 153-168 (in Russian). doi: 10.22250/24107190_2021_7_1_153_168

38. Stepanova, V.V. (2021). Subiekty professionalnogo diskursa (k probleme tipologii) [Subjects of professional discourse (to the problem of its typology)]. Izvestiya Gomelskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni F. Skoriny [Izvestiya of Francisk Skorina Gomel State University], 1(124), 134- 139 (in Russian).

39. Temnova, E.V. (2004). Sovremennye podkhody k issledovaniyu diskursa [Modern approaches to discourse analysis]. In V.V. Krasnykh, A.I. Izotov (Eds.), Yazyk, soznanie, kommunikaciya [Language, conscience, communication]: collection of articles. Issue 26 (pp. 24-32). Moscow: MAKS Press (in Russian).

40. Trabasso, T., Secco, T., Van Den Broek, P. (1982). Causal Cohesion and Story Coherence. In H. Mandl, N.L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 83-111). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

41. Trubnikova, M.A. (2020). Tipologiya khudozhestvennogo diskursa [Typology of literary discourse]. In G.R. Vlasyan, M.A. Samkova (Eds.), Aktualnye problemy lingvistiki: vzglyad molodykh issledovatelei [Relevant issues in linguistics: young researchers’ perspective]: Collection of scientific articles (pp. 118-123). Chelyabinsk (in Russian).

42. Trukhin, S.S. (2021). Tipologiya metafor v futbolnom diskurse [Typology of metaphors in football discourse]. Studencheskaya nauka i XXI vek [Students science and the 21st century], vol. 18, issue 1(21), part 2, 553-554 (in Russian).

43. Tso, A. (2024). Challenges in Achieving Coherence and Cohesion: A Discourse Analysis of Chinese EFL Students’ Essays. Professional Discourse & Communication, 6(1), 95-108. https://doi. org/10.24833/2687-0126-2024-6-1-95-108

44. Van Dijk, T.A. (1977). Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London and New York: Longman.

45. Vorkachev, S.G., & Vorkacheva, E.A. (2019). Diskurs i ego tipologiya v rossijskoj lingvistike [Discourse and its typology in Russian linguistics]. Aktualnye problemy filologii i pedagogicheskoi lingvistiki [Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics], 3, 14-21 (in Russian). https:// doi.org/10.29025/2079-6021-2019-3-14-21

46. Vygotskii, L.S. (2019). My`shlenie i rech` [Mind and Speech]. St.Petersburg: Piter (in Russian).

47. Yelkina, E.E., Kononova, O.V., & Prokudin, D.E. (2019). Tipologiya kontekstov i principy` kontekstnogo podkhoda v mezhdisciplinarny`kh nauchny`kh issledovaniyakh. [Typology of contexts and contextual approach principles in multidisciplinary scientific research]. Sovremenny`e informacionny`e texnologii i IT-obrazovanie [Modern Information Technology and IT-education], 15(1), 141-153 (in Russian). doi:10.25559/SITITO.15.201901.141-153

48. Zhuchkova, I.I. (2014). O sushhnosti i specifike ispol`zovaniya terminov “cohesion” (svyaznost`) i “coherence” (cel`nost`) v angloyazy`chnom i russkom yazy`koznanii. [On the implications and characteristic aspects of the terms «cohesion» and «coherence» in the English and Russian linguistics]. Vektor nauki TGU [Science Vector of Togliatti State University], 3(29), 155-159 (in Russian).