Vera M.

Vujevi*
Univerzitet u Istonom Sarajevu
Filozofski fakultet Pale
Katedra za engleski jezik i knjievnost

UDK 81'367.3

Originalni nauni rad

ELLIPSIS AND SUBSTITUTION AS COHESIVE DEVICES

Abstract: There are several cohesive relations that link the sentences into a
text. In this paper, we deal with substitution and ellipsis. These two mechanisms of cohesion, common to all languages, make a series of sentences coherent, so they do not seem to occur randomly. Their common purpose is to avoid the burdening repetitions within the text, and to make the whole text cohere. The linguistic devices of ellipsis and
substitution will be illustrated on selected examples.
Keywords: cohesion, ellipsis, substitution, discourse, context, presupposition.

Today, we rarely speak, or even write, in complete sentences that are

considered to be the ideal structures of language in general. Language is, in fact,
made of gaps since the speakers of one language (as well as writers) operate
within the context in which omitted or replaced parts of linguistic structures are
understood even though they are not expressed.
In spoken and written English, ellipsis and substitution are used as linguistic mechanisms which help specific linguistic structures to be expressed
more economically, at the same time maintaining their clarity and comprehensiveness. These mechanisms include mainly those linguistic structures that enable
the avoidance of repetition, either by choosing alternative (usually shorter)
words, phrases, or by complete omission of words, phrases or clauses. We will
try to define these two cohesive relations, and thus, to the possible extent, limit
their overlapping since they are closely related. In addition, it is necessary to
emphasize that a strict classification of cohesive relations is not possible, since
there are many structures of cohesion that lie on the border between the two
types, and, therefore, could not be clearly defined as one or the other. This situation is common to many linguistic fields especially those linguistic phenomena
that share semantical and grammatical features. Therefore, it often happens that
semantic criterion provides one interpretation and grammatical the other. Finally, the only possible way to analyse such phenomena is by adopting some general principles, with, more or less, ambiguous examples.
The potential of cohesion lies in the systematic source of its relations:
reference, substitution, and ellipsis, which are embedded in the language itself
and do not exist in isolation, but in specific situations of use. Common task of
ellipsis and substitution is to avoid unnecessary repetition of familiar words,
phrases, or clauses within the text, in order to make all sentential elements related and the whole text coherent.

v.vujevic@yahoo.com

Vera M. Vujevi

In communication, cohesion helps the interlocutors to follow the development of statements in a discourse. In addition, cohesion is necessary for creating and interpreting a communication discourse. In the discussions about a discourse1 there have always been arguments and confusion about what makes
strings of words, or strings of sentences, a discourse. In other words, what is it
that makes a passage written or a set of utterances spoken a unity, instead of just
a collection of unrelated sentences?
Many linguists have discussed the issue of cohesion, but their opinions
on this linguistic phenomenon vary. Some (such as Crystal 1987: 119) argue
that the cohesion is achieved between its meaning and its superior forms, and to
call a series of sentences a text means to assert that the sentences show a certain
kind of mutual dependence. Others (such as Leech et al. 2001: 83)) refer to cohesion as a way of combining ideas into arrays using clauses and phrases in order to form the text. Halliday & Hasan (1976: 4) believe that the concept of cohesion is semantic, and that it refers to the relations of meaning which exist within the text, and which define it as a text. The table given by these two authors
(Halliday & Hasan 1976: 145) may serve as an illustrative account of ellipsis
and substitution:

Level of abstraction
Primary source of presupposition
What is presupposed?
Is class preserved?
Is replacement possible?
Use as a cohesive device

SUBSTITUTION AND ELLIPSIS

lexicogrammatical
text
items (ie words, groups, clauses)
yes
yes
yes; anaphoric (occasionally cataphoric)

In this paper we would refer to cohesion as a relation that exits on the

semantic level of communication and that links sentential elements together into
a unified whole. Namely, we can say that the text is not just a grammatical unit,
such as clauses or sentences, and does not have to be of a clear-cut length. A
text can be considered everything from one sentence to the entire novel; it can
be written or spoken, dialogue or monologue. The text is perhaps best defined as
a semantic unit, regardless of form but of meaning. Therefore, we can say that
cohesion lies in the semantic identity. The text that precedes or follows a specific example is its relevant linguistic environment.
Cohesion occurs when the interpretation of certain elements depends on
other elements in the text. By interpretation we mean not only lexical and grammatical mechanisms, but also the close-knit relationships that exist between the
1

Halliday and Hasan (1976: 1) The word text is used in linguistics to refer to
any passage, spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole.
In fact, the term text and discourse are identical in many works of theorists of
language.

408

Ellipsis and Substitution as Cohesive Devices

elements in the discourse. Here lies the importance of cohesion and interpretation within the text: to understand the meaning of the elements. Interpretation
can rely on the reference to another element, or on the reconstruction of missing
elements in the text.
Let us consider the following examples:
(1) If there is one area in our lives where most of us struggle, its relationships. Thats the bad news. The good news is that they can be improved.
(The Times, 3 May 2009)
(2) When I told my husband flat shoes were fashionable again, his eyes
widened.
But theyre terrible, he said.
... And there, in a nutshell, you have the problem with flats: on the whole, men dont like them. (The Times, 20 March 2010)
(3) The Bodleian Library in Oxford is renowned for its collection of Hebrew manuscripts. Although it houses one of the most extensive collections in
the world, few people have the chance to see what lies beneath in the librarys
vaults. (The Times, 19 February 2010)
It is clear that in the example (1) pronoun they in the third sentence refers to the noun relationships in the first sentence. And that they/them from the
example (2) refer to flat shoes in the first sentence. The same applies to the
example (3): The Bodleian Library/it. This type of relationship has anaphoric
function that contributes to the connection between these sentences and then to
the interpretation of them as a whole. Therefore, we can say that these sentences
together form a discourse. It is impossible to interpret the meaning of pronouns
in the examples given if we do not rely on the relationship that exists between
them, i.e. nouns and their pronouns in examples (1), (2) and (3).
We rely on cohesive mechanisms to interpret the meaning of language
messages, but it is a misconception to think that the meaning can be interpreted
only by using syntactic structures or lexical forms. Sometimes we can recognize
a form in a discourse, but we cannot claim to have got the message, simply because we need more information. Whether this information can be supplied
from the linguistic context, or extralinguistic situations, does not affect the nature of ellipsis and substitution, as long as the meaning is clear and the message
conveyed. When one element of a discourse presupposes another, then a cohesive relation is established. Another way of understanding cohesion is as a connection between the two linguistic forms that help the text to create that sense of
a whole, as we have seen in examples (1), (2) and (3).
All texts (either written or spoken) are based on cohesion during their
formation. The text becomes a structural unit when its elements are connected
with each other. This means that the cohesion of the text relies on a system of
relations that support cohesion. These relations are evident at the structural level of a language use, and they are seen as the properties of a text. Cohesion creates continuity between one part of the text with another. This continuity is es-

409

Vera M. Vujevi

sential for the listener or the reader of the text in order to obtain all necessary information and presuppositions necessary for interpretation.
Ellipsis and substitution, as mechanism of cohesion, can be defined, in
the simplest way, as language processes within a single text: substitution is a replacement of one language category with another category, while ellipsis represents complete omission of these categories: Substitution and ellipsis are both
devices for avoiding the unnecessary repetition of words or phrases in speech or
writing. 2 (Foley & Hall 2003: 328)
What makes these two processes essentially the same is that ellipsis can
be defined as a form of substitution, where certain linguistic categories are replaced by zero form. But what puts a clear line between them are the mechanisms and principles involved in these processes, which are quite different and,
at least in the case of ellipsis, more complicated. Their function is to make the
text coherent and the flow of ideas and thoughts continual. There are many points in which ellipsis and substitution overlap and there is no clear dividing line
between these cohesive relations. Namely, ellipsis and substitution have the function to unburden the text of unnecessary repetitions and to introduce the freshness of new information. Their overlapping is, therefore, logical bearing all
this in mind.
Substitution is a relation within the text, which could be defined as a
form of replacement used instead of repeating certain linguistic categories I do
not have a pen. Do you have one?3 (Crystal 1987)
Consider the following two examples:
(4) Yet many of their stories remain to be told. Anyone who remembers
one from a great aunt or finds one in a dusty attic should heed Wood-Kellys
advice and call Poad. (The Times, 20 February 2010)
(5) Perhaps I shouldn't have enjoyed it as much as I did: but with more
energy and satire and craziness in its lycra-gloved little finger than other films
have everywhere else, Kick-Ass is all pleasure and no guilt. (The Guardian, 31
March 2010)
Indefinite pronoun one and the operator did are both substitution devices, one is a substitute word for the noun phrase, and did for the verb phrase.
While other mechanism of cohesion, such as reference, do not imply that certain
presupposed linguistic forms can be interpreted within the text, substitution clearly contains this in itself. From this follows the general rule that the replaced
language category has the same structural function as the one that is replaced.
Linguistic forms that serve as substitutes in the relation of substitution are
known as pro-forms. Pronouns that replace noun phrases are the largest class of
pro-forms, as in (6), (7), and (8).
2

Foley and Hall 2003: 328,

.
3
, 1987: 119
( . ?).

410

Ellipsis and Substitution as Cohesive Devices

(6) Walker died in 2008, a few months after Gordon Brown agreed to
award surviving ATA pilots a badge of honour on the basis that late recognition
of their work was better than none at all. (The Times, 20 February 2010)
(7) Designing album covers is like one form of art paying homage to
another. One is for the eyes and one is for the ears, but what is common to them
is invariably what the music is about. (The Independent, 31 March 2010)
(8) The iPad is designed for media of all sorts, including games, video,
pictures, electronic books and magazines. It can access roughly 150,000 already
existing iPhone apps, as well as new ones freshly designed for the iPad. (The
Independent, 4 April 2010)
Other examples of pro-forms are operators that replace the verb phrases:
(9) We don't have courtyards in France like they do in New York, where Hitchcock's film is set, but we have street buildings that are set very close to
each other. (The Guardian, 14 March 2010)
(10) These women were delighted to be doing what they did best for
the war effort, but furious whenever anyone suggested it was glamorous, which
the press did constantly. (The Times, 20 February 2010)
In addition, do is used in combination with that or so thus forming the
structures do that/do so, which function as pro-forms and substitute expressions
for the verb phrases:
(11) This is annoying, unless youre a girl and youre sitting on it, but
there is a cure. You just speed up a bit. When you do that, the car starts to float.
(The Times, 28 March 2010)
(12) What on earth will make a family go to a museum whose biggest
boast is that it houses the world's greatest collection of Staffordshire pottery?
This place has worked out how to do so, with what they call "pottery that will
win your heart". (The Guardian, 31 March 2010)
(13) And as she said in the New Statesman debate, it was unlikely that
she would get to Cambridge, but she did. And most unlikely of all that she'd get
to Parliament, and she did that too. (The Independent, 11 June 2010)
Pro-form so, and its equivalent in negation not, are used as substitute
words for the whole clauses, as in (14) and (15):
(14) GWENDOLEN: Then that is all quite settled, is it not?
CECILY: I hope so.
(Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest: 44)
(15) GWENDOLEN: But we will not be the first to speak.
CECILY: Certainly not.
(Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest: 54)
From the standpoint of textual cohesion, substitution has some common
features with anaphoric reference, and thus creates a link between the parts of
the text. Substitution as a cohesive relation is literally related to the words and,
therefore, essentially limited to the text. Most examples of substitution are of
anaphoric nature; although under certain conditions we come across examples
of cataphoric substitution.

411

Vera M. Vujevi

Substitution and ellipsis imply the same relationship between the parts
of the text, i.e. between words, phrases or clauses, while reference is the relation
between the meanings. In fact, another important point in which substitution and
ellipsis overlap is the test which we can use to determine the process of substitution and ellipsis.
The relation of substitution is the relation between the pro-form and its
antecedent, where a pro-form replaces antecedent to avoid the repetition of the
same antecedent. The test which determines substitution implies the possibility
of copying antecedent to a place that takes a pro-form without any change in
meaning. The same is true of elliptical constructions; the omitted language
structure can be rewritten in the gap from the adjacent part of the text, whether it
precedes or follows elided material. The result is a grammatical sentence with
unchanged meaning.
In the example (16) pro-form did is grammatically and semantically
equivalent to the verb phrase it replaces. Example (17) contains two ellipses: of
a noun phrase and of a subject complement. They can easily be reconstructed
from the first sentence into the ellipsis site in the second sentence.
(16) She argues that Bush liberated female creativity as much as punk
did; it's essential reading for 21st-century grrrls. (The Guardian, 31 March
2010)
(17) But I knew my fear was irrational. Tinas wasnt .
(The Times, 27 March 2010)
(17){But I knew my fear was irrational. Tinas fear wasnt irrational.}
Substitution does not imply a verbatim recoverability4. When the repeated phrase is put in the place of pro-forms, as in (18), it is possible that it is
morphologically different from the antecedent, which does not affect the grammar of the sentence or its meaning. The same is with ellipsis (19):
(18) "He has already started a war once, and we can't exclude that he
will do so again. (The Independent, 1 April 2010)
(18){He has already started a war once, and we can't exclude that he
will start a war again.}
(19) As the officers approached the car it exploded, killing two officers,
injuring a third and killing a woman who was walking past, Russia's interior
minister, Rashid Nurgaliyev, said. (The Guardian, 31 March 2010)
(19){As the officers approached the car it exploded, killing two officers, injuring a third officer and killing a woman who was walking past, Russia's interior minister, Rashid Nurgaliyev, said.}
Halliday & Hasan (1976: 142) refer to ellipsis simply as substitution by
zero. Definition of ellipsis can be based on a well-known concept when it comes to this linguistic category; that something is left unsaid, or is completely
4

Quirk et al. 1985: 884, ,

.

412

Ellipsis and Substitution as Cohesive Devices

omitted. However, it does not mean that what is not explicitly stated is not understood. On the contrary, ellipsis implies that if something is left unsaid can be
understood, interpreted and reconstructed by simply examining the context.
On the other hand, when we speak of ellipsis we do not take into consideration every case where there is some information that the speaker has to, so
to say, supply from its source. This would apply to almost every sentence ever
spoken or written and would not be very useful in revealing the nature of the
text. On the contrary, ellipsis involves debates about the phrases or clauses,
whose structure is such that it can be presupposed by a certain language category that precedes or follows, and as such serves as a source of omitted information. Elliptical structure is one that leaves a particular structural site empty
and which can be filled in with the appropriate language category. This can be
compared with the presupposition in substitution, except that in this case it is
explicitly specified what has already been expressed in advance, such as, for
example, one or do, while in the case of ellipsis nothing has been put in that position. Therefore, ellipsis can be described as, as we have previously stated, substitution by zero.
In elliptical constructions parts of the statement that the recipient understands from the context of the conversation have been omitted. In (20) a noun
babies is left out in the second and third clause. Elided sentences are quite
grammatical, because the speakers are almost always unmistakably aware what
the elided material is and what it refers to. Ellipsis makes this text coherent and
free from noun repetition:
(20) Eight of the babies had pale green hospital tags looped around their
ankles. These identified three as having been admitted to the emergency room
of the Jining Medical College Hospital and five as being cared for in the same
hospital. The 13 other bodies had no form of identification. (The Times, 31
March 2010)
Cohesive relation of ellipsis is a relation within the text, and in almost
every case, what is left unsaid is present in the text. In other words, if something
is ellipsis, then there is a presupposition in a sentence that something must be
understood or reconstructed. If certain linguistic categories are elided and may
be elements of the preceding sentence, ellipsis has a role of cohesive ties: it contributes to cohesion within the text. Certain linguistic structures are missing, but
understood, as in (21) and (22):
(21)ALGERNON: And who are the people you amuse?
JACK: Oh, neighbours, neighbours!
ALGERNON: Got nice neighbours in your part of Shropshire?
JACK: Perfectly horrid! Never speak to one of them.
(Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest:8)
(22) His complaint to the Border Agency tells how six guards restrained
him on a plane and that "one turned round trying to strangle me by my throat
while the other was banging my head on the seat in front".
(The Observer, 14 March 2010)

413

Vera M. Vujevi

Similar to the relation of substitution, there is ellipsis of noun phrases,

(23), (24), verb phrases (25), and ellipsis of the whole clause (26):
(23) Blake received a life sentence, with the judge recommending a minimum term of almost 11 years, Hibberd was sentenced to 17 years and Cameron to 15 . (The Guardian, 31 March 2010)
(24) Like Monday's deadly metro blasts in Moscow, which killed 39 people and injured more than 70 , today's attacks were a symbolic strike against
the Russian state. (The Guardian, 31 March 2010)
(25) Unloading high emotion or anger before my husband walks through the door had simply never occurred to me (as I say, a rubbish early education), so it struck like an epiphany that its not so much what those friends do, as
what they dont , that makes their marriage work. (The Times, 3 May 2009)
(26) But what else is a woman saying when she teeters and sways on
her platforms? That she hasnt had to compromise her femininity to become
economically powerful? That she can withstand daily pain and is defiantly
plucky in vile weather? That she likes looking men in the eye as opposed to gazing up at them? Or that she has a keenly developed sense of irony? All that,
probably. (The Times, March 10 2010)
Where there is ellipsis there is presupposition, i.e. all the examples
when something needs to be reconstructed or understood. This is not quite the
same as when we say some structures are elided. Some constructions are elliptical if their structures do not reflect all the characteristics which have participated in their construction, and all the important choices which were built in during their creation. In other words, as a general principle of ellipsis, we can say
that ellipsis occur when something of a structural importance is left out, and
when there is a sense of incompleteness associated with that omitted item.
In addition, it is important to mention that the essence of elliptical constructions lies in the omission of those linguistic structures that are present as
choices in the system of options. As substitution, ellipsis is a relation within the
text, and in many instances they presuppose a linguistic structure present in the
text. Substitution is the presupposition at the level of words and structures.
When there is substitution then a certain word, phrase or clause may be contextually reconstructed, and the substitute structure retains the same language class
as the presupposed structures. The difference between substitution and ellipsis is
that substitute expressions occupy precisely defined site which must be deleted
before the presupposed item is replaced, while in ellipsis that position remains
vacant as is replaced by zero entry. In contrast to the reference, substitution
and ellipsis are basically textual relations that usually exist as anaphoric, rarely
cataphoric, linguistic structures.
To sum up, substitution and ellipsis are both forms of presupposition;
mechanisms for identifying something new by referring to known information,
or to something that already exists in extralinguistic situation, or to something
that is quite possible for the listener to reconstruct. Since this something is

414

Ellipsis and Substitution as Cohesive Devices

presupposed, these mechanisms have the effect of cohesion, i.e. they greatly
contribute to cohesion within the text.
Primjeri preuzeti iz sljedeih izvora
1895: O. Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest, London: Penguin Books.
The Times www.timesonline.co.uk
The Guardian www.guardian.co.uk
The Independent www.independent.co.uk
Literatura
, 2003: M. Foley & D. Hall, Advanced Learners' Grammar, Harlow:
Longman Group.
, 1990: S. Greenbaum and R. Quirk, A Student's Grammar of
the English Language, Harlow: Longman.
, 1976: M.A.K. Halliday and R. Hasan, Cohesion in English,
London: Longman.
2008: K. Johnson (ed.), Topic in Ellipsis, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
et al. 2001: G. Leech, et al., An A-Z of English Grammar & Usage, Harlow: Longman.
2004: D. Crystal, Making Sense of Grammar, Harlow: Longman.
1987: . , : .
et al. 1985: R. Quirk et al., A Comprehensive Grammar of the English
Language, Harlow: Longman Group.
1995: R. Salkie, Text and Discourse Analysis, London and New York:
Routledge.
1991: D. Serl, Govorni inovi, Beograd: Nolit.
2005: R. L. Trask, Temeljni lingvistiki pojmovi (preveo Benedikt Perak),
Zagreb: kolska knjiga.

415

Vera M. Vujevi
.

. , ,
. , ,
, .
, , .

416