UNIT 35

EXPOSITORY TEXTS: STRUCTURE AND MAIN

FEATURES.
OUTLINE
1. INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Aims of the unit.
1.2. Notes on bibliography.
2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS OF EXPOSITORY TEXTS.
2.1. The notion of text linguistics: Discourse Analysis.
2.2. On defining text.
2.2.1. Textual features:texture and ties.
2.2.2. Textuality: the seven standards.
2.3. Intertextuality: text types.
2.3.1. Text types: main criteria.
2.3.2. Text types: exposition.
3. EXPOSITORY TEXTS: STRUCTURE AND MAIN FEATURES.
3.1. On defining expository texts.
3.2. Expository texts: main types.
3.2.1. Regarding the audience.
3.2.2. Regarding the authors purpose.
3.3. Expository texts: structure.
3.3.1. Main types.
3.3.2. Sequence of steps.
3.4. Expository texts: textual features.
3.4.1. Cohesion.
3.4.1.1. Grammatical devices.
3.4.1.2. Lexical devices.
3.4.1.3. Graphological devices.
3.4.2. Coherence.
4. EXPOSITORY TEXTS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING.
5. CONCLUSION.
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1/24

1. INTRODUCTION.

1.1.Aims of the unit.

The main aim of Unit 35 is to present the issue of expository texts (also called explanatory
and explicative) in terms of structure and main features. Our aim is to offer a broad
account of what expository texts are and why they are used for in both linguistic and
pragmatic terms, that is, how language and textual features are used to achieve the purpose
of explaining a topic to an addresse in a clear and organised way. So, we shall divide our
study in five main chapters.

In Chapter 2 we shall offer a theoretical framework for the analysis of expository texts
since the concepts of text and exposition (or explanation) are related to other key
notions which prove essential in the understanding of their analysis. So, in order to
establish the relationship between both concepts, we shall review (1) the notion of text
linguistics since the analysis of expository texts is discussed within the framework of
Discourse Analysis. Accordingly, we shall provide (2) a definition of text and hence we
shall examine (a) its main textual features (common to all text types) such as texture and
ties and (b) the seven standards of textuality in order to get to the notion of intertextuality.
Then, we shall approach (3) the notion of intertextuality as the linguistic source of text
types regarding (a) the main criteria for classifying text types and hence (b) the term
expository.

Chapter 3 will offer then an insightful analysis of expository texts in terms of (1)
definition; (2) main types of expository texts (a) regarding the audience and (b) regarding
the authors purpose; (3) structure in terms of (a) types of structure (deductive and
inductive) and (b) sequence of steps; and (4) main textual devices within expository text
types: (a) cohesion, regarding (i) grammatical, (ii) lexical and (iii) graphological devices,
and (b) coherence.

2/24

Chapter 4 will be devoted to present the main educational implications in language

teaching regarding expository texts and Chapter 5 will offer a conclusion to broadly
overview our present study. Finally, Chapter 6 will include all the bibliographical
references used in this study.

1.2.Notes on bibliography.

An influential introduction to the analysis of texts is based on relevant works of Halliday

and Hasan, Cohesion in English (1976); van Dijk, Text and Context (1984); and
Beaugrande and Dressler, Introduction to Text Linguistics (1988). Classic works regarding
the term expository include Crystal and Davy, Investigating English Style (1969); Brooks
and Warren, Modern Rethoric (1979), Traugott and Pratt, Linguistics for Students of
Literature (1980); and Genette, Noveau discours du rcit (1983).

The background for educational implications regarding expository texts is based on the
theory of communicative competence and communicative approaches to language teaching
are provided by Canale, From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language
Pedagogy (1983); Hymes, On communicative competence (1972). In addition, the most
complete record of current publications within the educational framework is provided by
the guidelines in van Ek and Trim, Vantage (2001); B.O.E. (2002); and the Council of
Europe, Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European
Framework of reference (1998).

2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS OF EXPOSITORY

TEXTS.

In Chapter 2 we shall offer a theoretical framework for the analysis of expository texts
since the concepts of text and exposition (or explanation) are related to other key

3/24

notions which prove essential in the understanding of their analysis. So, in order to
establish the relationship between both concepts, we shall review (1) the notion of text
linguistics since the analysis of expository texts is discussed within the framework of
Discourse Analysis. Accordingly, we shall provide (2) a definition of text and hence we
shall examine (a) its main textual features (common to all text types) such as texture and
ties and (b) the seven standards of textuality in order to get to the notion of intertextuality.
Then, we shall approach (3) the notion of intertextuality as the linguistic source of text
types regarding (a) the main criteria for classifying text types and hence (b) the term
expository.

2.1. The notion of text linguistics: Discourse Analysis.

The notion of text linguistics designates any work in language science devoted to the text
as the primary object of inquiry (Beaugrande & Dressler, 1988). In fact, many fields have
approached the study of texts, and in particular, that of expository texts: linguistics (from
grammar, morphology and phonology), anthropology (different speech acts in different
cultures), psychology (speaker and hearer behaviour) and stylistics (correctness, clarity,
elegance, appropriateness, style).

Yet, the oldest form of preoccupation with texts and the first foundation for the analysis of
texts and its articulation is drawn from the notion of text linguistics which has its historical
roots in rethoric, dating from Ancient Greece and Rome through the Middle Ages up to the
present under the name of text linguistics or discourse. Traditional rethoricians were
influenced by their major task of training public orators on the discovery of ideas
(invention), the arrangement o f ideas (disposition), the discovery of appropriate expressions
for ideas (elocution), and memorization prior to delivery on the actual occasion of
speaking.

In the Middle Ages, rethoric was based on grammar (on the study of formal language
patterns in Greek and Latin) and logic (on the construction of arguments and proofs), hence

4/24

its relevance within our study. Rethoric still shares several concerns with the kind of text
linguistics we know today, for instance, the use of texts as vehicles of purposeful
interaction (oral and written), the variety of texts which express a given configuration of
ideas, the arranging of ideas and its disposition within the discourse and the judgement of
texts which still depends on the effects upon the audience.

2.2. On defining text.

The definition of text is quite relevant in our study since it will lead us straighforwardly to
the notion of expository when reviewing the notion of intertextuality within text types.
Following Halliday & Hasan (1976), the word text is used in linguistics to refer to any
passage, spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole. As a
general rule, we know whether an utterance or sequence of utterances constitute a text or
not though it may be spoken or written, prose or verse, dialogue or monologue, and also
anything from a single proverb to a whole play, from a momentary cry for help to an allday discussion on a committee.

In addition, a text is best regarded as a semantic unit and not a unit of form. Hence, we may
establish its relation to the term explanatory since we may deal with explaining a topic to
the audience in a clear, detailed and organised way.

2.2.1. Textual features: texture and ties.

Textual features such as texture and ties give a text the status of being a text. First of all,
the concept of texture is defined as the textual resource that functions as a unity with
respect to its environment and secondly, ties are defined as the resources that English has
for creating texture so as to contribute to its total unity by means of cohesive relations
(reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion). The concept of a tie

5/24

makes it possible to analyse a text in terms of its cohesive properties and give a systematic
account of its patterns of texture, as it is the case of explanatory texts (Halliday & Hasan,
1976).

2.2.2. Textuality: the seven standards.

Perhaps the notion of textuality is the most relevant in our study since we reach the notion
of expository text through one of its seven standards: intertextuality. Actually, written texts
conform to rules that most successful writers unconsciously follow and native readers
unconsciously expect to find. It is relevant, then, to address the term textuality in written
and oral texts as it is involved in rules governing written discourse (hence its relationship to
expository texts).

In the approach to text linguistics by de Beaugrande & Dressler (1988), a text, oral or
printed, is established as a communicative occurrence, which has to meet seven standards
of textuality: cohesion, coherence, intentionality and acceptability, informativity,
situationality and finally, intertextuality. If any of these standards are not satisfied, the text
is considered not to have fulfilled its function and not to be communicative.

We shall briefly review the first six standards of textuality in relation to expository texts so
as to analyse the seventh one in more depth in next section:

(1) Cohesion is, as well as coherence, a text-centred notion which is related to the
function of syntax and the components of the surface text. It also deals with
cohesive ties as mentioned above (anaphora, cataphora, ellipsis, etc) and signalling
relations (tense and aspect, modality, updating, junction, conjunction, disjunction
and subordination) which prove essential in expository texts.
(2) Coherence is the outcome of actualizing meanings in order to make sense
(Beaugrande & Dressler, 1988). It concerns a set of relations subsumed under
causality (cause, reason, purpose time present in expository texts-) and global

6/24

patterns responsible for making a text be senseless or non-sensical (frames,

plans). In other words, it gives sense to a text by means of organization.
(3) Intentionality subsumes the intentions of text producers, that is, their attitude. In the
most immediate sense of the term, the producer intends the language
configuration under production to a cohesive and coherent text instrumental in
fulfilling the writer intentions. This standard deals with the pra gmatic perspective of
discourse, that is, the conversational maxims of co-operation: quantity, quality,
relation and manner on saying be informative, be truthful, be relevant and be brief.
Here we meet the purpose of expository texts, that is, to explain a topic briefly and
clearly.
(4) Acceptability, on the other hand, concerns the receiver attitude. Here a set of
occurrences should constitute a cohesive and coherent text having some use or
relevance for the receiver in an appropriate context of communication (historical
analysis vs. empirical research).
(5) Informativity concerns the extent to which the occurrences of the text are expected
vs. unexpected or known vs. unknown or uncertain by means of content words
(verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs). Hence specific lexical devices in expository
texts (declarative verbs regarding explanation, qualifying adjectives).
(6) Situationality concerns the factors which make a text relevant to a current or
recoverable situation of occurrence (Beaugrande & Dressler, 1988). The effects of
a situational setting are very rare when there is no mediation and therefore, the
extent to which one feeds ones own beliefs and goals into ones model of the
current communicative situation (i.e. in opinion essays). There exist the prerogative
of presenting alternative opinions about people, objects and events in live
presentations and hence, common and specific explanations.
(7) And finally, intertextuality which will be reviewed in connection to text types and,
will be the basis for the notion of expository texts.

7/24

2.3. Intertextuality: text types.

Intertextuality concerns the factors which make the use of one text dependent upon
knowledge of one or more previously encountered texts, that is, the ways in which the
production and reception of a given text depends upon the participants knowledge of other
texts. The usual mediation is achieved by means of the development and use of text types,
being classes of texts expected to have certain traits for certain purposes: narrative,
descriptive, argumentative, dialectic and, for our purposes, expository (or explanatory).

For 2,400 years there have been two traditions of classifying texts. The first one, deriving
from Aristotles Rethoric, where the term rethoric refers to the uses of language. More
specific, it refers to modes of discourse realized through text types, thus narration,
description, directive, exposition and argumentation. Within the second tradition, rethoric
refers to communicative function as rethorical strategies in functional lines: argumentative:
to promote the acceptance of certain beliefs; descriptive: to enrich knowledge spaces;
narrative: to arrange actions and events and, for our purposes, expository texts: to explain a
topic (ideas, operations, actions or utterances) to an audience in a clear, detailed and
organised way.

In this section we shall approach the concept of text typology from two main perspectives:
(1) the main criteria for text typology by means of which we review basic principles for all
types of texts regarding textual devices, order and sequence elements and common text
structures; and (2) a text type classification and exposition.

2.3.1. Text types: main criteria.

There are three main criteria when establishing a typology for texts: textual devices, order
and sequence elements and common text structures for all types of texts.

8/24

(1) Regarding textual devices, we deal with specific conditions of production,

contradictory cultural discourses, and intercultural processes. For such reasons,
texts may have a wide range of interpretative possibilities. The main basic
principles are considered to be literary elements and devices to evaluate how the
form and use of elements and devices which contribute to the works message and
impact.

(2) Order and sequence. Moreover, basic to the concept of form is the notion of order
and sequence, which may vary depending on the type of text. For instance,
introduction,

development

and

conclusion

in

expository

texts,

logical,

chronological, or psypchological in narrative texts; from ge neral to specific, upward

and downward direction, personality vs. physical appearance in descriptive texts;
and so on.

(3) Text structure. By studying the textual and lexical elements of text types, one can
learn to regularly recognize the overall structure of a text. Following a general
division of any kind of text we may sometimes begin with a brief heading or title,
continue with a detailed body development, and conclude with a brief trailer,
byline, or signature.

2.3.2. Text types: expository.

We may classify texts in two ways. Firstly, according to purpose, and secondly, according
to type or mode. According to purpose, in terms of communicative functions, the discourse
is intended to inform, explain, express an attitude, persuade and create a debate. According
to type or mode, the classification distinguishes among descriptive, narrative,
argumentative, instrumental, and expository modes.

Hence, in this study we are dealing with expository texts which, on the one hand, are
intended to explain a topic to the audience in terms of communicative functions and, on the

9/24

other hand, according to the category or text types it is included within the type of
exposition, that is, the fact of offering a detailed explanation and analysis of a subject in a
clear and organised way. Now let us examine expository texts more in depth regarding
their structure and main features.

3. EXPOSITORY TEXTS: STRUCTURE AND MAIN FEATURES.

Chapter 3 will offer then an insightful analysis of expository texts in terms of (1)
definition; (2) main types of expository texts (a) regarding the audience and (b) regarding
the authors purpose; (3) structure in terms of (a) types of structure (deductive and
inductive) and (b) sequence of steps; and (4) main textual devices within expository text
types: (a) cohesion, regarding (i) grammatical, (ii) lexical and (iii) graphological devices,
and (b) coherence.

3.1. On defining expository texts.

An expository text is usually defined as a type of discourse concerned with the explanation
and ana lysis of a subject in a clear, detailed and organised way for the listener/reader to
have relevant information about a topic. So, the purpose of expository texts is to explain an
issue to an addressee in a clear, detailed and organised way by showing relationships of
cause, consequence and final purpose.

It must be borne in mind that in current society, explanation is always present at all levels,
that is, in the domains of literature (fiction) and in everyday life (non- fiction). Therefore, it
is relevant to remember that expository texts are not clearly-cut types and they may
interrelate with other types such as argumentation, narration or description when explaining
ideas, operations, actions, utterances, a theory, a plan, an academic subject, concepts,

10/ 24

advertisements, definitions, lectures, articles, book of reference, touristic guides, and

political speeches among others.

The explanation of any issue is normally a long, detailed, often scholarly account of all the
salient points regarding the subject under consideration (argument, proposal, description,
theory), hence the emphasis on form and organization of this type of text. The author
usually makes a point-by-point discussion of a complex matter especially used in the
paraphrase and analysis of a literary text. This complex analysis implies a global
knowledge of the question one intends to explain and it also demands a progressive and
articulated development of the ideas which contribute to its content, usually written
assessments.

3.2. Expository texts: main types.

Basically, we can distinguish several types of expository texts depending on two main
parameters: first, the audience it is addressed to (general or specific) and second, the
authors purpose (define, classify, illustrate, instruct, ana lyse, compare and contrast, show
relationships of cause and effect).

3.2.1. Regarding the audience.

Regarding the audience, the main types of expository texts may be objective and subjective
(also called general vs. specific, divulging vs. specialised).

1. The first type, defined as an objective, general and also divulging type is the
modality used by the author so as to inform about a subject of general interest in a
clear and objective way to a wide range of population. This modality is not complex
and therefore, easily understood by any ordinary addressee since both the order of
the content provided, and the accuracy of the terms aim at an effective

11/ 24

communication (i.e. TV, radio news, Internet news, personal e-mails, business and
personal notes).
2. The second type, defined as subjective, specific and also specialised modality,
requires the knowledge of a particular discipline or science (or part of it) on the part
of the speaker/writer since the topic must be developed in a technical way with
specific vocabulary. Hence this type of explanation is not likely to be understood by
all listeners or readers unless they are experts on the subject matter. This kind of
expository texts are related to scientific, technological, linguistic fields where the
written language is the vehicle that transmits and presents these specific contents.

3.2.2. Regarding the authors purpose.

Regarding the authors purpose, expository texts may aim at (1) defining, (2) classifying,
(3) illustrating (giving examples), (4) instructing, (5) analysing, (6) comparing and
contrasting, and finally (7) showing relationships of cause and effect.

1. By defining, the author states clearly what something is by locating the item in a
class and also by pointing out the specific characteristics that make the item differ
from other subjects in that class (a limited classification). Then we may find two
types of definitions which work together so as to offer reasonable explanations:
logical and rethorical. On the one hand, logical definitions can be reduced to a
single sentence whereas rethorical definitions are more elaborated (when defining
abstract items: sadness, friendship, jealousy) and show the personal point of view of
the author.
2. By classifying, the author helps the reader think in a clear and systematic way by
giving a logical structure to an item. Actually, he may locate the item within a
logical classification or a general division by means of immediate upward or
downward relations. Thus on the one hand, classification moves upwards from the
particular to the more general so as to state the general class to which a particular

12/ 24

instance belongs. On the other hand, the division process moves downwards, from
the general to the particular, dividing a general class into parts.
3. By illustrating or giving examples, the author cites a particular item (or items) so as
to clarify the nature of the class in which it is included. Examples serve to back up
what we want to explain or analyse for the addressee to understand the topic better.
In fact, the success of an expository text depends on the vividness and relevance of
the given examples, usually introduced by prepositional phrases like for example
and for instance. Both the concept and the example must have a relevant
connection so as to give the text a sense of effectiveness. Yet, unqualified
generalisations with no concrete examples will make the text non-coherent and
therefore, non effective.
4. By instructing the reader, the author presents information in a linear way where all
the information is given the same relevance and it is organised in a temporal
sequence (i.e. Travel guides, cooking recipes, rules of games, installing antivirus).
This kind of text is characterised by the use of imperatives, future and the use of
second and third person singular. Their aim is to guide and teach the reader/listener
how to successfully carry out the process described.
5. By analysing, the author treats the item as an individual subject and its relation to
its own parts (and not in relation to something more general or inclusive), that is, by
dividing the item into component parts (i.e. a person, an object, a flower). In
addition, this method deals directly with processes, that is, how to do things and
therefore, how to organise an exposition (i.e. scientific, literary, technical,
historical). In dealing with processes, we often provide the reader with a mere
account of the stages in time sequence (narration, historical event, anecdote, joke).
6. By comparing and contrasting, the author establishes similarities and differences. It
is relevant to say that comparison is more common than contrast because it is easier
to point out similarities between different items (people, animals, objects, events)
than differences. Within this method we distinguish formal and rhetorical
comparisons. On the one hand, formal comparison distinguishes between
comparison (between objects which belong to the same class: childhood vs.
adulthood) and analogy (between two different specific items: horse vs. bird). On

13/ 24

the other hand, rethorical comparison focuses on emphasis and originality (i.e. Life
is like a river).
7. Finally, by showing relationships of cause and effect , the author seeks an analysis of
the items from the simple to the complex, from the casual to the very formal.
Although many of these relationships are proved scientifically, some are mere
speculations (i.e. He swam in freezing water. As a result, he got a cold) and refer to
certain facts that provoke certain results (effects).

3.3. Expository texts: structure.

The structure of expository texts which seeks to clarify and explain a subject in a clear and
organised way cannot be a sequence of disordered arguments. In fact, the discourse
organization is essential, so both structure and content must be organized in a clear and
coherent way for the reader/listener to follow the issue development step by step. Even in
oral expository texts the discourse is fully planned and non-spontaneous.

3.3.1. Main types.

Since these texts have an open structure, they offer a lot of new informatio n which must be
logically organized. Actually, we may distinguish two main types of expository texts:
inductive and deductive.

1. The inductive structure develops the explanation in a progressive way going from
the particular to the general. Here the speaker/writer moves from particular
explanations to general conclusion as the basis of his/her exposition.

2. On the other hand, the deductive structure deals with the opposite direction: from
the general to the particular. This order is also respected in the organization of the
components, and of their possible relations in the case of the scientific expository

14/ 24

text. In addition, specific terminology and formulae are used with the aim of
clarifying the steps to follow.

3.3.2. Sequence of steps.

According to classical guidelines, expository texts will follow three main steps:
introduction, development and conclusion, which will be structured in three different
paragraphs. Before the introduction, it is common to present an outline of the exposition for
the reader/listener to get acquainted with the concept, as a and then to begin with the
exposition itself of what is to be communicated; finally, it is usual to end up our exposition
with a conclusion, which summarises the previous steps.

The sequence of exposit ion may be oral or written although it is quite frequent in essay
writing since it is a dialectic form (from classical dialectic and rethoric). Yet, the structure
is not always the same, it may start from the end, to continue with the development of the
process which is meant to be explained. The election of the chronological and logical order
depends on the authors communicative intention.

1. Firstly, the introduction presents the concept to be explained. It may also inform
about the main objectives, temporal setting, spatial location and bibliographical
references of the text. Actually, this introductory paragraph is quite relevant since it
helps us to know about the previous knowledge the speaker has about the subject. In
some way, the speaker selects his audience through his use of vocabulary,
inferences or implicit references.

2. The development may involve several paragraphs whose number depends on the
theme. Hence every paragraph is a thematic unit which works as theme (new
information) and rheme (old information) at the same time. In addition, they
constantly recover information from previous paragraphs to make the information

15/ 24

develop in a logical way. This is achieved by means of conjunct clauses

(summative, adversative, temporal or causal).

3. Finally, we get to the conclusion, which is a summary of all the information given
about the subject. It usually reflects the authors position with respect to the issue.

3.4. Expository texts: textual features.

The main textual features in expository texts are given by textual and lexical items, that is,
textual devices which are words used to enhance the effectiveness of the exposition:
declarative verbs such as explain, clarify, define, classify and so on; adversative,
summative and causal connectors; and specific syntactic structures. Yet, these textual
devices are quite similar to those of argumentative texts since the author may use a wide
range of word choice for different purposes, thus (a) to provide objective and subjective
exposition and (b) to explain a fact by using brief and clear statements.

So, let us analyse the basic language structures in expository texts regarding the disciplines
of syntax, pragmatics and namely semantics, together with a grammatical approach. Hence
we shall namely analyse two standars of textuality: cohesion and coherence. We shall start
by offering (1) an analysis of cohesion regarding (i) grammatical, (ii) lexical and (iii)
graphological devices, and (b) a brief analysis of coherence following Halliday & Hassan
(1976).

3.4.1. Cohesion.

Semantically speaking, the term cohesion concerns the ways in which the components of
the surface text (the actual words we hear or see) are mutually connected within a sequence
of utterances (Beaugrande & Dressler, 1988), that is, intra-text linking devices are connected
to extra-textual reference. The notion of cohesion is expressed through the stratal

16/ 24

organization of language which can be explained as a multiple coding system comprising

three levels of coding: the semantic one (meanings), the lexicogrammatical (morphological
forms, grammar and vocabulary) and the phonological and orthographic one (expressions:
sounding and writing).

Cohesion has been a most popular target for research, and it is well known its relation to the
second of the textuality standards, coherence. Since cohesive markers are important for the
understanding of expository texts, all speakers make extensive use of them, for example in
order to enhance coherence, but also for reasons of economy (e.g. a sequence of logical
steps to apply a new shampoo).

Since cohesion is expressed partly through the grammar and partly through the vocabulary,
we find two main types of cohesive devices considered as general categories of cohesion:
grammatical cohesion (substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, reference) and lexical cohesion
(reiteration, collocation) by means of grammatical categories such as adjectives, nouns,
process verbs, and so on. Yet, we shall include in our study a third type that, although last
is not the least. We refer to graphological devices (orthography, punctuation, headings, foot
notes, tables of contents and indexes) since most of them deal with form and structure of
expository texts, and are part of the semantic relations established in this text type.

3.4.1.1. Grammatical cohesion.

Thus the concept of cohesion accounts for the essential semantic relations in an expository
text: substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and reference. Note that the two latter items make
reference to the terms anaphora and cataphora, connectors and deixis. It is relevant to
mention first that anaphora and cataphora will be examined under the heading of reference,
connectors under the heading of conjunction and finally, deixis as a subtype of reference
and ellipsis.

17/ 24

The cohesive device of substitution is very similar to that of ellipsis. These two
cohesive relations are thought of as processes within the text: substitution as the
replacement of one item by another so as not to repeat similar vocabulary; and
ellipsis as the omission of an item (i.e. To finish with, ...).

The reference type of grammatical cohesion is another well researched area within
linguistics. It is defined by Halliday & Hasan (1976) as the case where the
information to be retrieved is the referential meaning, the identity of the particular
thing or class of things that is being referred to; and the cohesion lies in the
continuity of reference, whereby the same thing enters into the discourse a second
time. As we stated before, paragraph ideas are linked and interrelated although they
are in different paragraphs, so theme and rheme (anaphora and cataphora) are
always present in expository texts.

Conjunction is a relevant relationship with respect to expository texts since

connectors establish the necessary links between ideas and thoughts within the text
(Summative vs. adversative relations between paragraphs). They indicate how the
subsequent sentence or clause should be linked to the preceding or the following
sentence or parts of sentence (i.e. because, since, as, thus, while, or therefore).

Connectors play an essential role in expository texts since they reflect cohesion
within the discourse and show a logical development of the discussion by
establishing different relationships between the presented ideas: summative (i.e. In
addition, moreover), restrictive (i.e. specially, in particular), causal (i.e. because,
because of, due to), explanatory (i.e. as we can see), illustrating (i.e. for example,
for instance), previous reference (anaphora: As stated before) and conclusive (i.e. In
conclusion, to sum up).

Other grammatical devices involve the use of specific syntactic structures, such as
subordinate clauses (causal, consequence, final), relative clauses (i.e. It is a person who
makes bread), impersonal structures (i.e. It must be switched off when installed),

18/ 24

coordination in terms of copulative and explanatory structures (i.e. It is used for cutting and
it is made of metal) and finally, specific adjectival structures (i.e. nuclear energy,
environmental disasters, acid rain)

3.4.1.2. Lexical cohesion.

From a lexical approach, expository texts are concerned with specific and technical
vocabulary so as not to be ambiguous and be objective. We must remember that the
intention of the author is not to creaty beauty by means of language (rethoric) but to expose
ideas accurately and logically (dialectic). So, the main linguistic function in these texts is
the referential one since pragmatic factors determine the specialised level of the text.

Hence this type of texts is namely characterized by the use of (1) declarative verbs to
introduce explanations (i.e. define, classify, illustrate, exemplify, instruct, analyse,
compare, contrast), which namely appear in present tense and indicative mood; (2) abstract
nouns as expository texts are frequently marked by a more or less level of abstraction,
depending on the frame where the author is placed (specialised or divulging; particular or
general); and (3) connectors, which establish a semantic link between paragraphs (i.e.
Moreover, although, in addition, but, eventually, etc).

3.4.1.3. Graphological devices

With respect to graphological resources, we are mainly dealing with the most outstanding
visual device in expository texts: paragraphs. Yet, we can also make reference to
orthography, punctuation, headings, foot notes, tables of contents and indexes, since most
of them deal with form and structure of this type of texts.

Firstly, orthography for a correct spelling; secondly, according to Quirk et al (1972)

punctuation serves two main functions. Firstly, the separation of successive units (such as
sentences by periods, or items in a list by commas), and secondly, the specification of

19/ 24

language function (as when an apostrophe indicates that an inflection is genitive).

Moreover, punctuation is concerned with purely visual devices, such as capital letters, full
stops, commas, inverted commas, semicolons, hyphens, brackets and the use of
interrogative and exclamative marks. It is worth noting that punctuation has never been
standardised to the same extent as spelling, and as a result, learners tend to overlook the
relevance of punctuation when producing a text.

Learners must be encouraged to pay attention to the few areas where conventions
governing the use of the visual devices as fairly well established, among which we may
mention letters and filling in forms as part of a sociocultural educational aim. Thus,
students must try to understand the relevance of the use of commas to enumerate a
sequence of items, the use of question and exclamation marks to express requests or
attitudes, the use of inverted commas to highlight a word or sentence, and the use of
paragraphs to separate different explanations and ideas.

3.4.2. Coherence.

Coherence is a purely semantic property of discourse, while cohesion is mainly concerned

with morpho-syntactic devices in discourse. A coherent text is a semantically connected,
integrated whole, expressing relations of closeness, thus, causality, time, or location
between its concepts and sentences. A condition on this continuity of sense is that the
connected concepts are also related in the real world, and that the reader identifies the
relations.

In a coherent text, there are direct and indirect semantic referential links between lexical
items in and between sentences, which the reader must interpret. A text must be coherent
enough for the interlocutor to be able to interpret. It seems probable that this coherence can
be achieved either through cohesion, for instance, markers and clues in the speakers text,
or through the employment of the user-centred textuality standards of intentionality,
acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality.

20/ 24

These markers are defined as all the devices which are needed in writing in order to
produce a text in which the sentences are coherently organised so as to fulfil the writers
communicative purpose (to explain a fact in a logical, clear and organised order). As
Byrne (1979) claims, they refer to words or phrases which indicate meaning relationships
between or within sentences: addition, comparison (similes), consequence, result, and
condition expressed by the use of short utterances, and exemplification (imagery and
symbolism).

4. EXPOSITORY TEXTS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING.

But how do expository texts tie in with the new curriculum? As we stated above, one of the
pleasures of teaching the written language is that it is so easy to provide good models of
almost any kind of writing. Following van Ek & Trim (2001), the learners can perform,
within the limits of the resources available to them, those writing tasks which adult citizens
in general may wish, or be called upon, to carry out in their private capacity or as members
of the general public when dealing with explanations drawn from their personal opinion.

Moreover, nowadays new technologies may provide a new direction to language teaching
as they set more appropriate context for students to experience the target culture. Presentday approaches deal with a communicative competence model in which first, there is an
emphasis on significance over form, and secondly, motivation and involvement are
enhanced by means of new technologies. Expository texts prove frequent and relevant
within the students environment (i.e. installing a new computer program, instructions for a
pad game, mums instructions when she is out, comparing two friends, etc).

The success partly lies in the way the language becomes real to the users, feeling
themselves really in the language. Some of this motivational force is brought about by
intervening in authentic communicative events. Otherwise, we have to recreate as much as
possible the whole cultural environment in the classroom. This is to be achieved within the

21/ 24

framework of the European Council (1998) and, in particular, the Spanish Educational
System which establishes a common reference framework for the teaching of foreign
languages where students are intended to carry out several communication tasks with
specific communicative goals within specific contexts and registers (i.e. school, home,
friends, office, tutorial meeting, at the doctors). Thus, foreign language activities are
provided within the framework of social interaction, personal, professional and educational
fields.

Writing skills are mentioned as one of the aims of our current educational system (B.O.E.
2002) and in particular, for students of E.S.O. and Bachillerato about how to explain a fact
in a clear, organised and logical order (i.e. how to make a coffee, what you did yesterday
giving details-, events in a History exam). Actually, Bachillerato students are asked to
explain facts or give their own opinion about a fact by structuring expository texts into
paragraphs (i.e. Introduction development - conclusion) by using expository textual
features (lexical devices: connectors, declarative verbs, nouns, adjectives, etc).

It is stated that students will make use of this competence in a natural and systematic way
in order to achieve the effectiveness of communication through the different
communication skills, thus, productive (oral and written communication), receptive (oral
and written comprehension within verbal and non-verbal codes), and interactional role of a
foreign language as a multilingual and multicultural identity.

Analytic interpretation of texts in all genres should become part of every literary students
basic competence (B.O.E., 2002). There are hidden influences at work beneath the textual
surface: these may be sociocultural, inter and intratextual, or ecological. The literary
student has to discover these, and wherever necessary apply them in further examination.
The main aims that our currently educational system focuses on are mostly sociocultural, to
facilitate the study of cultural themes, as our students must be aware of their current social
reality within the European framework.

22/ 24

5. CONCLUSION.

In this study expository texts have been approached in terms of main types, main textual
features and structure. We may observe that dealing with expository style is not just a
linguistic matter to be developed in the classroom setting; on the contrary, defending our
personal point of view about a current issue enables us to carry out everyday performances
which prove essential in our current society, for instance, when discussing on the relevance
of recycling or not.

In present society, giving account of a fact from different perspectives (explaining,

comparing, illustrating) is emphasized by the increasing necessity of learning a foreign
language. As we are now members of the European Community, we need to communicate
with other countries at oral and written levels. Written patterns are given an important role
when language learners face the monumental task of acquiring not only new vocabulary,
syntactic patterns, and phonology, but also discourse competence, sociolinguistic
competence, strategic competence, and interactional competence.

To sum up, we may say that language is where culture impinges on form and where second
language speakers find their confidence threatened through the diversity of registers, genres
and text types, in particular, expository texts that make up the first language speakers day
to day interaction. Language represents the deepest manifestation of a culture, and peoples
values systems, including those taken over from the group of which they are part, play a
substantial role in the way they use not only their first language but also subsequently
acquired ones.

23/ 24

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. 1988. Introduction to Text Linguistics . London: Longman.
B.O.E. 2002. Consejera de Educacin y Cultura. Decreto N. 112/2002, de 13 de septiembre. Currculo de la Educacin
Secundaria Obligatoria en la Comunidad Autnoma de la Regin de Murcia.
B.O.E. 2002. Consejera de Educacin y Cultura. Decreto N. 113/2002, de 13 de septiembre. Currculo de Bachillerato en
la Comunidad Autnoma de la Regin de Murcia.
Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Brooks, J. and D. Warren. 1979. Modern Rethoric. Harcourt Braze.
Canale, M. 1983. From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy, in J. Richards and R.
Schmidt (eds.). Language and Communication. London, Longman.
Conn, J. 1995. Choosing and Using Literature. Curriculum Corporation.
Council of Europe. 1998. Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European Framework of
reference.
Crystal, D. and D. Davy. 1969. Investigating English Style. Longman, London.
Genette,G. 1983. Noveau discours du rcit. Paris, Seuil.
Halliday, M.A. K. and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. Longman.
Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics, pp. 269-93.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Traugott, E. and M. L. Pratt. 1980. Linguistics for Students of Literature. New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
van Dijk, T. 1984. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.

van Ek, J.A., and J.L.M. Trim, 2001. Vantage. Council of Europe. Cambridge University Press.

24/ 24