Розширена когезія: ланцюги референції (C1)
C1 текст про one/ones and such substitution in a funding report: this/that, анафора, заміна one/ones у академічному контексті. Англійська з перекладом.
Tracing Substitution in a Funding Report
Читання для практики
Читайте безкоштовно. Створіть акаунт, щоб перекладати слова, зберігати прогрес і тренуватися.
Стаття тренує зв'язність і ланцюжки відсилань у контексті a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Містить багато цільових конструкцій для автоматизації форми.
Рівень: C1Тема: Розширена когезія; this/that/these/those, pronoun chains, anaphora/cataphora, one/ones, such, the former/the latter; 30+ examples
Hana opened a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure by naming the pilot programme as the anchor for later reference. The text centred on one/ones and such substitution in a funding report, where this, that, these, and those bound paragraphs into a single argument. Pavel noted that pronoun chains fail when authors assume readers share unstated background knowledge.
Rosa reminded the group that substitution with one, ones, and such must preserve identifiable antecedents. Ian observed that former and latter work only when two referents remain unmistakably paired. By the end of the first review, advanced cohesion sounded less decorative and more structurally necessary.
A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit. The draft contrasted the regulatory framework with the stakeholder forum; the former received cautious praise, whereas the latter drew sustained criticism. Pavel defended the revision clause; its implications unsettled Rosa, and their debate clarified the reference chain.
Hana repeated the phrase the consultation window at paragraph openings to strengthen lexical cohesion across a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Pavel and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit.
Pavel repeated the phrase the regulatory framework at paragraph openings to strengthen lexical cohesion across a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Pavel replaced vague plural pronouns with explicit ones so readers could track each antecedent in a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Rosa noted that substitution with one or ones can reduce repetition without breaking cohesion.
The committee approved a revised version of the regulatory framework, but the earlier one still appeared in the appendix. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit. When the discussion turned to lexical cohesion, the chair reminded everyone that synonyms must not obscure referents.
Pavel and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims. Reviewers questioned the baseline survey, yet Hana argued that that concern rested on an outdated sample. Ian and Hana reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims.
Pavel listed three weak links in the draft, and these gaps appeared again when Rosa reread section two. Readers expect that every demonstrative in a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure will point to an identifiable noun phrase. Hana and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims.
The editors asked Ian to clarify demonstratives, and Ian did so before resubmitting a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Rosa listed three weak links in the draft, and these gaps appeared again when Ian reread section two. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit.
Ian noted that substitution with one or ones can reduce repetition without breaking cohesion. Several teams misread the regulatory framework; those misreadings spread because demonstratives lacked clear antecedents.
Rosa reminded the group that substitution with one, ones, and such must preserve identifiable antecedents. Ian observed that former and latter work only when two referents remain unmistakably paired. By the end of the first review, advanced cohesion sounded less decorative and more structurally necessary.
A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit. The draft contrasted the regulatory framework with the stakeholder forum; the former received cautious praise, whereas the latter drew sustained criticism. Pavel defended the revision clause; its implications unsettled Rosa, and their debate clarified the reference chain.
Hana repeated the phrase the consultation window at paragraph openings to strengthen lexical cohesion across a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Pavel and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit.
Pavel repeated the phrase the regulatory framework at paragraph openings to strengthen lexical cohesion across a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Pavel replaced vague plural pronouns with explicit ones so readers could track each antecedent in a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Rosa noted that substitution with one or ones can reduce repetition without breaking cohesion.
The committee approved a revised version of the regulatory framework, but the earlier one still appeared in the appendix. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit. When the discussion turned to lexical cohesion, the chair reminded everyone that synonyms must not obscure referents.
Pavel and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims. Reviewers questioned the baseline survey, yet Hana argued that that concern rested on an outdated sample. Ian and Hana reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims.
Pavel listed three weak links in the draft, and these gaps appeared again when Rosa reread section two. Readers expect that every demonstrative in a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure will point to an identifiable noun phrase. Hana and Rosa reviewed a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure, tracking how each paragraph linked back to prior claims.
The editors asked Ian to clarify demonstratives, and Ian did so before resubmitting a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Rosa listed three weak links in the draft, and these gaps appeared again when Ian reread section two. A shared principle emerged: advanced cohesion devices bind paragraphs only when antecedents stay explicit.
Ian noted that substitution with one or ones can reduce repetition without breaking cohesion. Several teams misread the regulatory framework; those misreadings spread because demonstratives lacked clear antecedents.
Про статтю
Рівень C1Фокус читання
Що вивчите
Розширена когезія; this/that/these/those, pronoun chains, anaphora/cataphora, one/ones, such, the former/the latter; 30+ examples
Стаття тренує зв'язність і ланцюжки відсилань у контексті a multilateral funding report on rural infrastructure. Містить багато цільових конструкцій для автоматизації форми.
Коментарі
Увійдіть, щоб залишити коментар
УвійтиПоки що немає коментарів. Будьте першим!
