This was developed from a wide range of sources to explain the coherence of texts by considering the functions propositions aim to achieve through the relations they contain.
The clauses containing relevant tokens in the cohesive chains reflect the lexicogrammatical features of the Chinese source text and English target texts in construing the coherence of the text.
Since cohesive chains are taken as the basis of coherence, the interrelation of the logical and textual meanings can tell us how the cohesive devices and clauses make a coherent text, and how they are representative in distinguishing the coherence of a text.
In the present research, cohesion is treated as a key factor in building up the coherence of a text, and the configuration of cohesive devices in cohesive chains in the text as essential.
As a result, the English texts are more explicit than the Chinese text in the construction of texture, because in English TTs more clauses take part in realizing the coherence of the text.
The logical and textual metafunctions together contribute to the coherence of a text.
The coherence of the text can be expressed by the lexicogrammatical patterns of the combination of the logical and textual.
In other words, in building up the structure that realizes the coherence of the text, the ST is comparatively implicit while the two TTs are relatively explicit; the ST contains less relevant tokens than the TTs.
Given the slight difference of the clauses with relevant tokens in the TT1 and TT2, 79.82 and 82.39%, respectively, Hawkes' version is more explicit than Yang's in the construction of structure that realizes the coherence of the text.
After all, if feminists evaluate canonical texts so differently, it raises questions about the coherence of feminist interpretations of texts.
