511-023.htm

Binding clauses together (subordination)

Binding relations in text

Binding relations are very common in argument and in some explanation texts. Linking relations are more common in story and recount texts. Argument texts are concerned with persuading readers (and listeners) and so they organise their messages in order to best support a position. The organisation of an argument reflects the dependency of one message on another, as well as 'packaging' those messages together that naturally go together. This kind of organisation is more easily achieved with binding relations than with linking relations. Here is an example of a written argument text:

Smoking - The arguments for and against

Many people claim that the dangers of smoking have not been proven scientifically. Other people say that cigarettes are killing millions of people all over the world.

Smokers like to say that smoking relaxes them, makes them comfortable with other people, and gives them a sense of sophistication. It seems that if people really believe that smoking makes them feel good, then it's nearly impossible to prove them wrong. Feeling comfortable in social settings, for example, is entirely subjective. Doctors argue against smoking because daily they see the damage done to the bodies of smokers. They see cancers of the mouth, the tongue, the lungs, and so on that they claim are caused by smoking, in many cases leading to premature death. For these reasons doctors have been campaigning to reduce smoking.

The anti-smoking campaigns have prompted the cigarette manufacturers to try and create a new market for their product. They are hoping to win over young people, especially young girls, by trying to reach them through sponsorship of events that are of interest to young people.

The decision to smoke is clearly up to the individual, but the cost of smoking in dollars and health makes one wonder whether it's worth it just to look sophisticated.

In the following analysis of clause combining relations, the sentences (or clause complexes) are numbered sequentially for the whole text in square brackets, eg [1], [2], while clauses combined in a sentence (or clause complex) are numbered sequentially for each sentence, eg [2.1], [2.2].

Smoking - The arguments for and against

[1.1] Many people claim

[1.2] that the dangers of smoking have not been proven scientifically.
        binding relation

[2.1] Other people say [2.2] that cigarettes are killing millions of people all over the world.
                                                        binding relation

[3.1] Smokers like to say [3.2] that smoking relaxes them,
                                                              binding relation

[3.3] makes them comfortable with other people,
         linking relation

[3.4] and feeling sophisticated.
         linking relation

[4.1] It seems [4.2] that if people really believe that smoking makes them feel good,
                                      binding relation

[4.3] then it's nearly impossible to prove them wrong.
         binding relation

[5] Feeling comfortable in social settings, for example, is entirely subjective.

[6.1] Doctors argue against smoking

[6.2] because daily they see the damage done to the bodies of smokers.
        binding relation

[7.1] They see cancers of the mouth, the tongue, the lungs, and so on

that they claim are caused by smoking,

[7.2] in many cases leading to premature death.
        binding relation

[8] For these reasons doctors have been campaigning to reduce smoking.

[9.1] The anti-smoking campaigns have prompted the cigarette manufacturers

[9.2] to try and create a new market for their product.
        binding relation

[10.1] They are hoping to win over young people, especially young girls,

[10.2] by trying to reach them through sponsorship of events
           binding relation

that are of interest to young people.

[11.1] The decision to smoke is clearly up to the individual,

[11.2] but the cost of smoking in dollars and health makes one wonder
           linking relation

[11.3] whether it's worth it [11.4] just to look sophisticated.
           binding relation                         binding relation

The analysis shows that out of a total of 13 combining relations, 11 (85%) are of the binding type; 2 out of 11 sentences are made up of one clause only; and no sentence begins with a coordinating conjunction to link it cohesively to its co-text. These results are summarised in the table below:

Language features	Examples
binding relations	11/13 = 85%
1 sentence = 1 clause	2/11 = 18%
sentences linked with conjunction	0/11 = 0%

The most important result is that the proportion of binding relations out of the total number of combining relations is very high, illustrating that argument texts favour binding-type relations.

For more information on linking relations in text, see the menu on the left: Linking clauses together (coordination)

The other two language features noted are similar to the text illustrating linking relations, ie some sentences consisting of only one clause and no sentence being linked 'cohesively' to the preceding text. Both results are a feature of writing: in spoken texts we would expect there to be more clauses per sentence, just as we would expect sentences to be linked cohesively by coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or).

For information about some of the problems that students have with binding relations in text, click here.

Alternative terms
PrimeGram	Other grammars
linking relation	coordination
binding relation	subordination

Tell me more ...

How do we recognise a binding relation?
Subject in non-finite clauses related by binding
Binding relations in text