what is coherence in essay

• Select text to style.
• Paste youtube/vimeo url to add embeded video.
• Click + sign or type / at the beginning of line to show plugins selection.
• Use image plugin to upload or copy/paste image searched from internet or paste in snip/sketched image from snap tool

Pasco-Hernando State College

• Unity and Coherence in Essays
• The Writing Process
• Paragraphs and Essays
• Proving the Thesis/Critical Thinking
• Appropriate Language

Test Yourself

• Essay Organization Quiz
• Sample Essay - Fairies
• Sample Essay - Modern Technology

Related Pages

• Proving the Thesis

Unity is the idea that all parts of the writing work to achieve the same goal: proving the thesis. Just as the content of a paragraph should focus on a topic sentence, the content of an essay must focus on the thesis.  The introduction paragraph introduces the thesis, the body paragraphs each have a proof point (topic sentence) with content that proves the thesis, and the concluding paragraph sums up the proof and restates the thesis. Extraneous information in any part of the essay that is not related to the thesis is distracting and takes away from the strength of proving the thesis.

An essay must have coherence. The sentences must flow smoothly and logically from one to the next as they support the purpose of each paragraph in proving the thesis.

Just as the last sentence in a paragraph must connect back to the topic sentence of the paragraph, the last paragraph of the essay should connect back to the thesis by reviewing the proof and restating the thesis.

Example of Essay with Problems of Unity and Coherence

Here is an example of a brief essay that includes a paragraph that does not support the thesis “Many people are changing their diets to be healthier.”

     People are concerned about pesticides, steroids, and antibiotics in the food they eat.  Many now shop for organic foods since they don’t have the pesticides used in conventionally grown food.  Meat from chicken and cows that are not given steroids or antibiotics are gaining popularity even though they are much more expensive. More and more, people are eliminating pesticides, steroids, and antibiotics from their diets.     Eating healthier also is beneficial to the environment since there are less pesticides poisoning the earth. Pesticides getting into the waterways is creating a problem with drinking water.  Historically, safe drinking water has been a problem. It is believed the Ancient Egyptians drank beer since the water was not safe to drink.  Brewing beer killed the harmful organisms and bacteria in the water from the Nile. There is a growing concern about eating genetically modified foods, and people are opting for non-GMO diets.  Some people say there are more allergic reactions and other health problems resulting from these foods.  Others are concerned because there are no long-term studies that clearly show no adverse health effects such as cancers or other illnesses. Avoiding GMO food is another way people are eating healthier food.

See how just one paragraph can take away from the effectiveness of the essay in showing how people are changing to healthier food since unity and coherence are affected. There is no longer unity among all the paragraphs. The thought pattern is disjointed and the essay loses its coherence.

Transitions and Logical Flow of Ideas

Transitions are words, groups of words, or sentences that connect one sentence to another or one paragraph to another.

They promote a logical flow from one idea to the next and overall unity and coherence.

While transitions are not needed in every sentence or at the end of every paragraph, they are missed when they are omitted since the flow of thoughts becomes disjointed or even confusing.

There are different types of transitions:

• Time – before, after, during, in the meantime, nowadays
• Space – over, around, under
• Examples – for instance, one example is
• Comparison – on the other hand, the opposing view
• Consequence – as a result, subsequently

These are just a few examples.  The idea is to paint a clear, logical connection between sentences and between paragraphs.

• Printer-friendly version

Definition of Coherence

Types of coherence, examples of coherence in literature, example #1:  one man’s meat (by e.b. white).

“Scientific agriculture, however sound in principle, often seems strangely unrelated to, and unaware of, the vital, grueling job of making a living by farming. Farmers sense this quality in it as they study their bulletins, just as a poor man senses in a rich man an incomprehension of his own problems. The farmer of today knows, for example, that manure loses some of its value when exposed to the weather … But he knows also that to make hay he needs settled weather – better weather than you usually get in June.”

This is a global level coherent text passage in which White has wonderfully unified the sentences to make it a whole. He has started the passage with a general topic, scientific agriculture, but moved it to a specific text about farmers and their roles.

Example #2:  A Tale of Two Cities (by Charles Dickens)

“The wine was red wine, and had stained the ground of the narrow street in the suburb of Saint Antoine, in Paris, where it was spilled. It had stained many hands, too, and many faces, and many naked feet, and many wooden shoes. The hands of the man who sawed the wood, left red marks on the billets; and the forehead of the woman who nursed her baby, was stained with the stain of the old rag she wound about her head again. Those who had been greedy with the staves of the cask … scrawled upon a wall with his finger dipped in muddy wine-lees—BLOOD.”

Example #3:  Animal Farm (by George Orwell)

“ Now , comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength … “No animal in England knows the meaning of happiness or leisure after he is a year old. The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth.”

Through the speech of the Old Major, Orwell starts the passage about the miserable nature of the life of animals on the animal farm , and then he inspires them to think about how to safeguard their interests on the farm. The entire paragraph is an example of coherent speech.

Example #4:  Unpopular Essays (by Bertrand Russell)

“The word “philosophy” is one of which the meaning is by no means fixed. Like the word “religion,” it has one sense when used to describe certain features of historical cultures, and another when used to denote a study or an attitude of mind which is considered desirable in the present day. Philosophy, as pursued in the universities of the Western democratic world, is, at least in intention, part of the pursuit of knowledge, aiming at the same kind of detachment as is sought in science …”

Coherence links the sentences of a work with one another. This may be done with paragraphs, making sure that each statement logically connects with the one preceding it, making the text easier for the readers to understand and follow. Also, ordering thoughts in a sequence helps the reader to move from one point to the next smoothly. As all of the sentences relate back to the topic, the thoughts and ideas flow smoothly.

Post navigation

• I nfographics
• Show AWL words
• Subscribe to newsletter
• What is academic writing?
• Academic Style
• What is the writing process?
• Understanding the title
• Brainstorming
• Researching
• First draft
• Proofreading
• Report writing
• Compare & contrast
• Cause & effect
• Problem-solution
• Classification
• Essay structure
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Book review
• Research proposal
• Thesis/dissertation

What is cohesion?

• Cohesion vs coherence

Transition signals

• What are references?
• In-text citations
• Reference sections
• Reporting verbs
• Band descriptors

Show AWL words on this page.

Levels 1-5:     grey  Levels 6-10:   orange 

Show sorted lists of these words.

Any words you don't know? Look them up in the website's built-in dictionary .

Choose a dictionary .  Wordnet  OPTED  both

Cohesion How to make texts stick together

Cohesion and coherence are important features of academic writing. They are one of the features tested in exams of academic English, including the IELTS test and the TOEFL test . This page gives information on what cohesion is and how to achieve good cohesion. It also explains the difference between cohesion and coherence , and how to achieve good coherence. There is also an example essay to highlight the main features of cohesion mentioned in this section, as well as some exercises to help you practise.

For another look at the same content, check out YouTube or Youku , or the infographic .

It is important for the parts of a written text to be connected together. Another word for this is cohesion . This word comes from the verb cohere , which means 'to stick together'. Cohesion is therefore related to ensuring that the words and sentences you use stick together.

Good cohesion is achieved through the following five main methods, each of which is described in more detail below:

• repeated words/ideas
• reference words
• transition signals
• substitution

Two other ways in which cohesion is achieved in a text, which are covered less frequently in academic English courses, are shell nouns and thematic development . These are also considered below.

Repeated words/ideas

Check out the cohesion infographic »

One way to achieve cohesion is to repeat words, or to repeat ideas using different words (synonyms). Study the following example. Repeated words (or synonyms) are shown in bold.

Cohesion is an important feature of academic writing . It can help ensure that your writing coheres or 'sticks together', which will make it easier for the reader to follow the main ideas in your essay or report . You can achieve good cohesion by paying attention to five important features . The first of these is repeated words. The second key feature is reference words. The third one is transition signals. The fourth is substitution. The final important aspect is ellipsis.

In this example, the word cohesion is used several times, including as a verb ( coheres ). It is important, in academic writing, to avoid too much repetition, so using different word forms or synonyms is common. The word writing is also used several times, including the phrase essay or report , which is a synonym for writing . The words important features are also repeated, again using synonyms: key feature , important aspect .

Reference words

Reference words are words which are used to refer to something which is mentioned elsewhere in the text, usually in a preceding sentence. The most common type is pronouns, such as 'it' or 'this' or 'these'. Study the previous example again. This time, the reference words are shown in bold.

Cohesion is an important feature of academic writing. It can help ensure that your writing coheres or 'sticks together', which will make it easier for the reader to follow the main ideas in your essay or report. You can achieve good cohesion by paying attention to five important features. The first of these is repeated words. The second key feature is reference words. The third one is transition signals. The fourth is substitution. The final important aspect is ellipsis.

The words it , which and these are reference words. The first two of these, it and which , both refer to 'cohesion' used in the preceding sentence. The final example, these , refers to 'important features', again used in the sentence that precedes it.

Transition signals, also called cohesive devices or linking words, are words or phrases which show the relationship between ideas. There are many different types, the most common of which are explained in the next section on transition signals . Some examples of transition signals are:

• for example - used to give examples
• in contrast - used to show a contrasting or opposite idea
• first - used to show the first item in a list
• as a result - used to show a result or effect

Study the previous example again. This time, the transition signals are shown in bold. Here the transition signals simply give a list, relating to the five important features: first , second , third , fourth , and final .

Substitution

Substitution means using one or more words to replace (substitute) for one or more words used earlier in the text. Grammatically, it is similar to reference words, the main difference being that substitution is usually limited to the clause which follows the word(s) being substituted, whereas reference words can refer to something far back in the text. The most common words used for substitution are one , so , and auxiliary verbs such as do, have and be . The following is an example.

• Drinking alcohol before driving is illegal in many countries, since doing so can seriously impair one's ability to drive safely.

In this sentence, the phrase 'doing so' substitutes for the phrase 'drinking alcohol before driving' which appears at the beginning of the sentence.

Below is the example used throughout this section. There is just one example of substitution: the word one , which substitutes for the phrase 'important features'.

Ellipsis means leaving out one or more words, because the meaning is clear from the context. Ellipsis is sometimes called substitution by zero , since essentially one or more words are substituted with no word taking their place.

Below is the example passage again. There is one example of ellipsis: the phrase 'The fourth is', which means 'The fourth [important feature] is', so the words 'important feature' have been omitted.

Shell nouns

Shell nouns are abstract nouns which summarise the meaning of preceding or succeeding information. This summarising helps to generate cohesion. Shell nouns may also be called carrier nouns , signalling nouns , or anaphoric nouns . Examples are: approach, aspect, category, challenge, change, characteristics, class, difficulty, effect, event, fact, factor, feature, form, issue, manner, method, problem, process, purpose, reason, result, stage, subject, system, task, tendency, trend, and type . They are often used with pronouns 'this', 'these', 'that' or 'those', or with the definite article 'the'. For example:

• Virus transmission can be reduced via frequent washing of hands, use of face masks, and isolation of infected individuals. These methods , however, are not completely effective and transmission may still occur, especially among health workers who have close contact with infected individuals.
• An increasing number of overseas students are attending university in the UK. This trend has led to increased support networks for overseas students.

In the example passage used throughout this section, the word features serves as a shell noun, summarising the information later in the passage.

Cohesion is an important feature of academic writing. It can help ensure that your writing coheres or 'sticks together', which will make it easier for the reader to follow the main ideas in your essay or report. You can achieve good cohesion by paying attention to five important features . The first of these is repeated words. The second key feature is reference words. The third one is transition signals. The fourth is substitution. The final important aspect is ellipsis.

Thematic development

Cohesion can also be achieved by thematic development. The term theme refers to the first element of a sentence or clause. The development of the theme in the rest of the sentence is called the rheme . It is common for the rheme of one sentence to form the theme of the next sentence; this type of organisation is often referred to as given-to-new structure, and helps to make writing cohere.

Consider the following short passage, which is an extension of the first example above.

• Virus transmission can be reduced via frequent washing of hands, use of face masks, and isolation of infected individuals. These methods, however, are not completely effective and transmission may still occur, especially among health workers who have close contact with infected individuals. It is important for such health workers to pay particular attention to transmission methods and undergo regular screening.

Here we have the following pattern:

• Virus transmission [ theme ]
• can be reduced via frequent washing of hands, use of face masks, and isolation of infected individuals [ rheme ]
• These methods [ theme = rheme of preceding sentence ]
• are not completely effective and transmission may still occur, especially among health workers who have close contact with infected individuals [ rheme ]
• health workers [ theme, contained in rheme of preceding sentence ]
• [need to] to pay particular attention to transmission methods and undergo regular screening [ rheme ]

Cohesion vs. coherence

The words 'cohesion' and 'coherence' are often used together with a similar meaning, which relates to how a text joins together to make a unified whole. Although they are similar, they are not the same. Cohesion relates to the micro level of the text, i.e. the words and sentences and how they join together. Coherence , in contrast, relates to the organisation and connection of ideas and whether they can be understood by the reader, and as such is concerned with the macro level features of a text, such as topic sentences , thesis statement , the summary in the concluding paragraph (dealt with in the essay structure section), and other 'bigger' features including headings such as those used in reports .

Coherence can be improved by using an outline before writing (or a reverse outline , which is an outline written after the writing is finished), to check that the ideas are logical and well organised. Asking a peer to check the writing to see if it makes sense, i.e. peer feedback , is another way to help improve coherence in your writing.

Example essay

Below is an example essay. It is the one used in the persuasion essay section. Click on the different areas (in the shaded boxes to the right) to highlight the different cohesive aspects in this essay, i.e. repeated words/ideas, reference words, transition signals, substitution and ellipsis.

Title: Consider whether human activity has made the world a better place.

History shows that human beings have come a long way from where they started. They have developed new technologies which means that everybody can enjoy luxuries they never previously imagined. However , the technologies that are temporarily making this world a better place to live could well prove to be an ultimate disaster due to , among other things, the creation of nuclear weapons , increasing pollution , and loss of animal species . The biggest threat to the earth caused by modern human activity comes from the creation of nuclear weapons . Although it cannot be denied that countries have to defend themselves, the kind of weapons that some of them currently possess are far in excess of what is needed for defence . If these [nuclear] weapons were used, they could lead to the destruction of the entire planet . Another harm caused by human activity to this earth is pollution . People have become reliant on modern technology, which can have adverse effects on the environment . For example , reliance on cars causes air and noise pollution . Even seemingly innocent devices, such as computers and mobile phones, use electricity, most of which is produced from coal-burning power stations, which further adds to environmental pollution . If we do not curb our direct and indirect use of fossil fuels, the harm to the environment may be catastrophic. Animals are an important feature of this earth and the past decades have witnessed the extinction of a considerable number of animal species . This is the consequence of human encroachment on wildlife habitats, for example deforestation to expand cities. Some may argue that such loss of [animal]   species is natural and has occurred throughout earth's history. However , the current rate of [animal]   species loss far exceeds normal levels   [of animal species loss] , and is threatening to become a mass extinction event. In summary , there is no doubt that current human activities such as the creation of nuclear weapons , pollution , and destruction of wildlife , are harmful to the earth . It is important for us to see not only the short-term effects of our actions, but their long-term ones as well. Otherwise , human activities will be just another step towards destruction .

Aktas, R.N. and Cortes, V. (2008), 'Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing', Journal of English for Academic Purposes , 7 (2008) 3-14.

Alexander, O., Argent, S. and Spencer, J. (2008) EAP Essentials: A teacher's guide to principles and practice . Reading: Garnet Publishing Ltd.

Gray, B. (2010) 'On the use of demonstrative pronouns and determiners as cohesive devices: A focus on sentence-initial this/these in academic prose', Journal of English for Academic Purposes , 9 (2010) 167-183.

Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English . London: Longman.

Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar . Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc Publishers.

Hyland, K. (2006) English for Academic Purposes: An advanced resource book . Abingdon: Routledge.

Thornbury, S. (2005) Beyond the Sentence: Introducing discourse analysis . Oxford: Macmillan Education.

GET FREE EBOOK

Like the website? Try the books. Enter your email to receive a free sample from Academic Writing Genres .

Below is a checklist for essay cohesion and coherence. Use it to check your own writing, or get a peer (another student) to help you.

Next section

Find out more about transition signals in the next section.

• Transitions

Previous section

Go back to the previous section about paraphrasing .

• Paraphrasing

Exercises & Activities Some ways to practise this area of EAP

You need to login to view the exercises. If you do not already have an account, you can register for free.

• Register        
• Forgot password        
• Resend activiation email

Author: Sheldon Smith    ‖    Last modified: 03 February 2022.

Sheldon Smith is the founder and editor of EAPFoundation.com. He has been teaching English for Academic Purposes since 2004. Find out more about him in the about section and connect with him on Twitter , Facebook and LinkedIn .

Compare & contrast essays examine the similarities of two or more objects, and the differences.

Cause & effect essays consider the reasons (or causes) for something, then discuss the results (or effects).

Discussion essays require you to examine both sides of a situation and to conclude by saying which side you favour.

Problem-solution essays are a sub-type of SPSE essays (Situation, Problem, Solution, Evaluation).

Transition signals are useful in achieving good cohesion and coherence in your writing.

Reporting verbs are used to link your in-text citations to the information cited.

• WRITING SKILLS

Coherence in Writing

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Writing Skills:

• A - Z List of Writing Skills

The Essentials of Writing

• Common Mistakes in Writing
• Introduction to Grammar
• Improving Your Grammar
• Active and Passive Voice
• Punctuation
• Clarity in Writing
• Writing Concisely
• Gender Neutral Language
• Figurative Language
• When to Use Capital Letters
• Using Plain English
• Writing in UK and US English
• Understanding (and Avoiding) Clichés
• The Importance of Structure
• Know Your Audience
• Know Your Medium
• Formal and Informal Writing Styles
• Note-Taking from Reading
• Note-Taking for Verbal Exchanges
• Creative Writing
• Top Tips for Writing Fiction
• Writer's Voice
• Writing for Children
• Writing for Pleasure
• Writing for the Internet
• Journalistic Writing
• Technical Writing
• Academic Writing
• Editing and Proofreading

Writing Specific Documents

• Writing a CV or Résumé
• Writing a Covering Letter
• Writing a Personal Statement
• Writing Reviews
• Using LinkedIn Effectively
• Business Writing
• Study Skills
• Writing Your Dissertation or Thesis

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Have you ever read a piece of writing and wondered what point the writer was trying to make? If so, that piece of writing probably lacked coherence. Coherence is an important aspect of good writing—as important as good grammar or spelling. However, it is also rather harder to learn how to do it, because it is not a matter of simple rules.

Coherent writing moves smoothly between ideas. It guides the reader through an argument or series of points using signposts and connectors. It generally has a clear structure and consistent tone, with little or no repetition. Coherent writing feels planned —usually because it is. This page provides some tips to help you to develop your ability to write coherently.

Defining Coherence

Dictionary definition of coherence

cohere , v. to stick together, to be consistent, to fit together in a consistent, orderly whole.

coherence , a sticking together, consistency.

Source: Chambers English Dictionary, 1989 edition.

The dictionary definition of coherence is clear enough—but what does that mean in practical terms for writers?

Once you have achieved coherence in your writing, you will find that:

Your sentences and ideas are connected and flow together;

Readers can move easily through the text from one sentence, paragraph or idea to the next; and

Readers will be able to follow the ideas and main points of the text.

On the other hand, a text that is NOT coherent jumps between ideas without making clear connections between them. It is often hard to follow the argument. Readers may find themselves unclear about the point of particular paragraphs or even whole sections. There may be odd sentences that do not fit well with the previous or following sentence, or paragraphs that repeat earlier ideas.

All these issues provide pointers for how to develop coherence.

Elements of Coherence

There are several different elements that contribute to coherence, or are closely linked to the concept.

They include:

Cohesion , or whether ideas are linked within and between sentences.

Unity , or the extent to which a sentence, paragraph or section focuses on a single idea or group or ideas. In any given paragraph, every sentence should be relevant to a single focus.

A joint effort

Together, cohesion and unity mean that sentences and paragraphs are connected around a central theme.

• Flow , or how the reader is led through the text. Some of this is about the ordering of ideas, but it also takes into account issues like phrasing, rhythm and style. Some people define flow as the quality that makes writing engaging and easy to read.

Levels of Coherence

We can consider coherence at several different levels. These include:

Within sentences. A sentence is coherent when it flows naturally, and uses correct grammar , spelling and punctuation . Coherence also includes the use of the most appropriate words, and avoidance of redundancy.

Between sentences . Coherence between sentences means that each sentence flows logically and naturally from the previous one. Connections are made between them so that readers can see the flow of ideas, and how each sentence is linked to the previous one.

Within paragraphs . This is a logical extension of coherence between sentences. Coherence within a paragraph means that the sentences within the paragraph work together as a whole to present a complete thesis or idea.

Why single-sentence paragraphs don’t work

This definition of ‘within paragraph’ coherence explains why you should (almost) never use single-sentence paragraphs. A single sentence is (almost) never going to be able to provide a complete summary of your thesis or idea.

Between paragraphs . For most pieces of writing, you will also need to consider how the paragraphs fit together. Each paragraph covers an idea or thesis—and must then be connected logically to the next paragraph, so that your overall thesis is built step-by-step.

Between subsections or sections . This final level of coherence is only really important for longer documents. You must create a logical flow between different sections, to guide your reader from one to the next so that they can follow the development of your ideas.

Techniques to Improve Coherence

The first step to improving coherence is to plan your writing in advance.

Decide on the main point that you want to make, and the ideas that will lead your reader towards your point. It is also helpful to consider your planned audience, and what they want from your text.

There is  more about this in our page on Know Your Audience . You may also find it helpful to read our page on Know Your Medium , to check whether there is anything about your publishing medium that you need to consider ahead of starting to write.

There are some techniques that you can use to help improve coherence within your writing. These include:

Using transitional expressions and phrases to signal connections

Words and phrases like ‘however’, ‘because’, ‘therefore’, ‘additionally’, and ‘on the one hand... on the other’ can be used to signal connections between sentences and paragraphs.

WARNING! Real connections needed!

Transitional phrases and words should only be used where the ideas really are connected.

Just inserting transitional expressions will not connect your ideas. Instead, you need to create a reasonable progression of ideas through a paragraph or section.

You also need to use transitional expressions sparingly. Not all ideas need an obvious link—and sometimes putting one in can seem awkward and contrived.

Using repeating forms or parallel structures to emphasise links between ideas

Generally speaking, repetition of words and phrases is unadvisable.

However, used sparingly, you may be able to harness repetition as a way to signal connections between sentences or ideas.

For example, many research papers have a section setting out the limitations of the study. These limitations can often be quite diverse, which makes for a rather disjointed section. To overcome this issue, writers often use the form ‘First... Second... Finally...’ to demonstrate the links between the disparate ideas.

Using pronouns and synonyms to eliminate unnecessary repetition

Repetition is often the enemy of coherence because it interrupts your movement through the writing. You tend to get distracted by the repeated words, and lose the thread of the argument or idea.

Pronouns and synonyms are a good way to avoid repeating words and phrases. However, care is needed when using them, to avoid ambiguity. It is advisable NOT to use pronouns following a sentence with two elements that might take the same pronoun.

For example:

John was sure that Tom was wrong. He had made the same argument last week.

Who made the same argument last week? John or Tom?

It is better to use at least one name again than create ambiguity.

TOP TIP! Come back later

It is often hard to detect ambiguity in your own writing because you know what you wanted to say.

It is therefore a good idea to leave any piece of writing overnight, and read it again in the morning. This will often identify problems such as ambiguous pronouns, and give you a chance to revise them.

Revisit, Revise and Review

Alongside planning, the single most important thing that you can do to improve the coherence of a piece of writing is to review and revise it with the reader’s needs in mind.

When you have finished a piece of writing, put it aside for a while. Overnight is ideal, but longer is fine. Once you have had a chance to forget precisely what you meant, read it over again as if you were coming to it for the first time.

As you start to read, consider the focus of your text: the main point that you want to make.

With that in mind, consciously examine whether the ideas flow clearly through your sentences, paragraphs and sections. Can the reader grasp your argument and follow it through the text? Is there an obvious conclusion?

While you are reading, you should also consider whether there are any very long sentences. If so, shorten them, using transitional words or phrases to link them together effectively. This will make your writing easier to read, and it will naturally flow better.

A Final Thought

It is not always easy to know how to create more coherent writing.

The best way to do so is to plan your writing, and then review it carefully. You should particularly consider your focus, and your readers’ needs. In doing so, you may find it helpful to use some of the techniques described on this page—but they will not, in themselves, be sufficient without the planning and review.

Continue to: Writing Concisely Using Plain English

See also: The Importance of Structure in Writing Editing and Proofreading Copywriting

Cohesion And Coherence In Essay Writing

Table of contents, introduction, definitions cohesion and coherence, what is coherence, what is cohesion.

If the elements of a text are cohesive, they are united and work together or fit well together.

How to Achieve Cohesion And Coherence In Essay Writing

Lexical cohesion, grammatical cohesion, substitutions, conjunctions transition words, cohesive but not coherent texts.

The player threw the ball toward the goalkeeper. Balls are used in many sports. Most balls are spheres, but American football is an ellipsoid. Fortunately, the goalkeeper jumped to catch the ball. The crossbar in the soccer game is made of iron. The goalkeeper was standing there.

How to write a coherent essay?

1. start with an outline, 2. structure your essay.

3. Structure your paragraphs

4. relevance to the main topic, 5. stick to the purpose of the type of essay you’re-writing, 6. use cohesive devices and signposting phrases.

What is signposting in writing?

Essay signposting phrases.

7. Draft, revise, and edit

• Literary Terms
• Definition & Examples
• When & How to Write Coherently

I. What is Coherence?

Coherence describes the way anything, such as an argument (or part of an argument) “hangs together.”  If something has coherence, its parts are well-connected and all heading in the same direction. Without coherence, a discussion may not make sense or may be difficult for the audience to follow. It’s an extremely important quality of formal writing.

Coherence is relevant to every level of organization, from the sentence level up to the complete argument. However, we’ll be focused on the paragraph level in this article. That’s because:

• Sentence-level coherence is a matter of grammar, and it would take too long to explain all the features of coherent grammar.
• Most people can already write a fairly coherent sentence, even if their grammar is not perfect.
• When you write coherent paragraphs, the argument as a whole will usually seem coherent to your readers.

Although coherence is primarily a feature of arguments, you may also hear people talk about the “coherence” of a story, poem, etc. However, in this context the term is extremely vague, so we’ll focus on formal essays for the sake of simplicity.

Coherence is, in the end, a matter of perception. This means it’s a completely subjective judgement. A piece of writing is coherent if and only if the reader thinks it is.

II. Examples of Coherence

There are many distinct features that help create a sense of coherence. Let’s look at an extended example and go through some of the features that make it seem coherent. Most people would agree that this is a fairly coherent paragraph:

Credit cards are convenient , but dangerous . People often get them in order to make large purchases easily without saving up lots of money in advance. This is especially helpful for purchases like cars, kitchen appliances, etc., that you may need to get without delay . However, this convenience comes at a high price : interest rates. The more money you put on your credit card, the more the bank or credit union will charge you for that convenience . If you’re not careful, credit card debt can quickly break the bank and leave you in very dire economic circumstances!

• Topic Sentence . The paragraph starts with a very clear, declarative topic sentence, and the rest of the paragraph follows that sentence. Everything in the paragraph is tied back to the statement in the beginning.
• Key terms . The term “credit card” appears repeatedly in this short paragraph. This signals the reader that the whole paragraph is about the subject of credit cards. Similarly, the word convenience (and related words) are also peppered throughout. In addition, the key term “ danger ” appears in the topic sentence and is then explained fully as the paragraph goes on.
• Defined terms . For most readers, the terms in this paragraph will be quite clear and will not need to be defined. Some readers, however, might not understand the term “interest rates,” and they would need an explanation. To these readers, the paragraph will seem less coherent !

Clear transitions . Each sentence flows into the next quite easily, and readers can follow the line of logic without too much effort.

III. The Importance of Coherence

Say you’re reading a piece of academic writing – maybe a textbook. As you read, you find yourself drifting off, having to read the same sentence over and over before you understand it. Maybe, after a while, you get frustrated and give up on the chapter. What happened?

Nine times out of ten, this is a symptom of incoherence. Your brain is unable to find a unified argument or narrative in the book. This may become frustrating and often happens when a book is above your current level of understanding. To someone else, the writing might seem perfectly coherent, because they understand the concepts involved. But from your perspective, the chapter seems incoherent. And as a result, you don’t get as much out of it as you otherwise would.

How can you avoid this in your own writing? How can you make sure that readers don’t misunderstand you (or just give up altogether)? The answer is to work on coherent writing. Coherence is perhaps the most important feature of argumentative writing. Without it, everything falls apart. If an argument is not coherent, it doesn’t matter how good the evidence is, or how beautiful the writing is: an incoherent argument will never persuade anyone or even hold their attention.

V. Examples in Literature and Scholarship

Since coherence is subjective, people will disagree about the examples. This is especially true in scholarly fields , where authors are writing for a very specific audience of experts; anyone outside that audience is likely to see the work as incoherent. For example, the various fields of analytic philosophy are a great place to look for coherence in scholarly work. Analytic philosophers are trained to write very carefully, with all the steps in the argument carefully laid out ahead of time. So their arguments usually have a remarkable internal coherence. However, analytic philosophy is a very obscure topic, and very few people are trained to understand the terms these scholars use! Thus, ironically, some of the most coherent writers in academia (from an expert perspective) usually come across as incoherent to the majority of readers.

For writing Indian Schools: a Nation’s Neglect , journalist Jill Burcum was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize in the editorial writing category. An excellent example of coherence in journalistic writing, the editorial deals with the shabby federal schools that are meant for Native Americans on reservations. The essay’s paragraphs are much shorter than they would be in an essay. Yet each one still revolves around a single, tightly focused set of ideas. You can find key concepts (such as “neglect”) that run as themes throughout the piece. The whole editorial is also full of smooth and clear transitions.

VI. Examples in Media and Pop Culture

You can often see something like argumentative coherence in political satire. Good satire always focuses on a single question and lampoons it in a highly coherent manner. Watch, for example, Jon Stewart’s opening monologues on The Daily Show. Whatever your opinion on Stewart’s politics, it’s hard to argue with the fact that he uses terms carefully. He transitions smoothly and focuses on a single, tightly controlled set of concepts in each monologue.

Sports debates can also provide a good example of coherence. When you watch a show about sports (like SportsCenter or First Take), pay attention to the attributes of coherence. How do the hosts and guests use their terms? Do they repeat key terms? Do they start each monologue with a “topic sentence”? Do they stick to one topic, or do they go off on tangents?

VII. Related Terms

“Cogency” sounds like “coherence,” but means convincing or persuasive . The two terms are related, though: an argument cannot be cogent if it’s not coherent, because coherence is essential to persuasion. However, an argument could be coherent but not cogent (i.e. it’s clear, unified, and easy to read, but the argument does not persuade its reader).

Focus is also related to coherence. Often, coherence problems emerge when the focus is too broad. When the focus is broad, there are just too many parts to cover all at once, and writers struggle to maintain coherence.

List of Terms

• Alliteration
• Amplification
• Anachronism
• Anthropomorphism
• Antonomasia
• APA Citation
• Aposiopesis
• Autobiography
• Bildungsroman
• Characterization
• Circumlocution
• Cliffhanger
• Comic Relief
• Connotation
• Deus ex machina
• Deuteragonist
• Doppelganger
• Double Entendre
• Dramatic irony
• Equivocation
• Extended Metaphor
• Figures of Speech
• Flash-forward
• Foreshadowing
• Intertextuality
• Juxtaposition
• Literary Device
• Malapropism
• Onomatopoeia
• Parallelism
• Pathetic Fallacy
• Personification
• Point of View
• Polysyndeton
• Protagonist
• Red Herring
• Rhetorical Device
• Rhetorical Question
• Science Fiction
• Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
• Synesthesia
• Turning Point
• Understatement
• Urban Legend
• Verisimilitude
• Essay Guide
• Cite This Website

• Writing Center
• Writing Resources

Cohesion & Coherence

What this resource is about:.

This resource defines both cohesive and coherent writing and explains how to write cohesively and coherently.   

Creating Cohesive and Coherent Paragraphs  

Cohesive writing is “based on how each sentence ends and the next begins” (Williams & Bizup, 2017, p. 65). Each sentence should, in terms of their content , connect to the sentences surrounding it.  

Here are a few tips for composing cohesive paragraphs:  

     "1. Begin sentences with information familiar to your readers.

      2. End sentences with information that readers cannot anticipate.

      3. Begin sentences with information that readers will find simple; end with information they will find complex”              (Williams & Bizup, 2017, p. 67).  

Coherent writing is “based on how all the sentences in it cumulatively begin” (Williams & Bizup, 2017, p. 65). The ideas of the sentences in the passage ought to be related in topic and structured so the reader increases their understanding within each sentence and between sentences.  

Here are a few tips for composing coherent paragraphs:  

• Analyze: Find the subjects (or noun phrases) of your sentences.
• Assess: Do these subjects reference related ideas? Will your reader see this relatedness of ideas? Are they referencing your “actors” (subject) doing the main “actions” (action verb)?
• Rewrite: Rewrite your paragraphs so that you answer ‘yes’ to the questions above (Williams & Bizup, 2017)

Example paragraphs

To illustrate the difference between noncoherent and coherent writing, consider these paragraphs. Subjects are bolded both paragraphs.  

• "Consistent ideas toward the beginnings of sentences, especially in their subjects, help readers understand what a passage is generally about. A sense of coherence arises when a sequence of topics comprises a narrow set of related ideas. But the context of each sentence is lost by seemingly random shifts of topics. Unfocused, even disorganized paragraphs result when that happens" (Williams & Bizup, 2017, p. 71).
•   “ Readers  understand what a passage is generally about when  they  see consistent ideas toward the beginnings of sentences, especially in their subjects.  They  feel a passage is coherent when  they  read a sequence of topics that focuses on a narrow set of related ideas. But when  topics  seem to shift randomly,  readers  lose their context of each sentence. When  that  happens,  they feel they are reading paragraphs that are unfocused and even disorganized” (Williams & Bizup, 2017, p. 71-72).  

The subjects in the second paragraph are only ‘readers’ and ‘topics,' whereas the subjects in the first paragraph are more scattered. By unifying the subjects of your paragraphs to one or two kinds of subjects, you can write coherently. By following these tips, writers may establish a flow of information that helpfully and logically organizes information for the reader.  

The purpose of these aspects of writing is to think about, understand, and write for your readers. You can improve the clarity and organization of your writing by knowing the differences between concrete versus abstract language and making your paragraphs cohesive and coherent.  

Source: Williams, J.M., & Bizup, J. (2017). Style: Lessons in clarity and grace (12th ed.). Pearson Education Inc.  

The Writing Center

Montana State University P.O. Box 172310 Bozeman, MT 59717-2310

Wilson Hall 1-114, (406) 994-5315 Romney Hall 207, (406) 994-5320 MSU Library (1st floor), (406) 994-4346

[email protected]

Facebook   Twitter   Instagram  

Job Opportunities FAQ & How To

writing@chalmers

Coherence & cohesion.

Coherence and cohesion are essential for aiding readability and idea communication.  Coherence is about the unity of the ideas and cohesion the unity of structural elements.  One way to do this is through the use of cohesive devices: logical bridges (repetition), verbal bridges (synonyms), linking words, and clear back referencing.  If these types of devices are missing in the text, it not only becomes more difficult to read the text, but also to understand its contents since the reader must guess how the various parts of the paragraph or text are connected, which will involve re-reading sentences or larger sections more than once.

With logical bridges, the same idea of a topic is carried over (repeated) from sentence to sentence, and successive sentences can be constructed in parallel form. With verbal bridges, key words or synonymous words can be repeated, pronouns can replace nouns and transition words (as shown below) can be used.   In the paragraph below, words and phrases that serve to increase the coherence of the paragraph are highlight and underlined. As this sample paragraph indicates, coherence and cohesion in a paragraph is established by combining more than one device.

A more direct way of emphasizing the inherent logic of a paragraph is through the use of linking words and phrases which mark transitions within and between sentences. The table below gives a sample of such linking words and groups them based on the connection they illustrate/indicate.

Back referencing is another effective device for creating coherence, but this device must be used carefully because it can cause confusion rather than create clarity. Consider whether or not the use of back referencing is clear in the following example.

It is perfectly acceptable to use back referencing, just be sure to make it clear. One way to do this, as exemplified in the remarks above, is to add a summary word to the back reference (e.g. this situation, where situation is the summary word). Using a summary word specifies the back reference, often making it much clearer.

How Coherence in Writing Facilitates Manuscript Acceptance

Coherence is an essential quality for good academic writing . In academic writing, the flow of ideas from one sentence to the next should be smooth and logical. Without cohesion, the reader will not understand the main points that you are trying to make. It also hampers readability. Cohesion necessarily precedes coherence. There is a difference between cohesion and coherence: cohesion is achieved when sentences are connected at the sentence level, whereas as coherence is achieved when ideas are connected. In addition, cohesion focuses on the grammar and style of your paper.

What is Coherence in Writing?

Coherence also means “clarity of expression” and it is created when correct vocabulary and grammar are used. After all, the goal of writing is to benefit the readers. Without both coherence and cohesion, the readers may detect choppiness in the text and feel as if there are gaps in the ideas presented. Needless to say, texts without coherence are difficult to read and understand. It defeats the whole purpose of writing, which is to relay ideas in a clear and efficient manner. There are strategies that you can use to ensure coherence and cohesion in academic writing.

Examples of Cohesive and Non-Cohesive Paragraphs

Paragraph coherence and cohesion results in paragraph unity . To ensure that your paragraphs have unity, there are two things to keep in mind: it must have a single topic (found in the topic sentence) and sentences provide more detail than the topic sentence, while maintaining the focus on the idea presented. The paragraph below shows a lack of unity:

Non-cohesive sample: Dogs are canines that people domesticated a long time ago. Wolves are predecessors of dogs and they help people in a variety of ways. There are various reasons for owning a dog, and the most important is companionship.

Cohesive sample: Dogs are canines that people domesticated a long time ago, primarily for practical reasons. Even though dogs descended from wolves, they are tame and can be kept in households. Since they are tame, people have various reasons for owning a dog, such as companionship.

Notice that the ideas in the non-cohesive sample are not arranged logically. The sentences are not connected by transitions and give the readers new ideas that are not found in the topic sentence. Thus, the paragraph is hard to read, leaving readers confused about the topic. On the other hand, the cohesive sample has ideas arranged logically. All ideas in this sample flow from the topic sentence. In addition, they give more details about the topic while maintaining their focus on the topic sentence.

Establishing Coherence

It is important to focus on coherence when writing at the sentence level. However, cohesion smoothens the flow of writing and should be established. There are various ways to ensure coherent writing :

• Write sentences that flow by varying the lengths and structures, the use of correct punctuation, and broadening your word choices
• Use simple transitions, such as “in addition, additionally, furthermore, therefore, thus, on the contrary, by the same token, at the same time, in other words, etc.”
• Repeat your keywords but be careful of excessive repetition
• Repeat sentence structures, which is used as a rhetorical technique rather than cohesion to highlight parallelism between sentences
• Ensure thematic consistency
• Start every sentence or paragraph with information that hints at the content of the next sentence

Academic writing is improved by coherence and cohesion. Without coherence and cohesion, readers will become confused and eventually disinterested in the article.  Your ideas then become lost and the primary objective of writing is not achieved.

Tips and Strategies

There are six ways for creating coherence, which you will find useful while polishing your manuscript. Creating coherence is not as difficult as it seems, but you will need the right tools and strategies to achieve it.

• >Lexis creates cohesion using synonyms, hyponyms, and superordinates. The use of lexical chains creates variety in writing and avoids monotony.
• Reference creates cohesion by using possessive pronouns (e.g. your, their, etc.), pronouns (e.g. she, me, etc.), and determiners (e.g. those, these, etc.).
• Substitution, which is the use of a different word in place of a previously mentioned word (e.g. “I bought a designer bag today. She did the same.”)
• Ellipsis is the removal or omission of words because their meaning is implied through context (e.g. “He goes to yoga classes in the afternoon. I hope I can too.”)
• Cohesive nouns are also called umbrella nouns because they summarize many words in one.
• Conjunctions include words that list ideas (e.g. first, next, then, lastly, etc.)

Academic writing should be concise, coherent, and cohesive. Maintaining these three qualities involves using a number of strategies to impart ideas to the reader. After all, that is the whole point of any type of writing.

Thanks for this nice post. It is very useful.

rich info, thank you.

Thanks for the well explained meaning of cohesion and coherence, how ever, I rated this post with 5 🌟 to show my appreciation, once again thanks 😂😀😀

Nice content 👍🏻

Very interesting content

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Language & Grammar
• Reporting Research

How to Avoid Run-on Sentences in Academic Writing

When writing a paper, are you more focused on ideas or writing style? For most…

How to Improve Your Academic Writing Using Language Corpora

No matter how brilliant a researcher you are, you must be able to write about…

• Global Spanish Webinars
• Old Webinars

Cómo Dominar el Arte de Escribir Manuscritos en Inglés

Consejos de corrección Errores comunes de manuscritos Aplicación de la gramática inglesa Consejos sobre redacción…

• Global Japanese Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

英語での論文執筆をマスターする

英語でのライティングスキルの重要性 論文英語の組み立て 日本人によくある英語の間違い 論文執筆の基本

• Infographic

Top 10 Tips to Increase Academic Vocabulary for Researchers

Improving academic vocabulary is an important skill for all researchers.  Academic vocabulary refers to the words…

Avoid These Common Grammatical Errors in Your Paper

Manuscript Drafting: Why is Subject-Verb Agreement Important?

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Publishing Research
• AI in Academia
• Promoting Research
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

Coherence in Composition

Guiding the Reader to Understand a Piece of Writing or Speech

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

In composition , coherence refers to the meaningful connections that readers or listeners perceive in a written or oral text , often called linguistic or discourse coherence, and can occur on either the local or global level, depending on the audience and writer.

Coherence is directly increased by the amount of guidance a writer provides to the reader, either through context clues or through direct use of transitional phrases to direct the reader through an argument or narrative.

Word choice and sentence and paragraph structure influence the coherence of a written or spoken piece, but cultural knowledge, or understanding of the processes and natural orders on the local and global levels, can also serve as cohesive elements of writing. 

Guiding the Reader

It is important in composition to maintain the coherence of a piece by leading the reader or listener through the narrative or process by providing cohesive elements to the form. In "Marking Discourse Coherence," Uta Lenk states that the reader or listener's understanding of coherence "is influenced by the degree and kind of guidance given by the speaker: the more guidance is given, the easier it is for the hearer to establish the coherence according to the speaker's intentions."

Transitional words and phrases  like "therefore," "as a result," "because" and the like serve to move connect one posit to the next, either through cause and effect or correlation of data, while other transitional elements like combining and connecting sentences or repetition of keywords and structures can similarly guide the reader to make connections in tandem with their cultural knowledge of the topic.

Thomas S. Kane describes this cohesive element as "flow" in "The New Oxford Guide to Writing," wherein these "invisible links which bind the sentences of a paragraph can be established in two basic ways." The first, he says, is to establish a plan in the first of the paragraph and introduce each new idea with a word marking its place in this plan while the second concentrates on the successive linking of sentences to develop the plan through connecting each sentence to the one before it.

Constructing Coherence Relations

Coherence in composition and constructionist theory relies on a readers' local and global understanding of the written and spoken language, inferring the binding elements of text that help guide them through understanding the author's intentions. 

As Arthur C. Graesser, Peter Wiemer-Hasting and Katka Wiener-Hastings put it in "constructing Inferences and Relations During Text Comprehension," local coherence "is achieved if the reader can connect the incoming sentence to information in the previous sentence or to the content in working memory." On the other hand, global coherence comes from the major message or point of the structure of the sentence or from an earlier statement in the text. 

If not driven by these global or local understanding, the sentence is typically given coherence by explicit features like anaphoric references, connectives, predicates, signaling devices and transitional phrases. 

In any case, coherence is a mental process and the Coherence Principle accounts for "the fact that we do not communicate by verbal means only," according to Edda Weigand's "Language as Dialogue: From Rules to Principles." Ultimately, then, it comes down to the listener or leader's own comprehension skills, their interaction with the text, that influences the true coherence of a piece of writing.

• What Is Cohesion in Composition?
• Unity in Composition
• Learn About Précis Through Definition and Examples
• Definition and Examples of Transitional Paragraphs
• What Is an Echo Word?
• Definition Examples of Collage Essays
• Editing and Proofreading Marks in Composition
• Focusing in Composition
• The Four Master Tropes in Rhetoric
• English Phrasal Verbs: Definition
• Cue Word (or Phrase) in English
• Substitution in English Grammar
• Definition and Examples of Text Linguistics
• Paragraph Transition: Definition and Examples
• The Definition of a Review in Composition
• Definition and Examples of Body Paragraphs in Composition

Paragraph Unity, Coherence, and Development

In each paragraph of an essay, one particular idea or topic is developed and explained. In order to successfully do so, however, it is essential that the paragraph be written in a unified and coherent manner. 

A unified paragraph must follow the idea mentioned in the topic sentence and must not deviate from it. For a further explanation on topic sentences, see the Write Right on Topic Sentences .

A coherent paragraph has sentences that all logically follow each other; they are not isolated thoughts. Coherence can be achieved in several ways. First, using transitions helps connect ideas from one sentence to the next. For more on transitions, see the Write Right on Transitions . Second, ordering thoughts in numerical sequence helps to direct the reader from one point to the next. Third, structuring each paragraph according to one of the following patterns helps to organize sentences: general to particular; particular to general; whole to parts; question to answer; or effect to cause. 

Remember that a paragraph should have enough sentences so that the main idea of the topic sentence is completely developed. Generalizations should be supported with examples or illustrations. Also, details and descriptions help the reader to understand what you mean. Don't ever assume that the reader can read your mind: be specific enough to develop your ideas thoroughly, but avoid repetition

An effective paragraph might look like this:

It is commonly recognized that dogs have an extreme antagonism toward cats. This enmity between these two species can be traced back to the time of the early Egyptian dynasties. Archaeologists in recent years have discovered Egyptian texts in which there are detailed accounts of canines brutally mauling felines. Today this type of cruelty between these two domestic pets can be witnessed in regions as close as your own neighborhood. For example, when dogs are walked by their masters (and they happen to catch sight of a stray cat), they will pull with all their strength on their leash until the master is forced to yield; the typical result is that a feline is chased up a tree. The hatred between dogs and cats has lasted for many centuries, so it is unlikely that this conflict will ever end.

This paragraph is effective for the following reasons:

• The paragraph shows unity. All the sentences effectively relate back to the topic sentence at the beginning of the paragraph. 
• The paragraph shows coherence. There is a flow of thoughts and ideas among the sentences in this paragraph. There are good transitions employed in the paragraph. The writer also presents her sub-topics in an orderly fashion that the reader can follow easily.
• The paragraph is developed. The writer gives herself enough space to develop the topic. She gives us at least two reasons to accept her argument and incorporates some examples in order to give those reasons more validity.

Reference: Strunk, Wiliam Jr., and E. B. White. The Elements of Style . 4th ed., Allyn and Bacon, 2000.

Copyright © 2009 Wheaton College Writing Center

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

5 Coherent Paragraphs

When you think about it, there’s no contradiction in the advice of these two American writers. You should respond with genuine feeling and without inhibition to what stimulates you – in our case, a set of texts. But feeling isn’t enough. When Gustave Flaubert asked “Has a drinking song ever been written by a drunken man?” he meant a coherent song. Between “getting it down” and “handing it in” good writers show respect for their readers by organizing their material into recognizable patterns. An important benefit of this is that by distancing yourself from your ideas and putting them in order for your reader, you are forced to shape your own nebulous feelings into clear thoughts.

This brings us to the well-known (but apparently not well enough known) paragraph: the basic unit of composition. The traditional and still useful rule that a paragraph must have unity, coherence, and emphasis only means that it must make sense, that the sentences should fit together smoothly, and that not all the sentences function in the same way.

When you see that its purpose is to support your thesis by developing and connecting your ideas meaningfully, then paragraph structure should appeal to your common sense. As a point of emphasis a topic sentence – whether you choose to put it at the beginning, middle, or end – allows you to control your writing and guide your reader by expressing the main idea of the paragraph. Remember, you’re not writing a mystery novel. There will be relatively few instances in this type of essay when you’ll want to surprise your reader.

Must every paragraph have a topic sentence? Not necessarily: if the main idea is obvious, then a topic sentence may be omitted. But even if it is only implied by your paragraph, you and your reader should be able to state easily the main idea . Whether explicit or implicit, the topic sentence of each of your paragraphs should come out of your thesis statement and lead to your conclusion. Like the paragraph, the whole essay should have unity, coherence, and emphasis. Try this: next time you read an essay, underline only the topic sentences of each paragraph; then reread only what you’ve underlined. In many cases you’ll see that the underlined sentences make up a coherent paragraph all by themselves (this is an easy way to write an abstract, incidentally). That’s because most topic sentences are more specific than the thesis statement that generates them, but still more general than the supporting sentences in the paragraphs that illustrate them. Thus they are transitions between the writer’s promise to the reader and the keeping of that promise.

Examples: Opening Paragraphs

From a student essay discussing Kafka’s The Metamorphosis :

When Nietzsche declared that “God is dead,” he did so with an air of optimism. No longer could man be led about on the tight leash of religion; a man liberated could strive for the status of Overman. But what happens if a man refuses to let go of his “dead” God and remains too fearful to evolve into an Overman? Rejecting the concept of the Christian God means renouncing the scapegoat for the sins of man and accepting responsibility for one’s own actions. In The Metamorphosis Gregor Samsa plays the god-like role of financial provider for his family. However, when his transformation renders him useless in this role, the rest of Samsa’s family undergoes a change of its own: Kafka uses the metamorphoses of both Gregor and his family to illustrate a modern crisis.

Some comments on the structure:   Two provocative introductory sentences, then a transition question and a response that presents the central idea of the essay. Next, introduction of the text and characters under discussion. Finally, the topic sentence of the paragraph, which, as the thesis statement, promises an interpretation. A paragraph such as this engages the reader’s interest right away and makes the reader look forward to the rest of the essay.

From a student essay on the question, “What Do Historians of Childhood Do?”

In his 1982 book The Disappearance of Childhood , Neil Postman argues that the concept of childhood is a recent invention of literate society, enabled by the invention of moveable-type printing. Postman says as a result of television, literate adulthood and preliterate childhood are both vanishing. While Postman’s indictment of TV-culture is provocative, he ignores race, class, ideology, and economic circumstance as factors in the experience of both children and adults. Worse, he ignores history, making sweeping generalizations such as the claim that the pre-modern Greeks had no concept of children. These claims are contradicted by the appearance of children in classical Greek literature and in the Christian Gospels, written in Greek, which admonish their readers to “be as children.” A more useful and much more interesting observation might be that the idea of childhood and the experience of young people has changed significantly since ancient times, and continues to change.

Some comments on the structure:   Like the previous example, this essay begins with a statement from a text (this time with a paraphrase rather than a quotation) and builds towards a thesis statement. In this case the build-up, where the writer disagrees with one of the class texts, is stronger than the thesis. The writer has not stated exactly what he will argue, aside from saying he finds at least some of the ideas of childhood advanced in the course materials unsatisfactory. Keeping the reader in suspense may add to the interest of the essay, but in a short paper it might also waste valuable time and leave the reader unsure whether the writer has really thought things through.

From an essay on Crime and Punishment :

“Freedom depends upon the real…It is as impossible to exercise freedom in an unreal world as it is to jump while you are falling” (Colin Wilson, The Outsider, p. 39). Even without God, modern man is still tempted to create unreal worlds. In Feodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment Raskolnikov conceives the fantastic theory of the “overman.” After committing murder in an attempt to satisfy his theory, Raskolnikov falls into a delirious, death-like state; then, Lazarus-like, he is raised from the “dead.” His “resurrection” is not, as some critics suggest, a consequence of his love for Sonya and Sonya’s God. Rather, his salvation results from the freedom he gains when he chooses to live without illusions.

Comments: Once more, a stimulating opening. Between the first and last sentences, which frame the paragraph (the last one, as well as being the thesis sentence, is the specific application of the general first sentence), the writer makes her transition to the central idea and introduces the text and character she wishes to discuss. The reader is given enough information to know what to expect. It promises to be an interesting essay.

Each of the writers above chooses to open with a quotation or reference that helps to focus the reader’s attention and reveal the point of view from which a specific interpretation will be made. Movement from the general to the specific is very common in introductory thesis paragraphs, but it is not obligatory. You can begin with your thesis statement as the first sentence; start with a question; or use the entire opening paragraph to set the scene and provide background, then present your thesis in the second paragraph. Make choices and even create new options, so long as your sentences move to create a dominant impression on the reader.

Examples: Middle Paragraphs

From a student essay comparing P’u Sung-ling’s (17th century) The Cricket Boy and Franz Kafka’s (20th century) The Metamorphosis , two stories that deal with a son’s relationship to his family. (The writer’s thesis: according to these authors, one must connect in meaningful ways with other human beings in order to achieve what Virginia Woolf calls “health,” “truth,” and “happiness.”)

The most obvious similarity between Kiti and Gregor is that they both take the forms of insects; however, their and their families’ reactions to the changes account for the essential difference between the characters. Whereas Kiti thinks a cricket represents “all that [is] good and strong and beautiful in the world ( Cricket Boy , p. 2), Gregor is repulsed by his insect body and “closes his eyes so as not to have to see his squirming legs” ( Metamorphosis , p, 3). Their situations also affect their families differently.  Kiti’s experience serves as a catalyst that brings his family closer together: “For the first time, his father had become human, and he loved his father then” ( CB , p. 2). Gregor’s transformation, on the other hand, succeeds in further alienating him from his family: his parents “could not bring themselves to come in to him” ( M , p. 31). While Kiti and his parents develop a bond based on understanding and mutual respect, Gregor becomes not only emotionally estranged from his family, but also physically separated from them.

Some comments on the structure:   The writer is clearly on her way, with specific examples from the texts, to supporting her argument concerning the need for self-respect and communication. Notice that she uses transitions such as “however,” “whereas,” “also,” “on the other hand,” while,” and “not only…, but also…” to connect her thoughts and make her sentences cohere. Transitional words and phrases are the “glue” both within and between paragraphs: they help writers stick to the point, and also allow readers to stay on the path the writer intends.

Transitions

Writers use transitional words and expressions as markers to guide readers on their exploratory journey. They can express relationships very explicitly , which is often exactly what is needed. However, experienced writers can also build more subtle bridges between ideas, hinting at relationships with implicit transitions. These relationships may change from vague impressions to a very concrete statement, as the argument develops, allowing the reader to “discover” the writer’s conclusion as the essay builds to its final paragraph.

Examples of explicit transitional expressions

• Comparison: such as, like, similarly, likewise, in the same way, in comparison, correspondingly, analogous to
• Contrast: but, however, in contrast, although, different from, opposing, another distinction, paradoxically
•   Cause-effect: because, as a result, consequently, for this reason, produced, generated, yielded
•   Sequence: initially, subsequently, at the onset, next, in turn, then, ultimately
•  Emphasis: above all, of major interest, unequivocally, significantly, of great concern, notably
•   Examples: for example, in this instance, specifically, such as, to illustrate, in particular
•   Adding points: as well as, furthermore, also, moreover, in addition, again, besides

If you find that you are overusing explicit connectors and your transitions are beginning to feel mechanical (How many times have you used “furthermore” or “however”?  How many “other hands” do you have?), you can improve the flow of your writing either by changing up the transitional expressions, or by shifting toward more implicit transitions. One technique is, in the first sentence of the new paragraph, refer (either explicitly or implicitly) to material in the preceding paragraph. For example:

When Alcibiades does give his speech, we see that his example is Socrates himself.

While this interpretation still seems reasonable, I was surprised at the difficulty of uncovering useable data in the records of past societies.

This sometimes sickening detail that Dante uses to draw the reader emotionally into the Inferno also stimulates the reader to think about what he or she feels.

The Greek system is much more relaxed; obeisance and respect for the gods is not required, although in most cases it seems to make life easier.

Each of these implicit transition sentences builds on the previous paragraph and calls for support in the new paragraph. Even more subtle (that is, more difficult) would be to make the last sentence of the paragraph indicate the direction the next paragraph will take. If you try this, be careful you do not at the same time change the subject. You do not want to introduce a new idea at the end of a paragraph, and destroy its unity. Since it suggests a change in direction, we see this device used most commonly with thesis sentences at the end of introductory paragraphs, or in transitional paragraphs like the example above.

Other examples of hinges writers use to make connections include pronouns referring back to nouns in the previous paragraphs and synonyms to avoid repetition and overuse of pronouns. A good rule is not to overuse any device.

Concluding Paragraphs

From a student essay on Crime and Punishment :

Raskolnikov finally finds a new life:

Indeed he [is] not consciously reasoning at all; he [can] only feel .  Life [has] taken the place of logic and something quite different must be worked out in his mind. (Epi. II, p. 464)

Thus he ends his suffering by abandoning intelligence and reasoning.  Jean-Jacques Rousseau said that “above all the logic of the head is the feeling of the heart.” Ultimately, Raskolnikov transcends the “logic of the head” by discovering love and freedom.

Some comments on the structure: The paragraph works well as a conclusion because you can tell immediately that the writer has said all that she wants to say about the subject. She uses a quotation from another source, to “rub up against” Dostoevsky, expanding the dialogue between the text, the writer, and the reader by adding another voice. The answer to the “so what?” question is implied in the last sentence: love and freedom are values we all can share. Note that although this is a different conclusion from that of the earlier essay discussing Crime and Punishment , both interpretations are interesting and valid because both writers supported their arguments with careful readings of the text.

From a History essay analyzing the influence of Philippe Ariès’s book Centuries of Childhood on later historians:

In the end, Centuries of Childhood did not establish a conceptual framework for children’s history. Nor did the rival philosophies of history create a new paradigm for children’s history. Ariès identified a subject of study. He was a prospector who uncovered a rich vein of material. Subsequent miners should use whatever tools and techniques are best suited to getting the ore out of the ground. Historians should stop fighting over theories and get to work uncovering the lives of children and families. This will involve, as Jordanova suggested, self-awareness and sensitivity. But it should not be sidetracked by ideological debates. As Cunningham observed, the stakes for modern children and families are high. To make children’s history useful for the present, historians of children and families need to put aside their differences and get back to work.

Some comments on the structure:   As in the previous example, the writer includes the perspectives of other commentators. This is especially common in essays on secondary sources in history, because “historiography” is often imagined as an ongoing conversation about primary and important secondary texts. The “so what” statement is more explicit this time, relating the study of children in the past to improving the lives of children and families today. The importance of connecting with the needs of today is problematic (many historians would criticize this as “presentism”); so the writer includes a supporting perspective from a sympathetic commentator.

From an essay in which the writer compares and contrasts the character she is examining with a character from another work:

Like Ophelia, Gretchen has moments of confusion and despair, but she decides to give in to her feelings and take responsibility for them. By having Gretchen freely stay behind to face her execution, Goethe casts aside any similarities that his character shares with Shakespeare’s Ophelia. Along with the empowering freedom of Gretchen’s striving comes the struggle to act rightly. But if no objective absolutes exist, according to Goethe’s God, on what basis can Gretchen make her decisions in order to be saved? She comes to the realization that the only absolutes exist within herself. Goethe’s God saves her, not for being a penitent Christian, but for staying true to these self-imposed absolutes.

Some comments on the structure:  Another strong conclusion. The writer’s interpretation could be contested, but she has argued it well and convincingly throughout the essay and concluded strongly. Incidentally, note also that by specifying “Goethe’s God” in her interpretation she avoids any distracting discussion of religion and keeps her writing focused on literary analysis. We don’t argue the nature of “God” in an essay about literature; only the nature of the “God” in the text.

A Short Handbook for writing essays in the Humanities and Social Sciences Copyright © 2019 by Salvatore F. Allosso and Dan Allosso is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Staff Directory
• Library Policies
• Hege Research Award
• Quaker Archives
• Art Gallery
• Student Support
• Teaching & Learning
• Reserving spaces
• Technology Lending
• Interlibrary Loan
• Course Reserves
• Copyright & Fair Use
• Poster Printing
• Virtual Reference
• Research Guides
• Off-campus access
• Digital Scholarship
• Guilford Sources
• Open Educational Resources
• Quaker Collections
• Digital Collections
• College Archives
• Underground Railroad
• Universities Studying Slavery
• Images & Exhibitions

Service Alert

Hege Library & Learning Technologies

• Guilford College
• Campus Partners

Guilford College Writing Manual

Revising to improve coherence.

• Practical Considerations
• Write to Learn
• Defining and Freeing the Self
• Joining a Community of Seekers
• Final Thoughts
• A Proposed Categorization of the Academic Writer's Responsibilities
• Required Writing Courses
• Placement in First-Year Writing Courses
• Writing Courses Beyond First-Year English
• Informal vs. Formal Writing
• Essay vs. Article
• Two Models of Papers
• What is the Real Difference?
• Specific Expectations of Papers
• Grade Descriptions
• The A Paper
• The B Paper
• The C Paper
• The D Paper
• The F Paper
• What makes college reading different?
• Levels of Reading
• An Overview
• Sample Schedule
• Suggestions for Prewriting
• Modes of Invention
• Four Categories of Invention
• Intuition Heuristics
• The Five Perspectives
• Loosening Heuristics
• Closing Observations
• Introduction
• Preliminary Tasks
• The Search Strategy
• Finding Materials
• Finding Appropriate Websites
• Selected Websites
• Documenting Your Sources
• Open Form vs. Fixed Form
• Geography of a Thesis and Proof Essay
• Introductions
• Body Paragraphs
• Conclusions
• Maintaining Control
• Geography of an Issues and Exploration Paper
• Reader Expectations
• What is Style?
• Festival of Verbs
• Two Zones of the Word Stock
• Levels of Generality
• Writing with Nouns and Verbs
• Avoiding Cliches
• The Two Faces of Jargon
• Using "I" in Academic Writing
• What Kinds of Sentences to Use
• Hemingway vs. Faulkner
• Three Syntactic Devices Worth Using
• Subject-Verb-Object
• Touches of Elegance
• Gunning's Fog Index
• Why It's Important
• Two General Principles
• Some College-Level Problems
• A Word on Typos
• An Important General Rap
• Revising Checklist
• Revising for Concreteness
• Revising to Eliminate Wordiness
• Revising to Sharpen
• Revising to Make More Effective Use of Quotations
• Revising to Make Language More Inclusive
• Revising to Brighten
• What It Is and Why We Do It
• Sample Edit Guide

REVISING TO IMPROVE COHERENCE

            Coherence describes the way that the elements in our sentences and para­graphs hang together to produce meaning. Usually when we write rough drafts, we are concerned mainly with getting our thoughts on paper, not with making sure that they interconnect well so that a reader can process our reasoning easily. We may even leave logical steps out.

            Revising for coherence means going back to the draft with the reader's needs in mind. It may mean inserting transitional words and phrases, or creating parallelism so that the reader can see at a glance that a pair of elements carry the same weight, or rearranging material within a sentence so that the reader gets an accurate sense of what’s important and what’s not. Generally, it means instructing the reader on how to read our discourse.

            The goal? Sharp focus.

            It may be profitable to think of focus in terms of its original meaning. Borrowed without change from Latin, this word surprisingly first meant "hearth" or "fireplace" (compare fellow derivatives FOYER and FUEL)—in other words, that central point from which heat and light radiate throughout a structure.  Focus entered the language of optical science with the sense of a place where things converge, and it is this sense of convergence and centrality and the sharp image that a correctly focused lens produces that we intend when we speak of FOCUS in writing.

Original paragraph :

            Vegetation covers the earth, except for those areas continuously covered with ice or utterly scorched by continual heat. Richly fertilized plains and river valleys are places where plants grow, as well as at the edge of perpetual snow in high mountains. There is plant growth not only in and around lakes and swamps but under the ocean and next to it. The cracks of busy city sidewalks have plants in them as well as in barren rocks. Before man existed the earth was covered with vegetation, and the earth will have vegetation long after evolutionary history swallows us up.

                                                                                    (from Joseph Williams, Style )

            The sentences contain sufficient information, but when read together they seem hazy, disconnected. It's not clear‑‑really‑‑what the main point is, even though one can sense the underlying logic. Note how the revising choices in the following version alleviate the problem.  Then we'll look at the specific changes that were made.

Revised paragraph :

Except in those areas continually covered with ice or scorched by  continual heat, the earth is covered with vegetation.  Plants grow not only in richly fertilized plains and river valleys but at the edge of perpetual snow in high mountains, not only in and around lakes and swamps but under the ocean and next to it.  They survive in the cracks of busy city sidewalks as well as in barren rocks.  Vegetation covered the earth before we existed and will cover the earth after evolution swallows us up.

            This version is much more reader‑friendly because the writer has made the following changes:

            (1)  Shifted the material in the first sentence so that the main point comes at the end of the sentence. Readers expect the most important informa­tion to come at the end. By putting it there, the writer has insured that the reader will not interpret the exception ("except for . . .") to be what this paragraph is about.  Instead, the reader can confidently go to the next sentence looking for examples of "the earth is covered with vegetation."

            (2)  Taken the six examples which make up the meat of the paragraph and put them in grammatically parallel constructions so the reader can see at a glance that they are all being used in the same way‑‑as examples.  Note how in the revi­sion, the grammatical subject is "plants" throughout the middle sentences, whereas in the previous version the subjects are "plains and river valleys," "plants," "plant growth," "the cracks of busy city sidewalks."  The subject‑shifts in the original are abrupt and confusing.

            (3) Strengthened the continuity from second last sentence to final sentence by beginning with "vegetation."  "Vegetation" connects immediately with the previous sentences, whereas in the original version, the opening clause suddenly shifts us into a historical perspective in which the first grammatical subject is "man."  Note also how the writer has sharpened the paragraph's focus‑-and hence the coherence‑‑by eliminating wordiness and strengthening the verbs.

Using transitions

             Another sure‑fire way of improving coherence is to use transitional words and phrases. Such devices function like road signs. They signal immediately the logical relationship between parts of a sentence, or, if positioned near the beginning of a sentence, the relationship between that sentence and the sentence that preceded it. Any two consecutive sentences have an implicit logical relationship; often it helps the reader if you make the relationship explicit. In looking at the following list of transitions drawn from the Harbrace College Handbook , note the logical relationships indicated by the category headings:

            1.  Alternative and addition : or, nor, and, and then, moreover, further, furthermore, besides, likewise, also, too, again, in addition, even more important, next, first, second, third, in the first place, in the second place, finally, last.

            2.  Comparison : similarly, likewise, in like manner.

            3.  Contrast : but, yet, or, and yet, however, still, nevertheless, on the other hand, on the contrary, conversely, even so, notwithstanding, for  all that, in contrast, at the same time, although this may be true, otherwise, nonetheless.

            4.  Place : here, beyond, nearby, opposite to, adjacent to, on the opposite side.

            5.  Purpose : to this end, for this purpose, with this object.         

            6.  Cause, result : so, for, hence, therefore, accordingly, consequently, thus, thereupon, as a result, then, because.

            7.  Summary, repetition, exemplification, intensification : to sum up, in brief, on the whole, in sum, in short, as I have said, in other words, that is, to be sure, as has been noted, for example, for instance, in fact, indeed, to tell the truth, in any event.

            8.  Time : meanwhile, at length, soon, after a few days, in the mean­time, afterward, later, now, then, in the past, while.

            See the improvement in coherence that results when transitions are added to the following paragraph:

            Cable television sounds like a good deal at first. All available local channels can be piped into a television set for a relatively low cost per month. The reception is clear‑‑a real bonus in fringe and rural areas.  Several channels for news and local access are in the basic monthly fee.  A cable connection to a second or third TV set costs extra. In most places subscribers have to pay as much as thirty dollars a month extra to get the channels like Home Box Office and The Disney Channel.  The movies change each month. The pay‑TV movie channels run the same films over and over during a month's time.  Many of the films offered each month are box office flops or reruns of old movies that can be viewed on regular channels.  Cable television isn't really a bargain.

                                                                        from Harbrace College Handbook

            Cable television sounds like a good deal at first. All available local channels can be piped into a television set for a relatively low cost per month. And the reception is clear‑‑a real bonus in fringe and rural areas. Moreover , several channels for news and local access are in the basic monthly fee. On the other hand , a cable connection to a second or third TV set costs extra. And in most places subscribers have to pay as much as thirty dollars a month extra to get the channels like Home Box Office and The Disney Channel. While it is true that the movies change each month, the pay‑TV channels run the same films over and over during a month's time, and many of the films offered each month are box office flops or reruns of old movies that can be viewed on regular channels.  In sum , cable television isn't really a bargain.

A final comment about transitional words and phrases : don’t overuse them. As historian Richard Marius observes, “when we use them too frequently to hold an essay together, they leave the rivets in our writing showing."

• << Previous: Revising to Sharpen
• Next: Revising to Make More Effective Use of Quotations >>
• Last Updated: Dec 8, 2015 1:59 AM
• URL: https://library.guilford.edu/writingmanual

• Departments
• For Students
• For Faculty
• Book Appointment

Flow and Cohesion

• Reverse Outline
• Paper Skeleton
• Creating a Research Space
• Personal Statements
• Literature Reviews

Our Writing Center gets a lot of students who are concerned about the  flow  of their writing, but this can mean a lot of different things. When we talk about "flow" we mean  cohesion  or how ideas and relationships are communicated to readers. Flow can involve the  big-picture  (how parts of the essay fit together and the way the sequence of these parts affect how readers understand it) and the  sentence-level  (how the structure of a sentence affects the ways meanings and relationships come across to readers). This page has an overview of ways to think about revising the  flow  of an essay on both of these levels.

Big-Picture Revision Strategies

Reading out-loud.

Oftentimes, you can identify places that need some extra attention sharing your writing with a friend, or reading it out loud to yourself. For example, if it's hard to actually say a sentence at a normal conversational pace, this might indicate that there's something you can change about the structure that will make it easier to say (and probably, easier to understand). A few more tips:

• When you read out-loud, make sure to  slow down . If you are talking too fast, you might fill-in gaps or otherwise not notice things you want to change. You also want to give yourself time to process what you're saying  as you say it.
• If there's nobody around, there are also many computer programs that can convert text to speech and read to you, including  Microsoft Word .
• Take notes while you read. While you might want to fix things as you read, if you're worried about flow, it's also good to read your essay all the way through so that you can hear how parts fit together. If you don't want to interrupt your reading, you can take notes by doing things like putting a checkmark in the margins, using a highlighter, or making a list on a separate sheet of paper.

Structure and Sequence

Sometimes issues of flow and cohesion might actually be structural. It's good to reflect on the structure of an essay, the order of the different parts, and how they all fit together. If you want to revise the structure of your essay, consider trying one of the following activities.

Sign-Posting and Transitions

A great way to help readers comprehend the flow of ideas is include things like sign-posts and transitions. A sign-post is basically just language to point out different parts of the essay for readers in order to help them navigate your ideas. For example,  strong topic sentences  are a good as sign-posts because they tell readers what upcoming paragraphs are going to be about.  Transition sentences  can help readers understand how the ideas you were just discussing in a previous paragraph relate to what's coming up with the next paragraph. Here are a couple questions that can help you brainstorm sign-posting statements. After you brainstorm, you can then revise these sign-posting sentences so they fit better with your writing.

• Try starting a sentence by writing "In this paragraph, I will discuss..." After you complete this sentence, you can then revise it to make it fit better with your writing.
• "In the previous paragraph I discuss [purpose of paragraph 1] and this helps better understand [purpose of paragraph 2] because..."
• This paragraph supports my argument because..."
• While I discuss [previous idea or concept] above, I will now talk about [new idea or concept] because..."

Revision on the Sentence-Level

Verbs, or stuff we do.

A sentence seems clear when its important actions are in verbs. Compare these sentences where the actions are in bold and the verbs are UPPERCASE:

Because we  LACKED  data, we could not  EVALUATE  whether the UN  HAD TARGETED  funds to areas that most needed assistance. Our  lack  of data PREVENTED  evaluation  of UN  actions  in  targeting  funds to areas most in  need  of  assistance .

Nominalization

Turning a verb or adjective into a noun is called a “nominalization.” No element of style more characterizes turgid writing, writing that feels abstract, indirect, and difficult, than lots of nominalizations, especially as the subjects of verbs.  

Our request IS that you DO a review of the data.     vs. We REQUEST that you REVIEW the data.    

Try this:  when editing, underline the actions in your sentences.  Are those actions in the form of verbs?  If not, you might try rewriting your sentences to turn those actions into the main verbs in the sentence.

Active and Passive Verbs

Some critics of style tell us to avoid the passive everywhere because it adds a couple of words and often deletes the agent, the “doer” of the action.  But in fact, the passive is sometimes the better choice.  To choose between the active and passive, you have to answer two questions:

• The president  was rumored  to have considered resigning.
• Those who  are found  guilty can  be fined .
• Valuable records should always  be kept  in a safe.
• Because the test  was not done , the flaw  was not corrected .
• The weight given to industrial competitiveness as opposed to the value we attach to liberal arts   will determine  our decision.  
• Our decision  will be determined   by the weight we give to industrial competitiveness as opposed to the value we attach to the liberal arts .

Try this:   We need to find our passive verbs before we can evaluate whether or not to change them.  While you’re editing, try underlining all the “to be” verbs, since these are often paired with other verbs to make passive constructions.  The verbs you’re looking for are: am, are, is, was, were, be, become, became.  Once you’ve identified these verbs, check to see if they are necessary, or if the sentence would be clearer or stronger without them.  Example:  “There is one explanation in the story…” vs “The story explains…”

Writing is more coherent when readers are able to make connections across sentences and paragraphs. On the sentence level, this can include when the last few words of one set up information that appears in the first few words of the next.  That’s what gives us our experience of flow.

• Begin sentences with information familiar to your readers.  Readers get that information from two sources:  first, they remember words from the sentence they just read.  Second, readers bring to a sentence a general knowledge of its subject.  In a paper on black holes, for example, readers would find references to “astronomers”  familiar, even without prior mention.
• End sentences with information that readers cannot anticipate.  Readers prefer to read what’s easy before what’s hard, and what’s familiar and simple is easier to understand that what’ new and complex.  

Compare these two passages:

Try this:  While editing, check for these words: this, these, that, those, another, such, second, or more. Writers often refer to something in a previous sentence with these kinds of words. When you use any of those signals, try to put them at or close to the beginning of the sentence that you use them in.

Here are some tips to help your writing become more precise and cut out extra words.

• Delete what readers can infer.  This can include redundant categories like “period of time,” “pink in color,” or “shiny in appearance.

• Can you make sense of the negatives in this sentence?

Except when you have failed to submit applications without documentation, benefits will not be denied.

This handout contains excerpts from Joseph M. Williams'  Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace ( New York: Longman, 2000).

• General Philosophy

Philosophical Writing: An Introduction, 5th Edition

ISBN: 978-1-394-19340-0

August 2024

Wiley-Blackwell

Digital Evaluation Copy

A. P. Martinich

Philosophical Writing helps students to think clearly and analytically, improve their essay-writing skills, and present their knowledge and thoughts in a precise and coherent manner. Acclaimed for its accessible, highly practical approach, this bestselling textbook emphasizes what students should do in crafting a philosophical essay, as well as other types of essays that analyze concepts across a variety of disciplines.

Tracing the evolution of a good philosophical essay from the draft stage to completion, the book's eleven chapters are purpose-built to serve the needs of a wide range of students, with levels ranging from elementary to moderately advanced. Philosophical Writing includes numerous essay examples, techniques for outlining and composing, guidance on evaluating philosophical essays, useful appendices, a glossary, a full-featured companion website, and more.

Now in its fifth edition, Philosophical Writing is fully updated with enhanced language and improved explanations throughout. Two entirely new chapters delve into the intricacies of belief networks and explore the properties of sound interpretations, supported by a wealth of new exercises and discussion questions.

Written with clarity and humor by a leading analytic philosopher, Philosophical Writing:

• Helps students organize their beliefs, assess their interpretations, and critically evaluate the ideas of others
• Explains the basic concepts of logic and rhetoric, the structure of a philosophical essay, and the criterion of good philosophical writing
• Describes key tactics for analytic writing, such as definitions, analysis, counterexamples, and dialectical reasoning
• Discusses the concepts of author and audience as they apply to a student's philosophical writing
• Offers advice on common problems that students encounter when writing a philosophical essay

Philosophical Writing: An Introduction, Fifth Edition, remains an ideal textbook for lower- and upper-division courses in philosophy, particularly introductory philosophy classes, as well as courses with significant writing components that cover logic, rhetoric, and analysis.

A. P. MARTINICH is Vaughan Centennial Professor Emeritus in Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. He has published extensively on the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes and the philosophy of language. He is the author of A Hobbes Dictionary and Hobbes’s Political Philosophy , and the co-editor of A Companion to Analytic Philosophy and Analytic Philosophy: An Anthology .

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

The Coherence Theory of Truth

A coherence theory of truth states that the truth of any (true) proposition consists in its coherence with some specified set of propositions. The coherence theory differs from its principal competitor, the correspondence theory of truth, in two essential respects. The competing theories give conflicting accounts of the relation that propositions bear to their truth conditions. (In this article, ‘proposition’ is not used in any technical sense. It simply refers to the bearers of truth values, whatever they may be.) According to one, the relation is coherence, according to the other, it is correspondence. The two theories also give conflicting accounts of truth conditions. According to the coherence theory, the truth conditions of propositions consist in other propositions. The correspondence theory, in contrast, states that the truth conditions of propositions are not (in general) propositions, but rather objective features of the world. (Even the correspondence theorist holds that propositions about propositions have propositions as their truth conditions.) Although the coherence and correspondence theories are fundamentally opposed in this way, they both present (in contrast to deflationary theories of truth) a substantive conception of truth. That is, unlike deflationary theories, the coherence and correspondence theories both hold that truth is a property of propositions that can be analysed in terms of the sorts of truth-conditions propositions have, and the relations propositions stand in to these conditions.

1. Versions of the Coherence Theory of Truth

2. arguments for coherence theories of truth, 3. criticisms of coherence theories of truth, 4. new objections to coherentism, other internet resources, related entries.

The coherence theory of truth has several versions. These versions differ on two major issues. Different versions of the theory give different accounts of the coherence relation. Different varieties of the theory also give various accounts of the set (or sets) of propositions with which true propositions cohere. (Such a set will be called a specified set .)

According to some early versions of the coherence theory, the coherence relation is simply consistency. On this view, to say that a proposition coheres with a specified set of propositions is to say that the proposition is consistent with the set. This account of coherence is unsatisfactory for the following reason. Consider two propositions which do not belong to a specified set. These propositions could both be consistent with a specified set and yet be inconsistent with each other. If coherence is consistency, the coherence theorist would have to claim that both propositions are true, but this is impossible.

A more plausible version of the coherence theory states that the coherence relation is some form of entailment. Entailment can be understood here as strict logical entailment, or entailment in some looser sense. According to this version, a proposition coheres with a set of propositions if and only if it is entailed by members of the set. Another more plausible version of the theory, held for example in Bradley (1914), is that coherence is mutual explanatory support between propositions.

The second point on which coherence theorists (coherentists, for short) differ is the constitution of the specified set of propositions. Coherentists generally agree that the specified set consists of propositions believed or held to be true. They differ on the questions of who believes the propositions and when. At one extreme, coherence theorists can hold that the specified set of propositions is the largest consistent set of propositions currently believed by actual people. For such a version of the theory, see Young (1995). According to a moderate position, the specified set consists of those propositions which will be believed when people like us (with finite cognitive capacities) have reached some limit of inquiry. For such a coherence theory, see Putnam (1981). At the other extreme, coherence theorists can maintain that the specified set contains the propositions which would be believed by an omniscient being. Some idealists seem to accept this account of the specified set.

If the specified set is a set actually believed, or even a set which would be believed by people like us at some limit of inquiry, coherentism involves the rejection of realism about truth. Realism about truth involves acceptance of the principle of bivalence (according to which every proposition is either true or false) and the principle of transcendence (which says that a proposition may be true even though it cannot be known to be true). Coherentists who do not believe that the specified set is the set of propositions believed by an omniscient being are committed to rejection of the principle of bivalence since it is not the case that for every proposition either it or a contrary proposition coheres with the specified set. They reject the principle of transcendence since, if a proposition coheres with a set of beliefs, it can be known to cohere with the set.

Two principal lines of argument have led philosophers to adopt a coherence theory of truth. Early advocates of coherence theories were persuaded by reflection on metaphysical questions. More recently, epistemological and semantic considerations have been the basis for coherence theories.

2.1 The Metaphysical Route to Coherentism

Early versions of the coherence theory were associated with idealism. Walker (1989) attributes coherentism to Spinoza, Kant, Fichte and Hegel. Certainly a coherence theory was adopted by a number of British Idealists in the last years of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth. See, for example, Bradley (1914).

Idealists are led to a coherence theory of truth by their metaphysical position. Advocates of the correspondence theory believe that a belief is (at least most of the time) ontologically distinct from the objective conditions which make the belief true. Idealists do not believe that there is an ontological distinction between beliefs and what makes beliefs true. From the idealists’ perspective, reality is something like a collection of beliefs. Consequently, a belief cannot be true because it corresponds to something which is not a belief. Instead, the truth of a belief can only consist in its coherence with other beliefs. A coherence theory of truth which results from idealism usually leads to the view that truth comes in degrees. A belief is true to the degree that it coheres with other beliefs.

Since idealists do not recognize an ontological distinction between beliefs and what makes them true, distinguishing between versions of the coherence theory of truth adopted by idealists and an identity theory of truth can be difficult. The article on Bradley in this Encyclopedia (Candlish 2006) argues that Bradley had an identity theory, not a coherence theory.

In recent years metaphysical arguments for coherentism have found few advocates. This is due to the fact that idealism is not widely held.

2.2 Epistemological Routes to Coherentism

Blanshard (1939, ch. XXVI) argues that a coherence theory of justification leads to a coherence theory of truth. His argument runs as follows. Someone might hold that coherence with a set of beliefs is the test of truth but that truth consists in correspondence to objective facts. If, however, truth consists in correspondence to objective facts, coherence with a set of beliefs will not be a test of truth. This is the case since there is no guarantee that a perfectly coherent set of beliefs matches objective reality. Since coherence with a set of beliefs is a test of truth, truth cannot consist in correspondence.

Blanshard’s argument has been criticised by, for example, Rescher (1973). Blanshard’s argument depends on the claim that coherence with a set of beliefs is the test of truth. Understood in one sense, this claim is plausible enough. Blanshard, however, has to understand this claim in a very strong sense: coherence with a set of beliefs is an infallible test of truth. If coherence with a set of beliefs is simply a good but fallible test of truth, as Rescher suggests, the argument fails. The “falling apart” of truth and justification to which Blanshard refers is to be expected if truth is only a fallible test of truth.

Another epistemological argument for coherentism is based on the view that we cannot “get outside” our set of beliefs and compare propositions to objective facts. A version of this argument was advanced by some logical positivists including Hempel (1935) and Neurath (1983). This argument, like Blanshard’s, depends on a coherence theory of justification. The argument infers from such a theory that we can only know that a proposition coheres with a set of beliefs. We can never know that a proposition corresponds to reality.

This argument is subject to at least two criticisms. For a start, it depends on a coherence theory of justification, and is vulnerable to any objections to this theory. More importantly, a coherence theory of truth does not follow from the premisses. We cannot infer from the fact that a proposition cannot be known to correspond to reality that it does not correspond to reality. Even if correspondence theorists admit that we can only know which propositions cohere with our beliefs, they can still hold that truth consists in correspondence. If correspondence theorists adopt this position, they accept that there may be truths which cannot be known. Alternatively, they can argue, as does Davidson (1986), that the coherence of a proposition with a set of beliefs is a good indication that the proposition corresponds to objective facts and that we can know that propositions correspond.

Coherence theorists need to argue that propositions cannot correspond to objective facts, not merely that they cannot be known to correspond. In order to do this, the foregoing argument for coherentism must be supplemented. One way to supplement the argument would be to argue as follows. As noted above, the correspondence and coherence theories have differing views about the nature of truth conditions. One way to decide which account of truth conditions is correct is to pay attention to the process by which propositions are assigned truth conditions. Coherence theorists can argue that the truth conditions of a proposition are the conditions under which speakers make a practice of asserting it. Coherentists can then maintain that speakers can only make a practice of asserting a proposition under conditions the speakers are able to recognise as justifying the proposition. Now the (supposed) inability of speakers to “get outside” of their beliefs is significant. Coherentists can argue that the only conditions speakers can recognise as justifying a proposition are the conditions under which it coheres with their beliefs. When the speakers make a practice of asserting the proposition under these conditions, they become the proposition’s truth conditions. For an argument of this sort see Young (1995).

Any coherence theory of truth faces two principal challenges. The first may be called the specification objection. The second is the transcendence objection.

3.1 The Specification Objection

According to the specification objection, coherence theorists have no way to identify the specified set of propositions without contradicting their position. This objection originates in Russell (1907). Opponents of the coherence theory can argue as follows. The proposition (1) “Jane Austen was hanged for murder” coheres with some set of propositions. (2) “Jane Austen died in her bed” coheres with another set of propositions. No one supposes that the first of these propositions is true, in spite of the fact that it coheres with a set of propositions. The specification objection charges that coherence theorists have no grounds for saying that (1) is false and (2) true.

Some responses to the specification problem are unsuccessful. One could say that we have grounds for saying that (1) is false and (2) is true because the latter coheres with propositions which correspond to the facts. Coherentists cannot, however, adopt this response without contradicting their position. Sometimes coherence theorists maintain that the specified system is the most comprehensive system, but this is not the basis of a successful response to the specification problem. Coherentists can only, unless they are to compromise their position, define comprehensiveness in terms of the size of a system. Coherentists cannot, for example, talk about the most comprehensive system composed of propositions which correspond to reality. There is no reason, however, why two or more systems cannot be equally large. Other criteria of the specified system, to which coherentists frequently appeal, are similarly unable to solve the specification problem. These criteria include simplicity, empirical adequacy and others. Again, there seems to be no reason why two or more systems cannot equally meet these criteria.

Although some responses to the Russell’s version of the specification objection are unsuccessful, it is unable to refute the coherence theory. Coherentists do not believe that the truth of a proposition consists in coherence with any arbitrarily chosen set of propositions. Rather, they hold that truth consists in coherence with a set of beliefs, or with a set of propositions held to be true. No one actually believes the set of propositions with which (1) coheres. Coherence theorists conclude that they can hold that (1) is false without contradicting themselves.

A more sophisticated version of the specification objection has been advanced by Walker (1989); for a discussion, see Wright (1995). Walker argues as follows. In responding to Russell’s version of the specification objection, coherentists claim that some set of propositions, call it S , is believed. They are committed to the truth of (3) “ S is believed.” The question of what it is for (3) to be true then arises. Coherence theorists might answer this question by saying that “‘ S is believed’ is believed” is true. If they give this answer, they are apparently off on an infinite regress, and they will never say what it is for a proposition to be true. Their plight is worsened by the fact that arbitrarily chosen sets of propositions can include propositions about what is believed. So, for example, there will be a set which contains “Jane Austen was hanged for murder,” “‘Jane Austen was hanged for murder’ is believed,” and so on. The only way to stop the regress seems to be to say that the truth conditions of (3) consist in the objective fact S is believed. If, however, coherence theorists adopt this position, they seem to contradict their own position by accepting that the truth conditions of some proposition consist in facts, not in propositions in a set of beliefs.

There is some doubt about whether Walker’s version of the specification objection succeeds. Coherence theorists can reply to Walker by saying that nothing in their position is inconsistent with the view that there is a set of propositions which is believed. Even though this objective fact obtains, the truth conditions of propositions, including propositions about which sets of propositions are believed, are the conditions under which they cohere with a set of propositions. For a defence of the coherence theory against Walker’s version of the specification objection, see Young (2001).

A coherence theory of truth gives rise to a regress, but it is not a vicious regress and the correspondence theory faces a similar regress. If we say that p is true if and only if it coheres with a specified set of propositions, we may be asked about the truth conditions of “ p coheres with a specified set.” Plainly, this is the start of a regress, but not one to worry about. It is just what one would expect, given that the coherence theory states that it gives an account of the truth conditions of all propositions. The correspondence theory faces a similar benign regress. The correspondence theory states that a proposition is true if and only if it corresponds to certain objective conditions. The proposition “ p corresponds to certain objective conditions” is also true if and only if it corresponds to certain objective conditions, and so on.

3.2 The Transcendence Objection

The transcendence objection charges that a coherence theory of truth is unable to account for the fact that some propositions are true which cohere with no set of beliefs. According to this objection, truth transcends any set of beliefs. Someone might argue, for example, that the proposition “Jane Austen wrote ten sentences on November 17th, 1807” is either true or false. If it is false, some other proposition about how many sentences Austen wrote that day is true. No proposition, however, about precisely how many sentences Austen wrote coheres with any set of beliefs and we may safely assume that none will ever cohere with a set of beliefs. Opponents of the coherence theory will conclude that there is at least one true proposition which does not cohere with any set of beliefs.

Some versions of the coherence theory are immune to the transcendence objection. A version which holds that truth is coherence with the beliefs of an omniscient being is proof against the objection. Every truth coheres with the set of beliefs of an omniscient being. All other versions of the theory, however, have to cope with the objection, including the view that truth is coherence with a set of propositions believed at the limit of inquiry. Even at the limit of inquiry, finite creatures will not be able to decide every question, and truth may transcend what coheres with their beliefs.

Coherence theorists can defend their position against the transcendence objection by maintaining that the objection begs the question. Those who present the objection assume, generally without argument, that it is possible that some proposition be true even though it does not cohere with any set of beliefs. This is precisely what coherence theorists deny. Coherence theorists have arguments for believing that truth cannot transcend what coheres with some set of beliefs. Their opponents need to take issue with these arguments rather than simply assert that truth can transcend what coheres with a specified system.

3.3 The Logic Objection

Russell (1912) presented a third classic objection to the coherence theory of truth. According to this objection, any talk about coherence presupposes the truth of the laws of logic. For example, Russell argues, to say that two propositions cohere with each other is to presuppose the truth of the law of non-contradiction. In this case, coherentism has no account of the truth of law of non-contradiction. If, however, the coherence theorist holds that the truth of the law of non-contradiction depends on its coherence with a system of beliefs, and it were supposed to be false, then propositions cannot cohere or fail to cohere. In this case, the coherence theory of truth completely breaks down since propositions cannot cohere with each other.

Coherentists have a plausible response to this objection. They may hold that the law of non-contradiction, like any other truth, is true because it coheres with a system of beliefs. In particular, the law of non-contradiction is supported by the belief that, for example, communication and reasoning would be impossible unless every system of beliefs contains something like law of non-contradiction (and the belief that communication and reasoning are possible). It is true that, as Russell says, if the law is supposed not to cohere with a system of beliefs, then propositions can neither cohere nor fail to cohere. However, coherence theorists may hold, they do not suppose the law of non-contradiction to be false. On the contrary, they are likely to hold that any coherent set of beliefs must include the law of non-contradiction or a similar law.

Paul Thagard is the author of the first of two recent new arguments against the coherence theory. Thagard states his argument as follows:

if there is a world independent of representations of it, as historical evidence suggests, then the aim of representation should be to describe the world, not just to relate to other representations. My argument does not refute the coherence theory, but shows that it implausibly gives minds too large a place in constituting truth. (Thagard 2007: 29–30)

Thagard’s argument seems to be that if there is a mind-independent world, then our representations are representations of the world. (He says representations “should be” of the world, but the argument is invalid with the addition of the auxiliary verb.) The world existed before humans and our representations, including our propositional representations. (So history and, Thagard would likely say, our best science tells us.) Therefore, representations, including propositional representations, are representations of a mind-independent world. The second sentence of the passage just quoted suggests that the only way that coherentists can reject this argument is to adopt some sort of idealism. That is, they can only reject the minor premiss of the argument as reconstructed. Otherwise they are committed to saying that propositions represent the world and, Thagard seems to suggest, this is to say that propositions have the sort of truth-conditions posited by a correspondence theory. So the coherence theory is false.

In reply to this argument, coherentists can deny that propositions are representations of a mind-independent world. To say that a proposition is true is to say that it is supported by a specified system of propositions. So, the coherentist can say, propositions are representations of systems of beliefs, not representations of a mind-independent world. To assert a proposition is to assert that it is entailed by a system of beliefs. The coherentist holds that even if there is a mind-independent world, it does not follow that the “point” of representations is to represent this world. If coherentists have been led to their position by an epistemological route, they believe that we cannot “get outside” our system of beliefs. If we cannot get outside of our system of beliefs, then it is hard to see how we can be said to represent a mind-independent reality.

Colin McGinn has proposed the other new objection to coherentism. He argues (McGinn 2002: 195) that coherence theorists are committed to idealism. Like Thagard, he takes idealism to be obviously false, so the argument is a reductio. McGinn’s argument runs as follows. Coherentists are committed to the view that, for example, ‘Snow falls from the sky’ is true iff the belief that snow falls from the sky coheres with other beliefs. Now it follows from this and the redundancy biconditional ( p is true iff p ) that snow falls from the sky iff the belief that snow falls from the sky coheres with other beliefs. It appears then that the coherence theorist is committed to the view that snow could not fall from the sky unless the belief that snow falls from the sky coheres with other beliefs. From this it follows that how things are depends on what is believed about them. This seems strange to McGinn since he thinks, reasonably, that snow could fall from the sky even if there were no beliefs about snow, or anything else. The linking of how things are and how they are believed to be leads McGinn to say that coherentists are committed to idealism, this being the view that how things are is mind-dependent.

Coherentists have a response to this objection. McGinn’s argument works because he takes it that the redundancy biconditional means something like “ p is true because p ”. Only if redundancy biconditionals are understood in this way does McGinn’s argument go through. McGinn needs to be talking about what makes “Snow falls from the sky” true for his reductio to work. Otherwise, coherentists who reject his argument cannot be charged with idealism. He assumes, in a way that a coherent theorist can regard as question-begging, that the truth-maker of the sentence in question is an objective way the world is. Coherentists deny that any sentences are made true by objective conditions. In particular, they hold that the falling of snow from the sky does not make “Snow falls from the sky” true. Coherentists hold that it, like any other sentence, is true because it coheres with a system of beliefs. So coherentists appear to have a plausible defence against McGinn’s objection.

• Blanshard, B., 1939, The Nature of Thought , London: George Allen and Unwin.
• Bradley, F., 1914, Essays on Truth and Reality , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Cavendish, S., 2006, “Francis H. Bradley”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy , Fall 2006 Edition, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2006/entries/bradley/ .
• Davidson, D., 1986, “A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge,” Truth And Interpretation, Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson , Ernest LePore (ed.), Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 307–19.
• Hempel, C., 1935, “On the Logical Positivists’ Theory of Truth,” Analysis , 2: 49–59.
• McGinn, Colin, 2002, “The Truth about Truth”, in What is Truth ?, Richard Schantz (ed.), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 194–204.
• Neurath, O., 1983, Philosophical Papers 1913–46 , Robert S. Cohen and Marie Neurath (eds.), Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel.
• Putnam, H., 1981, Reason, Truth and History , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rescher, N., 1973, The Coherence Theory of Truth , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Russell, B., 1907, “On the Nature of Truth”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 7: 228–49.
• –––, 1912, The Problems of Philosophy , New York: H. Holt.
• Thagard, P., 2007, “Coherence, Truth and the Development of Scientific Knowledge”, Philosophy of Science , 74: 26–47.
• Walker, R.C.S., 1989, The Coherence Theory of Truth: Realism, anti-realism, idealism , London and New York: Routledge.
• Wright, C., 1995, “Critical Study: Ralph C.S. Walker, The Coherence Theory of Truth: Realism, anti-realism, idealism ,” Synthese , 103: 279–302.
• Young, J.O., 1995, Global Anti-realism , Aldershot: Avebury.
• –––, 2001, “A Defence of the Coherence Theory of Truth”, The Journal of Philosophical Research , 26: 89–101.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• The section Coherence Theories, in the entry on Truth , by Bradley Dowden, in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .

-->idealism: British --> | knowledge: analysis of | -->logical positivism --> | realism: challenges to metaphysical | Russell, Bertrand | truth: correspondence theory of | truth: deflationism about | truth: identity theory of | truth: revision theory of

Copyright © 2018 by James O. Young < joy @ uvic . ca >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054