Showing structure

The study presents the results of a synchronic and diachronic corpus-based analysis of discourse markers in Lithuanian. The paper aims to analyse patterns of usage and functional diversity of the most frequent discourse markers in contemporary spoken Lithuanian as well as to determine what kind of structural and functional changes occur in the diachronic process of discourse marker formation and what kind of factors foster the emergence of discourse markers. Three major structural groups of the markers were subject to the analysis: (a) particles, (b) adverbs and pronouns, (c) different verbal and nominal forms and their constructions.The data have been drawn from the corpora representing contemporary spoken Lithuanian and from Old Lithuanian texts (the 16th-17th centuries). The corpora of contemporary spoken Lithuanian exhibit a variety of different communication settings: they represent casual interactions between interlocutors who know each other very well, e. g. family members and close friends, or include more formal instances of speech production, e. g. interviews, TV and radio shows. The three corpora used for the synchronic analysis were the following: the sub-corpus of spontaneous private speech of the Spoken Corpus of the Lithuanian Language, compiled at Vytautas Magnus University, the online database of interviews Vilnius Speaking (only the interviews with native speakers of Lithuanian were included) and the Radio and TV Corpus (namely, the period of 1993–2011 was taken into account), compiled by the Department of Sociolinguistics, Institute of the Lithuanian Language. The analysis of the discourse markers in old Lithuanian was mainly based on the 16th-17th century texts, namely Postilė by Jonas Bretkūnas (1591), Postilė by Mikalojus Daukša (1599) and Punktai sakymų by Konstantinas Sirvydas (1629; 1644).In contemporary spoken Lithuanian the discourse markers under analysis have revealed a wide range of textual and interpersonal functions. The textual functions include signaling a conclusion, generalization (i.e. tai ‘so’, vat ‘there, here, so’, reiškia ‘it means’, (vienu) žodžiu) ‘in short’), elaboration, reformulation, word-search (i.e. na ‘well’, nu ‘well’, šita ‘this, so’, tenai(s) ‘there’, ta prasme ‘I mean’), the start of a new topic (i.e. tai ‘so’, na ‘well’, nu ‘well’, va ‘there, here’, žinok ‘you know’), filling a gap in conversation (i.e. šita ‘this, so’, na ‘well’, nu ‘well’) and creating the coherent and smooth flow of discourse (i.e. reiškia ‘it means’, kaip sakant ‘so to say’). The interpersonal functions show reference to shared knowledge and are realized by the markers čia ‘here’, gerai ‘ok’, žinok ‘you know’, ar ne/ane ‘yes or no’, which seek to establish a relationship with the addressee. The speaker may show agreement with the addressee, mitigate his/her statement or avoid providing a straightforward answer. The present study has also revealed a wide range of combinations of discourse markers, such as tai va ‘so here’, tai tada ‘so then’, tada dabar ‘now then’, o tai gerai ‘but so ok’, dabar žiūrėkite ‘now look’, dabar sakyk ‘now say’ expressing textual and interpersonal functions. Functional diversity of the discourse markers may result from their primary lexical or grammatical meaning, position in a sentence, speech act type, co-occurrence with other discourse markers and type of spoken discourse.The study of the 16th-17th century Lithuanian texts shows that common discourse markers in contemporary spoken Lithuanian are most frequently traced back to adverbs (na ‘well’, nu ‘well’, čia ‘here’, ten(ai) ‘there’, dabar ‘now’) and less frequently to pronouns (tai ‘this’). The adverbs examined in the old Lithuanian texts marked textual deixis and, as a result, they may also have acquired metalinguistic or textual functions. The adverbs čia ‘here’ and dabar ‘now’ were used as emphatic particles denoting the author’s subjective stance. Participial constructions containing verbs of speaking (trumpai sakant ‘shortly saying’, prastai kalbant ‘simply speaking’, etc.) were employed as textual markers, i.e. reformulating or paraphrasing the author’s thoughts. The data provide evidence that discourse markers in Lithuanian may have developed from adverbial phrases and complement clauses illustrating the two universal paths of semantic development (cf. Brinton 2017, 285-289). However, the 16th-17th century Lithuanian texts do not contain discourse markers of imperatival origin, such as žinok ‘know’, žiūrėk ‘look’, palauk ‘wait’, eik tu ‘come on’ or discourse markers deriving from the second-person singular or plural forms supranti ‘understand’ (SG), suprantat(e) ‘understand’ (PL) or the third-person form reiškia ‘it means’, as in the old texts these markers had their primary lexical meaning and may have developed discourse functions only in later stages. The particles gi and juk displayed intersubjective functions, as they were employed in contexts of shared knowledge.

The present paper examines and compares the role of cognitive discourse markers (DMs), such as uhm, like, or I mean, and a set of prosodic parameters as indicators of prosodic boundaries. Cognitive DMs traditionally are not studied as a separate DM group on par with the ideational, sequential, rhetorical, or interpersonal group. However, as they reflect the speaker’s mental processes during speech production, they offer an exceptional glimpse into how speakers construct their verbalisations. Along with the analysis of DMs, prosodic parameters, including pitch and intensity reset, speech rate change, and pauses, were automatically annotated to determine how well they overlapped with the manually annotated prosodic boundaries. To accommodate for the natural variability in speech, the parameters were evaluated using relative comparison methods. Among the prosodic parameters, pauses were found to overlap most often with the manually annotated prosodic boundaries. Cognitive DMs in the function of realising new information, restructuring, and emphasis indeed proved as relevant boundary indicators, however, the group of cognitive DMs as a whole fell behind the group of sequential and rhetorical DMs, which overlapped most frequently with the manually annotated prosodic boundaries.

The purpose of the study is to find out how vocational students employ discourse markers for writing procedural texts. Another goal is to investigate the difficulties students faced while writing coherent procedure text with discourse markers. This study applied a content analysis and adopted Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis as the analysis technique. Data were gathered through interviews and documentation. 121 occurrences of discourse markers were found from 21 worksheets. Among the four types identified by Fraser's (2005) framework, it was also discovered that elaborative discourse markers are the most often used type. It is discovered that students are challenged because they are not familiar with discourse markers and have less competence in English. It is concluded that students’ competence affects their use of discourse markers types in writing. The implications are students need more practice in using discourse markers for writing text and procedure text is applicable for vocational students. Then, student's cultural background affects their language competence. Lastly, the researcher expects the future researchers explore strategies to write using discourse markers or factors behind the challenges in using discourse markers.

Analysis of a series of computer science seminars indicates that use of the discourse marker ‘so’ in monologic talk is not random, rather it plays an important role in orienting the listener to the overall structure of the seminar. Although the institutional nature of seminar talk is such that only one person speaks for an extended turn, detailed analysis of seminars indicates that presenters do not maintain a continuous stream of talk. They talk for a bit, pause, and then talk for a bit more. These bits of talk (or sections) are characterised by a number of features, including discourse markers. The analysis shows how the discourse marker ‘so’ occurs in specific environments, with specific prosodic features, and that its role and function varies according to where it occurs within the seminar. The close interaction between talk (in this case, presenters’ use of ‘so’), and action (in this case, putting slides on the overhead projector), is also made apparent.

This study explores discourse markers (DMs) as they occur with compliment responses (CRs) in classroom interactions among Iranian learners of English as a foreign language (EFL). Using the tenets of conversation analysis, this paper draws on data from teacher–student interactions in several private language institutes in Iran. After audiorecording and transcription of the compliment–response exchanges, 148 DMs were identified within the responses. These sequences were analyzed to find out how DMs are combined with four distinct CR types; accept, mitigate, reject, and request interpretation. DMs were also identified and categorizedbased on their frequency of occurance and semantic features to allow comparison with previous findings. The results of this study revealed that Iranian EFL learners resorted to a limited number of DMs in responses to teacher‐generated compliments, with “linking” DMs being the most favorable type. Moreover, some DMs were accompanied by a specific CR type which helped the formation of an intended illocutionary force by the complimentee. It was also observed that a DM or a combination of these markers can stand alone as a legitimate and functional response to compliments, which further reveals that DMs can contribute to both semantic and pragmatic meaning. These findings clearly suggest that explicit teaching of DMs in English language classes should be taken into consideration, as these linguistic elements can provide learners with important tools to convey their intended meaning more smoothly and effectively.

This study is focused on the use of discourse markers in Donald Trmpu’s rally victory speech. The purposes of this study are to find out the types of discourse markers used during the speech and the functions by using Fraser’s theory (2009) to examine the types of discourse markers and Schiffrin’s theory (1987) to analyze their functions. In this study, the data used are words and phrases from the utterances uttered by Donald Trimp which included to discourse markers. Therefore, the researcher used qualitative research method to analyze this topic. The reearcher also used data analysis technique from Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014). In conclusion, the researcher found all types of discourse markers used by Donald Trump on his rally victory speech. There are 227 data included in the discourse markers. Among them are 54 contrastive discourse marker, 148 elaborative discourse markers, 20 inferential discourse markers, and 5 temporal discourse markers. Elaborative Discourse Markers are dominant used by Donald Trump. Based on the functions, the writer found that from 5 functions of discourse markers. There are Marker of Response, Marker of Connectives, Marker of Cause and Effect, and Marker of Information and Partiipation.

Od pojave jezikoslovnog interesa za njihov značaj, diskursne oznake predstavljaju problematičnu kategoriju. Različiti su pristupi s vremenom stvorili terminološku zbrku, a zbog činjenice što sama kategorija nije uniformno definirana, stvoreno je okružje u kojem one svoj status iz pragmatične kategorije počinju mijenjati u rezidualnu kategoriju jezika. Tome je doprinjelo i njihovo proučavanje u sklopu vrlo uskih tema i/ili u okviru specifičnih teorija s vlastitom heuristikom. Ne bi li se nadogradila dosadašnja saznanja, ovdje će diskursnim oznakama biti dano prvenstvo. Što preciznijim određivanjem njihova sinkronijskog statusa u vidu pragmatički utemeljene jezične kategorije i pružanjem dijakronijskog uvida u kategoriju, u kontekstu cyberkomunikacije, odredit će se položaj diskursnih oznaka u jezičnom sustavu, kao i njihova vrijednost za sustav koja se manifestira pri upotrebi. Još preciznije, raspravljat će se o razvojnim aspektima dikursnih oznaka s ciljem njihova razgraničenja od šutnje i kategorije poštapalica. Na taj će se način dijakronijskim pristupom ovoj pragmatičnoj kategoriji i osvrtanjem na marginalizirane pojavnosti u jeziku (npr. šutnja i poštapalice) nastojati doprinijeti i teoriji jezične evolucije, ali i istaknuti potrebu za formulacijom gramatičkih modela koji bi obuhvaćali i diskursnu razinu jezika. Konkretna analiza provedena je na privatnom korpusu od 600 razgovora vođenih razmjenom instant poruka (upotrebom aplikacija Hangouts, Facebook messenger, Whatsapp) i primjerima izabranim s Hrvatskog mrežnog korpusa (hrWaC), što je poslužilo kao referentni korpus. Metodološki i teorijski analiza je potpomognuta postavkama konverzacijske analize, pragmatike, analize diskursa, filozofije jezika i funkcionalnim pristupima gramatici. Širi znanstveni doprinos istraživanja ogleda se u pružanju teorijsko-metodološkog pristupa namijenjenog proučavanju i analizi komunikacije u cyber-prostoru, ukazivanju na dijakronijske procese na diskursnoj razini, te isticanju nužnosti za funkcionalnim teorijama jezika.

<i>Metalanguage in Interaction</i> is about the crystallization of metalanguage employed throughout interaction into the discourse markers which permeate talk. Based on close analysis of naturally-occurring Hebrew conversation, it is a synchronic study of the grammaticization of discourse markers, a phenomenon until now mostly studied from a diachronic perspective. It constitutes the first monograph in the fields of Hebrew interactional linguistics and Hebrew discourse markers. The book first presents what is unique to the present approach to discourse markers and gives them an operational definition. Discourse markers are explored as a system, illuminating their patterning in terms of function, structure, and the moments in interaction at which they are employed. Next, detailed analysis of four Hebrew discourse markers illuminates not only the functions and grammaticization patterns of these markers, but also what they reveal about quintessential aspects of Israeli society, identity, and culture. The conclusion discusses commonalities and differences in the grammaticization patterns of the four markers, and relates the grammaticization of discourse markers from interaction to projectability in discourse.

Fluent L2 English speakers frequently use discourse markers (DMs) as a speech management strategy, but research has largely ignored how this develops across different proficiency levels and how it is related to immersive experiences. This study examines the developmental patterns of three DMs –well,you knowandlike – in the speech of learners at A2-C1 in CEFR with and without immersive experiences in target language environments. The fluency-rated LINDSEI corpus (173 learners) and a parallel native corpus (50 speakers) provided approximately 350,000 tokens and 3,395 instances of the analyzed DMs. Overall, DM frequency (especially withwellandyou know) among C1 speakers increases with rising fluency levels up to almost native-like levels. Immersive experience correlates positively with overall and individual DM frequency (except forlike). As the skillful use of DMs results in more fluent speech production, the didactic implications for L2 instructors should be developed.

The present study aimed to investigate gender differences in using discourse markers (DMs) in spoken Jordanian Arabic. A quantitative-qualitative analysis of natural everyday conversations was employed, utilizing Brinton’s (1996) binary categorization as a theoretical framework to define the textual and interpersonal functions of Jordanian DMs. In total, (39) tokens of Jordanian DMs were designated, with اه /ʔah/ (yes/yeah) occupying the highest rank in the frequency list, and their functions were distinguished. The findings indicated insignificant differences in the frequency of DMs used by Jordanian male/female speakers. Gender discrepancies were observed at the functional levels. While Jordanian female speakers tend to use DMs for textual purposes, male speakers prefer using DMs for interpersonal functions. In sum, the difference between Jordanian male and female usage of DMs lies at the functional level rather than quantity.

Traditional static code analysis encompasses a mature set of techniques for helping understand and optimize programs, such as dead code elimination, program slicing, and partial evaluation (code specialization). It is well understood that compared to other program analysis techniques (e.g., dynamic analysis), static analysis techniques do a reasonable job for the cost associated with implementing them. Industry and government are moving away from more ‘traditional’ development approaches towards component-based approaches as ‘the norm.’ Component-based applications most often comprise a collection of distributed object-oriented components such as forms, code snippets, reports, modules, databases, objects, containers, and the like. These components are glued together by code typically written in a visual language. Some industrial experience shows that component-based development and the subsequent use of visual development environments, while reducing an application's total development time, actually increase certain maintenance problems. This provides a motivation for using automated analysis techniques on such systems. The results of this research show that traditional static analysis techniques may not be sufficient for analyzing component-based systems. We examine closely the characteristics of a component-based system and document many of the issues that we feel make the development, analysis, testing and maintenance of such systems more difficult. By analyzing additional summary information for the components as well as any available source code for an application, we show ways in which traditional static analysis techniques may be augmented, thereby increasing the accuracy of static analysis results and ultimately making the maintenance of component-based systems a manageable task. We develop a technique to use semantic information about component properties obtained from type library and interface definition language files, and demonstrate this technique by extending a traditional unreachable code algorithm. To support more complex analysis, we then develop a technique for component developers to provide summary information about a component. This information can be integrated with several traditional static analysis techniques to analyze component-based systems more precisely. We then demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques on several real Department of Defense (DoD) COTS component-based systems.

Based on Speech Production and Genre studies, I supply real data and describe informal interviews with native English speakers collected in the Speak up Magazine, a publication dedicated to Brazilian English speakers. Speech markers, or also known as discourse markers, which are used to signal different functions in conversation and commonly used by native speakers (NS) comprising the patterning of natural talk were highlighted. I show that in informal interviews in English, NS use, although not always, the discourse markers ‘you know’ and ‘I mean’ to give a continuum in the flow of speech and to maintain a connection with the interlocutor. Finally, I discuss the value of fluency features that do not normally contribute with additional lexical information and present the contributions of this study to the teaching of English as a foreign language, to didactic material production in real contexts, and for social relations.

Turn beginnings are the place in conversation where the connection (or otherwise) between a prior and a next turn is displayed. This crucial interactional task is usually fulfilled by turn-initial particles, specifically those known as discourse markers. Although the use of discourse markers by second or foreign language speakers has actually been largely discussed in the previous literature on interlanguage pragmatics, studies that focus on turn-initial discourse markers and that are conducted from a conversation analytical perspective are still scarce. The aim of this paper is therefore twofold. On the one hand, it makes a case for the use of conversation analysis as a research methodology for the study of discourse markers in a second or foreign language. On the other hand, and as a practical elaboration, this paper investigates the use of the discourse markers “y” and “sí” in the turn-initial position by foreign language speakers of Spanish. The results show that both discourse markers are part of an overall concern of signalling continuity and affiliation even in topic shifts and in non-aligned turns.

One of the main problems associated with research on discourse markers concerns their meaning. A large body of rich analyses has been presented, based on a range of different frameworks, such as conversation analysis, relevance theory, cognitive linguistics, or grammaticalization theory, to deal with the complexity of functions that discourse markers exhibit. The goal of the present paper is restricted in scope. Based on a comparative survey of 24 English information units that have been classified as discourse markers, it uses the framework of Discourse Grammar to relate the functions of these markers to the situation of discourse. The findings presented suggest on the one hand that these functions can be reduced essentially to a network of three components, namely the organization of texts, the attitudes of the speaker, and speaker-hearer interaction. On the other hand, they also suggest that it is the planning and structuring of texts that is the primary concern of speakers when they draw on discourse markers. But designing texts does not appear to be a means to an end; rather it serves the interlocutors to achieve their communicative goals in what they conceive to be the best way possible.

Combinations of discourse markers with repairs and repetitions in English, French and Spanish