Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
1,595
result(s) for
"Discourse Markers"
Sort by:
Analysis of Discourse Markers and Their Combinations in Nonnative Academic Writing
This study aimed to give a full account of discourse marker use in nonnative academic discourse. This study is a qualitative and quantitative investigation of discourse markers used in a corpus of 14 dissertations in applied linguistics from a Saudi university that uncovers the use patterns and DM combinations in abstracts, discussions, and conclusions. The model employed in the analysis was that of Fraser (2006), who classified discourse markers into four categories. The findings reveal a specific hierarchy of discourse use where elaborative discourse markers are the most frequent, followed by temporal discourse markers, contrastive discourse markers, and finally, inferential discourse markers. A notable tendency towards discourse marker clustering is also observed in the corpus.
Journal Article
Understanding pragmatic markers
The multifunctionality of pragmatic markers makes it difficult to describe their meaning and functional potential. By taking a broad perspective on markers, classifying them, describing their class-specific properties and analysing individual markers, Karin Aijmer assesses whether generalisations can be made about the prosody of the markers.
eBook
An Analysis of Turkish Interactional Discourse Markers ‘ŞEY’, ‘YANİ’, And ‘İŞTE’
This paper examines (1) the developmental aspects of the frequency and a range of functions expressed by Turkish interactional discourse markers şey ‘uh’, yani ‘I mean’, and işte ‘you know’ in child speech (4–8 year-olds), and (2) age and gender-related changes in the frequency and functional uses of these three DMs in the speeches of 84 Turkish speakers from four different age groups (4–8, 18–23, 33–50, and over 50 year-olds). Except for the children, the analyses were conducted in two different corpora, spontaneous and planned speech. As a result, in child speech, a developmental pattern from local to global in the use of the DMs yani ‘I mean’, and işte ‘you know’ was observed. Similarly, the frequency of these two DMs increased with aging among the four age groups in spontaneous speech. However, in planned speech, it was the case for the DM işte ‘you know’ only. Over 50 year-old men used şey ‘uh’ more frequently in their spontaneous speech compared to women, whereas 33–50 year-old women produced more işte ‘you know’ in their planned speech than men. The frequencies of şey ‘uh’, yani ‘I mean’, and işte ‘you know’ were lower in the planned speech condition compared to the spontaneous speech condition in general. Core functions of the three Turkish DMs under focus were described by conducting further analyses. These analyses also revealed that although there are some patterns that apply to all or a group of the DMs under focus, different variables interact in complicated ways resulting in differences in the functional uses of şey ‘uh’, yani ‘I mean’, and işte ‘you know’ by males and females among different age groups in two different speech conditions.
Journal Article
Information structuring in discourse
This collection presents current work on discourse structuring from a theoretical as well as a processing perspective. The main objectives are the investigation of appropriate levels of analysis for discourse segmentation and criteria for the identification of basic discourse units.
eBook
Like, literally, dude : arguing for the good in bad English
\"A linguistic exploration of the speech habits we love to hate-and why our \"um\"s, \"like\"s, and \"you know\"s actually make us better communicators. Do you hate that you say \"like\" too much? Do you go over your email drafts to remove excess \"so\"s and \"really\"s? Do you wish your presentation at work wasn't so full of \"um\"s and \"uh\"s? Do you get tripped up by slang, overly familiar greetings, or new pronouns? What if these features of our speech weren't a sign of cultural and linguistic degeneration or newfangled trends that won't stick around, but rather, some of the most dynamic and revolutionary tools in our arsenal? In Like, Literally, Dude, linguist Valerie Fridland argues that our most hated or confusing speech habits shape our conception of the world and our place in it in remarkable ways. With a mix of laugh-out-loud anecdotes and expertise built over two decades of research, Fridland helps us understand the history, cultural significance, and impact of how we speak today. We are all the products of centuries of linguistic progress, and the innovation hasn't stopped in our lifetimes. Writing in an accessible style and focusing on real-life examples, Fridland explains how filled pauses benefit both speakers and listeners when they're discussing new or tough topics; how the use of \"dude\" can help people bond across social divides; why we're always trying to make our intensifiers ever more intense; as well as many other language tics, habits, and developments. Language change is natural, built into the language system itself, and we wouldn't be who we are without it. This book will speak to anyone who talks, empowering them to communicate dynamically and effectively in their daily lives\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
A Socio-Pragmatic Study of Multifunctional Discourse Marker i:h in Algerian Spoken Arabic
The present study aims at investigating and describing the pragmatic functions of the discourse marker i:h in the Algerian Spoken Arabic, specifically in the eastern south, in the city of Ouargla. This piece of work is unique of its type in the Algerian context because it is the first to be conducted from a pragmatic perspective. Twelve different situations were included in the questionnaire which consists of one hundred items to collect data. The study adapted the pragmatic approach by Fraser (1990), which accounts upon a differentiation between content and pragmatic meaning. The findings revealed that, based on context, the discourse marker i:h is multifunctional in Algerian Spoken Arabic, and it conveys at least 12 meanings. Other functions were suggested by the participants. The distinction between the two groups at the level of both variables age and gender was not significantly marked.
Journal Article