No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers
Abstract
The importance of discourse markers (words like 'so', 'however', and 'well') lies in the theoretical questions they raise about the nature of discourse and the relationship between linguistic meaning and context. They are regarded as being central to semantics because they raise problems for standard theories of meaning, and to pragmatics because they seem to play a role in the way discourse is understood. In this new and important study, Diane Blakemore argues that attempts to analyse these expressions within standard semantic frameworks raise even more problems, while their analysis as expressions that link segments of discourse has led to an unproductive and confusing exercise in classification. She concludes that the exercise in classification that has dominated discourse marker research should be replaced by the investigation of the way in which linguistic expressions contribute to the inferential processes involved in utterance understanding.
... In the literature, they are classified as expressions that link segment 2 (S2) to the proposition in segment 1 (S1) (Fraser, 2006). In pragmatics and discourse analysis, two primary theoretical approaches to studying DMs are the discourse-coherence approach (e.g., Schiffrin, 1987;Fraser, 1997) and the relevance-theory approach (e.g., Blakemore, 2002). The two approaches differ in what functions these DMs signal in discourse. ...
... A surge of studies on DMs followed the theoretical contributions of researchers such as Schiffrin (1987), Fraser (2012Fraser ( , 2015, and Blakemore (2002Blakemore ( , 2006. These studies varied in focus, ranging from investigating DMs in English and comparing them to other languages, including Arabic (e.g., Alhuqbani, 2013 Warsi, 2000). ...
... Instead was present in six constructions (4,5,6,8,11,12). It was selected once by more than half of the participants (63%) in one construction, (9). It is this construction where it fits, and therefore the participants who selected it were right in their choice. ...
This paper examined the effect of gender and language proficiency on the translation and judgments of ten contrastive discourse markers: but, however, nevertheless, instead, rather, in contrast, on the other hand, yet, still, on the contrary. The participants were 77 Saudi undergraduate males and females majoring in English and Translation. They were given two tasks, with 15 items in each task. Overall, the results showed that the participants were uncertain of the meaning of English contrastive discourse markers when translating them into Arabic, except but, which received the highest score. Almost all of the participants translated but as lakin or wa’lakin. However, the majority of them failed to translate those markers in combinations, reflecting their lack of knowledge of such combinations. The results also revealed that the participants were uncertain about their judgments of these markers. Their noticeable inconsistency of what makes a discourse marker suitable in one context, but not in the other, reflects the participants' inability to cope with its core meaning. As for gender, female participants scored better than their male counterparts in just four out of 30 constructions, indicating that gender produced limited effect on the participants’ performance. Finally, language proficiency only correlated with three constructions, pointing to the possibility that it has no effect on translating and using contrastive discourse markers. The findings demonstrated the importance of teaching discourse markers to undergraduate English major students to improve their skills of communication, translation and academic writing. The paper also highlighted the need for further research.
... Within the relevance-theoretic framework, it will be proposed that, among the types of inference that are at work in the process of utterance interpretation, the procedural type of inference stands out as a suitable candidate for analyzing pre-posed subordination. In particular, the present study builds on the standard view of procedural meaning, as this was originally formulated by Blakemore (1987Blakemore ( , 2002, even though it might be recalled that her account of procedural meaning was motivated by semantic, rather than syntactic reflections, in other words, reflections pertaining to the semantics of a set of connectives. i.e., so, but, after all 7 . ...
... Elements of meaning have standardly received a procedural treatment with the proviso that 1. the procedural aspect of meaning is linguistically encoded (or encoded in the conventional meaning of the lexical item 10 earmarked procedural, e.g., so, but or after all) and that 2. this procedural encoding imposes a constraint on the hearer's context and, in doing so, it also constrains the delivery of a contextual effect (Blakemore 2002). ...
... Up to this point, the current procedural account of pre-position has been justified from the cognitive perspective of linguistic constraints on the derivation of a contextual effect (sections 4-5). However, procedural accounts can also be justified from a communicative perspective (Blakemore 2002), in the sense that a procedural linguistic device is used to fulfil a facilitative role; it is used by the speaker to accelerate the hearer's search for contextual effects relevant to the overall interpretation of an utterance. The facilitative/communicative role of a procedural device is envisaged as being essentially rhetorical. ...
The current paper aims to discuss the impact of pre-posing a subordinate clause (as in connective p, q) on the overall meaning of a conjunction. This issue has traditionally been explored from a functional perspective and, more specifically, in relation to 'topic', 'framework' or other related notions. The current work reveals that, among the inadequacies that a topic-based account presents, it essentially falls short of a context-sensitive and unified perspective. In response to these inadequacies, a relevance-theoretic approach is proposed on procedural grounds. More specifically, it is argued that a sentence-initial subordinate clause, or, more accurately, the entire context associated with it, serves as evidence for the delivery of procedure r, namely the inference that the main-clause-proposition that may follow will be relevant to the foregoing pre-posed context. From a communicative point of view, the procedural impact of sentence-initial subordinate clauses is justified as a useful rhetorical instrument that serves to manipulate the hearer's epistemic assessment of the main-clause-proposition as genuinely relevant to the context associated with the (pre-posed) subordinate-clause proposition.
... Contextualist approaches, in contrast, maintain that linguistic stimuli do not and cannot ever "have" meaning, let alone "literal meaning," in and of themselves (e.g., Blakemore, 2002;Carston, 2002;Christiansen & Chater, 2022;H. H. Clark, 1996;Levinson, 2000;Wilson, 2003;Wilson & Carston, 2007). ...
... Armed with this central idea, our understanding of an extremely broad and otherwise diverse range of empirical phenomena has been considerably deepened. This range spans all of pragmatics and semantics (discourse markers, irony, grammaticalization, metaphor, onomatopoeia, translation, and others) and also many nonlinguistic but still expressive domains such as emotions, impressions, art, and literature (e.g., Blakemore, 1992Blakemore, , 2002Cave & Wilson, 2018;Gibbs & Tendahl, 2006;Gutt, 2000;Ifantidou et al., 2021;Mazzarella & Pouscoulous, 2023;McCallum et al., 2020;Nicolle, 1997Nicolle, , 1998Sasamoto, 2019;Sperber & Wilson, 2008;Wharton, 2009). ...
Communication is ubiquitous in human social life. There are many possible modes of human communication but language use is plainly of special interest: because it plays a critical role in culture and society; and because languages are important cultural products in their own right, with their own distinctive properties. These properties include in particular grammatical structure. However, we do not presently have any compelling synthesis of our understanding of communication and our understanding of grammar. This problem is important because synthesizing knowledge across neighboring domains can considerably deepen understanding in its own right, and bring new perspectives to bear on old issues. Mature syntheses are major scientific breakthroughs. Here, I argue that contextualist theories of communication, and constructionist approaches to the description of grammars, together provide a cohesive picture. Both bodies of work have proved enormously influential in their respective subfields, but their synthesis provides a unified picture of considerable clarity. Linguistic communication is a coordination problem on the speaker’s informative intentions; and grammars are networks of microconventions (“constructions”) that enable language users to resolve this coordination problem far more easily than they otherwise would. This synthesis in turn provides fresh perspectives on many classical issues in the language sciences. I sketch three examples: literal meaning and “construction modulation”; language learning; and the evolutionary emergence of language in our species.
... Instead, it activates only the most contextually accessible ones to reach informatively relevant implicatures (Wilson and Carston, 2007: x4). Through this process, the interlocutordguided by expectations of relevancedconstructs an ad hoc meaning or occasionspecific use of the concept, enriched in the explicature, which then allows for the derivation of specific implicatures (Blakemore, 2002;Carston, 2002: 15;Leonetti, 2021). ...
... In addition to conveying new information, encapsulation carries an instruction aimed at constructing discourse, which overlaps with conceptual meaning to contextually solidify an explicature. Due to this functional interplay between these two types of meaning, encapsulating noun phrases exhibit more flexibility compared to other prototypically procedural connectors, such as discourse particles (Blakemore, 2002;. When instruction and (re)categorization align and adjust to the context, relevant communicative effects are achieved with highly controlled cognitive effort (cf. ...
Abstract
Anaphoric encapsulation is a discursive mechanism by which a noun phrase recovers an explicature. This eye tracking study addresses the question of whether categorizing versus recategorizing encapsulation lead to different processing patterns. Results show that (1) encapsulating noun phrases are cognitively prominent areas, (2) recategorization is never less effortful than categorization, (3) the prominence and instructional asymmetry of the encapsulating noun phrase with respect to the antecedent is greater in cases of recategorizing encapsulation. Overall, encapsulating noun phrases initiate a complex cognitive operation due to the nature of their antecedent, which includes both encoded and inferred information. A distinctive processing pattern emerges for recategorizing encapsulating noun phrases: greater local efforts, due to the introduction of new information, do not result in higher total reading times.
Beyond the introductory section, the structure of this study is as follows: Section 2 discusses the properties of categorizing and recategorizing mechanisms. Section 3 reviews experimental research on nominal anaphoric encapsulation in Spanish. Section 4 outlines the key aspects of the experimental design and execution. Finally, sections 5 and 6 present the results of the experiment and offer a theoretical discussion of the findings.
... In reference to the various terms used in the field, concepts such as "discourse markers" (Schiffrin, 1987;Schourup, 1999;Blakemore, 2002;Müller, 2005), "discourse connectives" (Blakemore, 2002), "discourse particles" (Aijmer, 2002;Lam, 2009aLam, , 2009b, and "pragmatic markers" (Brinton, 2010;Oladipupo & Unuabonah, 2020) are used interchangeably. Some scholars distinguish between DMs and discourse particles, though DMs are included in the broad category known as discourse particles. ...
... In reference to the various terms used in the field, concepts such as "discourse markers" (Schiffrin, 1987;Schourup, 1999;Blakemore, 2002;Müller, 2005), "discourse connectives" (Blakemore, 2002), "discourse particles" (Aijmer, 2002;Lam, 2009aLam, , 2009b, and "pragmatic markers" (Brinton, 2010;Oladipupo & Unuabonah, 2020) are used interchangeably. Some scholars distinguish between DMs and discourse particles, though DMs are included in the broad category known as discourse particles. ...
Discourse markers (DMs), as a set of language elements, are essential for structuring written material, indicating connections between concepts and ideas, and improving coherence in written texts. Gaining an understanding of how EFL students use DMs help better understand students writing ability, language growth, and textual organizing techniques. This study aimed to investigate female students use of DMs in writing. This was achieved through discovering the patterns of markers usage, potential challenges faced by learners, and strategies for enhancing the effective use of DMs in written English. A comparative analysis of texts produced by 24 female students (EFL setting) at Qassim University in Saudi Arabia was applied to fulfill the aim of the study. The results of this study showed that Saudi female students employ a relatively small variety of DMs. The use of restricted variety of DMs is the main focus of their writing. The most frequently DMs used are "and," "or," "as," "so," and "if". Nevertheless, the accuracy of these DMs is low. However, the amount of other DMs used by them is very low. Finally, this study draws a significant contribution to the study of second languages as it focused on exploring the discourse markers frequently used that enable teachers to pay attention to and work forward to encourage students to vary their use of DMs in their writing.
... Some researchers refer to them as discourse markers (e.g., Fraser, 1990;Schiffrin, 1987), others as discourse connectives (e.g. Blakemore, 2002), and cue phrases (e.g., Sanders & Noordman, 2000), in addition to a number of less common terms. Masaitiene (2003) defined DMs as expressions that link parts of a text with little lexical meaning and assume a marginal position in the clause structure. ...
... The analysis revealed that the most frequently used CDM by non-native writers was but. According to Blakemore (1989Blakemore ( , 2002, but can be interpreted as expressing a denial of expectations or establishing a contrast. Fraser (2013) identified it as one of the several DMs that signals a general contrastive relationship between two sentences. ...
Understanding the discourse marker usage of Arabic-speaking English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners is necessary to help improve their writing competence. However, previous studies focusing on this area have used small corpora for comparison. To make up for this, this study aimed to determine the frequency of use of discourse markers in Saudi EFL argumentative writing by examining large corpora. Hypothesizing that Saudi EFL learners would overuse discourse markers, this study compared a corpus of argumentative essays written by Saudi students majoring in English (comprising 42,560 words) to a sub-corpus of the LOCNESS corpus containing argumentative essays by American and British students (comprising 43,025 words). The frequency of each group’s use of discourse markers were calculated and treated with statistical tests. In both corpora, elaborative discourse markers (EDMs) and temporal discourse markers (TDMs) had the highest and lowest frequencies, respectively. In the Saudi students’ writings, EDMs represented the highest portion of discourse markers (51.3%), followed by contrastive discourse markers (CDMs) (30.7%) and inferential discourse markers (IDMs) (12.7%). These patterns were observed among native speakers as well, with 56.1% of their discourse markers in the elaborative category, followed by CDMs (31%) and IDMs (9.5%). Temporal discourse markers were the least frequently utilized category in both corpora (native corpus: 3.5%; non-native corpus: 5.2%). Based on the study findings, recommendations are provided to strengthen Arabic EFL learners' proficiency in the use of discourse markers.
... Desde esta perspectiva, resulta de interés el estudio de Blakemore (1992Blakemore ( , 2002 centrado en los marcadores discursivos. La autora propone una clasificación tripartita para los marcadores que se corresponde con tres tipos de efectos cognitivos que pueden tener: (i) los que dan lugar a una implicación contextual; (ii) los que refuerzan un supuesto o una hipótesis existente; (iii) los que contradicen o eliminan el supuesto o la hipótesis existente. ...
... Para intentar dar respuesta a estos interrogantes, retomamos la obra de Blakemore (1992Blakemore ( , 2002 sobre marcadores discursivos desde el marco de la Teoría de la Relevancia (Sperber y Wilson 1986, 1993. Recordamos que la autora propone una clasificación tripartita: ...
En este trabajo, abordamos los usos de provided that como marcador interoracional con el fin de orientar posibles soluciones de traducción. Adams (2004) plantea que esta expresión constituye una dificultad traductora, dado que suele asociarse unívocamente con un valor condicional. A partir del relevamiento bibliográfico y del análisis de un corpus, ilustramos casos en los que provided that expresa valores condicionales y no condicionales. Estos usos no siempre son reconocibles a primera vista, pero pueden comprenderse cabalmente si se consideran pistas formales y conceptuales que evidencian la contribución semántico-pragmática de la expresión.
... Furthermore, it needs to be conveyed that students' ostentive-referential communication competence is very weak and must be improved immediately. Such communication is based on its implementation on the relevance theory initiated by Sperber & Wilson (2015) in order to perfect Grice's cooperative principle (Blakemore, 2002a;van Poppel, 2020). Although the relevance theory is widely seen as oversimplifying the concepts and maxims of its predecessors, the substance of this theory is very relevant to the latest pragmatic study materials of the Indonesian Language Education, especially when associated with phatic communion in podcast media. ...
This study describes the pragmatic meanings of phatic communication in podcast media from a discursive pragmatic perspective based on inferential-ostentive intent. The data source comes from seven episodes of the Agak Laen podcast titled "Didn't Get Angry Even After Crashing a Pajero? 'Habib, I'm Just Happy'" featuring Habib Husein Ja'far Al-Hadar and hosts Boris Bokir, Oki Rengga, Bene Dion, and Indra Jegel. Data collection employed the listening method with note-taking techniques, followed by data reduction and classification. Data analysis used the contextual analysis method involving conventional and virtual contexts, with multimodality-based cybertextual context being the most dominant, along with social, societal, situational, and cultural contexts. Research steps included identification, reduction, interpretation, and presentation of data analysis results. The results of this study are: (1) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of greetings, (2) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of jokes, and (3) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of affirmations. Among the total data analyzed, greetings accounted for 41%, jokes for 36%, and affirmations for 23%, indicating that greetings were the most dominant form of phatic communication found in the podcast. The results of this study are believed to be very useful in developing the science of pragmatics, especially integrative pragmatics which is the integration of discursive pragmatics and multimodality in its five dimensions, namely visual, spatial, gestural, aural, and linguistic.
... We first asked whether a theoretical distinction between and, which is a truth functional connective, and but and so, which are connectives that come with specific additional procedural meanings, leads to more intensive (and unique) processing for the latter two. This proposal took its cues from Relevance Theory (RT) and its notion of procedural meaning, according to which extra-logical meaning intrinsic to discourse connectives, such as but and so, prompts the hearer to carry out an inferential process (Blakemore, 2002). Upon reviewing the existing experimental literature, we came to the provisional conclusion that there does, indeed, appear to be support for such a distinction. ...
Connectives such as and, but, and so conjoin two elements of discourse in characteristic ways. While highlighting (i) the conjunctive contribution of all three and (ii) the rich procedural information in the latter two, we posit that discourse connectives such as but and so convey specific kinds of extra-logical inferences, concerning contrast and causality, respectively. Unlike previous processing studies, which have focused either on the integration of a given connective to a provided thematic discourse representation or on its effect on processing downstream, we focus on the inferential potential of discourse connectives from the moment they are presented and in a largely thematically-neutral scenario. In order to systematically vary the processing import of discourse connectives, while holding constant all other variables, we present participants a repeatable game in which they determine whether a provided sentence – concerning a pair of letters – is true or false with respect to a provided three-letter word. For example, in one trial participants determine whether or not the sentence There is a B but there is no T is true with respect to the word BET. To isolate the processing contribution of the connective, the sentence is broken up into two segments (with the first containing the connective) in a self-paced task. This led to two pre-registered reading time experiments. In Experiment 1, in which the three-letter word is presented before the sentence, we found that but and so themselves are processed more slowly than and and that they each create specific discourse expectations, which are observable in post-connective reaction times. In Experiment 2, in which the word comes at the end of a trial (which means sentence-processing takes place without knowledge of the segments’ truth values), we confirmed the findings of Experiment 1. Overall, this study provides evidence showing that the extra-logical contributions in but and in so (i) come with processing costs that (ii) are due to rigid and complex procedures that addressees aim to cash out.
... Thus, a linguistic form could encode not only the constituents of the conceptual representations that enter inferential computations but also information that constrains the computations in which these computations are involved. In other words, it is possible for linguistic forms to encode either conceptual information or procedural information (Blakemore 2002). ...
Languages often use specific tools to indicate that the speaker cannot recall a particular word, is experiencing a lexical gap, or wants to avoid using the correct term. In those instances, a speaker may use a placeholder (PH), which is a dummy element that replaces part of the syntactic structure used when a speaker is unable or unwilling to produce the target word or expression. The word heri is primarily used as a PH in Assamese. This study presents an analysis of heri in Assamese under the relevance-theoretical framework, focusing on its two pragmatic functions as a "summarizer" and as a "list extender": beyond its role as a PH. The research is based on three hours of spontaneous conversational speech data, which were analyzed to identify all instances of heri. The findings indicate that the two pragmatic functions convey procedural meaning and involve loose language interpretations.
... Conjunctions, when analyzed from a lexico-functional perspective are not merely considered grammatical apparatus, but as critical instruments for encoding meaning. Their functional roles transcend the simple connection of words, phrases, or clauses; they also provide crucial information regarding the semantic and pragmatic relationships between linked elements, operating as key indicators of how diverse constituents of text or speech interrelate [Blakemore 2002]. The relevant capacity to create meaningful relationships positions the study of conjunctions not solely within the domain of syntax but also within the areas of semantics and pragmatics [Bozidov 1985;]. ...
The given article dwells on the comparative analysis of the lexico-functional peculiarities of conjunctions connecting words and phrases in English and Tajik, exemplified by Sadriddin Aini’s “Reminiscences”. The study demonstrates how conjunctions operate at various levels: connecting clauses, phrases, and words, as well as contributing to overall textual coherence. The use of relevant examples from the text under study allows for a better and more comprehensive understanding of the diverse communicative contexts in which these words operate. Furthermore, conjunctions emerge as more than mere grammatical devices; they are crucial in shaping meaning and enabling nuanced discourse.
... As there is no general agreement on the formal and functional characteristics that DMs share, this categorization poses terminological and conceptual challenges. Some researchers refer to them as discourse particles (e.g., Fischer 2006) or pragmatic markers (e.g., Brinton 1996;Aijmer and Simon-Vandenbergen 2006), while others shun the category of DMs, though still using the term (e.g., Blakemore 2002). 'Discourse marker' is the most widely used term and has the broadest coverage (Lewis 2006). ...
This paper unveils the similarities and differences between original English and Spanish recapitulative discourse markers (DMs), in fiction (F) and non-fiction (NF), and between translated and non-translated Spanish. It also aims to show that combining parallel and monolingual corpora can produce more focused results when tracking trends across language boundaries. Original English and Spanish data show how recapitulative DMs are distributed in both languages. Then, DMs with a low mutual correspondence (MC) value are selected for further analysis. English triggers to be compared with original Spanish data are identified in the English originals via the Spanish translations. Also, translated and non-translated Spanish are compared to identify translation trends. Results indicate that recapitulation is signalled by DMs more frequently in Spanish than in English. DMs in Spanish translation most frequently derive from well, anyway, you know/see, in short, I mean and after all. Additionally, many DMs in the translations do not have a trigger in English. Translated and non-translated Spanish results show the following trends, according to register: a) normalization in F (en fin, en síntesis) and counter-normalization in NF (en síntesis, en definitiva), b) deflation in F (en fin, en definitiva, total, a fin de cuentas) and in NF (en fin, en definitiva), c) dilation in NF (definitivamente, en resumidas cuentas, en síntesis), and d) equalization in F (definitivamente, en resumidas cuentas, en síntesis) and in NF (a fin de cuentas). The results may help to enhance contextual learning in generative language technology, leading to improved crosslinguistic performance.
... Such an exploration is not best of linguistic interest but also holds implications for academic writing pedagogy, as information the pragmatic use of discourse markers can equip budding pupils with the equipment to write down greater efficaciously inside and throughout disciplines. ( Blakemore, 2002) Significance of the Research (5) 1. Linguistic Insights and Academic Discourse Analysis: The take a look at of discourse markers, in particular in the context of contrasting medical and non-clinical instructional articles, offers profound linguistic insights. Discourse markers, as pivotal factors in structuring and guiding written discourse, serve as windows into the elaborate mechanics of language use in instructional settings. ...
In the tricky landscape of instructional writing, discourse markers serve as pivotal linguistic equipment, guiding readers via complicated arguments and making sure logical drift. This research embarked on a complete exploration of discourse markers throughout clinical and non-medical genres. Through a comparative analysis, awesome styles in the frequency and distribution of these markers emerged, reflecting the specific epistemological and methodological underpinnings of every genre. The have a look at similarly delved into the practical roles of those markers, highlighting their contribution to coherence, argumentative shape, and universal readability. The examination of interdisciplinary articles discovered a completely unique linguistic identification, emphasizing the complexity of melding conventions from more than one disciplines. The findings no longer most effective shed light on the pragmatic software of discourse markers however also underscore their significance in educational writing pedagogy.
... Redeker (1990) expanded on this, viewing DMs as expressions that link discourse units and indicate coherence and ideational relationships. Blakemore (2002) furthered this understanding by arguing that DMs contribute to procedural meaning, guiding the interpretation of subsequent discourse. ...
This study compares the use of discourse markers (DMs) in expository writing between Chinese EFL learners and native English speakers, aiming to identify overused and underused DMs and inform teaching strategies. Using corpus-based techniques and Fraser's (1999) taxonomy, the research analyzed DMs in Chinese college students' writing from the Chinese Learners English Corpus (CLEC) and matched samples from the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus. Results indicated that Chinese learners overused DMs like 'so,' 'but,' 'and,' and 'because,' while underusing 'thus,' 'in conclusion,' 'therefore,' and 'hence.' These findings suggest that explicit instruction on DMs is crucial for improving Chinese EFL learners' academic writing proficiency.
https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JRKSA/article/view/274709
... Desde los presupuestos de la Teoría de la relevancia, Blakemore (1993Blakemore ( , 2002 afirma que la decisión de reformular una expresión se debe a que el hablante reconoce que su formulación inicial no ha conseguido ser lo suficientemente relevante según su intención comunicativa y ha de formularla de nuevo para obtener la relevancia óptima. Esta autora asegura que la reformulación se muestra como uno de los medios que permite que una expresión sea relevante como la interpretación de otra con la que mantiene alguna semejanza; cuando la semejanza se basa en que comparten implicaciones lógicas o contextuales, la expresión reformuladora se considera relevante como interpretación de una forma proposicional o de un pensamiento (Blakemore 1993); en su propuesta no establece una clasificación de las relaciones propias de esta categoría. ...
Los objetivos de esta investigación se centran en caracterizar las relaciones de explicación y de corrección dentro de la categoría de la reformulación y exponer cómo se manifiestan estos tipos de relaciones en los textos digitales, concretamente en los blogs, que muestran un interés especial dado que son textos híbridos que se transmiten a través de un canal escrito, pero que reflejan, en muchos casos, rasgos de la oralidad concepcional. Nuestro análisis permitirá explicar cómo se configuran estas relaciones en la construcción de este tipo de discurso, establecer cuáles son los procedimientos mediante los que se expresan, determinar qué marcadores discursivos específicos se emplean y delimitar las funciones que desarrollan estos signos lingüísticos en esta modalidad discursiva. La base empírica en la que se sustenta el estudio son los blogs digitales incluidos en Corpes XXI y en el corpus MEsA en sus distintas variedades temáticas, situacionales y geolectales.
... Such an exploration is not best of linguistic interest but also holds implications for academic writing pedagogy, as information the pragmatic use of discourse markers can equip budding pupils with the equipment to write down greater efficaciously inside and throughout disciplines. ( Blakemore, 2002) Significance of the Research (5) 1. Linguistic Insights and Academic Discourse Analysis: The take a look at of discourse markers, in particular in the context of contrasting medical and non-clinical instructional articles, offers profound linguistic insights. Discourse markers, as pivotal factors in structuring and guiding written discourse, serve as windows into the elaborate mechanics of language use in instructional settings. ...
In the tricky landscape of instructional writing, discourse markers serve as pivotal linguistic equipment, guiding readers via complicated arguments and making sure logical drift. This research embarked on a complete exploration of discourse markers throughout clinical and non-medical genres. Through a comparative analysis, awesome styles in the frequency and distribution of these markers emerged, reflecting the specific epistemological and methodological underpinnings of every genre. The have a look at similarly delved into the practical roles of those markers, highlighting their contribution to coherence, argumentative shape, and universal readability. The examination of interdisciplinary articles discovered a completely unique linguistic identification, emphasizing the complexity of melding conventions from more than one disciplines. The findings no longer most effective shed light on the pragmatic software of discourse markers however also underscore their significance in educational writing pedagogy.
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... Consider the pronoun He in this respect: as Kaplan (1977) has pointed out, it would be awkward to assume that the linguistic meaning of pronouns were to be taken as the content they contribute in each use, because this changes according to context. He argues instead that the linguistic meaning of pronouns (and other indexicals) is their character, which is basically 10 As Blakemore (2002) comments, this amounts to a reversal of the traditional formula "semantics first, then pragmatics" to a view where pragmatics takes centre stage and (linguistic) semantic theory is shaped by asking how semantic information can best facilitate pragmatic processes. a procedure to determine the referent of the indexical expression. ...
... These include features such as PMs (e.g., obviously, you know), interjections (e.g., eh, wow), general extenders (e.g., or whatever, and everything), quotatives (e.g., say, think), vocatives (e.g., darling, baby), and intensifiers (e.g., totally, well) (Pichler 2016, 4). DPFs have been studied from different theoretical perspectives such as discourse-coherence (Lenk 1998;Schiffrin 1987), grammatical-pragmatic (Brinton 1996;Fraser 1996), cognitivepragmatic (Blakemore 2002), and variational pragmatic (Aijmer 2013) approaches. In this article, DPFs are explored from a postcolonial corpus pragmatic approach that combines the tenets of postcolonial pragmatics and corpus pragmatics. ...
This paper explores five borrowed discourse-pragmatic features—wena, mna/mina, yazi, phela, and ke—which are transferred from indigenous South African languages into South African English, with the objective of investigating their frequency, position, collocational patterns, and discourse-pragmatic functions. The data, which are taken from the South African component of the Global Web-based English corpus, are analysed quantitatively and qualitatively, from a postcolonial corpus pragmatic framework. The results show that the discourse-pragmatic features are generally infrequent, orthographically stable, and prefer the clause-initial position. The paper indicates that wena is used as an address term to call for the addressee’s attention, mna/mina is used to emphasise personal identity, while yazi seeks confirmation of and signals shared knowledge. Phela is an emphasis marker, while ke indicates contrast, textual coherence, and emphasis. This study underscores the contributions of indigenous South African languages to the discourse-pragmatic features of South African English.
... They frequently append a personal meaning that reflects the speaker's assessment of the situation, or the speaker's point of view. They have little or no lexical meaning, but they show the speaker's attitude or mood (Blakemore, 2002(Blakemore, & 1987Fraser, 2009). The usage of a certain expression in a given context is referred to as its discourse function. ...
Objectives: This study examines the diverse functions of the discourse marker "ʃikil" in spoken Jordanian Arabic, as analyzing its placement and usage in different contexts assists in comprehending its impact on meaning. Additionally, the study explores how the agreement pattern that governs "ʃikil" contributes to reinforcing the intended meaning. Methods: The research methodology utilized in this study is quantitative in nature. An online questionnaire consisting of 10 questions was designed and distributed through various social media platforms. The questionnaire targeted 150 native speakers of Jordanian Arabic who provided responses regarding their usage of the discourse marker "ʃikil" in specific contexts, its position within statements, and its agreement with the subjects of those statements. Furthermore, the study incorporated the relevance theory proposed by Spenser and Wilson to address the research questions effectively. Results: The analysis of the data indicates a noteworthy correlation between the position of the discourse marker "ʃikil" and its intended meaning within the sentence. Furthermore, the agreement pattern between the subject and the discourse marker has been found to be influential in conveying the desired meaning effectively. Conclusions: This study finds that the discourse marker "ʃikil" in Jordanian Arabic serves different purposes based on its position within the sentence. It can indicate common knowledge or beliefs that are shared with others, express the speaker’s interpretation based on visual evidence, or convey the speaker’s indirect opinion without eyewitnesses or direct evidence. The study also highlights the significance of agreement patterns between the subject and the discourse marker in enhancing meaning. However, it is not necessary for the agreement pattern to be directly connected to the position of the discourse marker in the sentence.
The aim of this paper is to illustrate the incidence and functions of Discourse Markers (DMs) in the speech of tourist guides (TGs), and further investigate their polyfunctionality. Approximately 3½ hours of speech were examined (corresponding to 30,429 graphic words). These consisted of audiovisual recordings of Neapolitan expert guides conducting guided tours of the San Martino Charterhouse (Naples), extracted from the CHROME Corpus (Origlia et al., 2018; Alfano et al., 2023). A total of 1759 occurrences were analyzed. DM functions were studied by means of an onomasiological approach considering interactional, metatextual and cognitive dimensions, and then annotated using a multilevel annotation scheme. The examined features concern frequency, variability in forms, the possibility of co-occurrence and polyfunctionality, on both the syntagmatic and the paradigmatic axes. The results show that DMs are powerful indicators of the type of register: their functional distribution responds to specific communicative needs and the choice of preferred DMs depends very much on their polyfunctionality: the more polyfunctional they are, the more frequent they are likely to be. Finally, polyfunctional clusters of DMs do not present restrictions with respect to functions, whereas monofunctional clusters of DMs tend to appear with a planning or focusing function.
The analysis of political texts, especially those containing pre-election propaganda, is increasingly gaining popularity among linguists, as the primary purpose of these texts is to shape, influence, and manipulate public opinion. Language serves politics as a political struggle or influence tool, allowing politicians to adjust their speech to align with their goals and ideology by manipulating communication resources and words. This paper presents an overview of the key characteristics of discourse and pragmatic markers in Georgian and American political discourse during elections. Since discourse and pragmatic markers are essential linguistic elements for communication and interaction, their main purposes include maintaining semantic and pragmatic consistency, expressing mental and emotional states during speech, and achieving communication goals-primarily, convincing the audience. The research objectives are as follows: (1) to provide a literature review on the main features of discourse markers; (2) to provide a literature review on the main features of pragmatic markers; and (3) to examine discourse and pragmatic markers in Georgian and American election-related political discourse and determine their influence. Our analysis highlights how these linguistic tools, while often overlooked in casual speech, are consciously employed in political discourse to influence, persuade, and engage the audience, aligning with broader political objectives. The research methods used include discourse analysis and lexical, semantic, comparative, and pragmatic analyses.
Code glosses are part of a set of meta-discourse tools that structure and organise information transmitted through communicative interaction. Presence of code glosses as an important means of reformulating or concretising previously stated information in scientific and academic discourse performs the functions of ordering, objectification, formalisation, as well as explaining and illustrating the information placed by the text author. The author of the article, based on the approaches of well-known foreign linguists to the classification of code glosses, defines the main characteristics of markers used in modern Russian scientific and academic discourses. The purpose and objectives of such research for the author are determined by the need to develop the pragmatic competences of foreign students in the study of scientific texts in Russian, followed by the transfer of the identified patterns into the scientific and academic discourse of the native (in this case, Chinese) language space. In the course of a multidimensional research of a theoretical and applied nature, the author identifies two categories of code glosses in Russian–language scientific and academic discourses – ‟reformulation” and ‟fitting” (author’s terminology); each of the categories carries a certain functional load in the text. The results of the study showed that in these types of discourse, the means of expressing code glosses are diverse, with their presence in texts justified, since they help the reader to find out the author’s communicative intentions with minimal effort, while maximally comprehending the context of the transmitted message. The use of code glosses by a teacher in academic discourse contributes, firstly, to improving the effectiveness of the educational process, and secondly, to development of pragmatic competences in students, assuming fluency in various resources of code glosses for expressing communicative intentions.
The quality and volume of research and publication in ELT display exponential growth due to the ways in which teachers and stakeholders have started to view the ELT classroom. This increase in interest can also be the result of the dilution of interdisciplinary borders. The acceptance and incorporation of the use of technology is no longer a burning question—during these years the focus is on the ways in which these can be harnessed for maximum impact and efficacy. The struggle with the perception of English as an alien tongue now stands suspended in the immersive and global vat of World Englishes. The impact of multiple influences from diverse fields brings about a shift towards examining and understanding the micro facets of the ELT panorama.
Este artículo indaga, desde la óptica de la Gramática Discursivo-Funcional, en los efectos cohesivos de los principales exponentes de la negación aditiva del español: ni y tampoco. Si bien el modelo adoptado no ha desarrollado todavía una teoría de la cohesión textual, sí contempla ciertos parámetros que acotan y clasifican sus distintos tipos. La aplicación de dichos parámetros (procedimiento de expresión, naturaleza estratégica, dimensión y alcance) al análisis de la negación aditiva del español permite identificar las semejanzas y diferencias del potencial cohesivo de las dos unidades consideradas. En concreto, queda de manifiesto que ni es una conjunción que lleva a cabo prototípicamente una cohesión interna de combinación paratáctica, mientras que tampoco es una partícula gramatical que transmite una cohesión de encadenamiento, la cual puede ser tanto interna como externa (esta última en su doble vertiente contextual y conceptual).
La noción de “significado procedimental” refiere a un tipo de significado computacional que interviene en el proceso interpretativo. Es una noción que se ha transformado hasta el punto de que algunas formas de entenderla distan bastante de la propuesta original. Por tal motivo, nos parece importante caracterizarla, ofrecer un panorama de sus modificaciones y señalar algunos problemas que de ella se han desprendido. En este artículo se ofrece una exposición de los antecedentes teóricos de la noción de “significado procedimental” con el fin de caracterizar cómo entra en escena en las discusiones sobre el significado. Asimismo, se exponen cuatro grandes etapas en su desarrollo y se señalan algunos rasgos definitorios que surgen de dichas etapas. Por último, se apuntan algunos problemas teóricos y metodológicos que se desprenden de las definiciones de “significado procedimental” y del uso de esta noción en el análisis lingüístico.
The study of French connectives has undergone significant evolution since the 1970s, with foundational research paving the way for the development of key concepts in discourse and pragmatics. This contribution provides an in‐depth examination of various French connectives, focusing on their linguistic functions, syntactic behaviors, and cross‐linguistic comparisons. It highlights the distinction between objective and subjective discourse relations, particularly in the usage of causal connectives like car, parce que, and puisque, and discusses their impact on language processing and comprehension. The article also explores the semantic differences and processing costs associated with these connectives, particularly in the context of native and non‐native speakers. Furthermore, it underscores the importance of prosodic cues in disambiguating the meanings of polyfunctional connectives and calls for further research into the complex form‐function mappings of connectives across languages. This comprehensive analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of how French connectives function within discourse and how they compare to their counterparts in other languages.
Connectives can be studied both as functional sentence elements and as elements of a textual or discourse grammar. The textual dimension introduced by text linguistics and discourse analysis has certainly intensified interest in their role. Attention is paid to the multifunctionality of connectives and to their independence from specific grammatical categories: connectives are seen as relational and organizational units, acting as instructions for the reader/hearer in many cognitive or semantic approaches. The study of connectors has been characterized by great terminological instability and by an emphasis on the complexity of the relations of these elements of textual grammar in the rapidly developing fields of semantics and pragmatics. Studies of connectives have often highlighted the problems of distinguishing semantic from pragmatic meaning in their use and attempts to arrive at a functional typology have been accompanied by an awareness that categories may be overlapping. The textual viewpoint developed by text linguistics and discourse analysis has rapidly inspired a wider range of different applied perspectives that can offer new insights into connectives. These include the following: discourse processing, argumentation, corpus‐based studies on variation and change, cross‐linguistic analysis, translation studies, studies on non‐native speakers, and learner corpora.
In Hausa language function words contribute to sentence structure mainly on the syntactic level. They can specify the attitude or mood of the speaker. The broad class of function words includes a sub-class of items known as Pragmatic Markers (PMs). So far interpretations of PM to in Hausa were based on its semantic rather than structural contributions to the utterance content. There is a lack of a closer look on to from the pragmatic perspective. The aim of this article is to demonstrate how the interpretation of to within the framework of PM can contribute to describing this item's functions in discourse in a more precise way, i.a. for the purpose of preparation of resources for studying the Hausa language by foreigners such as bilingual dictionaries. I propose the interpretation of to as a PM with the binary category of procedural and representational meaning. It will be demonstrated with the examples extracted from radio conversations that PMs framework allows to comprehensively describe to marker in terms of its contextually determined functions and meanings.
Every construction in a public language, every word, syntactic structure, idiom, every complex expression that is copied whole rather than reassembled by each speaker, has a stabilizing function. Performance of this stabilizing function is the reason for which, the explanation of why, the construction is retained in the language over time.
In this paper, we study the interrelation of implicit and explicit meanings, observe various definitions of the core implicitness of explicit constructions, and turn to the analyses of these linguistic concepts from the point of view of semantics and pragmatics as well. The complex coverage of the notion of implicitness is accompanied by the results and conclusions made by our own research. We also refer to the observations of implicitness in the fields of stylistics and translation. The paper can be considered theoretical as it is devoted to the analytical nuances of theoretical definitions of implicitness and explicitness and their practical usage. Implicitness “can’t be seen but can be heard” in explicit structures. On one hand, implied meanings convey an indirectly expressed main message; on the other hand, implicitness is a tool to convey additional information beyond the lines without being repeated. As dialogue is considered to be one of the means of implied discourse, it is important to pay attention to the intentions of a person in communication and to the linguistic and extralinguistic factors of comprehension as well. For decoding and analyzing the meaning of intentional implicitness, one should also comprehend the verbal intentions, allusions, subtexts, and voice tone of the speakers. As for unintentional implicitness, it refers to the common knowledge of the speakers in dialogue on some topic and the skills of making brief but meaningful speech.
This research investigates the utilization of the discourse marker (DM) “but” by interviewees (IEs) from a socio-pragmatic standpoint, focusing on its frequency and function through the analysis of a corpus comprising political interviews aired on BBC’s HARDtalk. The IEs are categorized into three demographic cohorts: those from eastern versus western cultures, non-native English-speaking IEs versus native English speakers, and female IEs versus their male counterparts. The study employs both quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitatively, no statistically significant difference is found in the overall frequency of “but” usage among the three groups. Qualitatively, the analysis reveals the polyfunctionality of the DM “but”, with the most prevalent function being “contrast”, consistently employed across all demographic cohorts, although lacking statistical significance. Additionally, statistically higher usage of various function types is observed among IEs from the western culture and native English speakers compared to their counterparts. Female IEs exhibit a statistically higher frequency in the deployment of the “topic” function than males. Overall, while the frequency and the use of the “contrast” function show no significant difference, the study highlights the nuanced impact of culture, first language, and gender on the multifaceted functions of the DM “but” in political discourse. These findings contribute to our understanding of how socio-pragmatic factors subtly shape the usage of discourse markers like the DM “but” among varied interviewee demographics, as well as its role in shaping public perception and political narratives within the context of political interviews.
Linguistic communication is an intrinsically social activity that enables us to share thoughts across minds. Many complex social uses of language can be captured by domain-general representations of other minds (i.e., mentalistic representations) that externally modulate linguistic meaning through Gricean reasoning. However, here we show that representations of others’ attention are embedded within language itself. Across ten languages, we show that demonstratives—basic grammatical words (e.g., “this”/“that”) which are evolutionarily ancient, learned early in life, and documented in all known languages—are intrinsic attention tools. Beyond their spatial meanings, demonstratives encode both joint attention and the direction in which the listener must turn to establish it. Crucially, the frequency of the spatial and attentional uses of demonstratives varies across languages, suggesting that both spatial and mentalistic representations are part of their conventional meaning. Using computational modeling, we show that mentalistic representations of others’ attention are internally encoded in demonstratives, with their effect further boosted by Gricean reasoning. Yet, speakers are largely unaware of this, incorrectly reporting that they primarily capture spatial representations. Our findings show that representations of other people’s cognitive states (namely, their attention) are embedded in language and suggest that the most basic building blocks of the linguistic system crucially rely on social cognition.
A successful communication is evaluated by the ability of the audience to effectively comprehend the essence of a communication and to respond accordingly. Meanwhile, a communicative discourse is considered effective in its characteristics of demonstrating natural pauses and fillers, among others, which helps to communicate ideas more easily and naturally. Engaging any kind of discourse in coherent and fluent manners to enhance effective communication is sacrosanct to a communicator. This study focuses on the system of how discourse markers are instrumental to text fluency, coherence and, above all, how they function and are consciously structured to aid effective interpretations of a discourse. The study also attempts to examine the functional complexity of discourse markers in cohesive texts. The work relies on the views of many discourse and stylistic analysts not only to investigate the relationship between discourse markers and textual composition but to also address how instrumental they are to the effective comprehension of a text. The study reveals that Discourse Markers are not only characterised with linguistic devices that enhance textual coherence and fluency but also provide discourse clues that are instrumental to effective organisation of ideas and effective comprehension of meanings in a text.
Although a common topic for some time, the idea of discourse markers has been hampered by the difficulty of providing an operative definition to the corresponding notion, in view of the very heterogeneous nature of the linguistic entities at stake. Starting from the different parameters regularly evoked in the study of such markers, this work aims at characterizing them as a class of operators likely to assume various functions according to their syntactic and/or semantic links within the discourse.
в статье рассматриваются функциональные и семантические особенности дискурсивных маркеров (ДМ) в русском языке. Актуальность исследования обусловлена недостаточной изученностью ДМ в русистике и необходимостью системного анализа их роли в организации дискурса. Цель работы – выявить и описать функции и семантику ДМ в различных типах дискурса. Материалом исследования послужили данные Национального корпуса русского языка (НКРЯ), включающие 1500 контекстов употребления 20 наиболее частотных ДМ (например, "ну", "вот", "так", "же", "ведь"). Методологической базой выступают дискурсивный анализ, корпусные методы, элементы семантического и прагматического анализа. В результате исследования установлено, что ДМ в русском языке полифункциональны и способны выполнять текстообразующую, фатическую, модальную, экспрессивную функции. Выявлены доминирующие функции отдельных ДМ: для "ну" характерна хезитативная функция (35% случаев), "вот" чаще используется для фокусирования внимания (28%), "так" типично маркирует логические связи между фрагментами дискурса (41%). Определены ядерные и периферийные семантические компоненты ДМ, описаны механизмы их прагматикализации. Установлена связь функционирования ДМ с типом дискурса: в неформальном общении чаще используются ДМ с фатической и хезитативной функциями, в институциональном дискурсе преобладают ДМ с текстообразующей и модальной семантикой. Сделан вывод о дискурсивной обусловленности реализации функционального потенциала ДМ и градуальном характере их семантики. Результаты исследования вносят вклад в теорию дискурсивных слов, дополняют научные представления о специфике русской дискурсивной практики, имеют прикладную значимость для преподавания РКИ, дискурсивного анализа текста, моделирования диалоговых систем.
the article examines the functional and semantic features of discursive markers (DM) in the Russian language. The relevance of the study is due to the insufficient knowledge of DM in Russian studies and the need for a systematic analysis of their role in the organization of discourse. The purpose of the work is to identify and describe the functions and semantics of DM in various types of discourse. The research material was data from the National Corpus of the Russian Language (NCRL), which includes 1,500 contexts of the use of the 20 most frequent DM (for example, "well", "here", "so", "same", "after all"). The methodological basis is discursive analysis, corpus methods, elements of semantic and pragmatic analysis. As a result of the study, it was found that DM in the Russian language are multifunctional and capable of performing text-forming, phatic, modal, expressive functions. The dominant functions of individual DM are revealed: "well" is characterized by a hesitative function (35% of cases), "here" is more often used to focus attention (28%), "so" typically marks logical connections between fragments of discourse (41%). The nuclear and peripheral semantic components of DM are defined, and the mechanisms of their pragmatization are described. The connection between the functioning of DM and the type of discourse has been established: in informal communication, DM with phatic and hesitative functions are more often used, DM with text-forming and modal semantics prevail in institutional discourse. The conclusion is made about the discursive conditionality of the realization of the functional potential of DM and the graduated nature of their semantics. The results of the research contribute to the theory of discursive words, complement scientific ideas about the specifics of Russian discursive practice, and have applied significance for teaching RFL, discursive text analysis, and modeling of dialogical systems.
Pragmatic markers (PMs) are multifunctional elements that allow language users to organize and coordinate discourse and to express their attitudes and cognitive states. This study compares the discourse-pragmatic functions and distributional features of four PMs in Kwéyòl Donmnik (konsa ‘so’, èben ‘well’, papa/Bondyé ‘papa/God’, la ‘there’) with those of their etyma in French, Kwéyòl’s lexifier ((ou) comme ça, (eh) ben, bon Dieu, là), and with their counterparts in English, the colonial source language with which it has been in contact for more than two centuries (so, well, oh my God, there). The properties of the Kwéyòl PMs are determined through a corpus analysis and are then compared to descriptions of the French and English PMs in previous studies. Each of the four Kwéyòl PM’s has functions in common with its French etymon and its English counterpart as well as its own unique functions. In addition, English so performs functions in the Kwéyòl data that are unique to Kwéyòl konsa ‘so’, suggesting that so is being integrated into Kwéyòl. This study expands the limited body of work on Kwéyòl and deepens our understanding of language contact and Creole emergence at the discourse-pragmatic level, particularly in cases involving a second, non-lexifier colonial source language.
Contrast, adversative and corrective can all be represented by er in Classical Chinese, but they are lexicalized respectively by er, danshi and ershi in Modern Chinese. The two lexicalization systems suggest that the opposition relations have commonalities as well as differences. In the framework of relevance theory and ‘three domains’, this study argues that the three opposition relations are in different cognitive domains, at different representational levels, and trigger different inferences, which accounts for their diverse lexicalizations in Modern Chinese. The opposition relations also have cognitive or metaphorical connections with each other, which justifies their unified actualization in Classical Chinese. The pragmatics-cognitive framework could also account for interlinguistic data.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.