Discourse marker and modal particle: The functions of utterance-final then in spoken English

The Use of Discourse Markers in Paragraph Writings: The Case of Preparatory Year Program Students in Qassim University

“…Jalilifar (2008) argues that with the status of English as an international language and the expansion in the use of English, an increasing number of second/ foreign language learners are engaged in academic pursuits that require them to write well. However, developing the writing skill has always been the most complex and difficult aspect of language teaching because writing is seen basically as a process of four main stages: planning, drafting, revising, and editing (Haselow, 2011). Thus, EFL learners need to be aware of the different components of writing that would assist them to write effectively and teachers are advised to focus on the process of writing more than the finished product since various operations and strategies applied during the completion of a writing task became important (Assadi, 2012).…”

Koordinatiivsed Partiklid Lause Perifeerias

“…Järjest enamate keelte (peale inglise keele nt prantsuse, saksa, jaapani, korea keel) kaasamine arutellu on toonud nii poolt-kui ka vastunäiteid ja osutanud, et keeltel on perifeeriate funktsioonides ja nende dünaamikas nii ühis-kui ka erijooni ning et siingi toimivad areaalsed tendentsid. Toetudes senistes käsitlustes (vt nt Vaskó, Fretheim 1997;Haselow 2011;Traugott 2012;ka Sohn 3 ) välja toodud partiklite funktsioonidele perifeeriates, jaotame need kolme rühma, mis on vastavuses ka eeltoodud tähendusmuutuste järjestusega mittesubjektiivne > subjektiivne > intersubjektiivne. Lisatud näited illustreerivad eesti keele rinnastavatel sidesõnadel põhinevate partiklite kasutust.…”

“…Tagasihaaret inglise kõnekeeles on vaadelnud Alexander Haselow (2011Haselow ( , 2012. Haselow (2012: 3609−3610) Toimuvad nihked järjestuvad niisiis järgmiselt: proadverb, alistav sidend > proadverb, rinnastav sidend > LP konnektiivpartikkel > RP konnektiivpartikkel (tagasihaare, teksti organiseerimise funktsioon).…”

Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the negotiation of common ground in spoken discourse: Final particles in English

“…The scope of these particles is extended as they create cohesion on the textual level, linking two independent utterances. In this sense, the use of final particles is an efficient strategy to create cohesion between two propositions in the utterance-chaining style that is characteristic for spoken discourse, where planning is restricted and complex relations often evolve or are recognized only during the production of an utterance itself (Haselow, 2011). The use of an utterance with a final particle is a case of delayed linking, which reflects the preference for right-tending, coordinative supplementation under conditions of real-time planning discussed by Altenberg (1986, p. 21).…”

“…The phenomenon of utterance-final particles has been addressed by some authors for single chosen elements, such as final though (Barth-Weingarten and Couper-Kuhlen, 2002), final but (Mulder and Thompson, 2008), final even (Kim and Jahnke, 2011), and final then (Haselow, 2011). However, it has not been subjected to a more extended, systematic study that includes all lexemes in particle-function (to be specified below) that occur in final position.…”