Unpacking the function(s) of discourse markers in academic spoken English: a corpus-based study

Abstract

Discourse markers can have various functions depending on the context in which they are used. Taking this into consideration, in this corpus-based research, we analyzed and unveiled quantitatively and qualitatively the functions of four discourse markers in academic spoken English. To this purpose, four discourse markers, i.e., “I mean,” “I think,” “you see,” and “you know,” were selected for the study. The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was used as the data gathering source. To detect the discourse markers, concordance lines of the corpus were carefully read and analyzed. The quantitative analysis demonstrated that from among the four discourse markers, “you know” and “you see” were the most and the least frequent ones in the corpus, respectively. In line with the quantitative analysis, the qualitative analysis of the concordance lines demonstrated that there were various functions with regard to each of the four discourse markers. The findings of this study can have implications in fields such as corpus-based studies, genre analysis, and contrastive linguistics.

Discourse markers in TV interviews: A corpus-based comparative study of Chinese and the western media

“…For instance, the majority of the studies tend to advocate for different interpretations of DMs, such as discourse connectives ( Blakemore, 2002 ), discourse particles ( Schourup, 1999 ), and connect a variety of theoretical models, like Redeker’s (1990) model and Schiffrin’s (1987) five distinct planes. The last few years have witnessed an increase in the number of empirical studies examining the role of DMs in various circumstances, such as mediatized institutional political interviews ( Furkó and Abuczki, 2014 ), scientific papers ( Rezanova and Kogut, 2015 ), Asian presidents’ addresses ( Banguis-Bantawig, 2019 ), therapeutic interviews ( Cepeda and Poblete, 2006 ), academic spoken English ( Farahani and Ghane, 2022 ), and laboratory experiments ( Holtgraves and Bonnefon, 2017 ). Another emerging trend in DM research is a growing interest in comparing the use of DMs in terms of functions and frequency between English native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers (NNSs) from a variety of L1 backgrounds ( Müller, 2005 ; Aijmer, 2011 ; Asik and Cephe, 2013 ; Al-khazraji, 2019 ; Şahin Kızıl, 2021 ).…”

“…DMs can function on the politeness level ( Östman, 1981 ), phatic level ( Aijmer, 2002 ), as a face mitigator ( Crible, 2018 ), and for weakening the illocutionary force ( Leech, 2014 ). In addition, the high frequency of DMs appearing in spoken genres makes their use a distinctive feature and a pivotal role in spoken English ( Carter and McCarthy, 2006 ; Farahani and Ghane, 2022 ). TV interview is a type of oral interaction between the host and the guest that provides a good opportunity to examine DMs in spoken discourse ( Oyeleye and Olutayo, 2012 ).…”

Improving Students' Speaking Skills through Learning Media and the Mastery of Different Discourse Markers

“…Further, most recent studies on discourse markers investigated the function and the use of discourse marker types (Aamir et al, 2023;Alif et al, 2023;Lu, 2023). There was quite a little research exploring the effects of discourse markers on specific language skills, such as writing and speaking (Balbay & Dogan, 2023;Farahani & Ghane, 2022;Khasawneh & Khasawneh, 2023;Lu, 2023). Then, none of them involved learners in primary education.…”

“…Then, none of them involved learners in primary education. Those studies generally recruited higher education participants, such as undergraduate students, language teachers, and lecturers (Farahani & Ghane, 2022;Khasawneh & Khasawneh, 2023). Balbay (2023) and Farahani and Ghane (2022) explored the impact of discourse markers, but they have yet to experiment with them.…”

“Money Doesn’t Like Noise”

“…Metadiscourse, in essence, refers to how we use language in consideration for our readers or listeners, based on our evaluation of how best we can help them process and comprehend what we are saying (Hyland, 2005). The elements that construct interaction between writer-reader and/or speaker-audience are referred to as metadiscourse markers (Farahani & Ghane, 2022).…”