Conjunctions in elf academic discourse: a corpus-based analysis
Over the last decades the development of conjunctions into discourse markers has been researched by a number of scholars.
In Lithuanian, studies on discourse markers are fragmented and lack the application of efficient qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. In Old Lithuanian, both kad and net mainly function as temporal conjunctions, which, over time, developed discourse functions and came to serve as discourse markers. Adopting both a synchronic and diachronic perspective and applying corpus-driven methodology, the present study aims at investigating the semantic functional potential of kad and net as well as their position and structural status in discourse.
The data set analyzed includes written and spoken Present-day Lithuanian as well as Old Lithuanian texts the 16th century. In the earliest Lithuanian texts, kad is most often used in different types of adverbial clauses, including time, purpose and condition; netin its turn, functions as a conjunction marking time or contrast or as a particle. However, in Present-day Lithuanian, kad and net are multifunctional: kad can be used either as a conjunction or a discourse marker with a clear discourse function—to signal a discourse shift and to preface a response or reaction of the speaker.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access. Rent this article via DeepDyve. When a particle fulfils discourse functions, it can be interpreted as a discourse marker. When kad is used as a discourse marker, I refrain from giving its precise translations since its meaning very much depends on the context and dialogic environment. Aijmer, K. English discourse particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Google Scholar. Aikhenvald, A. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ambrazas, V. Lithuanian grammar. Vilnius: Baltos lankos. Brinton, L. Pragmatic markers in English. Grammaticalization and discourse function. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The evolution of pragmatic markers in English: Pathways of change. Crible, L. Discourse markers and dis fluency across registers: A contrastive usage - based study in English and French.
PhD Thesis manuscript. Degand, L. Introduction: Grammaticalization and inter subjectification of discourse markers. Linguistics, 49 2— Detges, U. Diachronic pathways and pragmatic strategies: Different types of pragmatic particles from a diachronic point of view. Visconti Eds. Oxford: Emerald.To browse Academia.
Skip to main content.
Lingue e Linguaggi
Log In Sign Up. Laura Centonze. Conjunctions in ELF academic discourse: a corpus-based analysis. In addition to this, there does not seem to be a shared view as far as the classification and denomination of the different kinds of conjunctions are concerned cf. The selection of a specific type of conjunction acquires more importance because they are typically open to so many different interpretations, especially when the participants in the speech event come from diverse lingua-cultural backgrounds cf.
Guido; Cogo et al. Following the taxonomy provided by Halliday and Hasan for conjunctions, our study attempts to shed light on the usage of conjunctions by ELF speakers in specific contexts. We shall see the extent to which certain conjunctions are more restricted than others in terms of usage cf.
Introduction1 The aim of this paper is to gain insights into an element playing a pivotal role within the realization of cohesion in discourse, i. Cohesion is an important facet of text as it determines how people interpret discourse; it is something especially delicate in the context of English-as-a-Lingua-Franca henceforth ELF interaction that has only recently begun to be explored cf.
We shall analyze a set of transcriptions taken from the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English Seidlhofer et al. The study corpus that we considered represents an interesting set of data, for two main reasons: 1 because here speakers from different L1s may share less of the presuppositions that native speakers may cf. Leung ; Christiansen; 2 because, as mentioned previously, the speech events that we analyzed, i. On the left side of Table 1 is the identification code which is attributed to each file in the VOICE; each of them is broken down by speaker S1, S2, S3, and so forth and the discourse ratio is also provided, along with the total number of words for each file on the right.
As we can see, the overall number of words as well as the discourse ratio for each speaker is not homogeneous: the former ranging between and words, the latter including interviews with only two speakers as is the case EDint or more than two EDintand conversations with only two speakers LEcon or more LEcon8. In addition to this, the total number of words is no indication of the number of speakers involved in the speech event: for instance, in LEcon8 the total number of words is relatively low, although there are 9 speakers involved in the interaction; the same thing for the file displaying the highest amount of words, EDint, with its only 3 speakers.
Conjunctions in ELF academic discourse: a corpus-based analysis 9 2. Method of analysis As also stated previously, conjunctions have been treated and categorized differently in the literature — which also makes it difficult to find an adequate point of reference for their analysis.
Halliday and Hasanp. Caron and the multifarious interpretations, both at a cognitive-semantic and pragmatic level, which may be attributed to them, together with the lingua-cultural background shared by speaker from different L1s cf. Tables provide a re- adaptation of the different categories of conjunctions as identified by Halliday and Hasan in Christiansenpp.
In the first stages of our research, we predisposed the study corpus for our analysis according to individual speaker, by creating tables in Word which helped us sort out the different sections of the study corpora by speaker total amount of files: We then eliminated any additional information related to the speaker as well as any conventional signs being used in the VOICE e. Leung also notices the extent to which this is in line with the RTF principle according to which conjunctions incorporate concepts, expectations and mental assumptions.
In such a case, we had to look at each instance in its context and decide how to associate it with the most appropriate category. Continuatives now, of course, anyway, surely, after all.
Once each search item was identified and inserted into a specific category of conjunction, we used a formula whereby the number of instances found was divided by the number of words in that section of the corpus.
Lingue e Linguaggi
Conjunctions in ELF academic discourse: a corpus-based analysis 11 3. Analysis 1: an overview of conjunctions in the study corpus In this section, we shall examine results for each type of conjunction, with respect to the specific sections of the VOICE that constitute the object of our study, and to the two different typologies of discourse, i. Hence, Table provide a general overview of the different types of conjunction in each corpus file that we analyzed.
For reasons of available space, we shall only report those conjunctions which occurred most in the VOICE sections we analyzed, and not provide those ones for which no item was found whatsoever. Moreover, the results in the following tables are weighted against the number of words in the VOICE see the Method of Analysis section abovehence the ratio as well as the average for each section and for the whole corpus are included.
As we can see in the table, the most recurrent additive conjunction in the VOICE is conjunction and with a Ev backs up the results we found, i.
To sum up, in the bottom-right corner is a final calculation of average ratio for each conjunction, confirming that additive conjunctions are more likely to appear in conversations 3. Table 4 provides results for adversative ADV conjunctions, following the same methodology adopted previously for the identification of additive conjunctions. As we can see, the most recurrent adversative conjunction is represented by but, which is the also the most frequent adversative conjunction in each section of the study corpora — except for EDint, where I mean clearly displays higher figures Editorial Team.
Author Guidelines. Focus and Scope. Peer Review Process. Open Access Information. Publication Ethics. Plagiarism Screening. Citations in Google Scholar. Abstracting and Indexing. Author Guideline. Article Sample. Ahangar, A. Al-Khalidy, H. Banks, D. Systemic Functional Linguistics as a model for text analysis. Asp Journal, 35 36 Centonze, L. Lingue e Linguaggi, 10 1 De Oliveira, L. Editorial Board. Why now? Gleason, H. Contrastive analysis in discourse structure. Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, Halliday, M.
An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Oslo Studies in Language, 6 169— Ismali, H. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: Sage Publications. Kailani, A. Kusumawardhani, P. Wanastra: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra.
Subordinating Conjunctions as Discourse Markers in Lithuanian
Martin, J. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. London: Continuum. Purba, K.Corpus Linguistics in Chinese Contexts pp Cite as.
Using appropriate conjunctions in writing English assignments is a crucial skill for students to achieve their academic goals at universities because of the important role played by conjunctions as logical connectors, especially in academic writing. Therefore, it is vital to teach EFL learners to use conjunctions effectively in their academic writing. Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Skip to main content.Prof. C. Ó Giollagáin - ‘Language Minorities in Globalised Modernity’
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access. Alsop, S. CrossRef Google Scholar. Altenberg, B. Granger ed. Learner English on Computer pp. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Google Scholar. Celce-Murcia, M. Furuta, Y. Granger, S. The Learner Corpus: a revolution in applied linguistics. English Today10 3 : 25— World Englishes15 1 : 17— ReCALL19 3 : — Greaves, C.
Halliday, M. London: Longman. He, A. Foreign Language Teaching and Research6: —, Huang, L. Muo, J. Foreign Language Teaching5: 45— Narita, M. Nesi, H.
In: Frankenberg-Garcia, A. London: Continuum. Quirk, R. A comprehensive grammar of the English language.The present research is aimed at examining the relative importance of the competing motivators of the sequencing of reason clauses in a corpus of research articles of applied linguistics. All the finite reason clauses accompanied by their main clauses in this corpus were collected. Random forest of conditional inference trees is the statistical modelling in this study.
The findings showed that sentence-final reason clauses outnumber sentenceinitial ones. Moreover, subordinator choice and bridging, which are discourse-pragmatic constraints on clause positioning, emerged as the two more powerful predictors of the ordering of reason clauses in this corpus.
Furthermore, the complexity of the clause turned out to be a stronger processing-related predictor than the length of the clause. Aarts, Bass. Journal of English Linguistics 2.
Arnold, Jennifer E. Heaviness vs. Language 76 1. Bever, Thomas G. The Cognitive Basis for Linguistic Structures. In: John R. Hayes edCognition and the Development of Language, Hoboken: Wiley. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman. Birner, Betty J. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Breiman, Leo. Random Forests. Machine Learning 45 1. Chafe, Wallace. How People Use Adverbial Clauses.
Berkeley Linguistics Society The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity. Diessel, Holger. Language 77 3.
Linguistics 43 3. Cognitive Linguistics 19 3. Ford, Cecilia E. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibson, Edward. Linguistic Complexity: Locality of syntactic Dependencies.
Cognition 68 1. Syntax: An Introduction. Ute Reference Grammar.In addition to this, there does not seem to be a shared view as far as the classification and denomination of the different kinds of conjunctions are concerned cf. The selection of a specific type of conjunction acquires more importance because they are typically open to so many different interpretations, especially when the participants in the speech event come from diverse lingua-cultural backgrounds cf.
Guido ; Guido ; Cogo et al. We shall see the extent to which certain conjunctions are more restricted than others in terms of usage cf. Inoltre, non sembra esservi una visione condivisa per quanto concerne la classificazione delle diverse tipologie di congiunzione cf. Leung in entrambe le tipologie testuali, nonostante il gran numero di opzioni disponibili, e come le funzioni di congiunzioni - quali, per esempio, la coordinante and - necessitino di essere esplorate nuovamente, alla luce del loro utilizzo in contesti multiculturali.
Location of Repository. Topics: Language and Literature, P. OAI identifier: oai:doaj. Provided by: Directory of Open Access Journals new. Suggested articles.In addition to this, there does not seem to be a shared view as far as the classification and denomination of the different kinds of conjunctions are concerned cf. The selection of a specific type of conjunction acquires more importance because they are typically open to so many different interpretations, especially when the participants in the speech event come from diverse lingua-cultural backgrounds cf.
Guido ; Guido ; Cogo et al. Following the taxonomy provided by Halliday and Hasan for conjunctions, our study attempts to shed light on the usage of conjunctions by ELF speakers in specific contexts. We shall see the extent to which certain conjunctions are more restricted than others in terms of usage cf. Inoltre, non sembra esservi una visione condivisa per quanto concerne la classificazione delle diverse tipologie di congiunzione cf.
Leung in entrambe le tipologie testuali, nonostante il gran numero di opzioni disponibili, e come le funzioni di congiunzioni - quali, per esempio, la coordinante and - necessitino di essere esplorate nuovamente, alla luce del loro utilizzo in contesti multiculturali. Biber D. Caron J. Christiansen T. Cogo A. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge. Guido M. Peter Lang, Bern. Halliday M. Matthiessen, Edward Arnold, London. Hyland K. Leung C. Martin J. Rouchota V. Seidlhofer B. Vande Kopple W.
User Username Password Remember me. Font Size. Article Tools Print this article. Indexing metadata. How to cite item. Review policy. Email this article Login required. Email the author Login required. Laura Centonze.