: functions of in the speech of American and German students

Müller, Simone

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.01.008

Cited by 45 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, a study by Muller (2004) suggested different patterns of DM usage for German learners of English. This study was based on the retellings and discussion of a short film by American native English speakers and German learners of English.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Rahimi¹

2011

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to investigate the frequency and the type of discourse markers used in the argumentative and expository writings of Iranian EFL learners and the differences between these text features in the two essay genres. The study also aimed at examining the influence of the use of discourse markers on the participants' writing quality. To this end the discourse markers used in two essays (an argumentative and an expository) written by the participants of the study were analyzed. The results indicated a hierarchy of use of discourse markers in both essay types with elaborative markers (mainly "and") the most frequently connectors used in both essay types. Next came contrastive and inferential markers; reason, exemplifier, and conclusive markers, respectively, were the least frequently used connectors. The results, moreover, indicated that, on the whole, the mean of discourse marker use was significantly higher in argumentative essays than in expository essays. As for discourse marker categories, contrastive and conclusive markers were used more frequently in argumentative than in expository essays. The results, nonetheless, showed that the use of discourse markers cannot be a significant predictor of the writing quality in argumentative and expository compositions of Iranian undergraduate EFL students.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Rahimi¹

2011

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This overuse and underuse might be due to different sources such as instructors, textbooks, and the context of classroom interaction. The case of textbooks is suggested by Muller (2004) study on German learners of English and Rahimi (2011). The students' relationship in the classroom may not facilitate and provide the proper and the most likely context for various interpersonal usages.…”

Section: Sample Instances Of Dms Functions In Class C Applied By the mentioning

confidence: 99%

The frequencies and functions of discourse markers in the Iranian university EFL classroom discourse

Nejadansari¹,

Mohammadi²

2014

IJRSLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classroom discourse is the investigation of the models of classroom participation and is a comprehensive and multidimensional phenomenon. As semantically empty and functionally complicated linguistic devices, discourse markers assist the teachers and the learners monitor their discourse in the classroom. This exploratory study analyzed the frequency of occurrence, distribution, and the pragmatic functions of DMs in the Iranian university EFL teachers' and learners' classroom discourse quantitatively and qualitatively. Applying Fraser (1999Fraser ( , 2008 taxonomy, the researchers explored the frequency of occurrence and distribution of discourse markers quantitatively. The qualitative phase researched the functions of DMs on the basis of Brinton's (1996) classification. The data was recorded and transcribed from four EFL teachers' and students' classroom interactions. The results revealed that the subjects applied few DMs -7.76% out of the whole lexical size; overemployed message relating DMs; underused focus and attention markers; and never used comment and attitude markers. Also, in the process of monitoring discourse, teachers utilized more than 60% of DMs and their gender played no significant part. Moreover, the subjects applied textual functions more frequently than interpersonal functions, overusing information indicators and underusing closing and turn giving markers. The insufficient and imbalanced use of DMs and their relevant functions provide the evidence for the typical neglect of the knowledge of these discourse managing and regulating devices as an educational reality due to the inadequate input for discourse pedagogy in the Iranian university EFL context. This study can have some pedagogical implications for curriculum designers, teachers, learners, teacher trainers, and materials developers.

show abstract

“…DMs have been investigated in classroom oral discourse (Hays, 1992), informal settings (Lee, 1999;Muller, 2004;Trillo, 2002), reading (Abdullah Zadeh, 2006;Jalilifar & Alipour, 2007), lectures (Dailey-O'Cain, 2000;Perez & Macia, 2002), academic genres (Abdi, 2002;Blagojevic, 2003;Bunton, 1999;Longo, 1994;Mauranen, 1993;Ventola & Mauranen, 1993), and student writings (Connor, 1984;Field & Yip, 1992;Intraprawat & Steffensen, 1995;Johns, 1984;Johnson, 1992;Karasi, 1994;Norment, 1994;Steffensen & Cheng, 1996. These studies have targeted their use patterns of frequency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Markers in Composition Writings: The Case of Iranian Learners of English as a Foreign Language

Jalilifar¹

2008

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to investigate discourse markers in descriptive compositions of 90 Iranian students who were selected from two universities. Without any instruction, they were given a topic to write a descriptive composition per week for 8 weeks. 598 compositions were collected, and they were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively by three raters following Fraser's (1999) taxonomy of Discourse Markers. Findings showed that students employed discourse markers with different degrees of occurrence. Elaborative markers were the most frequently used, followed by inferential, contrastive, causative, and topic relating markers. There was a direct and positive relationship between the quality of the compositions and the number of well-functioned discourse markers. Results also revealed statistically significant differences between the use of discourse markers and composition quality in the groups. Graduate students used more discourse markers, and this led to more cohesive texts.

show abstract

: functions of in the speech of American and German students

Cited by 45 publications

References 14 publications

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

The frequencies and functions of discourse markers in the Iranian university EFL classroom discourse

Discourse Markers in Composition Writings: The Case of Iranian Learners of English as a Foreign Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About