2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.11.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Procedural meanings of well in a corpus of Xhosa English

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0
6

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
23
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Examples are utterance-initial usages of but, therefore, in conclusion, to the contrary, still, however, anyway, well, besides, actually, all in all, so, after all, and so on. It is generally conceded that such words have at least a component of meaning that resists truth-conditional treatment /.../ What they seem to do is indicate, often in a very complex ways, just how the utterance that contains them is a response to, or a continuation of, some portion of the prior discourse.« In discourse studies, there has been increasing interest in discourse markers over the past decades, not only in English but many languages worldwide, as can be seen from the number of articles (e.g., Redeker 1990;Fraser 1996;Swerts 1998;Kroon 1998;Fox Tree and Schrock 1999;Montes 1999;Andersen et al 1999;Archakis 2001;Matsui 2001;Schourup 2001;Norrick 2001;Vlemings 2003;Fuller 2003;Fukushima 2004;de Klerk 2004;Tagliamonte 2005;Dedaić 2005;Tchizmarova 2005), special issues (e.g., Discourse Processes, 1997 (24/1); Journal of Pragmatics, 1999 (31/10)), workshops (e.g., Workshop on Discourse Markers, Egmond aan Zee, Nederlands, January 1995; COLING-ACL Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers, Montreal, Canada, August 1998), and books (e.g., Schiffrin 1987;Jucker and Ziv 1998;Blakemore 2002) on the subject.…”
Section: Discourse Markersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples are utterance-initial usages of but, therefore, in conclusion, to the contrary, still, however, anyway, well, besides, actually, all in all, so, after all, and so on. It is generally conceded that such words have at least a component of meaning that resists truth-conditional treatment /.../ What they seem to do is indicate, often in a very complex ways, just how the utterance that contains them is a response to, or a continuation of, some portion of the prior discourse.« In discourse studies, there has been increasing interest in discourse markers over the past decades, not only in English but many languages worldwide, as can be seen from the number of articles (e.g., Redeker 1990;Fraser 1996;Swerts 1998;Kroon 1998;Fox Tree and Schrock 1999;Montes 1999;Andersen et al 1999;Archakis 2001;Matsui 2001;Schourup 2001;Norrick 2001;Vlemings 2003;Fuller 2003;Fukushima 2004;de Klerk 2004;Tagliamonte 2005;Dedaić 2005;Tchizmarova 2005), special issues (e.g., Discourse Processes, 1997 (24/1); Journal of Pragmatics, 1999 (31/10)), workshops (e.g., Workshop on Discourse Markers, Egmond aan Zee, Nederlands, January 1995; COLING-ACL Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers, Montreal, Canada, August 1998), and books (e.g., Schiffrin 1987;Jucker and Ziv 1998;Blakemore 2002) on the subject.…”
Section: Discourse Markersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Factor two named identification with the native speaker norm and contained items (31, 32, 33, 42, 43, 44, 48). Factor three named pragmatic (however, in this study this category is named practical) value of DMs is comprised of the value of the following items (1,2,3,7,12,27,29,30). Factor four named dispensable value of DMs and they are composed of these items (4,5,6,8,10,11,13).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a DM, the role of well is, broadly speaking, to "signal that the context created by an utterance may not be the most relevant one for the interpretation of the next utterance" (Jucker, 1993, page 450). Four specific functions of the DM well have been identified in the literature (Jucker, 1993;Schourup, 2001;de Klerk, 2005), again illustrated below with examples from the ICSI-MR corpus. In (6), well conveys some kind of insufficiency, showing that a background assumption of speaker A is not entirely adequate, and B cannot answer A's question without denying that assumption first; in (7), well is a "face-threat mitigator" which helps to disagree politely; in (8), well introduces an instance of reported speech, while in (9) it marks hesitation.…”
Section: Like and Well As Dms Or Non-dmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,000 words), and found 0.55% and 0.62% for DM like, and respectively 0.36% and 0.55% for DM well. In a corpus of non-native English speakers, de Klerk (2005Klerk ( , p. 1189Klerk ( -1190 found 788 uses of well over 540,000 words, of which 494 (62.6% or 0.09% of all words) were DMs. In a 50,000 word sample of the London-Lund Corpus, we found 500 occurrences of well, of which 87.4% were DMs (0.87% of all words).…”
Section: Dm Frequencies In the Icsi-mr And Other Corporamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation