The use of micro-level discourse markers in British and American feature-length films: Implications for teaching in EFL contexts

Yıl 2019, , 276 - 290, 25.03.2019

Hasan Çağlar Basol Galip Kartal

https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547735

Öz

Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
The use of micro-level discourse markers in British and American feature-length films: Implications for teaching in EFL contexts
Discourse markers (DMs) are significant for fluent speech. Furthermore, they are important elements of language for conversation organization, reciprocal relation among interlocutors, and productive speaking and comprehension. Although, they have very important functions for pragmatic development, they seem to be neglected in language teaching either because of the belief that they are difficult to teach, or as a result of the focus on grammatical competence in language teaching. This study examined the use and functions of micro-level. DMs in British and American feature-length films and it provided implications for using feature-lengths films as a source of authentic language input for explicit or implicit teaching of DMs. The scripts of four films (two British and two American) were analyzed using the AntConc Concordance program. The results show  that there is not a significant difference between British and American films in terms of the frequency of DMs well, like, and you know.  On the other hand, it is found that oh is used significantly more frequently in British films than American films. The functional analysis of the DMs showed that, both British and American feature-length films represent the use of English DMs in native discourse. Therefore, the study concludes that the films could be used for teaching and learning of DMs in foreign language teaching. The results are discussed in terms of pedagogical implications.
Information about Author(s)*
Author 1
Author (Last name, First name)	Basol, Hasan Caglar
Affiliated institution (University)	Selcuk University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No) Write only one corresponding author.	Yes
Author 2
Author (Last name, First name)	Kartal, Galip
Affiliated institution (University)	Necmettin Erbakan University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)	No
Author 3
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 4
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)

Anahtar Kelimeler

Discourse markers, films, frequency, pedagogical implications

Kaynakça

• Aijmer, K. (2011). Well I’m not sure I think The use of well by non-native speakers. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(2), 231-254.
• Alraddadi, B. M. (2016). The effect of teaching structural discourse markers in an ELF classroom setting. English Language Teaching, 9(7), 16-31.
• Anthony, L. (2011). AntConc (Version 3.2.2) [Computer Software] Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan Available from http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac. jp/
• Asık, A., & Cephe, P. T. (2013). Discourse markers and spoken English: Nonnative use in the Turkish ELF Setting. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 144-155.
• Aysu, S. (2017). The use of discourse markers in the writing of Turkish students of English as a foreign language: A corpus based study. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 7(1), 132-138.
• Bardovi-Harlig, H. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49(4), 677-713.
• Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 974–998.
• Buysse, L. (2012). So as a multifunctional discourse marker in native and learner speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1764-1782.
• Carless, D. (2009). Revisiting the TBLT versus P-P-P debate: voices from Hong Kong. Asian Journal of English Language teaching, 19, 49-66.
• Clarry Sada, W. S. (2016). Discourse markers used in short series movie ‘Friends’ and its relation with English language teaching. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembejalaran, 6(6), 1-16.
• Dastjerdi, H. V., & Shirzad, M. (2010). The impact of explicit instruction of metadiscourse markers on ELF learners' writing performance. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 2(2), 155-174.
• De Klerk, V. (2005). The use of actually in spoken Xhosa English: a corpus study. World Englishes, 24(3), 275-288.
• Escalera, E.A. (2009). Gender differences in children’s use of discourse markers: Separate worlds or different contexts? Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 2479–2495.
• Flowerdew, J., & Tauroza, D. (1995). The effects of discourse markers on second language lecture comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 435-458.
• Fraser, B. (1988). Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38, 19-33.
• Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 931-952.
• Fuller, J. M. (2003). Discourse marker use across speech contexts: a comparison of native and non-native speaker performance. Multilingua, 22, 185–208.
• Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). “Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings”. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410–439.
• Gholami, J., Mosalli, Z., & Nikou, S.B. (2012). Lexical complexity and discourse markers in soft and hard science articles. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(3), 368-374.
• Grant, L. E. (2010). A corpus comparison of the use of I don’t know by British and New Zealand speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2282–2296.
• Grant, L. E. (2011). The frequency and functions of “just” in British academic spoken English. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 183–197.
• Green, G. M. (2006). Discourse Particles in Natural Language Processing. Retrieved from http://www.linguistics.uiuc.edu/g-green/discourse.pdf
• Hellermann, J., & Vergun, A. (2007). Language which is not taught: The discourse marker use of beginning adult learners of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 157–179.
• House, J. (2009). Subjectivity in English as Lingua Franca discourse: The case of you know. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2, 171–193.
• Johns, T. (1994). From Printout to Handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. In Terense Odlin (Ed.) Perspectives on pedagogical grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Jones, C., & Carter, R. (2013). Teaching spoken discourse markers explicitly: A comparison of III and PPP. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 37-54.
• Jucker, A. (1993). The discourse marker ‘well’: A relevance-theoretical account. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 435–452.
• Jucker, A., & Smith, S. (1998). And people just you know like ‘wow’: discourse markers as negotiating strategies. In: Jucker, A., Ziv, Y. (Eds.), Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory (pp. 171–202). John Benjamins, Philadelphia.
• Kasper, G. (2001). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22(4). 502-530.
• Lam, P. W. Y. (2009). Discourse particles in corpus data and textbooks: The Case of Well. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 260–281.
• Lee, M. L. (2010). Interlanguage spoken discourse - exploratory study in discourse markers. Journal of Far East University General Education, 4, 165-184.
• Lee-Goldman, R. (2011). No as a discourse marker. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2627 - 2649.
• Liao, S. (2009). “Variation in the use of discourse markers by Chinese teaching assistants in the US”. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1313–1328.
• Martínez, A. (2009). Empirical Study of the Effects of Discourse Markers on the Reading Comprehension of Spanish Students of English as a Foreign Language. International Journal of English Studies, 19-43.
• Müller, S. (2004). Well you know that type of person: Functions of well in the speech of American and German students. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1157–82.
• Müller, S. (2005). Discourse markers in native and non-native English discourse. John Benjamins, Philadelphia.
• Norrick, N. R. (2001). Discourse markers in oral narrative. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 849–878.
• Polat, B. (2011). Investigating acquisition of discourse markers through a developmental learner corpus. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3745-3756.
• Popescu-Belis, A., & Zufferey, S. (2011). Automatic identification of discourse markers in dialogues: An in-depth study of like and well. Computer Speech and Language, 25, 499–518.
• Rahimi, F., & Riasati, M. J. (2012). The effect of explicit instruction of discourse markers on the quality of oral output. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(1), 70-81.
• Sadeghi, B., & Heideryan H. (2012). The effect of teaching pragmatic discourse markers on EFL learners’ listening comprehension. English Linguistics Research, 1(2), 165-176.
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Schourup, L. C. (1985). Common Discourse Particles in English Conversations: ‘Like’, ‘Well’, ‘Y’know’. Garland, New York, NY/London, UK.
• Schourup, L.C. (2001). Rethinking ‘well’. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1025–1060.
• Trester, A.M. (2009). Discourse marker ‘oh’ as a means for realizing the identity potential of constructed dialogue in interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(2),147–168.
• Uicheng, K., & Crabtree, M. (2018). Micro discourse markers in TED Talks: How ideas are signaled to listeners. PASAA, 55, 1-31.
• Webb, S. (2010). A corpus driven study of the potential for vocabulary learning through watching films. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,15, 497-519.
• Webb, S., & Rodgers, H. (2009). The lexical coverage of films. Applied Linguistics, 30, 407-427.
• Zorluel-Özer, H. & Okan, Z. (2018). Discourse markers in EFL classroom: A Corpus-driven research. Journal of Language and Linguistics Studies, 14(1). 50-66.