1887
Volume 20, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

In the present paper, we investigate a group of markers in spoken interaction, commonly termed general extenders (GEs). We compare their usage in different discourse settings within the reference speech corpus of the Slovene language GOS. The results show that there is a high variability of GE form, but that most forms are rarely used. GEs are generally less frequent in public and formal settings, such as classes and radio and television informative broadcasts, and more frequent in private settings. Substantial differences are found not only between the two groups of GEs, adjunctive and disjunctive, but also between particular GE expressions. We argue that mere qualitative analysis of pragmatic expressions such as GEs is not sufficient for reliable conclusions, and that quantitative corpus analysis can provide additional insights into GE functions, especially considering the differences between the two groups of GEs, adjunctives and disjunctives, and between particular GE expressions.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.20.4.02ver
2015-12-30
2022-08-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aijmer, K
    (1985) What happens at the end of our utterances? The use of utterance-final tags introduced by and and or . In Togeby, O . (Ed.), Papers from the 8th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics (pp. 117–127). Copenhagen, Denmark: Institut for Nordisk Philologie, Kopenhaven University.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (1996) English Discourse Particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.10 [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, D. , Johansson, S. , Leech, G. , Conrad, S. , & Finegan, E
    (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, UK: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Biber, D. , Conrad, S. , Reppen, R. , Byrd, P. , & Helt, M
    (2002) Speaking and writing in the university: A multidimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly, 36(1), 9–48. doi: 10.2307/3588359
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588359 [Google Scholar]
  5. Channell, J
    (1994) Vague Language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheshire, J
    (2007) Discourse variation, grammaticalisation and stuff like that. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(2), 155–193. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2007.00317.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00317.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Corté Rodríguez, L
    (2006) Los elementos de final de serie enumerativa del tipo ‘y todo eso, o cosas así, y tal etc. Perspectiva interactiva. Boletin de Linguistica, 18(26), 102–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dines, E.R
    (1980) Variation in discourse: ‘And stuff like that’. Language in Society, 9(1), 13–31. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500007764
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007764 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dubois, S
    (1992) Extension particles, etc. Language Variation and Change, 4(2), 179–203. doi: 10.1017/S0954394500000740
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000740 [Google Scholar]
  10. Erjavec, T
    (2013) Slovene corpora for corpus linguistics and language technologies. In K. Gajdišová & A. Žáková (Eds.), Natural Language Processing, Corpus Linguistics, e-Learning: Proceedings (pp. 51–61). Lüdensheid, Germany: RAM-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Erjavec, T. , Javoršek, J.J. , & Krek, S
    (2014) Raziskovalna infrastruktura CLARIN.SI / The research infrastructure CLARIN.SI. In T. Erjavec & J. Žganec Gros (Eds.), Language Technologies: Proceedings of the 17th International Multiconference Information Society (pp. 19–24). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Institut Jožef Stefan.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fernandez, J. , & Yuldashev, A
    (2011) Variation in the use of general extenders and stuff in instant messaging interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(10), 2610–2626. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.012 [Google Scholar]
  13. ten Have, P
    (1990) Methodological issues in conversation analysis 1. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 27(1), 23–51. doi: 10.1177/075910639002700102
    https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639002700102 [Google Scholar]
  14. Koester, A.J
    (2000) The role of idioms in negotiating workplace encounters. In H. Trappes-Lomax (Ed.), Change and Continuity in Applied Linguistics (pp. 169–183). Clevedon/NewYork: British Association for Applied Linguistics, Multilingual Matters Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kosem, I. , & Verdonik, D
    (2012) Key word analysis of discourses in Slovene speech: Differences and similarities. Linguistica (Ljubljana), 52(1), 309–321.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lee, J
    (2009) Size matters: An exploratory comparison of small- and large-class university lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 28(1), 42–57. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2008.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Louwerse, M. , Crossley, S. , & Jeuniaux, P
    (2008) What if? Conditionals in educational registers. Linguistics and Education, 19(1), 56–69. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2008.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2008.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Martinez, I.M.P
    (2011) I might, I might go I mean it depends on money things and stuff: A preliminary analysis of general extenders in British teenagers’ discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(9), 2452–2470. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.02.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.02.011 [Google Scholar]
  19. Nesi, H
    (2001) A corpus-based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines. In J. Cotterill & A. Ife (Eds.), Language across Boundaries (pp. 201–218). London, UK: Continuum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Norrby, C. , & Winter, J
    (2002) Affiliation in adolescents’ use of discourse extenders. In C. Allen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2001 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, Canberra, 27-30 September 2001. Retrieved fromwww.als.asn.au/proceedings/als2001/winter_norrby.pdf (last accessedApril 2015).
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Norric, N.R
    (2009) Pragmatic markers: Introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 863–865. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.008 [Google Scholar]
  22. Overstreet, M
    (1999) Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff Like That: General Extenders in English Discourse. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2005) And stuff und so: Investigating pragmatic expressions in English and German. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(11), 1845–1864. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.02.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.02.015 [Google Scholar]
  24. Overstreet, M. , & Yule, G
    (2001) Formulaic disclaimers. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(1), 45–60. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00125‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00125-3 [Google Scholar]
  25. Parvaresh, V. , Tavangar, M. , & Eslami Rasekh, A
    (2010) General extenders in Persian discourse: Frequency and grammatical distribution. Cross-cultural Communication, 6(3), 18–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Pichler, H. , & Levey, S
    (2010) Variability in the co-occurrence of discourse features. Language Studies Working Papers, 2(1), 17–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Pisanski Peterlin, A
    (2005) Text-organising metatext in research articles: An English-Slovene contrastive analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 307–319. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  28. Schlamberger Brezar, M
    (2007) Vloga povezovalcev v govorjenem diskurzu. Jezik in slovstvo, 52(3–4), 21–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Schourup, L
    (1999) Discourse markers. Lingua, 107(3–4), 227–265. doi: 10.1016/S0024‑3841(96)90026‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(96)90026-1 [Google Scholar]
  30. Simpson, R.C
    (2004) Stylistic features of academic speech: The role of formulaic expressions. In U. Connor & T.A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.16.03sim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.16.03sim [Google Scholar]
  31. Smolej, M
    (2010) Kazalci stopnje besedilne zgradbe v govorjenih narativnih besedilih. In I. Novak Popov (Ed.), Vloge središča: konvergenca regij in kultur (pp. 91–102). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Zveza društev Slavistično društvo Slovenije.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Swales, J.M
    (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge, UK: C.U.P.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tagliamonte, S.A. , & Denis, D
    (2010) The stuff of change: General extenders in Toronto, Canada. Journal of English Linguistics, 38(4), 335–368. doi: 10.1177/0075424210367484
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424210367484 [Google Scholar]
  34. Terraschke, A
    (2010) Or so, oder so, and stuff like that – general extenders in New Zealand English, German and in learner language. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(3), 449–469. doi: 10.1515/iprg.2010.020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2010.020 [Google Scholar]
  35. Verdonik, D
    (2010) Vpliv komunikacijskih žanrov na rabo diskurznih označevalcev. In Š. Vintar (Ed.), Slovenske korpusne raziskave(pp. 88–108). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Verdonik, D. , & Kačič, Z
    (2012) Označevalci odprte propozicije v govorjenem diskurzu. Slavistična revija, 60(1), 79–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Verdonik, D. , Kosem, I. , Zwitter Vitez, A. , Krek, S. , & Stabej, M
    (2013) Compilation, transcription and usage of a reference speech corpus: The case of the Slovene corpus GOS. Language Resources and Evaluation Journal, 47(4), 1031–1048. doi: 10.1007/s10579‑013‑9216‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-013-9216-5 [Google Scholar]
  38. Verdonik, D. , Rojc, M. , & Stabej, M
    (2007) Annotating discourse markers in spontaneous speech corpora on an example for the Slovenian language. Language Resources and Evaluation Journal, 41(2), 147–180. doi: 10.1007/s10579‑007‑9035‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-007-9035-7 [Google Scholar]
  39. Verdonik, D. , Žgank, A. , & Pisanski Peterlin, A
    (2008) The impact of context on discourse marker use in two conversational genres. Discourse Studies, 10(6), 759–775. doi: 10.1177/1461445608096572
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445608096572 [Google Scholar]
  40. Zemljak Jontes, M. , Kačič, Z. , Dobrišek, S. , Žganec Gros, J. , & Weiss, P
    (2002) Računalniški simbolni fonetični zapis slovenskega govora. Slavistična revija, 50(2), 159–169.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.20.4.02ver
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): general extenders; speech variability; spoken genre; vague expression
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error