A socio-pragmatic analysis of the Turkish discourse markers of ‘şey’, ‘yani’, and ‘işte’ based on educational level of speakers

References

1. Aksan, Mustafa, and Yeşim Aksan
   2018 “Linguistic Corpora: A View from Turkish.” InStudies in Turkish Natural Language Processing, ed. byKemal Oflazer and Murat Saraçlar, 291–315. Berlin: Springer Verlag. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑90165‑7_14
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90165-7_14 [Google Scholar]
2. Altıparmak, Ayşe
   2022 “An analysis of Turkish interactional discourse markers ‘şey’, ‘yani’, and ‘işte’.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research51(4): 729–762. 10.1007/s10936‑022‑09840‑4
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09840-4 [Google Scholar]
3. Andersen, Elaine S., Maquela Brizuela, Beatrice DuPuy, and Laura Gonnerman
   1999 “Cross-linguistic evidence for the early acquisition of discourse markers as register variables.” Journal of Pragmatics311: 1339–1351. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(98)00108‑8
   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00108-8 [Google Scholar]
4. Bazzanella, Carla
   1990 “Phatic connectives as interactional cues in contemporary spoken Italian.” Journal of Pragmatics141: 629–647. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90034‑B
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90034-B [Google Scholar]
5. Beeching, Kate
   2007 “La co-variation des marqueurs discursifs bon, c’est-à-dire, enfin, hein, quand même, quoi, et si vous voulez : Une question d’identité?” [The co-variation of the discursive markers bon, c’est-a-dire, enfin, hein, quand meme, quoi, and si vous voulez: A question of identity?] Langue Française2(154): 78–93.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brinton, Laurel J.
   1996 Pragmatic Markers in English. Berlin and New York: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110907582
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110907582 [Google Scholar]
7. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
   1978 “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena.” InQuestions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, ed. byEsther N. Goody, 56–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Chafe, Wallace
   1987 “Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow.” InCoherence and Grounding in Discourse, ed. byRussell S. Tomlin, 21–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.11.03cha
   https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.11.03cha [Google Scholar]
9. Dailey-O’Cain, Jennifer
   2000 “The sociolinguistic distribution of and attitudes toward focuser like and quotative like.” Journal of Sociolinguistics41: 60–80. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00103
   https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00103 [Google Scholar]
10. Du Bois, John W., Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Susanna Cumming, and Danae Paolino
    1993 “Outline of Discourse Transcription.” InTalking Data: Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research, ed. byJane A. Edwards and Martin D. Lampert, 45–89. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet
    1999 “New generalizations and explanations in language and gender research.” Language in Society281: 185–201. 10.1017/S0047404599002031
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599002031 [Google Scholar]
12. Erman, Britt
    1986 “Some Pragmatic Expressions in English Conversation.” InEnglish in Speech and Writing: A Symposium, ed. byGunnel Tottie and Ingegerd Bäklund, 131–147. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Erman, Britt
    1992 “Female and male usage of pragmatic expressions in same-sex and mixedsex interaction.” Language Variation and Change41: 217–234. 10.1017/S0954394500000764
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000764 [Google Scholar]
14. Foolen, Ad
    1996 “Pragmatic Particles.” InHandbook of Pragmatics, ed. byJef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert, and Chris Bulcaen, 1–24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hop.2.pra3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.2.pra3 [Google Scholar]
15. Fraser, Bruce
    2005 Guidelines for Research in Discourse Markers. Boston: Boston University.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Furman, Reyhan, and Aslı Özyürek
    2007 “Development of interactional discourse markers: Insights from Turkish children’s and adults’ oral narratives.” Journal of Pragmatics391: 1742–1757. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.01.008 [Google Scholar]
17. Gabarró-Lopez, Silvia
    2020 “Are discourse markers related to age and educational background? A comparative account between two sign languages.” Journal of Pragmatics1561: 68–82. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.019 [Google Scholar]
18. Goffman, Erving
    1955 “On face-work.” Psychiatry18(3): 213–231. 10.1080/00332747.1955.11023008
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1955.11023008 [Google Scholar]
19. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1970 “Language Structure and Language Functions.” InNew Horizons in Linguistics, ed. byJohn Lyons, 140–165. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1977 Explorations in the Functions of Language. New York: Elsevier North-Holland.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1978 Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1979 “Modes of Meaning and Modes of Expression: Types of Grammatical Structure, and their Determination by Different Semantic Functions.” InFunction and Context in Linguistic Analysis: Essays Offered to William Haas, ed.D. J. Allerton, Edward Carney, and David Holdcroft, 57–79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Holmes, Janet
    1986 “Functions of you know in women’s and men’s speech.” Language in Society151: 1–22. 10.1017/S0047404500011623
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500011623 [Google Scholar]
24. Holmes, Janet, Allan Bell, and Mary Teresa Boyce
    1991 Variation and Change in New Zealand English: A Social Dialect Investigation. (Project Report to the Social Sciences Committee of the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology). Wellington: Victoria University.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Ilgın, Leyla, and Nalan Büyükkantarcıoğlu
    1994 “Türkçe’de “Yani” Sözcüğünün Kullanımı Üzerine Bir İnceleme.” [A Study on the Use of the Word “Yani” in Turkish]. InProceedings of the 8th Turkish Linguistics Conference, 24–37. Istanbul: Istanbul University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Leech, Geoffrey
    1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Levelt, Willem J. M.
    1983 “Monitoring and self-repair in speech.” Cognition141: 41–104. 10.1016/0010‑0277(83)90026‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4 [Google Scholar]
28. Macaulay, Ronald
    2002 “You know, it depends.” Journal of Pragmatics341: 749–767. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(01)00005‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00005-4 [Google Scholar]
29. Matei, Mădălina
    2011 “The influence of age and gender on the selection of discourse markers in casual conversations.” Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov Series IV: Philology and Cultural Studies4 (53) No.1: 213–220.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Müller, Simone
    2005 Discourse Markers in Native and Non-native English Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.138
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.138 [Google Scholar]
31. Östman, Jan-Ola
    1981 You Know: A Discourse-Functional Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pb.ii.7
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.ii.7 [Google Scholar]
32. Özbek, Nurdan
    1995 Discourse Markers in Turkish and English: A Comparative Study. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Nottingham: Nottingham University.
33. Özbek, Nurdan
    2000 “Yani, İşte, Şey, Ya: Interactional Markers of Turkish.” InStudies on Turkish and Turkic Languages, ed. byAslı Göksel and Celia Kerslake, 393–401. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Perera, Kaushalya
    2021 “Interviewing academic elites: A discourse analysis of shifting power relations.” Qualitative Research21(2): 215–233. 10.1177/1468794120924208
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120924208 [Google Scholar]
35. Povolná, Renata
    2008 “Why are there so many labels for discourse markers?” Discourse and Interaction1/11: 115–124.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Ruhi, Şükriye
    2009 “The Pragmatics of Yani as a Parenthetical Marker in Turkish: Evidence from the METU Turkish Corpus.” InWorking Papers in Corpus-Based Linguistics and Language Education31: 285–298.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Ruhi, Şükriye
    2013 “Interactional markers in Turkish: A corpus-based perspective.” Journal of Linguistics and Literature10(2): 1–7.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1987 Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841 [Google Scholar]
39. Schleef, Erik
    2004 “Gender, power, discipline, and context: On the sociolinguistic variation of okay, right, like, and you know in English academic discourse.” Texas Linguistic Forum481: 177–186.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Schwalbe, Michael L., and Michelle Wolkomir
    2002 “Interviewing Men.” InHandbook of Interview Research, ed. byJaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein, 203–19. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Stubbe, Maria, and Janet Holmes
    1995 “You know, eh and other ‘exasperating expressions’: an analysis of social and stylistic variation in the use of pragmatic devices in a sample of New Zealand English.” Language & Communication15(1): 63–88. 10.1016/0271‑5309(94)00016‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(94)00016-6 [Google Scholar]
42. Wenger-Trayner, Etienne, and Beverly Wenger-Trayner
    2015 An Introduction to Communities of Practice: A Brief Overview of the Concept and Its Uses. Available from authors athttps://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice
    [Google Scholar]
43. Yılmaz, Erkan
    1994 Descriptive and Comparative Study of the Discourse Markers ‘Well’ in English and ‘Şey’ in Turkish (Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Colchester: Essex University.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Yılmaz, Erkan
    2004 A Pragmatic Analysis of Turkish Discourse Particles: Yani, İşte and Şey. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.