Skip to main content

Overview of the Corpus Findings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Contrastive View of Discourse Markers
  • 242 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents the main corpus findings in relation to the annotation grid. This short chapter successively examines the results obtained for the different levels of analysis: semantic-pragmatic, syntactic and collocational. The overall results show that the four DMs have one pragmatic function in common—metalinguistic comment—which is not surprising for DMs of saying. Despite this common feature, many divergences appear: first, some of the DMs have developed other functions; second, the four DMs do not rely on the same type of commitment and exhibit dissimilar syntactic and collocational features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Authier-Revuz, J. (1995). Ces mots qui ne vont pas de soi. Boucles rĂ©flexives et non-coĂŻncidences du dire (Vols. 1 & 2). Paris: Larousse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. (2009). Topic orientation markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 892–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lansari, L. (2017). I was going to say/j’allais dire as discourse markers in contemporary English and French. Languages in Contrast, 17(2), 205–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, A., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (2013). Affiliation in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 350–369). West Sussex: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peräkylä, A. (2012). What does the study of interaction offer to emotion research? In A. Peräkylä & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Emotion in interaction (pp. 274–289). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riou, M. (2015). The grammar of topic transition in American English conversation. Topic transition design and management in typical and atypical conversations (schizophrenia) (PhD dissertation). University Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3, University Paris Diderot (Paris 7).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schourup, L. (1999). Discourse markers. Lingua, 107(3–4), 227–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language in Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laure Lansari .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lansari, L. (2020). Overview of the Corpus Findings. In: A Contrastive View of Discourse Markers. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24896-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24896-3_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-24895-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-24896-3

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics