Asia Pacific Journal of Corpus Research (아시아태평양코퍼스연구)

Institute for Corpus Research (국립인천대학교 코퍼스연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Non-Discourse Marker Uses of So in EFL Writings: Functional Variability among Asian Learners

  • Received : 2020.10.29
  • Accepted : 2020.12.19
  • Published : 2020.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper examines the frequency and distribution of the so-called "non-discourse marker functions" of so in essay writings produced by 200 L1 English speakers and 1,300 EFL learners in China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Based on the data drawn from the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English, this study compares EFL learners and L1 English speakers' uses of so, identifying four grammatical uses, as (1) an adverb, (2) part of a fixed phrase, (3) a pro-form, and (4) a conjunction phrase specifying purpose. This study aims to show the wide variability among EFL learners with different L1s, identifying the tendency of usage both common among and specific to the sub-groups of EFL learners. The findings suggest that the learners demonstrate patterns distinctively different from those of L1 English speakers, indicating an underuse of so as a marker expressing "purpose" and an overuse as part of fixed phrases. Compared to L1 English speakers, the learners also tend to overuse so in the discourse marker functions, regardless of their L1s. The study proposes pedagogical implications focusing on discourse flow and diachronic aspects of so in order to understand its multifunctionality, although the latter is primarily suggested for advanced learners.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Portions of this paper were presented at the 6th International Conference on Language, Literature and Society 2019.

References

  1. Babanoglu, M. P. (2014). A corpus-based study on the use of pragmatic markers as speech-like features in Turkish EFL learners' argumentative essays. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 186-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.312
  2. Baker, P. S. (2012). Introduction to Old English. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
  3. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Essex: Pearson Education.
  4. Blakemore, D. (1988). 'So' as a constraint on relevance. In Kempson, R. (Ed.), Mental Representations: The Interface Between Language and Reality (pp. 183-195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker 'so' in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 974-998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.004
  6. Buysse, L. (2007). Discourse marker 'so' in the English of Flemish university students. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures, 5, 79-95.
  7. Buysse, L. (2012). 'So' as a multifunctional discourse marker in native and learner speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1764-1782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.08.012
  8. Curme, G. O. (1931). Syntax. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath & Company.
  9. Ding, R., & Wang, L. (2015). Discourse markers in local and native English teachers' talk in Hong Kong EFL classroom interaction: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(5), 65-75.
  10. Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6(2), 167-190. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.2.03fra
  11. Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28, 410-439. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm030
  12. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.008
  13. Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Ishikawa, S. (2013). The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian learners of English. Learner Corpus Studies in Asia and the World, 1, 91-118.
  15. Johnson, A. (2002). So...?: Pragmatic implications of so-prefaced questions in formal police interviews. In Cotterill, J. (Ed.), Language in the Legal Process (pp. 91-110). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  16. Lam, P. W. Y. (2009). The effect of text type on the use of so as a discourse particle. Discourse Studies, 11, 353-372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609102448
  17. Lam, P. W. Y. (2010). Toward a functional framework for discourse particles: A comparison of well and so. Text & Talk, 30(6), 657-677. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2010.032
  18. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Celce-Murcia, M. (2016). The Grammar Book: Form, Meaning, and Use for English Language Teachers. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
  19. Liu, B. (2017). The use of discourse markers but and so by native English speakers and Chinese speakers of English. Pragmatics, 27(4), 479-506. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.27.4.01liu
  20. Mitchell, B., & Robinson, F. C. (2011). A Guide to Old English. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
  21. Muller, S. (2005). Discourse Markers in Native and Non-native English Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  22. Quirk, R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
  23. Sato, S. (2019). A corpus-based analysis of so in written discourse: A comparison between L1 English speakers and Japanese EFL learners. Applied Pragmatics, 1(1), 26-45. https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00002.sat
  24. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Schourup, L. C. (1999). Discourse markers. Lingua, 107, 227-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(96)90026-1
  26. van Dijk, T. A. (1979). Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 447-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90019-5
  27. Vickov, G., & Jakupcevic, E. (2017). Discourse markers in non-native EFL teacher talk. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(4), 649-671. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2017.7.4.5