The Use Of English Discourse Markers Under The Framework Of Adaptation Theory

The study on discourse markers currently has become an interdisciplinary research area of psychology, philosophy and linguistics. In linguistics, many scholars have done researches on different theoretical background. Semanticists, pragmaticists in the Gricean tradition, speech act theorists and discourse analysts all contribute to the studies on discourse markers. Discourse markers have been studied from the syntactico-pragmatic perspective, the semantico-pragmatic perspective to the pragma-cognitive perspective. Discourse markers have attracted the interest of a wide variety of researchers of different ethnicity. A large amount of researches are still carried out from different perspectives. The present research tentatively applies the Adaptation Theory proposed by Verschueren (1999) to the analysis of the use of discourse markers, aiming at some findings which can throw light on future studies pursuing a comprehensive and thorough account of discourse markers.According to the Adaptation Theory, using language consists of the continuous making of linguistic choices. Therefore, the use of discourse markers, as a particular phenomenon, is also a linguistic choice-making process, in which speakers make adaptation consciously or unconsciously to approach points of satisfaction for communicative needs. Three properties of discourse markers, i.e. variability, negotiability and adaptability, are responsible for choice making. Variability of discourse markers is manifested in various forms for choosing discourse markers and it is the source of making choice. Negotiability of discourse markers refers to the fact that choices are not made mechanically or according to strict rules, but rather on the basis of highly flexible principles and strategies. Adaptability enables human beings to make negotiable choices from numerous discourse markers so as to achieve communicative goals. The three properties are hierarchically interrelated. Without both variability and negotiability, adaptability has no content. On the other hand, adaptability is at the core of the investigation of language use.Referring to Yu Guodong (2000), the specific objects to which speakers adapt ate categorized into linguistic reality, social conventions and psychological motivations. Considering the fact that adaptation to linguistic reality or social conventions is basically driven by communicator-external force, these two types of adaptation are called passive adaptation. By contrast, adaptation to psychological motivations is an active adaptation since it originates from communicator-internal force. First of all, adaptation to linguistic reality stands for the adaptation to linguistic existence and linguistic features. Secondly, with respect to social conventions, this dissertation mainly discusses how politeness motivates the use of discourse markers. Finally, psychological motivations also play a significant impact on the use of discourse markers. Different psychological motivations may lead to the choice of different strategies as well as different discourse markers.With the functioning of human"mind in society", the making of choices in general as well as the mental processes contributing to the overarching operation of linguistic choice making can all take place with different degrees of salience. Accordingly, some discourse markers are used very consciously whereas others are used unconsciously. With the regard to the issue of the salience in the choice of discourse markers, Verschueren's observation that what is more marked will be more clearly noticed and so more conscious or salient sheds much light on the issue.