A Study Of Discourse Markers Within The Framework Of Adaptation Theory

In daily communication, discourse markers serve as a pervasively used linguistic phenomenon. They are usually words or structures playing certain pragmatic functions in utterances. Taking a discourse marker away from the host discourse segment it is attached to does not affect the syntactic grammatical judgments or its propositional content, but does affect the pragmatic appropriateness and interpersonal relation on the social level. A good command of employing and understanding discourse markers not only helps us to process our communication smoothly but also helps us to achieve coherence in the discourse. So the research on the discourse markers is of great theoretical and practical significance.Since the 1970s, linguists, especially pragmatic linguists, from different research schools, have studied on discourse markers constantly. However, researches on discourse markers, though rich and fruitful, are far from being homogeneous and complete. Generally, there are three main distinctive schools on discourse markers, i.e., the coherence school represented by Schiffrin and Redeker, the grammar school represented by Fraser, and the relevance school represented by Blakemore and Rouchota. The term"discourse marker"has different meanings for different schools of researchers. And there is no agreement about what elements in a particular language should be referred to as discourse markers. None of them offer a comprehensive description from both speaker-oriented and hearer-oriented perspectives.Besides, the following three questions have never been discussed in a unified account: Why are discourse markers used? How do they function in utterance production? What role do they play in utterance interpretation? Assuming that a comprehensive account of discourse markers is supposed to answer these three questions, the present research conducts a general survey into the existing pragmatic schools on discourse markers, and tentatively employs Verschueren's Adaptation Theory as the theoretical framework to interpret the functions and roles of discourse markers from both utterance production and utterance interpretation, aiming at some findings which can shed light on further researches.The present dissertation consists of seven chapters, with the introduction as Chapter One, which briefly introduces discourse markers, the aims, methodology, and rationale of the study, and the organization of the paper. Chapter Two discusses the main schools to discourse markers and points out their advantages and disadvantages. Reviewing the existing definition of discourse markers, considering the characteristics of discourse markers, it sets forth a new statement as the working definition for the present study.Chapter Three introduces the theoretical framework of Adaptation Theory, which includes three properties of language, that is, variability, negotiability, and adaptability, and four angles of investigation, which are the contextual correlates of adaptability, the structural objects of adaptability, the dynamics of adaptability, the salience of the adaptation processes, meaning generation and metapragmatic awareness.Chapter Four interprets the factors of using discourse markers. Within the adaptation theoretical framework, using discourse markers is the results of linguistic choice-making, and the means of linguistic adaptation.Chapter Five discusses the functions of discourse markers in utterance production. In verbal communication, speakers are controlled by metapragmatic awareness to choose all kinds of discourse markers, which can realize different pragmatic functions and adapt to different communicative aims at three levels: prior proposition, current proposition and future proposition.Chapter Six explains the roles of discourse markers in utterance interpretation. Discourse markers can be used as explicit linguistic clues, and marked discourse markers often have a higher degree of salience. Hearers process discourse markers at different levels of awareness. By using discourse markers, the hearers can understand utterances correctly, and realize the interaction in communication.Chapter Seven is the concluding remarks, where the major findings are summarized. The theoretical and practical significance, the limitations of the present research as well as the suggestions are also talked about in this part.