A Corpus-Driven Study On Pragmatic Fossilization Of Discourse Markers By Chinese EFL Learners

As an interdisciplinary branch of SLA and pragmatics, interlanguage pragmatics (ILP) focuses on the acquisition of pragmatic knowledge and the development of pragmatic competence of non-native speakers. As a consequence, the phenomenon of fossilization can be revealed not only at linguistic aspects (phonological, semantic, and syntactic) of a language but also at pragmatic aspect of a language.Within the theory of ILP, based on the Spoken English Corpus of Chinese Learners (SECCL), this thesis aims to investigate the pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers (DMs) by Chinese English majors, focusing on the general characteristics of discourse markers by Chinese EFL learners, the top ten DMs used by Chinese learners, the pragmatic use of filler-type discourse markers (FTMs) by Chinese learners, and the differences between higher achievers and lower achievers of Chinese EFL learners in the use of filler-type DMs.With the results of other researchers' studies on English DMs used by native speakers as baseline data, this study leads to conclusions as follows:1) In general, Chinese EFL learners are inferior to native speakers in the use of DMs in terms of both the percentage and the number of categories, which proves that Chinese learners have some degree of fossilization and overgeneralization in the use of some English DMs.2) As for the top ten DMs in SECCL, except and, the other nine DMs are different from the top ten DMs used by native speakers, which shows that native speakers and Chinese EFL learners seem to employ different types of DMs. In addition, the top ten DMs by Chinese learners cover over 80% of the total DMs employed in SECCL. Furthermore, the top four DMs, and, very, but, and I think cover more than half of the total DMs used by Chinese learners. These results further show that there is overuse or overgeneralization of some DMs by Chinese EFL learners.3) As for the usage of FTMs, first of all, Chinese learners prefer two-word discourse markers, among which I think is employed most frequently by Chinese learners. Secondly, compared to native speakers, Chinese learners show some degree of deficiency in the use of well. Besides, Chinese learners also show some degree of insufficient use of FTMs like right, all right, sure, anyway.4) The data analysis manifests that there are significant differences between higher achievers and lower achievers in the use of FTMs. In general, higher achievers use much more FTMs than lower achievers. This shows that the use of English DMs may associate with the oral proficiency level of speakers.To sum up, in the use of English DMs, Chinese EFL learners are inferior to native speakers, and do exist some degree of fossilization and over- generalization.The possible casual factors of pragmatic fossilization in the use of discourse markers by Chinese learners may be due to the following reasons: negative pragmatic transfer of L1, pragmatic overgeneralization, inappropriate teaching and learning environment, and pedagogical strategies.The major findings of the study have significant pedagogical implications for the EFL teaching in China. The implications are as follows: attaching equal importance to accuracy and fluency in language teaching and learning, reducing negative pragmatic transfer with building up a firm basis of L2 knowledge, providing appropriate teaching materials and enhancing explicit and implicit classroom pragmatic instructions.