Publication: Exploring Discourse Marker Use in Thai University Students’ Conversations
Loading...
Submitted Date
Received Date
Accepted Date
Issued Date
2020
Issued Date (B.E)
2563
Copyright Date
Resource Type
Research Group
Research Area
Research Theme : 2
Research Theme : 3
Research Theme : 4
OECD Research Area
ISCED Classification
Resource Type
item.page.ddi:description
item.page.ddi:itemType
item.page.ddi:resInstru
Mode of Collection
Method of Data Analysis
Sampling Procedures
Collection notes
Edition
Resource Version
Language
File Type
No. of Pages/File Size
ISBN
ISSN
2630-0672 (Print), 2672-9431 (Online)
eISSN
DOI
Scopus ID
Other identifier(s)
Journal Title
LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network
Volume
13
Issue
1
Edition
Start Page
247
End Page
267
Conference/Event name
Conference/Event place
Conference/Event country
Conference/Event Start date
Conference/Event End date
Access Rights
Access Status
Rights
Rights Holder(s)
Physical Location
Citation
Arya, Tanyaporn (2020). Exploring Discourse Marker Use in Thai University Students’ Conversations. Retrieved from: https://harrt.in.th/handle/123456789/1829.
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Title
Exploring Discourse Marker Use in Thai University Students’ Conversations
Alternative Title(s)
Author(s)
Author’s Affiliation
Author's E-mail
Corresponding person(s)
Advisor(s)
Editor(s)
Editor’s Affiliation
Funder(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Series
Journal
Project
Has Part
Abstract
Using a specialized corpus of English conversations between Thai university students and non-Thai speakers of English, this study examines the distribution of discourse markers employed and how they function in context. Analysis of transcriptions from a conversational perspective, reference to audio recordings and frequency counts revealed thirty-four different discourse markers used, making up 5.6% of the total corpus. The most frequent were and, OK, but and so respectively. Results indicate that, for engagement in conversations, discourse markers were employed by participants most commonly for referential purposes, lacking in extensive discourse marker use for interpersonal communication (e.g. marking and confirming shared knowledge, hedging) and cognitive functions (e.g. reformulating, repair). For the management of conversations, structural discourse markers emerged from the data to function mainly as topic shifters and mostly to give turns. The deficiency in overall discourse marker use found in Thai EFL student conversations points to a pedagogical urgency to create learner awareness of how applying these small words can significantly impact the quality of a conversation and the relationship between interlocutors.