Article published In: Discourse Markers in Second Language Acquisition / Les marqueurs discursifs dans l’acquisition d’une langue étrangère: Studies on Italian and French as L2 / Études en italien et en français langues étrangères
Edited by Margarita Borreguero Zuloaga and Britta Thörle
[Language, Interaction and Acquisition 7:1] 2016
► pp. 67–88
The use of discourse markers in L2 Italian
A preliminary investigation of acoustic cues
Published online: 30 August 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.7.1.03dem
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.7.1.03dem
This exploratory study intends to investigate the use of discourse markers (DM) in Italian L2 by learners with different L1s and different levels of competence (three at A2/B1 level and two at B2/C1 level). The analysis aims to describe the functions, the distribution, and some acoustic features of three DMs (però ‘but’, allora ‘then’, quindi ‘therefore’) in semi-spontaneous conversations between the learners and two native speakers. The purpose is to determine the possible uses and the relationship between the forms and functions of the DMs in native and non-native speakers distinguishing three main macro-functions (interactional, cognitive and metadiscursive) activated by speakers on the basis of the characteristics of the cotext (acoustic profiles), the context and the communicative situation. Such an analysis suggests a possible sequence in the emergence of DMs in the speech of L2 learners with different levels of competence in the target language. This exploratory study adopts a functional approach (Bazzanella 1995a, b; 2006; Fisher 2006). The outcomes of the analysis show that learners use a variety of DM forms and functions, and that some functions only emerge in more proficient speakers. The structural context and, to a lesser degree, the acoustic profile prove to be reliable indicators of the spectrum of functions performed by DMs in verbal interaction.
References (24)
Aijmer, K. (2013). Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Bardel, C. (2004). La pragmatica in italiano L2: l’uso dei segnali discorsivi. In F. Albano Leoni, F. Cutugno, M. Pettorino & R. Savy (eds.), Il parlato italiano. Atti del Convegno Nazionale (Napoli, 13-15 febbraio 2003). Napoli: D’Auria, [CD-Rom].
Bazzanella, C. (1995a). Le facce del parlare. Un approccio pragmatico all’italiano parlato. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
. (1995b). I segnali discorsivi. In L. Renzi, G. Salvi & A. Cardinaletti (eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione (225–257). Bologna: il Mulino.
. (2006). Discourse markers in Italian: towards a ‘compositional’ meaning. In K. Fischer (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (449–464). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Bazzanella, C. & Borreguero Zuloaga, M. (2011). ‘Allora’ e ‘entonces’: problemi teorici e dati empirici. In E. Khachaturyan (ed.), Discourse markers in Romance languages, OSLO 31 (7–45). Oslo: University of Oslo.
Borreguero Zuloaga, M. (2009). Connettivi avversativi nei testi scritti da apprendenti ispanofoni di italiano per il corpus VALICO. In E. Corino & C. Marello (eds.), VALICO: Studi di linguistica e didattica (51–69). Perugia: Guerra.
Cresti, E. (2005). Enunciato e frase: teoria e verifiche empiriche. In M. Biffi, O. Calabrese & L. Salibra (eds.), Italia linguistica: discorsi di scritto e di parlato. Scritti in onore di Giovanni Nencioni (249–260). Siena: Prolagon.
Cresti, E. & Gramigni, P. (2007). Per una linguistica corpus based dell’italiano parlato: le unità di riferimento. In F. Albano Leoni, F. Cutugno, M. Pettorino & R. Savy (eds.), Il parlato italiano, Atti del Convegno Nazionale (1–23). Napoli: D’Auria Editore.
De Marco, A., & Leone, P. (2013). Discourse markers in Italian as L2 in face to face vs. computer mediated settings. In L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (eds.), 20 Years of EUROCALL: Learning from the past, looking to the future. EUROCALL Conference, Évora, Portugal, Proceedings (71–77). Dublin, Ireland; Voillans, France: Research- publishing.net.
Foster, P. & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 181, 299–323.
Götz, S. (2013). Fluency in native and nonnative speakers of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hansson, P. (1999). Prosodic and lexical correlates of Swedish discourse markers in spontaneous dialogue. In Ohala J. (ed.),
Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Science
(1533–1536). University of California.
Jafrancesco, E. (2015). L’acquisizione dei segnali discorsivi in italiano L2. Italiano LinguaDue 11, 1–39.
Matei, M. (2010). Discourse markers as functional elements. Bulletin of the Transilvania, University of Braşov 31, 119–126.
Nigoević, M. & Sučić, P. (2011). Competenza pragmatica in italiano L2: l’uso dei segnali discorsivi da parte di apprendenti croati, Italiano LinguaDue 31, 92–114.
. (2006). Discourse markers as attentional cues at discourse transitions. In K. Fischer (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (339–348). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Romero-Trillo, J. (2015). ‘It is a truth universally acknowledged’…, you know? The role of adaptive management and prosody to start a turn in conversation. Pragmatics and Society 6, 117–145.
. (2016). Prosodic modeling and position analysis of pragmatic markers in English conversation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, (aop).
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
De Cristofaro, Elisa, Linda Badan & Adriana Belletti
Deng, Delin, Fenqi Wang & Ratree Wayland
Ferroni, Roberta & Marilisa Birello
Borreguero Zuloaga, Margarita & Anna De Marco
Borreguero Zuloaga, Margarita, Kathrin Siebold & Britta Thörle
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.