Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 11:1 (2020) ► pp.1–23

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF

Discourse markers as indicators of connectedness between expositive illocutionary acts

 | Tokyo University of Science
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 30 March 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.17028.ois
Abstract
There has been consistent interest in discourse makers over the past couple of decades, and various proposals have been put forth regarding their functions. The present paper analyzes discourse markers in general as indicators of types of connectedness between expositive illocutionary acts (Austin, J. L. [1962] 1975. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), which bring about illocutionary effects in discourse. The discourse marker well in particular indicates a gap between the preceding expositive illocutionary act and the present one, signaling the present expositive illocutionary act is of a non-committal type. This gap is analyzed, depending on the types of the preceding and present expositive illocutionary acts, as divergence, hesitancy, a transition from one expositive illocutionary act to another, or a boundary between them.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Discursive illocutionary acts
    • 2.1Expositive illocutionary acts (Austin 1975)
    • 2.2The characterizations of expositive illocutionary act types
  • 3.Discourse markers as indicators of the connectedness between the preceding expositive illocutionary act and the present one
    • 3.1The discourse marker but
    • 3.2The functions of the discourse marker well
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (23)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2013. Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. [1962] 1975. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
[1961] 1979. Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1989. Intonation and its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffi, Claudia. 2007. Mitigation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, Ronald and Michel McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, Georgia M. 2006. “Discourse Particles and the Symbiosis of Natural Language Processing and Basic Research.” In Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn, ed. by Betty J. Birner, and Gregory Ward, 117–135. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita. 2006. “‘Minister, we will see how the public judges you.’: Media references in political interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 180–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “‘Here is the difference, here is the passion, here is the chance to be part of a great change’: Strategic context importation in political discourse.” In Context and Contexts: Parts Meet Whole?, ed. by Anita Fetzer, and Etsuko Oishi, 115–146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin (ed). 2006. Approaches to Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 1993. “The discourse marker well: A relevance theoretical account.” Journal of Pragmatics 191: 435–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 2001. “Discourse markers in oral narrative.” Journal of Pragmatics 331: 849–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oishi, Etsuko. 2014. “Evidentials in entextualization.” Intercultural Pragmatics 11(3): 437–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Follow-ups as speech acts in mediated political discourse.” In The Dynamics of Political Discourse: Forms and functions of follow-ups, ed. by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman, and Lawrence N. Berlin, 33–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Illocutionary effects, presupposition, and implicature.” In Pragmatics at its Interfaces, ed. by Stavros Assimakopoulos, 71–88. Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oishi, Etsuko and Anita Fetzer. 2016. “Expositives in discourse after discourse” Journal of Pragmatics 961: 49–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola. 1995. “Pragmatic particles twenty years after.” In Organization in Discourse: Proceedings from the Turku conference, ed. by Brita Wårvik, Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen, and Risto Hiltunen, 95–108. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Debora. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 2001. “Rethinking well .” Journal of Pragmatics 331: 1026–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1979. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Adrefiza, Adrefiza
2024. Comparing the Use of Linguistic Hedging Devices (LHDs) in English and Bahasa Indonesia: Gender and Pedagogical Perspectives. Innovare Journal of Education ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Oishi, Etsuko
2021. Speech-Act-Theoretic Explanations of Problems of Pure Indexicals. In Inquiries in Philosophical Pragmatics [Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, 27], ► pp. 63 ff. DOI logo
Oishi, Etsuko
2022. Illocutionary-act-type sensitivity and discursive sequence: An examination of quotation. Intercultural Pragmatics 19:3 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Oishi, Etsuko
2025. Speech act theory of quotation: Quotation indirect quotation and Japanese quasi-quotation. Intercultural Pragmatics 22:1 ► pp. 115 ff. DOI logo
Oishi, Etsuko
2025. Societal pragmatics. Pragmatics and Society 16:4 ► pp. 518 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue