Cover not available

In:Outside the Clause: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents
Edited by Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer and Arne Lohmann
[Studies in Language Companion Series 178] 2016
► pp. 29–58

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

Pragmatic markers as constructions. The case of anyway

 | University of Gothenburg
Published online: 3 October 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.178.02aij
The aim of the study is to explore the idea that discourse markers are oriented to properties of spoken language and the interaction and have special uses or tasks depending on formal and contextual factors. The empirical data comes from an analysis of anyway in informal conversation in several regional varieties of English. The British component of the ICE-corpus was selected as the home variety. Comparisons have been made with Canadian English (ICE-CAN), Philippine English (ICE-PHIL), and New Zealand English (ICE-NZ). Anyway has been analysed in a constructional approach as a combination of form and function. It does not have a fixed meaning but a meaning potential containing information about the position of anyway in the clause and the turn sequence, collocation, activity types and regional specialization. The analysis has shown that anyway can be regarded as distinct constructions (or meaning potentials) in the left and the right periphery or as a stand-alone marker. The meanings reflect the activities and tasks which have to be performed at interactionally sensitive transitions in the evolving discourse. While some varieties prefer anyway in the left periphery this may not be a general tendency when we look at more varieties.
References (31)
References
Altenberg, Bengt. 1986. Contrastive linking in spoken and written English. In English in Speech and Writing. A Symposium [Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia], Gunnel Tottie & Ingegerd Bäcklund (eds), 13-40. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 2000. On-line syntax – Oder: Was es bedeuten könnte, die Zeitlichkeit der mündlichen Sprache Ernst zu nehmen. Sprache und Literatur 85(31): 43-56.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate & Detges, Ulrich. 2014. Introduction. In Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds), 1-23. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness and Time. The Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca 2001. Meaning in interaction: The case of actually . Language 77(2): 245-291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eriksson, Mats. 1997. Ungdomars berättande. En studie i struktur och interaktion. Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrara, Kathleen W. 1997. Form and function of the discourse marker anyway: Implications for discourse analysis. Linguistics 35(2): 343-378. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam & Östman, Jan Ola. 2005. Construction grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics 37(11): 1752-1778. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hancil, Sylvie. 2014. The final particle but in British English. An instance of cooptation and grammaticalization at work. In Grammaticalization. Theory and Data [Studies in Language Companion Series 162], Sylvie Hancil & Ekkehard König (eds), 235-256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2012. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the negotiation of common ground in spoken discourse: Final particles in English. Language and Communication 32(3): 182-204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Arguing for a wide conception of grammar: The case of final particles in spoken discourse. Folia Linguistica 47(2): 375-424. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Left vs. right periphery in grammaticalization. The case of anyway . In New Directions in Grammaticalization Research [Studies in Language Companion Series 166], Andrew D.M. Smith, Graeme Trousdale & Richard Waltereit (eds), 157-186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John & Atkinson, J. Maxwell. 1984. Oh-responses to inquiry. Introduction. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson (ed.), 1-15. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kachru, Braj B. 1992. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenk, Uta. 1988. Discourse markers and conversational coherence. In Organization in Discourse. Proceedings from the Turku Conference, Brita Wårvik, Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen & Risto Hiltunen (eds), 341-352. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Marking Discourse Coherence: Functions of Discourse Markers in spoken English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1979. Activity types and language. Linguistics 17: 365-379. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linell, Per. 2005. En dialogisk grammatik. In Samtal och grammatik. Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, Jan Anward & Bengt Nordberg (eds), 232-328. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Grammatical constructions in dialogue. In Context and Constructions [Constructional Approaches to Language 9], Alexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 97-110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Communicative activity types as organisations in discourses and discourses in organisations. In Discourses in Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 203], Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo, Marjut Johansson & Mia Raitaniemi (eds), 33-59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norén, Kerstin & Linell, Per. 2006. Meningspotentialer i den språkliga praktiken. Meddelanden från institutionen för svenska språket (MISS) 54 (pp. 1-43). Göteborgs Universitet.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor, Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Thompson, Sandra A. (eds). 1996. Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ottesjö, Cajsa. 2005. Iallafall som diskursmarkör. In Samtal och Grammatik. Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, Jan Anward & Bengt Nordberg (eds), 201-229. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann. 1999. Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff Like that: General Extenders in English Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Park, Innhwa. 2010. Marking an impasse: The use of anyway as a sequence-closing device. Journal of Pragmatics 42(12): 3283-3299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polanyi, Livia & Scha, Remko J.H. 1983. The syntax of discourse. Text 3(3), 261-270.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2000. On turns’ possible completion, more or less: Increments and trail-offs. Paper read at EuroConference ‘Interactional Linguistics’ , Spa, Belgium, September.
Takahara, Paul Osamu. 1998. Pragmatic functions of the discourse marker anyway . In Discourse Markers. Descriptions and Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57], Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds), 327-351. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van der Wouden, Ton & Foolen, Ad. 2015. Dutch particles in the right periphery. In Final particles Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow & Margje Post (eds), 221-247. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Dontcheva‐Navratilova, Olga
2025. Grammar and Discourse. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hickey, Raymond
2025.  Anyway in Irish English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 26:2 ► pp. 288 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Minju
2025. Two opposite implicatures of a focus particle. Studies in Language 49:3 ► pp. 645 ff. DOI logo
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2023. On the rise of a marker of disaffiliation from Others’ discourse. In Reconnecting Form and Meaning [Studies in Language Companion Series, 230], ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Aijmer, Karin
2022. “Well He’s Sick Anyway Like”: Anyway in Irish English. Corpus Pragmatics 6:2 ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo
Alvanoudi, Angeliki
2022. Review of Heine, Kaltenböck, Kuteva & Long (2021): The Rise of Discourse Markers. Journal of Historical Linguistics 12:3 ► pp. 504 ff. DOI logo
Rüdiger, Sofia
2021. Likein Korean English speech. World Englishes DOI logo
Groom, Nicholas
2019. Construction Grammar and the corpus-based analysis of discourses. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 24:3 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Crible, Ludivine
2018. Book review: Graham Ranger, Discourse Markers: An Enunciative Approach. Discourse & Communication 12:6 ► pp. 663 ff. DOI logo
Lewis, Diana M.
2018. Grammaticalizing connectives in English and discourse information structure. In New Trends in Grammaticalization and Language Change [Studies in Language Companion Series, 202], ► pp. 135 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 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