ÍÀÓÊβ ÇÀÏÈÑÊÈ ÍÄÓ ³ì. Ì. Ãîãîëÿ.

Ô³ëîëîã³÷í³ íàóêè, 2010
ÌÎÂÎÇÍÀÂÑÒÂÎ

ÓÄÊ 811.111’42

CONTRASTIVE DISCOURSE MARKERS IN INDIRECTNESS
STRATEGIES

Volkova L.M.

Ó ñòàòò³ âèä³ëÿºòüñÿ êîðïóñ êîíòðàñòèâíèõ äèñêóðñèâíèõ ìàðêåð³â àíãë³éñüêî¿
ìîâè òà ðîçãëÿäàºòüñÿ ¿õíÿ ðîëü ó ðåàë³çàö³¿ íåïðÿìèõ äèñêóðñèâíèõ ñòðàòåã³é.
Äîïóñòîâà òà òåìïîðàëüíà ñåìàíòèêà äèñêóðñèâíèõ ìàðêåð³â ðîáèòü ¿õ
âàæëèâèìè çàñîáàìè ðåàë³çàö³¿ íåïðÿìèõ äèñêóðñèâíèõ ñòðàòåã³é ñïîíóêàííÿ,
îö³íêè, õåäæèíãó, çì³íè àáî çàêðèòòÿ òåìè ³íòåðàêö³¿.
Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: äèñêóðñèâíèé ìàðêåð, äèñêóðñèâíà ñòðàòåã³ÿ, åêñïë³öèòíà
ïðîïîçèö³ÿ, ³ìïë³öèòíà ïðîïîçèö³ÿ, êîðåëÿö³ÿ.

 ñòàòüå âûäåëÿåòñÿ êîðïóñ äèñêóðñèâíûõ ìàðêåðîâ àíãëèéñêîãî ÿçûêà è
ðàññìàòðèâàåòñÿ èõ ðîëü â ðåàëèçàöèè êîñâåííûõ äèñêóðñèâíûõ ñòðàòåãèé
ïîáóæäåíèÿ, îöåíêè, õåäæèíãà, ñìåíû èëè çàêðûòèÿ òåìû èíòåðàêöèè.
Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: äèñêóðñèâíûé ìàðêåð, äèñêóðñèâíàÿ ñòðàòåãèÿ, ýêñïëèöèòíàÿ
ïðîïîçèöèÿ, èìïëèöèòíàÿ ïðîïîçèöèÿ, êîððåëÿöèÿ.

The article introduces contrastive discourse markers of the English language and
reveals the role they play in realizing indirect discursive strategies. Concessive and
temporal semantics of discourse markers makes them perfect means of realization of
indirect discourse strategies of inducement, evaluation, hedging, changing or closing
the topic of interaction.
Key words: discourse marker, discourse strategy, explicit proposition, implicit proposition,
correlation.

People have different beliefs about language. One sequentially dependent elements that bracket units of
of them is that ‘good’ usage involves (among other talk and considered them as a set linguistic expressions
things) clarity, precision and directness. Hence, it is that comprised of members of word classes as varied
believed that vagueness, ambiguity, imprecision, and as conjunctions (because, and, but, or), interjections
general woolliness are to be avoided [2, p. 1]. However, (oh), adverbs (now, then), and lexicalized phrases
actual language in use proves the contrary. Language (y’know, I mean). Her main conclusion was that these
is deceptive and vague because it is used by people. markers could work at different levels of discourse to
Quite often, for different reasons, we tend not to reveal connect utterances across different planes [4, p. 312; 5,
our real purpose. To achieve his communicative p. 54–75]. A decade later D. Blakemore classified as
intention, the communicator has to choose one of a discourse markers some utterance initial units like so,
range of different language and speech means we have well, still, after all defining the role these expressions
at our disposal. In natural communication it is often play as marking, signaling or indicating how one unit of
achieved by indirectness strategies. The article is aimed discourse is connected to another [1, p. 113]. B.Frazer
at revealing the role of discourse markers in sees discourse markers as serving an integrative function
communicative indirect strategies. The object of in discourse, contributing to discourse coherence, he
investigation of the article is discourse markers with the defines them as ‘discourse glue’ and provides their
invariant meaning of contrast as components of pragmatic classification; his list of discourse markers
indirectness strategies. The subject of investigation is comprises about 30 lexical items belonging to different
semantic, pragmatic and functional peculiarities of the classes of words [3, p. 1–16]. All language analysts
discourse markers. The actuality of the research is mentioned above agree upon the fact that the main
predetermined by the necessity of revealing specific function of discourse markers is to provide cohesive
conditions of functioning of those language units that ties within discourse fragments. In this article, we will
are devoid of referential and nominative power. try to show that cohesive function is not the only one,
The notion of discourse markers was first introduced and by far not the most important one that these small
by D.Schiffrin. She defined discourse markers as language units can perform.

100

the following implicit yet? with the implicit proposition There will be someone information is rendered: the plan was not expected to in your life sooner or later acts as the marker of the well work. yet. by means of anyway. “It’s nice to hear because at the discourse level they correlate two from you. his your life yet?” [8. Besides. in its turn. Is there someone in Luigi smiled with excitement. I decided to find out whether you were on a consider the following example: heavy date or buried in research. the strategy of summing-up. “Sure. at any rate. is opposed to speech act – a directive It’s about time for you to find a the explicit one. going to the Grill. could you spare me five minutes similar qualities because they also render the idea of after the library closes?” concession by correlating explicit and implicit propositions. at least. the meaning rendered by girlfriend. Let us no answer. predetermines the use of these items as important In the utterance-initial position anyway is a marker components of indirect communicative strategies. 236]. Tony hit the roof. still. in the next discourse fragment to function as an important Consequently. This observation perform a certain action. Since it didn’t look like it was discourse marker is opposed to the implicit proposition going to happen. Of special interest here which makes the group of analyzed discourse markers are anyway and actually as these small and practically even broader. for distinguishing other function words that possess a Concessive markers are very popular means of contrastive-concessive semantics. The speaker resorts to the hedging strategy in after all contains a semantic component of concession order to reduce his responsibility for making the hearer (though the plan was destined to fail). and evidently very little to do concessive semantics of the discourse marker actually [6. “We’re perfectly more. With a little luck. The utterance I am. Thus. cameras were about to record Marco getting nabbed. and introduces the implicit proposition though you suggested Richard was already at his desk with a tall cup of coffee. really. p. The meaning of a ‘temporal change in the future’ Maybe they would kill him right there in the living room. any butting into our lives. the invariant expressing communicants’ intention in indirect meaning of contrastive semantics may also be strategies. What made you call me at this ungodly hour?” utterances by means of rendering the semantic “The whole truth? I’ve been pining here. in “Andrew – are you busy tonight?” Ted asked fact. p. anyhow. I phoned your apartment. 47]. which gives him an opportunity is crucial for our research because it serves the basis to save face in the process of speech interaction. the strategy of closing the topic of speaker’s face in the process of interaction. The latter. anyway correlates with the The inherent semantic meaning of contrast makes implicit proposition though others may find Heather temporal and concessive discourse markers perfect difficult to deal with. It should be Let us consider the pragmatic potential of the noted that all these strategies are indirect because of temporal discourse marker yet in the following discourse the invariant meaning of contrastive concession inherent fragment: in the semantic structure of this discourse marker. p. In addition.” she shouted. “I mean. actually. as yet. at last. and implicit propositions. native speakers in conversations. meaning of temporal change by correlating explicit anyway” [8. I’d prefer some place a little following example illustrates the scope of action of a more private” [7. All these items render the capable of dealing with Heather on our own – I am. invisible language units are capable of rendering various The group of contrastive-concessive discourse markers pragmatic meanings. I don’t like this idea. The 101 . it was destined to fail as there were a lot of hidden indirect strategy of inducement because it obstacles. inherent in the semantic structure of yet makes it possible captured on film. Perhaps the plan would work after all for this marker to change the illocutionary force of a [6. conversation. 167]. In the present example the item yet which In the given text fragment by means of the correlates the utterance Is there someone in your life discourse marker after all . of the following conversational strategies: the strategy especially those of hedging aimed at saving the of topic changing. Specific procedural the Wall Street Journal. “I’ll bet that childless old bitch The list of temporal discourse markers includes 8 which put this into your head. At the discourse level all these items reveal nervously. in any case. the discourse marker already implies component and even basic means for realization of that the state of things was different before by rendering indirect strategy of evaluation: the idea of temporal change. Thus. I don’t want any shrinks language units: already. actually. was already at his desk is opposed to the implicit The semantics of concessive contrast allows anyway information Richard was not at his desk before . When I got that is not expressed formally in the discourse. anyhow. hoping meaning of contrast: the explicit proposition with a you’d make a house call. temporal discourse marker: The last utterance of this discourse fragment The lobby was empty at such an early hour. Consider the following example includes 10 language units: anyway. and that is why they are frequently used by combined with the meaning of a temporal change. Contrastive discourse markers are defined so “Toni. the implicit information revealed by transforms the interrogative utterance into the indirect means of correlating two propositions. speech act. any longer. 97]. so far. 161]. utterance a component of the indirect hedging strategy. p.” he responded with pleasure. makes it a perfect means of realizing the indirect strategy By means of already the explicit information Richard of polite rejecting the proposal of the previous speaker. contrastive ties revealed for a couple of cheeseburgers?” by discourse markers may also be temporal. p. Want to go downstairs to the Grill As it was mentioned above. the means of conveying important pragmatic information speaker provides an implicit evaluation and makes the in conversational discourse. of actually: in any event. The “Uh? Well. Lambros.

Vague Language / Joanna Channell. Segal E. Grisham J. Prizes / Erich Segal. – P. “Across a crowded commissary. when he hung up that Sandy realized that his father rejecting the proposal or closing the conversation are had not directly answered his question [Prizes. 4.Y. 2003. Hamilton]. to perform all communicative tasks successfully. 2.example below illustrates the use of anyway as a pre. 8. evaluation. 102 . – P. – 1993. 105]. Discourse and Relevance Theory / Diana Blakemore // The Handbook of Discourse Analysis / [eds. : Cambridge University Press. does not want to discuss with his son an unpleasant The prospect of further investigation lies in subject about his mother. establishing the role of discourse markers of other The indirect strategy is chosen by the speaker in order functional groups in realizing indirectness strategies in to weaken a possible negative perlocutionary effect on conversational discourse. – 531 p. Frazer B. It must be emphasized that discursive competence closing device: implies the knowledge and proper usage of discourse “Do you ever see her?” he asked with a touch of markers of English in conversational strategies in order self-pity. 100–118. – Malden : Blackwell Publishing. – N. The Broker / John Grisham. 4. indispensable in natural communication as they often Using anyway makes it possible for Sidney. – N. – 226 p. – N. Literature 1. : Ivy Books. 1985. Speak to you next week. 2003. who help to make communication felicitous. 1994. – Malden : Blackwell Publishing. Segal E. – Vol. – 307 p. : Doubleday. 3. 1996. Discourse Markers / Deborah Schiffrin.Y. take function in discourse as means of realization of care of yourself. Sources of Illustrations 6. 7. Schiffrin D. : Bantam Books. so to speak. Channell J. p. – 500 p. The Class / Erich Segal. Deborah Tannen and Heidi E. Hamilton]. Deborah Schiffrin. – N. I always give your love. Schiffrin D. the hearer. 1–16. Blakemore D.Y. Discourse Markers across Language / Bruce Frazer // Pragmatics and Language Learning : Monograph Series – University of Illinois. Don’t worry. 2005. Deborah Tannen and Heidi E.Y.” It was oddly indirectness strategies of inducement. Deborah Schiffrin. – P.” “And does she Therefore. Discourse Markers: Language. contrastive discourse markers that can even remember me?” “Are you kidding? Anyway. 5. to close the conversation. 1995. Meaning and Context / Deborah Schiffrin // The Handbook of Discourse Analysis / [eds. – Oxford : Oxford University Press. – 364 p. 54–75.