대한언어학회 전자저널

Choi, Inji (2016). A Study on the Discourse Marker well in American English Face-to-Face Conversation. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 24(4), 343-374. This study examines the use of the discourse marker well in a corpus of American English conversation to determine its role in marking structural and interactional functions. In relevance theory, the discourse marker well is seen as a signal that reorients the hearer to a context of assumptions yielding the speakers intended interpretation (Blakemore, 2002). Adopting this perspective of relevance theory, this paper shows that the functions that well may serve can be inferred from its encoded procedural meaning together with the assumption that the utterance is the most relevant one compatible with the speakers abilities and preferences. Excerpts from the data illustrate how well initiates the speakers turn and holds the floor, how it indicates a shift of topic, resumption, and addition of information, how it introduces direct reported speech, and how it signals insufficiency, agreement, and disagreement. Of the ten functions used in the corpus, the most frequently occurred one involves turn management. The discourse marker well in turn-initial positions is also frequently used to express the speakers feelings and reactions as a marker of interactional functions.

# 담화표지어 well(discourse marker well) # 관련성 이론(relevance theory) # 절차적 의미(procedural meaning) # 구조적 기능(structural function) # 상호작용적 기능(interactional function)

• Aijmer, K. (2013). Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Aijmer, K. & Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M. (2003). Well in English, Swedish and Dutch. Linguistics, 16, 231-254.
• Baiat, G. E., Coler, M., Pullen, M., Tienkouw, S., & Hunyadi, L. (2013). Multimodal analysis of “well” as a discourse marker in Conversation: A pilot study. Paper presented at 4th IEEE International conference on Cognitive Infocommunication, Budapest, Hungary. Retrieved from http://www.culingtec.uni-leipzig.de/ESU_C_T/sites/default/files/docs/Esfandiari_coginfocom_2013.pdf
• Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic constrains on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Blakemore, D. (2002). Relevance and linguistic meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bolinger, D. (1989). Intonation and its uses: Melody in grammar and discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
• Carlson, L. (1984). ‘Well’ in dialogue games: A discourse analysis of the interjection ‘well’ in idealized conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Cuenca, M-J. (2008). Pragmatic markers in contrast: The case of well. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 1373-1391.
• De Klerk, V. (2005). Procedural meanings of well in a corpus of Xhosa English. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1183-1205.
• Du Bois, J., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S., & Paolino, D. (1993). Outline of discourse transcription. In J. Edwards & M. Lampert (Eds.) Talking data: Transcription and coding methods for language research (pp. 221-260). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 383-395.
• Heritage, J. (2015). Well-prefaced turn in English conversation: A conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 88, 88-104.
• Jucker, A. (1993). The discourse marker well: A relevance-theoretic account. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 435-452.
• Lakoff, R. (1973). Questionable answer and answerable questions. In B. R. Kachru, B. Lees, Y. Malkiel, A. Pietrangeli, & S. Saporta (Eds.), Issues in linguistics in honor of Henry and Renée Kohane (pp. 453-467). Urbana: University of Illinois.
• Müller, S. (2004). ‘Well you know that type of person’: Functions of well in the speech of American and German students. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1157-1182.
• Norrick, N. (2001). Discourse markers in oral narratives. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 849-878.
• Owen, M. (1981). Conversational units and the use of ‘well ...’. In P. Werth (Ed.), Conversation and discourse (pp. 99-116). London: Croom Helm.
• Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comparative grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Schourup, L. (1985). Common discourse particles in English conversation. New York: Garland.
• Schourup, L. (2001). Rethinking ‘well’. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1025-1060.
• Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986/1995). Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Svartvik, J. (1980). Well in conversation. In S. Greenbaum, G. N. Leech, & J. Svartvik (Eds.) Studies in English linguistics for Randolph Quirk (pp. 167-177). Oxford: Blackwell.
• Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Wilson, D. (2014). Relevance theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 26, 129-148.
• Wilson, D. & Sperber, D. (2012). Meaning and relevance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wizerbicka, A. (1976). Particles and linguistic relativity. International Review of Slavic Linguistics, 1, 23-67.