A Corpus Based Study of Discourse Markers in Pakistani Motivational Speeches
Keywords:
Discourse Markers,, Motivational SpeechAbstract
Motivational speech is a tool that inspires individuals and prompts positive changes in their lives. Previous research has explored discourse markers in various speech genres but limited studies have focused on Pakistani motivational speeches. Therefore, the present study aims to identify and analyze the function of discourse markers used by Pakistani motivational speakers in their speeches. The data for the current study comprise 15 speeches delivered by male speakers, using the theoretical framework proposed by Schiffrin (1987) for the classification of discourse markers. The study employs both qualitative and quantitative methods, utilizing AntConc 3.5.9 (Anthony, 2020) software as an analytical tool. The findings reveal that discourse markers such as and, but, or, so, because, now, then, well, I mean, and you know are used in Pakistani motivational speeches. The findings further show that among the 2348 discourse markers, 1654 were discourse connectives, 339 indicated cause and result, 164 were temporal markers, 121 served as markers of information and participation, and 65 indicated response markers. The findings also show that the most dominant discourse marker in Pakistani motivational speeches is a connective marker, which plays an important function in connecting the statements. The study further reveals that information and management markers are used less frequently in these speeches. This research contributes to our comprehension of discourse markers in public speech and provides valuable insights that can be applied by future motivational speakers.
References
Adel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69-97.
Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. Convention and creativity. Addison Wesley Longman Limited.
Aijmer, K. (1997). “I think” – An English modal particle. In T. Swan & O. J. Westvik (Eds.), Modality inGermanic Languages. Historical and Comparative Perspectives(pp. 1-47). Mouton de Gruyter.
Aijmer, K. (2002). English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Alami, M. (2015). Pragmatic functions of discourse markers: A review of related literature. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 3(3), 1-10.
Anthony, L. (2020). AntConc (Version 3.5.9). Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Banguis-Bantawig, R. (2019). The role of discourse markers in the speeches of selected Asian Presidents. Heliyon, 5(3), 1-57.
Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 974-998.
Brinton, L. (1996). Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. De Gruyter Mouton.
Buyukkarci, K., & Genc, B. (2009). Discourse Markers: The case of and in the speech of Turkish speakers of English. Linguistics Journal, 4(2), 40-50.
Castro, C. M. C. (2009). The use and functions of discourse markers in EFL classroom interaction. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, (11), 57-78.
Culpeper, J., Mackey, A., & Taguchi, N. (2018). Second language pragmatics: From theory to research. Routledge.
Dylgjeri, A. (2014). The function and importance of discourse markers in political discourse. Beder University Journal of Educational Sciences, 1(5), 26-35.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.
Gaines, P. (2011). The multifunctionality of discourse operator okay: Evidence from a police interview. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3291-3315.
Hughes, B. L., & Zaki, J. (2015). The neuroscience of motivated cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(2), 62-64.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of SecondLanguage Writing, 13, 112-132.
Hyland, K. (2018). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Ismail, H. M. (2012). Discourse markers in political speeches: Forms and functions. Journal of the College of Education for Women, 23(4), 1260-1278.
Jabeen, F., Rai, M. A., & Arif, S. (2011). A corpus based study of discourse markers in British and Pakistani speech. International Journal of Language Studies, 5(4), 69-86.
Lamiroy, B., & Swiggers, P. (1991). Imperatives as discourse signals. In Suzanne Vande Kopple, W. (1985).Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93.
Lenk, U. (1998). Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics. 30(2), 245- 257.
Liu, B. (2009). Chinese discourse markers in oral speech of mainland Mandarin speakers. In Yun Xiao (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st North American conference on Chinese linguistics (NACCL-21). Vol. 2 (pp. 358-374). Smithfield, Rhode Island: Bryant University.
Marbun, F. (2017). An analysis of discourse markers in Donald Trump’s speeches. Universitas Sumatera Utara.
Mohamad, F., & Abdul Malik, N. (2021). Metaphor, religion, and gender: A case study of metaphor analysis in Islamic motivational speech corpus. International Journal of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics (IJMAL), 5(3), 95-121.
Nazim, H., & Yousaf, M. (2021). Neuro-linguistic programming: A corpus-based critical analysis of motivational speeches. Corporum: Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(1), 45-59.
Rashid, B. N. (2020). Discourse markers in selected political speeches: A descriptive analysis. Journal ofCurrent Researches on Social Sciences, 10(4), 891-920.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.
Schleef, E. (2005). Navigating joint activities in English and German academic discourse: Form, function, and sociolinguistic distribution of discourse markers and question tags. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Michigan.
Schourup, L. (1985). Common discourse particles in English Conversation. Garland.
Shehzad, W and Zahra, T (2019, Ongoing research project). PakistanGender Text (PakGenText). Funded by Higher Education CommissionPakistan.
Sherwani, K. A. (2020). A cognitive positive discourse analysis of English motivational speeches. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(9), 4078-4091.
Sovolainen, P. (2000). Discourse markers in the English of Finnish Americans. (Unpublished MA thesis),University of Oulu.
Sri Rwa Jayantini, G. A., Wayan Juniartha, I., Kadek Arya Aditana, I., Umbas, R., & Arie Suwastini, N. K. (2021). Functioning discourse markers to construct a social situation in speech. LiNGUA, 16(2), 225-236.
Thompson, S. E. (2003). Text-structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signalling of organisation in academic lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(1), 5-20.
Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. M. (2012). The effects of motivation in education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 820-824.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (2012). The importance of studying metadiscourse. Applied Research in English, 1(2), 37-44.
