Hi!

So, first I wanna say: I studied German linguistics for 6 semesters without ever getting my degree - so if there are more educated people in this sub that can talk about this topic with more insight - please respond <3

Destiny recently talked to Fanatiq about the usage of the N-word. I have notice that both in the past AND in this conversation Destiny and his conversational partner kind of disagree on what the n-word actually is...

Every time this happens, I'm reminded of a linguistic phenomenon called - "Discourse Marker".

A discourse marker is, as far as I understand it, a word or phrase that doesn't really have a meaning in the context of the sentence BUT it influences the entire "mood" of the sentence. For example:

"Which bag of chips should I buy?" - "You know, the red one."

The "you know" in this interaction doesn't mean that "I assume you know this", it rather alters the mood of the interaction to make it less stiff/robotic and more chill/friendly.

I don't know what languages you guys speak, but in my language we have a word that has literally no other function than being a discourse marker. That word is "oida". Oida, originally meant "old man", but nowadays it has absolutely no meaning other than changing the overall mood of any given sentence that it is added to. For example:

"mir geht's nicht gut" = I do not feel well.

"Oida, mir geht's nicht gut" = Bro, I'm down bad :(

Also, one of the arguments for "oida" having lost all it's meaning is the fact that women frequently use that word, when talking to other women - it wouldn't make any sense for 2 women to refer to each other as "old men".

If we compare the conversational dynamics of "oida" with the word "nigga" - specifically the way black people use it in day-to-day speech - I'd say they're almost equal.

I'm not a native speaker, but a statement like "you're crazy" feels a bit more stiff and unfriendly than "nigga, you're crazy". And in addition to that "nigga, you're crazy" can easily be used when a black person talks to a white person - which pretty much shows that the word (in this scenario) has lost all its meaning, just like "oida" has lost it's meaning when used by women.

Of course, the difference is that nigga is ALSO a racial slur....BUT....maybe one could argue that it isn't.

Like, again, I'm not a native speaker, but if a racist white dude in the US want

Although they fall under the same category, linguistically they are significantly different. There are some studies substantaite their importance in teaching foreign languages. However, I've read that they indicate hesitation. I remember in school they always told us to avoid by all means filler markers to sound confident. Now, I do not think filler words make any speakrt less confident. What is your take on this?

One of my strongest beliefs about learning languages is that, if you want to improve your listening skills or speak in a natural way, you have to learn something called "discourse markers."

Discourse markers include so-called "filler words" like "actually," "you know," "so," etc. that are inserted relatively freely into colloquial speech.

The thing is that these words are often overlooked in conventional learning materials, which tend to focus on more formal, written language. Think about a typical sentence in a language textbook:

"I like pasta. Pasta is tasty. I eat pasta every day."

Why does this sound so awkward? It's because native speakers use tons of discourse markers to add shades of meaning to their statements:

"I mean, I love pasta. Cause pasta is tasty, you know? I basically eat pasta every day."

I remember when I was first surrounded by Russian speakers, I really struggled with listening, because I would hear familiar words and phrases from my textbook ("I love pasta") but they were surrounded by all these mumbled phrases that I didn't understand (короче, вообще, и т.д.).

Prescriptivists will say that these words are unnecessary "filler," that they make you sound uneducated, etc. But this is how real people actually talk.

Have any of you had the same experience? What examples have you come across from your target language?

Does anybody know of any research that covers the non-lexical uses of the word so in English (American, at least)?

I find myself using it a lot at the end of clauses or sentences, as just a sort of trailing off word. I haven't really worked out why, but it seems to just let the listener know that I'm done talking for the moment and that it's their turn.

Does anyone else know what a discourse marker is? I didn’t until I went looking for the name of all those words you say in conversation to move things along - “ok” “huh” “interesting” “right” etc, etc. These are called discourse markers! Here’s a link that discusses English discourse markers:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/british-grammar/discourse-markers-so-right-okay

Im working on making a list of Portuguese discourse markers to memorize and then (hopefully) start sprinkling naturally in conversation 😂

Here’s what I’ve got so far. Can people help me out and add to/correct these?

Right - certo/claro Really - mesmo Oh no - oh, não/lamento Doesn’t matter - não faz mal/não importa Really bad - muito mal You know - tu sabes (você sabe) Ok - ok/está bem/sim Yeah - sim/repeat verb I guess só - eu acho que sim Interesting - interessante That’s awesome - fantástico/espectacular

"Despite all the great qualities she has, her moodiness has estranged her from the fans."

My teacher gave us a psychotic looking PPT slide for these and it makes approximately zero sense. It's literally Charlie Day Conspiracy Theory Meme levels of incomprehensible. If anyone could be so kind as to explain how / when / the English equivalent (if there is any) of the following, that would be ~swell. ~ I will group them as they're grouped on the slide. Someone who speaks korean will probably understand why they're grouped that way but ya girl can't help you ;(

아/어 (놀람) / (발견) / ...(곤란함)

음 / 자 / 저 [자 is circled in a giant bright yellow bubble.]

저기/저기요/여기요 [I know what these mean, but she also has "말투" written in bold red next to them and idfk...]

N 있잖아 / 뭐더리 (뮈지) / 글쎄요

*언제더라 *어디더라 *누구더라

I fucking hate this program and I will never recommend it to anyone.

We ole, kwuŋo! Hello, everyone!

I'm home healing and I haven't posted anything in a while. In this thread, u/mareck_ mentioned that we shouldn't avoid semantics and pragmatics because they're scary, and she's right. So I decided to write a bit about a part of Mwaneḷe that is more on that side of things: discourse markers. A discourse marker is a word or phrase whose meaning reflects the conversational context of the sentence it's in. They don't affect the truth of the assertion the sentence is making or the content of the question, but rather express how the sentences fit in to to the discourse and how the speaker feels about them. Examples of these in English are words like well and so that serve to link sentences together or words like even, though or really that serve to emphasize, mark contrast, or show speaker feelings.

Some languages like English and German tend to place these words in the same place as regular adverbs. Others, like Cantonese or perhaps most famously Singlish, like to put them at the ends of sentences. Mwaneḷe has two or three different environments where discourse markers tend to show up. Most commonly they occur as unstressed clitics following the verb and any absolutive pronoun. Related to this, they often show up following echo verbs used to answer yes/no questions. They also commonly come after the sentence-linking conjunctions ŋe, be, and xo, all of which are different kinds of "and," in which case their first syllable is stressed. I'll note any exceptions.

lo [lo] is used to mark that the speaker thinks it's natural or makes sense that something happened, as well as after conjunctions to indicate that the second clause results from the first clause. It can also be used for backchanneling.

1.  Gwu ejimiḷ le wol? Im lo!
    gwu ej-    im -iḷ    =le=wol    im =lo
    Q   INTR.A-eat-NF.PFV=2 =yet    eat=LO
   'Have you eaten yet?'           'I have [of course]!'

2.  Eḷoḷikwi de, be lo elageḷ amwo.
    e-     ḷoḷ-ikwi=de be lo e-     lage -ḷ      amwo
    INTR.A-fly-CON =1  SS LO INTR.A-climb-NF.PFV breathe
   'I paddled frantically, and [because of that] I came up breathing.'

tak [tak] marks that the speaker is certain of the statement. It can also be used as an interjection alone or with lo to mean "of course, certainly." It is not normally us

Discourse markers

Discourse means ‘pieces of language longer than a sentence’. Some words and expressions are used to show how discourse is constructed. They can show the connection between what a speaker is saying and what has already been said or what is going to be said; they can help to make clear the structure of what is being said; they can indicate what speakers think about what they are saying or what others have said.

There are a very large number of these ‘discourse markers’, and it is impossible to give a complete list in a few pages. Here are a few of the most common examples. Some of these words and expressions have more than one use; for more information, look in a good dictionary. Some discourse markers are used mostly in informal speech or writing; others are more common in a formal style. Note that a discourse marker usually comes at the beginning of a clause.

1) focusing and linking

• These expressions focus attention on what is going to be said, by announcing the subject in advance. Some of them also make a link with previous discourse, by referring back to what was said before.
• With reference to is a very formal expression used mainly at the beginning of business letters.
  • With reference to your letter of 17 March, I am pleased to inform you …
• Speaking/talking of/about … is used to make a link with what has just been said. It can help a speaker to change the subject.
  • I saw Max and Lucy today. You know, she – ~ Talking of Max, did you know he’s going to Australia?
• Regarding can come at the beginning of a piece of discourse.
  • Hello, John. Now look, regarding those sales figures – I really don’t think …
• As regards and as far as … is concerned usually announce a change of subject by the speaker/writer.
  • … there are no problems about production. Now as regards marketing …
  • … about production. As far as marketing is concerned, I think …
• People sometimes leave out is concerned after as far as … This is usually considered incorrect.
  • As far as the new development plan, I think we ought to be very careful.
  • As for often suggests lack of interest or dislike.
  • I’ve invited Andy and Bob. As for Stephen, I never want to see him again.

2) balancing contrasting points

It's got to the point in learning German where I'm fed up of seeing "doch" everywhere and not understanding it, but there seem to be a million definitions online. The same goes for words like "wohl" and "halt".

Can anyone explain how on Earth some of these modal particles (/discourse markers, what's the difference?) work, or link to any relevant information?

Thanks!

Pausing is an OK thing to do when you are talking as a DM. Silence serves three purposes that I understand, at least, and no doubt it is more complex than my meagre brain can comprehend.

The first is to give yourself a chance to catch up. The second is to give your players a chance to catch up. And the third is to add to the drama of the piece. That sort of pause is great fun, if not overplayed. It usually gives players the greatest opportunity to imagine the worst of what they can dream up (if only you could bottle their fear and write with it for the next episode).

Instead of pauses in our speech, we will use "um" "errr" and so on. These are fine, and generally not remarked upon if not overused. Some of the most popular DMs on YouTube and Twitch will rarely be heard saying ums and errs. However, listen closely to their next session. What is the frequency of "like" and "kinda like"? Discourse markers like this in DnD particularly seem to be very common. I do it too. You probably do it. So when did it become so common?

Taking a break to let the mind catch up in speech is natural and important, but when the frequency of filler words begin to dominate every description, there's an opportunity to make narration more slick. Potentially, using pauses. Perhaps short sentences? Lists of things with copious punctuation in the form of semi-colons.

I'd like to think that there's something to be gained by reducing the frequency of "like" and "kinda like". But perhaps the opposite is true. We need pauses and filler words to let our mind catch up. We have so few words to play with. We don't want to have to talk much slower than we're used to, so it would be nice to make them all count. Maybe we just need alternatives to "kinda like"....

https://i.imgur.com/HJblK2f.png

I'm seeing a lot of people getting riled up about guests on both shows using "like" as a discourse marker when speaking.

I would liken picking out things like "like" and verbal fillers like "um's" and "uh's" is similar to teaching someone about kerning: once you see it, you can't unsee it - or hear it in this case

I understand once you look out for it, it's grating but please remember that most of these guests are not radio broadcasters or people who do live speaking for a living and have not trained themselves to not rely on fillers. I have noted some people telling Dick/Maddox to tell their guests to stop and re-do a sentence if they use "like" too much which is just ridiculous.

So to people of the subreddit I give you a challenge: Record yourself debating a friend on something - see how long you go before dropping an "uh", "um" or "like".

From personal experience training myself to get out of those habits went like this:

Week 1. Noticed I was throwing a lot of these things into my speech

Week 2. Consciously trying to not do it but then finding it hard to get my point across as I was juggling not saying certain things and ruining my flow (This is why it would be stupid to tell guests to go again as it would ruin their confidence and stilt their speech)

Week 3. Getting my point across but with long pauses

Week 4. Getting there but still slipping up every now and then

Look forward to seeing peoples attempts - it's really fucking hard.

We look at a few useful techniques you can start to use in your next speaking exam.

They are quite easy to adopt and will make you sound more natural.

In this tutorial you will learn:

• Discourse markers

This will help you in your IELTS speaking exam because:

• You’ll be able to use discourse markers in part 3 of IELTS speaking.

If you are struggling with the Speaking exam, or just want to improve faster, have a look at the Speaking Confidence course (included in the Jump to Ban 7 or it’s Free writing course).

What are Discourse Markers?

Click here to continue reading: https://www.ieltspodcast.com/speaking-ieltspodcast/discourse-markers-speakers/

This post (in the three comments I just posted) is a mish-mash of stuff I have compiled while searching for discourse markers on the internet. I really haven't found any one good source of them. I'm adding them here because I searched for so long before finding the book I copied these from - so I thought I should share. I would hope that the native speakers and other students could come along and add some - especially telling us which ones are currently in popular use. I find using these in my speech helps buy me time while I think of something to say or try to apply grammar rules to what I'm thinking of saying, and it is increasing the length of time Russian speakers are willing to talk to me.

I think, if a big list of these could be complied, that it would make an excellent Anki deck or Memrise course, sometime in the future. I'm not saying I will have the time or technical know-how to do that, but this is the internet, so I'm just putting that thought out there. ;) Have a fabulous day!

I find myself in desperate need to use one discourse marker or another – such as the adverb utcumque or the particle at – every second sentence when speaking or writing Latin. They're one of those things you typically pick up from listening to other speakers since it's often tricky to concisely describe their usage. This obviously poses a problem in Latin with its lack of listening material, especially when it comes to informal speech. Of course, this will also come after reading a few thousand pages worth of Roman classics, but I need to express myself somehow in the meanwhile.

For this reason I had to look for written descriptions, and that's where I'd appreciate your help. Googling "discourse markers" results in a large number of neatly organised tables and descriptions for English, and ideally I'd like to find something of the sort for Latin – a place to look for some new options, clarify my understanding of each item and see it used in context. So far I've found this list which only contains links to papers on some particular items or at best a small group of them. The biggest study I've found is this which includes nempe, quippe, scīlicet, vidēlicet and nīmīrum, but even that is very inefficient compared to simply using your own induction and linguistic intuition. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

I have been searching all over the internet and I haven't been able to find any list with Norwegian linkers. Have any of you found or made any list containing them? I think it would be really helpful to have. Something like this http://blocs.xtec.cat/turo/files/2012/12/LINKERS.jpg.

Takk

I am an English language undergrad and currently trying to get my head around this. In particular I am reading this article by Alexandra D'Arcy: http://web.uvic.ca/~adarcy/web%20documents/DArcy-like-Anglistik%20proofs.pdf, on the rise of 'like' in discourse.

Here she states that this is an example of a discourse marker: Like if you’re doing your undergrad, no big deal. Like, it’s not that bad, but like I’m in a professional school.

And that this is a discourse particle: I remember there being like a solar eclipse.

She does go on to explain what the difference is but I'm still having trouble. Can someone explain it to me in really simple terms?

Jason is excellent teacher, altough "X" I think femwle teacher are usually better with five-years olds.

What would you put in the place of "X"? I did 'all in all', is this correct?

And this: I know, but it was set in specific historical period. Obviously you can't expect the dialogue to be totally authentic, I mean nobody knows exactly how people spoke in Roman times but at least the details should be right. There were cannons in the battle scene and they weren't invented till a thousand of years later! All in all / That is to say, I thought it was a preety awful film.

Which one would you choose (with explanation please)?

I've been searching for material on the frequent insertion of 'basically' in spoken discourse. A few of the Internet sources that I have already found seem to group 'basically' as a DM, however, whenever 'basically' appears in speech as a filler, it fulfils an adverbial function which I feel should prohibit its classification as a DM. Basically, does anybody have any thoughts they would like to share on 'basically' and whether or not they regard it as a DM?

I'm looking for a really good list of spoken discourse markers, perhaps arranged by topic and/or frequency. Does anyone know of one?

Also, any good activities to encourage students to use having said that, all I know is, Where was I? and so on would be much appreciated!

I find myself in desperate need to use one discourse marker or another – such as the adverb utcumque or the particle at – every second sentence when speaking or writing Latin. They're one of those things you typically pick up from listening to other speakers since it's often tricky to concisely describe their usage. This obviously poses a problem in Latin with its lack of listening material, especially when it comes to informal speech. Of course, this will also come after reading a few thousand pages worth of Roman classics, but I need to express myself somehow in the meanwhile.

For this reason I had to look for written descriptions, and that's where I'd appreciate your help. Googling "discourse markers" results in a large number of neatly organised tables and descriptions for English, and ideally I'd like to find something of the sort for Latin – a place to look for some new options, clarify my understanding of each item and see it used in context. So far I've found this list which only contains links to papers on some particular items or at best a small group of them. The biggest study I've found is this which includes nempe, quippe, scīlicet, vidēlicet and nīmīrum, but even that is very inefficient compared to simply using your own induction and linguistic intuition. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

Hey, r/linguistics!

I'm a newbie at linguistics, taking an intro course in school right now. We're doing discourse and pragmatics right now, and I'm a bit confused about discourse markers. I'm not too clear on what really constitutes a discourse marker.

When we say:

>You're like the coolest person ever.

'like' is a discourse marker, correct?

What about when we say: >She was like 'I'm gonna fail this course'.

Would that also be a discourse marker, or something else altogether?

Thanks in advance.