Psychological Domains and Functions of Discourse Markers Used by Non-native EFL Teachers in Classroom Interactions: Investigating the Role of Teachers’ Experience
محورهای موضوعی :Mehdi Harati 1 , Goudarz Alibakhshi 2 , Eksir Eksir 3
1 - Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English Language, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr Branch, Bushehr, Iran
2 - English Department, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
3 - Department of English Language and Literature, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran
کلید واژه: Psychological Domains, Discourse Markers, Non-native EFL teachers, EFL Classroom Interactions, Teachers’ Experience,
چکیده مقاله :
This study explores the psychological functions and domains of discourse markers used by non-native EFL teachers in pre-intermediate and upper-intermediate classroom interactions. Focusing on teachers' experience levels, it aims to examine how discourse markers facilitate classroom communication, enhance comprehension, and impact interaction dynamics, contributing to the pedagogical effectiveness of experienced and less-experienced teachers alike. The study employed a corpus-driven quantitative descriptive design, using Crible's (2017) annotation model to analyze discourse markers (DMs) in EFL classroom interactions. Ten Iranian teachers (five novice, five experienced) were recorded during sessions, with transcriptions focused on teacher discourse. DMs were identified, coded using taxonomies, and analyzed with AntConc software. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including Chi-square, examined differences in DM use based on teacher experience and proficiency level. The study found no significant difference in discourse marker (DM) usage between novice and experienced Iranian EFL teachers, though novice teachers used more DMs. Sequential and rhetorical markers were most frequent, and both groups employed monitoring, concession, and addition functions most. Despite similar DM frequencies, novice teachers’ overuse suggested limited proficiency. The study highlights the role of DMs in structuring classroom discourse and calls for further research on DM usage in non-native contexts to improve teaching effectiveness and learner engagement.
This study explores the psychological functions and domains of discourse markers used by non-native EFL teachers in pre-intermediate and upper-intermediate classroom interactions. Focusing on teachers' experience levels, it aims to examine how discourse markers facilitate classroom communication, enhance comprehension, and impact interaction dynamics, contributing to the pedagogical effectiveness of experienced and less-experienced teachers alike. The study employed a corpus-driven quantitative descriptive design, using Crible's (2017) annotation model to analyze discourse markers (DMs) in EFL classroom interactions. Ten Iranian teachers (five novice, five experienced) were recorded during sessions, with transcriptions focused on teacher discourse. DMs were identified, coded using taxonomies, and analyzed with AntConc software. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including Chi-square, examined differences in DM use based on teacher experience and proficiency level. The study found no significant difference in discourse marker (DM) usage between novice and experienced Iranian EFL teachers, though novice teachers used more DMs. Sequential and rhetorical markers were most frequent, and both groups employed monitoring, concession, and addition functions most. Despite similar DM frequencies, novice teachers’ overuse suggested limited proficiency. The study highlights the role of DMs in structuring classroom discourse and calls for further research on DM usage in non-native contexts to improve teaching effectiveness and learner engagement.
Aijmer, K. (2002). English discourse particles. John Benjamins.
Alghamdi, E. A. (2014). Discourse markers in ESL personal narrative and argumentative papers: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(4), 294-305.
Alraddadi, B. M. J. (2016). The effect of teaching structural discourse markers in an EFL classroom setting. English Language Teaching, 9(7).
Aşık, A. (2015). Discourse markers in EFL settings: Perceptions of Turkish EFL teachers. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(7), 941-950.
Aysu, S. (2017). The use of discourse markers in the writings of Turkish students of English as a foreign language: A corpus-based study. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 7(1), 132-138.
Buskivadze, K. (2021). The pragmatic and grammatical functions of DMs in American and Georgian commencement speeches. Online Journal of Humanities ETAGTSU, 6, 14-14.
Christodoulidou, M. (2014). The meaning of discourse markers in classroom interaction. Major Trends in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 2, 11.
Cots, J., & Diaz, J. (2005). Constructing social relationships and linguistic knowledge through non-native speaking teacher talk. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native Language Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 85-106). New York: Springer.
Crible, L. (2017). Discourse markers and (dis) fluency across registers: A contrastive usage-based study. Journal of Pragmatics, 142, 139-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.005
Crible, L. (2017). Discourse Markers and (Dis) fluencies in English and French: Variation and Combination in the DisFrEn Corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2), 242-269.
Crible, L., & Degand, L. (2019). Domains and functions: A two-dimensional account of discourse markers. Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique. https://doi.org/10.4000/discours.9997
Crible, L., Abuczki, A., Burkšaitienė, N., Furkó, P., Nedoluzhko, A., Rackevičienė, S., Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė, G., & Zikánová, Š. (2019). Functions and translations of discourse markers in TED Talks: A parallel corpus study of under-specification in five languages. Journal of Pragmatics, 142, 139-155.
De Fina, A. (1997). An analysis of Spanish bien as a marker of classroom management in teacher-student interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(3), 337-354.
Evers-Vermeul, J., Hoek, J., & Scholman, M. C. J. (2017). On temporality in discourse annotation: Theoretical and practical considerations. Dialogue and Discourse, 8(2), 1-20.
Evers-Vermeul, J., & Sanders, T. J. M. (2009). The emergence of Dutch connectives: How cumulative cognitive complexity explains the order of acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 36(4), 829-854.
Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3), 383-398.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse mark-ers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.
Fuller, J. M. (2003). Discourse markers across speech contexts: A comparison of native and non-native speaker performance. Multilingua, 22, 185-208.
Fung, L. (2011). Discourse markers in the ESL classroom: A survey of teachers’ attitudes. Asian EFL Journal, 13(2), 199-248.
Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410-439.
González, M. (2004). Pragmatic markers in oral narrative: The case of English and Catalan. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hall, J. K., & Verplaetse, L. S. (Eds.). (2000). Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. Routledge.
Hall, J. K., & Walsh, M. (2002). Teacher-student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.
Hellerman, J. (2008). Social actions for classroom language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Hoa, N. T. M. (2011). Developing EFL learners’ intercultural communicative competence: A gap to be filled. Journal of English as an International Language: From defining EIL competence to designing EIL learning, 86-99.
House, J. (2013). Developing pragmatic competence in English as a lingua franca: Using discourse markers to express (inter)subjectivity and connectivity. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 57-67.
Jung, E. H. S. (2004). Interlanguage pragmatics. In C. L. Moder & A. Martinovic-Zic (Eds.), Discourse across languages and cultures (pp. 99-116). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Jung, E. H. S. (2006). Misunderstanding of academic monologues by nonnative speakers of English. Journal of Prag-matics, 38, 1928-1942.
Kapranov, O. (2020). The use of discourse markers in oral discourse by EFL pre-service teachers. ONOMÁZEIN | Special Issue VI – Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective, 126-146. https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.ne6.07
Karlina, Y., Suparno, S., & Setyaningsih, E. (2015). The little words that matter: Discourse markers in teacher talk. Paedagogia, 18(2), 81-89.
Khandaghi Khameneh, A., & Fakhraee Faruji, L. (2020). The effect of teaching discourse markers (DMs) on speaking achievement among Iranian intermediate EFL learners. International Journal of Research in English Education, 5(4), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.5.4.1
Khazaee, H. (2012). Use of discourse markers by Iranian teachers of English as a foreign language. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(9), 8912-8917.
Knight, P. (2001). The development of EFL methodology. English Language Teaching in Its Social Context, 147-166.
Marzban, A., & Khazaee, H. (2009). Explicit teaching of discourse markers in EFL listening comprehension. Regional Conference on English Literature, TEFL, and Translation Studies Islamic Azad University Ghaemshahr, October 1, 2009.
Mihaljević Djigunović, J., & Vickov, G. (2010). Acquisition of discourse markers – Evidence from EFL writing. Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia, 4, 255-278.
Nathan, M. J., Kim, S., & Grant, T. S. (2009). Instituting change in classroom discourse structure: Human and computer-based motif analysis. WCER Working Paper.
Nejadansari, D., & Mohammadi, A. M. (2015). The frequencies and functions of discourse markers in the Iranian university EFL classroom discourse. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(2), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2014.840.
Okan, Z., & Özer, H. Z. (2018). Discourse markers in EFL classrooms: A corpus-driven research. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(1), 50-66.
Ortega, L. (2007). Meaningful L2 practice in foreign language classrooms: A cogni-tive-interactionist SLA perspective. In R. M. Dekeyser (Ed.), Practice in a Second Language. Perspectives from Applied Linguistics and Cognitive Psychology (pp. 180-207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ostman, J.-O. (1982). The symbiotic relation-ship between pragmatic particles and im-promptu speech. In N. E. Enkvist (Ed.), Impromptu Speech: A Symposium (pp. 147-177). Abo: Abo Akademi.
Sadeghi, B., & Zarei, S. (2013). The effect of explicit teaching of discourse markers on EFL learners' oral performance. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Ap-plied Literature: Dynamics and Ad-vances, 2(1), 121-139.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cam-bridge University Press.
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architec-ture of the language classroom: A conver-sation analysis perspective. Blackwell.
Taguchi, N. (2005). Comprehension of implied meaning in English as a second lan-guage. In Pragmatics and Language Learning, 10, 21-40.
Tagliamonte, S. (2005). So who? Like how? Just what? Discourse markers in the con-versations of young Canadians. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(11), 1896-1915.
Trillo, J. R. (2002). The pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers in non-native speakers of English. Journal of Pragmat-ics, 34, 769-784.
Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring Classroom Dis-course: Language in Action.
Yulita, E., Rukmini, D., & Widhiyanto, W. (2021). Comparison of the use of discourse markers in English speeches between non-native and native speakers of English. English Education Journal, 11(2), 198-207. Zhang, F., Litman, D. & Forbes Riley, K. (2016). Inferring Discourse Relations from PDTB-Style Discourse Labels for Argumentative Revision Classification. In Y. Matsumoto & R. Prasad (eds.), Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics: 2615-2624. Available online
Zorluel Özer, H., & Okan, Z. (2018). Discourse markers in EFL classrooms: A corpus-driven research. Journal of Language and L inguistic Studies, 14(1), 50-66
Zuengler, J., & Miller, E. R. (2006). Cognitive and Sociocultural Perspectives: Two Par-allel SLA Worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 35-58.
