Cover not available
Article published In:
Applied Pragmatics
Vol. 1:1 (2019) ► pp.26–45

A corpus-based analysis of so in written discourse: A comparison between L1 English speakers and Japanese EFL learners

| Ritsumeikan University

This study examines the functional variability of so in essays written by 200 L1 English speakers (ENSs) and 400 Japanese EFL learners (EFLs). Using quantitative and qualitative approaches, this study elucidates discourse marker usage of so in each group, thereby establishing the normative patterns of use among ENSs and the features specific to L2 English writers. The findings suggest that ENSs use so strategically as a preface to stance-taking by carefully selecting and adjusting the information to be established as common ground with the reader. EFLs use so in a manner distinctly different from ENSs, displaying varying degrees of understanding and difficulty in utilising the word’s discoursal properties. The study concludes that it is important for L2 English learners to learn the uses of so not only as a connective marker with resultative meaning but also as a resource for projecting stance and assertion.

Keywords: so , discourse marker, L2 English writing, corpus-linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Discourse marker functions of so
    • 2.2L2 learners’ use of so
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Data analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Distribution of the use of so
    • 4.2Qualitative analysis of discourse marker so in ENS essays
    • 4.3Qualitative analysis of discourse marker so in EFL writing
      • 4.3.1Repeated (redundant) use of so
      • 4.3.2Absence of information serving as a premise
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion and implications
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 20 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00002.sat
References
Anthony, L.
(2014) AntConc (Version 3.4.4) [computer software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from [URL]
Babanoğlu, P. M.
(2014) A corpus-based study on the use of pragmatic markers as speech-like features in Turkish EFL learners’ argumentative essays. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1361, 186–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, D.
(1988) “So” as a constraint on relevance. In R. Kempson (Ed.), Mental representation: The interface between language and reality (pp. 183–195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bolden, G. B.
(2006) Little words that matter: Discourse markers “so” and “oh” and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication, 561, 661–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) “So what’s up?’’: Using the discourse marker “so’’ to launch conversational business. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 41(3), 302–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker “so” in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 411, 974–998. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buysse, L.
(2007) Discourse marker so in the English of Flemish university students. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures, 51, 79–95.Google Scholar
(2012)  So as a multifunctional discourse marker in native and learner speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 441, 1764–1782. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chapetón Castro, C. M.
(2009) The use and functions of discourse markers in EFL classroom interaction. Profile, 111, 57–77. Available from: [URL]
Ding, R., & Wang, L.
(2015) Discourse markers in local and native English teachers’ talk in Hong Kong EFL classroom interaction: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(5), 65–75.Google Scholar
Fraser, B.
(1988) Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38(1–4), 19–33.Google Scholar
(1990) An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 141, 383–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996) Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6(2), 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999) What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 311, 931–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fung, L., & Carter, R.
(2007) Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and non-native use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 281, 410–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R.
(1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hays, P. R.
(1992) Discourse markers and L2 acquisition. Papers in Applied Linguistics, 71, 24–34.Google Scholar
Hellermann, J., & Vergun, A.
(2007) Language which is not taught: The discourse marker use of beginning adult learners of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 391, 157–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
House, J.
(2013) Developing pragmatic competence in English as a lingua franca: Using discourse markers to express (inter)subjectivity and connectivity. Journal of Pragmatics, 591, 57–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howe, L.
(1991) Topic change in conversation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Ishikawa, S.
(2013) The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian learners of English. In S. Ishikawa (Ed.), Learner corpus studies in Asia and the world 11, 91–118. Kobe: Kobe UniversityGoogle Scholar
Johnson, A.
(2002) So..?: Pragmatic implications of so-prefaced questions in formal police interviews. In J. Cotterill (Ed.), Language in the legal process (pp. 91–110). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lam, P. W. Y.
(2009) The effect of text type on the use of so as a discourse particle. Discourse Studies, 111, 353–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Toward a functional framework for discourse particles: A comparison of well and so. Text and Talk, 30(6), 657–677. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lim, J.
(2016) Discourse marker so: A comparison between English language Learners and English-dominant speakers (Unpublished MA thesis). University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
Matsui, T.
(2002) Semantics and pragmatics of a Japanese discourse marker dakara (so/in other words): A unitary account. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(7), 867–891. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, S.
(2005) Discourse markers in native and non-native English discourse. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Raymond, G.
(2004) Prompting action: The stand-alone “so” in ordinary conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(2), 185–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Redeker, G.
(2006) Discourse markers as attentional cues at discourse transitions. In K. Fischer (Ed.). Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 339–358). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Romero Trillo, J.
(2002) The pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers in non-native speakers of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(6), 769–784. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sadler, M.
(2006) A blurring of categorization: The Japanese connective de in spontaneous conversation. Discourse Studies, 8(29), 303–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
(1987) Discourse markers (Studies in interactional sociolinguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schourup, L.
(1999) Discourse markers. Lingua, 1071, 227–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J.
(1995) Collins COBUILD English dictionary. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D.
(1986) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
van Dijik, T.
(1979) Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 447–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vickov, G., & Jakupčević, E.
(2017) Discourse markers in non-native EFL teacher talk. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(4), 649–671. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Collet, Caroline, Stefan Diemer & Marie‐Louise Brunner
2021. Soin video‐mediated communication in the Expanding Circle. World Englishes 40:4 ► pp. 594 ff. DOI logo
Fernández, Julieta
2022. Corpus linguistics in L2 pragmatics research. Applied Pragmatics 4:2 ► pp. 178 ff. DOI logo
Kapranov, Oleksandr
2021. Discourse Markers in Peer Reviews of Academic Essays By Future Teachers of English as a Foreign Language. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 56:1 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Magliacane, Annarita
2020. Erasmus students in an Irish studyabroad context. Study Abroad Research in Second Language Acquisition and International Education 5:1 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Taguchi, Naoko
2023.  Collecting and Analyzing L2 Pragmatics Data . In Current Approaches in Second Language Acquisition Research, ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.