The aim of the study is to explore the idea that discourse markers are oriented to properties of spoken language and the interaction and have special uses or tasks depending on formal and contextual factors. The empirical data comes from an analysis of anyway in informal conversation in several regional varieties of English. The British component of the ICE-corpus was selected as the home variety. Comparisons have been made with Canadian English (ICE-CAN), Philippine English (ICE-PHIL), and New Zealand English (ICE-NZ). Anyway has been analysed in a constructional approach as a combination of form and function. It does not have a fixed meaning but a meaning potential containing information about the position of anyway in the clause and the turn sequence, collocation, activity types and regional specialization.The analysis has shown that anyway can be regarded as distinct constructions (or meaning potentials) in the left and the right periphery or as a stand-alone marker. The meanings reflect the activities and tasks which have to be performed at interactionally sensitive transitions in the evolving discourse. While some varieties prefer anyway in the left periphery this may not be a general tendency when we look at more varieties.
1986Contrastive linking in spoken and written English. In English in Speech and Writing. A Symposium [Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia], Gunnel Tottie & Ingegerd Bäcklund (eds), 13-40. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
2000On-line syntax – Oder: Was es bedeuten könnte, die Zeitlichkeit der mündlichen Sprache Ernst zu nehmen. Sprache und Literatur 85(31): 43-56.
Beeching, Kate & Detges, Ulrich
2014Introduction. In Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds), 1-23. Leiden: Brill.
1994Discourse, Consciousness and Time. The Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.
1999Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.
2001Meaning in interaction: The case of actually. Language 77(2): 245-291.
1997Ungdomars berättande. En studie i struktur och interaktion. Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk.
Ferrara, Kathleen W.
1997Form and function of the discourse marker anyway: Implications for discourse analysis. Linguistics 35(2): 343-378.
Fried, Mirjam & Östman, Jan Ola
2005Construction grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics 37(11): 1752-1778.
1984Oh-responses to inquiry. Introduction. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson (ed.), 1-15. Cambridge: CUP.
Kachru, Braj B.
1992The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.
1988Discourse markers and conversational coherence. In Organization in Discourse. Proceedings from the Turku Conference, Brita Wårvik, Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen & Risto Hiltunen (eds), 341-352. Turku: University of Turku.
1998Marking Discourse Coherence: Functions of Discourse Markers in spoken English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Levinson, Stephen C.
1979Activity types and language. Linguistics 17: 365-379.
2005En dialogisk grammatik. In Samtal och grammatik. Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, Jan Anward & Bengt Nordberg (eds), 232-328. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
2008Grammatical constructions in dialogue. In Context and Constructions [Constructional Approaches to Language 9], Alexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 97-110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 november 2023. 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.