Based on data from the Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, this paper argues that the vocalizations [ə(:)] and [ə(:)m]), usually transcribed uh and um, can be regarded as pragmatic markers, rather than as undesirable disfluencies or hesitation markers. It is shown that they are especially frequent in registers and contexts that require more planning by speakers, like narrative passages in conversation and in task-related contexts, especially in long turns. The term planner is therefore proposed as an appropriate designation. Co-occurrences of uh and um with other pragmatic markers such as well, you know, I mean and like as well as with and and but are shown to support this view.
Archer, Dawn, Aijmer, Karin & Wichmann, Anne. 2012. Pragmatics. An Advanced Resource Book for Students. Abingdon: Routledge.
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Bortfeld, Heather, Leon, Silvia D., Bloom, Jonathan E., Schober, Michael. F. & Brennan, Susan E. 2001. Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech 44:123–147.
Brinton, Laurel J. 1996. Pragmatic Markers in English. Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The Comment Clause in English. Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: CUP.
Chafe, Wallace. 1980. Some reasons for hesitating. In Temporal Variables in Speech: Studies in Honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler, Hans W. Dechert & Manfred Raupach (eds), 169–180. The Hague: Mouton. Reprinted 1985 in Deborah Tannen & Muriel Saville-Troike (eds), Perspectives on Silence, 77–89. Norwood NJ: Ablex.
Clark, Herbert H. & Wasow, Thomas. 1998. Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology 37: 201–242.
Clark, Herbert H. & Fox Tree, Jean E. 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition 84: 73–111.
Clayman, Steven E. 2013. Turn-constructional units and the transition-relevance place. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Tanya Stivers & Jack Sidnell (eds), 150-166. Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
D'Arcy, Alexandra. 2007. Like and language ideology. Disentangling fact from fiction. American Speech 82: 386–419.
De Leeuw, Esther. 2007. Hesitation markers in English, German, and Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 19: 85–114.
Du Bois, John W., Schuetze-Coburn, Stephan, Cumming, Susanna & Paolino, Danae. 1993. Outline of discourse transcription. In Talking Data. Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research, Jane A. Edwards & Martin D. Lampert (eds), 45–89. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Edmondson, Willis. 1981. Spoken Discourse. A Model for Analysis. London: Longman.
Erard, Michael. 2007. Um... Slips, Stumbles, and Verbal Blunders, and What They Mean. New York NY: Pantheon Books.
Erman, Britt. 1987. Pragmatic Expressions in English [Stockholm Studies in English]. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Faerch, Claus & Kasper, Gabriele. 1982. Phatic, metalingual and metacommunicative functions in discourse: Gambits and repairs. In Impromptu Speech: A Symposium. Meddelanden från Stiftelsens för Åbo Akademi Forskningsinstitut 78, Nils Erik Enkvist (ed.), 71–103. Åbo: Åbo Akademi.
Fischer, Kerstin. 2000. From Cognitive Semantics to Lexical Pragmatics: The Functional Polysemy of Discourse Particles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fischer, Kerstin. 2006. Frames, constructions, and invariant meanings: The functional polysemy of discourse particles. In Approaches to Discourse Particles, Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 427–447. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2008. Hesitation markers among EFL learners: Pragmatic deficiency or difference? In Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics. A Mutualistic Entente, Jesús Romero-Trillo (ed.), 119–149. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & De Cock, Sylvie. 2011. Errors and disfluencies in spoken corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16(2):141–172. Reprinted 2013 in Errors and Disfluencies in Spoken Corpora, Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Sylvie De Cock (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goffman, Erwin. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goldman-Eisler, Freda. 1961. A comparative study of two hesitation phenomena. Language and Speech 4:18–26.
Jucker, Andreas. 1993. The discourse marker well. A relevance-theoretical account. Journal of Pragmatics 19: 435–452.
Jucker, Andreas. 2014. Uh and um as planners in the Corpus of Historical American English. In Developments in English: Expanding Electronic Evidence, Irma Taavitsainen, Merja Kytö, Claudia Claridge & Jeremy Smith (eds), 162-177. Cambridge: CUP.
Kjellmer, Göran. 2003. Hesitation. In defence of ER and ERM. English Studies 84:170–198.
Lester, Nicholas. 2013. It’s, uh, complicated: Modeling uh and um as functions of difficulty and complexity. In Paper presented at the
Cognition and Language Workshop (CLaW 2013)
. Santa Barbara, CA.
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Levinson, Stephen C. 2013. Action formation and ascription. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Tanya Stivers & Jack Sidnell (eds), 103–130. Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Maclay, Howard & Osgood, Charles E. 1959. Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous English speech. Word 15:19–44.
MacWhinney, Brian & Osser, Harry. 1977. Verbal planning functions in children's speech. Child Development 48: 978–985.
Miller, Jim & Weinert, Regina. 1995. The function of LIKE in dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 23: 365–393.
Norrick, Neal R. 2015. Interjections. In Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook, Karin Aijmer & Christoph Rühlemann (eds), 291–325. Cambridge: CUP.
O'Connell, Daniel C. & Kowal, Sabine. 2004. The history of research on the filled pause as evidence of the written language bias in linguistics (Linell, 1982). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 33: 459–474.
O'Connell, Daniel C. & Kowal, Sabine. 2005. Uh and Um revisited: Are they interjections for signaling delay?Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 34: 555–576.
Östman, Jan-Ola. 1982. The symbiotic relationship between pragmatic particles and impromptu speech. In Impromptu Speech: A Symposium, Nils Erik Enkvist (ed.), 147–177. Turku: Åbo Akademi.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1993. Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26: 99–128.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CUP.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2010. Some other “uh(m)s”. Discourse Processes 47: 30–174.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Jefferson, Gail & Sacks, Harvey. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 55: 361–382.
Shillcock, Richard, Kirby, Simon, McDonald, Scott & Brew, Chris. 2001. Filled pauses and their status in the mental lexicon. Paper presented at
DiSS '01 (Disfluencies in Spontaneous Speech)
August 29-31, Edinburgh.
Schneider, Ulrike. 2012. Do uh and um have different meanings? A clustering approach using dendrograms. Poster presented at
DGKL (German Society of Cognitive Linguistics)
Conference in Freiburg.
Schneider, Ulrike. 2014. Frequency, Hesitations and Chunks. A Usage-based Study of Chunking in English. PhD dissertation, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg in Breisgau.
Schourup, Lawrence C. 1985. Common Discourse Particles in English Conversation. New York NY: Garland.
Schourup, Lawrence. 2001. Rethinking well. Journal of Pragmatics 33:1025–1060.
Siegel, Muffy. 2002. Like: The discourse particle and semantics. Journal of Semantics 19: 35–71.
Stenström, Anna-Brita. 1990. Pauses in monologue and dialogue. In The London-Lund Corpus of Spoken English. Description and Research, Jan Svartvik (ed.), 211-252. Lund: LUP.
Svartvik, Jan. 1980. Well in conversation. In Studies in English Linguistics for Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik (eds), 167–177. London: Longman.
The Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English. <[URL]>
Tottie, Gunnel. 2011. Uh and um as sociolinguistic markers in British English. The International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16(2):173–196. Reprinted 2013 in Errors and Disfluencies in Spoken Corpora, Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Sylvie De Cock (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tottie, Gunnel. 2015a. Turn management and “filled pauses”, uh and um. In Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook, Karin Aijmer & Christoph Rühlemann (eds), 448–483. Cambridge: CUP.
Tottie, Gunnel. 2015b. Uh and um in British and American English: Are they words? Evidence from co-occurrence with pauses. In Linguistic Variation: Confronting Fact and Theory, Nathalie Dion, André Lapierre & Rena Torres Cacoullos (eds), 38-55. New York NY: Routledge.
Tottie, Gunnel. 2105c. From pause to word: Uh and um in written language. Paper presented at
ICAME 36
, May 27–31, Trier.
Tottie, Gunnel. Forthcoming. Uh or um – are there functional differences?
Wieling, Martijn, Grieve, Jack, Bouma, Gosse, Fruehwald, Joseph, Coleman, John & Liberman, Mark. 2016. Variation and change in the use of hesitation markers in Germanic languages. Language Dynamics and Change.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Bellifemine, Corrado & Loulou Kosmala
2024. Investigating pausing and gesturing patterns in children with and without developmental language disorder. Multimodal Communication
Niculescu, Oana
2023. Acoustic Correlates of Filler Particles in Romanian Connected Speech. Philologica Jassyensia 38:2 ► pp. 71 ff.
2022. The dual status of filled pauses: Evidence from genre, proficiency and co-occurrence. Language and Speech 65:1 ► pp. 216 ff.
Lingard, Lorelei & Christopher Watling
2021. Effective Use of Quotes in Qualitative Research. In Story, Not Study: 30 Brief Lessons to Inspire Health Researchers as Writers [Innovation and Change in Professional Education, 19], ► pp. 35 ff.
Revis, Melanie & Tobias Bernaisch
2020. The pragmatic nativisation of pauses in Asian Englishes. World Englishes 39:1 ► pp. 135 ff.
Lingard, Lorelei
2019. Beyond the default colon: Effective use of quotes in qualitative research. Perspectives on Medical Education 8:6 ► pp. 360 ff.
TOTTIE, GUNNEL
2019. From pause to word:uh, umanderin written American English. English Language and Linguistics 23:1 ► pp. 105 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 september 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.