Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
The CDMS
A wide range of alternative terms have been used in academia to define contrastive discourse markers (CDM) among different researchers with some labeling them as pragmatic connectives, discourse signaling devises, phatic connectives, pragmatic markers, and sentence connectives as used in making sentences and paragraph writing. Al-Yaari, Al Hammadi, Alyami, and Almaflehi (2013) admit that discourse markers are lexical expressions that are drawn from the prepositional phrases, syntactic classes of conjunctions, and adverbials.
Al-Yaari et al. (2013) argue that the lexical expressions signal the relationship between two sections of a sentence having the S2 and S1 components that are the post and prior segments of a sentence in English, which is the essence of discourse markers (Mahboob & Elyas, 2014).
Here, S1 and S2 are used in the context of signaling the contrastive relationship between a dichotomy of the two sentences either in a complex or simple statement. Here, the relationship between S1 and S2 segments in a sentence that a speaker intends to convey is dedicated by a discourse marker (Shu-hua, 2010). The presence of the discourse marker in a sentence enables the speaker to make a coherent interpretation of a sentence and a paragraph. The connection between the two sentences and the meaning conveyed is governed by rules to ensure coherence and the contrast between coherent and incoherent statements can be distinguished by the use of intuition.
Different categories of discourse markers are used to make sentences that are used in paragraph writing. One category of discourse markers includes cause and effect, adding, contrasting, and illustrating. Other discourse markers include because, therefore, since, so and such as depending on the exam level and the context of the application (Al-wossabi, 2014). However, a critical review of syntactic patterning of contrastive discourse markers shows that they do not have similar patterns, but show more than a single pattern. One class of discourse markers that are usually regarded as the citation form include statements such as even so, on the contrary, conversely, nevertheless, however, still, and on the other hand among others.
Saudi students also use another pattern of discourse markers in sentence and paragraph writing which include markers such as despite, in comparison, rather, in contrast, instead, and which are used to introduce the second segment of a sentence but are used with the pronouns this/that and occur with a modified form of S1with some of the statements functioning as discourse markers depending on the underlying conditions. For instance, one of the occurrences of cases of syntax occurs in a special case in a sentence where despite functions as a preposition by introducing S1 as a separate segment in a sentence (Shu-hua, 2010).
In addition, the sequence of different types of sentences exists in different forms and can be used to make different sentences such as declarative statements. For instance, declarative statements can be made with discourse markers that are introduced before and after the declarations statements are made in a sentence.
In conclusion, the results of the study show that contrastive discourse markers occur in three classes with each placing an emphasis or restrictions on the meaning and relationship between S1 and S2 segments of a sentence. For instance, some classes use but to define the relationship between S1 and S2 and the meaning differs from one class to the other. In most cases, different when different discourse markers are used on the same sentence, the interpretation or meaning differs significantly from one class of discourse marker to the other.
However, some discourse markers can replace or substitute other discourse makers in a sentence and convey the same meaning. For example, but can be used to substitute however and that depends on the sequence with which the markers are used. When, however, is used to substitute but, the order in which but and however are used in the sentence determines the extent to which restrictions are imposed on the sentence (Shu-hua, 2010).
Classification of Connectors
Different classes of connectors exist for making additions, comparisons, cause-effect, time, and contrast in a sentence. In addition, the connectors are effective when used appropriately with the connectors that are classified as coordinating, prepositions, conjunctive, subordinating, and correlative conjunctions. Each of the connectors is used with different frequencies by students when writing sentences and paragraphs of different levels and classes. For instance the use of discourse markers such as because, since, due to, as a result, for (cause), so (effect), not only, but, however, despite, in spite of, and although connectors generate different meanings depending on the context of usage.
In addition, Taboada (2006) offers a criticism of the position taken by other academicians on the use of discourse markers by arguing that they are deficient in the explanation of how discourse markers are separated from other words in a sentence and how they can be used at the beginning of each sentence to convey meaning since they belong to their own class of markers. Tahaineh (2014) and Taboada (2006) agree that discourse markers are appropriate for use within a sentence if they are separated from other functional words so that they provide a link that allows them to continue a sentence without disrupting the flow of a conversation.
Tianjian (2012) among other researchers agree that discourse markers are prosodically independent because when they are used in a conversation, they are usually separated from the other functional words in a sentence by intonation breaks and pauses, and sometimes they can be separated by using pauses and intonation as well. In addition, the discourse markers are seen as complex morphologically and do possess the element of monomorphemics (Ziv, 1998). In addition, it is shown that the discourse markers can be separated or insulated in a sentence syntactically because they do not form a relationship with the words that are adjacent in the sentence (Yingjie, 2012).
On the other hand, other academic researchers contend that the use of discourse markers except for oh and well each have their core meanings although the focus seems to narrow because it does not show how the verbs such as see, look, and listen, deictic such as here and there, interjections such as gosh and boy, and meta-talk such as this is the point and what it means, and quantifier phrases such as anyway, anyhow, and whatever (Wahby, 2014, p.12) work well. Here, the aim is to understand how the discourse markers function in a conversation to make sure that the position on discourse markers is coherent. It is asserted that coherence can be achieved by creating a relationship between the different units that are adjacent in a discourse.
To address the issues of discourse markers, some elements were reviewed and confirmed to have the means of making the discourse coherence. The elements include the structure used in the exchange of words in a conversation that shows the relationship between the alterations that occur in a speech (Wahby, 2014). In addition, it shows the effects of the action structure when the words are used in a sentence to show how the sequence of actions in a speech occurs in a discourse a conversation (Wahby, 2014).
Another important element that can be accounted for in the participation framework is critical in defining the way different people communicate with one another and the way those who listen to the speech understand the words. The last state is the information state that shows the current and future state of accumulation of knowledge as it evolves with time in the course of the discourse.
The discourses having been identified and studied using different models proposed by different authors, it is necessary to understand the contrastive discourse markers and their effects when applied to female undergraduate students for writing purposes. Different authors argue from different perspectives on the use of contrastive discourse markers and one of the approaches in the arguments is the use of sequence to express an idea. In this case, the argument is that the conjunctions can be used to recognize the discourse markers that are in either semantic or grammatical items.
Discourse markers among female students
When the contrastive discourse markers are used in spoken language, it is important to distinguish the relationship between the source of coherence in the spoken word and the order of the segments in the sentence. Here, one negative polarity can be used to negate one section of the sentence where the spoken word is used to contrast the content of the statement. For instance, a sentence that read that last week, the weather was bad in Scotland, whereas in the Netherlands the sun was shining shows the description of negative polarity, the semantics, and the additive operation. Here, the contrastive relationship is shown in the sentence using the word whereas , which represents the meaning that is conveyed by the speaker (Vetter, 1991).
The sequence of the contractive discourse markers is noncontiguous, which is true to the statement that CDMs occur in discourse segment-final position less frequently than in segment-initial position, and even less frequently in medial position, sometime changing their focus (Vetter, 1991, p.12) here, it is crucial to note the students who are not well versed in the use of contrastive discourse markers find it difficult to use them unless they have been taken through their usage (Vetter, 1991).
It is crucial to be informed of what makes a word to be classified into the category of contrastive discourse markers. The first element to consider here is that contrasts occur at the intersection of the words between the pragmatic, semantic, and prosodic systems (Vetter, 1991). Here, the rationale is to shed light on how the contrastive discourse markers work and how they interact when used to make an expression. Contrastive is a term taken to mean when a speaker makes a statement that is intended to make a contrast between an entity or concept and an utterance made by a speaker (Vetter, 1991, p.17). Here, there are two approaches that have been discussed to show how contrast in pragmatics and semantics occurs (Vetter, 1991).
When semantics is used, contrast occurs as part of the information structure in a sentence. Here, every entity makes some reference or refers to the existing discourse model or updates it, or simply refers to the model. However, it is possible for alternative sets of prepositions to be used by exploiting the pragmatic effects of the language (Vetter, 1991).
The study shows focus to be the most critical element to be used to control the information structure in a sentence, which happens to be the main linguistic mechanism for use in a sentence. Here, the focus can either be organizational or quantificational. However, academic literature shows that both sets of the argument are orthogonal because different sets of information structure can be captured in the usage process (Vetter, 1991). In English, it is possible for the prosodic marking of contrast to occur and to be in each utterance or in a written sentence ((Wahby, 2014). When an utterance is made, the contrast occurs in the pitch accent and that confirms the prosodic marking in the sentence.
Although some academicians agree by stressing that contrastive discourse markers are important for written English, it is important to understand the use of discourse markers in the context of contrastive pragmatic that departs from the pragmatic functioning and mapping into other languages to clarify their usage by undergraduate Saudi female students. Research shows that different expressions can be made using different linguistic forms that are explicitly represented as per-formatives in institutional contexts. Here, the function of the form-based frame references moves away from the pragmatic function to map them onto the different linguistic forms (Zhen-zhen, 2012).
To address the issues of the mappings, the conversational contributions require that some elements have to be fulfilled. Here, the fulfillment of the issues could provide the basis for addressing the challenges that occur when using contrastive discourse markers (Zhen-zhen, 2012). Here, there is a need to avoid illocutionary force, presuppositions, and prepositions. For a statement to be complete and convey the required meaning, the statement must realize responsive contributions, which possess more linguistic expressions, more lexical expressions, phonological configurations, morphemes, and syntactic constructions (Zhen-zhen, 2012).
For instance, the statement, I dont belief they should have to pay taxes negation is connected to the negative operators and in the context of the negation operator (Xiaolan, 2007). However, it is evident in the sentence that when the frame of investigation has terminated, a complex clause arises and it becomes difficult to identify the section of the sentence that is negated. However, to address the problem, it is important to differentiate the negative clauses in their non-contracted and contracted forms. Here, the non-contracted focus, the negated part of the statement is stressed upon by assigning prominence to the operator in the sentence (Zhen-zhen, 2012).
But
For instance but is used as a semantic functional contrastive discourse marker that enables a speaker to create a contrast in a sentence having two discourse segments (Jucker & Ziv, 1998). The but discourse marker is classified as coordinating conjunction in a sentence to create the contrast between two statements on a sentence. A statement like, the high level positions are stressful at times, but the financial rewards make these positions very desirable indeed is a statement that consists of but as a conjunctive discourse marker that joints two statements to covey a certain meaning.
A statement like Sue left very late. But she arrived on time consists of two discourse segments are used to indicate the relationship between an utterance and the prior discourse (Fartousi, 2012, p.29) in a statement, However, the statement using but shows a morphological complexity and is detached from the sentence and does not show any relationship with the previous segment. A key identifying factor is the discourse marker that has a pragmatic function in the sentence (Fraser, 1998). However, the use of but in a sentence sometimes raises the question on whether the element qualifies to the used in an elliptical sentence (Jucker & Ziv, 1998).
For instance, when but is used in the sentence as follows I tried to get there (Emery, 2000, p.12). I failed. And I tried to call you but no one answered (Emery, 2000) qualifies to be termed as a strong discourse marker. Sometimes when the contrastive discourse marker, but, is used with in contrast as shown in the statement in contrast imposes a more specific contrast than do but and on the other hand raises the question of how but fits into the expression (Fraser, 2006).
The reason for stating the argument is because of the core meaning contained in each discourse marker. The underlying rationale for the argument is that discourse markers have contextual meanings that show the contextual coordinates for utterances: they index an utterance to the local contexts in which utterances are produced and in which they are to be interpreted (Fraser, 2006, p.19). Here, a contrast can be made between the two statements.
Sometimes the sequencing of the but discourse marker in a sentence to separate the two segments of a sentence consists of the primary and secondary components of the discourse garments. For instance, the statement like do not run, but instead walk shows how but is used in the sentence consisting of S1 and S2, the primary and secondary segments respectively.
However
The use of however as a discourse marker is illustrated in the following sentence, he drove the truck through the parking lot and into the street. Then he almost cut me off. After that, he ran a red light. However, these werent his worst offenses (Fraser, 2006, p.10). It can be seen from the sentence that the marker however creates a relationship between the sentences and in the segments (Fraser, 2006).
The segments show that the marker, however, does not relate immediately, but relates the segments that are before the statement (Fartousi, 2012). In addition, the discourse however does not introduce S2 but can occur in different positions of the sentence that occur in the final positions of the sentence. The statement Harry is old enough to drink (Kang, 2010, p.2). However, he cant because he has hepatitis illustrates the position of the discourse marker in the sentence and illustrates how the marker however introduces different sections in the sentence (Lee & Chen, 2009).
The other issue that arises when using however in a sentence is the grammatical status of the statements that are made with the use of the discourse marker is used on the sentence. For instance, in the sentence we left late. However, we arrived home on time here, two independent sentences are connected with the use of the discourse marker however (Lee & Chen, 2009, p.23).
In academic writing, indirect contrasts are used in a situation where the reader or hearer of the statement does not understand the contrast made in the statement clearly. Here, the reader of the statement must find an indirect message to make the contrast clear for the interpretation of the statement to be done correctly with the correct meaning. The results are messages that are rejected that are defined by the indirect contrast discourse marker. For instance, when the following statements should be used, the following results occur.
I am a certified nurse. However, my husband does not permit me to practice (Zhen-zhen, 2012).
The first statement that my husband does not permit me to practice consists of the contextual meaning of the statement and the first part of the statement consists of the explicit implication I am a certified nurse , which means that the contextual meaning of the statement is denied because of the sequence of the statements. A critical analysis of the statement is that the first statement is in direct conflict with the second statement (Zhen-zhen, 2012).
However, it is appreciable for the student to use the most acceptable sequence when making an utterance or when communicating by written statements using a word such as but. When used properly, the word can penetrate any words that are used as contrastive discourse markers in a statement such as however, in contrast, contrary to expectations, conversely, and on the other hand. In addition, the research shows that the words mentioned above it is possible to use but in the same sequence with the word yet or to use the word with other words such as on the other hand or in comparison and in contrast. Here, the research shows that both statements of a cluster of words follow the same sequence.
Instead
Here, one group of contrastive discourse markers are used to convey the direct contrasts and meaning and the other group is used to convey the meaning of indirect contrasts only (Mahboob & Elyas, 2014). It is possible to use markers such as however, contrary, instead, and but to accommodate both the direct and indirect contrastive markers. Let us look at the use of instead and the necessary semantics that are required when using the marker instead as illustrated in the statements shown below. For instance, a statement that reads like I do not provide drugs, drink, or use profanity, instead we do our best to instill morals in our young children (Fraser, 1999, p.12).
From the use of the word instead in the above statement, it is clear that there are implicit and explicit implications of the statement. However, the actual use of instead is when it occurs in a statement that is in declarative and interrogative forms. Here, the declarative use of the marker occurs in a syntactic sequence, but that does not imply that it is any sequence that can be used on the word (Shu-hua, 2010).
On the Contrary
The on the contrary contrastive discourse marker is used to create a sense of denial and is classified in the group of a subcategory of discourse markers (Schiffrin, 1988). It is typical to argue that the speaker who makes a statement that signals the components in a sentence referred to as S1 and S2 subcategories make the sentence to convey a denial message to the listener. Here, the on the contrary discourse markers that use S1 and S2 categories show that S1 is in contrast with the S2 markers (Qin & Xiaoyu, 2013). In a sequence of discourse segments S1 or On the contrary, S2 ,on the contrary signals that the speaker who makes the S2 statement considers S1 to be an incorrect representation of some action, state, or property attributed to an aspect of that segment, and offers S2 as the correct representation (Qin & Xiaoyu, 2013, p.10).
For instance, the statement that:
Im not hungry. On the contrary, Im starved it clearly shows that the speaker negates S2 and affirms S1 to be correct (Qin & Xiaoyu, 2013, p.4).
When used in academic writing, the contrastive discourse markers can be classified into those that are defined by expressions that include on the contrary, instead, conversely, and but in sentences to convey certain meanings. The meaning conveyed by the use of the discourse markers is included in the signaling of differences between the discourse segments of indirect and direct contrasts. One of the examples is Susan is thin but John is fat which occurs when the one making the statement wants to make a comparison between the two contrastive users (Qin & Xiaoyu, 2013).
When writing or making a statement using both contrastive markers, it is important to ensure that meaning is conveyed in the statement and the contrast is made meaningfully (Qin & Xiaoyu, 2013). So that if Susan is thin and John is fat, the use of but is unnecessary because the user does not construe a contrast between the statements, otherwise, the bearer of the statement should frame the statement to show a contrast between the two segments of the statement. If the contrast indicated in the statement contains a single concept with a unique value that is compared with the same concept with a different value, then the resulting statement is a direct contrast. On the other hand, if two concepts have the same values, then the contrast must be made with more statements to clearly explain the contrasts.
Although
Although is a discourse marker that falls into the class of discourse markers that are used the contrast between two sentences. For example, John was late, although he arrived on time (Fraser, 2006, p.5). The study shows that the use of although can be used interchangeably with while because they fall under the class of discourse markers to include but, yet, however, nevertheless, nonetheless, in contrast, by contrast, instead, in spite, despite, although, though, even though, on the other hand (Fraser, 2006, p.5). The use of although can be taken to be reliable when considered from the context of reliability. However, it is critical to note that the use of discourse markers can be emphasized depending on the context of usage and the meaning intended to be conveyed (Fraser, 2006).
Yet
If negative semantic interpretations are used with multiple or double negatives, the proposition becomes true when the number of negatives is kept to be even (Zhen-zhen, 2012), however, the proposition becomes untrue when the number is made uneven. However, the model is based on the argument that supports the idea that two contractive forms can be used that include the n and the not forms (Ziv, 1998). In addition, the negative morphological markers can be used to negate a statement, such as the un that can be used to transform a statement from false to true.
However, when examined from the communication paradigm point of view, the case is not true. It has been shown that when two negatives are used in spoken statements rather than in written statements, the negatives work as understatements (Ziv, 1998). There is a significant potential inappropriateness of using boosted negatives in the statement. Here, the contexts in which the negatives occur depend on the language of the speaker and the operators used in the sentence (Fraser, 2006).
The following tabular comparison must be comprehensively and thoroughly completed and developed you can also add more columns to include and discuss more related studies and empirical research
The role of CDMs in Academic writing
Contrastive discourse markers can be used in a variety of situations to make different statements that convey different meanings to the audience. One example is the use of argumentative and expository writing in academic writing. The study shows that two forms of coherent and incoherent discourse markers happen because if the discourse markers are used properly, they can enable the writer to coherent statements that convey the meaning of a statement with grammatical and communicative correctness (Cheng & Robertson, 2012).
Connor (1996) argues that in academic writing, the contrastive discourse markers are important in creating coherent statements indicative of the relationship between the expressions that occur in a statement.
Here, there should be an appropriate use of signals that show how different segments of the sentence or stamen. The process of creating coherent texts involves an indication of relationships between the things one is on about to enable deductive reasoning and comprehension of what is conveyed in the statements by the reader (Connor, 1996). In this case, coherence is about the relations that hold together different parts of the discourse and that depends on the way the readers of the statements understand the meaning that is conveyed in them. To view a statement as simply coherent means that the written statement using the contrastive discourse markers are understood in the context of the communication intended by the writer of the statement (Connor, 1996).
However, additional elements such as the encyclopedic knowledge of the reader determine the extent to which the statements are understood. That is because, it is the way the people who read the text interprets the text that determines the coherence of the statements marked with contrastive discourse e markers (Coupland, Robinson & Coupland, 1994). Here, the same statement can be read with different meanings and communicative intentions, but the result must be identical (Coupland et al., 1994). The quality of being coherent and the coherence in the statements matter a significant deal in determining the qualitative use of the contrastive discourse markers (Coupland et al., 1994).
The key CDMs which Saudi Female EFL learners generally prefer to use in their academic writing.
The teaching and use of the English language are universal and are dynamically growing in use among the female EFL students in Saudi Arabia in sentence and paragraph writing. Here, discourse markers are used by students in their academic writing to link two components in a sentence to convey a certain meaning. However, the use of discourse markers depends on the competence of students in English to write sentences and paragraphs at different levels of study.
A study conducted by Daif-Allah and Albesher (2013) at the Qassim University shows that because of the competence of different students at different levels of study, most of the PYP EFL students preferred to use different levels of the discourse makers and connectors to make sentences when writing paragraphs. For instance, according to Daif-Allah and Albesher (2013), most of the students preferred to use the first category of discourse markers that consists of adding, illustrating, cause and effect, and contrasting as has been discussed elsewhere in the paper.
Daif-Allah and Albesher (2013) emphasized that most of the students preferred to use markers such as in addition, because, also, and since in paragraphs writing while ot
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.