The Appropriacy of Discourse Markers Used in Psychology Department Students’ Conversations
The objective of the study was to explain the appropriacy of discourse markers used in Psychology department students conversations in Muria Kudus University. The study used descriptive qualitative approach in the form of discourse analysis. The researchers were interested in analyzing it because in some cases, when the students want to express their ideas in conversation, they unfortunately sometimes do not know how to respond to speakers question especially if they doubt or are confused what to say. To fill the empty space beforeÂ a certain speaker decides what to say, they Â can use discourse markers such as and, but, because, so, now, then, oh, well, you know, I mean. There were 8 students who became the subjects of the study. They conducted the conversations in pairs for 20 minutes for each .There were 92 appropriate discourse markers and 22 inappropriate ones found in their conversations. It means the appropriacy of discourse markers used in the conversations of second semester ofÂ psychology department students is four times higher than the inappropriacy ones. Therefore, it can be inferred that the level of appropriacy of discourse markers used in the conversations was high.
Baker, P., & Ellege, S . 2011. Key Terms in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Blakemore, D.2002.Relevance and Linguistics Meaning The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Marker.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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. 2(56),661-688. Retrieved September 8, 2018, from www.researchgate.net/publication/227653481_Little_Words
Brennan, S. E. 2010. Conversation and Dialogue. New York: SAGE Publications.
Celce-Murcia, M & Olstain, E.2000. Discourse and Context in Language Teaching:A Guide for Language Teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cook, G.1989.Discourse. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Eggins, S & Slade, D. 1997. Analyzing Casual Conversation. London: Creative Print and Design Wales.
Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fritz, E.2007. Discourse Markers A Contrastive Analysis of English ‘now’ and German ‘nun’ in Conversation.Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G.E,. & Airasian, P.W. 2011. Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and Applications Tenth Editions. Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Gonzales, M. 2004. Pragmatic Marker in Oral Narrative. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Hussein, M. 2008. Two Accounts of Discourse Markers in English. Retrieved December 6, 2018 fromhttp://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/TljODdhM/DMs%20in%20English.pdf
Hartoyo.2011. Language Assessment. Semarang: Pelita Insani Semarang.
Kusumawati, D.2010. The Register of Expression of Anger in Slumdog Millionaire Movie Screenplay. Skripsi. Kudus: Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Muria Kudus University.
Lankes, R.D et al. 2007. The Library as Conversation. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mey, J.L. 1993. An Introduction to Pragmatics.Cambridge: T.J Press Ltd.
Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., & Hamilton, H.E. 2001. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publisher Ltd.
Shahbaz, M., Sheikh, O.I., & Ali, M.S. 2013. Use of Discourse Markers by Chinese EFL Professors: A Corpus Based Study of Academic Lectures by Natives and Non-natives. Journal of Education and Practice. 4(5), 80-89. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from http://www.academia.edu/3390000/Use_of_Discourse_Markers_by_Chinese_EFL_Professors_A_Corpus-_Based_Study_of_Academic_Lectures_by_Natives_and_Non-natives
Trihartanti, R.D., & Damayanti, D .2013. The Use of ‘Oh’ and ‘Well’ as Discourse Markers in Conversation of Bandung State Polytechnic Students. Disertation. Bandung: Postgraduate Program of Bandung State Polytechnic.