International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences
Int. j. adv. appl. sci.
Print ISSN: 2313-626X
Volume 4, Issue 3 (March 2017), Pages: 101-106
Title: Describing the use of discourse markers by ESL learners in writing
Author(s): Nor Ashikin Ab Manan 1,*, Nor Nadia Raslee 2
1Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 32610 Bandar Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia
2Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 35400 Tapah Road, Perak, Malaysia
Full Text - PDF XML
This research paper describes the use of discourse markers (henceforth DMs) in paragraph writing by English as second language (ESL) learners who were enrolled in a writing class. 25 diploma level students from Landscape Architecture programme participated in the study. The main objective of the study was to investigate the use of DMs in paragraph writing by these learners. 50 paragraphs written by the participants were scrutinized and the DMs used in each paragraph were recorded. The DMs used by the participants were classified into four categories; a) Contrastive Markers (CDMs); b) Elaborative Markers (EDMs); c) Implicative Markers (IDMs) and d) Temporal Markers (TDMs). It was found that the participants use Elaborative Markers (73%) the most followed by Temporal Markers (13%), Contrastive Markers (8%) and Implicative Markers (6%). There is a weak linear relationship (r = 0.007) between the variety of DM used and the scores awarded to the paragraphs and a weak non-linear relationship (r = -0.004) between the total number of DMs used and the scores awarded to the paragraphs. It was concluded that the students had overused the high frequency EDMs such as ‘and’ and ‘because’ and had misused some DMs in their writing. The study concluded that EFL learners tend to use more limited and redundant sets of DMs in their writing due to their low English language proficiency.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Keywords: Discourse markers, Overused, Misused, Writing ability
Article History: Received 7 November 2016, Received in revised form 16 January 2017, Accepted 20 January 2017
Digital Object Identifier:
Manan NAA and Raslee NN (2017). Describing the use of discourse markers by ESL learners in writing. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(3): 101-106
|Alghamdi EA (2014). Discourse markers in ESL personal narrative and argumentative papers: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(4): 294-305.|
|Ayman SDA and Khaled A (2013). The use of discourse markers in paragraph writings: The case of preparatory year program students in Qassim University. English Language Teaching, 6(9): 217-227.|
|Benson MJ (1994). Lecture listening in an ethnographic perspective. In: John F (Eds.), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives: 181-198. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.|
|Blakemore D (1992). Understanding utterances: An introduction to pragmatics. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.|
|Brinton L (1996). Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany.
|Castro CM (2009). The use and functions of discourse markers in EFL classroom interaction. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 11: 57-78.|
|Chen S (2014). A review of the role of discourse markers in ESL/EFL listening comprehension. Contemporary English Teaching and Learning in Non-English-Speaking Countries, 3(5): 1-27.|
|Flowerdew J (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An overview. In: John F (Eds.), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives: 7-29. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.|
|Fraser B (1999). What are discourse markers?. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7): 931-952.
|Fraser B (2004). An account of discourse markers. In: Garcés P, Gómez R, Fernández L, and Padilla M (Eds.), Current trends in Intercultural, Cognitive and Social Pragmatics: 13-34. Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.|
|Halliday MAK and Hasan R (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman, London, UK.
|Jalilifar A (2008). Discourse markers in composition writings: The case of Iranian learners of English as a foreign language. English Language Teaching, 1(2): 114-122.
|Kies D (2003). Coherence in writing. Available online at: http://papyr.com/hypertextbooks/engl101/coherent.htm.|
|Knott A and Dale R (1994). Using linguistic phenomena to motivate a set of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 18(1): 35-62.
|Lemke JL (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation, New Jersey, USA.|
|Mahmoud AEA and Salim MR (2016). The use of discourse markers in written discourse by students of English at the University of Jordan. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 6(3): 23-35.|
|Martinez ACL (2002). The use of discourse markers in E.F.L. learners' writing. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 15: 123-132.
|Martinez ACL (2004). Discourse markers in the expository writing of Spanish university students. IBÉRICA: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 8: 63-80.|
|Modhish A (2012). Use of discourse markers in the composition writings of Arab EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 5(5): 56-61.
|Polanyi L and Scha R (1983). The syntax of discourse. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 3(3): 261-270.
|Rahimi M (2011). Discourse markers in argumentative and expository writing of Iranian EFL learners. World Journal of English Language, 1(2): 68-78.
|Redeker G (1990). Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3): 367-381.
|Schiffrin D (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
|Swan M (2005). Practical English usage. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.|
|Thompson S (1994). Aspects of cohesion in monologue. Applied Linguistics, 15(1): 58-75.
|Thompson S (2003). Text structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signalling of organization in academic lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2(1): 5-20.
|Ting SH and Tee PF (2008). TESL undergraduates' ability to handle academic text-type at University Malaysia Sarawak. Asiatic, 2(2): 86-100.|
|Waggoner M (1984). The new technologies versus the lecture tradition in higher education: Is change possible?. Educational Technologies, 24(3): 7-12.|
|Wei S (2013). The importance of discourse markers in English learning and teaching. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11): 2136-2140.|
Yin W (2005). Narrow-sensed and broad-sensed grammaticalization. Journal of Sichuan International Studies University, 5: 15. Available online at:
|Yunus M and Haris SNF (2014). The use of discourse markers among form four SLL students in essay writing. International Education Studies, 7(2): 54-63.