Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

.

Abstract

According to Heine (2013), the main function of discourse markers is to relate our speech and the situation of discourse (i.e. the speaker-hearer interaction), to explain the speaker’s ideas, and organize the text. They are syntactically independent from the syntactic environment of the sentence. Since these markers, as particular tools of language usage and transferring messages, have a significant role in social communication, they make a part of sociolinguistic studies. This paper focuses on a group of Persian discourse markers which have mostly a fixed and certain syntactic structure (such as “The truth is that…”). We call these expressions “Disclosure” discourse markers due to their function in preparing the process of conversation and the addressee for revealing the truths. The research data were gathered from today’s Persian written texts and also Persian speakers speech. The theoretical framework consists of cognitive grammar and Aijmer’s (2007) grammaticalization models. Data analysis indicates that disclosure discourse markers represent a grammaticalized picture of the matrix clause in Persian because they no more carry the main concept of the sentence. This picture reinforces the necessity of reviewing the syntactic concepts of the matrix and subordinate clauses by considering the presence of discoursal elements in the sentence.

Keywords

Main Subjects

احمدی، بابک (1380). ساختار و تأویل متن. تهران: نشر مرکز.
پیرزاد، زویا (1388). سه کتاب. تهران: نشر مرکز.
داوری، شادی و هلن گیونشویلی (1392). تثبیت ترتیب کلمه در زبان فارسی: معیار دستوری‏شدگی. در: مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش زبان‏ها و گویش‏های ایرانی. به کوشش: مهرداد نغزگوی کهن. تهران: نشر نویسه.
داوری، شادی (1392). معین‏شدگی در زبان فارسی. رسالۀ دکتری زبان‏شناسی. دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران.
نجفی، ابوالحسن(1378). فرهنگ فارسی عامیانه. تهران: نشر نیلوفر.
نغزگوی کهن، مهرداد (1387). بررسی فرآیند دستوری‏شدگی در فارسی جدید. دستور (ویژه‏نامۀ نامۀ فرهنگستان)، پیاپی 4، 3-24.
نغزگوی کهن، مهرداد (1389). چگونگی شناسایی موارد دستوری‏شدگی. مجلۀ پژوهش‏های زبان و ادبیات تطبیقی، ش 2، 149-165.
 
Aijmer, Karin (2007). The Interface between Discourse and Grammar: The Fact is that. In: A. Celle & R. Huart (Eds.). Connectives as Discourse Landmarks. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, & E. Finegan. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Fraser, B. (1988). Types of English Discourse Markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38, 19-33.
Heine, B. (2013). On Discourse Markers: Grammaticalization, Pragmaticalization, or Something Else? Linguistics, 51(6), 1205–47.
Lehman, C. (1985). Grammaticalization: Synchronic Variation and Diachronic Change. Lingua e Stilo, 20, 303-318.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmid, H. J. (2000). English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shell: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Thompson, S. A. (2002).Object Complements and Conversation towards a Realistic Account. Studies in Language, 26(1), 125–64.
Traugott, E. (1995). The Role of the Development of Discourse Markers in a Theory of Grammaticalization. In: D. Stein and S. Wright (Eds.). Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives, (pp. 31-54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.