Discourse Cohesion Markers and Pragmatic Tones in Oprah Winfrey’s(2008) Motivational Speech
الكلمات المفتاحية:
intonation, discourse markers, speech acts, lexical cohesion, pitch contour
الملخص
This study examined how forms and functions of intonation discourse markers could be employed to deliver the pragmatic force of motivation in Oprah Winfrey’s (2008) Speech at Stanford’s Commencement Ceremony. It also explored the most recurring tones as classified by Well's (2006) in relation to Searle's (1969) speech act theory and Halliday and Hasan's (1976) discourse cohesion categorizations, with specific reference to lexical repetition as a discourse cohesive device. The findings revealed that the most frequently used tones were the rising and falling tones. The extensive use of these tones was due to the nature of illocutionary force investigated, which was motivation, to assert strong feelings of excitement. The rising tone was used mostly as a discourse marker of introducing and contrasting information and as a cohesive device for enhancing ideas, while the falling tone was used mostly as a discourse marker of finishing and concluding and as a cohesive device for extending ideas.
المراجع
1. Oprah talks to graduates about feelings, failure and finding happiness. (2008, June 15). Retrieved December 19, 2020, from https://news.stanford.edu/news/2008/june18/como-061808.html
2. Alami, M., 2015. Pragmatic Functions of Discourse Markers. London: London Press.
3. Andersen, G. 1998. The Pragmatic Marker Like From a Relevance- Theoretic Perspective. New York: New York Press.
4. Andersen, G. 2001. Pragmatic Markers of Sociolinguistic Variation: A Relevance Theoretical Approach to the Language of Adolescent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Altikriti, S. 2011. Speech Act Analysis to Short Stories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Austin, J. 1969. How to Do Things with Words. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Baby, M. & Afzal, B. 2020. A Comparative Study of Lexical Cohesive Devices used by L1 and L2 English speakers. Bern: Peter Lang.
8. Beebe, W. 2002. The Pragmatic Use of Discourse Markers in the Unplanned Speech. Blackwell: Blackwell Press.
9. Bu, M. 2013. Discourse Marker So: A Comparison Between English Language Learners and English Dominant Speakers. Blackwell: Blackwell.
10. Campos, M. 2004. Intonational Devices Used in the Distinction of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
11. Crane, A. 2016. Texture in Text. Harlow: Longman.
12. Dylgjeri, A. 2014. The Function and Importance of Discourse Markers in Political Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Farhan, I. 2018. Identifying the Pragmatic Force Of Attitudinal Intonation In Some Selected Political Speeches. Westport: Praeger Publishers.
14. Faris, A. , & Abdulsatar, M. 2021. Attitudinal Function of Intonation in the Discourse of Theresa May on the Brexit. Blackwell: Blackwell.
15. Fuller, J. 2003. Discourse Marker Use Across Speech Contexts: A Comparison of Native and Non-native Speaker Performance. Toronto: Toronto university Press.
16. Gee, N. & Hadford, A., 2016. What is Meant by Discourse Analysis? Oxford: Oxford Press.
17. Goertel, R. 2011. The Pragmatic Use of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: London Press.
19. He, Y. 2017. Lexical cohesion in English public speeches. New York: Random House Inc.
20. Jaeger, W. 2007. Some Exploratory Discourse on Meta-Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
21. Lim, J. 2016. Discourse Marker So: A Comparison between English Language Learners and English Dominant Speakers. Toronto: Toronto Press.
22. Malgwi, G., 2016. A Study of the Character of Lexical Cohesion in ESL texts. New York: New York Press.
23. McCArthy, M. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Blackwell: Blackwell Press.
24. Mufiah, N., & Rahman, M. 2019. Speech Acts Analysis of Donald Trump’s Speech. New York: New York Press.
25. Nilopa, L. Miftah, M. & Sugianto, A. 2017. Cohesive Discourse Markers. London: London University Press.
26. Nordquist, R. 2017. Discourse. London: London Press.
27. Petukhova, V. & Bunt, H. 2009. Semantics of Discourse Markers in Spoken Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Roach, P. 2006. English Phonetics and Phonology: A practical course. Cambridge University Press.
29. Rohde, H. & Frank, C. 2011. Markers Discourse Structure in Child Directed Speech. Oxford: Oxford Press.
30. Schiffrin, D. 2006. The Function and Importance of Discourse Markers in Political Discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Press.
31. Schiffrin, D., et al. 2003. Pragmatic Functions of Discourse Markers. Cambridge. Cambridge Press.
32. Searle, J. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language . Cambridge University Press.
33. Sharif, M. 2015. Discourse Markers in Political Interviews. Oxford: Oxford Press.
34. Shitwi, Z. H., Ali, Z., & Khalil, J. 2019. The Use of Information Tones in Obama’s Speech: A Phono-Pragmatic Analysis. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
35. Tannen, D., 2012. Discourse Analysis: What Speakers Do in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
36. Wang, G. & Qiao, L. 2014. Discourse and Coherence. Oxford: Oxford Press.
37. Wells, J. 2006. English intonation PB and Audio CD: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
38. Xuefeng, 2016. An Analysis of Lexical Cohesion in Narrative Text Three Children Storybooks. Blackwell: Blackwell University Press.
39. Yamato, K. 2000. Validating David Brazil’s Theory of Discourse Intonation for Intonation Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Yinxiu, J. 2014. Discourse Analysis. New York: New York Press.
2. Alami, M., 2015. Pragmatic Functions of Discourse Markers. London: London Press.
3. Andersen, G. 1998. The Pragmatic Marker Like From a Relevance- Theoretic Perspective. New York: New York Press.
4. Andersen, G. 2001. Pragmatic Markers of Sociolinguistic Variation: A Relevance Theoretical Approach to the Language of Adolescent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Altikriti, S. 2011. Speech Act Analysis to Short Stories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Austin, J. 1969. How to Do Things with Words. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Baby, M. & Afzal, B. 2020. A Comparative Study of Lexical Cohesive Devices used by L1 and L2 English speakers. Bern: Peter Lang.
8. Beebe, W. 2002. The Pragmatic Use of Discourse Markers in the Unplanned Speech. Blackwell: Blackwell Press.
9. Bu, M. 2013. Discourse Marker So: A Comparison Between English Language Learners and English Dominant Speakers. Blackwell: Blackwell.
10. Campos, M. 2004. Intonational Devices Used in the Distinction of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
11. Crane, A. 2016. Texture in Text. Harlow: Longman.
12. Dylgjeri, A. 2014. The Function and Importance of Discourse Markers in Political Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Farhan, I. 2018. Identifying the Pragmatic Force Of Attitudinal Intonation In Some Selected Political Speeches. Westport: Praeger Publishers.
14. Faris, A. , & Abdulsatar, M. 2021. Attitudinal Function of Intonation in the Discourse of Theresa May on the Brexit. Blackwell: Blackwell.
15. Fuller, J. 2003. Discourse Marker Use Across Speech Contexts: A Comparison of Native and Non-native Speaker Performance. Toronto: Toronto university Press.
16. Gee, N. & Hadford, A., 2016. What is Meant by Discourse Analysis? Oxford: Oxford Press.
17. Goertel, R. 2011. The Pragmatic Use of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: London Press.
19. He, Y. 2017. Lexical cohesion in English public speeches. New York: Random House Inc.
20. Jaeger, W. 2007. Some Exploratory Discourse on Meta-Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
21. Lim, J. 2016. Discourse Marker So: A Comparison between English Language Learners and English Dominant Speakers. Toronto: Toronto Press.
22. Malgwi, G., 2016. A Study of the Character of Lexical Cohesion in ESL texts. New York: New York Press.
23. McCArthy, M. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Blackwell: Blackwell Press.
24. Mufiah, N., & Rahman, M. 2019. Speech Acts Analysis of Donald Trump’s Speech. New York: New York Press.
25. Nilopa, L. Miftah, M. & Sugianto, A. 2017. Cohesive Discourse Markers. London: London University Press.
26. Nordquist, R. 2017. Discourse. London: London Press.
27. Petukhova, V. & Bunt, H. 2009. Semantics of Discourse Markers in Spoken Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Roach, P. 2006. English Phonetics and Phonology: A practical course. Cambridge University Press.
29. Rohde, H. & Frank, C. 2011. Markers Discourse Structure in Child Directed Speech. Oxford: Oxford Press.
30. Schiffrin, D. 2006. The Function and Importance of Discourse Markers in Political Discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Press.
31. Schiffrin, D., et al. 2003. Pragmatic Functions of Discourse Markers. Cambridge. Cambridge Press.
32. Searle, J. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language . Cambridge University Press.
33. Sharif, M. 2015. Discourse Markers in Political Interviews. Oxford: Oxford Press.
34. Shitwi, Z. H., Ali, Z., & Khalil, J. 2019. The Use of Information Tones in Obama’s Speech: A Phono-Pragmatic Analysis. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
35. Tannen, D., 2012. Discourse Analysis: What Speakers Do in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
36. Wang, G. & Qiao, L. 2014. Discourse and Coherence. Oxford: Oxford Press.
37. Wells, J. 2006. English intonation PB and Audio CD: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
38. Xuefeng, 2016. An Analysis of Lexical Cohesion in Narrative Text Three Children Storybooks. Blackwell: Blackwell University Press.
39. Yamato, K. 2000. Validating David Brazil’s Theory of Discourse Intonation for Intonation Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Yinxiu, J. 2014. Discourse Analysis. New York: New York Press.
منشور
2022-02-28
كيفية الاقتباس
Reem Maghrabi. (2022). Discourse Cohesion Markers and Pragmatic Tones in Oprah Winfrey’s(2008) Motivational Speech. Journal of Arts, Literature, Humanities and Social Sciences, (76), 156-176. https://doi.org/10.33193/JALHSS.76.2022.642
إصدار
القسم
المقالات
