Based on the noticing hypothesis, the case study adopts a descriptive approach and looks

at the acquisition and use of discourse markers in consideration to factors influencing noticing
these linguistic and functional units. Schriffrin, (1986) included a range of markers from textualoriented markers to perception verbs, deictic, interjections, metatalk, quantifier phrases as well as
non-verbal DMs. The discourse markers is proposed to operate on five planes: exchange
structure, action structure, ideational structure, participation framework, information state; each
marker may manifest itself on more than one plane. Erman (2001) categoried DMs ( which he
uses the term pragmatic markers) on three domains including the two most common ones
found in the literature review the textual/ideational and the interpersonal level, and as
metalinguistic monitors.
In consideration of the timeframe and the scale of the project, the DMs for analysis
would be selected based on the preliminary interview and the official interview for collecting
data. The choice will depend on the use and frequency of participants DMs and literature review
as well as the issues under discussion. Data from the three interviews will be transcribed and
turned to PDF file. The frequency of each word which might function as DM would be counted
by the search engine of PDF file. The researcher then would check again and omit the use of the
same word but not as a discourse marker (e.g. well can be used as a word and as an adverb) the
criteria for selection are taken from the body of literature into the common characteristics of
discourse marker: non-propositional, can be omitted without making utterances/sentences,
ungrammatical/unintelligible, may be text-oriented or denote interpersonal functions, etc
(Schiffrin, 1986)
REFERENCES:
Erman, B. (2001). Pragmatic markers revisited with a focus on you know in adult and adolescent
talk. Journal of pragmatics, 33(9), 1337-1359. Retrieved from
http://www.gloriacappelli.it/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/youknow.pdf
Schiffrin, D. (1986). Discourse markers. Studies in interactional sociolinguistics. New York:
Cambridge University Press
Schmidt, Richard W. (1990). The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied
Linguistics, 11(2), 129-58. Retrieved from http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/PDFs/SCHMIDT
%20The%20role%20of%20consciousness%20in%20second%20language
%20learning.pdf
Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S.
Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21-42). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press. Retrieved from http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/PDFs/SCHMIDT
%20Consciousness,%20learning%20and%20interlanguage%20pragmatics.pd
Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. Second Language
Research, 14(2), 103-135. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ez.library.latrobe.edu.au/docview/200244036?
OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=12001