Relevance-theoretic three-type, eleven-subtype classification of discourse connectives by contextual effect¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 1 study (1 associational), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 2 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The article adopts a relevance-theory framework (Sperber & Wilson, 1995; Blakemore) in which DCs encode procedural meaning that constrains the reader's inferential context. Under this account, DCs "impose constraints on relevance by virtue of the inferential connections they express" and "encode instructions for processing propositional representations". The study operationalises this by classifying 80 selected DCs into three types based on contextual effect — strengthening an assumption, contradicting an assumption, and making contextual implication — and further into 11 semantic subtypes (additive, enumerating, apposition, adversative, concessive, alternative, corroborative, contrastive, causal, resultive, summation), which structure the corpus comparison.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A pre-compiled list of DCs selected on explicit criteria from previous studies, so that items under study are representative

Constraints¶

• The article notes it is still not clear what accounts for the optimal use of DCs in argumentative writing, and calls for future studies beyond learner corpus research

Target Learners¶

• university students writing argumentative essays in English as L1 or L2

Target Learning Objectives¶

• appropriate and pragmatic use of discourse connectives to achieve textual cohesion and interpersonal meaning in argumentative writing

Claims¶

• Hk Sin L2 Underuse Dcs Overall [+M]
• Shared Top Dcs Different Frequencies [+M]

Related Theories¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Hu, C., & Li, Y. (2015). Discourse Connectives in L1 and L2 Argumentative Writing. Higher Education Studies. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v5n4p30