Summary of the contexts where Type B well tends to occur

B: That's what she's going for <,> Societies Secretary <,> A: Well| I <unclear-words> <,>

B: Who's Ed Dickinson

(ICE-GB: S1A-070)

6.4.2.12 Summary of the contexts where Type B well tends to occur

The types of co-occurrence which tend to co-occur with Type B well are summarised in this section. Tables 6.15 to 6.20 below illustrate the distribution of the positions in an utterance/turn of Type B well.

It is found that well co-occurs with hesitation markers, pauses, repetitive words and

restarts. Well is also used as a preface to a response. In these two contexts, well seems to

signal that the speaker is searching for content or lexis and well seems to be used to gain and hold the floor.

Well co-occurring with reported speech, repairs and rephrasing, the opening and closing of a topic and concluding remarks and questions suggests, to some extent, suggests a

transition in discourse. In some cases, the transitions and topic shifts are obvious. These instances are therefore grouped together in the category of transitions and shifts of topic.

The instances of well in the categories of disagreement and negative evaluation and as a

preface to a response can be interpreted as a mitigator. Well co-occurring with key

information and well as a continuer seem to be used to draw listeners‟ attention to what follows or to hold the floor.

the distribution of the identified co-occurrence of well varies to some extent across sub-corpora. In the NSs‟ monologues, the most frequent type of co-occurrence is in reported

speech and in the dialogues, the most frequent one is in disagreement and negative evaluation.

These two types of co-occurrence are not as frequently represented in the NSs‟ speech, in which the category of transitions and shifts of topic is highly represented.

Table 6.15: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in SECCL: Monologues

Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions

Co-occurrence % Utterance- initial % Utterance- medial % Utterance- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others %

1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 18.8 6 12.5 1 2.1 1 2.1 1 2.1

2. Reported speech 33.3 3 6.3 7 14.6 6 12.5

3. Repairs; rephrasing 0

4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 8.3 4 8.3

5. Questions 0

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 6.3 3 6.3

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 4.2 2 4.2

8. As a preface to a response 0

9. Key information 10.4 5 10.4

10. As a continuer 16.7 8 16.7

Unclassified 2.1 1 2.1

Occurrences: 48 out of 300 (random samples) 100.0 4 8.3 28 58.3 7 14.6 1 2.1 1 2.1 7 14.6 Table 6.16: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in SECCL: Dialogues Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions Co-occurrence % Turn- initial % Turn- medial % Turn- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others % 1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 19.6 12 10.7 3 2.7 1 0.9 4 3.6 2 1.8 2. Reported speech 0

3. Repairs; rephrasing 0.9 1 0.9

4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 7.1 7 6.3 1 0.9

5. Questions 3.6 4 3.6

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 4.5 4 3.6 1 0.9

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 30.4 28 25.0 5 4.5 1 0.9

8. As a preface to a response 23.2 26 23.2

9. Key information 0.9 1 0.9

10. As a continuer 7.1 7 6.3 1 0.9

Unclassified 2.7 2 1.8 1 0.9

Table 6.17: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in MICASE: Highly monologic discourse mode

Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions

Co-occurrence % Utterance- initial % Utterance- medial % Utterance- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others %

1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 6.7 1 1.0 1 1.0 3 2.9 2 1.9

2. Reported speech 14.4 12 11.5 3 2.9

3. Repairs; rephrasing 7.7 3 2.9 1 1.0 4 3.8

4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 1.9 2 1.9

5. Questions 4.8 2 1.9 1 1.0 2 1.9

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 44.2 2 1.9 44 42.3

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 1.0 1 1.0

8. As a preface to a response 1.0 1 1.0

9. Key information 0

10. As a continuer 18.3 2 1.9 17 16.3

Unclassified 0.0

Occurrences: 104 100.0 10 9.6 67 64.4 15 14.4 7 6.7 5 4.8 Table 6.18: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in MICASE: Highly interactive discourse mode Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions Co-occurrence % Turn- initial % Turn- medial % Turn- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others % 1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 10.7 6 2.2 2 0.7 1 0.4 6 2.2 1 0.4 12 4.4 1 0.4 2. Reported speech 4.1 10 3.7 1 0.4 3. Repairs; rephrasing 3.3 3 1.1 3 1.1 3 1.1

4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 3.0 5 1.9 3 1.1

5. Questions 7.4 19 7.0 1 0.4

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 24.4 36 13.3 27 10.0 3 1.1

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 15.9 40 14.8 2 0.7 1 0.4

8. As a preface to a response 19.3 51 18.9 1 0.4

9. Key information 1.9 2 0.7 2 0.7 1 0.4

10. As a continuer 8.9 14 5.2 10 3.7

Unclassified 1.1 3 1.1

Table 6.19: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in ICE-GB: Unscripted monologues

Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions

Co-occurrence % Utterance- initial % Utterance- medial % Utterance- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others %

1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 10.1 4 2.5 2 1.3 6 3.8 4 2.5

2. Reported speech 3.8 4 2.5 2 1.3

3. Repairs; rephrasing 4.4 2 1.3 4 2.5 1 0.6

4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 7.6 12 7.6

5. Questions 1.9 3 1.9

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 44.9 1 0.6 70 44.3

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 2.5 4 2.5

8. As a preface to a response 0

9. Key information 0

10. As a continuer 24.7 1 0.6 38 24.1

Unclassified 0

Occurrences: 158 100.0 14 8.9 121 76.6 10 6.3 6 3.8 7 4.4 Table 6.20: Distribution of co-occurrence of well as a discourse marker in ICE-GB: Private direct conversations Extra-clausal positions Intra-clausal positions Co-occurrence % Turn- initial % Turn- medial % Turn- final % after an M- % after an MA % after an MF % others % 1. Hesitation markers; pauses; repetitive words; restarts 14.8 11 4.3 12 4.7 3 1.2 7 2.7 5 1.9 2. Reported speech 4.3 10 3.9 1 0.4 3. Repairs; rephrasing 3.1 4 1.6 1 0.4 2 0.8 1 0.4 4. Opening/closing of a topic; concluding remarks 0.8 2 0.8

5. Questions 5.1 9 3.5 4 1.6

6. Transitions; shifts of topic 14.8 21 8.2 17 6.6

7. Disagreement; negative evaluation 17.5 39 15.2 6 2.3

8. As a preface to a response 18.3 45 17.5 2 0.8

9. Key information 0.4 1 0.4

10. As a continuer 17.5 32 12.5 12 4.7 1 0.4

Unclassified 3.5 9 3.5

6.5 Chapter summary and conclusions

The frequency information and collocates of well are used as a point of entry into the data. The frequencies of well in the six sub-corpora reveal that there are more instances of well in the dialogic genres than in the monologic ones. This finding is expected; well is often used in more interactive genres.

As I hypothesised, the manual classification of Type A well and Type B well reveals that

well is not primarily used as a DM by the NNSs, but is frequent among the NSs in their highly

interactive discourse mode and private direct conversations. In addition, the prominent collocates of well in the patterns across the six sub-corpora indicate some uses of Type A well and Type B well, as well as identifying some DM collocations, such as oh well, well I think,

well you know and well but in the NNSs‟ speech and well well, ok well, oh well, yeah well and so well in the NSs‟ speech.

The uses of well as a DM are discussed on the basis of its collocation phenomena in regard to placing it in an utterance/turn. In general, Type B well occurring in extra-clausal positions is common. Most of the instances appear in extra-clausal utterance-medial position in the three monologic genres and in extra-clausal turn-initial position in the three dialogic genres. There is no marked difference in the distribution of the positions in an utterance/turn of Type B well across the two types of genre and between the two groups of speakers. However, there are marked differences in the distribution of the types of co-occurrence of well across corpora. This can be attributed to the variations in the types of activity in the six sub-corpora. For example, the NNSs‟ monologues are mainly narratives, in which there are more opportunities for using well to mark reported speech. It is concluded that the use of well is sensitive to genre and dependent on context.

The difficulty of classification based on collocation phenomena has to be acknowledged, in particular when well occurs in the extra-clausal turn-initial position. More than one type of co-occurrence, such the structural evidence (e.g. as a topic opener and as a preface to a response), lexical co-occurrence (e.g. emphatic lexis) and surrounding proposition (e.g. a disagreement), can be found in a single instance of well, for instance, Excerpt (6.4.21), repeated here as Excerpt (6.5.1) for ease of reading. One example of well does not necessarily fit without controversy into one category or another. I coded the instance of well in Excerpt (6.5.1) in the category of as a preface to a response, according to my subjective judgment. Arguably, however, it also fits into the category of hesitation markers, pauses, repetitive

words and restarts. (6.5.1) P: Turn-initial E: Well as a preface to a response to a question; hesitation marker eh and pauses F: To search for contents or lexis

A: I am interested in the university social... socialists. I want to take part in. Eh... ... would you give me some advice please?

B: Well|,... eh... our university have... have a Germen... have Germen society. And also a society about environment preservation and a painting school. There are all quite good professions. You can take part in any of them to your content.

(SECCL: C00-58-33)

It is evident that DMs perform some functions in discourse. The classification can be made; however, it is difficult because DMs are multifunctional. This causes difficulties in investigating DMs and in reaching agreement on the use being made of them.

This study uses three publicly available corpora to investigate the use of DMs. The selection of the SECCL, MICASE and ICE-GB is justified in Section 3.1 of Chapter 3. The use of corpora with different mark-ups nevertheless has its limitations. The NNS corpus, SECCL, clearly identifies speaker change, but the NS corpora, MICASE and ICE-GB, annotate similar information in the mark-up language, which cannot easily be searched and identified. This causes difficulties for an investigation conducted across sub-corpora, giving rise to some questions. For example, Section 6.4.2.1 above discusses the co-occurring hesitation markers, pauses, repetitive words and restarts and Type B well in turn-initial position is about twice as frequent in the NNSs‟ speech as in the NSs‟ speech. Initial well marking hesitation and diffidence can be a notably NNS usage. However, it is difficult to test this hypothesis. The number of turns in SECCL can be easily counted by searching the speaker identities, a and b, and then finding the proportion of turns beginning with well, but this cannot be done in MICASE and ICE-GB. If I hypothesise that the Chinese NNSs tend to use well to mark hesitation and diffidence and NSs are more likely to use ok, which sounds more confident than well does, it is difficult pro tem to find the answer in the case of these corpora, which must be left as a topic for future research.

CHAPTER 7: ANALYSES OF YOU KNOW, I MEAN AND YOU SEE