Contrastive Analysis of German "weil" and English "because" as Discourse Markers in Connected Speech

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1 General approach

1.2 Primary objective

2. Discourse markers

2.1 Characteristic features

2.2 Primary functions

3. Contrastive analysis of English because and German weil

3.1 weil

3.1.1 Propositional versus non-propositional meaning

3.1.2 Functions and examples of weil in corpus

3.1.2.1 weil as a causal subordinating conjunction

3.1.2.2 Epistemic weil

3.1.2.3 weil referring to speech acts

3.1.2.4 weil as discourse marker

3.2 because

3.2.1 Propositional versus non-propositional meaning

3.2.2 Functions and examples of because in corpus

3.2.2.1 because as a causal subordinating conjunction

3.2.2.2 Paratactic uses of because

3.2.2.3 because as discourse marker

4. Results

5. Bibliographic references

5.1 Online sources

5.2 Corpora

6. Appendix

Objectives and Topics

The paper aims to conduct a contrastive analysis of the German "weil" and the English "because" regarding their usage and functions as discourse markers in spoken language, while also considering their roles as causal connectives. Key areas of investigation include:

• The linguistic definition and categorization of discourse markers.
• Distinctions between propositional and non-propositional usage of both terms.
• The role of "weil" and "because" in structuring topical actions and conversation.
• Analysis of corpus-based data from the "Forschungs- und Lehrkorpus für gesprochenes Deutsch" (FOLK) and the "British National Corpus" (BNC).
• The functional shift from causal connectives to pragmatic discourse markers.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1. Introduction: Outlines the scope of the study, focusing on the intricate nature of discourse markers in spontaneous spoken interaction and the primary objective of analyzing German "weil" and English "because".

2. Discourse markers: Provides a theoretical framework for defining discourse markers and their pragmatic functions within communicative planes, acknowledging the difficulty of achieving a consensus on their categorization.

3. Contrastive analysis of English because and German weil: Acts as the main analytical chapter, where each term is examined in its propositional and non-propositional functions using authentic corpus examples from FOLK and BNC.

4. Results: Evaluates the findings of the contrastive analysis, concluding that "weil" and "because" share significant functional similarities as polyfunctional devices that structure coherence and manage speaker interaction.

5. Bibliographic references: Lists all academic sources, corpora, and online references utilized for the research.

6. Appendix: Includes a formal German abstract summarizing the bachelor thesis's goals, methodology, and findings.

Keywords

discourse markers, weil, because, spoken language, corpus linguistics, causal connectives, pragmatic functions, coherence, turn-taking, contrastive linguistics, FOLK, BNC, propositional meaning, non-propositional meaning, interactional roles

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research?

The paper investigates the functions of German "weil" and English "because" when used as discourse markers in spontaneous spoken language, comparing their syntactic and pragmatic roles.

What are the primary thematic fields addressed?

The study covers corpus linguistics, pragmatics, contrastive analysis of German and English syntax, and the grammaticalization of discourse markers.

What is the main objective of the thesis?

The objective is to identify and differentiate the discourse-pragmatic functions of "weil" and "because" in connected speech and to examine how these terms have expanded beyond their traditional causal roles.

Which scientific methodology is applied?

The author employs a qualitative, corpus-based methodology, analyzing authentic transcripts from the FOLK (German) and BNC (English) corpora to validate functional hypotheses.

What topics are discussed in the main part?

The main part covers general definitions of discourse markers, the distinction between propositional and non-propositional meanings (e.g., epistemic, speech-act related), and their role in turn-taking and topic management.

Which keywords characterize this paper?

The work is defined by terms such as discourse markers, contrastive linguistics, pragmatics, corpus analysis, and functional expansion.

Does the author distinguish between causal and discourse-marker usage?

Yes, the author explicitly differentiates between "propositional" use (causal connection) and "non-propositional" use (pragmatic markers that structure discourse without adding truth-conditional causal meaning).

How is the "epistemic" use of the terms defined?

Epistemic use refers to instances where the marker does not link a cause to a factual effect, but rather provides a rationale for why a speaker claims or assumes a specific proposition.