T1 112009112 Full text

Study of Discourse Markers in Classroom Communication

THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan

Khurtina
112009112

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2015
1.

A STUDY OF DISCOURSE MARKERS IN CLASSROOM
COMMUNICATION

THESIS

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan

Khurtina
112009112

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2015

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course
or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of
my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by
any other person except where due reference is made in the text.

Copyright@ 2015. Khurtina and Maria Christina Eko Setyarini, S.S., M.Hum

All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of
Language and Literature, Satya Wacana University, Salatiga.

Khurtina:

TABLE OF CONTENT
INSIDE COVER .......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
APPROVAL PAGE ..................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT ........................................................................................4
TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................5
INTRODUCTION........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
LITERATURE REVIEW............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Discourse Markers ....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Types of Discourse Markers ........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
THE STUDY ................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
CONCLUSION ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

REFERENCES ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

A STUDY OF DISCOURSE MARKERS IN CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION
KHURTINA
112009112

Abstract
Emphasising on the importance of Initiation-respond-feedback (IRF) in
classroom communication, this study focuses on a part of IRF which is
initiation. This study was conducted to describe the types of discourse
markers given by Swan (2005) and Carter et al(2011) which are used by
teachers to initiate students so that active learning in classroom appear. Two
selected teachers in Padma Widyanata Easy English Course are analyzed in
6 classroom observations. The data is explained in descriptive manner. The
result of the observation is that by ten types which are promoted by Swan
(2005) and Carter et al (2011), there are seven types of discourse markers
which are used by teachers to initiate students' talk. They are starting
conversation, response, ending a conversation, changing a topic, showing
surprise, ordering what we say and saying something in other ways. These
markers work for teachers as tools to produce active learning. The other

three types, as reported in observation, are also used by both teachers but for
other function. They used the markers such as sharing knowledge, sounding
less direct, and type um and erm in order to manage explanation.
Keywords: discourse markers, initiation, active learning, classroom
communication.

INTRODUCTION

In classroom communication discourse, Initiation-Respond-Feedback (IRF) has
become a general pattern. The basic „IRF‟ exchange structure – an initiation by a teacher,
which elicits a response from a pupil followed by an evaluative comment or feedback
from the teacher – is once seen impossible to ignore in any classroom talk (Edwards &
Mercer, 1994: 202). Researcher highly agrees that IRF structure appears in any classroom

talk. However, the appearance of IRF may vary. The frequency of initiation, respond, and
feedback appearing in classrooms may different from one to other. Active learning in a
classroom needs teacher's skill to initiate students to be active.
One of the teacher's skills needed to initiate is a skill to give students appropriate
clue(s) / marker(s) so that appropriate discourse markers chosen by teacher will stimulate
students to understand the communication. There are some studies related to discourse

markers (DM). The first study is conducted in by Yang (2011). The result isthat discourse
markers perform on different functional level depending on various pedagogical aims.
Nevertheless, their pattern and functions have not been fully described. The frequencies,
categories, and effects of discourse markers that teachers use in classroom interaction are
still under investigation. The second study is conducted by Fung (2011). Results of this
qualitative-quantitative study indicate a very positive perception of the pragmatic and
pedagogic values of DMs by the subjects, where students at the intermediate-advanced
level are challenged to acquire DMs for both receptive and productive purposes. The
findings also reveal the underrepresentation of DMs, which is also another positive
perception in pedagogic value by the objects, where it also exist in teaching materials and
in subjects teaching. The third study is conducted by Kalahaji and Abdullah (2010). this
study questions the perception of Iranian English teachers toward the use of discourse
markers, HowIranian English teachers perceive DMs, and also find out the Iranian English
teachers‟ attitudes toward the use of discourse markers. The observation found that Iranian
English teachers seem to have a moderate attitude toward DMs, due to various factors like
teachers‟ perception and their own beliefs towards DMs. The fourth study is conducted by
Zarei (2013). She claimed on her paper that teachers using discourse markers as a model
for students is also a crucial thing in teaching language especially English. It is because
such discourse markers increase awareness in classroom practice which may allow

learners to access the appropriate situations. Likewise appropriate discourse markers will
help communication going well and social relationship between student and teacher.
Theories mentioned previously show that discourse markers is an important thing
in language teaching. So, it becomes an interesting topic to find out more about discourse
markers, especially in classroom communication. This study, therefore, tries to find out
which discourse markers that are used by selected teachers who are so far claimed that
they have successfully produced classroom communication in order to intiate students to
become active. So, this study will answer the question:
What discourse markers are used by selected teachers to initiate classroom
communication?
To find the answer for the question is important to give clues of some discourse
markers which are used to produce active learning, anything that involves students in
doing things and thinking about the things they are doing (Bowell &Eisoon, 1991: 2). It is
expected that the result of this study which is about types of discourse markers used by
teacher to initiate students will be a reference for English Department students to do the
subsequent research.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Discourse Markers

In linguistics, a discourse marker is a word or phrase that is relatively syntaxindependent and does not change the truth-conditional meaning of the sentence, and has a
somewhat empty meaning(Carter, Ronald: 2011). It means that discourse markers are
words or a group of words which are used in expressions without changing the real

meaning and these markers, for some uses, do not have any meaning. In Practical English
Usage, Michael Swan defines a 'discourse marker' as 'a word or expression which shows
the connection between what is being said and the wider context'. That either connects a
sentence to what comes before or after or indicates a speaker's attitude to what he is
saying. Some of the words or phrases that were considered discourse markers were treated
as "fillers" or "expletives": words or phrases that had no function at all. Now they are
assigned functions at different levels of analysis: topic changes, reformulations, discourse
planning, stressing or hedging.
Ijmer in Ismail (2012) puts it,“they function as cues or guides to the hearer‟s
interpretation”. Therefore, Ismail (2012) defines that discourse markers have many
functions. Basically, they have two fundamental functions: the discoursal function and the
interpersonal function. First, "the textual or discoursal function" refers to signal relations
between prior, present and subsequent discourse, marking off one text unit from another or
linking discourse units further apart (ibid). The "interpersonal function"helps in expressing
speaker or writer stance. For example, "Sentence openers" can paint a picture in the
reader‟s mind and grab their attention by drawing them into the composition. And a

"sentence opener" can use a (verb,plural noun, collectivenoun or a preposition)(ibid).
Discourse markers work not only as a grammatical function but also as
effective interactional features (Schiffin, ET all in Yang, 2011). The markers take apart
as connectors in grammartical function and is also useful to manage conversations which
lead to effective interaction. These are used in almost every expressions of language
functions where exchanging information happens if appropriate expression is uttered.
In short, discourse markers are words, phrases or expressions that can be used as
a partner for speaker or writer to connect and organize what to say or to write. This

markers are used in order to express an attitude in a discourse. Discourse markers can be
categorized based on function and meaning.
Zarei (2013) stated that since the 1970s interest in DMs has increased with
growing interest in the production and comprehension of extended discourse and, more
generally, in pragmatic and contextual aspects of utterance interpretation. Schiffin, has
developed some theories and been published with a focus on the use of discourse markers
in some perspectives. One of perspectives about discourse markers focuses in classroom
settings.
It is clear that communication takes place in classroom. The sharing knowledge
needs to be optimal so that we need to notice in ways of communication skill.
Appropriate use of discourse markers in classrooms not only can improve the participation

of the students but also may contribute to the effectiveness of learning (Liu, 2006).
Extended types and functions are agreed to be analyzed deeper and broader by looking at
the application importance, especially in classroom setting, place of a “dynamic" context
where series of events take place among teachers, learners, discourses, and learning
materials (Walsh, 2006).

Types of discourse markers

Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) developed a model for analyzing spoken language,
which was developed from classroom discourse in general secondary classrooms. It
should therefore be useful when applied to the language of the classroom. The language of
the classroom differs from many forms of spoken discourse in that it is formally structured
and controlled by one dominant party, i.e. the teacher. (Atkins, 2001:1).

Discourse markers generally are used, especially in classroom and used by
teacher or students, not only in writing but also in speaking. Common markers in speaking
shows in following table:
1. Common discourse markers in speaking

Anyway

Like

Right

you know

Fine

Now

So

I mean

Good

Oh

Well

as I say

Great

okay

mind you

for a start

2.

Meaning may not be found in every discourse markers. However, they have certain
functions. I try to summarizetypes of discourse markers seen by their functions shown by
Swan in Practical English Usage and Carter et al (2011:172) which commonly used. Due
to this research which focuses on classroom settings, examples given on each types are
also set from classroom conversation.

Starting a conversation or talk
Based on Cambridge online dictionary and Swan (2005:172), We can use
markers both in starting a conversation and in ending a conversation. There is a type of
discourse markers that help us to begin conversation or talk, to announce what we are
going to talk about. There are several common markers to start a conversation such as
right, regarding, now and okay.
[in a classroom]
T: (1) Right, guys, let‟s get started.Have you done your homework?
S:Not yet, Ms
[a part of lecturing]
T: (2) Now, We will discuss adjectives in describing person

Ending a conversation
It's better if we end a conversation with a marker so it will go smoothly. Discourse
Markers that are used to end conversation as given by Carter et al (2011:349)are so, right
and okay.
[at the end of a class]
T: (3) So, guys, we‟ll see you on Monday.
S: (4) Right, okay Mum.
S: (5) Okay, see you then, Ms.
[At the end of a class]
T: (5) Anyway, is that all? Is there any questions?
S: No. I think we‟re done.
T:(6)Right, fine, thanks for coming everyone. We‟ll meet again tomorrow at four.

Changing or managing topic
We also can use markers to help us change and manage the topic of certain
conversation. In Swan (2005:172) this type are used to introduce a new subject that has no
connection with the previous discourse or to mark that the next discourse is a turn back to
previous discourse which are interrupted.We may use markers like anyway and by the
way.
T: Names and Pronoun can be included in noun group
S: how about the word „good‟, Miss?
T: the word „good' is included in the adjective group, remember? (7)Anyway, word
with ion also considered as noun... (Anyway works as a mark to return to the main
topic of explaining noun).

Ordering what we say

We are able to use markers for ordering or sequencing what to say. Swan
(2005:172) said that this type is used to show the structure of what we are saying.Some of
the common words and phrases which work as alternatives are given by Cambridge online
dictionary:

3.
3.

And

in general

Second

to sum up

3.

and then

in the end

*secondly

what‟s more

3.

first (of all)

last of all

So

Well

3.

*firstly

next

Lastly

a…b

3.

for a start

on top of that

third(ly)

3.
3. Common discourse markers for ordering what we say
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.

*first
and second are less formal than firstly
3.
3.

[In a lecturing]
3.
3. (8) Firstly, we are going to look at how to write an essay. (9) Secondly we are
3. going to look at what makes a good essay and what makes a bad one. (10)
3.

Lastly, we‟re going to do some writing activities.

3. able to use the letters (a, b and c) in order to list reasons or arguments for
We are also
3.

something:

3.
3.
[In a lecturing]
3.

There are two reasons why I think it‟s a bad idea, (11) ais because it‟ll cost
too much money, and (12) bis because it‟ll take such a long time.

Saying something in other ways
As we talk, in Carter et al (2011:270)stated that we monitor by listening to what
we are saying and how our listener is responding to what they hear. It also explained that
we often rephrase or change what we say depending on how our listener is responding.
We use words and phrases such as well, I mean, in other words, the thing is, you know,
you know what I mean, you see, what I mean is.Swan (2005:172) stated that those
expression are used in purpose to clarify the discourse.These discourse markers help to
make what we say clearer for the listener:
[in a lecturing]
Especially for foreign names, they commonly have complete names,(13) I mean
they have first name and sure name.
Shared knowledge
While talking, we think about how much knowledge we can share with listeners.
Carter et al (2011:350)explained that we often mark what we think is old, shared or
expected knowledge with you know and we mark new knowledge that we see as not
shared with the listener with phrases like see, you see, the thing is, etc. Swan (2005:172)
refers this function as focusing on conversation. Those markers likely helps us to
announce what we are going to talk about:
[ In a lecturing]
(14) You know, drafting is a good idea before we do presentation (the speaker and
the listener know about drafting a speech)
T: Why don‟t you put s after that word?

S: (15) You see, the subject is plural, so we don‟t need to put any s after the verb.
(T assumes that S doesn‟t know about the use of s in plural. This is new information)

Discourse markers as responses
It is described also by Carter et al (2011: 570)that as we listen to someone
speaking, we usually show responses to what we hear either by gesture or by a short
response (Mm, yeah, really, that‟s a shame). This shows that we are listening to and
interested in what is being said. We call these short responses „response tokens‟.
Common respone tokens include:
4. Common respone tokens in discourse markers

Absolutely

fine

Okay

Wow

(all) right

good

quite (more formal)

Yeah

Certainly

great

Really

Yes

Definitely

I see

Sure

Exactly

no

Wonderful

that‟s great/interesting/amazing/awful, etc.

There are some functions in giving responses:
Showing interest and showing that we are eager if the speaker continue the story
they share in the conversation.
[ in a class discussion]
S: My hobbies are swimming and playing basketball
T: (16) Yeah.
S: Hmm and I also love cat very much

T: (17)Right.
S: I live with my family...

To show surprise
As paraphrased from Carter et al (2011: 570), some markers are used to build
conversation naturally. Responds such as „oh really‟ and „are you sure?‟ can be use to
show surprise on previouse discourse.
[in a class]
S: I can answer it less than 10 minutes, Miss.
T: (18) Oh really!

To show sympathy
Besides showing surprise as a positive respond, in Carter et al (2011: 350)also we
oftenly deal with negative information. Here, we can use some markers to show our
sympathy. We can have that's terrible, sorry to hear that and oh, that's awful.

[in a classroom]
S: Sorry, Miss. We come late because run out of gas
T: (19) That’s terrible. Just come in and sit down.

Discourse markers: Sounding less direct
We are careful when we speak not to sound too direct or forceful. We use words
and phrases such as like, maybe, sort of to soften what we say (hedges). In
Swan(2005:172) stated that this type is in purpose to show critical remarks. Those shows
opinions sounds less categorical or dogmatic.

Based on the example given by Carter et al (2011: 570), we often use these words and
expressions as hedges:

5. Common discourse markers for sounding less direct

apparently

kind of

Perhaps

Roughly

arguably

Like

Presumably

sort of/ kind of*

I think

Maybe

Probably

Surely

Just

*Sort of is more common in British English; Kind of is more common in American
English.
Can I (20)just ask you a question?
We can (21) probably add some more points to descriptions.
6. Comparison on the use of discourse markers for sounding less direct

There‟s a grammatical mistake in this sentence.
We should (22) probablycheck other sentences
There‟s a grammatical mistake in this sentence.
We should check other sentences.

The statement is hedged or softened so
as not to sound too strong or forceful.
The statement is not hedged and it
sounds more direct and forceful.

Discourse markers: Um and Erm
Discourse markers are not only words or a group of words that have meaning or
can be translated. Here, We can use um to introduce a new topic carefully:
(23) Um, could you please wait for a minute?
(24) Um, there‟s something else we need to revise in your final paper.

We can use erm when we pause before saying something, especially when we are
not sure about what to say:
[feedback after presentation in class]
I got the meaning.. (25) erm but I think we need to correct the arrangement of
your sentences.
In Swan (2005:172), this type also in purpose to show wether somebody‟s
expectations have been fullfilled enough or not.
A : how was the holiday?
B: (26)Um, actually, we didn‟t go.

THE STUDY

This research used descriptive qualitative study. It means that the data were
collected by observation. After observation, it was presented in descriptive manner.

Context of the study
This observation was conducted six times. The observation is held in an English
course in Salatiga Indonesia. The reason was that this is an English course where the
availability of teacher with the criteria asked in this study works in that place. Other
reason is that I had access to do my research there.

Participant
There were 2 participants based on selection are observed in an English Course
Padma Widyanata Easy English Course, Salatiga, Central Java. The selection was based
on how they conduct classes by initiating studentsso that they show their responds, all of
the students showed their enthusiasm so that the active learning in classroom might
happened. Great teachers don‟t pretend to know all the answers. They relish being asked
questions they can‟t answer because it gives them something to find out (Barton, Geoff:
2011).

Data collection Instrument
Real-time observation was used to gain the data needed in the attempt to fulfill
the purpose of this study with the assistance of event-sampling protocols. The eventsampling protocols used to record or gather the data, which were the types of discourse
markers used in class, by following the event of occurrences of the classroom observation.
The layout of the event sampling protocols consist of title, name of course, class length,
class time, initial of the instructor, total number of students and a table which includes
discourse markers types that teachers use to initiate and note.

Data Collection Procedures
The classroom observationswere conducted for six times to find the recurring
patterns of initiation by teachers using discourse markers to ensure that the data captured
in the observation is not only coincidental data. In each observation, the researcher
preparedthe observation protocols. Afterward, the researcher sit in the back of the class to
have the best position in observing the class. While observing, the researcher noted the
classroom discussion activities in event-sampling protocols as a way of capturing data.
The data captured in the observations was qualitative data which was explained in
descriptive manner.

Data Analysis Procedures
The datas gathered from the classroom observations using the event- sampling
protocols were analyzed in several steps. The first is to combine the observation protocols
of both participants into one table. Then, associate the types of the markers which are only
used to initiate students. After that, make specifics tables for each types. Finally, interpret
the tables in descriptive manner. It attempts to answer the research questions in the study
which were „What discourse markers are used by teacher to initiate classroom
communication?”.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The study shows that there are 30 initiations appears from 48 expressions which
use discourse markers. So, 62.3% expressions using discourse markers are in order to
initiate students so that active learning might happen in classroom setting. In this
percentage, however, only seven types of discourse markers are used by the observed
teacher in purpose to initiate students. They are starting conversation, response, ending a
conversation, changing a topic, surprise, ordering what we say, saying something in other
ways. Meanwhile, there are 10 types of discourse markers found in by Swan (2005) and
Carter et al (2011)which are observed, the other three types are hardly found in initiating
students.

Starting Conversation
The mostly used type of discourse markers in this observation is starting a
conversation. Table 1 gives us lists of markers in starting a conversation which are used
by the observed teacher to initiate students in the class. Both teachers likely have the same
style when they begin a conversation.
Table 1. Discourse markers for starting a conversation
No.

Discourse markers

The use in sentences

1.

Now

Now, how about you?

2.

Okay

Now, what do you think?

3.

Well

Okay, are you ready?

4.

Don‟t you think

Okay, do you think ...
Now, do you think it is good to ...?
Well, let's talk about it guys. I want your opinion
about...
Don‟t you think drafting in group is better ...

Teacher A uses this type so that her students respond her initiation and classroom
talk begins. She uses the markers „okay', „well' and „now'. She uses sentences such as
„Okay, let's start.' She also uses it in sentence „Well, today we're going to learn....‟ and
„Now, how about you?'. These starting sentences successfully initiate students to respond.
There are two kinds of response given by students. The first is that students' changing
behavior was seen become focus on the teacher. The second response is that students
started to tell their opinion. They start to show their opinion after the marker „now'
followed by question „how about you?' appears.
Having the same purpose with Teacher A, Teacher B stimulates his students to
start talking and discuss. The mostly marker he uses is „okay' though he also uses „now',
well' and „don't you think'. There are sentences that teacher B uses in beginning
conversation in class, such as „Okay, is everyone ready to start?', „Okay, do you think ...',
„Now, do you think it is good to....‟, „Well, let's talk about it guys. I want your opinion
about....‟, „Don't you think drafting in a group is better....‟ These starting sentence, as what
happen in teacher A's classroom, work well in initiating students' responses. There are also
two kinds of responses given by students. The first is that students‟ attention focuses on
the teacher. The second response is that students started to tell their opinion, of course
after markers which followed by question appear.
Based on these data, I found that discourse markers type starting a conversation are
effectively useful as a partner to initiate students' responses towards teacher's questions.

Response
The second most used discourse markers in purpose to initiate students is the
type response. Expressions used by both teacher appear in the classroom with their own
style. As teacher A's students are younger so that she shows her high enthusiasm face is
sided by markers and teacher B show their response using markers in natural way.

Table 2. Discourse markers for giving response
No.

Discourse markers

The use in sentences

1.

Great

That‟s great! That‟s what I‟m waiting for you to

2.

That‟s great

know

3.

Mm...

Great. That‟s correct

4.

Mm...And then?

Mm... good

Great. I like it

Mm...So you...
Mm...And then?

After observation, the data shows that teacher A uses the type response the most
in her class. She uses this type to respond her students' talk so that students become more
enthusiastic to continue their talk. This type is used in the middle of student's talk in
purpose to stimulate them to talk more. Markers alternatives are „mm...Good', „and then?',
or „great'. There are several expression which appear in teacher A's classroom, such as
„mm...And then?', „Great. I like it', „mm...Good' and „great. That's correct'. She uses many
response markers might be because students in junior level need more attention from
teacher especially when they practice telling a story in English which they often think that

it is hard to do. Responses also work in maintaining students' motivation to keep practice
talking in English.
Different with Teacher A, Teacher B uses this type though he also has the same
aim with Teacher A, to respond students' story so that they are eager to continue. There
are two expressions teacher a uses to show the response, such as „mm...So you....‟, „that's
great!'. He uses them in a short sentence like „That's great! That's what I'm waiting for you
to know'. This happen might be because teacher B has higher level students who have
been practicing English longer time than teacher A's class so that teacher B's class no need
many responses to finish their story. It also might be because they are confidential in using
English to speak is higher too.
So, discourse markers type response successfully stimulates students to talk
more because they think that their story in English are understandable so that they are
eager to continue.

Saying something in other ways
The type ordering what we say is also used by both participants. Teacher A
restate their instruction preferably uses middle markers; discourse markers which are used
in the middle of expression, however, Teacher B prefers to begin his stimulating
statements or questions using markers as we can see in table 3.

Table 3. Discourse markers for saying something in other ways
No.

Discourse markers

1.

I mean...

2.

Do you know

3.

In the other words

The use in sentences
Do you know how to tell someone who gets lost?
Comparing, I mean we value more than.
Do you know how to...
Intersection, in the other words we call it round about
Do you know what a good presenter is?
Do you know about hand gestures?

Teacher A uses this type on purpose to restate or make question smoother for
what she is going to explain or ask. So that before she lets students respond to her, she
makes sure that they have already understood the question or instruction. Markers which
appear in initiating are „I mean', in the other words' and do you know....‟ Those are applied
in some expression like „Go straight, I mean follow the road....‟, „Intersection, in the other
words we call it roundabout', and „Do you know how to compare things in English?'.
Middle marker in this type are observed appear when students show confused face after an
explanative or instructive word or phrase by teacher so that right away after the face
appear, teacher restate or paraphrase it by using marker as the beginning.
The same thing happens in Teacher B's class. He uses it on purpose to make
asking question become more neutral. The only markers he uses in all observed class is
„do you know..?'. The statement such as „Do you know what is an informative speech?',
„Do you know what is a good presenter?' and „Do you know about hand gestures?'
successfully stimulates students to answer those questions without feeling of being
interrogated.

Ending Conversation

Responses from students also can be initiated by using discourse markers in
ending a conversation. So after participant ends their talk, they use discourse markers to
begin their question about previous talk
Table 4. Discourse markers for ending conversation
No.

Discourse markers

1.

So

2.

Okay

3.

Well

The use in sentences
So, the correlation between our previous material and
today is...
So, how would you do if...
So, please tell me your strategy so far...
Okay, what do you think...?
So, that‟s all about...
Okay, do you understand?
Okay, is there any question?
Well, I think that‟s all

Responses from students also can be initiated by using discourse markers in
ending a conversation. So after participant ends their talk, they use discourse markers to
begin their question about previous talk... This is a way for teacher A to know students
understanding by asking question after her talk. She uses „so‟ and „okay‟ in sentences such
as „Okay, what do you think about that?‟, „So, that‟s all about it. Any question?‟, and
„Okay, do you understand?‟
Teacher B uses it to make sure whether his students get the explanation or not.
The only markers he uses is „so‟. Some expressions like„so, how would you do if....‟ and
„so, please tell me your strategy so far....‟ appear in purpose to reinforce students‟
understanding of lecturing given by asking questions begin with markers directly after the
explanation.
The ending conversation which are sided by discourse markers can also be an
alternative to initiate students to respond.

Changing Topic
Almost the same function with ending conversation, the type changing topic is a
matter to gain students idea so that they will talk. Expressions are offered in table 5.
Table 5. Discourse markers for changing topic
No.

Discourse markers

The use in sentences

1.

Anyway

That‟s good, anyway have you...?

2.

Next

... Tocompare two things, anyway „the most‟ is used
to..
Next we have some question here...

Teacher A uses it 2 times and Teacher B uses it 3 times. They shares same
markers „anyway' in this type. Teacher A shows that she changes the topic by sentences
such as „That's good, anyway have you....‟ Teacher B uses „next' in sentences such as
„Next we have some question here....‟.
Teachers begin a new topic in the class by asking about the general issue of a
topic being discussed. So that students' attention also moves smoothly. Here, initiation
also appears by using markers type changing a topic.

Showing Surprise
In showing surprise, the participant also uses DM on purpose to show their
enthusiasm for students' talk. This type is able to initiate students to talk more about the
topic they share.

Table 6. Discourse markers for showing surprise
No.
1.

Discourse markers
Really

The use in sentences
- It‟s so nervous sir
Really? Haha...
Yeah... and ...
-I forgot all my notes sir Hahira
Really...
-I've ever met, Ms
Really? Where was it?

As we can interpret table 6, teacher B uses this type more than Teacher A. He
uses this marker to show his eagerness to students about the talk. Teacher A uses it with
the same aim, to show that teacher is interested in students‟ story. To show that the teacher
understand students' talk though they are using simple and many mistake talk. Teacher A
uses „really' to show her surprise toward a student's story „I've ever met ms - really?
Where was it?‟ Teacher B also uses „really' in sentences like „It‟s so nervous sir - really?
Hahaha... - yeah... and ...‟ and „I forgot all my notes sir hahaha - really....‟ Commonly
these responses are used in casual conversation in class.
It is almost the same with type response, but it gives us certain expression so that
the conversation atmosphere become more natural and goes smoothly.

Ordering what we say and showing sympathy
But in types ordering what we say and showing sympathy, only Teacher B who
uses these types to initiate students. The type ordering what we say is used by teacher B to
order the explanation. Teacher A actually also uses discourse markers in this type but not
in purpose to initiate, she uses it to restate her explanation when she find her students still
confuse about previous explanation. Showing sympathy is used by Teacher B once. He

uses „that's awful' in short chat like „I forgot anything sir hahaha – oh that's awful'. Almost
like the type response, this type is used to show sympathy of the teacher as respond to
students' talk. This also stimulates students to tell more about his/her story. Especially for
teacher A‟s students. Probably because they are junior high students, expressions and
intonation in using discourse markers also a matter thing to encourage them to speak or to
tell more.

Sharing knowledge, sounding less direct and um and erm
3 lasts types which are observed in this study are sharing knowledge, sounding
less direct, and the use of um and urm are not used in initiating students to talk. These
types such as „I think....‟, „Maybe‟, „erm....‟ and „So aa‟ are used by all participants.
However, those markers are used as their partners in other function. These are used more
to explain and reinforce materials given by the teacher. It is probably because those
markers are more helpful to manage sentences in giving information in such lecturing
session where students tend to listen more rather than speak.

Discourse Markers: Initiating Students
After the analysis, it is found that there are some discourse markers which are used
by participants to initiate students to talk so that active learning might happen in
classroom setting. By associating all markers in the types which are discussed in previous
sections, the most used markers in initiating students are okay, so, well, and do you know.
The study found that those markers are used to start a conversation, to end a conversation,
and to say something in other ways. However, such types may not stimulate any initiation

without questions or instructions. So, the point is that discourse markers help to initiate
students to talk so that the classroom become active if those are followed by questions and
instructions. Students may be better accept the initiation in questions and instructions from
teachers which use discourse markers. The expressions such as “So, please tell me your
strategy so far...” and “Okay, what do you think about this expression?” are likely to have
better responds from students rather than directly ask, “what is your strategy..” and “what
is this expression?”. The appearance of discourse markers in such expressions can help to
build natural athmosphere in conversation so that students may feel save to respond to the
teachers.

CONCLUSION
The study was conducted in order to find out which type discourse markers that
are used by selected teacher to initiate students so that active learning might happen in
classroom. After the observation, discourse markers that are discussed in this study shows
that there are seven types are used by selected teachers who are so far claimed that they
have successfully produced classroom communication become active. Here, teachers use
markers in order to initiate students so that interactive classroom conversation
happen.Types of discourse markers which are used by selected teachers to initiate
classroom communication are starting conversation, response, ending a conversation,
changing a topic, showing surprise, ordering what we say and saying something in other
ways.
As we can see the result of the observation, limitations are found in the study.
Firstly, there are only two participants which are observed. I think the result might be
different to other participants with different classifications. Secondly, this observation was

only focused on the type of discourse markers which are used to initiate students to talk.
There are no emphasizes on the use of discourse markers by students.
This study finds that discourse markers is important to teachers as a partner which can
beapplied in order to produce active learning, anything that involves students in doing
things and thinking about the things they are doing (Bowell & Eisoon, 1991: 2). Also,
findings in this study, the use of discourse markers in classrooms can be evaluated by
English Department students as reference for the subsequent research. In short, I think it
can be an interesting point to find out in a further depth analysis about discourse markers
which are used not only to initiate students, but also to respond and to give feedback.

Reference
Swan, M. (2005). Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carter, et al. (2011). English Grammar Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Discourse Markers so, right, okay (n.d). In Cambridge Online Dictionary.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/discourse-markers-soright-okay. Retrieved September 14, 2014.
Zarei, F. (2013). Discourse Markers in English. International Research journal of Applied
and Basic Sciences. Vol. 32. 201-221. www.irjabs.com.pdf. Retrieved September
14, 2014
Kyzatis, A. &Ervin-Tripp, S. (1999). The development of Discourse Markers in Peer
Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics. www.elsvier.nl.pdf. Retrieved September 14,
2014
Yang, S.(2011).Investigating Discourse Markers in Pedagogical Settings: Literature
Review. ARECLS, 2011, Vol.8, 95-108.
research.ncl.ac.uk/ARECLS/volume_8/yang_vol8.pdf. Retrieved September 14, 2014
Martinez, A. 2002. The Use of Discourse Markers in EFL Learners‟ Writing.
RevistaAlicanita de EstudiosIngleses 15 (2002): 123-132.
rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/5257/1/RAEI_15_08.pdf. Retrieved September
14, 2014

Barton, G. (2010). Twelve things that great English teachers do. www.geoffbarton.co.uk.
Pdf. www.geoffbarton.co.uk/files/english/12_things.pdf. Retrieved September 14,
2014
Atkins, A. (2001). “Sinclair and Coulthard‟s „IRF‟ model in a one-to-one classroom: an
analysis”. Pdf. www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/collegeartslaw/cels/.../atkins4.pdf. Retrieved March 27, 2015.
Crile. 2013.”Student Initiation, Teacher Response, Student Follow-up: Towards an
Appreciation of Student initiated IRFs in the Language Classroom”.
www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/groups/crile/docs/crile55sunderl.pdf. Retrieved March 27,
2015.
Kalajahi, S., &Abdullah, A., (2012). Perceptions of Iranian English Language Teachers
towards the Use of Discourse Markers in the EFL Classroom. Theory and Practice
in Language Studies, Vol 2, No 10 (2012), 2002-2010, Oct 2012.
http://ojs.academypublisher.com/index.php/tpls/article/view/tpls021020022010.
Retrieved March 27, 2015.
Liao, S., (2008). Variation in the use of discourse markers by Chinese teaching assistants
In the US.Journal of Pragmatics (2008).
http://linguistics.ucdavis.edu/People/szeliao/publications/DM_paper.pdf. Retrieved
March 27, 2015.
Fung, L., 2011. Discourse markers in the esl classroom: a survey of teachers atitudes.
Asian EFL Journal.com, quarterly journal, Vol.06., p.566.
http://asianefljournal.com/566/quarterly-journal/2011/06/discourse-markers-in
the-eslclassrooma-survey-of-teachers-attitudes/. Retrieved March 27, 2015.

Ismail, H., 2012. Markers in Political Speeches: Forms and Functions. J.Of College Of
Education For Women vol.23(4)2012.
http://www.iasj.net/iasj?func=fulltext&aId=74411. Retrieved March 27, 2015.