• Login
    View Item 
    •   ResearchSpace Home
    • College of Humanities
    • School of Arts
    • Languages, Linguistics and Academic Literacy
    • Masters Degrees (Languages, Linguistics and Academic Literacy)
    • View Item
    •   ResearchSpace Home
    • College of Humanities
    • School of Arts
    • Languages, Linguistics and Academic Literacy
    • Masters Degrees (Languages, Linguistics and Academic Literacy)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Pragmatic functions of attitude markers in Kîîtharaka

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Kindiki, Stephen Kithinji thesis 2009.pdf (807.3Kb)
    Date
    2009
    Author
    Kindiki, Stephen Kîthinji.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    KîîTharaka is a Bantu language spoken by a minority community in Kenya numbering about 120,000. Attitude markers belong to the broad category of ‘residue’ elements in language commonly called ‘discourse markers’. Alternative terms for discourse markers are: Discourse particles, discourse/speech modifiers, pragmatic markers, pragmatic particles, or discourse operators. As the term ‘attitude’ markers itself suggests, attitude markers may best be defined as a set of expressions in language which the speaker applies to clarify his or her feelings, emotions or views contained in the utterance being made. Attitude markers ‘amplify’ the speakers intended meaning. Moore (2001: 5) observes that English speakers use expressive verbs to convey attitudes to or about a state of affairs e.g. ‘apologize’, ‘appreciate’, ‘congratulate’, ‘deplore’, ‘detest’, ‘regret’, ‘thank’, and ‘welcome’. It is such kind of expressions that are investigated in this research on KîîTharaka. This dissertation highlights on this linguistic phenomenon with the view that to ignore the role played by attitude markers in communicating meaning in KîîTharaka may reduce the accuracy of the speaker’s or the writer’s intended message. Bearing in mind that attitude markers are similar to discourse markers in that both are not part of the conceptual (i.e. the referential) information of the speaker’s utterance, the critical distinction to be made between discourse markers and attitude markers is that unlike discourse markers, attitude markers do not function as connectives i.e. they do not primarily establish discourse cohesion.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10413/281
    Collections
    • Masters Degrees (Languages, Linguistics and Academic Literacy) [98]

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2013  Duraspace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of ResearchSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsAdvisorsTypeThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsAdvisorsType

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2013  Duraspace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    @mire NV