The present study investigates usage variation of politeness markers in spoken academic discourse. The aim of this corpus-based analysis is is twofold. First, it aims at investigating different types of politeness markers in educational settings. Second, the usage of politeness markers in spoken academic discourse is analyzed with respect to general spoken English. The present investigation focuses on different politeness markers randomly selected for the analysis. The politeness markers are categorized into four distinctive types (i.e. indirect requests, apologies, respect markers, and hedges) according to the functions they perform in spoken discourse. / Šis baigiamasis darbas pristato mandagumo žymeklių kalbos variantiškumo analizę sakytiniame akademiniame diskurse, paremtą tekstyno duomenimis. Tyrimo tikslas yra dvejopas: išanalizuoti mandagumo žymeklių kalbos variantiškumą sakytiniame akademiniame diskurse ir palyginti su jų vartosena bendrinėje šnekamojoje anglų kalboje. Analizė atlikta remiantis skirtingais mandagumo žymekliais, atsitiktinai atrinktais ir suskirstytais į skirtingas kategorijas, t.y. netiesioginius prašymus, atsiprašymus, pagarbumo žymeklius ir švelninamuosius žodžius. Mandagumo žymekliai suskirstyti į skirtingus tipus pagal jų atliekamas funkcijas sakytinėje anglų kalboje.

An immense degree of linguistic diversity exists in the work force where it is possible for speakers of twenty-three home languages to come into contact on the work floor. The language of management in industry is predominantly English; while supervisors are primarily English- or Afrikaans-speaking. Misinterpretation of speaker intent plays a significant role in communication breakdown that occurs when management or foremen/supervisors communicate directly with workers who do not understand the two erstwhile official languages sufficiently or not at all. Reagan ( 1 986) hypothesized that the greatest number of problems are caused by what might be termed mutual ignorance, rather than by language difficulties. The aim of the thesis was therefore to establish what constitutes the mutual ignorance that leads to misinterpretation of speaker intent. The Hymesian model, the ethnography of speaking, was used as a model for an analysis of sociolinguistic features in factories in the Pretoria-WitwatersrandVereeniging area. For data collection a process of triangulation was used and qualitative and quantitative methods used. The Free Attitude Interview technique was used for unstructured interviews. Other methods include observation, and elicitation procedures such as the Discourse Completion Test, which were used in structured interviews. Language preference, forms of address and politeness markers were examined. Findings revealed that the major differences were found to be in the area of non-verbal behaviour. Speakers of Afrikaans and English are, on the whole, unaware of politeness markers used by speakers of African languages. Afrikaans and English speakers are unaware of offensive non-verbal behaviour used by them. It is revealing that speakers of the official languages believe this to be the very area that makes communication possible, but it is the area in which they may cause offence. It was also found that speakers of African languages have adopted many of the features of the power dominant group at work. The findings of the research are important for the development of strategies for overcoming misinterpretation of speaker intent and negative stereotyping. This research was undertaken as part of the Human Sciences Research Council's programme entitled Language in the labour situation. / Linguistics and Modern Languages / D.Litt. et Phil. (Linguistics)

An immense degree of linguistic diversity exists in the work force where it is possible for speakers of twenty-three home languages to come into contact on the work floor. The language of management in industry is predominantly English; while supervisors are primarily English- or Afrikaans-speaking. Misinterpretation of speaker intent plays a significant role in communication breakdown that occurs when management or foremen/supervisors communicate directly with workers who do not understand the two erstwhile official languages sufficiently or not at all. Reagan ( 1 986) hypothesized that the greatest number of problems are caused by what might be termed mutual ignorance, rather than by language difficulties. The aim of the thesis was therefore to establish what constitutes the mutual ignorance that leads to misinterpretation of speaker intent. The Hymesian model, the ethnography of speaking, was used as a model for an analysis of sociolinguistic features in factories in the Pretoria-WitwatersrandVereeniging area. For data collection a process of triangulation was used and qualitative and quantitative methods used. The Free Attitude Interview technique was used for unstructured interviews. Other methods include observation, and elicitation procedures such as the Discourse Completion Test, which were used in structured interviews. Language preference, forms of address and politeness markers were examined. Findings revealed that the major differences were found to be in the area of non-verbal behaviour. Speakers of Afrikaans and English are, on the whole, unaware of politeness markers used by speakers of African languages. Afrikaans and English speakers are unaware of offensive non-verbal behaviour used by them. It is revealing that speakers of the official languages believe this to be the very area that makes communication possible, but it is the area in which they may cause offence. It was also found that speakers of African languages have adopted many of the features of the power dominant group at work. The findings of the research are important for the development of strategies for overcoming misinterpretation of speaker intent and negative stereotyping. This research was undertaken as part of the Human Sciences Research Council's programme entitled Language in the labour situation. / Linguistics and Modern Languages / D.Litt. et Phil. (Linguistics)