Introduction: The Research Background: The Power of Negation
The history of English discourse development is rather complicated. Like any other issue that presupposes not only the tangible evidence like texts or any other form of keeping the track of the necessary data but also such ephemeral elements like oral speech, discourse is quite hard to analyze. Because of the changes which are currently going on in the English discourse, it can be suggested that the pragmatic negation can lead to ground-breaking changes in the sphere of English discourse, which calls for a detailed analysis of the current use of contrastive discourse markers in English.
It must be admitted that there have been a number of researches on the issue. To start with, the work of Fraser must be given credit to for a detailed analysis of such contrastive discourse marker as “on the contrary.” Provolone and Traugott also contributed to the exploration of the issue, offering a more general overview of the current use of discourse markers. Although Traugoff does not focus on any specific discourse marker, the paper is still of great importance, since it gives the general idea of the modern English discourse. A perfect addition to Fraser’s previously mentioned work, “Pragmatic Makers” is also worth mentioning, since it offers a more general perspective of the current state of the English discourse.
Another perfect paper that adds to the exploration of the issue is Lee-Goldman’s work on the negative discourse marker “no.” The last, but not the least, the research conducted by Taboada and Gomez-Gonzalez helps to understand the functions which contrastive discourse markers perform.
The Research Question and Objectives: Into the Depth of Discourse
The given paper is going to deal with the issue of discourse and the way in which discourse is organized in the English language; to be more precise, such elements of discourse as its contrastive makers are going to be looked at and analyzed. Thus, the research question which the given paper is going to answer is “What are the key negative and contrastive makers of the English discourse, what shape do they take in the discourse, how are they used, what are their specifics and the paradigm of their use?”
Answering the given question is the goal of the paper; however, it must be admitted that a number of objectives are going to be targeted at to make the paper full-fledged research and to consider the issues in question in the most objective manner. Consequently, the first objective which the paper concerns picking and classifying the existing negative and contrastive discourse markers, such as “although,” “however,” “nevertheless,” “regardless of,” “in spite of,” and many others. The second objective of the given paper is to split the given elements into several subcategories, which will allow defining these elements’ key functions in the discourse. Further on, the given elements are going to be checked for the possible synonyms, which will be the third objective. Finally, the analysis with the following announcement of the results is the fourth and the final objective of the given paper.
Research Method: Searching for the Most Appropriate Tools
It seems that in the given case, the most appropriate research method to adopt will be quantitative and statistical analysis. Since the given research does not presuppose taking any interviews or questionnaires and will concern mostly written documents, it can be considered that the method of statistical analysis is the optimum decision in the given case.
It must be admitted, though, that the research should also incorporate the method of text analysis. As it has been mentioned, the key aspect of the given paper is the analysis of certain textual elements, which means that the latter method must also be used to obtain the necessary data and reach the most objective results.
Thus, incorporating the two above-mentioned methods, one will doubtlessly be able to conduct the research and achieve considerable results.
The Supposed Results and Predictable Outcomes: Back into the Future
Speaking of the supposed research results, one must mention that in the given case, the conclusion can be rather unpredictable. On the one hand, it is quite understood that the above-mentioned contrastive elements of discourse are going to be analyzed and the ones which are used most frequently are going to be considered as the tendency for the future development of the discourse in the English language. Hon the other hand, however, it is worth mentioning that the issue concerning the distinction between the grammaticalization and grammaticalization is questioned in the given paper as well (Traugott, 139), which means that the results of the research can possibly define the further development of discourse. Hence, it can be suggested that the given paper will point out certain tendencies in the use of negative and contrastive discourse markers.
The Paper Significance: A Humble Chunk of Good Ideas
It goes without saying that in the field of linguistics, the major discoveries have been made already, which means that the given paper will only supply the colour commentary to the existing information about the English language, the discourse in the English language and the changes which the discourse is currently undergoing. Nevertheless, it is essential to mark that the given work will offer a number of unique results concerning the specified field, which will make the world one step closer to the ultimate understanding of the way languages in general and the English language in particular work. Therefore, it can be suggested that the given research is going to be of some significance for the issue of the English discourse.
Timetable: When Everything Goes According to the Plan
Since the given paper embraces a number of issues and presupposes working with several aspects, it is most reasonable to split the work into several parts. First of all, it will be necessary to take into account all the contrastive English discourse markers, such as however, though, although, etc. After the above-mentioned elements are collected, they must be divided into two categories, which are the words and the expressions implying a negative meaning. Further on, the elements mentioned above must be split into several subcategories depending on their meaning, for instance, the ones which presuppose a complete denial (e.g., “no,” “on no account,” etc.), the ones which imply a contrast e.g., “in contrast to,” “in comparison with,” etc.), the ones which imply a confession (e.g., “however,” “although,” etc.).
As the given stage is over, it will be necessary to conduct an analysis of the given elements, which will be followed by offering the research results. Finally, the conclusion will be provided together with the prospects for the future development of discourse.
The Research Budget: Touching upon the Money Issue
Since the given paper will not demand to conduct any sorts of surveys or anything that will demand considerable funding, it can be suggested that there will be no costs spent in the course of writing the research.
Academic Recommendations: To Develop the Existing Discourse System
Finally, the paper I question will offer certain recommendations concerning the way the discourse in the English language can be developed. In the light of the above-mentioned fusion between grammaticalization and grammaticalization, it can be suggested that the negative and contrastive English discourse markers should be applied within their typical use. The given approach can possibly slow down the process of changes which is currently going on within the sphere of English discourse.
Conclusion: The Probable Academic Recommendations
Thus, it can be considered that the given research will shed some light on the way in which the pragmatic of negation is expressed in the English language. Not only will the given paper provide the examples of negation is used in the modern discourse, but also explain the ways in which the major contrastive discourse markers affect the discourse. In addition, the pattern of the use of the contrastive discourse markers in the English language is going to be charted, which will help to figure out the paradigm of their use. Knowing what role the above-mentioned elements play and in what manner they are used in written language and in oral speech, one can possibly understand the specifics of the English language even better.
Works Cited
Fraser, Bruce. “Pragmatic Markers.” Pragmatics 6.2 (1996): 167-190. Print.
Fraser, Bruce. “The English Contrastive Discourse Marker on the Contrary.” Language in Life and Life in Language. Ed. Ken Turner and Bruce Fraser. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. 87-96. Print.
Lee-Goldman, Russell. “No as a Discourse Marker.” Journal of Pragmatics 43.10 (2010): 2627-2649. Print.
Povolna, Renata. “Casual and Contrastive Discourse Markers in Novice Academic Writing.” Brno Studies in English. 38.2 (2012). Web.
Taboada, Maite and Maria de Los-Angeles Gomez-Gonzalez. “Discourse Markers and Coherent Relations: Comparison Across Markers, Languages and Modalities.” Linguistics and the Human Sciences 6.3 (2012): 17-42. Print.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. “Discussion Article: Discourse Markers, Modal Particles, and Contrastive Analysis, Synchronic and Diachronic.” Catalan Journal of Linguistics. 6 (2007): 139-157. Print.