AbstractsLanguage, Literature & Linguistics

Ph.D. University of Hawaii at Manoa 2011. The use of the Korean discourse marker kulenikka 'so, that's why' can be frequently evidenced throughout daily conversations of native speakers of Korean. The various functions of kulenikka are to give further explanation, express hesitation, hold the floor, approximate (time, quantity, etc.), modify one's words, express strong agreement with the interlocutor, to name a few. In an attempt to present a unified explication for the different functions of the discourse marker kulenikka in interaction, this study employs a panchronic perspective. From the diachronic view, the study adopts the framework of grammaticalization which will give a clear account of how the clausal connective – (u)nikka developed into the expressive discourse marker kulenikka. The synchronic analysis is built on the study presented by Jucker and Smith (1998) on discourse markers as negotiating strategies, whereby a distinction between reception markers and presentation markers is made. As negotiating strategies, Jucker and Smith focus on the cognitive and interactional functions of discourse markers and define them as 'a type of cue that conversationalists use to negotiate their common ground.' On the one hand, reception markers are signals such as 'yeah,' 'oh,' and 'okay' used as a reaction to information provided by another speaker. Presentation markers, on the other hand, include examples such as 'like,' 'you know,' and 'I mean,' and accompany and modify the speaker's own information. Despite the typological differences between English and Korean, many studies in the field of Korean discourse analysis applied the definition of discourse markers as was presented for the English language. Thus, this study attempts to give a new definition to Korean DMs, i.e., those that are free bound (and not grammatically bound), while modifying the characteristics of discourse markers so that they best fit the typological features of Korean. The study also investigates the sociopragmatic aspects of kulenikka in interaction both as an agreement marker and disagreement marker. kulenikka in marking agreement is intended for solidarity by interlocutors, however, depending on social factors such as power, expertise, knowledge, age, gender, etc., the use of kulenikka creates the opposite, that is, a feeling of antipathy or uneasiness by the hearer.