Archives

Kalinangan Refereed Journal

Volume no. 31 | 2023/12
Issue no. 2


Title
What Do You Mean ‘Ga’?: Functions and Impact of a Local Marker
Author
Priscilla Mizpah P. Santillana, Mary Grace V. Delgado, Jacqueline G. Ocampo, Daisy A. Ilagan, Kristine Amor S. Catequista
Views: 24 Cited: 0
Downloads: 1
Click here to download
Abstract
This study is an analysis of the discourse particle ‘ga’ by determining its functions, discourse impact and preparing its inventory. Through the use of the Convergent Parallel mixed method, the findings of the study were interpreted and analyzed. Survey and FGD were the instruments used in data-gathering. Results showed that ‘ga’ is most likely used in information communication, specifically in asking information and polar questions. In terms of its impact in social perception, the use of this discourse marker is found to manifest the level of closeness and relationship among communicators. In speech accommodation, locals have the tendency to refrain from using ‘ga’ when communicating with Filipinos from other areas in the Philippines to avoid negative perception that comes with its use. The output, which is the inventory of the discourse markers, includes the identification of the element, characteristic of the element and the state of the element or its viability. Findings call for activities or projects that will help locals have an informed use of ‘ga’ for the promotion, appreciation and preservation of intangible cultural heritage such as this one.
Keywords
discourse marker, intangible cultural heritage, language, local culture
References
Banguis-Bantawig, R. (2019). The role of discourse markers in the speeches of selected Asian Presidents. Heliyon, 5(3), e01298.  

Furko, P. (2020). Discourse Markers and Beyond Descriptive and Critical Perspectives on Discourse-Pragmatic Devices across Genres and Languages, https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-37763-2.  

Ismail, S. (2021). Distribution of discourse markers elements or discourse particles as an entity relationship in discourse. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(3), 190-200.  

Mai, H. (2016). An Intercultural Analysis of Meta-discourse Markers as Persuasive Power in Chinese and American Political Speeches. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(6), 207. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll20160406.13.  

Mammadova, T. (2021). Discourse particles as cultural phenomena of intercultural communication breakdown. Cultural diversity in cross-cultural settings: a global approach, 65.   

Qian. X. (2021). Research Review on Discourse Markers. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, Volume 588. Nordquist, R. (2019). Discourse Marker (DM) In English Grammar. https://www.thoughtco.com/discourse-marker-or-dm-1690463.  

Palacio, M. A., & Gustilo, L. (2016). A Pragmatic Analysis of Discourse Particles in Filipino Computer Mediated Communication. Online Submission, 16(3), 1-19.  

Tonio, J. (2021). Pragmatic functions of discourse marker ‘well’in selected spoken discourse of Philippine English. International Journal of Language and Literary Studies, 3(3), 189-201.  

Walrod, M. (2006). The marker is the message: The influence of discourse markers and particles on textual meaning. Philippine Journal of Linguistics, 37(2), 100-119.