Pragmatikai transzfer és funkcióváltás: a magyar diskurzusjelölők használata mongol anyanyelvű beszélők interjúiban

Szótér, Krisztina (2026) Pragmatikai transzfer és funkcióváltás: a magyar diskurzusjelölők használata mongol anyanyelvű beszélők interjúiban. ALKALMAZOTT NYELVTUDOMÁNY, 26 (1). pp. 64-80. ISSN 1587-1061

Preview

Text Szoter.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (361kB) | Preview

Abstract

This study examines the use of discourse markers in the Hungarian L2 speech of Mongolian native speakers, with special regard to pragmatic transfer and functional reanalysis. Discourse markers play a key role in the organization of spoken discourse, contributing to information structuring, interaction management and the expression of speakers’ stance. Although these elements have been widely investigated in various languages, their use in Hungarian as a second language – especially among speakers of typologically distant languages such as Mongolian – has received little attention so far. The research is based on a qualitative micro-analysis of five semi-structured online interviews conducted in Hungarian with adult Mongolian speakers at different proficiency levels (A1–C1). The interviews focused on the participants’ experiences of learning Hungarian, their learning strategies and perceived difficulties. All recordings were transcribed verbatim, with pauses, laughter, hesitation, and relevant code-switching carefully annotated. Hungarian discourse markers were manually identified, including conjunction-like elements, particles, and multiword units, and each occurrence was assigned to one or more functional categories (e.g., logical connection, hesitation, addressee-involvement, topic shift, stance-marking). The analysis combines a frequency-based overview of the most common markers with a detailed qualitative examination of their functions in context. Special attention is paid to frequently occurring Hungarian discourse markers such as hát ‘well’, tehát ‘so/therefore’, szóval ‘so’, ugye ‘right?/you know’, akkor ‘then/so’, na/igen ‘well/yes’ and hesitation markers such as öö. The results show that several markers are used in ways that closely resemble native Hungarian patterns, especially in narrative structuring (és akkor ‘and then’, tehát as a summarising connector) and in basic turn management. At the same time, a number of elements display non-targetlike uses or a reduced or extended functional range, which can be linked to pragmatic transfer from Mongolian. Typical examples include the overuse and functional broadening of tehát as both a logical connector and a topic-introducing device, mirroring the multifunctional Mongolian marker тэгэхээр (tegexeer), as well as the use of akkor ‘then’ and hát ‘well’ in positions where Mongolian would regularly employ за (ja ‘yes, OK’) or ингэхэд (ingexed). sentence-final The comparison with Mongolian shows systematic correspondences between Hungarian markers and Mongolian particles and connectors, such as тэгээд (tegeed ‘and then’), тэгэхээр (tegexeer ‘so/therefore’), шүү (šüü ‘you know/indeed’) and за (ja ‘yes, OK’). These elements often encode discourse functions that in Hungarian are realised by clause-initial or clausemedial markers, which may encourage learners to map L1 patterns directly onto L2 forms. The data also indicate that the non-lexical vocalisation öö in Hungarian may be supported by a rich set of functions of Mongolian öö, ranging from hesitation and discourse-structuring to expressing subtle attitudinal nuances. Overall, the findings reveal a complex interplay between L1-based pragmatic routines, learner strategies and the multifunctional nature of Hungarian discourse markers. The study argues that the discourse marker system constitutes a specific locus of pragmatic transfer, where learners’ choices reflect both typological differences between Hungarian and Mongolian and the gradual development of L2 pragmatic competence. From a pedagogical perspective, the results suggest that it is useful to treat different discourse functions (summarising, topic-introduction, hesitation, stance-marking, interaction management) separately in teaching, to provide explicit cross-linguistic comparisons between Hungarian markers and their Mongolian counterparts, and to draw learners’ attention to position- and prosody-related constraints. The study thus contributes to research on discourse markers in contact situations and offers implications for the teaching of Hungarian as a foreign language by highlighting the role of discourse markers in sounding natural, managing interaction, and avoiding negative pragmatic transfer.

Actions (login required)

Edit Item