A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE ...

In (9a), because connects two actions in a single plane of discourse (action plane): a
request and the justification for that request. In (9b), however, but connects an utterance
defined on several different planes of discourse simultaneously, and thus relates (or
anchors) the different planes of discourse to one another. As Schiffrin explains, Freda’s
but prefaces an idea unit (i.e. intermarriages are healthy), displays a participation
framework (nonalignment with Jack’s proposition), realizes an action (i.e. a rebuttal
during an argument), and seeks to establish Freda as a current speaker in an exchange
(opens a turn at talk). The discourse marker but thus locates an utterance “at the
intersection of four planes of talk” (Schiffrin 2001:57). The usage of but in this example
demonstrates quite nicely the anchoring ability that discourse markers have across
different planes of discourse. This anchoring ability, according to Schiffrin, is due to
their status as INDEXICALS (Schiffrin 1987:322-325), or as CONTEXTUALIZATION CUES
(Schiffrin 2001:58, 1987). This means that discourse markers (due to their meaning
and/or grammatical properties) are able to guide the hearer as to how particular units of
discourse are to be interpreted.
One last point that Schiffrin makes about discourse markers in order to help us
understand the contribution of discourse markers to coherence is their role as
INDEXICALS, or as having indexical functions (Schiffrin 1987:322-326). Discourse
markers propose, according to Schiffrin, contextual coordinates by anchoring
simultaneously differing levels of discourse. What this essentially means is that, as
indexicals, discourse markers “index their containing utterance to whatever text precedes
them (proximal), or to whatever text is to follow (distal), or to both. In other words, they
either point backward in the text, forward, or to both” (Schiffrin 1987:323). For example,
27