Discourse Markers

Introduction

Effective writing requires more than strong arguments and good grammar; but also depends on how ideas are connected. One key element that enhances clarity and coherence is the use of discourse markers. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a discourse marker is “a word or phrase that is used for organizing discourse” (np). The Cambridge Dictionary defines discourse as “the use of language to communicate in speech or writing” (np). Discourse markers facilitate the exchange of thoughts, ideas, and information through language. The inclusion of discourse markers is significant as discourse markers eliminate wordiness in professional writing. These words guide the flow of a conversation or of one's writing. Some examples of discourse markers include “although,” “therefore,” and “subsequently.” Typically, these words do not change the meaning of a sentence but rather are used to connect what one is trying to express in a conversation. There are four types of discourse markers: interpersonal, referential, structural, and cognitive. Mastering discourse markers will allow English 145 students to demonstrate their understanding of their topics, refine their writing, and enhance their professionalism. This webpage will explain how to effectively use discourse markers to promote clear, structured, coherent, and concise writing.

The Importance of Discourse Markers 

Fei-Yu Chuang, in an Academic English Skills article, describes discourse markers as “the 'glue' that binds together a piece of writing, making the different parts of the text 'stick together'” (np). Chuang explains, “Without sufficient discourse markers in a piece of writing, a text would not seem logically constructed and the connections between the different sentences and paragraphs would not be obvious” (np). Discourse markers ensure that one's writing sounds coherent, flows well, and links ideas effectively. Discourse markers order items in a certain way that promotes the reader's comprehension of the text. For example, discourse markers support sequencing information, cause and effect comparisons, and contrasting ideas. 

Discourse markers are vital in guiding the flow of one's writing, but avoiding overusing discourse markers when writing academically is imperative. Chuang continues to analyze discourse markers by emphasizing that using conjunctions over discourse markers can occasionally be more effective. For example, Chuang indicates “instead of saying 'He studied French; however, his wife studied Physics', it might actually be more natural to say 'He studied English but his wife studied Physics'” which shows that sometimes overdoing the amount of discourse markers you use can cause more harm than good (np). Understanding the appropriate use of discourse markers to link ideas and recognizing when they are unnecessary is essential.

Discourse markers serve different functions in writing. They can be categorized into six types:

     Sequencing information refers to the organization of discourse markers when combining ideas in a chronological format. For example, words such as “first,” “next,” and “then.” 

Cause and effect discourse markers specify the relationship between two ideas, indicating one led to the other. These discourse markers include “because,” “therefore,” and “consequently.” 

Adding information discourse markers serve their purpose by adding information when the author is introducing new material that is relevant and builds upon the previous point. These words include “addition,” “moreover,” and “furthermore.”

Contrasting ideas signal relationships between ideas indicating the agreement, conflictment, or explanation of a subject. This includes words such as “however,” “on the other hand,” and “although.” 

Providing examples is a category of discourse markers that gives evidence to support an idea. These discourse markers include “for instance,” “namely,” and “for example.” 

Summarizing or concluding discourse markers signify the closing of an idea and the synopsis of a topic. For example, “to sum up,” “in conclusion,” and “overall.”

Types of Discourse Markers

Beyond discourse markers' functional categories, as mentioned above, discourse markers can also be classified into four types based on their role in communication. There are four different types of discourse markers: interpersonal, referential, structural, and cognitive. Each type of discourse marker serves a distinct purpose. Karin Aijmer, while analyzing discourse markers in a case study, highlights “the overriding problem in discourse marker studies is their multifunctionality some linguists have proposed a theory of ‘meaning potential’ or construction as a framework to describe the flexibility and context-boundness of lexical items” (90). Discourse markers such as “well”, “actually”, or “I mean” are not a single set of meanings. Instead, they come with a range of possible meanings depending on their context. For instance, people use “well” to show hesitation (Example: “Well, I am not sure”), to introduce a new idea (Example: “Well, let us move on”), and to soften an objection (Example: “Well, I see your point, however”). There is a sense of freedom and flexibility when using discourse markers, which linguists refer to as their ‘meaning potential, as they adapt to the situation and the speaker’s intentions. Discourse markers are tools in a toolbox. A hammer can be used to build, repair, or break something. A discourse marker, such as “actually,” can be used to correct someone (Example: “Actually, that is not right”), surprise someone (Example: “Actually, I did not know that”), or emphasize something (Example: “It was actually really fun”). The speaker uses the discourse marker, and the meaning depends on the context in which the word is used. By knowing the four types of discourse markers, in all likelihood, we will be able to improve the way we communicate. They are the glue that makes conversations flow better, more engaging, and easier to understand. Every one of these words helps writers and speakers to build interpersonal connections with interpersonal markers or cognitive markers, to guide listeners with referential markers or structural markers, or to share thoughts with cognitive markers. 

The referential discourse marker uses conjunctions to indicate links between conversational acts. Referential discourse markers can represent coordination, lack of coordination, sequence and cause and effect of an action (Maschler 327-330). Using referential discourse markers would indicate a relationship between two ideas. Examples include words as simple as “and,” which indicates correlation, or “because,” which demonstrates causality. Referential discourse markers are incredibly common in writing and are necessary for sequencing separate but related ideas. 

The structural type of discourse marker signals the organization of ideas in writing. Structural discourse markers can demonstrate the value a speaker adds to the sentence by emphasizing the least and most significant elements of a sentence. This kind of discourse marker can categorize, introduce, and summarize spoken or written issues (Maschler 345-349). Words and phrases of this type, such as “finally” and “subsequently,” aid the writer or speaker in organizing their ideas. 

The cognitive discourse marker can convey a speaker's thoughts about the discussion content. Discourse markers of this kind can reword phrases and even convey realization or doubt (Maschler 341-343). Cognitive discourse markers, like interpersonal discourse markers, are typically not appropriate for formal writing. 

These four categories of discourse markers broadly define different functions of discourse markers, but can be further divided into several distinct types. Further sub-categories include comparative, elaborative, sequential, contrastive, summative, causal, exemplifying, and emphasizing discourse markers, which all carry different functions for connecting ideas.

The table below presents discourse markers acceptable for formal writing and instances in which to use them.

Common Mistakes

While discourse markers enhance writing, improper use can lead to cluttered, confusing, or unnatural prose. The following section outlines common mistakes and how to avoid them. One of the most frequent errors is overuse, where students use too many discourse markers, which makes their writing cluttered. This excessive use can distract readers from the main points, disrupting the flow of ideas and weakening the overall argument. Another common issue is the misuse of discourse markers, where students may not fully understand their function or use them in the wrong contexts. Discourse markers are meant to clarify relationships between ideas, but when misused, they can confuse readers or create an unnatural tone. Additionally, incorrect placement of discourse markers is a common mistake. These markers need to be placed properly within sentences or paragraphs to ensure the writing flows smoothly and maintains coherence. If placed incorrectly, they can break the logical structure of the writing or make the argument harder to follow. By mastering their proper use, students can enhance the clarity, coherence, and effectiveness of their writing.

To address the common mistakes students make when using discourse markers, here are some practical solutions and suggestions:

1. Overuse of Discourse Markers
   Students should use discourse markers sparingly and only when necessary to clarify relationships between ideas. Instead of relying on markers for every transition, use them strategically to highlight important points or shifts in argument. An easy solution is to read through the writing and remove any discourse markers that don’t add significant value to the clarity or flow of the text. Relying on strong topic sentences and clear structure can also reduce the need for excessive markers.

2. Misuse of Discourse Markers
   To avoid misusing discourse markers, students must understand the specific function of each marker. For example, words like "therefore" and "consequently" indicate cause and effect, while markers like "however" and "on the other hand" introduce contrasting ideas. Familiarizing oneself with these functions will help students use the markers appropriately. Additionally, reviewing examples of correct and incorrect usage in academic texts can provide a better understanding of how to apply discourse markers in various contexts.

3. Incorrect Placement of Discourse Markers
   Discourse markers should be placed where they make the most sense in the sentence to maintain clarity and coherence. A general guideline is to place them at the beginning of a sentence or clause when introducing a new idea or transition, but within the sentence when linking ideas closely related to the main argument. For example, "However, the results were inconclusive" is more effective than "The results were inconclusive, however." Students should pay attention to sentence structure and ensure that the discourse marker connects ideas logically and smoothly.

How To Use Discourse Markers Correctly:

To effectively utilize them students must understand the proper function of certain discourse markers. Begin by having a basic understanding of the different types of discourse markers (interpersonal, referential, structural, and cognitive); discourse markers have a variety of different uses such as adding, sequencing, comparing, contrasting, exemplifying, emphasizing, summarizing, and demonstrating cause and effect. 

Utilizing the appropriate discourse marker for each intention guarantees writing clarity. When selecting a discourse marker, first determine what type of connection the marker will be used for, then choose a marker that is appropriate. 

If a student wants to connect research with analysis, they would use a cause and effect marker.

The word Consequently, emphasizes the outcome of the research.

Ex. "The test results revealed that the patient had Stage 4 lymphoma. Consequently, the patient decided to complete everything on their bucket list." 

The words Therefore/Thus/Hence can markers indicate the effect or consequence of the research findings.

Ex. "The research demonstrates a clear link between smoking and lung cancer. Therefore, it underscores the importance of anti-smoking programs and laws."

If a student wanted to connect two differing opinions, they would use a contrasting marker.

Ex. “While some argue that renewable energy sources are the key to mitigating climate change, others contend that nuclear power     is a more viable solution. However, despite this divergence in opinion, both sides agree on the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels."

Anonymous Student Examples:

"Because the substance is used in a party setting, most likely taken with other substances, those who use the ketamine are put into euphoric mindsets, giving the drug an even more heightened effect." 

“In conclusion, education and public representation is needed in areas that are high in drug activity. Educating and implementing stronger public health options will only help the issue.”  

“In addition, continuing to normalize such a harmful habit will only increase numbers in teenagers and young adults who partake in drug use.”  

“In addition to the political instability, these factors prove that despite outward appearances, the rights of the citizens of Thailand have not progressed since the abolishment of the absolute monarchy in 1932.”  

“Not only do coups allow for the rise of controversial and politically disputed military leaders, but they also offer economic advantages to the military”  

“Through hegemonic use of the CPB, Thai monarchy has compensated the powers lost in authority with power over the economy. Despite losing full autonomy on political decisions made in the country, the monarchy still has an immense influence on the government.”

Utilizes Interpersonal Discourse Markers: 

“Honestly, the prioritization of environmental sustainability in business practices is essential.”

Utilizes Referential Discourse Markers: 

"Those scholars argue that globalization has led to increased income inequality in developing countries." 

Utilizes Structural Discourse Markers: 

"However, a limitation of the study is the small sample size, which may affect the generalizability of the results."

Utilizes Cognitive Discourse Markers:

"Undoubtedly, the data support the hypothesis that exercise has a positive impact on mental health."

Examples of Different Uses

Adding: "The study's findings suggest a significant correlation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement; moreover, they highlight the role of parental involvement in shaping educational outcomes."

Sequencing: "In the initial phase of the experiment, participants were introduced to the task instructions, followed by a practice session to familiarize themselves with the procedure."

Contrasting: "While some researchers advocate for the implementation of strict regulations to mitigate environmental pollution, others argue that market-based incentives offer a more effective approach to addressing sustainability challenges."

Exemplifying: "Furthermore, the study provides concrete examples of what successful community-based interventions aim to achieve, specially in this case their goal was to reduce childhood obesity rates in urban areas."

Summarizing: "In summary, the meta-analysis confirms a positive association between regular physical activity and mental well-being across diverse population groups."

Demonstrating Cause and Effect: "The implementation of evidence-based interventions in healthcare facilities has been shown to reduce patient readmission rates, thereby improving overall healthcare outcomes."

Informal vs Formal:

Students should avoid the use of informal discourse markers in their writing. Examples of informal discourse marker include terms such as,  "Basically," " Actually," " To be honest,"  "Okay,"  "Fine,"  "Anyway".

This can be seen when words are used in writing that are grammatically incorrect or do not make sense in the type of sentence being written.

For example:

Barack Obama served two terms as the 44th president of the United States. Basically, this means that the population of the US generally liked him. 

Should be edited to:

Barack Obama served two terms as the 44th President of the United States. Therefore, he was generally liked by the population of the US.

Substituting "basically" with the term "therefore" creates a statement about the phrase being stated. Using "basically" makes the writer sound unsure about what they are saying, this could lead the reader to believe the writer could be wrong or doesn't know what they are talking about. 

Anonymous Student Examples:

"Drug use is constantly casually used in social settings, giving the idea that because drugs are such normally used things that makes them okay and safe to use."

"Basically, if social media was banned then younger generations would be fine, and would not be exposed to early media."

Additionally, students should not use discourse markers that are meant for a different purpose. This can be seen when words are used in writing that are grammatically incorrect or do not make sense in the type of sentence being written. 

For example:

"Colorado has a population of 5.77 million and an area of 269.84 thousand km² . Subsequently, Demark has a population of 5.93 million and an area of 42.93 thousand km² . In short, Denmark is more densely populated than Colorado."

• The word "subsequently" sequences time, therefore it is not correct for the purpose of comparison. Additionally, "in short" is used to summarize ideas, and therefore is not correct for the purpose of reasoning (cause and effect). The sentence could be changed to  

"Colorado has a population of 5.77 million and an area of 269.84 thousand km² whereas Demark has a population of 5.93 million and an area of 42.93 thousand km². Thus, Denmark is more densely populated than Colorado."

• Using words such as "whereas" shows the comparison in the phrase and allows the reader to understand that whats being stated is being compared to something else. The term "Thus" concludes the sentence by showing how the comparison has a correct choice.

Below is an example of an informal use of discourse markers versus a revised and formal use of discourse markers:

Distracting Sentence: "And therefore, it is important to note that, in eastern states since 1980, acid rain has become a serious problem" (Williams 43).

"When you open several sentences with distractions like that, your readers have a hard time seeing not just what each sentence is about, but the focus of a whole passage" (Williams 43).

Revised: "Since 1980,  therefore, acid rain has become a political problem in the eastern states" (Williams 43).

Conclusion

In conclusion, discourse markers are important to understand to improve the eloquence of one’s writing. Discourse markers are crucial for organizing ideas, improving clarity, and creating a more structured and cohesive text. Whether one is writing an academic essay or crafting a casual piece, understanding when to use and when to avoid discourse markers is essential for achieving the right tone and enhancing the overall quality of one's work. By mastering the usage of discourse markers, writers can ensure their ideas are communicated clearly, making their writing more engaging, persuasive, and effective. A student’s understanding of discourse markers is essential for the enhancement of writing quality to professionally convey an effective argument. Furthermore, discourse markers serve as linguistic tools that help readers follow the logical flow of ideas, making complex arguments easier to comprehend. They allow writers to establish relationships between different points, providing cohesion and coherence to their writing. Without discourse markers, writing can appear disjointed and difficult to follow, leading to confusion and misinterpretation. Therefore, developing a strong grasp of discourse markers is not only beneficial for academic success but also for effective communication in professional and everyday writing.

Works Cited

Works Cited

Aijmer, Karin. “Analysing Discourse Markers in Spoken Corpora: Actually as a Case Study.” SpringerLink, Palgrave Macmillan UK, 1 January 1970, link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137431738_5. 

Chuang, Fei-Yu. “Discourse Markers.” Open House. 15 July 2020. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/al/globalpad-rip/openhouse/academicenglishskills/grammar/discourse/. Accessed 11 March 2025

“Discourse.” Cambridge Dictionary, 2025. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/discourse?q=Discourse. Accessed 11 March 2025.

“Discourse Markers.” Cambridge Dictionary, 2025. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/discourse-marker. Accessed 11 March 2025

Maschler, Yael. “Metalanguaging and Discourse Markers in Bilingual Conversation.” Language in Society, vol. 23, no. 3, 1994, pp. 325–66. JSTOR.   

Williams, M. Joseph and Colomb G. Gregory. Style; The Basics of Clarity and Grace. Pearson Education Inc, 2006.