In this chapter, the framework proposed in Chapter 2 is applied to the history of English. The discourse markers studied are after all, anyway, I mean, if you like, if you will, instead, like, no doubt, right, so to say/so to speak, well, and what else. The findings presented are in support of the hypothesis proposed in Section 1.5, according to which discourse markers are the joint product of two separate mechanisms, with each of the mechanisms accounting for specific properties of discourse markers.

In this chapter, the framework proposed in Chapter 2 is applied to the history of French. The discourse markers studied are à la rigueur, à propos, à ce propos, alors, en fait, au fait, and enfin. The findings presented are in support of the hypothesis proposed in Section 1.5, according to which discourse markers are the joint product of two separate mechanisms, with each of the mechanisms accounting for specific properties of discourse markers.

In this chapter, the framework proposed in Chapter 2 is applied to the history of Korean. The discourse markers studied are icey, makilay, maliya, and tul. The findings presented are in support of the hypothesis proposed in Section 1.5, according to which discourse markers are the joint product of two separate mechanisms, with each of the mechanisms accounting for specific properties of discourse markers.

In this chapter, the framework proposed in Chapter 2 is applied to the history of Japanese. The discourse markers studied are dakedo, demo, douride, ga, jijitsu, sate, and wake. The findings presented are in support of the hypothesis proposed in Section 1.5, according to which discourse markers are the joint product of two separate mechanisms, with each of the mechanisms accounting for specific properties of discourse markers.