Abstract:
In English speaking, fillers have been concerned stylistically stigmata (Jucker
& Ziv, 1998), and they are one of speech disfluencies (Shriberg, 1999) that signal the
lack of oral phonetic proficiency, vocabulary and grammar ability, and syntactic
correctness. However, native speakers of English prevailingly include fillers in speech
as they are a part of conversational strategies (Rose, 1998; Shriberg, 2001). The
interesting usage of fillers in interactions led to the purpose of the study regarding
Thai speakers of English who were surrounded with less opportunity in English
interactions. As fillers associated with both oral performance and conversational
device in regular communication, the use of fillers in Thai speakers of English who
possessed different English learning experience contributed to the insight
understanding upon fillers. The investigation involved with filler use between both
groups of Thai interactants that were divided by English learning experience: long
term abroad experienced and little or no abroad experienced speakers. On the grounds
of non-English speaking atmosphere in Thailand, conversational interactions between
Thai speakers of English were collected through a Thai English learning talk show
conducted by the Thai host that welcomed Thai speakers with different language
levels as the guests to communicate via English. The researcher applied Brintons
(1996) model of fillers functions to analyze fillers found in conversational in order to
investigate the different functions employed by two groups of speakers. Six thousand
six hundred and eighty nine times of fillers were collected as the results of the study.
With the exclusion of fillers used by the host, both groups of speakers employed
fillers functions similarly in rank. Moreover, the fillers functions of show guests
were to discuss by considering similar and different use in communicative purposes.
Also, when fillers functions by the host were taken into consideration, it
demonstrated that functions applied for interacting with both groups of guests almost
resembled in rank. Apparently, the host more used some fillers functions signaling
superior status to the guests due to the effect of talk shows institutional discursive
features.