The paper studies the discourse-pragmatic functions of hesitation markers such as <hm> and <ehm> in a corpus of text-based German WhatsApp dialogues. The sequential analysis of these markers suggests that they are used by texters to indicate different discourse relations and stances. Responsive <HM> (i.e. markers without a vowel) usually indexes alignment with the current course of action; it frames the following contribution as the preliminary result of a longer thought process, and often invites other users to deliberate the matter at hand. <EHM> (markers with a vowel), in contrast, can also index processing which takes issue with a preceding posting and hence disaligns with the projected course of action. In opposition to recent studies highlighting the conversational nature of WhatsApp dialogues, the analysis shows that texters make use of different levels of incrementality. Prototypically, texters do not deploy <HM> and <EHM> as stand-alone elements of a posting to indicate that they are still deliberating and need more time to produce their next contribution. Rather, they use them as initial framing devices in longer postings actively suspending an incremental exchange of messages. It is argued that these instances should not be classified as hesitation markers, fillers or planners, but should be conceptualised as discourse markers. The results exhibit interesting similarities and dissimilarities to the formal and functional patterns of EHM (אהמ) in Hebrew WhatsApp chats identified by Marmorstein (this collection). The final discussion compares these findings as to how formal variation is exploited in digital discourse.

本文研究了基于文本的德语WhatsApp对话语料库中的<hm>和<ehm>等犹豫标记的话语语用功能。对这些标记的顺序分析表明，文本作者使用它们来表示不同的话语关系和立场。响应式<HM>（即没有元音的标记）通常索引与当前操作的对齐方式；它构想了以下贡献，这是经过漫长思考过程的初步结果，并且经常邀请其他用户来讨论眼前的事情。相比之下，<EHM>（带有元音的标记）也可以索引处理，这与先前的发布有关，因此与计划的操作过程不一致。与最近的研究突出显示WhatsApp对话的对话性质相反，分析表明发短信者利用了不同级别的增量性。原型上，发短信者不会将<HM>和<EHM>部署为发布的独立元素，以表明他们仍在审议中，并且需要更多时间来进行下一个贡献。相反，他们在较长的发布中将它们用作初始框架设备，从而主动挂起消息的增量交换。有人认为，这些实例不应被归类为犹豫标记，填充词或策划者，而应被概念化为话语标记。结果显示出有趣的异同与形式和功能上的差异 作为发布的独立元素，表示他们仍在审议中，需要更多时间来做出下一份文稿。相反，他们在较长的发布中将它们用作初始框架设备，从而主动挂起增量消息交换。有人认为，这些实例不应被归类为犹豫标记，填充词或策划者，而应被概念化为话语标记。结果显示出有趣的异同与形式和功能模式的差异。作为发布的独立元素，表示他们仍在审议中，需要更多时间来做出下一份文稿。相反，他们在较长的发布中将它们用作初始框架设备，从而主动挂起消息的增量交换。有人认为，这些实例不应被归类为犹豫标记，填充词或策划者，而应被概念化为话语标记。结果显示出有趣的异同与形式和功能模式的差异。但应将其概念化为话语标记。结果显示出有趣的异同与形式和功能模式的差异。但应将其概念化为话语标记。结果显示出有趣的异同与形式和功能模式的差异。Marmorstein（此集合）在希伯来语WhatsApp聊天中的EHM（אהמ）。最后的讨论将这些发现与在数字话语中如何利用形式变异进行了比较。