Abstract: Scholars hold different views on the formation mechanisms of discourse markers, which mainly focus on grammaticalization, lexicalization and pragmaticalization.This paper argues that there are numerous Chinese discourse markers with diverse formation mechanisms: discourse markers in the form of polysyllabic words undergo lexicalization before grammaticalization, those in the form of monosyllabic words are formed by grammaticalization, while those in the form of phrases or clauses are formed through pragmaticalization.No matter which mechanism the discourse markers are formed by, pragmatic factors will eventually be involved, and pragmaticalization only takes effect at the very end of the formation of discourse markers.The “cooptation” mechanism behind the thetical grammar has limited applicability to Chinese discourse markers, which can only explain the formation of discourse markers in the form of phrases and clauses, but cannot explain the formation of discourse markers in the form of words.Discourse markers are a subcategory of pragmatic markers.A distinction should be made between these two concepts and they should not be used interchangeably.The typological study of discourse markers in Chinese dialects and national languages within China, as well as the study of second language acquisition and information processing of discourse markers, are currently the frontier topics of discourse markers research in China.