Cover not available
Introduction published In:
Cognitive Linguistic Aspects of Information Structure and Flow
Edited by Wei-lun Lu and Jirí Lukl
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 7:2] 2020
► pp. 275–283
Introduction

The flow and structure of information in cognitive linguistics

Discourse, functional and cross-linguistic dimensions

| Masaryk University
| Masaryk University
Article outline
  • 1.Study of information structure as a cognitive pursuit: Its history, development and outlook
  • 2.Synopsis of the special issue
  • Note
  • References


This article is available free of charge.

Published online: 1 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00057.luk
References (32)
References
Barlow, M., & Kemmer, S. (Eds.). (2000). Usage-based models of language. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In C. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 25–55). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1988). Punctuation and the prosody of written language. Written Communication, 5(4), 396–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). Discourse, consciousness and time: Flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague/Paris: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B. (2012). The language of stories: A cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daneš, F. (Ed.). (1974). Papers on functional sentence perspective. Praha: Academia.Google Scholar
Firbas, J. (1983). On bipartition, tripartition, and pluripartition in the theory of functional sentence perspective. In T. Dobrzyńska, & E. Janus (Eds.), Text i zdanie (pp. 67–79). Wroclaw: Ossolineum.Google Scholar
(1992). Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1983). Modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gabelentz, G. von der. (1869). Ideen zu einer vergleichenden Syntax. Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft 61, 376–384.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (Ed.). (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Syntax: A functional-typological introduction, Volume I1 (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gundel, J. K. (1988a). The role of topic and comment in linguistic theory (Outstanding dissertations in linguistics). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
(1988b). Universals of topic-comment structure. In M. Hammond, E. A. Moravcsik, & J. Wirth (Eds.), Studies in syntactic typology (pp. 209–242). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hajičová, E., Partee, B., & Sgall, P. (1998). Topic-focus articulation, tripartite structures, and semantic content. Amsterdam: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English, Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3(2), 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M. (2007). Basic notions of information structure. In C. Féry, G. Fanselow, & M. Krifka (Eds.), Interdisciplinary studies on information structure 6: The notions of information structure (pp. 13–55). Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. (1975). Outline of a theory of truth. Journal of Philosophy 721, 690–716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuno, S. (1972). Functional sentence perspective: A case study from Japanese and English. Linguistic Inquiry 3(3), 269–320.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representation of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, C. N. & Thomson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Prince, E. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 223–255). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1992). The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In S. Thompson, & W. Mann (Eds.) Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund-raising text (pp. 295–325). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A. (2012). Construal and stylistics – within a language, across contexts, across languages. In Stylistics across Disciplines (Conference Proceedings, CD-ROM). Leiden.Google Scholar
Weil, H. (1844). De l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparées aux langues modernes. Paris: Joubert.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, M., & Féry, C. (2010). Introduction. In M. Zimmermann, & C. Féry (Eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives (pp. 1–11). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar