Review published in:
Sensory Perceptions in Language and Cognition
Edited by Rosario Caballero and Carita Paradis
[Functions of Language 22:1] 2015
► pp. 132141


Detges, Ulrich & Richard Waltereit
2007Different functions, different histories. Modal particles and discourse markers from a diachronic point of view. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 6. 61–81.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
(ed.) 2006Approaches to discourse particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2006aTowards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles. In Kerstin Fischer (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles, 1–20.Google Scholar
2006bFrames, constructions and invariant meanings: The functional polysemy of discourse particles. In Kerstin Fischer (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles, 427–447.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1999What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31. 931–952. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schoonjans, Steven
2014Oui, il y a des particules de démodulation en français. CogniTextes 11 (= http://​cognitextes​.revues​.org​/712).Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2012Intersubjectification and clause periphery. In Lieselotte Brems, Lobke Ghesquière & Freek Van de Velde (eds.), Intersections of intersubjectivity. Special issue of English Text Construction 5, 7–28.Google Scholar
Waltereit, Richard & Ulrich Detges
2009Diachronic pathways and pragmatic strategies: different types of pragmatic particles from a diachronic point of view. In Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen & Jacqueline Visconti (eds.), Current trends in diachronic semantics and pragmatics, 43–61. Bingley: Emerald. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Waltereit, Richard
2001Modal particles and their functional equivalents: A speech-act theoretic approach. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 1391–1417. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Abtönung: Zur Pragmatik und historischen Semantik von Modalpartikeln und ihren funktionalen Äquivalenten in romanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar