References
Akmajian, Adrian
1970Aspects of the grammar of focus in English. Boston: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD Thesis.
Asher, Nicholas & Alex Lascarides
2003Logics of conversation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter
2005Projection in interaction and projection in grammar. Text. Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 251. 7–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Projection and minimalistic syntax in interaction. Discourse Processes 461. 180–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthe, Florine
2021De la clivée en th- à la structure the-N-is en anglais oral: Vers une lecture discursive, prosodique et dialogique. Metz: Université de Lorraine & Augsburg Universität PhD thesis.
Corminboeuf, Gilles & Anne-Sylvie Horlacher
2016La projection en macro-syntaxe et en linguistique interactionnelle: Dimensions théoriques et empiriques. Langue Francaise 192(4). 15–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine & Vera Demberg
2020When do we leave discourse relations underspecified? The effect of formality and relation type. Discours (online) 261. 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Das, Debopam & Markus Egg
2023Continuity in discourse relations. Functions of Language 301. 41–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita
2017Contrastive discourse relations in context: Evidence from monologic and dialogic editing tasks. In Rachel Giora & Michael Haugh (eds.), Doing pragmatics interculturally: Cognitive, philosophical, and sociopragmatic perspectives, 269–292. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018Discourse pragmatics: Communicative action meets discourse analysis. In Cornelia Ilie & Neal Norrick (eds.), Pragmatics and its interfaces, 33–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaudy-Campbell, Isabelle, Héloïse Lechevallier-Parent & Vasilica Le Floch
2016Articulation topicale, référentielle et macrosyntaxique dans un discours oral. Modèles Linguistiques 731. 21–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1993English grammar: A function-based introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne
2011 N be that-constructions in everyday German conversation: A reanalysis of ‘die Sache ist/das Ding ist’ (‘the thing is’)-clauses as projector phrases. In Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds.), Subordination in conversation: A cross-linguistic perspective, 11–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
1994An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Ruqaiya Hasan
1976Cohesion in English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Herman, Thierry
2016Projections programmatiques, entamées et potentielles dans l’écrit scientifique: L’attente dans une perspective de linguistique textuelle. Langue Française 192(4). 97–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higgins, Francis
1979The pseudo-cleft construction in English. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul
2001Grammatical constructions and their discourse origins: Prototype or family resemblance? In Martin Pütz, Suzanne Niemeier & René Dirven (eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics: Theory, acquisition, and language pedagogy, 109–129. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004The openness of grammatical constructions. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 401. 153–175.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Sandra Thompson
2008Projectability and clause combining in interaction. In Ritva Laury (ed.), Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining: The multifunctionality of conjunctions, 99–123. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koops, Christian & Martin Hilpert
2009The co-evolution of syntactic and pragmatic complexity. In Thomas Givón & Masayoshi Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic complexity: Diachrony, acquisition, cognition and neurology, 215–238. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lapaire, Jean-Rémi & Wilfrid Rotgé
1991Linguistique et grammaire de l’anglais. Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail.Google Scholar
Lindström, Jan, Sofie Henricson & Martina Huhtamäki
2022Pseudo-cleft constructions in Swedish talk-in-interaction: Turn projection and discourse organization. Lingua 2651. e103167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, William & Sandra Thompson
1988Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3). 243–281.Google Scholar
Maschler, Yael & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2022Pseudo-cleft-like structures in Hebrew and French conversation: The syntax-lexicon-body interface. Lingua 2801. e103397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael, Jan Lindström & Elwys De Stefani
2023Pseudo-clefts: An interactional analysis across languages. Lingua 2911. e103538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F.
1978A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54(4). 883–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1980Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I ask you a question?Sociological Inquiry 50(3–4). 104–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen
1995On projection. In Esther N. Goody (ed.), Social intelligence and interaction: Expressions and implications of the social bias in human intelligence, 87–110. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taboada, Maite
2009Implicit and explicit coherence relations. In Jan Renkema (ed.), Discourse, of course: An overview of research in discourse studies, 127–140. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinert, Regina & Jim Miller
1996Cleft constructions in spoken language. Journal of Pragmatics 25(2). 173–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar