Part of
The Noun Phrase in English: Past and present
Edited by Alex Ho-Cheong Leung and Wim van der Wurff
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 246] 2018
► pp. 1146
References (42)
References
Acuña-Fariña, Juan Carlos. 1996. The Puzzle of Apposition. Santiago: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar
. 2009. Aspects of the grammar of close apposition and the structure of the noun phrase. English Language and Linguistics 13: 453–481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1968. Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa 2: 119–127.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine, Davidse, Kristin & Ghesquière, Lobke. 2011. Types of phoric relations expressed by complex determiners in English. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2689–2703. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burton-Roberts, Noel. 1975. Nominal apposition. Foundations of Language 13: 391–419.Google Scholar
Butler, Chris. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories [Studies in Language Companion Series 63–64]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin. 1994. Fact projection. In Perspectives on English: Studies in Honour of Professor Emma Vorlat, Keith Carlon, Kristin Davidse & Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (eds), 259–286. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
. 2003. A corpus check of the factive presupposition. In Configurations of Culture: Essays in Honour of Michael Windross, Aline Remael & Katja Pelsmaekers (eds), 115–126. Apeldoorn: Garant.Google Scholar
Davies, Eirian. 2001. Propositional attitudes. Functions of Language 8: 217–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts. Leuven & Dordrecht: Leuven University Press & Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delacruz, Enrique. 1976. Factives and proposition level constructions in Montague Grammar. In Montague Grammar, Barbara Partee (ed.), 177–199. New York, NY: Academic Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donellan, Keith. 1966. Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 60: 281–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, Gill. 1993. A corpus-driven approach to grammar. In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, Mona Baker, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds), 138–156. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentens, Caroline. 2016. The Factive-Reported Distinction in English: Representational and InterpersonalSemantics. PhD dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edn. London: ArnoldGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael & Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. Constituency, multi-functionality and grammaticalisation in Halliday’s Functional Grammar. Journal of Linguistics 24: 137–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina. 2010. Belief will create fact: On the relation between givenness and presupposition, and other remarks. Theoretical Linguistics 36: 199–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul & Kiparsky, Carol. 1971. Fact. In Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in Philosophy, Linguistics and Psychology, Danny Steinberg & Leon Jakobovits (eds), 345–369. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo. 1970. Some properties of non-referential noun phrases. In Studies in General and Oriental Linguistics, Presented to Shiro Hattori on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, Roman Jakobson & Shigeo Kawamoto (eds), 348–373. Tokyo: TEC Corporation for Language and Educational Research.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Martin, James. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGregor, William. 1992 The place of circumstantials in systemic-functional grammar. In Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice, Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds), 136–149. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
. 1997. Semiotic Grammar. London: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2005. The modal confusion: On terminology and the concepts behind it. In Modality: Studies in Form and Function, Alex Klinge & Henrik Høeg-Müller (eds), 5–38. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 1990. Modality and the English Modals. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen. 1992. The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness and information-status. In Discourse Description: Diverse Analyses of a Fund-raising Text [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 16], Sandra Thompson & William Mann (eds), 295–325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandelanotte, Lieven & Davidse, Kristin. 2009. The emergence and structure of be like and related quotatives: A constructional account. Cognitive Linguistics 20: 777–807. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Langendonck, Willy. 1994. Determiners as heads? Cognitive Linguistics 5: 243–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Neurolinguistic and syntactic evidence for basic level meaning in proper names. Functions of Language 6: 95–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Theory and Typology of Proper Names. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the Coordinate-Subordinate Dichotomy: Interpersonal Grammar and the Analysis of Adverbial Clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
WB: Collins WordBanks Online. <[URL]>
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1988. The Semantics of Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series 18]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Gentens, Caroline
2019. The Diachrony of the Fact That-Clauses. English Studies 100:2  pp. 220 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.