Cover not available
Review published In:
Language, Context and Text
Vol. 3:1 (2021) ► pp.174–198
Book review

Jonathan J. Webster & Carmel Cloran (eds.). Describing language: Form and function, volume 5 in the collected works of Ruqaiya Hasan. Sheffield, UK: Equinox, 2019. xiv + 371 pp.

Reviewed by
ORCID logo | Georgetown University
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Positioning the review
  • 3.Comments on individual articles
    • 3.1Section One: On language and linguistics
      • 3.1.1What kind of resource is language? [1984]
      • 3.1.2Directions from structuralism [1987]
      • 3.1.3Linguistic sign and the science of linguistics [2014]
      • 3.1.4A view of pragmatics in a social semiotic perspective [2012]
      • 3.1.5Choice, system and realisation: Describing language as meaning potential [2013]
    • 3.2Section two: Lexicogrammatical descriptions
      • 3.2.1The grammarian’s dream: Lexis as most delicate grammar [1987]
      • 3.2.2Lending and borrowing: From grammar to lexis [1985]
    • 3.3Section Three: On the relations of syntax and semantics
      • 3.3.1Syntax and semantics [1971]
      • 3.3.2The meaning of ‘not’ is not in ‘not’ [2011]
    • 3.4Section Four: Brief excursions into Urdu grammar
  • 4.Hasan’s writing style and the nature of her scholarly contributions
  • 5.Editorial critique
  • References
Published online: 24 February 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/langct.00033.byr
References (46)
References
Bernstein, Basil. 1999. Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education 20 (2). 157–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, Emanuel & Panos Athanasopoulos (eds.). 2015. The language and thought of motion in second language speakers. Modern Language Journal 991 (Supplement 2015). 1–164.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. Suresh. 2018. Materializing ‘competence’: Perspectives from international STEM scholars. Modern Language Journal 102 (2). 268–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, John B. (ed.). 1956. Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cloran, Carmel, David Butt & Geoffrey Williams (eds.). 1996. Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. Selected papers of Ruqaiya Hasan. London: Cassell. Republished in 2015 in hardback. London: Bloomsbury.
Derrida, Jacques. 1974. Of grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Positions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Douglas Fir Group. 2016. A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. Modern Language Journal 1001 (Supplement 2016). 19–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Nick C. & Diane Larsen-Freeman. 2009. Constructing a second language: Analyses and computational simulations of the emergence of linguistic constructions from usage. Language Learning 591 (Supplement). 90–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Nick C., Ute Römer & Matthew B. O’Donnell. 2016. Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and processing: Cognitive and corpus investigations of construction grammar. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fabb, Nigel, Derek Attridge, Alan Durant & Colin MacCabe (eds.). 1987. The linguistics of writing: Arguments between language and literature. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Fontaine, Lise, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds.). 2013. Systemic functional linguistics: Exploring choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García, Ofelia & Wei Li. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2013. Constructionist approaches. In Thomas Hoffman & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Construction grammar handbook, 15–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.). 1996. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Joan K. 2019. The contributions of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics to a usage-based understanding of language: Expanding the transdisciplinary framework. Modern Language Journal 1031 (Supplement 2019). 80–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1961. Categories of the theory of grammar. In Michael A. K. Halliday, On grammar, volume 1 in the collected works of M. A. K. Halliday. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster, 37–94. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English (Part 1). Journal of Linguistics 3 (1). 37–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English (Part 2). Journal of Linguistics 3 (2). 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1968. Notes on transitivity and theme in English (Part 3). Journal of Linguistics 4 (2). 179–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1987. Language and the order of nature. In Nigel Fabb, Derek Attridge, Alan Durant & Colin MacCabe (eds.), The linguistics of writing: Arguments between language and literature, 135–154. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
2009. Preface to Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics . In Michael A. K. Halliday & Jonathan J. Webster (eds.), Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics, vii–viii. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., Angus McIntosh & Peter Strevens. 1964. The linguistic sciences and language teaching. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasan, Ruqaiya. 2005. Introduction: Language, society and consciousness: Transdisciplinary orientations and the tradition of specialisation. In Ruqaiya Hasan, Language, society and consciousness, volume 1 in the collected works of Ruqaiya Hasan. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. 3–17. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Margaret & Junko Mori. 2018. Considering ‘trans-’ perspectives in language theories and practices. Applied Linguistics 39 (1). 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2019 (2nd edition). Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hult, Francis M. 2009. The history and development of educational linguistics. In Bernard Spolsky & Francis M. Hult (eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics, 10–24. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
2019. Toward a unified theory of language development: The transdisciplinary nexus of cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on social activity. Modern Language Journal 1031 (Supplement 2019). 136–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1997. Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18 (2). 141–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Complexity theory: The lessons continue. In Lourdes Ortega & Zhao Honghan (eds.), Complexity theory and language development: In celebration of Diane Larsen-Freeman, 11–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Wei. 2018. Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (1). 9–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucy, John A. 1996. The scope of linguistic relativity: An analysis and review of empirical research. In John J. Gumperz & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 37–69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2010. Language structure, lexical meaning, and cognition: Whorf and Vygotsky revisited. In Barbara C. Malt & Phillip Wolff (eds.), Words and the mind: How words capture human experience, 266–286. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mathesius, Vilem. 1964. On the potentiality of the phenomena of language. In Josef Vachek (ed.), A Prague School reader in linguistics, 1–32. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Mazak, Catherine. 2017. Introduction: Theorizing translanguaging practices in higher education. In Catherine M. Mazak & Kevin S. Carroll (eds.), Translanguaging in higher education: Beyond monolingual ideologies, 1–10. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew & Frances H. Syder. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Jack C. Richards & Richard W. Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication, 191–226. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Peng, Xuanwei & Geoff Williams. 2019. Editorial. Language, Context and Text: The Social Semiotics Forum 1 (1). 1–3.Google Scholar
Pennycook, Alastair. 2018. Posthumanist applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics 39 (4). 445–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Römer, Ute. 2009. The inseparability of lexis and grammar: Corpus linguistic perspectives. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 71. 140–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, Naoko & Carsten Roever. 2017. Second language pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. 2012. The mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyler, Andrea E. 2010. Usage-based approaches to language and their applications to second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 301. 270–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 2000a. Object language and the language subject: On the mediating role of applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 201. 21–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000b. On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied Linguistics 21 (1). 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 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.