Article published in:
Pragmatics & Cognition
Vol. 29:1 (2022) ► pp. 2958
References
Andersson, Marta & Jennifer Spenader
2014Result and Purpose relations with and without ‘so’. Lingua 1481. 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asher, Nicholas & Alex Lascarides
2003Logics of conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald
2008Analyzing linguistic data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bar-Lev, Zev & Arthur Palacas
1980Semantic command over pragmatic priority. Lingua 51(2/3). 137–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, John B. & Hyman Bern
1981Causal coherence and memory for events in narratives. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20(3). 267–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
1987Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane & Robyn Carston
1999The pragmatics of and-conjunctions: The non-narrative cases. CILISC1 (L’économie dans les structures, les computations etl’utilisation du langage 12–15 octobre 1999), ISCL.Google Scholar
Blochowiak, Joanna
2009La relation causale, ses relata et la négation. Nouveaux Cahiers de Linguistique Française 291. 149–172.Google Scholar
2014A theoretical approach to the quest for understanding. Semantics and pragmatics of whys and becauses . Geneva: University of Geneva PhD dissertation.
2016A presuppositional account of causal and temporal interpretations of and . Topoi 35(1). 93–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blochowiak, Joanna & Thomas Castelain
2018How logical is natural language conjunction? An experimental investigation of the French conjunction et . In Pierre Saint-Germier (ed.), Language, evolution and mind: Essays in honour of Anne Reboul, 97–125. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Bloom, Lois, Margaret Lahey, Lois Hood, Karin Lifter & Kathleen Fiess
1980Complex sentences: Acquisition of syntactic connectives and the semantic relations they encode. Journal of Child Language 7(2). 235–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bras, Myriam, Anne Le Draoulec & Laure Vieu
2001French adverbial puis between temporal structure and discourse structure. In Myriam Bras & Laure Vieu (eds.), Semantic and pragmatic issues in discourse and dialogue: Experimenting with current theories, 109–146. London: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Britton, Bruce K., Shawn M. Glynn, Bonnie J. Meyer & M. J. Penland
1982Effects of text structure on use of cognitive capacity during reading. Journal of Educational Psychology 74(1). 51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc
2007The language-as-fixed-effect-fallacy: Some simple SPSS solutions to a complex problem. London: University of London.Google Scholar
Cain, Kate & Hannah M. Nash
2011The influence of connectives on young readers’ processing and comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology 103(2). 429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canestrelli, Anneloes R., Willem Mak & Ted Sanders
2013Causal connectives in discourse processing: How differences in subjectivity are reflected in eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(9). 1394–1413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn
1993Conjunction, explanation and relevance. Lingua 90(1). 27–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998Conjunction and pragmatic effects. In Ron E. Asher (ed.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 692–698. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
2002Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Eve V.
2003First language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1973The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12(4). 335–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cozijn, Reinier, Leo Noordman & Wietske Vonk
2011Propositional integration and world-knowledge inference: Processes in understanding because sentences. Discourse Processes 48(7). 475–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine
2017Discourse markers and (dis)fluency in English and French: Variation and combination in the DisFrEn corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(2). 242–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine, Ágnes Abuczki, Nijolė Burkšaitienė, Péter Furkó, Anna Nedoluzhko, Sigita Rackevičienė, Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienėc & Šárka Zikánová
2019Functions and translations of discourse markers in TED Talks: A parallel corpus study of underspecification in five languages. Journal of Pragmatics 1421. 139–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine & Demberg, Vera
2020When do we leave discourse relations underspecified? The effect of formality and relation type. Discours 261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine & Martin J. Pickering
2020Compensating for processing difficulty in discourse: Effect of parallelism in contrastive relations. Discourse Processes 57(10). 826–879. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
2010The origins of grammaticalization in the verbalization of experience. Linguistics 481. 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth, Nathalie Lefèvre & Yves Bestgen
1999The impact of connectives and anaphoric expressions on expository discourse comprehension. Document Design 1(1). 39–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duran, Nicholas D., Philip M. McCarthy, Art C. Graesser & Danielle S. McNamara
2007Using temporal cohesion to predict temporal coherence in narrative and expository texts. Behavior Research Methods 39(2). 212–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline, Jet Hoek & Merel Scholman
2017On temporality in discourse annotation: Theoretical and practical considerations. Dialogue & Discourse 8(2). 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline & Ted Sanders
2009The emergence of Dutch connectives: How cumulative cognitive complexity explains the order of acquisition. Journal of Child Language 36(4). 829–854. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Field, Andy, Jeremy Miles & Zoë Field
2014Discovering statistics using R. London: Sage.Google Scholar
de Saussure, Louis
2003Cause implicitée et temps explicité. Cahiers de Linguistique Française 251. 119–136.Google Scholar
2007L’étrange cas de puis en usages discursif et argumentatif. In Estelle Moline & Carl Vetters (eds.), Temps, aspect et modalité en français, 261–275. London: Brill.Google Scholar
de Saussure, Louis & Bertrand Sthioul
2002Interprétations cumulative et distributive du connecteur et: Temps, argumentation, séquencement. Cahiers de Linguistique Française 241. 293–314.Google Scholar
Gómez Txurruka, Isabel
2003The natural language conjunction and . Linguistics and Philosophy 26(3). 255–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gosselin, Laurent
2007Les séquences de connecteurs temporels: Ordre et informativité des constituants. Cahiers Chronos 181. 47–68.Google Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Keith K. Millis & Rolf A. Zwaan
1997Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology 481. 163–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Murray Singer & Tom Trabasso
1994Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101(3). 371–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul
1975Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (vol. 31), 41–58. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grisot, Cristina & Blochowiak, Joanna
2019Temporal connectives and verbal tenses as processing instructions: Evidence from French. Pragmatics & Cognition 24(3). 404–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021Temporal relations at the sentence and text genre level: The role of linguistic cueing and non-linguistic biases: An annotation study of a bilingual corpus. Corpus Pragmatics 5(3). 379–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haberland, Karl
1982Reader expectations in text comprehension. In Jean-François Le Ny & Walter Kintsch (eds.), Language and language comprehension, 239–249. Amsterdam: Noth-Holland. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haberlandt, Karl & Bingham, Geoffrey
1978Verbs contribute to the coherence of brief narratives: Reading related and unrelated sentence triples. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17(4). 419–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard
2012The semantics of pragmatic expressions. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Cognitive Pragmatics, 311–587. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoek, Jet, Jacqueline Evers-Vermeul & Ted Sanders
2019Using the cognitive approach to coherence relations for discourse annotation. Dialogue & Discourse 10(2). 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Rosalind
1987Rhetorical structure in discourse processing. In Rosalind Horowitz & Jay S. Samuels (eds.), Comprehending oral and written language, 117–160. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Elsi
2019Order of mention in causal sequences: Talking about cause and effect in narratives and warning signs. Discourse Processes 56(8). 599–618. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitis, Eliza
2000Connectives and frame theory: The case of hypotextual antinomial and . Pragmatics & Cognition 8(2). 357–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lascarides, Alex & Nicholas Asher
1993Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(5). 437–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
2000Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luscher, Jean-Marc & Jacques Moeschler
1990Approches dérivationnelles et procédurales des opérateurs et connecteurs temporels: Les exemples de et et de enfin . Cahiers de Linguistique Française 111. 77–104.Google Scholar
Maat, Henk Pander
1999The differential linguistic realization of comparative and additive coherence relations. Cognitive Linguistics 10(2). 147–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mak, Willem M. & Ted Sanders
2013The role of causality in discourse processing: Effects of expectation and coherence relations. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(9). 1414–1437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, William C. & Sandra A. Thompson
1987Rhetorical structure theory: Description and construction of text structures. In Gerard Kempen (ed.), Natural language generation, 85–95. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Bonnie J. F.
1975The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Meyer, Bonnie J. F. & Roy O. Freedle
1984Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal 21(1). 121–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Millis, Keith K. & Marcel Adam Just
1994The influence of connectives on sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 33(1). 128–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mulder, Gerben
2008Understanding causal coherence relations. Utrecht: University of Utrecht PhD dissertation.
Piaget, Jean
1924Les mécanismes perceptifs. Modèles probabilistes, analyse génétique, relations avec l’intelligence. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
Prasad, Rashmi, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi & Bonnie Webber
2008The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. In Nicoletta Calzolari et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 2961–2968. Marrakech: European Language Resources Association. Retrieved from http://​www​.lrec​-conf​.org​/proceedings​/lrec2008/
R Development Core Team
Recio Fernández, Inés María
2020The impact of procedural meaning on second language processing: A study on connectives. Heidelberg: University of Heidelberg PhD dissertation.
Roze, Charlotte, Laurence Danlos & Philippe Muller
2012LEXCONN: A French lexicon of discourse connectives. Discours 101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted
2005Coherence, causality and cognitive complexity in discourse. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on the Exploration and Modelling of Meaning (SEM’05) – Connectives, discourse framing and discourse structure: From corpus-based and experimental analyses to discourse theories, 105–114.Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted & Leo Noordman
2000The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes 29(1). 37–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted, Wilbert Spooren & Leo Noordman
1992Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 15(1). 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segal, Erwin M., Judith F. Duchan & Paula J. Scott
1991The role of interclausal connectives in narrative structuring: Evidence from adults’ interpretations of simple stories. Discourse Processes 14(1). 27–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spelke, Elizabeth
1995Initial knowledge: Six suggestions. In Jacques Mehler & Susana Franck (eds.), Cognition on cognition, 433–447. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, David Premack & Ann James Premack
(eds.) 1996Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
1986Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Spooren, Wilbert
1997The processing of underspecified coherence relations. Discourse Processes 24(1). 149–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, Eve
1990From etymology to pragmatics: The mind-body metaphor in semantic structure and semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taboada, Maite & William C. Mann
2006Applications of rhetorical structure theory. Discourse Studies 8(4). 567–588. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Ellen, Javier Collado-Isasi, Maria Omana & Amanda Yousuf
2012The processing of asymmetric and symmetric sentential conjunction. International Journal of Language Studies (IJLS) 6(4). 25.Google Scholar
Trabasso, Tom & Paul Van Den Broek
1985Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Language 24(5). 612–630. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Broek, Paul
1990The causal inference maker: Towards a process model of inference generation in text comprehension. In David A. Balota, G. B. Flores D’Arcais & Keith Rayner (eds.), Comprehension processes in reading, 423–445. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Silfhout, Gerdineke, Jacqueline Evers-Vermeul & Ted Sanders
2015Connectives as processing signals: How students benefit in processing narrative and expository texts. Discourse Processes 52(1). 47–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno
1957Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66(2). 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Dan Sperber
1998Pragmatics and time. In Robyn Carston & Seiji Uchida (eds.), Relevance theory: Applications and implications, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeevat, Henk & Katja Jasinskaja
2007 And as an additive particle. In Mixel Aurnague, Kepa Korta & Jesus M. Larrazabal (eds.), Language, representation and reasoning: Memorial volume to Isabel Gómez Txurruka, 315–340. Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco.Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine
2014Givenness, procedural meaning and connectives. The case of French puisque . Journal of Pragmatics 621. 121–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine & Pascal M. Gygax
2016The role of perspective shifts for processing and translating discourse relations. Discourse Processes 53(7). 532–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, Rolf A., Mark C. Langston & Arthur C. Graesser
1995The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science 6(5). 292–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar