Article published in:
Pragmatics
Vol. 17:3 (2007) ► pp. 387416

Full-text

Meaning potentials and the interaction between lexis and contexts
References
Allwood, J.
(1998) Semantics as meaning determination with semantic-epistemic operations. In J. Allwood & P. Gärdenfors (eds.), Cognitive semantics: Meaning and cognition.Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 1-18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Meaning potential and context. Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J.R. Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 29-65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, P.
(1996) The pre-front field in spoken German and its relevance as a grammaticalization position. Pragmatics 6.3: 295-322.  BoP CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bezuidenhout, A.
(2002) Truth-conditional pragmatics. Philosophical Perspectives 16: 105-134.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Blank, A.
(2003) Polysemy in the lexicon and in discourse. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. Clarke (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 267-293. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Butt, D., & C.M.I.M. Matthiessen
forthcoming) The meaning potential of language: Mapping meaning systemically. Centre for Language in Social Life, Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Cappelen, H., and E. Lepore
(2005) Insensitive semantics. A defense of semantic minimalism and speech act pluralism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Carston. R.
(2002) Thoughts and utterances. The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford etc.: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carston, R.
(2005) Pragmatic inference – reflective or reflexive? Plenary lecture read at 9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy, 10-15 July, 2005.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., and M. Selting
(2005) A linguistic practice for retracting overstatements: ‘Concessive repair’. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 257-288. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., and A. Cruse
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref  MetBibGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, A.
(2005) Conversational interpretation of lexical items and conversational contrasting. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 289-318. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Ekberg, L.
(2003) Transformations on image schemas and cross-linguistic polysemy. In Nordlund 24. Småskrifter från Institutionen för Nordiska språk, Lund University.Google Scholar
Evans, V.
(2006) Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning construction. Cognitive Linguistics 17: 491-534. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., and M. Turner
(2003) Polysemy and conceptual blending. In Nerlich, et al. (2003), pp. 79-94.
Fetzer, A.
(2004) Recontextualizing context: Grammaticality meets appropriateness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Ch., P. Kay, and Mary K. O´Connor
(1988) Regularity and idiomatiticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language 64: 501-38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Ch
(2005) FrameNet. Retrieved from http://​framenet​.icsi​.berkeley​.edu/ January 29, 2006
Fretheim, T.
(2005) Is there a rigid boundary between semantics and pragmatics? Working Papers ISK, 2/2005. NTNU; Trodheim: Department of Language and Communication Studies, pp. 113-129.
(2005/in press) English then and Norwegian da/så compared: A relevance-theoretic account. Ms. Trondheim: Dept of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Fried, M., and J.-O. Östman
(2005) Construction grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried & J.-O. Östman (eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J.
(1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
(1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.
(1973) Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Hasan, R.
(1996) Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. Edited by C. Cloran, D. Butt & G. Williams. London: Cassell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Kay, P.
(2004) Pragmatic aspects of grammatical constructions. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 675-700.Google Scholar
Kilgariff, A.
(2003) “I don´t believe in word senses”. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. Clarke (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 361-391. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lähteenmäki, M.
(2004) Between relativism and absolutism: Towards an emergentist definition of meaning potential. In F. Bostad, C. Brandist, L.S. Evensen & H.C. Faber (eds.), Bakhtinian perspectives on language and culture: Meaning in language, art and new media.Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 91-113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R.
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2006) On the continuous debate about discreteness. Cognitive Linguistics 17: 107-151. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, J., & P. Linell
(2007)  Roli å roli: X-och-x som samtalspraktik och grammatisk konstruktion. (“Funny and funny: X-och-x as a conversational practice and a grammatical construction”). Forthc.in E. Engdahl & A.-M. Londen (eds.), Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, 2. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Linell, P.
(1998) Approaching dialogue. Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2006) Towards a dialogical linguistics. In M. Lähteenmäki, H. Dufva, S. Leppänen & P. Varis (eds.), Proceedings of the XIIth International Bakhtin Conference, Jyväskylä, Finland,18-22 July 2005 (e-book).Jyväskylä: Department of Languages, pp. 157-172.Google Scholar
Linell, P., and K. Norén
(2005a) Vad man kan göra: Om den dialogiska bestämningen av pronomens användningsbetydelser. [“What man can do: On the dialogical determination of the meanings in use of pronouns”] In I. Bäcklund, et al.. (eds.), Text i arbete / Text at work. Festskrift till Britt-Louise Gunnarsson den 12 januari 2005.Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, pp. 115-124.Google Scholar
(2005b)  Ny och ny – en dialogisk analys av meningspotentialen hos lexemet ny i svenskan. [“New and new – a dialogical analysis of the meaning potential of the lexeme ny ’new’ in Swedish.”] In B. Melander, et al.. (eds.). Språk i tid. Studier tillägnade Mats Thelander på 60-årsdagen. (Skrifter utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, 67.) Uppsala, pp. 231-242.Google Scholar
Marková, I.
(1992) On structure and dialogicity in Prague semiotics. In A.H. Wold (ed.), The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind. Oslo: Oslo University Press, pp. 45-63.Google Scholar
Mukařovský, J.
(1977) On poetic language. In J. Burbank & P. Steiner (eds.), The word and verbal art. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Czech original published in 1940].Google Scholar
Nationalencyklopediens ordbok
1995/96 (“Dictionary of the National Encyclopaedia”). Språkdata, Göteborgs universitet and Bra Böcker, Höganäs, Sweden.Google Scholar
Nerlich, B., Z. Todd, V. Herman, and D. Clarke
(2003) (eds.) Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norén, K.
(2006) Både ork och lust. Om semantisk påverkan mellan ord i ordpar. [“Both ‘strength’ and ‘disposition’. On semantic influences between words in word pairs”]. In S. Ask, et al.. (eds.), Lekt och lärt: Festskrift till Jan Einarsson 2006. (Reports from Växjö University – Humanities), pp. 189-202.Google Scholar
Norman, D.A.
(1990) The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Recanati, F.
(2004) Literal meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Rieger, B.
(2005) Semiotics and computational linguistics: On semiotic cognitive information processing. www​.uni​-trier​.de​/.​..​/ldv​_archiv​/http​/www​/public​_html​/dvpage​/rieger​/pub​/aufsaetze​/kaczad98​/kaczad98​.html. Retrieved Dec. 18, 2005.
Rommetveit, R.
(1974) On message structure. London: Wiley.  BoPGoogle Scholar
(1992) Outlines of a dialogically based social-cognitive approach to human cognition and communication. In A.H. Wold (ed.), The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind.Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, pp. 19-44.Google Scholar
SAOB = Ordbok öfver svenska språket utgifven av Svenska Akademien
1898- Stockholm. [“Dictionary of the Swedish language by the Swedish Academy”].Google Scholar
Selting, M.
(2005) Syntax and prosody as methods for the construction and identification of turn-constructional units in conversation. In Hakulinen & Selting (2005), pp. 17-44.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J.
(2004) Trust the text. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Teleman, U., S. Hellberg, & E. Andersson
(1999) Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. Vol. 4. Stockholm: Norstedt.Google Scholar
Thibault, P.
(2005) The interpersonal gateway to the meaning of mind: The inter-and intraorganism perspective on language. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen & J. Webster (eds.), Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective.London: Equinox, pp. 117-156.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J.
(2003) Polysemy or generality? Mu. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J.R. Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 447-494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 40 other publications

Adamczyk, Magdalena
2020. Unpacking the meaning of the DM now through its Polish translation equivalents. Journal of Pragmatics 161  pp. 28 ff. Crossref logo
Aijmer, Karin
2015.  In Corpora and Discourse Studies,  pp. 88 ff. Crossref logo
Aijmer, Karin
2015.  In Researching Sociopragmatic Variability,  pp. 201 ff. Crossref logo
Aijmer, Karin
2016.  In Outside the Clause [Studies in Language Companion Series, 178],  pp. 29 ff. Crossref logo
Aijmer, Karin
2020.  In Voices Past and Present - Studies of Involved, Speech-related and Spoken Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 97],  pp. 248 ff. Crossref logo
Bolly, Catherine T. & Dominique Boutet
2018. The multimodal CorpAGEst corpus: keeping an eye on pragmatic competence in later life. Corpora 13:3  pp. 279 ff. Crossref logo
Buysse, Lieven
2014. Review of Aijmer (2013): Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. English Text Construction 7:1  pp. 145 ff. Crossref logo
Bücker, Jörg
2018.  In Handbuch Pragmatik,  pp. 41 ff. Crossref logo
Cigala, Ada, Tiziana Mancini, Elena Venturelli & Laura Fruggeri
2018. Family Exploration: The Contribution of Stability and Change Processes. Journal of Child and Family Studies 27:1  pp. 154 ff. Crossref logo
Clausen, Yulia & Tatjana Scheffler
2020. A corpus-based analysis of meaning variations in German tag questions Evidence from spoken and written conversational corpora. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 0:0 Crossref logo
De Felice, Rachele
2016.  Karin Aijmer , Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013. Pp. ix + 162.. English Language and Linguistics 20:1  pp. 168 ff. Crossref logo
Deppermann, Arnulf
2011. The Study of Formulations as a Key to an Interactional Semantics. Human Studies 34:2  pp. 115 ff. Crossref logo
Deppermann, Arnulf & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2021. Longitudinal Conversation Analysis - Introduction to the Special Issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction 54:2  pp. 127 ff. Crossref logo
Fedriani, Chiara & Andrea Sansó
2017.  In Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles [Studies in Language Companion Series, 186],  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Gregory James Mills, Christine Howes, Arash Eshghi, Stergios Chatzikyriakidis, Matthew Purver, Ruth Kempson, Ronnie Cann & Patrick G. T. Healey
2020. Completability vs (In)completeness. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 52:2  pp. 260 ff. Crossref logo
Hickey, Raymond
2020.  In Voices Past and Present - Studies of Involved, Speech-related and Spoken Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 97],  pp. 174 ff. Crossref logo
Imo, Wolfgang
2010. Das Adverb jetzt zwischen Zeit- und Gesprächsdeixis. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 38:1 Crossref logo
Imo, Wolfgang
2011.  In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Crossref logo
Keevallik, Leelo & Richard Ogden
2020. Sounds on the Margins of Language at the Heart of Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 53:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
La Mantia, Francesco
2020.  In Glossary of Morphology [Lecture Notes in Morphogenesis, ],  pp. 459 ff. Crossref logo
La Mantia, Francesco
2012. Du potentiel sémantique au signifié dialogique. Arts et Savoirs :2 Crossref logo
Linell, Per
2015. Mishearings are occasioned by contextual assumptions and situational affordances. Language & Communication 40  pp. 24 ff. Crossref logo
Linell, Per
2021.  In Dialogical Approaches and Tensions in Learning and Development [Social Interaction in Learning and Development, ],  pp. 49 ff. Crossref logo
Linell, Per & Jan Lindström
2016. Partial intersubjectivity and sufficient understandings for current practical purposes: On a specialized practice in Swedish conversation. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 39:2  pp. 113 ff. Crossref logo
Mohammadi, Ariana N.
2019. Meaning potentials and discourse markers: The case of focus management markers in Persian. Lingua 229  pp. 102706 ff. Crossref logo
Mohr, Susanne
2021.  You know  and  I think  in English(es) in Zanzibar . World Englishes Crossref logo
Monzoni, Chiara M. & Markus Reuber
2016.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health,  pp. 209 ff. Crossref logo
Myrendal, Jenny
2019. Negotiating meanings online: Disagreements about word meaning in discussion forum communication. Discourse Studies 21:3  pp. 317 ff. Crossref logo
Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2011.  In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Crossref logo
Plug, L., B. Sharrack & M. Reuber
2010. Seizure, Fit or Attack? The Use of Diagnostic Labels by Patients with Epileptic or Non-epileptic Seizures. Applied Linguistics 31:1  pp. 94 ff. Crossref logo
Polguère, Alain
2015.  In Language Production, Cognition, and the Lexicon [Text, Speech and Language Technology, 48],  pp. 53 ff. Crossref logo
Prażmo, Ewelina
2017. Deliberately misleading or unintentionally ambiguous?. Pragmatics & Cognition 24:3  pp. 346 ff. Crossref logo
Prażmo, Ewelina
2018. The modal potential in the English present progressive. Brno studies in English :1  pp. [43] ff. Crossref logo
Ranger, Graham
2018.  In Discourse Markers,  pp. 17 ff. Crossref logo
Spieß, Constanze
2016. Der Leser als Trüffelschwein. Ein (text)linguistischer Zugang zum literarischen Textverständnis. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 46:3  pp. 439 ff. Crossref logo
Szczyrbak, Magdalena
2021.  I’m thinking and you’re saying: Speaker stance and the progressive of mental verbs in courtroom interaction. Text & Talk 41:2  pp. 239 ff. Crossref logo
TANTUCCI, Vittorio
2020. From Co-Actionality to Extended Intersubjectivity: Drawing on Language Change and Ontogenetic Development. Applied Linguistics 41:2  pp. 185 ff. Crossref logo
Tantucci, Vittorio
2021.  In Language and Social Minds, Crossref logo
Venturelli, Elena, Elena Cabrini, Laura Fruggeri & Ada Cigala
2016. The study of Triadic Family Interactions: the Proposal of an Observational Procedure. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 50:4  pp. 655 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Grace
2016. Elastic language in TV discussion discourse. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics 3:2  pp. 245 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 november 2021. 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.