Review published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 25:2 (2001) ► pp.347353
Abraham, W.
(ed.) 1991Discourse particles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, D.
1987Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Brinton, L.
1996Pragmatic Markers in English. Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Discourse Processes
24:1 1997Special issue on Discourse Markers from a cognitive point of view. W. Spooren & R. Risselada (eds.). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Journal of Pragmatics
30:2 1998Special issue on Discourse Markers and coherence relations. R. Risselada & W. Spooren (eds.). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, A. & Y. Ziv
(eds.) 1998Discourse markers. Descriptions and theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foolen, A.
1996 “Pragmatic particles.” In: J. Blommaert & C. Bulcaen (eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. 24 pp. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fraser, B.
1996 “Pragmatic markers.” Pragmatics 61, 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 “What are discourse markers?Journal of Pragmatics 311, 931–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. Mosegaard
1996 “Some common discourse particles in spoken French.” In: M. Mosegaard Hansen & G. Skytte (eds.), Le discours: Cohérence et Connexion. Actes du colloque international, Copenhague le 7 avril 1995, 105–149. (= Etudes Romanes, 351). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar
1998a “The semantic status of discourse markers.” Lingua 1041: 235–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harder, P.
1996Functional semantics. A theory of meaning, structure and tense in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kroon, C.
1995Discourse particles in Latin. A study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberk, F.
1991 “Semantic change and heterosemy in grammaticalization.” Language 671: 475–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
1987Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schourup, L.
1999 “Discourse markers.” Lingua 1071, 227–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar