Article published in:
Outside the Clause: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents
Edited by Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer and Arne Lohmann
[Studies in Language Companion Series 178] 2016
► pp. 126
References

References

Aijmer, Karin
1997“I think” – An English modal particle. In Modality in Germanic Languages. Historical and Comparative Perspectives, Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westvik (eds), 1-47. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007The interface between discourse and grammar: The fact is that . In Connectives as Discourse Landmarks [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 161], Agnès Celle & Ruth Huart (eds), 31-46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Arnold, Doug
2007Non-restrictive relatives are not orphans. Journal of Linguistics 43: 271-309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Dough
2004Non-restrictive relative clauses in construction-based HPSG. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Stefan Müller (ed.), 27-47. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Astruc, Lluisa
2005The Intonation of Extra-sentential Elements in Catalan and English. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Averintseva-Klisch, Maria
2008To the right of the clause: Right dislocation vs. afterthought. In 'Subordination' versus 'Coordination' in Sentence and Text: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 98], Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen & Wiebke Ramm (eds), 217-239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barton, Ellen
1990Nonsentential Constituents: A Theory of Grammatical Structure and Pragmatic Interpretation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 2]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998The grammar of telegraphic structures: Sentential and nonsentential derivation. Journal of English Linguistics 26: 37-67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayer, Klaus
1973Verteilung und Funktion der sogenannten Parenthese in Texten. Deutsche Sprache 1: 64-115.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
2006Divisions of labour: The analysis of parentheticals. Lingua 116: 1670-1687. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard
1962[1933]Language. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1989Intonation and its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Harder, Peter
2007Complement-taking predicates: Usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language 31(3): 569-606. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brenier, Jason M. & Michaelis, Laura A.
2005Optimization via syntactic amalgam: Syntax-prosody mismatch and copula doubling. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(1): 45-88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2005Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
1996Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions [Topics in English Linguistics 19]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008The Comment Clause in English: Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development [Studies in English Language]. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burton-Roberts, Noel
1999Language, linear precedence and parentheticals. In The Clause in English [Studies in Language Companion Series 45], Peter Collins & David Lee (eds), 33-52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Parentheticals. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, Vol. 9, Keith Brown (ed.), 179-182. Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael
2006Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Corum, Claudia
1975A pragmatic analysis of parenthetic adjuncts. Chicago Linguistic Society 11: 133-141.Google Scholar
Crystal, David
1969Prosodic Systems and Intonation in English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole
2014Parentheticals in Spoken English: The Syntax-prosody Relation. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dehé, Nicole & Kavalova, Yordanka
2007Parentheticals [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 106]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dik, Simon C.
1997The Theory of Functional Grammar, Part 2: Complex and Derived Constructions. [Functional Grammar Series 21]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph
1973Parenthetical clauses. In You Take the High Node and I’ll Take the Low Node, Claudia Corum, Thomas Cedric Smith-Stark & Ann Weiser (eds), 333-347. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1976A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1979Appositive relatives have no properties. Linguistic Inquiry 10(2): 211-243.Google Scholar
Erman, Britt & Kotsinas, Ulla-Britt
1993Pragmaticalization: The case of ba and you know . Studier I modern språkvetenskap [Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, New Series] 10: 76-93. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa
1991The representation of disjunct constituents. Language 67: 726-762. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicolas
2007Insubordination and its uses. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nicolaeva (ed.), 366-431. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar
Fabb, Nigel
1990The difference between English restrictive and nonrestrictive relative clauses. Journal of Linguistics 26: 57-78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga
2007Morphosyntactic Change. Functional and Formal Perspectives. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
2010Constructions, frames and spoken interaction. Constructions and Frames 2(2): 185-207.Google Scholar
Frank-Job, Barbara
2006A dynamic-interactional approach to discourse markers. In Approaches to Discourse Particles, Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 359-374. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Google Scholar
Frota Sónia
2000Prosody and Focus in European Portuguese. Phonological Phrasing and Intonation. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore
2004Parentheticals in Russian. Journal of Pragmatics 36(11): 1953-1974. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
1991Parenthetical adverbials: the radical orphanage approach. In Aspects of Modern English Linguistics: Papers Presentedto Masatomo Ukaji on his 60th Birthday , Shuki Chiba, Akira Ogawa, Yasuaki Fuiwara, Norio Yamada, Osamu Koma & Takao Yagi (eds), 232-54. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
Halliday, Michael A.K.
1985An introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hannay, Mike & de los Ángeles Gómez-González, María
2012Thematic parentheticals in Dutch and English. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 6: 99-127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hannay, Michael & Keizer, Evelien
2005A discourse-treatment of English non-restrictive nominal appositions in Functioanl Discourse Grammer. In Studies in Functional Discourse Grammar, MaríaÁ. Gómez-González & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (eds), 159-194. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther & Kuteva, Tania
2016 Forthcoming. On insubordination and co-optation. In Dynamics of Insubordination, Nicholas Evans & Honoré Watanabe (eds), Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Cooptation as a discourse strategy. Linguistics.
Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther, Kuteva, Tania & Long, Haiping
2013An outline of Discourse Grammar. In Functional Approaches to Language, Shannon Bischoff & Carmen Jeny (eds), 155-206. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania & Kaltenböck, Gunther
2014Discourse Grammar, the dual process model, and brain lateralization: Some correlations. Language and Cognition 6: 146-180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania, Kaltenböck, Gunther & Long, Haiping
2015On some correlations between grammar and brain lateralization. In Oxford Handbooks Online. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Claudi, Ulrike & Hünnemeyer, Friederike
1991Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, Lachlan
2008Functional Discourse Grammar. A Typologically-based Theory of Language Structure. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heringa, Herman
2011Appositional Constructions. Groningen: LOT.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin
2013Constructional Change in English. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
1958A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Ludger
1998Parenthesen. Linguistische Berichte 175: 299–328.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J.
1991On some principles of grammaticalization. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1 [Typological Studies in Language 19(1)], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 17-35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ifantidou-Trouki, Elly
1993Sentential adverbs and relevance. Lingua 90(1-2): 69-90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
1972Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S.
1977X’ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. & Ziv, Yael
1998Discourse markers: Introduction. In Discourse Markers: Description and Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57], Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds), 1-12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther
2007Spoken parenthetical clauses in English. In Dehé & Kavalova (eds), Parentheticals, 25-52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Prosody and function of English comment clauses. Folia Linguistica 42(1): 83-134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Development of comment clauses. In The English Verb Phrase: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora, Bas Aarts, Joanne Close, Geoffrey Leech, & Sean Wallis (eds), 286-317. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
2015On theticals: A “rootless” analysis of I think . In Parenthetical Verbs Stefan Schneider, Julie Glikman & Mathieu Avanzi (eds), 39-70. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011On thetical grammar. Studies in Language 35(4): 848-893. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise
2003Epistemic Stance in English Conversation: A Description of its Interactional Functions, With a Focus on I think [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 115]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kavalova, Yordanka
2007And-parenthetical clauses. In Dehé & Kavalova (eds), Parentheticals, 145-172. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keizer, Evelien
2013The X is (is) construction: An FDG account. In Casebook in Functional Discourse Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series 137], Lachlan Mackenzie & Hella Olbertz (eds), 213-248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1995 [1982]Thoughts on Grammaticalization [revised and expanded version]. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
López-Couso, María José
1996On the history of methinks: From impersonal construction to fossilised expression. Folia Linguistica Historica XVII: 153-169.Google Scholar
López-Couso, María José & Méndez-Naya, Belén
2014From clause to pragmatic marker. A study of the development of like-parentheticals in American English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 15(1): 36-61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Massam, Diane
1999 Thing is constructions: The thing is, is what’s the right analysis? English Language and Linguistics 3(2): 335-352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James D.
1982Parentheticals and discontinuous constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 91-106.Google Scholar
1988The Syntactic Phenomena of English, 2 Vols. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Jim & Weinert, Regina
1998Spontaneous Spoken Language: Syntax and Discourse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne
2008The extension of dependency beyond the sentence. Language 84(1): 69-119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene
1986Prosodic Phonology [Studies in Generative Grammar 28]. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J.
2015Parentheticals and the grammar of complementation. In Parenthetical Verbs. Stefan Schneider, Julie Glikman & Mathieu Avanzi (eds), 13-37. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar
Palander-Collin, Minna
1999Grammaticalization and Social Embedding. I Think and Methinks in Middle and Early Modern English. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Peterson, Peter
1999On the boundaries of syntax: Non-syntagmatic relations. In The Clause in English: In Honour of Rodney Huddleston [Studies in Language Companion Series 45], Peter Collins & David Lee (eds), 229-250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petola, Niilo
1983Comment clauses in present-day English. In Studies in Classical and Modern Philology, Iiro Kajanto, Inna Koskenniemi & Esko Pennanen (eds), 101-113.Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Pittner, Karin
1995Zur Syntax von Parenthesen. Linguistische Berichte 156: 85-108.Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher
2003Conventional implicatures: A distinguished class of meanings. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds), 475-501. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2005The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey
1972A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ross, John R.
1970On declarative sentences. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, R.A. Jacobs & P.S. Rosenbaum (eds), 222–272. Waltham MA: Einn & Co.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert
1973Slifting. In The Formal Analysis of Natural Languages: Proceedings of the First International Conference. Maurice Gross, Morris Halle & Marcel-Paul Schützenberger (eds), 133-169. The Hague: Mouton. Google Scholar
Rouchota, Villy
1998Procedural meaning and parenthetical discourse markers. In Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57], Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds), 97-126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Jefferson, Gail
1974A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50: 696-735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Safir, Kenneth
1986Relative clauses in a theory of binding and levels. Linguistic Inquiry 17(4): 663-689.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Stefan
2007Reduced Parenthetical Clauses as Mitigators. A Corpus Study of Spoken French, Italian and Spanish [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Stefan, Glikman, Julie & Avanzi, Mathieu
(eds) 2015Parenthetical Verbs. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence Clifford
1985Common Discourse Particles in English Conversation. New York NY: GarlandGoogle Scholar
Tabor, Whitney & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1998Structural scope expansion and grammaticalization. In The Limits of Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 37], Ramat Giacolone & Paul J. Hopper (eds), 229-272. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A.
2002'Object complements' and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language 26(1): 125-164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Mulac, Anthony
1991A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1, [Typological Studies in Language 19(1)], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 313-29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1982From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In Perspectives on Historical Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 24], Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds), 245-271. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1988Pragmatic strengthening and grammaticalization. Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 406-416. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995The role of discourse markers in a theory of grammaticalization. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on Historical Linguistics , Manchester, England, August. www​.stanford​.edu​/~traugott​/ect​-papersonline​.html
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme
2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tuggy, David
1996The thing is is that people talk that way. The question is why? In Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods: The Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguistics, Eugen H. Casad (ed.), 713-752. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Urmson, James Opie
1952Parenthetical verbs. Mind 61: 480-496. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Bogaert, Julie
2010A constructional taxonomy of I think and related expressions: accounting for the variability of complement-taking mental predicates. English Language and Linguistics 14(3): 300-427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 49(2): 295-332.Google Scholar
de Vries, Mark
2003Three-dimensional grammar. In Linguistics in the Netherlands, Leonie M.E.A. Cornips & Paula Fikkert (eds), 201-212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Invisible constituents? Parentheses as B-merged adverbial phrases. In Dehé & Kavalova (eds), Parentheticals, 203-234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wackernagel
1897, see Scheider 2007b: 38-39.
Wichmann, Anne
2001Spoken parentheticals. In A Wealth of English. Studies in Honour of Göran Kjellmer, Karin Aijmer (ed.), 177-193. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgiensis.Google Scholar
Wischer, Ilse
2000Grammaticalization versus lexicalization: 'Methinks' there is some confusion. In Pathways of Change. Grammaticalization in English [Studies in Language Companion Series 57], Olga, Fischer, Anette Rosenbach & Dieter Stein (eds), 355-370. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, Yael
1985Parentheticals and functional grammar. In Syntax and Pragmatics in Functional Grammar, A. Machteld Bolkestein, Caspar de Groot & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (eds), 181-199. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Scivoletto, Giulio
2020. Semasiological cyclicity in the evolution of discourse markers. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 21:2 Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 september 2020. 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.