Part of
Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greek
Edited by Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak
[Studies in Language Companion Series 190] 2017
► pp. 114
References

References

Abraham, Werner
2016Discourse marker = discourse particle = thetical = modal particle? A futile comparison. In Discourse Particles. Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics [Linguistische Arbeiten 564], Josef Bayer & Volker Struckmeier (eds), 241–280. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adams, James N.
1984Female speech in Latin comedy. Antichthon 18: 43–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin
2013Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Allan, Keith & Jaszczolt, Kasia M.
2012 (eds). The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, John L.
1962How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bakker, Stephanie
2009The Noun Phrase in Ancient Greek: A Functional Analysis of the Order and Articulation of NP Constituents in Herodotus [Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology 15]. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakker, Stephanie & Wakker, Gerry
(eds) 2009Discourse Cohesion in Ancient Greek [Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology 16]. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Baños Baños, José Miguel
(coord.) 2009Sintaxis del latín clásico, Madrid: Liceus.Google Scholar
Barrios-Lech, Peter G.
2016Linguistic Interaction in Roman Comedy. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biraud, Michèle
2010Les interjections du théâtre grec antique. Étude sémantique et pragmatique. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
Bolkestein, A. Machtelt
1998What to do with topic and focus? Evaluating pragmatic information. In Functional Grammar and Verbal Interaction [Studies in Language Companion Series 44], Mike Hannay & A. Machtelt, Bolkestein (eds), 193–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonifazi, Anna, Drummen, Annemieke & de Kreij, Mark
2016Particles in Ancient Greek Discourse: Five Volumes Exploring Particle Use across Genres [Hellenic Studies Series 74]. Washington DC: Center for Hellenic Studies. [URL] (24 November 2016).
Broth, Mathias & Mondada, Lorenza
2013Walking away: The embodied achievement of activity closings in mobile interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 47(1): 41–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen C.
1987Politeness, Some Universals in Language Usage, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Cabrillana, Concepción
1999Type of text, pragmatic function and constituent order: A comparative study between the Mulomedicina Chironis and the Peregrinatio Egeriae . In Latin vulgaire-latin tardif V, Hubert Petersmann & Rudolf Kettemann (eds), 319–30. Winter: Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Crespo, Emilio, Conti, Luz & Maquieira, Helena
2003Sintaxis del griego clásico. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
(ed.) 2011Historical Sociopragmatics [Benjamins Current Topics 31]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denizot, Camille
2011Donner des ordres en grec ancien: Étude linguistique des formes de l’injonction. Mont-Saint-Aignan: Publications des Universités de Rouen et du Havre.Google Scholar
2012Impolite orders in Ancient Greek? The οὐκ ἐρεῖς; type. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 13(1): 110–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denniston, John D.
1954The Greek Particles, revised by Kenneth J. Dover. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Devine, Andrew M. & Stephens, Laurence D.
2006Latin Word Order. Structured Meaning and Information. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickey, Eleanor
1996Greek Forms of Address: From Herodotus to Lucian. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2002Latin Forms of Address: From Plautus to Apuleius. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2012The rules of politeness and Latin request formulae. In Laws and Rules in Indo-European, Philomen Probert & Andreas Willi (eds), 313–28. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dik, Helma
1995Word Order in Ancient Greek: A Pragmatic Account of Word Order Variation in Herodotus. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben.Google Scholar
2007Word Order in Greek Tragic Dialogue. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dik, Simon
1997The Theory of Functional Grammar, 2 Vols., 2nd edn revised by Kees Hengeveld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dostie, Gaétane
2004Pragmaticalisation et marqueurs discursifs: Analyse sémantique et traitement lexicographique. Brussels: De Boeck-Duculot. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald
1998Dire et ne pas dire. Principes de sémantique linguistique, 3rd edn. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1998Pragmatic research: Methodological issues. In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, Jacob L. Mey (ed.), 710–12. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
1999What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, David
2016Classical Greek Syntax: Wackernagel’s Law in Herodotus. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul
1975Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Jon
2009Politeness and Politics in Cicero’s Letters. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hand, Ferdinand G.
1829–1845Tursellinus seu de particulis Latinis commentarii, 4 Vols. Leipzig: Weidmann (reprint 1969, Amsterdam, Hakkert).Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C., van Reenen, Pieter & Schøsler, Lene
2000Textual Parameters in Older Languages [Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Series 4; Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 195]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H.
1994The feasibility of historical pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 533–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. & Taavitsainen, Irma
2010Historical Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
1990–1992Les Interactions verbales. Paris: A. Colin.Google Scholar
Kroon, Caroline
1995Discourse Particles in Latin: A Study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben.Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob L.
1998Pragmatics. In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, Jacob L. Mey (ed.), 716–34. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Muchnová, Dagmar
2011Entre conjonction, connecteur et particule: Le cas de ἐπεί en grec ancien. Étude syntaxique, sémantique et pragmatique. Prague: Karolinum.Google Scholar
Panhuis, Dirk
1982The Communicative Perspective in the Sentence: A Study of Latin Word Order [Studies in Language Companion Series 11]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinkster, Harm
1991Evidence for SVO in Latin? In Latin and the Romance Languages in the Early Middle Ages, Roger Wright (ed.), 69–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1990/1995 Sintaxis y semántica del latín, revised and enhanced edn. of Latin Syntax and Semantics . Madrid: Ed. Clásicas. [URL] (3 January 2017).
2015The Oxford Latin Syntax, Vol.1: The Simple Clause. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
In preparation). The Oxford Latin Syntax, Vol. 2.
Rijksbaron, Albert
(ed.) 1997New Approaches to Greek Particles. Proceedings of the Colloquium held in Amsterdam, January 4–6, 1996, to Honour C. J. Ruijgh. Amsterdam: Gieben.Google Scholar
Risselada, Rodie
1993Imperatives and Other Directive Expressions in Latin: A Study in the Pragmatics of a Dead Language. Amsterdam: Gieben.Google Scholar
Rosén, Hannah
2009Coherence, sentence modification, and sentence-part modification: The contribution of particles. In New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, Philip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), Vol. 1, 317–441. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold
2004Speech acts. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 53–73. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Scheppers, Frank
2011The Colon Hypothesis: Word Order, Discourse Segmentation and Discourse Coherence in Ancient Greek. Brussels: VUB Press.Google Scholar
Schrickx, Josine
2011Lateinische Modalpartikeln: Nempe, quippe, scilicet, videlicet und nimirum [Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology 19]. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R.
1969Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spevak, Olga
2010Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose [Studies in Language Companion Series 117]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014The Noun Phrase in Classical Latin Prose [Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology 21]. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, Eve
1990From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2004Historical Pragmatics. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 538–61. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Torrego, Esperanza
2009Coordination. In New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, Vol.1, Philip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 443–87, Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Unceta Gómez, Luis
2014La politesse linguistique en latin: Bilan d’une étude en cours. Dictionnaire Historique et Encyclopédie Linguistique du Latin, Paris-Sorbonne. [URL] (15 March 2017)
Vanderveken, Daniel
1988Les Actes de discours. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
2003Politeness. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weil, Henri
1844Question de grammaire générale: De l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparées aux langues modernes. Paris: de Crapelet (reprint Paris, Didier 1991; The Order of Words in the Ancient Languages Compared with the Modern Languages [Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics, 1800–1925, 14]; new ed. with an introduction by Aldo Scaglione. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1978).Google Scholar
Willi, Andreas
2003The Languages of Aristophanes. Aspects of Linguistic Variation in Classical Attic Greek. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Berger, Łukasz
2020. Greeting in Roman comedy: register and (im)politeness. Journal of Latin Linguistics 19:2  pp. 145 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 april 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.