Aijmer, Karin
2002English Discourse Particles. Evidence from a Corpus [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 10]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ameka, Felix
1992Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 18: 101–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Scott, Toocaram, Sophie, Nickels, Lyndsey, Beeke, Suzanne, Best, Wendy & Bloch, Steven
2019Everyday conversation after right hemisphere damage: A methodological demonstration and some preliminary findings. Journal of Neurolinguistics 52: 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartels-Tobin, Lori R. & Hinckley, Jacqueline
2005Cognition and discourse production in right hemisphere disorder. Journal of Neurolinguistics 18: 461–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beeching, Kate & Detges Ulrich
(eds) 2014Discourse Functions at the Right and Left Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beeman, Mark & Chiarello, Christine
1998Complementary right- and left-hemisphere language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science 7(1): 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berndt, Rita S.
1987Symptom co-occurrence and dissociation in the interpretation of agrammatism. In The Cognitive Neuropsychology of Language, Max Coltheart, Giuseppe Sartori & Remo Job (eds), 221–233. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Blake, Margaret Lehman
2009Inferencing processes after right hemisphere brain damage: Effects of contextual bias. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 52(2): 373–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
2002Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, Claire, Bilger, Mireille, Rouget, Christine & Van den Eynde, Karel
1990Le Français Parlé: Études Grammaticales. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Borod, Joan C., Bloom, Ronald, Brickman, Adam, Nakhutina, Luba & Curko, Elizabeth
2002Emotional processing deficits in individuals with unilateral brain damage. Applied Neuropsychology 9(1): 23–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bottini, Gabriella, Corcoran, Rhiannon, Sterzi, Roberto, Paulesu, Eraldo, Schenone, Pietro, Scarpa, Pina, Frackowiak, Richard & Frith, Chris D.
1994The role of the right hemisphere inthe interpretation of figurative aspects of language: A positron emission tomographyactivation study. Brain 117: 1241–1253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Bastiaanse, Roelien
2018Grammatical versus lexical words in theory and aphasia: Integrating linguistics and neurolinguistics. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1): 29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brady, Marian, Armstrong, Linda & Mackenzie, Catherine
2006An examination over time of language and discourse production abilities following right hemisphere brain damage. Journal of Neurolinguistics 19(4): 291–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brownell, Hiram H. & Joanette, Yves
(eds) 1993Narrative Discourse in Neurological Impaired and Normal Aging Adults. San Diego CA: Singular.Google Scholar
Butterworth, Brian
1994Disorders of sentence production. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 346: 55–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
1995Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10: 425–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caplan, Rochelle & Dapretto, Mirella
2001Making sense during conversation: An fMRI study. Neuroreport 12(16): 3625–3632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Centeno, José & Obler, Loraine
2001Agrammatic verb errors in Spanish speakers and their normal discourse correlates. Journal of Neurolinguistics 14(2): 349–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Champagne-Lavau, Maud & Joanette, Yves
2009Pragmatics, theory of mind and executive functions after a right-hemisphere lesion: Different patterns of deficits. Journal of Neurolinguistics 22: 413–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chantraine, Yves, Joanette, Yves & Ska, Bernadette
1998Conversational abilities in patients with right hemisphere damage. In Pragmatics in Neurogenic Communication Disorders, Michel Paradis (ed.), 21–32. Oxford: Pergamon Press.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Code, Chris
1996Speech from the isolated right hemisphere? Left hemispherectomy cases E. G. and N. F. In: Classic Cases in Neuropsychology, Vol. 1, Chris Code, Claus-W. Wallesch, Yves Joanette, André Roch Lecours (eds), 319–336. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
1997Can the right hemisphere speak? Brain and Language 57: 38–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cowell, Simon F., Egan, Gary, Code, Chris, Harasty, Jenny & Watson, John
2000The functional neuroanatomy of simple calculation and number repetition: A parametric PET activation study. Neuroimage 12: 565–573. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine
2017Discourse markers and (dis)fluencies 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 & Cuenca, María-Josep
2017Discourse markers in speech: Characteristics and challenges for corpus annotation. Dialogue and Discourse 8(2): 149–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crible, Ludivine & Degand, Liesbeth
2019Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation: What is the trade-off? Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 15(1): 71–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuenca, María Josep & Crible, Ludivine
2019Co-occurrence of discourse markers in English: From juxtaposition to composition. Journal of Pragmatics 140: 171–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Albyn, O’Neill-Pirozzi, Therese & Coon, Maribeth
1997Referential cohesion and logical coherence of narration after right hemisphere stroke. Brain and Language 56: 183–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Debaisieux, Jeanne-Marie
2007La distinction entre dépendance grammaticale et dépendance macrosyntaxique comme moyen de résoudre les paradoxes de la subordination. Faits de Langue 28: 119–132.Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth & Simon, Anne-Catherine
2009On identifying basic discourse units in speech: Theoretical and empirical issues. Discours 4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deulofeu, José
2017La macrosyntaxe comme moyen de tracer la limite entre organisation grammaticale et organisation du discours. Modèles Linguistiques 74: 135–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devinsky, Orrin
2000Right cerebral hemisphere dominance for a sense of corporeal and emotional self. Epilepsy and Behavior 1(1): 60–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele
2013‘Same same but different’ – Modal particles, discourse markers and the art (and purpose) of categorization. In Discourse Markers and Modal Particles. Categorization and Description [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 234], Liesbeth Degand, Paola Pietrandrea & Bert Cornillie (eds), 19–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dik, Simon C.
1997The Theory of Functional Grammar, Part 2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
2000From Cognitive Semantics to Lexical Pragmatics: The Functional Polysemy of Discourse Particles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1999What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31(7): 931–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015The combining of discourse markers – A beginning. Journal of Pragmatics 86: 48–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, Angela
2004The neural basis of syntactic processes. In The Cognitive Neurosciences, Michael S. Gazzaniga (ed.), 789–801. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Friederici, Angela, Rüschemeyer, Shirley-Ann, Hahne, Anja & Fiebach, Christian J.
2003The role of left inferior frontal and superior temporal cortex in sentence comprehension: Localizing syntactic and semantic processes. Cerebral Cortex 13: 170–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, Angela & Alter, Kai
2004Lateralization of auditory language functions: A dynamic dual pathway model. Brain and Language 89(2): 267–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, Angela, Bahlmann, Jörg, Heim, Stefan, Schubotz, Ricarda & Anwander, Alfred
2006The brain differentiates human and non-human grammars: Functional localization and structural connectivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(7): 2458–2463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, Morton
1990Language Comprehension as Structure Building. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González, Momtserrat
2005Pragmatic markers and discourse coherence relations in English and Catalan oral narrative. Discourse Studies 77(1): 53–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Singer, Murray & Trabasso, Tom
1994Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101, 371–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greene, Steven B., McKoon, Gail & Ratcliff, Roger
1992Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 18, 266–283.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1985An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M.
2004An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Hannay, Mike & Kroon, Caroline
2005Acts and the relationship between discourse and grammar. Functions of Language 12: 87–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard
2006A dynamic polysemy approach to the lexical semantics of discourse markers (with an exemplary analysis of French toujours). In Approaches to Discourse Particles, Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 21–41. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander
2017Spontaneous Spoken English. An Integrated Approach to the Emergent Grammar of Speech. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019Discourse marker sequences: Insights into the serial order of communicative tasks in real-time turn production. Journal of Pragmatics 146: 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haselow, Alexander & Kaltenböck, Gunther
(eds) 2020Grammar and Cognition: Dualistic Models of Language Structure and Language Processing [Human Cognitive Processing 70]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd
2019Some observations on the dualistic nature of discourse processing. Folia Linguistica 53(2): 411–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania & Kaltenböck, Gunther
2014Discourse grammar, the dual process model, and brain lateralization: Some correlations. Language & Cognition 6: 146–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania, Kaltenböck, Gunther & Long, Haiping
2015On some correlation between grammar and brain lateralization. Oxford Handbooks Online. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania & Long, Haiping
2020Dual process frameworks on reasoning and linguistic discourse. In Haselow & Kaltenböck (eds), 59–89.Google Scholar
Helasuvo, Marja-Liisa, Klippi, Anu & Laakso, Minna
2001Grammatical structuring in Broca’s and Wernicke’s aphasia in Finnish. Journal of Neurolinguistics 14(2): 231–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hird, Kathryn & Kirsner, Kim
2003The effect of right cerebral hemisphere damage on collaborative planning in conversation: An analysis of intentional structure. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 17(4–5): 309–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howard, David & Orchard-Lisle, Virginia
1984On the origin of semantic errors in naming: Evidence from the case of a global aphasic. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1(2): 163–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howes, D.
1964Application of the word frequency concept to aphasia. In Disorders of Language, Anthony V. S. DeReuck & Maeve O’Connor (eds), 47–75. London: Churchill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey
2002Language Description: The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther
2020Formulaic language and Discourse Grammar: Evidence from speech disorder. In Grammar and Cognition: Dualistic Models of Language Structure and Language Processing [Human Cognitive Processing 70], Alexander Haselow & Gunther Kaltenböck (eds), 233–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
2011On thetical grammar. Studies in Language 35: 852–897. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keizer, Evelien
2015A Functional Discourse Grammar for English. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Mary, Strand, Edythe A., Burton, Wendy & Peterson, Connie
1994Analysis of first-encounter conversations of right hemisphere damaged participants. Clinical Aphasiology 22: 67–80.Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter
1988The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review 95, 163–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehman-Blake, Margaret
2006Clinical relevance of discourse characteristics after right hemisphere brain damage. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 15(3): 255–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehman Blake, Margaret
2010Communication deficits associated with right hemisphere brain damage. In The Handbook of Language and Speech Disorders, Jack S. Damico, Nicole Muller & Martin J. Ball (eds), 556–576. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, Debra, Baynes, Kathleen, & Prat, Chantel
2005The propositional structure of discourse in the two cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Language 95(3), 383–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, Catherine & Marian Brady
2008Communication difficulties following right hemisphere stroke: applying evidence to clinical management. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention 2 (4), 235–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael
2009Metalanguage in Interaction: Hebrew Discourse Markers [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 181]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marini, Andrea, Carlomagno, Sergio, Caltagirone, Carlo & Nocentini, Ugo
2005The role played by the RH in the organization of complex textual structures. Brain and Language 93: 46–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marini, Andrea
2012Characteristics of narrative discourse processing after damage to the right hemisphere. Seminars in Speech and Language 33(1): 68–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonald, Skye
1999Exploring the process of inference generation in sarcasm: A review of normal and clinical studies. Brain and Language 68(3): 486–506. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian, Fromm, Davida, Forbes, Margret & Holland, Audrey
2011AphasiaBank: Methods for studying discourse. Aphasiology 25: 1286–1307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEldruff, Kathleen & Drummond, Sakina
1991Communication functions of automatic speech in non fluent aphasia. Aphasiology 5: 265–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McKoon, Gail & Ratcliff, Roger
1992Inference during reading. Psychological Review 99, 440–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Rachel L. C. & Crow, Tim J.
2005Right hemisphere language functions and schizophrenia: The forgotten hemisphere? Brain 128(5): 963–978. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers, Penelope S.
1994Communication disorders associated with right-hemisphere brain damage. In Language Intervention Strategies in Aphasia and Related Neurogenic Communication Disorders, 3d edn, Roberta Chapey (ed.), 514–534. Baltimore MD: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
1999Right Hemisphere Damage: Disorders of Communication and Cognition. San Diego CA: Singular.Google Scholar
2001Communication disorders associated with right hemispheredamage. In Language Intervention Strategies in Aphasia and Related Neurogenic Communication Disorders, 4th edn, Roberta Chapey (ed.), 963–987. Baltimore MD: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Oelschlaeger, Mary & Damico, Jack S.
1998Spontaneous verbal repetition: A social strategy in aphasic conversation. Aphasiology 12: 971–988. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann
Pallier, Christophe, Devauchelle, Anne-Dominique & Dehaene, Stanislas
2011Cortical representation of the constituents structure of sentences. PNAS 108(6): 2522–2527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pawley, Andrew
2009Grammarians’ languages versus humanists’ languages and the place of speech act formulas in models of linguistic competence. In Formulaic Language, Vol. 1: Distribution and Historical Change [Typological Studies in Language 82], Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen M. Wheatley (eds), 3–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, Palle, Vinter, Kirsten & Olsen, Tom S.
2004Aphasia after stroke: Type, severity and prognosis. The Copenhagen aphasia study. Cerebrovascular Diseases 17(1): 35–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pons Bordería, Salvador
Prat, Chantel S., Long, Debra L. & Baynes, Kathleen
2007The representation of discourse in the two hemispheres: An individual differences investigation. Brain and Language 100(3): 283–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Purdy, Mary H.
2002Script knowledge following stroke. Journal of Medical Speech Language Pathology 10(3): 173–181.Google Scholar
Redeker, Gisela
2006Discourse markers as attentional cues at discourse transitions. In Approaches to Discourse Particles, Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 339–358. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sakai, Kuniyoshi L., Tatsuno, Yoshinori, Suzuki, Kei, Kimura, Harumi & Ichida, Yasuhiro
2005Sign and speech: Amodal commonality in left hemisphere dominance for comprehension of sentences. Brain 128(6): 1407–1417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schnitzer, Marc L.
1989The Pragmatic Basis of Aphasia. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence
1985Common Discourse Particles in English Conversation. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
1999Discourse markers. Lingua 107: 227–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sherrat, Sue & Penn, Claire
1990Discourse in a right-hemisphere brain-damaged subject. Aphasiology 4(6): 539–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sherratt, Sue & Bryan, Karen
2012Discourse production after right brain damage: Gaining a comprehensive picture using a multi-level processing model. Journal of Neurolinguistics 25: 213–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Squire, Larry R.
2004Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 82: 171–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert
2002Common ground. Linguistic Philosophy 25(5–6): 701–721. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, Gerard
2005Basic discourse acts: Towards a psychological theory of discourse segmentation. In Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction [Cognitive Linguistics Research 32], M. Sandra Peňa Cervel & Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (eds), 283–312. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Stemberger, Joseph P. & MacWhinney, Brian
1986Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inflected forms. Memory and Cognition 14: 17–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tompkins, Connie A.
1995Right Hemisphere Communication Disorders: Theory and Management. San Diego CA: Singular.Google Scholar
2008Theoretical considerations for understanding “Understanding” by adults with right hemisphere brain damage. Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenetic Speech and Language Disorders 18(2): 45–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ullman, Michael T.
2004Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition 92(1–2): 231–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiological model of language learning, knowledge, and use. In Neurobiology of Language, Gregory Hickok & Steven L. Small (eds), 953–968. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun
1980Macrostructures. An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana
2001Preserved formulaic expressions in a case of transcortical sensory aphasia compared to incidence in normal everyday speech. Brain and Language 79(1): 38–41.Google Scholar
2004When novel sentences spoken or heard for the first time in the history of the universe are not enough: Toward a dual-process model of language. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 39: 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Formulaic and novel language in a ‘dual process’ model of language competence: Evidence from surveys, speech samples, and schemata. In Formulaic Language, Vol. 2: Acquisition, Loss, Psychological Reality, and Functional Explanations [Typological Studies in Language 83], Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen M. Wheatley (eds), 445–470. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012Formulaic language and language disorders. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32: 62–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana & Rallon, Gail
2004Tracking the incidence of formulaic expressions in everyday speech: Methods for classification and verification. Language and Communication 24: 207–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana & Postman, Whitney A.
2006Formulaic expressions in spontaneous speech of left- and right-hemisphere-damaged subjects. Aphasiology 20(5): 411–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana & Sidtis, John
2018The affective nature of formulaic language: A right-hemisphere subcortical process. Frontiers in Neurology 9: 573. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wray, Alison
2002Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Heine, Bernd
2023. The Grammar of Interactives, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 2023. 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.