Linear Unit Grammar

Anna Mauranen
University of Helsinki
Table of contents

As we encounter speech in real life, it comes up as a continuous stream of sounds, which on paper might appear something like this:

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

Primary data

ELFA
2008 The Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings. Director: Anna Mauranen. www​.helsinki​.fi​/elfa​/elfacorpus.Google Scholar

References

Auer, P.
2005a “Delayed self-repairs as a structuring device for complex conversation.” In Syntax and Lexis in Conversation, ed. by A. Hakulinen and M. Selting, 75–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005b “Projection in interaction and projection in grammar.” Text 25: 7–36.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Zum Segmentierungsproblem in der Gesprrochenen Sprache.” InList 49. www​.inlist​.unibayreuth​.de​/issues​/49​/inlist​/49​.pdfGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad and E. Finegan
1999 The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Biederman, I.
1987 “Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding.” Psychological Review 94: 115–117.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brazil, D.
1995 A Grammar of Speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carey, R.
2013 “ ‘On the other side’: Formulaic organizing chunks in spoken and written academic EFL.” Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 2(2): 207–228.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, R. and M. McCarthy
2006 Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chafe, W.
1994 Discourse, Consciousness, and Time. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cheng, W., C. Greaves and M. Warren
2008 A Corpus-driven Study of Discourse Intonation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. and N. Chater
2016 “The now-or-never bottleneck: A fundamental constraint on language.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 39: 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clancy, B. and M. McCarthy
2015 “Co-constructed turn-taking.” In Pragmatics: A Handbook, ed. by K. Aijmer and C. Ruehlemann, 430–453. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. and M. Selting
2018 Interactional Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cowan, N.
2001 “The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24: 87–185.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Groot, A. D.
1946 Het Denken van den Schaker. Hilversum: Noord HollandscheGoogle Scholar
1978 Thought and Choice in Chess. Antwerp: Mouton Publishers.Google Scholar
Firth, J.
1968 “A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955.” In Selected papers of J. R. Firth, ed. by F. Palmer, 168–205. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W. H.
2002 “Phrases in English.” http://​phrasesinenglish​.org/ (accessed 23 April 2015).
Frank, S., R. Bod and M. H. Christiansen
2012 “How hierarchical is language use?” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 279: 4522–4531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gobet, F., P. C. R. Lane, S. Croker, P.C-H. Cheng, G. Jones, I. Oliver and J. M. Pine
2001 “Chunking mechanisms in human learning.” Trends in Cognitive Science 5(6): 236–243.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.
2006 Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greaves, C.
2009 ConcGram 1.0: A phraseological search engine [Software]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. and G. Francis
2000 Pattern Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G.
1974 “Error correction as an interactional resource.” Language in Society 2: 181–199.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempson, R., W. Meyer-Viol and D. Gabbay
2001 Dynamic Syntax: The Flow of Language Understanding. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kurby, C. and J. Zacks
2008 “Segmentation in the perception and memory of events.” Trends in Cognitive Science 12(2): 72–79.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lerner, G. H.
1991 “On the syntax of sentences-in-progress.” Language in Society 20: 441–458.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mason. O.
2008 “Stringing together a sentence: Linearity and the lexis-syntax interface.” In Language, People, Numbers: Corpus Linguistics and Society, ed. by A. Gerbig and O. Mason, 231–248. Amsterdam: Rodopi.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, A.
2009a “Chunking in ELF: Expressions for managing interaction.” Journal of Intercultural Pragmatics 6(2): 217–233. Reprinted, 2012, in Corpus Linguistics, Volume 1, ed. by D. Biber & R. Reppen, 271-286. London: Sage.Google Scholar
2009b “Managing interaction: A linear perspective on interactive speech.” In Corpora and Discourse – and Stuff: Papers in Honour of Karin Aijmer, ed. by R. Bower, M. Mobärg and S. Ohlander, 213–221. Göteborg: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
2012 “Linear Unit Grammar.” In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by C. A. Chapelle, 3409–3417. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
2016 “Temporality in speech - Linear Unit Grammar.” English Text Construction 9(1): 77–98.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M. J.
2010 “Spoken fluency revisited.” English Profile Journal 1(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, G.
1956 “The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.” Psychological Review 63: 81– 97.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Monschau, J., R. Kreyer and J. Mukherjee
2004 “Syntax and semantics at tone unit boundaries.” Anglia-Zeitschrift für englische Philologie 121(4): 581–609.Google Scholar
Moon, R.
1998 Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus-based Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, J.
2001 Form and Function of Parasyntactic Presentation Structures: A Corpus-based Study of Talk Units in Spoken English. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
O’Grady, G.
2010 A Grammar of Spoken English Discourse: The Intonation of Increments. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
O’Grady, W.
2005 Syntactic Carpentry: An Emergentist Approach to Syntax. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2008 “Language without grammar.” In Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition, ed. by P. Robinson and N. Ellis, 139–167. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Renouf, A. and J. McH. Sinclair
1991 “Collocational frameworks in English.” In English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, ed. by Karin Aijmer and Bengt Altenberg, 128–143. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.
2013 “Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by M. Hayashi, G. Raymond and J. Sidnell, 41–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH.
1993/2004 “Written Discourse Structure.” In Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse, ed. by J. McH. Sinclair and R. Carter, 82–101. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1996 “The search for units of meaning.” Textus 9(1): 75–106.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. and A. Mauranen
2006 Linear Unit Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smart, C.
2016 Discourse Reflexivity in Linear Unit Grammar: The Case of IMDb Message Boards. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “Linear unit discourse analysis: The case of peer group interaction in the HKDSE public examination.” The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics 4(2): 148–160.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. and S. T. Gries
2003 “Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(2): 209–243.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M.
2007 “An example of frequent English phraseology: Distributions, structures and functions.” In Corpus Linguistics 25 years on, ed. by R. Facchinetti, 89–106. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Vetchinnikova, S. and A. Mauranen
2017 “Chunking- the cognitive basis of a dynamic grammar.” Paper presented at AAAL 2017 Conference, March 19, Portland, Oregon.
Vetchinnikova, S., A. Mauranen and N. Mikusová
2017 “Investigating the relevant units of online speech processing.” In INTERSPEECH 2017 – 18th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, August 20–24, Stockholm, Sweden. Proceedings, 811–812.Google Scholar
Willems, R.
(ed.) 2015 Cognitive Neuroscience and Natural Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wray, A.
2002 Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zacks, J. M. and B. Tversky.
2001 “Event structure in perception and conception.” Psychological Bulletin 127: 3–21.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zacks, J. M. and K. M. Swallow
2007. “Event segmentation.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 16(2): 80–84.DOI logoGoogle Scholar