Review published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 1:1 (1994) ► pp.145150
References (14)
References
Bolinger, D. L. (1952). Linear modification. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 671: 1117–1144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1976) Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and points of view. In C. N. Li (ed.) Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press. 26–56.Google Scholar
(1987) Cognitive constraints on information flow. In R. S. Tomlin (ed.) Coherence and Grounding in Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 21–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. (1969). Prosodic Systems and Intonation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daneš, F. (1964). A three-level approach to syntax. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 11: 225–240.Google Scholar
Geluykens, R. (1988). Five types of clefting in English discourse. Linguistics 261: 823–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press) The Pragmatics of Discourse Anaphora in English: Evidence from Conversational Repair. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo
Givón, T. (ed.) (1983). Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-language Study. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 21. Journal of Linguistics 31: 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, J. D. and G. F. Arnold. (1973). The Intonation of Colloquial English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1981) Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole (ed.) Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., E. A. Schegloff and G. Jefferson. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language 501: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, J. and R. Quirk (eds.) (1980). A Corpus of English Conversation. Lund: Gleerup.Google Scholar