Article published In:
Cognitive Perspectives on Genre
Edited by Carla Vergaro
[Pragmatics & Cognition 25:3] 2018
► pp. 430458
References
Andrews, James R.
(ed.) 2007Rhetoric, religion and the roots of identity in British colonial America. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
Antonopoulou, Eleni & Kiki Nikiforidou
2009Deconstructing verbal humour with Construction Grammar. In Geert Brône & Jeroen Vandaele (eds.), Cognitive Poetics: Goals, gains and gaps, 289–314. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011Construction Grammar and conventional discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 43(10). 2594–2609. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, John L.
1975 [1962]How to do things with words. Harvard: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail
1986The problem of speech genre. In Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (eds.), Speech genres and other late essays, 60–102. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Barlow, Michael & Suzanne Kemmer
(eds.) 2000Usage-based models of language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bercovitch, Sacvan
1975The Puritan origin of the American self. Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Berkenkotter, Carol & Thomas N. Huckin
1995Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition, culture, power. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bitzer, Lloyd F.
1968The rhetorical situation. Philosophy and Rhetoric 11. 1–14.Google Scholar
Blumenthal-Dramé, Alice
2012Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boggel, Sandra
2009Metadiscourse in Middle English and Early Modern English religious texts. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bremer, Francis J.
2003John Winthrop. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson
1987Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, Kenneth
1966Language as a symbolic action. Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1969aA grammar of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
1969bA rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
2006From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition, Language 82(4). 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. & Paul J. Hopper
(eds.) 2001Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, Yu-Chun
2016The entrenchment and conventionalization of linguistic knowledge: A neurolinguistics perspective. PhD dissertation, LMU Munich.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1998Communal lexicon. In Kirsten Malmkjær & John Williams (eds.), Context in language learning and language understanding, 63–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1999On the origins of conversation. Verbum 21(2). 147–161.Google Scholar
Cowley, Stephen J.
2017Entrenchment: A view from radical embodied cognitive science. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 409–431. Boston: APA and Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
2000Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
2009Toward a social cognitive linguistics. In Vyvyan Evans & Stephanie Pourcel (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics, 395–420. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devitt, Amy
2009Re-fusing form in genre study. In Janet Giltrow & Dieter Stein (eds.), Genres in the Internet: Issues in the theory of genre, 27–47. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijk, Teun van
2006Introduction: Discourse, interaction and cognition. Discourse Studies 8(1). 5–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Djik, Teun van
2014Discourse and knowledge: A socio-cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
2010Beyond the sentence: Constructions, frames and spoken interaction. Constructions and Frames 2(2). 185–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016Designing speech for a recipient. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fishelov, David
1993Metaphors of genre: The role of analogies in genre theory. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
1999The birth of a genre. European Journal of English Studies 3(1). 51–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Walter A.
1970A motive view of communication. The Quarterly Journal of Speech 56(2). 131–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fotion, Nick
1971Master speech acts. Philosophical Quarterly 21(4). 232–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979Speech activity and language use. Philosophia 8(4). 615–638. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003From speech acts to speech activity. In Barry Smith (ed.), John Searle, 34–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freadman, Anne
1994Anyone for tennis? In Aviva Freedman & Peter Medway (eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric, 43–66. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
2002Uptake. In Richard Coe, Lorelei Lingard & Tatiana Teslenko (eds.), The rhetoric and ideology of genre: Strategies for stability and change, 39–53. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
2012The traps and trappings of genre theory. Applied Linguistics 33(5). 544–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2017Entrenchment as onomasiological salience. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 153–174. Boston: APA and Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giltrow, Janet
2002Meta-genre. In Richard Coe, Lorelei Lingard & Tatiana Teslenko (eds.), The rhetoric and ideology of genre: Strategies for stability and change, 187–205. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Giltrow, Janet & Dieter Stein
(eds.) 2009Genres in the Internet: Issues in the theory of genre. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, Ian
2000Print and Protestantism in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall Jamieson, Kathleen
1973Generic constraints and the rhetorical situation. Philosophy and Rhetoric 6(3). 162–170.Google Scholar
Harder, Peter
2010Meaning in mind and society. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Thomas
2015Cognitive sociolinguistic aspects of football chants: The role of social and physical context in usage-based construction grammar. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 63(3). 273–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Thomas & Alexander Bergs
2018A construction grammar approach to genre. CogniTextes 181 [URL] (5 November 2018). DOI logo
Hopper, Paul J.
1987Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 131. 139–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iza Erviti, Aneider
2015Complementary alternation discourse constructions in English: A preliminary study. International Journal of English Studies 15(1). 71–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jost, Ethan & Morten H. Christiansen
2017Statistical learning as a domain-general mechanism of entrenchment. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 227–244. Boston: APA and Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerswill, Paul & Ann Williams
2002 “Salience” as an explanatory factor in linguistic change: Evidence from dialect levelling in urban England. In Mari C. Jones & Edith Esch (eds.), Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors, 81–110. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas
2010Religious discourse. In Andreas Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Historical Pragmatics, 523–547. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1966The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
2000A dynamic usage-based model. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 1–63. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
2001Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 12(2). 143–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lassen, Inger
2016Making sense of a generic label: A study of genre (re)cognition among novice genre analysts. In Ninke Stukker, Wilbert Spooren & Gerard Steen (eds.), Genre in language, discourse and cognition, 395–426. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lewis, David
1969Convention. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Michaelis, Laura & Hanbing Feng
2015What is this, sarcastic syntax? Constructions and Frames 7(2). 148–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, Laura & Knud Lambrecht
1996Toward a construction-based theory of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language 72(2). 215–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Carolyn
1984Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70(2). 151–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015Genre change and evolution. In Natasha Artemeva & Aviva Freedman (eds.), Genre studies around the globe: Beyond the three traditions, 154–185. Edmonton, AB: Inkshed Publications.Google Scholar
2016Genre innovation: Evolution, emergence or something else? The Journal of Media Innovations 3(2). 4–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017Where do genres come from? In Carolyn Miller & Ashley R. Kelly (eds.), Emerging genres in new media environments, 1–34. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Carolyn & Dawn Shepherd
2004Blogging as social action. In Laura Gurak, Smiljana Antonijevic, Laurie Johnson, Clancy Ratliff & Jessica Reymann (eds.), Into the blogosphere: Rhetoric, community and the culture of the weblogs. [URL] (7 September 2018).
2009Questions for genre theory from the blogosphere. In Janet Giltrow & Dieter Stein (eds.), Genres in the Internet: Issues in the theory of genre, 263–290. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki
2009Constructional analysis. In Frank Brisard, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Grammar, meaning and pragmatics, 16–32. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010Viewpoint and construction grammar: The case of past + now. Language and Literature 19(3). 265–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016‘Genre knowledge’ in a constructional framework: Lexis, grammar and perspective in folk tales. In Ninke Stukker, Wilbert Spooren & Gerard Steen (eds.), Genre in language, discourse and cognition, 331–359. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nir, Bracha
Østergaard, Svend & Peer F. Bundgaard
2014The double feedback loop and the parameter theory of text genres. In Jan Engberg, Carmen Daniela Maier & Ole Togeby (eds.), Reflections upon genre: Encounters between literature, knowledge, and emerging communicative conventions, 17–43. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
2015The emergence and nature of genres – a social-dynamic account. Cognitive Semiotics 8(2). 97–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola
2005Construction discourse: A prolegomenon. In Jan-Ola Östman & Mirjam Fried (eds.), Construction Grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions, 121–144. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, Brian
1995Working with genre: A pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 24(4). 393–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reid, Ronald F.
2007Puritan rhetoric and America’s civil religion: A study of three special occasion sermons. In James Andrews (ed.), Rhetoric, religion and the roots of identity in British colonial America, 65–120. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
Rütten, Tanja
2011How to do things with texts: Patterns of instruction in religious discourse 1350–1700. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2012Forms of early mass communication: The religious domain. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 295–303. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina
1989Linguaggio, ragione, interazione: Per una teoria pragmatica degli atti linguistici. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
2002Cognition and narrativity in speech act sequences. In Anita Fetzer & Christiane Meierkord (eds.), Rethinking sequentiality: Linguistics meets conversational interaction, 71–97. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2014Lexico-grammatical patterns, pragmatic associations and discourse frequency. In Thomas Herbst, Hans-Jörg Schmid & Susen Faulhaber (eds.), Constructions – collocations – patterns, 239–293. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2015A blueprint of the Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization Model. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 31. 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016Why cognitive linguistic must embrace the pragmatic and social dimensions of language and how it could do so more seriously. Cognitive Linguistics 27(4). 543–557. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017A framework for understanding entrenchment and its psychological foundations. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 9–36. Boston: APA and Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018Ein integratives soziokognitives Modell des dynamischen Lexikons. In Stefan Engelberg, Henning Lobin, Kathryn Steyer & Sascha Wolfer (eds.), Wortschätze: Dynamik, Muster, Komplexität, 215–231. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg & Annette Mantlik
2015Entrenchment in historical corpora? Reconstructing dead authors’ minds from their usage profiles. Anglia 133(4). 583–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R.
1976A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society 5(1). 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995The construction of social reality. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard
2011Genre between the humanities and the sciences. In Marcus Callies, Wolfram R. Keller & Astrid Lohöfer (eds.), Bi-directionality in the cognitive sciences, 24–41. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stukker, Ninke, Wilbert Spooren & Gerard Steen
(eds.) 2016Genre in language, discourse and cognition, 331–359. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Swales, John
1990Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2004Research genres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Worlds of genre – Metaphors of genre. In Charles Bazerman, Adair Bonini & Débora Figueiredo (eds.), Genre in a changing world, 3–16. Lafayette: Parlor Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
2008Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vergaro, Carla
2005“Dear Sirs…con la presente ci pregiamo di…”. Il genere business lettere in italiano e in inglese. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
2008On the pragmatics of concessive constructions in Italian and English business letter discourse. Multilingua 27(3). 255–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017aCome fare le cose con i testi: A Modell of Christian Charity di John Winthrop. L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria 25(1). 99–116.Google Scholar
2017bLogica illocutoria e azione in A Modell of Christian Charity di John Winthrop. In Mirella Vallone (ed.), Faith in literature. Religione, cultura e identità negli Stati Uniti d’America, 19–37. Perugia: Morlacchi UP.Google Scholar
Wells, Susan
2014Genres as species and spaces. Philosophy and Rhetoric 47(2). 113–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wenger, Etienne
1999Communities of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zwaan, Rolf A.
1994Effects of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology 20(4). 920–933.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Tseng, Ming-Yu & Grace Zhang
2022. Conceptual metonymy and emotive-affective meaning at the interface: Examples from online medical consultations. Lingua 268  pp. 103192 ff. DOI logo
Vergaro, Carla
2020. The Contribution of Metadiscourse to the Illocutionary Logic of Winthrop’sA Modell of Christian Charitiy. English Studies 101:8  pp. 921 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Danni
2023. A Cross-Cultural Genre Analysis of Leadership Statements in Italian and American University Sustainability Reports. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 66:1  pp. 26 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Danni & Carla Vergaro
2024. Regular selves constructed through genres: A socio-cognitive approach to the study of positioning acts in Italian rectors’ inaugural speeches. Discourse & Society DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 june 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.