Part of
Corpus-based Approaches to Register Variation
Edited by Elena Seoane and Douglas Biber
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 103] 2021
► pp. 85110
Argamon, Shlomo Engelson
2019Register in computational language research. Register Studies 1(1): 100–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, Tom
2014Analysing Power in Language: A Practical Guide. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berry, Margaret
1987The functions of place-names. In Leeds Studies in English, New Series XVIII. Studies in Honour of Kenneth Cameron, Thorlac Turville-Petre & Margaret Gelling (eds), 71–88. Leeds: University of Leeds.Google Scholar
1995Thematic options and success in writing. In Thematic Development in English Texts, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), 55–84. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
1996What is Theme? – A(nother) personal view. In Meaning and Form: Systemic Functional Interpretations. Meaning and Choice in Language: Studies for Michael Halliday, Margaret Berry, Christopher Butler, Robin Fawcett & Guowen Huang (eds), 1–64. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
2013Towards a study of the differences between formal written English and informal spoken English. In Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice, Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds), 365–383. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019The clause. An overview of the lexicogrammar. In The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds), 93–117. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forthcoming. On choosing the subject Theme.
Berry, Margaret, Thompson, Geoff & Hillier, Hilary
2014Theme and variations. In Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space, María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds), 107–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1988Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995On the role of computational, statistical, and interpretive techniques in multi-dimensional analyses of register variation: A reply to Watson (1994). Text 15: 341–370.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan
2009Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Egbert, Jesse
2016Using multi-dimensional analysis to study register variation on the searchable web. Corpus Linguistics Research 2: 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bowcher, Wendy L.
2019Context and register. In The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds), 142–170. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Gillian & Yule, George
1983Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Beaugrande, Robert & Dressler, Wolfgang
1981Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Marneffe, Marie-Catherine, MacCartney, Bill & Manning, Christopher D.
2006Generating typed dependency parses from phrase structure parses. In LREC 2006, 449–454. Genoa: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar
Dorgeloh, Heidrun & Wanner, Anja
2020Genre variation. In The Oxford Handbook of English Grammar, Bas Aarts, Jill Bowie & Gergana Popova (eds), 654–672. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Egbert, Jesse & Biber, Douglas
2018Do all roads lead to Rome? Modeling register variation with factor analysis and discriminant analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 14(2): 233–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enkvist, Nils Erik
1973Theme dynamics and style: An experiment. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 5: 127–135.Google Scholar
Forey, Gail
2009Marked interpersonal themes: Projecting clauses in workplace texts. In Text Type and Texture: In Honour of Flo Davies, Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds), 151–174. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Forey, Gail & Sampson, Nicholas
2017Textual metafunction and theme. What’s ‘it’ about? In The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds), 131–145. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fries, Peter H.
1995Themes, methods of development, and texts. In On Subject and Theme: A Discourse Functional Perspective, Ruqaiya Hasan & Peter H. Fries (eds), 317–359. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009The textual metafunction as a site for a discussion of the goals of linguistics and techniques of linguistic analysis. In Text Type and Texture: In honour of Flo Davies, Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds), 8–44. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Ghadessy, Mohsen
1998Textual features and contextual factors for register identification. In Text and Context in Functional Linguistics, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed), 125–139. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gosden, Hugh
1996A Genre-based Investigation of Theme: Product and Process in Scientific Research Articles Written by NNS Novice Researchers. Nottingham: University of Nottingham, Department of English Studies.Google Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason
2014Variation in English genitives across modality and genres. English Language and Linguistics 18(3): 471–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan T.
2003Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory R.
2005Letters to language. Language 81(3): 561–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1970A Course in Spoken English: Intonation. London: OUP.Google Scholar
1977Text as semantic choice in social contexts. In Grammars and Descriptions, Teun A. van Dijk & János S. Petöfi (eds), 176–225. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1985An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edn. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya
1976Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M.
2014Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th edn. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., McIntosh, Angus & Strevens, Peter
1964The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Hasan, Ruqaiya
1978Text in the systemic-functional model. In Current Trends in Textlinguistics, Wolfgang U. Dressler (ed.), 228–246. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D.
1991Further remarks on Halliday’s functional grammar. A reply to Martin and to Martin & Mathiessen. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics 6: 197–211.Google Scholar
Huumo, Tuomas
1996Bound spaces and the semantic interpretation of existentials. Linguistics 34: 295–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroll, Barbara
1977Combining ideas in written and spoken English: A look at subordination and coordination. In Discourse across Time and Space, Elinor Keenan & Tina Bennett (eds), 69–108. Los Angeles CA: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Lavid, Julia
2000Contextual constraints on thematization in written discourse: An empirical study. In Formal Aspects of Context, Pierre Bonzon, Marcos Cavalcanti & Rolf Nossum (eds), 37–47. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levshina, Natalia
MacDonald, Susan Peck
1992A method for analyzing sentence-level differences in disciplinary knowledge making. Written Communication 9(4): 533–569. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994Professional Academic Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Maechler, Martin, Rousseeuw, Peter, Struyf, Anja, Hubert, Mia & Maechler, Hornik Kurt
2019cluster: Cluster Analysis Basics and Extensions. R package version 2.1.0.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R.
1985Process and text: Two aspects of human semiosis. In Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. I: Selected Theoretical Papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop, James D. Benson & William S. Greaves (eds), 248–274. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. & Rose, David
2007Working with Discourse. Meaning beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M.
2019Register in systemic functional linguistics. Register Studies 1(1): 10–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, Anna
1993Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
McCabe, Anne
2004Thematic progression patterns and text types in history textbooks. In Text and Texture: Systemic Functional Viewpoints on the Nature and Structure of Text, David Banks (ed.), 215–237. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Nesi, Hilary & Gardner, Sheena
2012Genres across the Disciplines. Student Writing in Higher Education. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
North, Sara
2005Disciplinary variation in the use of theme in undergraduate essays. Applied Linguistics 26(3): 431–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nwogu, Kevin & Bloor, Thomas
1991Thematic progression in professional and popular medical texts. In Functional and Systemic Linguistics. Approaches and Uses, Eija Ventola (ed.), 369–384. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, Roy C.
1974Syntactic difference between speech and writing. American Speech 49(1–2): 102–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Guerra, Javier & Martínez-Insua, Ana Elina
2018Do genres, syntax and semantics go hand in hand? A corpus-based analysis of Themes in Present-Day American English. Delivered at 28 ESFLC, Pavia, 5–7 July.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
R Core Team
2020R: A language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Schulz, Anke & Fontaine, Lise
2019The Cardiff model of functional syntax. In The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds), 230–258. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Ryota, Terada, Yoshikazu & Shimodaira, Hidetoshi
2019pvclust: Hierarchical Clustering with P-Values via Multiscale Bootstrap Resampling. R package version 2.2-0.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt & Hinrichs, Lars
2008Probabilistic determinants of genitive variation in spoken and written English: A multivariate comparison across time, space, and genres. In The Dynamics of Linguistic Variation: Corpus Evidence on English Past and Present, Terttu Nevalainen, Irma Taavitsainen, Päivi Pahta & Minna Korhonen (eds), 291–309. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles V.
1983Structure and theme in printed school text. Text 3(2): 197–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Sarah & Hawes, Thomas
1997Theme in Academic and Media Discourse. Nottingham: University of Nottingham, Department of English Studies.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff
2013Introducing Functional Grammar, 3rd edn. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Thompson, Susan
2009Theme, subject and the unfolding of text. In Text Type and Texture: In Honour of Flo Davies, Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds), 45–69. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Zhou, Jianglin
2000Evaluation and organization in text: The structuring role of evaluative disjuncts. In Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds), 121–141. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Vande Kopple, William J.
1991Themes, thematic progressions, and some implications for understanding discourse. Written Communication 8(3): 311–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, Jiajin & Liang, Maocheng
2013A tale of two C’s: Comparing English varieties with Crown and CLOB (The 2009 Brown family corpora). ICAME Journal 37: 175–183.Google Scholar