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 29 may 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.