Part of
Reconnecting Form and Meaning: In honour of Kristin Davidse
Edited by Caroline Gentens, Lobke Ghesquière, William B. McGregor and An Van linden
[Studies in Language Companion Series 230] 2023
► pp. 1743
Allerton, David J. & Cruttenden, Alan
1979Three reasons for accenting a definite subject. Journal of Linguistics 15: 49–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman. Also published as Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward 2021 Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breivik, Leiv Egil & Martínez-Insua, Ana E.
2008Grammaticalization, subjectification and non-concord in English existential sentences. English Studies 89(3): 351–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, Peter
1992Cleft existentials in English. Language Sciences 14(4): 419–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidse, Kristin
1999aAre there sentences that can be analyzed as there-clefts? In Thinking English Grammar. To Honour Xavier Dekeyser, Professor Emeritus, Guy Tops, Betty Devriendt & Steven Geukens (eds), 177–193. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
1999bThe semantics of cardinal versus enumerative existential constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 10(3): 203–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000A constructional approach to clefts. Linguistics 38: 1101–1131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014On specificational there-clefts. Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics 3: 1–34.Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Kimps, Ditte
2016Specificational there-clefts. Functional structure and information structure. English Text Construction 9(1): 115–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Njende, Ngum Meyuhnsi
2019Enumerative there-clauses and there-clefts. Specification and information structure. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 51(2): 160–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat
1988Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-clefts. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
1999Demonstratives. Form, Function and Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 42]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erdmann, Peter
1980On the history of subject contact clauses in English. Folia Linguistica Historica 1: 139–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentens, Caroline
2016The discursive status of extraposed object clauses. Journal of Pragmatics 96: 15–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1967Notes on transitivity and theme in English 2. Journal of Linguistics 3: 199–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hannay, Michael
1985English Existentials in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Martin & Vincent, Nigel
1980On zero relatives. Linguistic Inquiry 11(4): 805–807.Google Scholar
Higgins, Francis
1976The Pseudo-cleft Construction in English. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus
1996Demonstratives in narrative discourse. A taxonomy of universal uses. In Studies in Anaphora [Typological Studies in Language 33], Barbara A. Fox (ed.), 205–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney
1971The Sentence in Written English. A Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of Scientific Texts. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
1984Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ihalainen, Ossi
1980Relative clauses in the dialect of Somerset. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 81: 187–196.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther
2005 It-extraposition in English. A functional view. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(2): 119–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015Processibility. In Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook, Karin Aijmer & Christoph Rühlemann (eds), 117–142. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd & Schneider, Edgar
(eds) 2004A Handbook of Varieties of English. A Multimedia Reference Tool. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuno, Susumu
1972The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kuroda, Shige-Yuki
1972The categorical and the thetic judgement. Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of Language 9: 153–185.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
1988 There was a farmer had a dog. Syntactic amalgams revisited. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Berkeley Linguistics Society, Shelley Axmaker, Annie Jaisser & Helen Singmaster (eds), 319–339. Berkeley CA: BLS. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001aA framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39(3): 463–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001bWhen subjects behave like objects. Studies in Language 24(3): 611–682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Hans Martin
2002Zero-subject relative constructions in American and British English. In New Frontiers in Corpus Research, Pam Peters, Peter Collins & Adam Smith (eds), 163–177. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Lewis, David
1979Scorekeeping in a language game. In Semantics from Different Points of View, Rainer Bauerle, Urs Egli & Arnim von Stechow (eds), 172–187. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Love, Robbie, Dembry, Claire, Hardie, Andrew & Brezina, Vaclav
2017The spoken BNC2014. Designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22: 319–344.Google Scholar
Nagucka, Ruta
1980Grammatical peculiarities of the contact-clause in EModE. Folia Linguistica Historica 1: 171–184.Google Scholar
Orton, Harold, Sanderson, Stewart & Widdowson, John
1978The Linguistic Atlas of England. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Patten, Amanda
2012The English It-Cleft: A Constructional Account and Diachronic Investigation. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perlman, Alan
1969 “This” as a third article in American English. American Speech 44(1): 76–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F.
1978A comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54: 88–907. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992The ZPG letter. Subject, definiteness, and information-status. In Discourse Description. Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 16], William C. Mann & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 295–326. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney & Leech, Geoffrey
1972A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rühlemann, Chris
2007Conversation in Context. A Corpus-Driven Approach. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1987The thetic/categorical distinction revisited. Linguistics 25: 511–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006Theticity. In Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Languages of Europe, Giuliano Bernini & Marcia L. Schwartz (eds), 255–308. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2000English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells. From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tottie, Gunnel & Johansson, Christine
2015 Here is an Old Mastiffe Bitch ø Stands Barking at Mee. Zero subject relativizers in Early Modern English (t)here-constructions. In From Clerks to Corpora. Essays on the English Language Yesterday and Today, Philip Shaw, Britt Erman, Gunnel Melchers & Peter Sundkvist (eds), 135–153. Stockholm: Stockholm University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Eynden, Nadine
1993Syntactic Variation and Unconscious Linguistic Change. A Study of Adjectival Relative Clauses in the Dialects of Dorset. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Wald, Benji
1983Referents and topic within and across discourse units. Observations from current vernacular English. In Discourse Perspectives on Syntax, Flora Klein-Andreu (ed.), 91–116. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yaguchi, Michiko
2010The historical development of the phrase there’s. An analysis of the Oxford English Dictionary Data. English Studies 91(2): 203–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar