The discourse functions of sane: Latin marker of agreement in description, interaction and concession

Journal of Pragmatics

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 225-244

  Risselada, Rodie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032133542     PISSN: 03782166     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-2166(98)00026-5     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Abraham, Werner, 1991. The grammaticization of the German modal particles. In: E.C. Traugott and B. Heine, eds., Approaches to grammaticalization, Vol. 2, 331-380. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
2. Bolkestein, A. Machtelt, 1995. Functions of verb-subject order in Latin. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 48: 32-43.
3. Foolen, Ad P.F., 1989. Beschreibungsebenen für Partikelbedeutungen. In: H. Weydt, ed., Sprechen mit Partikeln, 305-317. Berlin: De Gruyter.
4. Foolen, Ad P.F., 1993. De betekenis van partikels. Een dokumentatie van de stand van het onderzoek met bijzondere aandacht voor maar. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nijmegen.
5. Foolen, Ad P.F., 1996. Pragmatic particles. In: J. Verschueren, J.-O. Østman, J. Blommaert and C. Bulcaen, eds., Handbook of pragmatics, 1-24. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
6. Grice, H. Paul, 1975. Logic and conversation. In: P. Cole and J. Morgan, eds., Speech acts (Syntax and Semantics 3), 41-58. New York: Academic Press.
7. Knott, Alistair and Ted J.M. Sanders, 1998. The classification of coherence relations and their linguistic markers: An exploration of two languages. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 135-175 (this issue).
8. Kroon, Caroline H.M., 1989. Causal connectors in Latin: The discourse function of nam, enim, igitur and ergo. In: M. Lavency and D. Longrée, eds., Actes du cinquième colloque de linguistique latine. Cahiers de l'Institut de Linguistique de Louvain, 15: 231-243. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.
9. Kroon, Caroline H.M., 1995. Discourse particles in Latin. A study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben.
10. Kroon, Caroline H.M., 1998. A framework for the description of Latin discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 205-223 (this issue).
11. Kroon, Caroline H.M. and Rodie Risselada, in preparation. The discourse functions of iam.
12. Kühner, Raphael and Carl Stegmann, 1912-1914. Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. II: Satzlehre (2 vols.). Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.
13. Lakoff, George, 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14. Longacre, Robert E., 1983. The grammar of discourse. New York: Plenum.
15. Pander Maat, Henk, 1998. Classifying negative coherence relations on the basis of linguistic evidence. Journal of Pragmatics 30, 177-204 (this issue).
16. Pinkster, Harm, 1972. On Latin adverbs. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
17. Risselada, Rodie, 1994. Modo and sane, or what to do with particles in Latin directives. In: J. Herman, ed., Linguistic studies on Latin, 319-343. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
18. Risselada, Rodie, 1996. And now for something completely different? Temporal discourse markers: Latin nunc and English now. In: R. Risselada, J.R. de Jong and A.M. Bolkestein, eds., On Latin. Linguistic and literary studies in honour of Harm Pinkster, 105-125. Amsterdam: Gieben.
19. Redeker, Gisela, 1991. Linguistic markers of discourse structure: Review of Discourse markers, by D. Schiffrin. Linguistics 29: 1139-1172.
20. Roulet, Eddy, A. Auchlin, J. Moeschler, C. Rubattel and M. Schelling, 1985. L'articulation du discours en Français contemporain. Bern: Lang.
21. Sanders, Ted J.M., Wilbert P.M. Spooren and Leo G.M. Noordman, 1992. Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 15: 1-35.
22. Sanders, Ted J.M., Wilbert P.M. Spooren and Leo G.M. Noordman, 1993. Coherence relations in a cognitive theory of discourse representation. Cognitive Linguistics 4: 93-133.
23. Schiffrin, Deborah, 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Sedgwick, W.B., 1960. Plautus Amphitruo. Manchester: University Press.
25. Spooren, Wilbert P.M.S., 1989. Some aspects of the form and interpretation of global contrastive coherence relations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tilburg.
26. Stockert, W., 1983. Plautus Aulularia. Stuttgart: Teubner.
27. Sweetser, Eve E., 1990. From etymology to pragmatics. Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Thesleff, Holger, 1960. Yes and no in Plautus and Terence. Helsingfors: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
29. Traugott, Elisabeth C., 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In: W.P. Lehmann and Y. Malkiel, eds., Perspectives on historical linguistics, 245-271. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
30. Traugott, Elisabeth C., 1989. On the rise of epistemic meaning in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65: 31-55.
31. Traugott, Elisabeth C. and Ekkehard König, 1991. The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In: B.C. Traugott and B. Heine, eds., Approaches to grammaticalization, Vol. 1, 189-218. Amsterdam: Benjamins.