Data is data and model is model: You don't discard the data that doesn't fit your model!

Language

Volumn 81, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 218-225

  Laury, Ritva ^a,b   Ono, Tsuyoshi ^c  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 30344448256     PISSN: 00978507     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/lan.2005.0026     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. ASHBY, WILLIAM, and PAOLA BENTIVOGLIO. 1993. Preferred argument structure in spoken French and Spanish. Language Variation and Change 5.61-76.
2. BIBER, DOUGLAS. 1995. Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. BIBER, DOUGLAS; STIG JOHANSSON; GEOFFREY LEECH; SUSAN CONRAD; and EDWARD FINEGAN. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
4. BYBEE, JOAN. 2002. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of repetition. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. by Brian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda, 602-23. Oxford: Blackwell.
5. BYBEE, JOAN, and PAUL HOPPER (eds.) 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
6. BYBEE, JOAN; REVERE PERKINS; and WILLIAM PAGLIUCA. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. CHAFE, WALLACE. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8. DU BOIS, JOHN. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63.805-55.
9. DU BOIS, JOHN; LORRAINE KUMPF; and WILLIAM ASHBY (eds.) 2003. Preferred argument structure: Grammar as architecture for function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
10. FONSECA-GREBER, BONNIE, and LINDA R. WAUGH. 2003. On the radical difference between the subject personal pronouns in written and spoken European French. Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, ed. by Pepi Leistyna and Charles F. Meyer, 225-40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11. FOX, BARBARA A. 1994. Contextualization, indexicality, and the distributed nature of grammar. Language Sciences 16.1-38.
12. HARRIS, MARTIN. 1978. The evolution of French syntax: A comparative approach. London: Longmans.
13. HELASVUO, MARJA-LIISA. 2001. Syntax in the making: The emergence of syntactic units in Finnish conversation. (Studies in discourse and grammar 9.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
14. HELASVUO, MARJA-LIISA. 2004. Shared syntax: The grammar of co-constructions. Journal of Pragmatics 36.1315-36.
15. HOPPER, PAUL. 1987. Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 13.139-57.
16. JOHANSSON, STIG, and KNUT HOFLAND. 1989. Frequency analysis of English vocabulary and grammar based on the LOB corpus, vol. 1: Tag frequencies and word frequencies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
17. LABOV, WILLIAM. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 1: Internal factors. (Language in society 20.) Oxford: Blackwell.
18. LAMBRECHT, KNUD. 1987. On the status of SVO sentences in French discourse. Coherence and grounding in discourse, ed. by Russell Tomlin, 217-62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
19. LASS, ROGER. 2001. Shakespeare's sounds. Reading Shakespeare's language: A guide (The Arden Shakespeare), ed. by Sylvia Adamson, Lynette Hunter, Lynne Magnusson, Ann Thompson, and Katie Wales, 257-69. London: Thomson Learning.
20. LAURY, RITVA. 2002. Interaction, grounding and third-person referential forms. Grounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference (Cognitive linguistics research 21), ed. by Frank Brisard, 83-115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
21. LERNER, GENE H. 1996. On the place of linguistic resources in the organization of talk-in-interaction: 'Second person' reference in multi-party conversation. Pragmatics 6.281-94.
22. LEVELT, WILLEM J. M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. NEWMEYER, FREDERICK. 1998. Language form and language function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. NEWMEYER, FREDERICK. 2003. Grammar is grammar and usage is usage. Language 79.682-707.
25. OCHS, ELINOR; EMANUEL SCHEGLOFF; and SANDRA THOMPSON (eds.) 1996. Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. ONO, TSUYOSHI, and SANDRA A. THOMPSON. 1995. What can conversation tell us about syntax? Alternative linguistics: Descriptive and theoretical modes, ed. by Philip W. Davis, 213-71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27. ONO, TSUYOSHI, and SANDRA A. THOMPSON. 2003. Japanese (w)atashilorelboku 'I': They're not just pronouns. Cognitive Linguistics 14.321-47.
28. SCHEGLOFF, EMANUEL A. 1991. Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. Perspectives on socially shared cognition, ed. by Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine, and Stephanie D. Teasley, 150-71. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
29. SEPPÄNEN, EEVA-LEENA. 1998. Läsnäolon pronominit: Tämä, tuo, se ja hän viittaamassa keskustelun osallistujaan. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
30. TAO, HONGYIN. 1996. Units in Mandarin conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
31. THOMPSON, SANDRA A., and PAUL J. HOPPER. 2001. Transitivity, clause structure, and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. In Bybee & Hopper, 27-60.
32. TOMLIN, RUSSELL (ed.) 1987. Coherence and grounding in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.