Peircean semiotics and text linguistic models

Chinese Semiotic Studies

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 201-226

  Van Den Hoven, Paul ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874069192     PISSN: 21989605     EISSN: 21989613     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/css-2010-0115     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Kortmann, B. (eds.) (2000). Cause-Condition-Concession-Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse perspectives. Berlin; Mouton de Gruyter.
2. Dijk, T. van & W. Kintsch. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York; Academic press.
3. Elman, J. L et al. (1996). Rethinking innateness·. a connectionist perspective on development, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
4. Endicott, T. A. O. (2000). Vagueness in law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Fauconnier, G.& M.Turner. (2003). The way we think. Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. New York; Basic books.
6. Fletcher, C. R. (1994). Levels in representation in memory for discourse'. In: M. A. Gernsbacher (ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistic. New York: Academic press. 589-606.
7. Glastra van Loon, J. F. (1991). 'Het pragmatisme van Charles Peirce'. In H. van Driel, (red.), Het semiotisch pragmatisme van Charles S. Peirce. Amsterdam; Benjamins.
8. Haley, C. H. (1988). The semeiosis of poetic metaphor. Peirce Studies 4. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
9. Hart, H. L. A. (1958). ' Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals'. Harvard Law Review 71 (4):593 - 629
10. Hoven, P. van den. (2008). '[Review of] Judith Kamalski. Coherence marking, comprehension and persuasion. On the processing and representation of discourse'. In: Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing 30 (1), 97-102. [in Dutch]
11. Hoven, P. van den. (2010). ' The intriguing iconic sign'. In: Cultural Spaces and Identities in (Inter) Action. Interstudia 6. ISSN 2065-3204
12. Kattenbelt, Ch. (1994). 'The Triad of Emotion, Action and Reflection; A sign pragmatic approach to aesthetic communication' in: Ars Semeiotica 17. 123-139.
13. Kamalski. J. (2007). Coherence marking, comprehension and persuasion. On the processing and representation of discourse. Lot dissertation. Utrecht, 2007.
14. Marty, R. (sa). '76 Definitions of The Sign by C. S. Peirce'. http://www. cspeirce. com/menu/library/resources/76defs/76defs. htm. Checked January 27 2010.
15. Pander Maat, Η., Sanders, Τ. (2001). Subjectivity in causal connectives: an empirical study of language in use. In: CognitiveLinguistics 12, 247-273.
16. Parreren, C. F. van & J. A. M. Carpay (1980), Sovjetpsychologen over onderwijs en cognitieve ontwikkeling. Groningen.
17. Pihlström, S. (2004). ' Peirce's place in the pragmatic tradition'. In: C. Misak (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Peirce. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge etc. 27-57.
18. Pit, M. (2006). ' Determining subjectivity in text: the case of backward causal connectives in Dutch'. In: Discourse Processes41, 151-174.
19. Propp, V., Scott, L. (e d.), Wagner, L. (transl.) (1958). Morphology of the folktale. Austin; Texas University Press.
20. Pustejovski, J. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, etc.: MIT press.
21. Rosenthal, S. (2004). 'Peirce's pragmatic account of perception; issues and implications'. In: C. Misak (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Peirce. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press. 193-213.
22. Short, T.L. (2004). 'The development of Peirce's theory of signs'. In: C. Misak (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Peirce. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press. 214-240.
23. Stukker, Ν., Sanders T. & Verhagen, A. (2008). 'Causality in verbs and in discourse connectives: Converging evidence of cross-level parallels in Dutch linguistic categorization'. Journal of pragmatics 4 0, 1296-1322.
24. Sweetser, Ε. E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics. Metaphorical and CulturalAspects of Semantics Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Tomasello, M. (ed.) (1998). The new psychology of language. New Jersey: Lawrence Eribaum Ass.