Connectives and frame theory: The case of hypotextual antinomial ‘and’

Pragmatics and Cognition

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 357-409

  Kitis, Eliza ^a  

^a ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84989398164     PISSN: 09290907     EISSN: 15699943     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/pc.8.2.04kit     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Abelson, R. P. 1979. “Differences between belief and knowledge systems”. Cognitive Science 3: 355-366.
2. Allen, J. 1995. Natural Language Understanding. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.
3. Althusser, L. 1971. Lenin and Philosophy and other Essays. New York: Monthy Review Press.
4. Anderson, J. R. 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Anscombre, J. C. and Ducrot, O. 1977. “Deux mais en Français?”. Lingua 43: 23-40.
6. Atlas, J. D. and Levinson, S.C. 1981. “It-clefts, informativeness, and logical form: Radical pragmatics (Revised standard version)”. In P. Cole (ed), Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, 1-61.
7. Attardo, S. 1997. “The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 10(4): 395-420.
8. Austin, J. 1962. How to Do Things With Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
9. Bach, K. 1999. “The myth of conventional implicature”. Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 327-366.
10. Bakhtin, M. 1981. The Dialogical Imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.
11. Blakemore, D. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
12. Blakemore, D. and Carston, R. 1999. “The pragmatics of and-conjunctions: the nonnarrative cases”. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 1-20.
13. Bobrow, D. (ed) 1980. Special Issue on Non-Monotonic Logic. Artificial Intelligence 13(1,2).
14. Caffi, C. and Janney, R. W. 1994. “Towards a pragmatics of emotive communication”. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 325-373.
15. Dascal, M. 1983. Pragmatics and the Philosophy of Mind. Thought in Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
16. Dascal, M. 1987. “Defending literal meaning”. Cognitive Science 11: 259-281.
17. Dascal, M. 1997. “Critique without critics?”. Science in Context 10(1): 39-62.
18. Dascal, M. and Katriel, T. 1977. “Between semantics and pragmatics: The two types of but — Hebrew aval and ela”. Theoretical Linguistics 4: 143-172.
19. Davis, W. A. 1998. Implicature: Intention, Convention, and Principle in the Failure of Gricean Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Dijk, T. A. van 1977. “Connectives in text grammar and text logic”. In T. A. van Dijk and J. S. Petofi (eds) Grammars and Descriptions. Berlin: de Gruyter, 10-63.
21. Dijk, T. A. van 1979. “Pragmatic connectives”. Journal of Pragmatics 3(5): 447-456.
22. Dijk, T. A. van 1997. “Discourse as interaction in society”. In T. A. van Dijk (ed), Discourse as Social Interaction, Vol. 2. London: Sage, 1-37.
23. Dinsmore, J. 1987. “Mental spaces from a functional perspective”. Cognitive Science 11: 1-21.
24. Elio, R. and Pelletier, F. J. 1997. “Belief change as propositional update”. Cognitive Science 21(4): 419-460.
25. Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman.
26. Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
27. Fauconnier, G. 1985. Mental Spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mapping In Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. 1998. “Conceptual integration networks”. Cognitive Science 22(2): 133-187.
30. Fraser, B. 1990. “An approach to discourse markers”. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 383-395.
31. Fraser, B. 1996. “Pragmatic markers”. Pragmatics 6(2): 167-190.
32. Fraser, B. 1998. “Contrastive discourse markers in English”. In A. H. Jucker and Y. Ziv (eds) Discourse Markers. Description and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 301-326.
33. Fraser, B. 1999. “What are discourse markers?” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931-952.
34. Goodwin, C. and Duranti, A. 1992. “Rethinking context: an introduction”. In A. Duranti and C. Goodwin (eds), Rethinking Context. Language As an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-42.
35. Grice, P. H. 1967. “The causal theory of perception”. In G. J. Warnock (ed), The Philosophy of Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 85-112 [reprinted in Grice 1989].
36. Grice, P. H. 1975. “Logic and conversation”. In P. Cole and J.L Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41-58. [reprinted in Grice 1989].
37. Grice, P. H. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Haack, S. 1978. Philosophy of Logics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
40. Harris, J. 1771. Hermes Or A Philosophical Enquiry Concerning Language and Universal Grammar. London.
41. Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1983. Mental Models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Johnson-Laird, PN. 1989. “Analogy and the exercise of creativity”. In S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (eds), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 313-331.
43. Kalokerinos, A. and Karantzola, E. 1992. “Ma, omos, ala. Aspects of antithesis in discourse” (in Greek). Studies in Greek Linguistics. Proceedings of 13th Meeting for Greek Linguistics, 7-9 May 1992. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 391-408.
44. Kitis, E. 1983. (ms.) “Between semantics and pragmatics? Or just pragmatics?” Paper read at the 1st International Pragmatics Conference. Viareggio, September 1985.
45. Kitis, E. 1987a. “Discourse connectors and language learning materials”. Journal of Applied Linguistics 3: 30-50.
46. Kitis, E. 1987b. “A comment on the article”. Proceedings of the first International Symposium on English and Greek: Description and/or Comparison of the Two Language. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 42-54.
47. Kitis, E. 1987c. “A comment on John Hawkins, ‘A note on referent identifiability and co-presence’ ”. Journal of Pragmatics 11: 93-97.
48. Kitis, E. 1989. “Conventional implicature revisited”. Working Papers in Linguistics and Literature. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 109-125.
49. Kitis, E. 1994. “Some preliminary remarks on the Greek causal conjunctions ‘yiaTÎ’, ‘eneiSr] ’ and ‘Sum’”. In A. Kakouriotis (ed), Proceedings of the eighth International Symposium on English and Greek: Description and/or Comparison of the two languages. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 305-318.
50. Kitis, E. 1995. “Connectives and ideology”, paper presented at the 4th International Symposium on Critical Discourse Analysis, Language, Social Life and Critical Thought, 15-16 December 1995, Athens.
51. Kitis, E. 1996. [Further remarks on causal connectives of Modern Greek]. Studies in Greek Linguistics. Proceedings of 17th Meeting for Greek Linguistics. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 424-436.
52. Kitis, E. 1997. “Ads — part of our lives: linguistic awareness of powerful advertising”. WordandImage 13(1): 304-313.
53. Kitis, E. 1998. “When relevance saves”. In S. Lambropoulou (ed), Proceedings of the twelfth International Symposium of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 225-235.
54. Kitis, E. 1999. “On relevance again: From philosophy of language across ‘pragmatics and power’ to global relevance”. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 643-667.
55. Kitis, E. 2000. “Temporality and causality: The case of Greek subordinating connectives”. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique 8.
56. Kitis, E. Forthcoming [a]. “Causal connectives: the evidence from Greek”.
57. Kitis, E. Forthcoming [b]. “The semiotization of frames in interpretation” (in Greek). Proceedings of Vth National Congress on Semiotics and Culture of Hellenic Semiotic Society. Thessaloniki: Paratiritis.
58. Kitis, E (in preparation) “Further remarks on conventional implicatures”.
59. Kitis, E. and Milapides, M. 1997. “Read it and believe it: how metaphor constructs ideology in news discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 28(5): 557-590.
60. Koktova, E. 1998. “Grice, H. Paul (1926-85)”. In J. Mey (ed.) Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Oxford: Elsevier, 1073-1074.
61. König, E. 1985. “Where do concessives come from? On the development of concessive connectives”. In J. Fisiak (ed) Historical Semantics: Historical WordForma-tion. Berlin: De Gruyter, 263-82.
62. Koutoupis-Kitis, E. 1982. Problems Connected With the Notion of Implicature. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Warwick.
63. Koutoupi-Kitis, E. 1999. “General and specific remarks on subordinate connectives of Modern Greek” (in Greek). Studies in Greek Linguistics. Proceedings of 20th Meeting for Greek Linguistics. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, 222-233.
64. Laclau, E. 1988. “Metaphor and social antagonism”. In C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 249-257.
65. Lakoff, G. 1971. “The role of deduction in grammar”. In D. Steinberg and L. Jakobovits (eds), Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 329-340.
66. Lakoff, G. 1986. “Frame-semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint”. Papers from the Parasession in Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory. Chicago Linguistic Society 22, 152-163.
67. Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
68. Lakoff, G. 1996. Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know That Liberals Don’t. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
69. Lakoff, R. 1971. “If’s, and ’s and but ’s about conjunction”. In C. Fillmore and T. Langendoen (eds), Studies in Linguistic Semantics. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 114-149.
70. Lehrer, A. and Lehrer, K. 1995. “Fields, networks and vectors”. In Palmer (ed), 26-47.
71. Lenk, U. 1998. “Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 245-257.
72. Levinson, S. C. 1979. “Activity types and language”. Linguistics 17: 365-399.
73. Levinson, S. C. 1987. “Minimization and conversational inference”. In J. Verschueren and M. Bertuccelli-Papi (eds), The Pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 61-129.
74. Levinson, S. C. 1995. “Three levels of meaning”. In Palmer (ed), 90-115.
75. Malrieu, J. P. 1999. Evaluative Semantics. London: Routledge.
76. Mandler, G. 1982. “The structure of value”. In M.S. Clark and S.T. Fiske (eds) Affects and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 3-38.
77. Matsumoto, K. 1999. “And-prefaced questions in institutional discourse”. Linguistics 37(2): 251-274.
78. Matthiessen, C. and Thompson, S. 1988. “The structure of discourse and ‘subordination’ In J. Haiman and S. Thompson (eds). 1988. Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 275-329.
79. McClelland, J. L. and Rumelhart, D.E. (eds). 1986. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
80. McTear, M. F. 1980. “The pragmatics of ‘because’”. Ulster Polytechnic Ms.
81. Minsky, M. 1975. “A framework for representing knowledge”. In P. H. Winston (ed), The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, 211-277.
82. Nelson, K. 1996. Language in Cognitive Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
83. Ortony, A. 1991. “Value and emotion”. In W. Kesen, A. Ortony, and F. Craik (eds). Memories, Thoughts and Emotions: Essays in Honor of George Mandler. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 337-353.
84. Palmer, F. R. (ed). 1995. Grammar and Meaning. Essays in Honour of Sir John Lyons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
85. Quirk, R. 1954. The Concessive Relation in OE Poetry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
86. Reiter, R. 1980. “A logic for default theory”. Artificial Intelligence 13: 81-132.
87. Rieber, S. 1997. “Conventional implicatures as higher performatives”. Linguistics and Philosophy 20: 51-72.
88. Robins, R. H. 1967. A Short History of Linguistics. Great Britain: Longmans.
89. Robinson, J. J. 1986. “DIAGRAM: A grammar for dialogues”. In J. Grosz, K. S. Jones, and B. L. Webber (eds), Readings in Natural Language Processing. Los Altos, CA: M. Kaufmann, 139-159.
90. Roulet, E. 1984. “Speech acts, discourse structure, and pragmatic connectives”. Journal of Pragmatics 8: 31-47.
91. Rudolph, E. 1996. Contrast: Adversative and Concessive Relations and Their Expressions in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese on .Sentence and Text Level. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
92. Rumelhart, D. E. 1975. “Notes on a schema for stories”. In D. G. Bobrow and A. M. Collins (eds), Representations and Understanding: .Studies in Cognitive Science. New York: Academic Press, 211-236.
93. Russell, B. (1973 [1940]) An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth. UK.: Penguin.
94. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A, and Jefferson, G. 1974. “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation”. Language 50(4): 696-735.
95. Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1986. Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
96. Schank, R. and Abelson, R. 1977. .Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structure. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
97. Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
98. Searle, J. 1976. “The classification of illocutionary acts”. Language in Society 5: 1-24.
99. Sköries, U. 1998. “Features of a blame type using and. An analysis of an example”. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 48-58.
100. Slings, S. R. 1997. “Adversative relators between PUSH and PROP”. In A. Rijksbaron (ed), New Approaches to Greek Particles. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben, 101-129.
101. Smolensky, P. 1986. “Information processing in dynamical systems: foundations of harmony theory”. In D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, and the PDP Research Group. Parallel Distributed Processing. Explorations in the Microstructures of Cognition. V1, Foundations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 194-263.
102. Strawson, P.F. 1952. Introduction to Logical Theory. London: Methuen.
103. Thompson, J. B. 1984. Studies in the Theory of Ideology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
104. Traugott, E. 1989. “On the rise of epistemic meaning in English: an example of subjectification in semantic change”. Language 65(1): 31-55.
105. Ullmann, S. 1957. Principles ofSemantics. 2nd ed. Glasgow: Jackson and Oxford: Blackwell.
106. Ullmann, S. 1977. Semantics. An Introduction to the Science of Meaning. Oxford: Blackwell.
107. Wilks, Y. 1980. “Frames, semantics and novelty”. In D. Metzing (ed), Frame Conceptions and Text Understanding. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 134-163.
108. Žagar, I. (ed) 1996. OswaldDucrot. Slovenian Lectures. Ljubljana: ISH.