Cover not available

In:Usage-based and Typological Approaches to Linguistic Units
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono, Ritva Laury and Ryoko Suzuki
[Benjamins Current Topics 114] 2021
► pp. 1–9

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

On the notion of unit in the study of human languages

 | University of Alberta
ORCiD logo with link | University of Helsinki
 | Keio University
Published online: 21 April 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.114.01ono
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The notion of unit in linguistics
    • 1.2Unit in individual languages
    • 1.3Cross-linguistic perspective and functional motivation
    • 1.4Units and criteria to identify them in interactional linguistics
  • 2.Short summary of papers
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (26)
References
Abraham, Werner & Leonid Kulikov (eds.). 1999. Tense-aspect, transitivity and causativity. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Margret Selting. 2018. Interactional linguistics: Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 2008. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. London: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1997. Are grammatical relations universal? In Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type, 115–143. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. From subordinate clause to noun-phrase: yang constructions in colloquial Indonesian. In Ritva Laury (ed.), Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining: The multifunctionality of conjunctions, 1–33. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1974. Pragmatics and the description of discourse. In Siegfried J. Schmidt (ed.), Pragmatics II, 83–104. Munich: Fink.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson. 2013. Units and/or action trajectories: The language of grammatical categories and the language or social action. In Beatrice Szczepek Reed & Geoffrey Raymond (eds.), Units of talk – Units of action, 13–56. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, B., Thompson, S., C. Ford & E. Couper-Kuhlen. 2013. Conversation analysis in linguistics. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis, 726–740. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–687. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. How comparative concepts and descriptive linguistic categories are different. In Daniel van Olmen, Tanja Mortelmans & Frank Brisard (eds.), Aspects of Linguistic Variation., 83–114. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian & Robing Wooffitt. 2008. Conversation analysis. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linell, Per. 2005. The written language bias in linguistics: Its nature, origins and transformations. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Jim. 1995. Does spoken language have sentences. In F. R. Palmer (ed.), Grammar and meaning: Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons, 116–135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Jim & Regina Weinert. 1998. Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi & Kimberly Jones. 2008. Conversation and Grammar: Approaching So-called Conditionals in Japanese. In Junko Mori & Amy Ohta, eds., Japanese Applied Linguistics: Discourse and Social Perspectives. London: Continuum International. 21–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi & Sandra A. Thompson. 1995. What can conversation tell us about syntax? In P. W. Davis (ed.), Alternative linguistics: Descriptive and theoretical modes, 405–434. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Fixedness in Japanese adjectives in conversation: Toward a new understanding of a lexical (‘part-of-speech’) category. In Roberta Corrigan, Edith Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen Wheatley (eds.), Formulaic language, 117–145. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language 50 (4). 696–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. 1996. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, S. Thompson & E. Schegloff (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szczepek-Reed, Beatrice & Geoff Raymond. 2013. Units of talk – Units of action. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tao, Hongyin. 2003. Units in Mandarin conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2005. The clause as a locus of grammar and interaction. Discourse Studies 7 (4/5). 481–505. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue