Cover not available

In:Conjunctive Markers of Contrast in English and French: From syntax to lexis and discourse
Maïté Dupont
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 99] 2021
► pp. 397–424

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

References

Published online: 9 June 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.99.ref
Aarts, Bas. 2000. Corpus linguistics, Chomsky and fuzzy tree fragments. In Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Papers from the Twentieth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 20), Christian Mair & Marianne Hundt (eds), 5–14. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Adam, Jean-Michel. 2008. La linguistique textuelle: Introduction à l’analyse textuelle des discours. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin. 2008. Comparable and parallel corpora. In Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 1, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds), 275–292. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin & Altenberg, Bengt. 1996. Introduction. In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 11–16. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. The English-Swedish Parallel Corpus: A resource for contrastive research and translation studies. In Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Papers from the Twentieth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 20), Christian Mair & Marianne Hundt (eds), 15–33. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin, Altenberg, Bengt & Johansson, Mats. 1996. Text-based contrastive studies in English. Presentation of a project. In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 73–85. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin & Lewis, Diana. 2017. Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin & Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 2011. Pragmatic markers. In Discursive Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights 8], Jan Zienkowski, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds), 223–247. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alonso Belmonte, Isabel. 2007. Newspaper editorials and comment articles: a “Cinderella” genre? RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 1: 1–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt. 1984. Causal linking in spoken and written English. Studia Linguistica 38(1): 20–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. Contrastive linking in spoken and written English. In English in Speech and Writing. A Symposium, Gunnel Tottie & Ingegerd Bäckland (eds), 13–40. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Connectors and sentence openings in English and Swedish. In Corpora and Cross-linguistic Research: Theory, Method and Case Studies, Stig Johansson & Signe Oksefjell (eds), 115–143. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Adverbial connectors in English and Swedish: Semantic and lexical correspondences. In Out of Corpora. Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, Hilde Hasselgård & Signe Oksefjell (eds), 249–268. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Concessive connectors in English and Swedish. In Information Structure in a Cross-linguistic Perspective, Hilde Hasselgård, Stig Johansson, Bergljot Behrens & Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen (eds), 21–43. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. The function of adverbial connectors in second initial position in English and Swedish. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, Karin Aijmer & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 11–37. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. The correspondence of resultive connectors in English and Swedish. NJES: Nordic Journal of English Studies 6(1). <[URL]> (4 September 2020). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt & Aijmer, Karin. 2002. Zero translations and cross-linguistic equivalence: Evidence from the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus. In From the COLT’s Mouth … and Others’. Language Corpora Studies in Honour of Anna-Brita Stenström, Leiv Egil Breivik & Angela Hasselgren (eds), 19–41. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt & Granger, Sylviane. 2002. Recent trends in cross-linguistic lexical studies. In Lexis in Contrast: Corpus-based Approaches [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 7], Bengt Altenberg & Sylviane Granger (eds), 3–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt & Tapper, Marie. 1998. The use of adverbial connectors in advanced Swedish learner’s written English. In Learner English on Computer, Sylviane Granger (ed.), 80–93. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ansary, Hasan & Babaii, Esmat. 2005. The generic integrity of newspaper editorials: A systemic functional perspective. RELC Journal 36(3): 271–295. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Ducrot, Oswald. 1977. Deux “mais” en français? Lingua 43: 23–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Armstrong, Nigel. 2005. Translation, Linguistics, Culture: A French-English Handbook. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas & Lascarides, Alex. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asr, Fatemeh & Demberg, Vera. 2012. Implicitness of discourse relations. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), 2669–2684.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Astington, Eric. 1983. Equivalences. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Mona. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Text and Technology, Mona Baker, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds), 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Corpus-based translation studies. The challenges that lie ahead. In Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager [Benjamins Translation Library, 18] Harold Somers (ed.), 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Balažic Bulc, Tatjana & Gorjanc, Vojko. 2015. The position of connectors in Slovene and Croatian student academic writing: A corpus-based approach. In Meaning Making in Text, Sonja Starc, Carys Jones & Arianna Maiorani (eds), 51–71. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ballard, Michel. 1995. La traduction de la conjonction “and” en français. In Relations discursives et traduction, Michel Ballard (ed.), 221–293. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banks, David. 2002. Systemic functional linguistics as a model for text analysis. ASp. La revue du GERAS 35–36: 23–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. A Systemic Functional Grammar of French. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banks, David, Eason, Simon & Ormrod, Janet. 2009. La linguistique systémique fonctionnelle et la langue française. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2010. Corpus linguistics and systemic functional linguistics: Interpersonal meaning, identity and bonding in popular culture. In New Discourse on Language: Functional Perspectives on Multimodality, Identity, and Affiliation, Monika Bednarek & James R. Martin (eds), 237–266. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2013. A parallel corpus approach to investigating semantic change. In Advances in Corpus-based Contrastive Linguistics: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 54], Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds), 103–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benamara, Farah & Taboada, Maite. 2015. Mapping different rhetorical relation annotations: A proposal. In Proceedings of the Fourth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, 147–152. Denver CO: Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berk, Richard A. 2016. Statistical Learning from a Regression Perspective. New York NY: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berry, Margaret. 1996. What is theme? A(nother) personal view. In Meaning and Form: Systemic Functional Interpretations, Margaret Berry, Christopher Butler, Robin Fawcett & Guowen Huang (eds), 1–64. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berry, Margaret, Thompson, Geoff & Hillier, Hilary. 2014. Theme and variations. In Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 68], María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & Francisco Gonzálvez García (eds), 107–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bestgen, Yves. 2017. Getting rid of the Chi-square and Log-likelihood tests for analysing vocabulary differences between corpora. Quaderns de Filologia: Estudis Lingüístics 22: 33–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: The competing demands of popularization vs. economy. In New Media Language, Jean Aitchison & Diana Lewis (eds), 169–181. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan. 2001. Register variation: A corpus approach. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (eds), 175–196. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany. 2010. Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9(1): 2–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilger, Mireille & Cappeau, Paul. 2013. Une conjonction qui subordonne rarement: Le cas de “alors que.” In Morphologie, syntaxe et sémantique des subordonnants, Colette Bodelot (ed.), 259–273. Clermont-Ferrand: Presses universitaires Blaise Pascal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1989. Denial and contrast: A relevance theoretic analysis of “but.” Linguistics and Philosophy 12(1): 15–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Understanding Utterances: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloor, Thomas & Bloor, Meriel. 2004. The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach. London: Arnold. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1986. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies. In Interlingual and Intercultural Communication, Juliane House & Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds), 17–35. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolívar, Adriana. 2002. The structure of newspaper editorials. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), 276–294. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolton, Kingsley, Nelson, Gerald & Hung, Joseph. 2002. A corpus-based study of connectors in student writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7(2): 165–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boularès, Michèle & Frérot, Jean-Louis. 2017. Grammaire progressive du français. Niveau avancé. Paris: Clé International.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bourgoin, Charlotte. 2017. The role of the English it-cleft and the French c’est-cleft in research discourse. Discours (21): 3–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bourmayan, Anouch, Loiseau, Yves, Rimbert, Odile & Taillandier, Isabelle. 2017. Grammaire essentielle du français. Niveau B2. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowker, Lynne. 1999. Exploring the potential of corpora for raising language awareness in student translators. Language Awareness 8(3-4): 160–173. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Corpus-based applications for translator training: Exploring the possibilities. In Corpus-based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, Sylviane Granger, Jacques Lerot & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds), 169–183. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breiman, Leo, Friedman, Jerome, Olshen, Richard & Stone, Charles. 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Belmont CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert W. 2004. Fowler’s Modern English Usage. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher. 2003. Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories: Part 2: From Clause to Discourse and Beyond [Studies in Language Companion Series 64]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2004. Corpus studies and functional linguistic theories. Functions of Language 11(2): 147–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butt, David, Fahey, Rhondda & Feez, Susan. 2000. Using Functional Grammar. An Explorer’s Guide. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buysse, Lieven. 2017. English “so” and Dutch “dus” in a parallel corpus: An investigation into their mutual translatability. In Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres, Karin Aijmer & Diana Lewis (eds), 33–61. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffarel, Alice. 2006. A Systemic Functional Grammar of French: From Grammar to Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffarel, Alice, Martin, James R. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2004. Language Typology: A Functional Perspective [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 253]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffarel-Cayron, Alice & Rechniewski, Elizabeth. 2014. Exploring the generic structure of French editorials from the perspective of systemic functional linguistics. Journal of World Languages 1(1): 18–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, Lynn & Marcu, Daniel. 2001. Discourse tagging reference manual. ISI technical report ISI-TR-545.
Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael. 2006. Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter-Thomas, Shirley. 2002. Theme and information structure in French and English: A contrastive study of journalistic clefts. In 14th Euro-International Systemic Functional Workshop - EISFW 2002, C. A. M. Gouveia, C. Lopes da Costa, E. Ribeiro Pedro, L. Azuaga & S. Barcelos (eds). Lisbon: University of Lisbon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cartoni, Bruno, Zufferey, Sandrine & Meyer, Thomas. 2013. Annotating the meaning of discourse connectives by looking at their translation: The translation-spotting technique. Dialogue & Discourse 4(2): 65–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cartoni, Bruno, Zufferey, Sandrine, Meyer, Thomas & Popescu-Belis, Andrei. 2011. How comparable are parallel corpora? Measuring the distribution of general vocabulary and connectives. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Building and Using Comparable Corpora: Comparable Corpora and the Web (BUCC ‘11), 78–86. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Castagnoli, Sara. 2009. Regularities and Variations in Learner Translations: A Corpus-based Study of Conjunctive Explicitation. PhD dissertation, Università di Pisa.
Celce-Murcia, Marianne & Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1999. The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher’s Course. Boston MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Subject and Topic, Charles Li (ed.), 25–55. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1982. Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. In Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, Deborah Tannen (ed.), 35–53. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chalker, Sylvia. 1996. Linking Words. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Yu-Ying & Swales, John. 1999. Informal elements in English academic writing: Threats or opportunities for advanced non-native speakers? In Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices, Christopher N. Candlin & Ken Hyland (eds), 145–167. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charaudeau, Patrick. 1992. Grammaire du sens et de l’expression. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charolles, Michel & Vigier, Daniel. 2005. Les adverbiaux en position préverbale: Portée cadrative et organisation des discours. Langue française 148(4): 9–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew. 1998. Contrastive Functional Analysis [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 47]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christiansen, Thomas. 2011. Cohesion: A Discourse Perspective. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chuquet, Hélène & Paillard, Michel. 1987. Approche linguistique des problèmes de traduction anglais-français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Glossaire de linguistique contrastive. Anglais-français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. A power primer. Psychological Bulletin 112(1): 155–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Connor, Ulla & Moreno, Ana. 2005. Tertium comparationis: A vital component in contrastive research methodology. In Directions in Applied Linguistics. Essays in Honour of Robert B. Kaplan, Paul Bruthiaux, Dwight Atkinson, William Eggington, William Grabe & Vaidehi Ramanathan (eds), 153–164. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conrad, Susan. 1999. The importance of corpus-based research for language teachers. System 27(1): 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Corpus linguistics, language variation, and language teaching. In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching [Studies Corpus Linguistics 12], John Sinclair (ed.), 67–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conrad, Susan & Biber, Douglas. 2000. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds), 56–73. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cosme, Christelle. 2004. Towards a corpus-based cross-linguistic study of clause combining. Methodological framework and preliminary results. BELL: Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures 2: 199–224.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008a. A corpus-based perspective on clause linking patterns in English, French and Dutch. In “Subordination” versus “Coordination” in Sentence and Text [Studies in Language Companion Series, 98], Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen & Wiebke Ramm (eds), 89–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008b. Clause Linking across Languages. A Corpus-based Study of Coordination and Subordination in English, French and Dutch. PhD dissertation, Université catholique de Louvain.
Cotter, Colleen. 2003. Prescription and practice. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 4(1): 45–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Craggs, Richard & McGee Wood, Mary. 2005. Evaluating discourse and dialogue coding schemes. Computational Linguistics 31(3): 289–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crewe, W. J. 1990. The illogic of logical connectives. ELT Journal 44(4): 316–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Discourse Markers and (Dis)fluency: Forms and Functions across Languages and Registers [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 286]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crible, Ludivine & Zufferey, Sandrine. 2015. Using a unified taxonomy to annotate discourse markers in speech and writing. In Proceedings of the 11th Joint ACL - ISO Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation (isa-11), Harry Bunt (ed.), 14–22. London: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crismore, Avon, Markkanen, Raija & Steffensen, Margaret. 1993. Metadiscourse in persuasive writing. A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication 10(1): 39–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cross, Cate & Oppenheim, Charles. 2006. A genre analysis of scientific abstracts. Journal of Documentation 62(4): 428–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csüry, István. 2001. Le champ lexical de “mais”: Étude lexico-grammaticale des termes d’opposition du français contemporain dans un cadre textologique. Debrecen: Kossuth Egyetemi Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. L’identification d’une discipline: Difficultés et perspectives. Commentaires sur les différentes approches d’un objet pluridisciplinaire. In Des discours aux textes: Modèles et analyses, Philippe Lane (ed.), 103–124. Mont-Saint-Aignan: Publications des Universités de Rouen et du Havre.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2003. Two ways to reformulate: A contrastive analysis of reformulation markers. Journal of Pragmatics 35(7): 1069–1093. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep & Bach, Carme. 2007. Contrasting the form and use of reformulation markers. Discourse Studies 9(2): 149–175. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cummings, Michael. 2009. The theme/rheme distinction and the method of development of written French text. In La linguistique systémique fonctionnelle et la langue française, David Banks, Simon Eason & Janet Ormrod (eds), 43–66. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dafouz-Milne, Emma. 2008. The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 40(1): 95–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Danlos, Laurence, Colinet, Margot & Steinlin, Jacques. 2015a. FDTB1, première étape du projet French Discourse Treebank: Repérage des connecteurs de discours en corpus. Discours 17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015b. FDTB: Annotation des connecteurs de discours dans un corpus français. Rapport technique. Paris: ALPAGE, Université Paris Diderot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Danlos, Laurence & Roze, Charlotte. 2011. Hiérarchie des relations de discours dans le FDTB. Rapport technique. Paris: ALPAGE, Université Paris Diderot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Das, Debopam & Taboada, Maite. 2013. Explicit and implicit coherence relations: A corpus study. In Proceedings of the 2013 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, Shan Luo (ed.). Victoria: University of Victoria.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Beaugrande, Robert & Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Carvalho, Paulo. 2005. Phrase nominale, ‘parties du discours’ et théorie syntaxique. Syntaxe et Sémantique 6: 87–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2013. On the focusing function of focusing adverbs: A discussion based on Italian data. Linguistik Online 44(4). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degaetano-Ortlieb, Stefania. 2015. Evaluative meaning and cohesion: The structuring function of evaluative meaning in scientific writing. Discours 16: 3–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth. 2004. Contrastive analyses, translation and speaker involvement: the case of “puisque” and “aangezien.” In Language, Culture and Mind, Michel Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (eds), 251–270. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “So very fast very fast then” Discourse markers at left and right periphery in spoken French. In Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds), 151–178. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth & Fagard, Benjamin. 2011. “Alors” between discourse and grammar: The role of syntactic position. Functions of Language 18(1): 29–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth, Lefèvre, Nathalie & Bestgen, Yves. 1999. The impact of connectives and anaphoric expressions on expository discourse comprehension. Document Design 1(1): 39–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth & Pander Maat, Henk. 2003. A contrastive study of Dutch and French causal connectives on the Speaker Involvement Scale. In Usage-Based Approaches to Dutch. Lexicon, Grammar, Discourse, Arie Verhagen & Jeroen van de Weijer (eds), 175–199. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth & Sanders, Ted J. M. 2002. The impact of relational markers on expository text comprehension in L1 and L2. Reading and Writing 15(7): 739–757. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delaere, Isabelle & De Sutter, Gert. 2017. Variability of English loanword use in Belgian Dutch translations: Measuring the effect of source language, register, and editorial intervention. In Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions, Gert De Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer & Isabelle Delaere (eds), 81–112. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delisle, Jean. 2013. La traduction raisonnée. Manuel d’initiation à la traduction professionnelle de l’anglais vers le français. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Demberg, Vera, Asr, Fatemeh & Scholman, Merel. 2017. How compatible are our discourse annotations? Insights from mapping RST-DT and PDTB annotations. ArXiv e-prints. <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Dixon, Robert & Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2011. The Semantics of Clause Linking: A Cross-Linguistic Typology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downing, Angela. 1991. An alternative approach to theme: A systemic-functional perspective. Word 42(2): 119–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dupont, Maïté. 2013. Contrastive Relations in English and French Editorials. A Corpus-based Study. MA dissertation, Université catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Between lexis and discourse. A cross-register study of connectors of contrast. InCorpora and Lexis, Sebastian Hoffmann, Andrea Sand, Sabine Arndt-Lappe & Lisa Marie Dillmann (eds.), 173–208. Leiden: Brill Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, Jarle & Oksefjell Ebeling, Signe. 2013. Patterns in Contrast [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 58]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne. 1994. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elgemark, Anna. 2017. To the Very End. A Contrastive Study of N-Rhemes in English and Swedish Translations. PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg.
Enkvist, Nils. 1973. Theme dynamics and style: An experiment. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 5(12): 127–135.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1978. Coherence, pseudo-coherence, and non-coherence. In Cohesion and Semantics, Jan-Ola Östman (ed.), 109–128. Åbo: Åbo Akademi Forskningsinstitut.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 2007. Information Structure: The Syntax-Discourse Interface. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine. 2005. Elusive connectives. A case study on the explicitness dimension of discourse coherence. Linguistics 43(1): 17–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine, Ramm, Wiebke, Solfjeld, Kåre & Behrens, Bergljot. 2005. Coordination, discourse relations, and information packaging - cross-linguistic differences. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Exploration and Modelling of Meaning (SEM05), Michel Aurnague, Myriam Bras, Anne Le Draoulec & Laure Vieu (eds), 85–93. Biarritz, France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fawcett, Robin. 2000. A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 206]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. The many types of “Theme” in English: Their semantic systems and their functional syntax. 1–105. <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Field, Andy, Miles, Jeremy & Field, Zoë. 2012. Discovering Statistics Using R. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Field, Yvette & Yip, Lee. 1992. A comparison of internal conjunctive cohesion in the English essay writing of Cantonese speakers and native speakers of English. RELC Journal 23(1): 15–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Rudolf. 1974. The use of a corpus in contrastive studies. In Trends in Kontrastiver Linguistik, Horst Raabe (ed.), 51–66. Tübingen: Gunther Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Firbas, Jan. 1992. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. A contribution on a panel discussion on rheme. In Thematic Development of English Texts, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), 213–222. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fløttum, Kjersti, Dahl, Trine & Kinn, Torodd. 2006. Academic Voices: Across Languages and Disciplines [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 148]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John & Forest, Richard. 2015. Signalling Nouns in Academic English. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foolen, Ad. 1991. Polyfunctionality and the semantics of adversative conjunctions. Multilingua 10(1): 72–92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1998. Contrastive discourse markers in English. In Discourse Markers. Description and Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57], Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds), 301–326. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31(7): 931–952. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce & Malamud-Makowski, Monica. 1996. English and Spanish contrastive discourse markers. Language Sciences 18(3): 863–881. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fretheim, Thorstein & Johansson, Stig. 2002. The semantics and pragmatics of the Norwegian concessive marker “likevel”: Evidence from the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus. Language and Computers 40(1): 81–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fries, Peter. 1994. On theme, rheme and discourse goals. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), 229–249. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. A personal view of theme. In Thematic Development in English Texts, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), 1–19. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gallagher, John. 1995. L’effacement des connecteurs adversatifs et concessifs en français moderne. In Relations discursives et traduction, Michel Ballard (ed.), 201–220. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses Universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gast, Volker. 2012. Contrastive analysis: Theories and methods. In Dictionaries of Linguistics and Communication Science: Linguistic Theory and Methodology, Bernd Kortmann & Johannes Kabatek (eds), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gellerstam, Martin. 1996. Translations as a source for cross-linguistic studies. In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 53–62. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2010. Corpus, Cognition and Causative Constructions [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 39]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glaud, Ludivine, Loiseau, Yves & Merlet, Elise. 2015. Grammaire essentielle du français. Niveau B1. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gliemann, Marie-Françoise, Bonenfant, Joëlle, Bazelle-Shahmaei, Bernadette & Akyüz, Anne. 2015. Focus: Grammaire du français. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goatly, Andrew. 2004. Corpus linguistics, Systemic Functional Grammar and literary meaning: A critical analysis of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. Ilha do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies 46: 115–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles. 2001. The Theme–Topic Interface: Evidence from English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 71] Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
González Rodríguez, María José. 2007. On the interpretation of ideology through comment articles: Two views in opinion discourse. RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 1: 49–68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane. In press. Phraséologie et lexicographie bilingue: Apports croisés des corpus monolingues et parallèles. In Autour de l’énonciation, de la lexicologie, de la morphophonologie et de la contrastivité: Langues, discours, textes et corpus, Sylvie Hanote & Raluca Nita (eds). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. From CA to CIA and back: An integrated approach to computerized bilingual and learner corpora. In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 37–51. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. On identifying the syntactic and discourse features of participle clauses in academic English: Native and non-native writers compared. In Studies in English Language and Teaching, Jan Aarts, Inge de Mönnink & Herman Wekker (eds), 185–198. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. The computer learner corpus: A versatile new source of data for SLA research. In Learner English on Computer, Sylviane Granger (ed.), 3–18. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. The corpus approach: A common way forward for Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies. In Corpus-based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, Sylviane Granger, Jacques Lerot & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds), 17–29. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Comparable and translation corpora in cross-linguistic research. Design, analysis and applications. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University 2: 14–21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Tracking the third code: A cross-linguistic corpus-driven approach to metadiscursive markers. In The Corpus Linguistics Discourse [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 87], A. Cermakova & Michaela Mahlberg (eds), 185–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane & Lefer, Marie-Aude. 2013. Enriching the phraseological coverage of bilingual dictionaries: The respective contribution of monolingual and bilingual corpus data. In Advances in Corpus-based Contrastive Linguistics. Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 54], Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds), 157–176. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(eds). 2020. The Complementary Contribution of Comparable and Parallel Corpora to Crosslinguistic Studies. Special issue of Languages in Contrast 20(2).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, Lerot, Jacques & Petch-Tyson, Stephanie. 2003. Preface. In Corpus-based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, Sylviane Granger, Jacques Lerot & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds), 9–13. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane & Tyson, Stephanie. 1996. Connector usage in the English essay writing of native and non-native EFL speakers of English. World Englishes 15(1): 17–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, Bethany. 2015. Linguistic Variation in Research Articles [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney. 1969. Studies in English Adverbial Usage. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. Syntactic devices for compression in English. In Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel’s 60th Birthday, Josef Klegraf, Dietrich Nehls & Gerhard Nickel (eds), 3–10. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grégoire, Maïa & Thievenaz, Odile. 2017. Grammaire progressive du français. Niveau intermédiaire. Paris: Clé International.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grellet, Françoise. 1991. Apprendre à traduire: Typologie d’exercices et de traduction. Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grevisse, Maurice & Goosse, André. 1995. Nouvelle grammaire française: Grammaire. Bruxelles: De Boeck Supérieur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Le bon usage. Bruxelles: De Boeck - Duculot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan T. 2006. Exploring variability within and between corpora: Some methodological considerations. Corpora 1(2): 109–151. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. What is corpus linguistics? Language and Linguistics Compass 3(5): 1225–1241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013. Statistics for Linguistics with R. A Practical Introduction. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grieve, James. 1996. Dictionary of Contemporary French Connectors. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grote, Brigitte, Lenke, Nils & Stede, Manfred. 1997. Ma(r)king concessions in English and German. Discourse Processes 24(1): 87–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guillemin-Flescher, Jacqueline. 1981. Syntaxe comparée du français et de l’anglais: Problèmes de traduction. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gutwinski, Waldemar. 1976. Cohesion in Literary Texts. A Study of some Grammatical and Lexical Features of English Discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hadermann, Pascale & Degand, Liesbeth. 2009. Structure narrative et connecteurs temporels en français langue seconde. In La langue en contexte, Eva Havu, Juhani Härmä, Mervi Helkkula, Meri Larjavaara & Ulla Tuomarla (eds), 19–34. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hajičová, Eva. 1994. Topic/Focus and related research. In The Prague School of Structural and Functional Linguistics [Linguistic and Literary Studies in Eastern Europe 41], Philip A. Luelsdorff (ed.), 245–275. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English, Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3(2): 199–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1970. Language structure and language function. In New Horizons in Linguistics, John Lyons (ed.), 140–165. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1971. Language in a social perspective. Educational Review 23(3): 165–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1977. Text as semantic choice in social contexts. In Grammars and Descriptions: Studies in Text Theory and Text Analysis, Teun van Dijk & János Petöfi (eds), 176–225. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1991. Corpus studies and probabilistic grammar. In English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds), 30–43. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1992. Language as system and language as instance: The corpus as a theoretical construct. In Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82 Stockholm, 4–8 August 1991, Jan Svartvik (ed.), 61–77. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Computational and Quantitative Studies, Jonathan J. Webster (ed.). London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Afterwords. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson & Susan Hunston (eds), 293–299. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & James, Zoe. 1993. A quantitative study of polarity and primary tense in the English finite clause. In Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse, John Sinclair, Michael Hoey & Gwyneth Fox (eds), 93–128. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edn. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra. 2004. Connectives as a translation problem. In An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Werner Koller, Frank Harald, Paul Armin, Norbert Greiner, Jose Lambert & Fritz Paul (eds), 562–572. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hannay, Mike & Gómez-González, María de los Ángeles. 2012. Thematic parentheticals in Dutch and English. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 6: 99–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia & Neumann, Stella. 2003. The challenges of working with multilingual corpora. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Multilingual Corpora, Linguistics Requirements and Technical Perspectives. Corpus Linguistics Conference 2003, Stella Neumann & Silvia Hansen-Schirra (eds), 27–34. Lancaster.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, Neumann, Stella & Steiner, Erich. 2012. Cross-linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations: Insights from the Language Pair English-German. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hartnett, Carolyn. 1995. The pit after the theme. In Thematic Development of English Texts, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), 198–212. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1984. Coherence and cohesive harmony. In Understanding Reading Comprehension: Cognition, Language, and the Structure of Prose, James Flood (ed.), 181–219. Newark DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2011. Discourse marker and modal particle: The functions of utterance-final then in spoken English. Journal of Pragmatics 43(14): 3603–3623. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the negotiation of common ground in spoken discourse: Final particles in English. Language and Communication 32(3): 182–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3): 663–687. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasselgård, Hilde. 2004a. Thematic choice in English and Norwegian. Functions of Language 11(2): 187–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004b. The role of multiple themes in cohesion. In Discourse Patterns in Spoken and Written Corpora [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 120], Karin Aijmer & Anna-Brita Stenström (eds), 65–87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010a. Contrastive analysis/contrastive linguistics. In The Routledge Linguistics Encyclopaedia, Kirsten Malmkjaer (ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010b. Adjunct Adverbials in English. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014a. Additive conjunction across languages: “dessuten” and its correspondences in English and French. Oslo Studies in Language 6(1): 69–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawes, Thomas & Thomas, Sarah. 2012. Theme choice in EAP and media language. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11(3): 175–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, Roger & Towell, Richard. 2001. French Grammar and Usage. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hempel, Susanne & Degand, Liesbeth. 2008. Sequencers in different text genres: Academic writing, journalese and fiction. Journal of Pragmatics 40(4): 676–693. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, Qingshun & Wen, Binli. 2017. A corpus-based study of textual metaphor in English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 37(3): 265–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, Qingshun & Yang, Bingjun. 2015. Absolute Clauses in English from the Systemic Functional Perspective: A Corpus-Based Study. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herbst, Thomas, Schmid, Hans-Jörg & Faulhaber, Susen. 2014. From collocations and patterns to constructions – An introduction. In Constructions, Collocations, Patterns, Thomas Herbst, Hans-Jörg Schmid & Susen Faulhaber (eds), 1–8. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herriman, Jennifer. 2011. N-rhemes in English problem–solution texts. English Text Construction 4(1): 29–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herriman, Jennifer & Bostrom Aronsson, Mia. 2009. Themes in Swedish advanced learners’ writing in English. In Corpora and Language Teaching [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 33], Karin Aijmer (ed.), 101–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hervey, Sándor & Higgins, Ian. 1992. Thinking Translation: A Course in Translation Method, French-English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Thinking French Translation: A Course in Translation Method: French to English. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoarau, Lucie. 1997. Étude contrastive de la coordination en français et en anglais. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoek, Jet, Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline & Sanders, Ted J. M. 2018. Segmenting discourse: Incorporating interpretation into segmentation? Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 14(2): 357–386. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoek, Jet & Zufferey, Sandrine. 2015. Factors influencing the implicitation of discourse relations across languages. In Conference Proceedings 11th Joint ACL - ISO Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation, London, Harry Bunt (ed.), 39–45. Tilburg: Tilburg Centre for Cognition and Communication.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoek, Jet, Zufferey, Sandrine, Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline & Sanders, Ted J. M. 2017. Cognitive complexity and the linguistic marking of coherence relations: A parallel corpus study. Journal of Pragmatics 121(Supplement C): 113–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holtz, Monica. 2007. Corpus-based analysis of verb/noun collocations in interdisciplinary registers. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference 2007. University of Birmingham, UK 27–30 July 2007, Matthew Davies, Paul Rayson, Susan Hunston & Danielsson Pernilla (eds). <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey. 2002. The Cambdrige Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne & Mair, Christian. 1999. “Agile” and “uptight” genres: The corpus-based approach to language change in progress. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4(2): 221–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan. 2013. Systemic functional linguistics, corpus linguistics, and the ideology of science. Text & Talk 33(4-5): 614–640. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan & Francis, Gill. 2000. Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 1998. Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30(4): 437–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken & Jiang, Feng (Kevin). 2017. Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes 45: 40–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iruskieta, Mikel, da Cunha, Iria & Taboada, Maite. 2014. A qualitative comparison method for rhetorical structures: identifying different discourse structures in multilingual corpora. Language Resources and Evaluation 49(2): 263–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ivir, Vladimir. 1983. A translation-based model of contrastive analysis. Jyväskylä Cross-Language Studies 9: 171–178.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita. 2008. Contrast, concessive, and corrective: Toward a comprehensive study of opposition relations. Journal of Pragmatics 40(4): 646–675. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobson, Sven. 1964. Adverbial Positions in English. Uppsala: Studentbok.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
James, Carl. 1980. Contrastive Analysis. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Janicki, Karol. 1990. On the tenability of the notion “pragmatic equivalence” in contrastive analysis. In Further Insights into Contrastive Analysis [Linguistic and Literary Studies in Eastern Europe 30], Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 47–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Katarzyna. 2003. On translating “what is said”: Tertium comparationis in contrastive semantics and pragmatics. In Meaning Through Language Contrast, Vol. 2, Katarzyna Jaszczolt & Ken Turner (eds), 441–462. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig. 1998. On the role of corpora in cross-linguistic research. In Corpora and Cross-linguistic Research: Theory, Method and Case Studies, Stig Johansson & Signe Oksefjell (eds), 3–24. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Contrastive linguistics and corpora. In Corpus-based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, Sylviane Granger, Jacques Lerot & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds), 31–44. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Seeing Through Multilingual Corpora: On the Use of Corpora in Contrastive Studies [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 26]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Cross-linguistic perspectives. In English Corpus Linguistics: Crossing Paths, Merjä Kytö (ed.), 45–68. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig & Hofland, Knud. 1994. Towards an English-Norwegian parallel corpus. In Creating and Using English Language Corpora: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Zürich 1993, Udo Fries, Gunnel Tottie & Peter Schneider (eds), 25–37. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig & Lysvåg, Per. 1986. Understanding English Grammar: An Overview. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, Robert B. 1966. Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning 16(1-2): 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knott, Alistair. 1996. A Data-driven Methodology for Motivating a Set of Coherence Relations. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
König, Ekkehard. 2012. Contrastive linguistics and language comparison. Languages in Contrast 12(1): 3–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter. 2000. Causal and concessive clauses: formal and semantic relations. In Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Bernd Kortmann (eds), 341–360. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 1991. Free Adjuncts and Absolutes in English: Problems of Control and Interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kruger, Haidee. 2017. The effects of editorial intervention: Implications for studies of the features of translated language. In Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions, Gert De Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer & Isabelle Delaere (eds), 113–155. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kruger, Haidee & van Rooy, Bertus. 2012. Register and the features of translated language. Across Languages and Cultures 13(1): 33–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krzeszowski, Tomasz P. 1984. Tertium comparationis. In Contrastive Linguistics: Prospects and Problems, Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 301–312. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1990. Contrasting Languages: The Scope of Contrastive Linguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kunz, Kerstin, Degaetano-Ortlieb, Stefania, Lapshinova-Koltunski, Ekaterina, Menzel, Katrien & Steiner, Erich. 2017. English-German contrasts in cohesion and implications for translation. In Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions, Gert De Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer & Isabelle Delaere (eds), 265–311. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kunz, Kerstin & Lapshinova-Koltunski, Ekaterina. 2014. Cohesive conjunctions in English and German: Systemic contrasts and textual differences. In Recent Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Developing and Exploiting Corpora, Lieven Vandelanotte, Kristin Davidse, Caroline Gentens & Ditte Kimps (eds), 229–262. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Cross-linguistic analysis of discourse variation across registers. Nordic Journal of English Studies 14(1): 258–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kunz, Kerstin & Steiner, Erich. 2012. Towards a comparison of cohesive reference in English and German: System and text. In Contrastive Discourse Analysis: Functional and Corpus Perspectives, Maite Taboada, Susana Doval Suarez & Elsa Gonzalez Alvarez (eds), 208–239. Sheffield: Equinox. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Cohesive substitution in English and German: A contrastive and corpus-based perspective. In Advances in Corpus-based Contrastive Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 54] Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds), 201–232. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurokawa, David, Goutte, Cyril & Isabelle, Pierre. 2009. Automatic detection of translated text and its impact on Machine Translation. Proceedings of the Twelfth Machine Translation Summit, Ottawa, August 26–30, 81–88. <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics across Cultures: Applied Linguistics for Language Teachers. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1971. If’s, and’s and but’s about conjunction. In Studies in Linguistic Semantics, Charles J. Fillmore & D. Terence Langndoen (eds), 3–114. New York NY: Holt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1988. Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 18], John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 135–179. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Constraints on subject-focus mapping in French and English. In Comparative and Contrastive Studies of Information Structure [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 165], Carsten Breul & Edward Göbbel (eds), 77–100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lamiroy, Béatrice & Van Belle, William. 1995. Connectives of contrast and concession in Dutch and French. Leuvense Bijdragen: Tijdschrift voor Germaanse Filologie 84(3): 397–418.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lamiroy, Béatrice & Vanderbauwhede, Gudrun. 2016. Connecteurs et linguistique contrastive. Les marqueurs de discours “en effet”, “en fait”, “de fait”, “en réalité” et leurs pendants néerlandais. In Connexion et indexation. Ces liens qui lient le texte, Laure Sarda, Denis Vigier & Bernard Combettes (eds), 195–209. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lapshinova-Koltunski, Ekaterina & Kunz, Kerstin. 2014. Annotating cohesion for multilingual analysis. Proceedings of the 10th Joint ACL–ISO Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation, 57–64. Reykjavik: ACL/ISO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lapshinova-Koltunski, Ekaterina, Nedoluzhko, Anna & Kunz, Kerstin. 2015. Across languages and genres: Creating a universal annotation scheme for textual relations. Proceedings of The 9th Linguistic Annotation Workshop, 168–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017b. A functional classification of the introductory it pattern: Investigating academic writing by non-native-speaker and native-speaker students. English for Specific Purposes 48: 57–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lauridsen, Karen. 1996. Text corpora and contrastive linguistics: which type of corpus for which type of analysis? In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 63–71. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lavid, Julia. 2010. Contrasting choices in clause-initial position in English and Spanish: A corpus-based analysis. In Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Multilingual, Multimodal and Other Specialised Discourses, Elizabeth Swain (ed.), 49–68. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lavid, Julia, Arús, Jorge & Zamorano-Mansilla, Juan Rafael. 2011. Systemic Functional Grammar of Spanish. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laviosa, Sara. 2009. Universals. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha (eds), 306–310. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Le Draoulec, Anne & Bras, Myriam. 2006. Quelques candidats au statut de ‘connecteur temporel’. Cahiers de Grammaire 30: 219–237.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 2002. A Communicative Grammar of English. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lefer, Marie-Aude. 2009. Exploring Lexical Morphology across Languages: A Corpus-based Study of Prefixation in English and French Writing. PhD dissertation, Université Catholique de Louvain.
Lefer, Marie-Aude & Grabar, Natalia. 2015. Super-creative and over-bureaucratic: A cross-genre corpus-based study on the use and translation of evaluative prefixation in TED talks and EU parliamentary debates. Across Languages and Cultures 16: 187–208. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lefer, Marie-Aude & Vogeleer, Svetlana (eds). 2014. Genre- and Register-related Discourse Features in Contrast. Special issue of Languages in Contrast 14(1).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lefeuvre, Florence. 1999. La phrase averbale en français. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Le Goffic, Pierre. 1994. Grammaire de la phrase française. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1988. Towards a typology of clause linkage. In Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 18], John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 181–226. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenker, Ursula. 2010. Argument and Rhetoric. Adverbial Connectors in the History of English. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. A focus on adverbial connectors: Connecting, partitioning and focusing attention in the history of English. Varieng: Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 8. <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
. 2014. Knitting and splitting information: Medial placement of linking adverbials in the history of English. In Contact, Variation and Change in the History of English [Studies in Language Companion Series 159], Simone E. Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt & Daniel Schreier (eds), 11–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leroux, Agnès. 2012. La relation inter-énonciative et le marquage syntaxique des relations de cause: Étude contrastive anglais-français. CORELA HS-10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Contrastive analysis of adversative relational markers using comparable corpora. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, Karin Aijmer & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 139–153. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Markers of concession in a contrastive perspective: evidence from an English/French comparable corpus. In Corpora and Discourse - and Stuff: Papers in Honour of Karin Aijmer, Rhonwen Bowen, Mats Mobärg & Sölve Ohlander (eds), 189–198. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Dilin. 2008. Linking adverbials: An across-register corpus study and its implications. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(4): 491–518. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loock, Rudy. 2018. Using non-standard word order you should! A corpus-based approach to avoiding standardized word order in translated French. In Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies Conference, 5th edn [CECL Papers 1], Sylviane Granger, Marie-Aude Lefer & Laura Aguiar de Souza Penha Marion (eds), 115–116. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lores, Rosa. 2004. On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organisation. English for Specific Purposes 23(3): 280–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Love, Alison. 2004. Drawing on (a lot of) “Given”: One aspect of theme choice in newspaper editorials. In Text and Texture. Systemic Functional Viewpoints on the Nature and Structure of Text, David Banks (ed.). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lynch, Jack. 2007. The English Language: A User’s Guide. Newburyport MA: Focus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macken, Lieve, De Clercq, Orphée & Paulussen, Hans. 2011. Dutch Parallel Corpus: A balanced copyright-cleared parallel corpus. Meta 56(2): 374–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mair, Christian & Hundt, Marianne. 1995. Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43(2): 111–122.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William & Thompson, Sandra. 1988. Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8: 243–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Relational discourse structure: A comparison of approaches to structuring text by “contrast.” In Language in Context: Essays for Robert E. Longacre, Shin Ja Hwang & William Merrifield (eds), 19–45. Dallas TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martel, Guylaine. 1993. Les connecteurs contre-argumentatifs en anglais, en français et en espagnol: Une question d’usage. Langues et Linguistique 19: 151–165.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 1983. Conjunction: The logic of English text. In Micro and Macro Connexity of Texts, János Petöfi & Emel Sözer (eds), 1–72. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. Cohesion and texture. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (eds), 35–53. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & Rose, David. 2007. Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mason, Ian. 1998. Discourse connectives, ellipsis and markedness. In The Pragmatics of Translation, Leo Hickey (ed.), 170–186. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Translator behaviour and language usage: Some constraints on contrastive studies. Hermes 26: 65–80.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 1992. Interpreting the textual metafunction. In Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice, Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds), 37–81. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002. Combining clauses into clause complexes: A multi-faceted view. In Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson, Joan Bybee & Michael Noonan (eds), 235–319. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Frequency profiles of some basic grammatical systems: An interim report. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson & Susan Hunston (eds), 103–142. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. & Thompson, Sandra. 1988. The structure of discourse and “subordination.” In Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 18], John Haiman & Sandra Thompson (eds), 275–329. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Universal tendencies in translation. In Incorporating Corpora: The Linguist and the Translator, Gunilla M. Anderman & Margaret Rogers (eds), 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McDonald, Daniel & Woodward-Kron, Robyn. 2016. Member roles and identities in online support groups: Perspectives from corpus and systemic functional linguistics. Discourse & Communication 10(2): 157–175. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony & Wilson, Andrew. 2001. Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony & Xiao, Richard. 2007. Parallel and comparable corpora: What are they up to? In Incorporating Corpora: Translation and the Linguist, Gunilla M. Anderman & Margaret Rogers (eds), 17–21. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony, Xiao, Richard & Tono, Yukio. 2006. Corpus-based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, David, Zeileis, Achim, Hornik, Kurt, Gerber, Florian & Friendly, Michael. 2017. vcd: Visualizing Categorical Data. <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Meyer, Thomas. 2011. Disambiguating temporal-contrastive connectives for machine translation. In Proceedings of the ACL-HLT 2011 Student Session, 46–51. Portland OR.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, Thomas, Popescu-Belis, Andrei, Zufferey, Sandrine & Cartoni, Bruno. 2011. Multilingual annotation and disambiguation of discourse connectives for Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2011 Conference (SIGDIAL ‘11), 194–203. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikhailov, Mikhail & Cooper, Robert. 2016. Corpus Linguistics for Translation and Contrastive Studies: A Guide for Research. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Donna & Johnson, Jane. 2013. “Register-idiosyncratic” evaluative choice in Congressional debate. In Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice, Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds), 417–431. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Donna R. & Johnson, Jane. 2014. Evaluative phraseological choice and speaker party/gender: A corpus-assisted comparative study of “register-idiosyncratic” meaning in Congressional debate. In Evaluation in Context [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 242], Geoff Thompson & Laura Alba-Juez (eds), 345–366. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miltsakaki, Eleni, Dinesh, Nikhil, Prasad, Rashmi, Joshi, Aravind & Webber, Bonnie. 2005. Experiments on sense annotations and sense disambiguation of discourse connectives. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT), 9–10 December 2005, Barcelona, Spain.
Miltsakaki, Eleni, Prasad, Rashmi, Joshi, Aravind & Bonnie, Webber. 2004. The Penn Discourse Treebank. In Proceedings of the 4th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. Lisbon, Portugal.
Morel, Mary-Annick. 1996. La concession en français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morel, Mary-Annick & Danon-Boileau, Laurent. 1998. Grammaire de l’intonation. L’exemple du français oral. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moreno, Ana I. 1998. The explicit signaling of premise-conclusion sequences in research articles: A contrastive framework. Text 18(4): 545–585. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mortier, Liesbeth & Degand, Liesbeth. 2009. Adversative discourse markers in contrast: The need for a combined corpus approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(3): 3–301. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muller, Philippe, Vergez-Couret, Marianne, Prévot, Laurent, Asher, Nicholas, Farah, Benamara, Bras, Myriam, Le Draoulec, Anne & Vieu, Laure. 2012. Manuel d’annotation en relations de discours du projet ANNODIS. Rapport technique. Toulouse: CLLE-ERSS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murray, John D. 1997. Connectives and narrative text: The role of continuity. Memory & Cognition 25(2): 227–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mwinlaaru, Isaac N. & Xuan, Winfred Wenhui. 2016. A survey of studies in systemic functional language description and typology. Functional Linguistics 3. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nesbitt, Christopher & Plum, Guenther. 1988. Probabilities in a systemic-functional grammar: The clause complex in English. In New Developments in Systemic Linguistics: Theory and Application, Vol. 2, Robin Fawcett & David Young (eds), 6–38. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, Stella. 2010. Quantitative register analysis across languages. In Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Multilingual, Multimodal and Other Specialised Discourses, Elizabeth Swain (ed.), 85–113. Trieste: EUT Edizioni.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Register-induced properties of translations. In Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations: Insights from the Language Pair English-German, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Stella Neumann & Erich Steiner (eds), 191–209. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Contrastive Register Variation. A Quantitative Approach to the Comparison of English and German. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. New York NY: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nome, Astrid & Hobæk Haff, Marianne. 2011. Une analyse contrastive de “donc.” Oslo Studies in Language 3(1): 47–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Donnell, Michael. 2009. The UAM CorpusTool: Software for corpus annotation and exploration. In Applied Linguistics Now: Understanding Language and Mind / La lingüística aplicada actual: Comprendiendo el lenguaje y la mente, Carmen M. Bretones Callejas, José Francisco Fernández Sánchez, José Ramón Ibáñez Ibáñez, María Elena García Sánchez, Mª Enriqueta Cortés de los Ríos, Sagrario Salaberri Ramiro, Mª Soledad Cruz Martínez, Nobel Perdú Honeyman, Blasina Cantizano Márquez (eds), 1433–1448. Almeria: Universidad de Almería.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Osborne, John. 2008. Adverb placement in post-intermediate learner English: A contrastive study of learner corpora. In Linking up Contrastive and Learner Corpus Research, Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Szilvia Papp & María Belén Díez-Bedmar (eds), 127–146. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Øverås, Linn. 1998. In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation. Meta 43(4): 557–570. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oversteegen, Leonoor. 1997. On the pragmatic nature of causal and contrastive connectives. Discourse Processes 24(1): 51–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pander Maat, Henk & Degand, Liesbeth. 2001. Scaling causal relations and connectives in terms of speaker involvement. Cognitive Linguistics 12(3): 211–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paquot, Magali. 2010. Academic Vocabulary in Learner Writing: From Extraction to Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pekelder, Jan. 2010. Le tertium comparationis en linguistique contrastive. Problèmes et méthodes. Linguistica Pragensia 20(1): 22–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Petukhova, Volha & Bunt, Harry. 2009. Towards a multidimensional semantics of discourse markers in spoken dialogue. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Semantics (IWCS-8 ‘09), 157–168. Stroudsburg PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plonsky, Luke & Oswald, Frederick. 2014. How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64(4): 878–912. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plum, Guenther & Cowling, Ann. 1987. Social constraints on grammatical variables: Tense choice in English. In Language Topics: Essays in Honour of Michael Halliday, Vol. 2, Ross Steele & Terry Threadgold (eds), 281–292. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poncharal, Bruno. 2005. Etude contrastive de la structuration du discours en anglais et en français dans des textes de sciences humaines. In Actes du Colloque “D’une langue à l’autre”: Besançon, 5-6-7 septembre 2002. Daniel Lebaud (ed.), 287–302. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Cohérence discursive en anglais et en français: Fonction des connecteurs dans la traduction. In Les connecteurs, jalons du discours, Agnès Celle, Stéphane Gresset & Ruth Huart (eds), 117–136. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prasad, Rashmi, Dinesh, Nikhil, Lee, Alan, Miltsakaki, Eleni, Robaldo, Livio, Joshi, Aravind & Webber, Bonnie. 2008. The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC). Marrakech, Morocco.
Prasad, Rashmi, Joshi, Aravind & Webber, Bonnie. 2010. Realization of discourse relations by other means: Alternative lexicalizations. In Coling2010: Poster Volume, 1023–1031. Beijing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen. 1997. On the functions of left-dislocation in English discourse. In Directions in Functional Linguistics [Studies in Language Companion Series 36], Akio Kamio (ed.), 117–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramón García, Noelia. 2002. Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies interconnected: The corpus-based approach. In Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series – Themes in Translation Studies 1, Leona van Vaerenbergh (ed.), 393–406. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ravelli, Louise. 1995. A dynamic perspective: implications for metafunctional interaction and an understanding of Theme. In On Subject and Theme: A Discourse Functional Perspective [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 40], Ruqaiya Hasan & Peter Fries (eds), 187–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A Language and Eenvironment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. <[URL]> (28 September 2020).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Régent, Odile. 1980. Approche comparative des discours de spécialité pour l’entraînement à l’anglais écrit. Mélanges Pédagogiques 1: 117–135.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Pratiques de communication en médecine: Contextes anglais et français. Langages 26(105): 66–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. L’article scientifique: Un produit culturel. ASp. la revue du GERAS 5–6: 55–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rey, Joëlle. 1999. Approche argumentative des textes scientifiques: La traduction de “or” en espagnol. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs 44(3): 411–428. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riegel, Martin, Pellat, Jean-Christophe & Rioul, René. 2001. Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rivelin-Constantin, Eve. 1992. La thématisation en français et en anglais: Une étude contrastive. In Linguistique contrastive et traduction, Vol. 1, Jacqueline Guillemin-Flescher (ed.), 159–204. Gap: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rørvik, Sylvi & Egan, Thomas. 2013. Connectors in the argumentative writing of Norwegian novice writers. In Twenty Years of Learner Corpus Research. Looking Back, Moving Ahead. Proceedings of the First Learner Corpus Research Conference (LCR 2011), Sylviane Granger, Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Fanny Meunier (eds), 401–410. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossette, Fiona. 2007. Connecteurs, enchaînements discursifs et lisibilité en anglais: Quelques pistes de réflexion. In Les connecteurs, jalons du discours, Agnès Celle, Stéphane Gresset & Ruth Huart (eds), 11–42. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Thème, conjonction et cohésion: Corrélations entre les différents composants de la métafonction textuelle en français. In La linguistique systémique fonctionnelle et la langue française, David Banks, Simon Eason & Janet Ormrod (eds), 9–42. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roze, Charlotte, Danlos, Laurence & Muller, Philippe. 2012. LEXCONN: A French Lexicon of Discourse Connectives. Discours 10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rubattel, Christian. 1982. De la syntaxe des connecteurs pragmatiques. Cahiers de Linguistique Française 4: 37–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rudolph, Elisabeth. 1996. Contrast: Adversative and Concessive Relations and Their Expressions in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese on Sentence and Text Level. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruquet, Michel, Quoy-Bodin, Jean-Luc & Cayol, Micheline. 1991. Comment dire? Raisonner à la française. Paris: Clé International.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rysová, Magdalena & Rysová, Katerina. 2014. The centre and periphery of discourse connectives. In 28th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, 452–459. Phuket, Thailand.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sajavaara, Kari. 1996. New challenges for contrastive linguistics. In Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Lund 4–5 March 1994, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 17–36. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salkie, Raphael. 2008. How can lexicographers use a translation corpus? In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies (UCCTS 2008), Richard Xiao, Lianzhen He & Ming Yue (eds). Zhejiang University, Hangzhou.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salkie, Raphael & Oates, Sarah Louise. 1999. Contrast and concession in French and English. Languages in Contrast 2(1): 27–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted J. M. 1997. Semantic and pragmatic sources of coherence: On the categorization of coherence relations in context. Discourse Processes 24(1): 119–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Coherence, causality and cognitive complexity in discourse. In Proceedings/Actes SEM-05, First International Symposium on the Exploration and Modelling of Meaning, 105–114. Biarritz, France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted J.M, Demberg, Vera, Hoek, Jet, Scholman, Merel, Asr, Fatemeh, Zufferey, Sandrine & Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline. 2018. Unifying dimensions in coherence relations: How various annotation frameworks are related. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory (published online ahead of print 22 May). <[URL]> (4 September 2020).
Sanders, Ted J.M & Spooren, Wilbert. 2007. Discourse and text structure. In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds), 916–943. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted J.M, Spooren, Wilbert & Noordman, Leo. 1992. Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 15: 1–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 2006. Discourse. In An Introduction to Language and Linguistics, Ralph W. Fasold & Jeff Connor-Linton (eds), 169–203. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah, Tannen, Deborah & Hamilton, Heidi. 2015. Introduction. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Tannen, Heidi Hamilton & Deborah Schiffrin (eds), 1–7. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schilperoord, Joost & Verhagen, Arie. 1998. Conceptual dependency and the clausal structure of discourse. In Discourse and Cognition. Bridging the Gap, Jean-Pierre Koenig (ed.), 141–163. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmied, Josef. 2009. Contrastive corpus studies. In Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook, Vol. 2, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds), 1140–1159. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. Discourse markers. Lingua 107(3): 227–265. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, Mike. 2012. WordSmith Tools 6. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharoff, Serge. 2017. Corpus and systemic functional linguistics. In The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds), 533–546. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, Raoul & Frawley, William. 1983. Conjunctive cohesion in four English genres. Text 3(4): 347–374. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spooren, Wilbert & Degand, Liesbeth. 2010. Coding coherence relations: Reliability and validity. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 6(2): 241–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staples, Shelley, Egbert, Jesse, Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan. 2015. Register variation. A corpus approach. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Tannen, Heidi Hamilton & Deborah Schiffrin (eds), 505–525. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard. 2003. Conversationalization in discourse: Stylistic changes in editorials of The Times between 1950 and 2000. In Determination of Information and Tenor in Texts: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Discourse, Luuk Lagerwerf, Wilbert Spooren & Liesbeth Degand (eds), 115–124. Amsterdam & Munster: Stichting Neerlandistiek & Nodus Publikationen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stoye, Hélène. 2014. Les connecteurs contenant des prépositions en français: Profils sémantiques et pragmatiques en synchronie et diachronie. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Struck, Herman R. 1965. The myth about initial conjunctions. The English Journal 54(1): 42–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taboada, Maite. 2006. Discourse markers as signals (or not) of rhetorical relations. Journal of Pragmatics 38(4): 567–592. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Implicit and explicit coherence relations. In Discourse, of Course, Jan Renkema (ed.), 127–140. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taboada, Maite & Gómez-González, María de los Ángeles. 2012. Discourse markers and coherence relations: Comparison across markers, languages and modalities. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 6: 17–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taglicht, Josef. 1984. Message and Emphasis: On Focus and Scope in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Takagaki, Yumi. 2011. Les plans d’organisation textuelle en français et en japonais: De la rhétorique contrastive à la linguistique textuelle. Rouen: Editions universitaires européennes.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tankó, Gyula. 2004. The use of adverbial connectors in Hungarian university students’ argumentative essays. In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching [Studies in Corpus Linguistics12], John Sinclair (ed.), 157–181. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tanskanen, Sanna-Kaisa. 2006. Collaborating Towards Coherence: Lexical Cohesion in English Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 146] Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, Charlotte. 2008. What is corpus linguistics? What the data says. ICAME Journal 32: 179–200.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teich, Elke. 2003. Cross-Linguistic Variation in System and Text. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Linguistic computing. In Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics, Michael A. K. Halliday & Jonathan J. Webster (eds), 113–127. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Choices in analysing choice: Methods and techniques for register analysis. In Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice, Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds), 417–431. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teich, Elke, Eckart, Richard & Holtz, Monica. 2006. Systemic Functional corpus resources: Issues in development and deployment. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Treebanks and Linguistic Theories Conference (TLT 06), 247–258. Prague.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teubert, Wolfgang. 1996. Comparable or parallel corpora? International Journal of Lexicography 9(3): 238–264. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff. 2014. Introducing Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Hunston, Susan. 2006a. System and corpus: two traditions with a common ground. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson & Susan Hunston (eds), 1–14. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006b. System and Corpus: Exploring Connections. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Theme, subject and the unfolding of text. In Text Type and Texture, Gail Forey & Geoff Thompson (eds), 45–69. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Zhou, Jianglin. 2001. Evaluation and organization in text: The structuring role of evaluative disjuncts. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds), 121–141. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tierney, Robert & Mosenthal, James. 1983. Cohesion and textual coherence. Research in the Teaching of English 17(3): 215–229.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tizón-Couto, David. 2012. Left Dislocation in English: A Functional-Discoursal Approach. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. 2001. Corpus Linguistics at Work [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Touratier, Christian. 2006. Que faut-il entendre par “connecteur”? In La connexion et les connecteurs. La phrase existentielle, Christian Touratier & Jean-Marie Merle (eds), 19–40. Université de Provence. Provence.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Travis, Catherine & Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 2012. Discourse syntax. In The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics, José Ignacio Hualde, Antxon Olarrea & Erin O’Rourke (eds), 653–672. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trévise, Anne. 1986. Is it transferable, topicalization? In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition, Eric Kellerman & Michael Sharwood Smith (eds), 86–206. New York NY: Pergamon Institute of English.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tucker, Gordon. 2006. Systemic incorporation: On the relationship between corpus and systemic functional grammar. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson & Susan Hunston (eds), 81–102. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Towards a lexicogrammar of war: A corpus-based systemic functional investigation of the French lexical item “guerre.” In La linguistique systémique fonctionnelle et la langue française, David Banks, Simon Eason & Janet Ormrod (eds), 195–222. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandepitte, Sonia & De Sutter, Gert. 2013. Contrastive linguistics and translation studies. In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 4, Yves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (eds), 36–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Auwera, Johan. 2012. From contrastive linguistics to linguistic typology. Languages in Contrast 12(1): 69–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun. 1979. Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics 3: 447–456. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Hoof, Henri. 1989. Traduire l’anglais: Théorie et pratique. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van de Voorde, Katrien. 1992. De deux à trois “mais”: Essai de vérification des approches d’Anscombre et Ducrot et de Blumenthal. Travaux de Linguistique 24: 57–81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 2000. Concession implies causality, though in some other space. In Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Bernd Kortmann (eds), 361–380. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Subordination and discourse segmentation revisited, or: Why matrix clauses may be more dependent than complements. In Text Representation: Linguistic and Psychological Aspects [Human Cognitive Processing 8], Ted J. M. Sanders, Joost Schilperoord & Wilbert Spooren (eds), 337–357. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Virtanen, Tuija. 1992. Discourse functions of Adverbial Placement in English: Clause-initial Adverbials of Time and Place in Narratives and Procedural Place Descriptions. Åbo: Åbo Akademis Förlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. “Polls and surveys show”: Public opinion as a persuasive device in editorial discourse. In Persuasion across Genres: A Linguistic Approach [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 130], Elena Halmari & Tuija Virtanen (eds), 153–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Jianxin. 2011. Contrastive Connectors in English and Chinese: A Corpus-Based Study. PhD dissertation, University of Auckland.
Westin, Ingrid. 2002. Language Change in English Newspaper Editorials. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 1991. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 7(2): 133–161. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willems, Dominique, Defrancq, Bart, Colleman, Timothy & Noël, Dirk. 2004. Contrastive Analysis in Language. Identifying Linguistic Units of Comparison. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Canzhong. 2009. Corpus-based research. In Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics, Michael A. K. Halliday & Jonathan J. Webster (eds), 128–142. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010b. Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xiao, Richard & Yue, Ming. 2009. Using corpora in translation studies: The state of the art. In Contemporary Corpus Linguistics, Paul Baker (ed.), 237–262. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xi, Yan. 2010. Cohesion studies in the past 30 years: Development, application and chaos. Language, Society and Culture 31: 139–147.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Donald W. 2003. A warning about the large-sample Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. Understanding Statistics 2(4): 267–280. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zinn, Jens & McDonald, Daniel. 2018. Risk in The New York Times (1987–2014). A Corpus-based Exploration of Sociological Theories. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zinsser, William K. 2001. On Writing Well, 25th Anniversary: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction. New York NY: Collins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziv, Yael. 1994. Left and right dislocations: Discourse functions and anaphora. Journal of Pragmatics 22(6): 629–645. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine. 2012. “Car, parce que, puisque” revisited: Three empirical studies on French causal connectives. Journal of Pragmatics 44(2): 138–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine & Cartoni, Bruno. 2012. English and French causal connectives in contrast. Languages in Contrast 12(2): 232–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine & Degand, Liesbeth. 2017. Annotating the meaning of discourse connectives in multilingual corpora. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 13(2): 399–422. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine, Degand, Liesbeth, Popescu-Belis, Andrei & Sanders, Ted J. M. 2012. Empirical validations of multilingual annotation schemes for discourse relations. In Proceedings of the 8th Joint ISO-ACL SIGSEM Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation, Harry Bunt (ed.), 77–84. Pisa, Italy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine & Gygax, Pascal. 2016. The role of perspective shifts for processing and translating discourse relations. Discourse Processes 53(7): 532–555. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zufferey, Sandrine, Mak, Willem, Degand, Liesbeth & Sanders, Ted J. M. 2015. Advanced learners’ comprehension of discourse connectives: The role of L1 transfer across on-line and off-line tasks. Second Language Research 31(3): 389–411. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue