The (X) thing is: From a matrix clause to a discourse marker

References

A. Dictionaries

OED²: Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, 2nd edition. 1989. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

B. Literature

Andersen, G. 2000. Pragmatic markers and sociolinguistic variation: A relevance-theoretic approach to the language of adolescents. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.84Suche in Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. 1972. Some aspects of psychological predicates in English. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Suche in Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. 1997. “I think – an English modal particle”. In: Swan, T. and O. J. Westvik (eds.), Modality in Germanic languages. Historical and comparative perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1-47.10.1515/9783110889932.1Suche in Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. 2007. “The interface between discourse and grammar: The fact is that”. In: Celle, A. and R. Huart (eds.), Connectives as discourse landmarks. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 31-46.10.1075/pbns.161.05aijSuche in Google Scholar

Brems, L. and K. Davidse. 2010. “The grammaticalization of nominal type noun constructions with kind/sort of. chronology and paths of change”. English Studies 91. 180-202.10.1080/00138380903355023Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, D. et al. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Brinton, L.J. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English. Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110907582Suche in Google Scholar

Brinton, L. andE.C. Traugott. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615962Suche in Google Scholar

Brinton, L.J. 2008. The comment clause in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511551789Suche in Google Scholar

Crystal, D. and D. Davy. 1975. Advanced conversational English. London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Denison, D. 2002. “History of the sort of construction family”. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Construction Grammar, University of Helsinki, 7, September.Suche in Google Scholar

Erman, B. 1987. Pragmatic expressions in English. A study of you know, you see and I mean in face-to-face conversation. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Suche in Google Scholar

Green, G.M. 1976. Main clause phenomena in subordinate clauses. Language 52: 382-397.10.2307/412566Suche in Google Scholar

Hopper, P.J. 1991. “On some principles of grammaticalization”. In: Traugott, E.C. and B. Heine (eds.). (Vol. 1.) 17-35.Suche in Google Scholar

Huddleston, R. and G.K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530Suche in Google Scholar

Kaltenböck, G. 2005. “Charting the boundaries of syntax: A taxonomy of spoken parenthetical clauses”. View[z]: Vienna English Working Papers 14(1). 21-53.Suche in Google Scholar

Kärkkäinen, E. 2003. Epistemic stance in English conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.115Suche in Google Scholar

Knowles, J. 1980. “The tag as a parenthetical”. Studies in Language 4. 370-409.10.1075/sl.4.3.04knoSuche in Google Scholar

Kruisinga, E. 1932. A handbook of present-day English. Groningen: Noordhoff.Suche in Google Scholar

Leech, G.N. and J. Svartvik. 2002. A communicative grammar of English. (3rd ed.) London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Peterson, P. 1998. “On the boundaries of syntax: Non-syntagmatic relations”. In: Collins, P. and D. Lee (eds.), The clause in English: In honour of Rodney Huddleston. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 229-250.Suche in Google Scholar

Petola, N. 1983. “Comment clauses in present-day English”. In: Kajanto, I. et al. (eds.), Studies in classical and modern philology. Helsinki: Suomalainen, Tie-deakatemia. 101-113.Suche in Google Scholar

Quirk, R. et al. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611841Suche in Google Scholar

Schmid, H.-J. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110808704Suche in Google Scholar

Schourup L.C. 1985. Common discourse particles in English conversation. New York: GarlandSuche in Google Scholar

Schourup, L. 1999. “Discourse markers”. Lingua 107. 227--265.10.1016/S0024-3841(96)90026-1Suche in Google Scholar

Stenström A.-B. 1995. “Some remarks on comment clauses”. In: Aarts, B. and C.F. Meyer (eds.), The verb in contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 290-299.Suche in Google Scholar

Thompson, S.A. and A. Mulac. 1991a. “The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English”. Journal of Pragmatics 15. 237-251.10.1016/0378-2166(91)90012-MSuche in Google Scholar

Thompson, S.A. and A. Mulac. 1991b. “A quantitative perspective on the grammaticalization of epistemic parentheticals in English”. In: Traugott, E.C. and B. Heine (eds.), (vol. 2). 313-329.Suche in Google Scholar

Thompson, S.A. 2002. ‘“Object complements’ and conversation. Towards a realistic account”. Studies in Language 26(1). 125-164.10.1075/sl.26.1.05thoSuche in Google Scholar

Traugott, E.C. 1989. “On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change”. Language 65 (1). 31-55.10.2307/414841Suche in Google Scholar

Traugott, E.C. and B. Heine (eds.). 1991. Approaches to grammaticalization. {Typological studies in Language 19.) (2 vols.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.19.1Suche in Google Scholar

Traugott, E.C. 1995. “The role of discourse markers in a theory of grammaticaliza-tion”. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Manchester, UK, August 1995.Suche in Google Scholar

Traugott, E.C. and R.B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486500Suche in Google Scholar