Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of General Phonetics. Chicago: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Akerejola, E. (2005). A systemic functional grammar of Òkó. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.Google Scholar

Arús, J. (2010). On theme in English and Spanish: a comparative study. In Swain, E. (ed.), Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Multilingual, Multimodal and Other Specialised Discourses (pp. 23–48). Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar

Arús-Hita, J., Teruya, K., Bardi, M. A., Kumar, A. & Mwinlaaru, I. (2018). Quoting and reporting across languages: a system-based and text-based typology. Word, 64(2), 69–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2018.1463001Google Scholar

Bache, C. (2008). English Tense and aspect in Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar: A Critical Appraisal and an Alternative. London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.) (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bartoš, L. (1980). La atribución relacional y el adjetivo de relación en el español. Études romanes de Brno, 11, 69–77.Google Scholar

Bateman, J., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Nanri, K. & Zeng, L. (1991). The rapid prototyping of natural language generation components: an application of functional typology. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, 24–30 August 1991 (pp. 966–71). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar

Bateman, J., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Zeng, L. (1999). Multilingual language generation for multilingual software: a functional linguistic approach. Applied Artificial Intelligence: An International Journal, 13(6), 607–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bello, A. (1847). Gramática de la lengua castellana destinada al uso de los americanos. Santiago de Chile: Imprenta del Progreso.Google Scholar

Belloro, V. (2007). Spanish clitic doubling: a study of the syntax–pragmatics interface. Unpublished PhD dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.Google Scholar

Belloro, V. (2009). Doblado de objeto y accesibilidad referencial. Actas del XV Congreso de la Asociación de Lingüística y Filología de América Latina. Montevideo: Universidad de la República.Google Scholar

Benveniste, É. (1966). Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar

Berry, M. (1981a). Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: a multi-layered approach to exchange structure. In Coulthard, M. & Montgomery, M. (eds.), Studies in Discourse Analysis (pp. 120–45). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Berry, M. (1981b). Towards layers of exchange structure for directive exchanges. Network, 2, 23–32.Google Scholar

Berry, M. (2017). Stratum, delicacy, realisation and rank. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 42–55). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bloor, T. & Bloor, M. (2013). The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach (3rd edn). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bogard, S. (1999). Duplicación y clausura argumental: dos funciones del clítico reflexivo en español. Español actual, 71, 41–48.Google Scholar

Bosque, I. (ed.) (1990). Tiempo y aspecto en español. Madrid: Cátedra.Google Scholar

Bosque, I. (1993). Sobre las diferencias entre los adjetivos relacionales y los calificativos. Revista Argentina de Lingüística, 9, 9–48.Google Scholar

Bull, W. E. (1960). Time, Tense and the Verb: A Study in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, with Particular Attention to Spanish. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Burton, D. (1980). Dialogue and Discourse. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Burton, D. (1981). Analysing spoken discourse. In Coulthard, M. C. & Montgomery, M. (eds.), Studies in Discourse Analysis (pp. 146–57). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Caffarel, A. (1992). Interacting between a generalized tense semantics and register-specific semantic tense systems: a bistratal exploration of the semantics of French tense. Language Sciences, 14(4), 385–418. doi: 10.1016/0388-0001(92)90023-8Google Scholar

Caffarel, A. (2006). A Systemic Functional Grammar of French: From Grammar to Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (eds.) (2004). Language Typology: A Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Caldwell, D., Knox, J. & Martin, J. R. (eds.) (2022). Appliable Linguistics and Social Semiotics: Developing Theory from Practice. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Camus, B. (1992). Negación doble y negación simple en español moderno. Revista de filología románica, 9, 63–111.Google Scholar

Carbonero, P. (1980). Afirmación, negación, duda. Revista española de lingüística, 10, 161–76.Google Scholar

Castro, S. (2010). Las disfluencias en el habla espontánea de Santiago de Chile. Unpublished Master’s thesis in linguistics, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago.Google Scholar

Catford, J. C. (1977). Fundamental Problems in Phonetics. Indiana: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Chao, Y. R. (1948). Mandarin Primer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chao, Y. R. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Christie, F. & Martin, J. R. (eds.) (1997). Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and school. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Cummings, M. (2021). Interpreting the Old English nominal group from a parsed corpus. Word, 67(4), 493–520. doi: 10.1080/00437956.2021.1993589CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In Daneš, F. (ed.), Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective (pp. 106–28). Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidse, K. (1991/9). Categories of Experiential Grammar (vol. 11, Monographs in Systemic Linguistics). Nottingham: Department of English and Media Studies, Nottingham Trent University.Google Scholar

Davidse, K. (1998). Agnates, verb classes and the meaning of construals: the case of ditransitivity in English. Leuvense Bijdragen, 87(3–4), 281–313.Google Scholar

Davidse, K. (2018). A tribute to M. A. K. Halliday (1925–2018). Functions of Language, 25(2), 205–28. doi: 10.1075/fol.00008.davCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Di Paolo, M. (1989). Double modals as single lexical items. American Speech, 64(3), 195–224. https://doi.org/10.2307/455589Google Scholar

Di Tullio, Á. (1998). Complementos no flexivos de verbos de percepción física en español. Verba: anuario galego de filoloxía, 25, 197–221.Google Scholar

Ding, L. (1999). 从问句系统看“是不是”问句 [Cóng wènjù xìtǒng kàn ‘shì bù shì’ wènjù, A study of ‘shì bù shì’ questions from the perspective of question system]. 《中国语文》 [Zhōngguó Yǔwén, Studies of the Chinese Language], (6), 415–20.Google Scholar

Doran, Y. J. & Martin, J. R. (2021). Field relations: understanding scientific explanations. In Maton, K., Martin, J. R. & Doran, Y. J. (eds.), Teaching Science: Language, Knowledge, Pedagogy (pp. 105–33). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Doran, Y. J., Martin, J. R. & Zhang, D. (eds.) (2021a). The grammar of nominal groups: systemic functional linguistic perspectives (Special Issue on the nominal group, Part 1). Word, 67(3).Google Scholar

Doran, Y. J., Martin, J. R. & Zhang, D. (eds.) (2021b). The grammar of nominal groups: systemic functional linguistic perspectives (Special Issue on the nominal group, Part 2a). Word, 67(4).Google Scholar

Doran, Y. J., Martin, J. R. & Zhang, D. (eds.) (2022a). The grammar of nominal groups: systemic functional linguistic perspectives (Special Issue on the nominal group, Part 2b). Word, 68(1).Google Scholar

Doran, Y. J., Martin, J. R. & Zhang, D. (eds.) (2022b).The grammar of nominal groups: systemic functional linguistic perspectives (Special Issues on the nominal group). Word, 68(2).Google Scholar

Dreyfus, S., Humphrey, S., Mahboob, A. & Martin, J. R. (2015). Genre Pedagogy in Higher Education: The SLATE Project. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Dumitrescu, D. (1973). Apuntes sobre el uso enfático de ‘sí’ (adv.) en el español contemporáneo. Revue roumaine de linguistique, 18(5), 407–13.Google Scholar

Dumistrescu, D. (1979). El sistema de las respuestas minimales en castellano. Revue roumaine de linguistique, 24(1), 45–54.Google Scholar

Ellegård, A. (1953). The Auxiliary ‘Do’: The Establishment and Regulation of Its Use in English. Stockholm: Almqvist och Wiksell.Google Scholar

Enrique-Arias, A. (2003). From clitics to inflections: diachronic and typological evidence for affixal object agreement marking in Spanish. In Fradin, B. (ed.), Les unités morphologiques: Forum de morphologie (3e rencontres) (pp. 67–75). Lille: Université de Lille.Google Scholar

Evans, N. (2010). Dying Words: Endangered Languages and What They Have to Tell Us. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Fang, J. (2022). A Systemic Functional Grammar of Chinese Nominal Groups: A Text-based Approach. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fang, Y., McDonald, E. & Cheng, M. (1995). On Theme in Chinese: from clause to discourse. In Hasan, R. & Fries, P. H. (eds.), On Subject and Theme: A Discourse Functional Perspective (pp. 235–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. (1988). What makes a ‘good’ system network good? Four pairs of concepts for such evaluations. In Benson, J. D. & Greaves, W. S. (eds.), Systemic Functional Approaches to Discourse (pp. 1–28). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. (2000a). A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. (2000b). In place of Halliday’s ‘verbal group’, Part 1: evidence from the problems of Halliday’s representations and the relative simplicity of the proposed alternative. Word, 51(2), 157–203. doi: 10.1080/00437956.2000.11432500Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. (2000c). In place of Halliday’s ‘verbal group’, Part 2: evidence from generation, semantics and interruptability. Word, 51(3), 327–75. doi: 10.1080/00437956.2000.11432503Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. (2008). Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar (3rd edn). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Fernández-Soriano, O. (1999a). El pronombre personal: formas y distribuciones. Pronombres átonos y tónicos. In Bosque, I. & Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (vol. I, Sintaxis básica de las clases de palabras, pp. 1209–73). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar

Fernández-Soriano, O. (1999b). Two types of impersonal sentences in Spanish: locative and dative subjects. Syntax, 2(2), 101–40.Google Scholar

Figueredo, G. (2014). Uma metodologia de perfilação gramatical sistêmica baseada em corpus. Letras & letras, 30(2), 17–45. doi: 10.14393/LL60-v30n2a2014-2Google Scholar

Figueredo, G. (2021) The nominal group in Brazilian Portuguese. Word, 67(4), 461–92. doi: 10.1080/00437956.2021.1993588Google Scholar

Figueredo, G. & Figueredo, G. P. (2020). A systemic dynamics model of text production. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 27(4), 291–320. doi: 10.1080/09296174.2019.1567301Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In Bach, E. & Harms, T. (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar

Firbas, J. (1966). Non-thematic subjects in contemporary English. Travaux linguistiques de Prague, 2, 239–56.Google Scholar

FitzSimons, P. (2005). Place in time: Bondi Beach. The Sydney Magazine, 23 February.Google Scholar

Fontaine, L. (2017). The English nominal group: the centrality of the Thing element. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 267–83). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Fontaine, L. & Schönthal, D. (2019). The rooms of the house: grammar at group rank. In Thompson, G., Bowcher, W. L., Fontaine, L. & Schöntahl, D. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 118–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fontanella, M. B. (1992). Variación sincrónica y diacrónica de las construcciones con ‘haber’ en el español americano. Boletín de filología de la Universidad de Chile, 33, 35–46.Google Scholar

Fries, P. (1981). On the status of theme in English: arguments from discourse. Forum Linguisticum, 6(1), 1–38.Google Scholar

Fuentes-Rodríguez, C., Placencia, M. E. & Palma-Fahey, M. (2016). Regional pragmatic variation in the use of the discourse marker pues in informal talk among university students in Quito (Ecuador), Santiago (Chile) and Seville (Spain). Journal of Pragmatics, 97, 74–92. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.03.006Google Scholar

Fung, K. C. A. (2018). Analysing Cantonese doctor–patient communication: A semantic network approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar

Garachana, M. (ed.) (2017). La gramática en la diacronía: La evolución de las perífrasis verbales modales en español. Madrid: Iberoamericana/Veuvert.Google Scholar

García, L. & Camus, B. (eds.) (2004). El pretérito imperfecto. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar

Gili, S. (1958/2000). Curso superior de sintaxis española (15th edn). Barcelona: Biblograf.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. H. (1966). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. H. (ed.), Universals of Language (2nd edn, pp. 73–113). Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gu, Y. (2002). Towards an understanding of workplace discourse: a pilot study for compiling a spoken Chinese corpus of situated discourse. In Candlin, Ch (ed.), Theory and Practice of Professional Discourse (pp. 137–85). Hong Kong: CUHK Press.Google Scholar

Guo, R. (1993). 汉语动词的过程结构 [Hànyǔ dòngcí de guòchéng jiégòu, Process structures of Chinese verbs]. 《中国语文》 [Zhōngguó Yǔwén, Studies of the Chinese Language], (6), 410–20.Google Scholar

Guzmán, J. A. (2010). La ola maldita. Paula. Retrieved on 5 August 2021 from www.latercera.com/paula/la-ola-maldita/Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1956). Grammatical categories in modern Chinese. Transactions of the Philological Society, 55(1), 178–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1956.tb00567.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1959–60/1966). Typology and the exotic. In Halliday, M. A. K. & McIntosh, A. (eds.), (1966), Patterns of Language: Papers in General, Descriptive and Applied Linguistics (pp. 165–82). London: Longman.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1961/2002). Categories of the theory of grammar. In Webster, J. (ed.), On Grammar (vol. I, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 37–94). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1964). Syntax and the consumer. In Stuart, C. I. J. M. (ed.), Report of the Fifteenth Annual (First International) Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Study (Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, 17, pp. 11–24). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1964/76). English system networks. In Kress, G. (ed.), Halliday: System and Function in Language (pp. 101–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1965/81). Types of structure. In Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (eds.), Readings in Systemic Linguistics (pp. 29–41). London: Batsford.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1966). Some notes on ‘deep’ grammar. Journal of Linguistics, 2(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700001328Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1966/76). The English verbal group. In Kress, G. R. (ed.), Halliday: System and Function in Language (pp. 136–58). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1967a). Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1967b). Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: part I. Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 37–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1967c). Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: part II. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 199–244.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1968). Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: part III. Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 179–215.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1969/76). Types of process. In Kress, G. (ed.), Halliday: System and Function in Language (pp. 159–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). A Course in Spoken English: Intonation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1970/2005). Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. In Webster, J. (ed.), Studies in English Language (vol. VII, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 164–204). London: Continuum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M.A.K. (1977/2003). Ideas about language. In Webster, J. (ed.), On Language and Linguistics (vol. III, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp.92–115). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1979/2002). Modes of meaning and modes of expression: types of grammatical structure and their determination by different semantic functions. In Webster, J. (ed.), On Grammar (vol. I, The Collected Works of M. A. K Halliday, pp. 196–218). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1981). Structure. In Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (eds.), Readings in Systemic Linguistics (pp. 122–31). London: Batsford.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1982/2002). The de-automatization of grammar: from Priestley’s an inspector calls. In Webster, J. (ed.), Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse (vol. II, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 126–48). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1984a). Language as code and language as behaviour: a systemic functional interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of dialogue. In Fawcett, R., Halliday, M. A. K., Lamb, S. & Makkai, A. (eds.), The Semiotics of Culture and Language (vol. I, Language as Social Semiotic, pp. 3–35). London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1984/2002). On the ineffability of grammatical categories. In Webster, J. (ed.), On Grammar (vol. I, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 291–322).London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1984b). Linguistics in the university: the question of social accountability. In Copeland, J. E. (ed.), New Directions in Linguistics and Semiotics (pp. 51–67). Houston, TX: Rice University Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985/2005). It’s a fixed word order language is English. In Webster, J. (ed.), Studies in English Language (vol. VII, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 213–31). London: Continuum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1991/2005). Language as system and language as instance: the corpus as a theoretical construct. In Webster, J. (ed.), Computational and Quantitative Studies (vol. VI, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 76–92). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1992/2002). How do you mean? In Webster, J. (ed.), On Grammar (vol. I, The Collected Works of M. A. K Halliday, pp. 352–68). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1992/2003). Systemic grammar and the concept of a ‘science of language’. In Webster, J. (ed.), On Language and Linguistics (pp. 199–212). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (2003). Written language, standard language, global language. World Englishes, 22(4), 405–18.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (2008). Complementarities in Language. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (2010/13). Language evolving: some systemic functional reflections on the history of meaning. In Webster, J. (ed.), Halliday in the 21st Century (vol. XI, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, pp. 237–53). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (2014). That ‘certain cut’: towards a characterology of Mandarin Chinese. Functional Linguistics, 1, 4–23. doi: 10.1186/2196-419X-1-2Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Greaves, W. S. (2008). Intonation in the Grammar of English. London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English (English Language Series; No. 9). London: Longman.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & James, Z. L. (1993). A quantitative study of polarity and primary tense in the English finite clause. In Sinclair, J. M., Hoey, M. & Fox, G. (eds.), Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse (A Festschrift for Malcolm Coulthard) (pp. 32–66). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & McDonald, E. (2004). Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese. In Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (eds.), Language Typology: A Functional Perspective (pp. 305–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (eds.). (1993). Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edn). London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (4th edn). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hao, J. (2015). Construing biology: an ideational perspective. PhD dissertation, University of Sydney. www.isfla.org/Systemics/Print/Theses/HAO_2015_PhD_THESIS.pdfGoogle Scholar

Hao, J. (2018). Reconsidering ‘cause inside the clause’ in scientific discourse: from a discourse semantic perspective in systemic functional linguistics. Text & Talk, 38(5). doi: 10.1515/text-2018-0013Google Scholar

Hao, J. (2020a). Analysing Scientific Discourse: A Framework for Exploring Knowledge Building in Biology from a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hao, J. (2020b). Nominalisations in scientific English: a tristratal perspective. Functions of Language, 27(2), 143–73. doi: 10.1075/fol.16055.haoGoogle Scholar

Harrison, K. D. 2007. When Languages Die: The Extinction of the World’s Languages and the Erosion of Human Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hernández, A. (2006). Posesión y existencia: la competencia de ‘haber’ y ‘tener’ y ‘haber’ existencial. In Company, C. (ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua Española: Primera parte – la frase verbal (vol. II, pp. 1053–160). México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar

Hernanz, M. L. & Brucart, J. M. (1987). La sintaxis (vol. I, Principios teóricos: La oración simple). Barcelona: Crítica.Google Scholar

Hoang, V. (2012). An Experiential Grammar of the Vietnamese Clause. Hanoi: Vietnam Education Publishing House.Google Scholar

Hopper, P. J. & Traugott, E. C. (2003). Grammaticalization (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hu, Y. (2011). 《现代汉语》[Xiàndài Hànyǔ, Modern Chinese]. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press.Google Scholar

Huang, B. (1984). 《陈述句,疑问句,祈使句,感叹句》[Chénshù Jù, Yíwèn Jù, Qíshǐ Jù, Gǎntàn Jù, Declaratives, Interrogatives, Imperatives, Exclamatives]. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Publishing House.Google Scholar

Huang, B. & Liao, X. (2002). 《现代汉语》 [Xiàndài Hànyǔ, Modern Chinese] II. Beijing: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar

Huddleston, D. R. (1988). Constituency, multi-functionality and grammaticalization in Halliday’s Functional Grammar. Journal of Linguistics, 24, 137–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700011592Google Scholar

Iwasaki, S. & Ingkaphirom, P. (2005). A Reference Grammar of Thai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1949). On the identification of phonemic entities. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague, V (Recherches Structurales), 205–13.Google Scholar

Kashyap, A. K. (2019). Language typology. In Thompson, G., Bowcher, W. L., Fontaine, L. & Schöntal, D. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 767–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kim, M., Martin, J. R., Shin, G. & Choi, G. (2023). Korean Grammar: A Systemic-Functional Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kumar, A. (2009). A systemic functional description of the grammar of Bajjika. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.Google Scholar

Laca, B. (2005). Tiempo, aspecto y la interpretación de los verbos modales en español. Lingüística ALFAL, 17, 9–44.Google Scholar

Lamb, S. (1964). The sememic approach to structural semantics. American Anthropologist, 66(3), 57–78.Google Scholar

LaPolla, R. J. (2009). Chinese as a Topic-Comment (not Topic-Prominent and not SVO) language. In Xing, J. (ed.), Studies of Chinese Linguistics: Functional Approaches (pp. 9–22). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University PressGoogle Scholar

Lavid, J. (2000). Cross-cultural variation in multilingual instructions: a study of speech act realisation patterns. In Ventola, E. (ed.), Discourse and Community: Doing Functional Linguistics (pp. 71–85). Tübingen: Günter Narr.Google Scholar

Lavid, J., Arús, J. & Zamorano-Mansilla, J. R. (2010). Systemic Functional Description of Spanish: A Contrastive Study with English. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Lee, J. L. (2018). On the discovery procedure. In Brentari, D. & Lee, J. L. (eds.), Shaping Phonology (pp. 223–33). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lee, J. L. & Goldsmith, J. A. (2016). Linguistica 5: unsupervised learning of linguistic structure. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Demonstrations (pp. 22–6). San Diego: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar

Lemke, J. L. (1995). Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Li, E. S. (2007). Systemic Functional Grammar of Chinese: A Text-Based Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Li, E. S. (2017). The nominal group in Chinese. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 338–53). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Li, C. N. & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Liu, X. (2002). 现代汉语句尾“了”的语法意义及其解说 [Xiàndài Hànyǔ jùwěi ‘le’ de yǔfǎ yìyì jíqí jiěshuō, The grammatical meaning of the modal particle le and its explanation]. 《世界汉语教学》[Shìjiè Hànyǔ Jiàoxué, Chinese Teaching in the World], (3), 70–79.Google Scholar

Long, R. & Peng, X. (2012). 《现代汉语及物性研究》[Xiàndài Hànyǔ Jíwùxìng Yánjiū, Studies in Modern Chinese Transitivity]. Beijing: Peking University Press.Google Scholar

Lü, S. (1979). 《现代语法分析问题》[Xiàndài Yǔfǎ Fēnxī Wèntí, Issues in Modern Grammar Analysis]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Lü, S. (1999). 《现代汉语八百词》[Xiàndài Hànyǔ Bābǎi Cí, Eight Hundred Words in Modern Chinese]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Lü, S. (2014). 《中国文法要略》[Zhōngguó Wénfǎ Yàolüè, An Outline of Chinese Grammar]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Ma, Q. (2005). 《汉语动词和动词性结构》[Hànyǔ Dòngcí hé Dòngcíxìng Jiégòu, Chinese Verbs and Verbal Structures]. Beijing: Peking University Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (1996). Types of structure: deconstructing notions of constituency in clause and text. In Hovy, E. H. & Scott, D. R. (eds.), Computational and Conversational Discourse: Burning Issues – An interdisciplinary Account (pp. 39–66). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2002). From little things big things grow: ecogenesis in school geography. In Coe, R. M., Lingard, L. & Teslenko, T. (eds.), The Rhetoric and Ideology of Genre: Strategies for Stability and Change (pp. 243–271). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2004). Prosodic ‘structure’: grammar for negotiation. Ilha do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies, 46, 41–83. https://doi.org/10.5007/%25xGoogle Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2008a). Boomer dreaming: the texture of recolonisation in a lifestyle magazine. In Forey, G. & Thompson, G. (eds.), Text-Type and Texture: In Honour of Flo Davies (pp. 252–84). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2008b). What kind of structure: interpersonal meaning and prosodic realisation across strata. Word, 59(2), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2008.11432583Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2015). Cohesion and texture. In Tannen, D., Hamilton, H. E. & Schiffrin, D. (eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (2nd edn, pp. 61–81). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (ed.) (2018a). Interpersonal meaning: Systemic Functional Linguistics Perspectives (Special Issue of Functions of Language). 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.25.1Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2018b). Discourse semantics. In Thompson, G., Bowcher, W. L., Fontaine, L. & Schönthal, D. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 358–81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. (2018c). Meaning beyond the clause: co-textual relations. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 11(2–3), 203–35. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.34711Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Doran, Y. J. (eds.) (2015a). Around Grammar: Phonology, Discourse Semantics, Multimodality (vol. III, Critical Concepts in Linguistics: Systemic Functional Linguistics). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Doran, Y. J. (eds.) (2015b). Grammatical Descriptions (vol. II, Critical Concepts in Linguistics: Systemic Functional Linguistics). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Doran, Y. J. (eds.) (2015c). Grammatics (vol. I, Critical Concepts in Linguistics: Systemic Functional Linguistics). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., Doran, Y. J. & Figueredo, G. (eds.) (2020). Systemic Functional Language Description: Making Meaning Matter. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Dreyfus, S. (2015). Scaffolding semogenesis: designing teacher/student interactions for face-to-face and on-line learning. In Starc, S., Maiorani, A. & Jones, C. (eds.), Meaning Making in Text: Multimodal and Multilingual Functional Perspectives (pp. 265–98). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1991). Systemic typology and topology. In Christie, F. (ed.), Literacy in Social Processes: Papers from the Inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, Held at Deakin University, January 1990 (pp. 345–83). Darwin: Centre for Studies in Language in Education, Northern Territory University.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Painter, C. (2010). Deploying Functional Grammar. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., Quiroz, B. & Figueredo, G. (eds.) (2021). Interpersonal Grammar: Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory and Description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108663120Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Rose, D. (2003/2007). Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Rose, D. (2008). Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & White, P. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., Wang, P. & Zhu, Y. (2013). Systemic Functional Grammar: A Next Step into the Theory – Axial Relations. Beijing: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & Zappavigna, M. (2019). Embodied meaning: a systemic functional perspective on body language. Functional Linguistics, 6(1). doi: 10.1186/s40554-018-0065-9Google Scholar

Mathesius, V. (1933). Double negation and grammatical concord. In Mélanges de linguistique et de philologie offerts à J. van Ginneken (pp. 1–33). Paris: C. Klincksieck.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1995). Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1996). TENSE in English seen through systemic-functional theory. In Berry, M., Butler, C., Fawcett, R. & Huang, G. (eds.), Meaning and Form: Systemic Functional Interpretations (pp. 431–98). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). The system of TRANSITIVITY: an exploratory study of text-based profiles. Functions of Language, 6(1), 1–51. doi: 10.1075/fol.6.1.02matGoogle Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). Descriptive motifs and generalizations. In Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (eds.), Language Typology: A Functional Perspective (pp. 537–664). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2006). Frequency profiles of some basic grammatical systems: an interim report. In Hunston, S. & Thompson, G. (eds.), System and Corpus: Exploring Connections (pp. 103–42). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2007). The ‘architecture’ of language according to systemic functional theory: developments since the 1970s. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Webster, J. (eds.), Continuing Discourse on Language (vol. II, pp. 505–61). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Appliable discourse analysis. In Yan, F. & Webster, J. (eds.), Developing Systemic Functional Linguistics: Theory and Application (pp. 135–205). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2015a). Halliday on language. In Webster, J. (ed.), The Bloomsbury companion to M. A. K. Halliday (pp. 137–202). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2015b). Reflections on researching and teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Researching and Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language, 1(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2015c). Systemic functional morphology: the lexicogrammar of the word. In Rosa Francisco de Souza, E. (ed.), Estudos de descripção funcionalista: Objetos e abordagens (pp. 150–99). Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2018). The notion of a multilingual meaning potential: a systemic exploration. In Baklouti, A. & Fontaine, L. (eds.), Perspectives from Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 90–120). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2021). The architecture of phonology according to Systemic Functional Linguistics. In Teruya, K., Canzhong, W. & Slade, D. (eds.), Systemic Functional Linguistics, Part 1 (vol. I, Collected Works of Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, pp. 288–338). Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (forthcoming). The ‘architecture’ of language according to systemic functional theory. MS.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Arús-Hita, J. & Teruya, K. (2021). Translations of representations of moving and saying from English into Spanish. Word, 67(2), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2021.1909843Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Bateman, J. A. (1991). Systemic Linguistics and Text Generation: Experiences from Japanese and English. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Halliday, M. A. K. (1997/2009). Systemic Functional Grammar: A First Step into the Theory. Beijing: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Teruya, K. (forthcoming) The Routledge Guide to Systemic Functional Linguistics: Terms, Resources and Applications. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K. & Lam, M. (2010). Key Terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Wang, B., Ma, Y. & Mwinlaaru, I. N. (2022). Systemic Functional Insights on Language and Linguistics. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McDonald, E. (1994). Completive verb compounds in Modern Chinese: a new look at an old problem. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 22(2), 317–62. www.jstor.org/stable/23753925Google Scholar

McDonald, E. (1996). The ‘complement’ in Chinese grammar: a functional reinterpretation. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C. & Butt, D. (eds.), Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice (pp. 265–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.Google Scholar

McDonald, E. (1998). Clause and verbal group systems in Chinese: a text-based functional approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.Google Scholar

McDonald, E. (2017). Form and function in groups. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 251–66). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Meillet, A. (1903). Introduction à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar

Melis, C. & Flores, M. (2007). Los verbos pseudoimpersonales del español: una caracterización semántico-sintáctica. Verba: Anuario galego de filoloxia, 34, 7–57. http://hdl.handle.net/10347/3467Google Scholar

Montgomery, M. B. (2009). Historical and comparative perspectives on a-prefixing in the English of Appalachia. American Speech, 84(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2009-002Google Scholar

Moyano, E. (2010). El sistema de Tema en español: una mirada discursiva sobre una cuestión controvertida. In Ghio, E. & Fernández, M. D. (eds.), El discurso en español y portugués: Estudios desde una perspectiva sistémico-funcional (pp. 39–87). Santa Fe: Universidad Nacional del Litoral.Google Scholar

Moyano, E. (2016). Theme in English and Spanish: different means of realization for the same textual function. English Text Construction, 9(1), 190–220. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.9.1.10moyGoogle Scholar

Moyano, E. (2021). La función de Tema en español: sus medios de realización desde la perspectiva trinocular de la Lingüística Sistémico-Funcional. Revista signos, 54(106), 487–517. doi: 10.4067/S0718-09342021000200487Google Scholar

Mwinlaaru, I. (2017). A systemic functional description of the grammar of Dagaare. Unpublished PhD dissertation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.Google Scholar

Mwinlaaru, I. & Xuan, W. (2016). A survey of studies in systemic functional language description and typology. Functional Linguistics, 3(8). https://functionallinguistics.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40554-016-0030–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mwinlaaru, I., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Akerejola, E. (2018). A system-based typology of MOOD in African languages. In Agwuele, A. & Bodomo, A. (eds.), Handbook of African Languages (pp. 93–117). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Navarro, T. (1944). Manual de entonación española. Madrid: Guadarrama.Google Scholar

Neale, A. (2017). Transitivity in the Cardiff Grammar. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 178–93). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Nesbitt, C. & Plum, G. (1988). Probabilities in a systemic grammar: the clause complex in English. In Fawcett, R. & Young, D. (eds.), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics (vol. II, Theory and Application, pp. 6–38). London: Pinter.Google Scholar

Nespor, M., Shukla, M. & Mehler, J. (2011). Stress-timed vs. syllable-timed languages. In Oostendorp, M., Ewen, C. J., Hume, E. & Rice, K. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology (vol. II, pp. 1–13). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0048Google Scholar

Norman, J. (1988). Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ostler, N. (2005). Empires of the Word: A Language History of the World. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Pamies, A. (1999). Prosodic typology: on the dichotomy between stress-timed and syllable-timed languages. Language Design, 2, 103–30. http://elies.rediris.es/Language_Design/LD2/pamies.pdfGoogle Scholar

Patpong, P. (2005). A systemic functional interpretation of Thai grammar: an exploration of Thai narrative discourse. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.Google Scholar

Penny, R. (2002). A History of the Spanish Language (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Picallo, M. C. & Rigau, G. (1999). El posesivo y las relaciones posesivas. In Bosque, I. & Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (vol. I, Sintaxis básica de las clases de palabras, pp. 973–1023). Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar

Pike, L. K. (1945/72). General characteristics of intonation. In Bolinger, D. (ed.), Intonation: Selected Readings (pp. 53–82). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar

PRESEEA. (2014-22). Corpus del Proyecto para el estudio sociolingüístico del español de España y de América. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá. https://preseea.linguas.net/Corpus.aspxGoogle Scholar

Quilis, A. (1988). Fonética acústica de la lengua española. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2008). Towards a systemic profile of the Spanish mood. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 4(1), 31–65. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v4i1.31Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2013). The interpersonal and experiential grammar of Chilean Spanish: towards a principled systemic-functional description based on axial argumentation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney. www.isfla.org/Systemics/Print/Theses/BQuiroz_2013.pdfGoogle Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2015). La cláusula como movimiento interactivo: una perspectiva semántico-discursiva de la gramática interpersonal del español. DELTA: Documentação de Estudios em Linguística Teorica e Aplicada, 31(1), 261–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-445023762456121953Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2016). Convenciones de notación sistémica. Onomázein, 33(2), 412–26. doi: 10.7764/onomazein.33.24Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2017a). Gramática interpersonal básica del español: una caracterización sistémico-funcional del sistema de MODO. Lenguas modernas, 49, 157–82. https://revistas.uchile.cl/index.php/LM/article/view/49231Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2017b). The verbal group. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 301–18). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2018). Negotiating interpersonal meanings: reasoning about MOOD. Functions of Language, 25(1), 135–63. doi:10.1075/fol.17013.quiGoogle Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2020). Experiential cryptotypes: reasoning about PROCESS TYPE. In Martin, J. R., Doran, Y. J. & Figueredo, G. (eds.), Systemic Functional Language Description: Making Meaning Matter (pp. 102–28). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (2021). Interpersonal grammar in Spanish. In Martin, J. R., Quiroz, B. & Figuedero, G. (eds.), Interpersonal Grammar: Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory and Description (pp. 34–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. & Martin, J. R. (2021). Perfil sistémico-funcional del grupo nominal en español: estructura, funciones discursivas básicas y organización sistémica. Estudios filológicos, 68, 123–51. doi: 10.4067/s0071-17132021000200123Google Scholar

Quiroz, B. (in press) Procesos, participantes y circunstancias: una aproximación sistémico-funcional a la estructura experiencial de la cláusula española. Boletín de Filología.Google Scholar

Rochester, S. & Martin, J. R. (1979). Crazy Talk: A Study of the Discourse of Schizophrenic Speakers. New York/London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Rodríguez Espiñeira, M. J. (2000). Percepción directa e indirecta en español: diferencias semánticas y formales. Verba: Anuario galego de filoloxia, 27, 33–85. http://hdl.handle.net/10347/3331Google Scholar

Rojo, G. (1974). La temporalidad verbal en español. Verba: Anuario galego de filoloxia, 1, 68–149. http://hdl.handle.net/10347/2724Google Scholar

Rojo, G. & Veiga, A. (1999). El tiempo verbal: los tiempos simples. In Bosque, I. & Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (vol. II, pp. 2867–934). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar

Rose, D. (2001). The Western Desert Code: An Australian Cryptogrammar. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar

Rose, D. (2005). Narrative and the origins of discourse: construing experience in stories around the world. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 151–73. https://doi.org/10.1075/aralss.19.09rosGoogle Scholar

Rose, D. & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to Write, Reading to Learn: Genre, Knowledge and Pedagogy in the Sydney School. London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Sapir, E. (1921). Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech.New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.Google Scholar

Silva-Corvalán, C. (1980–1). La función pragmática de la duplicación de pronombres clíticos. Boletín de filología de la Universidad de Chile: Homenaje a Ambrosio Rabanales, 31, 561–70.Google Scholar

Silva-Corvalán, C. (1981). The diffusion of object-verb agreement in Spanish. Papers in Romance, 3(2), 163–76.Google Scholar

Soto, G. (2009). Vigencia y significado del pretérito anterior: un estudio a partir del español escrito en Chile. Estudios filológicos, 44, 227–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0071-17132009000100014Google Scholar

Steiner, E. & Yallop, C. (eds.) (2001). Exploring Translation and Multilingual Text Production: Beyond Content. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Suñer, M. (1978). Perception verb complements in Spanish: same or different? Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 23(1), 107–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taboada, M. (1995). Theme markedness in English and Spanish: a systemic-functional approach. Universidad Complutense de Madrid. www.sfu.ca/~mtaboada/docs/taboada-theme-markedness.pdfGoogle Scholar

Tam, H. R. (2004). A systemic-functional interpretation of Cantonese clause grammar. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney.Google Scholar

Tann, K. (2017). Context and meaning in the Sydney architecture of SFL. In Bartlett, T. & O’Grady, G. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 438–56). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Tao, L. (1998). “是不是”问句说略 [‘Shì bù shì’ wènjù shuōlüè, A brief account of ‘shì bù shì’ questions].《中国语文》[Zhōngguó Yǔwén, Studies of the Chinese Language], (2), 105–7.Google Scholar

Taverniers, M. (2018). Grammatical metaphor and grammaticalization: the case of metaphors of modality. Functions of Language, 25(1), 159–200. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.17014.tavGoogle Scholar

Teich, E. (1999). System-oriented and text-oriented comparative linguistic research: cross-linguistic variation in translation. Languages in Contrast, 2(2), 187–210. https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.2.2.04teiGoogle Scholar

Teich, E., Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Fankhauser, P., Kermes, H. & Lapshinova-Koltunski, E. (2016). The linguistic construal of disciplinarity: a data-mining approach using register features. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(7), 1668–78.Google Scholar

Teruya, K. (1998). An exploration into the world of experience: a systemic-functional interpretation of the grammar of Japanese. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.Google Scholar

Teruya, K. (2007). A Systemic Functional Grammar of Japanese (2 vols). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Teruya, K., Akerejola, E., Andersen, T. H., Caffarel, A., Lavid, J., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Petersen, U. H., Patpong, P. & Smedegaard, F. (2007). Typology of MOOD: a text-based and system-based functional view. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. & Webster, J. (eds.), Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective (vol. II, pp. 859–920). London: Equinox.Google Scholar

Teruya, K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2015). Halliday in relation to language comparison and typology. In Webster, J. (ed.), The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday (pp. 427–52). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar

Thai, M. D. (2004). Metafunctional profile: Vietnamese. In Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (eds.), Language Typology: A Functional Perspective (pp. 397–431). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Thompson, G. (2013). Introducing Functional Grammar (3rd edn). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tornel, J. L. (2001–2). Perífrasis verbales y consideraciones metodológicas (I y II). Contextos, 37–40, 39–88. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/2161011.pdfGoogle Scholar

Trubetzkoy, N. S. (1939). Grundzüge der Phonologie (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, vol. 7). Prague.Google Scholar

Tsao, F. (1980). A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: The First Step towards Discourse Analysis. Taipei: Student Book Co.Google Scholar

Vázquez, V. & García, M. (2012). A discourse-based analysis of object clitic doubling in Spanish. In Davidse, K., Breban, T., Brems, L. & Mortelmans, T. (eds.), Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections (pp. 271–97). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Veiga, A. (2004a). Cantaba y canté: sobre una hipótesis temporal y alguna de sus repercusiones. ELUA, Anexo 2 (El verbo), 599–614. http://dx.doi.org/10.14198/ELUA2004.Anexo2.29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Veiga, A. (2004b). La forma verbal ‘cantaba’ y la estructura modo-temporal del sistema verbal español. In García Fernández, L. & Camus Bergareche, B. (eds.), El pretérito imperfecto (pp. 96–193). Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar

Ventola, E. (1987). The Structure of Social Interaction: A Systemic Approach to the Semiotics of Service Encounters. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar

Wang, B. & Ma, Y. (2022) Introducing M. A. K. Halliday. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wang, L. (2011).《中国现代语法》[Zhōngguó Xiāndài Yǔfǎ, Modern Grammar of Chinese]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Wang, P. (2020a). Construing entities through nominal groups in Chinese. In M. Zappavigna & S. Dreyfus (eds.), Discourses of Hope and Reconciliation: On J. R. Martin’s Contribution to Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 57–83). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar

Wang, P. (2020b). Axial argumentation and cryptogrammar in interpersonal grammar: a case study of classical Tibetan. In Martin, J. R., Doran, Y. J. & G. Figueredo, (eds.), Systemic Functional Language Description: Making Meaning Matter (pp. 73–101). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wang, P. (2021). Interpersonal grammar in Chinese. In Martin, J. R., Quiroz, B. & Figueredo, G. (eds.), Interpersonal Grammar: Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory and Description (pp. 96–129). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Webster, J. (ed.) (2004). The Language of Early Childhood (vol. IV, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Webster, J. (ed.) (2005). Computational and Quantitative Studies (vol. VI, The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday). London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Westermann, D. (1907). Grammatik der Ewe-Sprache. Berlin: Dietrich Reimar (Ernst Vohsen).Google Scholar

Westermann, D. (1930). A Ststudy of the Ewe Llaanguage. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Whorf, B. L. (1945). Grammatical categories. Language, 21(1), 1–11. doi: 10.2307/410199. [Repr. In J. B. Carrol, (ed.) (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (pp. 87–101). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.]Google Scholar

Wiessner, P. W. (2014). Embers of society: firelight talk among the Ju/’hoansi Bushmen. PNAS, 111(39), 14027–35. doi: 10.1073/pnas.140421211Google Scholar

Wilson, E. O. (2019). Genesis: The Deep Origin of Societies. New York/London: Liveright Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar

Zappavigna, M. & Martin, J. R. (2018). Discourse and Diversionary Justice: An Analysis of Youth Justice Conferencing. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Zavala, V. (2001). Borrowing evidential functions from Quechua: the role of pues as a discourse marker in Andean Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 999–1023. doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00049-7Google Scholar

Zhou, X. (1997). Material and relational transitivity in Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar

Zhu, D. (1982). 《语法讲义》[Yǔfǎ Jiǎngyì, Lectures on Chinese Grammar]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar

Zuo, S. (1999). 现代汉语中“体”的研究——兼及体研究的类型学意义 [‘Xiàndài Hànyǔ zhōng ‘tǐ’ de yánjiū – jiānjí tǐ yánjiū de lèixíngxué yìyì, A study of ‘aspect’ in Modern Chinese and typological significance of aspect studies].《语文研究》[Yǔwén Yánjiū, Linguistic Research], (1), 9–20.Google Scholar