Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:15:59.394Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Standards of adequacy in Functional Grammar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Christopher Butler
Christopher Butler
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, School of Modern Languages, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , September 1991 , pp. 499 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bühler, K. (1934). Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. H. & Dik, S. C. (eds) (1989). Functional Grammar and the computer. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Dik, S. C. (1978). Functional Grammar. Amsterdam: North Holland (3rd edn 1981, Dordrecht: Foris).Google Scholar
Dik, S. C. (1986a). On the notion ‘Functional Explanation’. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 1. 11–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dik, S. C. (1986b). Linguistically motivated knowledge representations. Working papers in Functional Grammar 9. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. Also in Nagao, M. (ed.) (1987) Language and artificial intelligence. Amsterdam: North Holland. 145–170.Google Scholar
Dik, S. C. & Hengeveld, K.. (1990). The hierarchical structure of the clause and the typology of perception verb complements. Working papers in Functional Grammar 37. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. Also in Linguistics 29 (1991). 231–259.Google Scholar
Dik, S. C., Hengeveld, K., Vester, E. & Vet, C. (1990). The hierarchical structure of the clause and the typology of adverbial satellites. In Nuyts, J., Bolkestein, A. M. & Vet, C. (eds) Layers and levels of representation in language theory: a functional view. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 25–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, W. A. & van Valin, R. D. (1984). Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr (1984). Literal meaning and psychological theory. Cognitive Science 8. 275–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L. (1985a). Modality and the modals: a problem for Functional Grammar. In Bolkestein, A. M., de Groot, C. & Mackenzie, J. L. (eds) Predicates and terms in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris. 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L. (1985b). The auxiliarization of the English modals. Working papers in Functional Grammar 7. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. (Also published as ‘The auxiliarization of the English modals: a Functional Grammar view’, In Harris, M. & Ramat, P. (eds) (1987) Historical development of auxiliaries. Berlin: de Gruyter. 111–143.)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. (1985). Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hannay, M. (1990). Pragmatic function assignment and word order variation in a Functional Grammar of English. In Pragmatic functions: the view from the VU, Working papers in Functional Grammar 38. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. To appear also in Journal of Pragmatics.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1983). Word order universals. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, K. (1987). Clause structure and modality in Functional Grammar. In van der Auwera, J. & Goossens, L. (eds) Ins and outs of the predication. Dordrecht: Foris. 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K. (1988). Illocution, mood and modality in a Functional Grammar of Spanish. Journal of Semantics 6. 227–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K. (1989). Layers and operators in Functional Grammar. JL 25. 127–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesp, C. (1990). A critique of FG-CNLU. Working papers in Functional Grammar 35. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B. & Holmes, J. (eds) Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 269–293.Google Scholar
Keijsper, C. E. (1990). Waar gaat de FG heen? Mimeo. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Keizer, E. (1988). Definiteness and indefiniteness: a scalar representation. Working papers in Functional Grammar 26. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987a). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987b). Transitivity, case and grammatical relations: a Cognitive Grammar prospectus. Linguistic Agency Series A 172. Duisburg: University of Duisburg.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. L. & Keizer, M. E. (1990). On assigning pragmatic functions in English. In Pragmatic functions: the view from the VU, Working papers in Functional Grammar 38. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Nuyts, J. (1983). On the methodology of a functional language theory. In Dik, S. C. (ed.) Advances in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris. 369–404.Google Scholar
Nuyts, J. (1985). Some considerations concerning the notion of ‘psychological reality’ in Functional Grammar. In Bolkestein, A. M., de Groot, C. & Mackenzie, J. L. (eds) Syntax and pragmatics in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris. 91–105.Google Scholar
Nuyts, J. (1989). Functional Procedural Grammar: an overview. Working papers in Functional Grammar 31. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1981). Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, P. (ed.) Radical pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 223–255.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch, E. R. & Lloyd, B. (eds) Categorization and cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. 27–47.Google Scholar