Chapter published in:
Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: New perspectives
Edited by Chiara Fedriani and Andrea Sansó
[Studies in Language Companion Series 186] 2017
► pp. 369397
References

References

Adamczyk, Magdalena
2015Do hedges always hedge? On non-canonical multifunctionality of jakby in Polish. Pragmatics: Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 25(3): 321–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin
2002English Discourse Particles. Evidence from a Corpus [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 10]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, Gisle 2001Pragmatic Markers and Sociolinguistic Variation. A Relevance-theoretic Approach to the Language of Adolescents [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 84]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Awdiejew, Aleksy & Habrajska, Grażyna
2006Wprowadzenie do gramatyki komunikacyjnej (Introduction to communicational grammar), Vol. 2. Łask: Oficyna Wydawnicza LEKSEM.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
1988‘So’ as a constraint on relevance. In Mental Representations. The Interface between Language and Reality, Ruth M. Kempson (ed.), 183–195. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2007Discourse markers. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, 3rd edn. [Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics 16], Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 221–240. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
1996Pragmatic Markers in English. Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions [Topics in English Linguistics 19]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charciarek, Andrzej
2010Polskie wyrażenia metatekstowe o funkcji fatycznej i ich odpowiedniki czeskie i rosyjskie (Polish phatic metatextual expressions and their Czech and Russian equivalents) [Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach 2751. Językoznawstwo Słowiańskie]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.Google Scholar
Clemen, Gudrun
1997The concept of hedging: Origins, approaches and definitions. In Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts [Research in Text Theory/Untersuchungen zur Texttheorie 24], Raija Markkanen & Hartmut Schröder (eds), 235–248. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Czapiga, Zofia
2006Rosyjskie operatory metatekstowe i ich polskie odpowiedniki (Russian metatextual operators and their Polish equivalents). Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego.Google Scholar
Erman, Britt & Kotsinas, Ulla-Britt
1993Pragmaticalization: The case of ba’ and you know . Studier i Modernspråkvetenskap 10: 76–93.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
2006Towards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles: Introduction to the volume. In Approaches to Discourse Particles [Studies in Pragmatics 1], Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 1–20. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Frank-Job, Barbara
2006A dynamic-interactional approach to discourse markers. In Approaches to Discourse Particles [Studies in Pragmatics 1], Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 359–374. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1975Hedged performatives. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds), 187–210. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2010Pragmatic competence: The case of hedging. In New Approaches to Hedging [Studies in Pragmatics 9], Gunther Kaltenböck, Wiltrud Mihatsch & Stefan Schneider (eds), 15–34. Bingley: Emerald. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Habrajska, Grażyna
2004Komunikacyjna analiza i interpretacja tekstu (A communicational analysis and interpretation of text). Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.Google Scholar
Hübler, Axel
1983Understatements and Hedges in English [Pragmatics and Beyond IV:6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jagodziński, Grzegorz
2008Zaimki (Pronouns) 26 February 2008, <http://​grzegorj​.w​.interiowo​.pl​/gram​/pl​/zaimki​.html> (19 September 2015).
Jucker, Andreas H.
1993The discourse marker well: A relevance-theoretical account. Journal of Pragmatics 19(5): 435–452. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kryk, Barbara
1992aThe pragmatics of interjections: The case of Polish no . Journal of Pragmatics 18(2–3): 193–207. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kryk, Barbara 1992bA cross-linguistic look at discourse particles. In New Departures in Contrastive Linguistics/Neue Ansätze in der Kontrastiven Linguistik. Proceedings of the Conference held at the Leopold-Franzens-University of Innsbruck, Austria, 10–12 May 1991 [Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft. Anglistische Reihe 4], Christian Mair & Manfred Markus (eds), 43–50. Innsbruck: Verlag des Instituts für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1972Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. In Papers from the 8th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society [Chicago Linguistic Society 8], Paul M. Peranteau, Judith N. Levi & Gloria C. Phares (eds), 183–228. Chicago IL: CLS.Google Scholar
Lenk, Uta
1998Marking Discourse Coherence. Functions of Discourse Markers in Spoken English [Language in Performance 15]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Mišković-Luković, Mirjana & Dedaić, Mirjana N.
2010South Slavic discourse particles: Introduction. In South Slavic Discourse Particles [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 197], Mirjana N. Dedaić & Mirjana Mišković-Luković (eds), 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ożóg, Kazimierz
1990Leksykon metatekstowy współczesnej polszczyzny mówionej. Wybrane zagadnienia (Metatextual lexicon of contemporary spoken Polish. Selected issues) [Rozprawy Habilitacyjne 198]. Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński.Google Scholar
Pęzik, Piotr
2012Dane mówione w NKJP (Spoken data in NKJP [Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego/The National Corpus of Polish]). In Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego (The National Corpus of Polish), Adam Przepiórkowski, Mirosław Bańko, Rafał L. Górski & Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds), 272–273. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
2015Spokes – a search and exploration service for conversational corpus data. In Selected Papers from the CLARIN 2014 Conference, October 24-25, 2014, Soesterberg, The Netherlands [Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 116], 99–109. Linköping University Electronic Press, Linköpings universitet.
Pisarkowa, Krystyna
1975Składnia rozmowy telefonicznej (The syntax of telephone conversation) [Prace Instytutu Języka Polskiego 5]. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich (Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk).Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F., Frader Joel & Bosk, Charles
1982On hedging in physician-physician discourse. In Linguistics and the Professions: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Delaware Symposium on Language Studies [Advances in Discourse Processes 8], Robert J. Di Pietro (ed.), 83–97. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Rouchota, Villy
1998Procedural meaning and parenthetical discourse markers. In Discourse Markers. Descriptions and Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 57], Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds), 97–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted J. M. & Noordman, Leo G. M.
2000The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes 29(1): 37–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1985Conversational coherence: The role of well . Language 61(3): 640–667. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987Discourse Markers [Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 5]. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence
1999Discourse markers. Tutorial overview. Lingua 107(3–4): 227–265. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schröder, Hartmut & Zimmer, Dagmar 1997Hedging research in pragmatics: A bibliographical research guide to hedging. In Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts [Research in Text Theory/Untersuchungen zur Texttheorie 24], Raija Markkanen & Hartmut Schröder (eds), 249–272. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Słownik języka polskiego PWN
(The dictionary of Polish). Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. http://​sjp​.pwn​.pl> (17 January 2015).
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1995Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Linguistic Perspectives, Dieter Stein & Susan Wright (eds), 31–54. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Discussion article: Discourse markers, modal particles, and contrastive analysis, synchronic and diachronic. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 6: 139–157. Special issue: Contrastive Perspectives on Discourse Markers.Google Scholar
Voghera, Miriam
2013A case study on the relationship between grammatical change and synchronic variation. The emergence of tipo[-N] in Italian. In Synchrony and Diachrony. A Dynamic Interface [Studies in Language Companion Series 133], Anna Giacalone Ramat, Caterina Mauri & Piera Molinelli (eds), 283–312. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wielki słownik języka polskiego
PAN (The great dictionary of Polish). Wydawnictwo Naukowe PAN. http://​www​.wsjp​.pl> (18 September 2015).
Wierzbicka, Anna
1971Metatekst w tekście (Metatext in text). In O spójności tekstu (On the cohesion of text) [Z Dziejów Form Artystycznych w Literaturze Polskiej 21], Maria Renata Mayenowa (ed.), 105–121. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich (Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk).Google Scholar
Żydek-Bednarczuk, Urszula
1994Struktura tekstu rozmowy potocznej (The textual structure of casual conversation) [Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach 1409. Językoznawstwo Polonistyczne]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.Google Scholar