Discourse Motivations of Mental Construal and the Expression of Stance in Speech: A Case Study of English
- Авторлар: Khrisonopulo E.Y.1
-
Мекемелер:
- Saint-Petersburg State University of Culture
- Шығарылым: Том 21, № 1 (2017): Discourse Analysis in the 21 st Century: Theory an d Practice (II)
- Беттер: 91-104
- Бөлім: Articles
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2687-0088/article/view/331548
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2017-21-1-91-104
- ID: 331548
Дәйексөз келтіру
Толық мәтін
Аннотация
Негізгі сөздер
Авторлар туралы
Ekaterina Khrisonopulo
Saint-Petersburg State University of Culture
Email: hrisonopulo@mail.ru
2, Dvortsovaya nab., Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 191186
Әдебиет тізімі
- Кубрякова Е.С. Номинативные аспекты речевой деятельности. М.: Наука, 1986. [Kubryakova E.S (1986). Nominativnyi aspekt rechevoi deyatel’nosti. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ).]
- Кубрякова Е.С. В поисках сущности языка. Когнитивные исследования // Институт языкознания РАН. М.: Знак, 2012. [Kubryakova E.S. (2012) V poiskakh sushchnosti yazyka. Kognitivnye issledovaniya / Institut yazykoznaniya RAN. Moscow: Znak. (In Russ).]
- Кубрякова Е.С. Язык и знание: на пути получения знания о языке: части речи с когнтивной точки зрения. Роль языка в познании мира // Институт языкознания РАН. М.: Языки Славянских культур, 2004. [Kubryakova E.S. Yazyk i znaniye: Na puti polucheniya znanij o yazyke: Chasti rechi s kognitivnoj tochki zreniya. Rol’ yazyka v poznanii mira / Institut yazykoznaniya RAN. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kultur. (In Russ).]
- Сидоров Е.В. Онтология дискурса. 2-е изд. М.: Либроком, 2009. [Sidorov E.V. (2009). Ontologiya diskursa. 2nd ed. Moscow: Librokom. (In Russ).]
- Сидоров Е.В. Порядок текста. М.: Российский государственный социальный университет, 2011. [Sidorov E.V. (2001). Poryadok teksta. Moscow: Russian State Social University. (In Russ).]
- Berman, R.A. (2004). Introduction: developing discourse stance in different text types and languages. Journal of Pragmatics, 2004, 37, 105-124
- Biber, D. and Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93-124
- Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (2004). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited
- Bottineau, D. (2010). Language and enaction. In Stewart J., O. Gappenne, E. Di Paolo (eds.). Enaction: toward a new paradigm of cognitive science. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 267-306
- Du Maurier, D. (2006) The rendezvous and other stories. Great Britain: Virago Press
- Garrod, S. and. Pickering, M.J. (2004). Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 8-11
- Garrod, S. and Pickering, M.J. (2013). Interactive alignment and prediction in dialogue. In Wachsmuth I., J. de Ruiter, P. Jaecks and S. Kopp (eds.). Alignment in communication: towards a new theory of communication. Amsterdam. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 193-203
- Hyland, K. and P. (2005). Tse Evaluative ‘that’ constructions: signalling stance in research abstracts. Functions of Language, 12(1), 39-63
- Kärkkäinen, E. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation: a description of its interactional functions, with a focus on ‘I think’. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
- Kärkkäinen, E. (2006). Stancetaking in conversation: from subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text and Talk, 26(6), 699-731
- Kärkkäinen, E. (2007). The role of ‘I guess’ in conversational stancetaking. In Englebretson R. (eds.). Stancetaking in discourse: subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 183-219
- Keysanen, T. (2007). Stancetaking as an interactional activity: challenging the prior speaker. In Englebretson R. (eds). Stancetaking in discourse: subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 253-282
- Langacker, R.W. (1987). Grammatical ramifications of the setting / participant distinction. In Proceedings of the 13th BLS Annual Meeting, 383-394
- Langacker, R.W. (2000a) Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000a
- Langacker, R.W. (2000b). Why a mind is necessary: conceptualization, grammar and linguistic semantics. In Albertazzi, L. (ed.). Meaning and cognition: a multidisciplinary approach. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 25-38
- Langacker, R.W. (2011). On the subject of impersonals. In Brdar M., S.Th. Gries, M.Ž. Fuchs (eds.). Cognitive linguistics: convergence and expansion. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 179-217
- Le Carré, J. (2000). The spy who came in from the cold. Great Britain: Coronet Books, 2000
- Leontiev, A.A. (2000). The heuristic principle in the perception, emergence, and assimilation of speech. In Lenneberg Eric H. and Elizabeth Lenneberg (eds). Foundations of language development: a multidisciplinary approach. Paris: The UNESCO Press, 1975. 43-58
- Leontiev, A.A. (1981). Sign and activity. In Wertsch J.W. (eds). The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., Publisher, 241-255
- Leontiev, A.A. (2006a). Psycholinguistic units and speech generation. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 2006a, 44 (4), 7-88
- Leontiev, A.A. (2006b). Units and levels of activity. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 44 (3), 30-46
- Stewart, J., O. Gapenne and E.A. Di Paolo (eds.). Enaction: toward a new paradigm of cognitive science. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2010. XVIII
Қосымша файлдар
