Bernstein, B. 1973. Class, Codes and Control, Volume 1: Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. 1990. The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse: Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Butt, D. G. and Liang, J.. 2016. In Her Own Words: An Interview with Ruqaiya Hasan. In Bowcher, W. and Liang, J., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 381–411.Google Scholar

Cloran, C. 1989. Learning through Language. In Hasan, R. and Martin, J. R., eds., Language Development: Learning Language, Learning Culture. Meaning and Choice in Language: Studies in Honour of Michael Halliday. Norwood: Ablex. 111–51.Google Scholar

Cloran, C. 1994. Rhetorical Units and Decontextualization: An Enquiry into Some Relations of Context, Meaning and Grammar. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1973. Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1975. Learning How to Mean. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1984. Listening to Nigel: Conversations of a Very Small Child. Sydney: Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1993. Towards a Language-based Theory of Learning. Linguistics and Education 5: 93–116.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 4: The Language of Early Childhood. Edited by Webster, J. J.. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007. Language and Socialization: Home and School. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 81–96.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2013. On Grammar as the Driving Force from Primary to Higher-order Consciousness. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 11: Halliday in the 21st Century. London: Bloomsbury. 159–90.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2016. Aspects of Language and Learning. In Webster, J. J., ed., The M. A. K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2004. The World in Words: Semiotic Mediation, Tenor and Ideology. In Williams, G. and Lukin, A., eds., The Development of Language: Functional Perspectives on Species and Individuals. London: Continuum. 158–82.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2005. The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 1: Language, Society and Consciousness. Edited by Webster, J. J.. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2009. The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 2: Semantic Variation: Meaning in Society and in Sociolinguistics. Edited by Webster, J. J.. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2010. The Meaning of ‘Not’ is Not in ‘Not’. In Mahboob, A. and Knight, N. K., eds., Appliable Linguistics. London: Continuum. 267–306.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2015a. Systemic Functional Linguistics: Halliday and the Evolution of a Social Semiotic. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Continuum. 101–34.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2015b. Ways of Saying, Ways of Meaning: Selected Papers of Ruqaiya Hasan. Edited by Cloran, C., Butt, D. G., and Williams, G.. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Hasan, R., Cloran, C., Williams, G., and Lukin, A.. 2007. Semantic Networks: The Description of Linguistic Meaning in SFL. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 281–310.Google Scholar

Painter, C. 1984. Into the Mother Tongue: A Case Study in Early Language Development. London: Pinter.Google Scholar

Painter, C. 2005. The Concept of ‘Protolanguage’ in Language Development. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1(2): 177–96.Google Scholar

Painter, C., Derewianka, B., and Torr, J.. 2007. From Microfunction to Metaphor: Learning Language and Learning through Language. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 563–88.Google Scholar

Torr, J. 1997. From Child Tongue to Mother Tongue: A Case Study of Language Development in the First Two and a Half Years. Nottingham: Department of English Studies, University of Nottingham.Google Scholar

Torr, J. 2015. Language Development in Early Childhood: Learning How to Mean. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Continuum. 242–56.Google Scholar

Trevarthen, C. 1998. The Concept and Foundations of Infant Intersubjectivity. In Bråten, S., ed., Intersubjective Communication and Emotion in Early Ontogeny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 15–46.Google Scholar

Trevarthen, C. 2009. The Intersubjective Psychobiology of Human Meaning: Learning of Culture Depends on Interest for Co-operative Practical Work, and Affection for the Joyful Art of Good Company. Psychoanalytic Dialogues 19(5): 507–18.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. 1986. Thought and Language. Edited and translated by Kozulin, A.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Whorf, B. L. 1956. Language, Thought and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Edited by Carroll, J.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 1995. Joint Book-reading and Literacy Pedagogy: A Socio-semantic Examination. Volumes 1 and 2. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2005. Semantic Variation. In Webster, J. J., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Hasan, R., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 457–80.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2012. Recontextualization and Semantic Variation. Plenary paper presented at the International Systemic Functional Congress, University of Technology, Sydney, 11 July 2012.Google Scholar

Williams, G. and Lukin, A., eds. 2004. The Development of Language: Functional Perspectives on Species and Individuals. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Achugar, M. and Colombi, M. C.. 2008. Systemic Functional Linguistic Explorations into the Longitudinal Study of Advanced Capacities: The Case of Spanish Heritage Language Learners, in Ortega, L. and Byrnes, H., eds., The Longitudinal Study of Advanced L2 Capacities. New York: Routledge. 36–57.Google Scholar

Atkinson, D., ed. 2011. Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bednarek, M. 2015. Emotion Talk across Corpora. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Bednarek, M. and Martin, J. R., eds. 2010. New Discourse on Language: Functional Perspectives on Multimodality, Identity, and Affiliation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Bhatia, V. K. 2004. Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Biber, D. and Gray, B.. 2016. Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bunch, G. and Willett, K.. 2013. Writing to Mean in Middle School: Understanding How Second Language Writers Negotiate Textually-rich Content-area Instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing 22: 141–78.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H., ed. 2006a. Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2006b. What Kind of Resource is Language and Why Does It Matter for Advanced Language Learning? An Introduction. In Byrnes, H., ed., Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum. 1–28.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2009. Emergent L2 German Writing Ability in a Curricular Context: A Longitudinal Study of Grammatical Metaphor. Linguistics and Education 20: 50–66.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2011. Beyond Writing as Language Learning or Content Learning: Construing Foreign Language Writing as Meaning-making. In Manchón, R. M., ed., Learning-to-write and Writing-to-learn in an Additional Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 133–57.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2012. Conceptualizing FL Writing Development in Collegiate Settings: A Genre-based Systemic Functional Linguistic Approach. In Manchón, R. M., ed., L2 Writing Development: Multiple Perspectives. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 190–218.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2014a. Linking Task and Writing for Language Development: Evidence from a Genre-based Curricular Approach. In Byrnes, H. and Manchón, R. M., eds., Task-based Language Learning: Insights from and for L2 Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 235–61.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2014b. Theorizing Language Development at the Intersection of ‘Task’ and L2 Writing: Reconsidering Complexity. In Byrnes, H. and Manchón, R. M., eds., Task-based Language Learning: Insights from and for L2 Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 79–103.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2015. Linking ‘Task’ and Curricular Thinking: An Affirmation of the TBLT Educational Agenda. In Bygate, M., ed., Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT: A Decade of Plenaries from the International Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 193–224.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H. 2017. Meeting the Challenge of Instructed Language Development: Reflections on Systemic-Functional Contributions. In Neumann, S., Wegener, R., Fest, J., Niemietz, P., and Hützen, N., eds., Challenging Boundaries in Linguistics: Systemic Functional Perspectives. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 457–91.Google Scholar

Byrnes, H., Maxim, H. H., and Norris, J. M.. 2010. Realizing Advanced Foreign Language Writing Development in Collegiate Education: Curricular Design, Pedagogy, Assessment. Modern Language Journal 94(Supplement 1): iv–vi, 1–235.Google Scholar

Caffarel, A. 2006. Learning Advanced French through SFL: Learning SFL in French. In Byrnes, H., ed., Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum. 204–24.Google Scholar

Chaiklin, S. 2003. The Zone of Proximal Development in Vygotsky’s Analysis of Learning and Instruction. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S., and Miller, S. M., eds., Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 39–64.Google Scholar

Christie, F. 2012. Language Education throughout the School Years: A Functional Perspective. Language Learning Monograph Series. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Christie, F. and Derewianka, B.. 2008. School Discourse: Learning to Write across the Years of Schooling. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Coffin, C. and Donohue, J.. 2012. Academic Literacies and Systemic Functional Linguistics: How Do They Relate? Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11: 64–75.Google Scholar

Coffin, C. and Donohue, J.. 2014. A Language as Social Semiotic-based Approach to Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Language Learning Monograph Series. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar

Coffin, C., Donohue, J., and North, S.. 2009. Exploring English Grammar: From Formal to Functional. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Cook, V. 2008. Multi-competence: Black Hole or Wormhole for Second Language Acquisition Research? In Han, Z., ed., Understanding Second Language Process. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 16–26.Google Scholar

Douglas Fir Group. 2016. A Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World. Modern Language Journal 100: 19–47.Google Scholar

Ellis, N. C. and Larsen-Freeman, D., eds. 2009. Language as a Complex Adaptive System. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Gentil, G. 2011. A Biliteracy Agenda for Genre Research. Journal of Second Language Writing 20: 6–23.Google Scholar

Godfroid, A. 2016. The Effects of Implicit Instruction on Implicit and Explicit Knowledge Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36: 177–215.CrossRefGoogle 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. 1993. Towards a Language-based Theory of Learning. Linguistics and Education 5: 93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1996. On Grammar and Grammatics. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C., and Butt, D. G., eds., Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–38.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2002. Spoken and Written Modes of Meaning. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 1: On Grammar. London: Continuum. 323–51.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. On the Grammar of Scientific English. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 5: The Language of Science. London: Continuum. 181–98.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007a. A Language Development Approach to Education (1994). In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 368–82.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007b. The Notion of ‘Context’ in Language Education (1991). In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 269–90.Google Scholar

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

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2006. Construing Experience through Meaning. A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Harman, R. 2013. Literary Intertextuality in Genre-based Pedagogies. Building Lexical Cohesion in Fifth-grade L2 Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 22: 125–40.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 1995. On Social Conditions for Semiotic Mediation: The Genesis of Mind in Society. In Sadovnik, A. R., ed., Knowledge and Pedagogy: The Sociology of Basil Bernstein. Norwood: Ablex. 171–96.Google Scholar

Housen, A., Kuiken, F., and Vedder, I., eds. 2012. Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hulstijn, J. H., Ellis, R., and Eskildsen, S., eds. 2015. Orders and Sequences in the Acquisition of L2 Morphosyntax, 40 Years On. Language Learning 65.Google Scholar

Jackson, D. O. and Suethanapornkul, S.. 2013. The Cognition Hypothesis: A Synthesis and Meta-analysis of Research on Second Language Task Complexity. Language Learning 63: 330–67.Google Scholar

Kerfoot, C. and Simon-Vandenbergen, A.. 2015. Language in Epistemic Access: Mobilising Multilingualism and Literacy Development for More Equitable Education in South Africa. Language and Education 29: 177–85.Google Scholar

Kress, G. 2009. Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lafford, B. A. 2007. Second Language Acquisition Reconceptualized? The Impact of Firth and Wagner (1997). Modern Language Journal 91: 735–56.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J. P. 2005. Sociocultural and Second Language Learning Research: An Exegesis. In Hinkel, E., ed., The Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. 335–53.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2009. Adjusting Expectations: The Study of Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Second Language Acquisition. Applied Linguistics 30: 579–89.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2014. Another Step to Be Taken: Rethinking the End Point of the Interlanguage Continuum. In Han, Z. and Tarone, E., eds., Interlanguage: Forty Years Later. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 203–20.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2015. Saying What We Mean: Making a Case for ‘Language Acquisition’ to Become ‘Language Development’. Language Teaching 48: 491–505.Google Scholar

Llinares, A., Morton, T., and Whittaker, R., eds. 2012. The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 1991. Intrinsic Functionality: Implications for Contextual Theory. Social Semiotics 1: 99–162.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 1997. Analysing Genre: Functional Parameters. In Christie, F. and Martin, J. R., eds., Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School. London: Continuum. 3–39.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 2007. Construing Knowledge: A Functional Linguistic Perspective. In Christie, F. and Martin, J. R., eds., Language, Knowledge and Pedagogy: Functional Linguistic and Sociological Perspectives. 34–64. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 2009. Genre and Language Learning: A Social Semiotic Perspective. Linguistics and Education 20: 10–21.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., ed. 2013. Interviews with M. A. K. Halliday: Language Turned Back on Himself. London: Bloomsbury.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., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 2. Sheffield: Equinox. 505–61.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2009. Meaning in the Making: Meaning Potential Emerging from Acts of Meaning. Language Learning 59(Supplement 1): 211–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2013. Applying Systemic Functional Linguistics in Healthcare Contexts. Text & Talk 33: 437–66.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2018. The Notion of a Multilingual Meaning Potential: A Systemic Exploration. In Sellami-Baklouti, A. and Fontaine, L., eds., Perspectives from Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Routledge. 90–120.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K., and Wu, C.. 2008. Multilingual Studies as a Multi-dimensional Space of Interconnected Language Studies. In Webster, J. J., ed., Meaning in Context: Strategies for Implementing Intelligent Applications of Language Studies. London: Continuum. 146–220.Google Scholar

MLA Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages. 2007. Foreign Languages and Higher Education: New Structures for a Changed World. Profession 2007: 234–45.Google Scholar

Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., and Smit, U., eds. 2016. Conceptualising Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M. and Ortega, L.. 2000. Effectiveness of L2 Instruction: A Research Synthesis and Quantitative Meta-analysis. Language Learning 50: 417–528.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M. and Ortega, L.. 2009. Towards an Organic Approach to Investigating CAF in Instructed SLA: The Case of Complexity. Applied Linguistics 30: 555–78.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L., ed. 2011. Multimodal Studies: Exploring Issues and Domains. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ortega, L. 2015. Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing: Progress and Expansion. Journal of Second Language Writing 29: 82–94.Google Scholar

Ortega, L. and Byrnes, H.. 2008. Theorizing Advancedness: Setting up the Longitudinal Research Agenda. In Ortega, L. and Byrnes, H., eds., The Longitudinal Study of Advanced L2 Capacities. New York: Routledge. 281–99.Google Scholar

Painter, C., Martin, J. R., and Unsworth, L.. 2013. Reading Visual Narratives: Image Analysis of Children’s Picture Books. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Ravelli, L. 2003. Renewal of Connection: Integrating Theory and Practice in an Understanding of Grammatical Metaphor. In Simon-Vandenbergen, A., Taverniers, M., and Ravelli, L., eds., Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 37–64.Google Scholar

Ryshina-Pankova, M. and Byrnes, H.. 2013. Writing as Learning to Know: Tracing Knowledge Construction in L2 German Compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing 22: 179–97.Google Scholar

Schleppegrell, M. J. 2004a. The Language of Schooling: A Functional Linguistics Perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Schleppegrell, M. J. 2004b. Technical Writing in a Second Language: The Role of Grammatical Metaphor. In Ravelli, L. J. and Ellis, R. A., eds., Analysing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks. London: Continuum. 172–89.Google Scholar

Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Teruya, K. 2006. Grammar as a Resource for the Construction of Language Logic for Advanced Language Learning in Japanese. In Byrnes, H., ed., Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum. 109–33.Google Scholar

Whittaker, R., McCabe, A., and O’Donnell, M., eds. 2007. Advances in Language and Education. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar

Achugar, M. and Schleppegrell, M.. 2016. Reflective Literacy and the Teaching of History. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 357–78.Google Scholar

Achugar, M., Schleppegrell, M., and Oteiza, T.. 2007. Engaging Teachers in Language Analysis: A Functional Linguistic Approach to Reflective Literacy. Teaching English: Practice and Critique 6(2): 8–24.Google Scholar

Alyousef, H. and Mickan, P.. 2016. Literacy and Numeracy Practices in Postgraduate Management Accounting. In Archer, A. and Breuer, E., eds., Multimodality in Higher Education. Studies in Writing, Volume 33. Leiden: Brill. 216–40.Google Scholar

Barnes, D. 1969. Language, the Learner and the School. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. 1971. Class Codes and Control, Volume 1: Theoretical Studies toward a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. 1975. Class Codes and Control, Volume 3: Toward a Theory of Educational Transmission. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. 2000. Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar

Britton, J. 1970. Language and Learning. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Burton, J. and Mickan, P.. 1993. Teachers’ Classroom Research: Rhetoric and Reality. In Edge, J. and Richards, K., eds., Teachers Develop Teachers Research: Papers on Classroom Research and Teacher Development. Oxford: Heinemann. 113–21.Google Scholar

Chan, E. and Unsworth, L.. 2011. Image–Language Interaction in Online Reading Environments: Challenges for Students’ Reading Comprehension. Australian Education Researcher 38: 181–202.Google Scholar

Christie, F. 2005. Language Education in the Primary Years. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar

Christie, F. 2012. Language Education throughout the School Years: A Functional Perspective. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Christie, F. and Derewianka, B.. 2008. School Discourse: Learning to Write across the Years of Schooling. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Christie, F. and Maton, K., eds. 2011. Disciplinarity: Functional Linguistic and Sociological Perspectives. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Chu, C. 2014. Supporting New Arrival Students’ Engagement with Picture Books: Analysis of Teacher Talk Using the Appraisal Theory. Functional Linguistics 1(12): 1–17.Google Scholar

Chu, C. 2017. Student Questions in Talk around Children’s Picture Books. In Mickan, P. and Lopez, E., eds., Text-based Research and Teaching: A Social Semiotic Perspective on Language in Use. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 139–56.Google Scholar

Coffin, C. 2006. Learning the Language of School History: The Role of Linguistics in Mapping the Writing Demands of the Secondary School Curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies 38(4): 413–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coffin, C. and Donohue, J.. 2014. A Language as Social Semiotic-based Approach to Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Malden: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Derewianka, B. 2009. Using Appraisal Theory to Track Interpersonal Development in Adolescent Academic Writing. In McCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., and Whittaker, R., eds., Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum. 142–65.Google Scholar

de Silva Joyce, H. and Feez, S.. 2012. Text-based Language and Literacy Education: Programming and Methodology. Sydney: Phoenix Education.Google Scholar

Doughty, P., Pearce, J., and Thornton, G.. 1971. Language in Use. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Forsyth, I. and Wood, K.. 1977–1980. Language and Communication. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Gibbons, P. 2006. Bridging Discourses in the ESL Classroom: Students, Teachers and Researchers. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1975. Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language. London: Edward Arnold.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. 1993. Towards a Language-based Theory of Learning. Linguistics and Education 5: 93–116.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1996. Literacy and Linguistics: A Functional Perspective. In Hasan, R. and Williams, G., eds., Literacy in Society. London: Longman. 339–76.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. Representing the Child as a Semiotic Being (One Who Means). In Foley, J., ed., Language, Education and Discourse: Functional Approaches. London: Continuum. 19–42.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007a. Language and Socialization: Home and School. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 81–96.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007b. The Notion of ‘Context’ in Language Education. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 269–90.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2007c. On the Concept of Educational Linguistics. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, Volume 9: Language and Education. London: Continuum. 354–67.Google Scholar

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

Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R., eds. 1993. Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hanauer, D. 2008. Scientific Discourse: Multiliteracy in the Classroom. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2002. Semiotic Mediation and Mental Development in Pluralistic Societies: Some Implications for Tomorrow’s Schooling. In Wells, G. and Claxton, G., eds., Learning for Life in the 21st Century. Oxford: Blackwell. 112–26.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2009a. Language in the Process of Socialisation: Home and School. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 2: Semantic Variation: Meaning in Society and in Sociolinguistics. Sheffield: Equinox. 119–79.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2009b. Semantic Variation and Sociolinguistics. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 2: Semantic Variation: Meaning in Society and in Sociolinguistics. Sheffield: Equinox. 180–230.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2009c. The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 2: Semantic Variation: Meaning in Society and in Sociolinguistics. Edited by Webster, J. J.. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2011a. Literacy, Everyday Talk and Society. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 3: Language and Education: Learning and Teaching in Society. Sheffield: Equinox. 169–206.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2011b. The Collected Works of Ruqaiya Hasan, Volume 3: Language and Education: Learning and Teaching in Society. Edited by Webster, J. J.. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 2014. Towards a Paradigmatic Description of Context: Systems, Metafunctions and Semantics. Functional Linguistics 1(9): 1–54.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. and Cloran, C.. 1990. A Sociolinguistic Interpretation of Mother–Child Talk. In Halliday, M. A. K., Gibbons, J., and Nicolas, H., eds., Learning, Keeping and Using Language: Selected Papers from the 8th World Congress of Applied Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 67–99.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. and Williams, G.. 1996. Literacy in Society. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Heath, S. 1983. Ways with Words: Language, Life, and Work in Communities and Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hedeboe, B. 2009. On the ‘Internal Dialogue’ between the Examination Task and Pre-university Students’ Responses. In McCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., and Whittaker, R., eds., Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum. 201–16.Google Scholar

Hewings, A. 2005. Developing Discipline-specific Writing: An Analysis of Undergraduate Geography Essays. In Ravelli, L. and Ellis, R., eds., Analysing Academic Writing: Contextual Frameworks. London: Continuum. 131–52.Google Scholar

Hood, S. 2005. Managing Attitude in Undergraduate Academic Writing: A Focus on the Introduction to Research Reports. In Ravelli, L. and Ellis, R., eds., Analysing Academic Writing: Contextual Frameworks. London: Continuum. 24–44.Google Scholar

Hood, S. 2011. Writing Discipline: Constructing Inscriptions of Knowledge and Knowers in Academic Writing. In Christie, F. and Maton, K., eds., Disciplinarity: Functional Linguistic and Sociological Perspectives. London: Continuum. 106–28.Google Scholar

Jewitt, C. 2006. Technology, Literacy and Learning: A Multimodal Approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Kress, G. 2003. Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T.. 2006. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jones, J. 2005. Learning to Write in the Disciplines: The Application of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory to the Teaching and Research of Student Writing. In Ravelli, L. and Ellis, R., eds., Analysing Academic Writing: Contextual Frameworks. London: Continuum. 254–73.Google Scholar

Love, K., Sandiford, C., Macken-Horarik, M., and Unsworth, L.. 2014. From ‘Bored Witless’ to ‘Rhetorical Nous’: Teacher Orientation to Knowledge about Language and Strengthening Student Persuasive Writing. English in Australia 49(3): 43–56.Google Scholar

Mackay, D., Thompson, B., and Schaub, P.. 1978. Breakthrough to Literacy: Teacher’s Manual: The Theory and Practice of Teaching Initial Reading and Writing. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Macken-Horarik, M. 2013. English in the Tempest: The Value of Metaphor and Re-imagining Grammar in English. English in Australia 48(3): 46–53.Google Scholar

Macken-Horarik, M., Love, K., and Unsworth, L.. 2011. A Grammatics Good Enough for School English in the 21st Century: Four Challenges in Realizing Potential. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 34(1): 9–23.Google Scholar

Macken-Horarik, M., Sandiford, C., Love, K., and Unsworth, L.. 2015. New Ways of Working ‘with Grammar in Mind’ in School English: Insights from Systemic Functional Grammatics. Linguistics and Education 31: 145–58.Google Scholar

Macken-Horarik, M., Love, K., Sandiford, C., and Unsworth, L.. 2017. Functional Grammatics: Reconceptualising Knowledge about Language and Image for School English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 2009. Discourse Studies. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum. 154–65.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. 2014. Evolving Systemic Functional Linguistics: Beyond the Clause. Functional Linguistics 1(3): 1–24.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2007. Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. 2nd ed. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. and Rose, D.. 2008. Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. and Veel, R., eds. 1998. Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Martínez-Lirola, M. 2015. Using Genre Theory for Teaching Writing at Tertiary Level: A Practical Example of Teaching to Write Effective Recounts. Revista Científica Guillermo de Ockham 13(1): 59–66.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2009. Meaning in the Making: Meaning Potential Emerging from Acts of Meaning. Language Learning 59(Supplement 1): 206–29.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2014. Registerial Cartography: Context-based Mapping of Text Types and Their Rhetorical-relational Organization. Proceedings of the 28th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation. Available online at: www.aclweb.org/anthology/Y14-1003. (Last accessed 24/10/2017.)Google Scholar

McCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., and Whittaker, R., eds. 2009. Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. 2003. ‘What’s Your Score?’ An Investigation into Language Descriptors for Rating Written Performance. In Hyam, L., ed., International English Language Testing System Research Reports, Volume 5. Canberra: IELTS Australia Pty Ltd. 125–57.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. 2007. Doing Science and Home Economics: Curriculum Socialisation of New Arrivals to Australia. Language and Education 21(1): 1–17.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. 2013. Language Curriculum Design and Socialisation. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. 2017. Text-based Research and Teaching from a Social Semiotic Perspective: Transformative Research and Pedagogy. In Mickan, P. and Lopez, E., eds., Text-based Research and Teaching: A Social Semiotic Perspective on Language in Use. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 15–35.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. and Lopez, E., eds. 2017. Text-based Research and Teaching: A Social Semiotic Perspective on Language in Use. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Mickan, P. and Motteram, J.. 2009. The Preparation Practices of IELTS Candidates: Case Studies. In Osborne, J., ed., IELTS Research Reports, Volume 10. Canberra: IELTS Australia Ltd. 223–62.Google Scholar

Moghaddam, S. and Mickan, P.. 2014. An Investigation of IELTS Preparation Courses for University Study: Development of Written and Verbal Argumentative Texts. Saarbrucken: Scholars’ Press.Google Scholar

Moya Guijarro, A. J. 2014. A Multimodal Analysis of Picture Books for Children. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. 2000. Classroom Discourse in Mathematics: A Multisemiotic Analysis. Linguistics and Education 10(3): 359–88.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K., ed. 2004. Multimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic Functional Perspectives. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. 2005. Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism and Visual Images. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. 2007. Systemic Functional Multimodal Discourse Analysis (SF-MDA) Approach to Mathematics, Grammar and Literacy. In McCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., and Whittaker, R., eds., Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum. 77–102.Google Scholar

O’Hallaron, C., Palincsar, A., and Schleppegrell, M.. 2015. Reading Science: Using Systemic Functional Linguistics to Support Critical Language Awareness. Linguistics and Education 32: 55–67.Google Scholar

Painter, C. 2007. Children’s Picture Book Narratives: Reading Sequences of Images. In McCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., and Whittaker, R., eds., Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum. 40–59.Google Scholar

Painter, C. and Martin, J. R., eds. 1986. Writing to Mean: Teaching Genres across the Curriculum. Occasional Paper no. 9. Series: Occasional Papers Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. Brisbane: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.Google Scholar

Painter, C., Martin, J. R., and Unsworth, L.. 2013. Reading Visual Narratives: Image Analysis of Children’s Picture Books. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Polias, J. and Dare, R.. 2004. Language and Literacy: Classroom Applications of Functional Grammar: Teacher Development Course. Hindmarsh: Department of Education and Children’s Services.Google Scholar

Ravelli, L. 2005. Signalling the Organization of Written Essays: Hyper-themes in Management and History Essays. In Ravelli, L. and Ellis, R., eds., Analysing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks. London: Continuum. 104–30.Google Scholar

Ravelli, L. and Ellis, R., eds. 2005. Analysing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Rothery, J. 1990. ‘Story’ Writing in Primary School: Assessing Narrative Type Genres. PhD Thesis, University of Sydney.Google Scholar

Rothery, J. 1994. Exploring Literacy in School English (Write it Right Resources for Literacy and Learning). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.Google Scholar

Rothery, J. 1996. Making the Changes: Developing an Educational Linguistics. In Hasan, R. and Williams, G., eds., Literacy in Society. London: Longman. 86–123.Google Scholar

Rose, D. 2011a. Beyond Literacy: Building an Integrated Pedagogic Genre. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 34(1): 81–97.Google Scholar

Rose, D. 2011b. Meaning beyond the Margins: Learning to Interact with Books. In Dreyfus, S., Hood, S., and Stenglin, M., eds., Semiotic Margins: Meaning in Multimodalities. London: Continuum. 177–208.Google Scholar

Rose, D. 2015. New Developments in Genre-based Literacy Pedagogy. In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., and Fitzgerald, J., eds., Handbook of Writing Research. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Rose, D. and Martin, J. R.. 2012. Learning to Write/Reading to Learn: Genre, Knowledge and Pedagogy in the Sydney School. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Schleppegrell, M. 2004. The Language of Schooling: A Functional Linguistics Perspective. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Schleppegrell, M. 2006. The Linguistic Features of Advanced Language Use: The Grammar of Exposition. In Byrnes, H., ed., Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum. 134–46.Google Scholar

Tough, J. 1977. Development of Meaning: A Study of Children’s Use of Language. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Unsworth, L., ed. 2000. Researching Language in Schools and Communities: Functional Linguistic Perspectives. London: Cassell.Google Scholar

Unsworth, L. 2001. Teaching Multiliteracies across the Curriculum: Changing Contexts of Text and Image in Classroom Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Veel, R. 1997. Learning How to Mean – Scientifically Speaking: Apprenticeship into Scientific Discourse in the Secondary School. In Christie, F. and Martin, J. R., eds., Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School. London: Pinter. 161–95.Google Scholar

Ventola, E. and Moya Guijarro, A. J.. 2009. Introduction. In Ventola, E. and Moya Guijarro, A. J., eds., The World Told and the World Shown: Multisemiotic Issues. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 1–8.Google Scholar

White, B. 2014. Genres across the Curriculum. South Australia: Catholic Education Office.Google Scholar

Whittaker, R., O’Donnell, M., and McCabe, A.. 2006. Language and Literacy: Functional Approaches. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2000. Children’s Literature, Children and Uses of Language Description. In Unsworth, L., ed., Researching Language in Schools and Communities: Functional Linguistic Perspectives. London: Cassell. 111–29.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2004. Ontogenesis and Grammatics: Functions of Metalanguage in Pedagogical Discourse. In Williams, G. and Lukin, A., eds., The Development of Language: Functional Perspectives on Species and Individuals. London: Continuum. 241–67.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2005. Grammatics in Schools. In Webster, J. J., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Hasan, R., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 281–310.Google Scholar

Williams, G. 2016. Reflection Literacy in the First Years of Schooling: Questions of Theory and Practice. In Bowcher, W. L. and Liang, J. Y., eds., Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 333–56.Google Scholar

Yee Wong, T. S. 2016. Academic Literacies in the Field of Interior Architecture: A Multimodal Analysis. In Mickan, P. and Lopez, E., eds., Text-based Research and Teaching: A Social Semiotic Perspective on Language in Use. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 341–61.Google Scholar

Airoldi, E. M. 2007. Getting Started in Probabilistic Graphical Models. PLoS Computational Biology 3(12): e252.Google Scholar

Arora, S. and Barak, B.. 2009. Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A. 1997. Enabling Technology for Multilingual Natural Language Generation: The KPML Development Environment. Natural Language Engineering 3(1): 15–55.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A. 2008a. Multimodality and Genre: A Foundation for the Systematic Analysis of Multimodal Documents. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A. 2008b. Systemic Functional Linguistics and the Notion of Linguistic Structure: Unanswered Questions, New Possibilities. In Webster, J. J., ed., Meaning in Context: Strategies for Implementing Intelligent Applications of Language Studies. Sheffield: Equinox. 24–58.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A. 2014. Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bateman, J. A. and O’Donnell, M.. 2015. Computational Linguistics: The Halliday Connection. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 453–66.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A. and Zock, M.. 2017. Natural Language Generation. In Mitkov, R., ed., Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 284–304.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A., Tseng, C., Seizov, O., Jacobs, A., Lüdtke, A., Müller, M. G., and Herzog, O.. 2016. Towards Next-generation Visual Archives: Image, Film and Discourse. Visual Studies 31(2): 131–54.Google Scholar

Bateman, J. A., Wildfeuer, J., and Hiippala, T.. 2017. Multimodality: Foundations, Research and Analysis: A Problem-oriented Introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Berry, D. M., ed. 2012. Understanding Digital Humanities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Cao, Y. and O’Halloran, K. L.. 2015. Learning Human Photo Shooting Patterns from Large-Scale Community Photo Collections. Multimedia Tools and Applications 74(24): 11499–516.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton and Co.Google Scholar

Collins, M. 2003. Head-driven Statistical Models for Natural Language Parsing. Computational Linguistics 29(4): 589–637.Google Scholar

Costetchi, E. 2013. A Method to Generate Simplified Systemic Functional Parses from Dependency Parses. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Dependency Linguistics. Prague, August 27–30, 2013. Charles University in Prague. Prague: Matfyzpress. 68–77.Google Scholar

Couto-Vale, D. 2017. How to Make a Wheelchair Understand Spoken Commands. PhD Thesis, Bremen University.Google Scholar

Doermann, D. and Tombre, K., eds. 2014. Handbook of Document Image Processing and Recognition. London: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Domingos, P., Kok, S., Lowd, D., and Poon, H.. 2010. Markov Logic. Journal of Computational Biology: A Journal of Computational Molecular Cell Biology 17(11): 1491–508.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. P. 1988. Language Generation as Choice in Social Interaction. In Zoch, M. and Sabah, G., eds., Advances in Natural Language Generation. London: Pinter. 27–49.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. P. 1989. Towards a Systemic Flowchart Model for Discourse Analysis. In Fawcett, R. P. and Young, D., eds., New Developments in Systemic Linguistics: Theory and Application. London: Pinter. 116–43.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. P. 1993. The Architecture of the COMMUNAL Project in NLG (and NLU). In The Fourth European Workshop on Natural Language Generation. Pisa.Google Scholar

Fawcett, R. P. 2008. Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Fischer, K. 2016. Designing Speech for a Recipient: The Roles of Partner Modeling, Alignment and Feedback in So-called ‘Simplified Registers’. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Grinstead, C. M. and Snell, J. L.. 2012. Introduction to Probability. Providence: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar

Guo, H. and Hsu, W.. 2002. A Survey of Algorithms for Real-time Bayesian Network Inference. In The Joint AAAI/KDD/UAI02 Workshop on Real-time Decision Support and Diagnosis Systems. Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar

Guo, L. 2004. Multimodality in a Biology Textbook. In O’Halloran, K. L., ed., Multimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic Functional Perspectives. London: Continuum. 196–219.Google Scholar

Haegeman, L. 1991. Introduction to Government and Binding Theory, Volume 2. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1996. On Grammar and Grammatics. In Hasan, R., Cloran, C., and Butt, D., eds., Functional Descriptions: Theory in Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–38.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 1987. The Grammarian’s Dream: Lexis as Most Delicate Grammar. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Fawcett, R. P., eds., New Developments in Systemic Linguistics, Volume 1. London: Frances Pinter. 184–211.Google Scholar

Hiippala, T. 2016. Semi-automated Annotation of Page-based Documents within the Genre and Multimodality Framework. In Proceedings of the 10th SIGHUM Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, and Humanities. Berlin: Association for Computational Linguistics. 84–9.Google Scholar

Honnibal, M. 2004. Converting the Penn Treebank to Systemic Functional Grammar. In Proceedings of the Australasian Language Technology Workshop (ALTW04). Available online at: www.alta.asn.au/events/altw2004/publication/04-27.pdf. (Last accessed 12/09/2017.)Google Scholar

Honnibal, M. and Curran, J. R.. 2007. Creating a Systemic Functional Grammar Corpus from the Penn Treebank. In Proceedings of the ACL 2007 Workshop on Deep Linguistic Processing. Prague: Association for Computational Linguistics. 89–96.Google Scholar

Kasper, R. 1988. An Experimental Parser for Systemic Grammars. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Budapest: John von Neumann Society for Computing. 309–12.Google Scholar

Kembhavi, A., Salvato, M., Kolve, E., Seo, M., Hajishirzi, H., and Farhadi, A.. 2016. A Diagram Is Worth a Dozen Images. In Proceedings of the 14th European Conference in Computer Vision. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11–14, 2016. Cham: Springer. 235–51.Google Scholar

Kersting, K. and De Raedt, L.. 2007. Bayesian Logic Programming: Theory and Tool. In Getoor, L. and Taskar, B., eds., Introduction to Statistical Relational Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 291–321.Google Scholar

Kotthoff, L. 2014. Algorithm Selection for Combinatorial Search Problems: A Survey. AI Magazine 35(3): 48–60.Google Scholar

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T.. 2006. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., and Hinton, G.. 2015. Deep Learning. Nature 521: 436–44.Google Scholar

Mann, W. C. 1983. An Overview of the PENMAN Text Generation System. In Proceedings of the Third National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park: The AAAI Press. 261–5.Google Scholar

Mann, W. C. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 1985. Demonstration of the Nigel Text Generation Computer Program. In Benson, J. D. and Greaves, W. S., eds., Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Volume 1. Norwood: Ablex. 50–83.Google Scholar

Manning, C. D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S. J., and McClosky, D.. 2014. The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Baltimore: Association for Computational Linguistics. 55–60.Google Scholar

Marneffe, M., Dozat, T., Silveira, N., Haverinen, K., Ginter, F., Nivre, J., and Manning, C. D.. 2014. Universal Stanford Dependencies: A Cross-linguistic Typology. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). 4585–92.Google Scholar

Marneffe, M., MacCartney, B., and Manning, C. D.. 2006. Generating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Parses. Lrec 6(3): 449–54.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1985. The Systemic Framework in Text Generation: Nigel. In Benson, J. and Greaves, W., eds., Systemic Perspective on Discourse, Voume 1. Norwood: Ablex. 96–118.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015a. Halliday’s Conception of Language as a Probabilistic System. In Webster, J. J., ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to M. A. K. Halliday. London: Bloomsbury. 203–41.Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 2015b. Register in the Round: Registerial Cartography. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1–48.Google Scholar

McDonald, D. 1980. Natural Language Production as a Process of Decision Making under Constraint: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

McDonald, D. and Woodward-Kron, R.. 2016. Member Roles and Identities in Online Support Groups: Perspectives from Corpus and Systemic Functional Linguistics. Discourse and Communication 10(2): 157–75.Google Scholar

Neale, A. C. 2002. More Delicate TRANSITIVITY: Extending the PROCESS TYPE for English to Include Full Semantic Classifications. PhD Thesis, Cardiff University.Google Scholar

Nivre, J. 2015. Towards a Universal Grammar for Natural Language Processing. In Gelbukh, A., ed., Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. Berlin: Springer. 3–16.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. 1990. A Dynamic Model of Exchange. Word 41(3): 293–328.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. 1993. Reducing Complexity in a Systemic Parser. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Parsing Technologies. Tilburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. 203–17.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. 1994. Sentence Analysis and Generation: A Systemic Perspective. PhD Thesis, University of Sydney.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. 2005. The UAM Systemic Parser. In Proceedings of the 1st Computational Systemic Functional Grammar Conference. Sydney: University of Sydney. 47–55.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. 2008. Demonstration of the UAM Corpus Tool for Text and Image Annotation. In Proceedings of the ACL ’08: HLT Demo Session. Columbus: Association for Computational Linguistics. 13–16.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. and Bateman, J. A.. 2005. SFL in Computational Contexts: A Contemporary History. In Hasan, R., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., and Webster, J. J., eds., Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, Volume 1. Sheffield: Equinox. 343–82.Google Scholar

Oepen, S., Flickinger, D., Uszkoreit, H., and Tsujii, J.. 2000. Introduction to the Special Issue on Efficient Processing with HPSG. Natural Language Engineering 6(1): 1–14.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L. 2008. Systemic Functional-Multimodal Discourse Analysis (SF-MDA): Constructing Ideational Meaning Using Language and Visual Imagery. Visual Communication 7(4): 443–75.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L. 2014. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. In Hyland, K. and Paltridge, B., eds., The Bloomsbury Companion to Discourse Analysis. London: Bloomsbury. 120–37.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L. 2015. Multimodal Digital Humanities. In Trifonas, P. P., ed., International Handbook of Semiotics. Dordrecht: Springer. 389–416.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L., Chua, A., and Podlasov, A.. 2014a. The Role of Images in Social Media Analytics: A Multimodal Digital Humanities Approach. In Machin, D., ed., Visual Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 565–88.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L., Kwan Lin, M. E., and Tan, S.. 2014b. Multimodal Analytics: Software and Visualization Techniques for Analyzing and Interpreting Multimodal Data. In Jewitt, C., ed., The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. 386–96.Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L., Tan, S., Wignell, P., Bateman, J. A., Pham, D., Grossman, M., and Vande Moere, A.. 2016. Interpreting Text and Image Relations in Violent Extremist Discourse: A Mixed Methods Approach for Big Data Analytics. Terrorism and Political Violence. DOI: 10.1080/09546553.2016.1233871Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K. L., Tan, S., Pham, D., Bateman, J. A., and Vande Moere, A.. 2018. A Digital Mixed Methods Research Design: Integrating Multimodal Analysis with Data Mining and Information Visualization for Big Data Analytics. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 12(1): 11–30.Google Scholar

O’Toole, M. 2011. The Language of Displayed Art. 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Peters, S. P. and Ritchie, R. W.. 1973. On the Generative Power of Transformational Grammars. Information Sciences 6: 49–83.Google Scholar

Rautaray, S. S. and Agrawal, A.. 2015. Vision Based Hand Gesture Recognition for Human Computer Interaction: A Survey. Artificial Intelligence Review 43(1): 1–54.Google Scholar

Richardson, M. and Domingos, P.. 2006. Markov Logic Networks. Machine Learning 62(1–2): 107–36.Google Scholar

Schreibman, S., Siemens, R., and Unsworth, J., eds. 2016. A New Companion to Digital Humanities. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Shi, H., Jian, C., and Rachuy, C.. 2011. Evaluation of a Unified Dialogue Model for Human-Computer Interaction. International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Applications 2(1): 155–73.Google Scholar

Sleator, D. D. K. and Temperley, D.. 1993. Parsing English with a Link Grammar. In Third International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT). Tillburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. 277–92. Available online at: www.link.cs.cmu.edu/link/ftp-site/link-grammar/LG-IWPT93.pdf. (Last accessed 12/09/2017.)Google Scholar

Socher, R., Bauer, J., Manning, C. D., and Ng, A. Y.. 2013. Parsing with Compositional Vector Grammars. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. 455–65.Google Scholar

Steedman, M. J. 1993. Categorial Grammar. Lingua 90: 221–58.Google Scholar

Steels, L. 2005. The Emergence and Evolution of Linguistic Structure: From Lexical to Grammatical Communication Systems. Connection Science 17(3–4): 213–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Svensson, P. 2010. The Landscape of Digital Humanities. Digital Humanities Quarterly 4(1). Available online at: www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/4/1/000080/000080.html. (Last accessed 12/09/2017.)Google Scholar

Teich, E., Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Fankhauser, P., Kermes, H., and 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 (JASIST) 67(7): 1668–78.Google Scholar

Teich, E., Hagen, E., Grote, B., and Bateman, J. A.. 1997. From Communicative Context to Speech: Integrating Dialogue Processing, Speech Production and Natural Language Generation. Speech Communication 21(1–2): 73–99.Google Scholar

Traum, D. and Larsson, S.. 2003. The Information State Approach to Dialogue Management. In Smith, R. and van Kuppevelt, J., eds., Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 325–53.Google Scholar

Tseng, C. 2013. Cohesion in Film: Tracking Film Elements. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Weerasinghe, R. 1994. Probabilistic Parsing in Systemic Functional Grammar. PhD Thesis, School of Computing Mathematics, University of Wales College of Cardiff.Google Scholar

Winograd, T. 1972. Understanding Natural Language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

XTAG Research Group. 2001. A Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar for English. IRCS, University of Pennsylvania. Available online at: www.cis.upenn.edu/~xtag/tech-report/tech-report.html. (Last accessed 12/09/2017.)Google Scholar

Zinn, J. O. and McDonald, D.. 2015. Changing Discourses of Risk and Health Risk. In Chamberlain, J. M., ed., Medicine, Risk, Discourse and Power. London: Routledge. 207–40.Google Scholar

Aboraya, A., France, C., Young, J., Curci, K., and LePage, J.. 2005. The Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis Revisited: The Clinician’s Guide to Improve the Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2(9): 48–55.Google Scholar

Adams, C. and Bishop, D. V.. 1989. Conversational Characteristics of Children with Semantic-Pragmatic Disorder. I: Exchange Structure, Turntaking, Repairs and Cohesion. British Journal of Disorders of Communication 24(3): 211–39.Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association. 1968. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association. 1980. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar

Andreetta, S., Cantagallo, A., and Marini, A.. 2012. Narrative Discourse in Anomic Aphasia. Neuropsychologia 50: 1787–93.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 1987. Cohesive Harmony and Its Significance in Listener Perception of Coherence. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 210–15.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 1991. The Potential of Cohesion Analysis in the Analysis and Treatment of Aphasic Discourse. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 5(1): 39–51.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 1997. A Grammatical Analysis of Aphasic Discourse: Changes in Meaning-making over Time. PhD Thesis, Macquarie University.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 2000. Aphasic Discourse Analysis: The Story so Far. Aphasiology 14(9): 875–92.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 2001. Connecting Lexical Patterns of Verb Usage with Discourse Meanings in Aphasia. Aphasiology 15(10–11): 1029–45.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 2005a. Language Disorder: A Functional Linguistic Perspective. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 137–53.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. 2005b. Expressing Opinions and Feelings in Aphasia: Linguistic Options. Aphasiology 19(3–5): 285–95.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. and Ferguson, A.. 2010. Language, Meaning, Context, and Functional Communication. Aphasiology 24(4): 480–96.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. and Mortensen, L.. 2006. Everyday Talk: Its Role in Assessment and Treatment for Individuals with Aphasia. Neurogenic Communication Disorders (Special Issue: Brain Impairment) 7(3): 175–89.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E. and Ulatowska, H. K.. 2007. Making Stories: Evaluative Language and the Aphasia Experience. Aphasiology 21(6–8): 763–74.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E., Ciccone, N., Godecke, E., and Kok, B.. 2011. Monologues and Dialogues in Aphasia: Some Initial Comparisons. Aphasiology 25(11): 1347–71.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E., Mortensen, L., Ciccone, N., and Godecke, E.. 2012. Expressing Opinions and Feelings in a Conversational Setting. Seminars in Speech and Language 33(1): 16–26.Google Scholar

Armstrong, E., Fox, S., and Wilkinson, R.. 2013. Mild Aphasia: Is This the Place for an Argument? American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 22(2): 268–78.Google Scholar

Asp, E. and de Villiers, J.. 2010. When Language Breaks Down: Analysing Discourse in Clinical Contexts. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Asp, E., Song, X., and Rockwood, K.. 2006a. Self-referential Tags in the Discourse of People with Alzheimer’s Disease. Brain and Language 97(1): 41–52.Google Scholar

Baltaxe, C. A. M. and D’Angiola, N.. 1992. Cohesion in the Discourse Interaction of Autistic, Specifically Language-impaired and Normal Children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 22: 1–21.Google Scholar

Bartlett, S. C., Armstrong, E., and Roberts, J.. 2005. Linguistic Resources of Individuals with Asperger Syndrome. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 203–13.Google Scholar

Berry, M. 1981. Systemic Linguistics and Discourse Analysis: A Multi-layered Approach to Exchange Structure. In Coulthard, M. and Montgomery, M., eds., Studies in Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 120–45.Google Scholar

Bottenberg, D., Lemme, M., and Hedberg, N.. 1985. Analysis of Oral Narratives of Normal and Aphasic Adults. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 241–7.Google Scholar

Brown, M. and Kuperberg, G. R.. 2015. A Hierarchical Generative Framework of Language Processing: Linking Language Perception, Interpretation, and Production Abnormalities in Schizophrenia. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9: 643.Google Scholar

Butt, D. G., Moore, A. R., Henderson-Brooks, C., Meares, R., and Haliburn, J.. 2010. Dissociation, Relatedness, and ‘Cohesive Harmony’. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 3(3): 263–93.Google Scholar

Chapman, S. B., Ulatowska, H. K., King, K., Johnson, J. K., and McIntire, D. D.. 1995. Discourse in Early Alzheimer’s Disease versus Normal Advanced Aging. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 4(4): 124–9.Google Scholar

Coelho, C. A. 2002. Story Narratives of Adults with Closed Head Injury and Non-Brain-injured adults: Influence of Socioeconomic Status, Elicitation Task, and Executive Functioning. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 45(6): 1232–48.Google Scholar

Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1991a. Discourse Analyses with Closed Head Injured Adults: Evidence for Differing Patterns of Deficits. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 72: 465–8.Google Scholar

Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1991b. The Use of Discourse Analyses for the Evaluation of Higher Level Traumatically Brain-injured Adults. Brain Injury 5(4): 381–92.Google Scholar

Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., Duffy, R. J., Clarkson, J. V., and Elia, D.. 1994. Longitudinal Assessment of Narrative Discourse in a Mildly Aphasic Adult. Clinical Aphasiology 22: 145–55.Google Scholar

Coelho, C. A., Liles, B. Z., and Duffy, R. J.. 1995. Impairments of Discourse Abilities and Executive Functions in Traumatically Brain-injured Adults. Brain Injury 9(5): 471–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cohen, I. 2011. The Expression of Schizophrenia through Interpersonal Systems at the Level of Discourse Semantics. PhD Thesis, Bar-Ilan University.Google Scholar

Crystal, D. 1981. Clinical Linguistics. Vienna: Springer.Google Scholar

Crystal, D. 2002. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics’ First 15 Years: An Introductory Comment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 16(7): 487–9.Google Scholar

Crystal, D. 2013. Clinical Linguistics: Conversational Reflections. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 27(4): 236–43.Google Scholar

Davis, G. A. and Coelho, C. A.. 2004. Referential Cohesion and Logical Coherence of Narration after Closed Head Injury. Brain and Language 89: 508–23.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. 2005. Experientially-based Narration in Autism: A Case Study. In Makkai, A., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXXI. Houston: LACUS. 215–25.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. 2006a. Syntactic and Semantic Patterns of Pedantic Speech in Asperger’s Syndrome. In Hwang, S., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A., eds., LACUS Forum XXXII. Houston: LACUS. 81–9.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. 2006b. Discourse Analysis in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1(2): 245–60.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. 2009. Use of Um and Uh in spontaneous speaking in Autism Spectrum Disorder. In Sutcliffe, P., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXXVI. Houston: LACUS, 101–10.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. 2011. I Saw the Yellowish Going South: Narrative Discourse in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Cognitive and Empirical Pragmatics: Issues and Perspectives 25: 3–29.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J. and Szatmari, P.. 2004. Message Organization in Autism Spectrum Disorder. In Fulton, G. D., Sullivan, W. J., and Lommel, A. R., eds., LACUS Forum XXX. Houston: LACUS. 207–14.Google Scholar

de Villiers, J., Fine, J., Ginsberg, G., Vaccarella, L., and Szatmari, P.. 2007. Brief Report: A Scale for Rating Conversational Impairment in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 37(7): 1375–80.Google Scholar

Dijkstra, K., Bourgeois, M. S., Allen, R. S., and Burgioc, L. D.. 2004. Conversational Coherence: Discourse Analysis of Older Adults with and without Dementia. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17: 263–83.Google Scholar

Docherty, N. M., DeRosa, M., and Andreasen, N. C.. 1996. Communication Disturbances in Schizophrenia and Mania. Archives of General Psychiatry 53(4): 358–64.Google Scholar

Docherty, N. M., Cohen, A. S., Nienow, T. M., Dinezo, T. J., and Dangelmaier, R. E.. 2003. Stability of Formal Thought Disorder and Referential Communication Disturbances in Schizophrenia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 112(3): 469–75.Google Scholar

Ferguson, A. 1992. Interpersonal Aspects of Aphasic Conversation. Journal of Neurolinguistics 7(4): 277–94.Google Scholar

Ferstl, E. C. and von Cramon, D. Y.. 2001. The Role of Coherence and Cohesion in Text Comprehension: An Event-related fMRI Study. Cognitive Brain Research 11(3): 325–430.Google Scholar

Fine, J. 2006. Language in Psychiatry: A Handbook of Clinical Practice. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar

Fine, J. in press. Modeling Transitions in the Language of Psychiatric Disorders. In de Villiers, J., Sullivan, W., and Mailman, D., eds., LACUS Forum XLI. Houston: LACUS.Google Scholar

Fine, J., Bartolucci, G., Ginsberg, G., and Szatmari, P.. 1991. The Use of Intonation to Communicate in Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology 32(5): 771–82.Google Scholar

Fine, J., Bartolucci, G., Szatmari, P., and Ginsberg, G.. 1994. Cohesive Discourse in Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 24(3): 315–29.Google Scholar

Garcia, A. M. and Ibáñez, A.. 2016. Processes and Verbs of Doing, in the Brain: Theoretical Implications for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Functions of Language 23(3): 305–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Glosser, G. and Deser, T.. 1990. Patterns of Discourse Production among Neurological Patients with Fluent Language Disorders. Brain and Language 40: 67–88.Google Scholar

Gregory, M. 2002. Phasal Analysis within Communication Linguistics: Two Contrastive Discourses. In Fries, P., Cummings, M., Lockwood, D., and Spruiell, W., eds., Relations and Functions within and around Language. London: Continuum. 316–45.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. 1978. Further Notes on Logic and Conversation. In Cole, P., ed., Syntax and Semantics, Volume 9: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 183–97.Google Scholar

Guo, Y. E. and Togher, L.. 2008. The Impact of Dysarthria on Everyday Communication after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study. Brain Injury 22(1): 83–97.Google Scholar

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

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2005. A Note on Systemic Functional Linguistics and the Study of Language Disorders. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 133–5.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K., and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.. 2004. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Hartley, L. L. and Jensen, P.. 1991. Narrative and Procedural Discourse after Closed Head Injury. Brain Injury 5(3): 267–85.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 1984. Coherence and Cohesive Harmony. In Flood, J., ed., Understanding Reading Comprehension. Newark: International Reading Association. 181–219.Google Scholar

Hasan, R. 1985. The Texture of a Text. In Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R., eds., Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press. 70–96.Google Scholar

Huddleston, R. and Pullum, G. K.. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Iverach, L. and Rapee, R.. 2014. Social Anxiety Disorder and Stuttering: Current Status and Future Directions. Journal of Fluency Disorders 40: 69–82.Google Scholar

Jorgensen, M. and Togher, L.. 2009. Narrative after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Comparison of Monologic and Jointly-produced Discourse. Brain Injury 23(9): 727–40.Google Scholar

Kemper, S., Thompson, M., and Marquis, J.. 2001. Longitudinal Change in Language Production: Effects of Aging and Dementia on Grammatical Complexity and Semantic Content. Psychology and Aging 16(4): 600–14.Google Scholar

Kempler, D. 1995. Language Changes in Dementia of the Alzheimer Type. In Lubinski, R., ed., Dementia and Communication: Research and Clinical Implications. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group. 98–114.Google Scholar

Körner, H., Newman, C., Limin, M., Kidd, M. R., Saltman, D., and Kippax, S.. 2011. ‘The Black Dog Just Came and Sat on my Face and Built a Kennel’: Gay Men Making Sense of ‘Depression’. Health (London) 15(4): 417–36.Google Scholar

Korrel, H., Mueller, K. L., Silk, T., Anderson, V., and Sciberras, E.. 2017. Research Review: Language Problems in Children with Attention‐Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Meta‐analytic Review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 58(6): 640–54.Google Scholar

Kuperberg, G. R. 2010. Language in Schizophrenia Part 1: An Introduction. Language and Linguistics Compass 4(8): 576–89.Google Scholar

Kuperberg, G. R., Lakshmanan, B. M., Caplan, D. N., and Holcomb, P. J.. 2006. Making Sense of Discourse: An fMRI Study of Causal Inferencing across Sentences. Neuroimage 33(1): 343–61.Google Scholar

Kurczek, J. and Duff, M. C.. 2012. Intact Discourse Cohesion and Coherence Following Bilateral Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex. Brain and Language 123(3): 222–7.Google Scholar

Lee, A., van Dulm, O., Robb, M., and Ormond, T.. 2015. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 29(7): 536–56.Google Scholar

Lee, A., Robb, M., van Dulm, O., and Ormond, T.. 2016a. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter: Part II. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 30(7): 546–67.Google Scholar

Lee, A. S., Robb, M., van Dulm, O., and Ormond, T., 2016b. Communication Restriction in Adults Who Stutter: Part III. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 30(11): 911–24.Google Scholar

Liles, B. Z. 1985. Narrative Ability in Normal and Language-disordered Children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 23: 123–33.Google Scholar

Liles, B. Z., Coelho, C. A., Duffy, R. J., and Zalagens, M. R.. 1989. Effects of Elicitation Procedures on the Narratives of Normal and Closed Head-injured Adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 54: 356–66.Google Scholar

Linnik, A., Bastiaanse, R., and Hӧhle, B.. 2016. Discourse Production in Aphasia: A Current Review of Theoretical and Methodological Challenges. Aphasiology 30(7): 765–800.Google Scholar

Lock, S. and Armstrong, L.. 1997. Cohesion Analysis of the Expository Discourse of Normal, Fluent Aphasic and Demented Adults: A Role in Differential Diagnosis? Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 11(4): 299–317.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. and Rochester, S. R.. 1975. Cohesion and Reference in Schizophrenic Speech. In Makkai, A. and Makkai, V. B., eds., The First LACUS Forum. Columbia: Hornbeam Press. 302–11.Google Scholar

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

Mathers, M. E. 2005. Some Evidence for Distinctive Language Use by Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 215–25.Google Scholar

Mathers, M. E. 2006. Aspects of Language in Children with ADHD: Applying Functional Analyses to Explore Language Use. Journal of Attention Disorders 9: 523–33.Google Scholar

McDonald, S. 1993. Pragmatic Language Skills after Closed Head Injury: Ability to Meet the Informational Needs of the Listener. Brain and Language 44(1): 28–46.Google Scholar

McKenna, P. and Oh, T.. 2005. Schizophrenic Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mentis, M. and Prutting, C. A.. 1987. Cohesion in the Discourse of Normal and Head Injured Adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 30: 88–98.Google Scholar

Mesulam, M. 2008. Representation, Inference, and Transcendent Encoding in Neurocognitive Networks of the Human Brain. Annals of Neurology 64(4): 367–78.Google Scholar

Mok, Z. and Müller, N.. 2013. Staging Casual Conversations for People with Dementia. Dementia 13(6): 834–53.Google Scholar

Mortensen, L. 1992. A Transitivity Analysis of Discourse in Dementia of the Alzheimer’s Type. Journal of Neurolinguistics 7(4): 309–21.Google Scholar

Mortensen, L. 2005. Written Discourse and Acquired Brain Impairment: Evaluation of Structural and Semantic Features of Personal Letters from a Systemic Functional Linguistic Perspective. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 227–47.Google Scholar

Müller, N., Ball, M. J., and Rutter, B.. 2008. An Idiosyncratic Case of /r/ Disorder: Application of Principles from Systemic Phonology and Systemic Functional Linguistics. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing 11(4): 269–81.Google Scholar

Müller, N. and Mok, Z.. 2012. Applying Systemic Functional Linguistics to Conversations with Dementia: The Linguistic Construction of Relationships between Participants. Seminars in Speech and Language 33(1): 5–15.Google Scholar

Müller, N. and Wilson, B. T.. 2008. Collaborative Role Construction in a Conversation with Dementia: An Application of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 22: 767–74.Google Scholar

Olness, G. S. and Ulatowska, H. K.. 2011. Personal Narratives in Aphasia: Coherence in the Context of Use. Aphasiology 25: 1393–413.Google Scholar

Perkins, M. 2011. Clinical Linguistics: Its Past, Present and Future. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 25(11–12): 922–7.Google Scholar

Piehler, M. F. and Holland, A. L.. 1984. Cohesion in Aphasic Language. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings. Volume 14. Seabrook Island: BRK Publishers. 208–14.Google Scholar

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J.. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Reilly, S., Tomblin, B., Law, J., McKean, C., Mensah, F. K., Morgan, A., Goldfeld, S., Nicolson, J. M., and Wake, M.. 2014. Specific Language Impairment: A Convenient Label for Whom? International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 49(4): 416–51.Google Scholar

Rigaudeau-McKenna, B. 2005. Towards an Analysis of Dysfunctional Grammar. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 155–74.Google Scholar

Ripich, D. and Terrell, B.. 1988. Patterns of Discourse Cohesion and Coherence in Alzheimer’s Disease. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 53: 8–15.Google Scholar

Ripich, D. N., Terrell, B. Y., and Spinelli, F.. 1983. Discourse Cohesion in Senile Dementia of the Alzheimer Type. In Brookshire, R. H., ed., Clinical Aphasiology Conference Proceedings. Volume 13. Minneapolis: BRK Publishers. 316–21.Google Scholar

Ripich, D. N., Carpenter, B. D., and Ziol, E. W.. 2000. Conversational Cohesion Patterns in Men and Women with Alzheimer’s Disease: A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 35(1): 49–64.Google Scholar

Robins, E. and Guze, S. B.. 1970. Establishment of Diagnostic Validity in Psychiatric Illness: Its Application to Schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry 126: 983–7.Google Scholar

Rochester, S., Martin, J. R., and Thurston, S.. 1977. Thought-process Disorder in Schizophrenia: The Listener’s Task. Brain and Language 4: 95–114.Google Scholar

Rochester, S. and Martin, J. R.. 1979. Crazy Talk: A Study of the Discourse of Schizophrenic Speakers. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Ryle, G. 1968. The Thinking of Thoughts: What is “Le Penseur” Doing? In Collected Papers, Vol. 2: Collected Essays 1929–1968. New York: Barnes and Noble.Google Scholar

Sachdev, P. S., Blacker, D., Blazer, D. G., Ganguli, M., Jeste, D. V., Paulsen, J. S., and Petersen, R. C.. 2014. Classifying Neurocognitive Disorders: The DSM-5 Approach. Nature Reviews Neurology 10(11): 634–42.Google Scholar

Spencer, E., Packman, A., Onslow, M., and Ferguson, A.. 2005. A Preliminary Investigation of the Impact of Stuttering on Language Use. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 191–201.Google Scholar

Spencer, E., Packman, A., Onslow, M., and Ferguson, A.. 2009. The Effect of Stuttering on Communication: A Preliminary Investigation. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 23(7): 473–88.Google Scholar

Taler, V. and Phillips, N. A.. 2008. Language Performance in Alzheimer’s Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Comparative Review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 30(5): 501–56.Google Scholar

Tannock, R., Fine, J., Heintz, T., and Schachar, R. J.. 1995. A Linguistic Approach Detects Stimulant Effects in Two Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology 5(3): 177–89.Google Scholar

Tebble, H. 2012. Subjectivity in the Discourse of Depressed Acute Care Hospital Patients. In Baumgarten, N., Du Bois, I., and House, J., eds., Subjectivity in Language and in Discourse. Studies in Pragmatics, Volume 10. Bingley: Emerald. 115–35.Google Scholar

Thomson, J. 2005. Theme Analysis of Narratives Produced by Children with and without Specific Language Impairment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 19(3): 175–90.Google Scholar