Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-17T20:30:17.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Text Linguistics and New Applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

Robert de Beaugrande
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In its early stages, “text linguistics” was a sufficiently compact and localized enterprise that describing it would not have seemed inordinately difficult. Today, however, text linguistics has attained such prominence that it formed the largest contingent at the last International Congress of Linguists in Berlin in 1987. This rise has been accompanied by a widening of scope, a profusion of models, theories, and terms, and a diversification of the phenomena it is intended to capture or designate. The very term “text linguistics” may seem too narrow, and wider alternatives have been proposed, such as “text studies,” “text science,” “textology,” and above all “discourse analysis.” Similarly, some scholars have proposed that text linguistics be incorporated into a broader domain, such as semiotics/semiology, ethnography/enthnomethodology, communications, cognitive science, and so forth.

Type
Foundations of Discourse
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 11 , March 1990 , pp. 17 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

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

References

Unannotated Bibliography

Adelswärd, V., Aronsson, K., Jönsson, L. and Lindell, P.. 1987. The unequal distribution of interactional space: Dominance and control in courtroom interaction. Discourse processes. 10. 313–346.Google Scholar
Antos, G. and Krings, H. (eds.) 1989. Textproduktion: Ein interdisziplinärer Forschungsüberblick. [Text production: An interdisciplinary survey.] Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aron, K. and Rundström, B.. 1988. Child discourse and parental control in pediatric consultations. Text. 8. 159–189.Google Scholar
Baran, A. and Van Houten, L.. 1988. Lessons taught and lessons learned: Adaptation of lessons for high- and low-ranked hearing impaired students. Discourse processes. 11. 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J. B. 1990. Nonverbal and social aspects of discourse in face-to-face interaction. Text. 10. 5–8.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. and Paradis, J. (eds.) 1991. Text and the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in academic and other professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in academic and other professional communities. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Berman, R. 1988. On the ability to relate events in narrative. Discourse processes. 11. 469–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernárdez, E. (ed.) 1988. Lingüística del texto. [Text linguistics.] Madrid: Arco Libros.Google Scholar
Bhavnani, K. 1988. Empowerment and social research. Text. 8. 41–50.Google Scholar
Biber, D. and Finegan, E.. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text. 9. 93–124.Google Scholar
Billig, M. 1988. The notion of “Prejudice”: Some rhetorical and ideological aspects. Text. 8. 91–110.Google Scholar
Black, A. 1988. The syntax of conversational coherence. Discourse processes. 11. 433–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. and Weizman, E.. 1988. The inevitability of misunderstandings: Discourse ambiguities. Text. 8. 219–241.Google Scholar
Büchle, K. 1987. Textrezeption und Textproduktion im Fremdsprachenunterricht. [Text reception and text production in foreign language teaching.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für sprachwissenchaft, Akademie der wissenschaften der DDR. 382.Google Scholar
Butler, G. R. 1987. Conversational inference and cognitive expansion in folkloristic discourse. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sparchwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 375.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. 1990. Looking ahead. Text. 10. 19–22.Google Scholar
Charolles, M., Petöfi, J. S. and Sözer, E. (eds.) In Press. Research in text connexity and text coherence. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Chilton, P. 1985a. Words, discourse, and metaphors: The meanings of deter, deterrent, and deterrence. In Chilton, P. (ed.) Language and the nuclear arms debate. London: Pinter. 103–128.Google Scholar
Chilton, P. (ed.) 1985b. Language and the nuclear arms debate. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Chu, C. 1987. Pragmatics in modern Chinese. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 404.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. 1988. A case study in linguistic socialization: Korean WH-questions. Discourse processes. 12. 169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condor, S. 1988. “Race stereotypes” and racist discourse. Text. 8. 69–89.Google Scholar
Conte, M.E. et al. , (eds.) 1989. Text and discourse connectedness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crismore, A. 1990. Metadiscourse and discourse processes: Interactions and issues. Discourse processes. 13. 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, J., Weber, D., Vangelisti, A., Maxwell, M. and Neel, H.. 1989. Concurrent cognitions during conversations: Protocol analysis as a means of exploring conversations. Discourse processes. 12. 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeStefano, J. 1987. Cohesion in spoken and written dialogue: An investigation of cultural and textual constraints. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 387.Google Scholar
Dickinson, D. and Keebler, R.. 1989. Variation in preschool teachers' style of reading books. Discourse processes. 12. 353–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijk, T. Van. 1990a. TEXT in the next decade. Text. 10. 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijk, T. Van. 1990b. The further of the field: Discourse analysis in the 1990s. Text. 10. 133–156.Google Scholar
Dijk, T. Van. and Kintsch, W.. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Drass, K. 1988. Discourse and occupational perspective: A comparison of nurse practitioners. Discourse processes. 11. 163–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, W. and de Beaugrande, R.. Forthcoming. Introduction to the study of text and discourse. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Drew, P. 1990. Conversion analysis: Who needs it? Text. 10. 27–36.Google Scholar
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds.) In press. Talk at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dumesnil, J. and Dorval, B.. 1989. The development of talk-activity frames that foster perspective-focus talk among peers. Discourse processes. 12. 193–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duranti, A. and Goodwin, C. (eds.) In press. Rethinking “context”: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F.van, . 1990. The study of argumentation as normative pragmatics. Text. 10. 37–44.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F.van, Jacobs, S. and Jackson, S.. In press. Reconstructing conversational argument. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Fletcher, C. and Chrysler, S.. 1990. Surface forms, textbases, and situation models: Recognition memory for three types of textual information. Discourse processes. 13. 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. 1983. Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Kress, G. and Trew, T.. 1979. Language and control. London: Routelege and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Frawley, W. 1987. Review of Handbook of discourse analysis. Language. 63. 361–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, J. 1989. Two styles of narative construction and their linguistic and educational implications. Discourse processes. 12. 287–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geier, M. 1987. Intertextuelle Relation. [Intertextual relations.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 351.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. and Miller, R.. 1988. Conversational sequences and performance for indirect speech acts. Discourse processes. 11. 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, C. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1989. Mind, Code, and Context. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Golden, J., Haslett, B. and Gauntt, H.. 1988. Structure and content in eighth-graders' summary essays. Discourse processes. 11. 139–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greatbatch, D. 1988. A turn-taking system for British news interviews. Language in society. 17. 401–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harnisch, H. 1987. Kommunikationssitution und textsortenspezifische Sprachverwendung. [Communicative situation and language uses specific to text types.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 393.Google Scholar
Harris, R.J, Lee, J., Hensley, D. and Schoen, L.. 1988. The effect of cultural script knowledge on memory for stories over time. Discourse processes. 11. 413–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hein, N. and Wodak, R.. 1987. Medical interviews in internal medicine: Some results of an empirical investigation. Text. 7. 37–65.Google Scholar
Heller, M. 1989. Speech economy and social selection in educational contexts: A Franco-Ontarian case study. Discourse processes. 12. 377–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemphill, L. 1989. Topic development, syntax, and social class. Discourse processes. 12. 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herwig, R. 1987. Communicative intentions in foreign lanmguage discourse. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 410.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, A. 1987. The role of noun phrases in texts. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 146.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, L. 1987. Diskurs und Grammatik. [Discourse and grammer.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralistitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 363.Google Scholar
Holk, A. van. 1987. Wechselbeziehungen lexikalischer und grammatikalischer Funktionen in einem linguistischen Modell der dramatischen Handlung. [Reciprocal relations between lexical and grammatical functions in a linguistic model of drama actions.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 372.Google Scholar
Inghilleri, M. 1989. Learning to mean as a symbolic and social process: The story of two ESL writers. Discourse processes. 12. 391–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iran-Mejad, A. 1989. A nonconnectionist schema theory of understanding surpriseending stories. Discourse processes. 12 127–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, M. 1987. Die Bedeutung der kognitiven Reichweite von Texten fur eine Hierachisierung des Systems der Textsorten. [The significance of the cognitive range of texts for a systematic hierarchy of text types.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 341.Google Scholar
Kemper, , Susan, . 1990. Adult' diaries: Changes made to written narratives across the life span. Discourse processes. 13. 207–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, B. 1987. The grammer of technicological discourse. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 388.Google Scholar
Keroes, J. 1990. But what do they say? Gender and the content of student writing. Discourse processes. 13. 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W. 1988. The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction integration model. Psychological review. 95. 2. 163–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kintsch, W. 1989. The representation of knowledge and the use of knowledge in discourse comprehensive. In Dietrich, R. and Graumann, C. (eds.) Language processing in social context. Amsterdam: North Holland. 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kořenský, K. 1987. Prozessuelle Theorie der Sprechtätigkeit. [A process theory of speech activity.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 377.Google Scholar
Krause, W. 1987. Zur Beschreibung von Textsorten als strukturelle Prototypen. [On describing text types as structural prototypes.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 381.Google Scholar
Krenn, M. 1987. Culture-Specific discourse structures. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 355.Google Scholar
Liebling, C.R. 1988. Means to an end: Children's knowledge of dirctives during the elementary school years. Discourse processes. 11. 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linde, C. 1988. The quantative study of communicative success: Politeness and accidents in aviation discourse. Language in Society. 17. 375–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundquist, L. 1990a. L'Anayse textuelle: MÉthodes, exercises. [Text analysis: Methods exercises.] Copenhagen: Nyt. Nordisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Lundquist, L. 1990b. Some considerations on the relations between text linguistics and the study of texts for specific purposes. In Schroeder, H. (ed.) Research in text theory. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lutz, B. and Wodak, R.. 1987. Information für Informierte. [Information for the informed.] Vienna: Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Maas, U. 1988. Probleme und Traditionen der Diskursanalyse. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprach-wissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung. [Problems and traditions in discourse analysis.] 41. 717–729.Google Scholar
Maltz, D. N. and Borker, R.. 1982. A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In Gumperz, J. (ed.) Language and social identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 196–216.Google Scholar
Mackeldey, R. (ed.) 1991. Textsorten und Textmuster in der gesprochenen und der geschriebenee Sprache. [Text types and text patterns in spoken and written language.] Leipzig: Wissenschaftliche Beiträge der Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
Maynard, S. 1989. Japanese conversion: Self-contextualization through structure and interactional strategy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, M. 1990. Explanatory discourse and theories of causal attribution. Text. 10. 63–68.Google Scholar
Menz, F. 1989. Manipulation strategies in newspapers: A programme for critical linguistics. In Wodak, R. (ed.) Language, power, and ideology. Amsterdam: Jogn Benjamins. 227–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mühlner, W. 1987. Zur Valenstruktur des Satzes unter dem Einfluß des Kontextes. [On the valence structure of the sentence under the influence of context.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 129.Google Scholar
Müller, R. 1987. Zur textsortenspezifischen Distribution syntaktischer Erscheinungen: Das Beispiel der Kausalität. [On text-type-specific distributions of syntactic phenomena: The case of causality.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 389.Google Scholar
Neisser, U. 1976. Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Palek, B. 1988. The structure of reference in a text. Prague: Karlovy University.Google Scholar
Pateman, T. 1981. Linguistics as a branch of critical theory. University of East Anglia papers in linguistics. 14/15.1. 1–29.Google Scholar
Paul, I. 1987. Zur Wirkung von Textstrukturen auf Sprachaneigung. [The effect of text structures on language acquisition.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 307.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, O., Strouhal, E. and Wodak, R.. 1987. Recht auf Sprache. \The rigth to language.] Vienna: Orac.Google Scholar
Polanyi, L. 1990. Towards a formal analysis of discourse structure and interpretation. Text. 10. 81–86.Google Scholar
Polovina, V. 1987. Some problems in the segmentation of spoken conversational language. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 375.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. 1990. Discourse and awareness. Text. 10. 87–90.Google Scholar
Potter, J. and Wetherell, M.. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. 1988. Accomplishing attitudes: Fact and evaluation in racist discourse. Text. 8. 51–68.Google Scholar
Presch, G. 1987. Mehrfachinterpretierbakeit von Texten und Interpretationskonflikte in sozialen Spannungsfeldern. [Multiple interpretability of texts and interpretative conflicts in fields of social tension.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 384.Google Scholar
Read, S. J. 1988. Conjunctive explanations: The effect of a comparison between a chosen and a non-chosen alternative. Journal of experimental social psychology. 24. 146–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, K. 1987. Critical linguistics and textual diagnosis. Text. 7. 145–163.Google Scholar
Roger, D. and Bull, P. (eds.) 1989. Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sandig, B. 1990. Holistic linguistics as a perspective for the nineties. Text. 10. 91–96.Google Scholar
de, Saussure F.. 1966 [1916]. Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill. [tr. W. Baskin.]Google Scholar
Schildt, J. 1987. Die Bedeutung von Textsorten fur eine soziolinguistische Theorie des Sprachwandels. [The significance of text types for a sociolinguistic theory of language change.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 199.Google Scholar
Schriffrin, D. 1990. The language of discourse: Connections inside and out. Text. 10. 97–100.Google Scholar
Snow, C. 1990. The development of discourse skills as related to the development of the study of discourse. Text. 10. 101–104.Google Scholar
Spencer, J. W. 1988. The role in the processing of people in organizations. Discourse processes. 11. 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, W., Büttke, K. and Wiese, E.. 1987. Norm und Varianz bei der Textproduktion. [Norm and variation in text production.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 383.Google Scholar
Stefanova, L. 1987. Essai d'une classification sÉmantico-lexicale des éléments grammaticaux du texte scientifique. [A proposed semantic-lexical classification of grammatical elements in scientific texts.] Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR: Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 104.Google Scholar
Stein, N. 1990. New directions in discourse analysis. Text. 10. 105–108.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. 1989. Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. 1990. Discourse analysis: The excitement of diversity. Text. 10. 109–112.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. 1990. Discourse and grammer. Text. 10. 113–116.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. and Haiman, J. (eds.) 1989. Clause combining in grammer and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tracy, K. 1988. A discourse analysis of four discoures studies. Discourse Processes. 11. 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K. 1990. Framing discourse research to speak to issues of communicative practice. Text. 10. 117–120.Google Scholar
Tumbull, W. and Slugoski, B.. 1988. Conversational and linguistic processes in causal explanation. In Hilton, D. J. (ed.) Contemporary science and natural explanation. New York: New York University Press. 66–93.Google Scholar
Violi, P. 1990. Discourse analysis and semantics. Text. 10. 121–124.Google Scholar
Virtanen, T. 1987. Adverbial placement as a criterion in text typology. Abstracts of section papers and round-table talks, XIVth International Congress of Linguists. Berlin, GDR, Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR. 359.Google Scholar
Vitacolonna, L. 1989. Per un paradigma semiotica del texto. [Toward a semiotic paradigm of the text.] Chieti: Vechhio Faggio.Google Scholar
Waem, Y. 1988. Thoughts on text and content: Applying the think-aloud method to text processing. Text. 8. 327–350.Google Scholar
Whalen, J., Zimmermann, D. and Whalen, M.. 1988. When words fail: A single case analysis. Social problems. 35. 335–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, R. 1986. Language behavior in therapy groups. Loc Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. 1987. “And where is Lebanon?” A socio-psycholinguistic investigation of comprehension and intelligibility of news. Text. 7. 377–410.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. 1989a. Topic development, syntax, and social class. Discourse processes. 12. 267–286.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. 1990. Discourse analysis: Problems, findings, perspectives. Text. 10. 125–132.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. (ed.) 1989b. Language, power, and idelogy. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, R.De Chillia, R., Blüml, K. and Andraschko, E.. 1989. Sprache und Macht. [Language and power.] Vienna: Deuticke.Google Scholar
Wodak, R., Menz, F. and Lalouschek, J.. 1989. Sprachbarrieren: Die Verständigungskrise in unserer Gesellschaft. [ Language barriers: The communication crisis in our society.] Vienna: Edition.Google Scholar
Wodak, R., Menz, F., Lutz, B. and Gruber, H.. 1985. Die Sprache der Mächtigen und der Ohnmächtigen. [The language of the powerful and the powerless.] Vienna: Politische Akademie der Österreichischen Volkspartei.Google Scholar
Wodak, R., Moosmüller, S., Feistrizer, G. and Doleschal, U.. 1987. Die sprachliche Gleichbehandlung von Frau und Mann. [Linguistic equality for women and men.] Vienna: Bundesministerium für Soziales.Google Scholar
Wolf, D. and Hicks, D.. 1989. The voices within narratives: The development of intertextually in young children's stories. Discourse processes. 12. 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Y., Walters, J. and Holzman, S.. 1989. Integration of semantic and structural constraints in narrative comprehension. Discourse processes. 12. 149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar