oa The role of discourse strategies in the grammaticalization of the Japanese discourse marker dakara

References

1. Nakano, Mitsutoshi & Maeda, Ai & Jibō, Kazuya
   A. Nakano, Mitsutoshi & Maeda, Ai & Jibō, Kazuya (eds.) 2000 Sharebon, kokkeibon, nijōbon [Pleasure-quarter stories, humorous stories, and sentimental stories]. Tokyo: Shōgakukan.
   [Google Scholar]
2. B.Aozora bunko [Blue sky library]: www.aozora.gr.jp (Last accessed2016-07-22.)
   [Google Scholar]
3. C.Denshi bungei-kan [The Japan P.E.N. club digital library]: bungeikan.jp/international/ (Last accessed2016-07-22.)
   [Google Scholar]
4. Altenberg, Bengt
   1984 Causal linking in spoken and written English. Studia Linguistica38(1). 20–69. 10.1111/j.1467‑9582.1984.tb00734.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1984.tb00734.x [Google Scholar]
5. Altenberg, Bengt
   2002 Concessive connectors in English and Swedish. In Hasselgård, Hilde & Johansson, Stig & Behrens, Bergljot & Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine (eds.), Information structure in a cross-linguistic perspective, 21–43. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004334250_003
   https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334250_003 [Google Scholar]
6. Ariel, Mira
   1988 Retrieving propositions from context: Why and how. Journal of Pragmatics12(5–6). 567–600. 10.1016/0378‑2166(88)90049‑5
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90049-5 [Google Scholar]
7. Ariel, Mira
   1998 Discourse markers and form-function correlations. In Jucker, Andreas H. & Ziv, Yael (eds.), Discourse markers: Descriptions and theory, 223–259. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.57.12ari
   https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.57.12ari [Google Scholar]
8. Ariel, Mira
   2001 Accessibility in text and text processing. In Sanders, Ted & Schilperoord, Joost & Spooren, Wilbert (eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects, 29–87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.8.04ari
   https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.8.04ari [Google Scholar]
9. Baba, Toshiomi
   2005 Gyakusetsu no setsuzokushi/setsuzoku goku [On the adversative connectives]. InThe National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (ed.), Zasshi “Taiyō” ni yoru kakuritsuki gendaigo no kenkyū [Research on the formative era of contemporary Japanese based on the Taiyo Corpus], 173–191. Tokyo: Hakubunkan Shinsha.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Barlow, Michael & Kemmer, Suzanne
    2000 Usage based models of language. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Blumenthal-Dramé, Alice
    2012 Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110294002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110294002 [Google Scholar]
12. Bybee, Joan
    2010 Language, usage and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
13. Cook, Haruko Minegishi
    1990 An indexical account of the Japanese sentence-final particle no . Discourse Processes13(4). 401–439. 10.1080/01638539009544768
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539009544768 [Google Scholar]
14. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Thompson, Sandra A.
    2000 Concessive patterns in conversation. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 381–410. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.4.381
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.4.381 [Google Scholar]
15. Degand, Liesbeth & Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline
    2015 Grammaticalization or pragmaticalization of discourse markers?: More than a terminological issue. Journal of Historical Pragmatics16(1). 59–85. 10.1075/jhp.16.1.03deg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.16.1.03deg [Google Scholar]
16. Detges, Ulrich
    2006 From speaker to subject: The obligatorization of the Old French subject pronouns. In Andersen, Hanne Leth & Birkelund, Merete & Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard (eds.), La linguistique au coeur. Valence verbale, grammaticalisation et corpus: Mélanges offerts à Lene Schøsler à l’occasion de son 60e anniversaire [Linguistics in the heart. Verbal valence, grammaticalization and corpus: A collection of papers in honor of Lene Schøsler on the occasion of her 60th birthday] (University of Southern Denmark Studies in Literature 48), 75–103. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Diessel, Holger
    2014 Usage-based linguistics. Oxford University Press. (www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199772810/obo-9780199772810-0068.xml) (Accessed2015-12-24.) 10.1093/obo/9780199772810‑0068
    https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0068 [Google Scholar]
18. Diessel, Holger & Hetterle, Katja
    2011 Causal clauses: A cross-linguistic investigation of their structure, meaning, and use. In Siemund, Peter (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation, 23–54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238068.23
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238068.23 [Google Scholar]
19. Doi, Yōichi
    1984 -keredomo [but]. In Matsumura, Akira (ed.), Kotengo/gendaigo joshi jodōshi shōsetsu [Classical/Modern Japanese summary of particles and auxiliaries], 5th edn., 415–420. Tokyo: Gakutōsha.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Fitzmaurice, Susan
    2004 Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: From stance markers to discourse markers. Discourse Studies6(4). 427–448. 10.1177/1461445604046585
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604046585 [Google Scholar]
21. Ford, Cecilia E.
    1993 Grammar in interaction: Adverbial clauses in American English conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554278
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554278 [Google Scholar]
22. Ford, Cecilia E.
    2000 The treatment of contrasts in interaction. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 283–311. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.3.283
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.3.283 [Google Scholar]
23. Ford, Cecilia E. & Mori, Junko
    1994 Causal markers in Japanese and English conversations: A cross-linguistic study of interactional grammar. Pragmatics4(1). 31–61. 10.1075/prag.4.1.03for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.4.1.03for [Google Scholar]
24. Gohl, Christine
    2000 Causal relations in spoken discourse: Asyndetic constructions as a means for giving reason. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 83–110. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.1.83
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.1.83 [Google Scholar]
25. Günthner, Susanne
    2000 From concessive connector to discourse marker: The use of obwohl in everyday German interaction. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 439–468. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.4.439
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.4.439 [Google Scholar]
26. Habein, Yaeko Sato
    1984 The history of the Japanese written language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Hasunuma, Akiko
    1991 Taiwa ni okeru “dakara” no kinō. Himeji Dokkyō Daigaku Gaikokugo Gakubu Kiyō [The Journal of the College of Foreign Languages Himeji Dokkyo University] 41. 137–153.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Heine, Bernd & Reh, Mechthild
    1984 Grammaticalization and reanalysis in African languages. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Heine, Bernd & Narrog, Heiko
    2010 Grammaticalization and linguistic analysis. In Heine, Bernd & Narrog, Heiko (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 401–423. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Heritage, John
    1984 Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Heritage, John
    1988 Explanations as accounts: A conversational analytic perspective. In Antaki, Charles (ed.), Analysing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods, 127–144. London: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Heritage, John & Raymond, Geoffrey
    2005 The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly68(1). 15–38. 10.1177/019027250506800103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103 [Google Scholar]
33. Higashiizumi, Yuko
    2015 Periphery of utterances and (inter)subjectification in Modern Japanese: A case study of competing causal conjunctions and connective particles. In Smith, Andrew D. M. & Trousdale, Graeme & Waltereit, Richard (eds.), New directions in grammaticalization research, 135–156. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Hilpert, Martin
    2013 Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139004206
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004206 [Google Scholar]
35. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    2004 Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Opposite or orthogonal?In Bisang, Walter & Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Wiemer, Björn (eds.), What makes grammaticalization?: A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Hopper, Paul J.
    1991 On some principles of grammaticization. In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Heine, Bernd (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization, vol.11, 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
37. Hoye, Leo Francis
    2008 Evidentiality in discourse: A pragmatic and empirical account. In Romero-Trillo, Jesús (ed.), Pragmatics and corpus linguistics: A mutualistic entente, 151–174. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Im, Jae-eun
    2011 The Korean discourse marker kulenikka: A panchronic study. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
39. Ito, Kiwako
    2002 The interaction of focus and lexical pitch accent in speech production and dialogue comprehension: Evidence from Japanese and Basque. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (Doctoral dissertation.)
    [Google Scholar]
40. Jackson, Sally & Jacobs, Scott
    1980 Structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme. Quarterly Journal of Speech66(3). 251–265. 10.1080/00335638009383524
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383524 [Google Scholar]
41. Jacobs, Andreas & Jucker, Andreas H.
    1995 The historical perspective in pragmatics. In Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.), Historical pragmatics: Pragmatic developments in the history of English, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.04jac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.04jac [Google Scholar]
42. Kamio, Akio
    1994 The theory of territory of information: The case of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics21(1). 67–100. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90047‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90047-7 [Google Scholar]
43. Karatsu, Mariko
    1995 A functional analysis of dewa, dakara, and shikashi in conversation. Japanese Discourse11. 107–130.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Katō, Kaoru
    1995 “Gen’in/riyū” o ukenai “dakara”: “Dakara” no shutai-teki sokumen no tosshutsu [“Dakara” used as “cause/reason”: Prominence of the subjective aspect of “dakara”]. Waseda Nihongo Kenkyū [Waseda Japanese Language Study] 31. 14–31.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Kim, Ahrim
    2015 Utterance-final -ketun in spoken Korean: A particle for managing information structure in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics881. 27–54. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.006 [Google Scholar]
46. Kim, Alan Hyun-Oak
    2011 Rhetorical questions as catalyst in grammaticalization: Deriving Korean discourse marker KETUN from conditional connective. Journal of Pragmatics43(4). 1023–1041. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.001 [Google Scholar]
47. Kitahara, Yasuo
    2000 Nihon kokugo daijiten [The comprehensive dictionary of the Japanese language]. 2nd edn.Tokyo: Shogakukan.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Knott, Alistair
    2001 Semantic and pragmatic relations and their intended effects. In Sanders, Ted & Schilperoord, Joost & Spooren, Wilbert (eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects, 127–151. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.8.08kno
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.8.08kno [Google Scholar]
49. König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter
    2000 Causal and concessive clauses: Formal and semantic relations. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 341–360. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.4.341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.4.341 [Google Scholar]
50. Konishi, Izumi
    2003 Kaiwa ni okeru “dakara” no kinō kakuchō: Bunpō kinō to danwa kinō no setten [The function extension of dakara in Japanese conversation]. Shakai Gengo Kagaku [The Japanese Journal of Language in Society] 6(1). 61–73.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Krug, Manfred G.
    2001 Frequency, iconicity, categorization: Evidence from emerging modals. In Bybee, Joan & Hopper, Paul J. (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 309–335. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.16kru
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.16kru [Google Scholar]
52. Kyōgoku, Okikazu & Matsui, Eiichi
    1972 Setsuzokushi no hensen [Change in conjunctions]. In Suzuki, Kazuhiko . & Hayashi, Ōki (eds.), Hinshibetsu Nihon bunpō kōza [Japanese grammar lecture on parts of speech], 89–136. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Lang, Ewald
    2000 Adversative connectors on distinct levels of discourse: A re-examination of Eve Sweetser’s three-level approach. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause – condition – concession – contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 235–256. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.3.235
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.3.235 [Google Scholar]
54. Lehmann, Christian
    1985 Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e Stile20(3). 303–319.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1983 Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813313
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313 [Google Scholar]
56. Lewis, Diana M.
    2003 Rhetorical motivations for the emergence of discourse particles, with special reference to English of course . In van der Wouden, Ton & Foolen, Ad & Van de Craen, Piet (eds.), Particles (Belgian Journal of Linguistics 16), 79–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
57. López-Couso, María José
    2010 Subjectification and intersubjectification. In Jucker, Andreas H. & Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical pragmatics, 127–163. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110214284.3.127
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.3.127 [Google Scholar]
58. Maekawa, Kikuko
    1997 Effects of focus on duration and vowel formant frequency in Japanese. In Sagisaka, Yoshinori & Campbell, Nick & Higuchi, Norio (eds.), Computing prosody: Computational models for processing spontaneous speech, 129–153. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4612‑2258‑3_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2258-3_10 [Google Scholar]
59. Matsumoto, Yo
    1988 From bound grammatical markers to free discourse markers: History of some Japanese connectives. In Axmaker, Shelley & Jaisser, Annie & Singmaster, Helen (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 340–351. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Matsumoto, Yo
    1998 Semantic change in the grammaticalization of verbs into postpositions in Japanese. In Ōhori, Toshio (ed.), Studies in Japanese grammaticalization: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 25–60. Tokyo: Kuroshio.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Mauri, Caterina & Sansò, Andrea
    2011 How directive constructions emerge: Grammaticalization, constructionalization, cooptation. Journal of Pragmatics43(14). 3489–3521. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.001 [Google Scholar]
62. Maynard, Senko K.
    1992 Cognitive and pragmatic messages of a syntactic choice: The case of the Japanese commentary predicate n(o) da . Text12(4). 563–613. 10.1515/text.1.1992.12.4.563
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1992.12.4.563 [Google Scholar]
63. Maynard, Senko K.
    1993 Discourse modality: Subjectivity, emotion and voice in the Japanese language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.24 [Google Scholar]
64. Maynard, Senko K.
    1996 Contrastive rhetoric: A case of nominalization in Japanese and English discourse. Language Sciences18(3–4). 933–946. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(96)00055‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(96)00055-1 [Google Scholar]
65. Mori, Junko
    1994 Functions of the connective datte in Japanese conversation. In Akatsuka, Noriko (ed.), Japanese/Korean linguistics, vol.41, 147–163. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Mori, Junko
    1996 Historical change of the Japanese connective datte: Its form and functions. In Akatsuka, Noriko & Iwasaki, Shoichi & Strauss, Susan (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics, vol.51, 201–218. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Mori, Junko
    1999 Negotiating agreement and disagreement in Japanese: Connective expressions and turn construction (Studies in Discourse and Grammar 8). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.8 [Google Scholar]
68. Nakano, Mitsutoshi & Maeda, Ai & Jibō, Kazuya
    (eds.) 2000 Sharebon, kokkeibon, nijōbon [Pleasure-quarter stories, humorous stories, and sentimental stories]. Tokyo: Shōgakukan.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Narrog, Heiko
    2015 (Inter)subjectification and its limits in secondary grammaticalization. Language Sciences471. 148–160. 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.07.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.07.010 [Google Scholar]
70. Nihongo Kijutsu-bunpoo Kenkyuukai [Japanese Descriptive Grammar Research Group]
    Nihongo Kijutsu-bunpoo Kenkyuukai [Japanese Descriptive Grammar Research Group] 2003 Gendai Nihongo bunpoo 7: Danwa/taigu hyogen [Modern Japanese grammar 7: Conversation/intersubjective expression]. Tokyo: Kuroshio.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Okamoto, Shin’ichirō & Tamon, Yasuyo
    1998 Danwa ni okeru dakara no shoyōhō [Uses of dakara in discourse]. Nihongo Kyōiku [Journal of Japanese Language Teaching] 981. 49–60.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Ono, Tsuyoshi & Suzuki, Ryoko
    2014 Introduction: Situating usage-based (Japanese) linguistics. In Kabata, Kaori & Ono, Tsuyoshi (eds.), Usage-based approaches to Japanese grammar: Towards the understanding of human language, 1–10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.156.03int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.156.03int [Google Scholar]
73. Onodera, Noriko O.
    2004 Japanese discourse markers: Synchronic and diachronic discourse analysis. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.132
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.132 [Google Scholar]
74. Ōtsuka, Mariko
    2007 Kochakugo ni okeru bun no bunpōka ni kansuru ichi kōsatsu: Nihongo/Kankokugo no riyū o arawasu setsuzokushi “dakara” “geureonikka” no imi keisei katei ni tsuite [Evolution of clause combining processes in agglutinative languages: A case of Japanese ‘dakara’ and Korean ‘geureonikka’ as causal conjunctions]. Nihon Ninchi Gengo Gakkai ronbunshū [Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of Japanese Cognitive Linguistics Association], vol.71, 182–192. Tokyo: Japanese Cognitive Linguistics Association.
    [Google Scholar]
75. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984a Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell & Heritage, John (eds.), Structure of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
76. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984b Pursuing a response. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell & Heritage, John (eds.), Structure of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 152–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
77. Raevaara, Liisa
    2011 Accounts at convenience stores: Doing dispreference and small talk. Journal of Pragmatics43(2). 556–571. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.020
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.020 [Google Scholar]
78. Ren, Li & Yi, Hu
    2010 Danwa no tenkai ni okeru “dakara” no kinō [Function of connective dakara in progressive discourse]. Kokusai Nihongogaku Ronsō [Journal of International Japanese Studies] 71. 47–85.
    [Google Scholar]
79. Rhee, Seongha
    2015 On the emergence of Korean markers of agreement. Journal of Pragmatics831. 10–26. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.005 [Google Scholar]
80. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007 Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in Conversation Analysis, vol.11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
81. Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Jefferson, Gail & Sacks, Harvey
    1977 The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53(2). 361–382. 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
82. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1987 Discourse markers. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841 [Google Scholar]
83. Schwenter, Scott A.
    1998 From hypothetical to factual and beyond: Refutational si-clauses in Spanish conversation. In Koenig, Jean-Pierre (ed.), Discourse and cognition: Bridging the gap, 423–435. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
84. Schwenter, Scott A. & Waltereit, Richard
    2010 Presupposition accommodation and language change. In Davidse, Kristin & Vandelanotte, Lieven & Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization (Topics in English Linguistics 66), 75–102. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226102.2.75
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.2.75 [Google Scholar]
85. Shinzato, Rumiko
    2014 From degree/manner adverbs to pragmatic particles in Japanese: A corpus-based approach to the parallel diachronic development of amari, bakari, and yahari . In Taavitsainen, Irma & Jucker, Andreas H. & Tuominen, Jukka (eds.), Diachronic corpus pragmatics, 77–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.243.07shi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243.07shi [Google Scholar]
86. Smirnova, Elena
    2015 When secondary grammaticalization starts: A look from the constructional perspective. Language Sciences471. 215–228. 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.07.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.07.009 [Google Scholar]
87. Suzuki, Ryoko
    2011 A note on the emergence of quotative constructions in Japanese conversation. In Laury, Ritva & Suzuki, Ryoko (eds.), Subordination in conversation: A cross-linguistic perspective, 149–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.24.07suz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.24.07suz [Google Scholar]
88. Sweetser, Eve
    1990 From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
89. Taavitsainen, Irma & Fitzmaurice, Susan
    2007 Historical pragmatics: What it is and how to do it. In Fitzmaurice, Susan & Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Methods in historical pragmatics, 11–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197822.11
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197822.11 [Google Scholar]
90. Taavitsainen, Irma & Jucker, Andreas H.
    2010 Trends and developments in historical pragmatics. In Jucker, Andreas H. & Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical pragmatics, 3–30. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110214284.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.1.3 [Google Scholar]
91. Takada, Hiroyuki & Shiina, Michi & Onodera, Noriko O.
    2011 Rekishi goyōron no kiso chishiki [Basic knowledge for historical pragmatics]. In Takada, Hiroyuki & Shiina, Michi & Onodera, Noriko O. (eds.), Rekishi goyōron nyūmon: Kako no komyunikēshon o fukugen suru [Introduction to historical pragmatics], 5–44. Tokyo: Taishukan.
    [Google Scholar]
92. Tanizaki, Kazuyo
    1994 Danwa hyōshiki ni tsuite no kōsatsu: “Dakara” o chūshin ni [An analysis of the Japanese discourse marker dakara ]. Ōsaka Daigaku Gengobunkagaku [Osaka University Journal of Language and Culture] 31. 79–93.
    [Google Scholar]
93. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    1995 Subjectification in grammticalisation. In Stein, Dieter & Wright, Susan (eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation: Linguistic perspectives, 31–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003 [Google Scholar]
94. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2003 From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond, Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009 [Google Scholar]
95. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2008 “All that he endeavoured to prove was …”: On the emergence of grammatical constructions in dialogual and dialogic contexts. In Cooper, Robin & Kempson, Ruth (eds.), Language in flux: Dialogue coordination, language variation, change and evolution, 143–177. London: Kings College Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
96. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2010a Dialogic contexts as motivations for syntactic change. In Cloutier, Robert A. & Hamilton-Brehm, Anne Marie & Kretzschmar Jr., William A. (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language V: Variation and change in English grammar and lexicon: Contemporary approaches, 11–27. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110220339.1.11
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220339.1.11 [Google Scholar]
97. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2010b (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Davidse, Kristin & Vandelanotte, Lieven & Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization (Topics in English Linguistics 66), 29–71. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226102.1.29
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29 [Google Scholar]
98. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard B.
    2002 Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
99. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme
    2013 Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
100. Twine, Nanette
     1991 Language and the modern state: The reform of written Japanese. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
101. van Dijk, Teun A.
     1977 Text and context: Explorations in the semantics and pragmatics of discourse. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
102. van Dijk, Teun A.
     1979 Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics3(5). 447–456. 10.1016/0378‑2166(79)90019‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90019-5 [Google Scholar]
103. von Mengden, Ferdinand & Coussé, Evie
     2014 Introduction: The role of change in usage-based conceptions of language. In Coussé, Evie & von Mengden, Ferdinand (eds.), Usage-based approaches to language change, 1–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
104. Waltereit, Richard
     2006 The rise of discourse markers in Italian: A specific type of language change. In Fischer, Kerstin (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles, 61–76. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
105. Waltereit, Richard
     2012 On the origins of grammaticalization and other types of language change in discourse strategies. In Davidse, Kristin & Breban, Tine & Brems, Lieselotte & Mortelmans, Tanja (eds.), Grammaticalization and language change: New reflections, 51–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.130.03wal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.130.03wal [Google Scholar]
106. Waltereit, Richard & Detges, Ulrich
     2007 Different functions, different histories: Modal particles and discourse markers from a diachronic point of view. Catalan Journal of Linguistics61. 61–80. 10.5565/rev/catjl.124
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.124 [Google Scholar]
107. Wang, Chueh-chen & Huang, Lillian M.
     2006 Grammaticalization of connectives in Mandarin Chinese: A corpus-based study. Language and Linguistics7(4). 991–1016.
     [Google Scholar]
108. Wang, Yan
     2007 A functional study of the final particle mono in Japanese conversational discourse. The Linguistics Journal2(1). 162–183.
     [Google Scholar]
109. Yajima, Masahiro
     2011 Jikanteki/kūkanteki hikaku o jiku ni shita kinsei-go bunpōshi kenkyū: Soredakara-rui no goi-ka o rei to shite [A study of the Early Modern Japanese grammar based on time/space comparisons]. In Kanazawa, Hiroyuki & Yajima, Masahiro (eds.), Kinseigo kenkyū no pāsupekuthibu gengobunka o dō toraeru ka [Perspective of the early modern Japanese language: How to recognize our language and culture], 56–82. Tokyo: Kasama Shoin.
     [Google Scholar]