Korean general extenders tunci ha and kena ha ‘or something’

References

1. Aijmer, K.
   2002 English Discourse Particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.10
   https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.10 [Google Scholar]
2. Barsalou, L.
   1983 “Ad hoc Categories.” Memory and Cognition11: 211–227. 10.3758/BF03196968
   https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196968 [Google Scholar]
3. Brems, L., Ghesquière, L. and Van de Velde, F.
   eds. 2014 Intersubjectivity and Inter-subjectification in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical and Descriptive Advances. Vol.65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E.
   1999 Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bybee, J. L.
   2006 “From usage to grammar: The mind’s Response to Repetition.” Language82(4): 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
   https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
6. Bybee, J. L.
   2010 Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
7. Bybee, J. L., Revere, P. and Pagliuca, W.
   1994 The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Channell, J.
   1994 Vague language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Cheshire, J.
   2007 “Discourse Variation, Grammaticalisation and Stuff like That.” Journal of Sociolinguistics11(2): 155–193. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2007.00317.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00317.x [Google Scholar]
10. Carter, R. and McCarthy, M.
    2006 Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide; Spoken and Written English Grammar and Usage. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Sprachen.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cho, Y-M., Lee, H-S., Schulz, C., Sohn, H-M. and Sohn, S-O.
    2012 Integrated Korean: Intermediate 1. 2nd edition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Dines, E. R.
    1980 “Variation in Discourse – ‘and stuff like that’.” Language in Society9: 13–33. 10.1017/S0047404500007764
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007764 [Google Scholar]
13. Drake, A. V.
    2015 “Indexing Uncertainty: The Case of Turn-final or.” Research on Language and Social Interaction48(3): 301–318. 10.1080/08351813.2015.1058606
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2015.1058606 [Google Scholar]
14. Emanatian, M.
    1992 “Chagga ‘come’ and ‘go’: Metaphor and the Development of Tense-Aspect.” Studies in Language16(1): 1–33. 10.1075/sl.16.1.02ema
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.16.1.02ema [Google Scholar]
15. Erman, B.
    1995 “Grammaticalization in Progress: The Case of or something.” InPapers from the XVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, ed. byInger, M., Simonsen, HG. and Lødrup, H., 136–147. Oslo, Norway: Department of Linguistics, University of Oslo.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Evans, N. and Watanabe, H.
    eds. 2016 Insubordination (Vol.115). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.115
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.115 [Google Scholar]
17. Fraser, B.
    2010 “Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging.” InNew Approaches to Hedging, ed. byKaltenböck, G., Mihatsch, W. and Schneider, S., 15–34. Emerald: Bingley. 10.1163/9789004253247_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253247_003 [Google Scholar]
18. Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C.
    2003 Grammaticalization. 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
19. Itani, R.
    1992 “Japanese Conjunction kedo ‘but’ in Utterance-final Use: A Relevance-based Analysis.” English Linguistics9: 265–283. 10.9793/elsj1984.9.265
    https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj1984.9.265 [Google Scholar]
20. Jefferson, G.
    1990 “List Construction as a Task and Resource.” InInteraction Competenceed. byPsathas, G., 63–92. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Kim, M.
    2015 “From Choice to Counter-expectation: Semantic-pragmatic Connections of the Korean Disjunctive, Concessive, and Scalar Focus Particle -na,” Journal of Pragmatics80: 1–21. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.012 [Google Scholar]
22. Kim, M.
    2018 “From Connective to Final Particle: Korean tunci “or” and Cross-Linguistic Comparisons,” Journal of Pragmatics135: 24–38. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.07.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.07.004 [Google Scholar]
23. Lindström, A.
    1997 Designing Social Actions: Grammar, Prosody, and Interaction in Swedish Conversation. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
24. Mulder, J. and Thompson, S. A.
    2008 “The Grammaticization of but as a Final Particle in English Conversation.” InCrosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions. ed. byLaury, R.179–204, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.80.09mul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.80.09mul [Google Scholar]
25. Overstreet, M.
    1999 Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff like That: General Extenders in English Discourse, New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Overstreet, M. and Yule, G.
    1997 “On Being Inexplicit and Stuff in Contemporary American English,” Journal of English Linguistics25: 250–258. 10.1177/007542429702500307
    https://doi.org/10.1177/007542429702500307 [Google Scholar]
27. Prince, E., Frader, J. and Bosk, C.
    1982 “On Hedging in Physician-physician Discourse.” InLinguistics and the Professions. Proceedings of the Second Annual Delaware Symposium on Language Studies. ed. byDi Pietro, R. J., 83–97, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Suzuki, S.
    1998 “Pejorative Connotation: A Case of Japanese.” InDiscourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory, ed. byJucker, A. H. and Ziv, Y.261–276, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.57.13suz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.57.13suz [Google Scholar]
29. Suzuki, S.
    2008 “Expressivity of Vagueness: Alienation in the verb-tari suru Construction.” Japanese Language and Literature42(1):157–169.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Tagliamonte, S. A. and Denis, D.
    2010 “The Stuff of Change: General Extenders in Toronto, Canada.” Journal of English Linguistics38(4):335–368. 10.1177/0075424210367484
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424210367484 [Google Scholar]
31. Traugott, E. C.
    2003 “From Subjectification to Intersubjectification.” InMotives for Language Change. ed. byHickey, R.124–139, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009 [Google Scholar]
32. Traugott, E. C.
    2010 “Revisiting Subjectification and Intersubjectification.” InSubjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. ed. byDavidse, K., Vandelanotte, L. and Cuyckens, H.29–70, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Traugott, E. C.
    2014 “Intersubjectification and Clause Periphery.” InIntersubjectivity and Intersubjectification in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical and Descriptive Advances (Vol. 65). ed. byBrems, L., Ghesquière, L. and Van de Velde, F., 7–28, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Traugott, E. C. and Dasher, R. B.
    2005 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Vaughan, E., McCarthy, M., and Clancy, B.
    2017 “Vague Category Markers as Turn-final Items in Irish English.” World Englishes36(2): 208–223. 10.1111/weng.12254
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12254 [Google Scholar]
36. Yeon, J. and Brown, L.
    2011 Korean: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]