oa Irregular perspective shifts and perspective persistence, discourse-oriented and theoretical approaches

References

1. Adelaar, Willem F. H.
   1990 “The Role of Quotations in Andean Discourse.” InUnity in Diversity: Papers Presented to Simon C. Dik on His 50th Birthday, ed. byHarm Pinkster, and Inge Genee, 1–12. Dordrecht and Providence, RI: Foris publications. 10.1515/9783110847420.1
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110847420.1 [Google Scholar]
2. Banfield, Ann
   1982 Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. Boston, MA: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Cornillie, Bert, and Barbara De Cock
   (eds) 2015 Hearer-Orientation in Spoken Genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   [Google Scholar]
4. De Smet, Hendrik, and Jean-Christophe Verstraete
   2006 “Coming to Terms with Subjectivity.” Cognitive Linguistics17: 365–392.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Dancygier, Barbara, Wei-Lun Lu, and Arie Verhagen
   2016 Viewpoint and the Fabric of Meaning. Form and Use of Viewpoint Tools across Languages and Modalities. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110365467
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110365467 [Google Scholar]
6. Evans, Nick
   2006 “View with a View: Towards a Typology of Multiple Perspective Constructions.” InProceedings of the Thirty-first Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. byRebecca T. Cover, and Yuni Kim, 93–120. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Evans, Nick, Henrik Bergqvist, and Lila San Roque
   2018 “The Grammar of Engagement I: Framework and Initial Exemplification.” Language and Cognition10 (1): 110–140. 10.1017/langcog.2017.21
   https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2017.21 [Google Scholar]
8. Everett, Daniel
   2008 “Wari’ Intentional State Constructions.” InInvestigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics Interface, ed. byRobert D. van Valin, 381–409. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.105.27eve
   https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.105.27eve [Google Scholar]
9. Gentens, Caroline
   2016 “The Factive-Reported Distinction in English. Representational and Interpersonal Semantics.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Leuven.
10. Gentens, Caroline, and Kristin Davidse
    2017 “Reconceptualizing Factivity: a New View on the Semantics of Factive Constructions.” Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics35 (6): 65–95.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Ghesquière, Lobke, Lot Brems, and Freek van de Velde
    (eds) 2014 Intersubjectivity and Intersubjectification in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Güldemann, Tom
    2008 Quotative Indexes in African Languages: A Synchronic and Diachronic Survey. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110211450
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211450 [Google Scholar]
13. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed.London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Hinterwimmer, Stefan, and Petra B. Schumacher
    (eds) 2017 Special Issue on Perspective Taking. Glossa (2) 1.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Konnerth, Linda
    2016 “Speech-act Participant Perspectives in Quotative Constructions of Monsang.” Paper presented atSLE49, University of Naples, 31 August – 3 September 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Konnerth, Linda
    . Subm. “Recycling through Perspective Persistence in Monsang (Trans-Himalayan): Reconstructing the Desiderative from a Reported Intentionality Construction.” Functions of Language.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1987 Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Levinson, Stephen
    2006 “Deixis.” InThe Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. byLaurence R. Horn and Gregory L. Ward, 97–120. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756959.ch5
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch5 [Google Scholar]
19. McGregor, William B.
    1994 “The Grammar of Reported Speech and Thought in Gooniyandi.” Australian Journal of Linguistics14 (1): 63–92. 10.1080/07268609408599502
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07268609408599502 [Google Scholar]
20. McGregor, William B.
    2007 “A Desiderative Complement Construction in Warrwa.” InLanguage Description, History and Development: Linguistic Indulgence in Memory of Terry Crowley, ed. byJeff Siegel, John Lynch, and Diana Eades, 27–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cll.30.08mcg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cll.30.08mcg [Google Scholar]
21. Munro, Robert, Rainer Ludwig, Uli Sauerland, and David W. Fleck
    2012 “Reported Speech in Matses: Perspective Persistence and Evidential Narratives.” International Journal of American Linguistics78 (1): 41–75. 10.1086/662637
    https://doi.org/10.1086/662637 [Google Scholar]
22. Nunberg, Geoffrey
    1993 “Indexicality and Deixis.” Linguistics and Philosophy16:1–43. 10.1007/BF00984721
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984721 [Google Scholar]
23. Pascual, Esther
    2014 Fictive Interaction: The Conversation Frame in Thought, Language, and Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.47
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.47 [Google Scholar]
24. Reinhart, Tanya
    1975 “Whose Main Clause? Point of View in Sentences with Parentheticals.” InHarvard Studies of Syntax and Semantics: Vol. 1, ed. bySusumu Kuno, 127–171. Cambridge, MA: Dept. of Linguistics, Harvard University.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Rumsey, Alan
    2001 “On the Syntax and Semantics of Trying.” InForty Years on: Ken Hale and Australian Languages, ed. byJane Simpson, David Nash, Mary Laughren, Peter Austin, and Barry Alpher, 353–63. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
26. San Roque, Lila, and Henrik Bergqvist
    (eds) 2015 Special Issue on Epistemic Marking in Typological Perspective. STUF – Language Typology and Universals.
    [Google Scholar]
27. San Roque, Lila, Floyd, Simeon, and Elisabeth Norcliffe
    2017 “Evidentiality and Interrogativity.” Lingua186–187: 120–143. 10.1016/j.lingua.2014.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.11.003 [Google Scholar]
28. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 “Shifters, Linguistic Categories, and Cultural Description.” InMeaning in Anthropology, ed. byKeith H. Basso, and Henry A. Selby, 11–55. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Spronck, Stef
    2012 “Minds Divided, Speaker Attitudes in Quotatives.” InQuotatives: Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, ed. byIsabelle Buchstaller, and Ingrid van Alphen, 71–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.15.07spr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.15.07spr [Google Scholar]
30. Spronck, Stef
    2015 “Reported Speech in Ungarinyin: Grammar and Social Cognition in a Language of the Kimberley Region, Western Australia.” Ph.D. dissertation, Canberra: Australian National University.
31. Spronck, Stef
    2017 “Defenestration: Deconstructing the Frame-in Relation in Ungarinyin.” Journal of Pragmatics114: 104–133. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.016 [Google Scholar]
32. Spronck, Stef, An Van linden, Caroline Gentens, and Maria S. Sansiñena
    eds. Subm.Notes from the Field on Perspective-Indexing Constructions: Irregular Shifts and Perspective Persistence. Functions of Language.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Steever, Sanford B.
    2002 “Direct and Indirect Discourse in Tamil.” InReported Discourse: A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains, ed. byTom Güldemann, and Manfred von Roncador, 91–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.52.07ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.52.07ste [Google Scholar]
34. Vandelanotte, Lieven
    2004a “From Representational to Scopal Distancing Indirect Speech or Thought: A Cline of Subjectification.” Text24 (4): 547–585. 10.1515/text.2004.24.4.547
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2004.24.4.547 [Google Scholar]
35. Vandelanotte, Lieven
    2004b “Deixis and Grounding in Speech and Thought Representation.” Journal of Pragmatics36: 489–520. 10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.003 [Google Scholar]
36. Vandelanotte, Lieven
    2009 Speech and Thought Representation in English. A Cognitive-Functional Perspective. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110215373
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215373 [Google Scholar]
37. Vanparys, Johan
    1996 Categories and Complements of Illocutionary Verbs in a Cognitive Perspective. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Verhagen, Arie
    2005 Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
    2007 Rethinking the Coordinate-Subordinate Dichotomy. Interpersonal Grammar and the Analysis of Adverbial Clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110918199
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110918199 [Google Scholar]
40. Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
    2008 “The Status of Purpose, Reason and Intended Endpoint in the Typology of Complex Sentences: Implications for Layered Models of Clause Structure.” Linguistics46: 757–788. 10.1515/LING.2008.025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2008.025 [Google Scholar]
41. von Roncador, Manfred
    1980 “Gibt die Redewiedergabe Rede wieder?” L.A.U.T. (Linguistic Agency University of Trier), Series A: Paper no. 71.
    [Google Scholar]
42. von Roncador, Manfred
    1988 Zwischen direkter und indirekter Rede: Nichtwörtliche direkte Rede, erlebte Rede, logophorische Konstruktionen und Verwandtes. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783111678764
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111678764 [Google Scholar]