Journals / Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2

Zeyrek, D., and Özge U. (Eds). Discourse Meaning: The view from Turkish. 2020. De Gruyter Mouton. 284 pages. ISBN 9783110678925

Pages
313–322
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
🔖

Cite This Article

ATASOY, G. (2020). Zeyrek, D., and Özge U. (Eds). Discourse Meaning: The view from Turkish. 2020. De Gruyter Mouton. 284 pages. ISBN 9783110678925. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2, 313–322. https://ajindex.com/articles/348461

References (8)

  1. Akar, D., Öztürk,B., Göksel, A. & Kelepir, M. (2020). Common ground management and inner negation in one: The case of hani. In Zeyrek, D. & U. Özge (eds.). Discourse meaning: The view from Turkish (pp. 57-80). Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton. Aksan, M. Demirhan, U. U., & Aksan, Y. (2020). Corpus evidence and discourse functions of the -mış-Dir pattern. In Zeyrek, D. & U. Özge (eds.). Discourse meaning: The view from Turkish (pp. 189-222). Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton. Büyükkantarcıoğlu, N. (2006). An analysis of Turkish interjections in the context of reactive idea framing. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Faculty of Letters] 23(1). 19–32.
  2. Dede, M. (1986). Definiteness and referentiality in Turkish verbal sentences. In Dan I. Slobin & Karl Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics, (pp. 147–164). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Enç, M. (1986). Topic switching and pronominal subjects in Turkish. In Dan Isaac Slobin & Karl Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics, (pp. 195–209). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Erguvanlı-Taylan, E. (1986). Pronominal versus zero representation of anaphora in Turkish. In Dan Isaac Slobin & Karl Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics, (pp. 209–233). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Erk-Emeksiz, Z. (2010). Negation in Turkish. Dilbilim Araştırmaları/Journal of Linguistic Research 2, 1–16.
  3. Göksel, A. & Özsoy, S. (2003). dA: A focus/topic associated clitic in Turkish. Lingua 11. 1143–1167.
  4. Horn, L. R. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language 61. 121–174.
  5. İşsever, S. (2003). Information structure in Turkish: the word order–prosody interface. Lingua 113 (11). 1025–1053.
  6. Küntay, A. (2002.) Development of the expression of indefiniteness: presenting new referents in Turkish picture-series stories. Discourse Processes 33, (pp. 77–101).
  7. Oktar, L. (1997). Söylemsel artgönderim örüntülerinde iletişimsel etkenler [Communicative factors in coreference patterns in discourse]. Dilbilim Araştırmaları/Journal of Linguistic Research 8, (pp. 127–132).
  8. Özge, D. & Evcen, E. (2020). Referential form, word order and emotional valence in Turkish pronoun resolution in physical contact events. In Zeyrek, D. & U. Özge (eds.). Discourse meaning: The view from Turkish (pp. 165-188). Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton. Özge, U. & von Heusinger, K. (2020). Case marking and forward and backward discourse function. In Zeyrek, D. & U. Özge (eds.). Discourse meanin