The Semantics of MOOD and the Syntax of the Let’s-construction in English: A Corpus-based Cardiff Grammar Approach

References

• Alcázar A & M Saltarelli 2014 The syntax of Imperatives Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Allan K 2006 ‘Clause-type, primary illocution, and MOOD-like operators in English’ Language Sciences 28: 1–50. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2004.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biber D, S Johansson, G Leech, S Conrad & E Finnegan 1999 The Longman Grammar of Spoken and written English London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Börjars K & K Burridge 2010 Introducing English grammar 2nd edition London: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Butler CS 1988 ‘Politeness and the semantics of modalised directives in English’ in JD Benson, MJ Cummings & WS Greaves (eds) Linguistics in a Systemic Perspective Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 119–153.
   Google Scholar
• Clark B 1993 ‘Let and let’s: procedural encoding and explicature’ Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale 90: 173–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins P 2004 ‘Let-imperatives in English’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9: 299–319. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.9.2.07col
   Google Scholar
• Costa RM 1972 ‘Let’s solve let’s!’ Paper in Linguistics 5: 141–144. doi: 10.1080/08351817209370291
   Google Scholar
• Davies E 1986 The English Imperative London: Croom Helm.
   Google Scholar
• Downing A & P Locke 2006 English Grammar: a university course 2nd edition London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Eggins S 2004 An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics 2nd edition London and New York: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Ervin-Tripp S 1976 ‘Is sybil there? The structure of some American English directives’ Language in Society 5: 25–66. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500006849
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP 1980 Cognitive Linguistics and Social Interaction: towards an integrated model of a systemic functional grammar and the other components of a communicating mind Heidelberg: Julius Groos and Exeter University.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP 2000 A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP 2008 Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar: an extension and simplification of Halliday’s systemic functional grammar 3rd edition. London: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP 2009 ‘A semantic system network for MOOD in English’ In JY Zhang, Y Peng & W He (eds) Current Issues in Systemic Functional Linguistics: papers from the 8th Chinese systemics week Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. pp. 3–62.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP, A van der Mije & C van Wissen 1988 ‘Towards a systemic flowchart model for local discourse structure’ in RP Fawcett & DJ Young (eds) New Developments in Systemic Linguistics: theory and application Volume 2 London: Pinter. pp. 116–143.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RP, GH Tucker & Y Lin 1993 ‘The role of realization in realization: how a systemic grammar works’ in H Horacek & M Zock (eds) From Planning to Realization in Natural Language Generation London: Pinter. pp. 114–186.
   Google Scholar
• Fries CC 1952 The Structure of English: an introduction to the construction of English sentences New York: Harcourt Brace.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 1961 ‘Categories of the theory of grammar’ Word 17: 241–292. doi: 10.1080/00437956.1961.11659756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 1976 ‘Functions and universals’ in G Kress (ed) Halliday: system and function in language London: Oxford University Press. pp. 26–35.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar 2nd edition London: Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 2006 ‘Systemic theory’ in K Brown et al. (eds) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Vol.12) 2nd edition Amsterdam: Elsevier. pp. 443–447.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 2013 Halliday in the 21st century Edited by J Webster. London and New York: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar 4th edition Revised by CMIM Matthiessen. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• He W, JY Zhang, J Zhang & BB Jia 2015 Functional Syntactic Analysis of English Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
   Google Scholar
• He ZQ 2004 ‘Reanalysis of the MOOD structure of imperatives in English’ Journal of Tianjin Foreign Studies University 1: 14–19.
   Google Scholar
• Hopper PJ & EC Traugott 2003 Grammaticalization 2nd edition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huddleston R & GK Pullum 2002 The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jary M & M Kissine 2014 Imperatives Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jespersen O [1933] 2006 Essentials of English Grammar London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Langacker RW 2008 Cognitive Grammar: a basic introduction New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin JR, CMIM Matthiessen & C Painter 2010 Deploying Functional Grammar 2nd edition Beijing: Commercial Press.
   Google Scholar
• Matthiessen CMIM 1995 Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English systems Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Morley GD 2004 Explorations in Functional Syntax: a new framework for lexicogrammatical analysis London: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Newmeyer FJ 1971 ‘Let’s eat!’ Paper in Linguistics 4(2): 393–394. doi: 10.1080/08351817109370267
   Google Scholar
• Potsdam E 1998 Syntactic Issues in the English Imperative New York: Garland.
   Google Scholar
• Quirk R, S Greenbaum, G Leech & J Svartvik 1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Ross JR 1970 ‘On declarative sentences’ in RA Jacobs & PS Rosenbaum (ed) Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham: Ginn and Co. pp. 222–272.
   Google Scholar
• Seppänen A 1977 ‘The position of let in the English auxiliary system’ English Studies 58: 515–529. doi: 10.1080/00138387708597860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber D & D Wilson 1986 Relevance: communication and cognition Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Takahashi H 2009 ‘Let’s-imperative in conversational English’ Journal of the Graduate School of Letters 4: 23–36.
   Google Scholar
• Takahashi H 2012 A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis of the English Imperative Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson SA 1996 Introducing Functional Grammar 2nd edition London: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Tregidgo PS 1982 ‘Let and let’s’ English Language Teaching Journal 36(3): 186–188. doi: 10.1093/elt/36.3.186
   Google Scholar
• Tucker GH 1998 The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: a systemic functional approach to lexis London: Cassell Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Ukaji M 1978 Imperative Sentences in Early Modern English Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
   Google Scholar
• van der Wurff W 2007 Imperatives in Generative Grammar Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Xu TH 1998 ‘Syntactic and semantic analysis of let’s structure in English’ Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 7: 22–23.
   Google Scholar