Open Access
Issue
SHS Web of Conferences
Volume 27, 2016
5e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 01001
Number of page(s) 20
Section Conférences invitées
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20162701001
Published online 04 July 2016
  1. Adam, J.M. 1985. Le texte narratif, précis d’analyse textuelle. Poitiers: Fernand Nathan.
  2. Ailhaud, E., Chenu, F., Jisa, H. soumis. La phrase : de la maîtrise de ses conventions raphiques à sa pertinence cognitive.
  3. Ailhaud, E., Chenu, F., Jisa, H. 2015. A developmental perspective on the units of written French. In Perera, J., Aparici, M., Rosado, E. & Salas, N. (Eds), Written and spoken language development across the lifespan: Essays in honour of Liliana Tolchinsky. Springer, 287-305.
  4. Aisenman, R. et Berman, R. 2000. Rethinking lexical analysis. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities, and Languages 3: 187-196.
  5. Aksu-Koç, A. et Küntay, A. 2001. Reformulating causal relations while retelling narratives: evidence from Turkish. Papier présenté au Colloque Acquisition et construction du sens dans une perspective interlangue, Paris, 20-21 décembre 2001.
  6. Allen, S., Skarabela, B. et Hughes, M. 2008. Using corpora to examine discourse effects in syntax. Trends in language acquisition research, Corpora in language acquisition research 6: 99-138. [CrossRef]
  7. Argerich, N. et Tolchinsky, L. 2000. On a definition of lexical items in written and spoken texts. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities and Languages 3: 197-204.
  8. Ariel, M. 1990. Accessing Noun Phrases Antecedents. London: Routledge.
  9. Ariel, M. 1996. Referring expressions and the +/- coreference distinction. In Fretheim, T., Gundel, J. (eds.), Reference and referent accessibility. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 13-37. [CrossRef]
  10. Ashby, William J., 1992. The variable use of on versus tu/vous. Journal of French Language Studies, 2: 135-157. [CrossRef]
  11. Atlani, Françoise, 1984. On l’illusionniste. In : A. Grésillon. et J-L ; Lebrave, La langue au ras du texte, 13-29. Lille : Presses Universitaires de Lille.
  12. Auer, P. (2009). On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31: 1-13. [CrossRef]
  13. Bellert, I. 1971. On a condition of the coherence of texts. Semiotica 4: 253-288.
  14. Berman, R. 1997. Preliterate knowledge of language. In Portecovo, C. (eds.), Writing development: an interdisciplinary view. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 61-76. [CrossRef]
  15. Berman, R. 2000. Thematic perspectives on how children talk about interpersonal conflict. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities, And Languages 3: 65-76.
  16. Berman, R. 2007. Developing linguistic knowledge and language use across adolescence, In Hoff, E., Shatz, M. (Eds.). Handbook of Language Development. London: Blackwell, 346-367.
  17. Berman, R. et Katzenberger, I. 2004. Form and function in introducing narrative and expository texts: A developmental perspective. Discourse Processes 381: 57-94. [CrossRef]
  18. Berman, R. et Nir-Sagiv, B. 2004. Linguistic indicators of inter-genre differentiation in later language development. Journal of Child Language 31: 339-380. [CrossRef]
  19. Berman, R. et Nir-Sagiv, B. 2007. Comparing narrative and expository text construction across adolescence: A developmental paradox. Discourse Processes 43: 79-120. [CrossRef]
  20. Berman, R. et Ravid, D. 2009. Becoming a literate language user oral and written text construction across adolescence. In Olson, D., Torrance, N. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 92-111. [CrossRef]
  21. Berman, R. et Slobin, D. 1994. Relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  22. Berman, R. et Verhoeven, L. 2002. Cross linguistic perspectives on the development of text-production abilities in speech and writing. Written Language and Literacy 5 Vol. 1. [CrossRef]
  23. Berman, R. et Verhoeven, L. 2002. Cross linguistic perspectives on the development of text-production abilities in speech and writing. Written Language and Literacy 5 Vol. 2.
  24. Biber, D. 1988. Variations across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]
  25. Blanche-Benveniste, C. 1983. L’importance du français parlé pour la description du français tout court. Recherches sur le Français Parlé 5: 23-45.
  26. Blanche-Benveniste, C. 1985. La langue du dimanche. Reflets 14: 42-43.
  27. Blanche-Benveniste, C. 1990. Le français parlé. Paris: Edition du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
  28. Blanche-Benveniste, C. 1995. Le semblable et le dissemblable en syntaxe. Recherches sur le Français Parlé 13: 7-32.
  29. Blanche-Benveniste, C. 2000. Approche de la langue parlée en français. Gap: Ophrys.
  30. Boersma P. et Weenink D. 2009. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.1.05) [Programme informatique], site internet : http://www.praat.org/.
  31. Boscolo, P. 1990. The construction of expository text. First Language 10: 217-230. [CrossRef]
  32. Britton, B. 1994. Understanding expository text: Building mental structures to induce insights. In Gernsbacher, M. (Eds.). Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, California: Academic Press, 641-674.
  33. Bruner, J. 1986. Actual Minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  34. Chafe, W. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  35. Charolles, M. 1978. Introduction aux problèmes de la cohérence des textes. Langue Française 38: 7-41. [CrossRef]
  36. Chenu F., Jisa H. et Mazur-Palandre A. 2012. Développement de la connectivité syntaxique à travers deux types de textes à l’oral et à l’écrit. In F. Neveu, V. Muni Toke, P. Blumenthal, T. Klingler, P. Ligas, S. Prévost, S. Teston-Bonnard (Eds.), Actes de la Xème Congrès Mondial de la Linguistique Française (CMLF 2012), 4-7 Juillet, Lyon : Institut de Linguistique Française ; EDP Sciences, 1591-1605.
  37. Chesnet, D. et Alamargot, D. 2005. Analyses en temps réel des activités oculaires et graphomotrices du scripteur: intérêt du dispositif ‘Eye and Pen’. L’Année Psychologique 105: 477-520. [CrossRef]
  38. Clark, H. et Haviland, S. 1977. Comprehension and the Given-New contract. In Freedle, R. (Eds.), Discourse Production and Comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1-40.
  39. Du Bois, J. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63: 805-855. [CrossRef]
  40. Du Bois, J. 2003. Argument Structure: Grammar in use. In Du Bois, J., Kumpf, L., Ashby, W. (eds.), Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as architecture for function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 11-60. [CrossRef]
  41. Fayol, M. 1990. La production de textes écrits, Introduction à l’approche cognitive. Education Permanente 102: 21-30.
  42. Fayol, M. 1996. La production d’écrits narratifs : approche de psycholinguistique textuelle chez l’enfant et l’adulte. In David, J. et Plane, S. (éds.) L’apprentissage de l’écriture de l’école au collège. Paris : PUF, 9-36.
  43. Fayol, M. 1997. Des idées au texte : psychologie cognitive de la production verbale orale et écrite. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  44. Gadet, F. 1989. Le français ordinaire. Paris: Armand colin éditeur.
  45. Gadet, F. 1996. Une distinction bien fragile : oral/écrit. TRANEL (Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique) 25: 13-27.
  46. Gayraud, F. 2000. Le développement de la différenciation oral/écrit vu à travers le lexique. Thèse de Doctorat, Université Lumière, Lyon 2.
  47. Gayraud, F., Jisa, H. et Viguié, A. 1999. The development of syntactic packaging in French children’s written and spoken texts. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities, And Languages 1: 169-181.
  48. Gayraud, F., Jisa, H. et Viguié, A. 2001. Utilisation des outils cohésifs comme indice de sensibilité au registre : une étude développementale. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère 14: 3-24.
  49. Gernsbacher, M. 1990. Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  50. Gernsbacher, M. et Hargreaves, D. 1988. Accessing sentence participants: the advantage of first mention. Journal of Memory and Language 27: 699-717. [CrossRef]
  51. Halliday, M.A.K. et Hasan, R. 1976-1989. Cohesion in English. Londres: Longman group limited.
  52. Hawkins, J. 1983. Word order universals. New York: Academic press.
  53. Hickmann, M. 2003. Children’s Discourse: Person, Space and Time across Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  54. Hickmann, M. et Hendriks, H. 1999. Cohesion and anaphora in children’s narratives: a comparison of English, French, German and Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Child Language 26: 419-452. [CrossRef]
  55. Hickmann, M., Hendriks, H., Roland, F. et Liang, J. 1996. The marking of new information in children’s narratives: a comparison of English, French, German, and Mandarin Chinese. Journal of child Languages 23: 591-619. [CrossRef]
  56. Jisa, H. & Viguié, A. 2005. A developmental perspective on the role of on in written and spoken expository texts in French. Journal of Pragmatics, 37: 125-142. [CrossRef]
  57. Jisa, H. 1998. Relative clauses in French children’s narrative text. Journal of Child Language 25: 623-652. [CrossRef]
  58. Jisa, H. 2000. Increasing cohesion in narratives: a developmental study of maintaining and reintroducing subjects in French. Linguistics 38: 591-620. [CrossRef]
  59. Jisa, H. 2004. Growing into academic French. Later Language Development: Typological and psycholinguistic Perspectives, Collection Trends in Language Acquisition Research (TILAR) 3: 135-162.
  60. Jisa, H. et Mazur, A. 2006. L’expression de la causalité : une étude développementale. Actes Journée d’étude : Des savoirs savants aux savoirs enseignés. Université Paris X, Nanterre : Presses universitaires de Namur, 33-60, 29 Mars 2006.
  61. Johansson, V. 1999. Word frequencies in speech and Writing: a study of expository discourse. Genre and modality in developing discourse abilities 1: 182-198.
  62. Katzenberger, I. 2004. The development of clause packaging in spoken and written texts. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1921-1948. [CrossRef]
  63. Khorounjaia, E. et Tolchinsky, L. 2004. Discursive constraints on the lexical realization of arguments in Spanish, In Berman, R. (Eds.). Language Development Across Childhood and Adolescence, Collection Trends in Language Acquisition Research, (TILAR), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 83-110. [CrossRef]
  64. Koenig, Jean-Pierre. 1999. On a tué le président! The nature of passives and ultra-indefinites. In: Barbara Fox, Dan Jurafsky and Laura A. Michaelis, Cognition and function in language, 235-251. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
  65. Laberge, Suzanne and Gillain Sankoff, 1980. Anything you can do. In: Gillian Sankoff., The social life of language, 271-293. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  66. Laberge, Suzanne. 1978. The changing distribution of indeterminate pronouns in discourse. In: R. W. Shuy and J. Shnukal, Language use and the use of language. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
  67. Labov, W. 1978/1993. Le parler ordinaire, la langue dans les ghettos noirs des états-unis. Paris: Les éditions de minuit.
  68. Lambrecht, K. 1994. Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus and mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]
  69. Langacker, R. 2000. A Dynamic Usage-Based Model. In Michael Barlow et Suzanne Kemmer (éds.), Usage-Based Models of Language. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 1-63.
  70. Levelt, W. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge/Massachussetts: The MIT Press.
  71. MacWhinney, B. (2002) Language emergence. In Burmeister, P., Piske, T., and Rohde, A. (Eds.) An integrated view of language development - Papers in honor of Henning Wode. pp. 17-42. Trier: Wissenshaftliche Verlag.
  72. Mazur Palandre, A., Fayol, M. & Jisa, H. 2012. Information Flow across Modalities and Text Types. In Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology, Berninger, V. (éd), Psychology Press/Taylor Francis Group, 423-437.
  73. Mazur-Palandre A. et Jisa, H. (2012). La complexité lexicale des syntagmes nominaux : Une étude développementale. Enfance, 4, 359-371. [CrossRef]
  74. Mazur-Palandre, A. & Jisa, H. 2012. Introduire et développer l’information : une acquisition tardive? Cognitique, 7 (cogitextes.revues.org/500)
  75. Mazur-Palandre, A. 2007. Later language development: syntactic packaging in written and spoken French. Paper presented at The Second Oxford Linguistics Postgraduate Conference, Oxford.
  76. Mazur-Palandre, A. 2008. Referential cohesion in written expository and narrative: A developmental study. Sigwriting 2008, The 11th international conference of the EARLI, social interest group on writing, Lund University.
  77. Mazur-Palandre, A. 2009. Le flux de l’information, aspects syntaxiques et discursifs : Une étude fonctionnaliste et développementale. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Lyon.
  78. Mazur-Palandre, A. et Jisa, H. 2012. La lexicalité des productions orales et écrites : Une étude développementale. Enfance.
  79. McCutchen, D. 2011. From novice to expert: Implications of language skills and writing-relevant knowledge for memory during the development of writing skill. Journal of Writing Research, v. 3, 51-68. [CrossRef]
  80. Mosenthal, P. 1985. Defining the expository discourse continuum, toward a taxinomy of expository text. Poetics 14: 387-414. [CrossRef]
  81. Nippold, M. A. et Scott, C. M. 2009. Expository discourse in children, adolescents, and adults. London: Psychology Press.
  82. Ravid, D. 2000. NP complexity in the development of text writing. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities and Languages 3: 163-170.
  83. Ravid, D. 2002. Paper about NP analysis: conceptualization and methodological issues. Tel Aviv University.
  84. Ravid, D. 2005. Emergence of linguistic complexity in later language development: evidence from expository text construction. In Ravid, D., Shyldkrot, H.B. (Eds.), Perspectives on language and language development. Essays in Honor of Ruth A. Berman. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 337-355. [CrossRef]
  85. Ravid, D. 2006. Semantic development in textual contexts during the school years: Noun Scale analyses. Journal of Child Language 33: 791–821. [CrossRef]
  86. Ravid, D. et Berman, R. 2012. Developing noun phrase complexity across adolescence: A text-embedded analysis. First Language 30 (1): 1-29.
  87. Reilly, J., Jisa, H., Baruch, E. & Berman, R. 2002. Propositional attitudes. Journal of Written Language and Literacy 5:2, 183-218. [CrossRef]
  88. Reinhart, T. 1980. Conditions for text coherence, Poetics Today 1: 161-180. [CrossRef]
  89. Sanford, A. et Garrod, S. 1981a. Understanding written language, New York: Wiley.
  90. Sanford, A. et Garrod, S. 1981b. Vers la construction d‘un modèle psychologique de la compréhension du langage écrit. Bulletin de psychologie 35: 643-648.
  91. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. Advances in applied psycholinguistics, 1, 142.
  92. Schneuwly, B. 1988. Le langage écrit chez l’enfant, Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.
  93. Strömquivst, S., Johansson, V., Kriz, S., Ragnarsdöttir, H., Aisenman, R. et Ravid, D. 2002. Toward a crosslinguistic comparison of lexical quanta in speech and writing. Written Language and Literacy 5, 45-67 [CrossRef]
  94. Strömqvist, S., Holmqvist, K. Johansson, V., Karlsson, H. et Wengelin, A. 2006. What key stroke logging can reveal about writing. In Sullivan, K. et Lindgren, E. (éds.) Computer key-stroke logging and writing : methods and applications. Studies in writing, 18 : 45-72.
  95. Strömqvist, S., Nordqvist, A. et Wengelin, A. 2004. Writing the frog story : developmental and cross-modal perspectives. In Ströpqvist, S. et Verhoeven, L. (éds) Relating events in narrative : typological and contextual perspectives. Mahwah, New Jersey : Erlbaum, 359-394.
  96. Tomasello. Michael. 2012. The usage-based theory of language acquisition. In Bavin, E. éd., The Cambridge handbook of child language. Cambridge University Press. pp. 69-88
  97. Viguié-Simon, A. 2001. Développement de la connectivité selon le type textuel et le mode de production au cours de l’adolescence. Thèse de Doctorat, Université Lumière, Lyon.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.