Open Access
Issue
SHS Web of Conferences
Volume 27, 2016
5e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 10007
Number of page(s) 20
Section Psycholinguistique et Acquisition
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20162710007
Published online 04 July 2016
  1. Aksu-Koç, A. et Kuntay, A. (2001). Reformulating causal relations while retelling narratives: evidence from Turkish. Colloque Acquisition et construction du sens dans une perspective interlangue, Paris, décembre 2001.
  2. Allen, S., Skarabela, B. et Hughes, M. (2008). Using corpora to examine discourse effects in syntaxe. Trends in language acquisition research, Corpora in language acquisition research, 6.
  3. Ariel, M. (1996). Referring expressions and the +/- coreference distinction, In Fretheim, T. et Gundel, J. (eds.), Reference and referent accessibility, pp. 13-37. Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins. [CrossRef]
  4. Bellert, I. (1971). On a condition of the coherence of texts, Semiotica, 4, 253-288.
  5. Berman, R. (2008). The psycholinguistics of text construction. Journal of Child Language, 35, 1-37.
  6. Berman, R. et Nir-Sagiv, B. (2007). Comparing narrative and expository text construction across adolescence: A developmental paradox. Discourse Processes, 43(2), 79-120 [CrossRef]
  7. 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, 92-111, Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]
  8. Berman, R. et Slobin, D. (1994). Relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, Erlbaum.
  9. 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.
  10. Blanche-Benveniste, C. (1983). L’importance du français parlé pour la description du français tout court. Recherches sur le Français Parlé, 5, 23-45.
  11. Blanche-Benveniste, C. (1990). Le français parlé. Paris: Edition du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
  12. Blanche-Benveniste, C. (2000). Approche de la langue parlée en français. Gap: Ophrys.
  13. Boscolo, P. (1990). The construction of expository text. First Language, 10, 217-230 [CrossRef]
  14. Britton, B. (1994). Understanding expository text: Building mental structures to induce insights. In Gernsbacher, M. (ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics, pp. 641-674, San Diego, California, Academic Press.
  15. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual Minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
  16. Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
  17. Charolles, M. (1978). Introduction aux problèmes de la cohérence des textes. Langue Française, 38, 7-41. [CrossRef]
  18. Clark, H. et Haviland, S. (1977). Comprehension and the Given-New contract. In Freedle, R. (ed.), Discourse Production and Comprehension, pp. 1-40. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  19. De Weck, G. (1991). La cohésion dans les textes d’enfants, étude du développement des processus anaphoriques. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.
  20. De Weck, G. et Schneuwly, B. (1994). Anaphoric procedures in four text types written by children. Discourse Processes, 17, 101-113. [CrossRef]
  21. Du Bois, J. (1987). The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63, 805-855. [CrossRef]
  22. Du Bois, J. (2003). Argument Structure: Grammar in use. In Du Bois, J., Kumpf, L., Ashby, W. (eds.), Prefered Argument Structure: Grammar as architecture for function, pp. 11-60, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [CrossRef]
  23. Fayol, M. (1997). Des idées au texte : psychologie cognitive de la production verbale orale et écrite. Paris, Presse Universitaire de France.
  24. Fox, B. (1987). Discourse structure and anaphora.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]
  25. Gadet, F. (1996). Une distinction bien fragile : oral/écrit. TRANEL (Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique), 25, 13-27.
  26. Gayraud, F. (2000). Le développement de la différenciation oral/écrit vu à travers le lexique. Doctorat, Sciences du Langage, Université Lumière
  27. Gayraud, F., Jisa, H. et Viguié, A. (2001). Utilisation des outils cohésifs comme indice de sensibilité au registre : une étude développementale. AILE, 14, 3-24.
  28. Halliday, M. et Hasan, R. (1976/1989). Cohesion in English. Londres: Longman group limited.
  29. Hickmann, M. (2002). Développement de la production verbale orale. In Fayol, M. (ed.), Production du langage, pp.173-203. Paris: Lavoisier.
  30. Hickmann, M. (2003). Children’s discourse: person, space and time across languages. Cambridge ; New York, Cambridge University Press.
  31. 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]
  32. 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]
  33. Jisa, H. (2000). Increasing cohesion in narratives: a developmental study of maintaining and reintroducing subjects in French, Linguistics, 38, 591-620.
  34. Jisa, H. (2004). A developmental study of discourse stance in spoken and written French. Writing 2004, Genève, 20-22 septembre.
  35. Jisa, H. et Mazur, A. (2006), “L’expression de la causalité : une étude développementale”. Acte Journée d’étude : Des savoirs savants aux savoirs enseignés, Université Paris X, Nanterre, Presses universitaires de Namur, 33-60.
  36. Kail, M. et Hickmann, M. (1992). French children’s hability to introduce referents in narratives as a function of mutual knowledge. First Language, 12, 637-62. [CrossRef]
  37. Katzenberger, I. (2004). The development of clause packaging in spoken and written texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1921-1948. [CrossRef]
  38. Katzenberger, I. (2005). The super-structure of written ewpository texts – a developmental perspective. In Ravid, D. et Shyldkrot, H.B. (eds.), Perspectives on language and language development. Essays in Honor of Ruth A. Berman, pp. 327-336. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. [CrossRef]
  39. Khorounjaia, E. et Tolchinsky, L. (2004). Discursive constraints on the lexical realization of arguments in Spanish. In Berman, R. (ed.), Language Development across Childhood and Adolescence, Vol. 3, pp. 83-110. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [CrossRef]
  40. Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus and mental representations of discourse referents, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]
  41. Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge/Massachussetts: The MIT Press.
  42. Mazur-Palandre, A. (2010). Formes et positions syntaxiques du syntagme nominal : Une étude développementale du français scolaire en ZEP. Sciences Croisées, Numéro thématique.
  43. Mazur-Palandre, A. (2015). Overcoming Preferred Argument Structure in written French: development, modality, text type. Written Language and Literacy, 18:1, 25-55. [CrossRef]
  44. Mazur-Palandre, A. et Jisa, H. (2013). La lexicalité des productions orales et écrites : Une étude développementale. Enfance, 4, 359-371.
  45. Mazur-Palandre, A. et Jisa, H. (2012). Introduire et développer l’information : une acquisition tardive? CogniTextes 7.
  46. Moirand, S. (1975). Le rôle anaphorique de la nominalisation dans la presse écrite. Langue Française, 28, 60-78. [CrossRef]
  47. Mosenthal, P. (1985). Défining the expository discourse continuum, toward a taxinomy of expository text. Poetics, 14, 387-414. [CrossRef]
  48. Pellegrini, A., Galda, L. et Rubin, D. (1984). Context in text: The development of oral and written language in two genres. Child Development, 55, 1549–1555. [CrossRef]
  49. 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, pp. 337-355. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. [CrossRef]
  50. Ravid, D. et Berman, R. (2010). Developing noun phrase complexity across adolescence: A text-embedded analysis,. First Language, 30(1), 1-29.
  51. Reinhart, T. (1980). Conditions for text coherence. Poetics Today, 1, 161-180. [CrossRef]
  52. Sanford, A. et Garrod, S. (1981). Understanding written language. New York: Wiley.
  53. Schneuwly, B. (1988). Le langage écrit chez l’enfant. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.
  54. Schneuwly, B., Rosat, M.C. et Dolz, J. (1989). Les organisateurs textuels dans 4 types de textes écrits. Étude chez des élèves de 10, 12 et 14 ans. Langue Française, 81, 40-58. [CrossRef]
  55. Tolchinsky, L. (2006). The emergence of writing, In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., Fitzgerald, J. (eds.), Handbook of Writing Research, 83-95, New York: The Guilford Press.
  56. Tolchinsky, L., Perera, J., Argerich, N. et Aparici, M., (1999). Rhetorical moves and noun phrase complexity in written expository texts. Developing Literacy Across Genres, Modalities and Languages, 1, 257-278.
  57. 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.