越南語是一種强勢的分析性語言（robust analytic language），能夠使用多種語言機制表達非關鍵語義（non-at-issue meanings）。本論文旨在透過探討越南語中豐富的溝通性成分，深入理解時制詞組（TP）以上的功能結構。我詳細研究了越南語語句兩緣的三組非關鍵成分。這些項目包括位於線性左緣的說話者導向的情態/模態相關標記（speaker-oriented mood/modal markers）和兩個情態助詞（modal particles），以及僅存在於線性右緣的各種互動性助詞（interactional particles）。這些成分雖然不被視為主句命題內容的一部分，也不包含在描述性意義（descriptive meaning）之中，但在對話中起著不可替代的作用。若省略它們，句子的溝通效果將會受影響。
從結構上來看，我提出這些非關鍵成分位於越南語功能脊柱（functional spine）的頂端部分。我認為說話者導向的情態/模態詞位於CP內，因為它們緊跟對比主題（contrastive topic）之後，且位於我認定為限定性短語（Finiteness Phrase）的中心語「là」之前。這類情態和模態標記包括了評價（evaluative）、示証（evidential）和認知（epistemic）狀語。它們依循Cinque（1999）的框架，形成了嚴格的層次架構。此外，我認為有兩個單音節的情態詞位於這些情態和模態標記之上，並與它們一起形成所謂的「句子模態域」（MOD-field）。情態詞「mà」表示一種無可能性（unlikelihood），而情態詞「lại」通常表達一種反預期感（counter-expectation）。雖然每個模態域的成分有其獨特的意涵，但它們都是涉及態度持有者（attitude holder）對命題內容的個人認知/信念狀態（doxastic state）或主觀評價。
另一方面，本文認爲越南語中的句末助詞（sentence-final particles）形成一個CP之外的獨立領域，稱為「互動領域」(interactional domain)（參見Wiltschko 2021）。根據這些助詞的解釋效果以及它們在分佈上的限制，我提出一個精細的互動領域架構，其中包含了兩個投射。較低的投射稱為「承諾短語」（Commitment Phrase），標記了說話者和聽話者的公開承諾（public commitment）。較高的投射稱為「說話者-聽話者短語」（Speaker-Addressee Phrase）或「言語行為短語」（Speech Act Phrase），著重於言談參與者之間的語篇關係（discourse relation）。這兩個投射又再各自分為兩層。「承諾短語」（CommitP）中有較低的「說話者承諾層」（CommitPSpk）和較高的「聽話者承諾層」（CommitPAdd）。「說話者-聽話者短語」（SAP）中有較低的「回應層」（SAPCoA）和較高的「紐帶層」（SAPBonding）。「回應層」的助詞促使聽話者以特定方式回應話語，而「紐帶層」的則負責描繪言談參與者之間的關係。我主張這些非關鍵成分展現了明確的分工，其中模態域成分專門標記個人判斷或私人信念，而句末助詞則用於標記公開承諾或使聽話者感興趣。從句法上來看，儘管兩者在一般意義上都被視為「根句現象」（root phenomena），但前者可以出現在一組明確的嵌入環境（embedding contexts）中，後者卻不可被嵌入。
總括來說，本研究的目的是對越南語語句脊柱中的最高區域進行全面性的調查並關注其內部結構，特別是語用方面的結構表現。我採用製圖理論（Cartographic approach）對三組非關鍵成分進行詳細研究，並擴展狹義句法（narrow syntax）的概念來解釋其句法行為。本研究的發現進一步地闡明了越南語中非關鍵語義所表達的句法頂層結構。

Vietnamese is a robust analytic language which exhibits a large repertoire of linguistic devices for conveying non-at-issue meanings. This dissertation endeavors to capitalize on the richness and diversity of these communicative elements, aiming to provide a more profound understanding of the Vietnamese functional architecture within the domains above TP. To this goal, I conduct an in-depth investigation of three groups of non-at-issue elements residing at the two linear edges of the Vietnamese sentence. These clusters comprise speaker-oriented mood/modality-related markers and two modal particles positioned at the linear left edge, as well as a diverse array of interactional particles exclusively found at the linear right edge of the sentence.
These elements, by definition, are not considered part of the propositional content of the host clause and are therefore excluded from the computation of descriptive meanings. With the exception of mood and modal elements, both modal particles and sentence-final particles largely belong to the category of “untranslatables”—linguistic expressions whose meaning is challenging to articulate descriptively or to translate accurately. They, however, play an irreplaceable role in communication and cannot be omitted without sacrificing a significant portion of the sentence’s communicative effects.
In structural terms, I propose that these non-at-issue elements reside at the top parts of the Vietnamese functional spine. Speaker-oriented mood and modal markers are assumed to merge squarely within CP, given that they follow a contrastive topic but precede the complementizer là, which I identify as the head of the Finiteness Phrase—the lower boundary of the Split-CP system à la Rizzi (1997). These mood and modal markers, including evaluatives, evidentials, and epistemics, form a rigid hierarchy in line with Cinque (1999). Two monosyllabic modal particles are assumed to merge above these mood and modal elements, forming with them what will be dubbed the clausal MOD-field. At its core, modal particle mà indicates a sense of unlikelihood, while modal particle lại typically expresses a sense of counter-expectation. While each MOD-field element carries its own unique interpretive contribution, they all concern the personal epistemic/doxastic state or subjective evaluation of an attitude holder towards the propositional content under consideration.
Sentence-final particles, on the contrary, are considered to form a separate domain beyond the traditional CP, known as the interactional domain, following Wiltschko (2021). Based on the interpretive effects these particles introduce into the utterance and their distributional restrictions, I propose a finer-grained architecture of the interactional domain which comprises two projections. The lower projection, referred to as the Commitment Phrase (CommitP), codifies information pertaining to the public commitments of the speaker and the addressee. The upper projection, called Speaker-Addressee Phrase or Speech Act Phrase (SAP), focuses on the discourse relation between the speech participants. Each projection is further divided into two layers. CommitP consists of a lower CommitPSpk and a higher CommitPAdd. The former accommodates the particles marking or modulating the speaker’s commitments, while the latter hosts those pertaining to the commitment the speaker submits to the addressee. SAP is divided into the lower SAPCoA and the higher SAPBonding. The SFPs hosted by SAPCoA serve to call on the addressee to respond to the utterance in a specific manner, whereas those merging under SAPBonding are responsible for profiling the relation between the speech participants.
I contend that these non-at-issue elements manifest a clear-cut division of labor, with MOD-field items dedicated to marking personal judgment or private belief, while SFPs are involved in calibrating public commitments or engaging the addressee. Syntactically, the former may appear in a well-defined set of embedded environments, while the latter are strictly non-embeddable, even though both are generally considered root phenomena.
Another form of division of labor is between SFPs and elements responsible for marking clause types. I propose that SFPs do not play a role in clause-typing, as they are structurally positioned beyond CP and can only contribute to the “ultimate illocutionary force” of the utterance (Portner 2004). I take clause type to be distinct from illocutionary force (Coniglio & Zegrean 2012; Coniglio 2014), with the former syntactically encoded in a Clause Type Phrase at the higher end of CP.
In summary, the primary objective of this study is to conduct a comprehensive examination of the highest domains within the Vietnamese clausal spine in terms of internal structure, with a specific focus on how pragmatic aspects are structurally represented in the language. Adopting the Cartographic approach, I scrutinize a range of non-at-issue elements, extending the concept of narrow syntax beyond the traditional CP. I contend that these non-at-issue elements are syntactically integrated and demonstrate how the extension of narrow syntax beyond CP effectively accounts for their syntactic behaviors. Findings from this present study are expected to shed more light on the overall architecture of the syntactic treetops in Vietnamese, where non-at-issue information holds a central position.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS - xii
LIST OF TABLES - xiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION - 1
1.1 Scope and delimitation - 1
1.2 A note on terminology - 4
1.3 Road map - 7
CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND - 8
2.1. Mood and modality: some preliminaries - 8
2.1.1. Mood/modality and judge-dependency - 8
2.1.2. Syntactic representation of mood and modal markers - 11
2.2. Modal particle as an independent category - 14
2.2.1. What makes MPs MPs? - 14
2.2.2. Where are MPs, syntactically? - 19
2.3. Sentence-final particles on the treetop - 22
2.3.1. SFPs as a cross-linguistically attested phenomenon - 22
2.3.2. SFPs in Vietnamese - 27
2.4. Commitment: an overview - 30
2.4.1. Commitment ≠ belief - 31
2.4.2. The multifaces of commitment - 33
2.4.3. Commitment vs. call-on-addressee - 34
2.4.4. Commitment and clause types - 36
2.4.5. Commitment can be contingent - 37
2.5. Pragmatics goes syntax - 40
2.5.1 Splitting up CP - 40
2.5.2 Beyond CP - 42
2.5.3 Decomposing speech act - 46
CHAPTER 3 SENTENTIAL MOOD/MODALITY AND MAIN-CLAUSE COMPLEMENTIZERS - 50
3.1 Setting the stage - 50
3.2 Previous analyses of [MOD+COMP] - 54
3.2.1. MOD is not adjectival - 54
3.3.2 Hill (2007a, 2010) - 56
3.3.3 Cruschina & Remberger (2017, 2018) - 59
3.3.4 Sato (2014) and Kocher (2017, 2018) - 61
3.3 An account for Vietnamese [MOD+là] - 63
3.3.1. MOD as evaluative, evidential, and epistemic adverbs - 63
3.2.2. MOD as high modal verbs of strong necessity - 66
3.2.3. Là heads Finiteness Phrase - 70
3.4. Summary - 74
CHAPTER 4 MODAL PARTICLES AND THE PARTICLE PHRASE - 75
4.1 Introduction - 75
4.2 MP mà - 76
4.2.1 Preliminaries - 76
4.2.2 Mà in tentative/hypothetical contexts - 77
4.2.3 Mà in non-canonical interrogative contexts - 89
4.2.4 Mà in negative/affective contexts - 93
4.2.5 Mapping mà syntactically - 96
4.3 MP lại - 100
4.3.1 Preliminaries - 100
4.3.2 Contexts and interpretations - 102
4.3.3 Mapping MP lại syntactically - 110
4.4 Summary - 113
CHAPTER 5 SENTENCE-FINAL PARTICLES AND THE INTERACTIONAL DOMAIN - 115
5.1 Introduction - 115
5.2 SFPs and (public) commitment - 117
5.2.1 Marking speaker’s commitment - 118
5.2.2 Marking addressee’s commitment - 123
5.2.3 Interim conclusion - 126
5.3 SFPs and the speaker-addressee relation - 128
5.3.1 Calling on the addressee - 128
5.3.2 Bonding with the addressee - 133
5.4 SFPs do not type clauses 137
5.5 SFPs are not always monosyllabic - 142
5.6 SFPs and the issue of head-directionality - 145
5.7 Summary - 149
CHAPTER 6 TWO TYPES OF ROOT PHENOMENA - 152
6.1 Root phenomena - 152
6.1.1 What is “root phenomena”? - 152
6.1.2 Vietnamese MOD-field elements and SFPs as root phenomena - 154
6.1.3 “Root phenomena” is not fine-grained enough - 158
6.2 SFPs and MOD-field items as strong and weak root phenomena - 160
6.2.1 Testing ground 1: Non-factive and factive complements clauses - 160
6.2.2 Testing ground 2: Central and peripheral adverbial clauses - 162
6.3 A note on some non-root phenomena - 168
6.4 Summary - 171
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION - 172
REFERENCES - 174

Aboh, Enoch O. 2009. Clause structure and verb series. Linguistic Inquiry, 40(1), 1–33.
Alston, William P. 2000. Illocutionary Acts and Sentence Meanings. Cornell University Press.
Abraham, Werner, 1991. Discourse particles in German: How does their illocutionary force come about?. In W. Abraham (ed.), Discourse Particles: Descriptive and Theoretical Investigations on the Logical, Syntactic, and Pragmatic Properties of Discourse Particles in German, 203–252. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Abraham, Werner. 2020. Modality in Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Abraham, Werner & Elisabeth Leiss. 2012. Introduction. In W. Abraham & E. Leiss (eds.), Covert Patterns of Modality, 1–23. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
Adachi, Mayumi. 2013. Tiểu từ tình thái cuối câu và thán từ cùng hình thái với từ chỉ vị trí trong tiếng Việt [Final modal particles and interjections isomorphic with demonstratives in Vietnamese]. In the Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Vietnamese Studies, 835-844. Hanoi.
Alexiadou, Artemis. 1997. Adverb Placement: A Case Study in Antisymmetric Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ambar, Manuela. 1999. Aspects of focus in Portuguese. In L. Tuller & G. Rebuschi (eds.), The Grammar of Focus, 23–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Amritavalli, R. 2014. Separating tense and finiteness: Anchoring in Dravidian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32(1), Special Issue: Finiteness in South Asian Language, 283–306.
Austin, John. 1961. Ifs and cans. In James O. Urmson and Geoffrey J. Warnock (eds.), Philosophical Papers, 153–180. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Austin, John. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Badan, Linda & Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng. 2015. Exclamatives in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 24(4), 383–413.
Badan, Linda and Liliane Haegeman. 2022. The syntax of peripheral adverbial clauses. Journal of Linguistics 58(4), 697–738.
Bailey, Laura Rudall. 2013. The syntax of question particles. Ph.D. thesis, Newcastle University.
Bartels, Christine. 1999. The Intonation of English Statements and Questions. New York, London: Garland Publishing.
Bayer, Josef. 2001. Asymmetry in emphatic topicalization. In Caroline Féry, Wolfgang Sternefeld (Hgg.), Audiatur Vox Sapientiae, 15–47. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Bayer, Josef. 2012. From modal particle to interrogative marker: a study of German denn. In L. Brugé, A. Cardinaletti, G. Giusti, N. Munaro & C. Poletto (eds.), The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 13–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bayer, Josef & Hans-Georg Obenauer. 2011. Discourse particles, clause structure, and question types. The Linguistic Review 28(4), 449–491.
Bayer, Josef & Volker Struckmeier. 2017. The status quo of research on discourse particles in syntax and semantics. In J. Bayer & V. Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles: Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics, 1–14. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.
Bellert, Irena. 1977. On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 8(2), 337–351.
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the Low IP Area. In L. Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of IP and CP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Vol 2, 16–51, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Belletti, Adriana. 2009. Structures and Strategies. New York/ London: Routledge.
Benincà, Paola. 2001. “The position of Topic and Focus in the left periphery.” In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 39–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bennis, Hans. 2006. Agreement, pro and imperatives. In P. Ackema, P. Brandt, M. Schoorlemmer, & F. Weerman (eds.), Arguments and Agreement, 101–123. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Benveniste, Emile. 1958/1966. Subjectivity in language. In M. E. Meek (trans.), Problems in General Linguistics (1971), 223–230. Coral Gables: FL: University of Miami Press.
Beyssade, Claire & Jean-Claire Marandin. 2006. The speech act assignment problem revisited: Disentangling speaker’s commitment from speaker’s call on addressee. In O. Bonami & P. C. Hofherr (eds.), Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics 6, 37–68. Paris: Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris.
Bezuidenhout, Anne. 2004. Procedural meaning and the semantics/pragmatics interface. In Claudia Bianchi (ed.), The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction, 101–131. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Bhatt, Rajesh. 1999. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
Bianchi, Valentina. 2003. On finiteness as logophoric anchoring. In Jacqueline Gueron and L. Tasmovski (eds), Temps et point de vue [Tense and Point of View], 213–246. Nanterre: Université Paris X.
Bianchi, Valentina, Giuliano Bocci, & Silvio Cruschina. 2016. Focus fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative implicatures. Semantics and Pragmatics 9(3), 1–54.
Theresa Biberauer. 2017. Probing the nature of the Final-over-Final Condition: The perspective from adpositions. In Laura R. Bailey & Michelle Sheehan (eds.), Order and Structure in Syntax I: Word Order and Syntactic Structure, 177–216. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Biberauer, Theresa, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts. 2014. A Syntactic Universal and Its Consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 45(2), 169–225.
Biberauer, Theresa, Glenda Newton & Michelle Sheehan. 2009. Limiting synchronic and diachronic variation and change: The Final-over-Final Constraint. Language and Linguistics 10(4), 701–743.
Biberauer, Theresa & Sten Vikner. Pseudo-coordination in Danish and Afrikaan. Talk presented at the SyntaxLab, Dept. of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge, May 2015.
Biberauer, Theresa & Sten Vikner. 2017. Having the edge: A new perspective on pseudo-coordination in Danish and Afrikaans. In N. LaCara, K. Moulton & A.-M. Tessier (eds.), A Schrift to Fest Kyle Johnson, 77–90. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts. http://scholarworks.umass.edu/linguist_oapubs/1
Bjorkman, Bronwyn M. 2015. Go get, come see: Motion verbs, morphological restrictions, and syncretism. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 34(1), 53–91.
Blakemore, Diane. 2002. Relevance and linguistic meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boulat, Kira. 2023. The Pragmatics of Commitment. Bern/Berlin/Bruxelles/New York/Oxford: Peter Lang.
Bošković, Željko. 2016. What is sent to spell-out is phases, not phasal complements. Linguistica, 56(1), 25–66.
Brandom, Robert B. 1983. Asserting. Noûs 17, 637–650.
Bravo, Ana. 2020. On pseudo-coordination in Spanish. Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 9(1), 125–180.
Brennan, Virginia. 1993. Root and Epistemic modal auxiliary verbs. MA: University of Massachusetts at Amherst Ph.D. dissertation.
Bross, Fabian. 2012. German modal particles and the common ground. Helikon. A Multidisciplinary Online Journal (2), 182–209.
Brown, Jason, Tyler Peterson, Kimberley Craig. 2016. Belief, evidence, and interactional meaning in Urama. Oceanic Linguistics 55(2), 432–448.
Bùi, Mạnh Hùng. 2003. Bàn về vấn đề phân loại câu theo mục đích phát ngôn [On classifying sentences in terms of uttering purposes]. Ngôn ngữ [Language] 2, 47–57.
Burkhardt, Armin. 1994. Abtönungspartikel im Deutschen. Bedeutung und Genese. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 22(2), 129–151.
Bybee, Joan. 2003. Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In M. Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, vol. II, 145–167. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischman. 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse: An introductory essay. In J. Bybee & S. Fleischman (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse, 1–14. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Cao, Xuân Hạo. 1991/2006. Tiếng Việt: Sơ thảo ngữ pháp chức năng [Vietnamese: A Sketch of Functional Grammar]. Hồ Chí Minh: Khoa học xã hội.
Carden, Guy & David Pesetsky. 1977. Double-verb constructions, markedness, and a fake co-ordination. In Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. 13, 82–92. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
Cardinaletti, Anna. 2015. Italian verb-based discourse particles in a comparative perspective. In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl & A. Trotzke (eds.), Discourse-oriented Syntax, 71–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Giuliana Guisti. 2001. Semi-lexical Motion Verbs in Romance and Germanic. In N. Corver and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), Semi-lexical Categories, 371–414. Berlin: Mouton.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Giuliana Giusti. 2003. Motion verbs as functional heads. In C. Tortora (ed.), The Syntax of Italian Dialects, 31–50. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Chan, Brian Hok-Shing. 2014. Sentence-final particles, complementizers, antisymmetry, and the Final-over-Final Constraint. In Theresa Biberauer, and Michelle Sheehan (eds), Theoretical Approaches to Disharmonic Word Order, 445–468. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen. 1991. On the Typology of Wh-questions. MIT Ph.D. dissertation (published by Garland, New York, 1997).
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen. 1995. On dou-quantification. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 4, 197–234.
Cheng, Siu-Pong. 2023. Cantonese sentence-final particles pertaining to the TP domain. Current Research in Chinese Linguistics 102(1), 81–100.
Cheung, Lawrence Y.-L. 2009. Dislocation focus construction in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 18(3), 197–232.
Chierchia, Gennaro & McConnell-Ginet, Sally. 2000. Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 1995a. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 1995b. Bare phrase structure. In H. Campos & P. Kempchinsky (eds.), Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory, 51-109. Washington, DC.: Georgetown University Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–156. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clark, Herbert H. & Susan E. Brennan. 1991. Grounding in communication. In L. Resnick, J. M. Levine, S. D. Teasley (eds.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, 222–233. American Psychological Association.
Collins, Chris. 1997. Argument sharing in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 28, 461–497.
Collins, Chris. 2002. Multiple verb movement in ‡ Hoan. Linguistic Inquiry 33, 1–29.
Condoravdi, Cleo & Sven Lauer. 2011. Performative verbs and performative acts. In I. Reich, E. Horch, & D. Pauly (eds.), Sinn and Bedeutung 15: Proceedings of the 2010 annual conference of the Gesellschaft für Semantik, 149–164. Saarbrücken: Universaar – Saarland University Press.
Condoravdi, Cleo & Sven Lauer. 2012. Imperatives: meaning and illocutionary force. In C. Piñón (ed.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 9, 37–58.
Coniglio, Marco. 2007. German modal particles in the IP-domain. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 32, 3–37.
Coniglio, Marco. 2008. Modal particles in Italian. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 91–129.
Coniglio, Marco. 2009. Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln: Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. University of Venice Ph.D. dissertation.
Coniglio, Marco. 2011. Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln: Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Coniglio, Marco. 2014. The fine structure of force: on the interaction of modal particles with illocutionary force and clause type. In A. Cardinaletti, G. Cinque, Y. Endo (eds.), On Peripheries, 103–140. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Coniglio, Marco & Iulia Zegrean. 2012. Splitting up force: Evidence from discourse particles. In L. Aelbrecht, L. Haegeman & R. Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, 229–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cognola, Federica. 2013. The mixed OV/VO syntax of Mòcheno main clauses: On the interaction between high and low left periphery. In T. Biberauer & M. Sheehan (eds.), Theoretical approaches to disharmonic word order, 106–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Copley, Bridget. 2006. What should should mean? Manuscript of a presentation at the Workshop Language under Uncertainty: Modals, Evidentials, and Conditionals, Kyoto University, January 2005.
Corr, Alice. 2016. Ibero-Romance and the Syntax of the Utterance. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Cambridge.
Cruschina, Silvio & Eva-Maria Remberger. 2017. Before the complementizer: Adverb types and root clause modification. In M. Hummel & S. Valera (eds.), Adjective Adverb Interfaces in Romance, 81–109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cruschina, Silvio & Eva-Maria Remberger. 2018. Speaker-oriented syntax and root clause complementizers. In J. Garzonio & S. Rossi (eds.), Variation in C: Comparative approaches to the Complementizer Phrase, 336–358. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cuenca, Maria Jose. 2013. The fuzzy limits between discourse marking and modal marking. In L. Degand, B. Cornillie, & P. Pietrandrea (eds.), Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: Categorization and Description, 192–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Czypionka, Anna, Maribel Romero, & Josef Bayer. 2021. Question-sensitive discourse particles at the interfaces of syntax, semantics and pragmatics – an experimental approach. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6(1), 24.

Davis, Christopher M. 2011. Constraining Interpretation: Sentence Final Particles in Japanese. Ph.D. dissertation. MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Declerck, Renaat. 2010. Future time reference expressed by be to in Present-day English. English Language and Linguistics 14, 271–291.
Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed. 2001. Conditionals: A Comprehensive Empirical Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
DeLancey, Scott. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1, 33–52.
Del Gobbo, Francesca, Nicola Munaro, & Cecilia Poletto. 2015. On sentential particles: A crosslinguistic study. In S. Hancil, A. Haselow, & M. Post (eds.), Final Particles, 359–386. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Demonte, Violeta & Olga Fernández-Soriano. 2009. Force and finiteness in the Spanish complementizer system. Probus 21(1), 23–49.
Denham, Kristin. 2000. Optional wh-movement in Babine-Witsuwit'en. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18(2), 199–251.
Diewald, Gabriele. 2006. Discourse Particles and Modal Particles as Grammatical Elements. In K. Fischer (ed.), Approaches to Discourse Particles, 403–425. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Diewald, Gabriele. 2007. Abtönungspartikel. In L. Hoffmann (ed.), Handbuch der deutschen Wortarten, 117–142. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.
Diewald, Gabriele, Marijana Kresic, & Elena Smirnova. 2009. The grammaticalization channels of evidentials and modal particles in German: Integration in textual structures as a common feature. In M.-B. M. Hansen & J. Visconti (eds.), Current Trends in Diachronic Semantics and Pragmatics, 189–209. Leiden: Brill.
Diewald, Gabriele. 2013. “Same same but different” – Modal particles, discourse markers and the art (and purpose) of categorization. In L. Degand, B. Cornillie, & P. Pietrandrea (eds.), Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: Categorization and Description, 19–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dohi, Atsushi. 2021. A formal approach to role language: sentence-final particles and the speaker-hearer link. Journal of Japanese Linguistics, 37(2), 203–227.
Do-Hurinville, Danh Thành & Dao Huy Linh. 2019. The Vietnamese polyfunctional marker mà as a Generalized Linker: a multilevel approach. JSEALS 12(2), 58–71.
Duffield, Nigel. 1999. Final modals, adverbs and antisymmetry in Vietnamese. Revue québécoise de linguistique 27(2), 91–129.
Duffield, Nigel. 2013a. On polarity emphasis, assertion and mood in Vietnamese and English. Lingua 137, 248–270.
Duffield, Nigel. 2013b. Head-first: On the head-initiality of Vietnamese clauses. In D. Hole and E. Löbel (eds.), Linguistics of Vietnamese: An International Survey, 127–154. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Duffield, Nigel. 2013c. Minimalism and semantic syntax: interpreting multifunctionality in Vietnamese. Paper presented at the International Conference on The Linguistics of Vietnam in the Context of Renovation and Integration, 1090–1113. Hanoi.
https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001919
Duffield, Nigel. 2019. Illusory islands: On ‘wh-questions in Vietnamese’. In Nigel Duffield, Trang Phan, and Tue Trinh (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Vietnamese Linguistics, 81–112. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Egg, Markus & Johannes Mursell. 2017. The syntax and semantics of discourse particles. In J. Bayer & V. Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics, 15–48. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.
Emonds, Joseph E. 1969. Root and Structure-preserving Transformations. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ph.D. dissertation.
Emonds, Joseph E. 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. NY: Academic Press.
Endo, Yoshio. 2012. Illocutionary force and modal particle in the syntax of Japanese. In W. Abraham & E. Leiss (eds.), Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, 405–424. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.
Endo, Yoshio & Liliane Haegeman. 2019. Adverbial clauses and adverbial concord. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4(1), 48.
Erlewine, Michael Y. 2017. Low sentence-final particles in Mandarin Chinese and the Final-over-Final Constraint. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 26, 37–75.
Ernst, Thomas. 2008. Adverbs and positive polarity in Mandarin Chinese. In Marjorie K.M. Chan and Hana Kang (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20) 1, 69–85. Ohio: The Ohio State University.
Ernst, Thomas. 2009. Speaker-oriented adverbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 27(3), 497–544.
Ettinger, Allyson & Sophia A. Malamud. 2019. Mandarin utterance-final particle ba in the conversational scoreboard. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 19, 232–251.
Etxepare, Ricardo. 1997. The Grammatical Representation of Speech Events. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland.

Faller, M. 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford: Stanford University.
Farkas, Donka & Floris Roelofsen. 2012. Polar initiatives and polarity particles in an inquisitive discourse model. Paper presentation at Colloquium, Nijmegen University.
Farkas, Donka & Kim Bruce. 2010. On Reacting to Assertions and Polar Questions. Journal of Semantics 27(1), 81 – 118.
Feldman, Fred. 1986. Doing the Best We Can: An Essay in Informal Deontic Logic. Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster, Tokyo: Reidel Publishing Company.
von Fintel, Kai and Anthony S. Gillies. 2007. An opinionated guide to epistemic modality. In T. S. Gendler and J. Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology: Volume 2, 32–62. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
von Fintel, Kai & Sabine Iatridou. 2008. How to say ought in Foreign: The composition of weak necessity modals. In Jacqueline Guéron & Jacqueline Lecarme (eds.), Time and Modality, 115–141. Springer.
Fiorini, Matteo. 2021. Anchoring and word order in Basque: speaker-oriented and discourse-oriented foci. Paper presented at the 50th Poznań Linguistic Meeting, Poznań, Poland.
Fischer, Kerstin. 2006. Towards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles: Introduction to the volume. In K. Fischer (ed.), Approaches to Discourse Particles, 1–20. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Foley, William A. & Robert D. Van Valin. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frascarelli, Mara & Roland Hinterhölzl. 2007. Types of Topics in German and Italian. In K. Schwabe & S. Winkler (eds.), On Information Structure, Meaning and Form: Generalizations Across Languages, 87–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fraser, Bruce. 1999. What are discourse markers?. Journal of Pragmatics 31, 931–952.
Frege, Gottlob. 1897/1979. “Logic”. In Hans Hermes, Friedrich Kambartel & Friedrich Kaulbach (eds.), Posthumous Writings: Gottlob Frege (translated by Peter Long & Roger White), 126–151. Oxford: Blackwell.
Frege, Gottlob. 1918. Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung. Beiträge zur Philosophie des Deutschen Idealismus 2, 1918–1919.
Frege, Gottlob. 1956. The thought: A logical inquiry. Mind 65(1), 289–311.
Frey, Werner. 2005. Pragmatic properties of certain German and English left peripheral constructions. Linguistics 43(1), 89–129.
Frey, Werner. 2011. Peripheral adverbial clauses, their licensing and the prefeld in German. In E. Breindl, G. Ferraresi & A. Volodina (eds.), Satzverknüpfung: Zur Interaktion von Form, Bedeutung und Diskursfunktion, 41–77. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Frey, Werner. 2016. On some correlations between formal and interpretative properties of causal clauses. In Ingo Reich & Augustin Speyer (eds.), Co- and Subordination in German and Other Languages. Linguistische Berichte, Sonderhefte 21, 153–179. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
Frey, Werner. 2018. On the syntax–discourse interface with different kinds of not-at-issue expressions. Presented at Comparative Germanic Syntax Workshop (CGSW33), Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.
Frey, Werner. 2023. On the categorical status of different dependent clauses. In J. M. Hartmann & A. Wöllstein (Hrsg.) Propositionale Argumente im Sprachvergleich: Theorie und Empirie. /Propositional Arguments in Cross-Linguistic Research: Theoretical and Empirical Issues, 363–407. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Frey, Werner & André Meinunger. 2019. Topic marking and illocutionary force. In V. Molnár, V. Egerland, and S. Winkler (eds.), Architecture of Topic, 95–138. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Gast, Volker. 2008. Modal particles and context updating - the functions of German ‘ja’, ‘doch’, ‘wohl’ and ‘etwa’. In H. Vater and O. Letnes (eds.), Modalverben und Grammatikalisierung, 153–177. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Gazdar, Gerald, 1981. Speech act assignment. In A. Joshi, B. Webber, & I. A. Sag (eds.), Elements of Discourse Understanding, 64–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Geach, Peter. 1965. Assertion. The Philosophical Review 74, 449–465.
Gergel, Remus & Jutta M. Hartmann. 2009. Experiencers with (un)willingness: A raising analysis of German ‘wollen’. In A. Alexiadou, J. Hankamer, T. McFadden, J. Nuger & F. Schäfer (eds.), Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax, 327–356. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1998. Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)veridical Dependency. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1999. Affective dependencies. Linguistics and Philosophy 22(4), 367–421.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2006. Only, emotive factive verbs, and the dual nature of polarity dependency. Language 82(3), 575–603.
Ginsburg, Jason R. 2009. Interrogative Features. Tucson: University of Arizona Ph.D. thesis.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1995a. Resolving questions (Part I). Linguistics and Philosophy 18(5), 459–527.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1995b. Resolving questions (Part II). Linguistics and Philosophy 18(6), 567–609.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1996. Dynamics and the semantics of dialogue. In J. Seligman & D. Westerståhl (eds.), Language, Logic and Computation, vol. 1. Lecture Notes, 221–237. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2016. The Semantics of dialogue. In M. Aloni & P. Dekker (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Formal Semantics, 130–170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan A. Sag, 2000. Interrogative Investigations. The Form, Meaning, and Use of English Interrogatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Giorgi, Alessandra & Chiara Dal Farra. 2019. On the syntax/pragmatics interface: Expressing surprise and disapproval. Intercultural Pragmatics 16(3): 335–361.
Givón, Talmy. 2001. Syntax: An Introduction, vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Grano, Thomas. 2017. Finiteness contrasts without Tense? A view from Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 26, 259–299.
Grevisse, Maurice & André Goosse. 2008. Le bon usage, 14th edn. Brussels: De Boeck & Larcier.
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3: Speech Acts, 43–58. New York: Academic Press.
Grimshaw, Jane. 1991. Extended projection. Boston: Brandeis University manuscript.
Groenendijk, Jeroen & Floris Roelofsen. 2009. Inquisitive semantics and pragmatics. In J.M. Larrazabal & L. Zubeldia (eds.), Meaning, Content, and Argument: Proceedings of the ILCLI International Workshop on Semantics, Pragmatics, and Rhetoric. http://www.illc.uva.nl/inquisitive-semantics
Grosz, Patrick. 2005. ‘Dn’ in Viennese German. The syntax of a clitic version of the discourse particle denn. Vienna: University of Vienna MA thesis.
Gunlogson Christine. 2001. True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Gunlogson, Christine. 2008. A question of commitment. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 22, 101–136.
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1984. On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents. Dordrecht: Foris
Gutzmann, Daniel. 2008. On the interaction between modal particles and sentence mood in German. Mainz: Johannes Gutenberg-Universitat MA thesis.
Gutzmann, Daniel. 2013. Expressives and beyond: An introduction to varieties of use-conditional meaning. In D. Gutzmann & H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Beyond Expressives: Explorations in Use-Conditional Meaning, 1–58. Leiden: Brill.
Hack, Franziska M. 2014. The particle po in the varieties of Dolomitic Ladin - Grammaticalisation from a temporal adverb into an interrogative marker. Studia Linguistica, 68(1), 49–76.
Hacquard, Valentine. 2006. Aspects of Modality. Boston: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ph.D. dissertation.
Hacquard, Valentine. 2010. On the event relativity of modal auxiliaries. Natural Language Semantics 18(1), 79–114.
Hacquard, Valentine. 2019. 14. Modality. In P. Portner, K. Heusinger & C. Maienborn (eds.), Semantics - Noun Phrases and Verb Phrases, 463–502. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hacquard, Valentine & Alexis Wellwood. 2012. Embedding epistemic modals in English: A corpus-based study. Semantics and Pragmatics 5(4), 1–29.
Haegeman, Liliane. 1984. Parasitic gaps and adverbial clauses. Journal of Linguistics 20, 229–232.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2002. Anchoring to speaker, adverbial clauses and the structure of CP. Georgetown University Working Papers in Theoretical Linguistics 2, 117–180.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2003. Conditional clauses: External and internal syntax. Mind & Language 18(4), 317–339.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2004. Topicalization, CLLD and the Left Periphery. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35(1), 157–192.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2006a. Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116, 1651–1669.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2006b. Argument fronting in English, Romance CLLD and the left periphery. In Raffaella Zanuttini, Hector Campos, Elena Herburger & Paul Portner (eds), Negation, Tense and Clausal Architecture: Cross-linguistic Investigations, 27–52. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Haegeman, Liliane. 1991/2009. Parenthetical adverbials: The radical orphan approach. In Shuki Chiba, Akira Ogawa, Yasuaki Fuiwara, Norio Yamada, Osamu Koma & Takao Yagi (eds.), Aspects of modern English linguistics, 232–254. Tokyo: Kaitakusha. (Republished in Benjamin Shaer, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey & Claudia Maienborn (eds.), Dislocated elements in discourse: Syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic perspectives, 331–347. London: Routledge.)
Haegeman, Liliane. 2012. Adverbial clauses, main clause phenomena and the composition of the left periphery. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haegeman, Liliane. 2014. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the Speech Act layer. Studia Linguistica 68(1), 116–39.
Haegeman, Liliane & Virginia Hill. 2013. The syntacticization of discourse. In R. Folli, C. Sevdali & R. Truswell (eds.), Syntax and its limits, 370–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haegeman, Liliane & Virginia Hill. 2014. Vocatives and speech act projections: A case study in West Flemish. In A. Cardinaletti & G. Cinque (eds.), On Peripheries, 209–236. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo Publishing.
Haegeman, Liliane & Manuela Schönenberger. 2023. The External Syntax of Conditional Clauses. In S. Kaufmann, D.E. Over, G. Sharma (eds.), Conditionals: Logic, Linguistics and Psychology, 275–320. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 6, 322–361.
Hamblin, Charles L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.
Hamblin, Charles L. 1971. Mathematical models of dialogue. Theoria 37(2): 130–155.
Hamblin, Charles L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10, 41–53.
Han, Chung-hye. 1997. Deontic modality of imperatives. Language and Information, 1:1, 107–136. Seoul: Korean Society for Language and Information.
Han, Chung-hye. 1998. The Structure and Interpretation of Imperatives: Mood and Force in Universal Grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Han, Chung-hye. 1999. Deontic modality, lexical aspect and the semantics of imperatives. Linguistics in Morning Calm 4, vol. 4, 479–495. Seoul: Hanshin Publications.
Haselow, Alexander. 2012. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the negotiation of common ground in spoken discourse: Final particles in English. Language & Communication 32(3), 182–204.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2016. The serial verb construction: Comparative concept and cross-linguistic generalizations. Language and Linguistics, 17(3), 291–319.
Heim, Johannes M. 2019. Commitment and Engagement: The Role of Intonation in Deriving Speech Acts. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of British Columbia.
Heim, Johannes, Hermann Keupdjio, Zoe Wai-Man Lam, Adriana Osa-Gómez, Sonja Thoma, and Martina Wiltschko. 2016. Intonation and particles as speech act modifiers: A syntactic analysis. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 37(2), 109–129.
Helbig, Gerhard. 1977. Partikeln als illokutive Indikatoren im Dialog. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 14, 30–44.
Helbig, Gerhard & Joachim Buscha. 2001. Deutsche Grammatik. Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. Berlin: Langenscheidt.
Hengeveld, Kees. 1988. Illocution, mood and modality in a functional grammar of Spanish. Journal of Semantics 6(1), 227–269.
Herrmann, Annika. 2014. Chapter 5: Modality and modal particles in spoken languages. Modal and Focus Particles in Sign Languages: A Cross-Linguistic Study, 77–106. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Heycock, Carolina. 2006. Embedded Root Phenomena. In M. Everaert & H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax (Vol. 1), 174–209. MA/Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Hill, Virginia. 2007a. Romanian adverbs and the pragmatic field. The Linguistic Review 24, 61–86.
Hill, Virginia. 2007b. Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua 117(12), 2077–2105.
Hill, Virginia. 2010. Main clause că ‘that’ in Romanian. Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics 12(2), 5–16.
Hill, Virginia. 2012. A main clause complementizer. In L. Aelbrecht, L. Haegeman & R. Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, 279–296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hill, Virginia. 2014. Vocatives: How Syntax meets with Pragmatics. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Hinterhölzl, Roland & Nicola Munaro. 2015. On the interpretation of modal particles in non- assertive speech acts in German and Bellunese. In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl, & A. Trotzke (eds.), Discourse-Oriented Syntax, 41–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2001. Multiple agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese. In O. Matsushansky et al. (eds.), The Proceedings of the MIT-Harvard Joint Conference (HUMIT 2000) MITWPL #40, 67–80. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
Hiraiwa, Ken and Shinichiro Ishihara. 2002. Missing Links: Cleft, Sluicing and ‘no da’ Construction in Japanese. In T. Ionin, H. Ko & A. Nevins (eds.), The Proceedings of Humit 2001, 35–54. Cambridge, Mass: Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT.
Hoàng, Phê. 2003. Logic Ngôn ngữ học [Logic in Linguistics]. Hà Nội: Trung tâm Từ điển học.
Hoàng, Phê (ed.). 2006. Từ điển tiếng Việt [Vietnamese Dictionary]. Hà Nội/Đà Nẵng: Nhà xuất bản Đà Nẵng/Trung tâm Từ điển học.
Hoekstra, Eric. 1993. Dialectal variation inside CP as parametric variation. In W. Abraham & J. Bayer (eds). Dialektsyntax. Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft (vol. 5), 161–179. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Holmberg, Anders. 2000. Deriving OV order in Finnish. In Peter Svenonius (ed.), The Derivation of VO and OV, 123–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
de Hoop, Helen and Gijs Mulder. 2022. Claiming common ground with utterance-final particle hoor in Dutch. In Jorrig Vogels and Sterre Leufkens (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 39(1), 88–102.
Hooper, Joan B. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4(4), 465–97.
Hsieh, Feng-fan & Rint Sybesma. 2008. Generative syntax and sentence-final particles in Chinese. In Y. Shen & S. Feng (eds.), Contemporary Linguistic Theories and Related Studies on Chinese, 364–374. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Hsieh, Feng-fan & Rint Sybesma. 2011. On the linearization of Chinese sentence-final particles: Max spell out and why CP moves? Korea Journal of Chinese Language and Literature 49, 53–90.
Huang, C.-T. James & Masao Ochi. 2009. Syntax of the hell: two types of dependencies. In C.-T. J. Huang, Between Syntax and Semantics, 207–221. New York/London: Routledge.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1987. Existential sentences in Chinese and (in)definiteness. In E. J. Reuland & A. G.B. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, 226–253. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Huang, C.-T. James. 2009. Lexical decomposition, silent categories, and the localizer phrase. Yuyanxue Luncong 39, 86–122.
Huang, Ching-yu. 2008. A Case Study of Taiwanese Khi1 and Khi2. MA thesis, National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan.
Huang, Rui-heng Ray. 2017. On the grammatical category of postnominal keshi in Mandarin Chinese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 15(1), 103–139.
Huang, Xiao-You Kevin. 2007. Initialness of sentence-final particles in Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished manuscript. Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University.

latridou, Sabine. 2000. The Grammatical ingredients of counterfactuality. Linguistic Inquiry 31(2), 231–270.
Iatridou, Sabine & Hedde Zeijlstra. 2013. Negation, polarity, and deontic modals. Linguistic Inquiry 44, 529–568.
Isac, Daniela. 2015. The Morphosyntax of Imperatives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ituarte, Aitor Lizardi. 2022. Clause type vs. speech act: Knowledge confirmation questions in Basque. Journal of Linguistics 60(1), 75–101.
Izutsu, Katsunobu & Mitsuko Narita Izutsu. 2020. Dichotomous or continuous? Final particles and a dualistic conception of grammar. In Alexander Haselow & Gunther Kaltenböck (eds.), Grammar and Cognition: Dualistic models of language structure and language processing, 159–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Izvorski, Roumyana. 1997. The present perfect as an epistemic modal. In Aaron Lawson (ed.), Proceedings of SALT XII, 222–239. Cornell University.
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jaeggli, Osvaldo & Nina Hyams. 1993. On the independence and interdependence of syntactic and morphological properties: English aspectual come and go. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 11, 313–346.
Kaplan, David. 2004. The Meaning of Ouch and Oops. Howison Lecture in Philosophy delivered at UC Berkeley (transcribed by Elizabeth Coppock), April 2004.
https://eecoppock.info/PragmaticsSoSe2012/kaplan.pdf
Karttunen, Lauri. 1976. Discourse referents. In J. D. McCawley (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 7, 363–386. New York: Academic Press.
Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 3–44.
Kaufmann, Magdalena. 2012. Interpreting imperatives. Dordrecht: Springer.
Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kayne, Richard. 2005. Movement and Silence. New York: Oxford University Press.
van Kemenade, Ans & Meta Links. 2020. Discourse particles in early English: Clause structure, pragmatics and discourse management. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 3: 1–23.
Kim, Ahrim. 2018. Utterance-final particle -canha in modern spoken Korean: A marker of shared knowledge, (im)politeness, theticity and mirativity. Linguistics 56(5), 995–1057.
Kjeldahl, Anne. 2010. The syntax of quirky verbal morphology. PhD thesis, Aarhus University. https://tildeweb.au.dk/au132769/papers/Kjeldahl-2010-phd-Quirky-verbal-morph.pdf
Kocher, Anna. 2017. From verum to epistemic modality and evidentiality. In S. Cruschina & E.-M. Remberger (eds.), The Rise and Development of Evidential and Epistemic Markers, Journal of Historical Linguistics 7(1/2), 77–110.
Kocher, Anna. 2018. Epistemic and evidential modification in Spanish and Portuguese. In R. Enghels (ed.), Extending the Notion of Near-synonymy: Studies in Morphological, Syntactic and Pragmatic Equivalence, Languages in Contrast 18(1), 99–121.
Koev, T. (2011). Evidentiality and temporal distance learning. In N. Ashton, A. Chereches, and D. Lutz (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 21, 115–134.
Kölbel, Max. 2004. Faultless disagreement. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 104(1), 53–73.
König, Esther. 1997. Zur Bedeutung von Modalpartikeln im Deutschen: Ein Neuansatz im Rahmen der Relevanztheorie. Germanistische Linguistik 136, 57–75.
Krajinović, Ana. 2018. Comparative study of conditional clauses in Nafsan. In B. H. Boerger & P. Unger (eds.), SIL Language and Culture Documentation and Description 41 (Proceedings of COOL 10), 1–18.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1977. What ‘must’ and ‘can’ must and can mean. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 337–355.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1981. The notional category of modality. In H.-J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts: New Approaches in Word Semantics. Berlin: de Gruyter, 38–74.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1991. Modality. In Arnim von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, 639–650. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1999. Beyond ‘ouch’ and ‘oops’: how descriptive and expressive meaning interact. Paper presented at the Cornell Conference on Theories of Context Dependency.
Krifka, Manfred. 2013. Response particles as propositional anaphors. In T. Snider (ed.), Proceedings of SALT 23, 1–18.
Krifka, Manfred. 2014. Embedding Illocutionary Acts. In T. Roeper & M. Speas (eds.), Recursion: Complexity in Cognition, 125–155. Cham: Springer.
Krifka, Manfred. 2017. Assertions and judgments, epistemics and evidentials. Handout, Speech Acts: Meanings, Uses, Syntactic and PROSODIC realization. ZAS, Berlin, May 2017. http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~h2816i3x/Talks/CommitmentEpistemicsHandout.pdf
Krifka, Manfred. 2023. Layers of assertive clauses: propositions, judgements, commitments, acts. In J. M. Hartmann & A. Wöllstein (Hrsg.) Propositionale Argumente im Sprachvergleich: Theorie und Empirie. /Propositional Arguments in Cross-Linguistic Research: Theoretical and Empirical Issues, 115–182. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Ladusaw, William. 2002. On the Notion Affective in the Analysis of Negative-Polarity Items. In P. H. Portner & B. H. Partee (eds.), Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings, 457–470. Oxford : Blackwell.
Lakarra, Joseba Andoni. 2019. Bon-/bor-/bol- familiaren berreraiketarako (II): Etimologia, partikulen historiaurrea eta hots-lege batzuen irregularitateez [The reconstruction of the family bon-/bor-/bol-: Etymology, prehistory of the particles and on the irregularity of some sound laws]. In I. Epelde & O. Jauregi (eds.), Bihotz ahots: M.L. Oñederra irakaslearen omenez [Heart voice: tribute to the Prof. M. L. Oñederra], 377–396. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
Lam, Zoe Wai-Man. 2014. A complex ForceP for speaker- and addressee-oriented discourse particles in Cantonese. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 35(2), 61–80.
Lasersohn, Peter. 2005. Context dependence, disagreement and predicates of personal taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 28, 643–686.
Lassiter, Daniel. 2016. Must, knowledge, and (in)directness. Natural Language Semantics 24, 117–163.
Larson, Richard. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 335–391.
Larson, Richard K. 1991. Some issues in verb serialization. In C. Lefebvre (ed.), Serial Verbs: Grammatical, Comparative and Cognitive Approaches, 185–211. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lau, Seng-Hian & Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai. 2020. A comparative study of how and why in Taiwan Southern Min and Mandarin Chinese. Language and Linguistics 21(2), 254–284.
Lazard, Gilbert. 1999. Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other?. Linguistic Typology 3(1), 91–110.
Lee, Hun-tak Thomas. 1986. Studies on quantification in Chinese. PhD Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.
Lee, Junwen. 2022. An analysis of Colloquial Singapore English lah and its interpretation across speech acts. Languages 7(3), 203.
Lee, Sarah Hye-yeon and Elsi Kaiser. 2021, In P. G. Grosz, L. Martí, H. Pearson, Y. Sudo, and S. Zobel (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 25, 545–562. University College London and Queen Mary University of London.
Lee-Wong, Song Mei. 1998. Face support – Chinese particles as mitigators: A study of ba, a/ya and ne. Pragmatics 8(3), 387–404.
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.
Lewis, Diana M. 2006. Discourse markers in English: A discourse-pragmatic view. In K. Fischer (ed.), Approaches to Discourse Particles, 43–59. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Lê, Đông and Nguyễn Văn Hiệp. 2001. Ngữ nghĩa - ngữ dụng các tiểu từ tình thái trong tiếng Việt [Semantics and Pragmatics of Modal Particles in Vietnamese]. Hanoi: Hanoi University of Social Sciences and Humanities.
Li, Boya. 2006. Chinese Final Particles and the Syntax of the Periphery. Ph.D. Dissertation, Leiden University.
Li, Yen-hui Audrey. 1990. Order and Constituency in Mandarin Chinese. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Liao, W. Roger. 2017. Remarks on the final-over-final condition: A view from Chinese head-final structures. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 38(2), 93–118.
Liao, W. Roger & Yuyun Wang. 2023. Attitude, Control, and the Finiteness Distinction in Chinese. Manuscript. Taipei: Academia Sinica and Ming Chuan University.
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1706057/v1
Liao, Y.-L. Irene & T.-H. Jonah Lin. 2023. The left-peripheral nature of the right-edge particle không in Vietnamese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics (22)1, 115–133.
Lin, T.-H. Jonah. 2010. Structures and functional categories of Mandarin sentences. UST Working Papers in Linguistics 6, 41–79.
Lin, T.-H. Jonah. 2012. Multiple-modal constructions in Mandarin Chinese and their finiteness properties. Journal of Linguistics 48(01), 151–186.
Lin, T.-H. Jonah. 2015. Tense in Mandarin Chinese sentences. Syntax 18, 320–342.
Lindström, Jan & Anne-Marie Londen. 2008. Constructing reasoning: The connectives för att (causal), så att (consecutive) and men att (adversative) in Swedish conversations. In J. Leino (ed.), Constructional Reorganization, 105–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lødrup, Helge. 2019. Pseudocoordination with posture verbs in Mainland Scandinavian: A grammaticalized progressive construction? Nordic Journal of Linguistics 42, 87–110.
Luke, K.K., 1990. Utterance Particles in Cantonese Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MacFarlane, John. 2010. Epistemic modals are assessment-sensitive. In Brian Weatherson and Andy Egan (eds.), Epistemic Modality, 144–178. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
MacFarlane, John. 2011. What is assertion? In J. Brown & H. Cappelen (eds.), Assertion: New Philosophical Essays, 79–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Malamud, Sophia A. & Tamina Stephenson. 2015. Three Ways to Avoid Commitments: Declarative Force Modifiers in the Conversational Scoreboard. Journal of Semantics 32(2), 275–311.
Manzini, Maria R. 2015. Italian adverbs and discourse particles: Between recategorization and ambiguity . In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl & A. Trotzke (eds.), Discourse-oriented Syntax, 93–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Matsumoto, Daiki. 2023. Social evolution and commitment: Bridging the gap between formal linguistic theories and language evolution research. Biolinguistics 17, Article e12787. https://doi.org/10.5964/bioling.12787
Matthews, Stephen & Virginia Yip. 1994. Cantonese. A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.
Méi, Guǎng. 2019. Shànggǔ hànyǔ yǔfǎ gāngyào [Outline of Archaic Chinese grammar]. Taipei: Sānmín shūjú.
Meibauer, Jörg. 1994. Modaler Kontrast und konzeptuelle Verschiebung. Studien zur Syntax und Semantik deutscher Modalpartikeln. Tubingen: Niemeyer.
Meisterernst, Barbara. 2020. A semantic analysis of modal DE 得 in pre-modern Chinese. Lingua Sinica 5(1), 1–29.
Bağrıaçık, Metin. 2017. Representing discourse in clausal syntax: The ki particle in Pharasiot Greek. Journal of Greek Linguistics 17, 141–189.
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2012. Agreements that occur mainly in the main clause. In Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds.), Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, 79–112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2022. Syntax in the Treetops. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Monforte, Sergio. 2020. Syntactic analyses of discourse particles through the microvariation of Basque ote. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5(1), 126. 1–29.
Moro, Andrea. 2000. Dynamic Antisymmetry. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Munaro, Nicola & Cecilia Poletto. 2004. Sentential particles and clausal typing in the Veneto dialects. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35(2), 375–397.
Murasugi, Keiko. 2014. Root infinitive analogues in Chinese and Japanese and the emergence of full syntactic structure. In Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson and Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai (eds.), Chinese Syntax in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective, 375–398. New York: Oxford University Press.
Müller, Kalle. 2019. Sentence adverbs and theories of secondary meaning. Non-at-issueness and its problems. In Van Alem, Astrid, Mirella De Sisto, Elisabeth J. Kerr and Joanna Wall (eds.), Proceedings of ConSOLE XXVII, 238-256. Leiden University Centre for Linguistics.
Nagy C., Katalin. 2010. The cognitive background of grammaticalization. In E. Németh T. & K. Bibok (eds.), The Role of Data at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface, 207–260. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Ngo, Binh. 2021. Vietnamese: An Essential Grammar. New York: Routledge.
Nguyen, Dinh Hoa & Phan Van Giuong. 2018. Tuttle Vietnamese-English Dictionary: Completely Revised and Updated Second Edition. Tuttle Publishing.
Nguyen, Thi Hong Quy. 2021. Demonstratives as Sentence Final Particles and the Architecture of the Periphery in Vietnamese. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 37(3), 119–134.
Nguyen, Thi Thuy Nguyen. 2021. Formal analysis of the Vietnamese sentence-final particle cơ. Singapore: National University of Singapore Ph.D. dissertation.
Nguyễn, Đức Dân. 1996. Lôgích và Tiếng Việt [Logic and Vietnamese]. HCM: Giáo dục.
Nguyễn, Đình Hòa. 1997. Vietnamese: Tiếng Việt Không Son Phấn. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nguyễn, Kim Thản. 1997. Nghiên cứu ngữ pháp tiếng Việt [Studies on Vietnamese Grammar]. Hà Nội: Giáo dục.
Nguyễn, Thị Lương. 1996. Tiểu từ tình thái dứt câu dùng để hỏi với việc biểu thị các hành vi ngôn ngữ trong tiếng Việt [Sentence-final Modal Particles in Interrogatives with the Communication of Speech Acts in Vietnamese]. National University Hanoi Ph.D. Dissertation.
Nguyễn, Văn Hiệp. 1994. Tình thái ngữ trong hộ thống thành phần phụ của câu tiếng Việt [Modal phrases in the system of secondary components of Vietnamese sentence]. Tạp chí Khoa học [VNU Journal of Science: Social Sciences and Humanities] 10(5), 41–43.
Nguyễn, Văn Hiệp. 2001. Hướng đến một cách miêu tả và phân loại các tiểu từ tình thái cuối câu Tiếng Việt [Towards a way to describe and classify final modal particles in Vietnamese]. Ngôn ngữ [Language] 5/2001.
Noda, Hisashi. 1987. Noda no kinoo [The Function of Noda]. Tokyo: Kuroshio.
Nuyts, Jan. 1992. Subjective vs. objective modality: What is the difference. In Michael Fortescue, Peter Harder, & Lars Kristoffersen (eds.), Layered Structure and Reference in a Functional Perspective: Papers from the Functional Grammar Conference, Copenhagen, 1990, 73–97. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nuyts, Jan. 2001. Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 383–400.

Obenauer, Hans-Georg. 2006. Special interrogatives — left periphery, wh-doubling, and (apparently) optional elements. In Jenny Doetjes & Paz González (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’, Leiden, 9–11 December 2004, 247–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Olbertz, Hella & Marize Mattos Dali’Aglio Hattnher. 2018. On objective and subjective epistemic modality again Evidence from Portuguese and Spanish modal auxiliaries. In Evelien Keizer & Hella Olbertz (eds.), Recent Developments in Functional Discourse Grammar, 131–168. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pan, Victor J. 2015. Mandarin peripheral construals at the syntax-discourse interface. The Linguistic Review 32(4), 819–868.
Pan, Victor J. 2019. Architecture of the periphery in Chinese: Cartography and Minimalism. London: Routledge.
Pan Victor J. 2021. Sentence-Final Particles in Chinese. Oxford Research Encyclopedia, Linguistics.
Pan Victor J. 2022. Deriving head-final order in the peripheral domain of Chinese. Linguistic Inquiry, 1–34.
Pan, Victor J. & Waltraud Paul. Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional nor disjunctors. Lingua 170, 23–34.
Papafragou, Anna. 2006. Epistemic modality and truth conditions. Lingua 116, 1688–1702.
Paul, Waltraud. 2014. Why particles are not particular: Sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica 68(1), 77–115.
Paul, Waltraud. 2015. New Perspectives on Chinese Syntax. Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Paul, Waltraud & Victor J. Pan. 2017. What you see is what you get: Chinese sentence-final particles as head-final complementisers. In J. Bayer & V. Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles: Formal Approaches to their Syntax and Semantics, 49–77. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1903. Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism: Lecture I. MS [R] 301. http://www.commens.org/dictionary/entry/quote-harvard-lectures-pragmatism-lecture-i-7
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1934. The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 5: Pragmatism and Pragmaticism, C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pesetsky, David. 1987. Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. In E. Reuland & A. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)Definiteness, 98–129. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian & W. K. Wilkins (eds.), Phrasal and Clausal Architecture Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Phạm, Thị Ly. 2002. Tiểu từ tình thái cuối câu: Một trong những phương tiện chủ yếu diễn đạt ý nghĩa tình thái trong tiếng Việt (Đối chiếu với những phương tiện diễn đạt các ý nghĩa tương ứng trong tiếng Anh) [Final modal particles: one of the major devices to express modal meanings in Vietnamese (in comparison with their English counterparts]. Ngôn ngữ [Language] 13(160), 18–27.
Phan, Manh Hùng. 1985. Các kiểu tổ hợp tiểu từ tình thái tiếng Việt và vấn đề ranh giới từ [Ways of combining modal particles in Vietnamese and the issue of word boundary]. Ngôn ngữ [Language] 4/1985.
Phan, Trang. 2013. Syntax of Vietnamese Aspect. Sheffield: University of Sheffield PhD thesis.
Phan, Trang. 2023. The syntax of Vietnamese Tense, Aspect, and Negation. London/New York: Routledge.
Phan, Trang & Nigel Duffield. 2019. A more perfect unification: exploring a Nano-syntactic solution to Vietnamese đã. In N. Duffield, T. Phan, & T. Trinh (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Vietnamese Linguistics, 69–80. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Phan, Trang & Duffield, Nigel. 2022. A road map to Vietnamese phrase structure. In C. Shei & S. Li (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Asian Linguistics. Chapter 9, 165–185. New York/London: Routledge.
Phan, Trang & Michal Starke. 2022. Yes-no questions and the Vietnamese clause structure. JSEALS Special Publication 9, 192–211.
Phan, Trần. 2023. Trinity in unity: asking what, how and why with sao in Vietnamese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 21(2), 129–175.
Phan, Trần. 2024. Vietnamese modal system of dynamic possibility: a diachronic perspective. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 22(1), 167–198.
Phan, Trần. (in preparation). Up, Up and Away: A Cartographic Approach to Vietnamese đi. Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University manuscript.
Phan, Trần & Barbara Meisterernst. to appear. Vietnamese post-verbal được: aspectuality, modality, predication, and speaker commitment. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics.
Phan, Trần & Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai. 2022. Surprise-denial/disapproval what-questions in Vietnamese: a comparative perspective. JSEALS Special Publication 9, 168–191.
Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1992. On Mood and Complementizers in Modern Greek. Reading University Working Papers in Linguistics 1, 5–41.
Pierrehumbert, Janet, and Julia Hirschberg. 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In P. R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan, & Martha E. Pollack (eds.), Intentions in Communication, 271–311. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Plann, Susan. 1982. Indirect Questions in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 297–312.
Poletto, Cecilia. 2000. The Higher Functional Field. New York: Oxford University Press.
Poletto, Cecilia. 2012. The Syntax of Old Italian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Portner, Paul, 2004. The semantics of imperatives within a theory of clause types. In Robert B. Young (ed.), Proceedings of SALT XIV, 235–252. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Potsdam, Eric. 1998. Syntactic Issues in the English Imperative. London: Routledge.
Potts, Christopher. 2005. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Potts, Christopher. 2007. The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics 33, 165–97.
Prieto, Pilar. 2015. Intonational meaning. WIREs Cognitive Science 6, 371–381.
von Prince, Kilu. 2015. A Grammar of Daakaka. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
von Prince, Kilu. 2017. Paradigm-induced implicatures in TAM-expression: A view from the Daakaka distal. In R. Truswell, C. Cummins, C. Heycock, B. Rabern & H. Rohde (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 21, 969–984. University of Edinburgh.
von Prince, Kilu, Ana Krajinović, Manfred Krifka, Valérie Guérin & Michael Franjieh. 2019. Mapping Irreality: Storyboards for Eliciting TAM Contexts. In A. Gattnar, R. Hörnig, M. Störzer & S. Featherston (eds.), Proceedings of Linguistic Evidence 2018: Experimental Data Drives Linguistic Theory, 187–207. Tübingen: University of Tübingen.
von Prince, Kilu, Ana Krajinović, Manfred Krifka. 2022. Irrealis is real. Language 98(2), 221–249.
Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1995. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Radford, Andrew. 2009. Analysing English Sentences: A Minimalist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Radford, Andrew. 2013. The complementiser system in spoken English: Evidence from broadcast media. In V. C. Taboada, Á. L. Jiménez-Fernández, J. Martin-González & M. Reyes-Tejedor (eds.), Information Structure and Agreement, 11–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Recanati, François. 2004. Pragmatics and semantics. In Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 442–462. Oxford: Blackwell.
Reis, Marga. 1999. On sentence types in German: An enquiry into the relationship between grammar and pragmatics. Interdisciplinary Journal for Germanic Linguistics and Semiotic Analysis 4(2), 195–236.
Rett, Jessica. 2012. On modal subjectivity. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Papers in Semantics 16, 129–148.
Rett, Jessica. 2021a. The semantics of emotive markers and other illocutionary content. Journal of Semantics 38(2), 305–340.
Rett, Jessica. 2021b. A comparison of expressives and miratives. In Andreas Trotzke, and Xavier Villalba (eds), Expressive Meaning Across Linguistic Levels and Frameworks, 191–215. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rett, Jessica & Sarah E. Murray. 2013. A semantic account of mirative evidentials. In Todd Snider (ed.), Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory 23, 453–472. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
de Rhodes, Alexandre. 1651. Dictionarium Annamiticum Lusitanum et Latinum [Annamese-Portuguese-Latin Dictionary]. Rome: Sacred Congregation for the propagation of the faith.
Richards, Norvin. 2016. Contiguity Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Ritter, Elizabeth & Sara Th. Rosen. 1996. Strong and weak predicates: Reducing the lexical burden. Linguistic Analysis 26(1-2), 29–62.
Ritter, Elizabeth & Martina Wiltschko. 2009. Varieties of INFL: TENSE, LOCATION and PERSON. In Jeroen van Craenenbroeck (ed.), Alternatives to Cartography, 153–201. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Ritter, Elizabeth & Martina Wiltschko. 2021. Grammar constrains the way we talk to ourselves. In A. Hernández & C. Plyley (eds.), Actes du Congrès de l’ACL 2021|2021 CLA Conference Proceedings.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2001. On the position “Int(errogative)” in the Left Periphery of the clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: Brill.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and left periphery. 2004. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond – The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 3, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2013. Notes on cartography and further explanation. Probus 25(1), 197–226.
Rizzi, Luigi and Giuliano Bocci. 2017. Left Periphery of the clause: Primarily illustrated for Italian. In M. Everaert & H.C. Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax (2nd ed.), 1–33. New Jersey: Wiley.
Roberts, Craige. 2012. Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics & Pragmatics Volume 5, Article 6, 1–69.
Roberts, Ian. 1985. Agreement parameters and the development of English auxiliaries. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 21-58.
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Grammaticalization, the clausal hierarchy and semantic bleaching. In E. Traugott & G. Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, Gradualness and Grammaticalization, 45–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Roberts, Ian. 2019. Parameter Hierarchies and Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roelofsen, Floris & Donka F. Farkas. 2015. Polarity particle responses as a window onto the interpretation of questions and assertions. Language 91(2), 359–414.
Rothstein, Susan. 1991. Heads, projections, and category determination. In K. Leffel & D. Bouchard (eds.), Views on Phrase Structure, 97–112. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Ross, Robert. 1970. On declarative sentences. In R. A. Jacobs & P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 222–272. Waltham MA: Xerox College Publishing.
Ross, Daniel. 2016. Between coordination and subordination: Typological, structural and diachronic perspectives on pseudocoordination. In F. Pratas, S. Pereira & C. Pinto (eds.), Coordination and Subordination: Form and Meaning – Selected Papers from CSI Lisbon 2014, 209–243. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Roussou, Anna. 2000. On the left periphery: Modal particles and complementisers. Journal of Greek Linguistics 1, 65–94.
Roussou, Anna. 2021. A Balkan view on the Left Periphery: Modal and discourse particles. Languages 6, 75.
Sadock, Jerry. 1969. Hypersentences. Research on Language and Social Interaction 1(2), 283–370.
Sadock, Jerrold M. & Arnold Zwicky. 1985. Speech act distinctions in syntax. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 155–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saito, Mamoru. 2010. On the nature of the complementizer to. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 26, 85–100. The Ohio State University: Institute for Japanese Studies.
Saito, Mamoru. 2013. Sentence types and the Japanese Right Periphery. In Günther Grewendorf & Thomas Ede Zimmermann (eds.), Discourse and Grammar: From Sentence Types to Lexical Categories, 147–176. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Sander, Thornsten. 2022. Taxonomizing non-at-issue contents. Grazer Philosophische Studien 99(1), 50–77.
Sato, Hiromi. 2014. Modals, Attitudes, and Different Positions for Complementizers in Japanese. In A. Cardinaletti, G. Cinque & Y. Endo (eds.), On Peripheries: Exploring Clause Initial and Clause Final Positions, 299–328. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo Publishing.
Schmerling, Susan F. 1972. Apparent counterexamples to the coordinate structure constraint: a canonical conspiracy. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 2(1), 91–104.
Searle, John R. 1965. What is a speech act? In Maurice Black (ed.), Philosophy in America, 221–239. London: Allen and Unwin.
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shi, Dingxu. 2023. Evaluative adverbs in Chinese. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
Retrieved 13 Jan. 2024, from https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/acrefore/978 0199384 655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-904.
Shlonsky, Ur & Gabriela Soare. 2011. Where’s ‘why’? Linguistic Inquiry 42(4), 651–669.
Shopen, Timothy. 1971. Caught in the act: an intermediate stage in a would-be historical process providing syntactic evidence for the psychological reality of paradigms. In Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 254–263. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
Sigurðsson, Halldór Á. 2004. The syntax of Person, Tense, and speech features. Rivista di Linguistica - Italian Journal of Linguistics 16(1), 219–251.
Sigurðsson, Halldór Á. 2010. On EPP effects. Studia Linguistica 64(2), 159–189.
Simon, Walter. 1952. Functions and meanings of “erl而” (I): “erl” in conditional sentences. Asia Major 2(2), 179–202.
Simons, Mandy, Judith Tonhauser, David Beaver, Craige Roberts. 2010. What projects and why. In Proceedings of the Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 21, 309–327.
Simpson, Andrew. 2014. Sentence-final particles. In C.-T. James Huang, Y.-H. Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson (eds.), The Handbook of Chinese Linguistics, 156–179. NJ: Wiley.
Sledd, James. 1959. A Short Introduction to English Grammar. Chicago: Scott, Foresman & Co.
Schachter, Jacqueliyn C. 1971. Presupposition and counterfactual sentences. Ph.D. dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California.
Schmerling, Susan. 1975. Asymmetric conjunction and rules of conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds.), Speech Acts, vol. 3 Syntax and Semantics, 211–231. New York: Academic Press.
Speas, Margaret & Carol L. Tenny. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In A.-M. Di Sciullo (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar, 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson. 2010. Epistemic vigilance. Mind & Language 25, 359–393.
Stalnaker, Robert C. 1974. Pragmatic presupposition. In M. Munitz & P. Unger (eds.), Semantics and Philosophy, 197–213. New York: New York University Press.
Stalnaker, Robert C. 1978. Assertion. In P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, 315–322. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Stalnaker, Robert C. 2002. Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25(5), 701–721.
Stavrou, Melita. 2013. About the Vocative. In L. Schürcks, A. Giannakidou & U. Etxeberria (eds.), The Nominal Structure in Slavic and Beyond, 299–342. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Stefanowitsch, Anatol, 2003. The English imperative: a construction-based approach. Ms, University of Bremen.
Stephenson, Tamina. 2007. Judge dependence, epistemic modals, and predicates of personal taste. Linguistics and Philosophy 30, 487–525.
Stirling, Lesley. 1993. Switch Reference and Discourse Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Struckmeier, Volker. 2014. Ja doch wohl C? Modal particles in German as C-related elements. Studia Linguistica 68(1), 16–48.
Sundaresan, Sandhya. 2021. Shifty attitudes: indexical shift versus perspectival anaphora. Annual Review of Linguistics 7, 235–59.
Sybesma, Rint. 1999. Overt wh-movement in Chinese and the structure of CP. In H.-S. Wang, F.-F. Tsai, C.-F. Lien (eds.), Selected Papers from the Fifth International Conference of Chinese Linguistics, 279–299. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Sybesma, Rint and Boya Li. 2007. The dissection and structural mapping of Cantonese sentence final particles. Lingua 117, 1739–1783.
Tang, Sze-Wing. 1998. Parametrization of Features in Syntax. Irvine: University of California Ph.D. Dissertation.
Tang, Sze-Wing. 2015a. A generalized syntactic schema for utterance particles in Chinese. Lingua Sinica 1(3), 1–23.
Tang, Sze-Wing. 2015b. Cartographic syntax of pragmatic projections. In Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson & Wei-tien Dylan Tsai (eds.), Chinese Syntax in a Cross-linguistic Perspective, 429–441. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Tang, Sze-Wing. 2020. Cartographic syntax of performative projections: evidence from Cantonese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 29, 1–30.
Tang, Ting-Chi. 1988/1989. Hànyŭ Cífă Jùfă Lĭlùn [Studies on Chinese Morphology and Syntax], Vol. 1 & 2. Taipei: Student Book Co.
Thoma, Sonja. 2016. Discourse Particles in Bavarian German. Ph.D. dissertation, University of British Columbia.
Thompson, Sandra A., Robert E. Longacre and Shin Ja J. Hwang. 2007. Adverbial clauses. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. II: Complex Constructions, 237–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thurmair, Maria. 1989. Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Tonhauser, Judith, David Beaver, Craige Roberts & Mandy Simons. 2013. Towards a taxonomy of projective content. Language 89(1), 66–109.
Tsai, C.-Y. Edwin. 2009. Wh-dependency in Vietnamese and the syntax of wh-in-situ. National Tsing Hua University MA thesis, Taiwan.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 1994. On Economizing the Theory of A-Bar Dependencies. MA: MIT Ph.D. dissertation.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 1999. The hows of why and the whys of how. In Francesca Del Gobbo and Hidehito Hoshi (eds.), UCI Working Papers in Linguistics 5, 155–184. Irvine: University of California.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2008. Left periphery and how-why alternations. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 17, 83–115.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2010. Tán Hànyǔ mótàicí de fēnbù yǔ quánshì zhī duìyìng guānxì [On the syntax-semantics correspondence of Chinese modals]. Zhōngguó Yǔwén [Studies of the Chinese Language] 3, 208–221.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2015a. On the topography of Chinese modals. In U. Shlonsky (ed.), Beyond functional sequence, 275–294. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2015b. A tale of two peripheries: evidence from Chinese adverbials, light verbs, applicatives and object fronting. In W.-T. D. Tsai (ed.), The Cartography of Chinese Syntax, 1–32. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan. 2022. On applicative why-questions in Chinese. In G. Soare (ed.), Why is 'Why' Unique? Its Syntactic and Semantic Properties. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan & Ching-Yu Helen Yang. 2022. On the syntax of mirativity: Evidence from Mandarin Chinese. In Andrew Simpson (ed.), New Explorations in Chinese Theoretical Syntax: Studies in honor of Yen-Hui Audrey Li, 431–444. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tsoulas, George. 2018. The common syntax of deixis and affirmation. In L. R. Bailey & M. Sheehan (eds.), Order and structure in syntax I: Word order and syntactic structure, 281–309. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Tran, Thuan. 2009. Wh-quantification in Vietnamese. University of Delaware Ph.D. dissertation.
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2003. From Subjectification to Intersubjectification. In R. Hickey (ed.), Motives for Language Change, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trinh, Tue. 2005. Aspects of Clause Structure in Vietnamese. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin MA Thesis.
Trotzke, Andreas. 2017. The Grammar of Emphasis: From Information Structure to the Expressive Dimension. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2019. 1. Semantics of intonation. In C. Maienborn, K. van Heusinger, & P. Portner (eds.), Semantics – Interfaces, 1–40. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Uriagereka, Juan. 1999. Multiple spell-out. In Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein (eds.), Working Minimalism, 251–282. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and Times. The Philosophical Review 66 (2), 143–160.
Vikner, Sten. 1988. Modals in Danish and Event Expressions. Working papers in Scandinavian Syntax 39, 1-33. Dept. of Scandinavian Linguistics, Lund University.
Visconti, J. 1996. On English and Italian complex conditional connectives: matching features and implicatures in defining semanto-pragmatic equivalence. Lang. Sci. 18, 549–573.
de Vos, Mark. 2005. The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Leiden Centre for Linguistics. LOT/Igitur Publishing.
Wakefield, John C. 2020. The syntax and semantics of Cantonese particles in the Left Periphery. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 41(2), 109–138.
Walton, Douglas. 1989. Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation 3, 169–184.
Walton, Douglas. 1996. Arguments from Ignorance. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Wei, Wei. 2020. Discourse Particles in Mandarin Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, CA, USA.
Weinrich, Harald. 1993. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.
Weydt, Harald. 1969. Abtönungspartikeln. Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg, Berlin & Zürich: Gehlen.
Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. The conceptual–procedural distinction: Past, present and future. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti, & A. Ahern (eds.), Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, 3–31. Bingley, UK: Emerald Groups Publishing.
Wiltschko, Martina. 2014. The Universal Structure of Categories: Towards a Formal Typology. Cambridge University Press.
Wiltschko, Martina. 2021. The Grammar of Interactional Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiltschko, Martina. 2022. Language is for thought and communication. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 7(1), 1–19.
Wiltschko, Martina & Johannes Heim. 2014. The syntax of sentence peripheral discourse markers: A neo-performative analysis. Paper presented at Outside the clause: Form and function of Extraclausal constituents. University of Vienna, July 2014.
Wiltschko, Martina & Johannes Heim. 2016. The syntax of confirmationals: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents. In G. Kaltenböck, E. Keizer & A. Lohmann (eds.), Outside the Clause: Form and Function of Extra-clausal Constituents, pp. 305–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Woods, Rebecca. 2016. Investigating the Syntax of Speech Acts: Embedding Illocutionary Force. Ph.D. dissertation, University of York.
Woods, Rebecca. 2021. Towards a model of the syntax–discourse interface: a syntactic analysis of please. English Language and Linguistics 25(1), 121–153.
Wolf, Lavi, Ariel Cohen & Almog Simchon. 2016. An experimental investigation of epistemic modal adverbs and adjectives. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 20, 798–814.
Wratil, Melani. 2005. Die Syntax des Imperativs. Berlin Akademie Verlag.
Xu, Kang. 2022. On the syntax of Mandarin sentence-final particles: a neo-performative analysis. Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics (CWPL) 32, 31–50.
Yang, Zhaole. 2020. Yě, yě, yě: On the syntax and semantics of Mandarin yě. Amsterdam: Universiteit Leiden Ph.D. dissertation.
Yap, Foong Ha, Jiao Wang, Charles Tsz-kwan Lam. 2010. Clausal integration and the emergence of mitigative and adhortative sentence-final particles in Chinese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 8(2), 63–86.
Yatsushiro, Kazuko, Tue Trinh, Marzena Żygis, Stephanie Solt, Anton Benz & Manfred Krifka. 2022. Certainly but not certain: The expression of subjective and objective probability. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 7(1), 1–48.
Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2023. FOFC and what left–right asymmetries may tell us about syntactic structure building. Journal of Linguistics 59(1), 179–213.
Zhang, N. Ning. 2003. On the pre-predicate lai and qu in Chinese. In J. Xu, D. Ji & T. L. Kim (eds.), Chinese Syntax and Semantics, 177–201. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Zhang, N. Ning. 2020. Low predicate inversion in Mandarin. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 29, 159–207.
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 2008. Encoding the addressee in the syntax: evidence from English imperative subjects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26, 185–218.
Zanuttini, Raffaella & Paul Portner. 2003. Exclamative clauses: at the syntax-semantics interface. Language 79(1), 39–81.
Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann, & Bruno Strecker [et al.]. 1997. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. 3 vol. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.
Zimmermann, Malte. 2004. Discourse particles in the left periphery. In B. Shaer, W. Frey & C. Maienborn (eds.), ZAS Papers in Linguistics (ZASPIL) 35, 543–566.
Zimmermann, Malte. 2008. Discourse particles in the left periphery. In B. Shaer et al. (eds.): Dislocated Elements in Discourse: Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Perspectives, 200–231. London: Routledge.
Zimmermann, Malte. 2018. Wird schon stimmen! A degree operator analysis of schon. Journal of Semantics 35(4), 687–739.
Zimmermann, Malte. 2024. Katharina ist eben die beste: On conclusive discourse particles in Wolof and German. In A. Himmelreich, D. Hole & J. Mursell (eds.), To the left, to the right, and much in between: A Festschrift for Katharina Hartmann, 351–369. Frankfurt: Goethe University Frankfurt.
Zubizarreta, Maria-Luisa. 1982. On the Relationship of the Lexicon to Syntax. Boston: MIT Ph.D. dissertation.