1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 語言與手勢之溝通動態性
Communicative Dynamism in Language and Co-speech Gesture
作者 楊婉君
Yang, Wan Chun
貢獻者 徐嘉慧
Chui, Kawai
楊婉君
Yang, Wan Chun
關鍵詞 溝通動態
手勢
手勢特徵
資訊狀態
主題連續性
communicative dynamism
co-speech gesture
gestural features
information status
topic continuity
日期 2012
上傳時間 22-Jul-2013 10:01:38 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究探討溝通動態與手勢之關係。本研究相較於過去的研究提供了中文口語語料的量化結果，除了檢視語言上的溝通動態值與手勢出現、手勢類型的關係以外，並加入手勢特徵進而檢視。語言上的溝通動態值分別以「資訊狀態」與「主題連續性」來決定溝通動態值之高低，並且將手勢所伴隨的語詞依詞性分開分為名詞與動詞，檢視是否手勢上會依循語碼原則（the coding principle）：當溝通動態值越高，所使用的代碼材料便越多；當溝通動態值越低，所使用的代碼材料越少。結果發現，以決定溝通動態值的標準來看，資訊狀態較主題連續性更能依語碼原則反應溝通動態值。原因是因為資訊狀態反應訊息的新舊差異性，而主題連續性反應的是舊訊息當中的不同的「舊」的程度差異，因此前者較能反應溝通動態與手勢之關係；而以手勢伴隨的語詞而言，動詞較名詞更能依語碼原則反應溝通動態值。因為動詞相較於名詞而言，在語言上無完整的語碼系統以反應溝通動態值之高低，因此倚賴手勢出現與手勢特徵來反應語言上的溝通動態值之高低。
The study investigates the correlation between communicative dynamism (CD) and gesture. Different from the previous studies, the present study provides quantitative analysis based on Chinese conversational data. The study examines the correlation between CD in language and the occurence of gestures, gestural types and gestural features. The various degrees of CD are deteremined by two separate criteria, namely “information status” and “topic continuity”. Morover, the study also distinguishes between the nominal affiliates of gesture and the verbal counterparts. The study found that gestures occur at the two extremities of CD. Gestures tend to co-occur with linguistic elements bearing the highest or the lowest CD. In addition, based on the criterion of “information status”, stroke duration and handedness were found to reflect the various degrees of CD. On the other hand, based on the criterion of “topic continuity”, all gestural features including stroke duration, gestural space, handedness and stroke frequency have no correlation with CD.
參考文獻 中文書目

李曉婷（2008）。Firbas的動態交際理論評述。語言學研究，6：33-39。

封宗信（2001）。Theories and Schools of Modern Linguistics。載於胡壯麟（主編），語言學教程 （392—459頁）。北京：北京大學出版社。

錢軍（1996）。布拉格學派近況與現狀。國外語言學，4：11-21。

錢軍（1995）。捷克語言學家Jan Firbas。國外語言學，4：36-39。

胡壯麟（1991）。功能主義縱橫談。外國語，3：3-10。

英文書目

Chafe, W. L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: the flow and displacement
of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Chafe, W. L. (1987). Cognitive constraints on information flow. In R.S. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and Grounding in discourse, 21-52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Chafe, W.L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Li, E. N. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.25-55). New York: Academic.

Chui, Kawai and Lai, Huei-ling. (2009). The NCCU Corpus of Spoken Chinese, Hakka, and Southern Min. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 6.2:119-144.

Chui, Kawai. (2003). Is the correlation between grounding and transitivity universal? Studies in Language 27(2):221-244.

Chui, Kawai. (2002). Categorization of gestures in communication. In Lily I-wen Su, Chinfa Lien, and Kawai
Chui (eds.), Form and function: Linguistic studies in honor of Shuanfan Huang, 105-129. Taipei: Crane Publishing.

Chui, Kawai. (2001). Topic Chain and Grounding in Chinese Discourse. Taipei: Crane Publishing.

Danes̆, Frantis̆ek. (1974). Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Firbas, Jan. (1999). Communicative Dynamism. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert & Christ Bulcaen (eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co.

Firbas, Jan. (1992). Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Firbas, Jan. (1987). On the delimitation of the theme in functional sentence perspective. In Driven, Ren and Vilem Fried. (Eds.) Functionalism in Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Firbas, Jan. (1986). On the dynamics of written communication in the light of theory of functional sentence perspective. In Cooper, C. & Greenbaum (Eds.) Studying writing: Linguistic approaches (1): 40-71. Brouly Hills: Sage Publications.

Firbas, Jan. (1974). Some Aspects of the Czechoslovak Approach to Problems of Functional Sentence Perspective. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Firbas, Jan (1959). Thoughts on the Communicative Function of the verb in English, German and Czech. Brno Studies in English. 1: 39-65.

Firbas, Jan. (1961). On the Communicative Function of the Verb in English. Brno Studies in English. 3: 79-102.

Ekman, P. & Friensen, W. (1969). The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior: Categories, Origins, Usage and Coding. Semiotica, 1(1):49-98.

Givón, T. (1990). Syntax: a functional-typological introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (1985). Iconicity, isomorphism and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. In Haiman, J. (Ed.), Iconicity in Syntax. 187-219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (ed.) 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study, vol.3 of Typological Studies in Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (1979). On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.

Givón, T. (1976). Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Li (Ed.) Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Kendon, Adam. (2004). Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kendon, A. (1988). Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, Semiotic and Communicative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Krauss, R.M. (1998). Why do we gesture when we speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science 7 (2): 55-60.

Lan, Li-mei. (2008). Thematic Progression and Cohesive Devices: An Approach to English Reading. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.

LaPolla, R. J. (1995). Pragmatic relations in word order in Chinese. In Dowing P. & Noonan M. (Eds.), Word Order in Discourse, 297-329. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

LaPolla, R. J. (1993). Arguments against ‘Subject’ and ‘Direct Object’ as Viable Concepts in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philosophy, 63: 759-813.

Levinson, S. C. (2006). Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies,
8(1), 85-93. doi:10.1177/1461445606059557.

Levy, E.T. & McNeill, D. (1992). Speech, Gesture, and Discourse. Discourse Processes, 15: 277-301.

Mathesius, V. (1939). O tak zvanem aktualnim cleneni vetnem. [On the so-called functional sentence perspective]. Slovo a Slovestnost, 5: 234-242.

McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and Thought. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

McNeill, D; Levy, E.T. & Pedelty, L.L. (1998) Gestures and speech. In Hammond, G.R., Advances in psychology: Cerebral control of speech and limb movements, 203-256. Amsterdam: Elsevier/ North Holland Publishers.

McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.

Prince, E.F. (1992). Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Mann, W.C. & Thompson, S.A., (Eds), Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text, 295-326. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Prince, E.F. (1986). On the syntactic marking of presupposed open propositions. In A. Farley et al., (Eds), Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical
theory at the 22nd regional meeting. CLS, 208-222.

Prince, E. F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, P. (eds), Radical pragmatics, 223-255. New York: Academic Press.

Sgall, Petr. (1995). Functional Sentence Perspective. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman & Jan Blommaert(eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co.

Sloetjes, H., & Wittenburg, P. (2008). Annotation by category - ELAN and ISO DCR. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008).

Stephens, D. (1983). Hemispheric language dominance and gesture hand preference. Ph.D. dissertation., Department of Behavioral Sciences, University of Chicago.

Svoboda, Ales̆. (1974). On Two Communicative Dynamisms. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Taylor, A. and S. Pintzuk. (to appear). The Effect of Information Structure on Object Position in the History of English, to appear in Los, B., Lopez-Couso, M.J. and Meurman-Solin, A. (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English , (Oxford Studies in the History of English, Vol.1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thompson, S. A. & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2005). The clause as a locus of grammar and interaction. Discourse Studies. 7 (4-5): 481-505.

Tsao, Feng-Fu. (1979). A functional study of topic in Chinese: the first step toward discourse analysis. Taipei: Student Book Company.

Van Valin Jr, R.D. and LaPolla R.J. (1997). Syntax. Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
99555003
101
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0995550032
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 徐嘉慧zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chui, Kawaien_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 楊婉君zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Yang, Wan Chunen_US
dc.creator (作者) 楊婉君zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Yang, Wan Chunen_US
dc.date (日期) 2012en_US
dc.date.accessioned 22-Jul-2013 10:01:38 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 22-Jul-2013 10:01:38 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 22-Jul-2013 10:01:38 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0995550032en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/58899-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 99555003zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 101zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究探討溝通動態與手勢之關係。本研究相較於過去的研究提供了中文口語語料的量化結果，除了檢視語言上的溝通動態值與手勢出現、手勢類型的關係以外，並加入手勢特徵進而檢視。語言上的溝通動態值分別以「資訊狀態」與「主題連續性」來決定溝通動態值之高低，並且將手勢所伴隨的語詞依詞性分開分為名詞與動詞，檢視是否手勢上會依循語碼原則（the coding principle）：當溝通動態值越高，所使用的代碼材料便越多；當溝通動態值越低，所使用的代碼材料越少。結果發現，以決定溝通動態值的標準來看，資訊狀態較主題連續性更能依語碼原則反應溝通動態值。原因是因為資訊狀態反應訊息的新舊差異性，而主題連續性反應的是舊訊息當中的不同的「舊」的程度差異，因此前者較能反應溝通動態與手勢之關係；而以手勢伴隨的語詞而言，動詞較名詞更能依語碼原則反應溝通動態值。因為動詞相較於名詞而言，在語言上無完整的語碼系統以反應溝通動態值之高低，因此倚賴手勢出現與手勢特徵來反應語言上的溝通動態值之高低。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The study investigates the correlation between communicative dynamism (CD) and gesture. Different from the previous studies, the present study provides quantitative analysis based on Chinese conversational data. The study examines the correlation between CD in language and the occurence of gestures, gestural types and gestural features. The various degrees of CD are deteremined by two separate criteria, namely “information status” and “topic continuity”. Morover, the study also distinguishes between the nominal affiliates of gesture and the verbal counterparts. The study found that gestures occur at the two extremities of CD. Gestures tend to co-occur with linguistic elements bearing the highest or the lowest CD. In addition, based on the criterion of “information status”, stroke duration and handedness were found to reflect the various degrees of CD. On the other hand, based on the criterion of “topic continuity”, all gestural features including stroke duration, gestural space, handedness and stroke frequency have no correlation with CD.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 目錄

第一章 導論 1

第二章 文獻回顧 9
2.1溝通動態與語言 9
2.2溝通動態與手勢 13
2.2.1 溝通動態值與資訊狀態（Levy與McNeill，1992） 13
2.2.2溝通動態值與主題連續性 （McNeill，1992） 17
2.3 人類的溝通 20
2.4手勢的基本介紹 22
2.4.1 手勢階段與手勢特徵 22
2.4.2 手勢的分類 26
2.5 小結 31

第三章 研究方法 34
3.1 語料 34
3.2 取樣原則：子句的定義 35
3.3語言上的溝通動態值 37
3.4 與手勢伴隨的語詞判定 40
3.5 手勢分析 41
3.6 小結 45

第四章 結果 46
4.1 溝通動態（資訊狀態）與手勢的出現 48
4.2 溝通動態（主題連續性）與手勢的出現 50
4.3 溝通動態（資訊狀態）與手勢類型 52
4.4溝通動態（主題連續性）與手勢類型 56
4.5溝通動態（資訊狀態）與動作執行階段的時間（stroke duration） 60
4.6溝通動態（主題連續性）與動作執行階段的時間（stroke duration） 66
4.7溝通動態（資訊狀態）與動作執行階段的使用空間 69
4.8溝通動態（主題連續性）與動作執行階段的使用空間（gestural space） 74
4.9溝通動態（資訊狀態）與動作執行用手（handedness） 77
4.10溝通動態（主題連續性）與動作執行用手（handedness） 81
4.11溝通動態（資訊狀態）與動作執行階段的頻率（same stroke frequency） 84
4.12溝通動態（主題連續性）與動作執行階段的頻率（same stroke frequency） 87
4.13溝通動態（資訊狀態）與複雜手勢特徵 90
4.14溝通動態（主題連續性）與複雜手勢特徵 93
4.15溝通動態（資訊狀態）與簡單手勢特徵 97
4.16溝通動態（主題連續性）與簡單手勢特徵 100
4.17 小結 103

第五章 討論 105
5.1 溝通動態值與手勢的出現 105
5.2與手勢伴隨的語詞：名詞與動詞 106
5.3 溝通動態值：資訊狀態與主題連續性 109
5.4 溝通動態值與手勢特徵 110
5.5「互動引擎」（the Interaction Engine）與手勢 112

第六章 結語與未來研究 115
6.1 總結 115
6.2未來研究之建議 117		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1436036 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0995550032en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 溝通動態zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 手勢zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 手勢特徵zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資訊狀態zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 主題連續性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) communicative dynamismen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) co-speech gestureen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) gestural featuresen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) information statusen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) topic continuityen_US
dc.title (題名) 語言與手勢之溝通動態性zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Communicative Dynamism in Language and Co-speech Gestureen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文書目

李曉婷（2008）。Firbas的動態交際理論評述。語言學研究，6：33-39。

封宗信（2001）。Theories and Schools of Modern Linguistics。載於胡壯麟（主編），語言學教程 （392—459頁）。北京：北京大學出版社。

錢軍（1996）。布拉格學派近況與現狀。國外語言學，4：11-21。

錢軍（1995）。捷克語言學家Jan Firbas。國外語言學，4：36-39。

胡壯麟（1991）。功能主義縱橫談。外國語，3：3-10。

英文書目

Chafe, W. L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: the flow and displacement
of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Chafe, W. L. (1987). Cognitive constraints on information flow. In R.S. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and Grounding in discourse, 21-52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Chafe, W.L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Li, E. N. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.25-55). New York: Academic.

Chui, Kawai and Lai, Huei-ling. (2009). The NCCU Corpus of Spoken Chinese, Hakka, and Southern Min. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 6.2:119-144.

Chui, Kawai. (2003). Is the correlation between grounding and transitivity universal? Studies in Language 27(2):221-244.

Chui, Kawai. (2002). Categorization of gestures in communication. In Lily I-wen Su, Chinfa Lien, and Kawai
Chui (eds.), Form and function: Linguistic studies in honor of Shuanfan Huang, 105-129. Taipei: Crane Publishing.

Chui, Kawai. (2001). Topic Chain and Grounding in Chinese Discourse. Taipei: Crane Publishing.

Danes̆, Frantis̆ek. (1974). Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Firbas, Jan. (1999). Communicative Dynamism. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert & Christ Bulcaen (eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co.

Firbas, Jan. (1992). Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Firbas, Jan. (1987). On the delimitation of the theme in functional sentence perspective. In Driven, Ren and Vilem Fried. (Eds.) Functionalism in Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Firbas, Jan. (1986). On the dynamics of written communication in the light of theory of functional sentence perspective. In Cooper, C. & Greenbaum (Eds.) Studying writing: Linguistic approaches (1): 40-71. Brouly Hills: Sage Publications.

Firbas, Jan. (1974). Some Aspects of the Czechoslovak Approach to Problems of Functional Sentence Perspective. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Firbas, Jan (1959). Thoughts on the Communicative Function of the verb in English, German and Czech. Brno Studies in English. 1: 39-65.

Firbas, Jan. (1961). On the Communicative Function of the Verb in English. Brno Studies in English. 3: 79-102.

Ekman, P. & Friensen, W. (1969). The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior: Categories, Origins, Usage and Coding. Semiotica, 1(1):49-98.

Givón, T. (1990). Syntax: a functional-typological introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (1985). Iconicity, isomorphism and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. In Haiman, J. (Ed.), Iconicity in Syntax. 187-219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (ed.) 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study, vol.3 of Typological Studies in Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Givón, T. (1979). On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.

Givón, T. (1976). Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Li (Ed.) Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Kendon, Adam. (2004). Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kendon, A. (1988). Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, Semiotic and Communicative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Krauss, R.M. (1998). Why do we gesture when we speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science 7 (2): 55-60.

Lan, Li-mei. (2008). Thematic Progression and Cohesive Devices: An Approach to English Reading. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.

LaPolla, R. J. (1995). Pragmatic relations in word order in Chinese. In Dowing P. & Noonan M. (Eds.), Word Order in Discourse, 297-329. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

LaPolla, R. J. (1993). Arguments against ‘Subject’ and ‘Direct Object’ as Viable Concepts in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philosophy, 63: 759-813.

Levinson, S. C. (2006). Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies,
8(1), 85-93. doi:10.1177/1461445606059557.

Levy, E.T. & McNeill, D. (1992). Speech, Gesture, and Discourse. Discourse Processes, 15: 277-301.

Mathesius, V. (1939). O tak zvanem aktualnim cleneni vetnem. [On the so-called functional sentence perspective]. Slovo a Slovestnost, 5: 234-242.

McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and Thought. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

McNeill, D; Levy, E.T. & Pedelty, L.L. (1998) Gestures and speech. In Hammond, G.R., Advances in psychology: Cerebral control of speech and limb movements, 203-256. Amsterdam: Elsevier/ North Holland Publishers.

McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.

Prince, E.F. (1992). Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Mann, W.C. & Thompson, S.A., (Eds), Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text, 295-326. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Prince, E.F. (1986). On the syntactic marking of presupposed open propositions. In A. Farley et al., (Eds), Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical
theory at the 22nd regional meeting. CLS, 208-222.

Prince, E. F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, P. (eds), Radical pragmatics, 223-255. New York: Academic Press.

Sgall, Petr. (1995). Functional Sentence Perspective. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman & Jan Blommaert(eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co.

Sloetjes, H., & Wittenburg, P. (2008). Annotation by category - ELAN and ISO DCR. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008).

Stephens, D. (1983). Hemispheric language dominance and gesture hand preference. Ph.D. dissertation., Department of Behavioral Sciences, University of Chicago.

Svoboda, Ales̆. (1974). On Two Communicative Dynamisms. In Danes̆, F. (Ed.) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Prague : Academia.

Taylor, A. and S. Pintzuk. (to appear). The Effect of Information Structure on Object Position in the History of English, to appear in Los, B., Lopez-Couso, M.J. and Meurman-Solin, A. (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English , (Oxford Studies in the History of English, Vol.1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thompson, S. A. & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2005). The clause as a locus of grammar and interaction. Discourse Studies. 7 (4-5): 481-505.

Tsao, Feng-Fu. (1979). A functional study of topic in Chinese: the first step toward discourse analysis. Taipei: Student Book Company.

Van Valin Jr, R.D. and LaPolla R.J. (1997). Syntax. Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.		zh_TW