Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T16:48:29.321Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prosody and grammar of other-repetitions in French: The interplay of position and composition – Addendum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2020

Rasmus Persson
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Addendum
Information
Language in Society , Volume 49 , Special Issue 4: Other-Repetition in Conversation across Languages , September 2020 , pp. 687
Check for updates
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Persson 2020 published online ahead of print. It now appears in Language in Society issue 49(4) and has been updated to include the page number for a quotation taken from another article in the same issue.

The updated passage appears on page 599: “This often involves raising problems of expectation with what the previous speaker has said, for example ‘because it reports an extraordinary or remarkable fact, or because it presents an inappropriate or questionable view’ (Rossi, introduction, this issue, 512).”

References

Persson, Rasmus. “Prosody and grammar of other-repetitions in French: The interplay of position and composition.” Language in Society 49(4):585–618.Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni. “Other-repetition in conversation across languages: Bringing prosody into pragmatic typology.” Language in Society 49(4): 495–520.Google Scholar