| [1] | Basset, L. (2009). The Use of the Imperfect to Express Completed States of Affairs: The Imperfect as a Marker of Narrative Cohesion. In S. Bakker, & G. Wakker (Eds.), Discourse Cohesion in Ancient Greek (pp. 205-220). Leiden: Brill.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174726.i-284.61
|
| [2] | Black, S.L. (2002). Sentence Conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew: Kai, de, Tote, Gar, Syn and Asyndeton in Narrative Discourse (Volume 216). London: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [3] | Blomberg, C. (1992). Matthew. NAC 22. Nashville: Broadman & Holman.
|
| [4] | Brown, A. (1989). Piggybook. London: Little Mammoth.
|
| [5] | Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
|
| [6] | Davies, W. D., and Allison Jr., D. C. (2004). A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (Volume 2). ICC. New York: T&T Clark.
|
| [7] | Duling, D.C. (2012). A Marginal Scribe: Studies of the Gospel of Matthew in Social-Scientific Perspective (Matrix: The Bible in Mediterranean Context 7). Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.
|
| [8] | Eriksson, Anders. (2002). Contrary Arguments in Paul’s Letters. In S. E. Porter, & D. Stamps (Eds.), Rhetorical Criticism and the Bible (pp. 336-354). JSNTS 195. London: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [9] | Fawcett, R. P. (2000). A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cilt.206
|
| [10] | France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew (NICNT). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
|
| [11] | Gledhill, C. (2009). Colligation and the Cohesive Function of Present and Past Tense in the Scientific Research Article. In D. Banks (Ed.), Les Temps et les Textes de Specialite (pp. 65-84). Paris: L’Harmattan.
|
| [12] | Gregory, M. (1988). Generic Situation and Register: A Functional View of Communication. In J. D. Benson, & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Linguistics in a Systemic Perspective (pp. 301-330). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cilt.39.12gre
|
| [13] | Hagner, D. A. (1998). Matthew 14-28. WBC 33B, Dallas: Word.
|
| [14] | Halliday, M. A. K. (1976). Anti-Languages. American Anthropologist, 78, 570-584.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aa.1976.78.3.02a00050
|
| [15] | Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). London: E. Arnold.
|
| [16] | Halliday, M. A. K. (2007). Language and Society. London: Continuum.
|
| [17] | Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
|
| [18] | Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2006). Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. Open Linguistics Series, London: Continuum.
|
| [19] | Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. English Language Series, London: Longman.
|
| [20] | Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University.
|
| [21] | Hasan, R. (2009). The Place of Context in a Systemic Functional Model. In J. Webster, & M. A. K. Halliday (Eds.), Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 166-189). London: Continuum.
|
| [22] | Hasan, R. (1995). The Conception of Context in Text. In P. H. Fries, & M. Gregory (Eds.), Discourse in Society: Systemic Functional Perspectives (pp. 183-284). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cilt.118
|
| [23] | Hudson, R. A. (2001). Sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University.
|
| [24] | Keener, C. S. (2009). The Gospel of Matthew: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
|
| [25] | Kress, G. (1989). Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University.
|
| [26] | Levinsohn, S. H. (1995). A Discourse Study of Constituent Order and the Article in Philippians. In S. E. Porter, & D. A. Carson (Eds.), Discourse Analysis and Other Topics in Biblical Greek (pp. 60-74). JSNTS 113, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [27] | Longacre, R. E. (1999). A Top-Down, Template-Driven Narrative Analysis, Illustrated by Application to Mark’s Gospel. In S. E. Porter, & J. T. Reed (Eds.), Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (pp. 140-196). JSNTS 170, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [28] | Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (2 Vols.). New York: United Bible Societies.
|
| [29] | Lukin, A., Moore, A. R., Herke, M., Wegener, R., & Wu, C. Z. (2011). Halliday’s Model of Register Revisited and Explored. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 4, 187-213.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v4i2.187
|
| [30] | Luz, U. (2001). Matthew: A Commentary. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.
|
| [31] | Martin, J. R. (2001). Cohesion and Texture. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 35-53). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
|
| [32] | Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/z.59
|
| [33] | Martin-Asensio, G. (2000). Transitivity-Based Foregrounding in the Acts of the Apostles: A Functional-Grammatical Approach to the Lukan Perspective. JSNTS 202, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [34] | Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause (2nd ed.). Open Linguistics Series, London: Bloomsbury.
|
| [35] | Meeks, W. (1986). The Moral World of the First Christians. Library of Early Christianity 6, Philadelphia, PA: Westminster.
|
| [36] | Metzger, B. M. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.). a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.). New York: United Bible Societies.
|
| [37] | Morley, J. (2009). Lexical Cohesion and Rhetorical Structure. In J. Flowerdew, & M. Mahlberg (Eds.), Lexical Cohesion and Corpus Linguistics (pp. 5-22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/bct.17.02mor
|
| [38] | Newman, B. M., & Stine, P. C. (1992). A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. UBS Handbook Series, New York: United Bible Societies.
|
| [39] | Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC, Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.
|
| [40] | O’Donnell, M. B. (1999). Linguistic Fingerprints or Style by Numbers? The Use of Statistics in the Discussion of Authorship of New Testament Documents. In S. E. Porter, & D. A. Carson (Eds.), Linguistics and the New Testament: Critical Junctures (pp. 206-255). JSNTS 168, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [41] | Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament. Sheffield: JSOT.
|
| [42] | Porter, S. E. (2004). The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: Previous Discussion and New Proposals. JSNTS 191, London: T & T Clark.
|
| [43] | Porter, S. E. (1989). Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament with Reference to Tense and Mood. New York: Peter Lang.
|
| [44] | Porter, S. E., & O’Donnell, M. B. (2007). Conjunctions, Clines and Levels of Discourse. Filologia Neotestamentaria, 20, 3-14.
|
| [45] | Porter, S. E., O’Donnell, M. B., & Reed, J. (2006). The OpenText.org Syntactically Analyzed Greek New Testament. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
|
| [46] | Puigdollers, A. R. R. (2009). The Particles ΑΥ and ΑΥΤΕ in Ancient Greek as Topicalizing Devices. In S. Bakker, & G. Wakker (Eds.), Discourse Cohesion in Ancient Greek (pp. 83-110). Leiden: Brill.
|
| [47] | Reed, J. T. (1999). The Cohesiveness of Discourse: Towards a Model of Linguistic Criteria for Analyzing New Testament Discourse. In S. E. Porter, & J. T. Reed (Eds.), Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (pp. 28-46). JSNTS 170, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [48] | Reed, J. T. (1997). A Discourse Analysis of Philippians: Method and Rhetoric in the Debate over Literary Integrity. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [49] | Reed, J. T. (1997). Discourse Analysis. In S. E. Porter (Ed.), Handbook to Exegesis of the New Testament (pp. 188-218). New Testament Tools and Studies 25, New York: Brill.
|
| [50] | Reed, J. T. (1995). Identifying Theme in the New Testament: Insights from Discourse Analysis. In S. E. Porter, & D. A. Carson (Eds.), Discourse Analysis and Other Topics in Biblical Greek (pp. 75-101). JSNTS 113, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [51] | Reed, J. T. (2000). Language of Change and the Changing of Language: A Sociolinguistic Approach to Pauline Discourse. In S. E. Porter (Ed.), Diglossia and Other Topics in New Testament Linguistics (pp. 121-53). JSNTS 193, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [52] | Rohrbaugh, R. L. (2007). The New Testament in Cross-Cultural Perspective/Matrix: The Bible in Mediterranean Context 1. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.
|
| [53] | Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to Discourse. Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics, Oxford: Blackwell.
|
| [54] | Schmidt, F. (2001). How the Temple Thinks: Identity and Social Cohesion in Ancient Judaism. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
|
| [55] | Stoddard, S. (1991). Text and Texture: Patterns of Cohesion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
|
| [56] | Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Language in Society 4, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
|
| [57] | Teich, E. (2009). Linguistic Computing. In J. Webster, & M. A. K. Halliday (Eds.), Continuum Companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics (pp. 113-127). London: Continuum.
|
| [58] | Tucker, G. H. (1998). The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic Functional Approach to Lexis. Functional Descriptions of Language Series, London: Cassell.
|
| [59] | Van Neste, R. (2004). Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles. JSNTS 280, London: T & T Clark International.
|
| [60] | Woods, J. (2013). Antilanguage in the Synoptic Gospels: A Sociolinguistic Inquiry. Master’s Thesis, Virginia Beach, VA: Regent University.
|
