Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Moore, Nick (2016)
Publisher: Springer Open
Journal: Functional Linguistics
Languages: English
Types: Article
The main claim of this paper is that punctuation marks, in conjunction with spaces between words, function to provide visual rather than auditory cues for information\ud structure in written English. INFORMATION STRUCTURE is defined here as dividing the flow of discourse into units, each containing a newsworthy element, and in contrast to the Systemic Functional systems of REFERENCE and THEME. A model of how these three systems interact is further supported by evidence from the historical development of reading and modern studies of the process of fluent silent reading. Reading silently does not require physical articulation and so written text is constrained by the saccading eye rather than the need to draw breath. The silent reader uses punctuation marks as a guide in a saccade to focus on the end of a clause which provides a non-arbitrary location for New Information.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Alexander, R. 2008. Essays on Pedagogy. London: Routledge.
    • Banks, D. 1991. Some observations concerning transitivity and modality in scientific writing. Language Sciences 13: 59-78.
    • Baron, N. 2001. Commas and canaries: The role of punctuation in speech and writing. Language Sciences 23: 15-67.
    • Barsalou, L.W. 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59: 11.1-11.29.
    • Biber, D, S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, and E. Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
    • Briggs, C.F. 2000. Literacy, reading and writing in the medieval West. Journal of Medieval History 26(4): 397-420.
    • Bruthiaux, P. 1993. Knowing when to stop: Investigating the nature of punctuation. Language & Communication 13(1): 27-43.
    • Burnyeat, M.F. 1997. Postscript on Silent Reading. The Classical Quarterly. New Series 47(1): 74-76.
    • Carter, R., and M. McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Chafe, W. 1970. Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    • Chafe, W. 1988. Punctuation and the prosody of written language. Written Communication 5(4): 395-426.
    • Chafe, W. 1995. Accessing the mind through language. In Of Thoughts and Words - Proceedings of Nobel Symposium '92, ed. S. Allén, 107-125. London: Imperial College Press.
    • Clark, H.H., and S. Haviland. 1977. Comprehension and the Given-New contract. In Discourse Production and Comprehension, ed. R. Freedle, 1-40. New Jersey: Ablex.
    • Cohen, H J. Douaire, and M. Elsabbagh. 2001. The role of prosody in discourse processing. Brain and Cognition 46(1-2): 73-82.
    • Coulouris, G., J. Dollimore, and T. Kindberg. 2001. Distributed Systems: Concepts and Design, 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson.
    • D'Ausillio, A., et al. 2009. The motor somatotopy of speech perception. Current Biology 19(5): 381-385.
    • Davies, M. 1989. Prosodic and non-prosodic cohesion in speech and writing. Word 40(1-2): 255-261.
    • Davies, M. 1994a. “I'm sorry, I'll read that again”: Information structure in writing. In The Syntax of Sentence and Text: A Festschrift for František Daneš, eds. S. Čmejrkova and F. Štícha, 75-89. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
    • Davies, M. 1994b. Intonation IS visible in written English. In Writing vs. Speaking: Language, Text, Discourse Communication, eds. S. Čmejrkova, F. Daneš, and E. Havlova, 199-203. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag
    • Deacon, T.W. 1997. The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain. New York: W.W. Norton.
    • Dehaene, S L. Cohen, M. Sigman, and F. Vinikier. 2005. The neural code for written words: A proposal. TRENDS in Cognitive Science 9(7): 335-341.
    • Edelman, G.M. 2004. Wider Than the Sky - The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    • Findlay, J.M. 2004. Eye scanning and visual search. In Interface of Language, Vision and Action, ed. J.M. Henderson, 135-158. New York: Psychology Press.
    • Fodor, J.D. 2002. Psycholinguistics cannot escape prosody, Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2002, Aix-en-Provence, France, April 11-13, 2002, 83-90. France: Aix-en-Provence.
    • Fries, P.H. 1992. The structuring of information in written text. Language Sciences 14(4): 461-488.
    • Fries, P.H. 2000. Issues in modelling the textual metafunction. In Patterns of Text: In honour of Michael Hoey, ed. M. Scott and G. Thompson, 83-107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    • Fries, P.H. 2002. The flow of information in a written text. In Relations and Functions within and around Language, ed. P. Fries, M. Cummings, D. Lockwood, and W. Spruiell, 117-155. London: Continuum.
    • Gavrilov, A.K. 1997. Techniques of reading in classical antiquity. The Classical Quarterly. New Series 47(1): 56-73.
    • Gregory, M., and S. Carroll. 1978. Language and Situation: Language Varieties and their Social Contexts. London: Routledge.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. 1967a. Notes on transitivity and theme part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3/2: 199-244
    • Halliday, M.A.K. 1967b. Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton
    • Halliday, M.A.K. 1976. Theme and information in the English clause. In Halliday: System and Function in Language, ed. G. Kress. London: Oxford University Press.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. 1979. Modes of meaning and modes of expression: types of grammatical structure, and their determination by different semantic functions. In Function and Context in Linguistic Analysis, ed. D.J. Allerton, E. Carney, and D. Holcroft, 57-79. Cambridge: CUP.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. 1989. Spoken and Written Language. Oxford: OUP.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. and W.S. Greaves. 2008. Intonation in the Grammar of English. London: Equinox.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
    • Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. 1985. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
    • Halliday, M.A.K., and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. 2014. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th ed. London: Arnold.
    • Hannay, M. and E.M. Martínez Caro. 2008. Last things first: A FDG approach to clause-final focus constituents in Spanish and English. In Languages and Cultures in Contrast: New Directions in Contrastive Linguistics, ed. M.A. GómezGonzález, J.L. MacKenzie, and E. González-Alvarez, 33-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    • Herriman, J. 2004. Identifying relations: The semantic functions of wh-clefts in English. Text 24(4): 447-469.
    • Hill, R.L. and W.S. Murray. 2000. Commas and spaces: Effects of punctuation on eye movements and sentence parsing. In Reading as a Perceptual Process, ed. A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, and J. Pynte, 565-589. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    • Hirotani, M L. Frazier, and K. Rayner. 2006. Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 54: 425-443.
    • Jackendoff, R. 2002. Foundations of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Johnson, W.A. 2000. Toward a sociology of reading in classical antiquity. The American Journal of Philology 121(4): 593-627.
    • Lambrecht, K. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP.
    • Lassen, I. 2004. Ideological resources in biotechnology press releases: Patterns of Theme/Rheme and Given/New. In Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. L. Young and C. Harrison, 264-279. London: Continuum.
    • Linell, P. 2005. The Written Bias in Linguistics. London: Routledge.
    • Lowe, E.A. and E.K. Rand. 1922. A Sixth-Century Fragment of the Letters of Pliny the Younger. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/16706. Accessed 6 Aug 2008.
    • Lowth, R. 1762/1967. A Short Introduction to English Grammar. London: A. Miller and J. Dodsby. Reprinted by Menston: Scholar Press.
    • Lukatela, G T. Eaton, C. Lee, and M.T. Turvey. 2001. Does visual word identification involve a sub-phonemic level? Cognition 78: B41-B52.
    • Martin, J.R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    • Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. 1992. Interpreting the textual metafunction. In Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory and Practice, ed. M. Davies and L. Ravelli, 37-82. London: Pinter.
    • Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. 1995a. THEME as an enabling resource in ideational 'knowledge' construction. In Thematic Development in English Texts, ed. M. Ghadessy, 20-54. London: Pinter
    • Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. 1995b. Lexicogrammatical Cartography: English Systems. Tokyo: International Language Science Publishers
    • Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. 2015. Register in the round: Registerial cartography. Functional Linguistics 2(9): 1-48.
    • Moore, N. 2006. Aligning Theme and Information Structure to Improve the Readability of Technical Writing. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 36(1): 43-55.
    • Moore, N. 2008a. Bridging the metafunctions: Tracking participants through taxonomies. In From Language to Multimodality: New Developments in the Study of Ideational Meaning, eds. C. Jones & E. Ventola, 111-129. London: Equinox
    • Moore, N. 2008b. Validating a model of information structure in written English through a reading protocol. In Proceedings of the 19th European Systemic Functional Linguistics Conference and Workshop, eds. E. Steiner & S. Neumann. http://scidok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/volltexte/2008/1697/pdf/Moore_form.pdf. Accessed 15 July 2015
    • Nunberg, G. 1990. The Linguistics of Punctuation. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    • Parkes, M.B. 1992. Pause and Effect: Punctuation in the West. Farnham: Ashgate.
    • Peereman, R A. Content, and P. Bonin. 1998. Is perception a two-way street? The case of feedback consistency in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 39: 151-174.
    • Perea, M. and J. Acha. 2009. Space information is important for reading. Vision Research 49: 1994-2000.
    • Perfetti, C.A., and D.J. Bolger. 2004. The brain might read that way. Scientific Studies of Reading 8(3): 293-304.
    • Prince, E. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Radical Pragmatics, ed. S. Cole, 223-255. New York: Academic.
    • Pulvermüller, F, O. Hauk, V.V. Nikulin, and R.J. Ilmoniemi. 2005. Functional links between motor and language systems. European Journal of Neuroscience 21: 793-797.
    • Pulvermüller, F, R.L. Moseley, N. Egorova, and Z. Shebani. 2014. Motorcognition-motor semantics: Action perception theory of cognition and communication. Neuropsychologia 55: 71-84.
    • Pynte, J and A. Kennedy. 2007. The influence of punctuation and word class on distributed processing in normal reading. Vision Research 47: 1215-1277.
    • Rayner, K. 1998. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 Years of Research. Psychological Bulletin 124(3): 372-422.
    • Rayner, K., M.H. Fischer, and A. Pollatsek. 1998. Unspaced text interferes with both word identification and eye movement control. Vision Research 38(8): 1129-1144.
    • Rayner, K., G. Kambe, and S.A. Duffy. 2000. The effects of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 53A(4): 1061-1080.
    • Saenger, P. 1982. Silent reading: Its impact on late medieval script and society. Viator 13: 367-414.
    • Saenger, P. 1997. Space Between Words: The Origins of Silent Reading. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    • Sainio, M, J. Hyönän, K. Bingushi, and R. Bertram. 2007. The role of interword spacing in reading Japanese: An eye movement study. Vision Research 47: 2575-2584.
    • Salmelin, R., and J. Kujala. 2006. Neural representation of language: Activation versus long-range connectivity. TRENDS in Cognitive Science 10(11): 519-525.
    • Seidenberg, M.S. 2011. Reading in different writing systems: One architecture, multiple solutions. In Dyslexia Across Languages, ed. P. McCardle, B. Miller, J.R. Lee, and O.J.L. Tzeng, 146-168. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
    • Steedman, M. 2000. Information structure and the syntax-morphology interface. Linguistic Inquiry 31(4): 649-689.
    • Svenbro, J. 1993. Phrasikleia: An Anthropology of Reading in Ancient Greece. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
    • Tarone, E., S. Dwyer, S. Gillette, S. and V. Icke. 1998. On the use of the passive and active voice in astrophysics journal papers: With extensions to other languages and other fields. English for Specific Purposes 17/1: 113-132
    • Tomasino, B, C.J. Werner, P.H. Weiss, and G.R. Finka. 2007. Stimulus properties matter more than perspective: An fMRI study of mental imagery and silent reading of action phrases. NeuroImage 36: T128-T141.
    • Truss, L. 2003. Eats, Shoots and Leaves - The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. London: Profile Books Ltd.
    • Vallduvi, E. 1993. Information Packaging: A survey. Report prepared for WOPIS. http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/publications/rp44.ps.gz. Accessed 2 Oct 2007
    • Vallduvi, E, and E. Engdahl. 1996. The linguistic realization of information packaging. Linguistics 34: 459-519.
    • Vigneau, M, et al. 2006. Meta-analyzing left hemisphere language areas: Phonology, semantics, and sentence processing. NeuroImage 30: 1414-1432.
    • Winskel, H. 2011. Orthographic and phonological parafoveal processing of consonants, vowels, and tones when reading Thai. Applied Psycholinguistics 32: 739-759.
    • Winskel, H, R. Radach, and S. Luksaneeyanawin. 2009. Eye movements when reading spaced and unspaced Thai and English: A comparison of Thai-English bilinguals and English monolinguals. Journal of Memory and Language 61: 339-351.
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article