[Allen, K. 1998. Meaning and Speech Acts.[Accessed 15 January 2020]. Available at: http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Philosophy/Philosophy_of_Language/Pragmatics/Speech_Acts]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, J. L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bach, K. 2007. Regression in pragmatics (and semantics). In: N. Burton-Roberts, ed. Pragmatics. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 24-44.10.1057/978-1-349-73908-0_3]Search in Google Scholar
[Bianchi, V. 2003. On finiteness as logophoric anchoring. In: J. Guéron & L. Tasmovski, eds. Temps et point de vue/Tense and Point of View, Université Paris X - Nanterre, pp. 213-246.]Search in Google Scholar
[Blackwell, S. E. 2003. Implicatures in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bühler, K. 1934/1999. Sprachtheorie. Stuttgart: Lucius and Lucius.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E. 2005. Insensitive Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9780470755792]Search in Google Scholar
[Carston, R. 1999. The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from Relevance Theory. In: K. Turner, ed. The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 85–125.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chomsky, N. A. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cinque, G. and Rizzi, L. 2008. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Studies in Linguistics 2, CISCL Working Papers, pp. 43–59. [Accessed May 19, 2018]. Available at: http://ciscl.media.unisi.it/doc/doc_pub/STiL-2008-vol2.pdf]Search in Google Scholar
[Cinque, G. and Rizzi, L. 2015. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. In B. Heine – H. Narrog, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 65-78.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cinque, G. and Rizzi, L. 2016. Functional Categories and Syntactic Theory. Annual Review of Linguistics, January 2016.[Accessed 12 April 2019]. Available at: https://internt.ht.lu.se/doc/1461565913.calendarEvents.8294.pdf.0.RizziCinqueAnnualRevLing.pdf/]Search in Google Scholar
[Clements, G. N. 1975. The Logophoric Pronoun in Ewe: Its Role in Discourse. Journal of West African Languages 2, pp. 141-177.]Search in Google Scholar
[Corpus of Contemporary American English.[Accessed 5 June 2020]. Available at: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca]Search in Google Scholar
[Culy, Ch. 2002. The Logophoric Hierarchy and Variation in Dogon. In: T. Guildeman and M. Roncador, eds. Reported Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, pp. 201-210.10.1075/tsl.52.14cul]Search in Google Scholar
[Dickey, S. M. 2000. Parameters of Slavic Aspect: A Cognitive Approach. Stanford: CSLI Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dik, S. C. 1997. The Theory of Functional Grammar I, II. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, J. L. Morgan, eds., Syntax and Semantics 3, New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hagège, C. 1974. Les pronoms logophoriques. Bulletin de la Societé de Linguistique de Paris 69, pp. 287-310.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hajičová, E., Panevová, J. and Sgall, P. 1985-1987. Coreference in the Grammar and in the Text: Part I., Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, vol. 44, pp. 3-32; Part II., vol. 46, pp. 1-11; Part III., vol. 48, pp. 3-12.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirschová, M. 2012. Performativnost a gramatické kategorie slovesa. Slovo a slovesnost vol. 73, no.1, pp. 3-12.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirschová, M. 2013. Pragmatika v češtině. Praha: Karolinum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirschová, M. 2017. Česká věta na rozhraní mezi gramatikou a pragmatikou. Praha: Karolinum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Horn, L. 1984. Toward a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-Based and R-Based Implicature. In: D. Schiffrin, ed.: Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications. Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 11-42.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, Y. 1994/2007. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Digital version 2007.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, Y. 2000. Discourse anaphora: Four theoretical models. Journal of Pragmatics vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 151-176.10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00041-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, Y. 1994/2007. The syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Digital version 2007.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, Y. 2013. Logophoricity and Neo-Gricean Truth-Conditional Pragmatics. In: A. Capone et al., eds. Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology 2, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, pp. 217-241.10.1007/978-3-319-01014-4_8]Search in Google Scholar
[Jakobson, R. 1971. Shifters, Verbal Categories, and the Russian Verb. In: Selected Writings, vol. II, The Hague: Mouton, pp. 130-147.10.1515/9783110873269.130]Search in Google Scholar
[Kaplan, D. 1977/1989. Demonstratives. An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics, and Epistemology of Demonstratives. In: J. Almog and J. Perry et al., eds. Themes from Kaplan. New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 481-563.]Search in Google Scholar
[Karlík, P. 2014. Gramatika a lexikon češtiny. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.]Search in Google Scholar
[Koopman, H. and Sportiche, D. 1989. Pronouns, Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe. Linguistic Inquiry 20, pp. 555-588.]Search in Google Scholar
[Koschmieder, E. 1934. Nauka o aspektach czasownika polskiego w zarysie: proba syntezy. Wilno: Towarzystwo przyjaciol nauk.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kucarov, I. K. 2007. Teoretična gramatika na bălgarskija ezik. Morfologija. Plovdiv: Universitetsko Izdatelstvo Paisij Chilendarski.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kuno, S. 1972. Pronominalization, Reflexivization, and Direct Discourse. Linguistic Inquiry vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 161-195.]Search in Google Scholar
[Leech, G. 1987. Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. 1975. A Communicative Grammar of English. Harlow: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levinson, S. C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Mailing, J. 1984. Non-Clause-Bounded Reflexives in Modern Icelandic. Linguistics and Philosophy vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 211-241.10.1007/BF00627706]Search in Google Scholar
[Martí, L. 2006. Unarticulated constituents revisited. Linguistics and Philosophy vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 135-166.10.1007/s10988-005-4740-4]Search in Google Scholar
[Mey, J. L. 2009. Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. 2nd edition, Oxford: Elsevier. pp. 206-213.]Search in Google Scholar
[Panevová, J., et al. 2014. Mluvnice současné češtiny 2. Praha: Karolinum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Perry, J. 1998. Indexicals, Contexts and Unarticulated Constituents. In: D. Westerstahl et al., eds. Computing Natural Language. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 1-11.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rècanati, F. 2002. Unarticulated Constituents. Linguistics and Philosophy vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 391-434.]Search in Google Scholar
[Reichenbach, H. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. London: Collier-Macmillan.]Search in Google Scholar
[Reinhart, T. 1983. Anaphora and semantic interpretation. London: Croom Helm.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rizzi, L. 1997. The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. In: L. Haegman, ed. Elements of Grammar. A Handbook of the Generative Syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 281-337.10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7]Search in Google Scholar
[Ross, J. R. 1970. On Declarative Sentences. In: R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum, eds. Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham: Ginn and Company, pp. 222-277.]Search in Google Scholar
[Safir, K. 2003. Person, context and perspective. Rivista di linguistica vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 107-153.10.1177/1971400903016SP131]Search in Google Scholar
[Scatton, E. A. 1984. A Reference Grammar of Modern Bulgarian. Columbus: Slavica Publishers.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schlenker, P. 2003. A Plea for Monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 29-120.10.1023/A:1022225203544]Search in Google Scholar
[Searle, J. R. 1976. A Classification of Illocutionary Acts. Language in Society vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1-23.10.1017/S0047404500006837]Search in Google Scholar
[Sells, P. 1987. Aspects of Logophoricity. Linguistic Inquiry vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 445-479.]Search in Google Scholar
[Siewierska, A. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511812729]Search in Google Scholar
[Speas, M. 2004. Evidentiality, Logophoricity and the Syntactic Representation of Pragmatic Features. Lingua vol. 114, issue 3, pp. 255-276.10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00030-5]Search in Google Scholar
[Stanley, J. 2007. Language in Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Stirling, L. 1993. Switch-reference and discourse representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597886]Search in Google Scholar
[Thráinsson, H. 1976. Reflexives and Subjunctives in Icelandic. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of North Eastern Linguistic Society. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics vol. 6, Montreal: McGill University, pp. 225-239.]Search in Google Scholar
[Vikner, S. 1985. Reichenbach Revisited: One, Two, or Three Temporal Relations? Acta linguistica Hafniensia vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 81-98.10.1080/03740463.1985.10415447]Search in Google Scholar