[BEJČEK, E. et al., 2013. Prague Dependency Treebank 3.0. Data/software. Charles University in Prague, MFF, ÚFAL, Prague, Czech Republic, http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt3.0/.]Search in Google Scholar
[BIRNER, B. J. and WARD, G., 2009. Information structure and syntactic structure. Language and Linguistics Compass, vol. 3, no.4, pp. 1167-1187.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00146.x]Search in Google Scholar
[BURKE, M., 2016. Discourse implicature, Quintilian and the Lucidity Principle: Rhetorical phenomena in pragmatics. Topics in Linguistics, vol.17, no. 1, pp. 1-16.10.1515/topling-2016-0001]Search in Google Scholar
[CAMBLIN, C. Ch., GORDON, P.C. and SWAAB, T.Y., 2007. The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 56, no.1, pp. 103-128.10.1016/j.jml.2006.07.005]Search in Google Scholar
[CARNAP, R., 1947. Meaning and necessity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[CHOMSKY, N., 1964. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. Cambridge Research Lab of Electronics.10.21236/AD0616323]Search in Google Scholar
[DANEŠ, F., 1974. FSP and the organization of the text. In: Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective, pp. 106-128. Prague: Academia.10.1515/9783111676524]Search in Google Scholar
[FREGE, G., 1892. Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschift für Philosophie und philologische Kritik, 100, pp. 25-50.]Search in Google Scholar
[GORDON, P. C. and HENDRICK, R., 1998. Dimensions of grammatical coreference. In: Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 424-429.10.4324/9781315782416-83]Search in Google Scholar
[GROSS, M., 1973. On grammatical reference. Generative grammar in Europe. Springer Netherlands, pp. 203-217.10.1007/978-94-010-2503-4_10]Search in Google Scholar
[GROSZ, B. J. and SIDNER, C.L., 1986. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, vol.12, no. 3, pp. 175-204.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., 1972. Some remarks on presuppositions. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, vol.17, pp. 11-23.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., 2011. On interplay of information structure, anaphoric links and discourse relations. In: Societas linguistica europaea SLE 2011, 44th Annual Meeting, Book of Abstracts. Universidad de la Rioja, Center for Research in the Applications of Language, Logrono, pp. 139-140.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., 2012. Topic-focus revisited (Through the eyes of the Prague Dependency Treebank). In: J. D. Apresjan, ed. Smysly, teksty i drugie zachvatyvajuščie sjužety. Sbornik statej v čest 80-letija Igorja Aleksandroviča Melčuka. Moscow: Jazyky slavjanskoj kultury, pp. 218-232.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., PARTEE, B.H. and SGALL, P., 1998. Topic-focus articulation, tripartite structures and semantic content. Kluwer, Dordrecht.10.1007/978-94-015-9012-9]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., HAVELKA, J. and SGALL, P., 2014. Topic and focus, anaphoric relations and degrees of salience. Accepted for publication Prague Linguistic Circle Papers, vol.2, no.4, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., PANEVOVÁ, J. and SGALL, P. 1985. Coreference in the grammar and in the text. Part I. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, vol.44, pp. 2-22.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., PANEVOVÁ, J. and SGALL, P. 1986. Coreference in the grammar and in the text. Part II. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, vol. 46, pp. 1-11.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., PANEVOVÁ, J. and P. SGALL, P. 1987. Coreference in the grammar and in the text. Part III. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, vol. 48, pp. 3-12.]Search in Google Scholar
[HAJIČOVÁ, E., OLIVA, K. and SGALL, P. 1987. Odkazování v gramatice a v textu [Coreference in the grammar and in the text]. Slovo a slovesnost, vol.48, no.3, pp. 199-212.]Search in Google Scholar
[HALLIDAY, M. A. K. and HASAN, R., 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[HLAVSA, Z., 1975. Denotace objektu a její prostředky v současné češtině. Vol. 10. Acad. Naklad.]Search in Google Scholar
[HOBBS, J. R., 1979. Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science, vol.3, no.1, pp. 67-90. 10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4]Search in Google Scholar
[KEHLER, A., 2002. Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[LAMBRECHT, K., 1996. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[LANGACKER, R., 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[LE GAC, D. and YOO, H.Y.,2002. Intonative structure of focalization in French and Greek. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science, 4, pp. 213-232.10.1075/cilt.232.12gac]Search in Google Scholar
[LEDOUX, K., GORDON, P. C., CAMBLIN, C.C. and SWAAB, T.Y., 2007. Coreference and lexical repetition: Mechanisms of discourse integration. Memory & Cognition, vol.35, no.4, pp. 801-815. 10.3758/BF03193316]Search in Google Scholar
[LONG, D. L and CHONG, J. L., 2001. Comprehension skill and global coherence: A paradoxical picture of poor comprehenders abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory and Cognition, vol. 27, pp. 1424-1429.10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1424]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[MATHESIUS, V., 1907. Studie k dějinám anglického slovosledu [A study on history of English word order]. Věstník České akademie, vol.16, no.1, pp. 261-265.]Search in Google Scholar
[MIKULOVÁ, M. et al., 2005. Annotation on the tectogrammatical layer in the Prague Dependency Treebank. Praha: Universitas Carolina Pragensia. <http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/browse/doc/manuals/en/t-layer/html/>.]Search in Google Scholar
[MIODUNKA, W., 1974. Funkcje zaimków w grupach nominalnych współczesnej polszczyzny mówionej. Zesz. Nauk. UJ. Prace językoznawcze, Zesz. 43. Krakow: PWN.]Search in Google Scholar
[MITKOV, R., 2014. Anaphora resolution. Routledge.10.4324/9781315840086]Search in Google Scholar
[NEDOLUZHKO A. and HAJIČOVÁ, E., 2015. Information structure and anaphoric links - a case study and probe. In: Corpus Linguistics 2015. Abstract book. Lancaster: Lancaster University, pp. 252-254.]Search in Google Scholar
[NEDOLUZHKO, A., 2011. Extended nominal coreference and bridging anaphora (An approach to annotation of Czech data in the Prague Dependency Treebank). Prague: ÚFAL.]Search in Google Scholar
[PADUCHEVA, E., 1985. Vyskazyvanie i ego sootnesennost’ s dejstvitel’nost’ju [The utterance and its realization in the text]. Moscow: Nauka.]Search in Google Scholar
[PAJAS, P. and ŠTĚPÁNEK, J., 2008. Recent advances in a feature-rich framework for treebank annotation. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling 2008). Manchester, pp. 673-680.10.3115/1599081.1599166]Search in Google Scholar
[PALEK, B., 1988. Referenční výstavba textu. Univerzita Karlova, Praha. ]Search in Google Scholar
[PAUL, H., 1886. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Halle: Max Niemeyer.]Search in Google Scholar
[PETI-STANTIĆ, A., 2013. Informativity of sentence information structure: The role of word order. Language as Information, pp. 155-178.]Search in Google Scholar
[PETROVA, S., 2009. Information structure and word order variation in the Old High German Tatian. Information structure and language change: New approaches to word order variation in Germanic, pp. 251-280.10.1515/9783110216110.3.251]Search in Google Scholar
[POVOLNÁ, R., 2016. A cross cultural analysis of conjuncts as indicators of the interaction and negotiation of meaning in research articles. Topics in Linguistics, vol.17, no.1, pp. 45-63. 10.1515/topling-2016-0004]Search in Google Scholar
[PUTNAM, H., 1961. Some issues in the theory of grammar. In: R. Jakobson, ed. The structure of language and its mathematical aspects. Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics. Providence: American Mathematical Society, pp. 25-42.10.1090/psapm/012/9984]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[RUSSEL, B., 1905. On denoting. Mind, vol.14, no.56, pp. 479-493.10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479]Search in Google Scholar
[RYSOVÁ, K., 2014. O slovosledu z komunikačního pohledu [On word order from the communicative point of view]. Prague: ÚFAL.]Search in Google Scholar
[RYSOVÁ, K. and RYSOVÁ, M. 2015. Analyzing text coherence via multiple annotation in the Prague Dependency Treebank. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, No. 9302, Text, Speech, and Dialogue: 18th International Conference, TSD 2015. Cham / Heidelberg / New York / Dordrecht / London: Springer International Publishing, pp. 71-79.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., 1964. Generativní systémy v lingvistice [Generative systems in linguistics]. Slovo a slovesnost, vol.25, no.4, pp. 274-282.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., 1967. Functional sentence perspective in a generative description of language. Prague Studies in Mathematical Linguistics, 2, pp. 203-225.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., 1975. On the nature of topic and focus. In: H. Ringbom, ed. Style and text (Studies Presented to Nils Erik Enkvist). Stockholm: Scriptor, pp. 409-15.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., HAJIČOVÁ, E. and BENEŠOVÁ, E. 1973. Topic, focus and generative semantics. Kronberg/Taunus: Scriptor.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., HAJIČOVÁ, E. and PANEVOVÁ, J. 1986. The meaning of the sentence in its semantic and pragmatic aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.]Search in Google Scholar
[SGALL, P., NEBESKÝ, L., GORALČÍKOVÁ, A. and HAJIČOVÁ, E., 1969. A functional approach to syntax in generative description of language. New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company.]Search in Google Scholar
[SORACE, A. and FILIACI, F., 2006. Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, vol.22, no. 3, pp. 339-368.10.1191/0267658306sr271oa]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[STEEDMAN, M., 1991. Structure and intonation. Language, vol.67, no.2, pp. 260-296.10.1353/lan.1991.0098]Search in Google Scholar
[ŠTĚPÁNEK, J. and PAJAS, P., 2010. Querying diverse treebanks in a uniform way. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010). European Language Resources Association, Valletta, Malta, pp. 1828-1835.]Search in Google Scholar
[TOPOLIŃSKA, Z., 1984. Składnia grupy imiennej. Gramatyka współczesnego języka polskiego, pp. 301-384.]Search in Google Scholar
[VAN HOEK, K., 1995. Conceptual reference points: A cognitive grammar account of pronominal anaphora constraints. Language, pp. 310-340.10.2307/416165]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[VON DER GABELENTZ, G., 1868. Ideen zu einer vergleichenden Syntax - Wort- und Satzstellung. Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft, vol.6, no.1, pp. 376-384.]Search in Google Scholar
[WEGENER, P., 1885. Untersuchungen über die Grundfragen des Sprachlebens. Amsterdam: Benjamins.]Search in Google Scholar
[WEIL, H., 1844. Question de grammaire générale: de l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparées aux langues modernes (thèse française). Paris: Joubert. Translated by Charles W. Super as Weil, H. 1887. The order of words in the ancient languages compared with that of the modern languages. Boston: Ginn.]Search in Google Scholar
