中文部分
王金泉 (2005):九年級學生科學寫作與學習成就之探討-以「溫度與熱」為例。 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班碩士論文。
王振華 (2004):法庭交叉質詢中的人際關係─系統功能語言學“情態”視角。外語學刊,118,51-59。
朱永生 (2002):系統功能語言學與轉換生成語言學的主要差別。外語研究,74,1-5。
朱德熙 (1985):語法答問。北京:商務印書館。
何秀煌 (2000):記號學導論 (第5版)。台北市:水牛。李美惠 (2005):科學寫作在自然科學教學與評量的應用-以電影中酸鹼現象之觀察與解釋為例。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班碩士論文。
李哲迪、楊文金 (2003):高一學生如何定義力、能量和功?發表於中華民國第十九屆科學教育學術研討會,彰化。
邢福義 (2002):漢語複句研究。北京:商務印書館。
周佩儀 (2003):教科書研究的現況分析與趨勢展望。中華民國課程與教學學會編,教科書之選擇與評鑑 (頁175-207)。高雄:復文。
屈承熹 (1996):現代漢語中「句子」的定義及其地位。世界漢語教學,4,16-23。
林明瑞等編 (2005):高級中學基礎物理 (第二版)。台南市:南一。
林俊智 (2003):以系統功能語言學觀點探討不同課文結構對科學文章的理解─以溫度與熱為例。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林英智等編 (2004):國中自然與生活科技領域(全六冊)。台北縣:康軒文教。
林陳涌、楊榮祥 (1998):利用凱利方格晤談法探討教師對科學本質的觀點-個案研究。科學教育學刊,6(2),113-128。邱美虹 (2000):概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊,8(1),1-34。胡壯麟 (1994):語篇的銜接與連貫。上海:上海外語教育出版社。
胡壯麟、朱永生、張德錄 (1989):系統功能語法概論。長沙:湖南教育出版社。
范開泰、張亞軍 (2000):現代漢語語法分析。上海市:華東師範大學出版社。
翁育誠 (2004):以蘊含序列與詞彙密度兩種結構探討科學課文結構與閱讀理解的關係─以溫度與熱為例。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
翁敏婷 (2000):國中生理化學習環境知覺及其與學術地位、自我效能關係之探討。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
張德祿 (2004):系統功能語言學的新發展。當代語言學,6,57-65。
張德祿、劉汝山 (2003):語篇連貫與銜接理論的發展及應用。上海:上海外語教育出版社。
英文部分
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning - an introduction to school learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday.
Bezzi, A. (1996). Use of repertory grids in facilitating knowledge construction and reconstruction in geology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 179.
Bezzi, A. (1999). What is this thing called geoscience? Epistemological dimensions elicited with the repertory grid and their implications for scientific literacy. Science Education, 83(6), 675-700.
Brockriede, W., & Ehninger, D. (1960). Toulmin on argument: An interpretation and application. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 46, 44-53.
Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.
Burr, V. (1995). An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge.
Castejon, J. L., & Martinez, M. A. (2001). The personal constructs of expert and novice teachers concerning the teacher function in the spanish educational reform. Learning and Instruction, 11(2), 113.
Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (1997). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Cassell.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1993). The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
Easterby-Smith, M. (1981). The design, analysis and interpretation of repertory grids. In M. L. G. Shaw (Ed.), Recent advances in personal construct technology (pp. 9-30). London: Academic Press.
Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd.
Fetherstonhaugh, T. (1994). Using the repertory grid to probe students' ideas about energy. Research in Science & Technological Education, 12(2), 117.
Gagne', E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, K. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school earning (2 ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Gaines, B., & Shaw, M. (2005). Rep iv: Manual for research version 1.12. from http://repgrid.com/RepIV/
Geelan, D. R. (1997). Epistemological anarchy and the many forms of constructivism. Science and Education, 6, 15-28.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993a). The analysis of scientific texts in english and chinese. In M. A. K. Halliday (Ed.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993b). On the language of physical science. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 54-68). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993c). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93-116.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2 ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1995). Language and the reshaping of human experience. Paper presented at the The Fourth International Symposium on Critical Discourse Analysis, Athens.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1998a). Language and knowledge: The 'unpacking' of text. In D. Allison, L. Wee, B. Zhiming & S. A. Abraham (Eds.), Text in education and society (pp. 157-178). Singapore: Singapore University Press and World Scientific.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1998b). Things and relations: Regrammaticising experience as technical knowledge. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. New York: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in english. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Continuum.
Haneda, M. (2000). Modes of student participation in an elementary school science classroom: From talking to writing. Linguistics and Education, 10(4), 459-485.
Hart, C. (2002a). If the sun burns you is that a force? Some definitional prerequistites for understanding newton's laws. Physics Education, 37, 234-238.
Hart, C. (2002b). Teaching newton's laws. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 48(4), 14-23.
Hellingman, C. (1989). Do forces have twin brothers? Physics Education, 24, 36-40.
Herman, P. M. (1982). Energy, force, and matter. London: Cambridge University Press.
Herron, J. D., Cantu, L. L., Ward, R., & Srinivasan, V. (1977). Problems associated with concept analysis. Science Education, 61(2), 185-199.
Heywood, D., & Parker, J. (2001). Describing the cognitive landscape in learning and teaching about forces. International Journal of Science Education, 23(11), 1177-1199.
Hill, F. I. (1983). The rhetoric of aristotle. In J. J. Murphy (Ed.), A synoptic history of classical rhetoric (pp. 19-76). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.
Johnson, R. K. (1979). Readability. School Science Review, 212(60), 562-568.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. London: Routledge.
Kintsch, W. (1979). On modeling comprehension. Educational Research, 14, 3-14.
Klaasen, C. W. J. M., & Lijnse, P. L. (1996). Interpreting students' and teachers' discourse in science classes: An underestimated problem. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 115-134.
Knain, E. (2001). Ideologies in school science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 319-329.
Kong, K. C. C. (2004). Marked themes and thematic patterns in abstracts, advertisements and administrative documents. Word-Journal Of The International Linguistic Association, 55(3), 343-362.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. New York: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub.
Martin, J. R. (1993a). A contextual theory of language. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 116-136). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Martin, J. R. (1993b). Life as a noun: Arresting the universe in science and humanities. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 221-267). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Martin, J. R. (1997a). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 3-39). London: Cassell.
Martin, J. R. (1997b). Working with functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse. New York: Continuum.
Martin, J. R., & Rothery, J. (1993). Grammar: Making meaning in writing. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 137-153). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Martin, J. R., & Veel, R. (Eds.). (1998). Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. New York: Routledge.
McCloughlin, T. J. J., & Matthews, P. S. C. (2002). The use of repertory grid analysis in studying students' conceptual frameworks in science. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the European Educational Research Association, Lisboa.
McDermott, L. C. (1984). Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today, 37, 24-32.
Meyer, B. J. F. (1985). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures, and problems. In B. K. Britton & J. B. Black (Eds.), Understanding expository text (pp. 11-64). Hillsdle, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mills, S. (1997). Discourse. New York: Routledge.