Cover not available
Review published In:
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Volume 7
Edited by Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7] 2009
► pp. 345–356
Book review

Hilpert, M. (2008). Germanic Future Constructions. A Usage-Based Approach to Language Change

Reviewed by
| Erfurt University
Published online: 19 November 2009
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.17ham
References
Bybee, J. L., W. Pagliuca and R. D. Perkins
(1991) Back to the future. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization. Vol. 2. (pp. 17–58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L., R. D. Perkins and W. Pagliuca
(1994) The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, aspect and mood in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Guilquin, G. & S.Th. Gries
(2008) Corpora and experimental methods: A state-of-the-art review. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 5(1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S.Th.
(2003) Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: The case of Particle Placement. London/New York: Continuum PressGoogle Scholar
(2004) Coll.Analysis 31. A program for R for Windows 2.x (available from the author)Google Scholar
Gries, S.Th. & M. Hilpert
(2008) The identification of stages in diachronic data: variabilitybased neighbor clustering. Corpora, 3(1), 59–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S.Th. & A. Stefanowitsch
(2004) Extending collostructional analysis. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1), 97–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Eds.) (2006) Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
to appear). Cluster analysis and the identification of collexeme classes. In S. Rice & J. Newman Eds. Empirical and Experimental Methods in Cognitive/Functional Research CSLI Publications
Heine, B.
(1995) On the German werden future. In W. Abraham, T. Givon, and S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Discourse, Grammar and Typology (pp. 119–138). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M.
(2006) Distinctive collexemes and diachrony. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2(2), 243–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. & S.Th. Gries
(2008) Assessing frequency changes in multi-stage diachronic corpora. Applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition. Literary and Linguistic Computing. ( DOI logo)Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B.
(2006) Morpho-Syntactic Persistency in Spoken English. A Corpus Study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. (TiLSM 1771) Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A.
(2006) Distinctive collexeme analysis and diachrony. A comment. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2(2), 257–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. & S.Th. Gries
(2003) Collostructions: Investigating the inter-action between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 81, 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vater, H.
(1997) Werden als Modalverb. In J. P. Calbert & H. Vater (Eds.), Aspekte der Modalität (pp. 71–145). Tubingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Wulff, S.
(2009) Rethinking Idiomaticity. London/New York: Continuum PressGoogle Scholar
Zeschel, A.
(Ed.) (2008) Usage-based approaches to language processing and representation. Special Issue of Cognitive Linguistics, 18(3).Google Scholar