Cover not available
Part of
Corpus Approaches to Language, Thought and Communication
Edited by Wei-lun Lu, Naděžda Kudrnáčová and Laura A. Janda
[Benjamins Current Topics 119] 2021
► pp. 1–6

Deep dives into big data

Best practices for synthesis of quantitative and qualitative analysis in Cognitive Linguistics

| UiT The Arctic University of Norway
| Masaryk University
| Masaryk University
Published online: 16 August 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.119.01jan
References
Chomsky, N.
(1980) Rules and representations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
(2001) Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
(2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E.
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalizations in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1991a) Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1991b) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lyngfelt, B., Borin, L., Ohara, K., & Torrent, T. T.
(Eds.) (2018) Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, L. I., Sung, L., Huang, S., Hsieh, F., & Lin, Z.
(2008) NTU corpus of Formosan languages: A state-of-the-art report. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 4(2), 291–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar