Cover not available
Part of
On Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change
Edited by Hendrik De Smet, Lobke Ghesquière and Freek Van de Velde
[Benjamins Current Topics 79] 2015
► pp. 1–17

On multiple source constructions in language change

 | University of Leuven
 | Research Foundation Flanders
Published online: 25 November 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.79.01int
References (32)
References
Allan, Kathryn. 2010. A dull paper: An example of proportional analogy in semantic change? Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics(ICEHL) at the University of Pécs, 23–27 August 2010.
Boyd, Jeremy K. & Adele E. Goldberg. 2011. Learning what not to say: The role of statistical preemption and categorization in “a”-adjective production. Language 87(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burridge, Kate. 1992. Creating grammar: Examples from Pennsylvania German, Ontario. In: Kate Burridge & Werner Enninger (eds.), Diachronic studies on the languages of the Anabaptists (Bochum-Essener Beiträge zur Sprachwandelforschung, 17), 199–241. Bochum: N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: The role of frequency. In: Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 602–623. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Diachronic linguistics. In: Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The handbook of cognitive linguistics, 945–987. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1983. Historical linguistics, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Gerald L. 1987. Syntactic blends in English parole. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining language change. An evolutionary approach. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Fortson, Benjamin W. 2010. Indo-European language and culture: An introduction, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk. 1997. Diachronic prototype semantics: A contribution to historical lexicology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2003. On contact-induced grammaticalization. Studies in Language 27(3). 529–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus.P. 2004. Lexicalization and grammaticization: opposite or orthogonal? In: Walter Bisang, Nikolaus Himmelmann, Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Israël, Michael. 1996. The way constructions grow. In Adele E. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language, 217–230. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. 2004. Rescuing traditional (historical) linguistics from grammaticalization“theory”. In Olga Fischer, Muriel Norde & Harry Perridon (eds.), Up and down the cline –the nature of grammaticalization, 44–71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1990. How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution. Journal of Linguistics 26. 79–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Menard, Philippe. 1978. Manuel du français du moyen âge, vol. 1, Syntaxe de l’ancien français.Bordeaux: SOBODI.Google Scholar
Menge, Hermann. 2000. Lehrbuch der lateinischen Syntax und Semantik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Mondorf, Britta. 2011. Variation and change in English resultatives. Language Variation and Change 22. 397–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OED: Murray, James A.H., Henry Brodly, W.A. Craigie & C.T. Onions. 1993. The Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available online at [URL]Google Scholar
Philippa, Marlies, Frans Debrabandere, Arend Quak, Tanneke Schoonheim & Nicoline van der Sijs. 2003–2009. Etymologisch woordenboek van het Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Prokosch, Eduard. 1939. A comparative Germanic grammar. Philadelphia: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Ringe, Don. 2006. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth.C. 2007. The concepts of constructional mismatch and type-shifting from the perspective of grammaticalization’. Cognitive Linguistics 18. 523–557. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Bree, Cor. 1996. Historische taalkunde, 2nd edn. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
Van Coetsem, Frans. 1982. The development of the Germanic reduplicating class: Reanalysis and competition in morphological change. In Irmengard Rauch & Gerald F. Carr (eds.), Language change, 39–88. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Van der Horst, Johannes M. & Freek Van de Velde. 2003. Zo vreemd een groep. Taal & Tongval Thematic issue 15/16. 237–250.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek & Johannes M. van der Horst. 2013. Homoplasy in diachronic grammar. Language Sciences 36. 66–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. Manuscript. The diachrony of so odd a noun phrase.
Wischer, Ilse. 2010. Sekretion und Exaptation als Mechanismen in der Wortbildung und Grammatik. In Rüdiger Harnisch (ed.), Prozesse sprachlicher Verstärkung: Typen formaler Resegmentierung und semantischer Remotivierung, 29–40. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Hilpert, Martin
2024. Corpus linguistics meets historical linguistics and construction grammar: how far have we come, and where do we go from here?. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 20:3 ► pp. 481 ff. DOI logo
Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale
2022. On Multiple Paths and Change in the Language Network. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 70:3 ► pp. 359 ff. DOI logo
Masini, Francesca & Simone Mattiola
2022. Syntactic discontinuous reduplication with antonymic pairs: a case study from Italian. Linguistics 60:1 ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Feltgen, Quentin
2019. Diachronic Emergence of Zipf-like Patterns in Construction-Specific Frequency Distributions: A Quantitative Study of the Way Too Construction. Lexis :16 DOI logo
Margerie, Hélène
2019. Am I Way Wrong on this One? On the Multiple Semantic Sources and Paths of Development of the Amplifier Way. Lexis :16 DOI logo
Smith, Chris A.
2019. List of References. Lexis :16 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.