Introduction published in:
Current trends in analyzing syntactic variation
Edited by Ludovic De Cuypere, Clara Vanderschueren and Gert De Sutter
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 31] 2017
► pp. 17

Full-text

Introduction
References

References

Bruening, Benjamin
2010 “Double Object Constructions Disguised as Prepositional Datives”. Linguistic Inquiry 41: 287–305. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan W., and Marilyn Ford
2010 “Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English.” Language 86 (1): 168–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, Bert
2006 “Particle placement and the case for ‘allostructions’”. ConstructionsGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th.
2003Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: a study of Particle Placement. London & New York: Continuum Press.Google Scholar
Heller, Benedikt, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi & Jason Grafmiller
2017 “Stability and fluidity in syntactic variation world-wide: the genitive alternation across varieties of English”. Journal of English Linguistics 45(1): 3–27.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray, and Perter William Culicover
1971 “A Reconsideration of Dative Movement.” Foundations of Language 7: 397–412.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold, and Paul Postal
1964An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago (Ill.): University of Chicago press.Google Scholar
Larson, R. K.
1988 “On the Double Object Construction”. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 335–393.Google Scholar
Newman, John
1996Give: a cognitive linguistic study. Cognitive linguistics research 7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, Jason
2009 “Understanding the Nature and Outcomes of Early Bilingualism: Romance Languages as Heritage Languages.” International Journal of Bilingualism 13: 155–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günther
2003 “Aspects of grammatical iconicity in English.” In From Sign to Signing, edited by Wolfgang G. Müller and Olga Fischer, 263–285. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shank, Christopher, Van Bogaert Julie, and Koen Plevoets
2016The diachronic development of zero complementation: A multifactorial analysis of the that/zero alternation with think, suppose, and believe. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. 12(1): 31–72.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vanderschueren, Clara, and Kevin Diependaele
2013 “The Portuguese Inflected Infinitive: An Empirical Approach.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 9 (1): 161–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wulff, Stefanie
2016 “A friendly conspiracy of input, L1, and processing demands: that – variation in German and Spanish learner language”. In The usage-based study of language learning and multilingualism (Proceedings of GURT 2014), edited by Lourdes Ortega, Andrea E. Tyler, Hae In Park and Mariko Uno, 115–136. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar