Article published In:
Computational Construction Grammar and Constructional Change
Edited by Katrien Beuls and Remi van Trijp
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 30] 2016
► pp. 91113
References (39)
Barðdal, Jóhanna, and Spike Gildea. 2015. “Diachronic Construction Grammar: Epistemological Context, Basic Assumptions and Historical Implications.” In Diachronic Construction Grammar, ed. by Jóhanna Barðdal, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer, and Spike Gildea, 1–49. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer, and Spike Gildea (eds). 2015. Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny, Timothy Colleman, and Gijsbert Rutten. 2014. “Constructions all the Way Everywhere: Four New Directions in Constructionist Research.” In Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar, ed. by Ronny Boogaart, Timothy Colleman, and Gijsbert Rutten, 1–14. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cappelle, Bert. 2005. Particle Patterns in English: a Comprehensive Coverage. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Colleman, Timothy, and Dirk Noël. 2014. “Tracing the History of Deontic NCI Patterns in Dutch: A Case of Polysemy Copying.” In Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics, ed. by Irma Taavitsainen, Andreas H. Jucker, and Jukka Tuominen, 213–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colleman, Timothy. To appear. “Distributional Assimilation in Constructional Semantics: On Contact-related Semantic Shifts in Afrikaans Three-argument Constructions.” To appear in Constructions in Contact, ed. by Hans Boas, and Steffen Höder. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Dixon, R.M.W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Doğruöz, Seza, and Ad Backus. 2009. “Innovative Constructions in Dutch Turkish: An Assessment of On-going Contact Induced Change.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12 (1): 41–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elenbaas, Marjon. 2007. The Synchronic and Diachronic Syntax of the English Verb-Particle Combination. Utrecht: LOT publications.Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam. 2009. “Construction Grammar as a Tool for Diachronic Analysis.” Constructions and Frames 1 (2): 262–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Principles of Constructional Change.” In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann, and Graeme Trousdale, 419–437. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Constructions: A New Theoretical Approach to Language.” Trends in Cognitive Science 71: 219–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2008. “Phraseology and linguistic theory: a brief survey.” In Phraseology: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, ed. by Sylviane Granger, and Fanny Meunier, 3–25. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, Katrien Deygers, Hilde van Aken, Vicky Van den Heede, and Dirk Speelman. 2000. “Het CONDIV-corpus geschreven Nederlands [The CONDIV corpus of written Dutch].” Nederlandse Taalkunde 51: 356–363.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höder, Steffen. 2012. “Multilingual Constructions: a Diasystematic Approach to Common Structures.” In Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller, and Christoph Gabriel, 241–257. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Constructing Diasystems: Grammatical Organisation in Bilingual Groups”. In The Sociolinguistics of Grammar, ed. by Tor A. Åfarli, and Britt Mæhlum, 137–152. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. “Twistin’ the Night Away.” Language 731: 534–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Constructions in the Parallel Architecture.” In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann, and Graeme Trousdale, 70–92. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron, and Jeanette Sakel. 2007. “Investigating the Mechanisms of Pattern-Replication.” Studies in Language 311: 829–865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Andrew. 2003. “Preverbs, Argument Linking and Verb Semantics: German Prefixes and Particles.” In Yearbook of Morphology 2003, ed. by Geert Booij, and Jaap van Marle, 119–144. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noël, Dirk. 2007. “Diachronic Construction Grammar and Grammaticalization Theory.” Functions of Language 141: 177–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2010. “What has Changed in Hiberno-English: Constructions and Their Role in Contact-induced Change.” Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 631: 118–145.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2008a. “The Grammaticalization of NP of NP Patterns.” In Constructions and Language Change, ed. by Alexander Bergs, and Gabriele Diewald, 23–45. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2008b. “Grammaticalization, Constructions and the Incremental Development of Language: Suggestions from the Development of Degree Modifiers in English.” In Variation, Selection, Development: Probing the Evolutionary Model of Language Change, ed. by Regine Eckhardt, Gerhard Jäger, and Tonjes Veenstra, 219–250. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2015. “Toward a Coherent Account of Grammatical Constructionalization.” In Diachronic Construction Grammar, ed. by Jóhanna Barðdal, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer, and Spike Gildea, 51–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Contentful constructionalization.” Journal of Historical Linguistics 41: 256–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. “Multiple Inheritance and Constructional Change.” Studies in Language 371: 491–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “On the Relationship between Grammaticalization and Constructionalization.” Folia Linguistica 481: 557–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek, Hendrik De Smet, and Lobke Ghesquière. 2013. “On Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change.” Studies in Language 371: 473–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek, and Eline Zenner. 2010. “Pimp my Lexis: het nut van corpusonderzoek in normatief taaladvies [Pimp my lexis: the use of corpus research in normative language advice].” In Liever meer of juist minder? Over normen en variatie in taal [Preferably more or rather less? On norms and variation in language], ed. by Els Hendrickx, Karl Hendrickx, Willy Martin, Hans Smessaert, William Van Belle, and Joop van der Horst, 51–68. Gent: Academia press.Google Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 2007. “English Constructions from a Dutch Perspective: Where Are the Differences?” In Structural-Functional Studies in English Grammar: In honour of Lachlan Mackenzie, ed. by Mike Hannay, and Gerard J. Steen, 257–274. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1953 [1964]. Languages in Contact. Second edition. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
WNT = De Vries, M., L.A. Te Winkel et al. (ed.) (1882–1998). Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal [Dictionary of the Dutch Language]. Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff etc.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2021. Widening the scope. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30],  pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2021. The Spanish verb-particle construction [V para atrás]. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30],  pp. 140 ff. DOI logo
Percillier, Michael
2020. Allostructions, homostructions or a constructional family?. In Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 27],  pp. 214 ff. DOI logo
Zenner, Eline, Kris Heylen & Freek Van de Velde
2018. Most borrowable construction ever! A large-scale approach to contact-induced pragmatic change. Journal of Pragmatics 133  pp. 134 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 october 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.