Cover not available
Part of
Constructions in Contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 30] 2021
► pp. 139–187

The Spanish verb-particle construction [V para atrás]

Disentangling constructional contact and change

| Universität Tübingen

Spanish verb-particle constructions such as llamar para atrás ‘call back’ or ir para atrás ‘go back’, which are found among bilingual speakers in the USA, have been attributed either to structural and/or semantic contact with English or to merely language-internal evolutions.

In the present contribution, I provide a qualitative corpus study on the role of [V para atrás] in European, Mexican, and US Spanish, combining a constructional framework with cognitive-semantic, variational and pragmatic-functional approaches.

The study reveals that [V para atrás] can be considered a constructional idiom situated in the middle range between lexicon and syntax in all three varieties under study. It also shows that [V para atrás] in US Spanish differs from European and Mexican Spanish with regard to its extended combinatorial properties and the degree of meaning extensions from the spatial into the aspectual domain. These findings allow a more nuanced view on the role of language contact and constructional change, since the properties of US Spanish [V para atrás] can be modelled via intra- and interlingual inheritance links in the cognitive network of bilingual speakers.

Keywords: Spanish, verb-particle construction, constructional idiom, para atrás , motion, aspect, metonymy, metaphor
Article outline
  • 1.Verb-particle constructions in Spanish: Typology and language contact
  • 2.[V para atrás] in European, Mexican, and US Spanish corpora
    • 2.1Corpus data
    • 2.2Semantic and syntactic properties of [V para atrás]
    • 2.3Semantic extensions under a cognitive semantic and functional-pragmatic perspective
      • 2.3.1From ‘counter-directional’ movement to telic return motion
      • 2.3.2From telic return motion to iterative and reciprocal aspect
    • 2.4Disentangling the intra- and interlingual linking of [V para atrás]
  • 3.Discussion and outlook
  • Notes
  • List of abbreviations (following Leipzig Glossing Rules)
  • Literature
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.30.06wie
References

Literature

Arizona Corpus = Carvalho, A. M.
(2012–) Corpus del Español en el Sur de Arizona (CESA). University of Arizona, [URL] (03.04.2018).
Aske, J.
(1989) Path predicates in English and Spanish: a closer look. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 15, 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Shiao Wei, T.
(2010) The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46(3), 331–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C.
(2003) A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
(2011) Coercion and leaking argument structures in Construction Grammar. Linguistics, 49(6), 1271–1303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C., & Höder, S.
(Eds.) (2018) Constructions in contact: constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, G.
(2002a) Constructional idioms, morphology, and the Dutch lexicon. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 14(4), 301–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002b) Separable complex verbs in Dutch: a case of periphrastic word formation. In N. Dehé, R. Jackendoff, A. McIntyre, & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb-particle explorations (pp. 21–41). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, G., & Van Kemenade, A.
(2003) Preverbs: an introduction. Yearbook of Morphology, 16, 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, L. J.
(1994) The development of English aspectual systems: aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. 2nd printing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burnett, H., Petrik, K., & Tremblay, M.
(2005) La grammaire des particules en ancien français : sémantique, distribution et perte de productivité. In C. Gurski (Ed.), Actes du congrès de l’Association Canadienne de Linguistique 2005, [URL] (26.02.2019).
Burnett, H., & Tremblay, M.
(2012) The evolution of the encoding of direction in the history of French: a quantitative approach to argument structure change. In N. de Haas, & A. van Kemenade (Eds.), Historical Linguistics 2009 (pp. 333–353). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burnett, H., & Troberg, M.
(2014) On the diachronic semantics of resultative constructions in French. In C. Piñón (Ed.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 10 (pp. 37–54), [URL] (26.02.2019).
Cadierno, T.
(2004) Expressing motion events in a second language: a cognitive typological perspective. In M. Achard, & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 13–50). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Ruiz, L.
(2006) Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 183–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calvo Rigual, C.
(2008) I verbi sintagmatici italiani, con appunti contrastivi con lo spagnolo e il catalano. In C. González Royo, & P. Mogorrón Huerta (Eds.), Estudios y análisis de fraseología contrastiva: lexicografía y traducción (pp. 47–66). Alicante: Universidad de Alicante.Google Scholar
Calvo Rigual, C., & Carrera Díaz, M.
(2017) El estudio de los verbos sintagmáticos ayer y hoy. In G. Caprara, & G. Marangón (Eds.), Italiano e dintorni: La realtà linguistica italiana: approfondimenti di didattica, variazione e traduzione (pp. 415–433). Frankfurt a.M. etc.: Lang.Google Scholar
Cappelle, B.
(2005) Particle patterns in English: a comprehensive coverage. Ph.D. Dissertation. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, [URL] (28.02.2019).
(2008) The grammar of complex particle phrases in English. In A. Asbury, J. Dotlačil, B. Gehrke, & R. Nouwen (Eds.), Syntax and semantics of spatial P (pp. 103–145). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Contextual cues for particle placement: multiplicity, motivation, modeling. In A. Bergs, & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 145–192). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B., & Declerck, R.
(2005) Spatial and temporal boundedness in English motion events. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(6), 889–917. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CdE = Davies, M.
(2016) El Corpus del Español web/dialects, [URL] (26.02.2019).
Cifuentes-Férez, P.
(2014) A closer look at Paths of vision, Manner of vision and their translation from English into Spanish. Languages in Contrast, 14(2), 214–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
COCA = Davies, M.
(2015) Corpus of Contemporary American English, [URL] (03.04.2018).
COEM = Martín Butragueño, P., Mendoza, É., & Orozco, L.
(Eds.) (2012–) Corpus Oral del Español de México. México: El Colegio de México, [URL] (26.02.2019).
CORPES XXI = Real Academia Española
Corpus del Español del Siglo XXI (Version 0.91, December 2018), [URL] (26.02.2019).
CREA = Real Academia Española
Corpus de Referencia del Español Actual (Version 3.2, June 2008), [URL] (26.02.2019).
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C.
(2010) Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In H. C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 201–235). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CSCM = Martín Butragueño, P., & Lastra, Y.
(Eds.) (2011–2015) Corpus Sociolingüístico de la Ciudad de México. México: El Colegio de México, [URL] (26.02.2019).
De Miguel, E.
(1999) El aspecto léxico. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, vol. II (pp. 2977–3060). Madrid: Real Academia Española/Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Detges, U.
(1999) Wie entsteht Grammatik? Kognitive und pragmatische Determinanten der Grammatikalisierung von Tempusmarkern. In J. Lang, & I. Neumann-Holzschuh (Eds.), Reanalyse und Grammatikalisierung in den romanischen Sprachen (pp. 31–52). Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DLE = Real Academia Española
(2014) Diccionario de la lengua española, tomo II h/z. 23a edición. México, D.F.Google Scholar
Eberenz, R.
(1997)  Tornar/volver y descender/bajar: orígenes de dos relevos léxicos. In C. García Turza, F. González Bachiller, & J. Mangado Martínez (Eds.), Actas del IV Congreso internacional de historia de la lengua española La Rioja, 1–5 de abril de 1997, vol. II (pp. 109–125). Logroño: Universidad de La Rioja.Google Scholar
Errico, E.
(2015)  Hace dos años para atrás que fui a Egipto… sobre algunas semejanzas entre el español de Gibraltar o yanito y el español de Estados Unidos. Confluenze. Rivista di Studi Iberoamericani, 7(2), 194–209.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. M., & Potowski, K.
(2015) El español de los Estados Unidos. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, B.
(1976) The verb-particle combination in English. New York etc.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
García, M.
(1977) Chicano Spanish/Latin American Spanish: some differences in linguistic norms. Bilingual Review/Revista Bilingüe, 4(3), 200–209.Google Scholar
(1979)  Pa(ra) usage in United States Spanish. Hispania, 62(1), 106–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1982) Syntactic variation in verb phrases of motion in US-Mexican Spanish. In J. Amastae, & L. Elías-Olivares (Eds.), Spanish in the United States: sociolinguistic aspects (pp. 82–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, F.
(2009) The family of object-related depictives in English and Spanish: towards a usage-based constructionist analysis. Language Sciences, 31(5), 663–723. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goschler, J., & Stefanowitsch, A.
(Eds.) (2013) Variation and change in the encoding of motion events. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T.
(2003) Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: a study of particle placement. London/New York: Continuum Press.Google Scholar
Haßler, G.
(2016) Temporalität, Aspektualität und Modalität in romanischen Sprachen. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T.
(2010) Contact and grammaticalization. In R. Hickey (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (pp. 86–105). Chichester etc.: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hijazo-Gascón, A., Cadierno, T., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
(2016) Learning the placement caused motion construction in L2 Spanish. In S. de Knop, & G. Gilquin (Eds.), Applied Construction Grammar (pp. 185–210). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Östman, J.-O.
(2014) Reflections on constructions across grammars. In M. Hilpert, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Reflections on constructions across grammars. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 137–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höder, S.
(2012) Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 241–257). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Constructing diasystems: grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In T. Åfarli, & B. Mæhlum (Eds.), The sociolinguistics of grammar (pp. 137–152). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Grammar is community-specific: background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar. In H. C. Boas, & S. Höder (Eds.), Constructions in contact: constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages (pp. 37–70). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iacobini, C.
(2015) Particle verbs in Romance. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation: an international handbook of the languages of Europe (pp. 626–658). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
(2012) Placement and removal events in Basque and Spanish. In A. Kopecka, & B. Narasimhan (Eds.), Events of putting and taking: a crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 123–143). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., & Hijazo-Gascón, A.
(2012) Variation in motion events. Theory and applications. In L. Filipović, & K. M. Jaszczolt (Eds.), Space and time in languages and cultures. Linguistic diversity (pp. 349–371). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johanson, L.
(2008) Remodeling grammar: copying, conventionalization, grammaticalization. In P. Siemund, & N. Kintana (Eds.), Language contact and contact languages (pp. 61–79). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, P.
(1999) Frame and contiguity: on the cognitive bases of metonymy and certain types of word formation. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 139–167). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) The pervasiveness of contiguity and metonymy in semantic change. In K. Allan, & J. A. Robinson (Eds.), Current methods in historical semantics (pp. 259–311). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Lamiroy, B., & Delbecque, N.
(1998) The possessive dative in Romance and Germanic languages. In W. van Belle, & W. van Langendonck (Eds.), Case and grammatical relations across languages: the dative. Vol. II: Theoretical and contrastive studies (pp. 29–74). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberk, F.
(1991) Semantic change and heterosemy in grammaticalization. Language, 67(3), 475–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipski, J. M.
(1987) The construction pa(ra) atrás among Spanish-English bilinguals: parallel structures and universal patterns. Iberoamericana, 28/29, 87–96.Google Scholar
(2010) Spanish and Portuguese in contact. In R. Hickey (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (pp. 550–580). Chichester etc.: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lope Blanch, J. M.
(1971) El habla de la ciudad de México: Materiales para su estudio. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
(1976) El habla popular de la ciudad de México: Materiales para su estudio. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
(1990) El español hablado en el suroeste de los Estados Unidos: Materiales para su estudio. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
(1995) El habla popular de la República Mexicana: Materiales para su estudio. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Maldonado, R.
(1992) Middle voice: the case of Spanish ‘se’. Ph.D. Dissertation. San Diego: University of California.Google Scholar
(2008) Spanish middle syntax: a usage-based proposal for grammar teaching. In S. de Knop, & T. de Rycker (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar. Volume in honour of René Dirven (pp. 155–196). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Martínez-Vázquez, M.
(2013) Intralinguistic variation in the expression of motion events in English and Spanish. Lingue e Linguaggi, 9, 143–156.Google Scholar
Masini, F.
(2005) Multi-word expressions between syntax and the lexicon: the case of Italian verb-particle constructions. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 18, 145–173.Google Scholar
Mateu, J., & Rigau, G.
(2009) Romance paths as cognate complements. A lexical-syntactic account. In P. J. Masullo, E. O Rourke, & C.-H. Huang (Eds.), Romance Linguistics 2007 (pp. 227–241). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matlock, T.
(2004) The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In G. Radden, & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 221–248). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Matras, Y.
(2009) Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miami Corpus = Centre for Research on Bilingualism in Theory and Practice
(2010–2013) Miami Spanish-English corpus. Bangor University, [URL] (03.04.2018).
Moussy, C.
(1997) La polysémie du préverbe re- . Revue de Philologie, LXXI(2), 227–242.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R.
(1993) A reconsideration of the notion of loan translation in the analysis of US Spanish. In A. Roca, & J. M. Lipski (Eds.), Spanish in the United States: linguistic contact and diversity (pp. 21–45). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Convergencia conceptual y la sobreestimación de la presencia de elementos estructurales ingleses en el español estadounidense. In D. Dumitrescu, & G. Piña-Rosales (Eds.), El español en los Estados Unidos: e pluribus unum? Enfoques multidisciplinarios (pp. 129–149). New York: ANLE.Google Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş.
(2002) Metaphors we move by: a crosslinguistic-developmental analysis of metaphorical motion events in English and Turkish. Ph.D. Dissertation. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Pedersen, J.
(2005) The Spanish impersonal se-construction: constructional variation and change. Constructions, 1, 1–49.Google Scholar
(2013) The Spanish impersonal se-construction: constructional motivation for case-marking – quantitative evidence. In K. Jeppesen Kragh, & J. Lindschouw (Eds.), Deixis and pronouns in Romance languages (pp. 109–123). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Variable type framing in Spanish constructions of directed motion. In H. C. Boas, & F. Gonzálvez-García (Eds.), Romance perspectives on Construction Grammar (pp. 269–304). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Spanish constructions of directed motion – a quantitative study: typological variation and framing strategy. In J. Yoon, & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to Construction Grammar (pp. 105–144). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Verb-based vs. schema-based constructions and their variability: on the Spanish transitive directed-motion construction in a contrastive perspective. Linguistics, 57(3), 473–530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perek, F., & Hilpert, M.
(2014) Constructional tolerance: cross-linguistic differences in the acceptability of non-conventional uses of constructions. In M. Hilpert, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Reflections on constructions across grammars. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 266–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietsch, L.
(2010) What has changed in Hiberno-English: constructions and their role in contact-induced change. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 63(2), 118–145.Google Scholar
Piña-Rosales, G., Covarrubias, J. I., Segura, J., & Fernández, D.
(Eds.) (2010) Hablando bien se entiende la gente: Consejos de la Academia Norteamericana de la Lengua Española para mejorar su español. Nueva York: ANLE/Español Santillana.Google Scholar
PRESEEA = PRESEEA
(2014–) Corpus del Proyecto para el Estudio Sociolingüístico del Español de España y de América. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá, [URL] (26.02.2019).
Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z.
(1999) Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Revuelta Puigdollers, A. R.
(2012) Non-prototypical reciprocals in Greek, Spanish and other languages. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 32, 314–326.Google Scholar
Rojo, A., & Valenzuela, J.
(2003) Fictive motion in English and Spanish. International Journal of English Studies, 3(2), 125–151.Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, M.
(2016) The development of iterative verbal periphrases in Romance. Linguistics, 54(2), 235–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salinas Corpus = Brown, E. K.
(2018–) Corpus of Mexican Spanish in Salinas, California. University Corporation of Monterey Bay, [URL] (03.04.2018).
Schrickx, J.
(2015) Reflexionen über lateinische re-Komposita. Glotta, 91, 264–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C.
(1994) Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I.
(1996) Two ways to travel: verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: their form and meaning (pp. 195–233). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
(2009) Relations between paths of motion and paths of vision: a crosslinguistic and developmental exploration. In V. M. Gathercole (Ed.), Routes to language: studies in honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 197–221). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A.
(2013) Variation and change in English path verbs and constructions: usage patterns and conceptual structure. In J. Goschler, & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Variation and change in the encoding of motion events (pp. 223–244). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L.
(1985) Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2000a) Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2000b) Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 2: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Texas Corpus = Bullock, B. E., & Toribio, A. J.
(Eds.) (2013) The Spanish in Texas Corpus Project. University of Texas at Austin, [URL] (03.04.2018).
Traugott, E., & Trousdale, G.
(Eds.) (2013) Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, M., Dupuis, F., & Dufresne, M.
(2003) Les prépositions dans l’histoire du français : transitivité, grammaticalisation et lexicalisation. Verbum, 25, 549–562.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1967) Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Villa, D. J.
(2005)  Back to patrás: a process of grammaticization in a contact variety of Spanish. In J. Cohen, K. T. McAlister, K. Rolstad, & J. MacSwan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp. 2310–2316). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
(2010)  Y nos vamos patrás: back to an analysis of a supposed ‘calque’. In S. V. Rivera-Mills, & D. J. Villa (Eds.), Spanish of the US Southwest: a language in transition (pp. 239–251). Madrid/Frankfurt a.M.: Iberoamericana/Vervuert. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wasserscheidt, P.
(2014) Constructions do not cross languages: on cross-linguistic generalizations of constructions. In M. Hilpert, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Reflections on constructions across grammars. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 305–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Bilinguales Sprechen: Ein konstruktionsgrammatischer Ansatz. Ph.D. Dissertation. Freie Universität Berlin, [URL] (03.04.2018).
Wiesinger, E.
(2019)  no volver a repetir lo mismo pa’ tras: [V para atrás] als Konstruktion im Sprachkontakt. In J. Erfurt, & S. de Knop (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik und Mehrsprachigkeit. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie (OBST), 94, 105–125.Google Scholar
(2020)  ¿Esto se echa para atrás? Una aproximación a los verbos sintagmáticos en el español peninsular a base de un estudio de corpus de [V para atrás]. In C. Mellado Blanco (Ed.), Gramática de construcciones y fraseología en las lenguas románicas. Thematic issue of Romanica Olomucensia, 32(1), 201–230, [URL] (27.01.2021). DOI logo
accepted). On the diachronic role of verb-particle constructions in Spanish: onomasiological networks and typological change. In I. Hennecke, & E. Wiesinger Eds. Constructions in Spanish Amsterdam/Philadelphia Benjamins
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Hennecke, Inga & Evelyn Wiesinger
2023. Chapter 1. Construction Grammar meets Hispanic linguistics. In Constructions in Spanish [Constructional Approaches to Language, 34], ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Venegas, René, Iris Viviana Bosio & Constanza Cerda-Canales
2022. Los corpus sincrónicos del español. Descripción y potencialidades para la investigación teórica y aplicada de la lengua. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching 9:2 ► pp. 116 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2023. Chapter 12. On the role of verb-particle constructions in Old Spanish. In Constructions in Spanish [Constructional Approaches to Language, 34], ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 september 2023. 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.