Article published In:
Reflections on Constructions across Grammars
Edited by Martin Hilpert and Jan-Ola Östman
[Constructions and Frames 6:2] 2014
► pp. 232265
References (72)
Achard, M
(1998) Representation of cognitive structures: Syntax and semantics of French sentential complements [Cognitive Linguistics Research Series 11]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 432–456). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Akinci, M.A., & Jisa, H
(2001) Développement de la narration en langue faible et forte: le cas des connecteurs. AILE, 141, 87–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, P., & Pfänder, S
(Eds.) (2011) Constructions. Emerging and emergent. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergs, A., & Diewald, G
(Eds.) (2009) Contexts and constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R.A
(1978) Modern Hebrew structure. Tel Aviv: University Pub. Projects.Google Scholar
(1980) The case of an (S)VO language: Subjectless constructions in modern Hebrew. Language, 561, 759–776. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998) Typological perspectives on connectivity. In N. Dittmar & Z. Penner (Eds.), Issues in the theory of language acquisition (pp. 203–224). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Berman, R.A., & Nir, B
(2009) Clause–packaging in narratives: A crosslinguistic developmental study. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin–Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özçalişkan & K. Nakamura (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan I. Slobin. Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berman, R.A., & Slobin, D.I
(1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berman, R.A., & Verhoeven, L
Bylund, E
(2011) Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: Insights from bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 108–142). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E., & Jarvis, S
(2011) L2 effects on L1 event conceptualization. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 141, 47–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T
(2008) Learning to talk about motion in a foreign language. In P. Robinson & N.C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 239–275). New York / London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carroll, M., Roßdeutscher, A., von Stutterheim, C., & Lambert, M
(2008) Subordination in narratives and macrostructural planning: A comparative point of view. In C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’ versus ‘Coordination’ in sentence and text (pp. 161–184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cristofaro, S
(2003) Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W
(2001) Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., Barddal, J., Hollmann, W.B., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C
(2010) Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex events. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive construction grammar (pp. 201–236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Knop, S., & Dirven, R
(2008) Motion and location events in German, French and English: A typological, contrastive and pedagogical approach. In S. De Knop & T. De Rycker (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A volume in honour of René Dirven (pp. 298–327). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Degand, L
(2000) Causal connectives or causal prepositions? Discursive constraints. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 687–707. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duffield, C.J., Hwang, J.D., & Michaelis, L.A
(2010) Identifying assertions in text and discourse: The presentational relative clause construction. Proceedings of the NAACL HLT Workshop on Extracting and Using Constructions in Computational Linguistics , 17–24.
Ellis, N.C., & Cadierno, T
(2009) Constructing a second language: Introduction to the special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 71, 111–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G
(1998) Mental spaces, language modalities, and conceptual integration. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Volume 1 (pp. 251–280). Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C.J
(1977) The case for case reopened. In P. Cole & J.M. Saddock (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 81, 59–81.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.C
(2003) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of Let Alone . In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Volume 2 (pp. 243–270). Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fischer, K
(2010) Accounting for the role of situation in language use in a cognitive semantic representation of sentence mood. In D. Glynn & K., Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 179–200). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fried, M., & Östman, J.–O
(2005) Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 1752–1778. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fujii, S.Y
(1993) On the clause-linking to construction in Japanese. In P.M. Clancy (Ed.), Japanese / Korean linguistics, volume 2 (pp. 3–19). Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Givón, T
(1980) The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements. Studies in Language, 4(3), 333–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990) Syntax: A functional typological introduction. Volume 21. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) The genesis of syntactic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.E
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hilpert, M
(2010) The force dynamics of English complement clauses: A usage-based account. In K. Fischer & D. Glynn (Eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics (pp. 155–178). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Johnstone, B
(1987) Parataxis in Arabic: Modification as a model for persuasion. Studies in Language, 111, 85–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keenan, E.L
(1985) Relative clauses. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions. Volume 21 (pp. 141–170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W
(1997) Some further steps in narrative history. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 71, 394–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, K
(1990) ‘What me worry?’ — Mad Magazine sentences revisited. BLS, 61, 215–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics, 391, 463–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R
(2008) Subordination in cognitive grammar. In B. Lewandowska Tomaszczyk (Ed.), Asymmetric events (pp. 137–149). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Liamkina, O
(2008) Making dative a case for semantic analysis: Differences in use between native and non-native speakers of German. In A. Tyler, M. Takada & Y. Kim (Eds.), Language in the context of use: Discourse and cognitive approaches to language (pp. 145–166). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B
(2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. Third Edition. Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Mann, W.C., & Thompson, S.A
(1986) Relational propositions in discourse. Discourse Processes, 91, 57–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Y
Niemeier, S., & Reif, M
(2008) Making progress simpler? Applying cognitive grammar to tense-aspect teaching in the German EFL classroom. In S. De Knop, & T. De Rycker (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A Volume in Honour of René Dirven (pp. 325–356). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nir, B
(2008) Clause packages as constructions in developing narrative discourse. PhD Dissertation, Tel Aviv University.
(2014) Complementizers in Hebrew. In G. Khan (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Hebrew language and linguistics. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers. [URL]Google Scholar
Nir, B., & Berman, R.A
(2010a) Complex syntax as a window on contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Pragmatics, 421, 744–765. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010b) Parts of speech as constructions: The case of Hebrew “adverbs”. Constructions and Frames, 2(2), 242–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noonan, M
(1985) Complementation. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions. Volume 21 (pp. 42–140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Östman, J.–O
(2005) Construction discourse: A prolegomenon. In J.–O. Östman & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 121–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T
(1984) Principles of gestalt perception in the temporal organization of narrative texts. Linguistics, 221, 779–809.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N
(2008) Conclusion: Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and L2 instruction — Issues for research. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 489–546). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., & Michaelis, L.A
(2010) A constructional account of genre-based argument omissions. Constructions and Frames, 2(2), 158–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmiedtová, B., & Flecken, M
(2008) Aspectual concepts across languages: Some considerations for second language learning. In S. De Knop & T. De Rycker (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A volume in honour of René Dirven (pp. 357–384). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schmiedtová, B., v. Stutterheim, C., & Carroll, M
(2011) Implications of language-specific patterns in event construal of advanced L2 speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 66–107.). Clevendon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D.I
(1993) Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives (pp. 239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1996) From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J.J. Gumperz & S.C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sorace, A
(2005) Selective optionality in language development. In L. Cornips & K.P. Corrigan (Eds.), Syntax and variation. Reconciling the biological and the social (pp. 55–80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C
(1998) Global principles of information organisation in texts of L2 speakers. Studi italiani di linguistica teoretica a applicata, XXVII, 1. S, 89–111.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., & Lambert, M
(2005) Crosslinguistic analysis of temporal perspective in text production. In H. Hendricks (Ed.), The structure of learner varieties (pp. 203–230). Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., & Nüse, R
(2003) Processes of conceptualisation in language production. Linguistics, 41(5), 851–881.Google Scholar
Talmy, L
(1978) Figure and ground in complex sentences. In J.H. Greenberg, C. Ferguson & J. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of human language. Volume 4: Syntax (pp. 625–649). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics, vol. 2: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S.A
(1987) ‘Subordination’ and narrative event structure. In R. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp. 435–454). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Object complements and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language, 26(1), 125–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S.A., & Longacre, R.E
(1985) Adverbial clauses. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions. Volume 21 (pp. 171–234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, A
(2008) Cognitive Linguistics and second language instruction. In N. Ellis & P. Robinson (Eds.), The handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 456–488). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Van Valin, R.D., & LaPolla, R
(1997) Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A
(2001) Subordination and discourse segmentation revisited, or: Why matrix clauses may be more dependent than complements. In T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation. Linguistic and psychological aspects (pp. 337–357). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waara, R
(2004) Construal, convention, and constructions in L2 Speech. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language pedagogy (pp. 51–75). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webelhuth, G
(2012) The Distribution of that-Clauses in English: An SBCG Account. In H.C. Boas & I.A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based Construction Grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by 2 other publications

Nir, Bracha
2015. Frames for clause combining. Constructions and Frames 7:2  pp. 348 ff. DOI logo
Nir, Bracha
2017. Resonance as a resource for stance-taking in narratives. Functions of Language 24:1  pp. 94 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 july 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.