Article published in:
On the Interaction of Constructions with Register and Genre
Edited by Kerstin Fischer and Kiki Nikiforidou
[Constructions and Frames 7:2] 2015
► pp. 148180
Cited by

Cited by 12 other publications

Alm, Maria, Janina Behr & Kerstin Fischer
2018. Modal particles and sentence type restrictions: A construction grammar perspective. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1 Crossref logo
Celle, Agnès
2018.  In Tense, Aspect, Modality, and Evidentiality [Studies in Language Companion Series, 197],  pp. 213 ff. Crossref logo
Dong, Chengru & Dawei Jin
2019. An Enthymematic Account of the Deduction of the Negative Meaning of the Chinese Shenme-based Rhetorical Question Construction. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 40:1  pp. 47 ff. Crossref logo
Hilpert, Martin & Samuel Bourgeois
2020. Intersubjectification in constructional change. Constructions and Frames 12:1  pp. 96 ff. Crossref logo
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
2021. Flexibility and fluidity of grammar: Grammatical constructions in discourse and sociocultural context. Journal of Pragmatics 172  pp. 105 ff. Crossref logo
Nikiforidou, Kiki
2018. Genre and constructional analysis. Pragmatics & Cognition 25:3  pp. 543 ff. Crossref logo
Nikiforidou, Kiki
2021. Grammatical variability and the grammar of genre: Constructions, conventionality, and motivation in ‘stage directions’. Journal of Pragmatics 173  pp. 189 ff. Crossref logo
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda L. Thornburg
2017.  In Studies in Figurative Thought and Language [Human Cognitive Processing, 56],  pp. 18 ff. Crossref logo
Põldvere, Nele & Carita Paradis
2019. Motivations and mechanisms for the development of the reactive what-x construction in spoken dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 143  pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo
2020. ‘What and then a little robot brings it to you?’ The reactive what-x construction in spoken dialogue. English Language and Linguistics 24:2  pp. 307 ff. Crossref logo
Tobin, Vera
2021. Where irony goes: routinization and the collapse of viewpoint configurations. Chinese Semiotic Studies 17:2  pp. 199 ff. Crossref logo
Vergaro, Carla
2018. A cognitive framework for understanding genre. Pragmatics & Cognition 25:3  pp. 430 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 september 2021. 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.



Arregi, K.
(2007) Syntax and semantics of split questions. In J. Camacho, N. Flores Ferrán, L. Sánchez, V. Déprez, & M.J. Cabrera (Eds.), Romance Linguistics 2006: Selected papers from the 36th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL) (pp. 15–28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref
Bai, Y.
(2014) A Usage-based study of the just me construction. In A. Stefanowitsch (Ed.), Yearbook of the German cognitive linguistics association, Vol. 2 (pp. 126–146). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M.
(1986) Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Biber, D.
(1995) Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T.A.
(2007) Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Camp, E.
(2012) Sarcasm, presence and the semantics-pragmatics distinction. Nous, 46, 587–634. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cieri, C., Miller, D., & Walker, K.
(2004) The Fisher corpus: A resource for the next generations of speech-to-text. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (pp. 69–71), Lisbon.
Clark, H.C., & Fox Tree, J.E.
(2002) Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84, 73–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.C., & Gerrig, R.
(1984) On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 121–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coupland, N.
(2007) Style: Language variation and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M.
(2008) The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. Available online at http://​corpus​.byu​.edu​/coca/.
Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.C.
(1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 64, 501–538. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, M.H.
(1996) Shifting frame. In D. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context and language: Essays in honor of Susan Irvin-Tripp (pp. 71–83). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
Grice, H.P.
(1975/1989) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3. Academic press. Reprinted as ch. 2 of Grice 1989, Studies in the way of words (pp. 22-40). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, P.
(1997) Constructional modus tollens and level of conventionality. In P. Kay, Words and the grammar of context (pp. 171–188). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C.J.
(1999) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The ‘What’s X doing Y’ construction. Language, 75, 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kay, P., & Michaelis, L.A.
(2012) Constructional meaning and compositionality. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An International handbook of natural language meaning, Vol. 3 (pp. 2271–2296). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S., & Brown, M.
(1995) How about another piece of pie? The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 3–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, K.
(1994) Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, K., & Michaelis, L.A.
(1998) Sentence accent in information questions: Default and projection. Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, 477–544. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
López-Cortina, J.
(2007) The Spanish left periphery: Questions and answers. Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.
Michaelis, L.A.
(2012) Making the case for Construction Grammar. In H. Boas & I. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based construction grammar (pp. 31–69). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Michaelis, L.A., & Francis, H.S.
(2007) Lexical subjects and the conflation strategy. In N. Hedberg & R. Zacharski (Eds.), Topics in the grammar-pragmatics interface: Papers in honor of Jeanette K. Gundel (pp. 19–48). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, L.A., & Lambrecht, K.
(1996) Toward a construction-based theory of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language, 72, 215–247. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J.
(1978) Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics (pp. 261–280). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Norrick, N.
(1992) Wh-Questions with guesses in tag position. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 85–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rampton, B.
(1995) Crossing: Language and ethnicity among adolescents. New York & London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sag, I.A.
(2012) Sign-Based Construction Grammar: An informal synopsis. In H. Boas & I.A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-Based Construction Grammar (pp. 69–202). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Thompson, S.A., & Hopper, P.J.
(2001) Transitivity, clause structure and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. In J. Bybee (Ed.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 28–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar