Article published In:
Cognitive Linguistic Studies
Vol. 6:1 (2019) ► pp.103129
References
Barcelona, A.
(2000) On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective (pp. 31–58). Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2008) Metonymy is not just a lexical phenomenon: On the operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse. Selected papers from the Stockholm, 1–40.Google Scholar
(2011) Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 7–57). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Metonymy. In E. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 143–166). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cambridge University Press
(2008) Cambridge online dictionary, Cambridge Dictionary online in [URL]
Evans, V.
(2009) How words mean: Lexical concepts, cognitive models, and meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010a) From the spatial to the non-spatial: The “state” lexical concepts of in, on and at. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language, cognition & space: The state of the art and new directions (pp. 215–248). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
(2010b) The perceptual basis of spatial representation. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language, cognition and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp. 21–48). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
(2013) Language and time: A cognitive linguistics approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, V. A unified account of polysemy within LCCM Theory. Lingua
(2015) doi:  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M.
(2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Grady, J.
(1997) Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Unpublished doctoral thesis, linguistics dept, UC Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hampe, B.
(2005) Image schemas in cognitive linguistics: Introduction. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in Cognitive Linguistics. (pp. 1–12). Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haun, D. B., Rapold, C. J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C.
(2011) Plasticity of human spatial cognition: Spatial language and cognition covary across cultures. Cognition, 119 (1), 70–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herskovits, A.
(1985) Semantics and pragmatics of locative expressions. Cognitive Science 91, 341–378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986) Language and spatial cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1988) Spatial expressions and the plasticity of meaning. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 271–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
(1983) Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, M.
(1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) The philosophical significance of image schemas. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 15–33). Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Philosophy in the flesh (Vol. 41). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, volume I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1991) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, volume II: Descriptive applications. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Metonymic grammar. In K. U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012a) Interactive cognition: Toward a unified account of structure, processing, and discourse. International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics, 3(2), 95–125.Google Scholar
(2012b) Linguistic manifestations of the space-time (dis) analogy. In L. Filipović & K. M. Jaszczolt (Eds.), Space and time in languages and cultures: Language, culture and cognition (pp. 191–215). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandler, J.
(2004) The foundations of mind: Origins of conceptual thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Morras, J.
(2018) Base conceptual de la preposición entre y sus equivalentes de la lenguainglesa between, among, y amid: una perspectivaenlingüísticacognitiva [Conceptual basis of entre and its English equivalents between, among and amid: A cognitive linguistics perspective]. RILEX. Revista sobre Investigaciones Léxicas, 1(2), 52–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, E.
(1998) Prepositions and particles in English: A discourse-functional account. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Peña Cervel, S.
(2012) Los esquemas de imagen [Imageschemas]. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano & Valenzuela (Eds.), Lingüística Cognitiva (pp. 69–98). Barcelona: Anthropos.Google Scholar
Radden, G. & Dirven, R.
(2007) Cognitive English grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española
(2015) Diccionario de la lengua española (23.aed.). Consultado en [URL]
Rosch, E., & Lloyd, B. B.
(Eds.) (1978) Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.
(2006) Polysemy and the lexicon. In G. Kristiansen, M. Achard, R. Dirven & F. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives (pp. 51–80). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
(2003a) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003b) Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over . In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. Clarke (Eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language (pp. 95–159). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandeloise, C.
(1991) Spatial prepositions: A case study from French (trans. Anna R. K. Bosch). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
(1994) Methodology and analyses of the preposition in. Cognitive Linguistics, 5(2), 157–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Kermer, Franka
2021. Semantic network of the German preposition hinter . Review of Cognitive Linguistics 19:2  pp. 403 ff. DOI logo
Morras, Javier
2022. Semantic Parameters, Cognitive Models, and Mental Units. Cognitive Semantics 8:1  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Morras Cortés, Javier A. & Xu Wen
2021. Unweaving the embodied nature of English temporal prepositions. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:1  pp. 60 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 january 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.