Article in:
Cognitive Linguistic Studies
Vol. 9:2 (2022) ► pp. 403430
References
Anderson, S.
(1977) Comments on the Paper by Wasow. In P. Culicover, T. Wasow & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal Syntax (pp. 361–378). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Beavers, J.
(2013) Aspectual classes and scales of change. Linguistics (54): 681–706. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burzio, L.
(1986) Italian Syntax, A Government and Binding Approach. Rdidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
(2012) Verbs: Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D.
(1967) The Logical Form of Action sentences. In N. Rescher (Ed.), The logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Reprinted in Davidson (1980), Essays on Action and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Dirven, R.
(2001) English particle verbs: Theory and didactic application. In M. Pütz & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D.
(1979) Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, Reidel, Dordrecht. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T.
(1999) Particle movement: A cognitive and functional approach. Cognitive Linguistics, 10 (2): 105–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, J.
(1990) Argument Structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Han, J.
(2020) On the unaccusativity of the English verb die . Foreign Language Teaching and Research (6): 817–829.Google Scholar
Han, L.
(2017) English transitive particle verbs: Particle placement and idiomaticity. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, (4): 330–354.Google Scholar
Hay, J. et al.
(1999) Scalar structure underlies telicity in “degree achievements”. In T. Mathews & D. Strolovitch (Eds.), SALT IX (pp. 127–144). Ithaca: CLPC Publications. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
(1990) Semantic Structures, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C., & L. McNally
(2005) Scale structure, degree modifications, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language, (2): 345–381. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M.
(1992) Thematic Relations as Links between Nominal Reference and Temporal Constitution. In I. Sag & A. Szabolsci (Eds.), Lexical Matters, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford.Google Scholar
Larson, R.
(1988) On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, (19): 335–391.Google Scholar
Levin, B.
(1989) English Verbal Diathesis, Lexicon Project Working Papers 32, MIT Center for Cognitive Science, Cambridge: MA.Google Scholar
(1993) English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Levin, B., & M. Rappaport Hovav
(1995) Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantic Interface. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Macfarland, T.
(1995) Cognate Objects and the Argument/Adjunct Distinction in English. Ph.D. Dissertation. Northwestern University.
Massam, D.
(1990) Cognate Objects as Thematic Objects, Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 161–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maya, A.
(1996) A minimalist view of the syntax-lexical semantics interface, UCL Working papers in Linguistics, (8), 1–30.Google Scholar
Nakajima, K.
(2006) Adverbial cognate objects. Linguistic Inquiry 37 1: 674–684. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, D.
(1983) Studies in Relational Grammar I, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D., & Postal, P.
(1984) ‘The 1-Advancement Exclusiveness Law’. In D. Perlmutter & C. Rosen (Eds.), Studies in Relational Grammar 2 (pp. 81–125). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J.
(1991) The Syntax of Event Structure, Cognition, 41 (1–3): 47–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk et al.
(1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rappaport, M., & Levin, B.
(1988) ‘What to do with Theta-roles’. In W. Wilkins (Ed.), Thematic Relations, Syntax and Semantics 211 (pp. 7–36), New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, C.
(1984) ‘The Interface between Semantic Roles and Initial Grammatical Relations’. In D. M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Studies in Relational Grammar 2 (pp. 38–77). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Simpson, J.
(1983) Aspects of Warlpiri Morphology and Syntax, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.
Ter Meulen, A. G. B.
(1995) Representing Time in Natural Language: The Dynamic Interpretation of Tense and Aspect. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tenny, C.
(1994) Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, S.
(2005) Resultatives under the “Event-Argument Homomorphism”. In N. Erteschitshir & T. Rapoport (Eds.), The Syntax of Aspect (255–273). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, Max
(1923/1950) Laws of organization in perceptual forms. In W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A source book of Gestalt psychology (pp. 71–88). New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Zubinarreta, M. L.
(1987) Levels of Representation in the Lexicon and in the Syntax. Foris, Dordrecht. CrossrefGoogle Scholar