Review published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 16:2 (2009) ► pp.290297
Bolinger, Dwight
1961Generality, gradience and the all-or-none. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Givón, T.
1984Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. 21 vols. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
1961Categories of the theory of grammar. Word 17(2). 241–92. Reprinted in Halliday, M. A. K. 2002 On grammar (The collected works of M. A. K. Halliday 11 – ed. by Jonathan Webster), 37–94. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum
2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobsson, Bengt
1977Adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions in English: a study in gradience. Studia Linguistica 311. 38–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George
1987Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
2004A new Gray’s Anatomy of English grammar: A review of Huddleston and Pullum (2002). English Language and Linguistics 8(1). 121–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph
1965Descriptive statement and serial relationship. Language 41(2). 205–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1975Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1041. 192–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, John R.
1973A fake NP squish. In Charles J. Bailey & Roger W. Shuy (eds.), New ways of analyzing variation in English, 96–140. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Zadeh, Lotfi A.
1965Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 81. 338–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar