How Grammar Links Concepts

Verb-mediated constructions, attribution, perspectivizing

| University of Rostock
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027246738 | EUR 99.00 | USD 149.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027265784 | EUR 99.00 | USD 149.00
 
The proposed framework of concept linking combines insights of construction grammar with those of traditional functional descriptions to explain particularly challenging but often neglected areas of English grammar such as negation, modality, adverbials and non-finite constructions. To reach this goal the idea of a unified network of constructions is replaced by the triad of verb-mediated constructions, attribution and scope-based perspectivizing, each of them understood as a syntactically effective concept-linking mechanism in its own right, but involved in interfaces with the other mechanisms.

In addition, concept linking supplies a novel approach to early child language. It casts fresh light on widely accepted descriptions of early two-word utterances and verb islands in usage-based models of language acquisition and encourages a new view of children’s ‘mistakes’.

Intended readership: Constructionist and cognitive linguists; linguists and psychologists interested in language acquisition; teachers and students of English grammar and grammar in general.
[Human Cognitive Processing, 57]  2017.  xiii, 325 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
List of figures
List of tables
Chapter 1. Introduction
1–10
Part 1. Basics
11
Chapter 2. Mechanisms of concept linking
13–48
Chapter 3. Hierarchy in concept linking
49–70
Chapter 4. Restrictions on concept linking
71–80
Chapter 5. Signaling concept linking: Word order, morphology, function words
81–94
Chapter 6. Concept linking, topic, comment and focusing
95–132
Part 2. Interfaces
133
Chapter 7. Introductory remarks on interfaces in concept linking
135–138
Chapter 8. Interfaces of verb-mediated constructions and attribution
139–176
Chapter 9. Interfaces of perspectivizing and attribution (adverb interfaces)
177–196
Chapter 10. Non-finite constructions as interfaces of VMCs, attribution and perspectivizing
197–224
Chapter 11. Interfaces and the grammaticalization of perspectivizers
225–234
Part 3. Language acquisition
235
Chapter 12. Introductory remarks on concept linking in language acquisition
237–240
Chapter 13. Temporal priority of attribution in early language acquisition
241–254
Chapter 14. The emergence of VMCs and copula/modifier interfaces
255–270
Chapter 15. The development of perspectivizing mechanisms
271–300
Chapter 16. Conclusion and outlook
301–308
References
Name index
Subject index
References

References

Aarts, Bas
2011Oxford modern English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin
1996I think an English modal particle. In Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westvik (Eds.), Modality in Germanic languages (1–47). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2015What I mean is – what is it doing in conversational interaction? The European English Messenger, 24, 29–36.Google Scholar
Allerton, D. A.
1982Valency and the English verb. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ambridge, Ben, & Goldberg, Adele E.
2008The island status of clausal complements: evidence in favor of an information structure explanation. Cognitive Linguistics, 29, 357–389.Google Scholar
Austin, Keith, Theakston, Anna, Lieven, Elena, & Tomasello, Michael
2014Young children’s understanding of denial. Developmental Psychology, 50, 2061–2070. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bannard, Colin, Lieven, Elena, & Tomasello, Michael
2009Modeling children's early grammatical knowledge. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106 (41), 17284-17289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beckmann, E.
1880Über die doppelformigen englischen Adjectiv-Adverbien. Archiv für das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, 64, 25–70.Google Scholar
Behrens, Heike
2001Cognitive-conceptual development and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes. In Melissa Bowerman & Steven Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (450-474). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bencini, Giulia M. L., & Goldberg, Adele E.
2000The contribution of argument structure constructions to sentence meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 640–651. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin, & Chang, Nancy
2013Embodied construction grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 168–190).Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, & Finnegan, Edward
1999Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Binneck, Robert
(Ed.) 2012The Oxford handbook of tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, Lois
1973One word at a time: The use of single-word utterances before syntax. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C.
2013Cognitive construction grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 233–252).Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper, & Harder, Peter
2007Complement-taking predicates: Usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language, 31, 569–606. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braine, Martin D.
1976Children’s first word combinations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brand, Christiane, & Götz, Sandra
2011Fluency versus accuracy in advanced spoken learner language: A multi-method approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16 (2), 255-275. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, & Nikitina, Tatiana
2003On the gradience of the dative alternation. Draft of May 7 2003.Google Scholar
Broccias, Christano
2013Cognitive grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 191–210).Google Scholar
Brown, Roger
1973A first language: The early years. Cambridge/Mass.: Harvard University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron-Faulkner, Thea, Lieven, Elena, & Theakston, Anna
2007What part of no do children not understand? A usage-based account of multiword-negation. Journal of Child Language, 33, 251–282. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carter, Ronald, & McCarthy, Michael
2006Cambridge grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1965Aspects of the theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., & Clark, Eve V.
1977Psychology and language: An introduction into psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt College Publications.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1976Aspect. An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1985Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1989Language universals and linguistic typology. 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2013Radical construction grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 191–232).Google Scholar
Croft, William, & Cruse, D. Alan
2004Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dabrowska, Ewa
2000From formula to schema: The acquisition of English questions. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 83–102.Google Scholar
2008Questions with long-distance dependencies. A usage-based perspective. Cognitive Linguistics, 19, 391–425. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Functional constraints, usage, and mental grammars: A study of speakers’ intuitions about questions with long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Linguistics, 24, 633–665. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen
2010Typology of negation. In Horn (The expression of negation, 9–38).Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen, & Velupillai, Viveka
2013Tense and Aspect. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
Daneš, Frantisek
1974Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In Frantisek Daneš (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective (106–128). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Deane, Paul
1996Neurological evidence for a cognitive theory of syntax. In Eugene H. Casad (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics in the redwoods: The expansion of a new paradigm (55–116). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
2004The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Construction grammar and first language acquisition. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 347–363).Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger, & Tomasello, Michael
2001The acquisition of finite complement clauses in English: A corpus-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics,12: 1-45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005A new look at the acquisition of relative clauses. Language, 81, 1–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dimroth, Christine
2010The acquisition of negation. In Horn (The expression of negation, 39–73).Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.
2005A semantic approach to English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dodge, Ellen, & Lakoff, George
2005On The Neural Basis of Image Schemas. In Hampe & Grade (57–92).Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S.
1988Object-verb order and adjective-noun order: Dispelling a myth. Lingua, 74, 77–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013aRelationship between the order of object and verb and the order of adjective and noun. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013bOrder of adjective and noun. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013cOrder of genitive and noun. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013dOrder of adposition and noun phrase. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013eOrder of degree word and adjective. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013fOrder of negative morpheme and verb. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
2013gPosition of negative morpheme with respect to subject, object, and verb. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S., & Haspelmath, Martin
(Eds.) 2013The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at http://​wals​.info. Accessed December 30, 2015.Google Scholar
Evans, Vvyan
2014The language myth. Why language is not an instinct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan, & Green, Melanie
2006Cognitive linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline, & Krifka, Manfred
2008Information structure. Notional distinctions, ways of expression. In Piet van Sterkenburg (Ed.), Unity and diversity of languages (123-135). Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1968The case for case. In Emmon Bach & Robert T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Quoted after The case for case, http://​linguistics​.berkeley​.edu​/~syntax​-circle​/syntax​-group​/spr08​/fillmore​.pdf. Accessed December 30, 2015.Google Scholar
2013Berkeley construction grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 111–132).Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Kay, Paul, & O’Connor, Mary Catherine
1988Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. The case of let alone. Language, 64, 508–538. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Firbas, Jan
1992Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga
2003The development of the modals in English: Radical versus gradual changes. In David Hart (Ed.), English modality in context. Diachronic perspectives (16–32). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W.
2005The psychological status of image schemas. In Hampe & Grady (From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 113–136). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gil, David
2013Genitives, adjectives and relative clauses. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
Gleason, Henry Allan
1961An introduction to descriptive linguistics. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
1995Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2003Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 219–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Constructions at work: the nature of generalization in language. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2013Constructionist approaches. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 15–31).Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan, & Alibali, Martha
2013Gesture’s role in learning and development. In Philip Zelazo (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Golinkoff, Roberta M., & Hirsh-Pase, Kathy
Grady, Joseph E.
2005Image schemas and perception: Refining a definition. In Hampe & Grady (From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 35–56). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney
1969Studies in English adverbial usage. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph
1966Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of language. 2nd ed. (73–113). Cambridge/Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th
2003Towards a corpus-based identification of prototypical instances of constructions. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Data in construction grammar. In Hoffmann, & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 93–108). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Jeannette K., Hedberg, Nancy, & Zacharias, Ron
1993Cognitive status and form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69, 274–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gülzow, Insa
2003Early development of verb morphology in an English-speaking child. In Dagmar Bittner, Wolfgang U. Dressler, & Marianne Kilani-Schoch (Eds.), Development of verb inflection in first language acquisition. A cross-linguistic perspective (43–88). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., & Hasan, Ruqayia
1976Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1994An introduction to functional grammar, 2nd ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hampe, Beate
2005Introduction. In Hampe & Grady (From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, i–x). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hampe, Beate, & Grady, Joseph E.
(Eds.) 2005From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A.
1983Word order universals. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hayase, Naoko
2011The cognitive motivation for the use of dangling participles in English. In Günter Radden & Klaus-Uwe Panther (Eds.), Motivation in grammar and lexicon (89–105). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014The motivation for using English suspended dangling participles: A usage-based development of (inter)subjectivity. In Evie Coussé & Ferdinand von Mengen (Eds.), Usage-based approaches to language change (117-145). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther, Kuteva, Tania, & Long, Haiping
2013An outline of discourse grammar. In Shannon Bischoff & Carmen Jenny (Eds.), Reflections on functionalism in linguistics (155–206). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Herbst, Thomas, Heath, David, Roe, Ian F., & Götz, Dieter
2004A valency dictionary of English. A corpus-based analysis of the complementation patterns of English verbs, nouns and adjectives. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herbst, Thomas, & Schüller, Susen
2008Introduction to syntactic analysis: a valency approach. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hoad, T. F.
2003The concise Oxford dictionary of English etymology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Thomas, & Trousdale, Graeme
2013Construction grammar: Introduction. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 1–12).Google Scholar
(Eds.) 2013The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., & Traugott, Elizabeth
2003Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Lawrence
1989A natural history of negation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) 2010The expression of negation. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne
2007English mediopassive constructions. A cognitive, corpus-based study of their origin, spread and current status. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Iggesen, Oliver A.
2013Number of cases. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi
2015A multiple grammar model of speakers’ linguistic knowledge. Cognitive Linguistics, 26, 161–210. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Roy
2009Compounding in the parallel architecture and conceptual semantics. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavil Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding (105–128). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1933The essentials of grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Jesperson, Otto
1924The philosophy of grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark
1987The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunter
2011Explaining diverging evidence. The case of clause-initial I think. In Doris Schönefeld (Ed.), Converging evidence. Methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research (81–112). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Heine, Bernd, & Kuteva, Tania
2011On Thetical grammar. Studies in Language, 35, 852–897. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul, & Kiparsky, Carol
1971Fact. In Manfred Bierwisch & Erich Heidolph (Eds.), Progress in Linguistics (143–173). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kirjavainen, Minna, Theakston, Anna, Lieven, Elena, & Tomasello, Michael
2009 ‘I want hold Postman Pat’: An investigation into the acquisition of infinitival marker ‘to’. First Language, 29, 313–339. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward S., & Bellugi, Usula
1966Syntactic regularity in the speech of children. In John Lyons & Roger J. Wales (Eds.), Psycholinguistic papers (183–208). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Krahe, Hans, & Meid, Wolfgang
1969Germanische Sprachwissenschaft. Vol. 2: Formenlehre. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd
1991Free adjuncts and absolutes in English: Problems of control and interpretation problems of control and interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kowalski, Alix, & Yan, Charles
2012Verb islands in adult and child language. BUCLD Proceedings from the 2011 meeting . Prefinal version.
Lakoff, George
1987Women, fire and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark
1999Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York, Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
1994Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
1976Semantic Representations and the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Foundations of Language, 14, 307–357.Google Scholar
1987/1991Foundations of cognitive grammar. 2 vols. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langendonck, Willy Van
2007Iconicity. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (394–418). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P.
1973A structural principle of language and its implications. Language, 49, 47–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lenker, Ursula
2011A focus on adverbial connectors: Connecting, partitioning, and focusing attention in the history of English. In Anneli Meurman-Soli & Ursula Lenker (Eds.), Connectives in synchrony and diachrony in European languages. Helsinki: VARIENG.Google Scholar
2014Knitting and splitting information. Medial placement of linking adverbials in the history of English. In Simone E. Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt, & Daniel Schreier (Eds.), Contact, variation and change in the history of English (11–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Li, Charles N., & Thompson, Sandra
1976Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In Charles N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (457–489). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lieven, Elena
2015First language learning from a usage-based approach. In Schmid (Entrenchment, memory and automaticity. The psychology of linguistic knowledge and language learning, 1–24).Google Scholar
Lieven, Elena, Pine, J., & Baldwin, G.
1997Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language, 24, 187–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
1977Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian
1975Pragmatic patterns in child syntax. Stanford Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 10, 153–165.Google Scholar
2015Item-based patterns in early syntactic development. In Schmid (Entrenchment, memory and automaticity. The psychology of linguistic knowledge and language learning, 25–61).Google Scholar
Mandler, Jean M., & Canovas, Cristobal Pagan
2014On defining image schemas. Language and Cognition, 12, 510–532. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, Laura
2003Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In Hubert Cuykens, René Dirven, & John R. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (93–122). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, Laura A.
2013Sign-based construction grammar. In Hoffmann & Trousdale (The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 133–132).Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti
2008Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Subtypes of asymmetric standard negation. In Dryer & Haspelmath.The world atlas of language structures online, Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce
1985Old English syntax. 2 vols. Oxford. Clarenden. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F. R.
1986Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Patten, Amanda
2012The English it-cleft. A constructional account and a diachronic investigation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F.
1978A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language, 54, 883–906. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, & Svartvik, Jan
1972A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Radden, Günter
1992The cognitive approach to natural language. In Martin Pütz (Ed.), Thirty years of linguistic evolution (513–541). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004The metaphor TIME AS SPACE across languages. In Nicole Baumgarten, Claudia Böttger, Markus Motz, & Julia Probst (Eds.), Übersetzen, Interkulturelle Kommunikation, Spracherwerb und Sprachvermittlung – das Leben mit mehreren Sprachen. Festschrift für Juliane House zum 60. Geburtstag (225–238). Bochum: AKS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Radden, Günter, & Panther, Klaus-Uwe
2004Introduction: Reflections on motivation. In Radden, & Panther (Studies in linguistic motivation, 1–46).Google Scholar
(Eds.) 2004Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Radden, Günter, & Dirven, René
2007Cognitive English grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Radford, Andrew
1988Transformational grammar. A first course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004Minimalist syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roget, Peter Mark
1982Roget’s Thesaurus. Ed. by Susan M. Lloyd. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rochat, Philippe
2013Self-conceptualizing in development. In Philip Zelazo (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press,Google Scholar
Rohrer, Tim
2005Image schemata in the brain. In Hampe & Grady (From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 165–196). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M.
2012The Modular Architecture of Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1988Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2007Entrenchment, salience and basic levels. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (117–138). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) 2015Entrenchment, memory and automaticity. The psychology of linguistic knowledge and language learning. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John H.
1991Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Robin
1995Logic. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Aristotle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, & Wilson, Deirdre
1995Relevance: Communication and cognition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol, & Rohde, Ada
2004The goal bias in the encoding of emotion events. In Radden & Panther (Studies in linguistic motivation, 249–268).Google Scholar
Swan, Toril
1982A note on the scope(s) of sadly. Studia Linguistica 36, 121-130. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1975Semantics and syntax of motion. In John P. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 4 (181–238). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2000Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge/Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, John R.
2002Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A.
2002“Object complements” and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language, 26, 125–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
2000First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 61–82.Google Scholar
2003Constructing a language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge/Mass.: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
2006Acquiring linguistic constructions. In William Damon, Richard M. Lerner, Deanna Kuhn, & Robert S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology. Vol. 2. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
2008The origins of human communication. Cambridge/Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ungerer, Friedrich
1980Zur Auswahl des Beispielmaterials in Schulgrammatiken. Der Fremdsprachliche Unterricht, 14, 103–114.Google Scholar
1988Syntax der englischen Adverbialen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000Englische Grammatik heute. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
2001Basicness and conceptual hierarchies in foreign language learning. A corpus-based study. In Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier, & René Dirven (Eds.), Applied cognitive linguistics. Vol. 2: Language pedagogy (201–222). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
. (in preparation). Towards a concept-linking grammar of German. Verb-second position and the competition between word order principles.
Ungerer, Friedrich, G. E. H. Meier, K. Schäfer, & S. Lechler
1981A grammar of present-day English. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
Ungerer, Friedrich, & Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2006An introduction to cognitive linguistics. 2nd ed. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Van Bogaert, Julie
2011I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics, 49, 295–332.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo
1975Analogy in generative grammar: the origin of word order. In Luigi Heilmann (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Congress of Linguists. Vol. 2 (79–83). Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Vergaro, Carla
2018. “And the Rabbi Begins the Benediction … ”: Declarative Shell Nouns in English. English Studies 99:8  pp. 817 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 2020. 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.

Subjects
BIC Subject: CFK – Grammar, syntax
BISAC Subject: LAN009060 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Syntax
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2017003489 | Marc record