Chapter published in:
Broader Perspectives on Motion Event Descriptions
Edited by Yo Matsumoto and Kazuhiro Kawachi
[Human Cognitive Processing 69] 2020
► pp. 63104
References

References

Bishop, N.
1992A typology of causatives, pragmatically speaking. In Sh. Hwang & W. Merrifield (Eds.), Language in context: Essays for Robert E. Longacre (295–304). The Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Blomberg, J., & Zlatev, J.
2014Actual and non-actual motion: Why experientialist semantics needs phenomenology (and vice versa). Phenomenology & the Cognitive Sciences, 13(3), 395–418. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B.
This volume. Looking into visual motion expressions in Dutch, English and French: How languages stick to well-trodden typological paths.
Comrie, B.
1976Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
2012Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C.
2010Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In H. C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in construction grammar (201–235). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, S.
1981An interpretation of split ergativity and related patterns. Language, 57, 626–657. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dewell, R. B.
1997Construal transformations: Internal and external viewpoints in interpreting containment. In M. H. Verspoor, K. D. Lee, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Lexical and syntactical constructions and the construction of meaning (17–32). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011The meaning of prefix / particle constructions in German. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Draye, L.
1992Zum Trajektiv. Ein Kapitel aus der kognitiv orientierten niederländisch-deutschen Kontrastivgrammatik. Leuvense Bijdragen, 81, 163–203.Google Scholar
1996The German dative. In W. Van Belle & W. Van Langendonck (Eds.), The Dative. Vol 1: Descriptive studies (155–215). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, V., & Tyler, A.
2004Rethinking English ‘prepositions of movement’: The case of to and through . In H. Cuyckens, T. Mortelmans, & W. De Mulder (Eds.), Belgian Journal of Linguistics 18: Adpositions of Movement: Proceedings of the International Conference on Adpositions of Movement (Leuven 2002) (247–270). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Goschler, J., & Stefanowitsch, A.
2010Pfad und Bewegung im gesprochenen Deutsch: Ein kollostruktionaler Ansatz. In E. Ruigendijk, Th. Stolz, & J. Trabant (Eds.), Linguistik im Nordwesten (103–115). Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Hawkins, B. W.
1985The semantics of English spatial prepositions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, San Diego. Reproduced by L.A.U.T., Series A, Paper No. 142.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
2017Motion and semantic typology: A hot old topic with exciting caveats. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Ed.), Motion and Space across Languages: Theory and applications [Human Cognitive Processing 59] (13–36). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Itkonen, E.
2008Concerning the role of consciousness in linguistics. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 15(6), 15–33.Google Scholar
Jokinen, E.
2005 Ortswechsel, Orientierung und Origo. Eine Korpusanalyse ausgewählter deutscher Richtungsadverbien mit hin- und her- und ihrer finnischen Entsprechungen . Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tampere. [http://​acta​.uta​.fi​/pdf​/951​-44​-6453​-2​.pdf]
Lewandowski, W.
2018A typological approach to the encoding of motion events. In M. de los Ángeles Gómez González & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (Eds.), The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 296] (45–74). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leys, O.
1989Aspekt und Rektion räumlicher Präpositionen. Deutsche Sprache, 17, 97–113.Google Scholar
1995Dativ und Akkusativ in der deutschen Sprache der Gegenwart. Leuvense Bijdragen, 84, 39–62.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Y.
2003Typologies of lexicalization patterns and event integration: Clarifications and reformulations. In Sh. Chiba et al. (Eds.), Empirical and theoretical investigations into language: A festschrift for Masaru Kajita (403–418). Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
(Ed.) 2017Idoo-hyoogen no ruikeiron. Tokyo: Kurosio.Google Scholar
2018Motion event descriptions in Japanese: Typological perspectives. In P. Pardeshi & T. Kageyama (Eds.), Handbook of Japanese contrastive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meex, B.
2004Motion, path and aspect: The case of the German path adpositions über and durch . In H. Cuyckens, T. Mortelmans, & W. De Mulder (Eds.), Belgian Journal of Linguistics 18: Adpositions of Movement: Proceedings of the International Conference on Adpositions of Movement (Leuven 2002), (299–322). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ochsenbauer, A.-K., & Hickmann, M.
2010Children’s verbalizations of motion events in German. Cognitive Linguistics, 21, 217–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rice, S.
1999Aspects of prepositions and prepositional aspect. In L. de Stadler & C. Eyrich (Eds.), Issues in cognitive linguistics: 1993 Proceedings of the International Cognitive Linguistics Conference (225–247). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schubert, C.
2009Raumkonstitution durch Sprache: Blickführung, Bildschemata und Kohäsion in Blickführung, Bildschemata und Kohäsion in Deskriptionssequenzen englischer Texte. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I.
1996Two Ways to Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani and S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning (195–219). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2004The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, M.
1983Verb-descriptivity in German and English: A contrastive study in semantic fields. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Takahashi, K.
This volume. Syntactic and semantic structures of Thai motion expressions.
Talmy, L.
1985Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 3 (36–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1991Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (480–519). Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
2000Toward a cognitive semantics, Vols. 1 and 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2016Properties of Main Verbs. Cognitive Semantics, 2, 133–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J.
1993Prepositions: Patterns of polysemization and strategies of disambiguation. In C. Zelinski-Wibbelt (Ed.), The semantics of prepositions: From mental processing to natural language processing (151–175). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verkerk, A.
2014The evolutionary dynamics of motion event encoding. Ph.D dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Wienold, G.
1995Lexical and conceptual structures in expressions for movement and space: With reference to Japanese, Korean, Thai, and Indonesian as compared to English and German. In U. Egli, P. Pause, C. Schwarze, A. von Stechow, & G. Wienold (Eds.), Lexical knowledge in the organization of language, (301–340). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Blomberg, J., & David, C.
2010Translocation, language and the categorization of experience. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Space in language and cognition: The state of the art and new directions (389–418). London: Equinox.Google Scholar