Article published in:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 22:1/2 (1995) ► pp. 123162
Cited by

Cited by other publications

No author info given
1997.  In Cognitive Semantics and the Polish Dative, Crossref logo
Cienki, Alan
1999. Cognitive Space and Linguistic Case. Journal of English Linguistics 27:1  pp. 70 ff. Crossref logo
Fortis, Jean-Michel
2018.  In Substance-based Grammar – The (Ongoing) Work of John Anderson [Studies in Language Companion Series, 204],  pp. 113 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 04 january 2021. 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.

Referencias bibliográficas

Referencias bibliográficas

Agud, Ana
1980Historia y Teoría de los Casos. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M.
1971The Grammar of Case: Towards a localistic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1977On Case Grammar: Prolegomena to a theory of grammatical relations. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1987 “Case Grammar and the Localist Hypothesis”. Dirven & Radden 1987.103–121.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie & Winifred Boagey
1977Review of Anderson (1971). Linguistics and Philosophy 1.119–152.Google Scholar
Becker, Karl Ferdinand
1827Organism der Sprache. Frankfurt am Main: Ludwig Reinherz. (2nd ed. 1841.)Google Scholar
Berlin, Brent & Paul Kay
1969Basic Color Terms: Their universality and evolution. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Blank, David L.
1987 “Apollonius and Maximus on the Order and Meaning of the Oblique Cases”. The History of Linguistics in the Classical Period ed. by Daniel J. Taylor, 67–83. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, Arthur L.
1987 “The Emergence of Psycholinguistics”. Synthese 72.313–323.Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz
1833Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Littauischen, Gothischen und Deutschen. Vol. I. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
Brecht, Richard D. & Catherine V. Chvany
eds. 1974Slavic Transformational Syntax. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Univ. of Michigan.Google Scholar
Brugman, Claudia M.
1981The Story of over: Polysemy, semantics, and the structure of the lexicon. M.A. thesis, Univ. of California at Berkeley. (Repr., New York: Garland 1988.)Google Scholar
1990 “What Is the Invariance Hypothesis?”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:2.257–266.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1934Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: Gustav Fischer. (Repr., Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1965.) [Transl. by Donald Fraser Goodwin, Theory of Language: The representational function of language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins 1990.]Google Scholar
Croft, William
1991Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen
1977Review of Brecht & Chvany (1974). Language 53.228–232.Google Scholar
1979 “Case Grammar and Prototypes”. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 32.3–23. (Repr. in Dirven & Radden 1987.147–161.)Google Scholar
Deane, Paul D.
1991 “Syntax and the Brain: Neurological evidence for the spatialization of form hypothesis”. Cognitive Linguistics 2:4.361–367.Google Scholar
1992Grammar in Mind and Brain: Explorations in cognitive syntax. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dirven, René & Günter Radden
eds. 1987Concepts of Case. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Döleke, Wilhelm Heinrich
1814Ueber die Casus, die Tempora, das Pronomen und Verbum substantivum. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.Google Scholar
1826Deutsch-lateinische Schul-Grammatik. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Fairbanks, Gordon H.
1977 “Case Inflections in Indo-European”. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 5:2.102–131.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1968 “The Case for Case”. Universals in Linguistic Theory ed. by Emmon Bach & Robert T. Harms, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Freidhof, Gerd
1978Kasusgrammatik und localer Ausdruck im Russischen. Munich: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
1988 “Cognitive Grammar and the History of Lexical Semantics”. Rudzka-Ostyn 1988.647–677.Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr.
1990 “Psycholinguistic Studies on the Conceptual Basis of Idiomaticity”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:4.417–451.Google Scholar
Hartung, Johann Adam
1831Ueber die Casus, ihre Bildung und Bedeutung, in der griechischen und lateinischen Sprache. Erlangen: J. J. Palm & Ernst Enke.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis
1935–37 “La Catégorie des cas”. Acta Jutlandica 7:1 (i–xii, 1–184); 9:2 (i–vii, 1–78). Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Holzweissig, Fr[iedrich]
1877Wahrheit und Irrthum der localistischen Casustheorie. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Hübschmann, H[einrich]
1875Zur Casuslehre. München: Theodor Ackermann.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura A.
1984A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes za-, pere-, do-, and ot-. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California at Los Angeles. (Published as volume 192 of Slavistische Beiträge , Munich: Otto Sagner 1986.)Google Scholar
1990 “The Radial Network of a Grammatical Category – Its genesis and dynamic structure”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:3.269–288.Google Scholar
1993A Geography of Case Semantics: The Czech dative and the Russian instrumental. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark
1987The Body in the Mind: The bodily basis of meaning of imagination, and reason. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán
1990Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Kurlyowicz, Jerzy
1964The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1987Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1990 “The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on imageschemas?”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:1.39–74.Google Scholar
1993 “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”. Metaphor and Thought ed. by Andrew Ortony, 2nd ed., 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. & Mark Johnson
1980Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. & Mark Turner
1987More Than Cool Reason: Afield guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
1973Review of Anderson (1971). Journal of Linguistics 9.319–331.Google Scholar
1987Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1988 “Case and Grammatical Relations in Cognitive Grammar (with special reference to Newari)”. Linguistic Notes from La Jolla 14.57–94.Google Scholar
1991a “Transitivity, Case, and Grammatical Relations”. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar, 209–260. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
1991bFoundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Lunn, Patricia V.
1987The Semantics of Por and Para . Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana Univ. Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
1977Semantics. Vol. II. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian
1977 “Starting Points”. Language 53.152–168.Google Scholar
Madvig, Johan Nikolai
1875Kleine philologische Schriften. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. (Repr., Hildesheim: G. Olms 1966.)Google Scholar
Marty, Anton
1910Zur Sprachphilosophie. Die “logische”, “lokalistische” und andere Kasustheorien. Halle/S.: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Michelsen, Conrad
1843Kasuslehre der lateinischen Sprache, vom kausallokalen Standpunkte aus. Berlin: T. Trautwein.Google Scholar
Miller, James
1974 “A Localist Account of the Dative in Russian”. Brecht & Chvany 1974.244–261.Google Scholar
1985Semantics and Syntax: Parallels and Connections. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1986 “A Third Look at the Second Dative”. Case in Slavic ed. by Richard D. Brecht & James S. Levine, 296–311. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica.Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki
1991 “The Meanings of the Genitive: A case study in semantic structure and semantic change”. Cognitive Linguistics 2:2.149–205.Google Scholar
Parret, Herman
1989 “Cognition, the Localist Hypothesis, and back to Kant”. Worlds Behind Words ed. by F. J. Heyvaert & F. Steurs, 37–49. Leuven: Leuven Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H.
1974 “The Case Theory of Maximus Planudes”. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Congress of Linguists ed. by Luigi Heilmann, Vol I, 107–111. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1973 “On the Internal Structure of Perceptual and Semantic Categories”. Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language ed. Timothy E. Moore, 111–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1978 “Principles of Categorization”. Cognition and Categorization ed. by Eleanor Rosch & Barbara B. Lloyd, 27–48. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida
ed. 1988Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rumpel, Theodor
1845Casuslehre in besonderer Beziehung auf die griechische Sprache. Halle/Saale: E. Anton.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael B.
1987The Semantics of Dative and Accusative in German: An investigation in cognitive grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California at San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve E.
1990From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic sructure. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1976 “Semantic Causative Types”. The Grammar of Causative Constructions ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 43–116. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1988a “Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition”. Cognitive Science 12.49–100.Google Scholar
1988b “The Relation of Grammar to Cognition”. Rudzka-Ostyn 1988.165–205.Google Scholar
Turner, Mark
1987Death is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, metaphor, criticism. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Vandeloise, Claude
1986L’espace en français: Sémantique des prépositions spatiales. Paris: Seuil. (Transl. by Anna R. K. Bosch, Spatial Prepositions: A case study from French. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press 1991.)Google Scholar
Wüllner, Fr[anz]
1827Die Bedeutung der sprachlichen Casus und Modi. Münster: Coppenrathsche Buch- und Kunsthandlung.Google Scholar
1831Ueber Ursprung und Urbedeutung der sprachlichen Formen. Münster: Theissingsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Wundt, Wilhelm
1900Völkerpsychologie. Vol. I. Die Sprache. Part 2. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar