References (34)
References
Brenzinger, M., & Kraska-Szlenk, I. (Eds.). (2014). The body in language: Comparative studies of linguistic embodiment. Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cabral, A. S. A. C. (1996a). Algumas evidências lingüísticas de parentesco genético do Jo’é com as línguas Tupí-Guaraní. Moara, (4), 47–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1996b). Notas sobre a fonologia segmental do Jo’é. Moara, (4), 23–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). A propósito das oclusivas sonoras em Jo’é. Moara, (10), 53–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Fonologia da língua Jo’é. Universa, 50–60.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Flexão relacional na família Tupí-Guaraní. Boletim da ABRALIN, 251, 233–262.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). As categorias nome e verbo em Zo’é. In A. S. A. C. Cabral & A. D. Rodrigues (Eds.), Línguas e culturas Tupí (Vol. I1, pp. 241–257). LALLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Uma escrita para a língua Zo’é. Laboratório de Línguas Indígenas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2023). Quando a ordem dos constituintes em Zo’é é pragmaticamente motivada. In É. A. Fragoso, Q. F. Camargos, & S. da S. Facundes (Eds.), Conhecimento, ensino e política de línguas na Amazônia (pp. 25–53). Pontes.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cabral, A. S. A. C., Jennings, E., & Pinto, S. B. (2019). Manual linguístico de apoio ao atendimento de saúde junto ao povo Zo’é. LALLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cravens, T. D. (1982). The origin of “testa” as “head” in Romance. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 83(1), 53–60.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (2011). The languages of Australia. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley].
Haarmann, H. (1986). Language in ethnicity: A view of basic ecological relations. Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, B. (1991). Auxiliaries: Cognitive forces and grammaticalization. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). The body in language: Observations from grammaticalization. In M. Brenzinger & I. Kraska-Szlenk (Eds.), The body in language: Comparative studies of linguistic embodiment (pp. 13–32). Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hock, H. H. (1991). Principles of historical linguistics. Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture. Universality and Variation. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). The Metaphor–Metonymy Relationship: Correlation Metaphors Are Based on Metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(2), 75–88. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kluge, F. (2002). Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (E. Seebold, Ed.; 24th ed.). De Gruyter. (Original work published 1872). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kraska-Szlenk, I. (2014). Semantics of body part terms: General trends and a case study of Swahili. LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pasch, H. (2020). Body-part terms as a linguistic topic and the relevance of body-parts as tools. In I. Kraska-Szlenk (Ed.), Body part terms in conceptualization and language usage (pp. 52–75). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peña-Cervel, M. S., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. (2022). Figurative thought and language. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A. D. (2010). Estrutura da língua Tupinambá. In A. S. A. C. Cabral, A. D. Rodrigues, & F. B. Duarte (Eds.), Línguas e culturas Tupí II (pp. 11–42). LALLI/Universidade de Brasília. (Original work published 1981).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodrigues, A. D., & Cabral, A. S. A. C. (2002). Revendo a classificação interna da família Tupí-Guaraní. In A. S. A. C. Cabral & A. D. Rodrigues (Eds.), Línguas indígenas brasileiras: fonologia, gramática e história (Vol. 11, pp. 327–337). EDUFPA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Pérez Hernández, L. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor: Myths, developments and challenges. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(3), 161–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1976). Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In R. M. W. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages (pp. 112–172). Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Survival Brasil. (2025). Zo’é. [URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue