Cover not available
Review published In:
Extending the notion of near-synonymy: Studies in morphological, syntactic and pragmatic equivalence
Edited by Renata Enghels
[Languages in Contrast 18:1] 2018
► pp. 145–149
Book review

Signe Oksefjell Ebeling and Hilde Hasselgård (eds). Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions

Reviewed by
| Cardiff University, Wales
Published online: 22 February 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00007.chr
References
Altenberg, B. and Aijmer, K.
(eds) 2013 Text-Based Contrastive Linguistics. Special issue of Language in Contrast, 13(2). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebeling, S. and Hasselgård, H.
2015 Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. and Matthiessen, C.
2014 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th Ed. London: Hodder Arnold. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, P.
2012 How people use words to make meanings: Semantic types meet valencies. In Input, Process and Product: Developments in Teaching and Language Corpora, A. Boulton and J. Thomas (eds), 53–67. Brno: Masaryk University Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, S.
2007 Seeing through Multilingual Corpora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mindt, I.
2016 The Diachronic Development of ‘Come To V’. In Silesian Studies in English 2015, M. Crhová and M. Weiss (eds), 38–59. Opava: Silesian University in Opava.Google Scholar
Newman, J.
2002 The Linguistics of Sitting, Standing and Lying. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 English Posture Verbs: An experientially grounded approach. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics Published under the Auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association 7(1), 30–57.Google Scholar
Palmer, F.
1987 The English Verb. 2nd Ed. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Viberg, A.
2013 Posture Verbs: A multilingual contrastive study. Languages in Contrast, 13(2), 139–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar