Part of
Contexts of Subordination: Cognitive, typological and discourse perspectives
Edited by Laura Visapää, Jyrki Kalliokoski and Helena Sorva
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 249] 2014
► pp. 1772
Bolinger, Dwight
1971The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper, and Peter Harder
Chafe, Wallace L.
1987“Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow.” In Coherence and Grounding in Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 11], ed. by Russell S. Tomlin, 21–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1994Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Morris Halle
1968The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1981“An Interpretation of Split Ergativity and Related Phenomena.” Language 57: 626–657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger, and Michael Tomasello
2001“The Acquisition of Finite Complement Clauses in English: A Corpus-Based Analysis.” Cognitive Linguistics 12: 97–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles
1985Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press/Bradford.Google Scholar
1997Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay, and Mary Catherine O’Connor
1988 “Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone .” Language 64: 501–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harder, Peter
1996Functional Semantics: A Theory of Meaning, Structure and Tense in English [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 87]. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L., and Bernard Comrie
1977“Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar.” Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
1987aFoundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1987b“Nouns and Verbs.” Language 63: 53–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2, Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1993“Reference-Point Constructions.” Cognitive Linguistics 4: 1–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995“Conceptual Grouping and Constituency in Cognitive Grammar.” In Linguistics in the Morning Calm 3, ed. by Ik-Hwan Lee, 149–172. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
1997“Constituency, Dependency, and Conceptual Grouping.” Cognitive Linguistics 8: 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999“Assessing the Cognitive Linguistic Enterprise.” In Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology [Cognitive Linguistics Research 15], ed. by Theo Janssen, and Gisela Redeker, 13–59. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001a“Discourse in Cognitive Grammar.” Cognitive Linguistics 12: 143–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001b“Dynamicity in Grammar.” Axiomathes 12: 7–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002“Deixis and Subjectivity.” In Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference [Cognitive Linguistics Research 21], ed. by Frank Brisard, 1–28. 
Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004“Form, Meaning, and Behavior: The Cognitive Grammar Analysis of Double Subject Constructions.” In Cognitive and Communicative Approaches to Linguistic Analysis [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 51], ed. by Ellen Contini-­Morava, Robert S. Kirsner, and Betsy Rodríguez-Bachiller, 21–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008aCognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008b“Subordination in Cognitive Grammar.” In Asymmetric Events [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 11], ed. by Barbara 
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 137–149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Investigations in Cognitive Grammar [Cognitive Linguistics Research 42]. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010“Day After Day After Day.” In Meaning, Form, and Body, ed. by Fey Parrill, Vera Tobin, and Mark Turner, 149–164. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
2012“Substrate, System, and Expression: Aspects of the Functional Organization of English Finite Clauses.” In Cognitive Linguistics between Universality and Variation, ed. by Mario Brdar, Ida Raffaelli, and Milena Žic Fuchs, 3–52. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Lashley, Karl S.
1951“The Problem of Serial Order in Behavior.” In Cerebral Mechanisms in Behavior, ed. by Lloyd A. Jeffress, 112–136. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1997“From Outer to Inner Space: Linguistic Categories and Non-Linguistic Thinking.” In Language and Conceptualization [Language, Culture and Cognition 1], ed. by Jan Nuyts, and Eric Pederson, 13–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindner, Susan
1981A Lexico-Semantic Analysis of English Verb-Particle Constructions with UP and OUT. San Diego: University of California doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
1982“What Goes Up doesn’t Necessarily Come Down: The Ins and Outs of Opposites.” Papers from the Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 18: 305–323.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1978“Principles of Categorization.” In Cognition and Categorization, ed. by Eleanor Rosch, and Barbara B. Lloyd, 27–47. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan I.
1987“Thinking for Speaking.” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13: 435–445.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve
1999“Compositionality and Blending: Semantic Composition in a Cognitively Realistic Framework.” In Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology [Cognitive Linguistics Research 15], ed. by Theo Janssen, and Gisela Redeker, 129–162. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1996“The Windowing of Attention in Language.” In Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra Thompson, 235–287. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tesnière, Lucien
1965Éléments de Syntaxe Structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A.
Verhagen, Arie
1986Linguistic Theory and the Function of Word Order in Dutch: A Study on Interpretive Aspects of the Order of Adverbials and Noun Phrases. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
2005Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition. 
Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Andersen, Anders & Erling Strudsholm
2023. Il congiuntivo alla danese. Revue Romane. Langue et littérature. International Journal of Romance Languages and Literatures 58:1  pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Etelämäki, Marja & Laura Visapää
2015. Why blend conversation analysis with cognitive grammar?. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA)  pp. 477 ff. DOI logo
Fong, Ronald
2017. Chinese Motion-Directional Construction: A Conceptual and Cognitive Analysis. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 38:2  pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Langacker, Ronald W.
2016. Toward an integrated view of structure, processing, and discourse. In Studies in Lexicogrammar [Human Cognitive Processing, 54],  pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Peltola, Rea
2021. Unfolding constructions. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 32],  pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
Visapää, Laura
2022. Infinitives of affect and intersubjectivity: on the indexical interpretation of the Finnish independent infinitives. Cognitive Linguistics 33:3  pp. 521 ff. DOI logo
Waliński, Jacek Tadeusz
2022. Trees, assemblies, chains, and windows. In Construction Grammar across Borders [Benjamins Current Topics, 122],  pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Wiklund, Mari

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2023. 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.