Article published in:
The Dynamics of Lexical Innovation: Data, methods, models
Edited by Daphné Kerremans, Jelena Prokić, Quirin Würschinger and Hans-Jörg Schmid
[Pragmatics & Cognition 25:1] 2018
► pp. 122141
References

References

Baayen, R. Harald
2009Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, 900–919. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
1983English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref[ p. 140 ]Google Scholar
2001Morphological productivity (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benczes, Réka
2006Creative compounding in English: The semantics of metaphorical and metonymical noun-noun combinations (Human Cognitive Processing 19). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Setting limits on creativity in the production and use of metaphorical and metonymical compounds. In Sascha Michel & Alexander Onysko (eds.), Cognitive approaches to word formation, 221–245. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berry, Roger
2005Making the most of metalanguage. Language Awareness 14(1). 3–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bower, Jack & Satomi Kawaguchi
2011Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese/English eTandem. Language Learning & Technology 15(1). 41–71.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan
1985Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form (Typological Studies in Language 9). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Roswitha
1998Lexical change in present-day English: A corpus-based study of the motivation, institutionalization, and productivity of creative neologisms. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Kerremans, Daphné
2015A web of new words: A corpus-based study of the conventionalization process of English neologisms. Frankfurt am Main etc.: Peter Lang. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Metcalf, Allan
2002Predicting new words. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Morzycki, Marcin
2011Metalinguistic comparison in an alternative semantics for imprecision. Natural Language Semantics 19. 39–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Predelli, Stefano
2003Scare quotes and their relation to other semantic issues. Linguistics and Philosophy 26. 1–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2008New words in the mind: Concept-formation and entrenchment of neologisms. Anglia 126 (1). 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016English morphology and word-formation: An introduction. 3rd edn. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Semino, Elena
2016A corpus-based study of ‘mixed metaphor’ as a metalinguistic comment. In Raymond W. Gibbs Jr. (ed.), Mixing metaphor (Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 6), 203–220. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Svanlund, Jan
2006Hur man etablerar sig som curlingförälder och stafettläkare . Svenskans beskrivning 28. Örebro universitet. 359–368.Google Scholar
2009Lexikal etablering: En korpusundersökning av hur nya sammansättningar konventionaliseras och får sin betydelse (Stockholm Studies in Scandinavian Philology, n.s., 52). Vällingby: Elanders.[ p. 141 ]Google Scholar