Article published in:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 18:2 (2020) ► pp. 397427
References
Bouveret, M., & Sweetser, E.
(2009) Multi-frame semantics, metaphoric extensions, and grammar. In I. Kwon, H. Pritchett & J. Spence (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 49–59). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bretones Callejas, C. M.
(2001) Synaesthetic metaphors in English. Technical Reports, TR 01–008. Berkeley: International Computer Science Institute.Google Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A.
(2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cytowic, R. E.
(2002) Synaesthesia: A union of the senses. Massachusetts: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cytowic, R. E., & Eagleman, D. M.
(2009) Wednesday is indigo blue: Discovering the brain of synaesthesia. Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E.
(2014) Figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Day, S.
(1996) Synaesthesia and synaesthetic metaphors. Psyche, 2(32), 1–16.Google Scholar
Elias, L. J., Deborah, M., Saucier, D. M., Hardie, C., & Sarty, G. E.
(2003) Dissociating semantic and perceptual components of synaesthesia: Behavioural and functional neuroanatomical investigations. Cognitive Brain Research, 161, 232–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J.
(1982) Frame semantics. In I. Yang (Ed.), Linguistic in the Morning Calm. Selected Papers from SICOL-1981 (pp. 111–137). Hanshin, Seoul.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., & Atkins, B. T.
(1992) Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbours. In A. Lehrer & E. F. Kittay (Eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization (pp. 75–102). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. A., Johnson, C. R., & Petruck, M. R. L.
(2003) Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography, 16(3), 235–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fried, M., & Östman, J. O.
(2004) Construction grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried & J. O. Östman (Eds.), Construction grammar in cross-language perspective (pp. 11–86). Amesterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E.
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7(5), 219–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. In J. O. Östman & M. Fried, Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (Vol. 3) (pp. 17–43). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., & Casenhiser, D.
(2006) English constructions. In B. Aarts & A. McMahon (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics. (pp. 343–355). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., & Suttle, L.
(2010) Construction grammar. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(14), 468–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M.
(2008) Germanic future constructions: A usage-based approach to language change. Amesterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J.
(1999) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 75(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1991) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive applications (Vol. 2). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, K. E.
(2006) Space-to-time mappings and temporal concepts. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(2), 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Ego-perspective and field-based frames of reference: Temporal meanings of front in Japanese, Wolof and Aymara. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(3), 759–776. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Frames and the experiential basis of the Moving Time metaphor. In M. Fried & N. Nikiforidou (Eds.), Advances in frame semantics (pp. 85–107). Amesterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östman, J. O., & Fried, M.
(2005) Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (Vol. 3). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perception frame
Rogowska, A. M.
(2015) Synaesthesia and individual differences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J.
(2010) FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. California: International Computer Science Technology.Google Scholar
Simner, J.
(2007) Beyond perception: synaesthesia as a psycholinguistic phenomenon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), 23–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, K.
(2006) Frame-based constraints on lexical choice in metaphor. In Proceedings of the thirty-second annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, K., & Sweetser, E.
(2009) Is “generic is specific” a metaphor? In F. Parrill, V. Tobin & M. Turner (Eds.), Meaning, form and body (pp. 309–328). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar