Article published In:
Review of Cognitive LinguisticsVol. 12:1 (2014) ► pp.223–242
In search of motivation in language
An interview with Klaus-Uwe Panther
References (34)
Baicchi, A. (2011). Metaphoric motivation in grammatical structure: The caused-motion construction from the perspective of the Lexical-Constructional Model. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.),
Motivation in grammar and the lexicon
(pp. 149–169). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
Barnden, J. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 211, 1-34.
Brdar, M. (2009). Metonymies we live without. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg, &
A. Barcelona (Eds.),
Metonymy and metaphor in grammar
(pp. 259–274). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Culicover, P. W., & R. Jackendoff (2005).
Simpler Syntax
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fauconnier, G. (1984).
Espaces mentaux: Aspects de la construction du sens dans les langues naturelles
. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1999). Metonymy and conceptual integration. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.),
Metonymy in language and thought
(pp. 77–90). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2002).
The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities
. New York: Basic Books.
Gonzálvez-García, F. (2011). Metaphor and metonymy do not render coercion superfluous: Evidence from the subject-transitive construction.
Linguistics
, 491, 1305–1358.
Goschler, J., & Stefanowitsch, A. (Eds.). (2013).
Variation and change in the encoding of motion events
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic actions.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 11, 323–340.
Grady, J. (1997).
Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes
. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
Kövecses, Z. (1986).
Metaphors of anger, pride and love: A lexical approach to the structure of contexts
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 91, 37–77.
Lakoff, G. (1987).
Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind
. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999).
Philosophy in the flesh
. New York: Basic Books.
Landau, I. (2013).
Control in Generative Grammar: A research companion
. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. (2008).
Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lyngfelt, B. (2009). Towards a comprehensive Construction Grammar account of control: A case study of Swedish infinitives.
Constructions and Frames
, 11, 153–189.
Michaelis, L. A. (2004). Type shifting in construction grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 151, 1–67.
Panther, K.-U. (1994).
Kontrollphänomene im Englischen und Deutschen aus semantisch-pragmatischer Perspektive
. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
2008). Relating participants across asymmetric events: Conceptual constraints on obligatory control. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Ed.),
Asymmetric events
(pp. 209–225). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2014). Metaphor and metonymy shaping grammar: The role of animal terms in expressive morphology and syntax.
Journal of Foreign Languages
, 37, 2–20.
Panther, K.-U., & Köpcke, K.-M. (1989). On correlations between word-order and pragmatic function of conditional sentences in German.
Journal of Pragmatics
, 131, 685–711.
Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G. (Eds.) (1999).
Metonymy in language and thought
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Eds.) (2011).
Motivation in grammar and the lexicon
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. L. (1998). A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation.
Journal of Pragmatics
, 30(6), 755–769.
1999). Coercion and metonymy: The interaction of constructional and lexical meaning. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Ed.),
Cognitive perspectives on language
(pp. 37–52). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
2012). Conceptualizing humans as animals in English verb-particle constructions.
Language Value
, 4(1), 63–83. Available on-line at: [URL].
Eds.) (2003).
How universal are conceptual metonymies?: A cross-language comparison. Special issue. Jezikoslovlje
, 4(1). ([URL], or: [URL]).
Radden, G, & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther &
G. Radden (Eds.),
Metonymy in language and thought
(pp. 17–59). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Radden, G., & Panther, K.-U. (Eds.). (2004).
Studies in linguistic motivation
. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Mairal Usón, R. (2008). Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: An introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model.
Folia Linguistica
, 421, 355–400.
Talmy, L. (2000).
Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems
. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Thornburg, L., & Panther, K.-U. (1997). Speech act metonymies. In W.-A. Liebert, G. Redeker, & L. Waugh (Eds.),
Discourse and perspective in Cognitive Linguistics
(pp. 205–219). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda L. Thornburg
2018. Chapter 5. What kind of reasoning mode is metonymy?. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 121 ff. 
Szeverényi, Sándor
2017. Proceedings of the 4th Mikola Conference - 14-15, November 2014 [Proceedings of the 4th Mikola Conference - 14-15, November 2014, 51], ► pp. 107 ff.
Benczes, Réka
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. 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.