Review published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 8:1 (2010) ► pp.207221
References
Biber, D., Conrad, S., Reppen, R., Byrd, P., Helt, M., Clark, V., Cortes, V., Csomay, E. & Urzua, A.
(2004) Representing Language Use in the University. Analysis of the TOEFL 2000 Spoken and Written Academic Language Corpus. Princeton, NJ: ETS.Google Scholar
Carston, R.
(2002) Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Connor, U., Precht, K. & Upton, T. A.
(2002) Business English: learner data from Belgium, Finland and the US. In S. Granger, J. Hung & S. Petch-Tyson (eds.), Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching (pp. 175–194). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Deignan, A.
(2005) Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) ‘Image’ metaphors and connotations in everyday language. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 51, 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M.
(1996) Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language (pp. 113–129). Standford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, L.
(2004) The argument for using English specialized corpora to understand academic and professional language. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (eds.), Discourse in the Professions. Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics (pp. 11–33). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(4), 321–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuertes-Olivera, P. A.
(2007) A corpus-based view of lexical gender in written business English. English for Specific Purposes, 26(4), 219–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Mittelberg, I., Coulson, S. & Spivey, M. J.
(eds.) (2007) Methods in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grady, J.
(1999) A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance.” In R. Gibbs & G. Steen (eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th.
(2006) Introduction. In S. Th. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpora-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis (pp. 1–17). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th. & Stefanowitsch, A.
(eds.) (2006) Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpora-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grondelaers, S., Geeraerts, D. & Speelman, D.
(2007) A case for cognitive corpus linguistics. In M. González-Márquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson & M. J. Spivey (eds.), Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 149–170). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrero Ruiz, J.
(2009) Understanding Tropes. At the Crossroads between Pragmatics and Cognition. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. & Ward, G.
(eds.) (2004) The Handbook of Pragmatics. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago/London: The Chicago University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oswald, S.
(2007) Argumentation and cognition: Can Pragma-Dialectics interplay with Pragma-Semantics? Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 1(1), 48–165. Also in [URL] [Last accesed: September, 15, 2009]
Panther, K. & Thornburg, L.
(2003) Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. & Peña, S.
(2005) Conceptual interaction, cognitive operations and proyectes spaces. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza & S. Peña (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction. Cognitive Linguistic Research (pp. 254–280). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D.
(1985/6) Loose talk. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 861, 153–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986) On defining relevance. In R. Grady & R. Warner (eds.), Philosophical Grounds of Rationality: Intentions, Categories, Ends (pp. 143–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, D.
(1995) Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thompson, P.
(2000) Citation practices in PhD theses. In L. Burnard & T. McEnery (eds), Rethinking Language Pedagogy from a Corpus Perspective (pp. 91–101). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Turner, M. & Fauconnier, G.
(1994) Conceptual projection and middle spaces. Cognitive Science Report 94011, UCSD.Google Scholar
(1995) Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 101, 183–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H. J.
(1996) An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, J.
(2008) Review of Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Mittelberg, I., Coulson, S. & Spivey, M. J. (eds.) (2007) Methods in Cognitive Linguistics. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 61, 302–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar