Review published in:
Specialised Translation in Spain: Institutional dimensions
Edited by José Santaemilia-Ruiz and Sergio Maruenda-Bataller
[Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 30:2] 2017
► pp. 662668
References

[ p. 667 ]References

Béjoint, H.
(2010) The lexicography of English: From origins to present. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cowie, A. P.
(1999) English dictionaries for foreign learners: A history. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
de Schryver, G. M.
(2003) Lexicographers’ dreams in the electronic-dictionary age. International Journal of Lexicography, 16(2), 143–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J.
(1982) Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing.Google Scholar
(2003) Double-decker definitions: The role of frames in meaning explanation. Sign Language Studies, 3(3), 263–295. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, D.
(1990) The lexicographic treatment of prototypical polysemy. In S. L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorization (pp. 195–210). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Oatley, K.
(1989) The language of emotions: an analysis of a semantic field. Cognition and Emotion, 3(2), 81–123. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2000) Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Csábi, S.
(2014) Lexicography and cognitive linguistics. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 27(1), 118–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 201–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E.
(1975) Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 192–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rundell, M.
(2012) ‘It works in practice but will it work in theory?’: The uneasy relationship between lexicography and matters theoretical. In R. V. Fjeld & J. M. Torjusen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Euralex international congress, EURALEX 2012 (pp. 47–92). Oslo: University of Oslo. Accessed online at http://​www​.euralex​.org​/elx​_proceedings​/Euralex2012​/pp47​-92%20Rundell​.pdf.
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
(2003) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A.
(1992) Defining emotion concepts. Cognitive Science, 16, 539–581. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Xu, H.
(2015) Treatment of the preposition to in English learnerʼs dictionaries: A cognitive approach. International Journal of Lexicography, 28(2), 207–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 668 ]