Part of
Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change
Edited by Evie Coussé and Ferdinand von Mengden
[Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 69] 2014
► pp. 203242
References

Sources:

ADL = Arkiv for dansk litteratur [Archive of Danish Literature] [URL]
DDO = Den Danske Ordbog 1-6 [The Danish Dictionary]. Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab. Copenhagen: Gyldendal 2000-2006.Google Scholar
GL = Gammeldansk læsebog Eds. Nelly Uldaler & Gerd Wellejus. København 1968.
Korpus.dk [URL]
Legend of St. Christina. Text from GL
ODS = Ordbog over det danske Sprog 1-28. [Dictionary of the Danish Language 1918–1955.
References
Andersen, H
(1973) Abductive and deductive change. Language 49, 4, 765–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1980) Morphological change: towards a typology. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Historical Morphology (pp. 1–50). The Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001a) Markedness and the theory of linguistic change. In H. Andersen (Ed.), Actualization. Linguistic change in progress (pp. 21–57). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
(2001b) Actualization and the (uni)directionality of change. In H. Andersen (Ed.), Actualization. Linguistic change in progress (pp. 225–248). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
(2006a) Synchrony, Diachrony, and Evolution. In O. Nedergaard Thomsen (Ed.), Competing Models of Linguistic Change. Evolution and beyond (pp. 59–90). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006b) Grammation, regrammation, and degrammation. Tense loss in Russian. Diachronica XXIII, 2, 231–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Grammaticalization in a speaker-oriented theory of change. In Th. Eythórsson (Ed.), Grammatical Change and Linguistic Theory. The Rosendal papers (pp. 11–44). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, K. & Harder, P
(2007) Complement-taking predicates: usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language 31.3, 569–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J., Perkins. R. & Pagliuca, W
(1994)  The Evolution of Grammar . Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World . Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.L
(2010)  Language, usage, and cognition . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colleman, T
(2011) Ditransitive Verbs and the Ditransitive Construction: A diachronic perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 59, 387–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colleman, T. & de Clerck, B
(2011) Constructional semantics on the move: On semantic specialization in the English double object construction. Cognitive Linguistics 22, 183–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W
(2001)  Radical Construction Grammar . Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Faarlund, J.T., Lie, S. & Vannebo, K.I
(1997)  Norsk Referansegrammatikk . Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C
(1975)  Transformative, intransitive und kursive Verben . Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fried, M. & Östman, J.-O
(Eds) (2004)  Construction Grammar in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Construction Grammar: A Thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried & J.-O. Östman (Eds.) (pp. 11–86).
Goldberg, A
(1995)  A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1998) Patterns of experience in patterns of language. In M. Tomasello (Ed.) (pp. 203–220).
Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T.R. & Alho, I
(2004)  Iso Suomen Kielioppi . Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Hansen, E. & Heltoft, L
(2011)  Grammatik over det Danske Sprog 1-3. [Grammar of the Danish Language]. Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab. Odense: University of Southern Denmark Press.Google Scholar
Harder, P
(1996a)  Functional semantics: a theory of meaning, structure and tense in English . Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1996b) Linguistic structure in a functional grammar. In E. Engberg-Pedersen, M. Fortescue, P. Harder, L. Heltoft & L. Falster Jakobsen (Eds.), Content, Expression, and Structure: Studies in Danish Functional Grammar (pp. 423–452). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M
(2002)  Understanding Morphology . London: Arnold.Google Scholar
(2006) Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of Linguistics 42, 25–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heltoft, L
(1996) Paradigms, Word Order and Grammaticalization. In E. Engberg-Pedersen, M. Fortescue, P. Harder, L. Heltoft & L. Falster Jakobsen (Eds.), Content, Expression, and Structure: Studies in Danish Functional Grammar (pp. 469–494). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Paradigmatic structure in a usage-based theory of grammaticalisation. In K. Boye & E. Engberg-Pedersen (Eds.), Language usage and language structure (pp. 145–166). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Heltoft, L., Nørgård-Sørensen, J. & Schøsler, L
(2005) Grammatikalisering og struktur. In L. Heltoft, J. Nørgård-Sørensen & L. Schøsler (Eds.), Grammatikalisering og struktur (pp. 9–30). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L
(1935–37) La catégorie des cas 1-2 . Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
(1943)  Omkring Sprogteoriens Grundlæggelse . Københavns Universitets Festskrift november 1943. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
(19592 [1939])Notes sur les oppositions supprimables. In Essais linguistiques. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague , vol. XII, 84–88.Google Scholar
Hopper, P.J
(1998) Emergent Grammar. In M. Tomasello (Ed.) (pp. 155–176).
Høysgaard, J.P
(1752)  Methodisk Forsøg til en fuldstændig dansk Syntax [Methodical Essay at a Complete Danish Grammar] Copenhagen. (=H. Bertelsen (Ed.), Danske Grammatikere V. Det danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab [1919–1920]).Google Scholar
Kay, P
(2005) Argument structure constructions and the argument-adjunct distinction. In M. Fried & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots (Constructional Approaches to Language 4) (pp. 71–98). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kittilä, S
(2005) Recipient-prominence vs. beneficiary-prominence. Linguistic Typology 9, 269–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mikkelsen, K
(1911)  Dansk Ordföjningslære . Copenhagen: Lehmann og Stages Forlag.Google Scholar
Nørgård-Sørensen, J., Heltoft, L. & Schøsler, L
(2011)  Connecting Grammaticalisation . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romppanen, B. et al. (
1997)  Suuri Suomi-Ruotsi-Sanakirja 1-2 . Porvoo-Helsinki-Juva: Werner Söderström Osakeyhtiö.Google Scholar
SAG = Teleman, U. et al.
Taylor, J.R
(1989)  Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory . Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
1998Syntactic Constructions as Prototype Categories. In M. Tomasello (Ed.) (pp. 177–202).
Teleman, U. Hellberg, S. & Andersson, E
(1999)  Svenska Akademiens Grammatik 1-4. Stockholm: Nordstedts.Google Scholar
Timberlake, A
(1977) Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. In C.N. Li (Ed.), Mechanisms of Syntactic Change (pp. 141–180). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M
(Ed) (1998)  The New Psychology of Language. Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure . Mahwah N.J. and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, A
(1988)  The Semantics of Grammar . Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Jeppesen Kragh, Kirsten & Lene Schøsler
2014. Reanalysis and gramma(ticaliza)tion of constructions. In Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics, 69],  pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Nielsen, Peter Juul
2022. The affactive få ‘get’ construction in Danish. Constructions and Frames 14:1  pp. 78 ff. DOI logo
Nørgård-Sørensen, Jens
2014. Filling empty distinctions of expression with content. In Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics, 69],  pp. 243 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 june 2023. 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.