Cover not available
Review published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 40:2 (2016) ► pp.457–467
Book review

Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Graeme Trousdale. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. . [Oxford Studies in Diachronic & Historical Linguistics, 6]. xvii+278 pp. ISBN 978 0 19 967989 8 andPeter Petré. Constructions and environments: Copular, passive, and related constructions in Old and Middle English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. . [Oxford Studies in the History of English, 4]. xiv+295 pp. ISBN 978 0 19 937339 0

Reviewed by
| Canada Institute of Linguistics, Trinity Western University
Published online: 1 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.40.2.06nic
References (27)
References
Andersen, Henning (ed.). 2001. Actualization: Linguistic change in action. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, Harald R. & Rochelle Lieber. 1991. Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics 291. 801–843. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Ian Roberts. 2012. Towards a parameter hierarchy for auxiliaries: Diachronic considerations. Cambridge Occasional Papers in Linguistics 61. 209–236.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2012. A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 881: 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Radical construction grammar. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 211–232. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2012. The course of actualization. Language 881. 601–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, Regine. 2009. APO: Avoid pragmatic overload. In Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen & Jacqueline Visconti (eds.), Current trends in diachronic semantics and pragmatics, 21–41. Bingley, UK: Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 2007. Morphosyntactic change: Functional and formal perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gelderen, Elly van. 2011. The linguistic cycle: Language change and the language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. & Martin Hilpert. 2008. The identification of stages in diachronic data: Variability-based neighbor clustering. Corpora 31. 59–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2008. Particles at the semantics/pragmatics interface: Synchronic and diachronic issues. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 2012. The semantics of pragmatic expressions. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Cognitive pragmatics ( Handbook of pragmatics , vol.41.), 587–311. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard & Richard Waltereit. 2006. GCI theory and language change. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 381. 235–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2013a. Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013b. Corpus-based approaches to constructional change. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 458–475. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin & Stefan Th. Gries. 2009. Assessing frequency changes in multi-stage diachronic corpora: Applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition. Literary and Linguistic Computing 241. 385–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Richard A. 2007. Language networks: The new Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moeschler, Jacques, Cristina Grisot & Bruno Cartoni. 2012. Jusqu’où les temps verbaux sont-ils procéduraux? Nouveaux Cahiers de Linguistique Française 301. 119–139.Google Scholar
Nicolle, Steve. 2011. Pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 370–397. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Grammaticalization, the clausal hierarchy and semantic bleaching. In Elizabeth C. Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness, and grammaticalization, 45–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saussure, Louis de. 2011. On some methodological issues in the conceptual/procedural distinction. In Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti & Aoife Ahern (eds.), Procedural meaning: Problems and perspectives, 55–79. Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
Scwenter, Scott A. & Richard Waltereit. 2010. Presupposition accommodation and language change. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 75–102. Berin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Wal, Jenneke & Theresa Biberauer. 2014. From macroparameters to nanoparameters: a comparative Bantu case study. Paper presented at ComSyn meetings , Leiden, 5 February 2014.