Cover not available
Part of
Causation, Permission, and Transfer: Argument realisation in GET, TAKE, PUT, GIVE and LET verbs
Edited by Brian Nolan, Gudrun Rawoens and Elke Diedrichsen
[Studies in Language Companion Series 167] 2015
► pp. 1–11

Introduction

Published online: 14 January 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.167.001int
References (23)
References
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. The syntax of causative constructions: Cross-language similarities and divergences. In Shibatani (ed.), 261–312.Google Scholar
Diedrichsen, Elke. 2012. What you give is what you GET? On reanalysis, semantic extension, and functional motivation with the German bekommen-passive construction. In Lenz & Rawoens (eds), 1163–1205Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W. 2010. A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. In Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity, Robert M.W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds), 30–83. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Gronemeyer, Claire. 1999. On deriving complex polysemy: The grammaticalization of get. English Language and Linguistics 3: 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopecka, Anetta & Narasimhan, Bhuvana. 2012. Events of Putting and Taking: A Crosslinguistic Perspective [Typological Studies in Language 100]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenz, Alexandra N. & Rawoens, Gudrun (eds). 2012. The Art of Getting: GET Verbs in European Languages from a Synchronic and Diachronic Point of View. Special issue of Linguistics 50(6).Google Scholar
Margetts, Anna & Austin, Peter K. 2007. Three participant events in the languages of the world: Towards a cross-linguistic typology. Linguistics 45: 393–451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2005. English Ditransitive Verbs. Aspects of Theory, Description and a Usage-based Model. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, John. 1996. Give: A Cognitive Linguistic Study [Cognitive Linguistics Research 7]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 1998. The Linguistics of Giving [Typological Studies in Language 36]. 
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nolan, Brian. 2012a. The Structure of Modern Irish: A Functional Account. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
. 2012b. The GET constructions of Modern Irish and Irish English: GET-passive and GET-recipient variations. In Lenz & Rawoens (eds), 1111–1162.Google Scholar
. 2013. Constructional polysemy and argument realisation with the Irish GET verb. In van Gelderen, Barðdal & Cennamo (eds), 87–116.Google Scholar
Nolan, Brian & Diedrichsen, Elke. 2013. Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of Constructions in Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series 145]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi (ed.). 1976. The Grammar of Causative Constructions [Syntax and Semantics 6]. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2002. The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation [Typological Studies in Language 48]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Song, Jae Jung. 1996. Causatives and Causation: A Universal-typological Perspective [Longman Linguistics Library]. London: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. I: Concept Structuring Systems. [Language, Speech, and Communication Series]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tragel, Ilona. 2001. On Estonian core verbs. In Papers in Estonian Cognitive Linguistics [Publications of the Department of General Linguistics 2], Ilona Tragel (ed.), 145–169. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
Tragel, Ilona & Habicht, Külli. 2012. Grammaticalization of the Estonian saama ‘get’. In Lenz & Rawoens (eds), 1371–1412.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly, Jóhanna Barðdal & Michela Cennamo. 2013. Argument Structure in Flux. The Naples-Capri Papers [Studies in Language Companion Series 131]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Jr., Robert D. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). 2008. Investigations of the Syntax–Semantics–Pragmatics Interface [Studies in Language Companion Series 105]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar