Article published in:
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. 129146
References

References

Bresnan, Joan & Nikitina, Tatiana
2003On the gradience of dative alternation. Ms, Stanford University.
Bybee, Joan
2002Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In The New Psychology of Language, Vol. 2, Michael Tomasello (ed.). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Croft, William & Cruse, D. Alan
2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan
1982On lexical ambiguity. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 11: 65–80.Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael
2010Semantic maps as metrics on meaning. Linguistic Discovery 8(1): 70–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J.
2003Linguistic Epidemiology: Semantics and Grammar of Language Contact in Mainland Southeast Asia. London: RoutledgeCurzon.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2010Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff
2011Semantic Analysis: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd
2002On the role of context in grammaticalization. In New Reflections on Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 49], Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 83–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newman, John
1996Give: A Cognitive Linguistic Study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven
1989Learnability and Cognition. The Acquisition of Argument Structure. 
Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1973Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 7: 532–547. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Jonathan R.
1973A fake NP squish. In New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English, Charles-James N. Bailey & Roger W. Shuy (eds). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar