Chapter published in:
Essays on Linguistic Realism
Edited by Christina Behme and Martin Neef
[Studies in Language Companion Series 196] 2018
► pp. 79138


Beck, David
2016Some language-particular terms are comparative concepts. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 395–402.Google Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin K. & Chang, Nancy
2005Embodied Construction Grammar in simulation-based language understanding. In Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, Jan-Ola Östman & Mirjam Fried (eds), 147–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, James P.
2016Word and Paradigm Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bobrowski, Ireneusz
2015Problems of Methodology and Philosophy in Linguistics [Interfaces. Studies in Language, Mind and Translation 7]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf
1958Introduction to Symbolic Logic and its Applications. New York NY: Dover.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1982On the Generative Enterprise: A Discussion with Riny Huybregts and Henk von Riemsdijk. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Clément, Lionel, Kirman, Jérome & Salvati, Sylvain
2015A logical approach to grammar description. Journal of Language Modelling 3(1): 87–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crabbé, Benoit, Duchier, Denys, Gardent, Claire, Le Roux, Joseph & Parmentier, Yannick
2013XMG: eXtensible MetaGrammar. Computational Linguistics 39(3): 591–629. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
2016Comparative concepts and language-specific categories: Theory and practice. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 377–393.Google Scholar
Duchier, Denys & Parmentier, Yanick
2015High-level methodologies for grammar engineering. Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Language Modelling 3 (1): 5–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ettinger, Allyson
2017Workshop on Building Linguistically Generalizable NLP Systems (at EMNLP 2017). (Workshop announcement). http://​generalizablenlp​.weebly​.com
Falkenberg, Thomas
1996Grammatiken als empirische axiomatische Theorien [Linguistische Arbeiten 346]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
] The 21st Conference on Formal Grammar. Bozen-Bolzano, Italy, August 20–21 2016 (Conference announcement). http://​fg​.phil​.hhu​.de​/2016/
Gil, David
2016Describing languoids: When incommensurability meets the language-dialect continuum. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 439–462.Google Scholar
Giusti, Giuliana
2015Nominal Syntax at the Interfaces: A Comparative Analysis of Languages with Articles. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.
1963Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Universals of Language, Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), 73–113. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H., Osgood, Charles E. & Jenkins, James J.
1963Memorandum concerning language universals presented to the conference on Language Universals, Gould House, Dobbs Ferry NY, April 13–15 1961 In Universals of Language, Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), xv–xxvii. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Forkel, Robert, Haspelmath, Martin & Bank, Sebastian
2016Glottolog 2.7. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2010aComparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3): 663–687. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010bThe interplay between comparative concepts and descriptive categories (Reply to Newmeyer). Language 86(3): 696–699. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Defining vs. diagnosing linguistic categories: A case study of clitic phenomena. In How Categorical are Categories? New Approaches to the Old Questions of Noun, Verb, and Adjective, Joanna Błaszczak, Dorota Klimek-Jankowska & Krzysztof Migdalski (eds), 273–304. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016aThe serial verb construction: Comparative concept and cross-linguistic generalizations. Language and Linguistics 17(3): 291–319.Google Scholar
2016bThe challenge of making language description and comparison mutually beneficial. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 299–301.Google Scholar
2017aToward a standard list of grammatical comparative concepts: The Grammaticon. SLE 2017 Book of Abstracts: 500–501.Google Scholar
2017bSome principles for language names. Language Documentation & Conservation 11: 81–93.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin & Östman, Jan-Ola
(eds) 2016Constructions across Languages [Benjamins Current Topics 82]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D. & Pullum, Geoffrey K., with collaborators
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J.
1981Language and Other Abstract Objects. Totowa NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
2000[1998]Realistic Rationalism. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, Andy
2010Introduction. In The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, Andy Kirkpatrick (ed.), 1–16. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lander, Yury & Arkadiev, Peter
2016On the right of being a comparative concept. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 403–416.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1975 A Communicative Grammar of English . Based on A Grammar of Contemporary English by Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
Forthcoming. Linguistic concepts and categories in language description and comparison. To appear in Typology, Acquisition, Grammaticalization Studies, Marina Chini & Pierluigi Cuzzolin eds Milano Franco Angeli
Levshina, Natalia
2015How to do Linguistics with R. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F. & Fennig, Charles D.
(eds) 2016Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 19th edn. Dallas TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Lichte, Timm & Petitjean, Simon
2015Implementing semantic frames as typed feature structures with XMG. Journal of Language Modelling 3(1): 185–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lieb, Hans-Heinrich
1968Communication Complexes and their Stages. A Contribution to a Theory of the Language Stage [Janua Linguarum 71]. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1969On explicating ‘language’ for linguistics. Semiotica 1: 167–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1970Sprachstadium und Sprachsystem: Umrisse einer Sprachtheorie. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
1974Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part I). Theoretical Linguistics 1: 39–115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975Universals of language: Quandaries and prospects. Foundations of Language 12: 471–511.Google Scholar
1976Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part II). Theoretical Linguistics 3: 1–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1978Universals and linguistic explanation. In Universals of Human Language, Vol.1: Method & theory, Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds), 157–202. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1980Wortbedeutung: Argumente für eine psychologische Konzeption. Lingua 52: 1–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1983Integrational Linguistics, Vol. I: General Outline [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 17]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1987Sprache und Intentionalität: der Zusammenbruch des Kognitivismus. In Sprachtheorie: Der Sprachbegriff in Wissenschaft und Alltag. Jahrbuch 1986 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache [Sprache der Gegenwart 71], Rainer Wimmer (ed.), 11–76. Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar
1992aThe case for a New Structuralism. In Prospects for a New Structuralism [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 96], Hans-Heinrich Lieb (ed.), 33–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992bIntegrational Semantics: An integrative view of linguistic meaning. In Current Advances in Semantic Theory [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 73], Maxim Stamenov (ed.), 239–268. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1993Linguistic Variables: Towards a Unified Theory of Linguistic Variation [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 108.] Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005Notions of paradigm in grammar. In Lexikologie / Lexicology: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Natur und Struktur von Wörtern und Wortschätzen / An International Handbook on the Nature and Structure of Words and Vocabularies, Vol.2 [Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 21.2], D. Alan Cruse, Franz Hundsnurscher, Michael Job & Peter Lutzeier (eds), 1613–1646. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013Towards a General Theory of Word Formation: The Process Model. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin. http://​edocs​.fu​-berlin​.de​/docs​/receive​/FUDOCS​_document​_000000018561
2017‘Comparative concepts’ vs. ‘descriptive categories’: Bridging the gap. Paper read at the 50th yearly conference of the Societas Linguistica Europaea in Zürich, September 10 to September 13, 2017. Ms.
(ed.) 1992Prospects for a New Structuralism [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 96]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2017Linguistic Research in Progress: Proceedings of the Berlin Research Colloquium on Integrational Linguistics 1992 – 2003 (Parts I to XXII) / Berliner Forschungskolloquium Integrative Sprachwissenschaft 1992–2003. Protokolle (Teil I bis XXII). Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin. http://​edocs​.fu​-berlin​.de​/docs​/receive​/FUDOCS​_series​_000000000782
Lieb, Hans-Heinrich & Drude, Sebastian
2000Advanced Glossing. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin. http://​dobes​.mpi​.nl​/documents​/Advanced​-Glossing1​.pdf
Müller, Stefan
2010Grammatiktheorie [Stauffenburg Einführungen 20]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
2013Grammatiktheorie, 2nd edn. [Stauffenburg Einführungen 20]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
2015The CoreGram project: Theoretical linguistics, theory development, and verification. Journal of Language Modelling 3(1): 21–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016Grammatical Theory: From Transformational Grammar to Constraint-Based Approaches [Textbooks in Language Sciences 1]. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
2017Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Sign-Based Construction Grammar, and Fluid Construction Grammar: Commonalities and differences. Constructions and Frames 9(1): 139–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Neef, Martin
2014Das nächste Paradigma: Realistische Linguistik. Eine Ergänzung zum Beitrag Wo stehen wir in der Grammatiktheorie? von Wolfgang Sternefeld und Frank Richter. Muttersprache 124(2): 105–120. Also: lingbuzz/001801.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J.
2010On comparative concepts and descriptive categories: A reply to Haspelmath. Language 86(3): 688–695. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nolda, Andreas
2018Explaining linguistic facts in a realist theory of word formation. In Essays on Linguistic Realism, Christina Behme & Martin Neef (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (this volume).Google Scholar
Pitt, David
2009Intentional psychologism. Philosophical Studies 146: 117–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plank, Frans (ed.)] 2016Discussion. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 297–462.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M.
2012Chomsky’s foundational admission. lingbuzz/001569.Google Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2013The central question in comparative syntactic metatheory. Mind & Language 28(4): 492–521. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richter, Frank
2004Foundations of Lexical Resource Semantics. Tübingen: Universität Tübingen, Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft, Abteilung Computerlinguistik. Habilitationsschrift. Ms.Google Scholar
2007Closer to the truth: A new model theory for HPSG. In Model-theoretic syntax at 10 [Proceedings of the ESSLLI ’07 workshop MTS at 10], James Rogers & Stephan Kepser (eds), 101–110. Dublin: Trinity College.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A.
2010English filler-gap constructions. Journal of Linguistics 86(3): 486–545.Google Scholar
2012Sign-based construction grammar: An informal synopsis. In Sign-based Construction Grammar [SDLI Lecture Notes 193], Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds), 69–202. Stanford CA: CSLI. http://​lingo​.stanford​.edu​/sag​/paper s​/theo​-syno​.pdf
Schäfer, Roland & Bildhauer, Felix
2013Web Corpus Construction. San Francisco CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar
Scholz, Barbara C., Pelletier, Francis Jeffry & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2011–2015Philosophy of Linguistics. Stanford Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Sept. 2011 – Jan. 2015.Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson T.
2016[1996]The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology [Classics in Linguistics 2]. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Searle, John R.
1983Intentionality. An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Soames, Scott
2013Cognitive propositions. Philosophical Perspectives: Philosophy of Language 27: 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steels, Luc
(ed.) 2011Design Patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language 11]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sternefeld, Wolfgang & Richter, Frank
2012Wo stehen wir in der Grammatiktheorie? Bemerkungen anlässlich eines Buchs von Stefan Müller. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 31: 263–291. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Suppes, Patrick
1957Introduction to Logic. Princeton NJ: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Wasserscheidt, Philipp
2016Constructions do not cross languages: On cross-linguistic generalizations of constructions. In Constructions across Languages [Benjamins Current Topics 82], Martin Hilpert & Jan-Ola Östman (eds), 169–201. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

No author info given
2021.  In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], Crossref logo
Nefdt, Ryan M.
2018.  In Essays on Linguistic Realism [Studies in Language Companion Series, 196],  pp. 139 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 april 2021. 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.