Chapter published in:
Re-Assessing Modalising Expressions: Categories, co-text, and context
Edited by Pascal Hohaus and Rainer Schulze
[Studies in Language Companion Series 216] 2020
► pp. 223252


Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. New York NY: Longman.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1983The go-progressive and auxiliary-formation. In Essays in Honor of Charles F. Hockett, Frederick B. Agard, Gerold Kelley, Adam Makkai & Valerie Becker Makkai (eds), 153–167. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philippe
2003On two distinct uses of go as a conjoined marker of evaluative modality. In Modality in Contemporary English [Topics in English Series 44], Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred Krug & Frank Palmer (eds), 349–373. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carden, Guy & Pesetsky, David
1977Double-verb constructions, markedness, and a fake co-coordination. CLS 13: 82–92.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V.
1974Normal states and evaluative viewpoints. Language 50(2): 316–332. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1971Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Gesuato, Sara
2009 Go to V: Literal meaning and metaphorical extensions. In Corpora: Pragmatics and Discourse, Papers form the 29th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 29), Andreas H. Jucker, Daniel Schreier & Marianne Hundt (eds), 343–360. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York NY: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles & Duranti, Alessandro
1992Rethinking context introduction: An . In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds), 1–42. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., McIntosh, Angus & Strevens, Peter
1964The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1978Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvald A. & Hyams, Mina M.
1993On the independence and interdependence of syntactic and morphological properties: English aspectual come and go . Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11: 313–346. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
1995Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Noriko
2015Multi-Verb Sequences in English: Their Classification and Functions. PhD dissertation, Kobe University.
Newman, John & Rice, Sally
2008Asymmetry in English multi-verb sequences: A corpus-based approach. In Asymmetric Events [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 11], Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed.), 3–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K.
1990Constraints on intransitive quasi-serial verb constructions in modern colloquial English. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 218–239.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Salkie, Raphael
2010On going . In Distinction in English Grammar: Offered to Renaat Declerck, Bert Cappelle & Naoki Wada (eds), 169–190. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schönefeld, Doris
2013 It is … quite common for theoretical predictions to go untested (BNC_CMH). A register-specific analysis of the English go un-V-ed construction. Journal of Pragmatics 52: 17–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shopen, Timothy
1971Caught in the act. CLS 7: 254–263.Google Scholar
Stahlke, Herbert F. W.
1970Serial verb. Studies in African Linguistics 1(1): 60–99.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol
1999The go-and-verb construction in a cross-linguistic perspective: Image-schema blending and the construal of events. Proceedings of the Second Annual High Desert Linguistic Society Conference, 123–134.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederik Theodoor
1969An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part Three, First Half, Syntactical Units with Two Verbs. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M.
1969Phonological constraints in syntactic description. Papers in Linguistics 1: 411–463. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992Some choices in the theory of morphology. In Formal Grammar: Theory and Implementation, Robert Levine (ed.), 327–371. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar