Part of
Perspectives on Semantic Roles
Edited by Silvia Luraghi and Heiko Narrog
[Typological Studies in Language 106] 2014
► pp. 122
Anderson, Lloyd B
1982The “perfect” as a universal and as a language specific category. In Tense – Aspect. Between Semantics and Pragmatics [Typological Studies in Language 1], Paul J. Hopper (ed.), 227–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986Evidentials, paths of change, and mental maps: Typologically regular asymmetries. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, Wallace Chafe & Marianne Mithun (eds), 273–312. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J
2004Case, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina, Schlesewsky, Matthias, Comrie, Bernard & Friederici, Angela D
(eds) 2006Semantic Role Universals and Argument Linking. Theoretical, Typological, and Psycholinguistic Perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1986Markedness, grammar, people, and the world. In Markedness, Fred R. Eckman, Edith Moravcsik & Jessica R. Wirth (eds), 85–106. New York NY: Plenum Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard & van den Berg, Helma
2006Experiencer constructions in Daghestanian languages. In Bornkessel et al. (eds), 127–154.
Creissels, Denis & Mounole, Céline
2011Animacy and spatial cases: Typological tendencies, and the case of Basque. In Kittilä, Västi & Ylikoski (eds), 157–182.
Croft, William
1991Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William & Poole, Keith T
2008Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34(1): 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cysouw, Michael
2010Semantic maps as metrics on meanings. Linguistic Discovery 8(1): 70–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
1991Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J
1968The case for case. In Universals in Linguistic Theory, Emmon Bach & Robert T. Harms (eds), 1–88. London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
1971Some problems for case grammar. Working Papers in Linguistics, Ohio State University 10: 245–65.Google Scholar
Foley, William A. & Van Valin Jr., Robert D
1984Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey
1965Studies in Lexical Relations. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Haspelmath, Martin
1997Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2003The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In The New Psychology of Language, Vol. 2, Michael Tomasello (ed.), 211–43. Mahwah NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2002Understanding Morphology. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
2009Terminology of case. In The Oxford Handbook of Case, Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds), 505–517. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Claudi, Ulrike & Hünnemeyer, Friederike
1991Grammaticalization. A Conceptual Framework. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura
1993The Czech Dative and the Russian Instrumental. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kailuweit, Rolf
2004Protorollen und Makrorollen. In Semantische Rollen, Rolf Kailuweit & Martin Hummel (eds), 83–103. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Kittilä, Seppo, Västi, Katja & Ylikoski, Jussi
(eds) 2011Case, Animacy, and Semantic Roles [Typological Studies in Language 99]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Haspelmath, Martin
1997Les constructions à possesseur externe dans les langues d’Europe. In Actance et valence dans les langues d’Europe, Jack Feuillet (ed.), 525–606. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
1949Le problème du classement des cas. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego 9: 20–43. Reprinted in: Kuryłowcz, Jerzy. 1960. Esquisses linguistiques. Wrocław: Polska Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
Kuryłowcz, Jerzy
1960Esquisses linguistiques. Wrocław: Polska Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
1964Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian & Yong-Min Shin
2005The functional domain of concomitance. A typological study of instrumental and comitative relations. In Typological Studies in Participation [Studia Typologica 7], Christian Lehmann (ed.), 9–104. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Lestrade, Sander
2010The best of two maps. Comment on ‘A Diachronic Dimension in Maps of Case Functions’ by Heiko Narrog. Linguistic Discovery 8(1): 255–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka
2005Argument Realization. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia & Parodi, Claudia
2010Key Terms in Syntax and Syntactic Theory. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia
2001Some remarks on instrument, comitative, and agent in Indo-European. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 54(4): 385–401.Google Scholar
2003On the Meaning of Prepositions and Cases. A Study of the Expression of Semantic Roles in Ancient Greek [Studies in Language Companion Series 67]. Amsterdan: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991Paradigm size, possible syncretism, and the use of cases with adpositions in inflectional languages. In Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection, Frans Plank (ed.), 57–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008Case in Cognitive Linguistics. In The Handbook of Case, Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds), 136–150. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2009Cases as radial categories: The limits of polysemy. Paper presented at the SKY Conference on Case , 27–30 August 2009, Helsinki.
2011Human landmarks in spatial expressions: From Latin to Romance. In Kittilä, Västi & Ylikoski (eds), 209–234.
Malchukov, Andrej & Narrog, Heiko
2009Case polysemy. In The Handbook of Case, Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds), 518–534. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko & Ito, Shinya
2007Reconstructing semantic maps. The comitative-instrumental area. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 60(4): 273–292.Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko
2010A diachronic dimension in maps of case functions. Linguistic Discovery 8(1): 233–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J
2010On comparative concepts and descriptive categories: A reply to Haspelmath. Language 86(3): 688–695. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki
1991The meaning of the genitive. Cognitive Linguistics 2(2): 149–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Yoshiki
1993Agentivity in cognitive grammar. In Conceptualization and Mental Processing in Language, Richard A. Geiger & Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (eds), 488–530. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noonan, Michael
2009Patterns of development, patterns of syncretism of relational morphology in the Bodic languages. In The Role of Semantics and Pragmatics in the Development of Case [Studies in Language Companion Series 108], Johanna Barddal & Shobhanna Chelliah (eds), 261–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Primus, Beate
2006Mismatches in semantic-role hierarchies and the dimensions of role semantics. In Bornkessel et al. (eds), 89–126.
Radden, Günter
1989Semantic roles. In A User’s Grammar of English, René Dirven & Richard A. Geiger (eds), 421–471. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Raineri, Sophie & Evola, Vito
2008A Construction Grammar Analysis of the Empathetic Dative Construction in French and Italian. Ms.
Schlesinger, Izchak M
1989Instruments as agents: On the nature of semantic relations. Journal of Linguistics 25(1): 189–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan
2008In defense of classical semantic maps. Theoretical Linguistics 34(1): 39–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin Jr., Robert D. & LaPolla, Randy J
1997Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and Function. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard
2010Similarity semantics and building probabilistic semantic maps from parallel texts. Linguistic Discovery 8(1): 331–271.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Henkin, Roni & Letizia Cerqueglini
2023. Spatial prepositions min and ʕan in Traditional Negev Arabic. Studies in Language 47:2  pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
Luraghi, Silvia, Chiara Naccarato & Erica Pinelli
2020. The u+gen construction in Modern Standard Russian. Cognitive Linguistics 31:1  pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
2017. <i>Perspectives on Semantic Roles</i>. ENGLISH LINGUISTICS 33:2  pp. 567 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2024. 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.