Chapter published in:
The Typology of Physical Qualities
Edited by Ekaterina Rakhilina, Tatiana Reznikova and Daria Ryzhova
[Typological Studies in Language 133] 2022
► pp. 2956
van der Auwera, J. & Plungian, V.
1998Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1): 79–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L. & Dahl, Ö.
1989The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13: 51–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cysouw, M., Haspelmath, M. & Malchukov, A. L.
2010Introduction to the special issue « Semantic maps: Methods and applications ». Linguistic Discovery 8 (1): 1–3. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
François, A.
2008Semantic maps and the typology of colexification: Intertwining polysemous networks across languages. In From Polysemy to Semantic change: Towards a Typology of Lexical Semantic Associations, M. Vanhove (ed), 163–215. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, G.
1995Metonymische Muster und Metaphernfamilien. Bemerkungen zur Struktur und Geschichte der Verwendungsweisen von “scharf”. In Der Gebrauch der Sprache. Festschrift für Franz Hundsnurscher zum 60. Geburtstag, H. v. G. Hindelang, E. Rolf & W. Zillig (eds), 77–107. Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. & Grondelaers, S.
1995Looking back at anger: Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, J. R. Taylor & R. E. MacLaury (eds), 153–180. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulos, T., Werning, D. A., Hartlieb, J., Kitazumi, T., Peut, L. E. van de, Sundermeyer, A. & Chantrain, G.
2016The meaning of ancient words for ‘earth’: An exercise in visualizing colexification on a semantic map. ETopoi. Journal for Ancient Studies 6: 418–452.Google Scholar
Georgakopoulos, T. & Polis, S.
2018The semantic map model: State of the art and future avenues for linguistic research. Language and Linguistics Compass 12(2): 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, C. & Wierzbicka, A.
2007NSM analyses of the semantics of physical qualities: sweet, hot, hard, heavy, rough, sharp in crosslinguistic perspective. Studies in Language 31(4): 765–800. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
1997Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
2003The geometry of grammatical meaning: semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In The New Psychology of Language, Vol.. 2, M. Tomasello (ed), 211–242. NJ: Mahwah.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., Divjak, D. & Rakhilina, E.
2010Aquamotion verbs in Slavic and Germanic: A case study in lexical typology. In New Approaches to Slavic Verbs of Motion, V. Hasko & R. Perelmutter (eds), 315–341. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., Rakhilina, E. & Vanhove, M.
2016The semantics of lexical typology. In The Routledge Handbook of Semantics, N. Riemer (ed), 434–455. Oxon/NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lazard, G.
1981La quête des universaux sémantiques en linguistique. Le Bulletin du groupe de recherces sémio-linguistiques 19: 26–37.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. & Wilkins, D.
(eds) 2006Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maisak, T. & Rakhilina, E.
(eds) 2007Glagoly dviženija v vode: Leksičeskaja tipologija [Verbs of AQUA-Motion: Lexical Typology]. Moscow: Indrik.Google Scholar
Majid, A. & Levinson, S.
2011The senses in language and culture. The Senses & Society 6(1): 5–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Majid, A., Gullberg, M., Staden, M. van & Bowerman, M.
2007How similar are semantic categories in closely related languages? A comparison of cutting and breaking in four Germanic languages. Cognitive Linguistics 18(2): 179–194. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Majid, A., Jordan, F. & Dunn, M.
2015Semantic systems in closely related languages. Language Sciences 49: 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Parina, E.
2016The polysemy of llym in Middle Welsh. Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 63: 129–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rakhilina, E.
2010Verbs of rotation in Russian and Polish. In New Approaches to Slavic Verbs of Motion, V. Hasko & R. Perelmutter (eds), 291–314. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Kognitivnyj analiz predmetnyx imen: semantika i sočetaemost’ [Cognitive Analysis of Concrete Nouns: Semantics and Combinability]. Moscow: Azbukovnik.Google Scholar
Rakhilina, E. & Reznikova, T.
2016A Frame-based methodology for lexical typology. In Lexico-Typological Approaches to Semantic Shifts and Motivation Patterns in the Lexicon, M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm & P. Juvonen (eds), 95–130. Berlin, Boston: Mouton De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sahlgren, M.
2008The distributional hypothesis. Italian Journal of Linguistics 20: 33–53.Google Scholar
Spiridonova, N.
2002Prilagatel’nye funkcional’noj semantiki: ostryj i typoj [Adjectives with functional semantics: sharp and blunt]. In Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies. International Conference « Dialogue 2002 » Proceedings, 494–499. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Vejdemo, S.
2007Sharp, vass och skarp: Semantiska relationer mellan tre perceptionsadjektiv. MA thesis. Stockholms universitet. Institutionen för lingvistik.