Article published in:
Word Classes: Nature, typology and representations
Edited by Raffaele Simone and Francesca Masini
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 332] 2014
► pp. 181200
References
Ackermann, Farrel
1992 “Complex Predicates and Morphological Relatedness: Locative alternations”. Lexical Matters (= CSLI Lecture Notes 24) ed. by Ivan Sag & Anna Szabolcsi, 55–84. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Andor, József & Tamás Pólya
2001 “A Frame-based, Lexicalist Approach to Describing Functions of the Verbal Prefix ‘le-’ in Hungarian”. Színes eszmék nem alszanak: Szépe György 70. születésnapjára [Colorful Ideas Do Not Sleep: A Festschrift for György Szépe for His 70th Birthday] ed. by József Andor & Tibor Szűcs, 67–83. Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport.Google Scholar
Anward, Jan, Edith Moravcsik & Leon Stassen
1997 “Parts of Speech: A challenge for typology”. Linguistic Typology 1–2.167–184.Google Scholar
Benczédy, József & Rácz Endre
1982A mai magyar nyelv [Today’s Hungarian Language]. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Bhat, Shankara D.N.
2000 “Word Classes and Sentential Functions”.Vogel & Comrie, eds 2000, 47–65.
Booij, Geert & Ans van Kemenade
2003 “Preverbs: An introduction”. Yearbook of Morphology 2003 ed. by Geert Booij & Ans van Kemenade, 1–11. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Colette
1991 “Ways to Go in Rama: A case study in polygrammaticalization”. Approaches to Grammaticalization (= TSL 19) ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine, vol. II, 455–492. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Colette & Ken Hale
1988 “Relational Preverbs in Some Languages of the Americas: Typological and historical perspectives”. Language 64:2.312–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2006Syntaxe générale. Une introduction typologique, 2 vols. Paris: Lavoisier.Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole, Ray Jackendoff, Andrew McIntyre & Silke Urban
eds. 2002Verb-Particle Explorations. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
2001Syntax, 2 vols. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grinevald, Colette, Caroline Imbert & Anna Sőrés
. “Pour une catégorie de “satellite” de Trajectoire dans une approche fonctionnelle-typologique”. Cahiers de Faits de langues3, 99–116. Paris: Ophrys.
Iacobini, Claudio & Francesca Masini
2006 “The Emergence of Verb-Particle Constructions in Italian: Locative and actional meanings”. Morphology 16:2.155–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Imbert, Caroline
2010 “Multiple Preverbation in Homeric Greek. A typological insight.” CogniTextes [Online] 4:2010 (http://​cognitextes​.revues​.org​/387).Google Scholar
2008Systems Dynamics and Functional Motivations in Path Coding. A typological description of Homeric Greek and Old English. Ph.D. dissertation, CNRS Laboratory “Dynamique du Langage”, University of Lyon 2.Google Scholar
Soltész, Katalin J.
1959Az ősi magyar igekötők [Old Hungarian Preverbs]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István
2000 “Szavak, szófajok, toldalékok” [Words, Word Classes, Affixes]. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan [Structural Grammar of Hungarian] ed. by Ferenc Kiefer, vol. 3, 75–98. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István, Robert M. Vágó & Anna Fenyvesi
1998Hungarian. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Keszler, Borbála
ed 2000Magyar grammatika [Hungarian Grammar]. Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc & Katalin É. Kiss
eds. 1994Syntax and Semantics. The syntactic structure of Hungarian. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc & Mária Ladányi
2000 “Az igekötők” [Preverbs]. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan [Structural Grammar of Hungarian] ed. by Ferenc Kiefer, vol. 3, 453–518. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc & László Honti
2003“Verbal ‘Prefixation’ in the Uralic Languages”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 50.137–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiss, Katalin É., Ferenc Kiefer & Péter Siptar
1998Új magyar nyelvtan [New grammar of Hungarian]. Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.Google Scholar
Komlósy, András
1992 “Régensek és vonzatok” [Regents and Complements]. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan I. Mondattan [Syntax] ed. by Ferenc Kiefer, 299–527. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
1994 “Complements and Adjuncts”. Kiefer & Kiss, eds. 1994, 91–178.
Kopecka, Anetta
2004“Étude typologique de l’expression de l’espace: Localisation et déplacement en français et en polonais”. Ph.D. dissertation, Université Lumière Lyon 2.Google Scholar
Kopecka, Anetta & Miyuki Ishibashi
. “L’(a)symétrie dans l’expression de la source et du but: perspective translinguistique”. Cahiers de Faits de langues 3, 131–149. Paris: Ophrys.
Nyéki, Lajos
1988Grammaire pratique du hongrois d’aujourd’hui. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Országh, László
1973Magyar-angol kéziszótár [A Concise Hungarian-English Dictionary]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Perrot, Jean
ed. 2002Magyar-francia kéziszótár [A Concise Hungarian-French Dictionary]. Szeged: Grimm Kiadó.Google Scholar
Rousseau, André
ed. 1995Les préverbes dans les langues d’Europe. Introduction à l’étude de la préverbation. Lille: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.Google Scholar
Simone, Raffaele
1996“Esistono verbi sintagmatici in italiano?” Cuadernos de Filología Italiana 3.47–61.Google Scholar
2008 “Verbi sintagmatici come costruzione e come categoria”. I verbi sintagmatici in italiano e nelle varietà dialettali. Stato dell’arte e prospettive di ricerca ed. by Monica Cini, 13–30. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sőrés, Anna
2006Le hongrois dans la typologie des langues. Limoges: Lambert-Lucas.Google Scholar
Szende, Thomas & Georges Kassai
2001Grammaire fondamentale du hongrois. Paris: L’Asiathèque.Google Scholar
Tallerman, Maggie
1998Understanding Syntax. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1985 “Lexicalization Pattern: Semantic structure in lexical forms”. Language Typology and Syntactic Description ed. by Timothy Shopen, vol. 3, 57–77. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2000Toward a Cognitive Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tompa, József
ed 1970 “A mai magyar nyelv rendszere. Leíró nyelvtan” [The Structure of the Modern Hungarian Language. Descriptive grammar I]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Vogel, Petra M. & Bernard Comrie
eds. 2000Approaches to the Typology of Word Classes. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar