Semantic Structure in English

Hardbound – Available
ISBN 9789027215833 | EUR 105.00 | USD 158.00
 
e-Book –
ISBN 9789027266521 | EUR 105.00 | USD 158.00
 
Syntax puts our meaning (“semantics”) into sentences, and phonology puts the sentences into the sounds that we hear and there must, surely, be a structure in the meaning that is expressed in the syntax and phonology. Some writers use the phrase “semantic structure”, but are referring to conceptual structure; since we can express our conceptual thought in many different linguistic ways, we cannot equate conceptual and semantic structures.

The research reported in this book shows semantic structure to be in part hierarchic, fitting the syntax in which it is expressed, and partly a network, fitting the nature of the mind, from which it springs. It is complex enough to provide for the emotive and imaginative dimensions of language, and for shifts of standard meanings in context, and the “rules” that control them.

Showing the full structure of English semantics requires attention to many currently topical issues, and since the underlying theory is fresh, there are fresh implications for them. The most important of those issues is information structure, which is given full treatment, showing its overall structure, and its relation to semantics and the whole grammar of English.
[Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics, 73]  2016.  xv, 452 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins
https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.73
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction
1–6
Chapter 2. Semantic structures in the strata of English
7–23
Chapter 3. Basis of semantic structure
25–38
Chapter 4. Elements of semantic structure
39–78
Chapter 5. Network structure
79–123
Chapter 6. System structure
125–145
Chapter 7. Hierarchic structure (1): Figures
147–175
Chapter 8. Hierarchies (2): Groups and senses
177–254
Chapter 9. Hierarchic structure (3): Information structure
255–290
Chapter 10. Other structures
291–308
Chapter 11. Realisation (1): Interpersonal functions
309–340
Chapter 12. Realisation (2): Ideational function
341–384
Chapter 13. Discussion
385–405
Chapter 14. Conclusion
407–426
References
427–442
Index
443–452
References

References

Aarts, Bas
(2007) Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aarts, Bas, & Meyer, Charles F.
(Eds) (1995) The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description. Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
① ② ③
Adamson, Sylvia
(1999) Literary language. In Roger Lass (Ed.), Cambridge history of the English language, Volume III, 1476–1776 (pp. 187–331). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean
(2012) Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. 4th edition. Chichester, UK / Malden, Ma.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Allan, Keith
(1986) Linguistic meaning. Volume I. London / New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Allan, Keith, & Jaszczolt, Kasia M.
(Eds) (2012) The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ②
Allen, Cynthia L.
(1995) Case marking and reanalysis: Grammatical relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix
(1992) Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(2–3), 101–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andreewsky, Evelyne; Rosenthal, Rosen; & Bourcier, Daniele
(1985) Meaning without lexicon: A computational model for the resolution of lexical ambiguities. Psychological relevance. In Hoppenbrouwers et al. (Eds.), Meaning and the lexicon (pp. 380–383).Google Scholar
Armstrong, Sharon Lee; Gleitman, Lila R.; & Gleitman, Henry
(1983) What some concepts might not be. Cognition, 13, 263–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asp, Melissa
(2013) The twin paradoxes of unconscious choice and unintentional agents. In Lise Fontaine (Ed.), Systemic functional linguistics: exploring choice (pp. 161–178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence W.
(1983) Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition, 11(3), 211–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1992a) Cognitive psychology: An overview for cognitive scientists. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.Google Scholar
(1992b) Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In Adrienne Lehrer, & Eva Feder Kittay (Eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts (pp. 21–74). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.Google Scholar
(1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660.Google Scholar
(2005) Situated conceptualisations. In Cohen & Lefebvre (Eds.), (pp. Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 620–636). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) The human conceptual system. In Spivey et al. (Eds.), (pp. The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics, 239–258). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence, & Wiemer-Hastings, Katja
(2005) Situating abstract concepts. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 129–163). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, Bryan
(1982) Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner & L. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art (pp. 173–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
(2004) Adjectives, compounds and words. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 3(1) (special issue, World of Words: a Tribute to Arne Zettersten), 7–22.Google Scholar
Bencini, Giulia M.L.
(2013) Psycholinguistics. In Thomas Hoffmann, & Graeme Trousdale (Eds.), Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 379–396). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas; Johansson, Stig; Leech, Geoffrey; Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
(1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred, & Schreuder, Robert
(1992) From concepts to lexical items. Cognition, 42, 23–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Birner, Betty J., & Gregory, Ward
(1998) Information status and noncanonical word order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bisang, Walter
(2008) Precategoriality and syntax-based parts of speech: The case of late archaic Chinese. Studies in Language, 32(3), 568–589. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
(2002) Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L.
(1933) Language. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Bohm, Isabel C.; Altmann, Ulrike; Lubrich, Oliver; Menninghaus, Winifried; & Jacobs, Arthur M.
(2013) When we like what we know – A parametric fMRI analysis of beauty and familiarity. Brain and Language, 124(1), 1–8. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
(1967) Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua, 18, 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1986) Intonation and its parts: Melody. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit
(1998) Morphology and syntax. In Spencer & Zwicky (Eds.), (pp. The handbook of morphology, 151–190).Online: Chapter 8. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper, & Harder, Peter
(2009) Evidentiality: Linguistic categories and grammaticalization. Functions of Language, 16(1), 9–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braisby, N.R.
(1990) Situating word meaning. In Robin Cooper, Kuniaki Mukai, & John Perry (Eds.), Situation theory and its applications (pp. 315–342). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Brownell, Hiram H.
(1988) Appreciation of metaphoric and connotative word meaning by brain-damaged patients. In Christine Chiarello (Ed.), Right hemisphere contributions to lexical semantics (pp. 19–31). Heidelberg, NY: Springer-Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bundegaard, Peer F.; Ostergaard, Svend; & Stjernfelt, Frederik
(2008) Waterproof fire stations? Conceptual schemata and cognitive operations in compound constructions. Semiotica, 161(1), 363–393.Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel
(2007) Semantics, intonation and information structure. In Ramchand & Reiss (Eds.), (pp. Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 435–473).Google Scholar
Burnley, David
(1992) Lexis and semantics. In Norman Blake (Ed.), Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume II, 1066–1476 (pp. 409–499). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butt, Miriam
(2006) Theories of case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
(2002) Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. In Talmy Givón, & Bertram F. Malle (Eds.), Evolution of Language out of Pre-language (pp. 109–134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L.
(2001) The analysis of discourse flow. In Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, & Heidi Ehernberger Hamilton, (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 673–684). Oxford / Malden, Ma: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chen, Melinda
(2004) Affect in language interpretation. In Michael Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (Eds.), Language, culture and mind (pp. 37 ff.). Stanford Ca: CSLI.Google Scholar
Chiarcos, Christian; Berry, Claus; & Grabski, Michael
(2011) Salience in linguistics and beyond. In Christian Chiarcos, Claus Berry, & Michael Grabski (Eds.), Salience: Multidisciplinary perspectives on its function in discourse (pp. 1–28). Berlin / New York: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Citron, Francesca M.M.
(2012) Neural correlates of written emotion word processing: A review of recent electrophysiological and haemodynamic neuroimaging studies. Brain and Language, 122, 211–226). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Citron, Francesca M.M.; Weekes, Brendan S. & Ferstl, Evelyn C.
(2014) Arousal and emotional valence interact in written word recognition. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(10), 1257–1267. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
(1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coates, Richard
(2000) Singular definite expressions with a unique denotatum and the limits of properhood. Linguistics: An interdisciplinary journal of the language sciences, 38, 1161–1171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
COBUILD
(2001) Collins COBUILD English dictionary for advanced learners. 3rd ed. Glasgow: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Cohen, Henri, & Lefebvre, Claire
(2005) Handbook of categorization in cognitive science. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
Collins, Peter
(2009) Information-packaging constructions. In Pam Peters, Peter Collins, & Adam Smith (Eds.), Comparative studies in Australian and New Zealand English: Grammar and beyond (pp. 73–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
(1986) An introduction to English intonation. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
(1993) English speech rhythm: Form and function in everyday verbal interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
(2001) Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Typology and universals. 2nd ed.; 1st ed. 1990. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. In Östman & Fried (Eds.), (pp. , 273–309).Google Scholar
①
(2007) Beyond Aristotle and gradience: A reply to Aarts. Studies in Language, 31(2), 409–430. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William, & Cruse, D. Alan
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cruse, Alan
(2000) Aspects of the microstructure of word meanings. In Ravin & Leacock (Eds.), (pp. Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 30–31).Google Scholar
(2011) Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. 3rd ed.; 1st ed. 2004. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan
(1997) Intonation. 2nd edition; 1st edition 1986. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David
(1967) English. Lingua, 17, 24–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1988) Language play. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W., & McNally, Louise
(Eds.) (1988) Syntax and semantics volume 29: The limits of syntax. San Diego / London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
①
Dahl, Östen
(1976) Grammar and meaning: Papers on syntactic and semantic topics. Lingua, 39(1), 158–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Barbara L., & MacNeilage, Peter F.
(2002) The internal structure of the syllable. In Talmy Givón, & Bertram F. Malle (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language (pp. 135–154). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Deyne, Simon; Voorspoels, Wouter; Verheyen, Steven; Navarro, Daniel J.; & Storms, Gert
(2014) Accounting for graded structure in adjective categories with valence-based opposition relationships. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29( 5), 568–583. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Smet, Hendrik, & Heyvaert, Liesbet
(2011) The meaning of the English present participle. English Language and Linguistics, 15(3), 473–498. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
(1981) An interpretation of ergativity and related patterns. Language, 37(3), 626 ff. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1987) Transitivity in grammar and cognition. In Russell S. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp. 57–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
(2006) Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 17 (4), 463–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dik, Simon C., & Hengeveld, Kees
(1997) Theory of functional grammar, Parts 1 & 2. 2nd ed. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dimroth, Christine; Gretsch, Petra; Jordens, Peter; Perdue, Clive; & Starren, Marianne
(2003) A stage model for first and second language development. In Christine Dimroth, & Marianne Starren (Eds.), Information structure and the dynamics of language acquisition (pp. 65–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark
(2011) The use and meaning of ideophones in Siwu. PhD dissertation. Nijmegen: Radboud University.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W.
(1994) Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) A semantic approach to English grammar. 2nd edition; 1st edition 1981. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Donohue, Mark
(2008) Covert word classes: Making your own syntax in Tukang Besi. Studies in Language, 32, (3), 590–609. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Pamela
(1977) On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53, 810–842. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
(1991) Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67(3), 547–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W.
(1987) The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63(4), 805–855. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Discourse and grammar. In Michael Tomasello (Ed.), (pp. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 17–88).Google Scholar
Elman, Jeffrey L.
(2009) On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science, 33, 547–582. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engelberg, Stefan
(2011) Lexical decomposition: Foundational issues. In Maienborn et al. (Eds.), (pp. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 124–144). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Thomas
(2012) The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria; Jungl, Manuel Leonetti; & Ahern, Aoife
(Eds.) (2011) Procedural meaning: problems and perspectives. Bingley: Emerald. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
①
Evans, Vyvyan
(2009) How words mean: Lexical concepts, cognitive models, and meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fawcett, Robin P.
(2000) The theory of syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feist, Jim
(2011) Compound constructions: Waterproof three-storey brick and tile fire stations? Semiotica, 187(1), 337–367.Google Scholar
(2012a) Premodifiers in English: Their structure and significance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2012b) What controls the ‘genitive variation’ in Present-Day English? Studies in Language, 36(2), 261–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Noun incorporation in English. Functions of Language, 20(2), 159–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, Victor S., & Slevc, L. Robert
(2007) Grammatical encoding. In Gaskell (Ed.), (pp. Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics, 453–170).Google Scholar
Ferris, Connor
(1983) The meaning of syntax: A study in the adjectives of English. London / New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, & Speyer, Augustin
(2012) Discourse relations in English and German discourse: Local and not so local constraints. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9(4), 413 ff. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillenbaum, Samuel, & Rapoport, Amnon
(1971) Structures in the subjective lexicon. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., & Atkins, B.T.S.
(2000) Describing polysemy: The case of ‘crawl’. In Ravin & Leacock (Eds.), (pp. Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 91–110).Google Scholar
Firth, J.R.
(1957) Modes of meaning. In Papers in linguistics 1934–1951 (pp. 190–215). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Olga, & Nänny, Max
(2001) The motivated sign. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flores d’Arcais, G.B., & Schreuder, R.
(1987) Psychological Research, 49, 153–159.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry, & Lepore, Ernest
(2002) The compositionality papers. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael
(2007) The non-linearity of speech production. In Hannay & Steen (Eds.), (pp. Structural-functional studies in English grammar: In honour of Lachlan Mackenzie, 337–351). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) A neural network model of lexical organisation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2010) A neural network approach to compositionality and co-compositionality. The Mental Lexicon, 5(2), 180–204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fretheim, Thorstein
(2011) Description as indication: The use of conceptual meaning for a procedural purpose. In Escandell-Vidal et al. (Eds.), (pp. Procedural meaning: problems and perspectives, 131 ff.).Google Scholar
Fries, Peter H.
(1983) On the status of theme in English: Arguments from discourse. In János S. Petöfi, & Emel Sözer (Eds.), Micro and Macro Connexity of Texts (pp. 116–146). Hamburg: Helmet Buske.Google Scholar
Gagné, Christina L.; Spalding, Thomas L.; & Gorrie, Melissa C.
(2005) Sentential context and the interpretation of familiar open-compounds and novel modifier-noun phrases. Language and Speech, 48(2), 203–221). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, Simon & Pickering, Martin J.
(2007) Alignment in dialogue. In Gaskell (Ed.), (pp. Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics, 453–452).Google Scholar
Gaskell, M. Gareth
(Ed.) (2007) Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ②
Geeraerts, Dirk
(2010) Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, Dedre, & Boroditsky, Lera
(2001) Individuation, relativity, and early word learning. In Melissa Bowerman & Stephen C. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 215–250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerdts, Donna B.
(1998) Incorporation. In Spencer & Zwicky (Eds.), (pp. The handbook of morphology, 84–100). Online: Chapter 8. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W.
(2005) Embodiment in metaphorical imagination. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 65–92). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jnr; Wilson, Nicole L.; & Bryant, Gregory A.
(2012) Figurative language: Normal adult cognitive research. In Spivey & others (Eds.), (pp. The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics, 455–484). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giegerich, Heinz J.
(1999) Lexical strata in English: Morphological causes, phonological effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gil, David
(2005) Isolating-monocategorial associational language. In Cohen & Lefebvre (Eds.), (pp. Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 348–380). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gillon, Brendan S.
(2005) Semantic categorisation. In Cohen & Lefebvre (Eds.), (pp. Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 167–187). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
(1970) Notes on the semantic structure of English adjectives. Language, 46(4), 816–837. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1979) On understanding grammar. New York / San Francisco / London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1988) Pragmatics of word order: Predictability, importance and attention. In Michael Hammond, Edith Moravcsik, & Jessica Wirth (Eds.), Studies in syntactic typology (pp. 243–284). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1993) English grammar: A function-based introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
(1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
(1999) The emergence of the semantics of argument constructions. In Bryan MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 197–212). Mahwah, NJ / London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeannette K.
(2012) Pragmatics and information structure. In Allan & Jaszczolt (Eds.), (pp. The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 585–598). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos
(2004) The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John
(1983) Iconic and economic motivation. Language, 59(4), 781–819. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K.
(1977) Text as semantic choice in social contexts. In Teun A. van Dijk & Janos S. Petöfi (Eds.), Grammars and descriptions (studies in text theory and text analysis) (pp. 176–225). Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1989) Grammar and daily life: Concurrence and complementarity. In Jonathon Webster (Ed) (2012) On grammar (volume 1 of Collected works of M. A. K. Halliday) (pp. 369–383).Google Scholar
(2014) An introduction to functional grammar. 3rd ed.; 1st ed. 1985. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
(2000) Grammar and daily life. In Lockwood et al. (Eds.), (pp. Functional approaches to language, culture and cognition: Papers in honour of Sydney M. Lamb, 221–238). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K., & William S. Greaves
(2008) Intonation in the grammar of English. London / Oakville, Ct: Equinox.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, Ruqaiya
(1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, M.I.M.
(1999) Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London / New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hanks, Patrick
(2013) Lexical analysis: Norms and exploitations. Cambridge, Ma. /London: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hannay, Mike, & Steen, Gerard J.
(2007) Structural-functional studies in English grammar: In honour of Lachlan Mackenzie. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ②
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard
(2012) A pragmatic approach to historical semantics with specific reference to markers of clausal negation in mediaeval French. In Kathryn Allan, & Justyna A. Robinson (Eds.), Current methods in historical semantics (pp. 233–257). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Hanson, Catherine, & Hanson, Stephen José
(2005) Categorization in neuroscience: Brain response to objects and events. In Cohen & Lefebvre (Eds.), (pp. Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 119–140). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harder, Peter
(1996) Functional semantics: A theory of meaning, structure and tense in English. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Grammar flow and procedural knowledge: Structure and function at the interface between grammar and discourse. In Hannay & Steen (Eds.), (pp. Structural-functional studies in English grammar: In honour of Lachlan Mackenzie, 309–335). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hasan, Ruqaiya, & Fries, Peter H.
(1995) Reflections on subject and theme: An introduction. In Ruqaiya Hasan, & Peter H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme: A discourse functional perspective (pp. xiii–xlv). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
(2003) The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (Ed.), (pp. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 211–242).Google Scholar
(2007) Pre-established categories don’t exist. Linguistic Typology, 11, 119–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Terminology of case. In A.L Mal’chukov, & Andrew Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of case (pp. The handbook of morphology, 505–517). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A.
(1994) A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2004) Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees; Rijkhoff, Jan; & Siewierska, Anna
(2004) Part-of-speech systems and word order. Journal of Linguistics, 40(3), 527–570. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees, & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan
(2008) Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herbst, Thomas, & Götz-Votteler, Katrin
(2007) Valency: Theoretical, descriptive and cognitive issues. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
①
Hinterhölzl, Roland, & van Kemenade, Ans
(2012) The interaction between syntax, information structure, and prosody in word order change. In Terttu Nevalainen, & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English (pp. 803–821). New York / Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
(1960) The origin of speech. Scientific American, 205, 88–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoppenbrouwers, G.A.J.; Seuren, P.A.M.; & Weijters, A.J.M.M.
(Eds.) (1985) Meaning and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
①
Hopper, Paul J., & Thompson, Sandra A.
(1984) The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal grammar. Language, 60(4), 703–752. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, Kerry
(2012) Connectionism, dynamical cognition, and nonclassical compositional representation. In Werning et al. (Eds.), (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 557 ff.).Google Scholar
Hsu, Chun-Ting; Jacobs, Arthur M.; Citron, Francesca M.M.; & Conrad, Markus
(2015) The emotion potential of words and passages in reading Harry Potter – an fMRI study. Brain and Language, 142, 96–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
(2002) The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Richard A.
(1984) Word grammar. Oxford / New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard, & Holmes, Jasper
(2000) Re-cycling in the encyclopedia. In Peeters (Ed.), (pp. The lexicon encyclopedia interface, 259–290).Google Scholar
Inchaurralde, Carlos
(2000) Lexicopedia. In Peeters (Ed.), (pp. The lexicon encyclopedia interface, 97–114).Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
(2002) Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1972) Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2011) Conceptual semantics. In Maienborn et al. (Eds.), (pp. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 688–709). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Roman
(1936/1990) Contribution to the general theory of case. (Combining the 1936 paper with parts of the 1958 revised paper; translated from German). In Linda R. Waugh, & Monique Monville-Burston (Eds.) (1990) On Language (pp. 332–385). Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
(1960) Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In Thomas A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Janssen, Theo A.J.M.
(2007) A speaker/hearer-based grammar: The case of possessives and compounds. In Mike Hannay & Gerard J. Steen (Eds.), Structural-functional studies in English grammar: In honour of Lachlan Mackenzie (pp. 353–388). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, Theo M.V.
(2012) Compositionality: Its historical context. In Werning et al., (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 19–46).Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
(1924) Philosophy of grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Jung, Kiju; Shavitt, Sharon; Viswanathan, Madhu; & Hilbe, Joseph M.
(2014) Female hurricanes are deadlier than male hurricanes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8782–8787. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, Hans, & Partee, Barbara
(1995) Prototype theory and compositionality. Cognition, 57, 129–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, Hans, & Reyle, U.
(2011) Discourse Representation Theory. In Maienborn et al. (Eds.), (pp. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 872–922).Google Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, Annette
(1979) Micro- and macro- developmental changes in language acquisition and other representational systems. Cognitive Science, 3, 91–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff, Kyra, & Karmiloff-Smith, Annette
(2001) Pathways to language: From fetus to adolescent. Cambridge, Ma. / London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Graham
(2008) Modification of state verbs. In Louise McNally & Christopher Kennedy (Eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse (pp. 220–248). Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne
(1993) The middle voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994) Middle voice: Transitivity and the elaboration of events. In Barbara A. Fox & Paul J. Hopper (Eds.), Voice: Form and function (pp. 179–230). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
(1998) Partitive case and aspect. In Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 265–307). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Kirsner, Robert S.
(2011) Instructional meanings, iconicity and l’arbitraire du signe in the analysis of the Afrikaans demonstratives. In Bob de Jonge & Yishai Tobin (Eds.), Linguistic theory and empirical evidence (pp. 97–138). Amsterdam: John Benjamins CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang
(2004) How time is encoded. In Wolfgang Klein & Ping Li (Eds.), The expression of time (pp. 39–82). Berlin / New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaya-Tamm, Maria
(2012) New directions in lexical typology. Linguistics, 50(3), 373–394.Google Scholar
Kravchenko, Alexander V.
(2007) Essential properties of language, or, why language is not a code. Language Sciences, 29, 650–671. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, Stan A., & Hendry, Jennifer L.
(2003) Does language help animals think? In Dedre Gentner & Susan Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 237–276). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W.
(1973) Boundaries of words and their meanings. In C.J. Bailey & R. Shuy (Eds.), New ways of analysing variation in English (pp. 340–373). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark
(2003) Metaphors we live by. 2nd ed.; 1st ed. 1980. Chicago /London: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lamb, Sydney M.
(1966) Outline of Stratificational Grammar. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Pathways of the brain: The neurocognitive basis of the brain. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) Language and reality. London / New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
(1994) Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
(1987a) Foundations of cognitive grammar, volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, Ca.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1987b) Nouns and verbs. Language, 63, 33–94. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999) Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Dynamicity, fictivity, and scanning: The imaginative basis of logic and linguistic meaning. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 164–197). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lascaratou, Chryssoula
(2007) The Language of pain: Expression or description? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
(1974) Semantics. London: Pelican.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N., & Li, Lu
(1995) Indeterminacy between noun phrases and adjective phrases as complements of the English verb. In Aarts & Meyer (Eds.), (pp. The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description, 183–202).Google Scholar
Leffel, Timothy; Lauter, Miriam; Westerlund, Masha; & Pylkkänen, Liina
(2014) Restrictive vs. non-restrictive composition: A magnetoencephalography study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(10), 1191–1204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
(2008) Roots, stems and word classes. Studies in Language, 32(3), 546–567. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lemmens, Maarten
(1998) Lexical perspectives on transitivity and ergativity: Causative constructions in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, Willem J.M.
(1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1993) Accessing words in speech and production: Stages, Processes and representations. In Levelt (Ed.), (pp. Lexical access in speech production, 1–22).Google Scholar
(Ed.) (1993) Lexical access in speech production. 2nd ed.; 1st ed. 1991. Cambridge Ma. / London: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ②
Levin, Beth
(1993) English verb classes and alternations. Chicago / London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lockwood, David G.; Fries, Peter H.; & Copeland, James E.
(Eds.) (2000) Functional approaches to language, culture and cognition: Papers in honour of Sydney M. Lamb. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
①
Lohndahl, Terje
(2012). Toward the end of argument structure. In Maria Cristina Cuervo & Yves Roberge (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 38: The end of argument structure? (pp. 155–184). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Lüdtke, Jana; Meyer-Sickendieck, Burkhard; & Jacobs, Arthur M.
(2014) Immersing in the stillness of an early morning: Testing the mood empathy hypothesis of poetry reception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 363–377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
(1966) Towards a ‘notional’ theory of the ‘parts of speech’. Journal of Linguistics, 2, 209–236. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1968) Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1977) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McClelland, James L.; Rumelhart, David E.; & Hinton, G.E.
(1986) The appeal of parallel distributed processing. In David E. Rumelhart & James L. McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, volume 1: Foundations (pp. 3–44). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McGregor, William
(1997) Semiotic Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McNally, Louise
(1988) On the linguistic encoding of information packaging instructions. In Culicover & McNally (Eds.), (pp. Syntax and semantics volume 29: The limits of syntax, 161–183).Google Scholar
Mcnamara, Timothy P.
(2003) Semantic priming: The state of the art. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Bryan
(1999) The emergence of language from embodiment. In Bryan MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 213–256). Mahwah, NJ / London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2005) The emergence of grammar from perspective. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 198–223). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia; von Heusinger, Klaus; & Portner, Paul
(Eds.) (2011) Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ② ③ ④
Malinowski, Bronislaw
(1929) The sexual life of savages in north-western Melanesia: An ethnographic account of courtship, marriage and family life among the natives of Trobriand Islands, British New Guinea. London: Routledge & Paul (1948).Google Scholar
(1930) The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C.K. Ogden & I.A. Richards, The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and the science of symbolism (pp. 296–366). 2nd ed.; 1st ed. 1923. New York: Harcourt Brace / London: Routledge & Paul.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec
(2013) No escape from morphemes in morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7), 905–916. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marchand, Hans
(1969) The categories and types of present-day English word formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach. 2nd ed.; 1st ed. 1960. Munich: Beck.Google Scholar
Matthews, Gerald; Deary, Ian J.; & Whiteman, Martha C.
(2003) Personality traits. 2nd ed. Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, P.H.
(1981) Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mel’cuk, Igor A.
(2001) Communicative organisation in natural language: The semantic communicative structure of sentences. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Semantics: From meaning to text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Charles F.
(1995) Grammatical relations in English. In Aarts & Meyer (Eds.), (pp. The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description, 27–39).Google Scholar
Miller, D. Gary
(2014) English lexicogenesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, George A., & Fellbaum, Christiane
(1991) The semantic networks of English. Cognition, 41(1–3), 197–229. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce
(1985) Old English syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, Marianne
(1984) The evolution of noun incorporation. Language, 60, 847–892. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Tags: Cross-linguistic diversity and commonality. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(15), 2165–2182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike, & Hovdhaugen, Even
(1992) Samoan reference grammar. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press / Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Gregory L.
(1988) Comprehending complex concepts. Cognitive Science, 12, 529–562. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, M. Lynne
(2003) Semantic relations and the lexicon: Antonymy, synonymy, and other paradigms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter
(2008) A modular approach to grammatical categories: Evidence from language diversity and contact. In Cohen & Lefebvre (Eds.), (pp. Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 46–69).Google Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J.
(2000) The discrete nature of syntactic categories: Against a prototype-based account. In Robert D. Borsley (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, volume 32: The nature and function of syntactic categories (pp. 221–250). New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nuckolls, Janis B.
(1999). The case for sound symbolism. Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, 225–252. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, E.
(1992) Indexing gender. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context (pp. 335–358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Őstman, Jan-Ola, & Fried, Mirjam
(Eds.) (2005) Cognitive grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Partee
(2010) Privative adjectives: Subsective plus coercion. In Rainer Bäuerle, U. Reyle & Thomas Ede Zimmermann (Eds.), Presuppositions and discourse: Essays offered to Hans Kamp (pp. 273–285). Bingley: Emerald. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pecher, Diane, & Zwaan, Rolf A.
(Eds.) (2005) Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥
Peeters, Bert
(Ed.) (2000) The lexicon encyclopedia interface. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
① ②
Pennebaker, James
(2011) The secret life of pronouns: What our words say about us. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders
(1931–1958) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Volume 2: Elements of logic. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Petrova, Svetlana
(2012) The impact of focusing and defocusing on word order: Changes at the periphery in Old English and Old High German. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English (pp. 846–858). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J., & Branigan, Holly P.
(1998) The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633–651. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pietroski, Paul M.
(2012) Semantic monadicity with conceptual polyadicity. In Werning et al. (Eds.), (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 129–148).Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen
(1981) Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 223–255). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Prinz, Jesse
(2002) Furnishing the mind: Concepts and their perceptual basis. Cambridge, Ma. / London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, Friedemann
(1999) Words in the brain’s language. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 22(2), 253–279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) The neuroscience of language: On brain circuits of words and serial order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., & Knoblauch, A.
(2009) Discrete combinatorial circuits emerging in neural networks: A mechanism for rules of grammar in the human brain? Neural Networks, 22(2), 161–172. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James
(1995) The generative lexicon. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2012) Co-compositionality in grammar. In Werning et al. (Eds.), (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 371–384).Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey; & Svartvik, Jan
(1972) A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew R.
(1988) Transformational grammar: A first course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
(1997) Aspect and predication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian, & Reiss, Charles
(Eds.) (2007) Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ravin, Yael, & Leacock, Claudia
(Eds.) (2002) Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
① ② ③
Redeker, Gisela
(2006) Discourse markers as attentional cues at discourse transitions. In Kerstin Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 339–358). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Reid, Wallis Hoch
(1991) Verb and noun number in English: A functional explanation. London / New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Reid, Wallis; Otheguy, Ricardo; & Stern, Nancy
(Eds.) (2002) Signal, meaning & message: Perspectives on sign-based linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
①
Reverberi, Carlo; Kuhlen, Anna; Abutalebi, Jubin; Greulich, R. Stefan; Costa, Albert; Seyed-Allaei, Shimas; & Haynes, John-Dylan
(2015) Language control in bilinguals: Intention to speak vs. execution of speech. Brain and Language, 144, 1–9. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rickheit, Gert, & Sichelschmidt, Lorenz
(2007) Valency and cognition – A notion in transition. In Herbst & Götz-Votteler (Eds.), (pp. Valency: Theoretical, descriptive and cognitive issues, 163–182).Google Scholar
Riehl, Claudia Maria, & Kilian-Hatz, Christa
(2005) Structure and function of incorporation processes in compounding. In F.K. Erhard Voeltz (Ed.), Studies in African linguistic typology (pp. 36 ff.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan
(2002) The noun phrase. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Descriptive and discourse referential modifiers in a layered model of the noun phrase. Linguistics, 46(4), 789–829. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roelofs, Ardi
(1993) A spreading activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. In Levelt (Ed.), (pp. Lexical access in speech production, 107–142).Google Scholar
Ruhl, Charles
(2002) Data, comprehensiveness, monosemy. In Reid et al. (Eds.), (pp. Signal, meaning & message: Perspectives on sign-based linguistics, 171–190). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sandra, Dominiek, & Sally Rice
(1995) Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind – the linguist’s or the language user’s? Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 89–100. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J.
(2008) Context, attention and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind and Language, 17(1–2), 188–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de
(1915) Charles Bally & Albert Sechehaye (Eds.), Course in general linguistics. Trans. Ray Harris 1983 London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Schreuder, Robert, & Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B.
(1989) Psycholinguistic issues in the lexical representation of meaning. In William Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 409–436). Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schreuder, Robert; Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B.; & Glazenborg, Ge
(1985) Semantic decomposition and word recognition. In Hoppenbrouwers et al. (Eds.), (pp. Meaning and the lexicon, 108–114).Google Scholar
Schlesinger, I.M.
(1995) On the semantics of the object. In Aarts & Meyer (Eds.), (pp. The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description, 54–74).Google Scholar
Schwanenflugel, Paula J.
(1991) Why are abstract concepts hard to understand? In Paula J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings (pp. 223–250). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
(2002) Shorter Oxford English dictionary on historical principles. 5th edition; 1st edition 1933. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John
(1998) The lexical item. In Edda Weigand (Ed.), Contrastive lexical semantics (pp. 1–25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie, & Taverniers, Miriam
(Eds.) (2003) Grammatical metaphor: Views from systemic functional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D.
(1970) Universals of grammatical development in children. In G.B. Flores d’Arcais, & W.J.M. Levelt (Eds.), Advances in psycholinguistics (pp. 174–184). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Smith, Mark
(2010) Pragmatic functions and lexical categories. Linguistics, 48(3), 717–777. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, Andrew, & Zwicky, Arnold M.
(Eds.) (1998) The handbook of morphology. Oxford / Malden, Ma.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④
Spivey, Michael J.; Richardson, Daniel C.; & Gonzalez-Marquez, Monica
(2005) Perceptual-motor and image schematic infrastructure. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 246–281). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spivey, Michael J.; McRae, Ken; & Joanisse, Marc F.
(Eds.) (2012) The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ②
Štalnaker, R.C.
(1978) Assertion In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Volume 9: Pragmatics (pp. 315–332). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol
(2003) Constructional semantics as a limit to grammatical alternation: The two genitives of English. In Gunter Rohdenburg & Britta Mondorf (Eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English (pp. 413–444). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Štekauer, Pavol; Valera, Salvador; & Körtvélyessy, Lívia
(2012) Word formation in the world’s languages: A typological survey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Terrence, & Eliasmith, Chris
(2012) Compositionality and biologically plausible models. In Werning & others (Eds.), (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 596–615).Google Scholar
Swee, Genevieve, & Shirmer, Annett
(2015) On the importance of being vocal: Saying ‘ow’ improves pain tolerance. Journal of Pain. Online: Crossref.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, & Pintzuk, Susan
(2012) The effect of information structure on object position in Old English: A pilot study. In Anneli Meurman-Solin, María José López-Couso & Bettelou Los (Eds.), Information structure and syntactic change in the history of English (pp. 47–65). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, John R.
(2002) Cognitive grammar. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Cognitive grammar (2nd edition). Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tench, Paul
(1996) The intonation systems of English. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra
(1978) Modern English from a typological point of view: Some implications of the function of word order. Linguistische Berichte, 54, 19–35.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., & Hopper, Paul J.
(2001) Transitivity, clause structure, and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. In Joan Bybee & Paul Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 27–69). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Timberlake, Alan
(1975) Hierarchies in the genitive of negation. Slavic and East European Journal, 19(2), 123–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tobin, Yishai
(1990) Semiotics and linguistics. London / New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Toman, Jindrich
(2001) Word syntax. In Spencer & Zwicky (Eds.), (pp. The handbook of morphology, 306–321). Online: Chapter 15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
(Ed.) (2003) The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure. Volume 2. Mahwah, NJ / London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
① ②
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
(2008) Syntax. In Richard M. Hogg (Ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language: Vol. 1 The Beginnings to 1066 (pp. 168–289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trousdale, Nikolas
(2010) The event structure of perception verbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tucker, Don M.
(2002) Embodied meaning: An evolutionary developmental analysis of adaptive semantics. In Givón & Malle (Eds.), (pp. 51–82).Google Scholar
Ullman, Stephen
(1959) Principles of semantics. 2nd edition; 1st edition 1951. Glasgow: Jackson. / Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vallduví, Enric, & Vikunen, Maria
(1998) On rheme and Kontrast. In Culicover & McNally (Eds.), (pp. 79–108).Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek
(2007) Interpersonal modification in the English noun phrase. Functions of Language, 14(2), 203–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Linden, An
(2012) Modal adjectives: English deontic and evaluative constructions in synchrony and diachrony. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D.
(2013) Lexical representation, co-composition, and linking syntax and semantics. In James Pustejovsky (Ed.), Advances in generative lexicon theory (pp. 67 ff.). Dordrecht / New York: Springer Science + Business Media. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vandelanotte, Lieven
(2002) Prenominal adjectives in English: Structures and ordering. Folia Linguistica, 36, 219–259. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno
(1968) Adjectives and nominalizations. The Hague / Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Ward, Gregory, & Birner, Betty J.
(2011) Discourse effects of word order variation. In Maienborn et al. (Eds.), Ch. 73.Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Warren, Beatrice
(1978) Semantic patterns of noun-noun compounds. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
(1984) Classifying adjectives. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel
(1966) Explorations in semantic theory. Reprinted in William Labov & Beatrice Weinreich (Eds.) (1980) On semantics (pp. 99–207). Philadephia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Wennerstrom, Ann
(2001) The music of English speech: Prosody as discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Werning, Markus; Hinzen, Wolfram; & Machery, Edouard
(Eds.) (2012) Oxford handbook of compositionality. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥
Wharton, Tim
(2012) Pragmatics and prosody. In Allan & Jaszczolt (Eds.), (pp. The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 567–584). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Anne
(2000) Intonation in text and discourse: Beginnings, middles, and ends. Harlow / New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
(1981) Case marking and human nature. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 1(1), 43–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1990) ‘Prototypes save’: On the uses and abuses of the notion of ‘prototype’ in linguistics and related fields. In S.L. Tsohadzidis (Ed.), Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorisation (pp. 347–367). London / New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(1992) The semantics of interjection. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 159–192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1996) Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison
(2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter
(2012) Lexical decomposition in grammar. In Werning et al. (Eds.), (pp. Oxford handbook of compositionality, 307–327).Google Scholar
Wymer, Adam Zachary
(2008) Towards flexible types with constraints for manner and factive adverbs. In Louise McNally & Christopher Kennedy (Eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse (pp. 249–273). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zaidel, Eran; White, Hedy; Sakurai, Eriko; & Banks, William
(1988) Representation, control and interaction: Separate roles for the right and left hemispheres? In Christine Chiarello (Ed.), Right hemisphere contributions to lexical semantics (pp. 71–88). Berlin: Springer-Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, Rolf A., & Madden, Carol J.
(2005) Embodied sentence comprehension. In Pecher & Zwaan (Eds.), (pp. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, 224–245). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Subjects

Linguistics

Semantics
Functional linguistics
Germanic linguistics
English linguistics
Theoretical linguistics
Syntax
BIC Subject: CFK – Grammar, syntax
BISAC Subject: LAN016000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Semantics
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2016027521 | Marc record