Intersubjectification in constructional change

References

1. Aarts, B.
   (2007) Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Adams, M.
   (2014) Slang in new media. A case study. InJ. Coleman (Ed.), Global English slang. Methodologies and perspectives (pp.175–186). London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Börjars, K., Vincent, N., & Walkden, G.
   (2015) On constructing a theory of grammatical change. Transactions of the Philological Society, 113(3), 363–382. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12068
   https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12068 [Google Scholar]
4. Brisard, F.
   (Ed.) (2002) Grounding. The epistemic footing of deixis and reference. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110899801
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899801 [Google Scholar]
5. Brône, G., & Zima, E.
   (2014) Towards a dialogic construction grammar. A corpus-based approach to ad hoc routines and resonance activation. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 457–495. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0027
   https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0027 [Google Scholar]
6. Bybee, J. L.
   (2010) Language, usage, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
7. Davies, M.
   (2013) Corpus of global web-based English: 1.9 billion words from speakers in 20 countries (GloWbE). Available online atcorpus.byu.edu/glowbe/
   [Google Scholar]
8. Deppermann, A.
   (2011) Konstruktionsgrammatik und Interaktionale Linguistik: Affinitäten, Komplementaritäten und Diskrepanzen. InA. Lasch & A. Ziem (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik III. Aktuelle Fragen und Lösungsansätze (pp.205–238). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Diessel, H.
   (2015) Usage-based construction grammar. InE. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of cognitivelinguistics (pp.295–321). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
    (1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of Let alone. Language, 64(3), 501–538. 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
11. Goldberg, A.
    (1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Goldberg, A.
    (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Gutzmann, D., & Henderson, R.
    (2019) Expressive updates, much?Language, 95(1), 107–135. 10.1353/lan.2019.0014
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0014 [Google Scholar]
14. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C.
    (2004) An introduction to functional grammar. 3rd ed.London: Hodder Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hilpert, M.
    (2013) Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word-formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139004206
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004206 [Google Scholar]
16. Hilpert, M.
    (2017) Historical sociolinguistics and construction grammar: From mutual challenges to mutual benefits. InT. Säily, A. Nurmi, M. Palander-Collin, & A. Auer (Eds.), Exploring future paths for historical sociolinguistics (pp.217–237). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ahs.7.09hil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ahs.7.09hil [Google Scholar]
17. Hilpert, M.
    (2018) Three open questions in diachronic construction grammar. InE. Coussé, P. Andersson, & J. Olofsson (Eds.), Grammaticalization meets construction grammar (pp.21–39). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21.c2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c2 [Google Scholar]
18. Hilpert, M.
    (2019) Construction grammar and its application to English. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Imo, W.
    (2015) Interactional construction grammar. Linguistics Vanguard, 1(1), 69–78. 10.1515/lingvan‑2015‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2015-0008 [Google Scholar]
20. Kristiansen, G.
    (2008) Style-shifting and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal variation. InG. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive sociolinguistics. Language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp.45–90). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199154.1.45
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199154.1.45 [Google Scholar]
21. Kristiansen, G., & Geeraerts, D.
    (2013) Contexts and usage in cognitive sociolinguistics. Journal of Pragmatics, 52, 1–4. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.017 [Google Scholar]
22. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
23. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Vol.1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Liberman, M.
    (2010) X much. languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2836, date of access: 8.3.2018]
25. Michaelis, L. A., & Feng, H.
    (2015) What is this, sarcastic syntax?Constructions and Frames, 7, 148–180. 10.1075/cf.7.2.01mic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.7.2.01mic [Google Scholar]
26. Tomasello, M.
    (2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Traugott, E. Closs
    (2010) Revisiting subjectification and intersubjectification. InK. Davidse, L. Vandelanotte, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification, and grammaticalization (pp.27–70). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Traugott, E. Closs, & Trousdale, G.
    (2010) Gradience, gradualness, and grammaticalization – how do they intersect?InE. Closs Traugott & G. Trousdale (Eds.), Gradience, gradualness, and grammaticalization (pp.19–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.90.04tra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.90.04tra [Google Scholar]
29. Traugott, E. Closs, & Trousdale, G.
    (2013) Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
30. Zappavigna, M.
    (2012) Discourse of Twitter and social media. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Ziem, A.
    (2015) Probleme und Desiderata einer Social Construction Grammar. InA. Ziem & A. Lasch (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik IV. Konstruktionenalssoziale Konventionen und kognitiveRoutinen (pp.1–22). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]