Verbo-Nominal Constructions with kommen ‘come’ in German

References

1. Algeo, J.
   (1995) Having a look at the expanded predicate. InB. Aarts & Ch. F. Meyer (Eds.), The verb in Contemporary English: Theory and description (pp.203–217). Cambridge University Press
   [Google Scholar]
2. Baayen, R. H.
   (2009) Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. InA. Lüdeling & M. Kyto (Eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook (pp.900–919). Mouton de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Barðdal, J.
   (2006) Predicting the productivity of argument structure constructions. Berkeley Linguistics Society32, 467–478. 10.3765/bls.v32i1.3438
   https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v32i1.3438 [Google Scholar]
4. Barðdal, J.
   (2008) Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.8
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.8 [Google Scholar]
5. Barðdal, J. & Gildea, S.
   (2015) Diachronic Construction Grammar: Epistemological context, basic assumptions and historical implications. InJ. Barðdal, E. Smirnova, L. Sommerer & S. Gildea (Eds.), Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.1–50). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.01bar
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.01bar [Google Scholar]
6. Brinton, L. J.
   (2011) The grammaticalization of complex predicates. InB. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp.556–569). Oxford University Press
   [Google Scholar]
7. Brinton, L. J. & Akimoto, M.
   (Eds.) (1999) Collocational and idiomatic aspects of composite predicates in the history of English. John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.47
   https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.47 [Google Scholar]
8. Brinton, L. J. & Traugott, E. C.
   (2005) Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615962
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615962 [Google Scholar]
9. Bybee, J.
   (2007) Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
10. Bybee, J.
    (2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
11. Coussé, E., Andersson, P. & Olofsson, J.
    (Eds.) (2018) Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21 [Google Scholar]
12. De Smet, H.
    (2020) What predicts productivity? Theory meets individuals. Cognitive Linguistics, 31(2), 251–278. 10.1515/cog‑2019‑0026
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0026 [Google Scholar]
13. DUDEN
    DUDEN (2016) Die Grammatik: Unentbehrlich für richtiges Deutsch. Dudenverlag.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Eisenberg, P.
    (1999) Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik. Das Wort. Verlag J.B. Metzler. 10.1007/978‑3‑476‑03765‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-03765-7 [Google Scholar]
15. Goldberg, A.
    (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Goldberg, A.
    (2019) Explain me this. Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Heine, A.
    (2020) Zwischen Grammatik und Lexikon. Forschungsgeschichtlicher Blick auf Funktionsverbgefüge. InS. De Knop & M. Hermann (Eds.), Funktionsverbgefüge im Fokus (pp.15–38). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110697353‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110697353-002 [Google Scholar]
18. Heine, B. & Kuteva, T.
    (2002) World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613463
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463 [Google Scholar]
19. Helbig, G.
    (1979) Probleme der Beschreibung von Funktionsverbgefügen im Deutschen. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 16(2), 273–284.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Heringer, H. J.
    (1968) Die Opposition von „kommen“ und „bringen“ als Funktionsverben. Schwann.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Lehmann, Ch.
    (2002a) Thoughts on grammaticalization. 2nd ed.Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität (ASSidUE, 9).
    [Google Scholar]
22. Lehmann, Ch.
    (2002b) New reflections on grammaticalization and lexicalization. InI. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp.1–18). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.03leh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.03leh [Google Scholar]
23. Lehmann, Ch.
    (2004) Theory and method in grammaticalization. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 32, 152–187.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Leiss, E.
    (1992) Die Verbalkategorien des Deutschen. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110883541
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883541 [Google Scholar]
25. Plag, I.
    (2003) Word-formation in English. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511841323
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841323 [Google Scholar]
26. Polenz, Peter von
    (1987) Funktionsverben, Funktionsverbgefüge und Verwandtes Vorschläge zur Satzsemantischen Lexikographie. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik15, 169–189. 10.1515/zfgl.1987.15.2.169
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1987.15.2.169 [Google Scholar]
27. Rösch, O.
    (1994) Untersuchungen zu passivwertigen Funktionsverbgefügen im Deutschen der Gegenwart. Ein Beitrag zur funktionalen Valenzgrammatik. Helmut Buske.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Schmid, H.-J.
    (2016) A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations. InH.-J. Schmid (Ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge (pp.9–35). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Smirnova, E.
    (2015) Constructionalization and constructional change: The role of context in the development of constructions. InJ. Barðdal, E. Smirnova, L. Sommerer & S. Gildea (Eds.), Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.81–106). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.03smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.03smi [Google Scholar]
30. Smirnova, E. & Sommerer, L.
    (2020) The nature of the node and the network – Open questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. InL. Sommerer & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.2–42). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.int [Google Scholar]
31. Traugott, E. C. & Trousdale, G.
    (2013) Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
32. Trousdale, G.
    (2008) Constructions in grammaticalization and lexicalization: Evidence from the history of a composite predicate construction in English. InG. Trousdale & N. Gisborne (Eds.), Constructional approaches to English grammar (pp.33–67). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199178.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199178.1.33 [Google Scholar]
33. Trousdale, G.
    (2014) On the relationship between grammaticalization and constructionalization. Folia Linguistica, 48(2), 557–578. 10.1515/flin.2014.018
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2014.018 [Google Scholar]
34. Van Goethem, K., Norde, M., Coussé, E. & Vanderbauwhede, G.
    (Eds.) (2018) Category change from a constructional perspective. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.20 [Google Scholar]
35. Van Pottelberge, J.
    (2001) Verbonominale Konstruktionen, Funktionsverbgefüge. Vom Sinn und Unsinn eines Untersuchungsgegenstandes. Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
36. von Polenz, P.
    (2009) Funktionsverben, Funktionsverbgefüge und Verwandtes. Vorschläge zur satzsemantischen Lexikografie. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 15(2), 169–189.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Wierzbicka, A.
    (1982) Why can you ‘have a drink’ when you can’t ‘*have an eat’?Language, 58, 753–799. 10.2307/413956
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413956 [Google Scholar]
38. Zeschel, A.
    (2008) Funktionsverbgefüge als Idiomverbände. InA. Stefanowitsch & Fischer, K. (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik: von der Konstruktion zur Grammatik (pp.263–278). Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]