A multilingual approach to the interaction between frames and constructions

References

1. Baker, C., Fillmore, C. J., & Lowe, J.
   (1998) The Berkeley FrameNet project. Proceedings of COLING-ACL, 11, 86–90. Retrieved fromacl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P98/P98-1013.pdf
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bertoldi, A., & Chishman, R.
   (2012) Frame Semantics and legal corpora annotation: Theoretical and applied challenges. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology, 71, 1–17. 10.33011/lilt.v7i.1277
   https://doi.org/10.33011/lilt.v7i.1277 [Google Scholar]
3. Boas, H. C.
   (2001) Frame semantics as a framework for describing polysemy and syntactic structures of English and German motion verbs in contrastive computational lexicography. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 conference, 64–73.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Boas, H. C.
   (Ed.) (2010) Contrastive studies in construction grammar. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.10
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.10 [Google Scholar]
5. Boas, H. C., Lyngfelt, B., & Torrent, T. T.
   (2019) Framing constructicography. Lexicographica, 1(35), 41–85. 10.1515/lex‑2019‑0002
   https://doi.org/10.1515/lex-2019-0002 [Google Scholar]
6. Boas, H. C., & Ziem, A.
   (2018) Constructing a constructicon for German: Empirical, theoretical, and methodological issues. InB. Lyngfelt, L. Borin, K. Ohara, & T. T. Torrent (Eds.), Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages (pp. 183–228). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.22.07boa
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22.07boa [Google Scholar]
7. Borin, L., Dannélls, D., Forsberg, M., Gronostaj, M. T., & Kokkinakis, D.
   (2010) The past meets the present in Swedish FrameNet++. Proceedings of the XIV EURALEX International Congress, 269–281. Fryske Akademy.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Burchardt, A., Erk, K., Frank, A., Kowalski, A., Padó, S., & Pinkal, M.
   (2009) Using FrameNet for the semantic analysis of German: Annotation, representation, and automation. InH. C. Boas (Ed.), Multilinugal FrameNets in computational lexicography: Methods and applications (pp. 209–244). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110212976.3.209
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110212976.3.209 [Google Scholar]
9. Clausner, T. C., & Croft, W.
   (1997) Productivity and schematicity in metaphors. Cognitive Science, 21(3), 247–282. 10.1207/s15516709cog2103_1
   https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2103_1 [Google Scholar]
10. Čulo, O.
    (2013) Constructions-and-frames analysis of translations: The interplay of syntax and semantics in translations between English and German. Constructions and Frames, 5(2), 143–167. 10.1075/cf.5.2.02cul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.5.2.02cul [Google Scholar]
11. Czulo, O.
    (2017) Aspects of a primacy of frame model of translation. InS. Hansen-Schirra, O. Czulo, & S. Hofmann (Eds.), Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting (pp. 465–490). Language Science Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Czulo, O., Ziem, A., & Torrent, T. T.
    (2020) Beyond lexical semantic frames: Notes on pragmatic frames. InT. T. Torrent, C. Baker, O. Czulo, K. Ohara, & M. Petruck (Eds.), Towards a global, multilingual FrameNet (pp. 1–7). Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Ellsworth, M., Ohara, K., Subirats, C., & Schmidt, T.
    (2006) Frame-semantic analysis of motion scenarios in English, German, Spanish, and Japanese. Paper presented at theFourth International Conference on Construction Grammar, Tokyo, Japan.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1968) The case for case. InE. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–88). Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Fillmore, C. J.Linguistic Society of Korea
    (1982) Frame semantics. InLinguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Fillmore, C. J., & Baker, C.
    (2010) A frames approach to semantic analysis. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 313–339. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. 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]
18. Fillmore, C. J., Lee-Goldman, R. R., & Rhomieux, R.
    (2012) The FrameNet Constructicon. InH. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-Based Construction Grammar (pp. 309–372). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Goldberg, A. E.
    (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hasegawa, Y., Ohara, K. H., Lee-Goldman, R., & Fillmore, C. J.
    (2006) Frame integration, head switching, and translation: RISK in English and Japanese. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Construction Grammar (ICCG4), 1–14. Tokyo, Japan.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Heid, U.
    (1996) Creating a multilingual data collection for bilingual lexicography from parallel monolingual lexicons. Euralex ’96 Proceedings, 573–590.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kay, P.
    (2002) English subjectless tagged sentences. Language, 78(3) 453–481.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Laviola, A.
    (2019) Constructicografia Multilíngue em Ação: Diretrizes linguístico-computacionais para o alinhamento de constructicons [Multilingual Constructicography in Action: Linguistic-computational guidelines for constructicon alignment]. PhD Dissertation, Federal University of Juiz de Fora.
25. Lyngfelt, B., Torrent, T. T., Laviola, A., Bäckström, L., Hannesdóttir, A. H., & Matos, E.
    (2018) Aligning constructicons across languages. In: B. Lyngfelt, L. Borin, K. H. Ohara, & T. T. Torrent (Eds.), Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages (pp.255–302). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.22.03lyn
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22.03lyn [Google Scholar]
26. Lyngfelt, B., Borin, L., Ohara, K., & Torrent, T. T.
    (Eds.) (2018) Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.22
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22 [Google Scholar]
27. Ohara, K.
    (2018) The relations between frames and constructions: A proposal from the Japanese FrameNet constructicon. InB. Lyngfelt, L. Borin, K. H. Ohara, & T. T. Torrent (Eds.), Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages (pp. 141–163). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.22.05oha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22.05oha [Google Scholar]
28. Ohara, K.
    (2020) Finding corresponding constructions in English and Japanese in a TED talk parallel corpus using Frames-and-constructions analysis. InT. T. Torrent, C. Baker, O. Czulo, K. Ohara, & M. Petruck (Eds.), Towards a global, multilingual FrameNet. Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Ohara, K., Fuji, S., Ohori, T., Suzuki, R., Saito, H., & Ishizaki, S.
    (2004) The Japanese FrameNet project: An introduction. Proceedings of the Satellite Workshop ‘Building Lexical Resources from Semantically Annotated Corpora’, 9–11. European Language Resources Association.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Oya, T.
    (1999) Er bettelt sich durchs Land – eine one’s way Konstruktion im Deutschen?Deutsche Sprache: Zeitschrift für Theorie, Praxis, Dokumentation4(27), 356–369.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Padó, S., & Erk, K.
    (2005) To cause or not to cause: Cross-lingual semantic matching for paraphrase modelling. Proceedings of the Cross-Language Knowledge Induction Workshop. Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R., Baker, C. F., & Scheffczyk, J.
    (2016) FrameNet: Theory and practice. Retrieved fromhttps://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/docs/r1.7/book.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
33. Subirats Rüggeberg, C., & Petruck, M.
    (2003) Surprise: Spanish FrameNet!InE. Hajičová, A. Kotéšovcová, & J. Mirovský (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on Frame semantics. Matfyzpress.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Torrent, T. T.
    (2015) On the relation between inheritance and change: The Constructional Convergence and the Construction Network Reconfiguration hypotheses. InJ. Barðdal, E. Smirnova, L. Sommerer, & S. Gildea (Eds.), Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp. 173–212). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.06tor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.06tor [Google Scholar]
35. Torrent, T. T., & Ellsworth, M.
    (2013) Behind the labels: Criteria for defining analytical categories in FrameNet Brasil. Veredas, 171, 44–65.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Torrent, T. T., Ellsworth, M., Baker, C. F., & Matos, E.
    (2018) The multilingual FrameNet shared annotation task: A preliminary report. InT. T. Torrent, L. Borin, & C. F. Baker (Eds.), Proceedings of the International FrameNet Workshop 2018: Multilingual Framenets and Constructicons. European Language Resources Association.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Torrent, T. T., Lage, L. M., Sampaio, T. F., da Silva Tavares, T., & da Silva Matos, E. E.
    (2014) Revisiting border conflicts between framenet and construction grammar: Annotation policies for the brazilian portuguese constructicon. Constructions and Frames, 6(1), 34–51. 10.1075/cf.6.1.03tor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.6.1.03tor [Google Scholar]
38. Torrent, T. T., Matos, E., Lage, L. M., Adrieli, L., Tavares, T., Gomes de Almeida, V., & Sigiliano, N.
    (2018) Towards continuity between the lexicon and the constructicon in FrameNet Brasil. InB. Lyngfelt, L. Borin, K. Ohara, & T. T. Torrent (Eds.), Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages (pp. 107–140). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.22.04tor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22.04tor [Google Scholar]
39. Willich, A.
    (2022) Konstruktionssemantik: Frames in gebrauchsbasierter Konstruktionsgrammatik und Konstruktikographie. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110762341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110762341 [Google Scholar]
40. Ziem, A., & Boas, H. C.
    (2017) Towards a Constructicon for German. Proceedings of the AAAI 2017 Spring Symposium on Computational Construction Grammar and Natural Language Understanding (pp. 274–277). Stanford University.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Ziem, A., Boas, H. C., & Ruppenhofer, J.
    (2014) Grammatische Konstruktionen und semantische Frames für die Textanalyse. InJ. Hagemann & S. Staffeldt (Eds.), Syntaxtheorien: Analysen im Vergleich (pp. 297–333). Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Ziem, A., & Ellsworth, M.
    (2016) Exklamativsätze im FrameNet-Konstruktikon am Beispiel des Englischen. InR. Finkbeiner & J. Meibauer (Eds.), Satztypen und Konstruktionen (pp. 146–191). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Ziem, A., Flick, J., & Sandkühler, P.
    (2019) The German Constructicon Project: Framework, methodology, resources. Lexicographica, 35(1), 15–40. 10.1515/lex‑2019‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lex-2019-0003 [Google Scholar]