oa Constructionist views on Construction Grammar

References

1. Anthoniessen, L.
   (2020) Special passives across the lifespan. Cognitive and social mechanisms [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Antwerp/LMU Munich.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Boas, H. C., & Sag, I. A.
   (Eds.) (2012) Sign-based Construction Grammar. CSLI Publications.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Boas, H. C., & Ziem, A.
   (2022) Debunking some myths about the role and relevance of (restricted) semantic role sets: Some thoughts on Ágel & Höllein 2021. InF. Gallez & M. Hermann (Eds.), Cognition and contrast. Festschrift for Sabine De Knop (pp. –). Saint-Louis University Press. 10.4000/books.pusl.27846
   https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pusl.27846 [Google Scholar]
4. Busso, L.
   (2018) Coercing Italian: Psycholinguistic investigations on valency coercion in Italian [Doctoral dissertation]. Pisa University.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Butler, C. S., & Gonzálvez-García, F.
   (2014) Exploring functional-cognitive space. John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.157
   https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.157 [Google Scholar]
6. Croft, W.
   (2001) Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
7. Croft, W.
   (2022) Morphosyntax. Constructions of the world’s languages. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316145289
   https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316145289 [Google Scholar]
8. Croft, W.
   (2024) Philosophical reflections on the future of construction grammar (or, confessions of a Radical Construction Grammarian). Constructions and Frames, ().
   [Google Scholar]
9. Desagulier, G.
   (2022) Changes in the midst of a construction network: A diachronic construction grammar approach to complex prepositions denoting internal location. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cog‑2021‑0128
   https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2021-0128 [Google Scholar]
10. Diessel, H.
    (2019) The grammar network. How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108671040
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671040 [Google Scholar]
11. Diessel, H.
    (2023) The constructicon. Taxonomies and networks. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009327848
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009327848 [Google Scholar]
12. Fillmore, C. J.The Linguistic Society of Korea
    (1982) Frame Semantics. InThe Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. –). Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1985) Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1988) The mechanisms of “Construction Grammar”. The Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, , –. 10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794 [Google Scholar]
15. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1999) Inversion and constructional inheritance. InG. Webelhuth, J.-P. Koenig & A. Kathol (Eds.), Lexical and constructional aspects of linguistic explanation (pp. –). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Fillmore, C. J.
    (2013) Berkeley Construction Grammar. InTh. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. –). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Fillmore, C. J., & Kay, P.
    (1995) Construction grammar coursebook [Unpublished manuscript]. University of California, Berkeley.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Fried, M., & Nikiforidou, K.
    Eds. (in press). The Cambridge handbook of construction grammar. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Goldberg, A. E.
    (1995) Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Goldberg, A. E.
    (2013) Constructionist approaches. InTh. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. –). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Goldberg, A. E.
    (2024) Usage-based constructionist approaches and large language models. Constructions and Frames, (). 10.31234/osf.io/8bmwz
    https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8bmwz [Google Scholar]
22. Gries, S. T.
    (2022) On, or, against?, (just) frequency?InH. C. Boas (Ed.), Directions for Pedagogical Construction Grammar. Learning and teaching (with) constructions (pp. –). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110746723‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110746723-002 [Google Scholar]
23. Haider, H.
    (2018) Grammatiktheorien im Vintage-Look – viel Ideologie, wenig Ertrag. InA. Wöllstein, P. Gallmann, M. Habermann & M. Krifka (Eds.), Grammatiktheorie und Empirie in der germanistischen Linguistik (pp. –). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110490992‑003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110490992-003 [Google Scholar]
24. Hilpert, M.
    (2024) The road ahead for Construction Grammar. Constructions and Frames, (). 10.1075/cf.6.2.01int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.6.2.01int [Google Scholar]
25. Hilpert, M.
    (in press). Frequency: Psychological and methodological considerations. InM. Fried & K. Nikiforidou Eds. The Cambridge handbook of construction grammar. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hoffmann, T.
    (2022) Construction grammar. The structure of English. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139004213
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139004213 [Google Scholar]
27. Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G.
    (Eds.) (2013) The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
28. Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J.
    (1999) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X Doing Y? Construction. Language, (), –. 10.2307/417472
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417472 [Google Scholar]
29. Kim, J.-B., & Michaelis, L. A.
    (2022) Syntactic constructions in English. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Lakoff, G.
    (1990) The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas?Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 [Google Scholar]
31. Langacker, R.
    (2000) A dynamic usage-based model. InM. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. –). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Leiss, E.
    (2009) Konstruktionsgrammatik versus Universalgrammatik. InE. Wieland & F. Schmöe (Eds.), Wie wir sprechen und schreiben.: Festschrift für Helmut Glück zum 60. Geburtstag (pp. –). Harrasowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Lester, N.
    (2018) The syntactic bits of nouns: How prior syntactic distributions affect comprehension, production, and acquisition [Doctoral dissertation]. University of California at Santa Barbara.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Michaelis, L. A.
    (2013) Sign-based Construction Grammar. InTh. Hoffman & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. –). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Michaelis, L.
    (2024) Staying terminologically rigid, conceptually open and socially cohesive: How to make room for the next generation of Construction Grammarians. Constructions and Frames, ().
    [Google Scholar]
36. Moretti, L.
    (2021) On multiple constructions and multiple factors in language change. The origin of auxiliary do [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Manchester.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Sag, I. A.
    (2012) Sign-based Construction Grammar: An informal synopsis. InH. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based Construction Grammar (pp. –). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Sag, I. A., Boas, H. C., & Kay, P.
    (2012) Introducing Sign-based Construction Grammar. InH. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based Construction Grammar (pp. –). CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Schmid, H.-J.
    (2020) The dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
40. Sommerer, L., & Hartmann, S.
    (Eds.) (2023) 35 years of constructions [Special issue]. Constructions, (). 10.24338/cons‑.0
    https://doi.org/10.24338/cons-.0 [Google Scholar]
41. Sommerer, L., & Smirnova, E.
    (Eds.) (2020) Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27 [Google Scholar]
42. Ungerer, T.
    (2022) Structural priming in the grammatical network: A study of English Argument Structure Constructions [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Edinburgh.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Ungerer, T.
    (2024) Vertical and horizontal links in constructional networks. Two sides of the same coin?Constructions and Frames, (), –. 10.1075/cf.22011.ung
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.22011.ung [Google Scholar]
44. Ungerer, T., & Hartmann, S.
    (2023) Constructionist approaches. Past, present, future. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009308717
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009308717 [Google Scholar]
45. van Trijp, R.
    (2024) Nostalgia for the future of Construction Grammar. Constructions and Frames, ().
    [Google Scholar]
46. Willich, A.
    (2022) Konstruktionssemantik: Frames in gebrauchsbasierter Konstruktionsgrammatik und Konstruktikographie. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110762341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110762341 [Google Scholar]