oa More refined typology and design in linguistic relativity

References

1. Bohnemeyer, J., Eisenbeiss, S., Narasimhan, B.
   (2006) Ways to go: Methodological considerations in Whorfian studies in motion events. Colchester: Dept. of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Boroditsky, L.
   (2001) Does language shape thought? English and Mandarin speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1), 1–22. 10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
   https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0748 [Google Scholar]
3. Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C.
   (Eds.) (1996) Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Lucy, J. A.
   (1992) Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620843
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620843 [Google Scholar]
5. Montero-Melis, G., Eisenbeiss, S., Narasimhan, B., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Kita, S., Kopecka, A., Lüpke, F., Nikitina, T., Tragel, I., Jaeger, T. F., & Bohnemeyer, J.
   (2017) Satellite- vs. verb-framing underpredicts nonverbal motion categorization: Insights from a large language sample and simulations. Cognitive Semantics, 3(1), 36–61. 10.1163/23526416‑00301002
   https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-00301002 [Google Scholar]
6. Naigles, L., Eisenberg, A., Kako, E., Highter, M., & McGraw, N.
   (1998) Speaking of motion: Verb use in English and Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13(5), 521–549. 10.1080/016909698386429
   https://doi.org/10.1080/016909698386429 [Google Scholar]
7. Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L.
   (2002) Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The representation of motion in thought and language. Cognition, 84(2), 189–219. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00046‑X
   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00046-X [Google Scholar]
8. Sapir, E.
   (1921) Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Skordos, D., & Papafragou, A.
   (2014) Lexical, syntactic, and semantic-geometric factors in the acquisition of motion predicates. Developmental Psychology, 50(7), 1985–1998. 10.1037/a0036970
   https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036970 [Google Scholar]
10. Slobin, D. I.
    (1987) Thinking for speaking. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp.435–445). Berkeley University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Slobin, D. I.
    (1996) Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. InM. Shibatani, & S. A. Thomspon (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp.195–219). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Slobin, D. I.
    (2006) What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. InM. Hickmann, & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp.59–81). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.66.05slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.66.05slo [Google Scholar]
13. Talmy, L.
    (1991) Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp.480–519). Berkeley University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Trueswell, J., & Papafragou, A.
    (2010) Perceiving and remembering events cross-linguistically: Evidence from dual-task paradigms. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 64–82. 10.1016/j.jml.2010.02.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.02.006 [Google Scholar]
15. Verkerk, A.
    (2014) The evolutionary dynamics of motion event encoding. Enschede: Ipskamp Drukkers. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/20488979.pdf
    [Google Scholar]