Review of Thomas (2020): Formalism and Functionalism in Linguistics. The Engineer and the Collector

References

1. Bates, Elizabeth & Brian MacWhinney
   1987 Competition, Variation, and Language Learning. Mechanisms of language acquisitioned. byBrian MacWhinney, 157–193. Hillsdale: NY. Lawrence Erlbaum.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bates, Elizabeth & Brian MacWhinney
   1989 Functionalism and the Competition Model. The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processinged. byBrian MacWhinney & Elizabeth Bates. 3–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Chomsky, Noam
   1957 Syntactic Structures. The Hague & Paris: Mouton. 10.1515/9783112316009
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112316009 [Google Scholar]
4. Croft, William
   2008 On Iconicity of Distance. Cognitive Linguistics19:1.49–57. ( 10.1515/COG.2008.003).
   https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2008.003 [Google Scholar]
5. Fischer, Olga
   2007 Morphosyntactic Change. Functional and formal perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Haiman, John
   ed. 1985 Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.6
   https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6 [Google Scholar]
7. Haiman, John
   2008 In Defence of Iconicity. Cognitive Linguistics19:1.35–48. ( 10.1515/COG.2008.002)
   https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2008.002 [Google Scholar]
8. Hajičová, Eva
   1994 Topic/Focus and Related Research. The Prague School of Structural and Functional Linguistics: A short introductioned. byPhilip A. Luelsdorff, 245–275. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/llsee.41.10haj
   https://doi.org/10.1075/llsee.41.10haj [Google Scholar]
9. Harder, Peter
   2013 Structure and Function: A niche-constructional approach. Functional Approaches to Languageedited byShannon T. Bischoff & Carmen Jany, 71–106. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110285321.71
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110285321.71 [Google Scholar]
10. Haspelmath, Martin
    2008 Frequency vs. Iconicity in Explaining Grammatical Asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics19:1.1–33. 10.1515/COG.2008.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2008.001 [Google Scholar]
11. Hyams, Nina
    1999 Underspecification and Modularity in Early Syntax: A formalist perspective on early acquisition. Functionalism and Formalism in Linguisticsed. byEdith Moravcsik, Michael Darnell, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan & Kathleen Wheatley, Vol.I, 387–413. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.41.18hya
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.41.18hya [Google Scholar]
12. Ibbotson, Paul & Michael Tomasello
    2016 Evidence Rebuts Chomsky’s Theory of Language Learning. Scientific American315. Available at: www.scientificamerican.com/article/evidence-rebuts-chomsky-s-theory-of-language-learning/
    [Google Scholar]
13. Tomasello, Michael
    2003 Constructing a Language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]