1887
image of Construct types in language change
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

There is no abstract available.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.22031.sch
2023-04-25
2024-02-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BFM2019 = École normale supérieure de Lyon (ENS) (ed.)
    BFM2019 = École normale supérieure de Lyon (ENS) (ed.) 2019Base de français médiéval 2019. Lyon: École normale supérieure de Lyon (ENS). Online: txm.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/bfm/
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BIBIT = Quondam, Amedeo
    (eds.) 2016–2023Biblioteca italiana. Roma: Sapienza Università di Roma. Online: www.bibliotecaitaliana.it
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CDH = Real Academia Española (ed.)
    CDH = Real Academia Española (ed.) 2013–2023Corpus del Nuevo diccionario histórico del español. Madrid: Real Academia Española. Online: web.frl.es/CNDHE
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Frantext = Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF) (ed.)
    Frantext = Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF) (ed.) 1998–2023Base textuelle Frantext. Nancy: Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF). Online: www.frantext.fr
  5. LIZ = Stoppelli, Pasquale & Eugenio Picchi
    (eds.) 2001Letteratura italiana Zanichelli. Bologna: Zanichelli.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. TLFi = Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF) (ed.)
    TLFi = Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF) (ed.) 2013–2023Trésor de la langue française informatisé. Nancy: Laboratoire Analyse et traitement informatique de la langue française (ATILF). Online: atilf.atilf.fr/tlfi.htm
  7. TLIO = Opera del vocabolario italiano (ed.)
    TLIO = Opera del vocabolario italiano (ed.) 2005–2023Corpus del Tesoro della lingua italiana delle origini. Firenze: Opera del vocabolario italiano. Online: tlioweb.ovi.cnr.it
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Andersen, Henning
    2001 Actualization and the (Uni)directionality of Change. Actualization: Linguistic Change in Progressed. byHenning Andersen, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.219.11and
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.219.11and [Google Scholar]
  9. Anthonissen, Lynn
    2021Individuality in Language Change. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110725841
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110725841 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barðdal, Jóhanna & Spike Gildea
    2015 Diachronic Construction Grammar: Epistemological Context, Basic Assumptions and Historical Implications. Diachronic Construction Grammared. byJóhanna Barðdal, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer & Spike Gildea, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.01bar [Google Scholar]
  11. Bergs, Alexander & Gabriele Diewald
    2008 Introduction: Constructions and Language Change. Constructions and Language Changeed. byAlexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211757.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211757.1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Booij, Geert
    2008 Constructional Idioms as Products of Linguistic Change: The aan het + INFINITIVE Construction in Dutch. Constructions and Language Changeed. byAlexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Börjars, Kersi, Nigel Vincent & George Walkden
    2015 On Constructing a Theory of Grammatical Change. Transactions of the Philological Society.–. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12068
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12068 [Google Scholar]
  14. Buridant, Claude
    2019Grammaire du français médiéval (XIe-XIVe siècles). Strasbourg: Éditions de linguistique et de philologie.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bybee, Joan L., Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
    1994The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chomsky, Noam & Horward Lasnik
    1993 The Theory of Principles and Parameters. Syntax. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. 1. Halbband / Vol. 1ed. byJoachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld & Theo Vennemann, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110095869.1.9.506
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110095869.1.9.506 [Google Scholar]
  17. Combettes, Bernard
    2014 Réanalyse et changement linguistique. Langages.–. 10.3917/lang.196.0053
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.196.0053 [Google Scholar]
  18. Coussé, Evie, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson
    (eds.) 2018Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21 [Google Scholar]
  19. Croft, William & D. Alan Cruse
    2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  20. Denison, David
    2017 Ambiguity and Vagueness in Historical Change. The Changing English Language: Psycholinguistic Perspectivesed. byMarianne Hundt, Sandra Mollin & Simone E. Pfenninger, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316091746.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316091746.013 [Google Scholar]
  21. De Smet, Hendrik
    2009 Analysing Reanalysis. Lingua.–. 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2012 The Course of Actualization. Language.–. 10.1353/lan.2012.0056
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0056 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2013Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Diessel, Holger
    2015 Usage-Based Construction Grammar. Handbook of Cognitive Linguisticsed. byEwa Dąbrowska & Dagmar Divjak, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110292022‑015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110292022-015 [Google Scholar]
  25. Diewald, Gabriele
    2002 A Model for Relevant Types of Contexts in Grammaticalization. New Reflections on Grammaticalizationed. byIlse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.09die
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.09die [Google Scholar]
  26. 2006 Context Types in Grammaticalization as Constructions. ConstructionsSV 1. Online: https://www.constructions.uni-osnabrueck.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2006-SI-Diewald-24-82-1-PB.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2009 Konstruktionen und Paradigmen. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik.–. 10.1515/ZGL.2009.031
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ZGL.2009.031 [Google Scholar]
  28. Diewald, Gabriele, Volodymyr Dekalo & Dániel Czicza
    2021 Grammaticalization of verdienen into an Auxiliary Marker of Deontic Modality: An Item-Driven Usage-Based Approach. Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammared. byMartin Hilpert, Bert Cappelle & Ilse Depraetere, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.32.04die
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.32.04die [Google Scholar]
  29. Eckhardt, Regine
    2006Meaning Change in Grammaticalization: An Enquiry into Semantic Reanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  30. Evans, Nicholas & David Wilkins
    2000 In the Mind’s Ear: The Semantic Extensions of Perception Verbs in Australian Languages. Language:.–. 10.2307/417135
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417135 [Google Scholar]
  31. Fedriani, Chiara
    2017Quapropter, quaeso? ‘Why, for Pity’s Sake?’ Questions and the Pragmatic Functions of quaeso, obsecro, and amabo in Plautus. Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greeked. byCamille Denizot & Olga Spevak, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.190.05fed
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.190.05fed [Google Scholar]
  32. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary C. O’Connor
    1988 Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of let alone. Language.–. 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  33. Fischer, Olga
    2007Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Flach, Susanne
    2020 Constructionalization and the Sorites Paradox: The Emergence of the into-Causative. Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammared. byLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.01fla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.01fla [Google Scholar]
  35. Fried, Mirjam
    2008 Constructions and Constructs: Mapping a Shift between Predication and Attribution. Constructions and Language Changeed. byAlexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Geis, Michael L. & Arnold M. Zwicky
    1971 On Invited Inferences. Linguistic Inquiry.–.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Ghezzi, Chiara & Piera Molinelli
    2014 Deverbal Pragmatic Markers from Latin to Italian (Lat. QUAESO and It. prego): The Cyclic Nature of Functional Developments. Discourse and Pragmatic Markers from Latin to the Romance Languagesed. byChiara Ghezzi & Piera Molinelli, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0005 [Google Scholar]
  38. Gisborne, Nicolas & Amanda Patten
    2011 Construction Grammar and Grammaticalization. The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalizationed. byHeiko Narrog & Bernd Heine, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0008 [Google Scholar]
  39. Grice, H. Paul
    1975 Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3. Speech Actsed. byPeter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan, –. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 [Google Scholar]
  40. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Gras Manzano, Pedro
    2010 Gramática de construcciones en interacción. Propuesta de un modelo y aplicación al análisis de estructuras independientes con marcas de subordinación en español. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona.
  43. Györi, Gábor
    1995 Historical Aspects of Categorization. Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods: The Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguisticsed. byEugene H. Casad, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Hansen, Maj-Britt M.
    2018a Cyclic Phenomena in the Evolution of Pragmatic Markers: Examples from Romance. Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Changeed. bySalvador Pons Bordería & Óscar Loureda Lamas, –. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 2018b The Expression of Clause Negation: From Latin to Early French. Latin tardif, français ancien. Continuités et rupturesed. byAnne Carlier & Céline Guillot-Barbance, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110551716‑014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110551716-014 [Google Scholar]
  46. Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell
    1995Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620553
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620553 [Google Scholar]
  47. Heine, Bernd
    2002 On the Role of Context in Grammaticalization. New Reflections on Grammaticalizationed. byIlse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.08hei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.08hei [Google Scholar]
  48. Hilpert, Martin
    2013Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139004206
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004206 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2018 Three Open Questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammared. byEvie Coussé, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21.c2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c2 [Google Scholar]
  50. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    2004 Lexicalization and Grammaticalization: Opposite or Orthogonal?What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look from its Fringes and its Componentsed. byWalter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Hjelmslev, Louis
    1961 [1943]Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press. [Translation ofOmkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse. København: Munksgaard.]
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Hofmann, Johann B. & Anton Szantyr
    1965Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. München: Beck.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Hopper, Paul
    1987 Emergent Grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society: Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting, February 14–16, 1987: General Session and Parasession on Grammar and Cognitioned. byJon Aske, Natasha Beery, Laura Michaelis & Hana Filip, –. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v13i0.1834
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v13i0.1834 [Google Scholar]
  54. 1991 On some Principles of Grammaticization. Approaches to Grammaticalization. Vol. 1: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issuesed. byElizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
  55. Hummel, Martin
    2018 Baseline Elaboration and Echo-Sounding at the Adjective Adverb Interface. Cognitive Linguistics.–. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0033
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0033 [Google Scholar]
  56. Israel, Michael
    1996 The Way Constructions Grow. Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Languageed. byAdele E. Goldberg, –. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Jespersen, Otto
    1917Negation in English and Other Languages. København: Høst og Søn.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Karlsson, Emanuel
    2018 A Radical Construction Grammar Approach to Construction Split in the Diachrony of Spatial Particles of Ancient Greek. Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammared. byEvie Coussé, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21.c10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c10 [Google Scholar]
  59. Kay, Paul & Charles J. Fillmore
    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]
  60. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1977 Syntactic Reanalysis. Mechanisms of Syntactic Changeed. byCharles N. Li, –. Austin: University of Texas Press. 10.7560/750357‑005
    https://doi.org/10.7560/750357-005 [Google Scholar]
  61. 1987Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Lave, Jean & Étienne Wenger
    1991Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511815355
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355 [Google Scholar]
  63. Legallois, Dominique
    2018 La notion de construction. Encyclopédie grammaticale du français. ed. byDenis Apothéloz, Marie-José Béguelin, Christophe Benzitoun, Alain Berrendonner, Gilles Corminboeuf, Jeanne-Marie Debaisieux, José Deulofeu, Peter Lauwers & Dominique Willems. Online : encyclogram.fr/notx/012/012_Notice.php
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Lehmann, Christian
    1982Thoughts on Grammaticalization: A Programmatic Sketch. Vol. 1. Köln: Universität Köln.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1983Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813313
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313 [Google Scholar]
  66. Lichtenberk, Frantisek
    1991 Semantic Change and Heterosemy in Grammaticalization. Language: –. 10.1353/lan.1991.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1991.0009 [Google Scholar]
  67. Masini, Francesca
    2016Grammatica delle costruzioni. Un’introduzione. Roma: Carocci.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Matras, Yaron & Jeanette Sakel
    2007 Investigating the Mechanisms of Pattern Replication in Language Convergence. Studies in Language.–. 10.1075/sl.31.4.05mat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.31.4.05mat [Google Scholar]
  69. Meillet, Antoine
    1912 L’évolution des formes grammaticales. Scientia: rivista internazionale di sintesi scientifica.–.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Molinelli, Piera
    2019 Verb-Based Functional Markers in Latin: Morphosyntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics at a Crossroads. Rivista italiana di linguistica e di dialettologia.–.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Narrog, Heiko & Bernd Heine
    2021Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Newmeyer, Frederick
    2003 Grammar is Grammar and Usage is Usage. Language:.–. 10.1353/lan.2003.0260
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0260 [Google Scholar]
  73. Nicolle, Steve
    2011 Pragmatic Aspects of Grammaticalization. The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalizationed. byHeiko Narrog & Bernd Heine, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0032
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0032 [Google Scholar]
  74. Noël, Dirk
    2007 Diachronic Construction Grammar and Grammaticalization Theory. Functions of Language.–. 10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe [Google Scholar]
  75. Persson, Gunnar
    1988 Homonymy, Polysemy and Heterosemy: The Types of Lexical Ambiguity in English. Symposium on Lexicography III: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Lexicography May 14–16, 1986 at the University of Copenhagened. byKarl Hyldgaard-Jensen & Arne Zettersten, –. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783111347349‑010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111347349-010 [Google Scholar]
  76. Petré, Peter
    2019 How Constructions are Born: The role of Patterns in the Constructionalization of be going to INF. Patterns in Language and Linguistics: New Perspectives on a Ubiquitous Concepted. byBeatrix Busse & Ruth Möhlig-Falke, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110596656‑007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110596656-007 [Google Scholar]
  77. Pinkster, Harm
    1988 [1984]Lateinische Syntax und Semantik. Tübingen: UTB Francke. [Translation ofLatijnse Syntaxis en Semantiek. Amsterdam: Grüner.]
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Prandi, Michele, Pierluigi Cuzzolin, Nicola Grandi & Maria Napoli
    2021Orizzonti della linguistica. Grammatica, tipologia, mutamento. Roma: Carocci.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Rheinfelder, Hans
    1952Altfranzösische Grammatik. 1. Teil. Lautlehre. München: Hueber.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 1967Altfranzösische Grammatik. 2. Teil. Formenlehre. München: Hueber.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Rosén, Hannah
    2010 Coherence, Sentence Modification, and Sentence-Part Modification: The Contribution of Particles. New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax. Volume 1. Syntax of the Sentenceed. byPhilip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin, –. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Saussure, Ferdinand de
    1995 [1916]Cours de linguistique générale. Publié par Charles Bailly et Albert Séchehaye avec la collaboration de Albert Riedlinger. Édition critique préparée par Tullio De Mauro. Postface de Louis-Jean Calvet. Paris: Payot & Rivages.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Schmid, Hans-Jörg
    2010 Does Frequency in Text Instantiate Entrenchment in the Cognitive System?Quantitative Methods in Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-Driven Approachesed. byDylan Glynn & Kerstin Fischer, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226423.101
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226423.101 [Google Scholar]
  84. 2020The Dynamics of the Linguistic System: Usage, Conventionalization, and Entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  85. Schneider, Stefan
    2018 Verbos cognitivos en el Corpus del Nuevo diccionario histórico (CDH). RILCE. Revista de filología hispánica:.–. 10.15581/008.34.3.1081‑103
    https://doi.org/10.15581/008.34.3.1081-103 [Google Scholar]
  86. 2020J’imagine comme verbe et marqueur pragmatique : une analyse diachronique. 7e Congrès mondial de linguistique française, Université de Montpellier 3, France, 6–10 juillet 2020ed. byFranck Neveu, Bernard Harmegnies, Linda Hriba, Sophie Prévost & Agnès Steuckardt. Online: 10.1051/shsconf/20207803001
    https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20207803001 [Google Scholar]
  87. 2022 Dal verbo immaginare al segnale discorsivo immagino. Estensione, rianalisi e adattamento. Storie e linguaggi:.–.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Schneider, Stefan & Julie Glikman
    2015 Origin and Development of French Parenthetical Verbs. Parenthetical Verbsed. byStefan Schneider, Julie Glikman & Mathieu Avanzi, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110376142‑008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110376142-008 [Google Scholar]
  89. Smirnova, Elena
    2015 Constructionalization and Constructional Change: The Role of Context in the Development of Constructions. Diachronic Construction Grammared. byJóhanna Barðdal, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer & Spike Gildea, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.03smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.03smi [Google Scholar]
  90. Smirnova, Elena & Lotte Sommerer
    2020 Introduction: The Nature of the Node and the Network: Open Questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammared. byLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.int [Google Scholar]
  91. Stefenelli, Arnulf
    1996 Thesen zur Entstehung und Ausgliederung der romanischen Sprachen. Lexikon der Romanistischen Linguistik (LRL). Band II.1: Latein und Romanisch: historisch-vergleichende Grammatik der romanischen Sprachened. byGünter Holtus, Michael Metzeltin & Christian Schmitt, –. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110938364.73
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110938364.73 [Google Scholar]
  92. Timberlake, Alan
    1977 Reanalysis and Actualization in Syntactic Change. Mechanisms of Syntactic Changeed. byCharles N. Li, –. Austin: University of Texas Press. 10.7560/750357‑006
    https://doi.org/10.7560/750357-006 [Google Scholar]
  93. Tomasello, Michael
    2003Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Traugott, Elizabeth C.
    2003 Constructions in Grammaticalization. The Handbook of Historical Linguisticsed. byBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda, –. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch20
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch20 [Google Scholar]
  95. 2008 The Grammaticalization of NP of NP Patterns. Constructions and Language Changeed. byAlexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. 2022Discourse Structuring Markers in English: A Historical Constructionalist Perspective on Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.33
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.33 [Google Scholar]
  97. Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Richard B. Dasher
    2002Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Graeme Trousdale
    2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  99. Varvaro, Alberto
    2013 Latin and the Making of the Romance Languages. The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages. Volume 2: Contextsed. byMartin Maiden, John Ch. Smith & Adam Ledgeway, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CHO9781139019996.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CHO9781139019996.002 [Google Scholar]
  100. Walkden, George
    2017 The Actuation Problem. The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntaxed. byAdam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781107279070.020
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107279070.020 [Google Scholar]
  101. Weinreich, Uriel, William Labov & Marvin I. Herzog
    1968 Empirical Foundations for a Theory of Language Change. Directions for Historical Linguistics: A Symposiumed. byWinfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel, –. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Wiemer, Björn & Walter Bisang
    2004 What Makes Grammaticalization? An Appraisal of its Components and its Fringes. What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look from its Fringes and its Componentsed. byWalter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.22031.sch
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.22031.sch
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: Italian ; construction ; grammaticalization ; construct ; French ; Spanish
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error