References
Anderson, S. (1971). On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language, 7(3), 387–396.
Ariel, M. (2010). Defining Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ariel, M. (2023). A usage-based analysis of the semantics/pragmatics interface. In Li, T., ed., Handbook of Cognitive Semantics. Leiden: Brill, pp. 269–297.
Auf der Strasse, A. (2017). Constructions in Use. Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How To Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Barðdal, J. (2008). Productivity: Evidence from Case and Argument Structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M., Croft, W., Ellis, N., Holland, J., Ke, J., Larsen-Freeman, D. & Schoenemann, T. (2009). Language is a complex-adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59(1), 1–26.
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13(2), 145–204.
Bergen, B. (2004). The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language, 80(2), 290–311.
Bergen, B. (2016). Embodiment, simulation and meaning. In Riemer, N., ed., Routledge Handbook of Semantics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 142–157.
Bergen, B. & Chang, N. (2013). Embodied Construction Grammar. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 168–190.
Bergs, A. (2018). Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist (Picasso): Linguistic aberrancy from a constructional perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), 277–293.
Bergs, A. (2019). What, if anything, is linguistic creativity? Gestalt Theory, 41(2), 173–183.
Bergs, A. & Kompa, N. A. (2020). Creativity within and outside the linguistic system. Cognitive Semiotics, 13, 20202025.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (2019). Register, Genre, and Style, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johannsson, S., Leech, G. N., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. & Quirk, R. (2021). Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Blasi, D., Wichmann, W., Hammarström, H., Stadler, P. & Christiansen, M. (2016). Sound-meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 113(39), 10818–10823.
Blasiman, R. N. & Was, C. A. (2018). Why is working memory performance unstable? A review of 21 factors. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 14(1), 188–231.
Boas, H. C. (2011). Coercion and leaking argument structures in Construction Grammar. Linguistics, 49(6), 1271–1303.
Boas, H. C. (2013). Cognitive construction grammar. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–254.
Boas, H. (2021). Construction grammar and frame semantics. In Wen, X. & Taylor, J., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 43–77.
Boas, H. (in press). What happened to Frame Semantics? English Linguistics
Boas, H., Leino, J. & Lyngfelt, B. (2024). Constructionist views on construction grammar. Constructions and Frames, 16(2), 169–190.
Bolinger, D. (1968). Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa, 2, 119–127.
Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boyd, J. & Goldberg, A. E. (2011). Learning what not to say: The role of statistical pre-emption and categorization in “a”-adjective production. Language, 81, 1–29.
Boye, K. & Harder, P. (2012). A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language, 88(1), 1–44.
Brdar, M. (2018). Novel metonymies, wine and wineskins, old and new ones. In Gudurić, S. & Radić-Bojanić, B., eds., Jezici i kulture u vremenu i prostoru VII/1. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet/Pedagoško društvo Vojvodine, pp. 123–134.
Breban, T. (2014). What is secondary grammaticalization? Trying to see the wood for the trees in a confusion of interpretations. Folia Linguistica, 48(2), 469–502.
Brems, L. (2011). The Layering of Size and Type Noun Constructions in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brems, L. (2012). The establishment of quantifier constructions for size nouns: A diachronic study of heap(s) and lot(s). Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 13, 202–231.
Brône, G. (2017). Cognitive linguistics and humor research. In Attardo, S., ed., The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor. New York: Routledge, pp. 250–266.
Budts, S. & Petré, P. (2016). Reading the intentions of be going to: On the subjectification of future markers. Folia Linguistica, 50, 1–32.
Busso, L., Perek, F. & Lenci, A. (2021). Constructional associations trump lexical associations in processing valency coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 32(2), 287–318.
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. (2006a). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733.
Bybee, J. (2006b). Language change and universals. In Mairal, R. & Gil, J., eds., Linguistic Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 179–194.
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 49–69.
Cai, Y. & De Smet, H. (2024). Are categories’ cores more isomorphic than their peripheries? Frontiers in Communication, 9, 1310234.
Cappelle, B. (2009). Can we factor out free choice? In Dufte, A., Fleischer, J. & Seiler, G. eds., Describing and Modeling Variation in Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 183–202.
Cappelle, B. (2017). What’s pragmatics doing outside constructions? In Depraetere, I. & Salkie, R., eds., Semantics and Pragmatics: Drawing a Line. Berlin: Springer, pp. 115–151.
Cappelle, B. (2020). Playing by/with the rules: Creativity in language, games, and art. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1), 1–8. doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2026.
Cappelle, B. (2024). Can Construction Grammar Be Proven Wrong? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cappelle, B. & Depraetere, I. (2016). Short-circuited interpretations of modal verb constructions: Some evidence from The Simpsons. Constructions and Frames, 8(1), 7–39.
Cappelle, B., Depraetere, I. & Lesuisse, M. (2019). The necessity modals have to, must, need to, and should: Using n-grams to help identify common and distinct semantic and pragmatic aspects. Constructions and Frames, 11(2), 220–243.
Carston, R. (2010). Truth-conditional semantics. In Östman, J.-O., Sbisà, M. & Verschueren, J., eds., Philosophical Perspectives for Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 280–288.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton and Co.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1971). Deep structure, surface structure, and semantic interpretation. In Steinberg, D. & Jacobovits, L., eds., Semantics. London: London University Press, pp. 183–216.
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2016). The now-or-never bottleneck: A fundamental constraint on language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e62.
Clark, E. (1987). The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. In MacWhinney, B., ed., Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1–33.
Coussé, E., Andersson, P. & Olofsson, J. (2018a). Grammaticalization meets construction grammar: Opportunities, challenges and potential incompatibilities. In Coussé, E., Andersson, P. & Olofsson, J., eds., Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3–19.
Coussé, E., Andersson, P. & Olofsson, J. (2018b). Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Croft, W. (2009). Toward a social cognitive linguistics. In Evans, V. & Pourcel, S., eds., New Directions in Cognitive Science. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 395–420.
Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culpeper, J. (2021). Sociopragmatics. In Haugh, M., Kadar, D. & Terkourafi, M., eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–29.
Culpeper, J., Crawshaw, R. & Harrison, J. (2008). ‘Activity types’ and ‘discourse types’: Mediating ‘advice’ in interactions between foreign language assistants and their supervisors in schools in France and England. Multilingua, 27, 297–324.
Cuyckens, H. (2018). Reconciling older and newer approaches to grammaticalization. Yearbook of the Cognitive Linguistics Association, 6, 183–196.
Daugs, R. (2023). Modality, usage and diachrony: Constructional changes in the modal domain in American English. PhD thesis, Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Kiel.
Dawson, H. C. & Phelan, M. (2016). The Language Files: Materials for an Introduction to Language and Linguistics. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Desagulier, G. & Monneret, P. (2023). Cognitive linguistics and a usage-based approach to the study of semantics and pragmatics. In Díaz-Campos, M. & Balasch, S., eds., The Handbook of Usage-Based Linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 31–53.
De Smet, H. (2019). The motivated unmotivated: Variation, function and context. In Bech, K. & Möhlig-Falke, R., eds., Grammar – Discourse – Context: Grammar and Usage in Language Variation and Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 305–332.
Diessel, H. (2007). Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change. New Ideas in Psychology, 25, 108–127.
Diessel, H. (2019a). The Grammar Network: How Linguistic Structure is Shaped by Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Diessel, H. (2019b). Usage-based construction grammar. In Dąbrowska, E. & Divjak, D., eds., Cognitive Linguistics: A Survey of Linguistic Subfields. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 50–80.
Diessel, H. (2023). The Constructicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Diewald, G. (2011). Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics, 49(2), 365–390.
Divjak, D., Milin, P. & Medimorec, S. (2020). Construal in language: A visual-world approach to the effects of linguistic alternations on event perception and conception. Cognitive Linguistics, 31(1), 37–72.
Divjak, D., Milin, P., Medimorec, S. & Borowski, M. (2022). Behavioral signatures of memory resources for language: Looking beyond the lexicon/grammar divide. Cognitive Science, 46, e13206.
Eckert, P. (2004). Adolescent language. In Finnegan, E. & Rickford, J., eds., Language in the USA. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 251–289.
Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 87–100.
Evans, V. (2006). Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(4), 491–534.
Evans, V. (2012). Cognitive Linguistics. WIREs Cognitive Science, 3(2), 129–141.
Evans, V. & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. (2001). Conceptual blending and analogy. In Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N., eds., The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 255–285.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a Central Process of Grammar. In Goldberg, A. E., ed., Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI, pp. 113–129.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (2008). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In Linguistic Society of Korea, ed., Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin, pp. 111–138.
Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–253.
Fillmore, C. J. (2006). Frame semantics. In Geeraerts, D., ed., Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 373–400.
Finkbeiner, R. (2019). Reflections on the role of pragmatics in construction grammar. Constructions and Frames, 11(2), 171–192.
Foolen, A. (2023). Construction pragmatics in a wider context: An addition to Wen (2022). Lege Artis. Language Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow, 8(1), 21–31.
Fort, M. & Schwartz, J-L. (2022). Resolving the bouba-kiki effect by rotting iconic sound symbolism in physical properties of round and spiky objects. Scientific Reports, 12, 1–12.
Foulkes, P. (2021). Phonological variation: A global perspective. In Aarts, B., McMahon, A. & Hinrichs, L., eds., The Handbook of English Linguistics, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, pp. 625–669.
Gärdenfors, P. (1999). Some tenets of cognitive semantics. In Allwood, J. S. & Gärdenfors, P., eds., Cognitive Semantics: Meaning and Cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 19–36.
Gardner, M. H., Uffing, E., Van Vaeck, N. & Szmrecsanyi, B. (2021). Variation isn’t that hard: Morphosyntactic choice does not predict production difficulty. PLoS ONE, 16(6), e0252602.
Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Geeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H., eds. (2007). The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gildea, S. & Barðdal, J. (2023). From grammaticalization to diachronic construction grammar: A natural evolution of the paradigm. Studies in Language, 47(4), 743–788.
Givón, T. (1991). The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in biblical Hebrew. In Traugott, E. C. & Heine, B., eds., Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 2, Types of Grammatical Markers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 257–310.
Glynn, D. (2022). Emergent categories: Quantifying analogically derived similarity in usage. In Krawczak, K., Grygiel, M. & Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B., eds., Analogy and Contrast in Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 246–282.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2002). Surface generalizations: an alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics, 13, 327–356.
Goldberg, A. E. (2004). Pragmatics and argument structure. In Horn, L. R. & Ward, G. L., eds., The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 427–441.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2013). Constructionist approaches. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 14–31.
Goldberg, A. E. (2014). The information structure of ditransitives: informing scope properties and long-distance dependency constraints. In Bourns, S. Katz & Myers, L. L., eds., Perspectives on Linguistic Structure and Context: Studies in Honour of Knud Lambrecht, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3–16.
Goldberg, A. E. (2016). Partial productivity of linguistic constructions: Dynamic categorization and statistical preemption. Language and Cognition, 8(3), 369–390.
Goldberg, A. E. (2019). Explain Me This: Creativity, Competition, and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. & Ferreira, F. (2022). Good-enough language production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(4), 300–11.
Goldberg, A. E. & Shirtz, S. (in press). The English phrase-as-lemma construction: When a phrase masquerades as a word, people play along. Language.
Gonzalves-Garcia, F. (2020). Maximizing the explanatory power of constructions in cognitive construction grammar(s). Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34, 110–121.
Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1–3, 323–340.
Grady, J., Oakley, T. & Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. In Steen, G. & Gibbs, R., eds., Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 101–124.
Gries, S. (2013). Data in construction grammar. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 93–108.
Gutzmann, D. (2015). Use-Conditional Meaning: Studies in Multidimensional Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haiman, J. (1985). Natural Syntax: Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall-Lew, L., Moore, E. & Podesva, R. (2021). Social meaning and linguistic variation: Theoretical foundations. In Hall-Lew, L., Moore, E. & Podesva, R., eds., Social Meaning and Linguistic Variation: Theorizing the Third Wave. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–24.
Harris, R. A. (1993). The Linguistics Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harris, R. A. (2022). The Linguistics Wars: Chomsky, Lakoff, and the Battle over Deep Structure, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hartmann, S. & Ungerer, T. (2023). Attack of the snowclones: A corpus-based analysis of extravagant formulaic patterns. Journal of Linguistics, 30(3), 599–634. doi.org/10.1017/S0022226723000117.
Haspelmath, M. (1999). Why is grammaticalization irreversible? Linguistics, 37(6), 1043–1068.
Herbst, T. & Hoffmann, T. (2018). Construction grammar for students: A constructionist approach to syntactic analysis (CASA). Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 6(1), 197–218.
Herbst, T. & Hoffmann, T. (2024). A Construction Grammar of the English Language: CASA – A Constructionist Approach to Syntactic Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hilpert, M. (2016). Change in modal meanings: Another look at the shifting collocates of may. Constructions and Frames, 8(1), 66–85.
Hilpert, M. (2018). Three open questions in diachronic construction grammar. In Coussé, E., Andersson, P. & Olofsson, J., eds., Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 21–39.
Hilpert, M. (2019). Construction Grammar and its Application to English, 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Hilpert, M. (2021). Ten Lectures on Diachronic Construction Grammar. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
Hilpert, M. & Flach, S. (2023). Modals in the network model of construction grammar. In Depraetere, I., Cappelle, B., Hilpert, M. et al., eds., Models of Modals: From Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics to Machine Learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 254–270.
Hilpert, M, Correia Saavedra, D. & Rains, J. (2023). Meaning differences between English clippings and their source words: a corpus-based study. ICAME Journal, 47(1), 19–37.
Höder, S. (2014). Phonological Elements and Diasystematic Construction Grammar. Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 202–231.
Hoffmann, T. (2020a). Construction grammar and creativity: evolution, psychology, and cognitive science. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1), 1–11.
Hoffmann, T. (2020b). Speakers are creative, within limits: A response to Peter Uhrig. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1), 1–7.
Hoffmann, T. (2021). Multimodal construction grammar: From multimodal constructs to multimodal constructions. In Wen, X. & Taylor, J., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 78–92.
Hoffmann, T. (2022). Construction Grammar: The Structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hoffmann, T. (in press). Cognitive approaches to linguistic creativity. In Wen, X. & Sinha, C., eds., The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G. (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hopper, P. & Traugott, E. C. (2003). Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horn, L. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language, 61(1), 121–174.
Huang, Y. (2014). Pragmatics, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huck, G. & Goldsmith, J. (1996). Ideology and Linguistic Theory: Noam Chomsky and the Deep Structure Debates. London: Routledge.
Hugues, A. & Trudgill, P. (1996). English Accents and Dialects: An Introduction to the Social and Regional Varieties of English in the British Isles, 3rd ed. London: Arnold.
Israel, M. (1996). The way constructions grow. In Goldberg, A. E., ed., Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI, pp. 217–230.
Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Joseph, B. (1992). Yet more on -gate words: a perspective from Greece. American Speech, 67(2), 222–223.
Joseph, B. (1998). Diachronic morphology. In Spencer, A. & Zwicky, A., eds., The Handbook of Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 349–373.
Jurafsky, D. (1992). An on-line computational model of human sentence interpretation: A theory of the representation and use of linguistic knowledge. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Kapatsinski, V. (2023). Understanding the roles of type and token frequency in usage-based linguistics. In Díaz-Campos, M. & Balasch, S., eds., The Handbook of Usage-Based Linguistics. Wiley: New Jersey, pp. 91–106.
Kasper, S. & Purschke, C. (2023). Whatever happened to the scene-encoding hypothesis? Salience and pertinence as the missing links between the usage-based model and scene encoding. Constructions, 15, 1–22.
Katz, J. & Postal, P. (1964). An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kay, P. (2004). Pragmatic aspects of grammatical constructions. In Horn, L. R. & Ward, G., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 675–700.
Kay, P. & Fillmore, C. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 75(1), 1–33.
Kay, P. & Michaelis, L. A. (2012). Constructional meaning and compositionality. In Maienborn, C., Heusinger, K. & Portner, P., eds., Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, vol. 3. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 2271–2296.
Kay, P. & Michaelis, L. A. (2019). Constructional meaning and compositionality. In Maienborn, C., Heusinger, K. & Portner, P., e ds., Semantics – Interfaces. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 293–324.
Keller, R. (1994). Sprachwandel: Von der unsichtbaren Hand in der Sprache. Tübingen & Basel: Francke.
Kövecses, Z. (2006). Language, Mind and Culture: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kranich, S. (2008). Subjective progressives in seventeenth and eighteenth century English: Secondary grammaticalization as a process of objectification. In Gotti, M., Dossena, M. & Dury, R., eds., English Historical Linguistics 2006, vol. I, Syntax and Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 241–256.
Kranich, S. (2010). Grammaticalization, subjectification and objectification. In Stathi, K., Gehweiler, E. & König, E., eds., Grammaticalization: Current Views and Issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 101–121.
Krug, M. G. (2000). Emerging English Modals. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kuryłowicz, J. (1965). The evolution of grammatical categories. Diogenes, 55–71.
Kuzai, E. (2020). Pragmatic information in constructions: What do speakers generalize? Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34, 215–227.
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in the meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 458–508.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1988). Cognitive semantics. In Eco, U., Santambrogio, M. & Violi, P., eds., Meaning and Mental Representations. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 119–154.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Ortony, A., ed., Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 202–251.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1990). Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 5–38.
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2, Descriptive Application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2000). A dynamic usage-based model. In Barlow, M. & Kemmer, S., eds., Usage-Based Models of Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI, pp. 1–63.
Langacker, R. W. (2005). Construction grammars: Cognitive, radical, and less so. In de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. Ruiz & Sandra Peña Cervel, M., eds., Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 101–159.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2010). Concept, Image, Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker, R. W. (2011). Grammaticalization and Cognitive Grammar. In Narrog, H. & Heine, B., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 79–91.
Langacker, R. W. (2016). Working towards a synthesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 27(4), 465–77.
Leclercq, B. (2019). Coercion: A case of saturation. Constructions and Frames, 11(2), 270–289.
Leclercq, B. (2020). Semantics and pragmatics in construction crammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34, 225–234.
Leclercq, B. (2023a). Ad hoc concepts and the relevance heuristics: A false paradox? Pragmatics, 33(3), 324–342.
Leclercq, B. (2023b). Modality revisited: Combining insights from construction grammar and relevance theory. In Depraetere, I., Cappelle, B. & Hilpert, M. et al., eds., Models of Modals: From Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics to Machine Learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 60–92.
Leclercq, B. (2024a). Linguistic Knowledge and Language Use: Bridging Construction Grammar and Relevance Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leclercq, B. (2024b). The post-modal grammaticalisation of concessive may and might. Constructions and Frames, 16(1), 130–161.
Leclercq, B. (2024c). The semantics–pragmatics interface in construction grammar. In Nesi, H. & Milin, P., eds., International Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 3rd ed. Online First, pp. 1–4.
Leclercq, B. & Depraetere, I. (2022). Making meaning with be able to: modality and actualisation. English Language and Linguistics, 26(1), 27–48.
Leclercq, B. & Morin, C. (2023). No equivalence: a new principle of no synonymy. Constructions, 15, 1–16.
Leclercq, B., & Morin, C. (2024). Taxonomy of constructional meanings. [Research project on OSF]. doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/USRWY.
Leclercq, B., & Morin, C. (2025). The TDD construction. [Research project on OSF]. doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/WTVA3.
Lee-Goldman, R. R. (2011). Context in constructions. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Lehar, S. (2002). The World in Your Head: A Gestalt View of the Mechanism of Conscious Experience. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Leino, J. (2013). Information structure. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 329–344.
Leino, J. & Östman, J.-O. (2005). Constructions and variability. In Fried, M. & Boas, H., eds., Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 191–213.
Lemmens, M. (2016). Cognitive semantics. In Riemer, N., ed., The Routledge Handbook of Semantics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 90–105.
Lemmens, M. (2017). A cognitive, usage-based view on lexical pragmatics: Response to Hall. In Depraetere, I. & Salkie, R., eds., Semantics and Pragmatics: Drawing a Line. Berlin: Springer International Publishing, pp. 101–114.
Levinson, S. C. (1992). Activity types and language. In Drew, P. & Heritage, J., eds., Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 66100, [1979].
Levshina, N. (2022). Communicative Efficiency: Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levshina, N. & Lorenz, D. (2022). Communicative efficiency and the principle of no synonymy: Predictability effects and the variation of want to and wanna. Language and Cognition, 14(2), 249–274.
Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy: Hidden Shortcuts in Thought, Language, and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlemore, J. (2022). On the creative use of metonymy. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 20(1), 104–129.
Lorenz, D. (2013). Contractions of English semi-modals: the emancipating effect of frequency. PhD thesis, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Freiburg.
Lyngfelt, B., Borin, L., Ohara, K. & Torrent, T., eds. (2018). Constructicography: Constructicon Development across Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
MacWhinney, B. (1989). Competition and lexical categorization. In Corrigan, R., Eckman, F. & Noonan, M., eds., Linguistic Categorization, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 195–242.
Marchand, H. (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word Formation. A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach. Muenchen: Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Mervis, C. & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89–115.
Michaelis, L. A. (2004). Type shifting in construction grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 1–67.
Mikkelsen, O. & Morin, C. (in press). Register as a source of non-equivalent constructions: be going to and gonna in British English. English Language and Linguistics, 29(3).
Moore, R. L. (2004). We’re cool, mom and dad are swell: Basic slang and generational shifts in values. American Speech, 79(1), 59–86.
Morin, C. (in press). Are phonemes constructions? A plea for distinguishing function and meaning. Constructions and Frames.
Morin, C. (2023). Social meaning in construction grammar: Double modals in dialects of English. PhD thesis, Université Paris-Cité, Paris.
Morin, C. & Leclercq, B. (in press). Cognitive Construction Grammar. In Wen, X. & Sinha, C., eds., The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Cognitive Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morin, C., Desagulier, G. & Grieve, J. (2024). A social turn for construction grammar: double modals on British Twitter. English Language and Linguistics, 8(2), 275–303.
Narrog, H. (2012). Beyond intersubjectification: Textual usages of modality and mood in subordinate clauses as part of speech orientation. English Text Construction, 5(1), 29–52.
Narrog, H. (2015). (Inter)subjectification and its limits in secondary grammaticalization. Language Sciences, 47, 148–160.
Narrog, H. (2017). Three types of subjectivity, three types of intersubjectivity, their dynamicization and a synthesis. In Van Olmen, D., Cuyckens, H. & Ghesquière, L., eds., Aspects of Grammaticalization: (Inter)Subjectification and Directionality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 19–46.
Nathan, G. (2006). Is the phoneme usage-based? Some issues. International Journal of English Studies, 6(2), 173–194.
Nesset, T. (2008). Abstract Phonology in a Concrete Model: Cognitive Linguistics and the Morphology-Phonology Interface. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nikiforidou, K. (2009). Constructional analysis. In Brisard, F., Östman, J.-O. & Verschueren, J., eds., Grammar, Meaning and Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 16–32.
Noël, D. (2007). Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory. Functions of Language, 14(2), 177–202.
Norde, M. (2009). Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Norde, M. (2012). Lehmann’s parameters revisited. In Davidse, K., Breban, T., Brems, L. & Mortelmans, T., eds., Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 73–110.
Nuyts, J. (2005). Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In Frawley, W., ed., The Expression of Modality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–26.
Partee, B. H. (1995). Lexical semantics and compositionality. In Gleitman, L. & Liberman, M., eds., Language: An Invitation to Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 311–360.
Perek, F. (2012). Alternation-based generalizations are stored in the mental grammar: Evidence from a sorting task experiment. Cognitive Linguistics, 23, 601–635.
Perek, F. (2016). Using distributional semantics to study syntactic productivity in diachrony: A case study. Linguistics, 54(1), 149–188.
Perek, F. (2023). Construction grammar and usage-based theory. In Diaz-Campos, M. & Balasch, S., eds., The Handbook of Usage-Based Linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 215–231.
Pijpops, D. (2020). What is an alternation? Six answers. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34, 283–294.
Pisciotta, F. (2024). When constructional choice is a matter of context: Sembrare-constructions across a continuum of text genres. CogniTextes, 25.
Plank, F. (1984). The modals story retold. Studies in Language, 8, 305–366.
Polinsky, M. (1998). A non-syntactic account of some asymmetries in the double object construction. In Koenig, J.-P., ed., Conceptual Structure and Language: Bridging the Gap, Stanford, CA: CSLI, pp. 402–423.
Rambelli, G. (2025). Constructions and Compositionality: Cognitive and Computational Explorations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P. & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. Psychological Review, 111(1), 159.
Recanati, F. (2004). Pragmatics and semantics. In Horn, L. R. & Ward, G., eds., The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 442–462.
Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of conflict in our language about language. In Ortony, A., ed., Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 284–324.
Rhodes, R. (1994). Aural images. In Hinton, L., Nichols, J. & Ohala, J., eds., Sound Symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 276–92.
Riemer, N. (2010). Introducing Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sampson, G. (2016). Two ideas of creativity. In Hinton, M., ed., Evidence, Experiment, and Argument in Linguistics and Philosophy of Language. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 15–26.
Schmid, H.-J. (2012). Entrenchment, salience, and basic levels. In Geeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–138.
Schmid, H.-J. (2014). Lexico-grammatical patterns, pragmatic associations and discourse frequency. In Herbst, T., Schmid, H.-J. & Faulhaber, S., eds., Constructions, Collocations, Patterns. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 239–293.
Schmid, H.-J. (2020). The Dynamics of the Linguistic System: Usage, Conventionalization, and Entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Siewirska, A. & Hollmann, W. (2007). Ditransitive clauses with special reference to Lancashire dialect. In Hannay, M. & Steen, G., eds., Structural-Functional Studies in English Grammar: In Honour of Lachlan Mackenzie. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 83–102.
Silvennoinen, O. (2023). Is construction grammar cognitive? Constructions, 15, 1–17.
Smirnova, E. (2015). When secondary grammaticalization starts: A look from the constructional perspective. Language Sciences, 47(2), 215–228.
Smith, C. (2014). The phonaesthetics of blends: A lexicographic study of cognitive blends in the OED. ExELL – Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, 2(1), 12–45.
Sommerer, L. (2020). Why we avoid the ‘multiple inheritance’ issue in usage-based cognitive construction grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34, 320–331.
Tagliamonte, S. A., & Pabst, K. (2020). A cool comparison: Adjectives of positive evaluation in Toronto, Canada and York, England. Journal of English Linguistics, 48(1), 3–30.
Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 49–100.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Thompson, S. A. & Koide, Y. (1987). Iconicity and ‘indirect objects’ in English. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(3), 399–406.
Traugott, E. C. (1995). Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In Wright, S. & Stein, D., eds., Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31–54.
Traugott, E. C. (2002). From etymology to historical pragmatics. In Minkova, D. & Stockwell, R., eds., Studying the History of the English Language: Millennial Perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 19–49.
Traugott, E. C. (2003). From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Hickey, R., ed., Motives for Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124–139.
Traugott, E. C. (2008). The grammaticalization of NP of NP patterns. In Bergs, A. & Diewald, G., eds., Constructions and Language Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 21–43.
Traugott, E. C. (2010). (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Davidse, K., Vandelanotte, L. & Cuyckens, H., eds., Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 29–71.
Traugott, E. C. (2015). Toward a coherent account of grammatical constructionalization. In Barðdal, J., Smirnova, E., Sommerer, L. & Gildea, S., eds., Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 51–79.
Traugott, E. C. (2024). Rethinking the relationship between subjectification, intersubjectification, and textualization from a constructionalist perspective. Cognitive Semantics, 10(1), 1–32.
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trips, C. (2009). Lexical Semantics and Diachronic Morphology: The Development of -hood, -dom and -ship in the History of English. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Trousdale, G. (2008a). Constructions in grammaticalization and lexicalization: Evidence from a composite predicate in the history of English. In Trousdale, G. & Gisborne, N., eds., Constructional Approaches to English Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 33–67.
Trousdale, G. (2008b). Words and constructions in grammaticalization: The end of the English impersonal construction. In Fitzmaurice, S. M. & Minkova, D., eds., Studies in the History of the English Language IV: Empirical and Analytical Advances in the Study of English Language Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 301–326.
Trousdale, G. (2010). Issues in constructional approaches to grammaticalization. In Stathi, K., Gehweiler, E. & König, E., eds., Grammaticalization: Current Views and Issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 51–71.
Trousdale, G. (2012). Grammaticalization, constructions, and the grammaticalization of constructions. In Davidse, K., Breban, T., Brems, L. & Mortelmans, T., eds., Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 167–198.
Turner, M. (1991). Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Uhrig, P. (2015). Why the principle of no synonymy is overrated. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistic, 63(3), 323–37.
Uhrig, P. (2020). Creative intentions: The fine line between “creative” and “wrong.” Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1), 1–19.
Ungerer, T. (2023). A gradient notion of constructionhood. Constructions, 15(1), 1–20.
Ungerer, T. & Hartmann, S. (2023). Constructionist Approaches: Past, Present, Future. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Välimaa-Blum, R. (2005) Cognitive Phonology in Construction Grammar: Analytic Tools for Students of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Weber, T. & Kopf, K. (2023). Free variation, unexplained variation? In Kopf, K. & Weber, T., eds., Free Variation in Grammar: Empirical and Theoretical Approaches, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–20.
Wen, X. (2022). Construction pragmatics: A brief sketch. In Lege Artis. Language Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow, 7(1), 249–266.
Willich, A. (2022). Introducing construction semantics (CxS): a frame-semantic extension of construction grammar and constructicography. Linguistics Vanguard, 8(1). 139–149.
Wilson, D. & Sperber, D. (2002). Truthfulness and relevance. Mind, 111, 583–632.
Winter, B. & Perek, F. (2023). Cognitive linguistics. In Wei, L., Hua, Z. & Simpson, J., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 309–321.
Yoon, S. (2012). Constructions, semantic compatibility, and coercion: An empirical usage-based approach. Ph.D. thesis, Rice University, Houston.
Zadeh, L. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 338–353.
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.
