Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T02:02:47.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Holger Diessel, The grammar network: How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Pp. xvii + 289. ISBN 9781108671040.

Review products

Holger Diessel, The grammar network: How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Pp. xvii + 289. ISBN 9781108671040.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2020

David Tizón-Couto*
Affiliation:
Department of English, French and German, Facultade de Filoloxía e Tradución, Universidade de Vigo, E-36310 Vigo, Spain davidtizon@uvigo.es

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnon, Inbal & Snider, Neal. 2010. More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language 62, 6782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal-Dramé, Alice. 2012. Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bürki, Audrey, F. Alario, Xavier & Frauenfelder, Ulrich H.. 2011. Lexical representation of phonological variants: Evidence from pseudohomophone effects in different regiolects. Journal of Memory and Language 64, 424–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 1999. Demonstratives: Form, function, and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2004. The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2007. Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change. New Ideas in Psychology 25, 108–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2011. Review article on Language, usage and cognition by Joan Bybee. Language 87, 830–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar & Caldwell-Harris, Catherine L.. 2015. Frequency and entrenchment. In Dąbrowska, Ewa & Divjak, Dagmar (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics, 5375. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame semantics. In Geeraerts, Dirk (ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings, 373400. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, Robert J. & Moors, Agnes. 2018. On the automaticity of language processing. In Schmid (ed.), 201–26.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2000. A dynamic usage-based model. In Barlow, Michael & Kemmer, Suzanne (eds.), Usage based models of language, 163. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Lorenz, David & Tizón-Couto, David. 2019. Chunking or predicting – frequency information and reduction in the perception of multi-word sequences. Cognitive Linguistics 30(4), 751–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg (ed.). 2018. Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Schönefeld, Doris (ed.). 2011. Converging evidence: Methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar