Florent Perek: Argument Structure in Usage-Based Construction Grammar: Experimental and corpus-based perspectives. Constructional Approaches to Language 17

References

Bybee, Joan L. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language. 82(4). 711–733.10.1353/lan.2006.0186Search in Google Scholar

Cappelle, Bert. 2006. Particle placement and the case for “allostructions”. Constructions, Special Volume 1. 1–28.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2003. Lexical rules vs. constructions: A false dichotomy. In Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, Renِé Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden, 49–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.243.07croSearch in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goldwater, Micah B., Mark T. Tomlinson, Catharina H. Echols & Bradley C. Love. 2011. Structural priming as structure-mapping: Children use analogies from previous utterances to guide sentence production. Cognitive Science 35. 156–170.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01150.xSearch in Google Scholar

Perek, Florent. 2012. Alternation-based generalizations are stored in the mental grammar: Evidence from a sorting task experiment. Cognitive Linguistics 23(3). 601–635.10.1515/cog-2012-0018Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan T. Gries. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(2). 209–243.10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03steSearch in Google Scholar

Vasilyeva, Marina & Heidi Waterfall. 2011. Beyond syntactic priming: Evidence for activation of alternative syntactic structures. Journal of Child Language 39(2). 1–26.10.1017/S0305000911000055Search in Google Scholar