Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton October 27, 2015

Florent, Perek: Argument structure in usage-based Construction Grammar

  • Lunella Mereu EMAIL logo
From the journal Linguistics

Reviewed Publication:

Florent, Perek. Argument structure in usage-based Construction Grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2015. x + 246 pp. ISBN 9789027204394


Alsina, Alex & Sam Mchombo. 1993. Object asymmetries and the Chichewa applicative construction. In Sam A. Mchombo (ed.), Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar, 17–45. Stanford, CA: CSLISearch in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & Harald Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In Gerlof Boume, Irene Kraemer & Joost Zwarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Search in Google Scholar

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

Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511750526Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2013. Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 49–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0004Search in Google Scholar

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

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica VI(2). 222–254.Search in Google Scholar

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

Goldberg, Adele, Devin Casenhiser & Nytia Sethuraman. 2004. Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics 13(3). 289–316.10.1515/cogl.2004.011Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul & Sandra Thompson. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2). 251–299.10.1353/lan.1980.0017Search in Google Scholar

Kay, Paul & Charles Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The what’s x doing why? construction. Language 75(1). 1–33.10.2307/417472Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 2000. A dynamic usage-based model. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 1–63. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511610479Search in Google Scholar

Mithun, Marianne & Greville G. Corbett. 1999. The effect of noun incorporation on argument structure. In Lunella Mereu (ed.), Boundaries of morphology and syntax, 49–71. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.180.05mitSearch in Google Scholar

Perek, Florent & Maarten Lemmens. 2010. Getting at the meaning of the English at construction: The case of a constructional split. CogniTextes 5. (accessed 5 October 2015)10.4000/cognitextes.331Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan Thomas 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

Talmy, Leonard. 1996. The windowing of attention in language. In Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, 235–287. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Towards a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-10-27
Published in Print: 2015-11-1

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 8.2.2023 from
Scroll Up Arrow