Conceptualization, symbolization, and grammar

The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure

Volumn 1, Issue , 2017, Pages 1-39

  Langacker, Ronald W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85069301820     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315085678-1     Document Type: Chapter

References (77)

1. Achard, M. (1993). Complementation in French: A cognitive perspective.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
2. Barsalou, L. W., Yeh, W., Luka, B. J., Olseth, K. L., Mix, K. S., & Wu, L.-L. (1993). Concepts and meaning. Papers from the Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 29(2), 23-61.
3. Casad, E. H. (1982). Cora locationals and structured imagery.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
4. Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of onscious exponent e tn speaking and writing.Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
5. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures.The Hague: Mouton.
6. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Cook, K. W. (1988). A cognitive analysis of grammatical relations, case, and transitivity tn Samoan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
8. Downing, P. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53, 810-842.
9. Elman, J. L., & McClelland, J. L. (1984). Speech perception as a cognitive process: The interactive activation model. In N. Lass (Ed.), Speech and language (pp. 337-374). New York: Academic Press.
10. Fauconnier, G. (1985). Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction m natural language. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press/Bradford.
11. Fauconnier, G., & Sweetser, E. (Eds.). (1996). Spaces, worlds, and grammar. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
12. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1994). Conceptual frrojection and middle spat es (Report No. 9401). San Diego: Department of Cognitive Science, University of California.
13. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. E. Goldberg (Ed.), Concefjtual structure, discourse and language (pp. 113-130). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
14. Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1-88). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
15. Forrest, L. B. (1996). Discourse goals and attentional processes in sentence production: The dynamic construal of events. In A. E. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language (pp. 149-161). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
16. Gentner, D. (1981). Some interesting differences between verbs and nouns. Cognition and Brain Theory, 4, 161-178.
17. Gentner, D. (1982). Why nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity versus natural patterning. In S. Kuczaj (Ed.), Language develofrment I: Syntax and semantics (pp. 301-334). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Gernsbacher, M. A., & Hargreaves, D. (1992). The privilege of primacy: Experimental data and cognitive explanations. In D. L. Payne (Ed.), Pragmatics of word order flexibility (pp. 83-116). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
19. Goldberg, A. E. (1992). The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English ditransitive construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 37-74.
20. Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
21. Haiman, J. (1980). Dictionaries and encyclopedias. Lingua, 50, 329-357.
22. Harder, P. (1996). Functional semantics' A theory of meaning, structure and tense in English.Berlin and New York: Mouton.
23. Holmqvist, K. (1993). Implementing cognitive semantics.Lund, Sweden: Lund University, Department of Cognitive Science.
24. Jackendoff, R. (1994). Patterns in the mind' Language and human nature.New York: Basic Books.
25. Janda, L. A. (1990). The radial network of a grammatical category—its genesis and dynamic structure. Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 269-288.
26. Janda, L. A. (1993). A geography of case semantics: The Czech dative and the Russian instrumental Berlin and New York: Mouton.
27. Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137-194.
28. Keenan, E. L., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63-99.
29. Kellogg, M. K. (1993). When a “cat�? is a “cow�? and “hearing�? is “understanding�?; paraphasia and the conceptualization of nouns and verbs. Papers from the Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 29(2), 201-215.
30. Kellogg, M. K. (1994). Conceptual mechanisms underlying noun and verb categorization: Evidence from paraphasia. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic s Society, 20, 300-309.
31. Kellogg, M. K. (1996). Neurolinguistic evidence of some coneefHuai properties of nouns and verbs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
32. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind.Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
33. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
35. Langacker, R. W. (1982). Space grammar, analysability, and the English passive. Language, 58, 22-80.
36. Langacker, R. W. (1986). Abstract motion. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 12, 455-471.
37. Langacker, R. W. (1987a). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
38. Langacker, R. W. (1987b). Nouns and verbs.Language, 63, 53-94.
39. Langacker, R. W. (1988). A usage-based model. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 127-161). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
40. Langacker, R. W. (1990). Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar.Berlin and New York: Mouton.
41. Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 2). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
42. Langacker, R. W. (1992). The symbolic nature of cognitive grammar: The meaning of of and of «periphrasis. In M. Pütz (Ed.), Thirty years of linguistic evolution: Studies in honour of René Dirven on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday (pp. 483-502). Philadelphia and Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
43. Langacker, R. W. (1993a). Grammatical traces of some “invisible�? semantic constructs. Language Sciences, 15, 323-355.
44. Langacker, R. W. (1993b). Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 1-38.
45. Langacker, R. W. (1995a). Conceptual grouping and constituency in cognitive grammar. In Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm 3 (pp. 149-172). Seoul: Hanshin.
46. Langacker, R. W. (1995b). Raising and transparency. Language, 71, 1-62.
47. Langacker, R. W. (1997a). A dynamic account of grammatical function. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type dedicated to T. Givon(pp. 249-273). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
48. Langacker, R. W. (1997b). Constituency, dependency, and conceptual grouping. Cognitive Linguistics, 8, 1-32.
49. MacWhinney, B. (1977). Starting points.Language, 53, 152-168.
50. Maldonado, R. (1992). Middle voice: The case of Spanish “se�?.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
51. Manney, L. (1993). Middle voice in Modem Greek.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
52. Matsumoto, Y. (1996a). Subject motion and English and Japanese verbs. Cognitive Linguistus, 7, 183-226.
53. Matsumoto, Y. (1996b). Subjective-change expressions in Japanese and their cognitive and linguistic bases. In G. Fauconnier & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Spaces, worlds, and grammar (pp. 124-156). Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
54. Nunberg, G. (1995). Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics, 12, 109-132.
55. Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1991). Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules of grammar. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 17, 230-251.
56. Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor—a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-324). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
57. Reid, W. (1991). Verb and noun number in English: A functional explanation, London and New York: Longman.
58. Rice, S. (1987). Towards a cognitive model of transitivity.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
59. Rubba, J. E. (1993). Discontinuous morphology in Modem Aramaic.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
60. Ryder, M. E. (1991). Mixers, mufflers and mousers: The extending of the -er suffix as a case of prototype reanalysis. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 17, 299-311.
61. Ryder, M. E. (1994). Ordered chews: The interfrretation of English noun-noun compounds.Berkeley: University of California Press.
62. Sandra, D., & Rice, S. (1995). Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind—the linguist's or the language user’s?Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 89-130.
63. Slobin, D. I. (1987). Thinking for speaking. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13, 435-445.
64. Smith, M. B. (1993). Aspects of German clause structure from a cognitive grammar perspective. Studi Italiani di Lingüistica Teórica e Applicata, 22, 601-638.
65. Stemberger, J. P., & MacWhinney, B. (1988). Are inflected forms stored in the lexicon? In M. Hammond & M. Noonan (Eds.), Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modem linguistics (pp. 101-116). San Diego: Academic Press.
66. Talmy, L. (1978). Figure and ground in complex sentences. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human language (Vol. 4, pp. 625-649). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
67. Talmy, L. (1988). The relation of grammar to cognition. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 165-205). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
68. Talmy, L. (1996). Fictive motion in language and “ception.�? In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
69. Taylor, J. R. (1995). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: Clarendon.
70. Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
71. Tomlin, R. S. (1995). Focal attention, voice, and word order. In P. Downing & M. Noonan (Eds.), Word order in discourse (pp. 517-554). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
72. Tuggy, D. (1988). Náhuatl causative/applicatives in cognitive grammar. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 587-618). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
73. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10, 183-204.
74. van Hoek, K. (1995). Conceptual reference points: A cognitive grammar account of pronominal anaphora constraints. Language, 71, 310-340.
75. van Hoek, K. (1997). Anaphora and concefdual structure.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
76. Verfaillie, K., & Daems, A. (1996). The priority of the agent in visual event perception: On the cognitive basis of grammatical agent-patient asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 131-147.
77. Wierzbicka, A. (1995). Dictionaries vs. encyclopaedias: How to draw the line. In P. W. Davis (Ed.), Alternative linguistics: Descriptive and theoretical modes (pp. 289-315). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.