Aspectual and causal structure in event representations

Routes to Language: Studies in Honor of Melissa Bowerman

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 139-166

  Croft, William ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85075301689     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203837924-15     Document Type: Chapter

References (37)

1. Bertinetto, P. M., & Squartini, M. (1995). An attempt at defining the class of “gradual completion verbs.” In P. M. Bertinetto, V. Bianchi, J. Higginbotham, & M. Squartini (Eds.), Temporal reference, aspect and actionality: Vol. 1. Semantic and syntactic perspectives (pp. 11-26). Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.
2. Bickel, B. (1997). Aspectual scope and the difference between logical and semantic representation. Lingua, 102, 115-131.
3. Binnick, R. I. (1991). Time and the verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Breu, W. (1994). Interactions between lexical, temporal and aspectual meaning. Studies in Language, 18, 23-44.
5. Carlson, G. N. (1979). Generics and atemporal when. Linguistics & Philosophy, 3, 49-98.
6. Carlson, L. (1981). Aspect and quantification. In P. Tedeschi & A. Zaenen (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 14.Tense and aspect (pp. 31-64). New York: Academic Press.
7. Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Croft, W. (1991). Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Croft, W. (1994). Voice: Beyond control and affectedness. In P. Hopper & B. Fox (Eds), Voice: Form and function (pp. 89-117). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
10. Croft, W. (1998a). Event structure in argument linking. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 21-63). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
11. Croft, W. (1998b). The structure of events and the structure of language. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. 67-92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Croft, W. (In preparation). Verbs: Aspect and argument structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A.(2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14. Dahl, O. (1985). Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
15. Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
16. Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67,547-619.
17. Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111-137). Seoul: Hanshin.
18. Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di semantica, 6, 222-254.
19. Goldsmith, J., & Woisetschlaeger, E. (1982). The logic of the English progressive. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 79-89.
20. Hay, J., Kennedy, C., & Levin, B. (1999). Scalar structure underlies telicity in “degree achievements.” Proceedings of SALT, 9, 127-144.
21. Herskovits, A. (1985). Semantics and pragmatics of locative expressions. Cognitive Science, 9, 341-378.
22. Johanson, L. 1996. Terminality operators and their hierarchical status. In B. Devriendt, L. Goossens, & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), Complex structures: A functionalist perspective (pp. 229-258). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
23. Johanson, L. (2000). Viewpoint operators in European languages. In 0. Dahl (Ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe (pp. 27-187). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
24. Klein, W. (1994). Time in language. London: Routledge.
25. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
26. Luraghi, S. (2003). On the meaning of prepositions and cases. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27. Mittwoch, A. (1988). Aspects of English aspect: On the interaction of perfect, progressive and durational phrases. Linguistics & Philosophy, 11, 203-254.
28. Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97-134). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
29. Sasse, H-J. (1991). Aspect and Aktionsart: A reconciliation. In C. Vetters & W. Vandeweghe (Eds.), Belgian Journal of Linguistics: Vol. 6. Perspectives on aspect and Aktionsart(pp. 31-45). Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
30. Sasse, H-J. (2002). Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishments, achievements, or just non-progressive state? Linguistic Typology, 6, 199-271.
31. Smith, C. (1991). The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
32. Talmy, L. (1976). Semantic causative types. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 6. The grammar of causative constructions (pp. 43-116). New York: Academic Press.
33. Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Vol. 3. Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp. 57-149). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34. Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49-100.
35. Timberlake, A. (1985). The temporal schemata of Russian predicates. In M. S. Flier & R. D. Brecht (Eds.), Issues in Russian morphosyntax (pp. 35-57). Columbus, OH: Slavica.
36. Van Valin, R. D. Jr., & LaPolla, R. J. (1997). Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37. Vendler, Z. (1967). Verbs and times. Linguistics in philosophy, (pp. 97-121). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.