In:Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Francisco Gonzálvez-García
[Constructional Approaches to Language 15] 2014
► pp. 1–35
Chapter 1. Applying constructional concepts to Romance languages
Published online: 28 August 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.15.01boa
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.15.01boa
References (127)
Aarts, B. (1992). Small clauses in English: The non-verbal types. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Allen, J.H., & Greenough, J.B. (1980). Allen and Greenough’s new Latin grammar. New Rochelle, NY: Caratzas Brothers, Publishers. [Revision of the 1883 edition.]
Báez Montero, I.C. (1988). La construcción con predicativo del complemento directo en castellano medieval. Vigo: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad.
Barðdal, J. (2004). The semantics of the impersonal construction in Icelandic, German and Faroese: Beyond thematic roles. In W. Abraham (Ed.), Focus on Germanic typology [Studia Typologica, 6] (pp. 101–130). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
. (2008). Productivity. Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 8]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2013). Construction-based historical-comparative reconstruction. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 438–457). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barðdal, J., & Eythórsson, Th. (2012). Reconstructing syntax: Construction Grammar and the comparative method. In H.C. Boas, & I. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based Construction Grammar (pp. 257–308). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Bergen, B.K., & Plauché, M. (2001).
Voilà voilà: Extensions of deictic constructions in French. In A. Cienki, B. Luka, & M. Smith (Eds.), Conceptual and discourse factors in linguistic structure (pp. 238–249). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
. (2005). The convergent evolution of radial constructions: French and English deictics and existentials. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(1), 1–42.
Bergs, A., & Diewald, G. (Eds.). (2008). Constructions and language change. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Bisang, W. (2008). Precategoriality and argument structure in Late Archaic Chinese. In J. Leino (Ed.), Constructional reorganization [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 5] (pp. 55–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2005). Determining the productivity of resultative constructions: A reply to Goldberg & Jackendoff. Language, 81(2), 448–464.
. (2006). A frame-semantic approach to identifying syntactically relevant elements of meaning. In P. Steiner, H.C. Boas, & S. Schierholz (Eds.), Contrastive studies and valency. Studies in honor of Hans Ulrich Boas (pp. 119–149). Frankfurt & New York: Peter Lang.
. (2008). Determining the structure of lexical entries and grammatical constructions in Construction Grammar. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 113–144.
. (2010a). Comparing constructions across languages. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (Ed.). (2010b). Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2011). Coercion and leaking argument structure in Construction Grammar. Linguistics, 49(6), 1271–1303.
Borkin, A. (1973).
To be or not to be
.
Proceedings of the 9th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society
, 44–56.
Bouveret, M., & Legallois, D. (Eds.). (2012). Constructions in French. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J.L. (1995). The semantic development of past tense modals in English. In J.L. Bybee, & S. Fleischman (Eds.), Modality in grammar and discourse (pp. 503–517). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J.L., & Eddington, D. (2006). A usage-based approach to Spanish verbs of ‘becoming’. Language, 82(2), 323–355.
Bybee, J.L., & Hopper, P.J. (Eds.). (2001). Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure [Typological Studies in Language, 45]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cardinaletti, A., & Guasti, M.T. (Eds.). (1995). Small clauses. Syntax and Semantics, 28. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Contreras, H. (1987). Small clauses in English and Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5(2), 225–243.
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V., & Taoka, C. (2010). Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 201–236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
De Knop, S., Mollica, F., & Kuhn, J. (2013). Konstruktionsgrammatik und Romanische Sprachen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Deulofeu, J., & Debaisioux, J.M. (2009). Constructions and context: When a construction constructs the context. In A. Bergs, & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 43–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Demonte, V., & Masullo, P. (1999). La predicación: Los complementos predicativos. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Dirs.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 2461–2523). Madrid: Espasa.
Ferraresi G., & Goldbach, M. (2003). Some reflections on inertia: Infinitive complements in Latin. In B. Baumgarten, C. Böttger, M. Motz, & M.J. Probst (Eds.), Übersetzen, interkulturelle Kommunikation, Spracherwerb und Sprachvermittlung – das Leben mit mehreren Sprachen. Festschrift für Juliane House zum 60. Geburtstag. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 8(2/3), 240–251. Retrieved from [URL].
Fillmore, C.J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.
. (1986). Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora. In V. Nikiforidou, M. VanClay, M. Niepokuj, & D. Feder (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 95–107). Berkeley: UC Berkeley Linguistics Department.
Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of ‘let alone’. Language, 64, 501–538.
Fox, B.A. (2007). Relative clauses in English conversation: Relativizers, frequency, and the notion of construction. Studies in Language, 31, 293–326.
Fried, M. (2004). Predicate semantics and event construal in Czech case marking. In M. Fried, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective (pp. 87–120). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2005a). A frame-based approach to case alternations: The swarm-class verbs in Czech. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(3), 475–512.
. (2005b). The stability of meaning-form associations across time. In P. Nejedlý, & M. Vajdlová (Eds.), Verba et historia (pp. 77–85). Praha: Ústav pro jazyk český AV ČR.
. (2009). Construction Grammar as a tool for diachronic analysis. Constructions and Frames, 1(2), 261–290.
. (2013). Principles of constructional change. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 417–437). Oxford: Oxford Univesity Press.
Fried, M., & Östman, J-O. (2004). Construction Grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective (pp. 11–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fujii, S. (2004). Lexically (un)filled constructional schemes and construction types: The case of Japanese modal conditional constructions. In M. Fried, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 2] (pp. 121–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Garachana Camarero, M. (2008). En los límites de la gramaticalización. La evolución de “encima (de que)” como marcador del discurso. Revista de Filología Española, LXXXVIII(1), 7–36.
Givón, T. (1980). The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements. Studies in Language, 4, 333–377.
Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions. A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gonzálvez-García, F. (2006a). Passives without actives: Evidence from verbless complement constructions in Spanish. Constructions, SV1-5/2006.
. (2006b). The fortunes of the competition between the accusative and infinitive and the NP + PRED complement constructions after “verba cogitandi” in English: A Construction Grammar view. In J.G. Vázquez González, M. Martínez Vázquez, & P. Ron Vaz (Eds.), The historical linguistics-cognitive linguistics interface (pp. 75–145). Huelva: Grupo de Gramática Contrastiva.
. (2007). Saved by the reflexive: Evidence from coercion via reflexives in verbless complement clauses in English and Spanish. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 5, 193–238.
. (2009). The family of object-related depictives in English and Spanish: Towards a usage-based, constructionist analysis. Language Sciences, 31(5), 663–723.
. (2010). Contrasting constructions in English and Spanish: The influence of semantic, pragmatic, and discourse factors. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 43–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2011). Metaphor and metonymy do not render coercion superfluous: Evidence from the subjective-transitive construction. Linguistics, 49(6), 1305–1358.
Gurevich, O. (2010). Conditional constructions in English and Russian. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 87–102). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gurevich, O., Johnson, M., & Goldberg, A.E. (2010). Incidental verbatim memory for language. Language and Cognition, 2(1), 45–78.
Haegeman, L. (1995). The syntax of negation [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 75]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Han, Ch. (2000). The structure and interpretation of imperatives: Mood and force in universal grammar. New York: Garland Publications.
Hartmann, K. (2000). Right node raising and gapping: Interface conditions on prosodic deletion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hasegawa, Y., Lee-Goldman, R., Ohara, K.H., Fujii, S., & Fillmore, C.J. (2010). On expressing measurement and comparison in English and Japanese. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp.169–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hens, G.W. (1995). Ditransitive constructions in German. (Ph.D. dissertation). University of California, Berkeley.
Heycock, C. (1994). The internal structure of small clauses. In J. Beckman (Ed.), Proceedings of NELS 25 (Vol. 1, pp. 223–238). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
Hilferty, J., & Valenzuela, J. (2001). Maximality and idealized cognitive models: The complementation of Spanish “tener”. Language Sciences, 23, 629–637.
Hilpert, M. (2006). A synchronic perspective on the grammaticalization of Swedish future constructions. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 29(2), 151–173.
. (2008). Germanic future constructions A usage-based approach to language change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2010). Comparing comparatives: A corpus-based study of comparative constructions in English and Swedish. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 21–42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2013). Corpus-based approaches to constructional change. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 458–475). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ionescu, D.C. (1998). Small clauses in English and Romanian. Bucureşti: Editura Universitatii Bucuresti.
Iwata, S. (2008). Locative alternation. A lexical-constructional approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kayne, R. (1992). Italian negative infinitival imperatives and clitic climbing. In L. Tasmowski (Ed.), Hommages à Nicolas Ruwet: De la musique à la linguistique (pp. 300–312). Ghent: Communication & Cognition.
Kenniston, H. (1937). The syntax of Castilian prose. The sixteenth century. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lambrecht, K. (1986). Topic, focus, and the grammar of spoken French. (Ph.D. dissertation). The University of California, Berkeley.
Lambrecht, K., & Lemoine, K. (2005). Definite null objects in (spoken) French: A construction-grammar account. In M. Fried, & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical constructions – Back to the roots [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 4] (pp. 13–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (1964). Los casos latinos: Restos sintácticos y sustitutos en español. Boletín de la Real Academia Española, 44, 76–82.
Lauwers, P., & Tobback, E. (2011). The rise of subjective meanings in the development of reflexive copulas in French. Paper delivered at the
10th International Conference on Tense, Aspect, Modality and Evidentiality
. Aston University, Birmingham, UK, April 2011.
Ledgeway, A. (2012). From Latin to Romance: Morphosyntactic typology and change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leino, J. (2010). Results, cases, and constructions: Argument structure constructions in English and Finnish. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 103–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leino, J., & Östman, J.-O. (2005). Constructions and variability. In M. Fried, & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical constructions – Back to the roots [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 4] (pp. 191–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leino, P., & Östman, J.-O. (2008). Language change, variability, and functional load: Finnish genericity from a constructional point of view. In J. Leino (Ed.), Constructional reorganization [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 5] (pp. 37–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lindström, J., & Londen, A.-M. (2008). Constructing reasoning: The connectives för att (causal), så att (consecutive) and men att (adversative) in Swedish conversations. In J. Leino (Ed.), Constructional reorganization [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 5] (pp. 105–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
López Muñoz, M. (2002). Delenda est machina? Informática y Filología Latina. Revista de Estudios Latinos, 2, 235–250.
Martínez Vázquez, M. (2003). Gramática de construcciones (Contrastes entre el inglés y el español). Huelva: Grupo de Gramática Contrastiva.
. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations in a foreign language. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 151–165.
Masini, F. (2005). Multi-word expressions between syntax and the lexicon: The case of Italian verb-particle constructions. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 18, 145–173.
Matsumoto, Y. (2008). Variations in Japanese honorification – deviations or a change in the making? In J. Leino (Ed.), Constructional reorganization [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 5] (pp. 89–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Michaelis, L.A. (2003). Headless constructions and coercion by construction. In E. Francis, & L.A. Michaelis (Eds.), Mismatch: Form-function incongruity and the architecture of grammar (pp. 259–310). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
. (2004). Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(1), 1–67.
. (2012). Making the case for Construction Grammar. In H.C. Boas, & I. Sag (Eds.), Sign-based Construction Grammar (pp. 31–69). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Newmeyer, F.J. (2010). What conversational English tells us about the nature of grammar: A critique of Thompson’s analysis of object complements. In K. Boye, & E. Engberg-Pedersen (Eds.), Language usage and language structure (pp. 3–44). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ohara, K. (2005). From relativization to clause-linkage: Evidence from modern Japanese. In M. Fried, & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical constructions – Back to the roots [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 4] (pp. 57–70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pollard, C., & Sag, I. (1994). Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pons, L. (2008). Las construcciones imitativas del accusativus cum infinitivo: Modelos latinos y consecuencias romances. Revista de Historia de la Lengua Española, 3, 118–148.
Pountain, C. (1998). Learned syntax and the Romance languages: The “accusative and infinitive” construction with declarative verbs in Castilian. Transactions of the Philological Society, 96(2), 159–201.
Rostila, J. (2005). Zur Grammatikalisierung bei Präpositionalobjekten. In T. Leuschner, T. Mortelmans, & S. De Groodt (Eds.), Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen (pp. 135–166). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rytting, C.A. (1999). Small clauses and indirect discourse in Latin prose. LACUS Forum, 25, 443–458.
Thompson, S.A. (2002). Object complements and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language, 26, 125–164.
Timnyam, N. & Bergen, B.K. (2010). A contrastive study of the caused-motion and ditransitive constructions in English and Thai: Semantic and pragmatic constraints. In H.C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar (pp. 137–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Torre, E. (2011). Grounding meaning in everyday experience in the world. An embodied Construction Grammar analysis of Italian caused-motion constructions. (Unpublished M.A. Thesis). University of Pavia, Italy.
. (2012). Symmetry and asymmetry in Italian caused-motion constructions: An Embodied Construction Grammar approach. Constructions. Retrieved from [URL].
Traugott, E.C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trousdale, G., & Hoffmann, T. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trousdale, G., & Traugott, E.C. (Eds.). (2010). Gradience, gradualness, and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tsujimura, N. (2005). A constructional approach to mimetic verbs. In M. Fried, & H.C. Boas (Eds.), Grammatical constructions – Back to the roots [Constructional Approaches to Language Series, 4] (pp. 137–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Urrutia Cárdenas, H., & Álvarez Álvarez, M. (1988). Morfosintaxis histórica del español. Bilbao: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Deusto.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Coussé, Evie, Steffen Höder, Benjamin Lyngfelt & Julia Prentice
2023. Introduction. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 1 ff.
Hennecke, Inga & Evelyn Wiesinger
2023. Construction Grammar meets Hispanic linguistics. In Constructions in Spanish [Constructional Approaches to Language, 34], ► pp. 2 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
