Cover not available

In:Constructions in Contact: Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 24] 2018
► pp. 37–70

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Grammar is community-specific

Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar

Published online: 12 December 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.24.02hod
Abstract
Mainstream grammatical theory and traditional grammaticography concentrate on single languages or varieties, which are conceptualised as pre-existing, distinct entities and analysed in terms of coherent, static, ideally variation-free language systems. This is in stark contrast to actual language usage, where various kinds of structural contact phenomena are the rule rather than the exception. In line with recent insights from contact linguistics, Diasystematic Construction Grammar assumes that multilingual speakers and communities organise their grammatical knowledge on the basis of the available input via processes of interlingual identification, abstraction, generalisation, and categorisation, regardless of language boundaries. This results in a community-specific multilingual constructicon, comprising both language-specific constructions (restricted to certain communicative contexts associated with a particular language) and constructions unspecified for language.
Article outline
  • 1.(Why) Yet another approach?
  • 2.Insights from contact linguistics: Language contact and its status in linguistic theory
  • 3.Taking usage-based CxG seriously: Towards socio-cognitive realism
  • 4.An integrated approach: The repertoire as constructicon
    • 4.1Language-specificity as a constructional property
    • 4.2Constructions without borders: Idioconstructions and diaconstructions
    • 4.3Language-specific input vs. diasystematic constructicon?
    • 4.4Pro-diasystematic change
    • 4.5Generalisation gone wild?
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgment
  • Notes
  • References
References (107)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2007). Grammars in contact. A cross-linguistic perspective. In A. Y. Aikhenvald, & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Grammars in contact. A cross-linguistic typology (pp.1–66). Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Babel, A., & Pfänder, S. (2014). Doing copying: Why typology doesn’t matter to language speakers. In Besters-Dilger, J., et al. (Eds.), Congruence in contact-induced language change. Language families, typological resemblance, and perceived similarity (pp.239–257). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergen, B. K. (2004). The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language, 80, 290–311.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Green, D. W., & Gollan, Tamar H. (2009). Bilingual minds. Psychological science in the public interest, 10, 89–129.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohn, R. (2006). Geschichte Schleswig-Holsteins. München: Beck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blom, J.-P., & Gumperz, J. J. (1972). Social meaning in linguistic structures: code switching in Northern Norway. In Gumperz, J. J., & Hymes, D. (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. The ethnography of communication (pp.407–434). New York etc.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. (1965 [1933]). Language. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, H. C. (Ed.) (2010). Contrastive studies in construction grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Cognitive Construction Grammar. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp.233–252). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyd, J. K., & Goldberg, A. E. (2011). Learning what not to say: the role of statistical preemption and categorization in a-adjective production. Language, 87, 55–83.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clyne, M. G. (2003). Dynamics of language contact. English and immigrant languages. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clyne, M. (2004). History of research on language contact. In Ammon, U., et al. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. An international handbook of the science of language and society (vol. 1, pp.799–805). 2nd edn. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2000). Explaining language change. An evolutionary approach. Harlow etc.: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. In Östman, J.-O., & Fried, M. (Eds.), Construction grammars. Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp.273–314). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Radical Construction Grammar. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp.211–232). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Divjak, D., & Caldwell-Harris, C. L. (2015). Frequency and entrenchment. In Dąbrowska, E., & Divjak, D. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.53–75). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doğruöz, A. S., & Backus, A. (2009). Innovative constructions in Dutch Turkish: An assessment of ongoing contact-induced change. Bilingualism: language and cognition, 12, 41–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. The linguistic construction of identity in Belten High. Malden etc.: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (2013). Construction grammar and second language acquisition. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp.365–378). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325–340.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the morning calm (pp.111–137), Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1967). Bilingualism with and without diglossia, diglossia with and without bilingualism. The journal of social issues, 23, 29–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fredsted, E. (2009). Sprachen und Kulturen in Kontakt – deutsche und dänische Minderheiten in Sønderjylland/Schleswig. In Stolz, C. (Ed.), Neben Deutsch. Die autochthonen Minderheiten- und Regionalsprachen Deutschlands (pp.1–23). Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code-switching. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., & Kristiansen, G. (2015). Variationist linguistic. In Dąbrowska, E., & Divjak, D. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.366–389), Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., Kristiansen, G., & Peirsman, Y. (2010). Introduction. Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics. In Geeraerts, D., Kristiansen, G., & Peirsman, Y. (Eds.), Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics (pp.1–19), Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Surface generalizations: an alternative to alternations. Cognitive linguistics, 13, 327–356.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Corpus evidence of the viability of statistical preemption. Cognitive linguistics, 22, 131–153.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Groot, A. M. B. (2011). Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals. An introduction. New York/Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and language, 36, 3–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Studying bilinguals. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosjean, F., & Li, P. (2013). The psycholinguistics of bilingualism. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2007). Pre-established categories don’t exist. Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic typology, 11, 119–132.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Framework-free grammatical theory. In Heine, B., & Narrog, H. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp.375–402). Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1950a). Problems of bilingualism. Lingua, 2, 271–290.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1950b). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26, 210–231.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1953). The Norwegian language in America. A study in bilingual behavior. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1956). Bilingualism in the Americas. A bibliography and research guide: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2003). On contact-induced grammaticalization. Studies in language, 27, 529–572.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hendrikx, I., Van Goethem, K., & Meunier, F. (2015). Modelling ‘constructional transfer’: a comparative corpus study of morphological and syntactic intensifiers in L1 French, Dutch and L2 Dutch. Paper presented at Morphology Days, 18 December 2015, Leuven.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hickey, R. (Ed.). 2010. The handbook of language contact. Malden etc.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Diessel, H. (2017). Entrenchment in construction grammar. In Schmid, H.-J. (Ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning. How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge (pp.57–74). Washington: De Gruyter Mouton/American Psychological Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Östman, J.-O. (2014). Reflections on constructions across grammars. Constructions and frames, 6, 137–142.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In Braunmüller, K., & Gabriel, C. (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp.241–257). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014a). Constructing diasystems. Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In Åfarli, T. A., & Mæhlum, B. (Eds.), The sociolinguistics of grammar (pp.137–152). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014b). Convergence vs. divergence from a diasystematic perspective. In Braunmüller, K., Höder, S., & Kühl, K. (Eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact. Factors and mechanisms (pp.39–60). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014c). Phonological elements and Diasystematic Construction Grammar. Constructions and frames, 6, 202–231.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016a). Niederdeutsche Form, unspezifische Struktur. Diasystematische Konstruktionen in der deutsch-dänischen Kontaktzone. In Spiekermann, H., et al. (Eds.), Niederdeutsch: Grenzen, Strukturen, Variation (pp.293–309). Wien/Köln/Weimar: Böhlau.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016b). Though this be contact, yet there is system in’t: Was man noch heute von Uriel Weinreich über Sprachkontakt lernen kann. In Walker, A. (Ed.), Classics revisited. Wegbereiter der Linguistik neu gelesen (pp.157–178). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York etc.: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johanson, L. (2002). Contact-induced change in a code-copying framework. In Jones, M. C., & Esch, E. (Eds.), Language change. The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors (pp.285–313). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). On copying grammatical meaning. Language typology and universals, 58, 75–83.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Remodeling grammar. Copying, conventionalization, grammaticalization. In Siemund, P., & Kintana, N. (Eds.), Language contact and contact languages (pp.61–79). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kristiansen, G. (2008). Style-shifting and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal variation. In Kristiansen, G., & Dirven, R. (Eds.), Cognitive sociolinguistics. Language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp.45–88). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Dussias, P. E., Bice, K., & Perrotti, L. (2015). Bilingualism, mind, and brain. Annual review of linguistics, 1, 377–394.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühl, J., & Bohn, R. (Eds.). (2005). Ein europäisches Modell? Nationale Minderheiten im deutsch-dänischen Grenzland 1945–2005. Bielefeld/Gütersloh: Verlag für Regionalgeschichte.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühl, K. H. (2008). Bilingualer Sprachgebrauch bei Jugendlichen im deutsch-dänischen Grenzland. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühl, K. (2015). Danske aflæggere i Nordeuropa: Færødansk, sydslesvigdansk og bokmål. Danske talesprog, 14, 29–54.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühl, K., & Braunmüller, K. (2014). Linguistic stability and divergence: An extended perspective on language contact. In Braunmüller, K., Höder, S., & Kühl, K. (Eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact. Factors and mechanisms (pp.13–38). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühl, K. H., & Petersen, H. P. (2009). Converging verbal phrases in related languages. A case study from Faro-Danish and Danish-German language contact situations. In Braunmüller, K., & House, J. (Eds.), Convergence and divergence in language contact situations (pp.101–124). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B., & Tabouret-Keller, A. (1985). Acts of identity. Creole-based approaches to language and ethnicity. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lepschy, G. (Ed.). (1998). History of linguistics. Vol. 3: Renaissance and early modern linguistics. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lightfoot, D. (1991). How to set parameters. Arguments from language change. Cambridge etc.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lüdi, G. (1996). Mehrsprachigkeit. In Goebl, H., et al. (Eds.), Contact linguistics. An international handbook of contemporary research (vol. 1, pp.233–245). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matras, Y. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Contact, convergence, and typology. In Hickey, R. (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (pp.66–85). Malden etc.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, M. (2002). Communities of practice. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., & Schilling-Estes, N. (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp.526–548). Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milroy, L. (2002). Social networks. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., & Schilling-Estes, N. (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp.549–572). Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, A. (Ed.) (1998). History of linguistics. Vol. 4: Nineteenth-century linguistics. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller, M. (1994 [1861–1864]). Lectures on the science of language. London: Routledge/Thoemmes.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muysken, P. (2000). Bilingual speech. A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (2002). Contact linguistics. Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oksaar, E. (1980). Mehrsprachigkeit, Sprachkontakt und Sprachkonflikt. In Nelde, P. H. (Ed.), Sprachkontakt und Sprachkonflikt (pp.43–52). Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palacios, A., & Pfänder, S. (2014). Similarity effects in language contact. Taking the speakers’ perceptions of congruence seriously. In Besters-Dilger, J., et al. (Eds.), Congruence in contact-induced language change. Language families, typological resemblance, and perceived similarity (pp.219–238). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patrick, P. L. (2002). The speech community. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., & Schilling-Estes, N. (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp.573–597), Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pedersen, K. M. (2003). Border-region Danish. International journal of the sociology of language, 159, 127–138.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perek, Florent (2015). Argument structure in usage-based construction grammar. Experimental and corpus-based perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pietsch, L. (2010). What has changed in Hiberno-English: constructions and their role in contact-induced change. Language typology and universals, 63, 118–145.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español. Toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581–618.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raith, J. (2004). Sprachgemeinschaft – Kommunikationsgemeinschaft. In Ammon, U., et al. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. An international handbook of the science of language and society (vol. 1, pp.146–158). 2nd edn. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (1999). Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism: language and cognition, 2, 169–186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, M. (2007). Calquing and metatypy. Journal of language contact, Thema 1, 116–143.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schuchardt, H. (1884). Dem Herrn Franz von Miklosich zum 20. November 1883. Slawo-Deutsches und Slawo-Italienisches. Graz: Leuschner & Lubensky.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sønderjyllands historie (2008–2009). Aabenraa: Historisk Samfund før Sønderjylland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley/Los Angeles/Oxford: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomason, S. (2010). Contact explanations in linguistics. In Hickey, R. (Ed.), The handbook of language contact (pp.31–47), Malden etc.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G. (2014). Contact-induced language change and typological congruence. In Besters-Dilger, J., et al. (Eds.), Congruence in contact-induced language change. Language families, typological resemblance, and perceived similarity (pp.201–218), Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2006a). Acquiring linguistic constructions. In Kuhn, D., & Siegler, R. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, vol. 2: Cognition, perception, and language (pp.255–298). 6th edn. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006b). Construction Grammar for kids. Constructions, special volume 1, article 11.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, M. (1945). Der yivo un di problemen fun undzer tsayt. Yivo bleter, 25, 3–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? Word, 10, 388–400.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1964 [1953]). Languages in contact. Findings and problems. 3rd edn. London/The Hague/Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Werlen, I. (2004). Domäne. In Ammon, U., et al. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. An international handbook of the science of language and society (vol. 1, pp.335–341). 2nd edn. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winge, V. (2004). Geschichte der deutsch-skandinavischen Sprachgrenze. In Besch, W., et al. (Eds.), Sprachgeschichte. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung (vol. 4, pp.3380–3390). 2nd edn. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziegeler, D. (2015). Converging grammars. Constructions in Singapore English. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (49)

Cited by 49 other publications

Bloom, Barthe & Thomas Herbst
2025. Describing English Constructions: An Introduction. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 73:3 ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Boas, Hans C. & Marc Pierce
2025. The for … zu construction in Texas German. In Varieties of German in Contact Settings [Studies in Germanic Linguistics, 10], ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo
Bogaards, Maarten & Roné Wierenga
2025. Aspectual cognate constructions in Afrikaans and Dutch. In Dutch and Contact Linguistics [IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 55], ► pp. 278 ff. DOI logo
Granvik, Anton, Rita Eloranta & Meri Tuuli Tilli
2025. Is the FROM construction community-specific?. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 23:2 ► pp. 408 ff. DOI logo
Hennecke, Inga & Evelyn Wiesinger
2025. Language contact phenomena in multiword units: The code-switching–calquing continuum. International Journal of Bilingualism 29:2 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo
Hilpert, Martin
2025. Construction Grammar and English Historical Linguistics. In The New Cambridge History of the English Language, ► pp. 796 ff. DOI logo
Hundt, Marianne & Laetitia van Driessche
2025. Prepositions in English Argument Structure Constructions. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Kessler, Ruth & Tatiana Perevozchikova
2025.  Now they accept it, now they don’t : Acceptability judgements of nontypical multiword units in Russian as a native and a heritage language . International Journal of Bilingualism 29:2 ► pp. 391 ff. DOI logo
Koch, Nikolas & Katharina Günther
2025. Patterns in (bilingual) language acquisition. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 208 ff. DOI logo
Konvička, Martin
2025. Language contact in online spaces. In Dutch and Contact Linguistics [IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 55], ► pp. 559 ff. DOI logo
Mithun, Marianne
2025. Constructions and Language Contact. In The Cambridge Handbook of Construction Grammar, ► pp. 469 ff. DOI logo
Morin, Cameron
2025. Are phonemes constructions?. Constructions and Frames DOI logo
Pavlović, Vladan & Biljana Mišić Ilić
2025. Review of Boas & Höder (2021): Constructions in contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 23:1 ► pp. 313 ff. DOI logo
Spina, Stefania, Aivars Glaznieks & Andrea Abel
2025. Intensification in written L2 Italian. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 11:2 ► pp. 276 ff. DOI logo
van Huyssteen, Gerhard B., Adri Breed & Suléne Pilon
2025. 2157 ‘What the hell?!’ vs. ‘Wat de hel?!’: Contrasting the intensifying whx construction in English and Afrikaans. In The Grammar of Impoliteness, ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo
Warmuth, Matthias
2025. Construction Grammar and phonology?. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 247 ff. DOI logo
Barking, Marie
2024. Language learners, chess champions, and piano prodigies – insights from research on language contact and expert behavior. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 12:1 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Beyer, Klaus
2024. A Diasystematic Approach to Multilingual Ecology: The Case of Mbum Speakers in Ngaoundéré, Cameroon. In Multilingualism in Its Multiple Dimensions, DOI logo
Croft, William
2024. Philosophical reflections on the future of construction grammar (or, confessions of a Radical Construction Grammarian). Constructions and Frames 16:2 ► pp. 191 ff. DOI logo
Hendrikx, Isa & Kristel Van Goethem
2024. Dutch compound constructions in additional language acquisition. Constructions and Frames 16:1 ► pp. 64 ff. DOI logo
van Rooy, Bertus & Haidee Kotze
2024. Conclusion. In Constraints on Language Variation and Change in Complex Multilingual Contact Settings [Contact Language Library, 60], ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo
Coussé, Evie, Steffen Höder, Benjamin Lyngfelt & Julia Prentice
2023. Introduction. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Olofsson, Joel & Julia Prentice
2023. The entrenchment of semi-schematic time constructions by German foreign language learners of Swedish. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 179 ff. DOI logo
Perak, Benedikt & Tajana Ban Kirigin
2023. Construction Grammar Conceptual Network: Coordination-based graph method for semantic association analysis. Natural Language Engineering 29:3 ► pp. 584 ff. DOI logo
Pijpops, Dirk
2022. Lectal contamination. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 27:3 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Höder, Steffen, Julia Prentice & Sofia Tingsell
2021. Additional language acquisition as emerging multilingualism. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Onysko, Alexander
2021. Cognitive models of language contact. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo
Onysko, Alexander
2025. Language Contact and World Englishes. In The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of World Englishes, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Rottet, Kevin J.
2021. Making one’s way in Welsh. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Urban, Aileen
2021. Idioconstructions in conflict. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Van Goethem, Kristel & Isa Hendrikx
2021. Intensifying constructions in second language acquisition. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 375 ff. DOI logo
Van Rooy, Bertus
2021. A Diasystematic Construction Grammar analysis of language change in the Afrikaans and English finite verb complement clause construction. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 109 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2021. The Spanish verb-particle construction [V para atrás]. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2025. Language contact and creolization. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
Zaefferer, Dietmar
2021. Beware of the emperor’s conceptual clothes: general linguistics must not be based on shaky dichotomies. Theoretical Linguistics 47:1-2 ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Hagel, Anna
2020. Strange sounds, familiar words. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 122 ff. DOI logo
Hagel, Anna
2023. One man’s [ɕœtː] is another man’s [kʰøð̞]. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Hagel, Anna
2025. Schemas all the way down?. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Percillier, Michael
2020. Allostructions, homostructions or a constructional family?. In Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 27], ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Höder, Steffen
2019. Phonological schematicity in multilingual constructions: A diasystematic perspective on lexical form. Word Structure 12:3 ► pp. 334 ff. DOI logo
Höder, Steffen
2023. The Devil is in the schema. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo
Mailhammer, Robert & Ronia Zeidan
2019. Cross-linguistic influence in bilingual productions of the English past tense in Arabic heritage speakers of Australian English. Linguistics Vanguard 5:1 DOI logo
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2018. Construction Grammar and language contact. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2021. Widening the scope. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2025. What makes Construction Grammar relevant for contact linguistics — and vice versa?. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2025. Diasystematic Construction Grammar at work. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 22 ff. DOI logo
Dux, Ryan
2018. Texas German and English word order constructions in contact. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo
Dux, Ryan
2020. Code-switching and loan translation in German-American. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 52 ff. DOI logo
Östman, Jan-Ola
2018. Constructions as cross-linguistic generalizations over instances. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 181 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue