Cover not available

In:Constructions in Contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 30] 2021
► pp. 1–13

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

Widening the scope

Recent trends in constructional contact linguistics

 | University of Texas at Austin
 | Kiel University
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.30.01boa
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The diasystematic approach in a nutshell
  • 3.Structure and chapters of the volume
  • References
References (46)
References
Backus, A. (2014). A usage-based approach to borrowability. In E. Zenner, & G. Kristiansen (Eds.), New perspectives on lexical borrowing (pp. 19–40). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barðdal, J. et al. (Eds.). (2015). Diachronic construction grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, H. C., & Höder, S. (2018a). Construction grammar and language contact. An introduction. In H. C. Boas, & S. Höder (Eds.), Constructions in contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages (pp. 5–36). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brône, G., & Zima, E. (2014). Towards a dialogic construction grammar. Ad hoc routines and resonance activation. Cognitive Linguistics 25, 457–495. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cappelle, B. (2017). What’s pragmatics doing outside constructions? In I. Depraetere, & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics. Drawing a line (pp. 115–151). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clyne, M. G. (2003). Dynamics of language contact. English and immigrant languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Distributional assimilation in constructional semantics. On contact-related semantic shifts in Afrikaans three-argument constructions. In H. C. Boas, & S. Höder (Eds.), Constructions in contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages (pp. 143–177). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Knop, S., & Gilquin, G. (Eds.). (2016). Applied Construction Grammar. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diessel, H. (2013). Construction Grammar and first language acquisition. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 347–364). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (2013). Construction grammar and second language acquisition. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 365–378). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faraclas, N., & Klein, T. B. (2009). Simplicity and complexity in creoles and pidgins. Battlebridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, L. & Hawkins, J. A. (2019). The Complex Adaptive System Principles model for bilingualism. Language interactions within and across bilingual minds. International Journal of Bilingualism 23, 1223–1248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Explain me this. Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (2008). Studying bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2013). Constructional change in English. Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Östman, J.-O. (Eds.). (2016). Constructions across grammars. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions. A diasystematic approach to common structures. In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 241–258). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014a). Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In T. A. Afarli, & B. Mæhlum (Eds.), The sociolinguistics of grammar (pp. 137–152). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Grammar is community-specific: Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar. In H. C. Boas, & S. Höder (Eds.), Constructions in contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages (pp. 37–70). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Phonological schematicity in multilingual constructions: a diasystematic perspective on lexical form. Word Structure 12, 334–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Israel, M. (1996). The way constructions grow. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language (pp. 217–230). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matras, Y. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. (2000). Creolization is a social, not structural, process. In I. Neumann-Holzschuh, & E. W. Schneider (Eds.), Degrees of restructuring in Creole languages (pp. 65–84). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muysken, P. (2013). Language contact outcomes as the result of bilingual optimization strategies. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16, 709–730. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Onysko, A. (2019). Reconceptualizing language contact phenomena as cognitive processes. In E. Zenner, A. Backus, & E. Winter-Froemel (Eds.), Cognitive contact linguistics (pp. 23–50). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, H.-J. (2015). A blueprint of the Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization Model. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 3, 3–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations. In H.-J. Schmid (Ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning. How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge (pp. 9–35). Washington: De Gruyter Mouton/American Psychological Association. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10, 209–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sommerer, L., & Smirnova, E. (Eds.) (2020). Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. (2019). Precursors of work on grammaticalization and constructionalization in Directions for Historical Linguistics. In H. C. Boas, & M. Pierce (Eds.), New Directions for Historical Linguistics (pp. 132–152). Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Goethem, K. et al. (Eds.). (2018). Category change from a constructional perspective (Constructional Approaches to Language 20). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiesinger, E. (2019). ‘no volver a repetir lo mismo pa’ tras’: [V para atrás] als Konstruktion im Sprachkontakt. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie 94, 105–125.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zenner, E., Backus, A., & Winter-Froemel, E. (Eds.). (2019). Cognitive contact linguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zenner, E., Heylen, K., & Van de Velde, F. (2018). Most borrowable construction ever! A large-scale approach to contact-induced pragmatic change. Journal of Pragmatics 133, 134–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziegeler, D. (2015). Converging grammars. Constructions in Singapore English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

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
Olguín Martínez, Jesús & Stefan Th. Gries
2025. Similative-pretence constructions in language contact situations. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 12:2 ► pp. 292 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
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

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