Cover not available

In:A Constructional Account of Verb-Forming Suffixation
Jacqueline Laws
[Constructional Approaches to Language 36] 2023
► pp. 237–244

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

References

Published online: 19 September 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.36.refs
Adams, V. (2001). Complex Words in English. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. (2021). “That’s well good”: A Re-emergent Intensifier in Current British English. Journal of English Linguistics, 49(1), 18-38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, S. (1971). The role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language, 7(3), 387-96.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Audring J. (2019). Mothers or sisters? The encoding of morphological knowledge. Word Structure, 12(3), 274–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Axelsson, K. (2018). Canonical tag questions in contemporary British English. In V. Brezina, R. Love & K. Aijmer (Eds.), Corpus Approaches to Contemporary British Speech: Sociolinguistic studies of the Spoken BNC2014 (pp. 96-119). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook (pp. 899–919). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, L. (2001). Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1983). English Word-Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, L., Lieber, R., & Plag, I. (2013). The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BE06: The British English 2006 Corpus. Baker, P. (2007–2008). Available online at [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. and Conrad, S. (2019). Register, Genre, and Style. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, B., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BLOB: The Before LOB 1931 Corpus. Leech, G., Rayson, P. & Smith, N. (2003–2006). Available online at [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, H. C. (2000). Resultative Constructions in English and German. Ph.D. thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford, Ca: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G. (2005). Compounding and derivation: Evidence for Construction Morphology. In W. U. Dressler, D. Kastovsky, O. E. Pfeiffer, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Morphology and its demarcations (pp. 109–132). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Polysemy and Construction Morphology. In F. Moerdijk, A. van Santen & R. Tempelaars (Eds.), Leven met woorden (pp. 355-364). Leiden: Instituut voor Nederlandse Lexicologie.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). The grammar of words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Morphology in Construction Grammar. In T. Hoffmann and G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 255–274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Inheritance and motivation in construction morphology. In N. Gisborne & A. Hippisley (Eds.), Defaults in morphological theory (pp. 18–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). The role of schemas in Construction Morphology. Word Structure, 12(3), 385–395. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowie, J., Wallis, S. and Aarts, B. (2013). Contemporary change in modal usage in spoken British English: mapping the impact of genre. In Arrese, J. I. M., Carretero, M., Hita, J. A. and van der Auwera, J. (Eds.), English modality: core, periphery and evidentiality (pp. 57-94). Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BNCweb ([URL])
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T. & Baayen, H. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Boume, I. Kraemer & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Briscoe, E. J., Copestake, A. & V. de Paiva (1993). Inheritance, defaults and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
British National Corpus, version 4.4 (2018). Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. Retrieved via BNCweb (CQP-Edition) from [URL]
The British National Corpus 2014: User manual and reference guide, version 1.1. Retrieved from [URL]
Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved from [URL]
Cappelle, B. (2006). Particle placement and the case for “allostructions”. Constructions Special Volume 1, 1-28.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, E. V., & Clark, H. H. (1979). When nouns surface as verbs. Language, 55, 767-811. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved from [URL]
Cowie, C. (1998). Diachronic Word-Formation: A Corpus-Based Study of Derived Nominalizations in the History of English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Economical with the truth: Register categories and the functions of -wise viewpoint adverbs in the British National Corpus. ICAME Journal, 30, 5-36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CQPweb. Retrieved from [URL]
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Lexical rules vs. constructions: A false dichotomy. In H. Cuyckens, T. Berg, R. Dirven, & K-U. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Gunter Radden (pp. 49–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Culicover, P. W., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dictionary.com. Retrieved from [URL]
Dixon, R. M. W. (2014). Making new words: Morphological derivation in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downing, P. (1977). On the Creation and Use of English Compound Nouns. Language, 53(4), 810-842. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunning, T. (1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 19, 61-74.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1988). The mechanisms of ‘Construction Grammar.’ In S. Axmaker, A. Jaisser & H. Signmaster (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 35–55). Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C., Kay, P. & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language. 64, 501–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
FLOB: The Freiburg-LOB Corpus. = Mair, C. (1991–1996). Available online at [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
FrameNet. Retrieved from [URL]
Gardner, A. C. (2014). Derivation in Middle English: Regional and Text Type Variation. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.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(3), 327–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(5). 219–24. 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
(2009). The nature of generalization in language. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(1), 93–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013a). Argument Structure Constructions versus Lexical Rules or Derivational Verb Templates. Mind & Language. 28(4). 435-465. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013b). Constructionist approaches. In Hoffmann, T. & G. Trousdale (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 15-31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A., Casenhiser, D., & Sethuraman, N. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(3), 289–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. & Jackendoff, R. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language 80. 532–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2001). Patient arguments of causative verbs can be omitted: the role of information structure in argument distribution. Language Sciences, 23, 503-524. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., Hampe, B. & Schönefeld, D. (2005). Converging evidence: Bringing together experimental and corpus data on the associations of verbs and constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 16. 635–676. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Converging evidence II: more on the association of verbs and constructions. In J. Newman & S. Rice (Eds.), Experimental and Empirical Methods in the Study of Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language (pp. 59-72). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R., & Wilson, R. (1989). The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language, 65, 203–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Groupings. Retrieved from [URL]
Guz, W. (2009). English affixal nominalizations across language registers. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 45(4), pp. 447–471. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hampe, B. (2011). Discovering constructions by means of collostruction analysis: The English denominative construction. Cognitive Linguistics 22(2), 211–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). More on the as-predicative: Granularity issues in the description of construction networks. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 2. 207–234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2013). Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S., Evert, S., Smith, N., Lee, D. & Berglund Prytz, Y. (2008). Corpus Linguistics with BNCweb – A Practical Guide. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T. (2017). Construction Grammars. In Dancygier, B. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 310-329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Construction Grammar: Introduction. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 1-12). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Foundations of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). A parallel architecture perspective on language processing. Brain Research, 1146, 2–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Compounding in the Parallel Architecture and Conceptual Semantics. In R. Lieber and P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding: 105-129. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R., & Audring, J. (2016). Morphological schemas: Theoretical and psycholinguistic issues. The Mental Lexicon, 11(3), 467–493. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D. (1992). An on-line computational model of human sentence interpretation: A theory of the representation and use of linguistic knowledge. Dissertation/Tech. Rep. No. 92/676. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley, Computer Science Division. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaunisto, M. (2007). Variation and Change in the Lexicon: A Corpus-based Analysis of Adjectives in English Ending in -ic and -ical. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kempf, L. (2016). Modeling polyfunctional word formation patterns. A Construction Morphology account of adjectival derivation in the history of German. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 13(2). 140–163.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landis, J. R., Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33. 159–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laws, J. and Ryder, C. (2018). Register variation in spoken British English: The case of verb-forming suffixation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(1). 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laws, J. (2019). Profiling complex word usage in the speech of English preschool children: frequency patterns and transparency characteristics. First Language, 39(6). 593–617. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(in preparation) Grammatical function and verb-forming suffixation.
Leech, G., Hundt, M., Mair, C., & Smith, N. (2009). Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehnert, M. (1971). Reverse dictionary of Present-Day English. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, B. (1985). Lexical semantics in review: an introduction. In B. Levin (Ed.), Lexical semantics in review. Lexicon Project Working Papers, 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Objecthood: An event structure perspective. In S. J. Billings, J. P. Boyle & A. M. Griffith (Eds.), Papers from the 35th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society Part 1 (pp. 223-247). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, B. and Rappaport, M. (1988). Non-event -er nominals: a probe into argument structure. Linguistics, 26, 1067-83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, B. and Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2004). Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). English word-formation processes: Observations, issues, and thoughts on future research. In P. Štekauer & R. Lieber (Eds.), Handbook of Word-Formation (pp. 375-427). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). A lexical semantic approach to compounding. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding (pp. 78-104). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieber, R., & Baayen, H. (1999). Nominalizations in a calculus of lexical semantic representations. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1998 (pp. 175–198). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindsay, M. (2012). Rival suffixes: synonymy, competition, and the emergence of productivity. In A. Ralli, G. E. Booij, S. Scalise & A. Karasimos (Eds.), Morphology and the architecture of grammar: On-line proceedings of the Eighth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (pp. 192–203). Patras: University of Patras.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindsay, M. and M. Aronoff (2013). Natural Selection in Self-Organizing Morphological Systems. In N. Hathout & F. Montermini, Gilles Boyé, and Jesse Tseng (Eds.) Morphology in Toulouse: Selected Proceedings of the 7th Décembrettes (pp. 133-153). Germany: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
LOB: The Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus. Leech, G., Johansson, S. & Hofland, K. (1970–1978). Available online at [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Love, R., Brezina, V., McEnery, T., Hawtin, A., Hardie A. & Dembry, C. (2019). Functional variation in the Spoken BNC2014 and the potential for register analysis. Register Studies 1(2). 296–317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Love, R, & N. Curry (2021). Recent change in modality in informal spoken British English: 1990s–2010s. English Language & Linguistics, 25(3), 537–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lloyd, C. (2011). Semantics and Word Formation. The Semantic Development of Five French Suffixes in Middle English. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina V. & McEnery T. (2017). The Spoken BNC2014: Designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. Special Issue of International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(3), 319-344.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahlberg, M. V. Wiegand, P. Stockwell & A. Hennessey (2019). Speech-bundles in the 19th-century English novel. Language and Literature. 28(4) 326–353. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marchand, H. (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-formation: A Synchronic-diachronic Approach (2nd ed.). Munich: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from [URL]
Oxford English Dictionary (OED online) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from [URL] March 2023.
Palmer, C. C. (2009). Borrowings, Derivational Morphology, and Perceived Productivity in English, 1300–1600. PhD dissertation, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perek, F. & Lemmens, M. (2010). Getting at the meaning of the English at-construction: the case of a constructional split. CogniTextes, 5. Retrieved from [URL]. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perek, F. (2012). Alternation-based generalizations are stored in the mental grammar: Evidence from a sorting task experiment. Cognitive Linguistics. 23, 601–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Rethinking constructional polysemy: The case of the English conative construction. In D. Glynn & J. Robinson (Eds.), Polysemy and Synonymy: Corpus Methods and Applications in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 61-85). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: the acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pinker, S. Lebeaux, D. and Frost, L. A. (1987). Productivity and constraints in the acquisition of the passive. Cognition, 26, 195–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plag, I. (1999). Morphological productivity: structural constraints in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Word-formation in English. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). On the mechanisms of morphological rivalry: A new look at competing verb-deriving affixes in English. In B. Reitz & S. Rieuwerts (Eds.), Anglistentag 1999 Mainz. Proceedings (pp. 63–76). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plag, I., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Baayen, R. H. (1999). Morphological productivity across speech and writing. English Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 209-228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PropBank. Retrieved from [URL]
Prytz Y. B. (2020). Return to the future: Exploring spoken language in the BNC and BNC2014. In E. Jonsson & T. Larsson (Eds.), Voices Past and Present – Studies of Involved, Speech-related and Spoken Texts: In honor of Merja Kytö (pp. 227-246). John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. and Boguraev, B. (1996). Introduction: lexical semantics in context. In J. Pustejovsky & B. Boguraev (Eds.), Lexical Semantics: The Problem of Polysemy (pp. 1-14). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quinion, M. (2002). Ologies and Isms: Word Beginnings and Endings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97-134). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. and Levin, B. (2008). The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics, 44(1), 129–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rautionaho, P. & R. Fuchs (2021). Recent change in stative progressives: a collostructional investigation of British English in 1994 and 2014. English Language & Linguistics, 25(1), 35-60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reference Guide for the British National Corpus (XML Edition). Burnard (2007). Retrieved from [URL]
Rodríguez-Puente, P. (2020). Register variation in word-formation processes: The development of -ity and -ness in Early Modern English. International Journal of English Studies 20(2): 147-169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). Nominalizations in Early Modern English: A cross-register perspective. In E. Seoane & D. Biber (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to register variation. Studies in Corpus Linguistics 103 (pp. 259-289). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, P., Säily, T. & Suomela, J. (2022). New methods for analysing diachronic suffix competition across registers: How -ity gained ground on -ness in Early Modern English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 27(4): 506-528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ryder, M. E. (1999). Bankers and Blue-chippers: An Account of -er Formations in Present-day English. English Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 269–297. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Säily, T. (2011). Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 7(1), 119-141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Säily, T., & Suomela, J. (2017). Types2: Exploring word-frequency differences in corpora. In T. Hiltunen, J. McVeigh, & T. Säily (Eds.) Big and Rich Data in English Corpus Linguistics: Methods and Explorations. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English. Helsinki: VARIENG.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Säily, T., V. González-Díaz & J. Suomela (2018). Variation in the productivity of adjective comparison in present-day English. In V. Brezina, R. Love & K. Aijmer (Eds.), Corpus Approaches to Contemporary British Speech: Sociolinguistic studies of the Spoken BNC2014 (pp. 159–184). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schröder, A. (2011). On the productivity of verbal prefixation in English: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Language in Performance 44. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, H-J. (2011). English Morphology and Word-formation: An Introduction. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneider, G. (2022). Recent changes in spoken British English in verbal and nominal constructions. In S. Flach & M. Hilpert (Eds.), Broadening the Spectrum of Corpus Linguistics: New approaches to variability and change (pp. 173-195). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schulte, M. (2015). The semantics of derivational morphology: A synchronic and diachronic investigation of the suffixes -age and -ery in English. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson, J. (1983). Resultatives. In L. Levin, M. Rappaport and A. Zaenen (Eds.), Papers in lexical-functional grammar pp. 143-157. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. (2003). Collostructions: investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stein, G. (2007). A Dictionary of English Affixes: Their Function and Meaning. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stratton, J. M. (2020). A diachronic analysis of the adjective intensifier well from Early Modern English to Present Day English. Canadian Journal of Linguistics. 65(2), 216-245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stubbs, M. (2002). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szymanek, B. (1988). Categories and categorization in morphology. Lublin: Catholic University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsunoda, T. (1985). Remarks on transitivity. Journal of Linguistics, 21(2), 385-396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. (1967). Linguistics in Philosophy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1988). The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, E. (1981). Argument Structure and Morphology. The Linguistic Review 1, 81–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, A. (2013). Embracing Bayes factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In M. Bieswanger & A. Koll-Stobbe (Eds.), New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability. Language Competence and Language Awareness in Europe. (pp. 3-11). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
WordNet. Retrieved from [URL]
Yao, X. & Collins, P. (2019). Developments in Australian, British, and American English Grammar from 1931 to 2006: An Aggregate, Comparative Approach to Dialectal Variation and Change. Journal of English Linguistics, 47(2) 120-149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue