Cover not available

Review article published In: On the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar
Edited by Rita Finkbeiner
[Constructions and Frames 11:2] 2019
► pp. 171192

Get fulltext from our e-platform
References (59)
References
Antonopoulou, E., & Nikiforidou, K. (2011). Construction Grammar and conventional discourse: A construction-based approach to discoursal incongruity. Journal of Pragmatics, 431, 2594–2609. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ariel, M. (2008). Pragmatics and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Research paradigms in pragmatics. In K. Allan & K. Jaszczolt (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics (pp. 23–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Revisiting the typology of pragmatic interpretations. Intercultural Pragmatics, 13(1), 1–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, K. (1994). Conversational impliciture. Mind & Language, 91, 124–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1995). Standardization vs. Conventionalization. Linguistics and Philosophy, 181, 677–686. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, K., & Harnish, R. M. (1992). How performatives really work: A reply to Searle. Linguistics and Philosophy, 151, 93–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergs, A., & Diewald, G. (2009). Contexts and constructions. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, A. (2017). Contextualism and Semantic Minimalism. In Y. Huang (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G. (2010). Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.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
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances. The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Copestake, A., & Terkourafi, M. (2010). Conventional speech act formulae: from corpus findings to formalization. In P. Kühnlein, A. Benz, & C. Sidner (Eds.), Constraints in Discourse 21 (pp. 125–140). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: 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
Depraetere, I., & Salkie, R. (Eds.). (2017). Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diewald, G. (2011). Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics, 49(2), 365–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, A. (2012). Contexts in interaction: relating pragmatic wastebaskets. In R. Finkbeiner, J. Meibauer, & P. Schumacher (Eds.), What is a context? Linguistic approaches and challenges (pp. 105–127). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1981 [1976]). Pragmatics and the description of discourse. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 143–166). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1996). The pragmatics of constructions. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language. Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp (pp. 53–69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.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, 641, 501–528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, R. (2017). ‘Argumente hin, Argumente her’. Regularity and idiomaticity in German ‘N hin, N her’. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 29(3), 205–258. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). ‘Bla(h), bla(h), bla(h)’. Usage and meaning of a repetitive all-rounder. In A. Urdze (Ed.), Non-prototypical reduplication (pp. 71–89). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, K. (2015). Situation in grammar or in frames? Constructions and Frames, 7(2), 258–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, K., & Stefanowitsch, A. (Eds.). (2008). Konstruktionsgrammatik I. Von der Anwendung zur Theorie. Second edition. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fried, M., & Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 1752–1778. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: a Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago 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
Grice, H. P. (1989). Logic and conversation. In H. P. Grice, Studies in the way of words (pp. 22–40). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gutzmann, D. (2015). Use-conditional meaning. Studies in multidimensional semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2005). Default semantics: Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. (1999). The meaning of ouch and oops. Explorations in the theory of meaning as use. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kay, P. (2004). Pragmatic aspects of constructions. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The Handbook of pragmatics (pp. 675–700). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations. The What’s X Doing Y? construction. Language, 751, 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kay, P., & Michaelis, L. A. (2012). Constructional meaning and compositionality. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics (pp. 2271–2296). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). There-constructions. In G. Lakoff, Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind (pp. 462–585). Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1990). “What, me worry?” – ‘Mad Magazine sentences’ revisited. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 215–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liedtke, F. (2017). Constructions, templates, and pragmatics: Response to Cappelle. In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line (pp. 153–162). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meibauer, J. (2015). On “R” in phrasal compounds – a contextualist approach. Language Typology and Universals (STUF), 68(3), 241–261.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morgan, J. L. (1978). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics (pp. 261–280). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, K. (2009). Constructional analysis. In F. Brisard, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Grammar, meaning and pragmatics (pp. 16–32). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Grammar and discourse: A constructional approach to discourse-based conventionality. Athens: Parousia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, K., & Fischer, K. (2015). On the interaction of constructions with register and genre. Constructions and Frames, 7(2), 137–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Discourse. A prolegomenon. In J.-O. Östman & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction Grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 121–144). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). From Construction Grammar to Construction Discourse … and back. In J. Bücker, S. Günthner, & W. Imo (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik V. Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und Textsorten (pp. 15–43). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paul, I., & Stainton, R. (2006). Really intriguing, that Pred NP! Actes du congrès annuel de l’Association Canadienne de Linguistique 2006. Proceedings of the 2006 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, 1–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Potts, C. (2005). The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Recanati, F. (2010). Truth-conditional pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (2015). Conversational implicatures, reference point constructions, and that noun thing. Linguistics, 53(3), 443–477. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Savva, E. (2017). Subsentential speech from a contextualist perspective. PhD diss., University of Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance. Communication and cognition. Second Edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2012). The mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Terkourafi, M. (2009). On de-limiting context. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 17–42). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. Closs, & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (18)

Cited by 18 other publications

Leclercq, Benoît & Cameron Morin
2025. The Meaning of Constructions, DOI logo
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
2025. Frame Semantics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Construction Grammar,  pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Gillmann, Melitta
2024. Allostructions and stancetaking: a corpus study of the German discourse management constructionsWo/wenn wir gerade/schon dabei sind. Cognitive Linguistics 35:1  pp. 67 ff. DOI logo
Raineri, Sophie
2024. Can context undo constructional meaning? A Construction Grammar study of French en situation de + NOUN. CogniTextes Volume 25 DOI logo
Wiesinger, Evelyn
2024. Semantics and Pragmatics of Spanish Verb-Particle Constructions formed with para atrás ‘back(wards)’. CogniTextes Volume 25 DOI logo
DESAGULIER, GUILLAUME & PHILIPPE MONNERET
2023. Cognitive Linguistics and a Usage‐Based Approach to the Study of Semantics and Pragmatics. In The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics,  pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Foolen, Ad
2023. CONSTRUCTION PRAGMATICS IN A WIDER CONTEXT. AN ADDITION TO WEN (2022). Lege artis. Language yesterday, today, tomorrow  pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
Sommerer, Lotte
2022.  Day to day and night after night . In English Noun Phrases from a Functional-Cognitive Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series, 221],  pp. 363 ff. DOI logo
Willich, Alexander
2022. Introducing Construction Semantics (CxS): a frame-semantic extension of Construction Grammar and constructicography. Linguistics Vanguard 8:1  pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Goria, Eugenio & Francesca Masini
2021. Category-building lists between grammar and interaction. In Building Categories in Interaction [Studies in Language Companion Series, 220],  pp. 73 ff. DOI logo
Kaltenböck, Gunther
2021. Funny you should say that. Constructions and Frames 13:1  pp. 126 ff. DOI logo
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2021. The rise of a concessive “category reassessment” construction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 22:2  pp. 164 ff. DOI logo
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
De Vaere, Hilde, Julia Kolkmann & Thomas Belligh
2020. Allostructions revisited. Journal of Pragmatics 170  pp. 96 ff. DOI logo
Kuzai, Einat
2020. Pragmatic information in constructions. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34  pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Leclercq, Benoît
2020. Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34  pp. 225 ff. DOI logo
Leclercq, Benoît
2024. The Semantics-Pragmatics Interface in Construction Grammar. In Reference Module in Social Sciences, 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