References

Secondary sources

Abraham, Werner
1997Kausativierung und Dekausativierung: Zu Fragen der verbparadigmatischen Markierung in der Germania. In Thomas Birkman, Heinz Klingenberg, Damaris Nübling & Elke Ronnenberger-Sibold (eds.), Vergleichende germanische Philologie und Skandinavistik: Festschrift für Otmar Werner, 13–28. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R.
1992A-morphous morphology. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Avery D.
2007The major functions of the noun phrase. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. I: Clause structure, 132–223. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo
1989 [1972]Historical and comparative linguistics. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 6). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bammesberger, Alfred
1965Deverbative jan-Verba des Altenglischen. Munich: Mikrokopie.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
1983English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1978Passive and transitivity again. Forum Linguisticum 3. 25–28.Google Scholar
Bosworth, Joseph & T. Northcote Toller
1898An Anglo-Saxon dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brewer, William B.
1970Extent of verbal influence and choice between le and lo in Alphonsine prose. Hispanic Review 38. 133–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
1988The development of English aspectual systems: Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel & Elizabeth C. Traugott
2005Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
1985Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. (Typological Studies in Language 9). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cennamo, Michela
2003(In)transitivity and object marking: Some current issues. In Giuliana Fiorentino (ed.), Romance Objects, 49–104. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cennamo, Michela, Thórhallur Eythórsson & Jóhanna Barðdal
2015Semantic and (morpho)syntactic constraints on anticausativization: Evidence from Latin and Old-Norse-Icelandic. Linguistics 53: 4. 677–730. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1989Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2006Transitivity pairs, markedness and diachronic stability. Linguistics 44:2. 303–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
2012Verbs: Aspect and clausal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De la Cruz, Juan M.
1975Old English pure prefixes: Structure and function. Linguistics 145. 47–81.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
2000A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. In Robert M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.) 2000 Changing valency, 30–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David R.
1979Word meaning and Montague grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallut
1995Verbal syntax in the early Germanic languages. PhD Dissertation. Cornell University.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles
1958Review of Fleisch, L’arabe classique. Language 34. 314–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García García, Luisa
2005Germanische Kausativbildung. Die deverbalen jan- Verben im Gotischen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
2012Morphological causatives in Old English: The quest for a vanishing formation. Transactions of the Philological Society 110:1. 122–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, Elly van.
2011Valency changes in the history of English. Journal of Linguistics 1:1. 106–143.Google Scholar
Hamel, A. G. van
1931Gotisch handbook. Haarlem: Tjeenk-Willink.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1993More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds), Causatives and transitivity, 87–111. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment typology. Linguistic Typology 15:3. 535–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015Transitive prominence. In Andrej Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages: Introducing the framework and case studies from Africa and Eurasia, 131–147. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Andrea D. Sims
2010Understanding morphology. 2nd ed. (Understanding Language Series). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Healey, Antonette diPaolo
(ed.) 2008The dictionary of Old English in electronic form A-G. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Healey, Antonette diPaolo, John Price Wilkin & Xi Xiang
(eds.) 2009The dictionary of Old English web corpus. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Hermodsson, Lars
1952Reflexive und intransitive Verba im älteren Westgermanischen. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto
1983The decline of the prefixes and the beginnings of the English phrasal verb. Turku: Turun Yliopisto.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles
1958A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J.
1994Phonogenesis. In William Pagliuca (ed.). Perspectives on grammaticalization, (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 109), 29–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson
1980Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56. 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1982Introduction. In Paul J. Hopper & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Syntax and semantics 15: Studies in transitivity, 1–5. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kemenade, Ans van & Los Bettelou
2003Particles and prefixes in Dutch and English. In Geert E. Booij and Jaap van Marle, (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2003, 79–117. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Krahe, Hans and Wolfgang Meid
1967Germanische Sprachwissenschaft: Wortbildungslehre. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid
2001The Vedic –ya presents. PhD Dissertation. University of Leiden.Google Scholar
2009Valency-changing categories in Indo-Aryan and Indoeuropean: A diachronic typological portrait of Vedic Sanskrit. In Anju Saxena & Åke Viberg (eds.), Multilingualism: Proceedings of the 23rd Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, 75–92. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1977Linguistic Gestalts. Chicago Linguistic Society 13. 236-287.Google Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert
2002Transitivity revisited as an example of a more strict approach in typological research. Folia Linguistica 36. 140–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindemann, Richard J. W.
1970Old English preverbal ge-: Its meaning. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
1968Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej
2015Valency classes and alternations: Parameters of variation. In Andrej Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages: Introducing the framework and case studies from Africa and Eurasia, 73–130. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej & Bernard Comrie
eds. Valency classes in the world’s languages: Introducing the framework and case studies from Africa and Eurasia Berlin De Gruyter
Martín Arista, Javier
2012The Old English prefix ge-: A panchronic reappraisal. Australian Journal of Linguistics 32:4. 411–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Thomas
2015Preverbal ge- in Old and Middle English. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 58. 15–48.Google Scholar
Narogg, Heiko
2009Synchrony and diachrony in transitivity pairs. Paper delivered at ALT 8, Berkeley, July.Google Scholar
Næss, Åshild
2007Prototypical transitivity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna, David Peterson & Jonathan Barnes
2004Transitivising and detransitivising languages. Linguistic Typology 8:2. 149–211.Google Scholar
Ottósson, Kjartan
2013The anticausative and related categories in the Old Germanic languages. In Folke Josephson & Ingmar Söhrman (eds.), Diachronic and typological perspectives on verbs, 329–382. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OED Online
Oxford: Oxford University Press. (25 July, 2018)
Plank, Frans & Adit Lahiri
2009Microscopic and macroscopic typology: Basic valence orientation. A paper delivered at ALT 8, Berkeley, July.Google Scholar
Poppe, Erich
2009Standard Average European and the Celticity of English intensifiers and reflexives: Some considerations and implications. English Language and Linguistics 13:2. 251–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prokosch, Eduard
1939A Comparative Germanic grammar. Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph & Charles Leslie Wrenn
1957An Old English grammar, 2nd edn. London: Methuen. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2008Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringe, Donald A.
2006From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruiz Narbona, Esaúl.
2012The degree of lexicalisation of present day English morphological causatives. MA Dissertation. Universidad de Sevilla.Google Scholar
2014Lexicalisation in present-day English morphological causatives: Its degree and syntactic-semantic effects. In Alejandra Moreno Álvarez & Irene Pérez Fernández (eds.), New alleyways to significance: Interdisciplinary approaches to English studies, 291–310. Palma: Edicions UIB.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1991Aspektstheorie. In Hans-Jürgen Sasse (ed.), Aspektsysteme, 1–33. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft. Universität zu Köln.Google Scholar
Seebold, Elmar
1970Vergleichendes und etymologisches Wörterbuch der germanischen starken Verben. Den Haag: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streitberg, Wilhelm
1891Perfective und imperfective actionsart im Germanischen. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 15. 70–177.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Seiichi
1989The morphosyntax of detransitive suffixes –þ- and –n- in Gothic: A synchronic and diachronic study. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Tesnière, Lucien
1953Equisse d’une syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klinksieck.Google Scholar
1959Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klinksieck.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Tasaku
1985Remarks on transitivity. Journal of Linguistics 21. 385–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valin, Robert D. van.
2005Exploring the syntax-semantic interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Visser, Frederik
1963An historical syntax of the English language. Vol. 1. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Klein, Thomas
2022. Does preverbal Old English ge- have semantic or aspectual force?: evidence from the Dictionary of Old English. Studia Neophilologica 94:1  pp. 87 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 february 2024. 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.