Cover not available
Part of
Aspectuality across Languages: Event construal in speech and gesture
Edited by Alan Cienki and Olga K. Iriskhanova
[Human Cognitive Processing 62] 2018
► pp. 185–203

References

Agrell, S.
1908 Aspektänderung und Aktionsartbildung beim polnischen Zeitworte: ein Beitrag zum Studium der indogermanischen Praeverbia und ihrer Bedeutungsfunktionen. Lunds Universitets Ärsskrift n.S. I, IV.2.Google Scholar
Aksakov, K. S.
1855 O russkikh glagolakh [On Russian verbs]. Moscow: Tipografija L. Stepanovoj Publ.Google Scholar
Aristotle
2006 Metaphysics. Book Theta. Translated with an introduction and commentary by Stephen Makin. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Arutjunova, N. D.
1988 Tipy jazykovykh značenij. Ocenka. Sobytie. Fakt. [Types of linguistic meanings: Evaluation, events, facts]. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar
Bach, E.
1981 On time, tense, and aspect: An essay in English metaphysics. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatic (63–81). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1986 The algebra of events, Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 5–16.Google Scholar
Badiou, A.
2000 Being and event. Translated by L. Burchell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Barlow, M. & Kemmer, S.
(Eds.) 1999  Usage-based models of language . Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L.
1999 Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(4), 577–609.Google Scholar
Bartenieff, I., & Lewis, D.
1980  Body movement. Coping with the environment . New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Bateman, J.
2008  Multimodality and genre. A foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents . Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Beck, S.
2005 There and back again: A semantic analysis. Journal of Semantics, 22, 3–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becker, R., Cienki, A., Bennett, A., Cudina, C., Debras, C., Fleischer, Z., Haaheim, M., Müller, T., Stec, K., & Zarcone, A.
2011 Aktionsarten, speech and gesture. In C. Kirchhof (Ed.), Proceedings of GESPIN2011: Gesture and speech in interaction [[URL]].
Becker, R. B., Ferretti, T. R., & Madden-Lombardi, C. J.
2013 Grammatical aspect, lexical aspect, and event duration constrain the availability of events in narratives. Cognition, 129(2), 212–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Behaghel, O.
1924  Deutsche Syntax. Eine geschichtliche Darstellung. Bd. 2 . Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. F.
1988  Events and their names . Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Co.Google Scholar
Benveniste, E.
1959 Les relations de temps dans le verbe français. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique, 54(1). Reprinted in E. Benveniste 1966, Problèmes de linguistique générale, Vol. 1 (237–250). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bergen, B., & Wheeler, K.
2010 Grammatical aspect and mental simulation. Brain and Language, 112(3), 150–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthoz, A.
1997  Le sens du mouvement . Paris: O. Jacob.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, M.
1989 Event nominalizations: Proposals and problems. In W. Motsch (Ed.), Linguistische Studien (1–73). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Boas, F.
1911/1916  The mind of primitive man . New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Boldyrev, A. V.
1812 Rassuždenie o glagolakh. Trudy obščestva ljubitelej rossijskoj slovesnosti, 2, 65–84.Google Scholar
Bondarko, A. V.
1971 Vid i vremja russkogo glagola [Aspect and tense of Russian verbs]. Мoscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
1983 Principy funkcional’noj grammatiki i voprosy aspektologii [Principles of functional grammar and aspectology]. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Boutet, D.
2001 Approche morpho-dynamique du sens dans la gestuelle conversationnelle. Université de Paris VIII, Paris.Google Scholar
2010 Structuration physiologique de la gestuelle: Modèle et tests. Lidil 42: 77–96.Google Scholar
2015 Conditions formelles d’une analyse de la négation gestuelle. Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Discourse as social practice: Priorities and prospects, 6(717), 116–129.Google Scholar
Brecht, R. D.
1985 The form and function of aspect in Russian. In M. S. Flyer & R. D. Brecht (Eds.), Issues in Russian morphosyntax (9–34). Columbus, OH: Slavica.Google Scholar
Bres, J.
1988 Temps, langage, praxis: de l’imparfait et du passé simple. L’Information Grammaticale 77: 33–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 Un emploi discursif qui ne manque pas de style: l’imparfait en cotexte narratif. In A. Carlier, V. Lagae & C. Benninger (Eds.), Passé et parfait (59–77). Amsterdam/Atlanta: Editions Rodopi.Google Scholar
Bressem, J., & Ladewig, S.
2011 Rethinking gesture phases: Articulatory features of gestural movement? Semiotica, 184(1/4), 53–91.Google Scholar
Bressem, J., & Müller, C.
2014a The family of away-gestures: Negation, refusal, and negative assessment. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (1592–1604). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
2014b A repertoire of German recurrent gestures with pragmatic functions. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem. (Eds.). Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 2 (1575–1591). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, R.
1976 Reference: In memorial tribute to Eric Lenneberg. Cognition, 4, 125–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C.
1993 “Uphill” and “downhill” in Tzeltal. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 3(1), 46–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruner, J.
1991 The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18, 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brunot, F.
1953  La pensée et la langue . Paris: Masson et Colin.Google Scholar
Bühler, K.
1933  Ausdruckstheorie. Das System an der Geschichte aufgezeigt . Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Bulygina, T. V.
1982 K postrojeniju tipologii predikatov v russkom jazyke [Towards building a typology of predicates in Russian]. In O. N. Seliverstova (Ed.), Semantičeskie tipy predikatov (7–85). Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.
2010  Language, Usage, and Cognition . NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L.
2003 Aspect. In W. J. Frawley (Ed.) International encyclopedia of linguistics. Second Edition (157–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Calbris, G.
1990  The semiotics of French gestures . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, G. N.
1980  Reference to kinds in English . New York: Garland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Carter, R. J.
1976 Some linking regularities. In B. Levin & C. Tenny (Eds.), On linking: Papers by Richard Carter, Lexicon Project Working Papers 25, MIT Center for Cognitive Science (1–92). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chisholm, R. M.
1970 Events and propositions, Noûs, 4, 15–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chu, M. & Kita, S.
2008 Spontaneous gestures during mental rotation tasks: Insights into the microdevelopment of the motor strategy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 706–723. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Co-thought and co-speech gestures are generated by the same action generation process. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(2), 257–270.Google Scholar
Cienki, A.
2008 Why study metaphor and gesture? In A. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (5–25). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Gesture and (cognitive) linguistic theory. In R. Caballero Rodriguez & M. J. Pinar Sanz (Eds.), Ways and modes of human communication (45–56). Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha.Google Scholar
2013 Cognitive Linguistics: Spoken language and gesture as expressions of conceptualization. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, S. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1 (182–201). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2016 Cognitive Linguistics, gesture studies, and multimodal communication. Cognitive Linguistics, 27(4), 603–618.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cienki, A., & Müller, C.
2006 Verbal to gestural, and gestural to verbal, metaphoric expression. Presentation at the conference “Researching and Applying Metaphor 6,” Leeds, UK, April 2006.
Clark, H.
1973 Space, time, semantics, and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.). Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (27–63). New York: Academic Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Codman, E. A.
1934  The shoulder: rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa . Boston, MA: Thomas Todd Co.Google Scholar
Cohen, D.
1989  L’aspect verbal . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S.
2003  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences . Mahwah, NJ: LEA Inc.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E.
1976  Das Romanische Verbalsystem . Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
1976  Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1981 Aspect and voice: Some reflections on perfect and passive in tense and aspect. In P. Tedeschi and A. Zaenen (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (65–78). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
1991  Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2012  Verbs: Aspect and causal structure . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A.
2004  Cognitive linguistics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culioli, A.
1999  Pour une linguistique de l’énonciation, Formalisation et opérations de repérage, tome 2 (Collection L’Homme dans la langue, animée par Janine Bouscaren). Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö.
1985  Tense and aspect systems . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Damourette, J., & Pichon, E.
1911–1936  Des mots à la pensée . Paris: D’Artrey.Google Scholar
Davidson, D.
1967 The logical form of action sentences. In N. Rescher (Ed.), The logic of decision and action (81–95). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh PressGoogle Scholar
1969 The individuation of events. In N. Rescher (Ed.), Essays in honour of Carl G. Hempel (216–234). Reidel: Dordrecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davydov, I. I.
1853 Opyt obšesravnitel’noj grammatiki russkogo jazyka. Izd. II otd. Imp. AN [Tentative comparative Russian grammar, published by the Second department of the Imperial Academy of Sciences]. St. Petersburg, Tipografija Imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
De Boer, C.
1947  Syntaxe du français moderne . Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Debras, C.
2013 L’expression multimodale du positionnement interactionnel : étude d’un corpus oral vidéo de discussions sur l’environnement en anglais britannique. Thèse de doctorat en linguistique anglaise, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3.Google Scholar
Declerck, R.
1979 Aspect and the bounded/unbounded (telic/atelic) distinction. Linguistics, 17, 761–794. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, G.
1990 The logic of sense. Transl. by M. Lester with C. Stivale. NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
de Saussure, F.
1959/1916  Course in general linguistics . New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
Desclés, J. -P., & Guentchéva, Z.
1996 Convergences et divergences dans quelques modèles du temps et de l’aspect. In V. Koseska-Toszewa and D. Rytel-Kuc (Eds.), Semantyka a konfrontacja jezykowa, Tom I (23–42). Warsaw: Instytut Slawistyki PAN.Google Scholar
Dickey, S. M., & Kresin, S. C.
2009 Verbal aspect and negation in Russian and Czech. Russian Linguistics, 33(2), 121–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Divjak, D.
2009 Mapping between domains. The aspect-modality interaction in Russian. Russian Linguistics, 33, 249–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. R.
1977 Toward a semantic analysis of verb aspect and the English ‘imperfective’ progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy, 111, 45–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979  Word meaning and Montague Grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ . Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W.
1985 Competing motivations. In J. Haiman (Ed.), Iconicity in syntax (343–366). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, O.
1979 Les lois de discours. Langue française, 42, 21–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dumas, R., Chèze, L., & Verriest, J. -P.
2007 Adjustments to McConville et al. and Young et al. body segment inertial parameters. Journal of Biomechanics, 40(3), 543–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S.
1996 Grammatical form and ‘thinking-for-speaking’ in Mandarin Chinese and English: An analysis based on speech-accompanying gestures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Chicago.Google Scholar
2006 Co-expressivity of speech and gesture: Manner of motion in Spanish, English, and Chinese. In Proceedings of the 27th Berkeley Linguistic Society Annual Meeting (353–370). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A.
1993 Principles and contrasting systems of discourse transcription. In J. A. Edwards & M. D. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research (3–31). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Eggins, S., & Slade, D.
1997  Analysing casual conversation . London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, P.
1986  Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik . Stuttgart: Metzler.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W.
1969 The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
1996 Sequencing in SLA: phonological memory, chunking and points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 91–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmott, C.
1999  Narrative comprehension: A discourse perspective . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Estes, Z., Verges, M., & Barsalou, L. W.
2008 Head up, foot down object words orient attention to the objects’ typical location. Psychological Science, 19(2), 93–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, V., & Green, M.
2006  Cognitive linguistics: An introduction . Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ferretti, T. R., Kutas, M., & McRae, K.
2007 Verb aspect and the activation of event knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 33(1), 182–196.Google Scholar
Filimonova, E. V.
2015 Funkcional’no-semantičeskaja kategorija aspektual’nosti v russkom žestovom jazyke [Functional-semantic category of aspectuality in Russian Sign Language]. Doctoral thesis. Novosibirsk: Novosibirskij gosudarstvennyj texničeskij universitet.Google Scholar
Filip, H.
1999  Aspect, eventuality types and noun phrase semantics . New York & London: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
1988 Regularity and idiomaticiy in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 64(3), 501–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firbas, J.
1971 On the concept of Communicative Dynamism in the theory of Functional Sentence Perspective. Sbornik prací filosofické fakulti brnenské universiti A 19/71, 135–144.Google Scholar
Fitts, P. M.
1954 The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47(6), 381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fleischman, S.
1990  Tense and narrativity: From medieval performance to modern fiction . Austin: U. of Texas.Google Scholar
Fludernik, M.
1996  Towards a “natural” narratology . London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folejewsky, Z.
1953 Otvečat: Otvetit’ – A Point in Russian Aspectology. Word, 9(4), 377–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fortunatov, F. F.
1897 Kritičeskij razbor soč. G. K.Ul’janova “Značenija glagol’nykh osnov v litovsko-slavjanskom jazyke” [Critique of the work “The meanings of the verbal stems in Lithuanian-Slavic language’ by Prof. G. K. Ulianov, Imperial Warsaw University Parts 1–2 (Warsaw, 1891–95)]. St. Petersburg, Tipografija Imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
Gabka, K.
(Ed.) 1985  Morphologie (Die russische Sprache der Gegenwart Bd 2) . Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Galton, A. P.
1984  The logic of aspect: An axiomatic approach . Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gardes-Tamine, J.
1990 La Grammaire, t.2: syntaxe, 4e édition [2010] (éd. 5e, Vol. II). Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Garey, H.
1957 Verbal aspect in French. Language, 33(2), 91–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H.
2007 Introducing cognitive linguistics. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (3–21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Geis, M. L.
1995  Speech acts and conversational interaction . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gennette, G.
1980 Narrative discourse: An essay in method. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr.
2006 Metaphor interpretation as embodied simulation. Mind & Language, 21(3), 434–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Colston, H. L.
1995 The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 347–378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Perlman, M.
2010 Language understanding is grounded in experiential simulations: A response to Weiskopf. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 41, 305–308. . DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J. J.
1979 The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Gladrow, W.
(Ed.) 1998  Russisch im Spiegel des Deutschen: Eine Einführung in den russisch-deutschen und deutsch-russischen Sprachvergleich . Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M.
1997 What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., & Gallese, V.
2012 Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production. Cortex, 48, 905–922. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A., & Kaschak, M.
2002 Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.
1995  Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S.
1997 When gestures and words speak differently. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6(5), 138–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S. & Brentari, D.
2017 Gesture, sign and language: The coming of age of sign language and gesture studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40(e46), 1–30.Google Scholar
Gosselin, L.
1996  Sémantique de la temporalité en français: un modèle calculatoire et cognitif du temps et de l’aspect . Louvain-la-neuve: Duculot.Google Scholar
Greč, N. I.
1827 Praktičeskaja russkaja grammatika [Russian grammar in use]. St. Petersburg: Tipografija Imperatorskogo St.-Peterburgskogo vospitatel’nogo doma Publ.Google Scholar
Grevisse, M.
1953  Le bon usage: cours de grammaire francaise et de langage francaise . Gembloux: Duculot.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J.
1990  Argument structure . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grinsell, T. W.
2012 Russian imperfective imperatives. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16. Vol.1 (279–292). Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Grišina, E. A.
2016 Vid russkogo glagola: žestikuljacionnyj profil’ [Russian verbal aspect and gesticulation]. Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference ‘Dialogue’ (2016), Issue 15, 182–199.Google Scholar
Grundzüge einer deutschen Grammatik
1981 Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Grush, R.
2004 The emulation theory of representation: Motor control, imagery, and perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 377–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guillaume, G.
1964/1951  Langage et science du langage, La représentation du temps dans la langue française (184–207). Paris, Québec: Librairie A. Nizet, Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
1970/1929  Temps et verbe: théorie des aspects, des modes et des temps . Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
1971 Leçons de linguistique 1948–1949, Série A, tome I, Québec: Presses de l’unviersité de Laval / Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Habets, B., Kita, S., Shao, Z., Ozyurek, A., & Hagoort, P.
2011 The role of synchrony and ambiguity in speech – gesture integration during comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 1845–1854. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S.
1982 Events and objects in space and time, Mind, 91, 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
1978  Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning . London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harrison, S.
2009 Grammar, gesture, and cognition: The case of negation in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Michel de Montaigne Bordeaux, France.Google Scholar
Harrison, C., Nuttall, L., Stockwell, P., & Yuan, W.
2014  Cognitive grammar in literature . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrower, M. R.
1936 Some factors determining figure-ground articulation. British Journal of Psychology, 26, 407–424.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F.
1824/1956 The philosophy of history. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M.
1969 Was ist Metaphysik? Frankfurt: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Herman, D.
1999 Toward a socionarratology: New ways of analyzing natural-language narratives. In D. Herman (Ed.). Narratologies: New perspectives on narrative analysis (218–46). Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, J.
2000 On events in linguistic semantics. In J. Higginbotham, F. Pianesi, & A. C. Pianesi (Eds.), Speaking of events (49–80). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, J. H., & Mannheim, B.
1992 Language and world view. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21, 381–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoekstra, T.
1986 Deverbalization and inheritance. Linguistics, 24(3), 549–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holt, J.
1943 Etudes d’aspect. (Acta Jutlandica, 15–2.) Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J.
1979 Some observations on the typology of focus and aspect in narrative. Studies in Language, 3, 37–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W.
2008 Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(3), 495–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hühn, P.
2009  Handbook of narratology . Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hymes, D.
1974 Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Imbs, P.
1960  L’Emploi des temps verbaux en français moderne. Essai de grammaire descriptive . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Iriskhanova, O. K.
1996 Semantika sobytijnykh imjon sušestvitel’nykh v jazyke i reči [Semantics of the nouns of events in language and speech]. Doctoral thesis. Moscow: MSLU Publ.Google Scholar
2004 O lingvokreativnoj dejatel’nosti čeloveka: otglagol’nye imena [On linguistic creativity: deverbal nouns]. Moscow: VTI Publ.Google Scholar
In press. Kognitivnyj rezonans i ego verbal’nye i neverbal’nye projavlenija [Cognitive resonance and its verbal and non-verbal instantiations].
Iriskhanova, O. K. & Prokof’eva, O. N.
In press. Fokusirovanie v ustnom opisatel’nom diskurse: Analiz vizual’noj percepcii, reči i žestov [Focusing in oral descriptive discourse: An analysis of visual perception, speech, and gestures].
Isačenko, A. V.
1960 Grammatičeskij stroj russkogo jazyka v sopostavlenii s slovackim. Čast’ vtoraja: morfologija [Grammatical system in Russian as opposed to Slovak. Part 2: Morphology]. Bratislava: Izdatel’stvo akademii nauk.Google Scholar
Ivanova, P.
1961 Vid i vremja v sovremennom anglijskom jazyke [Aspect and tense in contemporary English]. Leningrad: LGU Publishers.Google Scholar
Jäger, G., & Blutner, R.
2000 Against lexical decomposition in syntax. In Proceedings of IATL 15, 113–137. University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Janda, L.
2004 A metaphor in search if a source domain: the categories of Slavic aspect. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 471–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Aspectual clusters on Russian verbs. Studies in Language, 31, 607–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janda, L., & Lyashevskaya, O.
2011 Grammatical profiles and the interaction of lexicon with aspect, tense, and mood in Russian. Cognitive Linguistics, 22(4), 719–763. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O.
1924  The philosophy of grammar . London: George Allen and Anwin.Google Scholar
Johnson, M.
1987  The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kelter, S., Kaup, B., & Claus, B.
2004 Representing a described sequence of events: a dynamic view of narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 451.Google Scholar
Kendon, A.
1988 How gestures can become like words. In F. Poyatos (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives in nonverbal communication (131–141). Toronto: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
2004  Gesture: Visible action as utterance . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenny, A.
1963  Action, emotion and will . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Kerr, N. L.
1998 HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kibrik, A. A.
2003 Analiz diskursa v kognitivnoj perspektive [Discourse analysis from a cognitive point of view]. Doctoral thesis. Мoscow: Moscow State University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, J.
1993  Supervenience and mind: Selected philosophical essays . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A.
1978 Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kita, S.
1993 Language and thought interface: a study of spontaneous gestures and Japanese mimetics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Chicago.Google Scholar
1997 Two-dimensional semantic analysis of Japanese mimetics. Linguistics, 35, 379–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kita, S., & Özyürek, A.
2003 What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal? Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 16–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, W.
2000 An analysis of the German perfect. Language, 76, 358–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 How time is encoded. In W. Klein & P. Li (Eds.), The expression of time (39–82). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knox, J.
2007 Visual-verbal communication on online newspaper home pages. Visual Communication, 6(1), 19–36.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koerner, E.
1977 The Humboldtian trand in linguistics. Cahiers Linguistiques d’Ottawa, 5, 22–40.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaya-Tamm, M.
1993  Nominalizations . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koschmieder, E.
1928/29 Studien zum slavischen Verbalaspekt. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung, 55, 208–304 (part 1) and 56, 78–105 (part II).Google Scholar
1929  Zeitbezug und Sprache. Ein Beitrag zur Aspekt- und Tempusfrage . Leipzig/Berlin: Teubner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, G.
2010  Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T.
1996  Reading images: The grammar of visual design . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Krifka, M.
1992 Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. Sag & A. Szabolcsi (Eds.), Lexical matters (29–53). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
1998 The origins of telicity. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and grammar (197–235). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krongauz, M. A.
1998 Pristavki i glagoly v russkom jazyke: semantičeskaja grammatika [Prefixes and verbs in Russian: A semantic grammar]. Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury.Google Scholar
Laban, R., & Lawrence, F. C.
1947  Effort . London: Macdonald and Evans.Google Scholar
Labov, W.
1972 The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov (Ed.), Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular (354–396). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
2001  Principles of linguistic change. Vol 2. Social factors . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2010  Principles of linguistic change. Vol 3. Cognitive and cultural factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, W., & Waletzky, J.
1967 Narrative analysis. In J. Helm (Ed.). Essays on the verbal and visual arts (12–44). Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Ladewig, S. H.
2010 Beschreiben, auffordern und suchen – Varianten einer rekurrenten Geste. Sprache und Literatur, 41(1), 89–111.Google Scholar
2011 Putting the cyclic gesture on a cognitive basis. CogniTextes 6. [URL]DOI logo
2014a The cyclic gesture. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body-language-communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 2 (1605–1618). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
2014b Recurrent gestures. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem. (Eds.). Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 2 (1558–1574). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Ladewig, S. H. & Bressem, J.
2013 A linguistic perspective on the notation of gesture phases. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (Eds.), Body-language-communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (1060–1079). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
1993 The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, 2nd Edition (202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
1980  Metaphors we live by . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Laleko, O.
2010 The syntax-pragmatics interface in language loss: Covert restructuring of aspect in heritage Russian. Doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Landolf, J. P.
2006 Re(de)fining language proficiency in light of the concept of ‘languaculture’. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (72–94). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
1987  Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites . Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1988 A usage-based model. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (127–161). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
1990  Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
1991  Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive application . Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
2000  Grammar and conceptualization . Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2001 Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 143–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
2007 Cognitive Grammar. In D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (421–462). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2008  Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langlotz, A.
2015  Creating social orientation through language . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le Guen, O.
2011 Modes of pointing to existing spaces and the use of frames of reference. Gesture, 11(3), 271–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, V.
2009 Aspekt und Tempus im Slavsichen. In W. Kempgen, P. Kosta, T. Berger, & K. Gutschmidt (Eds.), Die slavischen Sprachen/The Slavic languages (526–556). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Leiss, E.
1992  Die Verbalkategorien des Deutschen. Ein Beitrag zur Theorie der sprachlichen Kategorisierung . Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Levin, B., & Rapoport, T. R.
1988 Lexical subordination. Papers from the 24th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 275–89.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C.
1996 Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslinguistic evidence. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (109–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. K.
1986 Events. Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2 (241–269). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Linde, C.
1999 The transformation of narrative syntax into institutional memory. Narrative Inquiry, 9(1), 139–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Linell, P.
2005  The written language bias in linguistics . London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lis, M., & Navarretta, C.
2013 Classifying the form of iconic hand gestures from the linguistic categorization of co-occurring verbs. In Proceedings from the 1st European Symposium on Multimodal Communication, University of Malta, Valletta, October 17–18 2013.Google Scholar
Liverence, B. M., & Scholl, B. J.
2012 Observation: Discrete events as units of perceived time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(3), 549–554.Google Scholar
Lomonosov, M. V.
1951 Rossijskaja grammatika [Russian grammar]. Lomonosov M. V. Polnoje sobranie sočinenii. [Lomonosov M. V. Complete collection of works]. T.7: Trudy po filologii 1739–1758 gg. [Vol. 7: Works in philology 1739–1758] (389–578). Moscow & Leningrad: Academy of Sciences of the USSR.Google Scholar
Lotman, Ju. M.
1977  The structure of the artistic text . Ann Arbor: U of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Louwerse, M. M., Hutchinson, S., Tillman, R., & Recchia, G.
2015 Effect size matters: The role of language statistics and perceptual simulation in conceptual processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(4), 430–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucy, J. A.
1992  Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J.
1977  Semantics. Vo1. 2 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacConaill, M. A.
1948 The movements of bones and joints. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume, 30B(2), 322–326.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Madden, C. J., & Zwaan, R.
2003 How does verb aspect constrain event representations? Memory & Cognition, 31(5), 663–672. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magliano, J. P., & Schleich, M. C.
2000 Verb aspect and situation models. Discourse Processes, 29, 83–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malaia, E., & Wilbur, R. B.
2012 Kinematic signatures of telic and atelic events in ASL predicates. Language and Speech, 55(3), 407–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M.
2007 The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940–967.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, R.
1971 Temps et aspect. Essai sur l’emploi des temps narratifs en moyen français, Paris: Editions Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Maslov, J. S.
1959 Glagol’nyj vid v sovremennom bolgarskom literaturnom jazyke [Aspect in modern standard Bulgarian]. In S. B. Bernshtein (Ed.), Voprosy grammatiki bolgarskogo literaturnogo jazyka (157–312). Moscow: Izd. AN SSSR.Google Scholar
1984 Očerki po aspektologii [Essays on aspectology]. Leningrad: Leningrad State University.Google Scholar
2004 Izbrannye trudy. Aspectologija. Obščee jazykoznanie [Selected works. Aspectology. General linguistics]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury.Google Scholar
Mathesius, V.
1938 O konkurenci vidů v českém vyjadřování slovesném [On the competition of aspects in Czech verbal expression]. Slovo a Slovesnost, 4, 193–202.Google Scholar
Matkhanova, I. P.
2015 Russkie vyskazyvanija s glagolami obraza žizni: osobennosti aspektual’noj kharakteristiki [Russian statements with lifestyle verbs: special traits of an aspectual nature]. Acta linguistica petropolitana, XI (I), 83–103.Google Scholar
McNeill, D.
1992  Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) 2000  Language and gesture . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Aspects of aspect. Gesture, 3(1), 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005  Gesture and thought . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Imagery for speaking. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
McNeill, D., & Duncan, S.
2000 Growth points in thinking-for-speaking. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (141–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meillet, A., & Vendryes, J.
1924  Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques . Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Mikhaylova, A.
2012 Aspectual knowledge of high proficiency L2 and heritage speakers of Russian. Heritage Language Journal, 9(1), 50–69.Google Scholar
Montague, R.
1969 On the nature of certain philosophical entities. The Monist, 53, 159–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrow, D. G., Greenspan, S. L., & Bower, G. H.
1987 Accessibility and situation models in narrative comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26(2), 165–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrow, D. G., Bower, G. H., & Greenspan, S. L.
1989 Updating situation models during narrative comprehension. Journal of Memory and language, 28(3), 292–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mounin, G.
1974  Dictionnaire de la linguistique . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Mourelatos, A. P. D.
1981; Events, processes and states, In P. Tedeschi & A. Zaenen (Eds.) Syntax and semantics (191–212). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Müller, C.
1994 Semantic structure of motional gestures and lexicalization patterns in Spanish and German descriptions of motion events. In K. Beals et al. (Eds.), CLS 30. Papers from the 30th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Vol 1: The main session (281–295). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1998a Beredte Hände. Theorie und Sprachvergleich redebegleitender Gesten. In T. Noll & C. Schmauser (Eds.), Körperbewegungen und ihre Bedeutungen (21–44). Berlin: Berlin Verlag.Google Scholar
1998b Iconicity and gesture. In S. Santi, I. Guaïtella, C. Cavé, & G. Konopczynski (Eds.), Oralité et gestualité: Communication multimodale et interaction (321–328). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
1998c  Redebegleitende Gesten. Kulturgeschichte – Theorie – Sprachvergleich . Berlin: Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz.Google Scholar
2000 Zeit als Raum. Eine kognitiv-semantische Mikroanalyse des sprachlichen und gestischen Ausdrucks von Aktionsarten. In E. W. B. Hess-Lüttich & H. W. Schmitz (Eds.), Botschaften verstehen. Kommunikationstheorie und Zeichenpraxis. Festschrift für Helmut Richter (211–228). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2008  Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Wie Gesten bedeuten. Eine kognitiv-linguistische und sequenzanalytische Perspektive. Sprache und Literatur, 41(1), 37–68.Google Scholar
2014a Gestures as “deliberate expressive movement”. In M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (Eds.), From gesture in conversation to visible action as utterance (127–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2014b Gestural modes of representation as techniques of depiction. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body-language-communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (1687–1702). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
2015 Using gestures with speech: Variable cognitive-semantic and pragmatic relations. MSLU Vestnik, 6(717), 452–466.Google Scholar
Müller, C., Bressem, J., & Ladewig, S. H.
2013b Towards a grammar of gestures: A form-based view. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, (707–732). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S., McNeill, D., & Teßendorf, S.
(Eds.) 2013 Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S., McNeill, D., & Bressem, J.
(Eds.) 2014 Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 2. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C., Ladewig, S. H., & Bressem, J.
2013a Gestures and speech from a linguistic perspective: A new field and its history. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, (29–55). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C., & Tag, S.
2010 The dynamics of metaphor: Foregrounding and activating metaphoricity in conversational interaction. Cognitive Semiotics, 6, 85–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov, V. P.
(Ed.) 1988  Typology of resultative constructions . Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nekrasov, N. P.
1865 O značenii form russkogo glagola [On the meaning of the forms of the Russian verb]. St. Petersburg: Tipografija I. Paul’sona i Ko.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. R.
2000  Conversational narrative . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Núñez, R., & Sweetser, E.
2006 With the future behind them: convergent evidence from language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30, 1–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olsen, M. B.
1997  A semantic and pragmatic model of lexical and grammatical aspect . New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Open Science Collaboration
2012 An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 657–660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), [DOI logo].Google Scholar
Özyürek, A.
2001 What do speech-gesture mismatches reveal about language specific processing? A comparison of Turkish and English. In C. Cavé, I. Guaitella, & S. Santi (Eds.), Oralité et Gestualité: Interactions et Comportements Multimodaux dans la Communication: Actes du Colloque ORAGE 2001 (567–581). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Özyürek, A., & Kita, S.
1999 Expressing manner and path in English and Turkish: Differences in speech, gesture, and conceptualization. In J. Hahn & S. C. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty first annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (507–512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Allen, S., Brown, A., Furman, R., & Ishizuka, T.
2008 Development of cross-linguistic variation in speech and gesture: motion events in English and Turkish. Developmental Psychology, 44(4), 1040–1054. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Allen, S., Furman, R., & Brown, A.
2005 How does linguistic framing of events influence co-speech gestures? Insights from cross-linguistic variations and similarities. Gesture, 5, 215–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padučeva, E. V.
1996 Semantičeskie issledovanija. Semantika vremeni v russkom jazyke. Semantika narrativa [Semantic studies. Semantics of time and aspect in Russian. Semantics of narrative]. Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury.Google Scholar
Paillard, P. J.
1974 Le traitment des informations spatiales. In Symposium de l’APSLF, (Bruxelles) (7–54). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Parisse, C., & Morgenstern, A.
2012 The unfolding of the verbal temporal system in French children’s speech between 18 and 36 months. Journal of French Language Studies, 22(1), 95–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parrill, F.
2012 Interactions between discourse status and viewpoint in co-speech gesture. In B. Dancygier & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (97–112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parrill, F., Bergen, B., & Lichtenstein, P.
2013 Grammatical aspect, gesture, and conceptualization: Using co-speech gesture to reveal event representations. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(1), 135–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parsons, T.
1990, Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Partee, B. H.
1999 Nominal and temporal semantic structure: Aspect and quantification. In E. Hajičová, T. Hoskovec, O. Leška, & P. Sgall (Eds.). Prague Linguistic Circle Papers, Vol. 3 (91–108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavskij, G. P.
1842 Filologičeskie nabljudeniia nad sostavom russkogo jazyka. Rassuždenie III. O glagole [Philological observations on the Russian language. Contemplation III: On the verbs]. St. Petersburg, Tipografija Imperatorskoj Akademii nauk.Google Scholar
Petrukhina, E. V.
2000 Osobennosti uporeblenija vidov v povestvovatel’nyh tekstakh (na materiale russkogo i zapadnoslavjanskikh tekstakh) [Specifics of aspect use in narrative texts (based on Russian and Western Slavic texts)]. In А. V. Bondarko & С. А. Šubik (Eds.). Problemy funkcional’noj grammatiki: kategorii morfologii i sintaksisa [Issues in functional grammar: morphological and syntactic categories in utterances] (52–66). Saint Petersburg: Nauka.Google Scholar
2009 Russkij glagol: kategorii vida i vremeni. [Russian verb: Aspect and tense]. Moscow: MAKS Press.Google Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S.
2004 Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plungjan, V. А.
1989 K opredeleniju rezul’tativa (universal’na li svjaz’ rezul’tativa i predel’nosti?) [On defining resultative: Is the link between resultative and boundedness universal?]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija, 6, 55–63.Google Scholar
Plungjan, V. A.
2001 Antirezul’tativ: do i posle rezul’tata [Antiresultative: Before and after the result. In V. A. Plungian (Ed.), Issledovanija po teorii grammatiki. I: Glagol’nye kategorii [Studies in the theory of grammar. Vol. I: Verbal categories] (50–88). Moscow: Russkie slovari.Google Scholar
Plungjan, V., Gusev, V., & Urmančieva, A.
(Eds.) 2008 Grammatičeskie kategorii v diskurse [Grammatical categories in discourse]. Issledovanija po teorii grammatiki 4 [Studies in the theory of grammar 4]. Moscow: Gnozis.Google Scholar
Pollak, H.
1967 Problematisches in der Lehre von Aktionsart und Aspekt. Zeitschrift für Deutsche Philologie, 86, 397–420.Google Scholar
Potebnja, A. A.
1874/1977 Iz zapisok po russkoi grammatike [From the notes on Russian grammar]. T.IV. Vyp.II: Glagol [Vol. IV. Issue II: Verbs]. Moscow: Prosveščenie.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J.
1991 The syntax of event structure. Cognition, 41, 47–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. V. O.
1950 Identity, ostension and hyposthasis. Journal of Philosophy, 47, 621–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1970  Philosophy of logic . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Quinton.Google Scholar
Quinton, A.
1979 Objects and events. Mind, 88, 197–214.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, F.
1927/1990 Facts and propositions. In D. H. Mellor (Ed.), Philosophical papers. F. P. Ramsey (34–51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Referovskaja, E. A.
1948 Kategorija vida vo francuzskom glagole [The category of aspect in the French verb]. Izv. Ak. Nauk, Otd. Lit. i Jaz, 7(5), 445–456.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H.
1947  Elements of symbolic logic . New York: Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
Reid, W.
1976 The quantitative validation of a grammatical hypothesis: The Passé Simple and the Imparfait. In J. A. Kegl et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, Cambridge, Massachusetts (315–333). Cambridge, MA: North East Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Reilly, J., Klima, E., & Bellugi, U.
1990 Once more with feeling: Affect and language in atypical populations. Development and Psychopathology, 2(4), 367–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Renkewitz, F., & Müller, S.
2013 Replication of Study 1 by Estes, Z., Verges, M., & Barsalou, L. W. (Psychological Science, 2008). Retrieved from [URL] [PDF file].
Ricoeur, P.
1981  Time and narrative . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rossi, A.
1982  The architecture of the city . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rothstein, S.
2003 Secondary predication and aspectual structure. In E. Lang, C. Maienborn, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Modifying adjuncts (553–590). Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004  Structuring events: A study in the semantics of lexical aspect . Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rozental’, D. E., & Telenkova, M. A.
1976 Slovar’-spravočnik linguističeskikh terminov [Dictionary of linguistic terms]. Moscow: Prosveščenie.Google Scholar
Rozwadowska, B.
1997  Towards a unified theory of nominalizations: External and internal eventualities . Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Universytetu Wrocławskiego.Google Scholar
Rubin, E.
1921  Visuell wahrgenommene Figuren. Studien in psychologischer Analyse . Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E.
1977 Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In D. LaBerge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension (265–303). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Russell, B.
1914  Our knowledge of the external world . London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Russkaya grammatika
[Russian Grammar] 1980 Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Ryle, G.
1949  The concept of mind . London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.
1995 Lectures on Conversation: Volumes 1 & 2. (One volume ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandström, G.
1993 When-clauses and the temporal interpretation of narrative discourse. Ph.D. thesis, University of Umeå.Google Scholar
Sapir, E.
1921/1949  Language: An introduction to the study of speech . New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company.Google Scholar
Sasse, H. -J.
(Ed.) 1991a Aspektsysteme. Arbeitspapier Nr.14 NF. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
1991b Aspect and Aktionsart: A reconciliation. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 6, 31–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishments, Achievements, or just Non-progressive State? Arbeitspapier Nr.40 NF. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
1996 Narrative as self-portrait: Sociolinguistic constructions of identity. Language in Society, 25, 167–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schogt, H. G.
1964 L’aspect verbal en français et l’élimination du passé simple. Word, 20(1), 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, J.
1969  Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W.
1949  The mathematical theory of communication . Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, L.
(Ed.) 2014  The Routledge handbook of embodied cognition . London: Routledge.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shklovsky, V.
1921/1965 Sterne’s Tristram Shandy: Stylistic Commentary. In L. T. Lemon & M. J. Reis (ed. and trans.), Russian formalist criticism: Four essays (25–57). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalan, C.
1983 Tense and aspect in oral Spanish narrative: Context and meaning. Language, 59(4), 760–780. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U.
2011 False-positive psychology undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slavin, S.
2003–2017 PsyScript (Version 2.3.0) [Computer software]. Lancaster University. Retrieved March 15, 2013. Available from [URL]
Slobin, D.
1987 Thinking for speaking. In J. Aske, N. Beery, L. Michaelis, & H. Filip (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (435–445). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1996 From “thought to language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. Gumperz & E. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I.
2003 Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sloetjes, H., & Wittenburg, P.
2008 Annotation by category – ELAN and ISO DCR. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008) [URL].
Smith, C.
1991/1997  The parameter of aspect . Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smotritskij, M. G.
1619 Grammatiki slavenskija pravilnoje sintagma [Slavonic grammar with correct syntax]. Jevje.Google Scholar
Stelma, J. H., & Cameron, L. J.
2007 Intonation units in spoken interaction: Developing transcription skills. Text & Talk, 27(3), 361–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, J.
2009  Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swallow, K. M., Zacks, J. M., & Abrams, R. A.
2009 Event boundaries in perception affect memory encoding and updating. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(2), 236–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šabes, V. Ja
1989 Sobytie i tekst [Event and text]. Moscow: Vysšaja škola.Google Scholar
Šafranov, S. N.
1852 O vidakh russkikh glagolov v sintaksičeskom otnošenii [On the aspects of Russian verbs from a syntactic point of view]. Moscow: Universitetskaja tipografija.Google Scholar
Šakhmatov, A. A.
1941 Sintaksis russkogo jazyka [Russian syntax]. Leningrad. Učpedgiz.Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
1975 Figure and ground in complex sentences. In Proceedings of the first annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (419–430). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1978 Figure and ground in complex sentences. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human language, vol. 4, Syntax (625–49). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1985a Force dynamics in language and thought. In Papers from the twenty-first regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (293–337). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1985b Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 3 (57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988a Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988b The relation of grammar to cognition. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (165–205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 Fictive motion in language and “ception”. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (211–276). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000a Figure and ground in language. In L. Talmy, Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1, Concept structuring systems (311–344). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000b The relation of grammar to cognition. In L. Talmy, Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1, Concept structuring systems (21–96). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000c  Toward a cognitive semantics. Volume I: Concept structuring systems . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D.
1989  Talking voices. Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tesnière, L.
1976/1959  Les éléments de syntaxe structurale . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Timberlake, A.
2004  A reference grammar of Russian . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Treisman, M.
1963 Temporal discrimination and the indifference interval: Implications for a model of the “internal clock.” Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 77(13), 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trudy Aspektologičeskogo Seminara filologičeskogo fakul’teta MGU
[Proceedings from the Workshop on Aspectology of the Department of Phiology, MGU] 1997 MGU: Izd. Moskovskogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Uljanov, G. K.
1895 Značenia glagol’nykh osnov v litovsko-slavjanskom jazyke [The meanings of verb roots in the Lithuanian-Slavic language]. Warsaw: Tipografija Imperatorskoj Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
UNESCO
2017 Statistics on Literacy. Retrieved from [URL].
Ungerer, F.
2007 Iconic text strategies: Path, sorting and weighting, kaleidoscope. In E. Tabakowska, C. Ljungberg, & O. Fischer (Eds.), Insistent images (229–246). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, T. A.
1980 Macrostructures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van Dijk, T. A.
2009  Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van ’t Veer, A. E., & Giner-Sorolla, R.
2016 Pre-registration in social psychology – A discussion and suggested template. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 2–12.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Z.
1957 Verbs and times. Philosophical Review, 66, 143–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1967  Linguistics in philosophy . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Verhagen, A.
2007 Construal and perspectivization. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (48–81). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Verkuyl, H.
1972 On the compositional nature of the aspects. Volume 15, Foundations of Language Supplementary Series. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1993  A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vet, C.
1980  Temps, aspect et adverbes de temps en français contemporain . Genève: Librairie Droz.Google Scholar
Vinogradov, V. V.
1938/1972 Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Grammatičeskoe učenie o slove [Modern Russian. Grammatical theory of the word]. Moscow: Učpedgiz/Vysšaja Škola.Google Scholar
Viviani, P., & Flash, T.
1995 Minimum-jerk, two-thirds power law, and isochrony: converging approaches to movement planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(1), 32.Google Scholar
von Humboldt, W.
1820 Über das vergleichende Sprachstudium in Beziehung auf die verschiedenen Epochen der Sprachentwicklung. In W. von Humboldt 1963, Schriften zur Sprachphilosophie, Werke Bd. 3, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
von Stechow, A.
1996 The different readings of wieder ‘again’: A structural account. Journal of Semantics, 13, 87–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M., & Schmiedtová, B.
2012 How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance. Linguistics, 50(4), 833–867. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Carroll, M. & Klein, W.
2009 New perspectives in analyzing aspectual distinctions across languages. In W. Klein & P. Li (Eds.), The expression of time (195–216). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vostokov, A.
1867 Kh. Russkaja grammatika [Russian grammar]. 2nd ed. Moscow: D. F.Fedorov.Google Scholar
Vygotskij, L.
1934/1996 Myšlenie i rech’ [Thinking and speech]. Moscow: Labirint. Published in 1962 as Thought and language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wagemans, J., Elder, J. H., Kubovy, M., Palmer, S. E., Peterson, M. A., Singh, M., & von der Heydt, R.
2012 A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1172–1217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. A.
2010 Affairs of state: Defining and coding stativity in English and English-based creole. In J. A. Walker (Ed.), Aspect in grammatical variation (95–110). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallace, S.
1982 Figure and ground: The interrelationships of linguistic categories. In P. J. Hopper (Ed.), Tense-Aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics (201–223). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, H.
1964/1973  Tempus: besprochene und erzählte Welt . Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. French translation : Le Temps. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Wertheimer, M.
1923 Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt, II. Psychologische Forschung, 4, 301–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, A. N.
1921  An enquiry into the principles of natural knowledge . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1929  Process and reality: An essay in cosmology . New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L.
1956 Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (J. B. Carroll, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Wilmet, M.
1970 Le système de l’indicatif en moyen français. Etude des « tiroirs » de l’indicatif dans les farces, sotties et moralités françaises des XVe et XVIe siècles, Genève: Droz.Google Scholar
2003 Grammaire critique du français, 3e éd. Bruxelles: Duculot.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N.
1978 A feature of performed narrative: The conversational historical present. Language and Society, 7, 215–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979 The conversational historical present alternation. Language, 55(1), 168–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, S.
In preparation. Transitivity, multimodality, and gesture. PhD dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Yap, D. F., & Casasanto, D.
2016 Semantics of beat gestures. Paper presented at the 7th annual conference of the International Society for Gesture Studies, Paris.
Zacks, J. M.
2004 Using movement and intentions to understand simple events. Cognitive Science, 28(6), 979–1008. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zacks, J. M., & Swallow, K. M.
2007 Event segmentation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 80–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zacks, J. M., & Tversky, B.
2001 Event structure in perception and conception. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 3–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zemskaja, Е. А.
2004 Russkaja razgovornaja reč’: Lingvističeskij analiz i problemy obučenia [Russian oral speech: Linguistic analysis and methods of teaching]. Moscow: Flinta.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R.
2009 Mental simulation in language comprehension and social cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(7), 1142–1150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C.
1995 The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6(5), 292–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A.
1998 Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, J.
2006  Event shape: Paths in the semantics of verbs . Ms. Radboud University: Nijmegen.Google Scholar