Article published In:
Converging paradigms in contrastive and translation studies: Crosslinguistic corpus perspectives
Edited by Silvia Bernardini and Adriano Ferraresi
[Languages in Contrast 23:2] 2023
► pp. 133160
References
Altenberg, B.
2007The Correspondence of Resultive Connectors in English and Swedish. Nordic Journal of English Studies 6(1): 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benešová, L., Křen, M. and Waclawičová, M.
2013ORAL2013: reprezentativní korpus neformální mluvené češtiny. ÚČNK FF UK, Praha. Available at [URL]
Čermák, F. and Rosen, A.
2012The Case of InterCorp, a Multilingual Parallel Corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 17(3): 411–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Consten, M. and Averintseva-Klisch, M.
2012Tentative Reference Acts? “Recognitional Demonstratives” as Means of Suggesting Mutual Knowledge – or Overriding a Lack of it. Research in Language (10)31: 257–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H.
1999Demonstratives: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006Demonstratives, Joint Attention, and the Emergence of Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 171: 463–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friendly, M.
1994Mosaic Displays for Multi-Way Contingency Tables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 891: 190–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ghesquière, L. and Van de Velde, F.
2011A Corpus-Based Account of the Development of English such and Dutch zulk: Identification, Intensification and (Inter)Subjectivity. Cognitive Linguistics 221: 765–797. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ghesquière, L., Brems, L. and Van de Velde, F.
2014Intersubjectivity and Intersubjectification. Typology and Operationalization. In Intersubjectivity and Intersubjectification, L. Brems, L. Ghesquière and F. Van de Velde (eds), 129–153. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hardie, A.
2012CQPweb – Combining Power, Flexibility and Usability in a Corpus Analysis Tool. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 17(3): 380–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N.
1996Demonstratives in Narrative Discourse: A Taxonomy of Universal Uses. In Studies in Anaphora, B. Fox (ed.), 205–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004Lexicalization and Grammaticization: Opposite or Orthogonal? In What Makes Grammaticalization: A Look from its Fringes and its Components, W. Bisang, N. Himmelmann and B. Wiemer (eds), 21–42. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirschová, M.
1988Netypické případy užití ukazovacích výrazů takový, tak . Naše řeč 71(2): 57–61.Google Scholar
Janebová, M., Martinková, M. and Gast, V.
2023Czech Type Nouns: Evidence from Corpora. In Type Noun Constructions in Slavic, Germanic and Romance Languages: Semantics and Pragmatics on the Move, W. Mihatsch, I. Hennecke, A. Kisiel, A. Kolyaseva, K. Davidse and L. Brems (eds), 571–617. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007bSeeing through Multilingual Corpora. In Corpus Linguistics 25 Years On, R. Facchinetti (ed.), 51–72. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., Rychlý, P., Smrž, P. and Tugwell, D.
2004The Sketch Engine. Proceedings of the Eleventh EURALEX International Congress. Lorient, France, 6–10 July 2004. 105–116.Google Scholar
Komárek, M., Kořenský, J., Petr, J. and Veselková, J.
1986 Mluvnice češtiny 2. Tvarosloví. Prague: Academia.Google Scholar
König, E.
2017The Deictic Identification of Similarity. In Similative and Equative Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Y. Treis and M. Vanhove (eds), 143–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020Beyond Exophoric and Endophoric Uses: Additional Discourse Functions of Demonstratives. In Demonstratives in discourse, Å. Næss, A. Margetts and Y. Treis (eds), 21–42. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
König, E. and Umbach, C.
2018Demonstratives of Manner, of Quality and of Degree: A Neglected Subclass. In Atypical Demonstratives: Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics, M. Coniglio, A. Murphy, E. Schlachter and T. Veenstra (eds), 285–327. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Křížková, H.
1971Zájmena typu ten a takový v současných slovanských jazycích. Slavica slovaca 6(1): 15–30.Google Scholar
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina, V. and McEnery, T.
2017The Spoken BNC2014: Designing and Building a Spoken Corpus of Everyday Conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(3): 319–344.Google Scholar
Mauri, C. and Sansò, A.
2020Ad hoc Categorization and Languaging: The Online Construction of Categories in Discourse. Language Sciences 811: 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svartvik, J.
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Šimík, R.
2016On Pragmatic Demonstratives: The Case of Pragmatic Discourse Anaphora in Czech. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 201, N. Bade, P. Berezovskaya, and A. Schöller (eds), 640–657. Available at [URL]
Traugott, E. C.
2003From Subjectification to Intersubjectification. In Motives for Language Change, Raymond Hickey (ed.), 124–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008Grammaticalization, Constructions and the Incremental Development of Language: Suggestions from the Development of Degree Modifiers in English. In Language Evolution: Cognitive and Cultural Factors, R. Eckardt, G. Jaeger and T. Veenstra (eds), 219–40. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2010(Inter)Subjectivity and (Inter)Subjectification: A Reassessment. In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, K. Davidse, L. Vandelanotte, and H. Cuyckens (eds), 29–71. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uhlířová, L.
1992 Ten nějaký//nějaký ten a případy podobné. Naše řeč 75(5): 247–254.Google Scholar
Umbach, C. and Ebert, C.
2009German Demonstrative so – Intensifying and Hedging Effects. Sprache und Datenverarbeitung 33(1–2): 153–168.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, J. and Coussé, E.
2016 Such and Sådan – The Same but Different. Nordic Journal of English Studies 15(3): 15–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, J. and Sahoo, K.
2020 Such Similatives: A Cross-Linguistic Reconnaissance. Language Sciences 811:1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar