Article published In:
Bridging the Methodological Divide: Linguistic and psycholinguistic approaches to formulaic language
Edited by Stefanie Wulff and Debra Titone
[The Mental Lexicon 9:3] 2014
► pp. 371376
References (13)
Cacciari, C., & Tabossi, P. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory & Language, 271, 668–683. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, V., Bergen, B.K., & Zinken, J. (2007). The cognitive linguistics enterprise: An overview. In Benjamin K. Bergen, Vyvyan Evans & Jörg Zinken (Eds.), The cognitive linguistics reader (pp. 2–36). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. (2006). Methodology in cognitive linguistics. In Gitte Kristiansen, Michael Achard, René Dirven & Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives (pp. 21–49). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.W. Jr. (2007). Why cognitive linguistics should care more about empirical methods. In Mónica González-Márquez, Irene Mittelberg, Seana Coulson & Michael J. Spivey (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp. 2–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W., Nayak, N.P., & Cutting, J.C. (1989). How to kick the bucket and not decompose: Analyzability and idiom processing. Journal of Memory & Language, 281, 576–593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Libben, M.R., & Titone, D.A. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition, 361, 1103–1121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, G. (1978). The pragmatics of reference. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics.Google Scholar
Titone, D., & Connine, C.M. (1999). On the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 311, 1655–1674. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2012). What do we (think we) know about formulaic language? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wulff, S. (2008). Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. London/New York: 
Continuum.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Zang, Chuanli, Shuangshuang Wang, Xuejun Bai, Guoli Yan & Simon P. Liversedge
2024. Parafoveal processing of Chinese four-character idioms and phrases in reading: Evidence for multi-constituent unit hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language 136  pp. 104508 ff. DOI logo
Zang, Chuanli, Zhichao Zhang, Manman Zhang, Federica Degno & Simon P. Liversedge
2023. Examining semantic parafoveal-on-foveal effects using a Stroop boundary paradigm. Journal of Memory and Language 128  pp. 104387 ff. DOI logo
Schmitt, Norbert, Suhad Sonbul, Laura Vilkaitė‐Lozdienė & Marijana Macis
2019. Formulaic Language and Collocation. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Zang, Chuanli
2019. New Perspectives on Serialism and Parallelism in Oculomotor Control During Reading: The Multi-Constituent Unit Hypothesis. Vision 3:4  pp. 50 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 september 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.