Review published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 18:1 (2020) ► pp.275281
References (19)
Blank, A.
(2003) Words and concepts in time: Towards diachronic cognitive onomasiology. In R. Eckardt, K. von Heusinger & Ch. Schwarze (Eds.), Words in time: Diachronic semantics from different points of view (pp. 37–65). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iacobini, C.
(2012) Grammaticalization and innovation in the encoding of motion events. Folia Linguistica, 461, 359–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Particle-verbs in Romance. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe (pp. 626–658). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, P.
(2000a) Pour une approche cognitive du changement sémantique lexical: Aspect onomasiologique. In the Société de Linguistique de Paris (Ed.), Théories contemporaines du changement sémantique (pp. 75–95). Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
(2000b) Indirizzi cognitivi per una tipologia lessicale dell’italiano. Italienische Studien, 211, 99–117.Google Scholar
(2004) Diachronic onomasiology and semantic reconstruction. In W. Mihatsch & R. Steinberg (Eds.), Lexical data and universals of semantic change (pp. 79–106). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Kopecka, A.
(2006) The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: Typological perspectives. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 83–101). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Pountain, Ch. J.
(2000) Pragmatic factors in the evolution of the Romance reflexive (with special reference to Spanish). Hispanic Research Journal, 1(1), 5–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pourcel, S., & Kopecka, A.
(2005) Motion expression in French: Typological diversity. Durham & Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics, 111, 139–153.Google Scholar
Simone, R.
(2008) Verbi sintagmatici come categoria e come costruzione. In M. Cini (Ed.), I verbi sintagmatici in italiano e nelle varietà dialettali: Stato dell’arte e prospettive di ricerca. Atti delle giornate di studio (Torino, 19–20 febbraio 2007) (pp. 13–30). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Stefenelli, A.
(1992) Das Schicksal des lateinischen Wortschatzes in den romanischen Sprachen. Passau: Richard Rothe.Google Scholar
Stolova, N. I.
(2008) From satellite-framed Latin to verb-framed Romance: Late Latin as an intermediate stage. In R. Wright (Ed.), Latin vulgaire – latin tardif VIII: Actes du VIIIe Colloque International sur le Latin Vulgaire et Tardif, Oxford, 6–9 septembre 2006 (pp. 253–262). Hildesheim: Georg Olms; Zürich: Weidmann.Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C.
(1985) On regularity in semantic change. Journal of Literary Semantics: An international review, 14(3), 155–173.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Dascher, R. B.
(2002) Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G.
(2013) Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar