Introduction. Plotting functional-cognitive space
References (141)
Anstey, M. (2008). Functional Discourse Grammar: Multifunctional problems and constructional solutions.
Linguistics
, 46(4), 831–859. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baicchi, A. (2013). What do constructions suggest about syntactic priming? Empirical evidence in L2 learners of English. Paper delivered at the III International Conference on Meaning Construction, Meaning Interpretation: Applications and Implications
(CRAL 2013), held at theUniversity of La Rioja, Spain, July 18–20, 2013.
Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2013). Embodied Construction Grammar. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar
(pp. 168–190). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berry, M. (1995). Thematic options and success in writing. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.).
Thematic development in English texts
(pp. 55–84). London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, D. (1988).
Variation across speech and writing
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brinton, L., & Traugott, E.C. (2005).
Lexicalization and language change
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2001). A matter of GIVE and TAKE: Corpus linguistics and the predicate frame.
Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses
, 42, 55–78.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2003a).
Structure and function: A guide to three major structural-functional theories. Part 1: Approaches to the simplex clause
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2003b).
Structure and function: A guide to three major structural-functional theories. Part 2: From clause to discourse and beyond
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2009a). Lexical phenomena in Functional Discourse Grammar and Systemic Functional Linguistics. In S. Slembrouck, M. Taverniers, & M. Van Herreweghe (Eds.),
Studies in linguistics offered to Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen: From will to well
(pp. 55–67). Ghent: Academia Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2012). Syntactic functions in Functional Discourse Grammar and Role and Reference Grammar: An evaluative comparison.
Language Sciences
, 34(4), 480–490\. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S. (2013). Constructions in the Lexical Constructional Model. In B. Nolan, & E. Diedrichsen (Eds.),
Linking constructions into Functional Linguistics. The role of constructions in grammar
(Studies in Language Companion Series, 145) (pp. 271–294). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S., & Gonzálvez-García, F. (2005). Situating FDG in functional-cognitive space: An initial study. In J.L. Mackenzie, & M.A. Gómez-González (Eds.),
Studies in Functional Discourse Grammar
(Linguistic Insights, 26) (pp. 109–158). Berne: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S., & Gonzálvez-García, F. (2014).
Exploring functional-cognitive space. (Studies in Language Companion Series)
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.S., & Taverniers, M. (2008). Layering in structural-functional grammars.
Linguistics
, 46(4), 689–756.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bybee, J. (2010).
Language, usage and cognition
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bybee, J. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In T. Hoffmann, & Trousdale, G. (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of construction grammar
(pp. 49–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carnie, A., & Mendoza-Denton, N. (2003). Functionalism is/n’t formalism: An interactive review of Darnell, et al. 1999.
Journal of Linguistics
, 39, 373–389. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, N. (1995).
The minimalist program
. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Christie, F., & Unsworth, L. (2005). Developing dimensions of an Educational Linguistics. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen, & J.J. Webster (Eds.).
Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective
, Vol. 1 (pp. 217–250). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2001).
Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies
. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cornish, F. (2000). L’accord, l’anaphore et la référence: Quelques enjeux. In M. Coene, W. De Mulder, P. Dendale, & Y. D’Hulst (Eds.),
Studia linguistica in honorem Lilianae Tasmowski
(pp. 509–533). Padua: Unipress.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cortés-Rodríguez, F. (2006). Derivational morphology in Role and Reference Grammar: A new proposal.
RESLA: Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada
, 19, 41–66.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W. (1990). A conceptual framework for grammatical categories (or: A taxonomy of propositional acts).
Journal of Semantics
, 7(3), 245–279. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W. (1995). Autonomy and functionalist linguistics.
Language
, 71, 490–532. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W. (2001).
Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Culicover, P., & Jackendoff, R. (2005).
Simpler syntax
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Darnell, M., Moravcsik, E.A., Newmeyer, F.J., Noonan, M., & Wheatley, K.M. (Eds.). (1999a).
Functionalism and formalism in linguistics. Volume 1: General papers
(Studies in Language Companion Series, 41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Darnell, M., Moravcsik, E.A., Newmeyer, F.J., Noonan, M., & Wheatley, K.M. (Eds.). (1999b).
Functionalism and formalism in linguistics. Volume 2: Case studies
(Studies in Language Companion Series, 42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dik, S.C. (1997a).
The theory of functional grammar, Part 1: The structure of the clause
(Functional Grammar Series, 20). 2nd edition. Ed. Kees Hengeveld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dik, S.C. (1997b).
The theory of functional grammar, Part 2: Complex and derived constructions
(Functional Grammar Series, 21). Ed. Kees Hengeveld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eddington, D., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J. (2010). Argument constructions and language processing evidence from a priming experiment and pedagogical implications. In S. De Knop, F. Boers, & T. De Rycker (Eds.),
Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics
(pp. 213–238). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, R.P. (1973/1981). Generating a sentence in systemic functional grammar. University College London (mimeo). Reprinted In M.A.K. Halliday, & J.R. Martin (Eds.),
Readings in Systemic Linguistics
(pp. 146–83). London: Batsford.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, R.P. (1980).
Cognitive Linguistics and social interaction: Towards an integrated model of a Systemic Functional Grammar and the other components of an interacting mind
. Heidelberg: Julius Groos and Exeter University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, R.P. (1994). On moving on on ontologies: Mass, count and long thin things. In D. McDonald (Ed.),
Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Natural Language Generation
(pp. 71–80).Association for Computational Linguistics, available through Computer Science, Brandeis University, Waltham MA. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Fawcett, R.P. (2008).
Invitation to Systemic Functional Linguistics through the Cardiff Grammar: An extension and simplification of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar
. 3rd edition. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, R.P. (2012). Problems and solutions in identifying processes and participant roles in discourse analysis. Part 2: How to handle metaphor, idiom and six other problems.
Annual Review of Functional Linguistics
, 3, 27–76.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, R.P., Tucker, G.H., & Lin, Y.Q. (1993). How a Systemic Functional Grammar works: The role of realization in realization. In H. Horacek, & M. Zock (Eds.),
New concepts in natural language generation
(pp. 114–186). London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fillmore, C.J., & Kay, P. (1995).
Construction Grammar coursebook, chapters 1 thru 11 (Reading materials for Ling. X20)
. University of California, Berkeley.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone
.
Language
, 64, 501–538. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
García Velasco, D., & Hengeveld, K. (2002). Do we need predicate frames?In R. Mairal Usón, & M.J. Pérez Quintero (Eds.),
New perspectives on argument structure in Functional Grammar
(Functional Grammar Series, 25) (pp. 95–123). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
García Velasco, D. (2009). Conversion in English and its implications for Functional Discourse Grammar.
Lingua
, 19, 1164–1185. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gisborne, N. (2008). Dependencies are constructions: A case study in predicative complementation. In G. Trousdale, & N. Gisborne (Eds.),
Constructional approaches to English grammar
(pp. 219–256). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gisborne, N. (2011). Constructions, Word Grammar, and grammaticalization.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 22(1), 155–182. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, T. (1989).
Mind, code and context: Essays in pragmatics
. Hillsdale, NJ and London: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, T. (2001a).
Syntax: An introduction, Volume I
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, T. (2001b).
Syntax: An introduction, Volume II
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, T. (2009).
The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.E. (1995).
Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument Structure
. Chicago: Chicago University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.E. (2006).
Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language
. New York: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.E. (2013). Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar
(pp. 15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A., Casenhiser, D., & Sethuraman, N. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 15(3), 289–316. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gonzálvez-García, F. (2009). The family of object-related depictives in English and Spanish: Towards a usage-based constructionist analysis.
Language Sciences
, 31(5), 663–723. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gonzálvez-García, F. (2011). Metaphor and metonymy do not render coercion superfluous: Evidence from the subjective-transitive construction.
Linguistics
, 49(6), 1305–1358. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K. (1987/2003). Language and the order of nature. In C. MacCabe, N. Fabb, D. Attridge, & A. Durant (Eds.),
The linguistics of writing: Arguments between language and literature
(pp. 135–154). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Reprinted in Halliday, M. A. K., & Webster, J. J. (Eds.). (2003). On language and linguistics (pp. 116–138). London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994a).
An introduction to Functional Grammar
. 2nd edition. London: Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994b). Systemic theory. In R.E. Asher, & J.M.Y. Simpson (Eds.),
The encyclopedia of language and linguistics
(pp. 4505–4508). Oxford: Pergamon Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (1999).
Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition
. London and New York: Cassell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004).
An introduction to Functional Grammar
. 3rd edition. London: Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2014).
Halliday’s introduction to Functional Grammar
. 4th edition. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hasan, R., & Fries, P.H. (1995). Reflections on subject and theme: An introduction. In R. Hasan, & P.H. Fries (Eds.),
On subject and theme: A discourse functional perspective
(Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 118) (pp. xiii–xlv). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, K., & Mackenzie, J.L. (2008).
Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, K., & Mackenzie, J.L. (2006). Functional Discourse Grammar. In E.K. Brown (Ed.),
The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, Vol. 4
(pp. 668–676). 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, K., & Mackenzie, J.L. (2010). Functional Discourse Grammar. In B. Heine, & H. Narrog (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis
(pp. 367–400). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, K. (2011). The grammaticalization of tense and aspect. In B. Heine, & H. Narrog (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization
(pp. 580–594). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, K. (2012). Referential markers and agreement markers in Functional Discourse Grammar.
Language Sciences
, 34(4), 468–479. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hopper, P.J. (1998). Emergent grammar. In M. Tomasello (Ed.),
The new psychology of language
(Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure). Vol. 1 (pp. 155–175). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Horie, K., & Comrie, B. (2000). Introduction. In K. Horie (Ed.),
Complementation (Cognitive and functional perspectives)
(Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 1) (pp. 1–10). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2004). Why education needs linguistics (and vice versa).
Journal of Linguistics
40, 105–130. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2006). Word Grammar. In K. Brown (Ed.),
The encyclopedia of language and linguistics
(pp. 633–642). 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2007).
Language networks: The new Word Grammar
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2008). Word Grammar and Construction Grammar. In G. Trousdale, & N. Gisborne (Eds.),
Constructional approaches to English grammar
(pp. 257–302). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2009). Measuring maturity. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand, & J. Riley (Eds.),
Sage handbook of writing development
(pp. 349–362).London: Sage. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.A. (2010).
An introduction to Word Grammar
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackendoff, R.J. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford:Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keizer, M.E. (2007). The grammatical-lexical distinction in Functional Discourse Grammar.
Alfa-Revista de Lingüística
, 51(2), 35–56.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keizer, M.E. (2013). The X
is (is) construction: An FDG account. In J.L. Mackenzie, & H. Olbertz (Eds.),
Casebook in Functional Discourse Grammar
(Studies in Language Companion Series, 137) (pp. 213–248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006).
Reading images. The grammar of visual design
. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Laffut, A., & Davidse, K. (2000). Verb meaning and construction sets: The case of caused NP-PrepP relations.
LACUS Forum 1999
, 293–304.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R.W. (1987).
Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites
. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R.W. (1991).
Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2: Descriptive application
. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mackenzie, J.L., & Martínez Caro, E. (2012).
Compare and contrast: An English grammar for speakers of Spanish
(Colección: Estudios de Lengua Inglesa). Granada: Comares.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mairal Usón, R., & Periñán-Pascual, J.C. (2009). The anatomy of the lexicon component within the framework of a conceptual knowledge base.
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada
, 22, 217–244.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martín Arista, J. (2011). Projections and constructions in functional morphology. The case of Old English HRĒOW.
Language and Linguistics
, 12(2), 393–425.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2005). Designing literacy pedagogy. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen, & J.J. Webster (Eds.),
Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective
, Vol. 1 (pp. 251–280). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, J.R. (1992a).
English text
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, J.R. (1992b). Genre and literacy-modeling context in educational linguistics.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
, 13, 141–172. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martínez Vázquez, M. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations in a foreign language.
VIAL, Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics
, 1, 151–165.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newmeyer, F.J. (1998).
Language form and language function
. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newmeyer, F.J. (2003). Grammar is grammar and usage is usage.
Language
, 79(4), 682–707. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newmeyer, F.J. (2005a).
Possible and probable languages: A generative perspective on linguistic typology
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newmeyer, F.J. (2010). Formalism and functionalism in linguistics.
WIREs Cogn Sci
, 1, 301–307. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nuyts, J. (2005). Brothers in arms? On the relations between cognitive and functional linguistics. In F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, & S. Peña Cervel (Eds.),
Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction
(Cognitive Linguistics Research, 32) (pp. 69–100). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nuyts, J. (2007). Cognitive linguistics and functional linguistics. In D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.),
Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics
(pp. 543–565). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Painter, C. (2009). Language development. In M.A.K. Halliday, & J.J. Webster (Eds.),
Continuum companion to Systemic Functional Linguistics
(pp. 87–103). London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Periñán-Pascual, J.C., & Mairal Usón, R. (2009). Bringing Role and Reference Grammar to natural language understanding.
Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural
, 43, 265–273.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ravelli, L.J. (2004). Signalling the organization of written texts: Hyper-themes in management and history essays. In L.J. Ravelli, & R.A. Ellis (Eds.),
Analysing academic writing: Contextualised frameworks
(pp. 104–130). London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rijkhoff, J. (2009). On the (un)suitability of semantic categories.
Linguistic Typology
, 13(1), 95–104. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rijkhoff, J. (2010). Functional categories in the noun phrase: On jacks-of-all trades and one-trick-ponies in Danish, Dutch and German.
Deutsche Sprache
, 2(Special issue: Modifikation im Deutschen: Kontrastive Untersuchungen zur Nominalphrase), 97–123.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J., & Agustín, M.P. (2013). La construcción reduplicativa de base léxica en español: Un estudio preliminar para estudiantes de español como L2. [‘The reduplicative construction with a lexical basis in Spanish: A preliminary study for students of Spanish as L2’]. In S. De Knop, F. Mollica, & J. Kuhn (Eds.),
Konstruktionsgrammatik und Romanische sprachen
(pp. 205–225). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J., & Mairal Usón, R. (2008). Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: An introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model.
Folia Linguistica
, 42(2), 355–400. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J., & Mairal Usón, R. (2011). Constraints on syntactic alternation: Lexical-constructional subsumption in the Lexical-Constructional Model. In P. Guerrero Medina (Ed.),
Morphosyntactic alternations in English. Functional and cognitive perspectives
(pp. 62–82). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schleppegrell, M. (2006).
The language of schooling. A functional linguistic perspective
. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taboada, M., & Gómez-González, M.A. (2013). Discourse markers and coherence relations: Comparison across markers, languages and modalities. In M. Taboada, S. Doval-Suárez, & E. González-Álvarez (Eds.),
Contrastive discourse analysis: Functional and corpus perspectives
(pp. 17–41). Sheffield: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tagliamonte, S.A. (2008).
So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Toronto, Canada.
English Language and Linguistics
, 12(2), 361–394. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tagliamonte, S.A., & Roberts, C. (2005).
So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends.
American Speech
, 80(3), 280–300. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thurlow, C., & Jaworski, A. (2006). The alchemy of the upwardly mobile: Symbolic capital and the stylization of elites in frequent-flyer programmes.
Discourse and Society
, 17(1), 99–135. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, M. (1998). Introduction: A cognitive-functional perspective on language structure. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Vol. 1 (ix–xxiii). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, M. (2003). Introduction: Some surprises for psychologists. In M Tomasello. (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Vol. 2 (pp. vii–xxiii). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Traugott, E.C., & Trousdale, G. (2013).
Constructionalization and constructional changes
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tucker, G.H. (1998).
The lexicogrammar of adjectives: A Systemic Functional Approach to lexis
. London: Cassell Academic.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tucker, G.H. (2007). Between lexis and grammar: Towards a systemic functional approach to phraseology. In C.M.I.M. Matthiessen, R. Hasan, & J.J. Webster (Eds.),
Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective, Vol. 2.
(pp. 953–977). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Valenzuela, J., & Rojo, A. (2008). What can language learners tell us about constructions?In S. De Knop, & T. De Rycker (Eds.),
Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar – Volume in honour of René Dirven
(pp. 197–229). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D.Jr., & LaPolla, R.J. (1997).
Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function
(Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D., Jr. (1993). A synopsis of Role and Reference Grammar. In R.D. Van Valin, Jr. (Ed.),
Advances in Role and Reference Grammar
(Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 82) (pp. 1–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D., Jr. (2005).
Exploring the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface: An introduction to Role and Reference Grammar
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D., Jr. (2006). Semantic macroroles and language processing. In I. Bornkessel, M. Schlesewsky, B. Comrie, & A. Friederici (Eds.),
Semantic role universals and argument linking: Theoretical, typological and psycho-/neurolinguistic perspectives
(pp. 263–302). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D., Jr. (2009). Privileged syntactic arguments, pivots and controllers. In L. Guerrero, S. Ibáñez, & V.A. Belloro (Eds.),
Studies in Role and Reference Grammar
(pp. 45–68). México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wee, L., & Ying Ying, T. (2008). That’s so last year! Constructions in a socio-cultural context.
Journal of Pragmatics
, 40(12), 2100–2113. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)