Part of
Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space
Edited by María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and Francisco Gonzálvez-García
[Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 68] 2014
► pp. 271294
References (38)
Aarts, B. (2007). Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Athanasiadou, A. (2007). On the subjectivity of intensifiers. Language Sciences , 29, 554–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, L., & Bauer, W. (2002). Adjective boosters in the English of young New Zealanders. Journal of English Linguistics , 30(3), 244–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A. (2002). Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 207–227). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D.L. (1972). Degree words . The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2003). Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In R. Janda, & B. Joseph (Eds.), Handbook of historical linguistics (pp. 602–623). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylinina, E. (2011). This is so np! The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication , 6, 1–29.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denison, D. (2010). Category change in English with and without structural change. In ­Elizabeth Closs Traugott, & Graeme Trousdale (Eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization (Typological Studies in Language, 90) (pp. 105–128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engelbretson, R. (2007). Stance-taking in discourse. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stance-taking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 1–12). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, O. (2007). Morphosyntactic change: Functional and formal perspectives (Oxford Surveys in Syntax and Morphology, 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument Structure . Chicago and London: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language . New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An introduction to Functional Grammar . London: Arnold. Third edition.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C., & McNally, L. (2005). Scale structure and the semantic typology of gradable predicates. Language , 81(2), 345–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuha, M. (2004). Investigating the spread of “so” as an intensifier: Social and structural factors. Texas Linguistic Forum , 48, 217–227.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Radden. G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics , 9(1), 37–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J. (1982). Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum?. In R.J. Jarvella, & W. Klein (Eds.), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics (pp. 101–124). New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Méndez-Naya, B. (2008). Introduction. English intensifiers. English Language and Linguistics , 12(2), 213–219.Google Scholar
Michaelis, L.A. (2003). Headless constructions and coercion by construction. In E. Francis, & L.A. Michaelis (Eds.), Mismatch: Form-function incongruity and the architecture of grammar (pp. 259–310). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Nuyts, J. (2012). Notions of (inter-)subjectivity. English Text Construction , 5(1), 53–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, C. (2008). Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of DEGREE. English Language and Linguistics , 12(2), 317–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, H. (1994). Degree adverbs in Early Modern English. In D. Kastovsky (Ed.), Studies in Early Modern English (pp. 269–288). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language . London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J. (2000). The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Ed.). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. A cognitive perspective (pp. 109–132). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J., & Pérez Hernández, L. (2001). Metonymy and the grammar: Motivation, constraints and interaction. Language & Communication , 21(4), 321–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J., & Díez Velasco, O.I. (2003). Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J. (2011). Metonymy and cognitive operations. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics. Towards a consensus view (pp. 103–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schönefeld, D. (2011). On the evidence of convergence in linguistic research. In D. ­Schönefeld (Ed.), Converging evidence: Methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research (pp. 1–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. (2008). So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Toronto, Canada. English Language and Linguistics , 12(2), 361–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S., & 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 logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.C., & Dasher, R.B. (2002). Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tuggy, D. (1993). Ambiguity, polysemy, and vagueness. Cognitive Linguistics , 4(3), 273–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A. (2005). Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition . Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wee, L., & Ying Ying, T. (2008). “That’s so last year! Constructions in a socio-cultural context. Journal of Pragmatics , 40, 2100–2113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, A. (2006). [URL] (April6, 2006).
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Bordet, Lucile
2016. References. Lexis :10 DOI logo
Cacchiani, Silvia
2016. Cognitive motivation in English complex intensifying adjectives. Lexis :10 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 october 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.