Cover not available
Part of
Lexical meaning as a testable hypothesis: The case of English look, see, seem and appear
Nadav Sabar
[Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 75] 2018
► pp. 139–141

References

Blevins, J.
(2012) Duality of patterning: absolute universal or statistical tendency? Language and Cognition 4(4), 275–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2002) Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. In T. Givon & B. Malle (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language (pp.107–132). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82(4), 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J, & P. Hopper
(2001) Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp.1–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E.
(1976) Universal categories: on the semantics of classifiers and children’s early word meanings. In A. Juilland (Ed.), Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg (pp.449–462). Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Contini-Morava, Ellen
1995 Introduction. Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory, ed. by E. Contini-Morava & B. Sussman Goldberg. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–39.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crupi, C.
(2004) But still a yet: the quest for a constant semantic value for English yet. New Brunswick, NJ: State University of New Jersey dissertation.Google Scholar
Culler, J.
(1976) Ferdinand de Saussure. Fonatan / Collins.Google Scholar
Davies, M.
(2008–) The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–present.
Davis, J.
(2002) Rethinking the place of statistics in Columbia School analysis. In W. Reid, R. Otheguy & N. Stern (Eds.), Signal, meaning, and message: perspectives on sign-based linguistics (pp.65–90). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Revisiting the gap between meaning and message. In E. Contini-Morava, R. S. Kirsner & B. Rodriguez-Bachiller (Eds.), Cognitive and communicative approaches to linguistic analysis (pp.155–174). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diver, W.
(1969) The system of relevance of the Homeric verb. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 12 , 45–68. Revised and reprinted in A. Huffman & J. Davis. (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.135–159). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
(1974) Substance and value in linguistic analysis. Semiotext(e) 1 , 11–30. Revised and reprinted A. Huffman & J. Davis. (Eds.), Language: communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.23–45). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
(1995) Theory. In E. Contini Morava & B. Sussman-Goldberg (Eds.), Meaning as explanation: advances in linguistic sign theory (pp.43–114). Revised and reprinted A. Huffman & J. Davis. (Eds.), Language: communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.445–519). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
(2012) The elements of a science of a language. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.65–84). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Diver, W., J. Davis & W. Reid
(2012) Traditional grammar and its legacy in twentieth-century linguistics. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.371–443). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(1995) Constructions – a construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, J.
(1967) Look and see. Language 43(4), 937–947. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L.
(1994) Introduction to government and binding theory. Second edition. Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hatfield, G.
(1998) Attention in early scientific psychology. In R. Wright (Ed.), Visual attention (pp.3–25). New York / Oxford: Oxford University press.Google Scholar
Huffman, A.
(1989) Teaching the English tenses. In W. Diver (Ed.), Columbia University working papers in linguistics (pp.10.1–1065).Google Scholar
Huffman, Alan
2001 The Linguistics of William Diver and the Columbia School. Word 52.29–68.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huffman, A.
(1997)  The categories of grammar: French lui and le . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Diver’s Theory. In J. Davis, R. J. Gorup & N. Stern (Eds.), Advances in functional linguistics: Columbia School beyond its origins (pp.41–62). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Introduction: the enduring legacy of William Diver. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp.9–20). Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Huffman, A. & J. Davis
(Eds.) (2012) Language: Communication and human behavior: The linguistic essays of William Diver. Leiden / Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, Volume 2 (pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Landau, B.
and L. Gleitman (1985) Language and experience: evidence from the blind child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
(2004) Form, meaning and behavior – the cognitive grammar analysis of double subject constructions. In E. Contini-Morava, R. S. Kirsner & B. Rodriguez-Bachiller (Eds.), Cognitive and communicative approaches to linguistic analysis (pp.21–60). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B.
(1993) English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
OED Online
(2015) “look, v.”; “look, n.” Oxford University Press. [URL]
Otheguy, R.
(1995) When contact speakers talk, linguistic theory listens. In E. Contini Morava & B. Sussman-Goldberg (Eds.), Meaning as explanation: advances in linguistic sign theory (pp.213–242). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Saussurean anti-nomenclaturism in grammatical analysis: A comparative theoretical perspective. In W. Reid, R. Otheguy & N. Stern (Eds.), Signal, meaning, and message: perspectives on sign-based linguistics (pp.373–403). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Otheguy, R., B. Rodriguez-Bachiller & E. Canals
(2004) Length of the extra-information phrase as a predictor of word order. In E. Contini-Morava, R. S. Kirsner & B. Rodriguez-Bachiller (Eds.), Cognitive and communicative approaches to linguistic analysis (pp.325–340). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pierce, J.
(1985) The nature of English grammar. English teaching forum, July: 2–8.
Reid, W.
(1974) The Saussurean sign as a control in linguistic analysis. Semiotext(e)1.31–53.Google Scholar
(1991) Verb and noun number in English: a functional explanation. London: Langman.Google Scholar
(1995) Quantitative Analysis in Columbia School Theory. In E. Contini Morava & B. Sussman-Goldberg (Eds.), Meaning as explanation: advances in linguistic sign theory (pp.115–152). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Monosemy, Homonymy and Polysemy. In E. Contini-Morava, R. S. Kirsner & B. Rodriguez-Bachiller (Eds.), Cognitive and communicative approaches to linguistic analysis (pp.93–130). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) The communicative function of English verb number. Natural language linguistic theory, 29, 1087–1146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saussure, F.
(1916) Cours de linguistique generale. Translated by Roy Harris as Course in general linguistics. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court Classics, 1972 [1986].Google Scholar
Swan, M.
(1980) Practical English usage. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sweetser, E.
(1990) From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tobin, Y.
(1993) Aspect in the English verb: process and result in language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2003) Constructing a language – a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1957) Verbs and Times. Philosophical Review 56, 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A.
(1988) The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolff, C.
(1738) Psychologia empirica. Frankfurt and Leipzig: Officina Libraria Rengeriana. Cited by section number.Google Scholar