Review published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 33:3 (2009) ► pp.758765
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2002Review of Language universals research: A Synthesis, Hansjakob Seiler. Studies in Language 26(2): 502–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1985Book notice of Apprehension: Das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen, Teil I + II, Hansjakob Seiler & Christian Lehmann (eds.). Studies in Language 9(3): 459–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994Review of Partizipation: Das sprachliche Erfassen von Sachverhalten, Hansjakob Seiler & Waldfried Premper (eds.). Kratylos 391: 22–26.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2001Radical construction grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1996Review of Approaches to language typology, Masayoshi Shibatani & Theodora Bynon (eds.). Journal of Linguistics 32(2): 513–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In The new psychology of language, Vol. 2: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Michael Tomasello (eds.), 211–242. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob
1995Cognitive-conceptual structure and linguistic encoding: Language universals and typology in the UNITYP framework. Approaches to language typology, Masayoshi Shibatani & Theodora Bynon (eds.), 273–325. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
2000Language universals research: A synthesis. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
2001The Cologne UNITYP Project. Language typology and language universals. An international handbook, Vol. 1, Martin Haspelmath; Ekkehard König; Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), 323–344. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 20(1)].Google Scholar
In press. The continuum of pragmaticity: A sketch. Festschrift für Christian Lehmann, Johannes Helmbrecht et al. eds. Berlin de Gruyter
Song, Jae Jung
2003The UNITYP (re-)view. Linguistic Typology 7(1): 141–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar