Article published In:
Advances in research on semantic roles
Edited by Seppo Kittilä and Fernando Zúñiga
[Studies in Language 38:3] 2014
► pp. 463484
References
Bickel, Balthasar
2007Typology in the 21st century: Major current developments. Linguistic Typology 111. 239–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Eric
2013Zenzontepec Chatino valency patterns. In Iren Hartmann, Martin Haspelmath & Bradley Taylor (eds.), Valency Patterns Leipzig. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. ([URL])Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1981Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael
2010Semantic maps as metrics on meaning. Linguistic Discovery 8(1). 70–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014Inducing semantic roles. In: Silvia Luraghi & Heiko Narrog (eds.), Perspectives on semantic roles, 23–68. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W
1979Ergativity. Language 551. 59–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donohue, Mark & Søren Wichmann
(eds.) 2008The typology of semantic alignment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
François, Alexandre
2008Semantic maps and the typology of colexification: Intertwining polysemous networks across languages. In Martine Vanhove (ed.), From polysemy to semantic change, 163–216. (Studies in Language Companion Series 106). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furrer, Reinhard, Douglas Nychka & Stephen Sain
2012Fields: Tools for spatial data. R package.Google Scholar
Haiman, John
1974Concessives, conditionals, and verbs of volition. Foundations of Language 11(3). 341–359.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Iren, Martin Haspelmath & Bradley Taylor
(eds.) 2013Valency Patterns Leipzig. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. ([URL])Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2003The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, vol. 21, 211–242. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2010Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment typology. Lingustic Typology 15(3). 535–567.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Iren Hartmann
2014+ (to appear). Comparing verbal valency across languages. In Bernard Comrie & Andrej L. Malchukov (eds.), Valency classes: A comparative handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Aleksandr E
1997Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology. Linguistic Typology 1(3). 279–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
2006Participant roles, thematic roles and syntactic relations. In Tasaku Tsunoda & Taro Kageyama (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations: In honor of Masayoshi Shibatani, 153–174. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej L
2013Alignment preferences in basic and derived ditransitives. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in memory of Anna Siewierska, 263–289. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J
2005Possible and probable languages: A generative perspective on linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick
1998Language form and language function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
2008Why are stative-active languages rare in Eurasia? A typological perspective on split-subject marking. In Mark Donohue & Søren Wichmann (eds.), The typology of semantic alignment, 121–140. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team
2012R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL].Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr
2005Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard
2009Motion events in parallel texts: A study in primary-data typology. Bern: University of Bern Habilitationsschrift.Google Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard & Michael Cysouw
2012Lexical typology through similarity semantics: Toward a semantic map of motion verbs. Linguistics 50(3). 671–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 20 other publications

Badir, Sémir & Stéphane Polis
2024. Les cartes sémantiques en typologie des langues. La médiation iconique entre qualification et quantification dans des représentations visuelles du discours linguistique. Travaux de linguistique n° 87:2  pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
Croft, William
2022. On two mathematical representations for “semantic maps”. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 41:1  pp. 67 ff. DOI logo
Croft, William & Meagan Vigus
2020. Event Causation and Force Dynamics in Argument Structure Constructions. In Perspectives on Causation [Jerusalem Studies in Philosophy and History of Science, ],  pp. 151 ff. DOI logo
Denk, Lukas
2023. Visualizing the conceptual space of pluractionality. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 76:1  pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
García-Miguel, José M. & María del Carmen Cabeza-Pereiro
2022. Argument and Verb Meaning Clustering From Expression Forms in LSE. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Georgakopoulos, Thanasis & Stéphane Polis
2018. The semantic map model: State of the art and future avenues for linguistic research. Language and Linguistics Compass 12:2 DOI logo
Georgakopoulos, Thanasis & Stéphane Polis
2021. Lexical diachronic semantic maps. Journal of Historical Linguistics 11:3  pp. 367 ff. DOI logo
Georgakopoulos, Thanasis & Stéphane Polis
2022. New avenues and challenges in semantic map research (with a case study in the semantic field of emotions). Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 41:1  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Haspelmath, Martin
2019. Ergativity and depth of analysis. Rhema :4, 2019  pp. 108 ff. DOI logo
Haspelmath, Martin
2023. Coexpression and synexpression patterns across languages: comparative concepts and possible explanations. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Haug, Dag & Nilo Pedrazzini
2023. The semantic map of when and its typological parallels. Frontiers in Communication 8 DOI logo
Hellan, Lars, Andrej Malchukov & Michela Cennamo
2017. Introduction. Issues in contrastive valency studies. In Contrastive Studies in Verbal Valency [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 237],  pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Levshina, Natalia
2016. Why we need a token-based typology: A case study of analytic and lexical causatives in fifteen European languages. Folia Linguistica 50:2 DOI logo
Rissman, Lilia & Asifa Majid
2019. Thematic roles: Core knowledge or linguistic construct?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 26:6  pp. 1850 ff. DOI logo
Rissman, Lilia, Saskia van Putten & Asifa Majid
2022. Evidence for a Shared Instrument Prototype from English, Dutch, and German. Cognitive Science 46:5 DOI logo
Shirtz, Shahar
2019. Isomorphic co-expression of nominal predication subdomains: An Indo-Iranian case study . Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 6:1  pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
Spike, Matthew
2020. Fifty shades of grue: Indeterminate categories and induction in and out of the language sciences. Linguistic Typology 24:3  pp. 465 ff. DOI logo
V S, Akshaya, Beatriz Lucia Salvador Bizotto & Mithileysh Sathiyanarayanan
2023. Human Intelligence and Value of Machine Advancements in Cognitive Science A Design thinking Approach. Journal of Machine and Computing  pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
van der Klis, Martijn & Jos Tellings
2022. Generating semantic maps through multidimensional scaling: linguistic applications and theory. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:3  pp. 627 ff. DOI logo
肖, 珊
2021. A Review and Perspective of Studies on Semantic Map in Chinese Language: 2003~2021. Modern Linguistics 09:05  pp. 1334 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 april 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.