Between spatial domain and grammatical meaning: The semantic content of English telic particles

References

Beavers, J. 2008. “Scalar complexity and the structure of events”. In: Dölling, J., Heyde-Zybatow, T. and M. Schӓfer (eds.) Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 245–265.10.1515/9783110925449.245Search in Google Scholar

Beavers, J. 2011. “On affectedness”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29. 335–70.10.1007/s11049-011-9124-6Search in Google Scholar

Bennett, D.C. 1975 Spatial and temporal uses of English prepositions. London: Long-man.Search in Google Scholar

Boers, F. 1996. Spatial prepositions and metaphor: A cognitive semantic journey along the UP-DOWN and the FRONT-BACK dimensions. Tübingen: G. Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Bolinger, D. 1971. The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Brinton, L. 1985. “From verb to aspectualiser: the semantics of grammaticalisation”. In: Faarlund, J.T. (ed.) Germanic linguistics: papers from a symposium at the University of Chicago. April 24, 1985. Indiana University Linguistics Club. 29–45.Search in Google Scholar

Brinton, L. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems. Aspectualisers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Brugman, C. 1981. The story of over. (MA thesis, UC Berkeley.) Published 1988 as The story of over: Polysemysemantics and the structure of the lexicon. New York: Garland Press.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, H. 1973. “Space, time, semantics and the child”. In: Moore, T.E (ed.) Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press. 27–64.10.1016/B978-0-12-505850-6.50008-6Search in Google Scholar

Croft, W. 2002. “The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies”. In: Dirven, R. and R. Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 161–205.10.1515/9783110219197.161Search in Google Scholar

Croft, W. 2012. Verbs: aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248582.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Ö. 1981. “On the definition of the telic-atelic (bounded-nonbounded) distinction”. In: Tedeschi, P. and A. Zaenen (eds.) Tense and aspect (Syntax and Semantics, 14). New York: Academic Press. 79–90.10.1163/9789004373112_006Search in Google Scholar

Depraetere, I. 1995. “On the necessity of distinguishing between (un)boundedness and (a)telicity”. Linguistics and Philosophy 18. 1–19.10.1007/BF00984959Search in Google Scholar

Dowty, D. 1979. Word meaning in Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7Search in Google Scholar

Freed, A. 1979. The semantics of English aspectual complementation. Dordrecht, Boston and London: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-9475-1Search in Google Scholar

Friedrich, P. 1974. “On aspect theory and Homeric aspect”. International Journal of American Linguistics 40(4–2). 1–44.10.1086/ijal.40.4_p2.42004709Search in Google Scholar

Grady, J. 1997. Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. (PhD dissertation, UC Berkeley.)Search in Google Scholar

Hampe, B. 2002. Superlative verbs. A corpus-based study of semantic redundancy in English verb-particle constructions. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, B. 1984. The semantics of English spatial prepositions. (PhD dissertation, University of California at San Diego.)Search in Google Scholar

Hay, J., C. Kennedy and B. Levin. 1999. “Scale structure underlies telicity in ‘degree achievements’”. In: Matthews, T. and D. Strolovitch (eds.), Semantics and linguistic theory 9. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications. 127–144.10.3765/salt.v9i0.2833Search in Google Scholar

Heine, B. 1997. Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195102512.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Herskovits, A. 1986. Language and spatial cognition: an interdisciplinary study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressSearch in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, R. 1996. “The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps even quantification in English”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14. 305–54.10.1007/BF00133686Search in Google Scholar

Janda, L., A. Endersen, J. Kuznetsova, O. Lyashevskaya and A. Makarova. 2013. Why Russian aspectual prefixes aren’t empty: Prefixes as verb classifiers. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, M. 1987. The body in the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. and B. Levin. 2008. “Measure of change: the adjectival core of degree achievements”. In: McNally, L. and C. Kennedy (eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: syntax, semantics, and discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 156–182.Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, M. 1989. “Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics”. In: Bartsch, R., J. van Benthem and P. van Emde Boas (eds.), Semantics and contextual expression. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 75–115.10.1515/9783110877335-005Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, M. 1998. “The origins of telicity”. In: S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 197–235.10.1007/978-94-011-3969-4_9Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff G. 1990. “The Invariance Hypothesis”. Cognitive Linguistics 1(1). 39–74.10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, R.W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, R.W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: a basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Levin, B. and M. Rappaport Hovav. 2010. “Lexicalised scales and verbs of scalar change”. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, April 8–10, 2010.Search in Google Scholar

Lindner, S. 1981. “A lexico-semantic analysis of English VPCs with UP and OUT”. (PhD dissertation, University of California at San Diego.)Search in Google Scholar

Luo, H. 2019. Particle verbs in English: a Cognitive Linguistic perspective. Singapore: Springer.10.1007/978-981-13-6854-7Search in Google Scholar

Morgan, P.S. 1997. “Figuring out ‘figure out’: metaphor and the semantics of the English verb-particle construction”. Cognitive Linguistics 8(4). 327–357.10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.327Search in Google Scholar

Rappaport Hovav, M. 2008. “Lexicalised meaning and the internal temporal structure of events”. In: Rothestein, S. (ed.), Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantic of aspect. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 13–42.10.1075/la.110.03hovSearch in Google Scholar

Rice, S. 1999. “Aspects of prepositions and prepositional aspect”. In: de Stadler, L. and C. Eyrich (eds.), Issues in Cognitive Linguistics: 1993 Proceedings of the International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 225–247.10.1515/9783110811933.225Search in Google Scholar

Rothstein, S. 2004. Structuring events. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470759127Search in Google Scholar

Rudzka-Ostyn, B. 2003. Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197235Search in Google Scholar

Svorou, S. 1994. The grammar of space. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.25Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, L. 2000a. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, L. 2000b. Toward a Cognitive SemanticsVol. 2: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6848.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Tenny, C.L. 1994. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-011-1150-8Search in Google Scholar

Turner, M. 1991. Reading minds. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691227788Search in Google Scholar

Turner, M. 1996. The literary mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, A. and V. Evans. 2003. The semantics of English prepositions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486517Search in Google Scholar

Vandeloise, C. 1991 Spatial prepositions: a case study in French. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Varela, F., E. Thompson and E. Rosch (eds.). 1991. The embodied mind. Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: the MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6730.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Vendler, Z. 1967. “Verbs and times”. In: Vendler, Z. (ed.), Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 97–121.10.7591/9781501743726Search in Google Scholar

Verkuyl, H.J.1972. On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-017-2478-4Search in Google Scholar

Walkova, M. 2013. The aspectual function of particles in phrasal verbs. Kosice: MKV Press.Search in Google Scholar