Constraction: a tool for the automatic extraction and interactive exploration of linguistic constructions

References

Anthony, Laurence. 2022. AntConc [computer program]. Tokyo: Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/ (accessed 1 May 2022).Search in Google Scholar

BNC Consortium. 2007. The British national corpus, version 3 (BNC XML edition). Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk (accessed 16 February 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Cappelle, Bert, Yury Shtyrov & Friedemann Pulvermüller. 2010. Heating up or cooling up the brain? MEG evidence that phrasal verbs are lexical units. Brain and Language 115(3). 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.004.Search in Google Scholar

Ciaramita, Massimiliano & Mark Johnson. 2003. Supersense tagging of unknown nouns in WordNet. In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 168–175. Sapporo: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/1119355.1119377Search in Google Scholar

Culicover, Peter W., Ray Jackendoff & Jenny Audring. 2017. Multiword constructions in the grammar. Topics in Cognitive Science 9(3). 552–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12255.Search in Google Scholar

de Castilho, Richard Eckart, Éva Mújdricza-Maydt, Seid Muhie Yimam, Silvana Hartmann, Iryna Gurevych, Anette Frank & Chris Biemann. 2016. A web-based tool for the integrated annotation of semantic and syntactic structures. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Language Technology Resources and Tools for Digital Humanities (LT4DH), 76–84. Osaka: COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.Search in Google Scholar

Dunn, Jonathan. 2017. Computational learning of construction grammars. Language and Cognition 9(2). 254–292. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2016.7.Search in Google Scholar

Dunn, Jonathan. 2022. Exposure and emergence in usage-based grammar: Computational experiments in 35 languages. Cognitive Linguistics 33(4). 659–699. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2021-0106.Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. & Dave C. Ogden. 2017. Thinking about multiword constructions: Usage-based approaches to acquisition and processing. Topics in Cognitive Science 9(3). 604–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12256.Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., Ute Römer & Matthew B. O’Donnell. 2016. Constructions and usage-based approaches to language acquisition. Language Learning 66(S1). 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.1_12177.Search in Google Scholar

Evans, Vyvyan. 2012. Cognitive linguistics. WIREs Cognitive Science 3(2). 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1163.Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J., Russell Lee-Goldman & Russell Rhomieux. 2012. The framenet constructicon. In Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds.), Sign-based construction grammar, 309–372. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Forsberg, Markus, Richard Johansson, Linnéa Bäckström, Benjamin Lyngfelt, Joel Olofsson & Julia Prentice. 2014. From construction candidates to constructicon entries: An experiment using semi-automatic methods for identifying constructions in corpora. Constructions and Frames 6(1). 114–135. https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.6.1.07for.Search in Google Scholar

Francis, Gill, Susan Hunston & Elizabeth Manning. 1996. Grammar patterns, vol. 1: Verbs. London: HarperCollins.Search in Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2021. Using corpora to foster L2 construction learning: A data-driven learning experiment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 31(2). 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12317.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2019. Explain me this: Creativity, competition and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.2307/j.ctvc772nnSearch in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. & Thomas Herbst. 2021. The nice-of-you construction and its fragments. Linguistics 59(1). 285–318. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0274.Search in Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th. & Nick C. Ellis. 2015. Statistical measures for usage-based linguistics. Language Learning 65(S1). 228–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12119.Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2019. Construction grammar and its application to English, 2nd edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9781474433624Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin & Stefan Th. Gries. 2016. Quantitative approaches to diachronic corpus linguistics. In Merja Kytö & Päivi Pahta (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English historical linguistics, 36–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139600231.003Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas. 2021. English comparative correlatives: Diachronic and synchronic variation at the lexicon-syntax interface (studies in English language). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale (eds.). 2013. The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Yan, Akira Murakami, Theodora Alexopoulou & Anna Korhonen. 2018. Dependency parsing of learner English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 23(1). 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16080.hua.Search in Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2019. Patterns, constructions, and applied linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 24(3). 324–353. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.00015.hun.Search in Google Scholar

Joty, Shafiq, Giuseppe Carenini & Raymond T. Ng. 2015. CODRA: A novel discriminative framework for rhetorical analysis. Computational Linguistics 41(3). 385–435. https://doi.org/10.1162/COLI_a_00226.Search in Google Scholar

Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý & Vít Suchomel. 2014. The sketch engine: Ten years on. Lexicography 1(1). 7–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9.Search in Google Scholar

Krause, Thomas & Amir Zeldes. 2016. ANNIS3: A new architecture for generic corpus query and visualization. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 31(1). 118–139. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqu057.Search in Google Scholar

Leńko-Szymańska, Agnieszka. 2017. Training teachers in data-driven learning: Tackling the challenge. Language, Learning and Technology 21(3). 217–241.Search in Google Scholar

Leufkens, Sterre. 2023. Measuring redundancy: The relation between concord and complexity. Linguistics Vanguard 9(s1). 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0143.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Jun, Yifan Cao, Jiong Cai, Yong Jiang & Kewei Tu. 2020. An empirical comparison of unsupervised constituency parsing methods. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3278–3283. Association for Computational Linguistics.10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.300Search in Google Scholar

Loenheim, Lisa, Benjamin Lyngfelt, Joel Olofsson, Julia Prentice & Sofia Tingsell. 2016. Constructicography meets (second) language education: On constructions in teaching aids and the usefulness of a Swedish constructicon. In Sabine De Knop & Gaëtanelle Gilquin (eds.), Applied construction grammar, 327–356. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110458268-013Search in Google Scholar

Neves, Mariana & Jurica Ševa. 2021. An extensive review of tools for manual annotation of documents. Briefings in Bioinformatics 22(1). 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbz130.Search in Google Scholar

O’Keeffe, Anne. 2021. Data-driven learning: A call for a broader research gaze. Language Teaching 54(2). 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000245.Search in Google Scholar

Paltridge, Brian & Sue Starfield (eds.). 2013. The handbook of English for specific purposes. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118339855Search in Google Scholar

Perek, Florent & Amanda L. Patten. 2019. Towards an English constructicon using patterns and frames. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 24(3). 354–384. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.00016.per.Search in Google Scholar

Römer, Ute, Matthew B. O’Donnell & Nick C. Ellis. 2015. Using COBUILD grammar patterns for a large-scale analysis of verb-argument constructions. In Nicholas Groom, Maggie Charles & Suganthi John (eds.), Corpora, grammar and discourse, 43–71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.73.03romSearch in Google Scholar

Schneider, Ulrike. 2020. ΔP as a measure of collocation strength. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16(2). 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2017-0036.Search in Google Scholar

Scott, Mike. 2021. WordSmith tools [computer program]. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software. https://www.lexically.net/wordsmith/downloads/ (accessed 12 March 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Solan, Lawrence M. & Peter M. Tiersma (eds.). 2012. The Oxford handbook of language and law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199572120.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Graeme. Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Tsao, Nai-Lung & David Wible. 2013. Word similarity using constructions as contextual features. In Proceedings of the Joint Symposium on Semantic Processing: Textual Inference and Structures in Corpora, 51–59. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/W13-3818.Search in Google Scholar

Wible, David & Nai-Lung Tsao. 2010. StringNet as a computational resource for discovering and investigating linguistic constructions. In Proceedings of the NAACL HLT Workshop on Extracting and Using Constructions in Computational Linguistics, 25–31. Available at: http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W/W10/W10-0804.Search in Google Scholar