References
- Bergs, A. (2018). ‘Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist’ (Picasso): Linguistic aberrancy from a constructional perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 6(3), pp. 277–293.
- Bergs, A. (2019). What, if anything, is linguistic creativity? Gestalt Theory, 41(2), pp. 173–183.
- Bergs, A. and Kompa, N. (2020). Creativity within and outside the linguistic system. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1).
- Conklin, K., and Schmitt, N. (2012). The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32, pp. 45–61.
- Giora, R. (2003) On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 259 p.
- Glaveanu, V. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17(1), pp. 69–81.
- Hartmann, S., and Ungerer, T. (2024). Attack of the snowclones: A corpus-based analysis of extravagant formulaic patterns. Journal of Linguistics, 60(3), pp. 599–634.
- Hartmann, S., and Ungerer, T. (2025). Chaos theory, shmaos theory: Creativity and routine in English shm-reduplication. In: S. Arndt-Lappe – N. Filatkina (eds.): Dynamics at the lexicon-syntax Interface: Creativity and routine in word-formation and multi-word expressions. De Gruyter, pp. 295–322.
- Fauconnier, G., and Turner, M. (2002). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books, 464 p.
- Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 286 p.
- Goldberg, A. E. (2019). Explain Me This: Creativity, Competition and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 195 p.
- Herbst, Th. (2018). Collo-Creativity and blending: Recognizing creativity requires lexical storage in constructional slots. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 309–328.
- Herbst, Th., and Hoffmann, Th. (2024). A Construction Grammar of English: A Constructionist Approach to Syntactic Analysis (CASA). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 315 p.
- Hilpert, M. (2019). Construction Grammar and its Application to English. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 296 p.
- Hoeksema, J., and Napoli, D. J. (2008). Just for the hell of it: A comparison of two taboo-term constructions. Journal of Linguistics, 44(2), pp. 347–378.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2018). Creativity and construction grammar: Cognitive and psychological issues. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 259–276.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2019). Language and creativity: A construction grammar approach to linguistic creativity. Linguistics Vanguard, 5(1).
- Hoffmann, Th. (2020). Construction grammar and creativity: Evolution, psychology and cognitive science. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1).
- Hoffmann, Th. (2021). The Cognitive Foundation Of Post-colonial Englishes: Construction Grammar as the Cognitive Theory for the Dynamic Model. (Cambridge Elements in World Englishes). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2022). Construction Grammar: The Structure of English. (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 315 p.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2024). The 5C model of linguistic creativity: Construction Grammar as a cognitive theory of verbal creativity. Journal of Foreign Languages and Cultures, 8(1), pp. 139–154.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2025a). Creativity. In Reference Module in Social Sciences, Elsevier. Accessible at: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95504-1.00588-3.
- Hoffmann, Th. (2025b). Cognitive approaches to linguistic creativity. In: X. Wen – Ch. Sinha (eds.): The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hoffmann, Th., and Steinhauser, M. (2025). Constructional Divergent Association Task (CXN-DAT): Using constructional contexts to measure linguistic creativity. Poster presented at the 2025 Society for the Neuroscience of Creativity (SfNC) conference, Paris Brain Institute (May 22 – 23, 2025).
- Hoffmann, Th., and Trousdale, G. (2022). On multiple paths and change in the language network. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 70(3), pp. 359–382.
- Hoffmann, Th., and Turner, M. (fc.). Creative Construction Grammar. (Cambridge Elements in Cognitive Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Kaufman, J. C. (2016). Creativity 101. 2nd ed. New York: Springer Publishing Company, 368 p.
- Lubart, T., Glăveanu, V., de Vries, He., Camargo, A., and Storme, M. (2021). Cultural perspectives on creativity. In: J. C. Kaufman – Robert J. Sternberg, (eds.): Creativity: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 128–151.
- Norde, M., and Trousdale, G. (2025). Creativity, paradigms and morphological constructions: evidence from Dutch pseudoparticiples. Linguistics, 63(4), pp. 1029–1063.
- Olson, J. A., Nahas, J., Chmoulevitch, D., Cropper, S. J., and Webb, M. E. (2021). Naming unrelated words predicts creativity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(25), e2022340118. Accessible at: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022340118.
- Perek, F. (2016).Using distributional Semantics to study syntactic productivity in diachrony: A case study. Linguistics, 54(1), pp. 149–188.
- Sampson, G. (2016). Two ideas of creativity. In: M. Hinton (ed.): Evidence, Experiment and Argument in Linguistics and Philosophy of Language. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 15–26.
- Schmid, H.-J. (2000). English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 468 p.
- Schneck, P. (2018). Creative grammarians: Cognition, language and literature: An exploratory response. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 381–391.
- Simonton, D. K. (2012). Creative productivity and aging. In: S. Krauss Whitbourne – M. J. Sliwinski (eds.): The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Adulthood and Aging. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 477–496.
- Sommerer, L., and Van de Velde, F. (2025). Constructional networks. In: M. Fried – K. Nikiforidou (eds.): The Cambridge Handbook of Construction Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 220–246.
- Stefanowitsch, A., and Flach, S. (2017). The corpus-based perspective on entrenchment. In: H.-J. Schmid (ed.): Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 101–127.
- Surdeanu, M., and Valenzuela-Escárcega, M. A. (2024). Deep Learning for Natural Language Processing. A Gentle Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 344 p.
- Trousdale, G. (2018). Creativity parallels between language and music. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 371–380.
- Trousdale, G. (2020). Creativity, reuse, and regularity in music and language. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1).
- Turner, M. (2018). The role of creativity in multimodal construction grammar. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 357–370.
- Turner, M. (2020). Constructions and creativity. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1).
- Uhrig, P. (2018). I don’t want to go all Yoko Ono on you. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 66(3), pp. 295–308.
- Uhrig, P. (2020). Creative intentions – The fine line between ‘creative’ and ‘wrong’. Cognitive Semiotics, 13(1).
- Veale, T. (2012). Exploding the Creativity Myth: The Computational Foundations of Linguistic Creativity. London et al.: Bloomsbury, 184 p.