The Cognitive Motivation Behind the Semantics of Hungarian Co-Verbial Constructions with Össze and Szét
References
- Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (1999). Lexical bundles in conversation and academic prose. In H. Hasselgard & S. Oksefjell (Eds.), Out of corpora (pp. 181–190). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
- Fillmore, C. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.
- Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors andprimary scenes (Ph. D. dissertation). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
- Grady, J. E., & Johnson, C. R. (1997). Converging evidence for the notions of sub-scene and primary scene. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 23(1), 123–136.<a href="https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v23i1.1258" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.3765/bls.v23i1.1258</a>
- Grygiel, M. (2018a). Co-verbs in specialized texts. In M. Grygiel, M. Rzepecka & E. Więcławska (Eds.), Specialist communication in education, translation and linguistics (pp. 135–147). Rzeszów, Poland: Wydawnictwo Uniersytetu Rzeszowskiego.
- Grygiel, M. (2018b). Phrasal verbs in the translation of specialized texts. Komunikacja Specjalistyczna, 15–16, 177–190.
- Grygiel, M. (2019). Comparing and contrasting Polish with Hungarian co-verbial constructions. In M. Grygiel & R. Kiełtyka (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics in the year 2017 (pp. 172–184). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
- Heine, B. (1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.
- Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1017/CBO9780511613463</a>
- Imrényi, A., Kugler, N., Ladányi, M., Markó, A., Tátrai, S., & Tolcsvai Nagy, G. (2017). Nyelvtan. Budapest: OsirisKiadó.
- Kardos,É. (2016). Telicity marking in Hungarian. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 1(1), 41. http://doi.org/<a href="https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.5210.5334/gjgl.52" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.5334/gjgl.5210.5334/gjgl.52</a>
- Kenesei, I., Vago, R., & Fenyvesi, A. (1998). Hungarian. (Routledge Descriptive Grammars series). London: Routledge.
- Kiss, K. (2002). The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511755088" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1017/CBO9780511755088</a>
- Kiss, K. (2008). The function and the syntax of the verbal particle. In K. Kiss (Ed.), Event structure and the left periphery: Studies on Hungarian (pp. 17–55). Berlin and New York: Springer.
- Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<a href="https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001</a>
- Langacker, R.W. (2011). Semantic motivation of the English auxiliary. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Motivation in grammar and the lexicon (pp. 29–48). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
- Lehmann, C. (2007). Motivation in language. In P. Gallmann, C. Lehmann & R. Lühr(Eds.), Sprachliche Variation. Zur Interdependenz von Inhalt und Ausdruck (pp. 100–135). (Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik, 502). Tübingen: G. Narr.
- Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2007). Polysemy, prototypes, and radial categories. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 139–169). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Knittel, M. L. (2015). Preverbs, aspect and nominalization in Hungarian. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 43, 47–76. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.4000/rlv.224510.4000/rlv.2245" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.4000/rlv.224510.4000/rlv.2245</a>
- Mroczko, E. (1989). Język węgierski dla początkujących. Warsaw: Wiedza Powszechna.
- Nuyts, J. (2007). Cognitive linguistics and functional linguistics. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 543–565). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Panther, K.-U. (2013). Motivationin language. In S. Kreitler (Ed.), Cognition and motivation: Forging an interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 407–432). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G. (Eds.). (2011). Motivation in grammar and the lexicon. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.27" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1075/hcp.27</a>
- Radden, G., & Panther, K.-U. (Eds.). (2004). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Rákosi, G., Laczkó, T., & Csernyi, G. (2011). On English phrasal verbs and their Hungarian counterparts from the perspective of a computational linguistic project. Argumentum, 7, 80–89.
- Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 328–350.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0</a>
- Rounds, C. H. (2001). Hungarian: An essential grammar. London and New York: Routledge.
- Sass, B. (2008). The verb argument browser. In A. Horák, I. Kopecek, K. Pala & P. Sojka (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Text, Speech and Dialogue (pp. 187–192). Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.
- Saussure, F. de.(1916). Course de linguistique générale. (Edited by Ch. Bally and A. Sechehaye). Lausanne and Paris: Payot.
- Schmid, H.-J. (2010). Does frequency in text instantiate entrenchment in the cognitive system? In D. Glynn & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 101–134). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Stefanowitsch, A. (2006). Words and their metaphors. In A. Stefanowitsch & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 64–105). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Surányi, B.(2009). Verbal particles inside and outside VP. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 56(2–3), 201–249.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2-3.3" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="text-signal-blue hover:underline">10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2-3.3</a>
- Thomason, G. S. (2005). Typological and theoretical aspects of Hungarian in contact with other languages. In A. Fenyvesi (Ed.), Hungarian language contact outside Hungary (pp. 11–29). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
- Tolcsvai Nagy, G. (2015). Az ige a magyar nyelvben. Funkcionális elemzés. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
- Váradi, T. (2002). The Hungarian national corpus. In M. González Rodríguez & C. Paz Suarez Araujo (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 385–389). Las Palmas, Spain: LREC.
Language: English
Page range: 31 - 47
Published on: Mar 20, 2020
Published by: University of Bialystok
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
Related subjects:
© 2020 Marcin Grygiel, published by University of Bialystok
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.