1. bookVolume 61 (2020): Edition 1 (March 2020)
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2199-6059
ISSN
0860-150X
Première parution
08 Aug 2013
Périodicité
4 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
Accès libre

The Cognitive Motivation Behind the Semantics of Hungarian Co-Verbial Constructions with Össze and Szét

Publié en ligne: 20 Mar 2020
Volume & Edition: Volume 61 (2020) - Edition 1 (March 2020)
Pages: 31 - 47
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
2199-6059
ISSN
0860-150X
Première parution
08 Aug 2013
Périodicité
4 fois par an
Langues
Anglais

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.Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.Search in Google Scholar

Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors andprimary scenes (Ph. D. dissertation). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.Search in Google Scholar

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), 123–136.10.3765/bls.v23i1.1258Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Grygiel, M. (2018b). Phrasal verbs in the translation of specialized texts. Komunikacja Specjalistyczna, 15–16, 177–190.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Heine, B. (1997). Cognitive foundations of grammar. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613463Search in Google Scholar

Imrényi, A., Kugler, N., Ladányi, M., Markó, A., Tátrai, S., & Tolcsvai Nagy, G. (2017). Nyelvtan. Budapest: OsirisKiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Kardos,É. (2016). Telicity marking in Hungarian. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 1(1), 41. http://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.5210.5334/gjgl.52Search in Google Scholar

Kenesei, I., Vago, R., & Fenyvesi, A. (1998). Hungarian. (Routledge Descriptive Grammars series). London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kiss, K. (2002). The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511755088Search in Google Scholar

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.Search 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

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.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Knittel, M. L. (2015). Preverbs, aspect and nominalization in Hungarian. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 43, 47–76. doi: 10.4000/rlv.224510.4000/rlv.2245Search in Google Scholar

Mroczko, E. (1989). Język węgierski dla początkujących. Warsaw: Wiedza Powszechna.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Panther, K.-U. (2013). Motivationin language. In S. Kreitler (Ed.), Cognition and motivation: Forging an interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 407–432). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G. (Eds.). (2011). Motivation in grammar and the lexicon. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.27Search in Google Scholar

Radden, G., & Panther, K.-U. (Eds.). (2004). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 328–350.10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0Search in Google Scholar

Rounds, C. H. (2001). Hungarian: An essential grammar. London and New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, F. de.(1916). Course de linguistique générale. (Edited by Ch. Bally and A. Sechehaye). Lausanne and Paris: Payot.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Surányi, B.(2009). Verbal particles inside and outside VP. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 56(2–3), 201–249.10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2-3.3Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Tolcsvai Nagy, G. (2015). Az ige a magyar nyelvben. Funkcionális elemzés. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.Search in Google Scholar

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.Search in Google Scholar

Articles recommandés par Trend MD

Planifiez votre conférence à distance avec Sciendo