[
Alber, Birgit and Sabine Arndt-Lappe. 2012. Templatic and subtractive truncation. In J. Trommer (ed.). The phonology and morphology of exponence – the state of the art, 289–325. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Antoine, Fabrice. 2000. An English-French dictionary of clipped words. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bybee, Joan L. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Davies, Mark. 2008. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available online at https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2000. Extragrammatical vs. marginal morphology. In U. Doleschal and A. M. Thornton (eds.). Extragrammatical and marginal phonology, 2–10. Munich: Lincom.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Firth, John R. 1957. A synopsis of linguistic theory 1930–1955. Studies in linguistic analysis, 1–32. Oxford: Blackwell.
]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
[
Heylen, Kris, Dirk Speelman and Dirk Geeraerts. 2012. Looking at word meaning. An interactive visualization of Semantic Vector Spaces for Dutch synsets. In Proceedings of the EACL-2012 joint workshop of LINGVIS & UNCLH: Visualization of Linguistic Patterns and Uncovering Language History from Multilingual Resources, 16–24. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/2388655.2388658.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Heylen, Kris, Thomas Wielfaert, Dirk Speelman and Dirk Geeraerts. 2015. Monitoring polysemy. Word space models as a tool for large-scale lexical semantic analysis. Lingua 157: 153–172.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hilpert, Martin. 2019. Construction Grammar and its application to English. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hilpert, Martin and David Correia Saavedra. 2020. Using token-based semantic vector spaces for corpus-linguistic analyses: From practical applications to tests of theoretical claims. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16 (2): 393–424. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2017-0009.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hilpert, Martin and Susanne Flach. 2020. Disentangling modal meanings with distributional semantics. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 36 (2): 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqaa014.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hilpert, Martin, David Correia Saavedra and Jennifer Rains. 2021. A multivariate approach to English clippings. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 6 (1): 104. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5771.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jamet, Denis. 2009. A morphophonological approach to clipping in English: Can the study of clipping be formalized? Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology 1: 15–31.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Katamba, Francis. 2005. English words. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kreidler, Charles W. 2000. Clipping and acronymy. In G. Booij, C. Lehmann and J. Mugdan (eds.). Morphologie/morphology: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An international handbook on inflection and word-formation. Vol. 1, 956–963. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do linguistics with R. Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Levshina, Natalia and Steve Moran. 2021. Efficiency in human languages: Corpus evidence for universal principles. Linguistics Vanguard 7 (Suppl. 3): 20200081.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Levshina, Natalia and David Lorenz. 2022. Communicative efficiency and the Principle of No Synonymy: Predictability effects and the variation of want to and wanna. Language and Cognition 14 (2): 249–274. https://doi:10.1017/langcog.2022.7.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Montes, Mariana. 2021. Cloudspotting. Visual analytics for distributional semantics. Doctoral dissertation. University of Leuven.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Plag, Ingo. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schütze, Hinrich. 1998. Automatic word sense discrimination. Computational Linguistics 24 (1): 97–124.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tournier, Jean. 1985. Introduction descriptive à la lexicogénétique de l’anglais contemporain. Paris-Genève: Champion-Slatkine.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Turney, Peter and Patrick Pantel. 2010. From frequency to meaning: Vector space models of semantics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 37: 141–188.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Uhrig, Peter. 2015. Why the Principle of No Synonymy is overrated. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 63 (3): 323–337. https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2015-0030.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van der Maaten, Laurens J. P. and Geoffrey E. Hinton. 2008. Visualizing data using t-SNE. Journal of Machine Learning Research 9: 2579–2605.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wheeler, Eric S. 2005. Multidimensional scaling for linguistics. In R. Koehler, G. Altmann and R.G. Piotrowski (eds.). Quantitative linguistics. An international handbook, 548–553. Berlin: De Gruyter.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1984. Diminutives and depreciatives: Semantic representation for derivational categories. Quaderni di semantica 5 (1): 123–130.
]Search in Google Scholar
