[Bickerton, Derek. 2008. Bastard tongues: A trailblazing linguist finds clues to our common humanity in the world’s lowliest languages. New York: Hill and Wang.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bickerton, Derek. 2013. The origins of syntactic language. In Maggie Tallerman, and Kathleen Gibson (eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution, 456–468. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Boas, Hans C. 2003. A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[Boeckx, Cedric. 2006. Linguistic minimalism: Origins, concepts, methods, and aims. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199247455.013.0018]Search in Google Scholar
[Bybee, Joan. 2013. Domain-general processes as the basis for grammar. In Maggie Tallerman, and Kathleen Gibson (eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution, 528–536. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. The grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cheung, Hung Nin Samuel. 2007. Xianggang Yueyu yufa de yanjiu [A grammar of Cantonese as spoken in Hong Kong]. The Chinese University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chomsky, Noam. 2015. Exploring the boundaries of Babel. In Andrea Moro, The boundaries of Babel, xi–xiii. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cristofaro, Sonia. 2014. Is there really a syntactic category of subordination? In Laura Visapää, Jyrki Kalliokoski, and Helena Sorva (eds.), Context of subordination: Cognitive, typological and discourse perspectives, 73–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.249.03cri]Search in Google Scholar
[Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Croft, William. 2012. Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248582.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Culicover, Peter W. 2013. Explaining syntax: Representations, structure, and computation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660230.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Culicover, Peter W. 2015. Simpler syntax and the mind: Reflections on syntactic theory and cognitive science. In Ida Toivonen, Piroska Csúri, and Emile van der Zee (eds.), Structures in the mind: Essays on language, music, and cognition in honor of Ray Jackendoff, 3–20. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/10044.003.0004]Search in Google Scholar
[Culicover, Peter W., and Ray Jackendoff. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Farrell, Patrick. 2005. Grammatical relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fauconnier, Gilles. 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139174220]Search in Google Scholar
[Fauconnier, Gilles. 2007. Mental spaces. In Dirk Geeraerts, and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 351–376. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fong, Ronald. 2015. A constructional-cognitive analysis of Chinese directionals. Cognitive Semantics 1(1). 104–130.10.1163/23526416-00101004]Search in Google Scholar
[Fong, Ronald. 2016. Chinese as satellite-framed: A constructional-cognitive interpretation. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 3(2). 233–258.10.1075/cogls.3.2.03fon]Search in Google Scholar
[Geuder, Wilhelm, and Matthias Weisgerer. 2008. Manner of movement and the conceptualization of force, slides, Journée d’étude ‘Il y a manière et manière’, Université d’Artois, Arras, France.]Search in Google Scholar
[Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University 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/9780199268511.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Huang, C-T James, Y-H Audrey Li, and Yafei Li. 2009. The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530]Search in Google Scholar
[Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Jackendoff, Ray. 2007. Language, consciousness, culture: Essays on mental structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/4111.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Jackendoff, Ray. 2010. Meaning and the lexicon: The parallel architecture 1975–2010. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[LaPolla, Randy J. 1992. Arguments against ‘subject’ and ‘direct object’ as viable concepts in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica 63(4). 759–813.]Search in Google Scholar
[Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar II: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Langacker, Ronald W. 2013. Essentials of Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0005]Search in Google Scholar
[Langacker, Ronald W. 2014. Subordination in a dynamic account of grammar. In Laura Visapää, Jyrki Kalliokoski, and Helena Sorva (eds.), Context of subordination, 17–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.249.02lan]Search in Google Scholar
[Levin, Beth and Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2013. Lexicalized meaning and manner/result complementarity. In Boban Arsenijević, Berit Gehrke, and Rafael Marín (eds.), Studies in the composition and decomposition of event predicates. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-5983-1_3]Search in Google Scholar
[Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613609]Search in Google Scholar
[Li, Charles, and Sandra Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Loar, Jian Kang. 2011. Chinese syntactic grammar: Functional and conceptual principles. New York: Peter Lang.10.3726/978-1-4539-0514-2]Search in Google Scholar
[Slobin, Dan. 2004. The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Sven Strömqvist, and Ludo Verhoeven (eds.), Relating events in narrative volume 2: Typological and contextual perspectives, 219–257. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Stassen, Leon. 1985. Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.]Search in Google Scholar
[Tallerman, Maggie. 2013. What is syntax? In Maggie Tallerman, and Kathleen Gibson (eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution, 442–455. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Talmy, Leonard. 2016. Properties of main verbs. Cognitive Semantics 2(2). 133–163.10.1163/23526416-00202001]Search in Google Scholar
[Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, and Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Cosntructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Van Valin, Robert D Jr, and Randy J LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166799]Search in Google Scholar
[Yiu, Yuk Man Carine. 2005. Spatial extension: Directional verbs in Cantonese. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology dissertation.]Search in Google Scholar
[Yiu, Yuk-man Carine. 2013. Directional verbs in Cantonese: A typological and historical study. Language and Linguistics 14(3). 511–569.]Search in Google Scholar
