[Allwood, Jens 2003 “Meaning potentials and context: Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning”, in: Hubert Cuyckens et al. (eds.), 29-66.10.1515/9783110219074.29]Search in Google Scholar
[Cuyckens, Hubert - René Dirven - John Taylor (eds.) 2003 Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219074]Search in Google Scholar
[Boas, Hans C. 2003 A constructional approach to resultatives. (Stanford Monographs in Linguistics.) Stanford: Centre for the Study of Language and Information.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cameron, Lynne J. 2003 Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chłopicki, Władysław - Andrzej Pawelec - Agnieszka Pokojska (eds.) 2007 Cognition in language: Volume in honour of Professor Elżbieta Tabakowska. Kraków: Tertium.]Search in Google Scholar
[Clark, Herbert H. 1996 Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]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
[Deignan, Alice 2005 Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/celcr.6]Search in Google Scholar
[Deignan, Alice 2006 “The grammar of linguistic metaphors”, in: Anatol Stefanowitsch - Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), 106-123.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dirven, René 2005 “Major strands in Cognitive Linguistics”, in: Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez - Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.), 17-68.]Search in Google Scholar
[Evans, Vyvyan 2006 “Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction”, Cognitive Linguistics 17(4): 491-534.10.1515/COG.2006.016]Search in Google Scholar
[Evans, Vyvyan - Melanie Green 2006 Cognitive Linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fauconnier, Giles - Mark Turner 2002 The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fillmore, Charles J. 1985 “Frames and the semantics of understanding”, Quaderni di Semantica 6: 222- 254.]Search in Google Scholar
[Frijda, Nico H. 1986 The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Geeraerts, Dirk 2003 “Decontextualizing and recontextualizing tendencies in 20th century linguistics and literary theory”, in: Ewald Mengel et al. (eds.), 369-379. 2006 “Introduction: A rough guide to Cognitive Linguistics”, in: Dirk Geeraerts (ed.), 1-28.10.1515/9783110199901.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Geeraerts, Dirk (ed.) 2006 Cognitive Linguistics: Basic readings. Berlin - New York: Mounton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110199901]Search in Google Scholar
[Goldberg, Adele E. 1995 Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Giora, Rachel 1999 “On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language”, Journal of Pragmatics 31/7: 919-929.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00100-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Glynn, Dylan 2004 “Constructions at the crossroads: the place of construction grammar between field and frame”, Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 2: 197-233.10.1075/arcl.2.07gly]Search in Google Scholar
[Haiman, John 1980 “Dictionaries and encyclopedias”, Lingua 50: 329-357.10.1016/0024-3841(80)90089-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Hampe, Beate - Joseph E. Grady (eds.) 2005 From perception to meaning: Image schemas in Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197532.0.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanks, Patrick 2006 “Metaphoricity is gradable”, in: Anatol Stefanowitsch - Stefan Th. Gries (eds.),17-36.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hudson, Richard 2008 “Word grammar and construction grammar”, in: Graeme Trousdale - Nikolas Gisborne (eds.), 257-302.10.1515/9783110199178.3.257]Search in Google Scholar
[Kövecses, Zoltán 2000 Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002 Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lakoff, George 1987 Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Lakoff, George - Mark Johnson. 1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Langacker, Ronald W. 1987 Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 2005 “Construction grammars: Cognitive, radical, and less so”, in: Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez - Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.), 101-159. 2008 Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[McRae, Kenneth J.- Michael Spivey-Knowlton - Michael K. Tanenhaus 1998 “Modelling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension”, Journal of Memory and Language 38: 283-312.10.1006/jmla.1997.2543]Search in Google Scholar
[Mengel, Ewald - Hans-Jorg Schmid - Michael Steppard (eds.) 2003 Anglistentag 2002 Bayreuth. Trier: Wissenschaftliger Verlag.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco J. - Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.) 2005 Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction. (Cognitive Linguistics Research 32.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Solomon, Robert C. 1976 The passions. New York: Doubleday Anchor.]Search in Google Scholar
[Steen, Gerard J. 2002 “Metaphor identification: A cognitive approach”, Style 36/3: 386-407. 2007 Finding metaphor in grammar and usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.]Search in Google Scholar
[Stefanowitsch, Anatol 2006 “Words and their metaphors: A Corpus-based approach”, in: Anatol Stefanowitsch - Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), 63-105.]Search in Google Scholar
[Stefanowitsch, Anatol - Stefan Th. Gries 2003 “Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions”, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8/2: 209-243.10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste]Search in Google Scholar
[Stefanowitsch, Anatol - Stefan Th. Gries (eds.) 2006 Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. Berlin: Mounton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110199895]Search in Google Scholar
[Stern, Josef 2000 Metaphor in context. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Strugielska, Ariadna 2010 “Metafora konceptualna - między kategorią klasyczną a modelem potocznym”, in: Zdzisław Wąsik - Aleksandra Wach (eds.), 109-121.]Search in Google Scholar
[Szwedek, Aleksander 2007 “Polysemy and metaphorization”, in: Władysław Chłopicki et al. (eds.), 255-272.]Search in Google Scholar
[Taylor, John 2002 Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Trousdale, Graeme - Nikolas Gisborne (eds.) 2008 Constructional approaches to English grammar. Berlin - New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110199178]Search in Google Scholar
[Vandeloise, Claude 1994 Spatial prepositions: A case study from French. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wąsik, Zdzisław - Aleksandra Wach (eds.) 2010 Heteronomie glottodydaktyki: Domeny, pogranicza i specjalizacje nauczania językówobcych. Księga jubileuszowa z okazji sześćdziesięciolecia urodzin prof. dr hab. TeresySiek-Piskozub. Poznań: Instytut Filologii Angielskiej UAM.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zlatev, Jordan 2005 “What’s in a schema? Bodily mimesis and the grounding of language”, in: Beate Hampe - Joseph E. Grady (eds.), 313-342.10.1515/9783110197532.4.313]Search in Google Scholar
[BNC: The British National Corpus. [Available at: http:// www.view.byu.edu ED 01.2011].]Search in Google Scholar
[Kemmer, Suzanne 2005 “Constructional profiles as the basis of semantic analysis”, [Paper read at the Converging and Diverging Trends in Cognitive Linguistics conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 17-18 October. Available at: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/DUB3.ppt].]Search in Google Scholar
