References

Barbara Dancygier; Eve Sweetser

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511486760.014

Akatsuka, N. 1985. Conditionals and epistemic scale. Language 61: 625–39CrossRef Google Scholar

Akatsuka, N. 1986. Conditionals are context-bound. In Traugott et al. (eds.), 333–52

Anderson, L. B. 1982. The “perfect” as a universal and as a language-particular category. In Hopper (ed.), 227–64

Athanasiadou, A. and , R. Dirven (eds.). 1997. On conditionals again. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRef Google Scholar

Athanasiadou, A. and R. Dirven 2000. Pragmatic conditionals. In , A. Foolen and , F. van der Leek (eds.), Constructions in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–26Google Scholar

Austin, J. L. 1961. Ifs and cans. In J. O. Urmson and G. J. Warnock, Philosophical papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 153–80

Auwera, J. 1985. Only if. Logique et Analyse 109: 61–74Google Scholar

Auwera, J. van der 1986. Conditionals and speech acts. In Traugott et al. (eds.), 197–214

Banfield, A. 1982. Unspeakable sentences: narration and representation in the language of fiction. Boston: Routledge and Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar

Barwise, J. and , J. Perry. 1983. Situations and attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Blakemore, D. 1987. Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford and New York: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Bolinger, D. 1977. Meaning and form. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Bolinger, D. 1984. Intonational signals of subordination. BLS 10: 401–13CrossRef Google Scholar

Brinton, L. J. 1998. The flowers are lovely; only, they have no scent”: The evolution of a pragmatic marker. In , R. Borgmeier, , H. Grabes, and , A. H. Jucker (eds.), Anglistentag 1997 Giessen, Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 9–33Google Scholar

Brooke-Rose, C. 1958. The grammar of metaphor. London: Secker and WarburgGoogle Scholar

Brugman, C. 1984. The very idea: A case study in polysemy and crosslexical generalizations. CLS 20: Papers from the Parasession on Lexical Semantics: 21–38Google Scholar

Brugman, C. 1986. Sisterhood is more powerful than you thought: Scopal adverb placement and illocutionary force. CLS 22: Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical theory: 40–53Google Scholar

Brugman, C. 1988. The story of over: Polsemy, semantics, and the structure of the lexicon. New York: GarlandGoogle Scholar

Bybee, J. 1999. Use impacts morphological representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 1016–17CrossRef Google Scholar

Bybee, J. and , S. Fleischman (eds.). 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRef Google Scholar

Bybee, J. and W. Pagliuca. 1985. Crosslinguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning. In , J. Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics and historical word formation. Berlin: Mouton, 59–83Google Scholar

Bybee, J. and Scheibman, J.. 1999. The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: the reduction of don't in English. Linguistics 37(4): 575–96CrossRef Google Scholar

Chafe, W. 1984. How people use adverbial clauses. BLS 10: 437–49CrossRef Google Scholar

Clark, B. 1989. A relevance-based approach to pseudo-imperatives. University College London Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 1: 53–74Google Scholar

Close, R. A. 1980. Will in if-clauses. In Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik (eds.), 100–109

Cohen, L. J. 1971. Some remarks on Grice's views about the logical particles of natural language. In Yehoshua Bar-Hillel (ed.), Pragmatics of natural Languages. Dordrecht Reidel, 50–68

Cole, P. and , J. Morgan (eds.). 1975. Syntax and semantics. Vol. III: Speech acts. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar

Comrie, B. 1981. On Reichenbach's approach to tense. CLS 17: 24–30Google Scholar

Comrie, B. 1982. Future time reference in the conditional protasis. Australian Journal of Linguistics 2: 143–52Google Scholar

Comrie, B. 1986. Conditionals: A typology. In Traugott, et al. (eds.), 77–99

Coulson, S. 2001. Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Couper-Kuhlen, E. and , B. Kortmann (eds.). 2000. Cause, condition, concession, contrast. Berlin: Mouton de GruyterCrossRef Google Scholar

Croft, W. 2001. Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Cutrer, M. 1994. Time and tense in narratives and everyday language. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, San Diego

Dancygier, B. 1985. If, unless, and their Polish equivalents. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 20: 65–72Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 1986. Two metalinguistic operators in English and Polish. Paper delivered at LARS 86 Conference in Utrecht, the Netherlands

Dancygier, B. 1987. If, if not and unless. Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Linguists, Berlin/GDR, August 1987, Vol. 1. 912–15

Dancygier, B. 1988a. A note on the so-called indicative conditionals. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 24: 123–32Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 1988b. Conditionals and concessives. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 24: 111–21Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 1990. Conditionals: sequence of events and sequence of clauses. In Fisiak (ed.), 357–73

Dancygier, B. 1992. Two metatextual operators: Negation and conditionality in English and Polish. BLS 18: 61–75CrossRef Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 1993. Interpreting conditionals: Time, knowledge and causation. Journal of Pragmatics 19: 403–34CrossRef Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 1998. Conditionals and prediction. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Dancygier, B. 2002. Mental space embeddings, counterfactuality, and the use of unless. English Language and Linguistics 6(2): 347–77CrossRef Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. 2003. Classifying conditionals: Form and function. English Language and Linguistics 7(2): 309–23CrossRef Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. (in press). Personal pronouns, blending, and narrative viewpoint. In A. Tyler (ed.), Language in the context of use: cognitive and functional approaches to language and language learning (Select papers from Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics 2003)

Dancygier, B. and Mioduszewska, E.. 1984. Semanto-pragmatic classification of conditionals. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 19: 121–34Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. and E. Sweetser. 1996. Conditionals, distancing, and alternative spaces. In , A. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 83–98Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. and , E. Sweetser 1997. Then in conditional constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 8(2): 109–36CrossRef Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. and E. Sweetser 2000. Constructions with if, since and because: Causality, epistemic stance, and clause order. In E. Couper-Kuhlen and B. Kortmann (eds.), 111–42

Davies, E. 1986. The English imperative. London: Croom HelmGoogle Scholar

Davis, W. 1983. Weak and strong conditionals. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 64: 57–71CrossRef Google Scholar

Davis, S. (ed.). 1991. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Declerck, R. and Reed, S.. 2000. The semantics and pragmatics of unless. English Language and Linguistics 4(2): 205–41CrossRef Google Scholar

Declerck, R. and Reed, S. 2001. Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin and New York: Mouton de GruyterCrossRef Google Scholar

Dirven, R. and A. Athanasiadou. 1996. Typology of if-clauses. In , E. Casad (ed.), Cognitive linguistics in the Redwoods. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 609–54Google Scholar

Ducrot, O. 1972. Dire et ne pas dire: Principes de sémantique linguistique. Paris: HermannGoogle Scholar

Ernst, T. 1984. Towards an integrated theory of adverb position in English. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics ClubGoogle Scholar

Ernst, T. 2002. The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 1975a. Pragmatic scales and logical structures. Linguistic Inquiry 6: 353–75Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 1975b. Polarity and the scale principle. CLS 11: 188–99Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 1985 [1994]. Mental Spaces. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Fauconnier, G. 1996. Analogical counterfactuals. In Fauconnier and Sweetser (eds.), 57–90

Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. and , E. Sweetser (eds.). 1996. Spaces, worlds, and grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Fauconnier, G. and M. Turner. 1996. Blending as a central process of grammar. In , A. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 113–30Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. and , M. Turner. 1998a. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22(2): 133–87CrossRef Google Scholar

Fauconnier, G. and M. Turner 1998b. Principles of conceptual integration. In J.-P. Koenig (ed.), 269–83

Fauconnier, G. and , M. Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books

Fillenbaum, S. 1976. Inducements: On the phrasing and logic of conditional promises, threats, and warnings. Psychological Research 38: 231–50CrossRef Google Scholar

Fillenbaum, S. 1986. The use of conditionals in inducements and deterrents. In Traugott et al. (eds.), 179–95

Fillmore, C. J. 1986. Varieties of conditional sentences. ESCOL 3 (Eastern States Conference on Linguistics): 163–82Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. 1988. The mechanisms of “Construction Grammar.”BLS 14: 35–55CrossRef Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. 1990a. Epistemic stance and grammatical form in English conditional sentences. CLS 26: 137–62Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. 1990b. The contribution of linguistics to language understanding. In Aura Bocaz (ed.), Proceedings of the First Symposium on Cognition, Language, and Culture. Universidad de Chile, 109–28

Fillmore, C. J. 1997 [1971]. Lectures on deixis. Stanford, CA: CSLIGoogle Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. and Kay, P.. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The what's X doing Y? construction. Language 75(1): 1–33Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., and O'Connor, M. C.. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 63(3): 501–38CrossRef Google Scholar

Fintel, K. 1991. Exceptive conditionals: The meaning of unless. NELS 22: 135–48Google Scholar

Fintel, K. von 1994. Restrictions on quantifier domains. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst

Fisiak, J. (ed.). 1990. Further insights into contrastive analysis. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsGoogle Scholar

Fleischman, S. 1982a. The future in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Fleischman, S. 1982b. The past and the future: Are they coming or going?BLS 8: 322–34Google Scholar

Fleischman, S. 1983. From pragmatics to grammar: Reflections on the diachronic development of complex pasts and futures in Romance. Lingua 60: 183–214CrossRef Google Scholar

Fleischman, S. 1989. Temporal distance: A basic linguistic metaphor. Studies in Language 13(1): 1–50CrossRef Google Scholar

Fleischman, S. 1990. Tense and narrativity: From medieval performance to modern fiction. Austin: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar

Foley, W. and , R. D. Van Valin. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Ford, C. E. 1993. Grammar in interaction: Adverbial clauses in American English conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Ford, C. E. and S. A. Thompson. 1986. Conditionals in discourse: A text-based study from English. In Traugott, et al. (eds.), 353–72

Fraser, B. 1969. An analysis of concessive conditionals. CLS 5: 66–73Google Scholar

Fraser, B. 1971. An analysis of even in English. In , C. J. Fillmore and , T. Langendoen (eds.), Studies in linguistic semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 151–80Google Scholar

Fujii, S. Y. 1989. Concessive conditionals in Japanese: A pragmatic analysis of the S1- TEMO-S2 construction. BLS 15: 291–302Google Scholar

Fujii, S. Y. 1993a. The use and learning of clause-linkage: Case studies in Japanese and English conditionals. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Berkeley

Fujii, S. Y. 1993b. On the idiomaticity of conditional constructions in Japanese. In J. Boulanger and C. Ouellon (eds.), CIL 1992: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress of Linguists. Les Presses de l'Université Laval, 59–62

Fujii, S. Y. 1993c. On the clause-linking TO construction in Japanese. In , P. Clancy (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics, Vol. II: Stanford, CA: CSLI, 3–19Google Scholar

Fujii, S. Y. 1994. A family of constructions: Japanese TEMO and other concessive conditionals. BLS 20: 194–207CrossRef Google Scholar

Fujii, S. Y. 1997. Mental-space builders: Observations from Japanese and English conditionals. In , M. Shibatani and , S. Thompson (eds.), Essays in semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 73–90Google Scholar

Fujii, S. Y. 2000. A corpus-based study of reduced conditionals in Japanese conversation. AILA'99. The Twelfth World Congress of Applied Linguistics. CD-ROM

Fujii, S. Y. 2001. Background knowledge and constructional meanings: English and Japanese concessive conditional clause-linking constructions. In E. Nemeth (ed.), Pragmatics in 2000: Selected papers from the seventh International Pragmatics Conference, Vol. II Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association, 235–48

Funk, W.-P. 1985. On a semantic typology of conditional sentences. Folia Linguistica 19(3/4): 365–414CrossRef Google Scholar

Geis, M. L. 1973. If and unless. In Kachru et al. (eds.), 231–53

Geis, M. L. and Zwicky, A. M.. 1971. On invited inferences. Linguistic Inquiry 2: 561–66Google Scholar

Genette, G. 1980. Narrative discourse: An essay in method. Translation by J. E. Lewin of Discours du récit, a portion of Figures III (1972). Ithaca: Cornell University Press

Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Green, G. M. 1976. Main clause phenomena in subordinate clauses. Language 52: 382–97CrossRef Google Scholar

Green, G. M. 1980. Some wherefores of English inversions. Language 56: 582–601CrossRef Google Scholar

Greenbaum, S., , G. Leech, and , J. Svartvik (eds.). 1980. Studies in English linguistics for Randolph Quirk. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), 41–58

Grice, H. P. 1978. Further notes on logic and conversation. In , P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. IX: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, 113–127Google Scholar

Günthner, S. 1999. Wenn-Sätze im Vor-Vorfeld: Ihre Formen und Funktionen in der gesprochenen Sprache. Deutsche Sprache 3: 209–35Google Scholar

Haegeman, L. 1984. Pragmatic conditionals in English. Folia Linguistica 18(3–4): 485–502CrossRef Google Scholar

Haiman, J. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54: 512–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Haiman, J. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 56: 515–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Haiman, J. 1983. Paratactic if-clauses. Journal of Pragmatics 7: 263–81CrossRef Google Scholar

Haiman, J. (ed). 1985. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRef Google Scholar

Haiman, J. 1986. Constraints on the form and meaning of the protasis. In Traugott et al. (eds.), 215–27

Harder, P. 1996. Functional semantics: A theory of meaning, structure and tense in English. Berlin: Mouton de GruyterCrossRef Google Scholar

Herforth, D. 1994. Conditional sentences in Old Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of East Asian Languages, University of California, Berkeley

Hopper, P. J. (ed.). 1982. Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRef Google Scholar

Hopper, P. and , E. C. Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Horn, L. 1969. A presuppositional analysis of only and even. CLS 5: 98–107Google Scholar

Horn, L. 1984. Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In , D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic applications (GURT 1984), Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 11–42Google Scholar

Horn, L. 1985. Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language 61: 121–74CrossRef Google Scholar

Horn, L. 1989. A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Horn, L. 2000. From if to iff: Conditional perfection as pragmatic strengthening. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 289–326CrossRef Google Scholar

Hyman, L. and , C. Li (eds.). 1988. Language, speech and mind: Studies in honour of Victoria A. Fromkin. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Iatridou, S. 1991. If then, then what?NELS 22: 211–25Google Scholar

Iatridou, S. 1994. On the contribution of conditional then. Natural Language Semantics 2: 171–99CrossRef Google Scholar

Israel, M. 1996. The way constructions grow. In , A. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure in discourse and language. Stanford, CA: CSLI. 217–30Google Scholar

Israel, M. 1998. The rhetoric of grammar: scalar reasoning and polarity sensitivity. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, San Diego

Jacobsen, W. 1992. Are conditionals topics? The Japanese case. In , D. Brentari, , G. N. Larson, and , L. A. MacLeod (eds.), The joy of grammar: A festschrift in honor of James D. McCawley. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 131–59Google Scholar

James, D. 1982. Past tense and the hypothetical: A cross-linguistic study. Studies in Language 6(3): 375–403CrossRef Google Scholar

Jespersen, O. 1940. A modern English grammar on historical principles, Vol. V: Syntax. London: George Allen and UnwinGoogle Scholar

Johnson, C. 1996. Learnability in the acquisition of multiple senses: SOURCE reconsidered. BLS 22: 469–81CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, C. 1999a. Constructional grounding: The role of interpretational overlap in lexical and constructional acquisition. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley

Johnson, C. 1999b. Metaphor vs. conflation in the acquisition of polysemy: The case of see. In , M. Hiraga, , C. Sinha, and , S. Wilcox (eds.), Cultural, psychological and typological issues in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 155–71Google Scholar

Kachru, B., , R. Lees, , Y. Malkiel, , A. Pietrangeli, and , S. Saporta (eds.). 1973. Issues in linguistics: Papers in honor of Henry and Renee Kahane. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois PressGoogle Scholar

Kamp, H. 1984. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In , J. Groenendijk, , T. Janssen, and , M. Stokhof (eds.), Truth, interpretation and information. Dordrecht: Foris, 1–41Google Scholar

Karttunen, L. and S. Peters. 1979. Conventional implicature. In Oh, C.-K. and D. Dinneen (eds.), 1–56

Kay, P. 1990. Even. Linguistics and Philosophy 13: 59–111CrossRef Google Scholar

Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The middle voice. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsCrossRef Google Scholar

Klein, W. 1992. The present perfect puzzle. Language 68: 525–52CrossRef Google Scholar

Koenig, J.-P. (ed.). 1998. Discourse and Cognition. Stanford, CA: CSLIGoogle Scholar

König, E. 1986. Conditionals, concessive conditionals and concessives: areas of contrast, overlap and neutralization. In Traugott, et al. (eds.), 229–46

König, E. and Traugott, E. C.. 1982. Divergence and apparent convergence in the development of yet and still. BLS 8: 170–79Google Scholar

König, E. and J. van der Auwera. 1988. Clause integration in German and Dutch conditionals, concessive conditionals and concessives. In , J. Haiman and , S. Thompson (eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 101–33Google Scholar

Köpcke, K.-M. and Panther, K.-U.. 1989. On correlations between word order and pragmatic function of conditional sentences in German. Journal of Pragmatics 13(5): 685–711CrossRef Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1974. Syntactic amalgams. CLS 10. 183–228Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1996. Sorry, I'm not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. In G. Fauconnier and E. Sweetser (eds.), 91–123

Lakoff, G. and E. Sweetser. 1994. Foreword to the second edition of Fauconnier 1985

Lakoff, R. T. 1971. If's, and's, and but's about conjunction. In , C. J. Fillmore and , D. T. Langendoen (eds.), Studies in linguistic semantics, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 114–49Google Scholar

Lakoff, R. T. 1973. The logic of politeness, or minding your p's and q's. CLS 9: 292–305Google Scholar

Langacker, R. W. 1978. The form and meaning of the English auxiliary. Language 54: 853–82CrossRef Google Scholar

Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar

Langacker, R. W. 1991a. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. II: Descriptive applications. Stanford CA: Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar

Langacker, R. W. 1991b. Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar

Leech, G. 1971. Meaning and the English verb. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Lewis, D. 1973. Counterfactuals. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Liddell, S. 1998. Grounded blends, gestures, and conceptual shifts. Cognitive Linguistics 9(3): 283–314CrossRef Google Scholar

Liddell, S. 2003. Grammar, gesture and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

McCawley, J. D. 1974. If and only if. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 632–35Google Scholar

Meillet, A. 1958 [1912]. L'évolution des formes grammaticales. In his Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris: Champion, 139–49. (Repr. from Scientia (Rivista di scienza) XII, 1912.)

Mejías-Bikandi, E. 1996. Space accessibility and mood in Spanish. In Fauconnier and Sweetser (eds.), 157–78

Michaelis, L. 1993. Towards a grammar of aspect: The case of the English Present Perfect construction. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley

Michaelis, L. 1994a. The ambiguity of the English present perfect. Journal of Linguistics 30: 111–57CrossRef Google Scholar

Michaelis, L. 1994b. A case of constructional polysemy in Latin. Studies in Language 18(1): 45–70CrossRef Google Scholar

Nieuwint, P. 1989. Should in conditional protases. Linguistics 27: 305–18CrossRef Google Scholar

Nikiforidou, V. 1990. Conditional and concessive clauses in Modern Greek: A syntactic and semantic description. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley

Nikiforidou, V. and D. Katis. 2000. Subjectivity and conditionality. In , A. Foolen and , F. van der Leek (eds.), Constructions in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 217–38Google Scholar

Oh, C.-K. and , D. Dinneen (eds.). 1979. Syntax and semantics, Vol. XI: Presupposition. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar

Palmer, F. R. 1974. The English verb. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Palmer, F. R. 1983. Future time reference in the conditional protasis: A comment on Comrie. Australian Journal of Linguistics 3(2): 241–43CrossRef Google Scholar

Panther, K.-U. and L. Thornburg. 2003. Metonymies as natural inference and activation schemas: The case of dependent clauses as independent speech-acts. In , K.-U. Panther and , L. Thornburg (eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 127–48Google Scholar

Pederson, E. 1991. Subtle semantics: universals in the polysemy of reflexives and causative constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley

Prince, E. F. 1985. Fancy syntax and “shared knowledge.” Journal of Pragmatics 9: 65–81CrossRef Google Scholar

Prince, E. F. 1978. Comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54: 883–906CrossRef Google Scholar

Quirk, R., , S. Greenbaum, , G. Leech, and , J. Svartvik. 1972. A grammar of contemporary English. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Quirk, R., , S. Greenbaum, , G. Leech, and , J. Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English Language. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar

Reichenbach, H. 1947. Elements of symbolic logic. London: Collier-Macmillan. (Reprinted New York: Free Press, 1966.)Google Scholar

Sanders, J. and G. Redeker. 1996. Perspective and the representation of speech and thought in narrative discourse. In Fauconnier and Sweetser (eds.), 290–317

Savova, M. and E. Sweetser. 1990. Pragmatic functions of conditional forms in English and Bulgarian. Paper presented at the 1990 International Pragmatics Conference, Barcelona

Schiffrin, D. 1992a. Conditionals as topics in discourse. Linguistics 30: 165–97CrossRef Google Scholar

Schiffrin, D. 1992b. Anaphoric then: Aspectual, textual, and epistemic meaning. Linguistics 30: 753–92CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwenter, S. 1994. “Hot news” and the grammaticalization of perfects. Linguistics 32: 995–1028CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwenter, S. 1998. From hypothetical to factual and beyond: Refutational si-clauses in Spanish conversation. In J.-P. Koenig (ed.), 423–36

Schwenter, S. 1999. Pragmatics of conditional marking: Implicature, scalarity and exclusivity. New York: Garland. (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics.)Google Scholar

Smith, M. 2001. The conceptual import of cataphoric pronouns in grammar. Paper presented at the International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Santa Barbara, July 2001

Smith, N. 1983. On interpreting conditionals. Australian Journal of Linguistics 3(1): 1–24CrossRef Google Scholar

Smith, N. and A. Smith. 1988. A relevance-theoretic account of conditionals. In Hyman and Li (eds.), 322–52

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D., 2002. Pragmatics, modularity and mindreading. Mind & Language 17: 1–2CrossRef Google Scholar

Sweetser, E. E. 1982. Root and epistemic modals: Causality in two worlds. BLS 8: 484–507Google Scholar

Sweetser, E. E. 1984. Semantic structure and semantic change: a cognitive linguistic study of modality, perception, speech acts, and logical relations. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley

Sweetser, E. E. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Sweetser, E. E. 1996a. Reasoning, mappings, and meta-metaphorical conditionals. In Shibatani, M. and Thompson, S. (eds.), Grammatical constructions: their form and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 221–233Google Scholar

Sweetser, E. E. 1996b. Mental spaces and the grammar of conditional constructions. In Fauconnier and Sweetser (eds.), 318–33

Sweetser, E. E. 1997. Role and individual readings of change predicates. In Nuyts, J. and Pederson, E. (eds.), Language and Conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 116– 36CrossRef Google Scholar

Sweetser, E. E. 1999. Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework. In Janssen, T. and Redeker, G. (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope and methodology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 129–62CrossRef Google Scholar

Tabor, W. 1994. Syntactic innovation: A connectionist model. Ph.D. dissertation, Linguistics Department, Stanford University

Talmy, L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science 2: 49–100CrossRef Google Scholar

Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics (2 vols.). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Taub, S. 1991. Constructions with unless. Unpublished manuscript

Tomasello, M. 2000. First steps towards a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics 11(1): 61–82Google Scholar

Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press

Traugott, E. C. 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings. In Lehmann, W. and Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Perspectives on historical linguistics, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 245–71CrossRef Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 1985. Conditional markers. In Haiman (ed.), 289–307

Traugott, E. C. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 57: 33–65Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 1997. Unless and but conditionals: A historical perspective. In A. Athanasiadou and R. Dirven (eds.), 169–90

Traugott, E. C. and Dasher, R.. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Traugott, E. C., Meulen, A., Snitzer, J. Reilly, and Ferguson, C. A. (eds.). 1986. On conditionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Turner, M. 1991. Reading minds. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar

Turner, M. 1996. The literary mind: The origins of thought and language. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Tyler, A. and V. Evans. 2001. The relation between experience, conceptual structure and meaning: Non-temporal uses of tense and language teaching. In Putz, M., Niemeier, S., and Dirven, R. (eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 63–105Google Scholar

Hoek, K. 1992. Anaphora and conceptual structure. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Verhagen, Arie. 2000. Concession implies causality, though in some other space. In Couper-Kuhlen and Kortmann (eds.), 361–80

Verstraete, J.-C. 2004. Initial and final position for adverbial clauses in English: The constructional basis of the discursive and syntactic differences. Linguistics 42: 819–853CrossRef Google Scholar

Verstraete, J.-C. 2005. Two types of coordination in clause combining. Lingua 115-4: 611–626CrossRef Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, A. 1987. Boys will be boys: “radical semantics” vs. “radical pragmatics.”Language 63(1): 95–114CrossRef Google Scholar

Marjorie Allingham. 1968. A Cargo of Eagles. P. & M. Youngman Carter. (Avon paperback 1990)

Charlotte Armstrong. 1943. The Case of the Weird Sisters (Zebra Books reprint, 1992)

Frances Hodgson Burnett. 1905. A Little Princess. Frederick Warne and Co

Mary Higgins Clark. 1987. Weep No More, My Lady. Simon and Schuster. (1988 paperback, Dell Publishing)

Susan Cooper. 1973. The Dark is Rising. Simon and Schuster. Aladdin Paperbacks

Susan Cooper. 1975. The Grey King. Simon and Schuster. Aladdin Paperbacks

Pamela Dean. 1985. The Secret Country. Ace Books: Berkley Publishing Group. (Firebird paperback from Penguin, 2000)

C. S. Forester. 1962. Hornblower and the Hotspur. Penguin Books

Dick Francis. 1989. Straight. G. Putnam's Sons. (Ballantine paperback 1990)

Alex Garland. 1997. The Beach. Riverhead Books

Alan Garner. 1963. The Moon of Gomrath. Penguin Books

Sue Grafton. 1999. O is for Outlaw. Ballantine Books

Grahame, Kenneth. 1908 The Wind in the Willows. Charles Scribner's Sons

Joseph Heller. 1959/89. Catch 22. Scribner

Georgette Heyer. 1968. Cousin Kate. E. P. Dutton. (Bantam Books paperback 1970)

Christopher Koch. 1978. The Year of Living Dangerously. Penguin Books

Sara Paretsky. 1994. Tunnel Vision. Dell Publishing

Sara Paretsky. 1999. Hard Time. Dell Publishing

Richard North Patterson. 1999. Dark Lady. Random House. (Arrow Books paperback 2000)

Jonathan Raban. 1986. Coasting. Pan Books/Picador

Jonathan Raban. 1981/1998. Old Glory. Vintage Books

Jonathan Raban. 1990/1991. Hunting Mister Heartbreak. Edward Burlingame Books/Harper Collins

Dorothy L. Sayers. 1934. Nine Tailors. Harcourt Brace and World

Dorothy L. Sayers. 1923. Whose Body? Harper and Row. (Avon paperback 1961)

Dorothy L. Sayers. 1927. Clouds of Witness. Harper and Row. (Avon paperback 1966)

Paul Scott. 1966. The Jewel in the Crown. William Morrow and Co. (Arrow paperback 1997)

Noel Streatfeild. 1951. White Boots. Collins (Puffin paperback 1951)

Susan Sontag. 2000. In America. Picador USA

Neal Stephenson. 1992. Snow Crash. Bantam Books

William G. Tapply. 1988. A Void in Hearts. Charles Scribner's Sons

P. L. Travers. 1934. Mary Poppins. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

Mark Twain. Innocents Abroad. 1883. James Osgood and Co

Anne Tyler. 1985. The Accidental Tourist. Penguin Books

Anne Tyler. 1998. The Patchwork Planet. Penguin Books