Beavers, J. & A. Koontz-Garboden. 2013a. Complications in diagnosing lexical meaning: a rejoinder to Horvath and Siloni [J]. Lingua 134:210-218.
Beavers, J. & A. Koontz-Garboden. 2013b. In defense of the reflexivization analysis of anticausativization [J]. Lingua 131:199-216.
Beavers, J. & C. Zubair. 2013. Anticausatives in Sinhala: involitivity and causer suppression [J]. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 31(1):1-46.
Beebee, H., C. Hitchcock & P. Menzies (eds.). 2009. The Oxford Handbook of Causation [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Comrie, B. 1989. Language Universal and Linguistics Typology (2nd) [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dixon, R. M. W. 2000. A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning [A]. In R. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald. (eds.). Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity [C]. New York: Cambridge University Press. 30-83.
Harley, H. 2013. External arguments and the mirror principle: on the distinctness of voice and v [J]. Lingua 125:34-57.
Horvath, J. & T. Siloni. 2011. Anticausatives: against reflexivization [J]. Lingua 121(15):2176-2186.
Horvath, J. & T. Siloni. 2013. Anticausatives have no cause(r): a rejoinder to Beavers and Koontz-Garboden (in this issue) [J]. Lingua 131:217-230.
Ji, Y. L. & J. Hohenstein. 2014. The syntactic packaging of caused motion components in a second language: English learners of Chinese [J]. Lingua 140:100-116.
Lewis, D. 1973. Causation [J]. Journal of Philosophy 70: 556-567.
Sanders, J., T. Sanders & E. Sweetser. 2012. Responsible subjects and discourse causality. How mental spaces and perspective help identifying subjectivity in Dutch backward causal connectives [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 44(2):191-213.
Sanders, T. & W. Spooren. 2013. Exceptions to rules: a qualitative analysis of backward causal connectives in Dutch naturalistic discourse [J]. Text & Talk 33(3):377-398.
Sanders, T., W. Spooren. & L. Noordman. 1992. Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations [J]. Discourse Processes 15(1). 1-35.
Talmy, L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition [J]. Cognitive Science (12):49-100.
Vesterinen, R. 2010. The relation between iconicity and subjectification in Portuguese complementation: Complements of perception and causation verbs [J]. Cognitive Linguistics 21(3):573-600.
Wolff, P. & J. Shepard. 2013. Causation, touch, and the perception of force [A]. In Ross B. H. (ed.). Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol 58 [C]. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press. 167-202.
Wolff, P. 2007. Representing causation [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General 136(1):82-111.
郭姝慧.2006.倒置致使句的类型及其制约条件[J].世界汉语教学(02):40-50.
廖巧云.2004.英语实据原因句探微[J].外国语(04):46-52.
廖巧云.2007.英语因果构式探讨[J].外语研究(03):24-27.
廖巧云.2008.英语实据因果句生成机理研究[J].现代外语(03):238-244.
廖巧云.2010.英语实据因果句识解机理研究[J].外语教学(05):10-14.
刘则渊、陈悦、侯海燕等.2008.科学知识图谱方法与应用[M].北京人民出版社.
彭国珍.2013.景颇语致使结构的类型学考察[J].中国语文(06):535-545.
熊学亮、梁晓波.2004.论典型致使结构的英汉表达异同[J].外语教学与研究(02):90-96.
熊学亮、魏薇.2014.倒置动结式的致使性透视[J].外语教学与研究(04):497-507.
张豫峰.2007.关于现代汉语致使态的思考[J].汉语学习(06):25-30.
张豫峰.2008.现代汉语致使语态句分析[J].中州学刊(04):246-248.
张豫峰.2014.现代汉语致使态研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社. |
