The Use of Onomatopoeic Interjections in Predicate Function in Russian and Other Languages: A Perspective from the Corpus of Parallel Texts of the Russian National Corpus

References

• Akita, K. 2017. “The Linguistic Integration of Japanese Ideophones and its Typological Implications.” Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 62 (2):314–34. doi: 10.1017/cnj.2017.6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bańko, M. 2008. Współczesny polski onomatopeikon. Ikoniczność w języku. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
   Google Scholar
• Bartens, A. 2000. Ideophones and Sound Symbolism in Atlantic Creoles. Helsinki: Finnish Academy of Science and Letters.
   Google Scholar
• Dingemanse, M. 2012. “Advances in the Cross-Linguistic Study of Ideophones.” Language and Linguistics Compass 6 (10):654–72. doi: 10.1002/lnc3.361
   Google Scholar
• Fidler, M. U. 2014. Onomatopoeia in Czech: A Conceptualization of Sound and Its Connections to Grammar and Discourse. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Hinton, L., Nichols, J., and J. J. Ohala, eds. 1994. Sound Symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. 2017. “Basque Ideophones from a Typological Perspective.” The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 62 (2):196–220. doi: 10.1017/cnj.2017.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isačenko, A. V. 1975. Die russische Sprache der Gegenwart. Munich: Max Hueber.
   Google Scholar
• Jääskeläinen, A. 2013. Todisteena äänen kuva. Suomen kielen imitatiivikonstruktiot. Helsinki: Unigrafia.
   Google Scholar
• Karcevski, S. 1941. “Introduction à l’étude de l’interjection.” Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure 1:57–75.
   Google Scholar
• Katsuki-Pestemer, N. 2014. An Introduction to Japanese Ideophones. Munich: Lincom.
   Google Scholar
• Kor Šajn, I. 2008. “Pljuch! – pljuch– pljuchnut′(sja). K voprosu ob èvoljucii narrativnych predikatov v svete korpusnych dannych.” In Instrumentarij rusistiki: korpusnye podchody, edited by A. Mustajoki, M.V. Kopotev, L.A. Birjulin and E. Ju. Protasova, 152–162. Helsinki: Department of Slavonic and Baltic Languages and Literatures.
   Google Scholar
• Kozanecka, M. 1996. “Transparency and Visibility of the Translator in Literary Texts.” In Translation and Meaning Part 4, edited by B. Lewandowska and T.M. Thelen, 241. Maastricht: UPM.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, Ill.: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Langacker, R. W. 1987: Foundations of Cognitive Grammar I. Theoretical Prerequisties. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ljaševskaja, O. N., and S. A. Šarov. 2009. Častotnyj slovar′ sovremennogo russkogo jazyka (na materialach Nacional′nogo korpusa russkogo jazyka). Moscow: Azbukovnik.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, G., and M. Dingemanse. 2015. “Iconicity in the Lab: A Review of Behavioural, Developmental, and Neuroimaging Research Into Sound-symbolism.” Frontiers in Psychology 6:1246. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood, G., M. Dingemanse, and P. Hagort. 2016. “Sound-Symbolism Boosts Novel Word Learning.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 42 (8):1274–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lur′e, S. Ja. 1955. Neizmenjaemye slova v funkcii skazuemogo v indoevropejskich jazykach. L′vov: Izdatel′stvo L′vovskogo universiteta.
   Google Scholar
• Nikitina, T. 2012. “Russian Verboids: A Case Study in Expressive Vocabulary.” Linguistics 50 (2):165–89. doi: 10.1515/ling-2012-0007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paramonov, D. A. 1999. “Modal′nye značenija nesoglasovannych predikatov v sovremennom russkom jazyke.” Vestnik Omskogo Universiteta 1: 80–83.
   Google Scholar
• Perniss, P., R. Thompson, and G. Vigliocco. 2010. “Iconicity as a General Property of Language: Evidence From Spoken and Signed Languages.” Frontiers in Psychology 1: 1–15. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peškovskij, A. M. 1927. Russkij sintaksis v naučnom osveščenii. Moscow: Učpedgiz.
   Google Scholar
• Potebnja, A. A. 1941. Iz zapisok po russkoj grammatike, vol. 4: Glagol. Mestoimenie. Čislitel′noe. Predlog. Moscow: Izd-vo AN SSSR.
   Google Scholar
• Reformatskij A. A. 1963. Glagol′nye formy tipa chlop. Izvestija Akademii Nauk SSSR, Otdelenie literatury i jazyka 22 (2):127–29.
   Google Scholar
• Russkaja grammatika. 1980. Vol. 1–2. Moscow: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Schürmann, M. 2010. “Multimodal Interactions: Tactile-Auditory.” In Encyclopedia of Perception. vol. I, edited by E. B. Goldstein, 592–93. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sereda, E.V. 2005. Morfologija sovremennogo russkogo jazyka: Mesto meždometij v sisteme častej reči: učebnoe posobie. Moscow: Flinta/Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Shams, L. 2010. “Multimodal Interactions: Visual-Auditory.” In Encyclopedia of Perception. vol. I, edited by E. B. Goldstein, 595–97. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Spence, C. 2010. “Multimodal Interactions: Visual-Haptic.” In Encyclopedia of Perception. vol. I, edited by E. B. Goldstein, 597–99. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Tošovič, B. 2006. Èkspressivnyj sintaksis glagola russkogo i serbskogo/chorvatskogo jazykov. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul′tury.
   Google Scholar
• Voeltz, E. F. K., and C. Kilian-Hatz, eds. 2001. Ideophones. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Volansky, V., N. Ordan, and S. Wintner. 2015. “On the Features of Translationese.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 30 (1):98–118. doi: 10.1093/llc/fqt031
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, M. T. 2010. “Multimodal Integration: Neural Basis.” In Encyclopedia of Perception. vol. I, edited by E. B. Goldstein, 585–88. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zellner, Debra A. 2010. “Multimodal Interactions: Color-Chemical.” In Encyclopedia of Perception. vol. I, edited by E. B. Goldstein, 584–85. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
   Google Scholar