Výzkum slovesné valence ve slovanských zemích. Karolína Skwarska Elżbieta Kaczmarska (eds.)

Výzkum slovesné valence ve slovanských zemích Karolína Skwarska Elżbieta Kaczmarska (eds.) Slovanský ústav AV ČR, v. v. i. Praha 2016 3

Vědečtí recenzenti: prof. Dr. Danuta Rytel-Schwarz Natalia Kotsyba, PhD Mgr. Bohuslava Němcová, Ph.D. doc. Dr. phil. Markus Giger Jazyková úprava: Dr. Nataliya Zanegina (ruské texty) doc. PhDr. Lucie Saicová Římalová, Ph.D. (anglický text) Erik Piper (anglická resumé) kolektiv autorů KATALOGIZACE V KNIZE NÁRODNÍ KNIHOVNA ČR Výzkum slovesné valence ve slovanských zemích / Karolína Skwarska - Elżbieta Kaczmarska (eds.). -- Vydání první. -- Praha: Slovanský ústav AV ČR, v.v.i., 2016. -- 440 stran. -- (Práce Slovanského ústavu AV ČR. Nová řada; svazek 43) ISBN 978-80-86420-60-8 811.16 * 81'367.625 * 81'367 * 81 * 81'374 * 81-115 - slovanské jazyky - slovesa - valence (lingvistika) - teorie jazyka - jazykové slovníky - komparativní lingvistika - kolektivní monografie 811.16 - Slovanské jazyky [11] Vydáno s finanční podporou Akademie věd České republiky Karolína Skwarska, 2016 Slovanský ústav AV ČR, v. v. i., 2016 ISBN 978-80-86420-60-8 4

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod 1. Introduction The Valency Database of Croatian Verbs is one of the projects of the Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistics conducted by Department of General Linguistics. The Valency Database of Croatian Verbs will become the foundation of an on-line searchable dictionary and a potential printed dictionary. Six associates are working as lexicographers, and two additional associates are joint members who are working as computer experts. Since May 2013 until the end of 2014, the alphabetical list of about 900 verbs was compiled, a linguistic model has been chosen, Tschwane- Lex-based user interface for data entry was customized, and 53 lemmas of psychological verbs with 168 different sublemmas were processed. This amount of work could not have been completed if we had not done some preparations during a previous project entitled The Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs, which is a predecessor of the Valency database in a certain way. The previous project did not have an appropriate computational support (and valency descriptions were written down as a linear data) and many facets of verb processing were not well elaborated. Therefore, we have adopted some aspects of the previous processing in our work, but the overall concept was redesigned. 2. Technical aspects The question which tool should be used for the development of our dictionary was raised at the very beginning of the project. There were two acceptable paths to choose from: development of a custom Content Management System (CMS) or usage of one of the existing commercial lexicographical solutions. Given our limited funds and the fact that some of our team members had extensive experience in compiling dictionaries using one such commercial application, a decision was made not to develop a custom CMS but to use TshwaneLex. Aside from the advantage of our having experience in developing dictionaries in it, the TshwaneLex s main advantage is its user-friendliness, 103

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs which implies a short and easy training of a lexicographer. TshwaneLex displays, at all times, a full list of the lemma signs of all entries in the dictionary. Clicking on a lemma sign selects that lemma for viewing or editing, and displays a WYSIWYG preview of the currently selected lemma. This preview updates immediately whenever changes are made. All lemma signs appearing in the preview are hyperlinked, allowing the lexicographer to select a lemma immediately. The different fields of an entry (e.g. definitions, translation equivalents and usage examples) are displayed in different colors ( JOFFE SCHRYVER 2004). As an antecedent of the actual customization of the dictionary grammar, a SQL compatible schema was developed in order to define general tables and logical relations which are essential in order to have a fully functional on-line dictionary as well as a solid database background that will enable the usage of a Boolean based search engine. According to the predefined requirements (see chapter 4), a robust schema was developed (Figure 1). Figure 1. Simplified Schema 104

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod The actual structure of the dictionary grammar (that closely corresponds to the original schema) was developed using a DTD (Document Type Definition) editing module of the TshwaneLex. A DTD is a description of the structure of the entries of a particular dictionary. Essentially, this is a description of specific types of elements that a dictionary has, as well as attributes that each of those elements may have. Our goal was to set up the DTD as completely as possible at the start of the project, allowing for minor modifications later on. This step has ensured that the final dictionary follows a logical and consistent structure throughout the project. Eventually, using a ODBC connection, the DTD was automatically transcribed into a PostgreSQL database (http://www.postgresql.org/, accessed January 15 2015) environment. Aside from allowing multiple users simultaneously, this will result in the fact that the final dictionary could be easily published on-line as well as be query-ready for future research purposes. In the final stage of our project, the processed data will be made available to general public via web-based (HTML5 & PHP) search engine. 3. Alphabetical list, the linguistic model and examples The alphabetical list of verbs, which amounts to about 900 lemmas, is compiled manually. Since we believe that none of Croatian corpora which we have at our disposal is balanced enough to serve for an automatic extraction of most frequent verbs, we have based our list on two sources: the Croatian frequency dictionary ( MOGUŠ ET AL. 1999) and textbooks for studying Croatian as a second language ( ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ ET AL. 2011; 2012; 2013; GRGIĆ ET AL. 2013). In the beginning, we have set an alphabetical list of about 700 verb lemmas as our goal for two reasons. Firstly, various researches have proved that in order to be able to understand 90 % of texts in a language ( BOŠNJAK BOTICA 2011), it is necessary to be acquainted with 3500 words. Among these 3500 words, 20 % are verbs, which makes total of 750. Secondly, German valency dictionary VALBU (2004), which we have chosen as our model, contains 638 verb lemmas. After comparing and confronting the two lists, we have finally reached somewhat larger list of about 900 verb lemmas. The verbs in our list are divided into 35 semantic classes. Our classes are motivated by Beth Levin s classification of English verbs, but they differ from her classes in many respects ( LEVIN 1993). The classification is tentative and we expect it to be changed during the further processing of verbs. 105

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs After becoming acquainted with various models of valency descriptions and lexicographic treatment of valency of verbs, we have decided to follow German valency dictionary VALBU (2004) as our linguistic and lexicographical model. The printed dictionary, published in 2004, is compiled by Helmut SCHUMACHER, Jacqueline KUBCZAK, Renate SCHMIDT, and Vera DE RUITER. Its on-line variant is available at the web site of Institute of German Language in Manheim. On the one hand, early descriptions of valency of verbs in Croatian linguistics have been performed in German valency tradition and we wanted to follow this tradition in some respect. The first introduction of valency theory in the description of Croatian verbs started in the mid-eighties of the 20th century ( SAMARDŽIJA 1986) and the first, rather small, valency dictionary was published in 1993 (Rječnik valentnosti hrvatskih glagola (RVHG 1993). It consists of 50 verbs and has been published as a part of the proceedings of Institute of Linguistics of Faculty of Philosophy (University of Zagreb). 1 On the other hand, we assumed that the VALBU model is simple enough to unite linguists and lexicographers with different backgrounds, and to enable simple and fast processing of verbs. In respect of recent investigations of valency in Croatia, we have to mention two contributions. The first one is Krešimir ŠOJAT s doctoral thesis from 2008 which is a significant theoretical contribution to research into Croatian verb valency. The second contribution is an on-line valency lexicon CROVALLEX 2, published in the same year (2008). CROVALLEX, created by Nives MIKELIĆ PRERADOVIĆ, follows the Czech valency lexicon VALLEX. The lexicon has been revised and improved in 2010. CRO- VALLEX has set different goals from ours: the verb lemmas are selected according to different methods and the differentiation of verb senses does not correlate with ours. While the total number of lemmas is smaller, the differentiation of verb meanings is more complex in our database. CRO- VALLEX also lists idioms and collocations as part of verb meanings while we single out idioms and collocations in a separate unit, together with the morphology block and the semantic class of a verb. Finally, there is an ob- 1 The name of the proceedings was: Kontrastivna analiza engleskog i hrvatskog jezika (Svezak IV): Teorija valentnosti i rječnik valentnosti hrvatskih glagola. Zagreb: Zavod za lingvistiku / Contrastive analysis of English and Croatian: The Valence theory and the Valence Dictionary of Croatian Verbs. Zagreb Institute of Linguistics. 2 http://theta.ffzg.hr/crovallex/data/html/generated/alphabet/index.html 106

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod vious difference in background theories: while Mikelić Preradović follows the tradition of functional gene rative description, our model is based on the dependency theory. We draw our examples manually from two Croatian corpora: Croatian Language Repository and hrwac. The corpus examples are adapted, but mostly not invented. 4. The Valency Database of Croatian Verbs The Valency Database of Croatian Verbs is created as a three-level data entry. An illustration of TshwaneLex user interface is given in Figure 2. Figure 2. Illustration of the user interface in TshwaneLex application 4.1. The first level The first level consists of a verb lemma in infinitive form, except for inherent reflexive verbs, which are entered with the reflexive particle se self. Each lemma is connected with three blocks: a morphological block, a prototypical semantic class of a verb and a block for idioms and collocations. The morphological block encompasses the verb inflections (the first person singular present, the third person plural present, masculine perfect participle, feminine perfect participle, and masculine passive participle) and an aspect label. The aspect label includes abbreviations for imperfective, per- 107

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs fective, and biaspectual value. As said above, after the morphology block there is a semantic class to which the specific verb belongs. The idiom and collocation block comprises a collocation or an idiom (for example, mrziti iz dna duše, hate your guts, literally hate from the bottom of someone s soul ), its definition (jako mrziti koga ili što strongly hate someone ), and an example of usage (Ako idete na posao, mrzit ćete budilicu iz dna duše. If you go to work, you will strongly hate your alarm clock. ). The first level is illustrated in Figure 3. Figure 3. Illustration of the first level 4.2. The second level The second level consists of different verb senses that are introduced by numerated sublemmas (e.g. mrziti 1, mrziti 2). Each sublemma is connected with a reflexive label, a stylistic label (if different from neutral), a possibility of changing a verb semantic class, and a semantic definition. All reflexive verbs, other than refl exiva tantum, that is inherent reflexive verbs, are treated as sublemmas, i.e. as one of the senses of the verb. 3 The treatment of reflexive verbs in valency models is a much-discussed question. In this respect, we depart from German model that treats every reflexive verb as a separate lemma regardless of a correlated non-reflexive verb. 4 The Czech valency dictionary VALLEX treats refl exiva tantum and derived reflexive verbs differently from other occurrences of reflexive verbs ( KETTNEROVÁ 3 As the authors of VALLEX have pointed out (p.c.), the possibility of a verb to have a reflexive variant, i. e. some types of reflexivization (except for inherent reflexive verbs) can be seen (and it is often considered) as a syntactic operation. In this vein, it is not theoretically justified to introduce a reflexive verb as one of the meanings of the verb. Moreover, some other phenomena (as for example pro-drop) were considered as syntactic properties in our approach. 4 Im Gegensatz zu den meisten Wörterbüchern werden in VALBU Verben als verschieden betrachtet, wenn sie sich im Verbalkomplex unterschieden, auch wenn das Verballexem gleich ist. Daraus folgt, dass ein unpersönliches Verb oder ein Reflexivverb getrennt von ihrem homonymen persönlichen Verb lemmatisiert werden. (VALBU 2004, p. 21) 108

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod L OPATKOVÁ 2014). 5 The semantic definition of a verb sublemma includes a paraphrase and a synonym. An illustration of the second level processing of a verb vrijeđati introducing separate sublemmas for particular meanings is given in Figure 4. The non-reflexive variant vrijeđati means to offend (1) or to injure (2) and the reflexive variant (vrijeđati se) means to be offended (3) or has a reciprocal meaning offend each other (4). 6 Figure 4. Illustration of the second level 4.3. The third level After the definition has been written in, we enter the third level that contains a valency analysis. The valency analysis consists of linking a part of a sentence example with a valency complement. Each meaning / sense can be associated with several valency patterns and each valency pattern can be linked to several examples. We obviously assume that valency can be defined at the meaning level, not at the level of different verbs. The valency pattern is associated with a label that indicates non-standard use and with a constraint section. In the constraint section, morphosyntactic and other constraints of specific verb complements are recorded (there we, for exam- 5 KETTNEROVÁ and LOPATKOVÁ have described in detail how reflexivity is captured in two ways in VALLEX: refl exiva tantum verbs and derived reflexives are stored as separate lemmas in the data component of the lexicon, but ability of verbs to be used in a reflexive, reciprocal constructions or to undergo deagentive and dispositional diathesis is marked by special attributes in the data component. Formal rules for these processes are stored in the grammar component. 6 A proposal of treatment of reflexive verbs in a Croatian valency dictionary was given in (ORAIĆ 2008). 109

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs ple, note that the accusative complement of the verb sabrati to gather has to be restricted to plural or collective nominal phrase). The valency analysis contains a morphological, a syntactic, and a semantic description. This is illustrated in Figure 5. that gives the complete processing of the verb bojati se to fear. In this illustration, you can see the sentence examples that are introduced by a diamond sign. The part of an example, written below, is connected with hyphen with syntactic, morphological, and semantic description (semantic description is in the square brackets). The syntactic analysis follows the system of complement classes introduced in VALBU (2004) with some adjustments that logically result from Croatian syntax. Similar to this and other cognate models, we also assume the existence of obligatory and optional complements and adjuncts (obligatorische, fakultative Ergänzungen and Angaben). Only obligatory and optional complements are part of a valency pattern. We have suggested that Croatian valency patterns can be analyzed by ten classes of complements (1): (1) Complement classes 1) Nominative Complement 2) Genitive Complement 3) Dative Complement 4) Accusative Complement 5) Instrumental Complement 6) Prepositional Complement 7) Adverbial Complement 8) Predicative Complement 9) Infinitive Complement 10) Sentential Complement VALBU (2004) assumes that eight classes of complements are required for description of German valency patterns (Nominative Complement, Genitive Complement, Dative Complement, Accusative Complement, Prepositional Complement, Adverbial Complement, Predicative Complement, and Verbal Complement (Verbativergänzung)). As far as Croatian is concerned, we assume that the Nominative Complement mainly includes subjects. There is a class of verbs that are considered avalent since they do not have any complement. These are for example grmiti thunder, sijevati it is lightening, flash, kišiti rain, as is the case in many other Indo-European languages. There are also verbs that require one or more complements, neither of which is in nominative case e.g. vrtiti 110

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod se when it means feeling dizzy requires only an obligatory dative complement, and possibly a non-obligatory prepositional complement (Vrti mi se (u glavi) I am dizzy (in my head) ). We assume that all finite sentences have Nominative Complements in Croatian regardless of the possibility of pronominal subjects to be dropped in the first and the second person, which is a characteristic feature of some Slavic and other languages. The Genitive Complement mostly includes genitive objects. The genitive of negation (so called Slavic genitive) and the partitive genitive are considered to be a reali zation of accusative complements. The Dative Complement covers many groups of dative nominals (e.g. logical subject in dative, dative of predication, dative of equality, directive dative and so on), some of them belong to the obligatory Dative Complement, some to the optional one. The Accusative Complement covers mostly the accusative object. Contrary to VALBU (2004), we treat cognate objects as part of the Accusative Complement. The Instrumental Complement includes mostly instrumental objects, 7 and the Prepositional Complement mostly prepositional objects. The Adverbial Complement can have various morphological realizations, ranging from simple adverbials to complex adverbial phrases, prepositional phrases and nominals in the instrumental case. 8 The Predicative Complement is motivated by the German model. This complement includes nominals and adjectives in nominative, instrumental and accusative case, kao-constructions ( as constructions) in predicative use and as a part of secondary predications. In VALBU (2004), Verbal Complement (Verbativergänzung) includes infinitives and sentences as complements of a verb. However, only those sentences that are not a realization of the case complements are considered a part of the Verbal Complement. The sentences that can emerge instead of a case-marked noun are not considered Verbal Complements. Our model treats all complement clauses as a uniform group belonging to Sentential Complement. After we have briefly described all complement classes, we have to finally remark that we still regard these syntactic classes as somehow tentative since we have started the first valency descriptions quite recently. It may be that we will have to change our syntactic model 7 Other instrumental nominals can also belong to Adverbial Complement and Predicate Complement. 8 So in such cases, we have a justification for separating the morphological description from the syntactic one. The same is true of genitive of negation and partitive genitive. 111

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs after processing some substantial amount of verbs, maybe not the number of classes but their content, what they can or cannot include. After the syntactic complements are extracted and described, the morphological realization is assigned to each complement. Although the valency dictionaries differ in respect of introducing the morphological layer, we decided to add morphology to our description in order to make the dictionary more accessible for foreigners. The morphology description encompasses all morphological categories that can be realizations of syntactic classes of complements. It subdivides into four parts (2): (2) Morphological realizations 1) Prepositions and Prepositional phrases 2) Cases 3) Sentential realizations, i.e. types of conjunctions and interrogative adverbs and pronouns 4) Other The first part, Prepositions and Prepositional phrases, consists of a finite list of all prepositions and prepositional phrases in Croatian. The second part Cases includes all Croatian cases (nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, locative, instrumental) apart from the vocative case, which is never a complement of a verb. 9 Theoretically, it should not include the loca tive case either since the locative case never occurs outside prepositional phrases. However, for entering a prepositional phrase in our interface, a selection of a preposition and a case form from a dropdown menu is required. Sentential realizations are conjunctions da, što, kako, gdje, li, neka, kao, 10 interrogative pronouns and adverbs, a label for quotation and zero (0), which is a sign for complement clauses without conjunctions. The part Other comprises adverbs and adverbial phrases, the infinitive, the kaophrase, the quantifier phrase, and adjectives. The morphological description is followed by the semantic description that is designed in accordance with the VALBU (2004) model as well. The semantic description is conducted in two layers. The first layer consists of a verb-specific description of a participant and the second layer of an as- 9 At least not in contemporary language. 10 Da, što, kako and gdje can all be translated as that in English. Li is a question particle, neka is a conjunction that introduces a clause after an imperative sentences and kao can be translated as as. Note that što, kako and gdje are also interrogative words and serve to introduce wh-clauses. 112

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod signment of a semantic category to a specific complement. 11 The descriptive verb-specific definition of a participant is based on a definition of a verb sense and it has to contain the same semantic parts as the definition of the specific meaning. For example, the nominative complement of the verb brinuti se (o kome) take care, worry (of / about somebody) is described as onaj koji je u brizi ili zabrinut one who is in concern or worried, and the prepositional complement as onaj ili ono zbog čega je tko u brizi ili zabrinut somebody or something, about whom or what is somebody in concern or worried. The second layer is a semantic description using semantic categories. Firstly, the lexicographer has to make a choice between two sections in the menu (Semantic categories and Without restrictions). We assume that there are complements that semantic categories need not to be determined for, or differently said that semantic restrictions are not imposed on, and the ones that are semantically restricted. In a sentence Ova haljina mi se sviđa. 12 I like this dress., for example, the nominative complement (ova haljina this dress ) is not semantically restricted whereas the dative complement mi to me (dat) is restricted to person and, rarely to all animates, in its usual use. After the section Semantic categories has been chosen, a list of 32 semantic categories appears. The list is also compiled in accordance with VALBU (2004). Some of the semantic categories are animate, person, institution, concrete, abstract, action, state, plant, liquid, mental achievement. However, they are not organized hierarchically, which is another point that we have to reconsider in-depth. If the semantic category of the defined complement can refer to some narrow set of entities, we try to illustrate this fact by separate examples (e.g. if a complement can refer to a person and an institution, it will be illustrated by two sentence examples). If the complement can refer to some broader set of entities, e.g. all concrete entities, only one example is entered. We also separated semantic categories of adverbials from the other semantic categories. Temporarily, there is a list of seven semantic categories of adverbials (place, time, instrument, manner, cause, purpose, quantity / dimension / volume), but it is likely that this list will have to be enlarged and divided into subgroups. 11 A similar kind of verb-specific description is also provided by VDE (2004) and some similar features can be recognized in Frament s descriptions of participants ( HERBST 2007, 25 26). 12 Ova haljina mi se sviđa. this dress-nom me-dative se-refl. particle like-3.sg. 113

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs In the figurative use of verbs, complements can be realized by unusual and unexpected semantic categories, which we do not record. Some of the very usual and broadly accepted figurative uses are, nevertheless, recorded among our verb meanings and are designated with abbreviation pren. from preneseno figuratively. 13 After the lexicographer has extracted the part of an example and has assigned the syntactic, morphological and semantic description to it, the complete valency pattern in the form of a short formula is again reentered next to the sublemma. At the end of the verb entry, there is a part named Remarks where all observations that cannot be otherwise explained are recorded (for example, a frequent usage of a specific verb without an obligatory complement or a frequent co-occurence of two complements). Figure 5. The processing of the verb bojati se fear 13 In VALBU (2004), such cases are marked as [indirekt.] for indirekte Charakterisierung. 114

Matea Birtić Bruno Nahod 5. Comparasion with other models If we compare our model to the German model, three conceptual differences emerge: the treatment of reflexive verbs, the introduction of prototypical and other verb semantic class, and the addition of the morphological description of complements. Compared to VALLEX, our system differs in the treatment of aspectual pairs, partly in the description of reflexive verbs, and presumably in the treatment of idiomatic and collocational usage of verbs. We enter both the perfective and the imperfective verb as a separate lemma, 14 whereas VALLEX treats them as belonging to the same lemma ( ŽABOKRTSKÝ LOPATKOVÁ 2007). In spite of following VALLEX in many respects, the other Croatian database, CROVALLEX also treats imperfective and perfective verbs as separate lemmas. Contrary to the differences, our Valency Database shares some common features both with CRO VALLEX and VALLEX in introducing the semantic classification of verbs and in identifying valency complements on the level of the particular meaning. In the latter characteristic, VDE (2004) model is alike. 6. Conclusion, contemporary state, and future goals Until today we have processed 53 verbs that belong primarily to the class of psychological verbs and their 168 sublemmas (senses). Of course, not all of these 168 sublemmas belong to the class of psychological verbs. Some verbs with basic or prototypical psychological meaning belong also to other semantic classes (verbs of communication, verbs of taking care). We have chosen this class of verbs as a pilot class to test how our database functions since we considered this verb class to be semantically rather homogeneous, with rare changing of the verb semantic class, and with relatively simple syntactic patterns. But we have already encountered some problems: it is difficult to determine for some psychological reflexive verbs if their second complement is obligatory or optional. 15 We have singled out 48 sentence patterns among these classes of verbs so far. Our final goal for this stage of the project is to present our results in a form of a searchable electronic dictionary that will be available 14 We have introduced separate treatment of perfective and imperfective verbs, because we have noticed that the perfective and imperfective verbs can in rare cases differ in number of senses and in correlated complement structure. 15 For example for bojati se fear and čuditi se wonder, we think that both complements are obligatory (only one meaning), but for dosađivati se to be bored we determined only the first one (nominative complement) to be obligatory. 115

An Outline of the On-line Valency Dictionary of Croatian Verbs at www.valencijski.ihjj.hr. The dictionary will feature both simple (by verb) and advanced querying (by complements, by morphological realization). The main purpose of this paper was to present the technical, lexicographical, and linguistic properties of The Valency Database of Croatian verbs, which is still a project in progress. Therefore is very likely that some aspects of the valency database will be changed during the time. 116

ANDERSON (1971): ANDERSON, J. M.: The Grammar of Case: Towards and Localistic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ANDERSON (2006): ANDERSON, J. M.: Case Grammar. In: Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. K. Brown (ed.). Amsterdam Boston Heidelberg etc.: Elsevier, 220 233. ANUSIEWICZ (1978): ANUSIEWICZ, J.: Konstrukcje analityczne we współczesnym języku polskim. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. APRESJAN (1992): APRESJAN, J. D.: Lexical Semantics: User s Guide to Contemporary Russian Vocabulary. Ann Arbor: Karoma. APRESJAN (2011): APRESJAN, V.: Active dictionary of the Russian language: Theory and practice. In: I. Boguslavsky L. Wanner (eds.): Meaning- -Text Theory 2011. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on MTT. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 13 24. APRESYAN (2013): APRESYAN, V.: Corpus Methods in Pragmatics: The Case of English and Russian Emotions. Intercultural Pragmatics 2013, Vol. 10, No. 4, 533 568. ARAD (1998): ARAD, M.: Psych-notes. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10. AUSTIN (1962): AUSTIN, J. L.: How to Do Things with Words. J. O. Urmson (ed.). Oxford. AUSTIN (1993): AUSTIN, J. L.: Jak działać słowami. In: AUSTIN, J. L.: Mówienie i poznawanie. Warszawa: PWN, 542 708. BABIĆ ET AL. (2007): BABIĆ, S. ET AL.: Glasovi i oblici hrvatskoga književnog jezika. Zagreb: Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti Nakladni zavod Globus. BAJEC (1959): BAJEC, A.: Besedotvorje slovenskega jezika IV: Predlogi in predpone. Ljubljana: SAZU. BAKER (1992): BAKER, M.: In Other Words: A Coursebook on translation. London New York: Routledge. BANDTKIE (1806): BANDTKIE, J. S.: Słownik dokładny języka polskiego i niemieckiego do podręcznego używania dla Polaków i Niemców ułożony, t. 1. Wrocław: Wilhelm Gottlieb Korn. BARIĆ ET AL. (1997): BARIĆ, E. ET AL.: Hrvatska gramatika. Zagreb: Školska knjiga. 387

BARTOŇ ET AL. (2009): BARTOŇ, T. CVRČEK, V. ČERMÁK, F. JELÍNEK, T. PETKEVIČ, V.: Statistiky češtiny. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny Ústav českého národního korpusu. BAUER GREPL (1972): BAUER, J. GREPL, M.: Skladba spisovné češtiny. Praha: SPN. BEJČEK ET AL. (2011): BEJČEK, E. ET AL.: Prague Dependency Treebank 2.5. Praha: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, MFF UK. On-line: [http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/ pdt2.5/]. BEJČEK ET AL. (2014): BEJČEK, E. KETTNEROVÁ, V. LOPATKOVÁ, M.: Automatic Mapping Lexical Resources: A Lexical Unit as the Keystone. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2014). Reykjavík: ELRA, 2826 2832. BELAJ (2001): BELAJ, B.: Prototipno-kontekstualna analiza povratnih glagola u hrvatskom jeziku. Suvremena lingvistika Vol. 51 52, No. 1 2, 1 11. BELAJ KUČANDA (2007): BELAJ, B. KUČANDA, D.: On the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of some subject-like NPs in Croatian. Suvremena lingvistika Vol. 63, No. 1, 1 12. BELAJ TANACKOVIĆ FALETAR (2014): BELAJ, B. TANACKOVIĆ FALE- TAR, G.: Kognitivna gramatika hrvatskoga jezika. Zagreb: Disput. BĚLIČ ET AL. (1979): BĚLIČ, J. ET AL.: Malý staročeský slovník. Praha: SPN. BĚLIČOVÁ UHLÍŘOVÁ (1996): BĚLIČOVÁ, H. UHLÍŘOVÁ, L.: Slovanská věta. Praha: Euroslavica. BELLETTI RIZZI (1988): BELLETTI, A. RIZZI, L.: Psych-Verbs and Theta- -Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6, 291 352. BENEŠOVÁ BOJAR (2006): BENEŠOVÁ, V. BOJAR, O.: Czech verbs of communication and the extraction of their frames. In: Text, Speech and Dialogue: 9th International Conference TSD 2006. Berlin: Springer, 29 36. BENKO (2014): BENKO, V.: Compatible sketch grammars for comparable corpora. In: Proceedings of the 16th EURALEX International Congress. A. Abel et al. (eds.). Bolzano: EURAC research, 417 430. BICK (2009): BICK, E.: DeepDict a graphical corpus-based dictionary of word relations. In: Proceedings of the 17th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics NODALIDA 2009. Uppsala: NEALT, 268 271. BIRTIĆ RUNJAIĆ (v tisku): BIRTIĆ, M. RUNJAIĆ, S.: Ustroj Baze hrvatskih glagolskih valencija. Zbornik radova Šestoga hrvatskog slavističkog kongresa (v tisku). 388

BOBROWSKI (1995): BOBROWSKI, I.: Gramatyka opisowa języka polskiego. (Zarys modelu generatywno-transformacyjnego). Kielce: Wyższa Szkoła Pedagogiczna. BOGUSŁAWSKI (1977a): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: On the semantic structure of interrogative sentences. Salzburger Beiträge zur Linguistic III, 61 70. BOGUSŁAWSKI (1977b): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: Polskie się słowo nie do końca poznane. International Review of Slavic Linguistics 2, Nr. 1, 99 124. BOGUSŁAWSKI (1988): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: Język w słowniku: desiderata semantyczne do wielkiego słownika polszczyzny. Wrocław: Ossolineum. BOGUSŁAWSKI (2004): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: Remarks on quotative saying. Studies in Polish Linguistics 1, 29 46. BOGUSŁAWSKI (2005): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: Do teorii czasownika powiedzieć. Polonica 24 25, 139 155. BOGUSŁAWSKI (2006): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: O zasięgu operandów metaforyzacji (uwagi do jednej fascynacji M. R. Mayenowej). In: B. Chodźko, E. Feliksiak, M. Olesiewicz (eds.): Obecność. Maria Renata Mayenowa (1908 1988). Białystok: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku, 282 300. BOGUSŁAWSKI (2007): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: A Study in the Linguistics-Philosophy Interface. Warszawa: Bel-Studio. BOGUSŁAWSKI (2008): BOGUSŁAWSKI, A.: Semantyka, pragmatyka. Leksykografa głos demarkacyjny. Warszawa: Bel-Studio. BOJAR (2003): BOJAR, O.: Towards automatic extraction of verb frames. Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 79 80, 101 120. BOJAR (2012): BOJAR, O.: Č eština a strojový překlad. Studies in Computational and Theoretical Linguistics 11. Praha: Ústav formální a aplikované lingvistiky Matematicko-fyzikální fakulta Univerzity Karlovy. BOJAR PROKOPOVÁ (2006): BOJAR, O. PROKOPOVÁ, M.: Czech-English word alignment. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006). Genoa: ELRA, 1236 1239. BORYŚ (2005): BORYŚ, W.: Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie. BOŠNJAK BOTICA (2011): BOŠNJAK BOTICA, T.: Kategorija glagolske vrste u hrvatskom jeziku. Doctoral dissertation. Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. 389

BRAČ BOŠNJAK BOTICA (2015): BRAČ, I. BOŠNJAK BOTICA, T.: Semantička raščlamba kao polazište u obradbi glagola u Bazi hrvatskih glagolskih valencija. Šesti hrvatski slavistički kongres (PP prezentace). BRESNAN (2001): BRESNAN, J.: Lexical Functional Syntax. Blackwell. BRESNAN ET AL. (1982): BRESNAN, J. ET AL.: The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press. BRINKMANN (1971): BRINKMANN, H.: Die deutsche Sprache. Düsseldorf: Schwann. BRÜCKNER (1927): BRÜCKNER, A.: Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego. Kraków: Krakowska Spółka Wydawnicza. BUSSE (1974): BUSSE, W.: Klasse, Transitivität, Valenz. München: Fink. BUTT (2010): BUTT, M.: The Light Verb Jungle: Still Hacking Away. In: Complex Predicates in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. M. Amberber M. Harvey B. Baker (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 48 78. BUTTLER (1976): BUTTLER, D.: Innowacje składniowe współczesnej polszczyzny. Warszawa: PWN. BUTTLER (1978): BUTTLER, D.: Rozwój semantyczny wyrazów polskich. Warszawa: Wyd. UW. BUZÁSSYOVÁ JAROŠOVÁ (2006): BUZÁSSYOVÁ, K. JAROŠOVÁ, A. (eds.): Slovník súčasného slovenského jazyka. A-G. 1. zv. Bratislava: Veda. BYBEE (1985): BYBEE, J. L.: Morphology. Amsterdam Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CATFORD (1965): CATFORD, J. C.: A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay In Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press. CINKOVÁ (2009): CINKOVÁ, S.: Words that Matter. Towards a Swedish- -Czech Colligational Lexicon of Basic Verbs. Praha: Ústav formální a aplikované lingvistiky. COMRIE (1976): COMRIE, B.: Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. COOK (1978): COOK, W. A.: A case grammar matrix model (and its application to a Hemingway text). In: Valence, semantic case and grammatical relations. W. Abraham (ed.). Amsterdam: Benjamin, 296 309. COOK WILSON (1926): COOK WILSON, J.: Statement and Inference. Oxford: Clarendon Press. CROVALLEX 2.008: On-line: [http://theta.ffzg.hr/crovallex/]. (Viz též MIKE- LIĆ PRERADOVIĆ 2008.) 390

CURCIO (1999): CURCIO, M. L.: Kontrastives Valenzwörterbuch der gesprochenen Sprache Italienisch-Deutsch. Mannheim: IDS. ČERMÁK (1991): ČERMÁK, F.: Podstata valence z hlediska lexikologického. In: Walencja czasownika a problemy leksykografi i dwujęzycznej. D. Rytel-Kuc (ed.). Wrocław Warszawa Kraków: Ossolineum, 15 40. ČERMÁK ROSEN (2012): ČERMÁK, F. ROSEN, A.: The case of InterCorp, a multilingual parallel corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics Vol. 17, No. 3, 411 427. ČERMÁKOVÁ (2009): ČERMÁKOVÁ, A.: Valence českých substantiv. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny. ČERNELIČ KOZLEVČAR (1979): ČERNELIČ KOZLEVČAR, I.: O glagolih premikanja zlasti glede na glagol iti in stavčne vzorce. Jezik in slovstvo 25, 45 47. ČESKÝ NÁRODNÍ KORPUS (ČNK): Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK. On-line: [http://www.korpus.cz]. ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ ET AL. (2011): ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ, M. ET AL.: Hrvatski za početnike 1: vježbenica i gramatički pregled hrvatskoga kao drugog i stranog jezika. 3. promijenjeno izd. Zagreb: Hrvatska sveučilišna naklada. ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ ET AL. (2012): ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ, M. ET AL.: Razgovarajte s nama! B1 B2: vježbenica, gramatika i fonetika hrvatskog jezika za niži srednji stupanj. 3. izd. Zagreb: FF press [i. e.] Filozofski fakultet. ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ ET AL. (2013): ČILAŠ MIKULIĆ, M. ET AL.: Razgovarajte s nama! A2 B1: vježbenica, gramatika i fonetika hrvatskog jezika za više početnike. 2. izd. Zagreb: FF press [i. e.] Filozofski fakultet. DALRYMPLE (2001): DALRYMPLE, M.: Lexical-Functional Grammar. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 34. New York: Academic Press. DĄMBSKA-PROKOP (2000): DĄMBSKA-PROKOP, U.: Mała encyklopedia przekładoznawstwa. Częstochowa: Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Języków Obcych i Ekonomii EDUCATOR. DANEŠ (1971a): DANEŠ, F.: Větné členy obligatorní, potenciální a fakultativní. In: Miscellanea lingvistica. M. Komárek (ed.). Ostrava: Profil, 131 138. DANEŠ (1971b): DANEŠ, F.: Pokus o strukturní analýzu slovesných významů. Slovo a slovesnost 32, 193 207. DANEŠ (1985): DANEŠ, F.: Věta a text. Studie ze syntaxe spisovné češtiny. Praha: Academia. 391

DANEŠ HLAVSA (1978): DANEŠ, F. HLAVSA, Z.: Hierarchizace sémantické struktury věty. In: Československé přenášky pro VIII. Mezinárodní sjezd slavistů v Záhřebu. Lingvistika. Praha: Academia, 67 77. DANEŠ HLAVSA (1981): DANEŠ, F. HLAVSA, Z.: Větné vzorce v češtině. Praha: Academia. DANEŠ HLAVSA (1987): DANEŠ, F. HLAVSA, Z.: Větné vzorce v češtině. 2., opr. vydání. Praha: Academia. DANEŠ ET AL. (1973): DANEŠ, F. HLAVSA, Z. KOŘENSKÝ, J.: Práce o sémantické struktuře věty. Praha: Academia. DANEŠ ET AL. (1975): DANEŠ, F. ET AL.: Teoretické základy synchronní mluvnice spisovné češtiny. Slovo a slovesnost 36, 18 46. DANET (1743): DANET, P. KOLA, F.: Nowy wielki dykcjonarz Jmci x. Daneta. Warszawa: Drukarnia Pijarów. DANIELEWICZOWA (2002): DANIELEWICZOWA, M.: Wiedza i niewiedza. Studium polskich czasowników epistemicznych. Warszawa: Katedra Lingwistyki Formalnej. DANIELEWICZOWA (2010): DANIELEWICZOWA, M.: Schematy zdaniowe podstawowe kwestie metodologiczne. Poradnik Językowy, Nr. 3, 5 27. DASYPODIUS (1643): DASYPODIUS, P.: Dasypodius Catholicus. Hoc est, Dictionarium Latino-Germanico-Polonicum, Germanico-Latinum Et Polono-Latino-Germanicum. Gdańsk: Andrea Hunefeldij. DĘBSKI (1982): DĘBSKI, A.: Semantyczna walencja czasownika w aspekcie konfrontatywnym. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego 39, 79 90. DIDAKOWSKI GEYKEN (2013): DIDAKOWSKI, J. GEYKEN, A.: From DWDS corpora to a German Word Profile methodological problems and solutions. In: Network Strategies, Access Structures and Automatic Extraction of Lexicographical Information. OPAL Online publizierte Arbeiten zur Linguistik X/2012. Mannheim: Institut für Deutsche Sprache, 43 52. DIRVEN VERSPOOR (1998): DIRVEN, R. VERSPOOR, M.: Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DŁUGOSZ-KURCZABOWA (2008): DŁUGOSZ-KURCZABOWA, K.: Wielki słownik etymologiczno-historyczny języka polskiego. Warszawa: PWN. DOKULIL (1949): DOKULIL, M.: Slovenský příspěvek k sémantice a syntaxi slovesa. Slovo a slovesnost 11, 68 78. 392

DOLNÍK (1981): DOLNÍK, J.: Kontextová sémantická vlastnosť slovesa. Jazykovedný časopis 32, č. 1, 25 32. DOLNÍK (2003): DOLNÍK, J.: Lexikológia. Bratislava: Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Komenského. DOROSZEWSKI (1958 1969): DOROSZEWSKI, W. (ed.): Słownik języka polskiego. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna, PWN. DUBISZ (2003): DUBISZ, S. (ed.): Uniwersalny słownik języka polskiego. Warszawa: PWN. DULAR (1982): DULAR, J.: Priglagolska vezava v slovenskem knjižnem jeziku (20. stoletja). Doktorska disertacija. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta UL. DUNAJ (1996): DUNAJ, B. (ed.): Słownik współczesnego języka polskiego. Warszawa: Wilga. DYVIK ET AL. (2009): DYVIK, H. MEURER, P. ROSÉN, V. DE SMEDT, K.: Linguistically Motivated Parallel Parsebanks. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories. M. Passarotti et al. (eds.). Milano: EDUCatt, 71 82. EISENBERG (1989): EISENBERG, P.: Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik. Stuttgart: Metzler. ELEKTRONICZNY SŁOWNIK JĘZYKA POLSKIEGO XVII I XVIII WIEKU. P. Gruszczyński (ed.). On-line: [http://sxvii.pl]. ENGEL SCHUMACHER (1976, 1978): ENGEL, U. SCHUMACHER, H.: Kleines Valenzlexikon deutscher Verben. Tübingen. (Forschungsberichte des Instituts für deutsche Sprache 31). ENGEL ET AL. (1999): ENGEL, U. ET AL.: Deutsch-polnische kontrastive Grammatik. I II. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag Warszawa: PWN (2000). ENGEL ET AL. (2012): ENGEL, U. ET AL.: Deutsch-polnische kontrastive Grammatik. IV. Hildesheim Zürich New York: Georg Olms Verlag. ERBEN (1980): ERBEN, J.: Deutsche Grammatik. Ein Abriss. München: Fink. EROMS (1981): EROMS, H.-W.: Valenz, Kasus und Präpositionen. Heidelberg: Winter. E-VALBU: DAS ELEKTRONISCHE VALENZWÖRTERBUCH DEUTSCHER VERBEN. On- -line: [http://hypermedia.ids-mannheim.de/evalbu/index.html]. EVANS (2004): EVANS, V.: The Structure of Time. Amsterdam Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. EVANS (2007): EVANS, V: Leksykon językoznawstwa kognitywnego. Kraków: Universitas. 393

FÁBREGAS ET AL. (2012): FÁBREGAS, A. MARÍN, R. MCNALLY, L.: From psych verbs to nouns. In: Telicity, Change, and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure. V. Demonte L. McNally (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 162 184. FIDAPLUS: Korpus slovenskega jezika FidaPLUS. On-line: [http://www.fidaplus.net/]. FILIPOVIĆ (1993): FILIPOVIĆ, R. (ed.): Kontrastivna analiza engleskog i hrvatskog jezika IV Teorija valentnosti i rječnik valentnosti hrvatskih glagola. Zagreb: Zavod za lingvistiku Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. FILLMORE (1968): FILLMORE, CH. J.: The Case for Case. In: Universals in Linguistic Theory. E. Bach R. T. Harms (eds.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1 88. FILLMORE (1971): FILLMORE, CH. J.: Some problems for case grammar. In: Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, No. 24. R. J. O Brien S. J. Washington (eds.). Washington: D.C. Georgetown University Press, 35 56. FILLMORE (1977): FILLMORE, CH. J.: The Case of Case Reopened. In: Syntax and Semantics, vol. 8. P. Cole J. M. Sadock (eds.). New York San Francisco London: Academic press, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 59 81. FILLMORE (2003): FILLMORE, CH. J.: Form and Meaning in Language, Vol. 1. Paper on Semantic Roles. Stanford: Stanford University Press. FILLMORE LANGENDOEN (1971): FILLMORE, CH. J. LANGENDOEN, D. T.: Studies in Linguistic Semantics. New York. FILLMORE ET AL. (1988): FILLMORE, C. KAY, P. O CONNOR, C.: Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of let alone. Language 64, 3, 501 538. FIRTH (1957): FIRTH, J. R.: Papers in linguistics, 1934 1951. Oxford: Oxford University Press. GAWEŁKO (2012): GAWEŁKO, M.: Przyimki polskie a tendencja analityczna języków indoeuropejskich. Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej 47, 7 38. GOŁĄB (1967): GOŁĄB, Z.: Próba klasyfikacji syntaktycznej czasowników polskich (na zasadzie konotacji). Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego XXV, 3 42. 394

GOLDBERG (1995): GOLDBERG, A. E.: Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. GOLDBERG (2006): GOLDBERG, A. E.: Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. GREŃ (1991): GREŃ, Z.: Konstrukcje z się w opisie walencyjnym czasownika. In: Walencja czasownika a problemy leksykografi i dwujęzycznej. D. Rytel-Kuc (red.). Wrocław Warszawa Kraków: Ossolineum, 125 136. GREŃ (1994): GREŃ, Z.: Semantyka i składnia czasowników oznaczających akty mowy w języku polskim i czeskim. Warszawa: SOW. GREŃ RYTEL-KUC (1991): GREŃ, Z. RYTEL-KUC, D.: Wykorzystanie przekładów literackich w pracy nad dwujęzycznym słownikiem walencyjnym. In: Problemy teoretyczno-metodologiczne badań konfrontatywnych języków słowiańskich. H. Běličová G. Nieszczimienko Z. Rudnik-Karwatowa (red.). Warszawa: Instytut Słowianoznawstwa PAN, 69 78. GREPL KARLÍK (1983): GREPL, M. KARLÍK, P. (1983): Gramatické prostředky hierarchizace sémantické struktury věty. Brno: Univerzita J. E. Purkyně. GREPL KARLÍK (1986): GREPL, M. KARLÍK, P: Skladba spisovné češtiny. Praha: SPN. GREPL KARLÍK (1998): GREPL, M. KARLÍK, P.: Skladba češtiny. Olomouc: Votobia. GRGIĆ ET AL. (2013): GRGIĆ, A. GULEŠIĆ MACHATA, M. NAZALEVIĆ ČUČE- VIĆ, I.: Hrvatski B1: Opisni okvir referentne razine B1 = Croatian B1: Descriptive framework of reference level B1. Zagreb: FF Press. GRZEGORCZYKOWA (1996): GRZEGORCZYKOWA, R.: Reguły deagentywizacji w polszczyźnie. In: Jazyk a jeho užívání. Sborník k životnímu jubileu profesora Oldřicha Uličného. Praha: FF UK, 58 65. GRZEGORCZYKOWA (1998): GRZEGORCZYKOWA, R.: Wykłady z polskiej składni. Warszawa: PWN. GRZEGORCZYKOWA (2002): GRZEGORCZYKOWA, R.: Wprowadzenie do semantyki językoznawczej. 3. wyd. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. GWJP (1998): Gramatyka współczesnego języka polskiego. Morfologia. Pod red. R. Grzegorczykowej, R. Laskowskiego, H. Wróbla. Wyd. 2, zmienione. 395

HAJNICZ (2011): HAJNICZ, E.: Automatyczne tworzenie semantycznych słowników walencyjnych. Warszawa: EXIT. HAJNICZ WOLIŃSKI (2009): HAJNICZ, E. WOLIŃSKI, M.: How valence information influences parsing Polish with Świgra. In: Recent Advances in Intelligent Information Systems. Red. M. A. Kłopotek, A. Przepiórkowski, S. T. Wierzchoń, K. Trojanowski. Challenging Problems in Science: Computer Science. Warszawa: Akademicka Oficyna Wydawnicza Exit, 193 206. HAM (2002): HAM, S.: Školska gramatika hrvatskoga jezika. Zagreb: Školska knjiga. HAVRÁNEK ET AL. (2011): HAVRÁNEK, B. ET AL. (eds.): Slovník spisovného jazyka českého. Praha: Ústav pro jazyk český. On-line: [http://ssjc.ujc.cas.cz] HEJWOWSKI (2009): HEJWOWSKI, K.: Kognitywno-komunikacyjna teoria przekładu. Warszawa: PWN. HELBIG (1965): HELBIG, G.: Der Begriff der Valenz als Mittel der strukturellen Sprachbeschreibung und des Fremdsprachenunterrichts. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 1, 10 23. HELBIG (1976): HELBIG, G.: Valenz, Semantik und Satzmodelle. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 13, 99 106. HELBIG (1992): HELBIG, G.: Probleme der Valenz- und Kasustheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer. HELBIG SCHENKEL (1969, 1983): HELBIG, G. SCHENKEL, W.: Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Verben. Leipzig: VEB Bibiographisches Institut Leipzig. HERBST (2007): HERBST, T.: Valency complements or valency patterns? In: Valency: Theoretical, Descriptive and Cognitive Issues. T. Herbst K. Götz-Votteler (eds.). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 15 35. HERINGER (1973): HERINGER, H. J.: Theorie der deutschen Syntax. München: Hueber. HLADKÁ ET AL. (2013): HLADKÁ, B. HOLUB, M. KŘÍŽ, V.: Feature engineering in the NLI Shared Task 2013: Charles University submission report. In: Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 232 241. HLAVÁČKOVÁ (2008): HLAVÁČKOVÁ, D.: Databáze slovesných valenčních rámců VerbaLex. Disertační práce. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, Filozofická fakulta. 396

HLAVÁČKOVÁ HORÁK (2006): HLAVÁČKOVÁ, D. HORÁK, A.: Verbalex new comprehensive lexicon of verb valencies for Czech. In: Computer Treatment of Slavic and East European Languages. Bratislava: Slovenský národný korpus, 107 115. HLAVSA (1991): HLAVSA, Z.: Některé problémy valenčního popisu slovesa. In: Walencja czasownika a problemy leksykografi i dwujęzycznej. D. Rytel-Kuc (red.). Wrocław Warszawa Kraków: Ossolineum, 7 14. HORECKÝ (2000): HORECKÝ, J.: (rec.) Nižníková, J. Sokolová, M. a kol.: Valenčný slovník slovenských slovies. Acta Facultatis Philosophicae Universitatis Prešoviensis. Prešov, Filozofická fakulta v Prešove Slovacontact 1998. 272 s. Jazykovedný časopis 51, 43 45. HRBÁČEK (1995 96): HRBÁČEK, J.: Několik poznámek o syntaktickém vztahu závislosti. Český jazyk a literatura 46, 5 13. HRBÁČEK (1997): HRBÁČEK, J.: K problematice syntaktických vztahů a jejich terminologie. Naše řeč 80, 169 177. HRVATSKA JEZIČNA RIZNICA (CROATIAN LANGUAGE REPOSITORY). On-line: [http://riznica.ihjj.hr/index.en.html]. HRWAC 2.0: On-line: [http://nl.ijs.si/noske/wacs.cgi/first?corpname=hrwac&reload=1]. CHOJAK (2015): CHOJAK, J.: Krótka wypowiedź o podpowiedzi. In: Odkrywanie słowa historia i współczesność. U. Sokólska (ed.). Białystok: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku, 49 64. CHOMSKY (1986): CHOMSKY, N.: Knowledge of language: its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger. ISJP (2000): BAŃKO, M. ET AL. (eds.): Inny słownik języka polskiego. I II. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. IVANOVÁ (2006): IVANOVÁ, M.: Valencia statických slovies. Prešov: FF PU. IVANOVÁ (2007 2008): IVANOVÁ, M.: Valenčný slovník slovenských slovies. Češtinář. Zpravodaj Katedry českého jazyka a literatury Univerzity Hradec Králové XVIII, 175 177. IVANOVÁ ET AL. (2013): IVANOVÁ, M. SOKOLOVÁ, M. KYSEĽOVÁ, M.: Teoreticko-metodologické otázky spracovania valencie slovenských slovies. Slovenská reč 78, 7 31. IVANOVÁ ET AL. (2014): IVANOVÁ, M. SOKOLOVÁ, M. KYSEĽOVÁ, M. PE- ROVSKÁ, V.: Valenčný slovník slovenských slovies na korpusovom základe. Prešov: Filozofická fakulta PU v Prešove. 397