Basic verbs in European languages
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60923/issn.2785-0943/22752Keywords:
lexical typology, semantic fields, verbs, basic vocabulary, word frequencies, European languages, corpus-based contrastive studyAbstract
This article presents a corpus-based approach toward a lexical typology of verbs in European languages, based on a comparison of the meanings of the most frequent verbs classified into semantic fields. The comparison is made in two steps. Among the twenty most frequent verbs, there is a set of grammatical verbs that top the list (with a few exceptions): ‘be’, ‘have’ and modals meaning ‘can’ and ‘must’. Among the lexical verbs, there are nine nuclear verbs with meanings that are distributed between the most basic verbal semantic fields (indicated within parentheses): ‘go’, ‘come’ (Motion); ‘give’, ‘take’ (Possession), ‘make’ (Production), ‘say’ (Verbal communication), ‘see’ (Perception), ‘know’ (Cognition), ‘want’ (Desire). Comparisons are made in two ways based on the rank order of the verbs according to descending frequency and according to a frequency measure, based on a logarithmic scale. As a second step, the comparison is extended to the 100 most frequent verbs. The result is compared to the inventories of simple verbs in some non-European languages with a very restricted number of such verbs. The frequency-based comparisons are complemented with the result of corpus-based contrastive studies of selected aspects of the semantic structure of the semantic fields to which the nuclear verbs belong.
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2015. Pragmatic markers. In Karin Aijmer & Christoph Rühlemann (eds.), Corpus pragmatics. A handbook, 195–218. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aijmer, Karin. 2019. What is happening to must in Present-day English? A contrastive perspective on a declining modal auxiliary. In Harumi Sawada, Yoshio Nitta & Masa-aki Yamanashi (eds.), Bamen to shutaisei/shukansei [Situation and subjectivity], 387–402. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Aksan, Yeşim, Mustafa Aksan, Ümit Mersinli & Umut Ufuk Demirhan. 2017. A frequency dictionary of Turkish. London: Routledge.
Altenberg, Bengt & Karin Aijmer. 2000. The English-Swedish Parallel Corpus: A resource for contrastive research and translation studies. In Christian Mair & Marianne Hundt (eds.), Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory, 15–23. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Andrius Utka, Sudarė. 2009. Dažninis rašytinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas: 1 milijono žodžių morfologiškai anotuoto tekstyno pagrindu. Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla. https://sitti.vdu.lt/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Dazninis_zodynas.pdf (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Ballmer, Thomas & Waltraud Brennenstuhl. 1981. Speech act classification. A study in the lexical analysis of English speech activity verbs. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Luca Ciucci & Denis Creissels. 2026a. Non-verbal predication in the world’s languages: A typological survey. Volume 1: Eurasia, North America, South America. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Luca Ciucci & Denis Creissels. 2026b. Non-verbal predication in the world’s languages: A typological survey. Volume 2: Africa, Austronesia, Papunesia, Australia. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Besters-Dilger, Juliane, Ana Drobnjaković & Björn Hansen. 2009. Modals in the Slavonic languages. In Björn Hansen & Ferdinand de Haan (eds.), Modals in the languages of Europe, 167–197. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bouveret, Myriam (ed.). 2021. Give constructions across languages [Constructional Approaches to Language 29]. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.29.
Buck, Carl Darling. 1949. A dictionary of selected synonyms in the principal Indo-European languages. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Camacho, José. 2012. Ser and estar: The individual/stage-level distinction and aspectual predication. In José Ignacio Hualde, Antxon Olarrea & Erin O’Rourke (eds.), The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics, 453–475. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Čermák, František & Michal Křen. 2011. A frequency dictionary of Czech. New York: Routledge.
Čermáková, Anna, Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling. 2023. ‘Be’ verbs in a contrastive perspective: The case of BÝT, BE and VÆRE. Nordic Journal of English Studies 22(2). 27–58.
Collinder, Björn. 1955. Fenno-Ugric vocabulary. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Cornillie, Bert, Walter De Mulder, Tine Van Hecke & Dieter Vermandere. 2009. In Björn Hansen & Ferdinand de Haan (eds.), Modals in the languages of Europe, 107–137. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Davies, John. 1981. Kobon [Lingua Descriptive Studies]. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Davies, Mark. 2006. A frequency dictionary of Spanish. London: Routledge.
Davis, E. Emory & Barbara Landau. 2021. Seeing and Believing: The relationship between perception and mental verbs in acquisition. Language Learning and Development 17(1). 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2020.1862660.
DeLancey, Scott. 1985. The analysis-synthesis-lexis cycle in Tibeto-Burman: A case study in motivated change. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 367–89. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Divjak, Dagmar. 2019. Frequency in language: Memory, attention and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, R. M. W. 1980. The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell. 2017. Bringing home the bacon! A contrastive study of the cognates bring/bringe in English and Norwegian. Kalbotyra 70. 104–126. https://doi.org/10.15388/Klbt.2017.11193.
Egan, Thomas. 2021. TELLING in English, Norwegian and French: A three-way contrast. BLS 11(1). 47–68.
Evans, Nicholas & David Wilkins. 2000. In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language 76(3). 546–592.
Family, Neiloufar. 2014. Semantic spaces of Persian light verbs. A constructionist account [Brill’s Studies in South and Southwest Asian Languages Series 6]. Leiden: Brill.
Ferguson, Charles. 1976. The Ethiopian language area. In M. Lionel Bender, J. Donald Bowen, Robert L. Cooper & Charles A. Ferguson (eds.), Language in Ethiopia, 63–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fetzer, Anita & Marjut Johansson. 2012. Cognitive verbs in context. A contrastive analysis of English and French argumentative discourse. In Stefania Marzo, Kris Heylen & Gert de Sutter (eds.), Corpus studies in contrastive linguistics, 89–115. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.43.05fet.
Fillmore, Charles J. 1997. Lectures on deixis [CSLI lecture notes 65]. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Flint, Aili. 1980Semantic structure in the Finnish lexicon: verbs of possibility and sufficiency[Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seuran toimituksia 0355–1768; 360]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Foley, William A. 1986. The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fortescue, Michael. 2001. Thoughts about thought. Cognitive Linguistics 12(1). 15–45.
Frommherz, Yannick. 2022. Thinking things in German versus Swedish. A cross-linguistic comparison of verbs of thinking in two genetically close languages. Studia Linguistica 76(2). 464–506.
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Åke Viberg. 2009. How to make do with one verb: a corpus-based contrastive study of DO and MAKE. Revue française de linguistique appliquée 14(1). 67–82.
Goddard, Cliff. 2001. Lexico-semantic universals: A critical overview. Linguistic Typology 5. 1–65.
Goddard, Cliff. 2003. Thinking across languages and cultures: six dimensions of variation. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3), 109–140 Special issue edited by Gary B. Palmer, Cliff Goddard & Penny Lee.
Göz, İlyas. 2003. Yazιlι türkçenin kelime sιklιğι sözlüğü [A Frequency Dictionary of Written Turkish]. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu.
Gries, Stefan Th. 2008. Dispersions and adjusted frequencies in corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(4). 403–437.
Hammarberg, Björn & Åke Viberg. 1977. The place-holder constraint, language typology, and the teaching of Swedish to immigrants. Studia Linguistica 31. 106–163.
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel, Martin Haspelmath & Sebastian Bank. 2026. Glottolog 5.3. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at: (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Hansen, Björn & Ferdinand de Haan (eds.). 2009. Modals in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Harkins, Jean. 1995. Desire in language and thought: A study in cross-cultural semantics. Canberra: Australian National University. (Doctoral Dissertation.) https://doi.org/10.25911/5d7638e7c1b34.
Harras, Gisela, Edeltraud Winkler, Sabine Erb & Kristel Proost. 2004. Handbuch deutscher Kommunikationsverben 1. Wörterbuch. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Harras, Gisela, Kristel Proost & Edeltraud Winkler. 2007. Handbuch deutscher Kommunikationsverben 2. Lexikalische Strukturen. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. ‘Want’ complement subjects. In Matthew Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online. Available online at: http://wals.info/chapter/124 (Accessed 2026-07-06)
Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession. Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hellenic National Corpus. http://hnc.ilsp.gr/index.php?current_page=main&lang=en(Accessed 2026-07-06).
Hoddinott, William G. & Frances M. Kofod. 1976. Djamindjungan. In R. M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 698–704. New Jersey: Humanities Press.
Isačenko, Alexander V. 1974. On ‘have’ and ‘be’ languages. In Michael S. Flier (ed.), Slavic forum: Essays in linguistics and literature, 43–77. The Hague: Mouton.
Jakobson, Roman. 1971. Selected Writings, vol. 2. The Hague: Mouton.
Johansson, Lars. 2009. Modals in Turkic. In Björn Hansen & Ferdinand de Haan (eds.), Modals in the languages of Europe, 487–510. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jones, Randall L. & Erwin Tschirner. 2020, 2ed. A frequency dictionary of German. London: Routledge.
Juvonen, Päivi. 2016. Making do with minimal lexica. Light verb constructions with MAKE/DO in pidgin lexica. In Päivi Juvonen & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), The lexical typology of semantic shifts, 223–248. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Kilgarriff, Adam. 1998. BNC lists. https://www.kilgarriff.co.uk/bnc-readme.html (Accessed 2026-07-06).
King, Gareth. 2016. Modern Welsh. A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.
Knight, Dawn, Steve Morris, Beth Tovey-Walsh, Tess Fitzpatrick, Laurence Anthony. 2020. Yr Amliadur: Frequency Lists for Contemporary Welsh (Version 1.0.0). Cardiff University. https://doi.org/10.17035/d2020.0120164107
Kopecka, Anetta. 2006. The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: Typological perspectives. In Maya Hickman & Stéphanie Robert (eds.), Space in languages. Linguistic systems and cognitive categories, 83–101. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kopecka, Anetta & Bhuvana Narasimhan (eds.). 2012. Events of Putting and Taking. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kronning, Hans. 2024. Les verbes modaux devoir et pouvoir. In Encyclopédie Grammaticale du Français, en ligne. Available online at: http://encyclogram.fr (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Kuiper, Alberta & William R. Merrifield. 1975. Diuxi Mixtec verbs of motion and arrival. International Journal of American Linguisitcs 41(1). 32–45.
Langlotz, Andreas. 2006. Idiomatic creativity: A cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-representation and idiom-variation in English. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Lees, Robert B. 1972. The Turkish copula. In John W. M. Verhaar (ed.), The Verb ‘Be’ and its synonyms. Philosophical and grammatical studies, Part 5, 64–73. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.
Lenz, Alexandra, Fabian Fleißner, Agnes Kim & Stefan Michael Newerkla. 2020. GIVE as a German PUT verb – Analyses on Slavic-German language contact. Journal of Linguistic Geography 8(2). 67–81.
Lenz, Alexandra N. & Gudrun Rawoens (eds.). 2012. The art of getting: GET verbs in European languages from a synchronic and diachronic point of view. Special issue of Linguistics 50(6).
Leonetti, Manuel, Silvia Gumiel-Molina & Isabel Pérez-Jiménez. 2015. Ser and estar: Outstanding questions. In Isabel Pérez-Jiménez, Manuel Leonetti & Silvia Gumiel-Molina (eds.), New perspectives on the study of ser and estar, 1–20. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Levshina, Natalia. 2015 European analytical causatives as a comparative concept: Evidence from a parallel corpus of film subtitles. Folia Linguistica 49(2). 487–520. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2015-0017.
Lewandowski, Wojciech. 2014. Deictic verbs: typology, thinking for speaking and SLA. SKY Journal of Linguistics 27. 43–65.
Liljegren, Henrik. 2010. Where have all the verbs gone? On verb stretching and semi-words in Indo-Aryan Palula. Himalayan Linguistics 9(1). 50–79.
Lonsdale, Deryle & Yvon Le Bras. 2009. A frequency dictionary of French. London: Routledge.
Lord, Carol. 1993. Historical change in serial verb constructions [Typological Studies in Language 26]. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.26.
Loveday, Leo. 1986. Explorations in Japanese Sociolinguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Margetts, Anna, Katharina Haude, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, Dagmar Jung, Sonja Riesberg, Stefan Schnell, Frank Seifart, Harriet Sheppard & Claudia Wegener. 2022. Cross-linguistic patterns in the lexicalisation of bring and take. Studies in Language 46(4). 934–993. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.19088.mar.
Margetts, Anna, Sonja Riesberg & Birgit Hellwig (eds.) (2022). Caused accompanied motion: Bringing and taking events in a cross-linguistic perspective [Typological Studies in Language 134]. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Maouene, Josita, Shohei Hidaka, & Linda B. Smith. 2008. Body parts and early-learned verbs. Cognitive Science 32. 1200–1216.
Maouene, Josita, Nitya Sethuraman, Mounir M. Maouene & Sango Otieno. 2016. Contingencies between verbs, body parts, and argument structures in maternal and child speech: a corpus study. Language and Cognition 8. 237–282. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2014.48.
Martinková, Michaela & Markéta Janebová. 2024. English and Czech venitive Verbs in contrast: Deictic or not?. Nordic Journal of English Studies 23(2). 34–60.
Matsumoto, Yo (ed.). 2025. Motion event descriptions across languages. Volume 1: Case studies of linguistic representations of motion. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
McGregor, William B. 2002. Verb classification in Australian languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Meex, Birgitta. 2020. Patterns of path encoding in German. In Yo Matsumoto & Kazuhiro Kawachi (eds.), Broader perspectives on motion event descriptions, 63–104. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Miller, Corey & Karineh Aghajanian-Stewart. 2017. A Frequency dictionary of Persian. London: Routledge.
Mulder, Gijs. 2017. When feeling is thinking. A lexical-semantic analysis of evidential and epistemic predicates in Spanish. In Juana I. Marín Arrese et al. (eds.), Evidentiality Revisited: Cognitive grammar, functional and discourse-pragmatic perspectives, 105–121. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Naughton, James & Karen von Kunes. 2021. Czech. An essential grammar. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
Newman, John. 1996. Give. A cognitive linguistic study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Newman, John (ed.). 1998. The linguistics of giving. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Newman, John (ed.). 2009. The linguistics of eating and drinking. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Nolan, Brian, Gudrun Rawoens & Elke Diedrichsen (eds.). 2015. Causation, permission, and transfer. Argument realisation in GET, TAKE, PUT, GIVE and LET verbs [Studies in Language Companion Series, 167]. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.167.
Norcliffe, Elisabeth & Asifa Majid. 2024a. Verbs of perception: A quantitative typological study. Language 100(1). 81–123.
Norcliffe, Elisabeth & Asifa Majid. 2024b. Word formation patterns in the perception domain: a typological study of cross-modal semantic associations. Linguistic Typology 28(3). 419–459.
Nuyts, Jan. 2014. Analyses of the modal Meanings. In Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modality and Mood, 31–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199591435.001.0001.
OPUS. https://opus.nlpl.eu/ (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Oravecz, Csaba, Tamás Váradi & Bálint Sass. 2014. The Hungarian Gigaword Corpus. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Hrafn Loftsson, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk, Stelios Piperidis (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'14), 1719–1723. Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). http://hnc.nytud.hu (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Palmer, Gary B., Cliff Goddard & Penny Lee (eds.). 2003. Talking about thinking across languages. Special issue of Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3).
Pawley, Andrew. 1993. A language which defies description by ordinary means. In William Foley (ed.), The role of theory in language description, 87–129. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Pawley, Andrew. 2006. Where have all the verbs gone? Remarks on the organisation of languages with closed verb classes. (Paper presented at the 11th Biennial Rice University Linguistics Symposium, 16-18 March 2006.) http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lingsymp/Pawley_paper.pdf (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Pawley, Andrew. 2020. The depiction of sensing events in English and Kalam. In Helen Bromhead & Zhengdao Ye (eds.), Meaning, life and culture: In conversation with Anna Wierzbicka. ANU Press. Canberra: Australia. https://doi.org/10.22459/MLC.2020.20.
Raag, Raimo. 2014. Estniska från grunden [Finsk-ugriska läromedel FU 25]. Uppsala: Uppsala University.
Reesink, Ger. 2013. Expressing the GIVE event in Papuan languages: A preliminary survey. Linguistic Typology 17(2). 217–266.
Ricca, Davide. 1993. I verbi deittici di movimento in Europa: una ricerca interlinguistica [Deictic Motion Verbs in Europe: A Cross-Linguistic Study]. Florence: La Nuova Italia Editrice.
Rice, Sally. 1998. Giving and taking in Chipewyan: the semantics of THING-marking classificatory verbs. In John Newman (ed.), The linguistics of giving, 97–134. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. 1989. Prototypes, schemas and cross-category correspondences: The case of ask. Linguistics 27. 613–661.
Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. 1995. Metaphor, schema, invariance: The case of verbs of answering. In Louis Goossens, Paul Pauwels, Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen & Johan Vanparys (eds.), By Word of Mouth, 205–243. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
San Roque, Lila, Kobin H. Kendrick, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Penelope Brown, Rebecca Defina, Mark Dingemanse, Tyko Dirksmeyer, Nicholas J. Enfield, Simeon Floyd, Jeremy Hammond, Giovanni Rossi, Sylvia Tufvesson, Saskia van Putten & Asifa Majid. 2015. Vision verbs dominate in conversation across cultures, but the ranking of non-visual verbs varies. Cognitive Linguistics 26(1). 31–60.
Sarda, Laure & Ludovica Lena (eds.). 2023. Existential constructions across languages. Forms, meanings and functions. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
SUC 1997. SUC 1.0. Stockholm Umeå Corpus. Produced by Dept. of Linguistics, Umeå University and Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University. CD-Rom.
Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2000. Simple and complex verbs in Jamingung. Nijmegen: MPI Series in Psycholinguistics.
Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2008. What do “do” verbs do? The semantic diversity of generalised action verbs. In Elisabeth Verhoeven, Stavros Skopeteas, Yong-Min Shin, Yoko Nishina & Johannes Helmbrecht (eds.), Studies on grammaticalization, 185–208. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Sharoff, Serge, Elena Manskaya & James Wilson. 2013. A frequency dictionary of Russian. London: Routledge.
Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Stassen, Leon. 2009. Predicative possession. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stassen, Leon. 2013a. Predicative Possession. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online. Available online at: http://wals.info/chapter/117 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Stassen, Leon. 2013b. Zero Copula for Predicate Nominals. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online. Available online at: http://wals.info/chapter/120 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Stassen, Leon. 2013c. Predicative Adjectives. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online. Available online at: http://wals.info/chapter/118 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Sussex, Roland & Paul Cubberley. 2006. The Slavic languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. III. Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 57–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The Frequency List of Estonian Literary Language. https://www.cl.ut.ee/ressursid/sagedused1/ (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Thornell, Christina. 2002. The uses of the Sango verb mû ‘transfer’. Afrika und Übersee 85. 267–299.
Tiedemann, Jörg. 2012. Parallel data, tools and interfaces in OPUS. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Mehmet Uğur Doğan, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk & Stelios Piperidis (eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12), 2214–2218. Istanbul: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid, Marijke van der Wal & Arjan van Leuvensteijn (eds.) 1998. DO in English, Dutch and German. History and present-day variation. Amsterdam: Stichting Neerlandistiek & Nodus Publikationen.
Tsangalidis, Anastasios. 2009. Modals in Greek. In Björn Hansen & Ferdinand de Haan (eds.), Modals in the languages of Europe, 139–163. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir A. Plungian 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1). 79–124.
Van Valin, Robert D. & Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Verhaar, John W. M. (ed.). 1967-1972. The Verb ‘Be’ and its synonyms. Philosophical and grammatical studies, Part 1-6 [Foundations of Language Supplementary Series, vols. 1, 6, 8, 9, 14 & 16.]. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.
Viberg, Åke. 1983a. The verbs of perception: a typological study. Linguistics 21(1). 123–162.
Viberg, Åke. 1983b. A universal lexicalization hierarchy for the verbs of perception. In Fred Karlsson (ed.), Papers from the 7th Scandinavian Conference of General Linguistics, 260–275. Helsinki: Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki.
Viberg, Åke. 1993. Crosslinguistic perspectives on lexical organization and lexical progression. In Kenneth Hyltenstam & Åke Viberg (eds.), Progression and regression in language, 340–385. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Viberg, Åke. 1999a. The polysemous cognates Swedish gå and English go. Universal and language-specific characteristics. Languages in Contrast 2(1). 87–113.
Viberg, Åke. 1999b. Lexical development in a second language. In Guus Extra & Ludo Verhoeven (eds.), Bilingualism and migration, 165–185. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Viberg, Åke. 2001. The verbs of perception. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wofgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals. An international handbook, 1294–1309. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Viberg, Åke. 2002. Basic verbs in lexical progression and regression. In Petra Burmeister, Thorsten Piske & Andreas Rohde, A. (eds.), An integrated view of language development. Papers in honor of Henning Wode, 109–134. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Viberg, Åke. 2003. The polysemy of the Swedish verb komma ‘come’: A view from translation corpora. In Kasia M. Jaszczolt & Ken Turner (eds.), Meaning through language contrast, vol. 2, 75–105. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Viberg, Åke. 2005. The lexical typological profile of Swedish mental verbs. Languages in Contrast 5(1). 121–157.
Viberg, Åke. 2006a. Towards a lexical profile of the Swedish verb lexicon. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 59(1): 103–129. Thematic issue on: The Typological Profile of Swedish.
Viberg, Åke. 2006b. What one verb can do: The Swedish verb göra in a crosslinguistic perspective. In Mickael Suominen et al. (eds.), A Man of Measure: Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th Birthday. Special Supplement to SKY Journal of Linguistics 19. Turku, The Linguistic Association of Finland, 243–257.
Viberg, Åke. 2009. The meaning patterns of Swedish låta ‘sound’; ‘let’. A corpus-based contrastive study. In Petra Bernardini, Verner Egerland & Jonas Granfeldt (eds.), Mélanges plurilingues offerts à Suzanne Schlyter à l’occasion de son 65ème anniversaire. [Études Romanes de Lund 85], 455–480. Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University.
Viberg, Åke. 2010. Basic verbs of possession. In Maarten Lemmens (ed.), Unison in multiplicity: Cognitive and typological perspectives on grammar and lexis [CogniTextes 4]. http://cognitextes.revues.org/308 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Viberg, Åke. 2012. Basic verbs in typological perspective. In Marleen Van Peteghem, Peter Lauwers, Els Tobbak, Annemie Demol & Laurence De Wilde (eds.), Le verbe en verve. Réflexions sur la syntaxe et la sémantique verbales, 255–273. Ghent: Academia Press.
Viberg, Åke. 2013a. Posture verbs. A multilingual contrastive study. Languages in Contrast 13(2). 139–169.
Viberg, Åke. 2013b. Seeing the lexical profile of Swedish through multilingual corpora. The case of Swedish åka and other vehicle Verbs. In Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds.), Advances in corpus-based contrastive linguistics. Studies in honour of Stig Johansson, 25–56. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Viberg, Åke. 2013c. Ord om konsten att förflytta sig: Svenskans gå, åka och köra i tvärspråkligt perspektiv. In Björn Lindblom (ed.), Text, tal & tecken. Några perspektiv inom språkforskningen [KVHAA Konferenser 83], 116–138. Stockholm: Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien.
Viberg, Åke. 2015a. Contrasts in construction and semantic composition: Crosslinguistic perspectives on the verbs of Putting in English and Swedish. In Signe Oksefjell Ebeling & Hilde Hasselgård (eds.), Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions, 222–253. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Viberg, Åke. 2015b. Sensation, Perception and Cognition. Swedish in a typological-contrastive perspective. Functions of Language 22(1). 96–131.
Viberg, Åke. 2016a. What happens in translation? A comparison of original and translated texts containing verbs meaning SIT, STAND and LIE in the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus (ESPC). Nordic Journal of English Linguistics (NJES) 15(3), 102–148. Available online at: https://publicera.kb.se/njes/article/view/26824/21895 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Viberg, Åke. 2016b. Asking and answering: A contrastive study of English and Swedish basic communication verbs. Linguistics Beyond and Within 2. 180–212. Available online at: https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/5646 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Viberg, Åke. 2016c. Polysemy in action: The Swedish verb slå ‘hit, strike, beat’ in a crosslinguistic perspective. In Päivi Juvonen & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), The lexical typology of semantic shifts. [Cognitive Linguistics Research 58], 177–222. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Viberg, Åke. 2017a. Contrasts in morphology. The case of UP/DOWN and IN/OUT as bound morphemes in Swedish and their English correspondents. In Markéta Janebová, Ekaterina Lapshinova-Koltunski & Michaela Martinková (eds.), Contrasting English and other languages through corpora, 32–74. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
Viberg, Åke. 2017b. SAYING, TALKING and TELLING. Basic verbal communication verbs in Swedish and English. In Thomas Egan & Hildegunn Dirdal (eds.), Cross-linguistic correspondences: From lexis to genre, 37–74. Amsterdam: Benjamins
Viberg, Åke. 2017c. Finding a model for contrastive lexical semantics: A look at verbal communication verbs. Linguistics Beyond and Within 3. 195–215. Available online at: https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/5659 (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Viberg, Åke. 2019. Phenomenon-based perception verbs in Swedish from a typological and contrastive perspective. In Éric Gilbert (ed.), Perception, perceptibilité et objet perçu. Approches inter-langues [Syntaxe & Sémantique 20], 17–48. Caen: Presses Universitaires de Caen.
Viberg, Åke. 2020. Contrasting semantic fields across languages. (Using the verbs of cutting and breaking as an example). In Renata Enghels, Bart Defrancq & Marlies Jansegers (eds.), New approaches to contrastive linguistics. Empirical and methodological challenges. [Trends in Linguistics 336], 265–312. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Viberg, Åke. 2025. What kind of verb is TAKE? The English and Swedish verbs take/ta and their correspondences in other European languages. Unpublished manuscript.
Viberg, Åke (to appear). Word meaning in comparative and contrastive linguistics. In Dirk Geeraerts & Dylan Glynn (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wälchli, Bernhard & Michael Cysouw. 2012. Lexical typology through similarity semantics: Toward a semantic map of motion verbs. Linguistics 50(3). 671 – 710.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1987. English speech act verbs. A semantic dictionary. New York: Academic Press.
Wiktionary. Frequency lists/Finnish/Press data https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Frequency_lists/Finnish/Press_data (Accessed 2026-07-06).
Wilkins, David P. & Deborah Hill. 1995. When “go” means “come”: Questioning the basicness of basic motion verbs. Cognitive Linguistics 6(2/3). 209–259.
Windfuhr, Gernot & John R. Perry. 2010. Persian and Tajik. In Gernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 416–544. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis Group.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Åke Viberg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
