Carston R. 2002. Linguistics meaning, communicated meaning and cognitive pragmatics. – Mind and Language 17: 127–48.

Croft W., Cruse A. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge, New York.

Cruse A. 1986. Lexical semantics. Cambridge, New York.

Dirven R. 1993. Dividing up physical and mental space into conceptual categories by means of English prepositions. – Zelinsky-Wibbelt C. (ed.). The semantics of prepositions: From mental processing to natural language. Berlin: 73–97.

Evans V., Tyler A. 2004. Spatial experience, lexical structure and motivation: The case of in. – Radden G., Panther K. (eds.). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin: 157–192.

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

Grady J. 1997. Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. [Ph.D. Diss., Linguistics Department, UC California].

Grice P. 1978. Further notes on logic and conversation. – Cole P., Morgan J. (eds.). Syntax and semantics. [vol. 9: Pragmatics]. New York: 113–128.

Hawkins B. 1988. The category MEDIUM. – Rudzka-Ostyn B. (ed.). Topics in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: 231–270.

Herskovits A. 1986. Language and spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary study of the preposi­tions in English. Cambridge.

Herskovits A. 1988. Spatial expressions and the plasticity of meaning. – Rudzka-Ostyn B. (ed.). Topics in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: 271–298.

Hottenroth P.-M. 1993. Prepositions and object concepts: A contribution to cognitive seman­tics. – Zelinsky-Wibbelt C. (ed.). The semantics of prepositions: From mental processing to natural language. Berlin: 179–219.

Johnson M. 1987. The body in the mind. Chicago.

Lakoff G. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago.

Lakoff G., Johnson M. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago.

Lakoff G., Johnson M. 1999. Philosphy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York.

Langacker R. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. [vol. 1]. Stanford.

Langacker R. 1991. Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin.

Lindstromberg S. 1997. English prepositions explained. Amsterdam.

Lu W. 2008. From textual prompts to cognitive models: A context-oriented perspective on metaphor interpretation in Taiwanese presidential speeches. – Language and Linguis­tics 9.2: 341–358.

Lu W. 2016. Polysemy and the semantic-pragmatic interface: The case of up in a context-based model. – Intercultural Pragmatics 13.4: 563–589.

Miller G., Johnson-Laird Ph. 1976. Language and perception. Cambridge.

Pustejovsky J. 1991. The generative lexicon. – Computational Linguistics 17.4: 409–441.

Reddy M. 1979. The conduit metaphor. – Ortony A. (ed.). Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: 284–310.

Rudzka-Ostyn B. 2003. Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. New York.

Ruhl Ch. 1989. On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. Albany.

Sandra D. 1998. What linguists can and can’t tell about the mind: A reply to Croft. – Cogni­tive Linguistics 9.4: 361–378.

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

Sperber D., Wilson D. 2002. Pragmatics, modularity and mindreading. – Mind & Lan­guage 17: 3–23.

Taylor J. 2003. Polysemy’s paradoxes. – Language Sciences 25: 637–655.

Tyler A., Evans V. 2003. The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge, New York.

Vandeloise C. 1991. Spatial prepositions: A case study in French. Chicago.

Vandeloise C. 1994. Methodology and analyses of the preposition in. – Cognitive Linguis­tics 5.2: 157–184.

Wilson D. 2003. Relevance theory and lexical pragmatics. – Italian Journal of Linguistics / Rivista di Linguistica 15.2: 273–291.