ساخت اسامی مشتق از پسوند «-گر» از منظر صرف ساختی

• Abbasi, Z. (2017). “Analyzing complex words in Persian in Construction Morphology and Lexical Morphology/Phonology”. Language Related Research. 8 (3). Pp. 67-93. [In Persian].
• Anvari, H. (2002). Sokhan Dictionary (8 Volumes). Tehran: Sokhan .[In Persian].
• Arcodia, Giorgio Francesco, (2014), “Diachrony and the Polysemy of Derivational Affixes”. In F. Rainer, F. Gardani, H. C. Luschützky & W. U. Dressler (eds.), Morphology and Meaning (127-139). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Azimdokht, Z. & A. Rafiei, (2017), “Compound words ending in present stem based on Construction Morphology: A case of [x-yab] ”. Proceedings of 4th National Conference on Morphology, Tehran: Neveeseh Parsi .[In Persian].
• Beard, R. (1990). “The nature and origins of derivational polysemy”. Lingua 81.Pp. 101–140.
• Booij, G. & R. Lieber, (2004), “On the paradigmatic nature of affixal semantics in English and Dutch”. Linguistic. 327-357.
• Booij, G. (1986). “Form and meaning in morphology: the case of Dutch "Agent" nouns”. Linguistics. 24.Pp. 503-517.
• Booij, G. (2008). “Construction Morphology and the Lexicon”. In F. Montermini, G. Boyé, and N. Hathout (eds), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
• Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Booij, G. (2010b). “Construction morphology”. Language and Linguistics. 3(1). Pp. 1-13.
• Booij, G. (2015). “Construction Morphology”. In. A. Hippisley & G. T. Stump (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology, 424-448. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Booij, G. (2015). “Construction Morphology”. In. A. Hippisley & G. T. Stump (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology, 424-448. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Booij, G. (2005). The Grammar of Words (1st edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Booij, G. (2010a). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Croft, W. (2007). “Construction Grammar”. In D. Geerarerts & H. Cuykens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of cognitive linguistics. 463- 509. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fabb, N. (1984). Syntactic Affixation. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD Dissertation.
• Ghaderi, S. & A. Rafiei , (1993), “Coercion and construction grammar”. Language Related Research. 8 (7) :183-208. [In Persian].
• Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Kashani, Kh. (2018). “Zansu Reverse Persian Dictionary”. Tehran: Markaz Nashre Daneshgah .[In Persian].
• Keyser, S. J. & T. Roeper, (1984), “On the middle and ergative constructions in English”. Linguistic Inquiry. 15. Pp.381-416.
• Lieber, Rochelle, (2004), Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
• Lüdtke, J. (2005). Romanische Wortbildung. Inhaltlich – diachronisch – synchronisch. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
• Luschützky, H. Ch. & F. Rainer, (2011),“Agent noun polysemy in cross- linguistic perspective”. Language Typology and Universals. 64(4).Pp. 287-338.
• Luschützky, H. C.(2011). “Agent-Noun Polysemy in Slavic: Some Examples”. In: Luschützky,Hans C.& Rainer,Franz (eds.), Agent noun polysemy in Indo-European languages. Special issue of Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 64(1). Pp. 75–97.
• Meyer- Lübke, W. (1890). Italienische Grammatik. Leipzig.
• Panagl, O. (1978). “Agens und Instrument in der Wortbildung”. In W. U. Dressler & W. Meid (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Linguists. Vienna,August 28- Septembre 2, 1977, 453- 456. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Sprachwissenschaft.
• Panagl, O. (1975). “Kasustheorie und Nomina Agentis”. In H. Rix (ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung. Akten der V. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Regensburg, 9 – 14 September 1973, 232 – 146. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
• Rafiei, A. & S. Torabi, (2014), “Inheritance and motivation of form and meaning in lexicon: Instantiations of Persian word formation patterns". Science of Language, 2 (3) .[In Persian].
• Rafiei, A. (2008). “A Study of the Semantics of Persian Derivational Suffixes”. Ph.D Dissertation, Allameh Tabataba’i University. [In Persian].
• Rafiei, A. (2012). “Construction Morphology: Some evidence from Persian word formation”. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Linguistics, Tehran: Allameh Tabataba’i University. [In Persian].
• Rainer, f. (2004a). ”Del nombre de agente al nombre de instrument en español: ¿Cómo y cuándo? ”. Iberoromania. 59. Pp. 97-122.
• Rainer, F. (2004b). “L'origine dei nomi di strumento italiani in –tor". In Krisch, Th; Lindner, Th & Müller, U. (eds.), Analecta homini universali dicata. Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65. Geburtstag. Vol.1. Stuttgart: Heinz. Pp. 399- 424.
• Rainer, F. (2005). “Semantic change in word formation”. Linguistics. 43.2. Pp. 415-441.
• Rainer, F. (2011). “The agent- instrument- place ''polysemy'' of the suffix –TOR in Romance”. Language Typology and Universals. Persian Academy letter (special issue). 1. Pp. 5-12.
• Rainer, F. (2014). “Polysemy in Derivation”. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Oxford: OUP.
• Sadeghi, A. (1991-1993). Ways and Possibilities of Word Formation in Contemporary Persian. Tehran: Nashr-e Danesh, (12 Articles) .[In Persian].
• Tabataba'i, A. (2003). A General Description of Word Formation Processes in Persian. Tehran: Nashr-e Danesh, 21 (3). [In Persian].
• Tabataba'i, A. (2003). Persian Noun and Adjective Compounds. Tehran: Markaz Nashre Daneshgahi [In Persian].
• Torabi, S. (2014). Semantic study of Persian Agent suffixes in the framework of Construction Morphology. MA dissertation, University of Isfahan. [In Persian].
• Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale, (2013), Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Vahedi Langrudi, M. & M. Ghaderi, (2010), “Argument structure of Persian derivational words”. Language Studies, 1 (1). Pp. 57- 74 [In Persian].