@article{oai:konan-wu.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000816,
 author = {月足, 亜由美},
 issue = {40},
 journal = {甲南女子大学研究紀要. 文学・文化編, Konan Women's University researches of literature and culture volume},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {110004680861, Both the have+object construction and have+complement construction can be interpreted in various ways and the meanings of the verb have look different in each instance. Taking their various meanings into account, the schematic meaning of the have construction can be reduced to the ideas that "the subject of have is cognitively close to its object or complement" or "the subject of have 'possesses' its object or complement within its sphere." All the have constructions can be considered to have this core meaning. The natures of the objects and complements of have differ in each individual instance, and so do the natures of the subjects of have in relation to them. Their differences give the verb have and the construction a number of different meanings. We assume that when the have construction is completely stative, it is analogous to the setting-subject construction which Langacker (1991, 2000) argues.},
 pages = {61--69},
 title = {have+目的語/補文構文のスキーマ的意味},
 year = {2004}
}