AHD 4 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 2000. 4th edition. With CD-ROM. Edited by Pickett, Joseph P.. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Cambridge International Dictionary of English 1995. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

COLLINS 5 Collins Electronic English Dictionary & Thesaurus 2002. 5th edition. Version 3.0. Findon: Harper Collins Publishers.

COD 10 Concise Oxford Dictionary (10th Edition) on CD-ROM 2000. Version 1.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

EWED 2001 Encarta World English Dictionary 2001. CD-ROM. London: Bloomsbury.

Evans, Bergen and Evans, Cornelia 1957. A Dictionary of Contemporary American Usage. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Fowler, Henry W. 1926. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fowler's Modern English Usage 1965. 2nd edition. Edited by Gowers, Ernest. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

LDOCE Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English 2003. Edited by Bullon et al, Stephen. New edition. Harlow: Longman.

MW 11 Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 2003. 11th edition. With CD-ROM. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

NODE 2000 The New Oxford Dictionary of English on CD-ROM 2000. Version 1.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

NHD The Newbury House Dictionary of American English 1999. With CD-ROM. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

OED 2 The Oxford English Dictionary 1989. 2nd edition. Edited by Simpson, John A. and Weiner, Edmund S. C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

OED on CD-ROM The Oxford English Dictionary (Second Edition) on CD-ROM 1994 (Version 1.13) and 2002 (Version 3.0). Edited by Simpson, John A. and Weiner, Edmund S. C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

OED Online The Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [www.oed.com].

The Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners 2002. London: Macmillan.

Webster's New World College Dictionary 1996. 3rd edition. Edited by Neufeldt, Victoria. Cleveland, OH: Macmillan.

Wells, John C. 2000. Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. 2nd edition. Harlow: Longman.

Aarts, Bas and Meyer, Charles F. (eds.) 1995. The Verb in Contemporary English: Theory and Description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Aarts, Jan and Meijs, Willem (eds.) 1990. Theory and Practice in Corpus Linguistics. Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 4. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Aarts, Jan and Wekker, Herman (eds.) 1997. Studies in English Language Research and Teaching. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Abercrombie, David 1967. Elements of General Phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Adams, Valerie 2001. Complex Words in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Ahrens, Rüdiger, Bald, Wolf-Dietrich and Hüllen, Werner (eds.) 1995. Handbuch Englisch als Fremdsprache. Berlin: Schmidt.

Aijmer, Karin 1984. ‘“Sort of” and “kind of” in English conversation’, Studia Linguistica 38: 118–28.Google Scholar

Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.) 1991. English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik. London: Longman.

Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M. (eds.) 2003. New Media Language. London: Routledge.

Albakry, Mohammed and Crawford, William 2004. ‘Subjunctive triggers in American English newspapers’. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Portland, OR.

Algeo, John 1988a. ‘British and American grammatical differences’, International Journal of Lexicography 1: 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Algeo, John 1988b. ‘The tag question in British English: It's different, i'n'it?’, English World-Wide 9: 171–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Algeo, John 1990. ‘It's a myth, innit? Politeness and the English tag question’, in Ricks, and Michaels, (eds.), pp. 443–50.

Algeo, John 1992. ‘British and American mandative constructions’, in Blank, (ed.), pp. 599–617.

Algeo, John 1995. ‘Having a look at the expanded predicate’, in Aarts, and Meyer, (eds.), pp. 203–17.

Algeo, John (ed.) 2001. The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 6: English in North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Algeo, John 2001. ‘External History’, in Algeo, (ed.), pp. 1–58.

Algeo, John 2006. British or American English? A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns. Studies in English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allerton, D. J. 1969. ‘The sentence as a linguistic unit’, Lingua 22: 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allerton, D. J. 1987. ‘English intensifiers and their idiosyncrasies’, in Steele, and Threadgold, (eds.), pp. 15–31.

Allerton, D. J. 1988. ‘Infinitivitis in English’, in Klegraf, and Nehls, (eds.), pp. 11–23.

Allerton, D. J. 2001. Review of: Paradis, Carita 1997. Degree Modifiers of Adjectives in Spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press. English Language and Linguistics 5: 184–8.Google Scholar

Allerton, D. J., Carney, Edward and Holdcroft, David (eds.) 1979. Function and Context in Linguistic Analysis: A Festschrift for William Haas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Allwood, Jens and Ljung, Magnus (eds.) 1980. ALVAR: A Linguistically Varied Assortment of Readings: Studies Presented to Alvar Ellegård on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday. Stockholm Papers in English Language and Literature 1. University of Stockholm.

Altenberg, Bengt 1982. The Genitive v. the Of-Construction: A Study of Syntactic Variation in 17th Century English. Malmö: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar

Altenberg, Bengt and Eeg-Olofsson, Mats 1990. ‘Phraseology in spoken English: Presentation of a project’, in Aarts, and Meijs, (eds.), pp. 1–26.

Anderson, John M. 1971. The Grammar of Case: Towards a Localistic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, John M. (ed.) 1982. Language Form and Linguistic Variation: Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Anderson, John M. 2001. ‘Modals, subjunctives, and (non-)finiteness’, English Language and Linguistics 5: 159–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderwald, Lieselotte 2003. ‘Non-standard English and typological principles: The case of negation’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 507–29.

Arnold, Jennifer, Wasow, Thomas, Losongco, Anthony and Ginstrom, Ryan 2000. ‘Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering’, Language 76: 28–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Asher, Ronald E. (ed.) 1994. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Aston, Guy and Burnard, Lou 1998. The British National Corpus 1995. Version 1.0. BNC Consortium/Oxford University Computing Services Handbook. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Atkinson, Dwight 1992. ‘The evolution of medical research writing from 1735 to 1985: The case of the Edinburgh Medical Journal ’, Applied Linguistics 13: 337–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkinson, Dwight 2001. ‘Scientific discourse across history: A combined multi-dimensional/rhetorical analysis of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London’, in Conrad, and Biber, (eds.), pp. 45–65.

Auer, Anita 2006. ‘Precept and practice: The influence of prescriptivism on the English subjunctive’, in Dalton-Puffer, , Kastovsky, , Ritt, and Schendl, (eds.), pp. 33–54.

Bäcklund, Ingegerd, Börestam, Ulla, Melander Marttala, Ulla and Näslund, Harry (eds.) 2004. Text i Arbete/Text at Work: Festskrift till Britt-Louise Gunnarsson den 12 januari 2005/Essays in Honour of Britt-Louise Gunnarsson, 12 January 2005. Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk and ASLA (Association suédoise de linguistique appliquée).

Bäckman, Sven and Kjellmer, Göran (eds.) 1985. Papers on Language and Literature: Presented to Alvar Ellegård and Erik Frykman. Gothenburg Studies in English 60. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

Bailey, Richard W. 2001. ‘American English abroad’, in Algeo, (ed.), pp. 456–96.

Barber, Charles 1985. ‘Linguistic change in Present-Day English’, in Bäckman, and Kjellmer, (eds.), pp. 36–45.

Barlow, Michael 2000. MonoConc Pro 2.0. Houston: Athelstan Publications.Google Scholar

Battistella, Edwin L. 1990. Markedness: The Evaluative Superstructure of Language. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie 1997. ‘A class of English irregular verbs’, English Studies 78: 545–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bauer, Laurie 2002. An Introduction to International Varieties of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie and Trudgill, Peter (eds.) 1998. Language Myths. London: Penguin.

Baugh, Albert C. 1959. A History of the English Language. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Beal, Joan 1988. ‘Goodbye to all ‘that’? The history and present behaviour of optional ‘that’’, in Nixon, and Honey, (eds.), pp. 44–66.

Beals, Katharine, Denton, Jeannette, Knippen, Robert, Melnar, Lynette, Suzuki, Hisami and Zeinfeld, Erica (eds.) 1994. Papers from the 30th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. 2: The Parasession on Variation in Linguistic Theory. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Beals, Katharineet al. (eds.) 1994. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Behaghel, Otto 1924. Deutsche Syntax: Eine geschichtliche Darstellung, vol. 2: Die Wortklassen und Wortformen. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar

Behre, Frank 1934. The Subjunctive in Old English Poetry. Göteborgs högskolas årsskrift 40. Göteborg: Elander.Google Scholar

Berg, Thomas 1999. ‘Stress variation in British and American English’, World Englishes 18: 123–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergh, Gunnar, Herriman, Jennifer and Mobärg, Mats (eds.) 2004. An International Master of Syntax & Semantics. Papers Presented to Aimo Seppänen on the Occasion of his 75th Birthday. Gothenburg Studies in English 88. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

Berlage, Eva 2007. Processing Complexity and Grammatical Variation in British and American English. Doctoral dissertation. University of Paderborn: English Department.

Biber, Douglas 1987. ‘A textual comparison of British and American writing’, American Speech 62: 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas 1995. Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas 2003. ‘Compressed noun phrase structures in newspaper discourse: The competing demands of popularization vs. economy’, in Aitchison, and Lewis, (eds.), pp. 169–81.

Biber, Douglas and Clark, Victoria 2002. ‘Historical shifts in modification patterns with complex noun phrase structures: How long can you go without a verb?’, in Fanego, López-Couso and Pérez-Guerra, (eds.), pp. 43–66.

Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1989. ‘Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres’, Language 65: 487–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1997. ‘Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English’, in Nevalainen, and Kahlas-Tarkka, (eds.), pp. 253–75. Reprinted in Conrad and Biber (eds.), pp. 66–83.

Biber, Douglas, Finegan, Edward and Atkinson, Dwight 1994. ‘A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers and its challenges: Compiling and exploring A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers’, in Fries, , Tottie, and Schneider, (eds.), pp. 1–13.

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Blair, David and Collins, Peter (eds.) 2001. English in Australia. Varieties of English Around the World: General Series 26. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Blank, Claudia (ed.) 1992. Language and Civilization: A Concerted Profusion of Essays and Studies in Honour of Otto Hietsch, vol. 2. Frankfurt: Lang.

Bod, Rens, Hay, Jennifer and Jannedy, Stefanie (eds.) 2003. Probabilistic Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Böker, Uwe and Sauer, Hans (eds.) 1997. Anglistentag 1996 Dresden: Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1965a. Forms of English: Accent, Morpheme, Order. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1965b. ‘Pitch accent and sentence rhythm’, in Bolinger, 1965a, pp. 139–80.

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1968. Aspects of Language. New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1971. The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1972. Degree Words. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight L. 1979. ‘The jingle theory of double -ing’, in Allerton, , Carney, and Holdcroft, (eds.), pp. 41–56.

Borst, Eugen 1902. Die Gradadverbien im Englischen. Anglistische Forschungen 10. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Braun, Albert 1982. Studien zur Syntax und Morphologie der Steigerungsformen im Englischen. Schweizer Anglistische Arbeiten 110. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar

Breivik, Leiv Egil and Hasselgren, Angela (eds.) 2002. From the COLT's Mouth, and Other Places. Studies in Honour of Anna-Brita Stenström. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Britton, Derek (ed.) 1996. English Historical Linguistics 1994: Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Bryant, Frank Egbert 1907. ‘On the conservatism of language in a new country’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 22: 277–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bryant, Margaret M. 1962. Current American Usage. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.Google Scholar

Bublitz, Wolfram 1979. ‘Tag questions, transformational grammar and pragmatics’, Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 9: 5–22.Google Scholar

Butters, Ronald R. 2001. ‘Grammatical structure’, in Algeo, (ed.), pp. 325–39.

Bybee, Joan 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, Joan 2003. ‘Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 602–23.

Bybee, Joan and Hopper, Paul (eds.) 2001. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Typological Studies in Language 45. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Bybee, Joan and Hopper, Paul 2001. ‘Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure’, in Bybee, and Hopper, (eds.), pp. 1–24.

Bybee, Joan and Scheibman, Joanne 1999. ‘The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don't in English’, Linguistics 37: 575–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, Joan and Slobin, Dan I. 1982. ‘Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense’, Language 58: 265–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Caie, Graham, Haastrup, Kirsten, Jakobsen, Arnt L., Nielsen, Jørgen E., Sevaldsen, Jørgen, Specht, Henrik and Zettersten, Arne (eds.) 1990. Proceedings from the Fourth Nordic Conference for English Studies, vol. 1. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen, English Department.

Carey, Gordon V. 1953. American into English: A Handbook for Translators. Melbourne and London: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Cattell, Ray 1973. ‘Negative transportation and tag questions’, Language 49: 612–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, Guohua 2000. ‘The grammaticalization of concessive markers in Early Modern English’, in Fischer, , Rosenbach, and Stein, (eds.), pp. 85–110.

Cheshire, Jenny 1991. ‘Variation in the use of ain't in an urban British dialect’, in Trudgill, and Chambers, (eds.), pp. 54–73.

Christie, William M. (ed.) 1976. Current Progress in Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar

Christophersen, Paul 1974. ‘A note on the construction “adjective + a + noun”’, English Studies 55: 538–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christophersen, Paul and Sandved, Arthur O. 1969. An Advanced English Grammar. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Clark, Arthur M. 1947. Spoken English: An Idiomatic Grammar for Foreign Students. Edinburgh and London: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar

Close, R. A. 1987. ‘Notes on the split infinitive’, Journal of English Linguistics 20: 217–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.) 1975. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.

Collins, Peter 1995. ‘The indirect object construction in English: An informational approach’, Linguistics 33: 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, Peter and Peters, Pam 2004. ‘Australian English: Morphology and syntax’, in Kortmann, Schneider, Burridge, Mesthrie and Upton, (eds.), pp. 593–610.

Conrad, Susan and Biber, Douglas (eds.) 2001. Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies. London: Longman.

Copperud, Roy H. 1970. American Usage: The Consensus. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar

Copperud, Roy H. 1980. American Usage and Style: The Consensus. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth 1986. An Introduction to English Prosody. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Crews, Frederick C., Schor, Sandra and Hennessy, Michael 1989. The Borzoi Handbook for Writers. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar

Crystal, David 1995. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Crystal, David 2003. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Culicover, Peter W. 1999. Syntactic Nuts: Hard Cases, Syntactic Theory and Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Curzan, Anne 2003. Gender Shifts in the History of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cuyckens, Hubert and Radden, Günter (eds.) 2002. Perspectives on Prepositions. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRef

Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, Kastovsky, Dieter, Ritt, Nikolaus and Schendl, Herbert (eds.) 2006. Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms: English from 1500–2000. Bern, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt/Main, New York, Oxford, Wien: Lang.CrossRef

Haan, Pieter 1989. Postmodifyng Clauses in the English Noun Phrase: A Corpus-Based Study. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Défromont, Hubert J. 1973. Les Constructions Perfectives du Verbe Anglais Contemporain: Étude Comparée de l'Aspect Transcendant dans les Systèmes Verbaux Anglais et Français. Janua Linguarum, Series Practica, 185. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Dekeyser, Xavier, Devriendt, Betty, Tops, Guy A. J. and Geukens, Steven 2004. Foundations of English Grammar. 6th edition. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar

Denison, David 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Denison, David 1998. ‘Syntax’, in Romaine, (ed.), pp. 92–329.

Depraetere, Ilse 2003. ‘On verbal concord with collective nouns in British English’, English Language and Linguistics 7: 85–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dillard, Joey L. 1992. A History of American English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Dirven, René 1989. ‘A cognitive perspective on complementation’, in Jaspers, , Klooster, , Putseys, and Seuren, (eds.), pp. 113–39.

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1991. A New Approach to English Grammar, on Semantic Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Dolan, Terence Patrick 1998. A Dictionary of Hiberno-English. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan.Google Scholar

Dossena, Marina and Jones, Charles (eds.) 2003. Insights into Late Modern English. Bern: Lang.

Downing, Angela 2001. ‘“Surely you knew!” Surely as a marker of evidentiality and stance’, Functions of Language 8: 253–85.Google Scholar

Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2003. ‘Naturalness and morphological change’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 461–71.

Ellegård, Alvar 1953. The Auxiliary Do: The Establishment and Regulation of its Use in English. Gothenburg Studies in English 2. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Ellis, Alexander J. 1869–89. Early English Pronunciation, with Especial Reference to Shakespeare and Chaucer. London: Asher.Google Scholar

Elsness, Johan 1990. ‘The present perfect in American and British English: Some results from an elicitation test’, in Caie, , Haastrup, , Jakobsen, , Nielsen, , Sevaldsen, , Specht, and Zettersten, (eds.), pp. 169–78.

Elsness, Johan 1997. The Perfect and the Preterite in Contemporary and Earlier English. Topics in English Linguistics 21. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Elsness, Johan 2000/2001. ‘A contrastive look at the present perfect/preterite opposition in English and Norwegian’, Languages in Contrast 3: 3–40.Google Scholar

Engel, Dulcie M. and Ritz, Marie-Eve 2000. ‘The use of the present perfect in Australian English’, Australian Journal of Linguistics 20: 119–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erdmann, Peter 1981. ‘Der Konjunktiv im britischen und amerikanischen English’, in Kunsmann, and Kuhn, (eds.), pp. 110–31.

Estling, Maria 2000. ‘Competition in the wastebasket: A study of constructions with all, both and half ’, in Mair, and Hundt, (eds.), pp. 103–16.

Estling-Vannestål, Maria 2004. Syntactic Variation in English Quantified Noun Phrases with all, whole, both and half. Växjö: Växjö University Press.Google Scholar

Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred and Palmer, Frank (eds.) 2003. Modality in Contemporary English. Topics in English Linguistics 44. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Faltz, Leonard M. 1985. Reflexivization: A Study in Universal Syntax. New York and London: Garland.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa 1996a. ‘On the historical development of English retrospective verbs’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–9.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa 1996b. ‘The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400–1760)’, Diachronica 13: 29–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fanego, Teresa 1996c. ‘The gerund in Early Modern English: Evidence from the Helsinki Corpus’, Folia Linguistica Historica 17: 97–152.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa 2004. ‘Is Cognitive Grammar a usage-based model? Towards a realistic account of English sentential complements’, Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies 29: 23–58.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa, López-Couso, María José and Pérez-Guerra, Javier (eds.) 2002. English Historical Syntax and Morphology: Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Fijn van Draat, Pieter 1910. Rhythm in English Prose. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger N.V. [Reprinted 1967.]Google Scholar

Fijn van Draat, Pieter 1912. ‘Rhythm in English prose: The adjective’, Anglia 36: 1–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J., Kay, Paul and O'Connor, Mary Catherine 1988. ‘Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone’, Language 64: 501–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, Andreas, Tottie, Gunnel and Lehmann, Hans Martin (eds.) 2002. Text Types and Corpora: Studies in Honour of Udo Fries. Tübingen: Narr.

Fischer, Olga C. M. 1997a. ‘The grammaticalisation of infinitival to in English compared with German and Dutch’, in Hickey, and Puppel, (eds.), pp. 265–80.

Fischer, Olga C. M. 1997b. ‘Infinitive marking in Late Middle English: Transitivity and changes in the English system of case’, in Fisiak, (ed.), pp. 109–34.CrossRef

Fischer, Olga C. M. 2003. ‘Principles of grammaticalization and linguistic reality’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 445–78.

Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel and Perridon, Harry (eds.) 2004. Up and Down the Cline: The Nature of Grammaticalization. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette and Stein, Dieter (eds.) 2000. Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Fisiak, Jacek (ed.) 1993. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics, vol. 28. Poznań: Adam Mickiewicz University.

Fisiak, Jacek (ed.) 1997. Studies in Middle English Linguistics. Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 103. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2000. ‘The great leveler: The role of the spoken media in stylistic shift from the colloquial to the conventional’, American Speech 75: 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Foster, Brian 1955. ‘Recent American influence on Standard English’, Anglia 73: 328–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Francis, Nelson and Kučera, Henry 1982. Frequency Analysis of English Usage: Lexicon and Grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Frawley, William 1992. Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Fries, Udo, Müller, Viviane and Schneider, Peter (eds.) 1997. From Ælfric to the New York Times: Studies in English Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel and Schneider, Peter (eds.) 1994. Creating and Using English Language Corpora: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Zürich 1993. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Ghadessy, Mohsen (ed.) 1988. Registers of Written English. London: Pinter.

Givón, Talmy 1991. ‘Isomorphism in the grammatical code: Cognitive and biological considerations’, Studies in Language 15: 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gloderer, Gabriele 1993. Morphological Regularization of Irregular Verbs: A Comparison of British and American English. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Freiburg: English Department.

Goldberg, Adele E. 1992. ‘The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English ditransitive construction’, Cognitive Linguistics 3: 37–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Goldsmith, John A. (ed.) 1995. The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Cambridge, MA, and Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

González-Álvarez, Dolores 2003. ‘If he come vs. if he comes, if he shall come: Some remarks on the subjunctive in conditional protases in early and late Modern English’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104: 303–13.Google Scholar

González-Díaz, Victorina 2004. The Evolution of the Comparative Degree in English: A Corpus-Based Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Manchester University.

Görlach, Manfred 1987. ‘Colonial lag? The alleged conservative character of American English and other “colonial” varieties’, English World-Wide 8: 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Görlach, Manfred 1999. Aspects of the History of English. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar

Grabe, Esther and Low, Ling Ee 2002. ‘Durational variability in speech and the rhythm class hypothesis’, in Gussenhoven, and Warner, (eds.), pp. 515–46.

Gramley, Stephan and Pätzold, Kurt-Michael 2003. A Survey of Modern English. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Granath, Solveig, Miliander, June and Wennö, Elisabeth (eds.) 2005. The Power of Words: Studies in Honour of Moira Linnarud. Karlstad: Karlstad University Press.

Graziano-King, Janine 1999. Acquisition of Comparative Forms in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Graduate School of the City University of New York.

Graziano-King, Janine and Smith Cairns, Helen 2005. ‘Acquisition of English Comparative Adjectives’, Journal of Child Language 32: 345–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Greenbaum, Sidney 1969. Studies in English Adverbial Usage. London and Harlow: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph 1966. Language Universals with Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.) 1978. Universals of Human Language, vol. 4: Syntax. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Grice, H. Paul 1975. ‘Logic and conversation’, in Cole, and Morgan, (eds.), pp. 41–58. Reprinted in Grice, H. Paul 1989. Studies in the Ways of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Grund, Peter and Walker, Terry 2006. ‘The subjunctive in adverbial clauses in nineteenth-century English’, in Kytö, , Rydén, and Smitterberg, (eds.), pp. 89–109.

Gumperz, John J. and Levinson, Stephen C. (eds.) 1996. Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gussenhoven, Carlos and Warner, Natasha (eds.) 2002. Papers in Laboratory Phonology 7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Haegeman, Liliane 1986. ‘The present subjunctive in contemporary British English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensa 19: 61–74.Google Scholar

Haiman, John 1983. ‘Iconic and economic motivation’, Language 59: 781–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haiman, John 1985. Natural Syntax: Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haiman, John 1994. ‘Iconicity and syntactic change’, in Asher, (ed.), pp. 1633–37.

Halliday, M. A. K. 1988. ‘On the language of physical science’, in Ghadessy, (ed.), pp. 162–78.

Harris, John 1991. ‘Conservatism versus substratal transfer in Irish English’, in Trudgill, and Chambers, (eds.), pp. 191–212.

Harsh, Wayne 1968. The Subjunctive in English. Alabama Linguistic & Philological Series 15. University of Alabama: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar

Hasan, Ruqiya and Fries, Peter (eds.) 1995. On Subject and Theme: A Discourse Functional Perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Hatfield, James Taft, Leopold, Werner and Zieglschmid, A. J. Friedrich (eds.) 1930. Curme Volume of Linguistic Studies: Edited on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Linguistic Society of America: Language Monographs 7. Baltimore: Waverly Press.

Hawkins, John A. 1986. A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrasts. London and Sydney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1990. ‘A parsing theory of word order universals’, Linguistic Inquiry 21: 223–61.Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1992. ‘Syntactic weight versus information structure in word order variation’, in Jacobs, (ed.), pp. 186–219.

Hawkins, John A. 1994. A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1999. ‘Processing complexity and filler-gap dependencies across grammars’, Language 75: 244–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2000. ‘The relative order of prepositional phrases in English: Going beyond manner-place-time’, Language Variation and Change 11: 231–66.Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2003. ‘Why are zero-marked phrases close to their heads?’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 175–204.

Hayes, Bruce 1984. ‘The phonology of rhythm in English’, Linguistic Inquiry 15: 33–74.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd, Claudi, Ulrike and Hünnemeyer, Friederike 1991. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Henry, Frank and Richards, Barry (eds.) 1983. Linguistic Categories: Auxiliaries and Related Puzzles. Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel.

Heyvaert, Liesbet, Rogiers, Hella and Vermeylen, Nadine 2005. ‘Pronominal determiners in gerundive nominalization: A “case” study’, English Studies 86: 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickey, Raymond (ed.) 2004. Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanisław (eds.) 1997. Language History and Linguistic Modelling. A Festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th Birthday, vol. 1: Language History. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Hock, Hans Heinrich 2003. ‘Analogical change’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 441–60.

Hoekstra, Eric and Wolf, Henk 2004. ‘Over het voorkomen van adjacente identieke elementen’ [‘On the use of adjacent identical elements’]. Paper presented at TIN-dag 2004, Utrecht.

Hoffmann, Sebastian 2005. Grammaticalization and English Complex Prepositions: A Corpus-based Study. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet 1983. ‘The functions of tag questions’, English Language Research Journal 3: 40–65.Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet 1984. ‘Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: Some evidence for hedges as support structures’, Te Reo 27: 47–62.Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet 1986. ‘Functions of you know in women's and men's speech’, Language in Society 15: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holmes, Janet 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Hommerberg, Charlotte 2003. ‘Pseudo-coordination or to-construction: A corpus study of the “try and-problem”’. Unpublished term paper. University of Växjö: English Department.

Hommerberg, Charlotte and Tottie, Gunnel 2007. ‘Try to or try and? Verb complementation in British and American English’, ICAME Journal 31: 45–64.Google Scholar

Hooper, Joan B. 1976. ‘Word frequency in lexical diffusion and the source of morphophonological change’, in Christie, (ed.), pp. 95–105.

Hopper, Paul J. and Thompson, Sandra A. 1980. ‘Transitivity in grammar and discourse’, Language 56: 251–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hopper, Paul J. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 1978. ‘Some Aspects of Negation’, in Greenberg, (ed.), pp. 127–210.

Hornby, Albert S. 1975. Guide to Patterns and Usage. 2nd edition [1st edition 1949]. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Horwill, H. W. 1936. American Variations. S. P. E. Tract 45. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Hoye, Leo 1997. Adverbs and Modality in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney 1970. ‘Two approaches to the analysis of tags’, Journal of Linguistics 6: 215–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2005. A Student's Introduction to English Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hudson, Jean 1998. Perspectives on Fixedness: Applied and Theoretical. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar

Hudson, Richard 1975. ‘The meaning of questions’, Language 51: 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hudson, Richard 2003. ‘Gerunds without phrase structure’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 579–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne 1997. ‘Has British English been catching up with American English over the past thirty years?’, in Ljung, (ed.), pp. 135–51.

Hundt, Marianne 1998a. New Zealand English Grammar: Fact or Fiction? A Corpus-Based Study in Morphosyntactic Variation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne 1998b. ‘It is important that this study (should) be based on the analysis of parallel corpora: On the use of the mandative subjunctive in four major varieties of English’, in Lindquist, , Klintborg, Levin and Estling, (eds.), pp. 159–75.

Hundt, Marianne 2001. ‘What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions’, Studies in Language 25: 49–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne 2004a. ‘The passival and the progressive passive – a case study of layering in the English aspect and voice systems’, in Lindquist, and Mair, (eds.), pp. 79–120.

Hundt, Marianne 2004b. ‘Animacy, agency and the spread of the progressive in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century English’, English Language and Linguistics 8: 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Mair, Christian 1999. ‘“Agile” and “uptight” genres: The corpus-based approach to language change in progress’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 221–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne, Biewer, Carolin and Nesselhauf, Nadja (eds.) 2007. Corpus Linguistics and the Web. Language and Computers 59. Amsterdam: Rodopi.CrossRef

Jacobs, Joachim (ed.) 1992. Informationsstruktur und Grammatik. Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 4. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRef

Jacobson, Sven 1975. Factors Influencing the Placement of English Adverbs in Relation to Auxiliaries. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Jacobson, Sven (ed.) 1980. Papers from the Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation, Stockholm, 1979. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.

Jacobson, Sven 1981. Preverbal Adverbs and Auxiliaries: A Study of Word Order Change. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Jaspers, Dany, Klooster, Wim, Putseys, Yvan and Seuren, Pieter (eds.) 1989. Sentential Complementation and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

Jespersen, Otto 1909. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part I: Sounds and Spellings. London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1927. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part III: Syntax (Second Volume). London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1931. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part IV: Syntax (Third Volume). London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1940. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part V: Syntax (Fourth Volume). London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1942. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part VI: Morphology. London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1949. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, part VII: Syntax. London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard [Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by J. Dickens & Co., Northampton].Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto 1972. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 9th edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Johansson, Stig 1979. ‘American and British English grammar: An elicitation experiment’, English Studies 60: 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johansson, Stig 1980. ‘Corpus-based studies of British and American English’, in Jacobson, (ed.), pp. 85–100.

Johansson, Stig and Hofland, Knut 1989. Frequency Analysis of English Vocabulary and Grammar: Based on the LOB Corpus. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Johansson, Stig and Norheim, Else H. 1988. ‘The subjunctive in British and American English’, ICAME Journal 12: 27–36.Google Scholar

Jones, Bob Morris 1990. ‘Constraints on Welsh English tags: Some evidence from children's language’, English World-Wide 11: 173–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D. (eds.) 2003. Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRef

Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social Stylistics: Syntactic Variation in British Newspapers. Topics in English Linguistics 6. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kager, René 1989. A Metrical Theory of Stress and Destressing in English and Dutch. Doctoral dissertation. Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht.

Kager, René 1995. ‘The metrical theory of word stress’, in Goldsmith, (ed.), pp. 367–402.

Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.) 1991. Historical English Syntax. Topics in English Linguistics 2. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Kastovsky, Dieter, Kaltenböck, Gunther and Reichl, Susanne (eds.) 2002. Anglistentag 2001 Wien. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

Kato, Kazuo 2001. ‘Not to be or to not be: More on split negative infinitives’, American Speech 76: 312–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keenan, Edward L. and Comrie, Bernard 1977. ‘Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Graeme 1998. An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Kihlbom, Asta 1938. ‘Concerning the present subjunctive in conditional clauses’, Studia Neophilologica 11: 257–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul 1982. Explanation in Phonology. Publications in Language Sciences. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul 1982. ‘Remarks on analogical change’, in Kiparsky, , pp. 199–215.

Kirchner, Gustav 1935. ‘To feed (tr. v.) construed with various objects and prepositions’, English Studies 17: 217–21.Google Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1936. ‘The verbs with direct and indirect object re-examined’, English Studies 18: 1–16, 206–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1937. ‘The verbs with direct and indirect object re-examined: Conclusion’, English Studies 19: 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1940. ‘(To be) due as a (passive) verb-equivalent’, English Studies 22: 27–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1951. ‘Die Verba mit “Stellungsdativ”: Primäre und sekundäre Passivumwandlungen’, Neuphilologische Zeitschrift 3: 38–44, 115–21.Google Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1954. ‘Not before the subjunctive’, English Studies 35: 123–5.Google Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1955. ‘Direct transitivation’, English Studies 36: 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1957. ‘Recent American influence on Standard English: The syntactical sphere’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 5: 29–42.Google Scholar

Kirchner, Gustav 1959. ‘Zur transitiven und intransitiven Verwendung des englischen Verbums’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 7: 342–99.Google Scholar

Kirk, John M. (ed.) 2000. Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English: Papers from the Nineteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerised Corpora (ICAME 1998). Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.

Kjellmer, Göran 1979. ‘The cups that cheer but not inebriate’, Moderna språk 73: 179–80.Google Scholar

Kjellmer, Göran 1980. ‘Accustomed to swim: Accustomed to swimming. On verbal forms after TO’, in Allwood, and Ellegård, (eds.), pp. 75–99.

Kjellmer, Göran 1985. ‘Help to/help Ø revisited’, English Studies 66: 156–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kjellmer, Göran 2000. ‘Auxiliary marginalities: The case of try’, in Kirk, (ed.), pp. 115–24.

Kjellmer, Göran 2003. ‘On nonoccurring perfective have in Modern English’, Studia Neophilologica 75: 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klegraf, Josef and Nehls, Dietrich (eds.) 1988. Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel's 60th Birthday. Heidelberg: Groos.

Klemola, Juhani 1999. ‘Still sat in your car? Pseudo-passives with sat and stood in the history of non-standard varieties of English English’, Sociolinguistica 13: 129–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klemola, Juhani 2002. ‘Continuity and change in dialect morphosyntax’, in Kastovsky, Kaltenböck and Reichl, (eds.), pp. 47–56.

König, Ekkehard 2003. ‘Intensification and reflexivity in the languages of Europe: Parameters of variation and areal features’, in Corvetto, Loi (ed.), pp. 229–52.

König, Ekkehard and Siemund, Peter 2000. ‘The development of complex reflexives and intensifiers in English’, Diachronica 17: 39–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd 1997. Adverbial Subordination. A Typology and History of Adverbial Subordinators Based on European Languages. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd (ed.) 2004. Dialectology Meets Typology. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kortmann, Bernd and König, Ekkehard 1992. ‘Categorial reanalysis: The case of deverbal prepositions’, Linguistics 30: 671–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd, Schneider, Edgar, Burridge, Kate, Mesthrie, Rajend and Upton, Clive (eds.) 2004. A Handbook of Varieties of English, vol. 2: Morphology and Syntax. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kötter, Markus, Traxel, Oliver and Gabel, Stephan (eds.) 2006. Investigating and Facilitating Language Learning: Papers in Honour of Lienhard Legenhausen. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

Kövecses, Zoltán 2000. American English: An Introduction. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.Google Scholar

Kroch, Anthony 1994. ‘Morphosyntactic Variation’, in Beals, , Denton, , Knippen, , Melnar, , Suzuki, and Zeinfeld, (eds.), pp. 180–201.

Krug, Manfred 1998. ‘British English is developing a new discourse marker, innit? A study in lexicalisation on social, regional and stylistic variation’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 23: 145–97.Google Scholar

Krug, Manfred G. 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Topics in English Linguistics 32. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krug, Manfred 2003. ‘Frequency as a determinant in grammatical variation and change’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 7–67.

Kruisinga, Etsko 1931. A Handbook of Present-Day English, part 2: English Accidence and Syntax 1. Groningen: Noordhoff.Google Scholar

Kühne, Christiane 1992. Prototypische und potentielle indirekte Objekte im Englischen. Doctoral dissertation. University of Bonn.

Kunsmann, Peter and Kuhn, Ortwin (eds.) 1981. Weltsprache Englisch in Forschung und Lehre: Festschrift für Kurt Wächtler. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.

Kürschner, Wilfried and Rapp, Reinhard (eds.) 2006. Linguistik International: Festschrift für Heinrich Weber. Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.

Kytö, Merja 1991. Variation and Diachrony, with Early American English in Focus: Studies on CAN/MAY and SHALL/WILL. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja 1993a. ‘Early American English’, in Rissanen, Kytö and Palander-Collin, (eds.), pp. 83–91.

Kytö, Merja 1993b. ‘Third-person singular verb inflection in early British and American English’, Language Variation and Change 5: 113–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kytö, Merja 1996. ‘“The best and most excellentest way”: The rivalling forms of adjective comparison in Late Middle and Early Modern English’, in Svartvik, (ed.), pp. 123–44.

Kytö, Merja 1997. ‘Be/have + past participle: The choice of the auxiliary with intransitives from Late Middle to Modern English’, in Rissanen, Kytö and Heikkonen, (eds.) 1997a, pp. 17–85.

Kytö, Merja 2004. ‘The emergence of American English: Evidence from seventeenth-century records in New England’, in Hickey, (ed.), pp. 121–57.

Kytö, Merja and Romaine, Suzanne 1997. ‘Competing forms of adjective comparison in Modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective?’, in Nevalainen, and Kahlas-Tarkka, (eds.), pp. 329–52.

Kytö, Merja and Romaine, Suzanne 2000. ‘Adjective comparison and standardisation processes in American and British English from 1620 to the present’, in Wright, (ed.), pp. 171–94.

Kytö, Merja, Rydén, Mats and Smitterberg, Erik (eds.) 2006. Nineteenth-Century English: Stability and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Lakoff, George 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1988. ‘An overview of cognitive grammar’, in Rudzka-Ostyn, (ed.), pp. 3–48.

Lass, Roger 1987. The Shape of English: Structure and History. London and Melbourne: Dent & Son.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger 1990. ‘Where do extraterritorial Englishes come from? Dialect input and recodification in transported Englishes’, in Law, , Adamson, Vincent and Wright, (eds.), pp. 245–80.

Lass, Roger (ed.) 1999. The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 3: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lass, Roger 1999. ‘Phonology and morphology’, in Lass, (ed.), pp. 56–186.

Law, Vivian, Adamson, Sylvia, Vincent, Nigel and Wright, Susan (eds.) 1990. Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics. Cambridge, 6–9 April 1997. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Leech, Geoffrey 2003. ‘Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992’, in Facchinetti, Krug and Palmer, (eds.), pp. 223–40.

Leech, Geoffrey and Culpeper, Jonathan 1997. ‘The comparison of adjectives in recent British English’, in Nevalainen, and Kahlas-Tarkka, (eds.), pp. 353–73.

Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan 1975. A Communicative Grammar of English. London, Beccles and Colchester: Longman.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey, Mair, Christian, Hundt, Marianne and Smith, Nicholas in press. Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Legenhausen, Lienhard and Rohdenburg, Günter 1995. ‘Kontrastivierung ausgewählter Strukturen im Englischen und Deutschen’, in Ahrens, , Bald, and Hüllen, (eds.), pp. 133–9.

Lehmann, Christian 1995. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. LINCOM Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 1. Munich and Newcastle: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar

Lehmann, Hans Martin and Tottie, Gunnel in preparation. ‘Relativizers after same: Differences between British and American English’.

Lehnert, Martin 1976. Die Sprache Shakespeares und das amerikanische Englisch. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar

Levin, Beth 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Levin, Magnus 2001. Agreement with Collective Nouns in English. Lund: Lund Studies in English.Google Scholar

Lima, Susan D., Corrigan, Roberta L. and Iverson, Gregory K. (eds.) 1994. The Reality of Linguistic Rules. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Lind, Åge 1983a. ‘The variant forms of help to/help Ø’, English Studies 64: 263–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lind, Åge 1983b. ‘The variant forms try and/try to’, English Studies 64: 550–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lindquist, Hans 2000. ‘Livelier or more lively? Syntactic and contextual factors influencing the comparison of disyllabic adjectives’, in Kirk, (ed.), pp. 125–32.

Lindquist, Hans and Mair, Christian (eds.) 2004. Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Studies in Corpus Linguistics 13. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus and Estling, Maria (eds.) 1998. The Major Varieties of English: Papers from MAVEN 97. Växjö: Acta Wexionensia.

Little, Greta D. and Montgomery, Michael (eds.) 1994. Centennial Usage Studies. Tuscaloosa and London: University of Alabama Press.

Ljung, Magnus (ed.) 1997. Corpus-Based Studies in English: Papers from the Seventeenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora. ICAME 17. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.

Loi Corvetto, Ines (ed.) 2003. Dalla linguistica areale alla tipologia linguistica (= Atti del Convegno della Società Italiana del Glottologia). Rome: Editrice ‘il Calamo’.

Lyne, Susanna 2006. ‘The form of the pronoun preceding the verbal gerund: Possessive or objective?’, ICAME Journal 30: 37–53.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian 1990. Infinitival Complement Clauses in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian 1993. ‘A crosslinguistic functional constraint on believe-type raising in English and selected other European languages’, in Fisiak, (ed.), pp. 5–19.

Mair, Christian 1997. ‘Parallel corpora: A real-time approach to the study of language change in progress’, in Ljung, (ed.), pp. 195–209.

Mair, Christian 1998. ‘Corpora and the major varieties of English: Issues and results’, in Lindquist, , Klintborg, , Levin, and Estling, (eds.), pp. 139–57.

Mair, Christian 2002. ‘Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: A real-time study based on matching text corpora’, English Language and Linguistics 6: 105–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mair, Christian 2003. ‘Gerundial complements after begin and start: Grammatical and sociolinguistic factors, and how they work against each other’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 329–45.

Mair, Christian 2007a. ‘British English/American English grammar: Convergence in writing – divergence in speech?’, Anglia 125: 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mair, Christian 2007b. ‘Varieties of English around the world: Collocational and cultural profiles’, in Skandera, (ed.), pp. 437–68.

Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne 1995. ‘Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43: 111–22.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne (eds.) 2000. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory: Papers from the Twentieth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1999. ICAME 20. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.

Mair, Christian and Markus, Manfred (eds.) 1991. New Departures in Contrastive Linguistics: Proceedings of the Conference Held at the Leopold-Franzens-University of Innsbruck, Austria, 10–12 May 1991, vol. 2. Innsbruck: Amoe.

Maling, Joan 1983. ‘Transitive adjectives: A case of categorial reanalysis’, in Henry, and Richards, (eds.), pp. 253–89.

Malmgren, Sven-Göran and Olofsson, Arne (eds.) 2003. Åtta ordbildningsstudier. ORDAT 22. Göteborg: Göteborg University.

Manning, Christopher D. 2003. ‘Probabilistic approaches to syntax’, in Bod, , Hay, and Jannedy, (eds.), pp. 289–341.

Marchand, Hans 1969. The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word Formation. 2nd edition. München: Beck.Google Scholar

Marckwardt, Albert H. 1958. American English. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Marckwardt, Albert H. 1980. American English. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Marckwardt, Albert H. and Quirk, Randolph 1964. A Common Language: British and American English. The British Broadcasting Corporation and The United States Government.

Markus, Manfred 1988. ‘Zur Distribution von synthetischer und analytischer Steigerung im historischen Englisch’, Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 13: 105–21.Google Scholar

Mazzon, Gabriella 2000. ‘The ideology of the standard and the development of Extraterritorial Englishes’, in Wright, (ed.), pp. 73–92.

McArthur, Tom (ed.) 1992. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McCafferty, Kevin, Bull, Tove and Killie, Kristin (eds.) 2005. Contexts – Historical, Social, Linguistic: Studies in Celebration of Toril Swan. Bern: Lang.

McCrum, Robert, Cran, William and MacNeil, Robert 2002. The Story of English. 3rd edition. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar

McGregor, William 1995. ‘The English “tag question”: A new analysis, is(n't)it?’, in Hasan, and Fries, (eds.), pp. 91–121.

McWhorter, John H. 2002. ‘What happened to English?’, Diachronica 19: 217–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mencken, Henry L. 1936. The American Language: An Inquiry into the Development of English in the United States. 4th edition. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar

Millar, Martin and Brown, Keith 1979. ‘Tag questions in Edinburgh speech’, Linguistische Berichte 60: 24–45.Google Scholar

Miller, D. Gary 2002. Non-Finite Structures in Theory and Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Miller, Jim 1993. ‘The grammar of Scottish English’, in Milroy, and Milroy, (eds.), pp. 99–138.

Miller, Jim 2004a. ‘Problems for typology: Perfects and resultatives in spoken and non-standard English and Russian’, in Kortmann, (ed.), pp. 305–34.

Miller, Jim 2004b. ‘Perfect and resultative constructions in spoken and non-standard English’, in Fischer, , Norde, and Perridon, (eds.), pp. 229–46.

Milroy, James and Milroy, Lesley (eds.) 1993. Real English: The Grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles. London and New York: Longman.

Mittins, W. H., Salu, Mary, Edminson, Mary and Coyne, Sheila 1970. Attitudes to English Usage. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Modiano, Marko (ed.) 2002. Studies in Mid-Atlantic English. Gävle: Högskolan i Gävle.

Moessner, Lilo 2002. ‘Who used the subjunctive in the 17th century?’, in Scholz, , Klages, , Hantson, and Römer, (eds.), pp. 227–35.

Moessner, Lilo 2005a. ‘The mandative subjunctive in Middle English’. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on Middle English, 24–27 August 2005, University of Naples.

Moessner, Lilo 2005b. ‘The verbal syntagm in Middle English conditional clauses’, in Ritt, and Schendl, (eds.), pp. 216–27.

Mondorf, Britta 2003. ‘Support for more-support’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 251–304.

Mondorf, Britta 2007. ‘Recalcitrant problems of comparative alternation and new insights emerging from internet data’, in Hundt, , Biewer, and Nesselhauf, (eds.), pp. 211–32.

Mondorf, Britta to appear a. More Support for More-Support: The Role of Processing Constraints on the Choice between Synthetic and Analytic Comparative Forms. Studies in Language Variation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Mondorf, Britta to appear b. ‘Variation and change in English resultatives’, Language Variation and Change.

Montgomery, Michael 1998. ‘In the Appalachians they speak like Shakespeare’, in Bauer, and Trudgill, (eds.), pp. 66–76.

Montgomery, Michael 2001. ‘British and Irish antecedents’, in Algeo, (ed.), pp. 86–153.

Müller, Wolfgang G. and Fischer, Olga (eds.) 2003. From Sign to Signing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Murray, Thomas E. and Simon, Beth Lee 2004. ‘Colloquial American English: Grammatical features’, in Kortmann, and Schneider, (eds.), pp. 221–44.

Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax, part 1: Parts of Speech. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 23. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar

Myers, Louis M. 1952. American English: A Twentieth-Century Grammar. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Nässlin, Siv 1984. The English Tag Question: A Study of Sentences Containing Tags of the Type ISN'T IT?, IS IT? Stockholm Studies in English 60. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Need, Barbara and Schiller, Eric 1990. ‘What was, and what happened to, the subjunctive in English’, in Ziolkowski, , Noske, and Deaton, (eds.), pp. 323–32.

Nespor, Marina and Vogel, Irene 1989. ‘On clashes and lapses’, Phonology 6: 69–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena (eds.) 1997. To Explain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen. Memoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 52. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.

Nixon, Graham 1979. ‘Corporate-concord phenomena in English’, Studia Neophilologica 44: 120–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nixon, Graham and Honey, John (eds.) 1988. An Historic Tongue: Studies in English Linguistics in Memory of Barbara Strang. London and New York: Routledge.

Nübling, Damaris 2000. Prinzipien der Irregularisierung: Eine kontrastive Analyse von zehn Verben in zehn germanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ochs, Elinor 1996. ‘Linguistic resources for socializing humanity’, in Gumperz, and Levinson, (eds.), pp. 407–37.

Ogura, Mieko 1993. ‘The development of periphrastic do in English: A case of lexical diffusion in syntax’, Diachronica 10: 51–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ogura, Mieko and Wang, William S.-Y. 1996. ‘Snowball effect in lexical diffusion: The development of -s in the third person singular present indicative in English’, in Britton, (ed.), pp. 119–41.CrossRef

Olofsson, Arne 1990. ‘A participle caught in the act: On the prepositional use of following’, Studia Neophilologica 62: 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olofsson, Arne 1999. ‘The 1959 which-hunt in Scientific American: A study of language change’. Paper read at the conference on Major Varieties of English at the University of Lincoln.

Olofsson, Arne 2003. ‘Affiliated to or affiliated with – an academic question’, in Malmgren, and Olofsson, (eds.), pp. 80–9.

Olofsson, Arne 2004. ‘Them bones, them bones … Why is the leg bone connected to rather than with the knee bone?’, in Bergh, , Herriman, and Mobärg, (eds.), pp. 163–80.

Olofsson, Arne 2005. ‘The rise of that and fall of which: A case of monitored language change’, in Granath, , Miliander, and Wennö, (eds.), pp. 157–65.

Östman, Jan Ola 1981. ‘A functional approach to English tags’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 13: 3–16.Google Scholar

Övergaard, Gerd 1995. The Mandative Subjunctive in American and British English in the 20th Century. Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 94. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis and Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Palmer, Frank R. 1964. A Linguistic Study of the English Verb. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Palmer, Harold E. and Blandford, Francis G. 1939. A Grammar of Spoken English. 2nd edition [1st edition 1924]. Cambridge: Heffer.Google Scholar

Paradis, Carita 1997. Degree Modifiers of Adjectives in Spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar

Pawley, Andrew and Syder, Frances H. 1983. ‘Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency’, in Richards, and Schmidt, (eds.), pp. 191–226.

Pears, Iain 1999. An Instance of the Fingerpost. New York: Berkley.Google Scholar

Peitsara, Kirsti 1997. ‘The development of reflexive strategies in English’, in Rissanen, , Kytö, and Heikkonen, (eds.) 1997b, pp. 277–370.

Pelli, Mario G. 1976. Verb-Particle Constructions in American English: A Study Based on American Plays from the End of the 18th Century to the Present. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar

Peters, Pam 1994. ‘American and British influence in Australian verb morphology’, in Fries, , Tottie, and Schneider, (eds.), pp. 149–58.

Peters, Pam 1998. ‘The survival of the subjunctive: Evidence of its use in Australia and elsewhere’, English World-Wide 19: 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peters, Pam 2001. ‘Corpus evidence on Australian style and usage’, in Blair, and Collins, (eds.), pp. 163–78.

Peters, Pam 2004. The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Phillips, Betty S. 2001. ‘Lexical diffusion, lexical frequency, and lexical analysis’, in Bybee, and Hopper, (eds.), pp. 123–36.

Pike, Kenneth L. 1945. The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Pinker, Steven 1994. The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. New York: Morrow.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pinker, Steven and Prince, Alan 1994. ‘Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules of grammar’, in Lima, , Corrigan, and Iverson, (eds.), pp. 321–51.

Plag, Ingo 2003. Word-Formation in English. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Plag, Ingo and Schneider, Klaus Peter (eds.) 2000. Language Use, Language Acquisition and Language History: (Mostly) Empirical Studies in Honour of Rüdiger Zimmermann. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

Plank, Frans 1984. ‘The modals story retold’, Studies in Language 8: 305–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poutsma, Hendrik 1923. The Infinitive, the Gerund and the Participles of the English Verb. Groningen: Noordhoof.Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph 1970. ‘Aspect and variant inflexion in English verbs’, Language 46: 300–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Quirk, Randolph and Rusiecki, Jan 1982. ‘Grammatical data by elicitation’, in Anderson, (ed.), pp. 379–94.

Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Ralph, Julian 1901. ‘The English of the English’, Harper's Monthly Magazine 103: 448.Google Scholar

Ramisch, Heinrich 1991. ‘English tag questions and their equivalents in German’, in Mair, and Markus, (eds.), pp. 51–60.

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena 1991. The Noun Phrase in Early Sixteenth-Century English: A Study Based on Sir Thomas More's Writings. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 50. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar

Renouf, Antoinette and Sinclair, John M. 1991. ‘Collocational frameworks in English’, in Aijmer, and Altenberg, (eds.), pp. 128–44.

Richards, Jack C. and Schmidt, Richard W. (eds.) 1983. Language and Communication. London: Longman.

Rickford, John R., Wasow, Thomas, Mendoza-Denton, Norma and Espinoza, Juli 1995. ‘Syntactic variation and change in progress: Loss of the verbal coda in topic-restricting as far as constructions’, Language 71: 102–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ricks, Christopher and Michaels, Leonard (eds.) 1990. The State of the Language. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Rissanen, Matti 1999. ‘Syntax’, in Lass, (ed.), pp. 187–331.

Rissanen, Matti 2002. ‘Despite or notwithstanding? On the development of concessive prepositions in English’, in Fischer, , Tottie, and Lehmann, (eds.), pp. 191–203.

Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja and Heikkonen, Kirsi (eds.) 1997a. English in Transition: Corpus-Based Studies in Linguistic Variation and Genre Styles. Topics in English Linguistics 23. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja and Heikkonen, Kirsi (eds.) 1997b. Grammaticalization at Work: Studies of Long-Term Developments in English. Topics in English Linguistics 24. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja and Palander-Collin, Minna (eds.) 1993. Early English in the Computer Age: Explorations through the Helsinki Corpus. Topics in English Linguistics 11. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Ritt, Nikolaus and Schendl, Herbert (eds.) 2005. Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and Literary Approaches. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.

Robertson, Stuart 1939. ‘British-American differentiations in syntax and idiom’, American Speech 14: 241–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Roesle, Andrea 2001. Tag Questions in British and American English: A Matter of Gender, Regional Dialect and Pragmatics. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Zurich: English Department.

Rohdenburg, Günter 1974. Sekundäre Subjektivierungen im Englischen und Deutschen: Vergleichende Untersuchungen zur Verb- und Adjektivsyntax. Bielefeld: Cornelsen-Velhagen & Klasing.Google Scholar

Rohdenburg, Günter 1995a. ‘Betrachtungen zum Auf- und Abstieg einiger präpositionaler Konstruktionen im Englischen’, North-Western European Language Evolution (NOWELE) 26: 67–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rohdenburg, Günter 1995b. ‘On the replacement of finite complement clauses by infinitives in English’, English Studies 76: 367–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rohdenburg, Günter 1996a. ‘Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English’, Cognitive Linguistics 7: 149–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rohdenburg, Günter 1996b. ‘Zur Einführung und Behauptung lexikalischer Einheiten durch syntaktische Struktursignale im Englischen’, in Weigand, and Hundsnurscher, (eds.), pp. 105–17.

Rohdenburg, Günter 1998. ‘Clarifying structural relationships in cases of increased complexity in English’, in Schulze, (ed.), pp. 189–205.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2000. ‘The complexity principle as a factor determining grammatical variation and change in English’, in Plag, and Schneider, (eds.), pp. 25–44.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2002. ‘Processing complexity and the variable use of prepositions in English’, in Cuyckens, and Radden, (eds.), pp. 79–100.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2003a. ‘Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 205–49.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2003b. ‘Aspects of grammatical iconicity in English’, in Müller, and Fischer, (eds.), pp. 263–85.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2005. ‘Establishing a clause embedding hierarchy for extractions’. Paper given at the First International Conference on the Linguistics of Contemporary English (ICLCE) in Edinburgh, 23–26 June 2005.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2006a. ‘The role of functional constraints in the evolution of the English complementation system’, in Dalton-Puffer, , Kastovsky, , Ritt, and Schendl, (eds.), pp. 143–66.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2006b. ‘Processing complexity and competing sentential variants in Present-Day English’, in Kürschner, and Rapp, (eds.), pp. 51–67.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2006c. ‘Discrepancies between the rule formulations advanced by famous linguists and their own written usage’, in Kötter, , Traxel, and Gabel, (eds.), pp. 47–63.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2007a. ‘Determinants of grammatical variation in English and the formation/confirmation of linguistic hypotheses by means of internet data’, in Hundt, , Biewer, and Nesselhauf, (eds.), pp. 191–209.

Rohdenburg, Günter 2007b. ‘Functional constraints in syntactic change: The rise and fall of prepositional constructions in Early and Late Modern English’, English Studies 88: 217–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rohdenburg, Günter 2008. ‘On the history and present behaviour of subordinating that with adverbial conjunctions in English’, in Seoane, and López-Couso, (eds.), 315–31.

Rohdenburg, Günter in preparation. ‘Reflections on reflexives in Modern English’.

Rohdenburg, Günter and Mondorf, Britta (eds.) 2003. Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English. Topics in English Linguistics 43. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef

Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia 2000. ‘Determinanten grammatischer Variation im Früh- und Spätneuenglischen’, Sprachwissenschaft 25: 443–96.Google Scholar

Rohr, Anny 1929. Die Steigerung des neuenglischen Eigenschaftswortes im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert mit Ausblicken auf den Sprachgebrauch der Gegenwart. Doctoral dissertation. University of Giessen.

Romaine, Suzanne (ed.) 1998. The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol. 4: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rosenbach, Anette 2003. ‘Aspects of iconicity and economy in the choice between the s-gentive and the of-genitive in English’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 379–412.

Ross, John R. 1972. ‘Doubl-ing’, Linguistic Inquiry 3: 61–86.Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani 2000. Corpora and Complementation: Tracing Sentential Complementation Patterns of Nouns, Adjectives and Verbs over the Last Three Centuries. Lanham, New York and Oxford: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani 2002. Complements and Constructions: Corpus-Based Studies on Sentential Complements in English in Recent Centuries. Lanham, New York and Oxford: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida (ed.) 1988. Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef

Rydén, Mats and Björk, Lennart A. (eds.) 1978. English Philology, Linguistics and Literature: Presented to Alerik Rynell. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.

Sacks, Harvey 1992. Lectures on Conversation, vol. 1. Edited by Jefferson, Gail. Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sapir, Edward 1921. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. London: Harvest.Google Scholar

Sayder, Stefan 1989. ‘The subjunctive in Indian, British and American English’, Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 69: 58–66.Google Scholar

Schibsbye, Knud 1970. A Modern English Grammar. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schlüter, Julia 2002. ‘Morphology recycled: The Principle of Rhythmic Alternation at work in Early and Late Modern English grammatical variation’, in Fanego, , López-Couso, and Pérez-Guerra, (eds.), pp. 255–81.

Schlüter, Julia 2003. ‘Phonological determinants of grammatical variation in English: Chomsky's worst possible case’, in Rohdenburg, and Mondorf, (eds.), pp. 69–118.

Schlüter, Julia 2005. Rhythmic Grammar: The Influence of Rhythm on Grammatical Variation and Change in English. Topics in English Linguistics 46. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schlüter, Julia to appear. ‘All beginnings are light: A study of upbeat phenomena at the syntax-phonology interface’, Journal of English Linguistics 37.

Schneider, Edgar W. (ed.) 1996. Focus on the USA. Amsterdam and New York: Benjamins.CrossRef

Schneider, Edgar W. 2002. ‘Quantitative techniques in the analysis of dialect data’, in Kastovsky, , Kaltenböck, and Reichl, (eds.), pp. 75–87.

Scholz, Sybil, Klages, Monika, Hantson, Evelyn and Römer, Ute (eds.) 2002. Language – Context and Cognition: Papers in Honour of Wolf-Dietrich Bald's 60th Birthday. München: Langenscheidt-Longman.

Schreiber, Peter S. 1971. ‘Some constraints on the formation of English sentence adverbs’, Linguistic Inquiry 2: 83–102.Google Scholar

Schulze, Rainer (ed.) 1998. Making Meaningful Choices in English: On Dimensions, Perspectives, Methodology and Evidence. Tübingen: Narr.

Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA, and London, UK: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Seoane, Elena and López-Couso, María-José (eds.) 2008. Theoretical and Empirical Issues in Grammaticalization. Typological Studies in Language. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRef

Seppänen, Aimo 1978. ‘Some notes on the construction “adjective + a + noun”’, English Studies 59: 523–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapiro, Michael 1999. ‘The change of government of commit “pledge/bind oneself”’, American Speech 74: 333–6.Google Scholar

Siegal, Allan M. and Connolly, William G. 1999. The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage. Revised and expanded edition. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar

Siemund, Peter 2004. ‘Substrate, superstrate and universals: Perfect constructions in Irish English’, in Kortmann, (ed.), pp. 401–34.

Sigley, Robert 1997. Choosing Your Relatives. Doctoral dissertation. Victoria University of Wellington.

Sinclair, John M. (ed.) 1987. Looking Up: An Account of the COBUILD Project in Lexical Computing and the Development of the Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary. London and Glasgow: Collins.

Skandera, Paul (ed.) 2007. Idioms in World English. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.