Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-pcn4s Total loading time: 4.153 Render date: 2022-05-18T19:51:14.890Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2016

Merja Kytö
Affiliation:
Uppsala Universitet, Sweden
Päivi Pahta
Affiliation:
University of Tampere, Finland
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Anglo-Norman Dictionary. www.anglo-norman.net
Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. http://bosworth.ff.cuni.cz
ARCHER = A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers. Compiled under the supervision of Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan at Northern Arizona University, University of South California, University of Freiburg, University of Heidelberg, University of Helsinki, Uppsala University, University of Michigan, University of Manchester, Lancaster University, University of Bamberg, University of Zurich, University of Trier, University of Salford and University of Santiago de Compostela. www.alc.manchester.ac.uk/subjects/lel/research/projects/archer/, www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/ARCHER/updated%20version/introduction.html; for the original sampling frame, see Biber et al. (1994a)
Augustan Prose Sample. http://ota.ahds.ac.uk/desc/0401
B-Brown = 1930s BROWN Corpus. Compiled by Marianne Hundt (University of Zurich). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/B-BROWN/index.html
BE06 Corpus. Compiled by Paul Baker (Lancaster University). www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/profiles/Paul-Baker
Bess of Hardwick's Letters. Project led by Alison Wiggins (University of Glasgow). www.bessofhardwick.org
BLOB-1901 Corpus. Compiled by Nick Smith, Paul Rayson and Geoffrey Leech (Lancaster University). See BLOB-1931
BLOB-1931 Corpus. Compiled by Geoffrey Leech, Paul Rayson and Nick Smith (Lancaster University). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/BLOB-1931
Bordalejo, Barbara 2003. Caxton's Canterbury Tales: The British Library Copies on CD-ROM. Leicester: Scholarly Digital EditionsGoogle Scholar
BNC = British National Corpus. Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk
Brooklyn–Geneva–Amsterdam–Helsinki Corpus of Old English. Compiled by Susan Pintzuk (University of York), Eric Haeberli (University of Geneva and University of Reading), Ans van Kemenade (University of Nijmegen), Willem Koopman (University of Amsterdam) and Frank Beths (Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam and University of York). www-users.york.ac.uk/∼sp20/corpus.html
Corpus, Brown. Compiled by W. Nelson Francis and Henry Kučera (Brown University). http://icame.uib.no/brown/bcm.html, www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/BROWN
Burnley, David and Wiggins, Alison (eds.) 2003. The Auchinleck Manuscript. National Library of Scotland. www.nls.uk/auchinleckGoogle Scholar
Canterbury Tales Project. Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing, University of Birmingham. www.petermwrobinson.me.uk/canterburytalesproject.com, see Robinson 1996, 2004; Solopova 2000a; Stubbs 2000; Thomas 2006
Catalogue of English Literary Manuscripts. Compiled by Peter Beal (Institute of English Studies, University of London). www.ies.sas.ac.uk/research/current-projects/catalogue-english-literary-manuscripts-1450-1700-celm
Catalogue of Vernacular Manuscript Books of the English West Midlands c. 1300–c. 1475. Project directed by Wendy Scase (University of Birmingham). www.hrionline.ac.uk/mwm
CC = Corpus of Changes. University of Edinburgh. www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/cone_mainpage.html, under www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/CoNE.html
CED = A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. Compiled under the supervision of Merja Kytö (Uppsala University) and Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CED/index.html, www.engelska.uu.se/Research/English_Language/Research_Areas/Electronic_Resource_Projects/A_Corpus_of_English_Dialogues
CEEC and CEEC-400 = Corpus of Early English Correspondence 1998. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Jukka Keränen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi and Minna Palander-Collin (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEC/ceec.html. See Nevalainen and Raumolin-Brunberg 1996b
CEECE = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Extension. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Mikko Laitinen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, Tanja Säily and Anni Sairio (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEC/ceece.html
CEECS = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler. Compiled by Jukka Keränen, Minna Nevala, Terttu Nevalainen, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEC/ceecs.html
CEECSU = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Supplement. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Teo Juvonen, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Mikko Laitinen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Anni Sairio, Tanja Säily and Tuuli Tahko (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEC/ceecsu.html
CEEM = Corpus of Early English Medical Writing. Compiled under the supervision of Irma Taavitsainen and Päivi Pahta (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/
CEN = Corpus of English Novels. Compiled by Hendrik de Smet (University of Leuven). https://perswww.kuleuven.be/∼u0044428
Centre for Editing Lives and Letters. www.livesandletters.ac.uk
CENZE = Corpus of Early New Zealand English. The first version samples the registers covered in the original ARCHER (apart from drama, diaries and journals, sermons and legal texts), covering the 1840s to 1999; for details, see Hundt (2012)
CHELAR = Corpus of Historical English Law Reports. Compiled by María José López-Couso, Belén Méndez-Naya, Teresa Fanego, Paloma Núñez-Pertejo, Paula Rodríguez-Puente, Zeltia Blanco-Suárez, Eduardo Coto-Villalibre, Tania de Dios-Miguéns, Beatriz Mato-Míguez, Paula Rodríguez-Abruñeiras, Iria-Gael Romay-Fernández and Vera Vázquez-López (University of Santiago de Compostela); for details, see Rodríguez-Puente (2011)
CIE = Corpus of Irish English. Compiled by Raymond Hickey (University of Duisburg-Essen). www.uni-due.de/IERC/CIE.htm
CLMET = Corpus of Late Modern English Texts. Compiled by Hendrik de Smet (University of Leuven). https://perswww.kuleuven.be/∼u0044428/clmet
CLMET3.0 = Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0. Compiled by Hendrik de Smet (University of Leuven), Hans-Jürgen Diller (Ruhr University Bockum) and Jukka Tyrkkö (University of Tampere). https://perswww.kuleuven.be/∼u0044428
CLMETEV = Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, Extended Version. Compiled by Hendrik de Smet (University of Leuven). https://perswww.kuleuven.be/∼u0044428/clmetev.htm
Clunies Ross, Margaret, Gade, Kari Ellen, Nordal, Guðrún, Marold, Edith, Whaley, Diana and Wills, Tarrin (eds.) 2012. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages: The Skaldic Project. www.abdn.ac.uk/skaldic/db.php
CMEPV = Corpus of Middle English Prose and Verse. Middle English Compendium. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme
COCA = Corpus of Contemporary American English. Compiled by Mark Davies (Brigham Young University). http://corpus.byu.edu/coca
COHA = The Corpus of Historical American English: 400+ million words, 1810–2009. Compiled by Mark Davies (Brigham Young University). http://corpus.byu.edu/coha
Collection of Nineteenth-Century Grammars. Compiled by Lieselotte Anderwald (University of Kiel). www.anglistik.uni-kiel.de/index.php/cng.html
CONCE = A Corpus of Nineteenth-Century English. Compiled by Merja Kytö (Uppsala University) and Juhani Rudanko (University of Tampere)
CoNE = Corpus of Narrative Etymologies. Compiled by Roger Lass (University of Cape Town), Margaret Laing (University of Edinburgh) and Rhona Alcorn (University of Edinburgh). www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/CoNE.html
CONTE-pC = Corpus of Early Ontario English, pre-Confederation Section; for details, see Dollinger (2006a). Compiled by Stefan Dollinger (University of British Columbia). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CONTE/index.html
COOEE = Corpus of Oz Early English. Australian English texts from between 1788 and 1900. Compiled by Clemens Fritz (Free University of Berlin); for details, see Fritz (2007). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/COOEE
COPC = Century of Prose Corpus. Compiled by Louis T. Milić (Cleveland State University)
CoRD = Corpus Resource Database. Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change in English, University of Helsinki. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/HelsinkiCorpus/index.html
CORIECOR = Corpus of Irish English Correspondence; for details, see McCafferty and Amador-Moreno (2012)
Corpus of Legislative Council Proceedings (1858–2012). Compiled from Hong Kong Hansard; for details, see Evans (2014)
CSC = Corpus of Scottish Correspondence. Compiled by Anneli Meurman-Solin (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CSC
Da Rold, Orietta, Kato, Takako, Swan, Mary and Treharne, Elaine (eds.). The Production and Use of English Manuscripts 1060 to 1220. www.le.ac.uk/ee/em1060to1220
DCPSE = The Diachronic Corpus of Present-Day Spoken English. London: Survey of English Usage. Compiled by Sean A. Wallis, Bas Aarts, Gabriel Ozon and Yordanka Kavalova (University College London). www.ucl.ac.uk/english-usage/projects/dcpse
DECL = Digital Editions for Corpus Linguistics. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/domains/DECL.html
DECTE = Diachronic Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English. Compiled under the supervision of Karen P. Corrigan (Newcastle University). http://research.ncl.ac.uk/decte
DIMEV = Digital Index of Middle English Verse. Compiled by Linne Mooney, Daniel W. Mosser and Elizabeth Solopova. www.dimev.net
DOE = Dictionary of Old English. Ed. by Angus Cameron, Ashley Crandell Amos and Antonette diPaolo Healey (University of Toronto). www.doe.utoronto.ca
DOEC = Dictionary of Old English Corpus. Original release 1981 compiled by Angus Cameron, Ashley Crandell Amos, Sharon Butler and Antonette diPaolo Healey. Release 2009 compiled by Antonette diPaolo Healey, Joan Holland, Ian McDougall and David McDougall (University of Toronto). www.doe.utoronto.ca/pages/pub/web-corpus.html
ECCO = Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale Digital Collections. http://gale.cengage.co.uk/product-highlights/history/eighteenth-century-collections-online.aspx
ECEG = Eighteenth-Century English Grammars database. Compiled by María E. Rodríguez-Gil (University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria) and Nuria Yáñez-Bouza (University of Manchester). www.manchester.ac.uk/eceg
EEBO = Early English Books Online. ProQuest LLC. http://eebo.chadwyck.com/home
eLALME = A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English. Compiled by Angus McIntosh (University of Edinburgh), M. L. Samuels (University of Glasgow), Michael Benskin (University of Oslo), Margaret Laing (University of Edinburgh) and Keith Williamson (University of Edinburgh). www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/elalme/elalme.html
Electronic Beowulf. http://ebeowulf.uky.edu
Electronic facsimiles of the Parker Library manuscripts. http://parkerweb.stanford.edu
EMEDD = Early Modern English Dictionaries Database. Edited by Ian Lancashire (University of Toronto). http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/∼ian/emedd.html
EMEMT = Early Modern English Medical Texts. Compiled by Irma Taavitsainen (University of Helsinki), Päivi Pahta (University of Tampere), Martti Mäkinen (Svenska handelshögskolan), and Turo Hiltunen, Ville Marttila, Maura Ratia, Carla Suhr and Jukka Tyrkkö (University of Helsinki). Available on the CD accompanying Early Modern English Medical Texts: Corpus Description and Studies edited by Taavitsainen, Irma and Pahta, Päivi (2010). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/EMEMTindex.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
ESTC = English Short Title Catalogue. British Library. http://estc.bl.uk
ETED = An Electronic Text Edition of Depositions 1560–1760. Compiled and edited by Merja Kytö, Peter J. Grund and Terry Walker. www.engelska.uu.se/Forskning/engelsk_sprakvetenskap/Forskningsomraden/Electronic_Resource_Projects/English_Witness_Depositions. Available on the CD accompanying Testifying to Language and Life in Early Modern England by Kytö, Merja, Grund, Peter J. and Walker, Terry (2011). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
F-LOB = Freiburg–LOB Corpus of British English. Original release 1999 compiled by Christian Mair (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg). Release 2007 compiled by Christian Mair (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg) and Geoffrey Leech (Lancaster University). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/FLOB
Frown = Freiburg–Brown Corpus of American English. Original release 1999 compiled by Christian Mair (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg). Release 2007 compiled by Christian Mair (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg) and Geoffrey Leech (Lancaster University). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/FROWN
Google Books Ngram Viewer. https://books.google.com/ngrams
HC = Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. Compiled by Matti Rissanen (Project leader), Merja Kytö (Project secretary); Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, Matti Kilpiö (Old English); Saara Nevanlinna, Irma Taavitsainen (Middle English); Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (Early Modern English). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/HelsinkiCorpus
HCOS = Helsinki Corpus of Older Scots. Compiled by Anneli Meurman-Solin (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/HCOS
Helsinki Corpus TEI XML edition. Designed by Alpo Honkapohja, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Henri Kauhanen, Matti Kilpiö, Ville Marttila, Terttu Nevalainen, Arja Nurmi, Matti Rissanen and Jukka Tyrkkö (University of Helsinki). Implemented by Henri Kauhanen and Ville Marttila (University of Helsinki). Based on the Helsinki Corpus of English Texts (1991). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/HelsinkiCorpus/HC_XML.html
HTE = Historical Thesaurus of English. University of Glasgow. http://historicalthesaurus.arts.gla.ac.uk
HyperBibliography of Middle English Prose and Verse. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/h/hyperbib
ICE = International Corpus of English – ICE-Phil (Philippines component), ICE-Sing (Singapore component), ICE-Ind (Indian component), ICE-FJ (Fiji component), ICE-GB (British component). Coordinated by Gerald Nelson (University of Hong Kong). http://ice-corpora.net/ice, www.ucl.ac.uk/english-usage/projects/ice-gb
Imagining History project. Project directed by John Thompson (Queen's University, Belfast). www.qub.ac.uk/imagining-history/wordpress/index.php
Kato, Takako and Hayward, Nick (eds.). Malory Project. www.maloryproject.com
LAEME = A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325. Compiled by Margaret Laing and Roger Lass (University of Edinburgh). www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme2/laeme2.html
LAOS = A Linguistic Atlas of Older Scots. Compiled by Keith Williamson (University of Edinburgh). www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laos1/laos1.html
LC = Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts. Compiled by Josef Schmied (Chemnitz University of Technology), Claudia Claridge (University of Duisburg-Essen) and Rainer Siemund. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/LC
LEME = Lexicons of Early Modern English. Edited by Ian Lancashire (University of Toronto). http://leme.library.utoronto.ca
LION = Literature Online. ProQuest LLC. http://lion.chadwyck.com
LLC = London–Lund Corpus of Spoken English. Compiled by Jan Svartvik (Lund University), Randolph Quirk (University College London), Sidney Greenbaum (University College London) and Knut Hofland (Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities, Bergen). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/LLC
LMEMT = Late Modern English Medical Texts. Compiled by Irma Taavitsainen (University of Helsinki), Päivi Pahta (University of Tampere), Turo Hiltunen, Anu Lehto, Ville Marttila, Raisa Oinonen, Maura Ratia, Carla Suhr and Jukka Tyrkkö (University of Helsinki). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/LMEMTindex.html
LOB = Lancaster–Oslo/Bergen Corpus of British English. Compiled by Geoffrey Leech (Lancaster University), Stig Johansson (University of Oslo) and Knut Hofland (University of Bergen). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/LOB
Málaga Corpus of Late Middle English Scientific Prose. Co-ordinated by Antonio Miranda García. http://hunter.uma.es
MED = Middle English Dictionary, see References, MED
MEG-C = The Middle English Grammar Corpus. Compiled by Merja Stenroos, Martti Mäkinen, Simon Horobin and Jeremy J. Smith (University of Stavanger). www.uis.no/research-and-Ph.D.-studies/research-areas/history-languages-and-literature/the-middle-english-scribal-texts-programme/meg-c
MEMT = Middle English Medical Texts. Compiled by Irma Taavitsainen (University of Helsinki), Päivi Pahta (University of Tampere) and Martti Mäkinen (University of Stavanger). www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/MEMTindex.html
MESTA = Middle English Scribal Texts Archive. Compiled under the super-vision of Merja Stenroos and Jacob Thaisen (University of Stavanger).
Middle English Compendium. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mec
Middle English Dictionary, see References, MED
Mooney, Linne, Horobin, Simon and Stubbs, Estelle. Late Medieval English Scribes. www.medievalscribes.com
NECTE = Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English. Compiled by Karen Corrigan (Newcastle University), Hermann Moisl (Newcastle University) and Joan C. Beal (University of Sheffield). http://research.ncl.ac.uk/necte/index.htm
OBC = Old Bailey Corpus. Compiled under the supervision of Magnus Huber (University of Giessen). www.uni-giessen.de/oldbaileycorpus
OBP = The Online Books Page. Edited by John Mark Ockerbloom (University of Pennsylvania). http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu
OED = Oxford English Dictionary, see References, OED
ONZE = Origins of New Zealand English. Compiled by the ONZE project team (University of Canterbury). www.nzilbb.canterbury.ac.nz/onze.shtml
Open Source Shakespeare. www.opensourceshakespeare.org
The Orrmulum Project. www.orrmulum.net
Oxford English Dictionary, see References, OED
PCEEC = Parsed Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Annotated by Ann Taylor, Arja Nurmi, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk and Terttu Nevalainen. Compiled by the CEEC project team (University of York and University of Helsinki). www-users.york.ac.uk/∼lang22/PCEEC-manual/, www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/CEEC/pceec.html
Penn Corpora of Historical English. www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora
Penn Parsed Corpus of Modern British English. Compiled by Anthony Kroch, Beatrice Santorini and Ariel Diertani (University of Pennsylvania). www.ling.upenn.edu/histcorpora/PPCMBE-RELEASE-1
PPCEME = Penn–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English. Compiled by Anthony Kroch, Beatrice Santorini and Ariel Diertani (University of Pennsylvania). www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCEME-RELEASE-2/index.html
PPCME2 = Penn–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, second edition. Compiled by Anthony Kroch and Ann Taylor (University of Pennsylvania). www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCME2-RELEASE-3/index.html
Proceedings of the Old Bailey Online. Compiled by Tim Hitchcock (University of Hertfordshire), Robert Shoemaker (University of Sheffield), Clive Emsley (Open University), Sharow Howard (University of Sheffield) and Jamie McLaughlin (University of Sheffield). www.oldbaileyonline.org
Project Gutenberg. www.gutenberg.org
Robinson, Peter (ed.) 1996. The Wife of Bath's Prologue on CD-ROM. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Peter (ed.) 2004. The Miller's Tale on CD-ROM. Leicester: Scholarly Digital EditionsGoogle Scholar
Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive and Transcription Project. Created under the supervision of Benjamin C. Ray (University of Virginia) and Bernard Rosenthal (University of Binghamton). http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/home.html
SC = Salamanca Corpus: Digital Archive of English Dialect Texts. Compiled by María F. García-Bermejo Giner, Pilar Sánchez-García and Javier Ruano-García (University of Salamanca). http://salamancacorpus.usal.es/SC/index.html
Scase, Wendy (ed.) 2011. A Facsimile Edition of the Vernon Manuscript: A Literary Hoard from Medieval England (Bodleian Digital Texts 3). Oxford: Bodleian LibraryGoogle Scholar
SED = Survey of English Dialects. Conducted under the supervision of Harold Orton (University of Leeds). http://sounds.bl.uk/Accents-and-dialects/Survey-of-English-dialects
Sociopragmatic Corpus = Sociopragmatic Corpus, a Specialized Sub-section of A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. Compiled by Jonathan Culpeper and Dawn Archer (Lancaster University)
Solopova, Elizabeth (ed.) 2000a. The General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales on CD-ROM. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, Estelle (ed.) 2000. The Hengwrt Chaucer Digital Facsimile. Leicester: Scholarly Digital EditionsGoogle Scholar
TCP = Text Creation Partnership. www.lib.umich.edu/tcp
Thomas, Paul 2006. The Nun's Priest's Tale on CD-ROM. Birmingham: Scholarly Digital EditionsGoogle Scholar
TIME Magazine Corpus. Compiled by Mark Davies (Brigham Young University). http://corpus.byu.edu/time
TOE = A Thesaurus of Old English. Compiled by Flora Edmonds, Christian Kay, Jane Roberts and Irené Wotherspoon (University of Glasgow). http://oldenglishthesaurus.arts.gla.ac.uk
Voigts, Linda Ehrsam and Kurtz, Patricia Deery (eds.) 2000. Scientific and Medical Writings in Old and Middle English: An Electronic Reference. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar
WebCorp = Synchronic English Web Corpus. Created, operated and maintained by the Research Development Unit for English Studies, School of English, Birmingham City University. www.webcorp.org.uk
WOLD = World Loanword Database. Edited by Martin Haspelmath and Uri Tadmor (Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology). http://wold.clld.org
YCOE = The York–Toronto–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. Compiled by Ann Taylor, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk and Frank Beths (University of York). www-users.york.ac.uk/∼lang22/YcoeHome1.htm
ZEN = Zurich English Newspaper Corpus. Compiled by Udo Fries, Hans Martin Lehmann, Beni Ruef, Peter Schneider, Patrick Studer, Caren auf dem Keller, Beat Nietlispach, Sandra Engler, Sabine Hensel and Franziska Zeller (University of Zurich). http://es-zen.unizh.ch

Secondary Sources

Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, MS Additional 6686
Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, NLS Adv. MS 19.2.1 (Auchinleck manuscript)
London, British Library, MS Additional 36791 (Speculum Sacerdotale)
London, Lambeth Palace, MS 328
Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 207
Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Eng. poet.a.1 (Vernon Manuscript)
San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 22
San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 55
San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 129
San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 140
San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 3027
Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne, Leech, Geoffrey and Wallis, Sean (eds.) 2013. The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aarts, Bas and McMahon, April (eds.) 2006. The Handbook of English Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-BlackwellCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, James 2007. The Regional Diversification of Latin 200bc–ad600. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia 1995. ‘From empathetic deixis to empathetic narrative: stylisation and (de)subjectivisation as processes of language change’, in Stein, Dieter and Wright, Susan (eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia 1999. ‘Literary language’, in Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume III: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 539653Google Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia 2000. ‘A lovely little example: word order options and category shift in the premodifying string’, in Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 3966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia 2007. ‘Prescribed reading: pronouns and gender in the eighteenth century’, Historical Sociolinguistics and Sociohistorical Linguistics 7. www.let.leidenuniv.nl/hsl_shl/Adamson.htmGoogle Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia, Law, Vivien, Vincent, Nigel and Wright, Susan (eds.) 1990. Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Cambridge, 6–9 April 1987. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins
Agari, Masahiko 2005. ‘Towards the prevalence of the third person singular -s in Early Modern English’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 106 (4): 389404Google Scholar
Agha, Asif 2003. ‘The social life of a cultural value’, Language and Communication 23: 231–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agha, Asif 2007 [2006]. Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Ahlgren, Arthur 1946. On the Use of the Definite Article with ‘Nouns of Possession’ in English. Uppsala: Appelbergs boktryckeriaktiebolagGoogle Scholar
Ahlqvist, Anders 2010. ‘Early English and Celtic’, Australian Celtic Journal 9: 4373Google Scholar
Akimoto, Minoji 2000. ‘The grammaticalization of the verb “pray”’, in Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 6784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Mark and Struan, Andrew 2013. ‘“In countries so unciviliz'd as those?”: the language of incivility and the British experience of the world’, in Farr, Martin and Guégan, Xavier (eds.), The British Abroad since the Eighteenth Century. Volume 2: Experiencing Imperialism Houndmills. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 232–49Google Scholar
Algeo, John 1998. ‘Vocabulary’, in Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 5791Google Scholar
Allan, Kathryn 2006. ‘On groutnolls and nog-heads: a case study of the interaction between culture and cognition in intelligence metaphors’, in Stefanowitsch, Anatol and Th. Gries, Stefan (eds.), Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 175–90Google Scholar
Allan, Kathryn 2009. Metaphor and Metonymy: A Diachronic Approach. Chichester: Wiley-BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Allan, Kathryn 2010. ‘Tracing metonymic polysemy through time: material for object mappings in the OED’, in Winters, Margaret E., Tissari, Heli and Allan, Kathryn (eds.), Historical Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin/ New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 163–96Google Scholar
Allan, Kathryn 2012. ‘Using OED data as evidence’, in Allan, Kathryn and Robinson, Justyna A. (eds.), Current Methods in Historical Semantics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1739Google Scholar
Allan, Kathryn and Robinson, Justyna A. (eds.) 2012. Current Methods in Historical Semantics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Allen, Cynthia 1977. ‘Topics in diachronic English syntax’. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts
Allen, Cynthia 1995. Case Marking and Reanalysis: Grammatical Relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Allen, Cynthia 2000. ‘Obsolescence and sudden death in syntax: the decline of verb-final order in early Middle English’, in Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, Denison, David, Hogg, Richard M. and McCully, C. B. (eds.), Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10 ICEHL. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 325Google Scholar
Allen, Cynthia 2001. ‘The development of a new passive in English’, in Butt, Miriam and King, Tracy Holloway (eds.), Time over Matter: Diachronic Perspectives on Morphosyntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, pp. 4372Google Scholar
Allen, Cynthia 2008. Genitives in Early English: Typology and Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Cynthia 2013. ‘Dealing with postmodified possessors in early English: split and group genitives’, in Börjars, Kersti, Denison, David and Scott, Alan (eds.), Morphosyntactic Categories and the Expression of Possession. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 134Google Scholar
Allen, Will 2007. ‘A linguistic “time capsule”: The Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English’, in Beal, Joan C., Corrigan, Karen P. and Moisl, Hermann (eds.), Creating and Digitizing Language Corpora. Volume 2: Diachronic Databases. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alston, R. C. 1965. A Bibliography of the English Language from the Invention of Printing to the Year 1800. Volume 1: English Grammars Written in English and English Grammars Written in Latin by Native Speakers. Leeds: Arnold & SonGoogle Scholar
Alston, R. C. 1967–73. English Linguistics 1500–1800: A Collection of Facsimile Reprints. Menston: Scolar PressGoogle Scholar
Alter, Stephen G. 1999. Darwinism and the Linguistic Image: Language, Race and Natural Theology in the Nineteenth Century. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 2009. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (4th edn)
Andersen, Henning 1973. ‘Abductive and deductive change’, Language 49 (4): 765–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, John 1977. On Case Grammar: Prolegomena to a Theory of Grammatical Relations. London: Croom HelmGoogle Scholar
Anderson, John and Jones, Charles 1974. ‘Three theses concerning phonological representations’, Journal of Linguistics 10: 126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte 2011. ‘Norm vs. variation in British irregular verbs: the case of past tense sang vs. sung’, English Language and Linguistics 15 (1): 85112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte 2012. ‘Clumsy, awkward or having a peculiar propriety? Prescriptive judgements and language change in the 19th century’, Language Sciences 34 (1): 2853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 1755. The Complete Letter-Writer…to which is Prefix'd a Plain and Compendious Grammar. London
Anshen, Frank and Aronoff, Mark 1999. ‘Using dictionaries to study the mental lexicon’, Brain and Language 68: 1626CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archer, Dawn 2005. Questions and Answers in the English Courtroom (1640–1760). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archer, Dawn 2006. ‘(Re)initiating strategies: judges and defendants in Early Modern English courtrooms’, Journal of Historical Pragmatics 7 (2): 181211Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn 2010. ‘Speech acts’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 379417Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn 2012a. ‘Data retrieval in a diachronic context: the case of the historical English courtroom’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 145–54Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn 2012b. ‘Early Modern English: pragmatics and discourse’, in Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 1. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 652–67Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Culpeper, Jonathan 2003. ‘Sociopragmatic annotation: new directions and possibilities in historical corpus linguistics’, in Wilson, Andrew, Rayson, Paul and McEnery, Tony (eds.), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune: A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 3758Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Culpeper, Jonathan 2009. ‘Identifying key sociophilological usage in plays and trial proceedings (1640–1760): an empirical approach via corpus annotation’, Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10 (2): 286309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnovick, Leslie K. 1990. The Development of Future Constructions in English: The Pragmatics of Modal and Temporal Will and Shall in Middle English. New York, NY: Peter LangGoogle Scholar
Arnovick, Leslie K. 1997. ‘Proscribed collocations with shall and will: the eighteenth-century (non-)standard reassessed’, in Cheshire, Jenny and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Taming the Vernacular: From Dialect to Written Standard Language. London: Longman, pp. 135–51Google Scholar
Arnovick, Leslie K. 1999. Diachronic Pragmatics: Seven Case Studies in English Illocutionary Development. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsGoogle Scholar
Arnovick, Leslie K. 2006. Written Reliquaries: The Resonance of Orality in Medieval English Texts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Athanasiadou, Angeliki, Canakis, Costas and Cornillie, Bert (eds.) 2006. Subjectification: Various Paths to Subjectivity. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Anita 2006. ‘Precept and practice: the influence of prescriptivism on the English subjunctive’, in Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, Kastovsky, Dieter, Ritt, Nikolaus and Schendl, Herbert (eds.), Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms: English from 1500–2000. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 3353Google Scholar
Auer, Anita 2009. The Subjunctive in the Age of Prescriptivism: English and German Developments during the Eighteenth Century. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Anita and Voeste, Anja 2012. ‘Grammatical variables’, in Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 253–70Google Scholar
Auer, Peter and Pfänder, Stefan 2011. ‘Constructions: emergent or emerging?’, in Auer, Peter and Pfänder, Stefan (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and Emergent. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austen, Jane 1998 [1798/9]. Northanger Abbey. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Austin, Frances 1994. ‘The effect of exposure to standard English: the language of William Clift’, in Stein, Dieter and van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 285313Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der and Nuyts, Jan (eds.) 2012. Grammaticalization and (Inter-)Subjectification. Koninklijke: Vlaamse Academie van Belgie voor Wetenschappen en KunstenGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald 2008. Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachmann, Ingo 2013. ‘Has go-V ousted go-and-V? A study of the diachronic development of both constructions in American English’, in Hasselgård, Hilde, Ebeling, Jarle and Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell (eds.), Corpus Perspectives on Patterns of Lexis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 91112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Charles J. and Maroldt, Karl 1977. ‘The French lineage of English’, in Meisel, Jürgen M. (ed.), Langues en contact – pidgins – creoles. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 2153Google Scholar
Bailey, Richard W. 1996. Nineteenth-century English. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Richard W. 2004. ʻThe need for good texts: the case of Henry Machyn's day book, 1550–1563ʼ, in Curzan, Anne and Emmons, Kimberly (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language II: Unfolding Conversations. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 217–28Google Scholar
Baker, Paul 2009. ‘The BE06 Corpus of British English and recent language change’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14 (3): 31237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Paul 2011. ‘Times may change but we will always have money: diachronic variation in recent British English’, Journal of English Linguistics 39 (1): 6588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, M. M. 1986 [1953]. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar
Baldzuhn, Michael and Putzo, Christine (eds.) 2011. Mehrsprachigkeit im Mittelalter: Kulturelle, literarische, sprachliche und didaktische Konstellationen in europäischer Perspektive. Mit Fallstudien zu den ‘Disticha Catonis’. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, Catherine N. 1994. ‘The origins of the informative-presupposition it-cleft’, Journal of Pragmatics 22 (6): 603–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bambas, Rudolph C. 1947. ‘Verb forms in -s and -th in Early Modern English prose’, Journal of English and Germanic Philology 46: 183–7Google Scholar
Bammesberger, Alfred and Vennemann, Theo (eds.) 2003. Languages in Prehistoric Europe. Heidelberg: WinterGoogle Scholar
Bao, Zhiming and Wee, Lionel 1999. ‘The passive in Singapore English’, World Englishes 18: 113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Charles 1976. Early Modern English. London: Andre DeutschGoogle Scholar
Barber, Charles 1997. Early Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (2nd edn)Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna 2008. Productivity: Evidence from Case and Argument Structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna 2013. ‘Construction-based historical-comparative reconstruction’, in Hoffmann, Thomas and Trousdale, Graeme (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 438–57Google Scholar
Barrett, Robert W. 2009. Against All England: Regional Identity and Cheshire Writing, 1195–1656. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame PressGoogle Scholar
Batllori, Montserrat and Hernanz, Lluïsa (eds.) 2011. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 10. http://ddd.uab.cat/pub/cjol/cjol_a2011v10/cjol_a2011v10p1.pdf
Battye, Adrian and Roberts, Ian (eds.) 1995. Clause Structure and Language Change. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie 1983. English Word Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie 1994. ‘English in New Zealand’, in Burchfield, Robert (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume V: English in Britain and Overseas: Origins and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 382429Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie 2001. Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle and Plag, Ingo 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baugh, Albert C. and Cable, Thomas 2002. A History of the English Language. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson (5th edn)Google Scholar
Baugh, Albert C. and Cable, Thomas 2005. A History of the English Language. London: Routledge (5th edn)Google Scholar
Baugh, Albert C. and Cable, Thomas 2013. A History of the English Language. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice (6th edn)Google Scholar
Bayley, Robert 2002. ‘The quantitative paradigm’, in Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter and Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 117–41Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles 1988. Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin PressGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, Charles and Paradis, James 1991. Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin PressGoogle Scholar
Beadle, Richard 1994. ‘Middle English texts and their transmission, 1350–1500: some geographical criteria’, in Laing, Margaret and Williamson, Keith (eds.), Speaking in our Tongues: Proceedings of a Colloquium on Medieval Dialectology and Related Disciplines. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, pp. 6991Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 1999. English Pronunciation in the Eighteenth Century: Thomas Spence's ‘Grand Repository of the English Language’. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in Modern Times, 1700–1945. London: Edward ArnoldGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2008. ‘Shamed by your English? The market value of a “good” pronunciation’, in Beal, Joan C., Nocera, Carmela and Sturiale, Massimo (eds.), Perspectives on Prescriptivism. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 2140Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2009a. ‘Enregisterment, commodification and historical context: “Geordie” versus “Sheffieldish”’, American Speech 84 (2): 138–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2009b. ‘Three hundred years of prescriptivism (and counting)’, in van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon and van der Wurff, Wim (eds.), Current Issues in Late Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 3556Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2010. ‘Prescriptivism and the suppression of variation’, in Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Eighteenth-Century English: Ideology and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 2137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2011. ‘The example of the French: the influence of French normative ideas on the codification of the English Language’, in Branca-Rosoff, Sonia, Fournier, Jean-Marie, Grinshpun, Yana and Régent-Susini, Anne (eds.), Langue commune et changements de normes. Paris: Champion, pp. 435–46Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2013. ‘The place of pronunciation in eighteenth-century grammars of English’, Transactions of the Philological Society 111 (2): 165–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C., Hodson, Jane and Fitzmaurice, Susan M. (eds.) 2012. Selected Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Late Modern English, special issue of English Language and Linguistics 16 (2)
Beal, Joan C., Hodson, Jane, Percy, Carol and Steadman-Jones, Richard 2006. ‘Introduction’, New Approaches to the Study of Later Modern English, special issue of Historiographia Linguistica 33 (1): 110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C., Nocera, Carmela and Sturiale, Massimo (eds.) 2008. Perspectives on Prescriptivism. Bern: Peter LangGoogle Scholar
Bell, Allan 1988. ‘The British base and the American connection in New Zealand media English’, American Speech 63: 326–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benskin, Michael 1991. ʻThe “fit”-technique explainedʼ, in Riddy, Felicity (ed.), Regionalism in Late Medieval Manuscripts and Texts: Essays Celebrating the Publication of ‘A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English’. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, pp. 926Google Scholar
Benskin, Michael 2004. ‘Chancery Standard’, in Kay, Christian, Hough, Carole and Wotherspoon, Irené (eds.), New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics: Selected Papers from 12 ICEHL, Glasgow, 21–26 August 2002. Volume 2: Lexis and Transmission. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 140Google Scholar
Benskin, Michael and Laing, Margaret 1981. ‘Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English manuscripts’, in Benskin, Michael and Samuels, M. L. (eds.), So Meny People, Longages and Tonges: Philological Essays in Scots and Mediaeval English Presented to Angus McIntosh. Edinburgh: Middle English Dialect Project, pp. 55106Google Scholar
Benson, Larry D. (ed.) 1987. The Riverside Chaucer. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin (3rd edn)Google Scholar
Benson, Larry D. (ed.) 2008. The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford: Oxford University Press (3rd edn)Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile 1966. Problems in General Linguistics. (Trans. Meek, Mary Elizabeth.) Coral Cables, FL: University of Miami Press. First published as Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: GallimardGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Emile 1971 [1958]. ‘Subjectivity in language’, in Meek, Mary Elizabeth (trans.), Problems in General Linguistics. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press, pp. 223–30. First published as ‘De la subjectivité dans le langage’, in Émile Benveniste (1958), Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard, pp. 258–66Google Scholar
Berg, Thomas 1998. Linguistic Structure and Change: An Explanation from Language Processing. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Bergner, Heinz 1998. ‘Dialogue in medieval drama’, in Borgmeier, Raimund, Grabes, Herbert and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Anglistentag 1997 Giessen: Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, pp. 7583Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander 2004. ‘Address pronouns in Late Middle English’, in Rodríguez Alvarez, Alicia and Alonso Almeida, Francisco (eds.), Voices on the Past: Studies in Old and Middle English Language and Literature. Coruña: Netbiblo, pp. 127–38Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander 2005. Social Networks and Historical Sociolinguistics: Studies in Morphosyntactic Variation in the Paston Letters (1421–1503). Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.) 2012. English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook, 2 vols. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Bergs, Alexander and Diewald, Gabriele 2009. ‘Introduction: contexts and constructions’, in Bergs, Alexander and Diewald, Gabriele (eds.), Contexts and Constructions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berlage, Eva. 2014. Noun Phrase Complexity in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo 2007. ‘Word-final prevocalic consonants in English: representation vs derivation’. Paper presented at the Old World Conference in Phonology 4, Rhodes, August 2010. www.bermudez-otero.com/OCP4.pdf
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo 2011. ‘Cyclicity’, in van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin, Hume, Elizabeth and Rice, Keren (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 2019–48Google Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo 2015. ‘Amphichronic explanation and the life cycle of phonological processes’, in Patrick Honeybone and Joseph Salmons (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Historical Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 379–99
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo forthcoming. Stratal Optimality Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo and Trousdale, Graeme 2012. ‘Cycles and continua: on unidirectionality and gradualness in language change’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 691720Google Scholar
Bethge, Richard 1900. ʻKonjugation des Urgermanischen’, in Dieter, Ferdinand (ed.), Laut- und Formenlehre der altgermanischen Dialekte. Leipzig: Reisland, pp. 345–91Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay 1993. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Donglas 1992a. ‘On the complexity of discourse complexity: a multidimensional analysis’, Discourse Processes 15: 133–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Donglas 1992b. ‘The multi-dimensional approach to linguistic analyses of genre variation: an overview of methodology and findings’, Computers and the Humanities 26 (5/6): 331–45Google Scholar
Biber, Donglas 2012. ‘Register as a predictor of linguistic variation’, Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8 (1): 937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Conrad, Susan 2009. Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan and Reppen, Randi 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1986. ‘An initial typology of English text types’, in Aarts, Jan and Meijs, Willem (eds.), Corpus Linguistics II: New Studies in the Analysis and Exploitation of Computer Corpora. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 1946Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1989. ‘Drift and the evolution of English style: a history of three genres’, Language 65 (3): 487517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1991. ‘On the exploitation of computerized corpora in variation studies’, in Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik. London: Longman, pp. 204–20Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward 1997. ‘Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena (eds.), To Explain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, pp. 253–75Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Finegan, Edward and Atkinson, Dwight 1994a. ‘ARCHER and its challenges: compiling and exploring A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers’, in Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel and Schneider, Peter (eds.), Creating and Using English Language Corpora: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Zürich 1993. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 114Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Finegan, Edward, Atkinson, Dwight, Beck, Ann, Burges, Dennis and Burges, Jena 1994b. ‘The design and analysis of the ARCHER corpus: a progress report [A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers]’, in Kytö, Merja, Rissanen, Matti and Wright, Susan (eds.), Corpora across the Centuries: Proceedings of the First International Colloquium on English Diachronic Corpora, St Catharine's College Cambridge, 25–27 March 1993. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 36Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany 2011a. ‘Grammar emerging in the noun phrase: the influence of written language use’, English Language and Linguistics 15: 223–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany 2011b. ‘The historical shift of scientific academic prose in English towards less explicit styles of expression: writing without verbs’, in Bhatia, Vijay, Hernández, Purificación Sánchez and Pérez-Paredes, Pascual (eds.), Researching Specialized Languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany 2012. ‘The competing demands of popularization vs. economy: written language in the age of mass literacy’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 314–28Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany 2013. ‘Being specific about historical change: the influence of sub-register’, Journal of English Linguistics 41: 104–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Jones, James K. 2009. ‘Quantitative methods in corpus linguistics’, in Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 2. Berlin/New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 1286–304Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa and Roberts, Ian 2005. ‘Changing EPP parameters in the history of English: accounting for variation and change’, English Language and Linguistics 9: 546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa and Roberts, Ian 2008. ‘Cascading parameter changes: internally-driven change in Middle and Early Modern English’, in Eythórsson, Thórhallur (ed.), Grammatical Change and Linguistic Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 79113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biewer, Carolin 2012. ‘South Pacific Englishes: the dynamics of second-language varieties of English in Fiji, Samoa and the Cook Islands’. Post-doctoral thesis, University of Zurich
Biggam, C. P. 2012. The Semantics of Colour: A Historical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjørge, Anne Kari 1989. ‘“I poor man is singing”: subject–verb concord in eighteenth-century English grammar’, in Breivik, Leiv E., Hille, Arnoldus and Johansson, Stig (eds.), Essays on English Language in Honour of Bertil Sundby. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 4765Google Scholar
Blake, Norman 1965. ‘English versions of Reynard the Fox in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries’, Studies in Philology 62: 6377Google Scholar
Blake, Norman 1969. Caxton and his World. London: DeutschGoogle Scholar
Blake, Norman 1974. ‘Varieties of Middle English religious prose’, in Rowland, Beryl (ed.), Chaucer and Middle English Studies in Honour of Rossell Hope Robbins. London: Allen & Unwin, pp. 348–56Google Scholar
Blake, Norman (ed.) 1980. The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer. London: Edward ArnoldGoogle Scholar
Blake, Norman (ed.) 1992. The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco-Suárez, Zeltia 2013. ‘The competition between the intensifiers dead and deadly: some diachronic considerations’, in Hasselgård, Hilde, Ebeling, Jarle and Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell (eds.), Corpus Perspectives on Patterns of Lexis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 7190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blank, Paula 1996. Broken English: Dialects and the Politics of Language in Renaissance Writings. London: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette 1995. ‘The syllable in phonological theory’, in Goldsmith, John A. (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 206–44Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette 2003. ‘The phonology of Yurok glottalized sonorants: segmental fission under syllabification’, International Journal of American Linguistics 69 (4): 371–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, House, Juliane and Kasper, Gabriele 1989. Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar
Bod, Rens, Hay, Jennifer and Jannedy, Stefanie (eds.) 2003. Probabilistic Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Boffey, Julia and Edwards, A. S. G. 2005. A New Index of Middle English Verse. London: British Library PublishingGoogle Scholar
Boling, Bruce D. 2006. ‘A Hiberno-English dialect of West Tyrone’, in Smyth, Anne, Montgomery, Michael and Robinson, Philip (eds.), The Academic Study of Ulster-Scots: Essays for and by Robert J. Gregg. Cultra: NMGNI, pp. 1938Google Scholar
Booij, Geert 1995. The Phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bopp, Franz 1833–52. Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litthauischen, Altslawischen, Gotischen und Deutschen, 6 vols. Berlin: DümmlerGoogle Scholar
Borgmeier, Raimund, Grabes, Herbert and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.) 1998. Anglistentag 1997 Giessen: Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher VerlagGoogle Scholar
Borowsky, Toni 1986. ‘Topics in the lexical phonology of English’. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Boureau, Alain 1987. ‘Franciscan piety and voracity: uses and strategems in the hagiographic pamphlet’, in Chartier, Roger (ed.) and Cochrane, Lydia G. (trans.), The Culture of Print: Power and the Uses of Print in Early Modern Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 1558Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire and Evans, Bethyn (eds.) 2014. The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics. New York, NY: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Bowers, John 2001. The Politics of Pearl: Court Poetry in the Age of Richard II. Cambridge: D. S. BrewerGoogle Scholar
Bowers, John 2012. An Introduction to the Gawain Poet. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida PressGoogle Scholar
Bradley, Henry 1904. The Making of English. London: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois (ed.) 1880. Thomas of Erceldoune. Berlin: WeidmannGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1886. Samuel Taylor Coleridge und die englische Romantik. Straßburg: TrübnerGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1915. Zur Geographie der altenglischen Dialekte. Berlin: Akademie der WissenschaftenGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1926–7. Englische Dialekte. Lautbibliothek. Berlin: Preußische StaatsbibliothekGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1936a. Forschungen und Charakteristiken; von Alois Brandl. Zum 80. Geburtstag hrsg. von dem Englischen Seminar der Universität Berlin und der Berliner Gesellschaft für das Studium der neueren Sprachen. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1936b. Zwischen Inn und Themse: Lebensbeobachtungen eines Anglisten – Alt-Tirol, England, Berlin. Berlin: GroteGoogle Scholar
Brandl, Alois 1937. Vom kosmologischen Denken des heidnisch-christlichen Germanentums: der früh.-ags. Schicksalsspruch der Handschrift Tiberius B. 13 und seine Verwandtheit mit Boethius. Berlin: Akademie der WissenschaftenGoogle Scholar
Braunmüller, Kurt 2008. ʻDas älteste Germanische: offene Fragen und mögliche Antwortenʼ, Sprachwissenschaft 33: 373403Google Scholar
Bréal, Michel 1964 [1900]. Semantics: Studies in the Science of Meaning. (Trans. Cust, Mrs Henry.) New York, NY: DoverGoogle Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte 2011. Measure Noun Constructions: An Instance of Semantically-driven Grammaticalization. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte, Ghesquière, Lobke and van de Velde, Freek (eds.) 2012. Intersections of Intersubjectivity, special issue of English Text Construction 5CrossRef
Bresnan, Joan 2007. ‘Is syntactic knowledge probabilistic? Experiments with the English dative alternation’, in Featherston, Sam and Sternefeld, Wolfgang (eds.), Roots: Linguistics in Search of its Evidential Base. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 7796Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Cueni, Anna, Nikitina, Tatiana and Baayen, R. Harald 2007. ‘Predicting the dative alternation’, in Bouma, Gerlof, Krämer, Irene and Zwarts, Joost (eds.), Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science, pp. 6994Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan and Hay, Jennifer 2008. ‘Gradient grammar: an effect of animacy on the syntax of give in New Zealand and American English’, Lingua 118 (2): 245–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bretz, Frank, Hothorn, Torsten and Westfall, Peter 2010. Multiple Comparisons Using R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRCCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, Asa 1985. A Social History of England. Harmondsworth: PenguinGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1991. ‘The origin and development of quasimodal have to in English’. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Amsterdam, August 1991. http://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/lbrinton/HAVETO.PDF
Brinton, Laurel J. 1996. Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2001. ‘Historical Discourse Analysis’, in Schiffrin, Deborah, Tannen, Deborah and Hamilton, Heidi E. (eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 138–60Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2006. ‘Pathways in the development of pragmatic markers in English’, in van Kemenade, Ans and Bettelou, Los (eds.), The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 307–34Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2007. ‘The development of I mean: implications for the study of historical pragmatics’, in Fitzmaurice, Susan M. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Methods in Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 3780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The Comment Clause in English: Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2010. ‘Discourse markers’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 285314Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs 2005. Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britain, David 2005a. ‘Innovation diffusion, “Estuary English” and local dialect differentiation: the survival of Fenland Englishes’, Linguistics 43 (5): 9951022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britain, David 2005b. ‘Where did New Zealand English come from?’, in Bell, Allan, Harlow, Ray and Starks, Donna (eds.), Languages of New Zealand. Wellington: Victoria University Press, pp. 156–93Google Scholar
Britain, David 2009. ‘One foot in the grave? Dialect death, dialect contact and dialect birth in England’, International Journal of the Sociology of Language 196/7: 121–55Google Scholar
Britain, David and Sudbury, Andrea 2010. ‘Falkland Islands English’, in Schreier, Daniel, Trudgill, Peter, Schneider, Edgar W. and Williams, Jeffrey P. (eds.), The Lesser-known Varieties of English: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 209–23Google Scholar
Britton, Derek 2012. ‘Degemination in English, with special reference to the Middle English period’, in Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris and Moore, Emma (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 232–43Google Scholar
Broccias, Cristiano 2012. ‘The syntax–lexicon continuum’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 735–47Google Scholar
Broccias, Cristiano and Smith, Nicholas 2010. ‘Same time, across time: simultaneity clauses from Late Modern to Present-day English’, English Language and Linguistics 14 (3): 347–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Christopher 1994. ‘Apprenticeship, social mobility and the middling sort, 1550–1800’, in Barry, Jonathan and Brooks, Christopher (eds.), The Middling Sort of People: Culture, Society and Politics in England 1550–1800. London: Macmillan, pp. 5283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Carleton and Robbins, , , Rossell Hope 1965. Supplement to the Index of Middle English Verse. Lexington, KY: University Press of KentuckyGoogle Scholar
Brown, Carleton and Robbins, Rossell Hope (eds.) 1943. The Index of Middle English Verse. New York, NY: Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger and Gilman, Albert 1960. ‘The pronouns of power and solidarity’, in Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.), Style in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 253–76Google Scholar
Brown, Roger and Gilman, Albert 1989. ‘Politeness theory and Shakespeare's four major tragedies’, Language in Society 18: 159212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broz, Vlatko 2011. ‘Kennings as blends and prisms’, Jezikoslovlje 12 (2): 165–86Google Scholar
Bruster, Douglas 2013. ‘Shakespearean spellings and handwriting in the additional passages printed in the 1602 Spanish Tragedy’, Notes and Queries 60: 420–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary and Hall, Kira 2005. ‘Identity and interaction: a sociocultural linguistic approach’, Discourse Studies 7: 585614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle 2009. ‘The quantitative analysis of morphosyntactic variation: constructing and quantifying the denominator’, Language and Linguistics Compass 3 (4): 1010–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle 2011. ‘Quotations across the generations: a multivariate analysis of speech and thought introducers across 5 decades of Tyneside speech’, Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 7 (1): 5992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle and D'Arcy, Alexandra 2009. ‘Localized globalization: a multi-local, multivariate investigation of quotative be like’, Journal of Sociolinguistics 13 (3): 291331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle and van Alphen, Ingrid (eds.) 2012. Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and Cross-disciplinary Perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullokar, William 1580. Booke at Large for the Amendment of Orthographie for English Speech. London: Henrie DenhamGoogle Scholar
Burchfield, R. W. 1956. ‘The language and orthography of the Ormulum MS’, Transactions of the Philological Society 55: 5687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnley, David 1992. ‘Lexis and semantics’, in Blake, Norman (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 409–99Google Scholar
Burnley, David 2003. ‘The T/V pronouns in later Middle English literature’, in Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 2745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrow, John A. 1982. Medieval Writers and their Work: Middle English Literature 1100–1500. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Burrow, John A. and Doyle, A. I. (eds.) 2002. Thomas Hoccleve: A Facsimile of the Autograph Verse Manuscripts. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Burrow, John A. and Turville-Petre, Thorlac 2004. A Book of Middle English. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell (3rd edn)Google Scholar
Busse, Dietrich (ed.) 1991. Diachrone Semantik und Pragmatik: Untersuchungen zur Erklärung und Beschreibung des Sprachwandels. Tübingen: NiemeyerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busse, Ulrich 2002. Linguistic Variation in the Shakespeare Corpus: Morpho-syntactic Variability of Second Person Pronouns. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busse, Ulrich 2003. ‘The co-occurrence of nominal and pronominal address forms in the Shakespeare Corpus: who says thou or you to whom?’, in Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 193221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busse, Ulrich and Busse, Beatrix 2010. ‘Shakespeare’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 247–81Google Scholar
Butler, Charles 1633/34. The English Grammar. OxfordGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, Ardis 2009. The Familiar Enemy: Chaucer, Language and Nation in the Hundred Years War. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butters, Ronald R. 2001. ‘Chance as cause of language variation and change’, Journal of English Linguistics 29 (3): 201–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan 2003. ‘Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: the role of frequency’, in Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D. (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 602–23Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan 2007. Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. New York, NY: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan and Hopper, Paul (eds.) 2001. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Pagliuca, William and Perkins, Revere D. 1991. ‘Back to the future’, in Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Heine, Bernd (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere and Pagliuca, William 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Caie, Graham D. 2011. ‘The relationship between MS Hunter 409 and the 1532 edition of Chaucer's Works edited by William Thynne’, in Pahta, Päivi and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Communicating Early English Manuscripts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 149–61Google Scholar
Cain, Christopher M. 2010. ʻGeorge Hickes and the “invention” of the Old English dialectsʼ, Review of English Studies 61: 729–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvo, Clara 1991. Power Relations and Fool–Master Discourse in Shakespeare: A Discourse Stylistics Approach to Dramatic Dialogue. Nottingham: Department of English Studies, University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar
Calvo, Clara 1992. ‘Pronouns of address and social negotiation in As you like it’, Language and Literature 1: 527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camden, William 1974 [1605]. Remains Concerning Britain. Yorkshire: EP Publishing LimitedGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah 2001. Working with Spoken Discourse. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Alan 1959. Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle 2001. ‘What's wrong with grammaticalization?’, Language Sciences 23 (2–3): 113–61Google Scholar
Canale, Michael 1978. ‘Word order change in Old English’. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto
Carey, Kathleen 1995. ‘Subjectification and the development of the English perfect’, in Stein, Dieter and Wright, Susan (eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 83102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, David 2004. The Struggle for Mastery: The Penguin History of Britain 1066–1284. London: PenguinGoogle Scholar
Carroll, Ruth, Peikola, Matti, Salmi, Hanna, Varila, Mari-Liisa, Skaffari, Janne and Hiltunen, Risto 2013. ‘Pragmatics on the page: visual text in late medieval English books’, European Journal of English Studies 17 (1): 5471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawdrey, Robert 1604. A Table Alphabetical. London: I. R. for Edmund WeaverGoogle Scholar
Caxton, William (trans.) 1480. The Description of Britayne, & also Irlonde taken out of Polichronicon. Westminster: W. CaxtonGoogle Scholar
Cedergren, Henrietta and Sankoff, David 1974. ‘Variable rules: performance as a statistical reflection of competence’, Language 50 (2): 333–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cercignani, Fausto 1981. Shakespeare's Works and Elizabethan Pronunciation. Oxford: ClarendonGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic Theory. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.) 2002. The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Chaucer, Geoffrey. ‘The Canterbury tales’. See Benson 1987
Cheshire, Jenny 1982. Variation in an English Dialect: A Sociolinguistic Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny and Milroy, James 1993. ‘Syntactic variation in non-standard dialects: background issues’, in Milroy, James and Milroy, Lesley (eds.), Real English: The Grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman, pp. 333Google Scholar
Chibnall, Marjorie (ed., trans.) 1969–80. The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, 6 vols. Oxford: ClarendonGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1973. ‘Conditions on transformations’, in Anderson, Stephen and Kiparsky, Paul (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 232–86Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Dordrecht: ForisGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York, NY: PraegerGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 2004. ‘Beyond explanatory adequacy’, in Belletti, Adriana (ed.), Structures and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 104–31Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 2005. ‘Three factors in language design’, Linguistic Inquiry 36 (1): 122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 2007. ‘Approaching UG from below’, in Sauerland, Uli and Gärtner, Hans-Martin (eds.), Interfaces + Recursion = Language?. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 129Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Halle, , , Morris 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Claridge, Claudia 2008. ‘Historical corpora’, in Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 1. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 242–59Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia 2010. ‘News discourse’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 587620Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia 2012. ‘Linguistic levels: styles, registers, genres, text types’, in Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 1. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 237–53Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia 2013. ‘The evolution of three pragmatic markers: as it were, so to speak/say and if you like’, Journal of Historical Pragmatics 14 (2): 161–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claridge, Claudia and Kytö, Merja 2014. ‘I had lost sight of them then for a bit, but I went on pretty fast: two degree modifiers in the Old Bailey Corpus’, in Taavitsainen, Irma, Jucker, Andreas H. and Tuominen, Jukka (eds.), Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 2952
Clark, Cecily (ed.) 1970. The Peterborough Chronicle, 1070–1154. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clédat, Léon 1891. Rutebeuf. Paris: HachetteGoogle Scholar
Clemens, Raymond and Graham, Timothy 2007. Introduction to Manuscript Studies. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
Closs, Elizabeth 1965. ‘Diachronic syntax and generative grammar’, Language 41 (3): 402–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, Michael 2003. Dynamics of Language Contact: English and Immigrant Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coates, Richard 2009. ‘A glimpse through a dirty window into an unlit house: names of some North-west European islandsʼ, in Ahrens, Wolfgang, Embleton, Sheila and Lapierre, André (eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Onomastic Sciences. Toronto: York University, pp. 228–42Google Scholar
Colleman, Timothy and Clerck, De, , Bernard 2011. ‘Constructional semantics on the move: on semantic specialization in the English double object construction’, Cognitive Linguistics 22 (1): 183209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, Daniel 2001. Reanimated Voices: Speech Reporting in a Historical-pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, Peter, Borlongan, Ariane Macalinga and Yao, Xinyue 2014. ‘Modality in Philippine English: a diachronic study’, Diachronic Approaches to Modality in World Englishes, special issue of Journal of English Linguistics 42 (1): 6888
Colman, Fran 1984. ʻAnglo-Saxon pennies and Old English phonologyʼ, Folia Linguistica Historica 5: 91143Google Scholar
Colman, Fran 1986. ‘A cǣġ to Old English syllable structure’, in Kastovsky, Dieter and Szwedek, Alexander (eds.), Linguistics across Historical and Geographical Boundaries, Vol. 1. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 225–30Google Scholar
Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo 2012. ‘The role of social networks and mobility in diachronic sociolinguistics’, in Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 332–52Google Scholar
Conner, Patrick W. 1998. ʻBeyond the ASPR: electronic editions of Old English poetryʼ, in Keefer, Sarah Larratt and O'Brien O'Keeffe, Katherine (eds.), New Approaches to Editing Old English Verse. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, pp. 109–26Google Scholar
Cooper, Christopher 1685. Grammatica linguæ anglicanæ. LondonGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Christopher 1687. The English Teacher. London: John Richardson for the AuthorGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Paul 2013. ‘Enregisterment in historical contexts: a framework’. Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield
Corrigan, Karen P. 1996. ‘“Plain life depicted in fiery shorthand”: sociolinguistic aspects of the languages and dialects of Ulster and Scotland as portrayed in Scott's Waverley (1814) and Banim's The Boyne Water (1826)’, Scottish Language 14/15: 218–33Google Scholar
Corrigan, Karen P. 2012. ‘GOAT vowel variants in the Diachronic Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English (DECTE)’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 9093Google Scholar
Coulmas, Florian (ed.) 1986. Direct and Indirect Speech. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craigie, Sir William, A., Aitken, A. J., Stevenson, James A. C. and Dareau, Marace (eds.) 1931–2002. A Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available online as part of the Dictionary of the Scots Language. www.dsl.ac.ukGoogle Scholar
Crisma, Paola 2007. ‘Were they “dropping their aitches”? A quantitative study of h-loss in Middle English’, English Language and Linguistics 11 (1): 5180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisma, Paola and Longobardi, Giuseppe (eds.) 2009. Historical Syntax and Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William 2000. Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Pearson EducationGoogle Scholar
Croft, William 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William 2003 [1990]. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Croft, William and Cruse, D. Alan 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowley, Tony 1991. Proper English? Readings in Language, History and Cultural Identity. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan 2008. Gimson's Pronunciation of English. London: Edward Arnold (7th edn rev.)Google Scholar
Crystal, David 2008. ‘Two thousand million?’, English Today 24 (1): 36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan 2010. ‘Historical sociopragmatics’, in Andreas, H. Jucker and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 6994Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan 2011. Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Archer, Dawn 2008. ‘Requests and directness in Early Modern English trial proceedings and play texts, 1640–1760’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Speech Acts in the History of English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 4584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Clapham, Phoebe 1996. ‘The borrowing of Classical and Romance words into English: a study based on the electronic Oxford English Dictionary’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1 (2): 199218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Kytö, Merja 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Short, Mick and Verdonk, Peter (eds.) 1998. Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Curzan, Anne 2003. Gender Shifts in the History of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curzan, Anne 2009. ‘Historical corpus linguistics and evidence of language change’, in Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 2. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1091–109Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne and Palmer, Chris C. 2006. ‘The importance of historical corpora, reliability, and reading’, in Facchinetti, Roberta and Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Corpus-based Studies in Diachronic English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 1734Google Scholar
Cusack, Bridget (ed.) 1998. Everyday English 1500–1700: A Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University PressGoogle Scholar
d'Ardenne, S. R. T. O. (ed.) 1961. Þe liflade and te Passiun of Seinte Iuliene. London: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Dal, Ingerid 1952. ‘Zur Entstehung des englischen Participium Praesentis auf -ing’, Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 16: 5116Google Scholar
Dalen-Oskam, K. H. 2012. ‘The secret life of scribes: exploring fifteen manuscripts of Jacob van Maerlant's Scolastica (1271)’, Literary and Linguistic Computing 27: 355–72Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, Christiane 1995. ‘Middle English is a creole and its opposite: on the value of plausible speculation’, in Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Linguistic Change under Contact Conditions. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 3550Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, ChristianeFisiak, Jacek 1996. The French Influence on Middle English Morphology: A Corpus-based Study of Derivation. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei 1997. ‘The Middle English creolization hypothesis revisited’, in Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Studies in Middle English Linguistics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 79108Google Scholar
Danchev, Andrei and Kytö, Merja 1994. ‘The construction be going to + infinitive in Early Modern English’, in Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 5977Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda and Bogoch, Bryna 1994. ‘Orality, literacy, and performativity in Anglo-Saxon wills’, in Gibbons, John (ed.), Language and the Law. London: Longman, pp. 100–35Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin, Vandelanotte, Lieven and Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.) 2010. Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark 2010. ‘The Corpus of Contemporary American English as the first reliable monitor corpus of English’, Literary and Linguistic Computing 25: 447–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark 2012a. ‘Expanding horizons in historical linguistics with the 400 million word Corpus of Historical American English’, Corpora 7: 121–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark 2012b. ‘Some methodological issues related to corpus-based investigations of recent syntactic changes in English’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 157–74Google Scholar
Davies, Mark 2013. ‘Recent shifts with three nonfinite verbal complements in English: data from the 100-million-word Time Corpus (1920s–2000s)’, in Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne, Leech, Geoffrey and Wallis, Sean (eds.), The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 4667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Norman (ed.) 1971. Paston Letters and Papers of the Fifteenth Century, Part I. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Electronic version available at the Oxford Text ArchiveGoogle Scholar
Davis, Norman 1989. ‘The language of the Pastons’, in Burrow, J. A. (ed.), Middle English Literature: British Academy Gollancz Lectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4570Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart 2003. ‘The footing of dactylic sequences in American English’, in Honma, Takeru, Okazaki, Masao, Tabata, Toshiyuki and Tanaka, Shin-ichi (eds.), A New Century of Phonology and Phonological Theory: A Festschrift for Professor Shosuke Haraguchi on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, pp. 277–89Google Scholar
Day, Mabel 1952. The English Text of the Ancrene Riwle: BM MS Cotton Nero A.14. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
de Fina, Anna, Schiffrin, Deborah and Bamberg, Michael (eds.) 2006. Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Man, Paul 1986. The Resistance to Theory. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota PressGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik 2005. ‘A corpus of Late Modern English texts’, ICAME Journal 29: 6982Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik 2009. ‘Analysing reanalysis’, Lingua 119: 1728–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik 2012. ‘The course of actualization’, Language 88: 601–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik 2013. Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik, Ghesquière, Lobke and Van de Velde, Freek (eds.) 2013. On Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change, special issue of Studies in Language 37 (3)CrossRef
De Smet, Hendrik and Verstraete, Jean-Christophe 2006. ‘Coming to terms with subjectivity’, Cognitive Linguistics 17: 365–92Google Scholar
Defour, Tine 2010. ‘The semantic-pragmatic development of well from the viewpoint of (inter)subjectification’, in Davidse, Kristin, Vandelanotte, Lieven and Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 155–95Google Scholar
Defour, Tine and Simon Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie 2010. ‘“Positive appraisal” as a core meaning of well: a corpus-based analysis in Middle and Early Modern English data’, English Studies 91 (6): 643–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier 1975. Number and Case Relations in 19th Century British English: A Comparative Study of Grammar and Usage. Antwerp/Amsterdam: Uitgeverij De Nederlandsche BoekhandelGoogle Scholar
Denison, David 1998. ‘Syntax’, in Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 92329Google Scholar
Derwing, Bruce L. 1992. ‘A “pause-break” task for eliciting syllable boundary judgments from literate and illiterate speakers: preliminary results for five diverse languages’, Language and Speech 35 (1–2): 219–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deuber, Dagmar, Biewer, Carolin, Hackert, Stephanie and Hilbert, Michaela 2012. ‘Will and would in selected New Englishes: general and variety-specific tendencies’, in Hundt, Marianne and Ulrike, Gut (eds.), Mapping Unity and Diversity World-wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 77102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devitt, Amy J. 1989a. ‘Genre as textual variable: some historical evidence from Scots and American English’, American Speech 64 (4): 291303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devitt, Amy J. 1989b. Standardising Written English: Diffusion in the Case of Scotland 1520–1659. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Dietz, Klaus 2007. ‘Denominale Abstraktbildungen des Altenglischen: die Wortbildung der Abstrakta auf -dōm, -hād, -lāc, -rǣden, -sceaft, -stæf und -wist und ihrer Entsprechungen im Althochdeutschen und im Altnordischen’, in Hans, Fix (ed.), Beiträge zur Morphologie: Germanisch, Baltisch, Ostseefinnisch. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, pp. 97172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen 1994. ‘Emotions in the English lexicon: a historical study of a lexical field’, in Fernández, Francisco, Fuster Márquez, Miguel and Calvo, Juan José (eds.), English Historical Linguistics 1992. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 219–34Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen 2001. ‘Genre in linguistic and related discourses’, in Diller, Hans-Jürgen and Görlach, Manfred (eds.), Towards a History of English as a History of Genres. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 343Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen 2013. ‘Culturomics and genre: wrath and anger in the 17th century’, in McConchie, R. W, Juvonen, Teo, Kaunisto, Mark, Nevala, Minna and Tyrkkö, Jukka (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 2012 Symposium on New Approaches in English Historical Lexis (HEL-LEX 3). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 5465Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen, De Smet, Hendrik and Tyrkkö, Jukka 2010. ‘A European database of descriptors of English electronic texts’, The European English Messenger 19 (2): 2935Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen and Görlach, Manfred (eds.) 2001. Towards a History of English as a History of Genres. Heidelberg: WinterGoogle Scholar
Dines, Elizabeth 1980. ‘Variation in discourse – “and stuff like that”’, Language in Society 9: 1331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar S. and Gries, Stefan Th. 2008. ‘Clusters in the mind? Converging evidence from near synonymy in Russian’, Mental Lexicon 3 (2): 188213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doane, Alger N. 1991. The Saxon Genesis: An Edition of the West Saxon Genesis B and the Old Saxon Vatican Genesis. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin PressGoogle Scholar
Dobson, Eric J. 1957. English Pronunciation 1500–1700, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Dobson, Eric J. 1968. English Pronunciation 1500–1700, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press (2nd edn)Google Scholar
Dobson, Eric J. 1972. The English Text of the Ancrene Riwle: BM Cotton MS Cleopatra C.6. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Docherty, Gerard and Mendoza-Denton, Norma 2012. ‘Speaker-related variation – sociophonetic factors’, in Cohn, Abigail C., Fougeron, Cécile and Huffman, Marie K (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Laboratory Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4360Google Scholar
Dollinger, Stefan 2006a. ‘Oh Canada! Towards the Corpus of Early Ontario English’, in Renouf, Antoinette and Kehoe, Andrew (eds.), The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, pp. 725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dollinger, Stefan 2006b. ‘The modal auxiliaries have to and must in the Corpus of Early Ontario English: gradient change and colonial lag’, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 51 (2–3): 287308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donne, John 1957 [1621]. The Sermons, Vol. 3. Ed. by Potter, George R. and Simpson, Evelyn M.. Berkeley, CA: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
Dons, Ute 2004. Descriptive Adequacy of Early Modern English Grammars. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dossena, Marina 2010. ‘Building trust through (self-)appraisal in nineteenth-century business correspondence’, in Pahta, Päivi, Nevala, Minna, Nurmi, Arja and Palander-Collin, Minna (eds.), Social Roles and Language Practices in Late Modern English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 191209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dossena, Marina 2011. ‘Handwritten communication in nineteenth-century business correspondence’, in Pahta, Päivi and Jucker, Andreas H (eds.), Communicating Early English Manuscripts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 133–46Google Scholar
Dossena, Marina and Fitzmaurice, Susan M. (eds.) 2006. Business and Official Correspondence: Historical Investigations. Bern: Peter LangGoogle Scholar
Doty, Kathleen L. 2010. ‘Courtroom discourse’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 621–50Google Scholar
Durand, Jacques 1990. Generative and Non-linear Phonology. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Durand, Jacques, Gut, Ulrike and Kristoffersen, Gjert (eds.) 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkin, Philip 2002. ‘Changing documentation in the Third Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary: sixteenth-century vocabulary as a test case’, in Fanego, Teresa, Méndez-Naya, Belén and Seoane, Elena (eds.), Sounds, Words, Texts and Change, Vol. 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 6581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkin, Philip 2009. The Oxford Guide to Etymology. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Durkin, Philip 2013. ‘Dating Middle English evidence in the OED’, OED Online. http://public.oed.com/aspects-of-english/english-in-time/dating-middle-english-evidence-in-the-oedGoogle Scholar
Durkin, Philip 2014. Borrowed Words: A History of Loanwords in English. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dury, Richard 2002. ‘May’, in Gotti, Maurizio, Dossena, Marina, Dury, Richard, Facchinetti, Roberta and Lima, Maria (eds.), Variation in Central Modals: A Repertoire of Types and Forms of Usage in Middle English and Early Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 83128Google Scholar
Dury, Richard 2006. ‘A corpus of nineteenth-century business correspondence: methodology of transcriptionʼ, in Dossena, Marina and Fitzmaurice, Susan M (eds.), Business and Official Correspondence: Historical Investigations. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 193205Google Scholar
Dyche, Thomas and Pardon, William 1735. A New General English Dictionary […] to which is Prefixed a Compendious English Grammar. London.Google Scholar
Echard, Siân 1997. ‘Pre-texts: tables of contents and the reading of John Gower's Confessio Amantis’, Medium Ævum 66: 270–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, Regine 2006. Meaning Change in Grammaticalization: An Enquiry into Semantic Reanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope 2000. Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Edden, Valerie 2000. The Index of Middle English Prose. Handlist XV: Manuscripts in Midland Libraries. Woodbridge: D. S. BrewerGoogle Scholar
Eddington, David, Treiman, Rebecca and Elzinga, Dirk 2013. ‘Syllabification of American English: evidence from a large-scale experiment. Part I’, Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 20 (1): 4567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, Thomas 2012. ‘Prefer: the odd verb out’, in Hegedűs, Irén and Fodor, Alexandra (eds.), English Historical Linguistics 2010: Selected Papers from the Sixteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 16), Pécs, 23–27 August 2010. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 215–28Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne and Martin, J. R. 1997. ‘Genres and registers of discourse’, in van Dijk, Teun A. (ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process. London: Sage Publications, pp. 230–56Google Scholar
Ehlich, Konrad 1992. ‘On the historicity of politeness’, in Watts, Richard J., Ide, Sachiko and Ehlich, Konrad (eds.), Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 71107Google Scholar
Ellis, Alexander 1889. Existing Dialectal as Compared with West Saxon Pronunciation. London: Trübner and CoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Alexander 1890. English Dialects, their Sounds and Homes. London: English Dialect SocietyGoogle Scholar
Elmer, Willy 1981. Diachronic Grammar: The History of Old and Middle English Subjectless Constructions. Tübingen: NiemeyerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmott, Catherine 1997. Narrative Comprehension: A Discourse Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph and Faarlund, Jan Terje 2014. English: The Language of Vikings. Olomouc: Palacky University
Ervin-Tripp, Susan M. 1972. ‘Sociolinguistic rules of address’, in Pride, John B. and Holmes, Janet (eds.), Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp. 225–40Google Scholar
Evans, Stephen 2014. ‘The decline and fall of English in Hong Kong's Legislative Council’, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 35 (5): 47996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Stephen 2015. ‘Testing the Dynamic Model: the evolution of the Hong Kong English lexicon (1858–2012)’, Journal of English Linguistics 43 (3): 175200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan 2009. How Words Mean: Lexical Concepts, Cognitive Models, and Meaning Construction. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur 1995. ‘Verbal syntax in the Early Germanic languages’. Dissertation, Cornell University
Facchinetti, Roberta 2000. ‘The modal verb shall between grammar and usage in the nineteenth century’, in Kastovsky, Dieter and Mettinger, Arthur (eds.), The History of English in a Social Context: A Contribution to Historical Sociolinguistics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 115–33Google Scholar
Facchinetti, Roberta, Brownlees, Nicholas, Bös, Birte and Fries, Udo 2012. News as Changing Texts: Corpora, Methodologies and Analysis. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge ScholarsGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Fairman, Tony 2000. ‘English pauper letters 1800–34, and the English language’, in Barton, David and Hall, Nigel (eds.), Letter Writing as a Social Practice. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 6382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairman, Tony 2006. ‘Words in English record office documents of the early 1800s’, in Kytö, Merja, Rydén, Mats and Smitterberg, Erik (eds.), Nineteenth-century English: Stability and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 5688Google Scholar
Fallows, Deborah 1981. ‘Experimental evidence for English syllabification and syllable structure’, Journal of Linguistics 17 (2): 309–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faya Cerqueiro, Fátima 2015. ‘An approach to parenthetical courtesy markers in requests in Late Modern English’, in Stefan Schneider, Julie Glikman and Mathieu Avanzi (eds.), Parenthetical Verbs. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 135–62
Feilke, Helmuth, Kappest, Klaus-Peter and Knobloch, Clemens (eds.) 2001. Grammatikalisierung, Spracherwerb und Schriftlichkeit. Tübingen: NiemeyerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feist, Sigmund 1932. ‘The origin of the Germanic languages and the Europeanization of North Europe’, Language 8: 245–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fennell, Barbara 2001. A History of English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Fennell, Barbara 2008. ‘Linguistic choices: analysing dialect representation in eighteenth-century Irish and Scottish literature in English’, Journal of Irish and Scottish Studies 1: 5970Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 2013. ‘Berkeley construction grammar’, in Hoffmann, Thomas and Trousdale, Graeme (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 111–32Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku 2003. ‘More on the English progressive and the Celtic connection’, in Tristram, Hildegard L. C. (ed.), The Celtic Englishes III. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 150–68Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku and Klemola, Juhani (eds.) 2009. Re-evaluating the Celtic Hypothesis, special issue of English Language and Linguistics 13 (2)
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani and Pitkänen, Heli (eds.) 2002. The Celtic Roots of English. Joensuu: Joensuu University PressGoogle Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani and Paulasrto, Heli 2008. English and Celtic in Contact. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Finegan, Edward 1998. ‘English grammar and usage’, in Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 536–88Google Scholar
Finkenstaedt, Thomas 1963. You und Thou: Studien zur Anrede im Englischen, mit einem Exkurs über die Anrede im Deutschen. Berlin/New York, NY: Walter de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkenstaedt, Thomas and Wolff, Dieter with contributions by Neuhaus, H. Joachim and Herget, Winfried 1973. Ordered Profusion: Studies in Dictionaries and the English Lexicon. Heidelberg: WinterGoogle Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1957. Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Andreas 2004. ‘“Non olet”: euphemisms we live by’, in Christian, Kay, Hough, Carole and Wotherspoon, Irené (eds.), New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics. Volume II: Lexis and Transmission. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 91107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1989. ‘The origin and spread of the accusative and infinitive construction in English’, Folia Linguistica Historica 8: 143217Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1991. ‘The rise of the passive infinitive in English’, in Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.), Historical English Syntax. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 141–88Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1992a. ‘Syntactic change and borrowing: the case of the accusative- and-infinitive construction in English’, in Gerritsen, Marinel and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Internal and External Factors in Syntactic Change. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1788Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1992b. ‘Syntax’, in Blake, Norman (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 207408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1994a. ‘The development of quasi-auxiliaries in English and changes in word order’, Neophilologus 78: 137–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga 1994b. ‘The fortunes of the Latin-type accusative and infinitive construction in Dutch and English compared’, in Swan, Toril, Mørck, Endre and Westvik, Olaf Jansen (eds.), Language Change and Language Structure: Older Germanic Languages in a Comparative Perspective. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 91133Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2000. ‘The position of the adjective in Old English’, in Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, Denison, David, Hogg, Richard M. and McCully, C. B. (eds.), Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10 ICEHL. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 153–81Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2006. ‘On the position of adjectives in Middle English’, English Language and Linguistics 10: 253–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2007. Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2011. ‘Grammaticalization as analogically driven change?’, in Narrog, Heiko and Heine, Bernd (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3142Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2012. ‘The status of the postposed ‘and-adjective’ construction in Old English: attributive or predicative?’, in Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris and Moore, Emma (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 251–84Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2013. ‘The role of contact in English syntactic change in the Old and Middle English periods’, in Schreier, Daniel and Hundt, Marianne (eds.), English as a Contact Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1844Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2015. ‘The influence of the grammatical system and analogy in processes of language change: the case of the auxiliation of HAVE-to once again’, in Fabienne, Toupin and Brian, Lowrey (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Variation and Change: From Old to Middle English. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars, pp. 120–50Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga and Rosenbach, Anette 2000. ‘Introduction’, in Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem and Wurff, Wim van der 2000. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette and Stein, Dieter (eds.) 2000. Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, John H. 1977. ‘Chancery and the emergence of standard written English in the fifteenth century’, Speculum 52: 870–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, John H. 1996. The Emergence of Standard English. Lexington, KY: University Press of KentuckyGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, James (ed.) 1997. Margaret Cavendish, CCXI Sociable Letters. New York, NY: GarlandGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2000. ‘Tentativeness and insistence in the expression of politeness in Margaret Cavendish's Sociable Letters’, Language & Literature 9 (1): 724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2002a. ‘Politeness and modal meaning in the construction of humiliative discourse in an early eighteenth-century network of patron–client relationships’, English Language and Linguistics 6 (2): 239–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2002b. ‘Servant or patron? Jacob Tonson and the language of deference and respect’, Language Sciences 24 (3): 247–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2002c. The Familiar Letter in Early Modern English: A Pragmatic Approach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2004. ‘Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: from stance markers to discourse markers’, Discourse Studies 6: 427–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2007. ‘The world of the periodical essay: social networks and discourse communities in eighteenth-century London’, Historical Sociolinguistics and Sociohistorical Linguistics 7. www.let.leidenuniv.nl/hsl_shl/periodical%20essay.htmGoogle Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.) 2007. Methods in Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne 1990. ʻPhilology, linguistics, and the discourse of the medieval textʼ, Speculum 65: 1937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foote, Peter and Quirk, Randolph (eds.) 1953. Gunnlaugssaga Ormstungu. London: Viking Society for Northern ResearchGoogle Scholar
Forker, Charles 1989. ʻWebster or Shakespeare? Style, idiom, vocabulary, and spelling in the addition to Sir Thomas Moreʼ, in Howard-Hill, T. H. (ed.), Shakespeare and ‘Sir Thomas More’: Essays on the Play and its Shakespearian Interest. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 151–70Google Scholar
Fowler, Alastair 1982. Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Fox, Denton 1972. ‘Henryson's “Sum Practysis of Medecyne”’, Studies in Philology 69: 453–60Google Scholar
Fox, Denton 1981. The Poems of Robert Henryson. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Frampton, Saul 2013. ‘Who edited Shakespeare?’, The Guardian 12 July 2013. www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/12/who-edited-shakespeare-john-florioGoogle Scholar
Frank, Roberta 1994. ‘King Cnut in the verse of his skalds’, in Rumble, Alexander R (ed.), The Reign of Cnut: King of England, Denmark, and Norway. London: Leicester University Press, pp. 106–24Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam 2008. ‘Constructions and constructs: mapping a shift between predication and attribution’, in Bergs, Alexander and Diewald, Gabriele (eds.), Constructions and Language Change. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 4779Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam 2010. ‘Grammar and interaction: new directions in constructional research’, Constructions and Frames 2: 125–33Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam 2013. ‘Principles of constructional change’, in Hoffmann, Thomas and Trousdale, Graeme (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 419–37Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam, Östman, Jan-Ola and Verschueren, Jef (eds.) 2010. Variation and Change: Pragmatic Perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, Paul 1986. ‘Social context and semantic feature: the Russian pronominal usage’, in Gumperz, John J. and Hymes, Dell (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 270300Google Scholar
Fries, Udo 1998. ‘Dialogue in instructional texts’, in Borgmeier, Raimund, Grabes, Herbert and Jucker, Andreas H (eds.), Anglistentag 1997 Giessen: Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, pp. 8596Google Scholar
Fries, Udo and Schneider, Peter 2000. ‘ZEN: preparing the Zurich English Newspaper Corpus’, in Ungerer, Friedrich (ed.), English Media Texts – Past and Present: Language and Textual Structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, Clemens 2000. ‘The Irish in Australia: aspects of linguistic accommodation’, in Tristram, Hildegard L. C (ed.), The Celtic Englishes II. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 5774Google Scholar
Fritz, Clemens 2007. From English in Australia to Australian English 1788–1900. Frankfurt: Peter LangCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, Gerd 1995. ‘Topics in the history of dialogue forms’, in Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.), Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 469–98Google Scholar
Fulk, R. D. 1997. ‘Ambisyllabicity in Old English: a contrary view’, in Rauch, Irmengard and Carr, Gerald F (eds.), Insights in Germanic Linguistics II: Classic and Contemporary. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 2945Google Scholar
Fulk, R. D. 2008. ʻAnglian dialect features in Old English anonymous homiletic literature: a survey, with preliminary findingsʼ, in Fitzmaurice, Susan M. and Minkova, Donka (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language IV: Empirical and Analytical Advances in the Study of English Language Change. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 81100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulk, R. D. 2010. ʻLocalizing and dating Old English anonymous prose, and how the inherent problems relate to Anglo-Saxon legislationʼ, in Jurasinski, Stefan, Oliver, Lisi and Rabin, Andrew (eds.), English Law before Magna Carta: Felix Liebermann and Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen. Leiden: Brill, pp. 5979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulk, R. D. 2012. ʻAnglian features in late West Saxon proseʼ, in Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris and Moore, Emma (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 6374Google Scholar
Gaaf, Willem van der 1931. ‘Beon and habban connected with an inflected infinitive’, English Studies 13: 176–88Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Georg von der 1901 [1891]. Die Sprachwissenshaft. Ihre Aufgaben, Methoden und bisherigen Ergebnisse. Leipzig: Weigel. [Reprint Tübingen: Narr, 1972]Google Scholar
García-Bermejo Giner, Maria F. and Montgomery, Michael 1997. ‘British regional English in the nineteenth century: the evidence from emigrant letters’, in Thomas, Alan R. (ed.), Issues and Methods in Dialectology. Bangor: University of Wales Bangor, Department of Linguistics, pp. 167–83Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew 2012. ‘The historical syntax problem: reanalysis and directionality’, in Jonas, Dianne, Whitman, John and Garrett, Andrew (eds.), Grammatical Change: Origins, Nature, Outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 5272Google Scholar
Gatto, Maristella 2011. ‘The “Body” and the “Web”: the Web as corpus ten years on’, ICAME Journal 35: 3558Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk 1997. Diachronic Prototype Semantics: A Contribution to Historical Lexicology. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk 2010. Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, Gevaert, Caroline and Speelman, Dirk 2012. ‘How anger rose: hypothesis testing in diachronic semantics’, in Allan, Kathryn and Robinson, Justyna A (eds.), Current Methods in Historical Semantics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 109–31Google Scholar
Gehweiler, Elke 2010. ‘Interjections and expletives’, in Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), Historical Pragmatics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 315–49Google Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 1993. The Rise of Functional Categories. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 2004. Grammaticalization as Economy. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 2006. A History of the English Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 2011a. ‘Grammaticalization and generative grammar: a difficult liaison’, in Narrog, Heiko and Heine, Bernd (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4355Google Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 2011b. The Linguistic Cycle: Language Change and the Language Faculty. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, Elly 2013. Clause Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Gelderen, Elly 2014. ‘Generative syntax and language change’, in Claire Bowern and Bethwyn Evans (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics. London: Routledge, pp. 326–42
Gelling, Margaret 1993. Place-names in the Landscape: The Geographical Roots of Britain's Place-names. London: DentGoogle Scholar
Genette, Gérard 1997 [1987]. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, Dedre 2010. ‘Bootstrapping the mind: analogical processes and symbol systems’, Cognitive Science 34: 752–75CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghesquière, Lobke, Brems, Lieselotte and Van de Velde, Freek 2012. ‘Intersubjectivity and intersubjectification: typology and operationalization’, in Brems, Lieselotte, Ghesquière, Lobke and Van de Velde, Freek (eds.), Intersections of Intersubjectivity, special issue of English Text Construction 5: 128–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gil(l), Alexander 1619. Logonomia Anglica. London: Johannes BealeGoogle Scholar
Gill, Alexander 1968 [1621]. Logonomia Anglica. York: MentsonGoogle Scholar
Cambrensis, Giraldus. ‘Expugnatio Hibernica’. See Scott and Martin 1978
Gisborne, Nikolas and Patten, Amanda L. 2011. ‘Construction grammar and grammaticalization’, in Narrog, Heiko and Heine, Bernd (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 92104Google Scholar
Gneuss, Helmut 1972. ‘The origin of standard Old English and Æthelwold's school at Winchester’, Anglo-Saxon England 1: 6383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gneuss, Helmut 2001. Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts: A List of Manuscripts and Manuscript Fragments Written or Owned in England up to 1100. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance StudiesGoogle Scholar
Gneuss, Helmut 2003. ‘Addenda and corrigenda to the Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts’, Anglo-Saxon England 32: 293305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gneuss, Helmut 2011. ‘Second addenda and corrigenda to the Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts’, Anglo-Saxon England 40: 293306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godden, Malcolm R. 1992. ‘Literary language’, in Hogg, Richard M (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume I: The Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 490535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2013. ‘Constructionist approaches’, in Hoffmann, Thomas and Trousdale, Graeme (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 1531Google Scholar
González-Díaz, Victorina 2008. ‘On normative grammarians and the double marking of degree’, in Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid (ed.), Grammars, Grammarians and Grammar-writing in Eighteenth-century England. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 289310Google Scholar
González-Díaz, Victorina 2009. ‘Little old problems: adjectives and subjectivity in the English NP’, Transactions of the Philological Society 107 (3): 376402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, E. V. (ed.) 1953. Pearl. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, Elizabeth 1998. ‘The origins of New Zealand speech: the limits of recovering historical information from written records’, English World-Wide 19 (1): 6185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, Elizabeth, Campbell, Lyle, Hay, Jennifer, Maclagan, Margaret, Sudbury, Andrea and Trudgill, Peter 2004. New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1986. ‘Middle English – a creole?’, in Kastovsky, Dieter and Szwedek, Aleksander (eds.), Linguistics across Historical and Geographical Boundaries. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 329–44Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1991. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1998a. An Annotated Bibliography of Nineteenth-century Grammars of English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1998b. Studies in Middle English Saints’ Legends. Heidelberg: WinterGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1999a. English in Nineteenth-century England: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 1999b. ‘Regional and social variation’, in Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume III: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 459538Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 2001. Eighteenth-century English. Heidelberg: WinterGoogle Scholar
Görlach, Manfred 2004. Text Types and the History of English. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio 2001. ‘The experimental essay in Early Modern English’, European Journal of English Studies 5: 221–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio 2006. ‘Disseminating early modern science: specialized news discourse in the Philosophical Transactions’, in Brownlees, Nicholas (ed.), News Discourse in Early Modern Britain: Selected Papers of CHINED 2004. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 4170Google Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio 2008. Investigating Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang (2nd edn)Google Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio, Dossena, Marina, Dury, Richard, Facchinetti, Roberta and Lima, Maria (eds.) 2002. Variation in Central Modals: A Repertoire of Forms and Types of Usage in Middle English and Early Modern English. Bern: Peter LangGoogle Scholar
Gradon, Pamela 1965–79. Dan Michel's Ayenbite of Inwyt (EETS OS 23, 278). Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Graff, Gerald 1987. Professing Literature: An Institutional History. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason 2014. ‘Variation in English genitives across modality and genre’, English Language and Linguistics, 18 (3): 471–96
Grant, Anthony 2009. ‘Loanwords in British English’, in Haspelmath, Martin and Tadmor, Uri (eds.), Loanwords in the World's Languages: A Comparative Handbook. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, 360–83Google Scholar
Gray, Douglas 1979. Robert Henryson. Leiden: E. J. BrillGoogle Scholar
Greenacre, Michael 2007. Correspondence Analysis in Practice. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC (2nd edn)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. ‘Diachrony, synchrony, and language universals’, in Greenberg, Joseph H, Ferguson, Charles A. and Moravcsik, Edith A. (eds.), Universals of Human Language. Volume 1: Method & Theory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 6191Google Scholar
Greenwood, James 1711. An Essay Towards a Practical English Grammar. London: R. TookeyGoogle Scholar
Greetham, David C. 1991. ‘Textual scholarship’, in Gibaldi, Joseph (ed.), Introduction to Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures. New York, NY: Modern Language Association, pp. 103–37Google Scholar
Greetham, David C. 1994. Textual Scholarship: An Introduction. London: GarlandGoogle Scholar
Greetham, David C. 1999. Theories of the Text. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gretsch, Mechthild 2006. ‘A key to Ælfric's standard Old English’, Leeds Studies in English 37: 161–77Google Scholar
Grice, Paul 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2002. ‘Evidence in linguistics: three approaches to genitives in English’, in Brend, Ruth. M., Sullivan, William J. and Lommel, Arle R. (eds.), LACUS Forum XXVIII: What Constitutes Evidence in Linguistics. Houston, TX: LACUS, pp. 1731Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th 2003. Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. London/New York, NY: ContinuumGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th 2012. ‘Commentary: corpus-based methods’, in Allan, Kathryn and Robinson, Justyna A. (eds.), Current Methods in Historical Semantics. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 184–95Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th 2013. Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter (2nd rev. and extended edn)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. and Hilpert, Martin 2008. ‘The identification of stages in diachronic data: variability-based neighbour clustering’, Corpora 3 (1): 5981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. and Hilpert, Martin 2010. ‘Modeling diachronic change in the third person singular: a multifactorial, verb- and author-specific exploratory approach’, English Language and Linguistics 14 (3): 293320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. and Hilpert, Martin 2012. ‘Variability-based neighbor clustering: a bottom-up approach to periodization in historical linguistics’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 134–44Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. and Stefanowitsch, Anatol 2004. ‘Extending collostructional analysis: a corpus-based perspective on “alternations”’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9 (1): 97129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, Mark (ed.) 1997. Judith. Exeter: University of Exeter PressGoogle Scholar
Grimm, Jacob 1822. Deutsche Grammatik, Vol. 1. Göttingen: Dieterich (2nd edn)Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, Speelman, Dirk and Geeraerts, Dirk 2007. ‘Lexical variation and change’, in Geeraerts, Dirk and Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 9881011Google Scholar
Gross, Alan G., Harmon, Joseph E. and Reidy, Michael 2002. Communicating Science: The Scientific Article from the 17th Century to the Present. New York, NY: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Grue, Dustin 2012. “besides I” in The Old Bailey: A Corpus Investigation of ‘Besides’ as a Pragmatic Marker in Courtroom Discourse. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, MSGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter J. 2006. ‘Manuscripts as sources for linguistic research: a methodological case study based on the Mirror of Lights’, Journal of English Linguistics 34 (2): 105–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter J. 2011. ‘Scribes and scribal practices’, in Kytö, Merja, Grund, Peter J and Walker, Terry, Testifying to Language and Life in Early Modern England. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 147–80Google Scholar
Grund, Peter J. and Smitterberg, Erik 2014. ‘Conjuncts in nineteenth-century English: diachronic development and genre diversity’, English Language and Linguistics 18 (1): 157–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter J. and Walker, Terry 2006. ‘The subjunctive in adverbial clauses in nineteenth-century English’, in Kytö, Merja, Rydén, Mats and Smitterberg, Erik (eds.), Nineteenth-century English: Stability and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 89109Google Scholar
Grund, Peter J. and Walker, Terry 2011. ‘Genre characteristics’, in Kytö, Merja, Grund, Peter J and Walker, Terry, Testifying to Language and Life in Early Modern England. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1556Google Scholar
Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich 2003. The Powers of Philology: Dynamics of Textual Scholarship. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois PressGoogle Scholar
Gupta, Anthea Fraser 1994. The Step-tongue: Children's English in Singapore. Clevedon: Multilingual MattersGoogle Scholar
Gussenhoven, C. 1986. ‘English plosive allophones and ambisyllabicity’, Gramma 10 (2): 119–41Google Scholar
Györi, Gábor 2002. ‘Semantic change and cognition’, Cognitive Linguistics 13 (2): 123–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Christopher J., Schmidtke, Daniel and Vickers, Jamie 2013. ‘Countability in World Englishes’, World Englishes 32 (1): 122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris 1962. Phonology in Generative Grammar. Chicago, IL: WordGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1988. ‘On the language of physical science’, in Ghadessy, Mohsen (ed.), Registers of Written English: Situational Factors and Linguistic Features. London: Printer Publishers, pp. 162–78Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, Ruqaiya 1976. Cohesion in English. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R. 1996 [1993]. Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Falmer PressGoogle Scholar
Hammond, Michael 1999. The Phonology of English: A Prosodic Optimality-theoretic Approach. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Hanks, Patrick 2013. Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanna, Ralph 2011. ‘Dan Michel of Northgate and his books’, in Kelly, Henry Ansgar (ed.), Medieval Manuscripts, their Makers and Users: A Special Issue of Viator in Honor of Richard and Mary Rouse. Turnhout: Brepols, pp. 213–24Google Scholar
Harbert, Wayne 2007. The Germanic Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Härke, Heinrich 2002. ‘Kings and warriors: population and landscape from post-Roman to Norman Britain’, in Slack, Paul and Ward, Ryk (eds.), The Peopling of Britain: The Shaping of a Human Landscape. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 145–75Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne and Watson, Catherine I. 2000. ‘Does the Queen speak the Queen's English?’, Nature 408: 927–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne and Watson, Catherine I 2005. ‘Deepening or lessening the divide between diphthongs: an analysis of the Queen's annual Christmas Broadcasts’, in Hardcastle, William J. and Beck, Janet Mackenzie (eds.), A Figure of Speech: Festschrift for John Laver. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 227–61Google Scholar
Harris, Alice C. and Campbell, Lyle 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John 2004. ‘Release the captive coda: the foot as a domain of phonetic interpretation’, in Local, John, Ogden, Richard and Temple, Rosalind (eds.), Phonetic Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–29Google Scholar
Harris, John 2012. ‘The foot as a phonotactic domain: “aw” and “wa” in English’, manuscript, University College London
Hart, John 1569. An Orthographie. LondonGoogle Scholar
Haselow, Alexander 2011. Typological Changes in the Lexicon: Analytic Tendencies in English Noun Formation. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin 1999. ‘External possession in a European areal perspective’, in Payne, Doris L and Barshi, Immanuel (eds.), External Possession. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 109–35Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin and Tadmor, Uri (eds.) 2009. Loanwords in the World's Languages: A Comparative Handbook. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatcher, John and Bailey, Mark 2001. Modelling the Middle Ages: The History and Theory of England's Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar 1966. ‘Dialect, language, nation’, American Anthropologist 68: 922–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar 1982. Scandinavian Language Structures: A Comparative Historical Survey. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota PressGoogle Scholar
Haumann, Dagmar 2003. ‘The postnominal “and adjective” construction in Old English’, English Language and Linguistics 7: 5783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haumann, Dagmar 2010. ‘Adnominal adjectives in Old English’, English Language and Linguistics 14: 5381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1990 [1987]. ‘Germanic languages’, in Comrie, Bernard (ed.), The Major Languages of Western Europe. London: Routledge, pp. 5866Google Scholar
Hawkins, John 2012. ‘The drift of English toward invariable word order from a typological and Germanic perspective’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 622–32Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer 2012. ‘Analyzing the ONZE data as evidence for sound change’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 94–7Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce 1995. Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce 2009. Syllabification in English. UCLA, MS. www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/hayes/120a/HayesAmbisyllabicity.pdf
Henry, Alison 2002. ‘Variation and syntactic theory’, in Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter and Schilling, Natalie (eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 267–82Google Scholar
Henryson, Robert. Orpheus and Eurydice, Morall Fables, Sum Practysis of Medecyne and Testament of Cresseid. See Fox 1981
Henstra, Froukje 2008. ‘Social network analysis and the eighteenth-century family network: a case study of the Walpole family’, Transactions of the Philological Society 106 (1): 2970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herman, Vimala 1995. Dramatic Discourse: Dialogue as Interaction in Plays. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo (eds.) 2012. The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-BlackwellCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Schilling, Natalie 2012. ‘The application of the quantitative paradigm to historical sociolinguistics: problems with the generalizability principle’, in Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 6379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickes, George 1703–5. Linguarum vett. septentrionalium thesaurus grammatico-criticus et archæologicus, 2 vols. Oxford: E Theatro SheldonianoGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 1984. ‘Syllable onsets in Irish English’, Word 35: 6774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 1995. ‘Early contact and parallels between English and Celtic’, Vienna English Working Papers 4: 87119Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2003a. Corpus Presenter: Software for Language Analysis, with a Manual and A Corpus of Irish English as Sample Data. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John BenjaminsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2003b. ‘How do dialects get the features they have? On the process of new dialect formation’, in Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Motives for Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 213–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond (ed.) 2004. Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2007. Irish English: History and Present-day Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond (ed.) 2010. Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond (ed.) 2012a. Areal Features of the Anglophone World. Berlin/New York, NY: Mouton de GruyterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2012b. ‘Assessing the role of contact in the history of English’, in Nevalainen, Terttu, Pfenninger, Simone E. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 485–96Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2012c. ‘Early English and the Celtic hypothesis’, in Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 497507Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond 2014. ‘Vowels before /r/ in the history of English’, in Pfenninger, Simone E., Timofeeva, Olga, Gardner, Anne-Chri