Aarts, Bas. 1992. Small Clauses in English. The Nonverbal Types. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

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

Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2001. Was/were variation in non-standard British English today. English World-Wide 22, 1–22.Google Scholar

Bailey, Charles-James 1973. Variation and Linguistic Theory. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Beckner, Clay, Blythe, Richard, Bybee, Joan, Christiansen, Morten H., Croft, William, Ellis, Nick C., Holland, John, Ke, Jinyun, Larsen-Freeman, Diane & Schoenemann, Tom. 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning 59(s1), 1–26.Google Scholar

Bossomaier, Terry R. J. & Green, David G. (eds.). 2000. Complex Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chambers, J. K. 2006–2007. Geolinguistic patterns in a vast speech community. Linguistica Atlantica 27(28), 27–36.Google Scholar

Cheshire, Jenny. 1994. Standardization and the English irregular verbs. In Stein, Dieter & van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon (eds.), Towards a Standard English 1600–1800, 115–133. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Collins, Peter (ed.) 2015. Grammatical Change in English World-Wide. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Collins, Peter & Yao, Xinyue. 2012. Modals and quasi-modals in New Englishes. In Hundt & Gut 2012, 35–53.Google Scholar

Culicover, Peter. 2013. Grammar and Complexity: Language at the Intersection of Competence and Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

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

Ellegård, Alvar. 1953. The Auxiliary Do: The Establishment and Regulation of Its Use in English. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2008. The dynamics of second language emergence: Cycles of language use, language change, and language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal 92(2), 232–249.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2011. The emergence of language as a complex adaptive system. In Simpson, James (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics, 666–679. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. & Larsen-Freeman, Diane (eds.). 2009. Language as a Complex Adaptive System. Malden, MA: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Fischer, Olga & van der Wurff, Wim. 2006. Syntax. In Hogg, Richard & Denison, David (eds.), A History of the English Language, 109–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani, Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.). 2017. Changing English. Global and Local Perspectives. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gleick, James. 1987. Chaos. Making a New Science. New York: Viking.Google Scholar

Guastello, Stephen J., Koopmans, Matthijs & Pincus, David (eds.) 2009. Chaos and Complexity in Psychology. The Theory of Nonlinear Dynamic Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas. 2014. The cognitive evolution of Englishes: The role of constructions in the Dynamic Model. In Buschfeld, Sarah, Hoffmann, Thomas, Huber, Magnus & Kautzsch, Alexander (eds.), The Evolution of Englishes. The Dynamic Model and Beyond, 160–180. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Holland, John H. 2014. Complexity. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul J. 1987. Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistic Society 13, 139–157.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne & Gut, Ulrike (eds.). 2012. Mapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.). 2018. The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Johnson, Neil. 2009. Simply Complexity. A Clear Guide to Complexity Theory. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.Google Scholar

KASELL (Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics). Dec. 2013. Proceedings. Seoul: KASELL.Google Scholar

Keller, Rudi. 1994. On Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Koch, Christopher, Lange, Claudia & Leuckert, Sven. 2016. “This hair-style called as ‘duck tail’”: The ‘intrusive as’-construction in South Asian varieties of English and Learner Englishes. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 2(2), 151–176.Google Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd, Schneider, Edgar W. et al. (eds.). 2004. A Handbook of Varieties of English. 2 vols. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd & Lunkenheimer, Kerstin (eds.). 2012. The Mouton World Atlas of Variation in English. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kretzschmar, William R., Jr. 2009. The Linguistics of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kretzschmar, William R., Jr. 2015. Language and Complex Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kroch, Anthony. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1, 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Labov, William. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol. 1: Internal Factors. Cambridge, MA, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Laitinen, Mikko. 2018. Placing ELF among the varieties of English. In Deshors, Sandra C. (ed.), Modeling World Englishes: Assessing the Interplay of Emancipation and Globalization of ESL Varieties, 109–131. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Lange, Claudia. 2016. The ‘intrusive as’-construction in South Asian varieties of English. World Englishes 35(1), 133–146.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1997. Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18(2), 141–165.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2013. Complexity Theory/Dynamic systems theory. In Robinson, Peter (ed.), The Routledge Encyclopedia of Second Language Acquisition, 103–106. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diana. 2018. Complexity and ELF. In Jenkins, et al. (eds.), 51–60.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane & Cameron, Lynne. 2008. Complex Systems and Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian & Smith, Nicholas. 2009. Change in Contemporary English. A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lindblom, Björn, MacNeilage, Peter & Studdert-Kennedy, Michael. 1984. Self-organizing processes and the explanation of language universals. In Butterworth, B., Comrie, Bernard & Dahl, Östen (eds.), Explanations for Language Universals, 181–203. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2017. A glimpse of ELF. In Filppula, et al. (eds.), 223–253.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2018. Conceptualising ELF. In Jenkins et al. (eds.), 7–24.Google Scholar

Mesthrie, Rajend & Bhatt, Rakesh. 2008. World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti, Sinnemäki, Kaius & Karlsson, Fred (eds.). 2008. Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Milroy, Jim & Milroy, Lesley. 1985. Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of Linguistics 21, 339–384.Google Scholar

Milroy, Lesley. 1987. Language and Social Networks. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Milroy, Lesley & Llamas, Carmen. 2013. Social networks. In Chambers, J. K. & Schilling, Natalie (eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, 409–427. Malden, MA, Osford: Wiley-Blackwell,Google Scholar

Mobus, George E. & Kalton, Michael C.. 2015. Principles of Systems Science. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Mufwene, Salikoko S., Coupé, Christophe & Pellegrino, Francois. 2017. Complexity in Language. Developmental and Evolutionary Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mukherjee, Joybrato & Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2006. Describing verb-complementational profiles of New Englishes: A pilot study of Indian English. English World-Wide 27, 147–173Google Scholar

Newmeyer, Frederic J. & Preston, Laurel B. (eds.). 2014. Measuring Grammatical Complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2015. Descriptive adequacy of the S-curve model in diachronic studies of language change. In Sanchez-Stockhammer, Christina (ed.), Can We Predict Linguistic Change? (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 16). http://helsinki.fi/varieng/series/volumes/16/.Google Scholar

Pitzl, Marie-Luise & Osimk-Teasdale, Ruth (eds.). 2016. English as a Lingua Franca: Perspectives and Prospects. Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

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

Rohdenburg, Günter & Schlüter, Julia. 2009. One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sampson, Geoffrey, Gil, David & Trudgill, Peter (eds.). 2009. Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 1989. American Earlier Black English. Morphological and Syntactic Variables. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 1997a. Chaos theory as a model for dialect variability and change? In Thomas, Alan R. (ed.), Issues and Methods in Dialectology, 22–36. Bangor: Department of Linguistics, University of Wales.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 1997b. As as “is”. Is as “is”? In Fries, Udo et al. (eds.), From Aelfric to the New York Times. Studies in English Corpus Linguistics, 33–50. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 2011a. English around the World: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 2011b. English into Asia: From Singaporean ubiquity to Chinese learners’ features. In Curzan, Anne & Adams, Michael (eds.), Contours of English and English Language Studies: In Honor of Richard W. Bailey, 135–156. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah Grey & Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Language Contact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2017. On the relationship between the cognitive and the communal: a complex systems perspective. In Filppula, et al. (eds.), 277–310.Google Scholar

Werner, Valentin, Seoane, Elena & Suárez-Gómez, Cristina (eds.). 2016. Re-Assessing the Present Perfect. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Adelaar, Willem F. H. 1996a. Areas of multilingualism in northern South America. In Stephen A. Wurm, Peter Mühlhäusler & Darrell T. Tryon (eds.), Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia and the Americas 1345. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adelaar, Willem F. H. 1996b. The Tupí-Guaraní languages of Atlantic South America, and Línguas Gerais. In Stephen A. Wurm, Peter Mühlhäusler & Darrell T. Tryon (eds.), Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia and the Americas, 1333–1334. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Alpher, Barry & Nash, David. 1999. Lexical replacement and cognate equilibrium in Australia. Australian Journal of Linguistics 19, 5–56.Google Scholar

Andersen, Henning. 1988. Center and periphery: adoption, diffusion, and spread. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical Dialectology: Regional and Social, 39–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Bakker, Peter & Grant, Anthony P.. 1996. Interethnic communication in Canada, Alaska and adjacent areas. In Wurm, et al. (eds.), 1107–1169.Google Scholar

Blythe, Richard A. & Croft, William. 2012. S-curves and the mechanisms of propagation in language change. Language 88, 269–304.Google Scholar

Bowern, Claire, Epps, Patience, Gray, Russell, Hill, Jane, Hunley, Keith, McConvell, Patrick & Zentz, Jason. 2011. Does lateral transmission obscure inheritance in hunter-gatherer languages? PLoS ONE 6, e25195.Google Scholar

Clackson, James & Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2007. The Blackwell History of the Latin Language. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crawford, James M. 1978. The Mobilian Trade Language. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2000. Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2009. Toward a social cognitive linguistics. In Evans, Vyvyan & Pourcel, Stéphanie (eds.), New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics, 395–420. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2010. The origins of grammaticalization in the verbalization of experience. Linguistics 48, 1–48.Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 2004. The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity (Studies in Language Companion Series, 71). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Östen Dahl, Viveka Velupillai. 2013. The past tense. In Dryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available at http://wals.info/chapter/66, accessed on January 28, 2019.)Google Scholar

Donald, Leland. 1984. The slave trade on the Northwest Coast of North America. Research in Economic Anthropology 6, 121–158.Google Scholar

Drechsel, Emanuel J. 1996. Native American contact languages of the contiguous United States. In Wurm, et al. (eds.), 1213–1239.Google Scholar

Drechsel, Emanuel J. 1997. Mobilian Jargon: Linguistic and Sociohistorical Aspects of a Native American Pidgin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dutton, Tom. 1983. Birds of a feather: a pair of rare pidgins from the Gulf of Papua. In Woolford, Ellen & Washabaugh, William (eds.), The Social Context of Creolization, 77–105. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar

Dutton, Tom. 1996. Hiri trading languages. In Wurm, et al. (eds.), 233–236.Google Scholar

Foley, William. 1988. Language birth: the processes of pidginization and creolization. In Newmeyer, Frederick J. (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, vol. IV, 162–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goddard, Ives. 1997. Pidgin Delaware. In Thomason, Sarah G. (ed.), Contact Languages: A Wider Perspective, 43–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred (ed.). 2001. A Dictionary of European Anglicisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Greenhill, Simon J., Currie, Thomas E. & Gray, Russell D.. 2009. Does horizontal transmission invalidate cultural phylogenies? Proceedings of the Royal Society B 276, 2299–2307.Google Scholar

Gumperz, John J. & Wilson, Robert. 1971. Convergence and creolization: a case from the Indo-Aryan/Dravidian border. In Hymes, Dell (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, 151–167. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Harrison, Simon. 1987. Cultural efflorescence and political evolution on the Sepik River. American Ethnologist 14, 491–507.Google Scholar

Haugen, Einar. 1966a/1972. Semicommunication: the language gap in Scandinavia. Sociological Inquiry 36, 280–297. Reprinted in Dil, Anwar S., The Ecology of Language: Essays by Einar Haugen, 215–236. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Haugen, Einar. 1966b/1972. Dialect, language, nation. American Anthropologist 68, 922–935. Reprinted in Dil, Anwar S., The Ecology of Language: Essays by Einar Haugen, 237–254. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd. 1970. Status and Use of African Lingua Francas. München/New York: Weltforum Verlag/Humanities Press.Google Scholar

Holm, John. 1989. Pidgins and Creoles, Vol. II: Reference Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Holm, John. 2004. Languages in Contact: The Partial Restructuring of Vernaculars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2010. Greek: A History of the Language and Its Speakers. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hull, David L. 1988. Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hymes, Dell. 1980. Commentary. In Valdman, A. & Highfield, A. (eds.), Theoretical Orientations in Creole Studies, 389–423. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, Allen W. & Earle, Timothy. 2000. The Evolution of Human Societies: From Foraging Group to Agrarian State, 2nd ed. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Kulick, Don. 1993. Growing up monolingual in a multilingual community: how language socialization patterns are leading to language shift in Gapun (Papua New Guinea). In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Viberg, Åke (ed.), Progression and Regression in Language, 94–121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

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

Lincoln, Peter C. 1979/1980. Dual lingualism: passive bilingualism in action. Te Reo 22/23, 65–72.Google Scholar

Lodge, R. Anthony. 1993. French: From Dialect to Standard. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lupyan, Gary & Dale, Rick. 2010. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5(1), e8559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

McDowell, Paul. 2017. Political anthropology: a cross-cultural comparison. In Brown, Nina, de González, Luara Tubelle & McIlwraith, Thomas (eds.), Perspectives: An Open Invitation to Cultural Anthropology. Portland, OR: Lumen Learning. Available at www.perspectives.americananthro.org/Chapters/Political_Anthropology.pdf, accessed August 22, 2018.Google Scholar

Mufwene, Salikoko. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mufwene, Salikoko. 2005. Créole, écologie sociale, évolution linguistique. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar

Mufwene, Salikoko. 2008. Language Evolution: Contact, Competition and Change. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Mühlhäusler, Peter, Dutton, Tom, Hovdhaugen, Even, Williams, Jerry & Wurm, Stephen A.. 1996. Precolonial patterns of intercultural communication in the Pacific Islands. In Wurm, et al. (eds.), 401–437.Google Scholar

Ohala, John. 1989. Sound change is drawn from a pool of synchronic variation. In Breivik, Leiv Egil & Jahr, Ernst Håkon (eds.), Language Change: Contributions to the Study of Its Causes, 173–198. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Oram, Nigel. 1982. Pots for sago: the hiri trading network. In Dutton, Tom (ed.), The Hiri in History: Further Aspects of Long Distance Motu Trade in Central Papua, 3–33. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar

Ross, Malcolm D. 1996. Contact-induced change and the comparative method: cases from Papua New Guinea. In Durie, Mark & Ross, Malcolm D. (ed.), The Comparative Method Reviewed: Irregularity and Regularity in Language Change, 180–217. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Samarin, William J. 1982. Colonization and pidginization on the Ubangi River. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 4, 1–42.Google Scholar

Samarin, William J. 1986. Chinook Jargon and pidgin historiography. Canadian Journal of Anthropology/Revue canadienne d’anthropologie 5, 23–34.Google Scholar

Samarin, William J. 1987. Demythologizing Plains Sign Language history. International Journal of American Linguistics 53, 65–73.Google Scholar

Samarin, William J. 1988. Jargonization before Chinook Jargon. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 22, 219–238.Google Scholar

Samarin, William J. 1990/1991. The origins of Kituba and Lingala. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 12, 47–77.Google Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1996. Dynamics of linguistic contact. In Goddard, Ives (ed.), Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. XVII: Language, 117–136. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar

Taylor, Allan R. 1975. Nonverbal communications systems in native North America. Semiotica 4, 329–374.Google Scholar

Taylor, Allan R. 1981. Indian lingua francas. In Ferguson, Charles A. & Heath, Shirley Brice (eds.), Language in the USA, 175–195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

ten Thije, Jan D. & Zeevaert, Ludger (eds.). 2007. Receptive Multilingualism: Linguistic Analyses, Language Policies and Didactic Concepts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah G. & Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Language Contact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Thurston, William R. 1987. Processes of Change in the Languages of North-Eestern New Britain (Pacific Linguistics, Series B, No. 99). Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar

Thurston, William R. 1989. How exoteric languages build a lexicon: esoterogeny in West New Britain. In Harlow, R. & Hooper, R. (ed.), VICAL 1, Oceania Languages: Papers from the Fifth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 555–579. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar

Tria, Francesca, Sevedio, Vito D. P., Mufwene, Salikoko S. & Loreto, Vittorio. 2015. Modeling the emergence of contact languages. PLoS ONE. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0120771.Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic Typology: Social Determinants of Linguistic Complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter & Hannah, Jean. 1994. International English, 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Wurm, Stephen, Mühlhäusler, Peter & Tryon, Darrell T. (eds.). 1996. Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Adrián, José Antonio, Alegria, Jesus & Morais, José. 1995. Metaphonological abilities of Spanish illiterate adults. International Journal of Psychology 30, 329–353.Google Scholar

Aronoff, Mark, Meir, Irit, Padden, Carol & Sandler, Wendy. 2008. The roots of linguistic organization in a new language. Interaction Studies 9, 131–150.Google Scholar

Bakker, Dik. 2012. Three languages from America in contact with Spanish. In Sackel, Jeanette & Stolz, Thomas (eds.), Amerindiana: Neue Perspektiven auf die indigenen Sprachen Amerikas, 171–195. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar

Bakker, Dik & Hekking, Ewald. 2012. Clause combining in Otomi before and after contact with Spanish. Linguistic Discovery 10(1), 42–61.Google Scholar

Berman, Ruth A. 2007. Developing linguistic knowledge and language use across adolescence. In Hoff, Erika & Shatz, Marilyn (eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Language Development, 347–367. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar

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

Biber, Douglas. 2009. Are there linguistic consequences of literacy? Comparing the potentials of language use in speech and writing. In Olson, David R. & Torrance, Nancy (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, 75–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Hared, Mohamed. 1991. Literacy in Somali: Linguistic consequences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 12, 260–282.Google Scholar

Biemiller, Andrew. 2003. Vocabulary: Needed if more children are to read well. Reading Psychology 24, 323–335.Google Scholar

Bürki, Audrey, Spinelli, Elsa & Gaskell, Gareth. 2012. A written word is worth a thousand spoken words: The influence of spelling on spoken-word production. Journal of Memory and Language 67, 449–467.Google Scholar

Cameron-Faulkner, Thea & Noble, Claire. 2013. A comparison of book text and Child Directed Speech. First Language 33, 268–279.Google Scholar

Castro-Caldas, Alexandre, Petersson, Karl Magnus, Reis, Alexandra, Stone-Elander, Sharon & Ingvar, Martin. 1998. The illiterate brain: Learning to read and write during childhood influences the functional organization of the adult brain. Brain: A Journal of Neurology 121(6), 1053–1063.Google Scholar

Cristofaro, Sonia. 2014. Is there really a syntactic category of subordination? In Kalliokoski, Jyrki, Visapää, Laura & Sorva, Helena (eds.), Contexts of Subordination, 73–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Cunningham, Anne E. & Stanovich, Keith E.. 1997. Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology 33(6), 934.Google Scholar

Cunningham, Anne E., and Stanovich, Keith E.. 1998. What reading does for the mind. American Educator 22, 1–8.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2009. Words as constructions. In Evans, Vyvyan & Pourcel, Stéphanie (eds.), New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics, 201–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2018. Experience, aptitude and individual differences in native language ultimate attainment. Cognition 178, 222–235.Google Scholar

Daneman, Meredyth & Merikle, Philip M.. 1996. Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3, 422–433.Google Scholar

Dehaene, Stanislas, Pegado, Felipe, Braga, Lucia W., Ventura, Paulo, Filho, Gilberto Nunes, Jobert, Antoinette, Dehaene-Lambertz, Ghislaine, Kolinsky, Régine, Morais, José & Cohen, Laurent. 2010. How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science 330(6009), 1359–1364.Google Scholar

Dehaene-Lambertz, Ghislaine, Dehaene, Stanislas & Hertz-Pannier, Lucie. 2002. Functional neuroimaging of speech perception in infants. Science 298(5600), 2013–2015.Google Scholar

Deumert, Ana & Vandenbussche, Wim. 2003. Standard languages: Taxonomies and histories. In Deumert, Ana & Vandenbussche, Wim (eds.), Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Deutscher, Guy. 2000. Syntactic Change in Akkadian: The Evolution of Sentential Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Deutscher, Guy. 2010. Through the Language Glass. Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 2016. Are Some Languages Better than Others? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ehri, Linnea C. 1985. Effects of printed language acquisition on speech. In Olson, David R., Torrance, Nancy & Hildyard, Angela (eds.), Literacy, Language and Learning: The Nature and Consequences of Reading and Writing, 333–367. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Everett, Daniel L. 2005. Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã: Another look at the design features of human language. Current Anthropology 46, 621–646.Google Scholar

Everett, Daniel. 2012. Language: The Cultural Tool. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar

Foley, William A. 1986. The Papuan Languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 1991. The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew. In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Heine, Bernd (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 2, 257–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hartshorne, Joshua K., Tenenbaum, Joshua B. & Pinker, Steven. 2018. A critical period for second language acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition 177, 263–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hayes, Donald P. & Ahrens, Margaret G.. 1988. Vocabulary simplification for children: A special case of “motherese”? Journal of Child Language 15, 395–410.Google Scholar

Hirsh-Pasek, Kathy & Golinkoff, Roberta Michnick. 1999. The Origins of Grammar: Evidence from Early Language Comprehension. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hoff, Erika. 2009. Language development at an early age: Learning mechanisms and outcomes from birth to five years. Encyclopedia of Early Childhood Development. www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/textes-experts/en/622/language-development-at-an-early-age-learning-mechanisms-and-outcomes-from-birth-to-five-years.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2013.Google Scholar

Huettig, Falk, Singh, Niharika & Mishra, Ramesh K.. 2011. Language-mediated visual orienting behavior in low and high literates. Frontiers in Language Sciences 2, 285. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00285.Google Scholar

Huettig, Falk. 2015. Literacy influences cognitive abilities far beyond the mastery of written language. In van de Craats, Ineke, Kurvers, Jeanne & van Hout, Roeland (eds.), Adult Literacy, Second Language, and Cognition. LESLLA Proceedings 2014, 115–128. Nijmegen: Centre for Language Studies.Google Scholar

Hunt, Kellog W. 1977. Early blooming and late blooming syntactic structures. In Cooper, Charles L. & Lee, Odell (eds.), Evaluating Writing, 91–104. Buffalo, NY: State University of Buffalo.Google Scholar

Hurford, James R. 2012. The Origins of Grammar: Language in the Light of Evolution II, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jakimik, Jola, Cole, Roland A. & Rudnicky, Alexander I. (1985). Sound and spelling in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 24, 165–178.Google Scholar

Joseph, John Earl. 1987. Eloquence and Power: The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. London: Pinter.Google Scholar

Kalmar, Ivan. 1985. Are there really no primitive languages? In Olson, David R., Torrance, Nancy & Hildyard, Angela (eds.), Literacy, Language and Learning, 148–166. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaplan, Dafna & Berman, Ruth. 2015. Developing linguistic flexibility across the school years. First Language 35, 27–53.Google Scholar

Karlsson, Fred. 2007. Constraints on multiple center-embedding of clauses. Journal of Linguistics 43, 365–392.Google Scholar

Karlsson, Fred. 2009. Origin and maintenance of clausal embedding complexity. In Sampson, Geoffrey, Gil, David & Trudgill, Peter (eds.), Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, 192–202. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

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

Kurvers, Jeanne, Vallen, Ton & van Hout, Roeland. 2006. Discovering features of language: Metalinguistic awareness of adult illiterates. In van de Craats, Ineke, Kurvers, Jeanne & Young-Scholten, Martha (eds.), Low-Educated Second Language and Literacy Acquisition: Proceedings of the Inaugural Symposium Tilburg 2005, 69–68. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar

Lupyan, Gary & Dale, Rick A.. 2010. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5(1), e8559.Google Scholar

Martowicz, Anna. 2011. Origin and Functioning of Circumstantial Clause Linkers: A Crosslinguistic Study. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2004. Talking academic: A corpus approach to academic speech. In Aijmer, Karin (ed.), Dialogue Analysis VIII: Understanding and Misunderstanding in Dialogue, 201–217. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English Shaped by Non-Native Speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Meir, Irit, Sandler, Wendy, Padden, Carol & Aronoff, Mark. 2010. Emerging sign languages. In Marschark, Marc & Spencer, Patricia Elizabeth (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education, vol. 2, 267–280. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley. 2012. Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mishra, Ramesh K., Singh, Niharika, Pandey, Aparna & Huettig, Falk. 2012. Spoken language-mediated anticipatory eye-movements are modulated by reading ability: Evidence from Indian low and high literates. Journal of Eye Movement Research 5(1), 1–10.Google Scholar

Mithun, Marienne. 1984. How to avoid subordination. Berkeley Linguistics Society 10, 493–509.Google Scholar

Montag, Jessica L. & MacDonald, Maryellen C.. 2015. Text exposure predicts spoken production of complex sentences in 8- and 12-year-old children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144, 447–468.Google Scholar

Montrul, Silvina. 2008. Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism: Re-Examining the Age Factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Morais, José, Alegria, Jesus & Content, Alain. 1986. Literacy training and speech segmentation. Cognition 24, 45–64.Google Scholar

Morais, José, Cary, Luz, Alegria, Jesus & Bertelson, Paul. 1979. Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition 7, 415–438.Google Scholar

Nevins, Andrew, Pesetsky, David & Rodrigues, Cilene. 2009. Pirahã exceptionality: A reassessment. Language 85, 355–404.Google Scholar

Nippold, Marilyn A. 1998. Later Language Development: The School-Age and Adolescent Years. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Google Scholar

Nippold, Marilyn A., Mansfield, Tracy C. & Billow, Jesse L.. 2007. Peer conflict explanations in children, adolescents, and adults: Examining the development of complex syntax. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 16, 179–188.Google Scholar

O’Neil, Wayne. 1977. Clause adjunction in Old English. Linguistics 17, 199–211.Google Scholar

Pakulak, Eric & Neville, Helen. 2010. Proficiency differences in syntactic processing of monolingual native speakers indexed by event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22(12), 2728–2744.Google Scholar

Pattamadilok, Chotiga, Morais, José, Ventura, Paulo & Kolinsky, Régine. 2007. The locus of the orthographic consistency effect in auditory word recognition: Further evidence from French. Language and Cognitive Processes 22, 700–726.Google Scholar

Paunonen, Heikki. 2006. Vähemmistökielestä varioivaksi valtakieleksi. In Juusela, Kaisu & Nisula, Katariina (eds.), Helsinki Kieliyhteisönä, 13–99. Helsinki: Suomen kielen Ja kotimaisen kirjallisuuden laitos.Google Scholar

Perre, Laetitia, Pattamadilok, Chotiga, Montant, Marie & Ziegler, Johannes C.. 2009. Orthographic effects in spoken language: On-line activation or phonological restructuring? Brain Research 1275, 73–80.Google Scholar

Petersson, Karl Magnus, Silva, Carla, Castro-Caldas, Alexandre, Ingvar, Martin & Reis, Alexandra. 2007. Literacy: A cultural influence on functional left–right differences in the inferior parietal cortex. European Journal of Neuroscience 26, 791–799.Google Scholar

Philp, Jenefer. 2003. Constraints on “noticing the gap”: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25(1), 99–126.Google Scholar

Pinker, Steven. 1995. Language acquisition. In Gleitman, Lila R. & Liberman, Mark (eds.), An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Vol. 1: Language. 2nd ed., 135–182. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1995. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar

Read, Charles A., Zhang, Yun-Fei, Nie, Hong-Yin & Ding, Bao-Qing. 1986. The ability to manipulate speech sounds depends on knowing alphabetic writing. Cognition 24, 31–44.Google Scholar

Reis, Alexandra & Castro-Caldas, Alexandre. 1997. Illiteracy: A cause for biased cognitive development. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 3(5), 444–450.Google Scholar

Scott, Cheryl M. 1988. Spoken and written syntax. In Nippold, Marilyn A. (ed.), Later Language Development: Ages 9 through 19, 49–95. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar

Seidenberg, Mark S. & Tanenhaus, Michael K.. 1979. Orthographic effects on rhyme monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 5(6), 546–554.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca: A Complete Introduction to the Theoretical Nature and Practical Implications of English Used as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Stanovich, Keith E. & Cunningham, Anne E.. 1992. Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: The cognitive correlates of print exposure. Memory & Cognition 20, 51–68.Google Scholar

Street, James & Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2010. More individual differences in language attainment: How much do adult native speakers of English know about passives and quantifiers? Lingua 120, 2080–2094.Google Scholar

Tarone, Elaine, Bigelow, Martha & Hansen, Kit. 2007. The impact of alphabetic print literacy level on oral second language acquisition. In Faux, Nancy (ed.), Low-Educated Second Language and Literacy Acquisition: Proceedings of the Second Annual Forum, The Literacy Institute at Virginia Commonwealth University, 2006, 99–122. Richmond, Virginia: The Literacy Institute.Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2015. Societies of intimates and linguistic complexity. In De Busser, Rik & LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), Language Structure and Environment: Social, Cultural, and Natural Factors, 133–147. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Wray, Alison & Grace, George W.. 2007. The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua 117, 543–578.Google Scholar

Ziegler, Johannes C., Petrova, Ana & Fernand, Ludovic. 2008. Feedback consistency effects in visual and auditory word recognition: Where do we stand after more than a decade? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 34, 643–661.Google Scholar

Aijmer, Karin, Altenberg, Bengt & Johansson, Stig (eds.) 1996. Languages in Contrast. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar

Altenberg, Bengt & Granger, Sylviane. 2002. The grammatical and lexical patterning of make in native and non-native student writing. Applied Linguistics 22(2), 173–189.Google Scholar

Baker, Mona. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Baker, Mona, Francis, Gill & Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, 233–250. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Becher, Victor. 2010. Abandoning the notion of ‘translation-inherent’ explicitation. Against a dogma of translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures 11(1), 1–28.Google Scholar

Bestgen, Yves, Granger, Sylviane & Thewissen, Jennifer. 2012. Error patterns and automatic L1 identification. In Jarvis, Scott & Crossley, Scott A. (eds.), Approaching Language Transfer through Text Classification, 127–153. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2006. University Language. A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2009. Are there linguistic consequences of literacy? Comparing the potentials of language use in speech and writing. In Olson, David R. & Torrance, Nancy (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, 75–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany. 2010. Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 1(19), 2–20.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Edward, Finegan E. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Blommaert, Jan & Rampton, Ben. 2011. Language and superdiversity: a position paper. Available at www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/education/research/Research-Centres/ldc/publications/workingpapers/abstracts/WP070-Language-and-superdiversity-a-position-paper-.aspx.Google Scholar

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1986. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In House, Juliane & Blum-Kulka, Shoshana (eds.), Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, 17–35. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

Canagarajah, A. Suresh. 2013. Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. New York and Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Carey, Ray. 2013. On the other side: Formulaic organizing chunks in spoken and written academic ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 2(2), 207–228.Google Scholar

Chambers, John K. 2009. Sociolinguistic Theory. Revised ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Chesterman, Andrew. 2004. Beyond the particular. In Mauranen, & Kujamäki, (eds.), 33–49.Google Scholar

Collins COBUILD English Dictionary. 1995. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian. 1991. The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second Language Research 7(2), 103–117.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian (ed.). 2002. Portraits of the L2 User. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian. 2003. Introduction: The changing L1 in the L2 user’s mind. In Cook, Vivian (ed.), Effects of the Second Language on the First, 1–18. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian (ed.). 2003b. Effects of the Second Language on the First. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian & Bassetti, Benedetta. 2011. Relating language and cognition: The second language user. In Cook, Vivian & Bassetti, Benedetta (eds.), Language and Bilingual Cognition, 143–190. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Selting, Margaret. 2018. Interactional Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Crossley, Scott A., Salsbury, Tom & McNamara, Danielle S.. 2015. Assessing lexical proficiency using analytical ratings: A case for collocation accuracy. Applied Linguistics 36(5), 570–590.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2004. Language, Mind and Brain. Some Psychological and Neurological Constraints on Theories of Grammar. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Djikstra, Ton & Van Heuven, Walter J. B.. 2002. The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: from identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 5(3), 51–66.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick. 2007. Cognitive perspectives on SLA: The associative-cognitive CREED AILA Review 19(1), 100–121.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick. 2017. Chunking in language usage, learning and change: I don’t know. In Hundt, Marianne, Sandra Mollin & Simone Pfenninger (eds.), The Changing English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Eskola, Sari. 2002. Syntetisoivat rakenteet käännössuomessa. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar

Eskola, Sari. 2004. Untypical frequencies in translated language. In Mauranen, Anna & Pekka Kujamäki (eds.) 2004. Translation universals – Do they exist? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 83–99.Google Scholar

Ferraresi, Adriano & Bernardini, Silvia. 2019. Lexical simplification in English and Italian Eurolects: (con/di)vergences. Presentation at the AIA conference, 5–7 September 2019, Padova, Italy.Google Scholar

Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani, Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.) 2017. Changing English: Global and Local Perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Firth, Alan & Wagner, Johannes. 1997. On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal 81, 285–300.Google Scholar

Firth, John R. 1957. General linguistics and descriptive grammar. In Firth, John Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951, 216–228. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Garcia, Ofelia & Wei, Li. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Gellerstam, Martin. 1996. Translation as a source for cross-linguistic studies. In Aijmer, , Altenberg, & Johansson, (eds.), 53–62.Google Scholar

Giles, Howard. 1973. Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics 33, 27–42.Google Scholar

Gilner, Leah. 2016. Dominant vocabulary in ELF interactions. JELF 5(1), 27–51.Google Scholar

Gilner, Leah & Morales, Franc. 2011. The ICE-CORE word list: The lexical foundation of 7 varieties of English. Asian Englishes 14(1), 4–21.Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2008. Combining contrastive and interlanguage analysis to apprehend transfer: Detection, explanation, evaluation. In Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, Papp, Szilivia & Diez-Bedmar, Maria Belén (eds.), Linking Up Contrastive and Learner Corpus Research, 3–33. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Granger, Sylviane. 2011. From EFL to ESL: Evidence from the International Corpus of Learner English. In Mukherjee, Joybrato & Hundt, Marianne (eds.), Exploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes, 55–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane, Hung, Joseph & Petch-Tyson, Stephanie (eds.). 2002. Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane & Meunier, Fanny (eds.). 2008. Phraseology. An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Grosjean, François. 2008. Studying Bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hari, Riitta, Sams, Mikko & Nummenmaa, Lauri. 2016. Attending to and neglecting people: bridging neuroscience, psychology and sociology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 371: 20150365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0365.Google Scholar

Hasselgård, Hilde & Johansson, Stig. 2011. Learner corpora and contrastive interlanguage analysis. In Meunier, Fanny, De Cock, Sylviane, Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Paquot, Magali (eds.), A Taste for Corpora. A Tribute to Professor Sylviane Granger, 33–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. & Filipović, Luna. 2012. Criterial Features in L2 English: Specifying the Reference Levels of the Common European Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hoey, Michael. 2005. Lexical Priming. A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

House, Juliane. 2011. Translation and bilingual cognition. In Cook, Vivian & Bassetti, Benedetta (eds.), Language and Bilingual Cognition, 519–527. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne, Mollin, Sandra & Pfenninger, Simone (eds.) 2017. The Changing English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2000. Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Hynninen, Niina. 2016. Language Regulation in English as a Lingua Franca. Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Jantunen, Jarmo. 2004. Synonymia ja käännössuomi. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar

Jarvis, Scott & Pavlenko, Aneta. 2007. Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2000. The Phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2015. Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a lingua franca. Englishes in Practice 2(3), 49–85.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.). 2018. The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Käännössuomen korpus (Corpus of Translated Finnish). Käännössuomen sähköinen tutkimusaineisto. Käännössuomi ja kääntämisen universaalit –hankkeessa koostanut Joensuun yliopiston kansainvälisen viestinnän laitos 1997–. Availability: Anna Mauranen, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar

Kujamäki, Pekka. 2000. Seitsemän veljen saksannokset ja romaanin saksankielinen vastaanotto – kaksi eri maailmaako? In Paloposki, Outi & Makkonen-Craig, Henna (eds.), Käännöskirjallisuus ja sen kritiikki, 199–227. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.Google Scholar

Kujamäki, Pekka. 2004. What happens to ‘unique items’ in learners’ translations? ‘Theories’ and ‘concepts’ as a challenge for novices’ views on ‘good translation’. In Mauranen, & Kujamäki, (eds.), 187–204.Google Scholar

Laitinen, Mikko. 2016. Ongoing changes in English modals: On the developments in ELF. In Timofeeva, Olga, Gardner, Anne-Christine, Honkapohja, Alpo & Chevalier, Sarah (eds.), New Approaches to English Linguistics: Building Bridges, 175–196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Laitinen, Mikko. 2018. Placing ELF among the varieties of English. In Deshors, Sandra C. (ed.), Modeling World Englishes: Assessing the Interplay of Emancipation and Globalization of ESL Varieties, 109–131. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Lanstyák, Istvan & Heltai, Pal. 2012. Universals in language contact and translation. Across Languages and Cultures 13(1), 99–121. doi.org/10.1556/Acr.13.2012.1.6.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2018. Complexity and ELF. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will and Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, 51–60. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Laviosa-Braithwaite, Sara. 1996. The English Comparable Corpus (ECC): A Resource and a Methodology for the Empirical Study of Translation, unpublished PhD thesis. Manchester: University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology.Google Scholar

LePage, Robert B. & Tabouret-Keller, Andrée. 1985. Acts of Identity: Creole-Based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Li, Wei. 2018. Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39(1), 9–30.Google Scholar

Low, Ee-Ling. 2016. A features-based description of phonological patterns in English as a lingua franca in Asia: Implications for standards and norms. JELF 5(2), 309–332.Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian. 2005. A unified model of language acquisition. In Kroll, Judith & De Groot, Annette M.B. (eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, 49–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 1998. Käännössuomi ja kääntämisen universaalit: tutkimus korpusaineistolla. [Translated Finnish and Translation Universals: A Corpus Study], project research plan, MS, Savonlinna School of Translation Studies.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 1999. Will ‘Translationese’ ruin a contrastive study? Languages in Contrast 2(2), 161–185.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2000. Strange strings translated language: A study on corpora. In Olohan, Maeve (ed.), Intercultural Faultlines. Research Models in Translation Studies 1: Textual and Cognitive Aspects, 119–141. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2004a. Corpora, universals, and interference. In Mauranen, & Kujamäki, (eds.), 65–82.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2004b. Talking academic: A corpus approach to academic speech. In Aijmer, Karin (ed.), Dialogue Analysis VIII: Understanding and Misunderstanding in Dialogue, 201–217. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2006. Signalling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua franca communication. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 177, 123–150.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2007. Hybrid voices: English as the lingua franca of academics. In Fløttum, Kjersti, Dahl, Trine & Kinn, Torodd (eds.), Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse, 244–259. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2013. Lingua franca discourse in academic contexts: shaped by complexity. In Flowerdew, John (ed.), Discourse in Context, 225–246. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2017. A glimpse of ELF. In Filppula, et al. (eds.), 223–253.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2018. Second language acquisition, World Englishes, and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). World Englishes 37, 106–119.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2019. Academically speaking. English as the lingua franca. In Hyland, Ken & Wong, Lillian L. C. (eds.), Specialised English: New Directions in ESP and EAP Research and Practice, 9–21. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna & Jantunen, Jarmo (eds.). 2005. Käännössuomeksi. Tutkimuksia suomennosten kielestä. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna & Kujamäki, Pekka (eds.). 2004. Translation Universals – Do They Exist?. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna & Tiittula, Liisa. 2005. MINÄ käännössuomessa ja supisuomessa. In Mauranen, & Jantunen, (eds.), 35–70.Google Scholar

Meriläinen, Lea, Paulasto, Heli & Rautionaho, Paula. 2017. Extended uses of the progressive form in Inner, Outer and Expanding Circle Englishes. In Filppula, et al. (eds.), 191–221.Google Scholar

Mesthrie, Rajend & Bhatt, Rakesh. 2008. World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Milroy, Jim & Milroy, Lesley. 1985. Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of Linguistics 21, 339–384.Google Scholar

Nattinger, James R. & DeCarrico, Jeannette S.. 1992. Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nesselhauf, Nadja. 2005. Collocations in a Learner Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Sampo. 2005. Köyhtyykö kieli käännettäessä? Mitä taajuuslistat kertovat suomennosten sanastosta. In Mauranen, & Jantunen, (eds.), 139-162.Google Scholar

Nitschke, Sanjo, Kidd, Evan & Serratrice, Ludovica. 2010. First language transfer and long-term structural priming in comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(1), 94–114.Google Scholar

Odlin, Terence. 2003. Cross-linguistic influence. In Doughty, Catherine J. & Long, Michael H. (eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 436–486. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Olohan, Maeve & Baker, Mona. 2000. Reporting THAT in translated English. Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures 1(2), 141–158.Google Scholar

Ortega, Lourdes. 2009. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar

Øverås, Linn. 1998. In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation. Meta 43, 571–588.Google Scholar

Paradis, Michel. 2004. A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Pavlenko, Aneta. 2014. The Bilingual Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pawley, Andrew & Syder, Frances H.. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, Jack C. & Schmidt, Richard W. (eds.), Language and Communication, 191–225. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Pickering, Martin J. & Garrod, Simon. 2004. Towards a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 27(2), 169–225.Google Scholar

Pickering, Martin J. & Garrod, Simon. 2017. Priming and language change. In Hundt, et al. (eds.), 173–190.Google Scholar

Pitzl, Marie-Luise. 2010. English as a Lingua Franca in International Business: Resolving Miscommunication and Reaching Shared Understanding. Saarbrücken: VDM.Google Scholar

Ranta, Elina. 2006. The ‘attractive’ progressive – why use the -ing form in English as a Lingua Franca? Nordic Journal of English Studies 5(2), 95–116.Google Scholar

Ranta, Elina. 2013. Universals in a Universal Language? Exploring Verb-Syntactic Features in English as a Lingua Franca, PhD thesis. University of Tampere.Google Scholar

Renouf, Antoinette & Sinclair, John McH.. 1991. Collocational frameworks in English. In Aijmer, Karin & Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, 128–143. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Ringbom, Håkan. 1992. On L1 transfer in L2 comprehension and production. Language Learning 42, 85–112.Google Scholar

Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel & Jefferson, Gail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language (50), 696–735.Google Scholar

Sajavaara, Kari. 1996. New challenges for contrastive linguistics. In Aijmer, , Altenberg, & Johansson, (eds.), 7–36.Google Scholar

Schmid, Monika. 2019. When is a bilingual an attriter? – Bilingualism as a two-way street. Presentation at the 5th International Conference of Applied Linguistics in Lithuania, 26–28 September 2019, Vilnius University, Lithuania.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 1997. Chaos theory as a model for dialect variability and change? In Thomas, Alan R. (ed.), Issues and Methods in Dialectology, 22–36. Bangor: Department of Linguistics, University of Wales.Google Scholar

Daniel, Schreier & Hundt, Marianne (eds.). 2013. English as a Contact Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2004. Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, 209–239.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Silva-Corvalan, Carmen. 1998. On borrowing as a mechanism of syntactic change. In Schwegler, Armin, Tranel, Bernard & Etcxebarria, Myriam Uribe- (eds.), Romance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives, 225–246. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sharwood Smith, Michael & Truscott, John. 2014. The Multilingual Mind: A Modular Processing Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1996. The search for units of meaning. Textus 9(1), 75–106. Reprinted in Sinclair, John McH. 2004. Trust the Text, 24–48. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Suviniitty, Jaana. 2012. Lectures in English as a Lingua Franca: Interactional Features, unpublished doctoral dissertation. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. HELDA E-thesis. [Online]. Available from http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-10-8540-6.Google Scholar

Swales, John M. & Burke, Amy. 2003. ‘It’s really fascinating work’: Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In Meyer, Charles & Leistyna, Pepi (eds.), Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Use, 1–18. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Teubert, Wolfgang. 1996. Comparable or parallel corpora? International Journal of Lexicography 9(3), 238–264.Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language Contact. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah G. & Kaufman, Thomas. 1988. Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 2004. Unique items – over-or under-represented in translated language?. In Mauranen, & Kujamäki, (eds.), 207–220.Google Scholar

Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 2005. Häviävätkö uniikkiainekset käännössuomesta?. In Mauranen, & Jantunen, (eds.), 123–137.Google Scholar

Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Trosborg, Anna. 1997. Translating hybrid political texts. In Trosborg, Anna (ed.), Analysing Professional Genres, 145–158. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Van Assche, Ewa, Wouter, Duyck & Hartsuiker, Robert. J.. 2012: Bilingual word recognition in a sentence context. Frontiers in Psychology 3, 174. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00174.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2017. On the relationship between the cognitive and the communal: a complex systems perspective. In Filppula, et al. (eds.), 277–310.Google Scholar

Wang, Yin. 2016. The Idiom Principle and L1 Influence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Weinreich, Uriel. 1953. Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York: Linguistic Circle. Reprinted: 1963. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Winford, Donald. 2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Zipf, George K.. 1935. The Psychobiology of Language. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar

ELFA. 2008. The Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings. Director: Anna Mauranen. www.helsinki.fi/elfa/elfacorpus (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

FECC. Finnish-English Contrastive Corpus. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar

Simpson, R. C., Briggs, S. L., Ovens, J. & Swales, J. M. 2002. The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/micase/ (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

VOICE. 2013. The Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (version POS XML 2.0). Director: Barbara Seidlhofer. www.univie.ac.at/voice/page/download_voice_xml (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

A Standard Corpus of Present-Day Edited American English, for use with Digital Computers (Brown). 1964, 1971, 1979. Compiled by Francis, W. N. and Kučera, H.. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.Google Scholar

ELFA. 2008. The Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings. Director: Anna Mauranen. www.helsinki.fi/elfa/elfacorpus (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

FECC. Finnish-English Contrastive Corpus. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar

Simpson, R. C., Briggs, S. L., Ovens, J. & Swales, J. M. 2002. The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/micase/ (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

VOICE. 2013. The Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (version POS XML 2.0). Director: Barbara Seidlhofer. www.univie.ac.at/voice/page/download_voice_xml (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

A Standard Corpus of Present-Day Edited American English, for use with Digital Computers (Brown). 1964, 1971, 1979. Compiled by Francis, W. N. and Kučera, H.. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.Google Scholar

ELFA. 2008. The Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings. Director: Anna Mauranen. www.helsinki.fi/elfa/elfacorpus (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

FECC. Finnish-English Contrastive Corpus. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar

Simpson, R. C., Briggs, S. L., Ovens, J. & Swales, J. M. 2002. The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/micase/ (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

VOICE. 2013. The Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (version POS XML 2.0). Director: Barbara Seidlhofer. www.univie.ac.at/voice/page/download_voice_xml (25 February 2013).Google Scholar

A Standard Corpus of Present-Day Edited American English, for use with Digital Computers (Brown). 1964, 1971, 1979. Compiled by Francis, W. N. and Kučera, H.. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University.Google Scholar

Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2016. Language between Description and Prescription: Verbs and Verb Categories in Nineteenth-Century Grammars of English. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bailey, Guy, Maynor, Natalie & Cukor-Avila, Patricia. 1989. Variation in subject–verb concord in Early Modern English. Language Variation and Change 1(3), 285–300.Google Scholar

Barber, Charles. 1997. Early Modern English. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Britton, Derek. 2000. Henry Machyn, Axel Wijk and the case of the wrong Riding: The south-west Yorkshire character of the language of Henry Machyn’s diary. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 101(4), 571–596.Google Scholar

Buchstaller, Isabelle, Corrigan, Karen P., Holmberg, Anders, Honeybone, Patrick & Maguire, Warren. 2013. T-to-R and the Northern Subject Rule: Questionnaire-based spatial, social and structural linguistics. English Language and Linguistics 17(1), 85–128.Google Scholar

Bullokar, William. 1586. William Bullokarz Pamphlet for Grammar. London: Edmund Bollifant.Google Scholar

Campbell, Gordon. 2004. Gil [Gill], Alexander, the elder. In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/10729.Google Scholar

Cole, Marcelle. 2019. Subject and adjacency effects in the Old Northumbrian gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. English Language and Linguistics 23(1), 131–154. doi: 10.1017/S1360674317000338.Google Scholar

Danielsson, Bror. 1955, 1963. John Hart’s Works on English Orthography and Pronunciation (1551, 1569, 1570), Part 1, Biographical and Bibliographical Introductions – Texts and Index Verborum; Part 2, Phonology. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar

Danielsson, Bror & Gabrielson, Arvid (eds.). 1972. Alexander Gill’s Logonomia Anglica (1619). 2 vols. (Stockholm Studies in English 26, 27). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar

Dobson, Eric J. 1957. English Pronunciation 1500–1700. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Ferguson, Charles. 1996. Variation and drift: Loss of agreement in Germanic. In Huebner, T. (ed.), Sociolinguistic Perspectives: Papers on Language in Society, 1959–1994, 241–260. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fox, Adam. 2003. Oral and Literate Culture in England, 1500–1700. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Gil, Alexander. 1619. Logonomia Anglica. London: J. Beale.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred. 1991. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hart, John. 1551. The Opening of the Unreasonable Writing of Our Inglish Toung, ed. by Danielsson, Bror (1963). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar

Hart, John. 1569. An orthographie. London: W. Serres.Google Scholar

Hart, John. 1570. Methode or Comfortable Beginning for All Vnlearned. London: Henrie Denham.Google Scholar

Hodges, Richard. 1643. A Special Help to Orthographie: Or, The True-vvriting of English. London: Richard Cotes.Google Scholar

Hodges, Richard. 1644. The English primrose. London: Richard Cotes.Google Scholar

Hodges, Richard E. 2004. Hodges, Richard. In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/65660.Google Scholar

Holmqvist, Erik. 1922. On the History of the English Present Inflections, Particularly ‑th and ‑s. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. 2000. Rats, bats, sparrows and dogs: biology, linguistics and the nature of Standard English. In Wright, Laura (ed.), The Development of Standard English, 1300–1800: Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, 46–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hynninen, Niina & Solin, Anna. 2017. Language norms in ELF. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, 267–278. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2017. The future of English as a lingua franca? In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, 594–605. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer, Cogo, Alessia & Dewey, Martin. 2011. Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching 44(3), 281–315. doi: 10.1017/S0261444811000115.Google Scholar

Klemola, Juhani. 2000. The origins of the Northern Subject Rule: A case of early contact? In Tristram, Hildegard L. C. (ed.), The Celtic Englishes II, 329–346. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd & Lunkenheimer, Kerstin (eds.). 2013. The Electronic World Atlas of Varieties of English. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://ewave-atlas.org (Accessed 20 February 2019).Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja. 1993. Third-person present singular verb inflection in early British and American English. Language Variation and Change 5, 113–139.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1969. Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language 45(4), 715–762.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1977. On the use of the present to explain the past. In Makkai, Adam, Makkai, Valerie Becker & Heilmann, Luigi (eds.), Linguistics at the Crossroads, 226–261. Lake Bluff, IL: Jupiter Press.Google Scholar

Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2), 344–387.Google Scholar

Leithead, Howard. 2009. Cromwell, Thomas, Earl of Essex. In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/6769.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2017. Conceptualising ELF. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, 7–24. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

McIntosh, Angus, Samuels, M. L. & Benskin, Michael. 1986. A Linguistic Stlas of Late Mediaeval English. Vol. I. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar

Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley. 1999. Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English. 3rd ed., repr. 2012. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mortimer, Ian. 2008. Machyn [Machin], Henry. In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/17531.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 1996. Gender difference. In Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language History: Studies Based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence, 77–91. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2003. English. In Deumert, Ana & Vandenbussche, Wim (eds.), Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present (Impact: Studies in Language and Society 18), 127–156. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2006. An Introduction to Early Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2014. Norms and usage in seventeenth-century English. In Rutten, Gijsbert, Vosters, Rik & Vandenbussche, Wim (eds.), Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective, 103–128. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2015. What are historical sociolinguistics? Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 1(2), 243–269. doi: 10.1515/jhsl-2015-0014.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2018. Going to completion: The diffusion of verbal -s. In Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna & Säily, Tanja (eds.), Patterns of Change in 18th-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach (Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 8). Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2000a. The changing role of London on the linguistic map of Tudor and Stuart England. In Kastovsky, Dieter & Mettinger, Arthur (eds.), The History of English in a Social Context: A Contribution to Historical Sociolinguistics, 279–337. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2000b. The third-person singular -(e)s and -(e)th revisited: The morphophonemic hypothesis. In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane & Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words: Structure, Meaning, Function. A Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky (Trends in Linguistics 130), 235–248. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2017. Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu, Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena & Trudgill, Peter. 2001. Chapters in the social history of East Anglian English: The case of the third-person singular. In Fisiak, Jacek & Trudgill, Peter (eds.), East Anglian English, 187–204. Cambridge: Boydell and Brewer.Google Scholar

Pietsch, Lukas. 2005. Variable Grammars: Verbal Agreement in Northern Dialects of English. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar

Power, M. J. 1985. John Stow and his London. Journal of Historical Geography 11(1), 1–20.Google Scholar

Puttenham, George. 1589. The arte of English poesie contriued into three bookes: The first of poets and poesie, the second of proportion, the third of ornament. London: Printed by Richard Field. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Digital Library Production Service 2011 April (TCP phase 2).Google Scholar

Rappaport, Steve. 1989. Worlds within Worlds: Structures of Life in Sixteenth-Century London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1996. Apparent time. In Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language History: Studies Based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence, 93–109. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Salmon, Vivian. 2004a. Bullokar, William. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/3926.Google Scholar

Salmon, Vivian. 2004b. Hart, John. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/12482.Google Scholar

Schendl, Herbert. 1996. The 3rd plural present indicative in Early Modern English: Variation and linguistic contact. In Britton, Derek (ed.), English Historical Linguistics, 1994: Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, 143–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schendl, Herbert. 2000. The third person present plural in Shakespeare’s First Folio: A case of interaction of morphology and syntax? In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane & Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words: Structure, Meaning, Function. A Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky (Trends in Linguistics 130), 263–276. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Schwarz-Stiglbauer, Margit. 2013. Whose language is it anyway?. Scilog: Culture and Society 4(13). https://scilog.fwf.ac.at/en/humanities-and-social-sciences/728/whose-language-is-it-anyway (Accessed 20 February 2019).Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2017. Standard English and the dynamics of ELF variation. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), 85–100. The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 2003. Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language and Communication 23(3), 193–229.Google Scholar

Smith, Jeremy. 1996. An Historical Study of English. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Strang, Barbara M. H. 1970. A History of English. London & New York: Methuen.Google Scholar

Taylor, C. James (ed.). 2018. Founding Families: Digital Editions of the Papers of the Winthrops and the Adamses. Vol. 10. Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society. www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/volume/ADMS-06-10 (Accessed 21 January 2019).Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2009. Vernacular universals and the sociolinguistic typology of English dialects. In Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Paulasto, Heli (ed.), Vernacular Universals and Language Contact, 304–322. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Walker, Terry. 2017. ‘he saith y^t he thinkes y^t’: Linguistic factors influencing third person singular present tense verb inflection in Early Modern English depositions. Studia Neophilologica 89(1), 133–146. doi: 10.1080/00393274.2016.1190298.Google Scholar

Widdowson, Henry. 2017. Historical perspectives on ELF. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca, 101–112. Abingdon, UK & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wright, Joseph. 1898–1905. The English Dialect Dictionary. 6 vols. Oxford: Henry Frowde.Google Scholar

Wright, Laura. 2002. Third-person plural present tense markers in London prisoners’ depositions, 1562–1623. American Speech 77(3), 242–263.Google Scholar

ACE. 2014. The Asian Corpus of English. Director: Andy Kirkpatrick; researchers: Wang Lixun, John Patkin, Sophiann Subhan. http://corpus.ied.edu.hk/ace/.Google Scholar

Airey, John, Lauridsen, Karen M., Räsänen, Anne, Salö, Linus & Schwach, Vera. 2017. The expansion of English-medium instruction in the Nordic countries: Can top-down university language policies encourage bottom-up disciplinary literacy goals? Higher Education 73(4), 561–576.Google Scholar

Altbach, Philip G., Reisberg, Liz & Rumbley, Laura E.. 2009. Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001831/183168e.pdf (June 3, 2017).Google Scholar

Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar

Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2014. Mediatization and sociolinguistic change: Key concepts, research traditions, open issues. In Androutsopoulos, Jannis (ed.), Mediatization and Sociolinguistic Change, 3–48. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Beck, Ulrich. 2000. What Is Globalization? Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Bull, Tove. 2004. Dagens og gårsdagens akademiske lingua franca. Eit historisk tilbakeblikk og eit globalt utsyn. In Simonsen, Dag F. (ed.), Språk i kunnskapssamfunnet. Engelsk – elitenes nye latin?, 35–45. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.Google Scholar

Cameron, Deborah. 2012. Verbal Hygiene. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Chambers, J. K. & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.). 2013. The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. 2nd ed. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Cogo, Alessia & Dewey, Martin. 2012. Analysing English as a Lingua Franca: A Corpus-Driven Investigation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Cohen, Stanley. 1987. Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockers. 2nd ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Coupland, Nikolas. 2001. Stylization, authenticity and TV news review. Discourse Studies 3(4), 413–442.Google Scholar

Coupland, Nikolas. 2007. Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Coupland, Nikolas. 2009. Dialects, standards and social change. In Maegaard, Marie, Gregersen, Frans, Quist, Pia & Normann Jørgensen, Jens (eds.), Language Attitudes, Standardization, and Language Change, 27–49. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar

Coupland, Nikolas. 2010a. Language, ideology, media and social change. In Junod, Karen & Maillât, Didier (eds.), Performing the Self (SPELL: Swiss Papers in English Language and Literature 24), 127–152. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

Coupland, Nikolas. 2010b. Introduction: Sociolinguistics in the global era. In Coupland, Nikolas (ed.), The Handbook of Language and Globalization, 1–27. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar