Aarts, Flor and Aarts, Bas. 2002. ‘Relative whom: “a mischief-maker”.’ In: Fischer, Andreas, Tottie, Gunnel and Lehmann, Hans-Martin (eds.). Text Types and Corpora. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 123–130.
Aarts, Jan. 1991. ‘Intuition-based and observation-based grammars.’ In: Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.). English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik. London and New York: Longman, pp. 44–62.
Aarts, Jan and Meijs, Willem (eds.). 1984. Corpus Linguistics. Recent Developments in the Use of Computer Corpora in English Language Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Adamczewski, Henri. 1982. Grammaire linguistique de l'anglais. Paris: Armand Colin.
Aitchison, Jean. 1991. Language Change: Progress or Decay?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Akimoto, Minoji. 1989. A Study of Verbo-nominal Structures in English. Tokyo: Shinozaki Shorin.
Algeo, John. 1992. ‘British and American mandative constructions.’ In: Blank, Claudia (ed.). Language and Civilization: A Concerted Profusion of Essays and Studies in Honor of Otto Hietsch. Vol. II. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 599–617.
Algeo, John. 1995. ‘Having a look at the expanded predicate.’ In: Aarts, Bas and Meyer, Charles F. (eds.). The Verb in Contemporary English: Theory and Description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 203–217.
Allerton, David J. 2002. Stretched Verb Constructions in English (Routledge Studies in Germanic Linguistics 7). London: Routledge.
Altenberg, Bengt. 1982. The Genitive v. the of Construction: A Study of Syntactic Variation in 17th Century English (Lund Studies in English 62). Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Altenberg, Bengt. 1991. ‘A bibliography of publications relating to English computer corpora.’ In: Johansson and Stenström, pp. 355–396.
Anderson, John M. 2001. ‘Modals, subjunctives, and (non-)finiteness.’ English Language and Linguistics 5(1), 159–166.
Arnaud, Réné. 2002. ‘Letter writers of the Romantic Age and the modernization of English (A quantitative historical survey of the progressive).’ http://web.univ-pau.fr/saes/pb/bibliographies/A/arnaud/romanticletterwriters.pdf [accessed 8 December 2007].
Ashley, Mike. 2000. The Time Machines: The Story of the Science-Fiction Pulp Magazine from the Beginning to 1950. The History of the Science-Fiction Magazine, Vol. 1. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
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. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 33–53.
Axelsson, Margareta Westergren. 1998. Contraction in British Newspapers in the Late 20th Century. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Bailey, Richard W. 1996. Nineteenth-Century English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Barber, Charles. 1964. Linguistic Change in Present-Day English. Edinburgh and London: Oliver and Boyd.
Barbieri, Federica. 2005. ‘Quotative use in American English.’ Journal of English Linguistics 33(2), 222–256.
Barlow, Michael. 2003. Concordancing and Corpus Analysis Using MP 2.2. Houston, TX: Athelstan.
Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English Change: An Introduction to the Study of Linguistic Change in Standard Englishes in the Twentieth Century. London: Longman.
Bell, Allan. 1984. ‘Language style as audience design.’ Language in Society 13(2), 145–204.
Bergenholtz, Henning and Schaeder, Burkhard (eds.). 1979. Empirische Textwissenschaft: Aufbau und Auswertung von Text-Corpora. Königstein: Scriptor.
Berglund, Ylva. 1997. ‘Future in Present-day English: Corpus-based evidence on the rivalry of expressions.’ ICAME Journal 21, 7–20.
Berglund, Ylva. 2000. ‘Gonna and going to in the spoken component of the British National Corpus.’ In: Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne (eds.). Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 35–49.
Bertinetto, Pier Marco. 2000. ‘The progressive in Romance, as compared with English.’ In: Dahl, Östen (ed.). Tense and Aspect in the Language of Europe. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 559–604.
Bevier, Thyra Jane. 1931. ‘American use of the subjunctive.’ American Speech 6(3), 207–215.
Biber, Douglas 1987. ‘A textual comparison of British and American writing.’ American Speech 62(2), 99–119.
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, Douglas. 1993. ‘Representativeness in corpus design.’ Literary and Linguistic Computing 8(4), 243–257.
Biber, Douglas. 2001. ‘Dimensions of variation in 18th century registers.’ In: Diller, Hans-Jürgen and Görlach, Manfred (eds.). Towards a History of English as a History of Genres. Heidelberg: C. Winter [reprinted in: Conrad and Biber (eds.), pp. 201–214].
Biber, Douglas. 2003a. ‘Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: The competing demands of popularization vs. economy.’ In: Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M. (eds.). New Media Language. London: Routledge, pp. 169–181.
Biber, Douglas. 2003b. ‘Variation among university spoken and written registers: A new multi-dimensional analysis.’ In: Leistyna, Pepi and Meyer, Charles F. (eds.). Corpus Analysis. Language Structure and Language Use. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 47–70.
Biber, Douglas. 2004. ‘Modal use across registers and time.’ In: Curzan, Anne and Emmons, Kimberly (eds.). Studies in the History of the English Language II. Unfolding Conversations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 189–216.
Biber, Douglas and Clark, Victoria. 2002. ‘Historical shifts in modification patterns with complex noun phrase structures.’ In: Fanego, Teresa, López-Couso, María and Pérez-Guerra, Javier (eds.). English Historical Morphology. Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September, 2000. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 43–66.
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan and Reppen, Randi. 1998. Corpus Linguistics. Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 1989. ‘Drift and evolution of English style: A history of three genres.’ Language 65(3), 487–517.
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 1997. ‘Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English.’ In: Nevalainen, Terttu and Kahlas-Tarkka, Lena (eds.). To Explain the Present. Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, pp. 253–275.
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Blake, Norman. 1996. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Blyth, Carl, Recktenwald, Sigrid and Wang, Jenny. 1990. ‘“I'm like, ‘Say what!’.” A new quotative in American narrative discourse.’American Speech 65(3), 215–217.
Bodine, Anne. 1975. ‘Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: Singular “they,” sex-indefinite “he,” and “he or she”.’ Language in Society 4(2), 129–146.
Bolinger, Dwight. 1980. ‘Wanna and the gradience of auxiliaries.’ In: Brettschneider, Gunter and Lehmann, Christian (eds.). Wege zur Universalienforschung. Sprachwissenschaftliche Beiträge zum 60. Geburtstag von Hansjakob Seiler. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 292–299.
Brinton, Laurel. 1996. ‘Attitudes towards increasing segmentalization: Complex and phrasal verbs in English.’ Journal of English Linguistics 24, 186–205.
Brinton, Laurel and Akimoto, Minoji (eds.). 1999. Collocational and Idiomatic Aspects of Composite Predicates in the History of English. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Bruyndonx, Jim. 2001. The Expanded Form in British English. Meanings and Constraints: A Corpus-illustrated Description. Unpublished PhD thesis, CatholicUniversity of Leuven.
Bryant, Margaret M. (ed.). 1962. Current American Usage. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2006. ‘Diagnostics of age-graded linguistic behaviour: The case of the quotative system.’ Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(1), 3–30.
Bundt, Harry and Black, William. 2000. Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue: Studies in Computational Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Burchfield, Robert W. 3 1996. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon.
Butters, Ronald. 1980. ‘Narrative go “say”.’ American Speech 55, 215–227.
Butters, Ronald. 1982. ‘Editor's note [on be like “think”].’ American Speech 57, 149.
Buyssens, Eric. 1968. Les Deux Aspectifs de la Conjugaison Anglaise au XXe Siècle. Brussels: Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles.
Bybee, Joan. 2007. Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, Joan and Pagliuca, William. 1985. ‘Cross-linguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning.’ In: Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). Historical Semantics, Historical Word Formation. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 59–83.
Bybee, Joan, Revere, D.Perkins and William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Carter, Ronald and McCarthy, Michael. 1999. ‘The English get-passive in spoken discourse.’ English Language and Linguistics 3(1), 41–58.
Cattell, Norman Raymond. 1984. Composite Predicates in English. Sydney: Academic Press.
Chafe, Wallace. 1982. ‘Integration and involvement in speaking, writing and oral literature.’ In: Tannen, Deborah (ed.). Spoken and Written Language. Exploring Orality and Literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 35–53.
Chappell, Hilary.1980. ‘Is the get-passive adversative?’ Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Human Communication 13(3), 411–452.
Charleston, Britta. 1960. Studies on the Emotional and Affective Means of Expression in Modern English. Bern: Francke.
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Christ, Oliver. 1994. ‘A modular and flexible architecture for an integrated corpus query system.’ Proceedings of complex '94: Third Conference on Computational Lexicography and Text Research (Budapest, July 7–10, 1994). Budapest, pp. 23–32.
Claridge, Claudia. 2000. Multi-word Verbs in Early Modern English. A Corpus-based Study. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Claridge, Claudia. 2008. ‘Historical corpora.’ In: Lüdeling and Kytö (eds.), pp. 242–259.
Close, Reginald A. 1988. ‘The future in English.’ In: Bald, Wolf-Dietrich (ed.). Kernprobleme der Englischen Grammatik: Sprachliche Fakten und Ihre Vermittlung. Munich: Langenscheidt-Longman, pp. 51–66.
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Meanings of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.
Coates, Jennifer and Leech, Geoffrey. 1980. ‘The meanings of the modals in British and American English.’ York Papers in Linguistics 8, 22–34.
Collins, Peter C. 1996. ‘Get-passives in English.’ English World-Wide 15(1), 43–56.
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conrad, Susan and Biber, Douglas (eds.). 2001. Variation in English. Multi-dimensional Studies. Harlow: Longman.
Cort, Alison and Denison, David. 2005. ‘The category modal – a moving target?’ Paper presented at the First International Conference on the Linguistics of Contemporary English, University of Edinburgh.
Crawford, William J. 2009. ‘The mandative subjunctive.’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia (eds.). One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 257–276.
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining Language Change. An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Longman.
Crystal, David. 2004. The Stories of English. Woodstock and New York: Overlook Press.
Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell.
Danchev, Andrei and Kytö, Merja. 2002. ‘The go-futures in English and French as an areal feature.’ Nowele 40, 9–60.
Davidse, Kristin and Heyvaert, Liesbet. 2003. ‘On the middle construction in English and Dutch.’ In: Granger, Sylviane, Lerot, Jacques and Petch-Tyson, Stephanie (eds.). Corpus-Based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 57–73.
Haan, Pieter. 2002. ‘Whom is not dead?’ In: Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter and Smith, Adam (eds.). New Frontiers of Corpus Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 215–228.
Declerck, Renaat. 1991a. A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
Declerck, Renaat. 1991b. Tense in English. Its Structure and Use in Discourse. London and New York: Routledge.
Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax. Verbal Constructions. London and New York: Longman.
Denison, David. 1998. ‘Syntax.’ In: Suzanne Romaine (ed), pp. 92–329.
Denison, David. 2001. ‘Gradience and linguistic change.’ In: Brinton, Laurel (ed.). Historical Linguistics. 1999. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 119–144.
Dennis, Leah. 1940. ‘The progressive tense: Frequency of its use in English.’ Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 55, 855–865.
Depraetere, Ilse. 2003. ‘On verbal concord with collective nouns in British English.’ English Language Linguistics, 7(1), 85–127.
Ding, Daniel. 2002. ‘The passive voice and social values in science.’ Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 32(2), 137–154.
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1991. A New Approach to English Grammar, on Semantic Principles. Oxford: Clarendon.
Dixon, Robert M. W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Downing, Angela. 1996. ‘The semantics of get-passives.’ In: Hasan, Ruqaiya, Cloran, Carmel and Butt, David (eds.). Functional Descriptions. Theory in Practice. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 179–205.
Elsness, Johan. 1994. ‘On the progression of the progressive in early Modern English.’ ICAME Journal 18, 5–25.
Elsom, John. 1984. ‘The sad decline of the subjunctive.’ Contemporary Review 245, 36–40.
Facchinetti, Roberta. 2002. ‘Be able to in Present-day British English.’ In: Kettemann, Bernhard and Marko, Georg (eds.). Teaching and Learning by Doing Corpus Analysis. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 117–130.
Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred and Palmer, Frank (eds.). 2003. Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
Fanego, Teresa. 1996a. ‘On the historical developments of English retrospective verbs.’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97, 71–79.
Fanego, Teresa. 1996b. ‘The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400–1760).’ Diachronica 13, 29–62.
Fillmore, Charles. 1990. ‘Epistemic stance and grammatical form in English conditional sentences.’ Papers from the 26th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 26, 137–162.
Markku, Filppula,. 2002. The English progressive on the move. Paper presented at International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Glasgow, August 2002.
Fischer, Olga. 1992. ‘Syntax.’ In: Blake, Norman (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 207–408.
Fischer, Olga and Wurff, Wim. 2006. ‘Syntax.’ In: Hogg, Richard and Denison, David (eds.). A History of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–198.
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2004. ‘The meaning and uses of the progressive construction in an early eighteenth-century English Network.’ In: Curzan, Anne and Emmons, Kimberly (eds.). Studies in the History of the English Language II: Unfolding Conversations. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 131–174.
Fleisher, Nicolas. 2006. ‘The origin of passive get.’ English Language and Linguistics 10(2), 225–252.
Fligelstone, Steven, Pacey, Mike and Rayson, Paul. 1997. ‘How to generalize the task of annotation.’ In: Garside et al., pp. 122–136.
Fong, Vivienne. 2004. ‘The verbal cluster.’ In: Lim, Lisa and Foley, Joseph A. (eds.). Singapore English: A Grammatical Description. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 75–104.
Foster, Brian. 1968. The Changing English Language. London: Macmillan.
Fowler, H. W.2 1965 [1926]. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Francis, W. Nelson. 1979. ‘Problems of assembling large computer corpora.’ In: Bergenholtz and Schaeder, pp. 110–123.
Francis, W. 1980. ‘A tagged corpus – problems and prospects.’ In: Greenbaum et al., pp. 192–209.
Francis, W. Nelson and Kučera, Henry. 1982. Frequency Analysis of English Usage: Lexicon and Grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Fries, Charles Carpenter. 1940. American English Grammar. The Grammatical Structure of Present-Day American English with Especial Reference to Social Differences or Class Dialects. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Gachelin, Jean-Marc. 1997. ‘The progressive and habitual aspects in Non-Standard Englishes.’ In: Schneider, Edgar (ed.). Englishes around the World. General Studies, British Isles, North America. Studies in Honour of Manfred Görlach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 33–46.
Garretson, Gregory and Ädel, Annelie. 2005. ‘Who's speaking?: Evidentiality in US newspapers during the 2004 presidential campaign’. Paper presented at the ICAME 26 and AAACL6 conference, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 12–15 May 2005.
Garside, Roger, Leech, Geoffrey and McEnery, Anthony (eds.). 1997. Corpus Annotation. Linguistic Information from Computer Text Corpora. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.
Garside, Roger and Smith, Nicholas. 1997. ‘A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS 4.’ In: Garside et al., pp. 102–121.
Geisler, Christer. 2007. ‘A multivariate investigation of written British and American English.’ Anonymous submission to Corpus Linguistics 2007, Birmingham, 27–30 July 2007.
Givón, Talmy. 1993. English Grammar. A Function-Based Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Gonzáles-Álvarez, Dolores. 2003. ‘If he come vs. if he comes, if he shall come: Some remarks on the subjunctive in conditional protases in Early Modern and Late Modern English.’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104, 303–313.
Granger, Sylviane. 1983. The BE + Past Participle Construction in Spoken English. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Green, Georgia. 1975. ‘How to get people to do things with words: The whimperative question.’ In: Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.). Syntax and Semantics. Vol. III: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 107–141.
Greenbaum, Sidney. 1986. ‘The Grammar of Contemporary English and A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language.’ In: Leitner, Gerhard (ed.). The English Reference Grammar. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 6–14.
Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan (eds.). 1980. Studies in English Linguistics. For Randolph Quirk. London: Longman.
Greenbaum, Sidney and Whitcut, Janet. 1988. Longman Guide to English Usage. Harlow: Longman.
Gries, Stefan Thomas. 2002. Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. New York and London: Continuum.
Grund, Peter 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. 89–109.
Haegeman, Liliane. 1985. ‘The get-passive and Burzio's generalization.’ Lingua 66, 53–77.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, Christian. 3 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold [1st edn Halliday, M.A.K., 1985].
Hancil, Sylvie. 1996. ‘Subjectivity, politeness and the progressive form.’ Proceedings of the Edinburgh Linguistics Department Conference 1996, pp. 112–117.
Hardie, Andrew and McEnery, Tony. 2004. ‘The were-subjunctive in British rural dialects: Marrying corpus and questionnaire data.’ Computers and the Humanities 37, 205–228.
Hardy, Donald E. 2004. ‘The role of linguistics in interpretation: The case of grammatical voice.’ Belgian Journal of English Language and Literature 2, 31–48.
Harsh, Wayne. 1968. The Subjunctive in English. Alabama: University of Alabama Press.
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Heringer, Hans Jürgen. 1989. Lesen, Lehren, Lernen: Eine Rezeptive Grammatik des Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Heyvaert, Lisbet. 2003. A Cognitive-Functional Approach to Nominalization in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hiltunen, Risto. 1999. ‘Verbal phrases and phrasal verbs in Early Modern English.’ In: Brinton, Laurel and Minoji Akimoto (eds.), pp. 133–165.
Hinrichs, Lars, Smith, Nicholas and Waibel, Birgit. forthcoming. The Part-of-speech-tagged ‘Brown’ Corpora: A Manual of Information, including Pointers to Successful Use. https://webspace.utexas.edu/lh9896/public/hinrichs/Manual_final.pdf.
Hinrichs, Lars and Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2007. ‘Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: A multivariate analysis of tagged corpora.’ English Language and Linguistics 11(3), 335–378.
Hirtle, Walter. 1967. The Simple and Progressive Forms: An Analytical Approach. Quebec: Presses de l'Université Laval.
Hoffmann, Achim. 1972. ‘Die verbo-nominale Konstruktion: eine spezifische Form der nominalen Ausdrucksweise im modernen Englisch.’ Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 20, 158–183.
Hoffmann, Sebastian. 1997. Mandative Sentences. A Study of Variation on the Basis of the British National Corpus. Unpublished Lizentiats-Arbeit, UniversitäZürich.
Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2005. Grammaticalization and English Complex Prepositions: A Corpus-based Study. London: Routledge.
Hofland, Knut and Johansson, Stig. 1982. Word Frequencies in British and American English. Bergen: Norwegian Computer Centre for the Humanities.
Holmes, Janet. 2 2001 [1992]. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
Hommerberg, Charlotte and Tottie, Gunnel. 2007. ‘Try to or try and? Verb complementation in British and American English.’ ICAME Journal 31, 45–64.
Hopper, Paul J. 1991. ‘On some principles of grammaticalization.’ In: Traugott, Elizabeth and Heine, Bernd (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization. Vol. I. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 17–35.
Hopper, Paul J. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2 2003 [1993]. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hübler, Axel. 1992. ‘On the get-passive.’ In: Busse, Wilhelm G. (ed.). Anglistentag 1991. Proceedings. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 89–101.
Hübler, Axel. 1998. The Expressivity of Grammar: Grammatical Devices Expressing Emotion across Time. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Huddleston, Rodney. 1980. ‘Criteria for auxiliaries and modals.’ In: Greenbaum et al., pp. 65–78.
Huddleston, Rodney. 1984. Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huddleston, Rodney, and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2005. A Student's Introduction to English Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hudson, Richard. 1994. ‘About 37% of word-tokens are nouns.’ Language 70, 331–339.
Hundt, Marianne. 1997. ‘Has BrE been catching up with AmE over the past thirty years?’ In: Ljung, Magnus (ed.). Corpus-based Studies in English. Papers from the 17th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 17), Stockholm, May 15–19, 1996. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 135–151.
Hundt, Marianne. 1998a. New Zealand English Grammar. Fact or Fiction. A Corpus-Based Study of Morphosyntactic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hundt, Marianne. 1998b. ‘It is important that this study (should) be based on the analysis of parallel corpora: On the use of the mandative subjunctive in four major varieties of English.’ In: Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus and Estling, Maria (eds.). The Major Varieties of English (Papers from MAVEN 97). Växjö: Acta Wexionensia, pp. 159–175.
Hundt, Marianne. 2001. ‘What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions.’ Studies in Language 25(1), 49–88.
Hundt, Marianne. 2004a. ‘Animacy, agentivity, and the spread of the progressive in modern English.’ English Language and Linguistics 8(1), 47–69.
Hundt, Marianne. 2004b. ‘The passival and the progressive passive: A case study of layering in the English aspect and voice systems.’ In: Lindquist, and Mair, (eds.), pp. 79–120.
Hundt, Marianne. 2006. ‘“Curtains like these are selling right in the City of Chicago for $1.50”: The mediopassive in American 20th-century advertising language.’ In: Renouf, Antoinette and Kehoe, Andrew (eds.). The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 163–183.
Hundt, Marianne. 2007. English Mediopassive Constructions. A Cognitive, Corpus-Based Study of their Origin, Spread and Current Status. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Hundt, Marianne. 2009a. ‘Colonial lag, colonial innovation or simply language change?’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia (eds.). One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 13–37.
Hundt, Marianne. 2009b. ‘Global feature – local norms? A case study on the progressive passive.’ In: Siebers, Lucia and Hoffmann, Tobias (eds.). World Englishes: Problems – Properties – Prospects. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 287–308.
Hundt, Marianne. forthcoming a. ‘These books (will) sell (well) – the development of constraints on mediopassives formation in late Modern and Present Day English advertising copy.’
Hundt, Marianne. forthcoming b. ‘How often do things get V-ed in Philippine and Singapore English? A case study on the get-passive in two outer-circle varieties of English.’
Hundt, Marianne and Mair, Christian. 1999. ‘“Agile” and “uptight” genres: The corpus-based approach to language change in progress.’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4, 221–242.
Hundt, Marianne, Nesselhauf, Nadja and Biewer, Carolin (eds.). 2007. Corpus Linguistics and the Web. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Jacobson, Sven. 1980. ‘Issues in the study of syntactic variation.’ In Jacobson, Sven, (ed.). Papers from the Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell. pp. 23–36.
James, Francis. 1986. Semantics of the English Subjunctive. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Jespersen, Otto. 1909–49. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, 7 vols. London: George Allen and Unwin/Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The Philosophy of Grammar. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Jespersen, Otto. 1984. Analytic Syntax. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press [First published 1937].
Jin, Koichi. 2002. ‘On the middle voice in present-day English.’ In: Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). Studies in English Historical Linguistics and Philology. A Festschrift for Okio Oizumi. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 139–155.
Johansson, Stig. 1980. Plural Attributive Nouns in Present-Day English. (Lund Studies in English 59). Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey and Goodluck, Helen. 1978. Manual of Information for the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus for Digital Computers. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Johansson, Stig and Norheim, Else Helene. 1988. ‘The subjunctive in British and American English.’ ICAME Journal 12, 27–36.
Johansson, Stig and Oksefjell, Signe. 1996. ‘Towards a unified account of the syntax and semantics of get.’ In: Thomas, Jenny and Short, Michael (eds.). Using Corpora for Language Research: Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Leech. London: Longman, pp. 57–75.
Johansson, Stig and Stenström, Anna-Brita (eds.). 1991. English Computer Corpora: Selected Papers and Research Guide. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Johnson, Samuel. 1755. A Dictionary of the English Language. 2 vols. London.
Joseph, Brian D. 2004. ‘The editor's department.’ Language 80, 381–383.
Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social Stylistics. Syntactic Variation in British Newspapers. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kearns, Kate. 2003. ‘Durative achievements and individual-level predicates on events.’ Linguistics and Philosophy 26(5), 595–635.
Kennedy, Graeme. 1998. An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London: Longman.
Kennedy, Graeme. 2001. ‘The distribution of agent marking and finiteness as possible contributors to the difficulty of passive voice structures.’ In: Aijmer, Karin (ed.). A Wealth of English. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, pp. 39–46.
Killie, Kristin. 2004. ‘Subjectivity and the English progressive.’ English Language and Linguistics 8, 25–46.
Kohnen, Thomas. 2007. ‘From Helsinki through the centuries: The design and development of English diachronic corpora.’ In: Pahta, Päivi, Taavitsainen, Irma, Nevalainen, Terttu and Tyrkkö, Jukka (eds.). Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 2: Towards Multimedia in Corpus Studies. http://www.helsinki.fi/varieng/journal/volumes/02/kohnen.
König, Ekkehard. 1980. ‘On the context-dependence of the Progressive in English.’ In: Rohrer, Christian (ed.). Time, Tense, and Quantifiers. Proceedings of the Stuttgart Conference on the Logic of Tense and Quantification. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 269–291.
König, Ekkehard. 1995. ‘He is being obscure: non-verbal predication and the progressive.’ In: Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Bianchi, Valentina, Dahl, Östen and Squartini, Mario (eds.). Temporal Reference, Aspect, and Actionality. Vol. II: Typological Approaches. Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier, pp. 155–167.
König, Ekkehard and Lutzeier, Peter. 1973. ‘Bedeutung and Verwendung der Progressivform im heutigen Englisch.’ Lingua 32, 277–308.
Kortmann, Bernd. 2006. ‘Syntactic variation in English: A global perspective.’ In:Aarts, Bas and MacMahon, April (eds.). The Handbook of English Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 603–624.
Kytö, Merja and Romaine, Suzanne. 1997. ‘Competing forms of adjective comparison in Modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective?’ In: Nevalainen, 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. 329–352.
Kytö, Merja and Romaine, Suzanne. 2000. ‘Adjective comparison and standardization processes in American and British English from 1620 to the present.’ In: Wright, Laura (ed.). The Development of Standard English 1300–1800: Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 171–194.
Kytö, Merja, Rudanko, Juhani and Smitterberg, Erik. 2000. ‘Building a bridge between the present and the past: A corpus of 19th century English.’ ICAME Journal 24, 85–97.
Kranich, Svenja. 2007. ‘Interpretative progressives in Late Modern English.’ Paper presented at the 3rd Late Modern English Conference, Leiden, the Netherlands, 29 August–1 September 2007.
Krenn, Brigitte. 2000. The Usual Suspects. Data-oriented Models for Identification and Representation of Lexical Collocations. Saarbrücken: German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence.
Krug, Manfred. 1996. ‘Language change in progress: Contractions in journalese in 1961 and 1991/92.’ In: McGill, Steven (ed.). Proceedings of the 1995 Graduate Research Conference on Language and Linguistics (Exeter Working Papers in English Language Studies 1), pp. 17–28.
Krug, Manfred. 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov, William. 1963. ‘The social motivation of a sound change.’ Word 19, 273–309.
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Labov, William 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol. I: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
Labov, William 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol. II: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
Labuhn, Ute. 2001. Von Give a Laugh bis Have a Cry. Zu Aspektualität und Transitivität der V + N-Konstruktionen im Englischen. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
Lakoff, Robin. 1971. ‘Passive resistance.’ Papers from the Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 8, 149–162.
Lakoff, Robin. 1990. Talking Power. New York: Basic Books.
Lee, Yong Wey David. 2000. Modelling Variation in Spoken and Written Language: the Multi-dimensional Approach Revisited. Unpublished PhD thesis, Lancaster University.
Leech, Geoffrey. 1966. English in Advertising. A Linguistic Study of Advertising in Great Britain. London: Longman.
Leech, Geoffrey. 2003. ‘Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992.’ In: Facchinetti et al., pp. 223–240.
Leech, Geoffrey.3 2004 [1971]. Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.
Leech, Geoffrey. 2004. ‘Recent grammatical change in English: Data, description, theory.’ In: Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.). Advances in Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 61–81.
Leech, Geoffrey. 2007. ‘New resources, or just better old ones? The Holy Grail of representativeness,’ In: Hundt et al. 2007, pp. 133–149.
Leech, Geoffrey and Coates, Jennifer. 1980. ‘Semantic indeterminacy and the modals.’ In: Greenbaum et al., pp. 79–90.
Leech, Geoffrey and Culpeper, Jonathan. 1997. ‘The comparison of adjectives in recent British 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: Societé Neophilologique, pp. 353–373.
Leech, Geoffrey and Fallon, Roger. 1992. ‘Computer corpora: What do they tell us about culture?’ ICAME Journal 16, 1–22 [reprinted in: Sampson, Geoffrey and McCarthy, Diana (eds.). 2004. Corpus Linguistics. Readings in a Widening Discipline. London and New York: Continuum, pp. 160–173].
Leech, Geoffrey, Francis, Brian and Xu, Xunfeng. 1994. ‘The use of computer corpora in the textual demonstrability of gradience in linguistic categories.’ In: Fuchs, Catherine and Victorri, Bernard (eds.). Continuity in Linguistic Semantics. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 57–76.
Leech, Geoffrey, Rayson, Paul and Wilson, Andrew. 2001. Word Frequencies in Written and Spoken English. Harlow: Longman.
Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2005. ‘Extending the possibilities of corpus-based research on English in the twentieth century: A prequel for LOB and F-LOB.’ ICAME Journal 29, 83–98.
Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2006. ‘Recent grammatical change in written English 1961–1992.’ In: Renouf, Antoinette and Kehoe, Andrew (eds.). The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi., pp. 185–204.
Leonard, Rosemary. 1968. The Types and Currency of Noun + Noun Sequences in Prose Usage 1750–1950. Unpublished MPhil thesis, University of London.
Leonard, Rosemary. 1984. The Interpretation of English Noun Sequences on the Computer. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Levin, Magnus. 2001. Agreement with Collective Nouns in English. Lund: Lund Studies in English.
Levin, Magnus. 2006. ‘Collective nouns and language change.’ English Language and Linguistics 10, 321–343.
Lindquist, Hans. 2000. ‘Livelier or more lively? Syntactic and contextual factors influencing the comparison of disyllabic adjectives.’ In: Kirk, John M. (ed.). Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English. Papers from the Nineteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerised Corpora (ICAME 1998). Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 125–132.
Lindquist, Hans and Mair, Christian. 2004a. ‘Introduction.’ In: Lindquist, and Mair, (eds.), pp. ix–xiv.
Lindquist, Hans, and Mair, Christian (eds.). 2004b. Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Live, Anna H. 1973. ‘The take-have phrasal in English.’ Linguistics 95, 31–50.
Ljung, Magnus. 1980. Reflections on the English Progressive (Gothenburg Studies in English 46). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Los, Bettelou. 2005. The Rise of the to Infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja. 2008. Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lyons, John. 1982. ‘Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sumA question mark before an example (invented or otherwise) indicates its questionable acceptability.’ In:Jarvella, Robert J. and Klein, Wolfgang (eds.). Speech, Place and Action. New York: Wiley, pp. 101–124.
Mair, Christian. 1997. ‘The spread of the going-to-future in written English: A corpus-based investigation into language change in progress.’ In: Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanislaw (eds.). Language History and Linguistic Modelling. A Festschrift for Jacek Fisiak. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1537–1543.
Mair, Christian., 2002. ‘Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: A real-time study based on matching text corpora.’ English Language and Linguistics 6, 105–131.
Mair, Christian. 2004. ‘Corpus linguistics and grammaticalization theory: Statistics, frequencies and beyond.’ In: Mair, Christian and Lindquist, Hans (eds.). Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 121–150.
Mair, Christian. 2006a. ‘Tracking ongoing grammatical change and recent diversification in Present-Day Standard English: The complementary role of small and large corpora.’ In: Renouf, Antoinette and Kehoe, Andrew (eds.). The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 355–375.
Mair, Christian. 2006b. Twentieth-Century English. History, Variation and Standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne. 1995. ‘Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress.’ Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43(2), 111–122.
Mair, Christian, Hundt, Marianne, Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2002. ‘Short-term diachronic shifts in part-of-speech frequencies: A comparison of the tagged LOB and F-LOB corpora.’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7(2), 245–264.
Mair, Christian and Leech, Geoffrey. 2006. ‘Current change in English syntax.’ In: Aarts, Bas and MacMahon, April (eds.). The Handbook of English Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 318–342.
Makkai, Adam. 1977. ‘The passing of the syntactic age: A first look at the ecology of the English verb take.’ In: Makkai, Adam (ed.). Linguistics at the Crossroads. Padua: Liviana, pp. 79–104.
Marmaridou, Sophia A. S. 1991. What's so Proper about Names?Athens: Parousia.
Mazaud, Carolin. 2004. Complex Premodifiers in Present-Day English. A Corpus-based Study. Unpublished PhD thesis, Heidelberg University.
McArthur, Tom (ed.). 1992. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
McCarthy, Michael. 1998. Spoken Language and Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McEnery, Anthony and Xiao, Zhonghua. 2005. ‘Help or help to: What do corpora have to say?’ English Studies 86(2), 161–187.
Meints, Kerstin. 2003. ‘To get or to be? Use and acquisition of get versus be passives: Evidence from children and adults.’ In: Cuyckens, Hubert, Berg, Thomas, Dirven, René and Panther, Klaus-Uwe (eds.). Motivation in Language. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 123–150.
Meyerhoff, Myriam and Niedzielski, Nancy. 2003. ‘The globalization of vernacular variation.’ Journal of Sociolinguistics 7, 534–555.
Mindt, Dieter. 2000. An Empirical Grammar of the English Verb System. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Misztal, Barbara. 2000. Informality. Social Theory and Contemporary Practice. London: Routledge.
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English Syntax. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mitchell, Bruce and Robinson, Fred C.. 5 1992. A Guide to Old English. Oxford: Blackwell.
Moens, Marc and Steedman, Mark. 1988. ‘Temporal ontology and temporal reference.’ Computational Linguistics 14(2), 15–28.
Möhlig, Ruth and Klages, Monika. 2002. ‘Detransitivization in the history of English from a semantic perspective.’ In: Pérez-Guerra, Javier, Fanego, Teresa and Couso, María José Lopez (eds.). English Historical Syntax and Morphology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 231–254.
Mondorf, Britta. 2007. ‘Recalcitrant problems of comparative alternation and new insights emerging from Internet data.’ In: Hundt et al. 2007, pp. 211–232.
Mossé, Fernand. 1938. Histoire de la forme périphrastique être + participe présent en germanique. 2 vols. Paris: Klincksieck.
Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2004. ‘Corpus data in a usage-based cognitive grammar.’ In: Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.). Advances in Corpus Linguistics. Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 85–100.
Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2005. English Ditransitive Verbs. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Müller, Ernst-August. 1978. Funktionsverbgefüge vom Typ ‘give a smile’ und ähnliche Konstruktionen. Eine Textorientierte Untersuchung im Rahmen eines doppelschichtigen Semantikmodells. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax. Part I: Parts of Speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
Myhill, John. 1995. ‘Change and continuity in the functions of the American English modals.’ Linguistics. An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 33, 157–211.
Myhill, John. 1996. ‘The development of the strong obligation system in American English.’ American Speech 71(4), 339–388.
Nakamura, Junsaku. 1991. ‘The relationship among genres in the LOB corpus based upon the distribution of grammatical tags.’ JACET Bulletin 22, 44–74.
Nehls, Dietrich. 1988. ‘On the development of the grammatical category of verbal aspect in English.’ In: Klegraf, Josef and Nehls, Dietrich (eds.). Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel's 60th Birthday. Heidelberg: Groos, pp. 173–198.
Nesselhauf, Nadja. 2007. ‘The spread of the progressive and its “future” use.’ English Language and Linguistics 11(1), 191–207.
Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2002. ‘The rise of who in Early Modern English.’ In: Poussa, Patricia (ed.). Relativization on the North Sea Littoral. Munich: Lincom Europa, pp. 109–121.
Nickel, Gerhard. 1968. ‘Complex verbal structures in English.’ International Review of Applied Linguistics 6, 1–21 [reprinted in Dietrich Nehls (ed.). Studies in Descriptive English Grammar. Heidelberg: Julius Groos, 1978, pp. 63–83].
Nokkonen, Soili. 2006. ‘The semantic variation of NEED TO in four recent British corpora.’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 11, 29–71.
Nuñez Pertejo, Paloma. 2004. The Progressive in the History of English: with Special Reference to the Early Modern English Period. A Corpus Based Study. München: Lincom Europa.
Oldireva Gustafsson, Larisa. 2006. ‘The passive in nineteenth-century scientific writing.’ In: Kytö, Merja, Rydén, Mats and Smitterberg, Eric (eds.). Nineteenth-Century English. Stability and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 110–135.
Olofsson, Arne. 1990. ‘A participle caught in the act: On the prepositional use of following.’ Studia Neophilologica 62, 23–35.
Olsson, Yngve. 1961. On the Syntax of the English Verb with Special Reference to “have a look” and Similar Complex Structures (Gothenburg Studies in English 12). Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell.
Övergaard, Gerd. 1995. The Mandative Subjunctive in American and British English in the 20th Century (Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 94). Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Palmer, Frank R.2 1990 [1979]. Modality and the English Modals. London and New York: Longman.
Palmer, Frank R. 1999. ‘Mood and modality: Basic principles.’ In: Brown, Keith and Miller, Jim (eds.). Concise Encyclopedia of Grammatical Categories. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 229–235.
Palmer, Frank R.2 2001 [1986]. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Palmer, Frank R. 2003. ‘Modality in English: Theoretical, descriptive and typological issues.’ In: Facchinetti et al., pp. 1–17.
Pauwels, Anne. 1998. ‘Feminist language planning: Has it been worthwhile?’ at http://www.linguistik-online.de/heft1_99/pauwels.htm. Linguistik online1, 1/98. Viewed 1 April 2009.
Peters, Pam. 1998. ‘The survival of the subjunctive: Evidence of its use in Australia and elsewhere.’ English World-Wide 19(1), 87–103.
Peters, Pam. 2000. ‘Paradigm split.’ In: Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne (eds.). Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Papers from the Twentieth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 1999). Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 301–312.
Peters, Pam. 2004. The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Popper, Karl R.2 1979 [1972]. Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Potter, Simeon. 2 1975 [1969]. Changing English. London: Deutsch.
Poutsma, Hendrik. 1926. A Grammar of Late Modern English. For the Use of Continental, Especially Dutch, Students. Pt. 2, The Parts of Speech, Section 2, The Verb and the Particles. Groningen: Noordhoff.
Pratt, Lynda and Denison, David. 2000. ‘The language of the Southey-Coleridge circle.’ Language Sciences 22, 401–422.
Prince, Ellen F. 1972. ‘A note on aspect in English: The take-a-walk construction.’ In: Plötz, Senta (ed.). Transformationelle Analyse. Frankfurt/Main: Athenäum, pp. 409–420.
Quirk, Randolph. 1995. Grammatical and Lexical Variance in English. London: Longman.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman.
Quirk, Randolph and Rusiecki, Jan. 1982. ‘Grammatical data by elicitation.’ In: Anderson, John (ed.). Language Form and Linguistic Variation. Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 379–394.
Raab-Fischer, Roswitha. 1995. ‘Löst der Genitiv die of-Phrase ab? Eine korpusgestützte Studie zum Sprachwandel im heutigen Englisch.’ Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43, 123–132.
Radford, Andrew. 1988. Transformational Grammar. A First Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rayson, Paul, Dawn Archer, Scott Piao and McEnery, Tony. 2004. ‘The UCREL semantic analysis system.’ In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Named Entity Recognition Semantic Labelling for NLP Tasks, in association with the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. (LREC2004), 25 May, 2004. Lisbon, pp. 7–12.
Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew and Leech, Geoffrey. 2002. ‘Grammatical word class variation within the British National Corpus Sampler.’ In: Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter and Smith, Adam (eds.). New Frontiers of Corpus Research. Papers from the Twenty First International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora – Sydney 2000. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 295–306.
Renský, Miroslav. 1966. ‘English verbo-nominal phrases: Some structural and stylistic aspects.’ Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 1, 289–299.
Rickford, John R., Mendoza-Denton, Norma, Wasow, Thomas A. and Espinoza, Juli. 1995. ‘Syntactic variation and change in progress: Loss of the verbal coda in topic restricting as far as constructions.’ Language 71, 102–131.
Rinzler, Simone. 2004. ‘Pragmatique d'un genre: Communication institutionelle, monologisme et aspect passif.’ Anglophonia 16, 207–225.
Rissanen, Matti. 1986. ‘The choice of relative pronouns in seventeenth century American English.’ In: Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). Historical Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 417–435.
Rissanen, Matti. 1999. ‘Syntax.’ In: Lass, Roger (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 3: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 187–331.
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1990. ‘Aspekte einer vergleichenden Typologie des Englischen und Deutschen: Kritische Anmerkungen zu einem Buch von John A. Hawkins.’ In: Gnutzmann, Claus (ed.). Kontrastive Linguistik. Frankfurt, Bern, New York and Paris: Peter Lang, pp. 133–152.
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1995. ‘On the replacement of finite complement clauses by infinitives in English.’ English Studies 16, 367–388.
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1996. ‘Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English.’ Cognitive Linguistics 7, 149–182.
Rohdenburg, Günter. 2006. ‘The role of functional constraints in the evolution of the English complementation system.’ In: Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, Kastovsky, Dieter, Rittand, Nikolaus and Schendl, Herbert (eds.). Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms. Bern, Berlin, Frankfurt/Main and Wien: Peter Lang, pp. 143–166.
Romaine, Suzanne (ed.). 1998. The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Romaine, Suzanne and Lange, Deborah. 1991. ‘The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: A case of grammaticalization in progress.’ American Speech 66, 227–279.
Römer, Ute. 2005. Progressives, Patterns, Pedagogy: A Corpus-Driven Approach to English Progressive Forms, Functions, Contexts and Didactics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rosenbach, Anette. 2003. ‘Aspects of iconicity and economy in the choice between the s-genitive and the of-genitive in English.’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Mondorf, Britta (eds.). Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 379–412.
Rosenbach, Anette. 2006. ‘On the track of noun+noun constructions in Modern English.’ In: Houswitschka, Christoph, Knappe, Gabriele and Müller, Anja (eds.). Anglistentag 2005 Bamberg. Proceedings. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, pp. 543–557.
Rudanko, Juhani. 1999. Diachronic Studies of English Complementation Patterns. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Rudanko, Juhani. 2000. Corpora and Complementation. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Rudanko, Juhani. 2006. ‘Watching English grammar change: A case study on complement selection in British and American English.’ English Language and Linguistics 10, 31–48.
Ryan, William M. 1961. ‘Pseudo-subjunctive were.’ American Speech 36, 48–53.
Rydén, Mats. 1975. ‘Noun-name collocations in British English newspaper language.’ Studia Neophilologica 47, 14–39.
Rydén, Mats. 1997. ‘On the panchronic core meaning of the English progressive.’ 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. 419–429.
Sadock, Jerrold M. 1974. Towards a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.
Sag, Ivan. 1973. ‘On the state of progress on progressives and statives.’ In: Bailey, Charles-James and Shuy, Roger (eds.). New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English. Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 83–95.
Salton, Gerard. 1989. Automatic Text Processing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Samuels, Michael. 1972. Linguistic Evolution. With Special Reference to English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sankoff, David. 1988. ‘Sociolinguistics and syntactic variation.’ In Newmeyer, Frederick J. (ed.). Linguistics. The Cambridge Survey. Vol. 4: Language. the Socio-Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 140–161.
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech. London: Harvest Books [original publisher Harcourt, Brace and World Inc.].
Scheffer, Johannes. 1975. The Progressive in English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Schlüter, Julia. 2009. ‘The conditional subjunctive.’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia (eds.). One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 277–305.
Schneider, Edgar W. 2005. ‘The subjunctive in Philippine English.’ In: Dayag, Danilo T. and Quakenbusch, J. Stephen (eds.). Linguistics and Language Education in the Philippines and Beyond. A Festschrift in Honor of Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines, pp. 27–40.
Scott, Mike. 1999. WordSmith Tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Seoane, Elena. 2006a. ‘Changing styles: On the recent evolution of scientific British and American English.’ In: Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, Kastovsky, Dieter, Ritt, Nikolaus and Schendl, Herbert (eds.). Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms. English from 1500–2000. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 191–211.
Seoane, Elena. 2006b. ‘Information structure and word order change: The passive as an information-rearranging strategy in the history of English.’ In: Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.). The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 360–391.
Seoane, Elena and Loureiro-Porto, Lucia. 2005. ‘On the colloquialization of scientific British and American English.’ ESP Across Cultures 2, 106–118.
Seoane, Elena and Williams, Christopher. 2006. ‘Changing the rules: A comparison of recent trends in English in academic scientific discourse and prescriptive legal discourse.’ In: Dossena, Marina and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.). Diachronic Perspectives on Domain-Specific English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 255–276.
Seoane-Posse, Elena. 2002. ‘On the evolution of scientific American and British English, with special reference to recent and ongoing changes in the use of the passive voice.’ Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, University of Glasgow, 21–26 August, 2002.
Serpollet, Noëlle. 2001. ‘The mandative subjunctive in British English seems to be alive and kicking…Is it due to American influence?’ In: Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew, McEnery, Tony, Hardie, Andrew and Khoja, Shereen (eds.). Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference. Lancaster University: UCREL Technical Papers 13, 531–542.
Serpollet, Noëlle. 2003. Should and the Subjunctive: A Corpus-Based Approach to Mandative Constructions in English. Unpublished PhD thesis, Lancaster University.
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1985. ‘Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis.’ Language 61(4), 821–848.
Sigley, Robert. 1997. ‘Text categories and where you can stick them: A crude formality index.’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 2(2), 199–237.
Smith, Nicholas. 2002. ‘Ever moving on. Changes in the progressive in recent British English.’ In: Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter and Smith, Adam (eds.). New Frontiers of Corpus Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 317–330.
Smith, Nicholas. 2003a. ‘Changes in the modals and semi-modals of strong obligation and epistemic necessity in recent British English.’ In: Facchinetti et al., pp. 241–266.
Smith, Nicholas. 2003b. ‘A quirky progressive? A corpus-based exploration of the will + be + -ing construction in recent and present-day English.’ In: Archer, Dawn, Rayson, Paul and Wilson, Andrew (eds.). Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2003 conference. Lancaster University: UCREL Technical Papers 16, pp. 714–723.
Smith, Nicholas. 2005. A Corpus-Based Investigation of Recent Change in the Use of the Progressive in British English. Unpublished PhD thesis, Lancaster University.
Smith, Nicholas and Rayson, Paul. 2007. ‘Recent change and variation in the British English use of the progressive passive.’ ICAME Journal 31, 129–159.
Smitterberg, Erik. 2005. The Progressive in 19th-Century English: A Process of Integration. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
Stein, Gabriele. 1991. ‘The phrasal verb type “to have a look” in Modern English.’ International Review of Applied Linguistics 29, 1–29.
Stein, Gabriele and Quirk, Randolph. 1991. ‘On having a look in a corpus.’ In: Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.). English Corpus Linguistics. Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, London: Longman, pp. 197–203.
Strang, Barbara M. H. 1970. A History of English. London: Routledge.
Strang, Barbara. 1982. ‘Some aspects of the history of the be+ing construction.’ In: Anderson, John (ed.). Language Form and Linguistic Variation. Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 427–474.
Strunk, William and White, E. B.. 3 1979 [1959]. The Elements of Style. New York: Longman.
Stubbs, Michael. 1996. Text and Corpus Analysis: Computer-assisted Studies of Language and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stubbs, Michael. 2001. ‘Texts, corpora and problems of interpretation: A response to Widdowson.’ Applied Linguistics 22(2), 149–172.
Sussex, Roland. 1982. ‘A note on the get-passive construction.’ Australian Journal of Linguistics 2, 83–92.
Svartvik, Jan. 1966. On Voice in the English Verb. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.
Svartvik, Jan and Quirk, Randolph (eds.). 1980. A Corpus of English Conversation. (Lund Studies in English, Volume 56). Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics. Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2003. ‘Be going to vs. will/ shall: Does syntax matter?’ Journal of English Linguistics 31, 295–323.
Taavitsainen, Irma and Pahta, Päivi. 2000. ‘Conventions of professional writing: The medical case report in a historical perspective.’ Journal of English Linguistics 28, 60–76.
Taeymans, Martine. 2004. ‘An investigation into the marginal modals dare and need in British present-day English.’ In: Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel and Perridon, Harry (eds.). Up and Down the Cline. The Nature of Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 97–114.
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2004. ‘Have to, gotta, must? Grammaticalisation, variation and specialization in English deontic modality.’ In: Lindquist, Hans and Mair, Christian (eds.), pp. 33–55.
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. 2001. Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Tottie, Gunnel. 1991. Negation in Speech and Writing. A Study in Variation. San Diego: Academic Press.
Tottie, Gunnel. 2002. An Introduction to American English. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tottie, Gunnel. 2009. ‘How different are American and British English grammar? And how are they different?’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia (eds.). One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 341–363.
Tottie, Gunnel and Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2006. ‘Tag Questions in British and American English.’ Journal of English Linguistics 34(4), 283–311.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1972. A History of English Syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. ‘On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic changes.’ Language 65(1), 31–55.
Traugott, Elizabeth. 1995. ‘Subjectification in grammaticalisation.’ In: Stein, Dieter and Wright, Susan (eds.). Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31–54.
Trudgill, Peter and Hannah, Jean. 4 2002 [1982]. International English. A Guide to Varieties of Standard English. London: Arnold.
Trudgill, Peter, Nevalainen, Terttu and Wischer, Ilse. 2002. ‘Dynamic have in North American and British Isles English.’ English Language and Linguistics 6(1), 1–15.
Turner, John F. 1980. ‘The marked subjunctive in contemporary English.’ Studia Neophilologica 52, 271–277.
Urdang, Laurence. 1991. ‘“If I were a king…” I'd be in a subjunctive mood.’ Verbatim 17, 12–14.
Ure, J. M. 1971. ‘Lexical density and register differentiation.’ In: Perren, G. E. and Trim, J. L. M. (eds.). Applications of Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 443–452.
Váradi, Tamás. 2001. ‘The linguistic relevance of corpus linguistics.’ In: Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew, McEnery, Tony, Hardie, Andrew and Khoja, Shereen (eds.). Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference. Lancaster University: UCREL Technical Papers 13, pp. 587–593.
Pérez, Varela, Ramón, José. 2007. ‘Negation of main verb have: Evidence of a change in progress in spoken and written British English.’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 108, 223–246.
Visser, Fredericus Th. 1963–1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Vosberg, Uwe. 2003a. ‘Cognitive complexity and the establishment of -ing constructions with retrospective verbs in Modern English.’ In: Dossena, Marina and Jones, Charles (eds.). Insights into Late Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 197–220.
Vosberg, Uwe. 2003b. ‘The role of extractions and horror aequi in the evolution of -ing complements in Modern English.’ In: Rohdenburg, Günter and Mondorf, Britta (eds.). Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English. (Topics in English Linguistics 43.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 305–327.
Vosberg, Uwe. 2006a. Die Große Komplementverschiebung. Außersemantische Einflüsse auf die Entwicklung satzwertiger Ergänzungen im Neuenglischen. Tübingen: Narr.
Vosberg, Uwe. 2006b. ‘The Great Complement Shift. Extra-semantic factors determining the evolution of sentential complement variants in Modern English.’ In: English and American Studies in German 2005. (Summaries of Theses and Monographs. A Supplement to Anglia.) Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 19–22.
Warner, Anthony. 1995. ‘Predicting the progressive passive: Parametric change within a lexicalist framework.’ Language 71, 533–557.
Weiner, E. Judith and Labov, William. 1983. ‘Constraints on the agentless passive.’ Journal of Linguistics 19(1), 29–58.
Wekker, Herman C. 1976. The Expression of Future Time in Contemporary British English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Westin, Ingrid. 2002. Language Change in English Newspaper Editorials. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
Westin, Ingrid and Geisler, Christer. 2002. ‘A multi-dimensional study of diachronic variation in British newspaper editorials.’ ICAME Journal 26, 115–134.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1982. ‘Why can you have a drink when you can't *have an eat?’ Language 58, 753–799.
Williams, Christopher. 2002. Non-progressive and Progressive Aspect in English. Fasano di Puglia: Schena Editore.
Wright, Susan. 1994. ‘The mystery of the modal progressive.’ In: Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.). Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 467–485.
Wright, Susan. 1995. ‘Subjectivity and experiential syntax.’ In: Stein, Dieter and Wright, Susan (eds.). Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Linguistic Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 467–485.
Yoshimura, Kimihiro and Taylor, John R.. 2004. ‘What makes a good middle? The role of qualia in the interpretation and acceptability of middle expressions in English.’ English Language and Linguistics 8(2), 293–321.
Ziegeler, Deborah. 1999. ‘Agentivity and the history of the English progressive.’ Transactions of the Philological Society 97, 51–101.
