Part of
Changing Structures: Studies in constructions and complementation
Edited by Mark Kaunisto, Mikko Höglund and Paul Rickman
[Studies in Language Companion Series 195] 2018
► pp. 112
References (32)
References
Berlage, Eva. 2014. Noun Phrase Complexity in English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curme, George O. 1931. Syntax. Boston MA: Heath.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2006. Distinctive collexeme analysis and diachrony. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2(2): 243–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Collostructional analysis: Measuring associations between constructions and lexical elements. In Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy [Human Cognitive Processing 43], Dylan Glynn & Justyna A. Robinson (eds), 391–404. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, Susan & Francis, Gill. 1999. Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1940. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part V: Syntax. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Egan, Thomas. 2008. Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements: From specific to general predication. In Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006, Vol. I: Syntax and Morphology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 296], Richard Dury, Maurizio Gotti & Marina Dossena (eds), 223–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 1996. On the historical development of English retrospective verbs. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–79.Google Scholar
. 1997. On patterns of complementation with verbs of effort. English Studies 78(1): 60–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. Fitting a slim dime between the verb template and argument structure construction approaches. Theoretical Linguistics, 4(1–2): 113–1135. Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2009. Colonial lag, colonial innovation or simply language change? In One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 13–37. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kachru, Braj B. 1985. Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and the Literature, Randolph Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (eds), 11–30. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Kruisinga, Etsko. 1922. A Handbook of Present-Day English, Vols. 1–2, 3rd edn. Utrecht: Kemink & Zoon.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian & Smith, Nick. 2009. Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEnery, Tony & Hardie, Andrew. 2012. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Mondorf, Britta. 2009. More Support for More-support: The Role of Processing Constraints on the Choice between Synthetic and Analytic Comparative Forms [Studies in Language Variation 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Michael. 2001. British and Irish antecedents. In The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. VI: English in North America, John Algeo (ed.), 86–153. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poutsma, Hendrik. 1929. A Grammar of Late Modern English, 2nd edn. Groningen: Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1996. The complexity principle as a factor determining grammatical variation and change in English. In Language Use, Language Acquisition and Language History: (Mostly) Empirical Studies in Honour of Rüdiger Zimmermann, Ingo Plag & Klaus Peter Schneider (eds), 25–44. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2006. The role of functional constraints in the evolution of the English complementation system. In Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms: English from 1500–2000, Christiane Dalton-Puffer, Nikolaus Ritt, Herbert Schendl & Dieter Kastovsky (eds), 143–166. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2009. Nominal complements. In , One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 1–12. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Rudanko, Juhani. 2010. Explaining grammatical variation and change: A case study of complementation in American English over three decades. Journal of English Linguistics 38(1): 4–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Changes in Complementation in British and American English: Corpus-Based Studies on Non-Finite Complements in Recent English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Linking Form and Meaning: Studies on Selected Control Patterns in Recent English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Infinitives and Gerunds in Recent English: Studies of Non-Finite Complements with Data from Large Corpora. London: Palgrave Macmillan.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2003. The dynamics of New Englishes: From identity construction to dialect birth. Language 79(2): 233–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Gries, Stefan T. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(2), 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vosberg, Uwe. 2003. The role of extractions and horror aequi in the evolution of ‑ing-complements in Modern English. In Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, Günter Rohdenburg and Britta Mondorf (eds), 305–327. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Die große Komplementverschiebung. Außersemantische Einflüsse auf die Entwicklung satzwertiger Ergänzungen im Neuenglischen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar