Anderwald, Lieselotte
2014The decline of the be-perfect, linguistic relativity, and grammar writing in the nineteenth century. In Late Modern English Syntax, Marianne Hundt (ed.), 13–27. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baugh, Albert C. & Cable, Thomas
1993A History of the English Language, 4th edn. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bisang, Walter
2015Hidden complexity - The neglected side of complexity and its implications. Linguistics Vanguard 1: 177–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borchers, Dörte
2008A Grammar of Sunwar. Descriptive Grammar, Paradigms, Texts and Glossary [Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region 5.7]. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
2010Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Coetsem, Frans
2000A General and Unified Theory of the Language Transmission Process in Language Contact. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne
2003Gender Shifts in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dolberg, Florian
2019Agreement in Language Contact. Gender Development in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. [Studies in Language Companion Series 208]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
2004Grammaticalization as Economy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genetti, Carol
1988Notes on the structure of the Sunwari transitive verb. Linguistics in the Tibeto-Burman Area 11 (2): 62–92.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1979On Understanding Grammar. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
2006Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos
2004The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haeberli, Eric
2002Inflectional morphology and the loss of verb-second in English. In Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, David W. Lightfoot (ed.), 88–106. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1999Why is grammaticalization irreversible? Linguistics37 (6): 1043–1068. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization. In Up and Down the Cline. The Nature of Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 59], Olga Fischer, Muriel Norde & Harry Perridon(eds), 17–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
2005Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1993Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Keller, Rudi
1994On Language Change. The Invisible Hand in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Kememade, Ans
2012Rethinking the loss of verb second. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott(eds), 1182–1199. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kranich, Svenja & Gast, Volker
2015Explicitness of epistemic modal marking. Recent changes in British and American English. In Thinking Modally: English and Contrastive Studies on Modality, Juan Rafael Zamorano-Mansilla, Carmen Maíz, Elena Domínguez & Maria Victoria Martín de la Rosa(eds), 3–22. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony
1994Morphosyntactic variation. In Papers from the 30th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Parasession on Variation and Linguistic Theory, Katharine Beals(ed.), 180–201. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony, Taylor, Ann & Ringe, Donald
2000The Middle English verb-second contsraint: A case study in language contact and language change. In Textual Parameters in Older Languages [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory “” 195], Susan C. Herring, Pieter van Reenen & Lene Schøsler(eds), 353–391. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Labov, William
1994Principles of Linguistic Change, Vol. I: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
2013Where have all the modals gone? An essay on the declining frequency of core modal auxiliaries in recent standard English. In English Modality. Core, Periphery and Evidentiality, Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera(eds), 95–115. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leung, Alex Ho-Cheong & van der Wurff, Wim.
2018Anaphoric reference in Early Modern English: The case of said and same. In The Noun Phrase in English. Past and Present [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 246], Alex Ho-Cheong Leung & Wim van der Wurff (eds), 143–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot David W
2002Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian
2006Twentieth Century English. History, Variation, and Standardization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron
2009Language Contact. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McMahon, April M.S
1994Understanding Language Change. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Möhlig-Falke, Ruth
2012The Early English Impersonal Construction. An Analysis of Verbal and Constructional Meaning. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östör, Ákos
1982Terms of address and Hungarian society. Language Sciences 4 (1): 55–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rapacha, Lal
2005A Descriptive Grammar of Kirānti-Kõits. PhD dissertation, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
Rudnicka, Karolina
2018Variation of sentence length across time and genre: Influence on the syntactic usage in English. In Diachronic Corpora, Genre, and Language Change [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 85], Richard Jason Whitt(ed.), 219–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward
1921Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1992Language decay and contact-induced change: Similarities and differences. In Language Death. Factual and Theoretical Explorations with Special Reference to East Africa, Matthias Brenzinger(ed.), 7–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, Carmen
1994Language Contact and Change. Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sorace, Antonella
2000Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs. Language76 (4): 859–890. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt
2012Analyticity and syntheticity in the history of English. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott(eds), 654–665. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sara G. & Kaufman, Terrence
1988Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tichý, Ondřej
2018Lexical obsolescence and loss in English: 1700–2000. In Applications of Pattern-Driven Methods in Corpus Linguistics, [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 82], Joanna Kopaczyk & Jukka Tyrkkö(eds), 81–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timberlake, Alan
1977Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. In Mechanisms of Syntactic Change, Charles N. Li(ed.), 141–177. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme(eds)
2010Gradualness, Gradience, and Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 90]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme
2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wahl, Alexander & Gries, Stefan T
2020Computational extraction of formulaic sequences from corpora: Two case studies of a new extraction algorithm. In Computational Phraseology [IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 24], Gloria Corpas Pastor & Jean-Pierre Colson(eds), 84–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wedel, Andrew, Kaplan, Abby & Jackson, Scott
2013High functional load inhibits phonological contrast loss: A corpus study. Cognition 128 (2): 179–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel
1953Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems. New York NY: Linguistic Circle of New York.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William & Herzog, Marvin
1968Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Directions of Historical Linguistics, Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel(eds), 95–188. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar