Cover not available
Part of
Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A sociolinguistic and comparative perspective
Edited by Gijsbert Rutten, Rik Vosters and Wim Vandenbussche
[Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 3] 2014
► pp. 1–18

The interplay of language norms and usage patterns. Comparing the history of Dutch, English, French and German

ORCID logo
Published online: 19 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ahs.3.01rut
References
Auer, Peter
2005 Europe’s sociolinguistic unity, or: A typology of European dialect/standard constellations. In Nicole Delbecque, Johan van der Auwera & Dirk Geeraerts (eds.), Perspectives on variation: Sociolinguistic, historical, comparative, 7–42. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011 Dialect vs. standard: A typology of scenarios in Europe. In Bernd Kortmann & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Europe, 485–500. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan
2004 English in modern times, 1700–1945. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1988 Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, Peter
2004 Languages and communities in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deumert, Ana & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2003a Germanic standardizations, past to present. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003b Research directions in the study of language standardization. In Ana Deumert & Wim Vandenbussche (eds.), Germanic standardizations, past to present, 461–476. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dossena, Marina
2012 The study of correspondence: Theoretical and methodological issues. In Marina Dossena & Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Letter writing in Late Modern Europe, 13–30. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dossena, Marina & Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti
(eds.) 2012 Letter writing in Late Modern Europe. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan
2005 Sprachgeschichte von unten. Untersuchungen zum geschriebenen Alltagsdeutsch im 19. Jahrhundert. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 The use of private letters and diaries in sociolinguistic investigation. In Juan M. Hernández-Campoy & Juan C. Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 156–169.Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan, Nils Langer, Joachim Sharloth & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2007 Germanic language histories ‘from below’ (1700–2000). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2007 Lower class language use in the 19th century. Special issue of Multilingua .Google Scholar
Fairman, Tony
2007 Writing and ‘the standard’: England, 1795–1834. In Stephan Elspaß & Wim Vandenbussche (eds.), Lower class language use in the 19th century, 165–199. Special issue of Multilingua .Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar
1966 Dialect, language, nation. American Anthropologist 68. 922–935. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond
(ed.) 2010a Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2010b Varieties of English in writing. The written word as linguistic evidence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2012 Standards of English. Codified varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Houdebine-Gravaud, Anne-Marie
(ed.) 2002 L’Imaginaire linguistique. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Joseph, John E
1987 Eloquence and power: The rise of language standards and standard languages. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Koch, Peter & Wulf Oesterreicher
1985 Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36. 15–43.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart
1972 Einleitung. In Reinhart Koselleck, Werner Conze & Otto Brunner (eds.), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, xiii-xxvii. Volume 1. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, Tore & Nikolas Coupland
(eds.) 2011 Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, Tore and Stefan Grondelaers
(eds.) 2013 Language (de)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: Experimental Studies. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Leerssen, Joep
2006 De bronnen van het vaderland: Taal, literatuur en de afbakening van Nederland 1806-1890. Nijmegen: Vantilt.Google Scholar
2007 National thought in Europe: A cultural history. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Lippi-Green, Rosina
2012 English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. 2nd edition. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Milroy, James
1992 Linguistic variation and change: On the historical sociolinguistics of English. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1994 Local and supra-local change in British English: the case of glottalisation. English World-Wide 15: 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James & Lesley Milroy
2012 [1985] Authority in language: Investigating standard English. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg
2012 Historical sociolinguistics: Origins, motivations, and paradigms. In Juan M. Hernández-Campoy & Juan C. Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 22–40. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade
2006 Standardisation. In Richard Hogg & David Denison (eds.), A history of the English language, 271–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nobels. Judith
2013 (Extra)Ordinary letters: A view from below on seventeenth-century Dutch. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne
1982 Socio-historical linguistics: Its status and methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert & Marijke van der Wal
2014 Letters as loot. A sociolinguistic approach to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Dutch. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salmons, Joseph
2013 A history of German: What the past reveals about today’s language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W
2007 Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simons, Tanja
2013 Ongekend 18e-eeuws Nederlands: Taalvariatie in persoonlijke brieven. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Vandenbussche, Wim
2007 Shared standardization factors in the history of sixteen Germanic languages. In Christian Fandrych & Reinier Salverda (eds.). Standard, Variation und Sprachwandel in germanischen Sprachen / Standard, variation and language change in Germanic languages, 25–36. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Wal, Marijke van der
2006 Onvoltooid verleden tijd. Witte vlekken in de taalgeschiedenis. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.Google Scholar
Wal, Marijke van der & Gijsbert Rutten
(eds.) 2013 Touching the past. Studies in the historical sociolinguistics of ego-documents. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard J
2012 Language myths. In Juan M. Hernández-Campoy & J. Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 585–606.Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Dourdy, Laura-Maï
2021. Entend-on vraiment les paysans ? Ce que la variation syntaxique nous dit des représentations sociales dans la littérature des XV e et XVI e  siècles. Cahiers internationaux de sociolinguistique N° 18:1 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Rutten, Gijsbert
2016. Historicizing diaglossia. Journal of Sociolinguistics 20:1 ► pp. 6 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.