Miscellaneous published in:
Patterns of Change in 18th-century English: A sociolinguistic approach
Edited by Terttu Nevalainen, Minna Palander-Collin and Tanja Säily
[Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 8] 2018
► pp. 271–294

References

Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Aarts, Bas, Joanne Close & Sean Wallis
2010 Recent changes in the use of the progressive construction in English. In Bert Cappelle & Naoaki Wada (eds.), Distinctions in English grammar: Offered to Renaat Declerck, 48–167. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Aarts, Bas, Maria José López-Couso & Belén Méndez-Naya
2012 Late Modern English syntax. In Alexander Bergs & Laurel Brinton (eds.), Historical linguistics of English, vol. 2, 869–887. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia
1989 With double tongue: Diglossia, stylistics and the teaching of English. In Michael Short (ed.), Reading, analysing and teaching literature, 204–240. London: Longman.Google Scholar
1999 Literary language. In Roger Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. III: 1476–1776, 539–653. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Prescribed reading: Pronouns and gender in the eighteenth century. Historical Sociolinguistics and Sociohistorical Linguistics 7. http://​www​.hum2​.leidenuniv​.nl​/hsl​_shl​/Adamson​.htm.Google Scholar
Agha, Asif
2007 Language and social relations. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Karen
2000 Productivity in English nominal and adjectival derivation, 1100–2000. Perth: University of Western Australia PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte
2012 Clumsy, awkward or having a peculiar propriety? Prescriptive judgements and language change in the 19th century. Language Sciences 34(1). 28–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Language between description and prescription: Verb categories in nineteenth-century grammars of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ando, Sadao
1976 A descriptive syntax of Christopher Marlowe’s language. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
Apcar, Amy
(ed.) 1918 Life and adventures of Emin Joseph Emin, 1726–1809. Calcutta: The Baptist Mission Press.Google Scholar
Ard, Josh
1982 Auxiliary do: Support or emphasis? Linguistics 20. 445–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Argamon, Shlomo, Moshe Koppel, Jonathan Fine & Anat Rachel Shimoni
2003 Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text 23(3). 321–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arkell, Tom
2006 Illuminations and distortions: Gregory King’s scheme calculated for the year 1688 and the social structure of later Stuart England. The Economic History Review N.S. 59. 32–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arnaud, René
1973 La forme progressive en Anglais du XIXe siècle. Lille: Service de Reproduction de Thèses Université Lille III.Google Scholar
1998 The development of the progressive in 19th century English: A quantitative study. Language Variation and Change 10(2). 123–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 (2007.)Google Scholar
Auer, Anita
2008 The letter which that I wrote: Self-corrections in Late Modern English letters. In Marina Dossena & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.), Studies in Late Modern English correspondence: Methodology and data (Linguistic Insights Studies in Language and Communication 76), 213–234. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Auer, Anita & Victorina González-Díaz
2005 Eighteenth-century prescriptivism in English: A re-evaluation of its effects on actual language usage. Multilingua 24(4). 317–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, Frances
1973 Epistolary conventions in the Clift family correspondence. English Studies 54. 9–22, 129–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 The Clift family correspondence 1792–1846. Sheffield: CECTAL.Google Scholar
1994 The effect of exposure to Standard English: The language of William Clift. In Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800, 285–313. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2000 Letter writing in a Cornish community in the 1790s. In David Barton & Nigel Hall (eds.), Letter writing as a social practice, 43–61. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Authorized Version = The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments, translated out of the original tongues: And with the former translations diligently compared and revised by His Majesty’s special command. Authorized King James version. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://​quod​.lib​.umich​.edu​/k​/kjv/ (15 June 2013.)Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H.
2009 Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, 899–919. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bækken, Bjørg
1998 Word order patterns in Early Modern English with special reference to the position of the subject and the finite verb (Studia Anglistica Norvegica 9). Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
1999 Periphrastic do in Early Modern English. Folia Linguistica Historica XX. 107–128.Google Scholar
2002  Yet this follie doth many times assault the brauest minds: Affirmative declarative do in 17th-century English. Nordic Journal of English Studies 1. 317–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Word order in 17th century English. A study of the stabilisation of the XSV pattern (Studia Anglistica Norvegica 12). Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Baeskow, Heike
2012 -Ness and ‑ity: Phonological exponents of n or meaningful nominalizers of different adjectival domains? Journal of English Linguistics 40(1). 6–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Richard W.
2010 Variation and change in eighteenth-century English. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change, 182–199. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baines, Paul
2004 The long 18th century. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Baker, Robert
1770 Remarks on the English language, in the nature of Vaugelas’s remarks on the French. London.Google Scholar
Barber, Charles
1976 Early Modern English. London: André Deutch.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
2001 Morphological productivity (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bax, Randy C.
2005 Traces of Johnson in the language of Fanny Burney. International Journal of English Studies 5(1). 159–181.Google Scholar
2008  Foolish, foolisher, foolishest: Eighteenth-century English grammars and the comparison of adjectives. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 279–288. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Baxter, Gareth & William Croft
2016 Modeling language change across the lifespan: Individual trajectories in community change. Language Variation and Change 28(2). 129–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayly, Anselm
1758 An introduction to languages, literary and philosophical. London.Google Scholar
1772 A plain and complete grammar of the English language. London.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C.
2004 English in modern times 1700–1945. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan C., Carmela Nocera & Massimo Sturiale
(eds.) 2008 Perspectives on prescriptivism. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan
1984 Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13(2). 145–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benjamini, Yoav & Yosef Hochberg
1995 Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 57(1). 289–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergs, Alexander
2004 Address pronouns in Late Middle English. In Alicia Rodríguez-Alvarez & Francisco Alonso-Almeida (eds.), Voices on the past: Studies in Old and Middle English language and literature, 127–138. Coruna: Netbiblo.Google Scholar
2005 Social networks and historical sociolinguistics: Studies in morphosyntactic variation in the Paston Letters (1421–1503). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 The Uniformitarian Principle and the risk of anachronisms in language and social history. In Juan Manuel Hernández-Campoy & Juan Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 80–98. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bestgen, Yves
2014 Inadequacy of the chi-squared test to examine vocabulary differences between corpora. Literary and Linguistic Computing 29(2). 164–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1988 Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995 Dimensions of register variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Dimensions of variation among 18th-century speech-based and written registers. In Hans-Jürgen Diller & Manfred Görlach (eds.), Towards a history of English as a history of genres (Anglistische Forschungen 298), 89–109. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
2010 What can a corpus tell us about registers and genres? In Anne O’Keeffe & Michael McCarthy (eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics, 241–254. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan
1997 Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 52), 253–275. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
1999 Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bingham, William
1867 A grammar of the English language: For the use of schools and academies. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Black, Jeremy
2008 Eighteenth-century Britain, 1688–1783, 2nd edn. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, Joseph et al.
(eds.) 2006 The broadview anthology of British literature: The restoration and the eighteenth century. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Blake, Norman F.
1992 The literary language. In Norman F. Blake (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. II: 1066–1476, 500–541. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L.
1948 On defining the morpheme. Word 4. 18–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1976 The in-group: One and its compounds. In P. A. Reich (ed.), The second LACUS forum 1975, 229–237. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.Google Scholar
Bonnell, Thomas F.
2009 The reprint trade. In Michael F. Suarez & Michael L. Turner (eds.), The Cambridge history of the book in Britain, vol. 5, 1695–1830, 699–709. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boulton, Jeremy
2000 London 1540–1700. In Peter Clark (ed.), The Cambridge history of urban Britain, vol. 2, 1540–1840, 315–346. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braaten, Björn
1967 Notes on continuous tenses in English. Norsk Tidskrift for Sprogvidenskap 21. 167–180.Google Scholar
Brant, Clare
2006 Eighteenth-century letters and British culture. London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav & Miriam Meyerhoff
2014 Significant or random? A critical review of sociolinguistic generalisations based on large corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19(1). 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brightland, John & Charles Gildon
1711 A grammar of the English tongue. London.Google Scholar
Brittain, Lewis
1788 Rudiments of English grammar. Louvain.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger & Albert Gilman
1960 The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in language, 253–276. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc, Emmanuel Keuleers & Boris New
2011 Assessing the usefulness of Google Books’ word frequencies for psycholinguistic research on word processing. Frontiers in Psychology 2, 27. doi: DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, James
1770 A plan of an English grammar-school education. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Burke, Peter
2000 A civil tongue: Language and politeness in Early Modern Europe. In Peter Burke, Brian Harrison & Paul Slack (eds.), Civil histories: Essays presented to Sir Keith Thomas, 31–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burles, Edward
1652 Grammatica Burlesa, or a new English grammar. (Facsimile edition, R. C. Alston (ed.) English linguistics 1500–1800. Menston: Scolar Press 1971.)Google Scholar
Burn, John
1766 A practical grammar of the English language. Glasgow.Google Scholar
Burnley, David
2003 The T/V pronouns in later Middle English literature. In Irma Taavitsainen & Andreas H. Jucker (eds.), Diachronic perspectives on address term systems (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 107), 27–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2010 Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrne, Muriel St Clare
1964 The foundations of Elizabethan language. In Allardyce Nicoll (ed.), Shakespeare in his own age (Shakespeare Survey 17), 223–239. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, George
1776 The philosophy of rhetoric […]. Volume 1. London: printed for W. Strahan; and T. Cadell, in the Strand; and W. Creech at Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Cannadine, David
2000 Class in Britain. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Card, William, Raven I. McDavid Jr., & Virginia McDavid
1984 Dimensions of usage and dictionary labelling. Journal of English Linguistics 17. 57–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carretta, Vincent
2004 Sancho, (Charles) Ignatius (1729?–1780). Oxford dictionary of national biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, Philip
2001 Men and the emergence of polite society, 1660–1800. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
CEEC = Corpora of Early English Correspondence Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg et al. at the Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD​/corpora​/CEEC/ (5 May 2014.)
CEECE Corpus of Early English Correspondence Extension Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Mikko Laitinen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, Tanja Säily and Anni Sairio at the Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki
Chambers, J. K.
2009 Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. Revised edition. Chichester & Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny
2013 Grammaticalisation in social context: The emergence of a new English pronoun. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17(5). 608–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Claridge, Claudia & Merja Kytö
2014  I had lost sight of them then for a bit, but I went on pretty fast: Two degree modifiers in the Old Bailey Corpus. In Irma Taavitsainen, Andreas H. Jucker & Jukka Tuominen (eds.), Diachronic corpus pragmatics, 29–52. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer
2004 Women, men, and language: A sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language, 3rd edn. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
COCA = Davies, Mark (2008–) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 400+ million words, 1990–present. Available online at http://​www​.americancorpus​.org/.
Cohen, Michèle
2006 ‘A little learning’: The curriculum and the construction of gender difference in the long eighteenth century. British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies 29(3). 321–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo
2012 The role of social networks and mobility in diachronic sociolinguistics. In Juan Manuel Hernández-Campoy & Juan Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 332–352. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CoRD Corpus Resource Database. Compiled by the Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change in English (VARIENG), University of Helsinki. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD/.
Coote, Charles
1788 Elements of the grammar of the English language. London.Google Scholar
Corfield, Penelope J.
1991 Class by name and number in eighteenth-century Britain. In Penelope J. Corfield (ed.), Language, history and class, 101–130. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cowie, Claire
1999 Diachronic word-formation: A corpus-based study of derived nominalizations in the history of English. Cambridge: University of Cambridge PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
2003 “Uncommon terminations”: Proscription and morphological productivity. Italian Journal of Linguistics 15(1). 17–30.Google Scholar
Cressy, David
1980 Literacy and society in England and beyond. In David Cressy (ed.), Literacy and the social order. Reading and writing in Tudor and Stuart England, 175–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Merja Kytö
2010 Early Modern English dialogues: Spoken interaction as writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Minna Nevala
2012 Sociocultural processes and the history of English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English (Oxford Handbooks in Linguistics), 365–391. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Arcy, Alexandra, Bill Haddican, Hazel Richards, Sali A. Tagliamonte & Ann Taylor
2013 Asymmetrical trajectories: The past and present of ‑body/‑one . Language Variation and Change 25(3). 287–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Torsten
1956 Linguistic studies in some Elizabethan writings. II The auxiliary do. Acta Jutlandica XXVIII. 3–104.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, Christiane
1994 Productive or not productive? The Romance element in Middle English derivation. In Francisco Fernández, Miguel Fuster & Juan José Calvo (eds.), English Historical Linguistics 1992: Papers from the 7th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Valencia, 22–26 September 1992 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 113), 247–260. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 The French influence on Middle English morphology: A corpus-based study of derivation (Topics in English Linguistics 20). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrej
1992 The evidence for analytic and synthetic developments in English. In Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics, 25–41. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daunton, M. S.
1995 Progress and poverty: An economic and social history of Britain 1700–1850. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark
2011– Google Books Corpus. Based on Google Books n-grams (Michel et al. 2011) http://​googlebooks​.byu​.edu.Google Scholar
2012 Some methodological issues related to corpus-based investigations of recent syntactic changes in English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 157–174. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Making Google Books n-grams useful for a wide range of research on language change. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19(3). 401–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daybell, James
(ed.) 2001 Early modern women’s letter writing, 1450–1700. Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Women letter-writers in Tudor England. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik
2013 Spreading patterns: Diffusional change in the English system of complementation. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Denison, David
1985 The origins of periphrastic do: Ellegård and Visser reconsidered. In Roger Eaton, Olga Fischer, Willem Koopman & Frederike van der Leek (eds.), Papers from the 4th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, 45–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1993 English historical syntax: Verbal constructions (Longman Linguistics Library). London: Longman.Google Scholar
1998 Syntax. In Suzanne Romaine (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, IV: 1776–1997, 92–329. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2003 Log(ist)ic and simplistic S-curves. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 54–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deumert, Ana & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2003 Germanic standardizations: Past to present (Impact: Studies in Language and Society 18). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickens, Charles
1859 A tale of two cities. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen, Hendrik De Smet & Jukka Tyrkkö
2011 A European database of descriptors of English electronic texts. The European English Messenger 19. 21–35.Google Scholar
Dilworth, Thomas
1751 A new guide to the English tongue. 13th edn. London.Google Scholar
Dossena, Marina
(ed.) 2014 Transatlantic perspectives on Late Modern English. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dossena, Marina, John G. Newman & Sylwester Łodej
(eds.) 2014 Token: A Journal of English Linguistics (Volume 3): Special issue on Late Modern English.Google Scholar
Dryden, John
1672a The conquest of Granada by the Spaniards in two parts. London: T. N. for Henry Herringman.Google Scholar
1672b Defence of the Epilogue to ‘The conquest of Granada’. London.Google Scholar
Duncan, D.
1731 A new English grammar. London.Google Scholar
ECEG = Eighteenth-Century English Grammars database 2010 Compiled by Nuria Yáñez-Bouza (Manchester) and María E. Rodríguez-Gil (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria). http://​www​.manchester​.ac​.uk​/ECEG. (September 2012.)Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope
2000 Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2012 Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology 41. 87–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Paul & Polly Rewt
(eds.) 1994 The letters of Ignatius Sancho. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ellegård, Alvar
1953 The auxiliary do, the establishment and regulation of its use in English (Gothenburg Studies in English 2). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Elphinson, James
1765 The principles of the English language digested. London.Google Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan
2012 Between linguistic creativity and formulaic restriction: Cross-linguistic perspectives on nineteenth-century lower class writers’ private letters. In Marina Dossena & Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Letter writing in Late Modern Europe, 45–64. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan, Nils Langer, Joachim Scharloth & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2007 Germanic language histories ‘from below’ (1700–2000) (Studia Linguistica Germanica 86). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emsley, Clive, Tim Hitchcock & Robert Shoemaker
2013 London history: A population history of London. Old Bailey proceedings online. http://​www​.oldbaileyonline​.org, version 7.0 (13 May 2013.)Google Scholar
Fairman, Tony
2012 Letters in mechanically-schooled language. Theories and ideologies. In Marina Dossena & Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Letter writing in Late Modern Europe, 205–227. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Language in print and handwriting. In Anita Auer, Daniel Schreier & Richard J. Watts (eds.), Letter writing and language change, 53–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farnworth, Richard
1655 The pure language of the spirit of truth set forth for the confounding false languages; acted out of pride, ambition and deceit, or, thee and thou in its place is the proper language to any single person whatsoever: Proved by severall examples, etc. London.Google Scholar
Farro, Daniel
1754 The royal universal British grammar and vocabulary. London.Google Scholar
Feather, John
1985 The provincial book trade in eighteenth-century England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fell, John
1784 An essay towards an English grammar. London.Google Scholar
Fenning, Daniel
1771 A new grammar of the English language; or an easy introduction to the art of speaking and writing English with propriety and correctness: […]. London: printed for S. Crowder.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles
1996 Variation and drift: Loss of agreement in Germanic. In T. Huebner (ed.), Sociolinguistic perspectives: Papers on language in society, 1959–1994, 241–260. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku
2003 More on the English progressive and the Celtic connection. In Hildegard Tristram (ed.), The Celtic Englishes III, 150–168. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku & Juhani Klemola
2012 English in contact: Celtic and Celtic Englishes. In Alexander Bergs & Laurel Brinton (eds.), English historical linguistics, vol. 2, 1687–1703. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward
1998 English grammar and usage. In Suzanne Romaine (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, 1776–1997, vol. IV, 536–588. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward & Douglas Biber
2001 Register variation and social dialect variation: The Register Axiom. In Penelope Eckert & John R. Rickford (eds.), Style and sociolinguistic variation, 235–267. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Finkenstaedt, Thomas
1963 You und thou: Studien zur Anrede im Englischen . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Michael
2004 Counterflows to colonialism: Indian travellers and settlers in Britain, 1600–1857. Ohio: Oberlin College.Google Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan
1998 The commerce of language in the pursuit of politeness in eighteenth-century England. English Studies 79. 309–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 The Spectator, the politics of social networks, and language standardisation in eighteenth-century England. In Laura Wright (ed.), The development of Standard English, 1300–1800: Theories, descriptions, conflicts, 195–218. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 The meanings and uses of the progressive construction in an early eighteenth-century English network. In Anne Curzan & Kimberly Emmons (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language II, 131–173. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Social factors and language change in eighteenth-century England: The case of negative concord. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 113. 293–321.Google Scholar
Fogg, Peter W.
1792–96 Elementa Anglicana; or, the principles of English grammar displayed and exemplified. 2 vols. London.Google Scholar
Fogg, Peter Walkden
1796 Elementa Anglicana. Stockport.Google Scholar
Forgeng, Jeffrey L.
2007 Daily life in Stuart England. Westwood, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Fox, George, John Stubs & Benjamin Furley
1660 A battle-door for teachers & professors to learn singular & plural; you to many, and thou to one. London.Google Scholar
Frank, Thomas
1985 The rise of do-support in Early Modern English: A reappraisal. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 10. 1–29.Google Scholar
Friginal, Eric & Jack A. Hardy
2014 Corpus-based sociolinguistics: A guide for students. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Friginal, Eric, Marsha Walker & Janet Beth Randall
2014 Exploring mega-corpora: Google Ngram Viewer and the Corpus of Historical American English. EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages 1(1). 48–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gachelin, Jean-Marc
1997 The progressive and habitual aspects in non-standard Englishes. In Edgar Werner Schneider (ed.), Englishes Around the World, vol. 1, 33–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, Anne
2013 Derivation in Middle English: Regional and text type variation. Zurich: University of Zurich PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Gerner, Jürgen
1996  Untersuchungen zur Funktion des emphatischen do im Englischen . Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gil, Alexander
1619 Logonomia Anglica. London: J. Beale.Google Scholar
González-Díaz, Victorina
2008 On normative grammarians and the double marking of degree. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 289–310. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Google
2013a Google Books Ngram Viewer. https://​books​.google​.com​/ngrams/.
2013b About Ngram Viewer. https://​books​.google​.com​/ngrams​/info.
Görlach, Manfred
1988 The study of Early Modern English variation – the Cinderella of English historical linguistics? In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical dialectology, regional and social, 211–228. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Eighteenth-century English (Sprachwissenschaftliche Studienbücher). Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Greaves, Paul
1594 Grammatica Anglicana. London. (Facsimile edition, R. C. Alston (ed.) English linguistics 1500–1800. Menston: Scolar Press 1969.)Google Scholar
Greenwood, James
1722 [1711] An essay towards a practical English grammar, […], 2nd edn. London: printed for John Clark.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. & Martin Hilpert
2010 Modeling diachronic change in the third person singular: A multifactorial, verb- and author-specific exploratory approach. English Language and Linguistics 14(3). 293–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter
2011 The science of pronominal usage: He and it in conference to inanimate entities in Late Middle English texts on alchemy. Journal of English Linguistics 39(4). 335–358.Google Scholar
Hammond, Samuel
1750 A new introduction to learning; or, a sure guide to the English pronunciation and orthography. Nottingham: Creswell.Google Scholar
Hay, Douglas & Nicholas Rogers
1997 Eighteenth-century English society: Shuttles and swords. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Helsinki Corpus = The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts (1991) Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. Compiled by Matti Rissanen (Project leader), Merja Kytö (Project secretary); Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, Matti Kilpiö (Old English); Saara Nevanlinna, Irma Taavitsainen (Middle English); Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (Early Modern English).Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond
2010a Timeline for the eighteenth century. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change, 139–159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2010b Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Early English and the Celtic hypothesis. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinneburg, Alexander, Heikki Mannila, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Terttu Nevalainen & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg
2007 How to handle small samples: Bootstrap and Bayesian methods in the analysis of linguistic change. Literary and Linguistic Computing 22. 137–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hodson, Jane
2008 Joseph Priestley’s two Rudiments of English grammar: 1761 and 1768. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 177–190. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Holmes, George & Daniel Szechi
1993 The age of oligarchy. Pre-industrial Britain 1722–1783. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet & Miriam Meyerhoff
2005 Different voices, different views: An introduction to current research in language and gender. In Janet Holmes & Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.), The handbook of language and gender, 1–17. Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holmqvist, Erik
1922 On the history of the English present inflections, particularly -th and -s. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Honegger, Thomas
2003 ‘And if ye wol nat so, my lady sweete, thanne preye I thee, […].’: Forms of address in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale . In Irma Taavitsainen & Andreas H. Jucker (eds.), Diachronic perspectives on address term systems (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 107), 61–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hope, Jonathan
1993 Second person singular pronouns in records of early modern ‘spoken’ English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94(1). 83–100.Google Scholar
Horne Tooke, John
1798 The diversions of Purley, vol. 1. 2nd edn. London.Google Scholar
Hornsey, John
1793 A short English grammar in two parts: Simplified to the capacities of children. York.Google Scholar
Huber, Magnus
2007 The Old Bailey Proceedings, 1674–1834: Evaluating and annotating a corpus of 18th- and 19th-century spoken English. In Anneli Meurman-Solin & Arja Nurmi (eds.), Annotating variation and change (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 1). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/01​/huber/.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum
2002 The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Richard A.
1996 Sociolinguistics, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne
2004 Animacy, agentivity and the spread of the progressive in Modern English. English Language and Linguistics 8(1). 47–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne & Geoffrey Leech
2012 “Small is beautiful”: On the value of standard reference corpora for observing recent grammatical change. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 175–188. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne & Christian Mair
1999 ‘Agile’ and ‘uptight’ genres: The corpus-based approach to language change in progress. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4(2). 221–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ihalainen, Ossi
1976 Periphrastic do in affirmative sentences in the dialect of East Somerset. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen LXXVII. 608–622.Google Scholar
1982 On the notion “possible grammatical change”: A look at a perfectly good change that did not quite make it. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 15. 3–11.Google Scholar
1994 The dialects of England since 1776. In Robert Burchfield (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. V: English in Britain and overseas: Origins and developments, 197–274. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Immel, Andrea
2009 Children’s books and school books. In Michael F. Suarez & Michael L. Turner (eds.), The Cambridge history of the book in Britain, vol. 5, 1695–1830, 736–749. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joby, Chris
2014 Third-person singular zero in the Norfolk dialect: A re-assessment. Folia Linguistica Historica 35. 135–172.Google Scholar
Johnson, Samuel
1755 A Dictionary of the English Language, vol. 2. London.Google Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara
2016 Enregisterment: How linguistic items become linked with ways of speaking. Language and Linguistics Compass 10. 632–643. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, Hugh
1724 An accidence to the English tongue. London.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H.
2000a History of English and English historical linguistics. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett.Google Scholar
2000b  Thou in the history of English: A case for historical semantics or pragmatics? In Christiane Dalton-Puffer & Nikolaus Ritt (eds.), Words: Structure, meaning, function: A festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, 153–163. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., Irma Taavitsainen & Gerold Schneider
2012 Semantic corpus trawling: Expressions of “courtesy” and “politeness” in the Helsinki Corpus. In Carla Suhr & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Developing corpus methodology for historical pragmatics (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 11). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/11​/jucker​_taavitsainen​_schneider/.Google Scholar
Kaislaniemi, Samuli
2006 The Corpus of Early English Correspondence Extension and Supplement. Poster presented at ICAME 27 (the 27th conference of the International Computer Archive for Medieval and Modern English), 24–28 May, Espoo, Finland. Available on CoRD: http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD​/corpora​/CEEC​/Kaislaniemi​_posteri​_96dpi​.pdf.
Kampstra, Peter
2008 Beanplot: A boxplot alternative for visual comparison of distributions. Journal of Statistical Software 28. Code Snippet 1, http://​www​.jstatsoft​.org​/v28​/c01/. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kekäläinen, Kirsti
1971 Aspects of style and language in the English and Scottish popular ballads. Helsinki: University of Helsinki licentiate thesis.Google Scholar
Kerswill, Paul
1996 Children, adolescents, and language change. Language Variation and Change 8. 177–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam
2001 Comparing corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 6(1). 97–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Killie, Kristin
2004 Subjectivity and the English progressive. English Language and Linguistics 8(1). 25–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirkby, John
1746 A new English grammar, or, guide to the English tongue, with notes. London: for R. Manby & H. S. Coy (Facs. ed. Menston: Scolar 1971, EL 297).Google Scholar
Klein, Lawrence E.
1994 “Politeness” as linguistic ideology in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England. In Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800, 31–50. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2002 Politeness and the interpretation of the British eighteenth century. The Historical Journal 45. 869–898. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kleiner, Brian & Dennis R. Preston
1997 Discourse disputes: How come you do do like you do. Folia Linguistica 31. 105–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knox, Vicesimus
1789 Liberal education, 10th edn., 2 vols. London.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. 15–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koplenig, Alexander
2017 The impact of lacking metadata for the measurement of cultural and linguistic change using the Google Ngram data sets: Reconstructing the composition of the German corpus in times of WWII. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 32(1). 169–188.Google Scholar
Kranich, Svenja
2008 Subjective progressives in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century English. Secondary grammaticalization as a process of objectification. In Marina Dossena, Richard Dury & Maurizio Gotti (eds.), English Historical Linguistics 2006. Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), vol. 1, 241–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2010 The progressive in Modern English: A corpus-based study of grammaticalization and related changes (Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 72). Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurki, Tommi
2005 Yksilön ja ryhmän kielen reaaliaikainen muuttuminen: Kielenmuutosten seuraamisesta ja niiden tarkastelussa käytettävistä menetelmistä [Real-time language change of group and individual: On following linguistic changes in apparent time and real time, and on the methods used in the study of language change]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja
1993 Third-person present singular verb inflection in early British and American English. Language Variation and Change 5. 113–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(comp) 1996 Manual to the diachronic part of the Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. Coding conventions and lists of source texts, 3rd edn. Helsinki: Department of English, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja & Matti Rissanen
1997 Introduction: Language analysis and diachronic corpora. In Raymond Hickey, Merja Kytö, Ian Lancashire & Matti Rissanen (eds.), Tracing the trail of time: Proceedings from the second Diachronic Corpora workshop, 9–22. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1978 [1972] Sociolinguistic patterns. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
1994 Principles of linguistic change, vol. 1: Internal factors (Language in Society 20). Oxford, UK & Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2001 Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors (Language in Society 29). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2010 Principles of linguistic change, vol. 3: Cognitive and cultural factors (Language in Society 39). Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Lea & Taru Nordlund
2012 Performing identities and interaction through epistolary formulae. In Marina Dossena & Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Letter writing in Late Modern Europe, 65–88. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Mikko
2002 Extending the Corpus of Early English Correspondence to the 18th century. Helsinki English Studies 2. http://​blogs​.helsinki​.fi​/hes​-eng​/volumes​/volume​-2​-corpora​-in​-todays​-english​-studies.Google Scholar
2007a Explaining present-day variation: Agreement patterns of he and they with singular antecedents. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 108(4). 537–562.Google Scholar
2007b Agreement patterns in English. Diachronic corpus studies on common-number pronouns. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
2009 Singular you was/you were variation and English normative grammars in the eighteenth century. In Arja Nurmi, Minna Nevala & Minna Palander-Collin (eds.), The language of daily life in England (1400–1800), 199–217. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langford, Paul
1998 [1989] A polite and commercial people: England, 1727–1783. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
2002 The uses of eighteenth-century politeness. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 12. 311–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lass, Roger
(ed.) 1999a The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. III: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1999b Phonology and morphology. In Roger Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. III: 1476–1776, 56–186. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1993 100 million words of English. English Today 9(1). 9–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey & Nicholas Smith
2005 Extending the possibilities of corpus-based research on English in the twentieth century: A prequel to LOB and FLOB. ICAME Journal 29. 83–98.Google Scholar
Lijffijt, Jefrey
2013 Computational methods for comparison and exploration of event sequences. Helsinki: Aalto University PhD dissertation. http://​urn​.fi​/URN:ISBN:978​-952​-60​-5475​-9.Google Scholar
Lijffijt, Jefrey, Terttu Nevalainen, Tanja Säily, Panagiotis Papapetrou, Kai Puolamäki & Heikki Mannila
2016 Significance testing of word frequencies in corpora. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 31(2). 374–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lijffijt, Jefrey, Tanja Säily & Terttu Nevalainen
2012 CEECing the baseline: Lexical stability and significant change in a historical corpus. In Jukka Tyrkkö, Matti Kilpiö, Terttu Nevalainen & Matti Rissanen (eds.), Outposts of historical corpus linguistics: From the Helsinki Corpus to a proliferation of resources (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 10). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/10​/lijffijt​_saily​_nevalainen/.Google Scholar
Lin, Yuri, Jean-Baptiste Michel, Erez Lieberman Aiden, Jon Orwant, Will Brockman & Slav Petrov
2012 Syntactic annotations for the Google Books Ngram Corpus. In Proceedings of the ACL 2012 system demonstrations, 169–174. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Lindert, Peter H. & Jeffrey G. Williamson
1982 Revising England’s social tables 1688–1812. Explorations in Economic History 19. 385–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, Mark & Mark Aronoff
2013 Natural selection in self-organizing morphological systems. In Nabil Hathout, Fabio Montermini & Jesse Tseng (eds.), Morphology in Toulouse: Selected proceedings of Décembrettes 7 (LINCOM Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 51). Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Lodge, R. Anthony
2004 A sociolinguistic history of Parisian French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Los, Bettelou
2002 The loss of the indefinite pronoun man. Syntactic change and information structure. In Teresa Fanego, María José López-Couso & Javier Perez-Guerra (eds.), English historical syntax and morphology. Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000, 181–202. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Loughton, William
1734 A practical grammar of the English tongue. London.Google Scholar
1744 A practical grammar of the English tongue, 4th edn. London.Google Scholar
Lowe, Solomon
1737 English grammar reformd into a small compass and easy method for the readier learning and better understanding of the English tongue. London.Google Scholar
Lowth, Robert
1762 A short introduction to English grammar: With critical notes. London.Google Scholar
1763 A short introduction to English grammar: With critical notes, 2nd edn. Dublin: Saunders.Google Scholar
Lutz, Angelika
1998 The interplay of external and internal factors in morphological restructuring: The case of you . In Jacek Fisiak & Marcin Krygier (eds.), Advances in English historical linguistics (1996), 189–210. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian
2006 Twentieth-century English: History, variation and standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, H. B. & D. R. Whitney
1947 On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18(1). 50–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mannila, Heikki, Terttu Nevalainen & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg
2013 Quantifying variation and estimating the effects of sample size on the frequencies of linguistic variables. In Manfred Krug & Julia Schlüter (eds.), Research methods in language variation and change, 337–360. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marchand, Hans
1969 The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach, 2nd edn. Munich: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Martin, Benjamin
1754 An introduction to the English language and learning in three parts. London.Google Scholar
Martinet, André
1964 Elements of general linguistics. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Martínez-Insua, Ana E. & Javier Pérez-Guerra
2006 ‘There’s Bjørg’: On there-sentences in the recent history of English. In Leiv Egil Breivik, Sandra Halverson & Kari E. Haugland (eds.), ‘These things I write vnto thee …’ Essays in honour of Bjørg Bækken, 189–211. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
McIntosh, Angus, M. L. Samuels & Michael Benskin
1986 A linguistic atlas of Late Mediaeval English, vol. I. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar
McIntosh, Carey
1986 Common and courtly language: The stylistics of social class in 18th-century British literature. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 The evolution of English prose 1700–1800: Style, politeness, and print culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 British English in the long eighteenth century (1660–1830). In Haruko Momma & Michael Matto (eds.), Blackwell companion to the history of the English language, 228–234. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, Lister
1771 The rudiments of the English tongue; or, the principles of English grammar, […], 2nd edn. Newcastle: printed by T. Saint, for J. Wilkie, London.Google Scholar
Michael, Ian
1970 English grammatical categories and the tradition to 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1987 The teaching of English from the sixteenth century to 1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 The hyperactive production of English grammars in the nineteenth century: A speculative bibliography. Publishing History 41. 23–61.Google Scholar
Michel, Jean-Baptiste, Yuan Kui Shen, Aviva Presser Aiden, Adrian Veres, Matthew K. Gray, The Google Books Team, Joseph P. Pickett, et al.
2011 Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science 331(6014). 176–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James
1992 Linguistic variation and change: On the historical sociolinguistics of English (Language in Society 19). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milroy, James & Lesley Milroy
2012 [1985] Authority in language: Investigating language prescription and standardisation, 4th edn. London & New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minugh, David
1999 What aileth thee, to print so curiously? Archaic forms and contemporary newspaper language. In Irma Taavitsainen, Gunnel Melchers & Päivi Pahta (eds.), Writing in non-standard English, 47–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Moore, Colette
2002 Writing good Southerne: Local and supralocal norms in the Plumpton letter collection. Language Variation and Change 14. 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mossé, Fernand
1938 Histoire de la forme périphrastique être + participe présent en germanique. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, Lynda
2003 [1995] ‘Talking proper’: The rise of accent as social symbol, 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Munck, Thomas
2000 The enlightenment: A comparative social history 1721–1794. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Murray, Lindley
1795 English grammar: Adapted to the different classes of learners. London.Google Scholar
Mustanoja, Tauno F.
1960 A Middle English syntax. 1: Parts of speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Nevala, Minna
2002  Your moder sent a letter to the: Pronouns of address in private correspondence from Late Middle to Late Modern English. In Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi & Matti Rissanen (eds.), Variation past and present: VARIENG studies on English for Terttu Nevalainen (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 61), 135–159. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
2004a Accessing politeness axes: On forms of address and terms of reference in early English correspondence. Journal of Pragmatics 36(12). 2125–2160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004b Address in early English correspondence: Its forms and socio-pragmatic functions (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 64). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
2009  Friends will be friends? The sociopragmatics of referential terms in early English letters. In Andreas H. Jucker, Daniel Schreier & Marianne Hundt (eds.), Corpora: Pragmatics and discourse. Papers from the 29th international conference on English language research on computerized corpora, 81–101. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Nevala, Minna & Arja Nurmi
2013  The Corpora of Early English Correspondence (CEEC400). In Anneli Meurman-Solin & Jukka Tyrkkö (eds.), Principles and practices for the digital editing and annotation of diachronic data (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 14). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/14​/nevala​_nurmi/.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu
1996 Gender difference. In Terttu Nevalainen & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence, 77–91. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
2000 Processes of supralocalisation and the rise of Standard English in the Early Modern period. In Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero, David Denison, Richard M. Hogg & C. B. McCully (eds.), Generative theory and corpus studies: A dialogue from 10 ICEHL, 329–372. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Negative concord as an English “vernacular universal”: Social history and linguistic typology. Journal of English Linguistics 34(3). 257–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Variation in written English: Grammar change or a shift in style? In Susan Kermas & Maurizio Gotti (eds.), Socially-conditioned language change: Diachronic and synchronic insights, 31–51. Lecce: Edizioni del Grifo.Google Scholar
2009 Number agreement in existential constructions: A sociolinguistic study of 18th-century English. In Markku Filppula, Juhani Klemola & Heli Paulasto (eds.), Vernacular universals and language contact, 80–102. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2013 English historical corpora in transition: From new tools to legacy corpora? In Paul Bennett, Martin Durrell, Silke Scheible & Richard J. Whitt (eds.), New methods in historical corpora (Korpuslinguistik und interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf Sprache 3), 37–53. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2014a Sociohistorical analysis. In Janet Holmes & Kirk Hazen (eds.), Research methods in sociolinguistics: A practical guide, 93–106. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
2014b What are historical sociolinguistics? Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 1(2). 243–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Descriptive adequacy of the S-curve model in diachronic studies of language change. In Christina Sanchez-Stockhammer (ed.), Can we predict linguistic change? (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 16). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/16​/nevalainen/.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
(eds.) 2012 The Oxford handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg
1994a Sociolinguistics and language history: The Helsinki Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 13. 135–143.Google Scholar
1994b  Its strength and the beauty of it: The standardization of the third person neuter possessive in Early Modern English. In Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800, 171–183. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(eds.) 1996a Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
1996b The Corpus of Early English Correspondence. In Terttu Nevalainen & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence, 39–54. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
2000a The changing role of London on the linguistic map of Tudor and Stuart England. In Dieter Kastovsky & Arthur Mettinger (eds.), The history of English in a social context: A contribution to historical sociolinguistics, 279–337. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000b The third-person singular -(e)s and -(e)th revisited: The morphophonemic hypothesis. In Christiane Dalton-Puffer & Nikolaus Ritt (eds.), Words: Structure, meaning, function; A festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky (Trends in Linguistics 130), 235–248. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England (Longman Linguistics Library). London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg & Heikki Mannila
2011 The diffusion of language change in real time: Progressive and conservative individuals and the time-depth of change. Language Variation and Change 23(1). 1–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg & Peter Trudgill
2001 Chapters in the social history of East Anglian English: The case of the third-person singular. In Jacek Fisiak & Peter Trudgill (eds.), East Anglian English, 187–204. Cambridge: Boydell & Brewer.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Matti Rissanen
1986 Do you support the do-support? Emphatic and non-emphatic do in affirmative statements in present-day spoken English. In Sven Jacobson (ed.), Papers from the Third Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation. Stockholm, May 11–12, 1985, 35–50. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
2002  Fairly pretty or pretty fair? On the development and grammaticalization of English downtoners. Language Sciences 24. 359–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Gijsbert Rutten
(eds.) 2012 Neuphilologische Mitteilungen CXIII(3). Special issue on comparative historical sociolinguistics.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade
2006 Standardisation. In Richard M. Hogg & David Denison (eds.), A history of the English language, 271–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Heli Tissari
2010 Contextualising eighteenth-century politeness: Social distinction and metaphorical levelling. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change (Studies in English Language), 133–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, James
1793 The rudiments or first principles of English grammar. Newcastle: M. Angus.Google Scholar
Núñez-Pertejo, Paloma
2004 The progressive in the history of English (LINCOM Studies in English Linguistics 06). Munchen: Lincom.Google Scholar
Nurmi, Arja
1996 Periphrastic do and be + ing: Interconnected developments? In Terttu Nevalainen & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence (Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 15), 151–165. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
1998 Manual for the Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler CEECS. Department of English. University of Helsinki. http://​clu​.uni​.no​/icame​/manuals/Google Scholar
1999 A social history of periphrastic do (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 56). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Nurmi, Arja, Minna Nevala & Minna Palander-Collin
(eds.) 2009 The language of daily life in England (1400–1800). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nurmi, Arja & Päivi Pahta
2010 Preacher, scholar, brother, friend: Social roles and code-switching in the writings of Thomas Twining. In Päivi Pahta, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi & Minna Palander-Collin (eds.), Social roles and language practices in Late Modern English (Pragmatics & Beyond NS 195), 135–162. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nurmi, Arja & Minna Palander-Collin
2008 Letters as a text type: Interaction in writing. In Marina Dossena & Ingrid Tieken-boon van Ostade (eds.), Studies in Late Modern English correspondence: Methodology and data (Linguistic Insights Studies in Language and Communication 76), 21–49. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
OED = Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edn. 1989 OED Online. Oxford University Press. http://​www​.oed​.com/ (5 May 2014.)Google Scholar
Oeppen, Jim
1993 Back projection and inverse projection: Members of a wider class of constrained projection models. Population Studies 47(2). 245–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ogura, Mieko & William S -Y. Wang
1996 Snowball effect in lexical diffusion: The development of ‑s in the third-person singular present indicative in English. In Derek Britton (ed.), English Historical Linguistics 1994: Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, 119–141. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oldireva-Gustafsson, Larisa
2002 Variation in usage and grammars: The past participle forms of write in English 1680–1790. Historical Sociolinguistics and Sociohistorical Linguistics 2. http://​www​.hum2​.leidenuniv​.nl​/hsl​_shl​/Oldireva%20G​.htm. (July 2012.)Google Scholar
Olsen, Kirstin
1999 Daily life in eighteenth-century England. Westwood, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
OTA University of Oxford Text Archive. University of Oxford. http://​ota​.ahds​.ac​.uk.
Pahta, Päivi, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi & Minna Palander-Collin
(eds.) 2010 Social roles and language practices in Late Modern English (Pragmatics & Beyond NS 195). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palander-Collin, Minna & Mikko Hakala
2011 Standardizing the Corpus of Early English Correspondence (CEEC). Poster presented at ICAME 32 (32nd conference of the International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English), 1–5 June 2011, Oslo, Norway. Available on CoRD: http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD​/corpora​/CEEC​/standardized​.html.
Palander-Collin, Minna & Minna Nevala
2010 Reporting and social role construction in eighteenth-century personal correspondence. In Päivi Pahta, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi & Minna Palander-Collin (eds.), Social roles and language practices in Late Modern English (Pragmatics & Beyond NS 195), 111–133. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palander-Collin, Minna, Minna Nevala & Anni Sairio
2013 Language and identity in letters. In Jukka Tyrkkö, Olga Timofeeva & Maria Salenius (eds.), Ex philologia lux. Essays in honour of Leena Kahlas-Tarkka (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 90), 291–311. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Palmer, Chris C.
2009 Borrowings, derivational morphology, and perceived productivity in English, 1300–1600. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Parker, Richard G. & Charles Fox
1835 [1834]. Progressive exercises in English grammar, 3rd edn. Boston/New York.Google Scholar
Pechenick, Eitan Adam, Christopher M. Danforth & Peter Sheridan Dodds
2015 Characterizing the Google Books corpus: Strong limits to inferences of socio-cultural and linguistic evolution. PLOS ONE 10(10). e0137041. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Percy, Carol
2008 Mid-century grammars and their reception in the Monthly Review and the Critical Review . In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 125–142. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009a Periodical reviews and the rise of prescriptivism: The Monthly (1749–1844) and Critical Review (1756–1817) in the eighteenth century. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade & Wim van der Wurff (eds.), Current issues in Late Modern English, 117–150. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2009b Learning and virtue: English grammar and the eighteenth-century girls’ school. In Mary Hilton & Jill Shefrin (eds.), Educating the child in Enlightenment Britain: Beliefs, cultures, practices, 77–98. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana, Gerard, Van Herk & Dawn Harvie
2002 ‘Deformed in the dialects’: An alternative history of non-standard English. In Richard Watts & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Alternative histories of English, 87–110. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy
2000 Enlightenment: Britain and the creation of the modern world. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pratt, Linda & David Denison
2000 The language of the Southey-Coleridge circle. Language Sciences 22. 401–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prest, Wilfrid
(ed.) 1987 The professions in early modern England. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Quackenbos, George P.
1868 [1862] An English grammar. New York.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph
1971 Shakespeare and the English language. In Kenneth Muir & Samuel Schoenbaum (eds.), A new companion to Shakespeare studies, 67–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena
1994 The development of the compound pronouns in ‑body and ‑one in Early Modern English. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English (Topics in English Linguistics 13), 301–324. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 Social factors and pronominal change in the seventeenth century: The Civil War effect. In Jacek Fisiak & Marcin Krygier (eds.), Advances in English historical linguistics, 361–388. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009 Lifespan changes in the language of three early modern gentlemen. In Arja Nurmi, Minna Nevala & Minna Palander-Collin (eds.), The language of daily life in England (1400–1800), 165–196. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka
1997 Indefinite pronouns with singular human reference. In Matti Rissanen, Merja Kytö & Kirsi Heikkonen (eds.), Grammaticalization at work: Studies of long-term developments in English (Topics in English Linguistics 24), 17–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena & Terttu Nevalainen
2007 Historical sociolinguistics: The Corpus of Early English Correspondence . In Joan C. Beal, Karen P. Corrigan & Hermann L. Moisl (eds.), Creating and digitizing language corpora, vol. 2, Diachronic databases, 148–171. Houndsmills: Palgrave-Macmillan. A pre-print version is available at http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD​/corpora​/CEEC​/generalintro​.html. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raven, James
2009 The book as a commodity. In Michael F. Suarez & Michael L. Turner (eds.), The Cambridge history of the book in Britain, vol. 5, 1695–1830, 85–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, Paul, Geoffrey Leech & Mary Hodges
1997 Social differentiation in the use of English vocabulary: Some analyses of the conversational component of the British National Corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 2(1). 133–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Renouf, Antoinette
2012 A finer definition of neology in English: The life-cycle of a word. In Hilde Hasselgård, Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling (eds.), Corpus perspectives on patterns of lexis (Studies in Corpus Linguistics 57), 177–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Riddle, Elizabeth M.
1985 A historical perspective on the productivity of the suffixes ‑ness and ‑ity . In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics; historical word-formation (Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 29), 435–461. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rissanen, Matti
1985 Periphrastic do in affirmative statements in Early American English. Journal of English Linguistics 18(2). 163–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989 Three problems connected with the use of diachronic corpora. ICAME Journal 13. 16–19.Google Scholar
1997 Whatever happened to the Middle English indefinite pronouns? In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Studies in Middle English linguistics, 513–529. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 Syntax. In Roger Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. III: 1476–1776, 187–331. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H.
1986 The evolution of English grammar books since the Renaissance. In Gerhard Leitner (ed.), English reference grammar. Languages and linguistics writers and readers, 292–306. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Rohrdantz, Christian, Andreas Niekler, Annette Hautli, Miriam Butt & Daniel A. Keim
2012 Lexical semantics and distribution of suffixes: A visual analysis. In Miriam Butt, Sheelagh Carpendale, Gerald Penn, Jelena Prokić & Michael Cysouw (eds.), Proceedings of the EACL 2012 joint workshop of LINGVIS & UNCLH, 7–15. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne
1985 Variability in word formation patterns and productivity in the history of English. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Papers from the 6th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Poznań, 22–26 August 1983 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 34), 451–465. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1998 The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2005 Variation in language and gender. In Janet Holmes & Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.), The handbook of language and gender, 98–118. Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rowlands, Ian, David Nicholas, Peter Williams, Paul Huntington, Maggie Fieldhouse, Barrie Gunter, Richard Withey, Hamid R. Jamali, Tom Dobrowolski & Carol Tenopir
2008 The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings 60(4). 290–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert
2009 Grammar to the people. The Dutch language and the public sphere in the 18th century. With special reference to Kornelis van der Palm. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft 19. 55–86.Google Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert & Marijke J. van der Wal
2014 Letters as loot: A Sociolinguistic approach to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Dutch. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert, Rik Vosters & Wim Vandenbussche
(eds.) 2014 Norms and usage in language history, 1600–1900: A sociolinguistic and comparative perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rydén, Mats & Sverker Brorström
1987  The be/have variation with intransitives in English: With special reference to the Late Modern period . Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Saeed, John I.
1997 Semantics (Introducing Linguistics 2). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Säily, Tanja
2011 Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 7(1). 119–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Sociolinguistic variation in English derivational productivity: Studies and methods in diachronic corpus linguistics (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki XCIV). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. http://​urn​.fi​/URN:ISBN:978​-951​-9040​-50​-9.Google Scholar
2016 Sociolinguistic variation in morphological productivity in eighteenth-century English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 12(1). 129–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Säily, Tanja, Terttu Nevalainen & Harri Siirtola
2011 Variation in noun and pronoun frequencies in a sociohistorical corpus of English. Literary and Linguistic Computing 26(2). 167–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Säily, Tanja & Jukka Suomela
2009 Comparing type counts: The case of women, men and ‑ity in early English letters. In Antoinette Renouf & Andrew Kehoe (eds.), Corpus linguistics: Refinements and reassessments (Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 69), 87–109. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sairio, Anni
2009 Language and letters of the Bluestocking network: Sociolinguistic issues in eighteenth-century epistolary English (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 75). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Sairio, Anni & Minna Nevala
2013 Social dimensions of layout in eighteenth-century letters and letter-writing manuals. In Anneli Meurman-Solin & Jukka Tyrkkö (eds.), Principles and practices for the digital editing and annotation of diachronic data (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 14). Helsinki: VARIENG. http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/14​/sairio​_nevala/ (26 June 2015.)Google Scholar
Sandhu, Sukhdev S.
1998 Ignatius Sancho and Laurence Sterne. Research in African Literature 29(4). 88–105.Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson T.
2004 Synchronic and diachronic microvariation in English do . Lingua 114. 495–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Leonard
2000 London 1700–1840. In Peter Clark (ed.), The Cambridge history of urban Britain, vol. 2, 1540–1840, 641–672. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shoemaker, Robert
2004 The London mob: Violence and disorder in eighteenth-century England. London: Hambledon and London.Google Scholar
Skedd, Susan
1997 Women teachers and the expansion of girl’s schooling in England, c.1760–1820. In Hannah Barker & Elaine Chalus (eds.), Gender in eighteenth-century England, 101–125. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam
(1762) [1983] Lectures on rhetoric and belles lettres. The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith. Vol. 4. Ed. by J. C. Bryce. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smitterberg, Erik
2002 The progressive in 19th-century English: A process of integration. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University PhD thesis.Google Scholar
2005 The progressive in 19th-century English: A process of integration (Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 54). Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stein, Dieter
1990  The semantics of syntactic change: Aspects of the evolution of do in English . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steinbach, Susie
2005 Women in England 1750–1914: A social history. London: Phoenix.Google Scholar
Stone, Lawrence
1969 Literacy and education in England, 1640–1900. Past and Present 42. 69–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Straaijer, Robin
2010 Prescription or practice? Be/have variation with past participles of mutative intransitive verbs in the letters of Joseph Priestley. In Ursula Lenker, Judith Huber & Robert Mailhammer (eds.), English historical linguistics 2008. Selected papers from the fifteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 15), Munich, 24–30 August 2008, 63–78. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara M. H.
1970 A history of English. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara
1982 Some aspects of the history of the be+ing construction. In John Anderson (ed.), Language form and linguistic variation, 427–474. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suarez, Michael F.
2009 Toward a bibliometric analysis of the surviving record, 1701–1800. In Michael F. Suarez & Michael L. Turner (eds.), The Cambridge history of the book in Britain, vol. 5, 1695–1830, 39–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sundby, Bertil, Anne Kari Bjørge & Kari E. Haugland
1991 A dictionary of English normative grammar 1700–1800. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suomela, Jukka
2014  types2: Type and hapax accumulation curves. Computer program. Zenodo. Cite to nonCR , http://​users​.ics​.aalto​.fi​/suomela​/types2/. DOI logo
Svartvik, Jan & Hans Lindquist
1997 One and body language. In Udo Fries, Viviane Müller & Peter Schneider (eds.), From Ælfric to the New York Times: Studies in English corpus linguistics, 11–20. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry
1903 A new English grammar II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt
2009 Typological parameters of intralingual variability: Grammatical analyticity versus syntheticity in varieties of English. Language Variation and Change 21. 319–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Analyticity and syntheticity in the history of English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 654–665. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 About text frequencies in historical linguistics: Disentangling environmental and grammatical change. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 12(1). 153–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Douglas Biber, Jesse Egbert & Karlien Franco
2016 Toward more accountability: Modeling ternary genitive variation in Late Modern English. Language Variation and Change 28(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A.
2012 Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
2016 Teen talk: The language of adolescents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
The Art of Letter-Writing, divided into two parts. The first, containing rules and directions for writing letters on all sorts of subjects: with a variety of examples, Equally elegant and instructive. The second, a collection of letters on the most interesting occasions in life, etc
(1762) London: T. Osborne.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid
1985  Do-support in the writings of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu: A change in progress. Folia Linguistica Historica VI. 127–151.Google Scholar
1987  The auxiliary do in eighteenth-century English . A Sociohistorical-linguistic Approach. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
2000 Normative studies in England. In Sylvain Auroux, E. F. Konrad Koerner, Hans-Josef Niederehe & Kees Versteegh (eds.), History of the language sciences, vol. I, 876–887. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2005 Of social networks and linguistic influence: The language of Robert Lowth and his correspondents. In Juan Camilo Conde-Silvestre (ed.), Sociolinguistics and the history of English. Special issue of International Journal of English Studies 5. 135–157.Google Scholar
2006 Eighteenth-century prescriptivism and the norm of correctness. In Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los (eds.), The handbook of the history of English, 539–557. London: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2008 Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2008a Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing: An introduction. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 1–14. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2008b The 1760s: Grammars, grammarians and the booksellers. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 101–124. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2008c Reception and the market for grammars: Introduction. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Grammars, grammarians and grammar-writing in eighteenth-century England, 79–80. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009 An introduction to Late Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Eighteenth-century women and their norms of correctness. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change (Studies in English Language), 59–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 In search of Jane Austen. The language of the letters. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter
1999 The dialects of England, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2011 Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tyrkkö, Jukka
2013 Notes on eighteenth-century dictionary grammars. Transactions of the Philological Society 111(2). 179–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vartiainen, Turo, Tanja Säily & Mikko Hakala
2013 Variation in pronoun frequencies in early English letters: Gender-based or relationship-based? In Jukka Tyrkkö, Olga Timofeeva & Maria Salenius (eds.), Ex philologia lux: Essays in honour of Leena Kahlas-Tarkka (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki XC), 233–255. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Visser, F.
1969 An historical syntax of the English language. III Part I. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Visser, Federicus Th
1963–73 An historical syntax of the English Language. 4 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Vorlat, Emma
1996 Lindley Murray’s prescriptive canon. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), Two hundred years of Lindley Murray, 163–182. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.Google Scholar
Wagner, Suzanne Evans & Isabelle Buchstaller
2017 Panel studies of variation and change. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagner, Suzanne Evans & Gillian Sankoff
2011 Age grading in the Montréal French inflected future. Language Variation and Change 23(3). 275–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wales, Kathleen M.
1983  Thou and you in Early Modern English: Brown and Gilman re-appraised. Studia Linguistica 37(2). 107–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, Terry
2007 Thou and you in Early Modern English dialogues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallis, John
1653 Grammatica linguae Anglicanae. Oxford.Google Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
1999 Language and politeness in early eighteenth century Britain. Pragmatics 9(1). 9–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 From polite language to educated language: The re-emergence of an ideology. In Richard Watts & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Alternative histories of English, 155–172. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Grammar writers in eighteenth-century Britain: A community of practice or a discourse community? In Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), 37–56.Google Scholar
Webster, Noah
1789 Dissertations on the English language. Boston.Google Scholar
White, James
1761 The English verb. London.Google Scholar
Whyman, Susan
2009 The Pen and the people: English letter writers 1660–1800. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcoxon, Frank
1945 Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1(6). 80–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa
1990 The bulge: A theory of speech behavior and social distance. Penn Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 2(1). 55–83.Google Scholar
Wood, Johanna L.
2004 Text in context: A critical discourse analysis approach to Margaret Paston. In Terttu Nevalainen & Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen (eds.), Letter writing. Special issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(2). 229–254.Google Scholar
Wright, Susan
1994 The mystery of the modal progressive. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 467–485. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wrightson, Keith
2002 Earthly necessities: Economic lives in Early Modern Britain 1470–1750. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Wrigley, Edward A.
1987 People, cities and wealth: The transformation of traditional society. Oxford. Blackwell.Google Scholar
2004 Poverty, progress, and population. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Energy and the English industrial revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wrigley, Edward A. & Roger C. Schofield
1981 The population history of England 1541–1871: A reconstruction. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria
2016 Early and Late Modern English grammars as evidence in English historical linguistics. In Merja Kytö & Päivi Pahta (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English historical linguistics, 164–180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria & David Denison
2015 Which comes first in the double object construction? English Language and Linguistics 19(2). 247–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria & María E. Rodríguez-Gil
2013 Special volume on English Grammar Writing in the Eighteenth Century . Transactions of the Philological Society 111(2). 141–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ziegeler, Debra
2004 Reanalysis in the history of do: A view from construction grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 15. 529–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar