Article in:
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2022
Edited by Jorrig Vogels and Sterre Leufkens
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 39] 2022
► pp. 2241
References
Audring, Jenny
2009Reinventing pronoun gender. Utrecht.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Mächler, Martin, Bolker, Benjamin M. & Walker, Steven C.
2015Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Hoop, Helen
2020Het verlies van een persoonlijk voornaamwoord*. Nederlandse Taalkunde 25 (2): 355–62, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Delignette-Muller, Marie Laure & Dutang, Christophe
2015fitdistrplus: An R Package for Fitting Distributions. Journal of Statistical Software 64 (4): 1–34, https://​www​.jstatsoft​.org​/article​/view​/v064i04
E-ANS
2021 Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst (ANS), versie 3.1 2021, <https://​e​-ans​.ivdnt​.org​/topics​/pid​/ans10031405lingtopic
Ferreira, Fernanda & Henderson, John M.
1990Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition 16 (4): 555–68, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giner, Göknur & Smyth, Gordon K.
2016statmod: Probability Calculations for the Inverse Gaussian Distribution. R Journal 8 (1): 339–51 (29 March 2022). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, van Gent, Paul & van Hout, Roeland
2022On the Inevitability of Social Meaning and Ideology in Accounts of Syntactic Change: Evidence from Pronoun Competition in Netherlandic Dutch. In Explanations in Sociosyntactic Variation, Tanya Karoli Christensen & Torben Juel Jensen. (eds), 120–43, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hinskens, F. L. M. P. & Bennis, H. J.
2014Goed of fout. Niet-standaard inflectie in het hedendaags Standaardnederlands. Nederlandse Taalkunde 19 (2): 131–84, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hubers, Ferdy & de Hoop, Helen
2013The effect of prescriptivism on comparative markers in spoken Dutch. Linguistics in the Netherlands 301: 89–101, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hubers, Ferdy, Redl, Theresa, de Vos, Hugo, Reinarz, Lukas & de Hoop, Helen
2020Processing Prescriptively Incorrect Comparative Particles: Evidence From Sentence-Matching and Eye-Tracking. Frontiers in Psychology 111, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hubers, Ferdy, Snijders, T. M. & de Hoop, H.
2016How the brain processes violations of the grammatical norm: An fMRI study. Brain and Language 1631, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hubers, Ferdy, Trompenaars, Thijs, Collin, Sebastian, de Schepper, Kees & de Hoop, Helen
2020Hypercorrection as a by-product of education. Applied Linguistics 41 (4): 552–74, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A. & Woolley, J. D.
1982Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of experimental psychology. General 111 (2): 228–38, http://​www​.ncbi​.nlm​.nih​.gov​/pubmed​/6213735 Crossref
Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Brockhoff, Per B. & Christensen, Rune H. B.
2017lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software 82 (13), CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lenth, Russell v.
2021emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means.Google Scholar
Lo, Steson & Andrews, Sally
2015To transform or not to transform: using generalized linear mixed models to analyse reaction time data. Frontiers in Psychology 61: 1171, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team
2008R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, https://​www​.r​-project​.org/
Schoenmakers, Gert-Jan T.
accepted). Linguistic judgments in 3D: The aesthetic quality, linguistic acceptability, and surface probability of stigmatized and non-stigmatized variation. Linguistics.
van Casteren, Maaarten & Davis, Matthew H.
2006Mix, a program for pseudorandomization. Behavior Research Methods 38 (4): 584–89, CrossrefGoogle Scholar