Article published in:
The Structure of the English NP: Synchronic and diachronic explorations
Edited by Kristin Davidse
[Functions of Language 23:1] 2016
► pp. 84119

Primary sources

A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers. Version 3.2 (1990–1993/2002/2007/2010/2013). Originally compiled under the supervision of Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan at Northern Arizona University and University of Southern California; modified and expanded by subsequent members of a consortium of universities.
Corpus of Late Modern British and American English Prose. For details, see Fanego (2012).
Century of Prose Corpus 1680–1780. For details, see Milic (1995).
DOE = Healey, Antonette diPaolo
(ed.) 2008The Dictionary of Old English: A-G on CD-ROM. Fascicle G and Fascicles A to F (with Revisions). Toronto: University of Toronto, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar
F-LOB = Mair, Christian
(comp) 1999The Freiburg - LOB Corpus of British English. Freiburg: Albert-Ludwigs-Universität.Google Scholar
Frown = Mair, Christian
(comp) 1999The Freiburg-Brown Corpus of American English. Freiburg: Albert-Ludwigs-Universität.Google Scholar
Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. For details, see Kytö (1996 [1991]).
MED = Kurath, Hans & Sherman M. Kuhn et al.
(eds.) 1952–2001Middle English Dictionary. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
= Oxford English Dictionary 1884–1997 3rd edn. in progress: OED Online , March (2000); Simpson, John A. (ed.).Google Scholar


Altenberg, Bengt
1982The genitive v. the of-construction: A study of syntactic variation in 17th century English. Lund: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
1999Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L.
1977Meaning and form. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel & Leslie K. Arnovik
2011 [2006]The English language: A linguistic history. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat
1991A comprehensive descriptive grammar of English. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik
2008Functional motivations in the development of nominal and verbal gerunds in Middle and Early Modern English. English Language and Linguistics 12. 55–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Analysing reanalysis. Lingua 119. 1728–1755. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010English ing-clauses and their problems: The structure of grammatical categories. Linguistics 48. 1153–1193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012The course of actualization. Language 88. 601–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Spreading patterns: Diffusional change in the English system of complementation. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2014Constrained confusion: The gerund/participle distinction in Late Modern English. In Marianne Hundt (ed.), Late Modern English syntax, 224–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Donner, Morton
1986The gerund in Middle English. English Studies 67. 394–400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duffley, Patrick J.
2006The English gerund-participle: A comparison with the infinitive. New York, NY: Lang.Google Scholar
Expósito, María Cruz
1996La estructura del sintagma nominal en el inglés de la Cancillería: 1400–1450. Barcelona: Kadle Books.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa
1990Finite complement clauses in Shakespeare’s English, Part 2. Studia Neophilologica 62. 129–149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992Infinitive complements in Shakespeare’s English. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela: Servizo de Publicacións.Google Scholar
1996aThe development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400–1760). Diachronica 13. 29–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996bThe gerund in Early Modern English: Evidence from the Helsinki Corpus. Folia Linguistica Historica 17. 97–152.Google Scholar
1998Developments in argument linking in early Modern English gerund phrases. English Language and Linguistics 2. 87–119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004aOn reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change: The rise and development of English verbal gerunds. Diachronica 21. 5–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004bSome strategies for coding sentential subjects in English: From exaptation to grammaticalization. Studies in Language 28. 321–361. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Variation in sentential complements in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century English: A processing-based explanation. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English, 200–220. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012COLMOBAENG: A corpus of late Modern British and American English Prose. In Nila Vázquez (ed.), Creation and use of historical English corpora in Spain, 101–117. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga
1988The rise of the for NP to V construction: An explanation. In Graham Nixon & John Honey (eds.), An historic tongue: Studies in English linguistics in memory of Barbara Strang, 67–88. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1989The origin and spread of the Accusative and Infinitive Construction in English. Folia Linguistica Historica 8. 143–217.Google Scholar
Fonteyn, Lauren, Hendrik De Smet & Liesbet Heyvaert
2015What it means to verbalize: The changing discourse-functions of the English gerund. Journal of English Linguistics 43. 36–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Andrew
2012The historical syntax problem: Reanalysis and directionality. In Dianne Jones, John Whitman & Andrew Garrett (eds.), Grammatical change: Origins, nature, outcome, 52–72. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
1995A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2006Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin
2013Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Houston, Ann
1989The English gerund: Syntactic change and discourse function. In Ralph W. Fasold & Deborah Schriffin (eds.), Language change and variation, 173–196. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, Geoffrey K. Pullum et al.
2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne
(ed.) 2014Late Modern English syntax. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jack, George B.
1988The origins of the English gerund. NOWELE 12. 15–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1909–1949A Modern English grammar on historical principles. 7 vols. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard. Reprinted, London: Allen & Unwin, 1961, 1965, 1970.Google Scholar
Kastovsky, Dieter
1985Deverbal nouns in Old and Modern English: From stem-formation to word-formation. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics – Historical word-formation, 221–261. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Killie, Kristin
2006Internal and external factors in language change: Present participle converbs in English and Norwegian. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 107. 447–469.Google Scholar
Killie, Kristin & Toril Swan
2009The grammaticalization and subjectification of adverbial -ing clauses (converb clauses) in English. English Language and Linguistics 13. 337–363. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kisbye, Torben
1971–1972An historical outline of English syntax. Parts I and II. Aarhus: Akademisk Boghandel.Google Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas
2001The influence of ‘Latinate’ constructions in Early Modern English: Orality and literacy as complementary forces. In Dieter Kastovsky & Arthur Mettinger, (eds.), Language contact in the history of English, 171–194. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
2004Text, Textsorte, Sprachgeschichte. Englische Partizipial- und Gerundialkonstruktionen 1100 bis 1700. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd
1991Free adjuncts and absolutes in English: Problems of control and interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1995Adverbial participial clauses in English. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 189–237. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja
1996 [1991]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
Langacker, Ronald W.
1987Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
2008Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lass, Roger
1992Phonology and morphology. In Norman Blake (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, Vol. 2: 1066–1476, 23–155. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Los, Bettelou
2005The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian
1990Infinitival complement clauses in English. A study of syntax in discourse. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Milic, Louis T.
1995The Century of Prose Corpus: A half-million word historical data base. Computers and the Humanities 29. 327–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. Gary
2002Nonfinite structures in theory and change. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce
1985Old English syntax. Oxford: Clarendon Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mustanoja, Tauno F.
1960A Middle English syntax. Part I: Parts of speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Naro, Anthony J.
1981The social and structural dimensions of a syntactic change. Language 57. 63–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Noonan, Michael
1985Complementation. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. II: Complex constructions, 42–140. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Poutsma, Hendrik
1904A grammar of Late Modern English. Part I: The sentence. Groningen: Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Río-Rey, Carmen
2002Subject control and coreference in Early Modern English free adjuncts and absolutes. English Language and Linguistics 6. 309–323. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter
1995On the replacement of finite complement clauses by infinitives in English. English Studies 76. 367–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006The role of functional constraints in the evolution of the English complementation system. In Christiane Dalton-Puffer, Nikolaus Ritt, Herbert Schendl & Dieter Kastovsky (eds.), Syntax, style and grammatical norms: English from 1500–2000, 143–166. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
2014On the changing status of that-clauses. In Marianne Hundt (ed.), Late Modern English syntax, 155–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rudanko, Juhani
1998Change and continuity in the English language: Studies on complementation over the past three hundred years. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
2000Corpora and complementation: Tracing sentential complementation patterns of nouns, adjectives and verbs over the last three centuries. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
2011Changes in complementation in British and American English: Corpus-based studies on non-finite complements in recent English. Basingstoke: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, Vivian
1986The spelling and punctuation of Shakespeare’s time. In Stanley Wells & Gary Taylor (eds.), William Shakespeare: The complete works. Original-spelling edition, xlii–lvi. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Söderlind, Johannes
1951–1958Verb syntax in John Dryden’s prose. Uppsala: A.-B. Lundequist.Google Scholar
Swan, Toril
2003Present participles in the history of English and Norwegian. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104. 179–195.Google Scholar
Tajima, Matsuji
1985The syntactic development of the gerund in Middle English. Tokyo: Nan’un-do.Google Scholar
1996The common-/objective-case subject of the gerund in Middle English. NOWELE 28/29. 569–578. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A.
1983Grammar and discourse: The English detached participial clause. In Flora Klein-Andreu (ed.), Discourse perspectives on syntax, 43–65. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
2010Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization: How do they intersect? In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 19–44. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek, Hendrik De Smet & Lobke Ghesquière
2013Introduction: On multiple source constructions in language change. Special issue of Studies in Language 37(3). 473–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. & Randy J. LaPolla
1997Syntax. Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Theodorus
1963–1973An historical syntax of the English language. 3 parts in 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Vosberg, Uwe
2006Die Große Komplementverschiebung: Außersemantische Einflüsse auf die Entwicklung satzwertiger Ergänzungen im Neuenglischen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony
1982Complementation in Middle English and the methodology of historical syntax. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

García‐Castro, Laura
2020. Finite and non‐finite complement clauses in postcolonial Englishes. World Englishes 39:3  pp. 411 ff. Crossref logo
Gentens, Caroline & Juhani Rudanko
2019. The Great Complement Shift and the role of understood subjects: The case of fearful. Folia Linguistica 53:1  pp. 51 ff. Crossref logo
Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer
2020.  In Complex Words, Crossref logo
Körtvélyessy, Lívia & Pavol Štekauer
2020.  In Complex Words,  pp. 335 ff. Crossref logo
Rickman, Paul & Juhani Rudanko
2018.  In Corpus-Based Studies on Non-Finite Complements in Recent English,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
2020. The Complexity Principle at work with rival prepositions. English Language and Linguistics 24:4  pp. 769 ff. Crossref logo
2020. Analogy-driven change: the emergence and development of mirative end up constructions in American English. English Language and Linguistics 24:1  pp. 97 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 03 march 2021. 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.