Article published in:
Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy
Edited by Dylan Glynn and Justyna A. Robinson
[Human Cognitive Processing 43] 2014
► pp. 279303
References
Aijmer, K
(1997) I think – an English modal particle. In T. Swan, & O. Jansen Westvik (Eds.), Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives (pp. 1–47). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ANC = American National Corpus
(2002) Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D
(1972)  That’s that . (Janua linguarum. Series Minor, 155). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T., & Baayen, H
(2007) Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Bouma, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Google Scholar
Brinton, L.J., & Traugott, E.C
(2005)  Lexicalization and language change. (Research Surveys in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
BROWN = Francis, W.N., & Kucera, H
(1979)  The Brown Corpus . Department of Linguistics, Brown University.Google Scholar
Bybee, J
(2002) Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language Vol. II (pp. 145–167). New Jersey: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
CEECS I & II = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler (CEECS) <http://​khnt​.hit​.uib​.no​/icame​/manuals​/ceecs/.
CEMET = Corpus of Early Modern English texts (Extended version). See De Smet (2005).
CLMETEV = Corpus of Late Modern English texts (Extended version). See De Smet (2005).
COCA = Davies, M
(2008) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 1990–present. Retrieved from <http://​www​.americancorpus​.org>.
De Smet, H
(2005) A Corpus of Late Modern English. ICAME Journal , 29, 69–82.Google Scholar
Divjak, D
(2010)  Structuring the lexicon: A clustered model for near-synonymy . Berlin & New York: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Elsness, J
(1984)  That or zero: A look at the choice of the object clause connective in a corpus of American English. English Studies , 65, 519–533. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Finnegan, E., & Biber, D
(1995)  That and zero complementizers in Late Modern English: Exploring Archer from 1650–1990. In B. Aarts, & C. Meyer (Eds.), The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description (pp. 241–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glynn, D
(2010) Testing the hypothesis: Objectivity and verification in usage-based Cognitive Semantics. In D. Glynn, & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 239–270). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S
Th (2013)  Statistics for linguistics with R: A practical introduction . 2nd revised edition . Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grondelaers S., Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D
(2008) National variation in the use of er “there”. Regional and diachronic constraints on cognitive explanations. In G. Kristiansen, & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp. 153–204). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, St., Geeraerts, D., & Speelman, D
(2007) A case for cognitive corpus linguistics. In M. Gonzalez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson, & M. Spivey (Eds.), Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 149–169). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heylen, K
(2005) A quantitative corpus study of German word order variation. In S. Kepser, & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives (pp. 241–264). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G
(2004)  That or no that – that is the question: On subordinator suppression in extraposed subject clauses. Vienna English Working Papers , 13, 49–68.Google Scholar
Kearns, K
(2007a) Epistemic verbs and zero complementizer. English Language and Linguistics , 11, 475–505. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007b) Regional variation in the syntactic distribution of null finite complementizer. Language Variation and Change , 19, 295–336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
LAMPETER = Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts
Palander-Collin, M
(1999)  Grammaticalization and social embedding: I THINK and METHINKS in Middle and Early Modern English . Helsinki: Tome LV.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J
(1972)  A grammar of contemporary English . London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rissanen, M
(1991) On the history of that/zero as clause object links in English. In K. Aijmer, & B. Altenberg (Eds.), English corpus linguistics: Studies in honor of Jan Svartvik (pp. 272–289). London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, G
(1996) Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English. Cognitive Linguistics , 7, 149–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D
(2010) Causes for causatives: The case of Dutch ‘doen’ and ‘laten’. In T. Sanders, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Causal categories in discourse and cognition (pp. 173–204). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S., & Smith, J
(2005) No momentary fancy! The zero ‘complementizer’ in English dialects. English Language and Linguistics , 9, 289–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S.A., & Mulac, A
(1991) A quantitative perspective on the grammaticalization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In E. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (pp. 313–339). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
TIME =
Davies, M (2007)  TIME Magazine Corpus (1920s–2000s). Retrieved from <http://​corpus​.byu​.edu​/time>.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R. & Walker, J.A
(2009) On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variationist study of that . Linguistics , 47, 1–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.C., & Dasher, R.B
(2002)  Regularity in semantic change . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, E.C., & Konig, E
(1991) The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In E.C. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization, Volume 1. Focus on theoretical and methodological issues (pp. 189–218). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Davidse, Kristin, Simon De Wolf & An Van linden
2015. The development of the modal and discourse marker uses of (there/it is/I have)no doubt. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16:1  pp. 25 ff. Crossref logo
Shank, Christopher & Koen Plevoets
2018. Investigating the impact of structural factors upon that/zero complementizer alternation patterns in verbs of cognition: a diachronic corpus-based multifactorial analysis. Research in Corpus Linguistics  pp. 83 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 may 2022. 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.