Article published in:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 23:1 (2018) ► pp. 5584
References

References

Baker, P.
(2009) The BE06 Corpus of British English and recent language change. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 312–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baroni, M., Bernardini, S., Ferraresi, A., & Zanchetta, E.
(2009) The WaCky wide web: A collection of very large linguistically processed web-crawled corpora. Language Resources and Evaluation, 43(3), 209–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E.
(1989) Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language, 65(2), 487–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, J., & Ford, M.
(2010) Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language, 86(1), 168–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins, M., & Brooks, J.
(1995) Prepositional attachment through a backed-off model. In D. Yarowsky & K. Church (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Very Large Corpora (pp. 27–38). Cambridge, MA: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).Google Scholar
Curran, J., Clark, S., & Vadas, D.
(2006) Multi-tagging for lexicalized-grammar parsing. COLING ACL 2006: 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computation Linguistics (pp. 697–704). Sydney: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).Google Scholar
De Clerck, B., Delorge, M., & Simon-Vandenbergen, A. -M.
(2011) Semantic and pragmatic motivations for constructional preferences: A corpus-based study of provide, supply, and present . Journal of English Linguistics, 39(4), 359–391. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Firth, J. R.
(1957) A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955. In J. R. Firth (Ed.), Studies in Linguistic Analysis , Special Volume of the Philological Society (pp. 1–32). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Stefanowitsch, A.
(2004) Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1), 97–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grover, C., & Tobin, R.
(2006) Rule-based chunking and reusability. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) (pp. 873–878). Genoa: LREC.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S.
(2007) From web page to mega-corpus: the CNN transcripts. In M. Hundt, N. Nesselhauf & C. Biewer (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics and the Web (pp. 69–85). Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, M., & Mair, C.
(1999) “Agile” and “uptight” genres: The corpus-based approach to language change in progress. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(2), 221–242. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S., & Francis, G.
(2000) Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O.
(1927) A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part III, Syntax, vol. II. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Leech, G., & Smith, N.
(2005) Extending the possibilities of corpus-based research on English in the twentieth century: A prequel to LOB and FLOB. ICAME Journal, 291, 83–98.Google Scholar
Lehmann, H. M., & Schneider, G.
(2009) Parser-based analysis of syntax-lexis interactions. Language and Computers, 68(1), 477–502.Google Scholar
(2012a) BNC Dependency Bank 1.0. In S. Oksefjell, J. Ebeling & H. Hasselgard (Eds.), Aspects of Corpus Linguistics: Compilation, Annotation, Analysis. Helsinki: Research Unit for Variation, Contacts, and Change in English.Google Scholar
(2012b) Dependency Bank. Paper presented at the LREC 2012 Challenges in the Management of Large Corpora, Istanbul.
(2012c) Syntactic variation and lexical preference in the dative-shift alternation. In J. Mukherjee & M. Huber (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics and Variation in English. Theory and Description. (pp. 65–76). Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Minnen, G., Carroll, J., & Pearce, D.
(2001) Applied morphological processing of English. Natural Language Engineering, 7(3), 207–223. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, J.
(2001) Principles of pattern selection: A corpus-based case study. Journal of English Linguistics, 29(4), 295–314. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
(1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Schneider, G.
(2008) Hybrid Long-distance Functional Dependency Parsing (Umpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Zurich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Stubbs, M.
(1995) Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language, 2(1), 23–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, T., & Arnold, J.
(2003) Post-verbal constituent ordering in English. In G. Rohdenburg & B. Mondorf (Eds.), Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English (pp. 119–154). Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolk, C., Bresnan, J., Rosenbach, A., & Szmrecsanyi, B.
(2013) Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica, 30(3), 382–419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar