Article published in:
Historical (socio)pragmatics at present
Edited by Matylda Włodarczyk and Irma Taavitsainen
[Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18:2] 2017
► pp. 271294


Austin, Francis
2004 “ ‘Heaving this Importunity’: The Survival of Opening Formulas in Letters in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries”. Historical Sociolinguistics & Sociohistorical Linguistics. Accessed August 2014 at: www​.let​.leidenuniv​.nl​/hsl​_shl​/heaving​_this​_importunity​.htm.
Barron, Anne
2003Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning How to Do Things with Words in a Study Abroad Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barton, David
2007Literacy: An Introduction to the Ecology of Written Language. (Second edition.) London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Barton, David and Mary Hamilton
1998Local Literacies: Reading and Writing in One Community. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bax, Marcel
2010 “Epistolary Presentation Rituals: Face-work, Politeness, and Ritual Display in Early Modern Dutch Letter-Writing”. In Jonathan Culpeper and Dániel Z. Kádár (eds), Historical (Im)politeness Research, 37–86. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Beetz, Manfred
1999 “The Polite Answer in Pre-modern German Conversation Culture”. In Andreas H. Jucker, Gerd Fritz and Franz Lebsanft (eds), Historical Dialogue Analysis, 139–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack K.
2004 “Dynamic Typology and Vernacular Universals”. In Bernd Kortmann (ed.), Dialectology meets Typology, 127–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cooke, Thomas
1801The Universal Letter-Writer; or, New Art of Polite Correspondence. London: Gainsborough.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
2009 “Historical Sociopragmatics: An Introduction”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10 (2): 179–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diller, Hans, Hendrik De Smet and Jukka Tyrkkö
2011 “A European Database of Descriptors of English Electronic Texts”. The European English Messenger 19: 21–35.Google Scholar
Dossena, Marina
2012 “The Study of Correspondence: Theoretical and Methodological Issues”. In Marina Dossena and Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds), Letter Writing in Late Modern Europe, 13–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dossena Marina and Susan Fitzmaurice
(eds) 2006Business and Official Correspondence: Historical Investigations. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Elspaß, Stephan
2007 “ ‘Everyday Language’ in Emigrant Letters and its Implications for German Historiography – the German Case”. In Stephan Elspaß and Wim Vandenbussche (eds), Lower Class Language Use in the 19th Century, 151–65. Special issue of Multilingua 26.Google Scholar
2012 “Between Linguistic Creativity and Formulaic Restriction: Cross-linguistic Perspectives on Nineteenth-century Lower Class Writers’ Private Letters”. In Marina Dossena and Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds), Letter Writing in Late Modern Europe, 45–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fairman, Tony
2007 “Writing and “the Standard”: England, 1795–1834”. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 26: 167–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Healey, Joseph F.
2010The Essentials of Statistics: A Tool for Social Research. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Held, Gudrun
1989 “On the Role of Maximization in Verbal Politeness”. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 8 (2–3): 167–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “ ‘Supplica la mia parvidade…’: Petitions in Medieval Society – A Matter of Ritualised or First Reflexive Politeness?”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 11 (2): 194–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Houston, Robert Allan
2014Peasant Petitions: Social Relations and Economic Life on Landed Estates. Basingstroke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Lea and Taru Nordlund
2012 “Performing Identities and Interaction Through Epistolary Formulae”. In Marina Dossena and Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds), Letter Writing in Late Modern Europe, 65–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Landert, Daniela
2013Personalisation in Mass Media Communication: British Online News between Public and Private. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meurman-Solin, Anneli
2013 “Visual Prosody in Manuscript Letters in the Study of Syntax and Discourse”. In Anneli Meurman-Solin and Jukka Tyrkkö (eds), Principles and Practices for the Digital Editing and Annotation of Diachronic Data. Helsinki: VARIENG. Accessed August 2014 at: http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/14​/meurman​-solin​_a/.
Nash, Marjorie D.
1987The Settler Handbook: A New List of the 1820 Settlers. Diep River: Chameleon Press.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu
2001 “Continental Conventions in Early English Correspondence”. In Hans-Jürgen Diller and Manfred Görlach (eds), Towards a History of English as a History of Genres, 203–24. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Nurmi, Arja and Minna Palander-Collin
2008 “Letters as a Text Type: Interaction in Writing”. In Marina Dossena and Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds), Studies in Late Modern English Correspondence: Methodology and Data, 21–49. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Palander-Collin, Minna
2009 “Patterns of Interaction: Self-Mention and Addressee Inclusion in the Letters of Nathaniel Bacon and his Correspondents”. In Arja Nurmi, Minna Nevala and Minna Palander-Collin (eds), The Language of Daily Life in England (1400–1800), 53–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peikola, Matti
2012 “Supplicatory Voices: Genre Properties of the 1692 Petitions in the Salem Witch-Trials”. Studia Neophilologica 84 (1): 106–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peires, Jeff
1989 “The British and the Cape: 1814–1834”. In Richard Elphick and Hermann Giliomee (eds), The Shaping of South African Society, 1652–1840, 472–518. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.Google Scholar
Perelman, Les
1991 “The Medieval Art of Letter Writing: Rhetoric as Institutional Expression”. In Charles Bazerman and James Paradis (eds), Textual Dynamics of the Professions, 97–119. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert and Marijke J. van der Wal
2012 “Functions of Epistolary Formulae in Dutch Letters from the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 13 (2): 173–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sairio, Anni and Minna Nevala
2013 “Social Dimensions of Layout in Eighteenth-Century Letters and Letter-Writing Manuals”. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English (Volume 14). Accessed January 2015 at: http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/series​/volumes​/14​/sairio​_nevala/.
Schneider, Klaus P.
1988Small Talk: Analysing Phatic Discourse. Marburg: Hitzeroth.Google Scholar
Sokoll, Thomas
2006 “Writing for Relief: Rhetoric in English Pauper Letters, 1800–1834”. In Andreas Gestrich, Steven King and Lutz Raphael (eds), Being Poor in Modern Europe: Historical Perspectives 1800–1940, 91–111. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Street, Brian
1995Social Literacies: ‪Critical Approaches to Literacy in Development, Ethnography and Education. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Svennevig, Jan
1999Getting Acquainted in Conversation: A Study of Initial Interactions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma
2012 “New Perspectives, Theories and Methods: Historical Pragmatics”. In Laurel Brinton and Alexander Bergs (eds), Handbook of Historical Linguistics, 1457–74. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Włodarczyk, Matylda
2013a “1820 Settler Petitions in the Cape Colony: Genre Dynamics and Materiality”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 14 (1): 45–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013b “British Colonial Office Correspondence on the Cape Colony (1820–1821): Metatextual Keywords vs. Analytic Categories”. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 49 (3): 399–428.Google Scholar
Włodarczyk Matylda
2013c “Community or Communities of Practice?” In Joanna Kopaczyk and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Communities of Practice in the History of English, 83–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Włodarczyk, Matylda
2014 “Literacies on the Move to the Cape Colony: The 1820 Settler Database”. Unpublished conference paper presented at Mobility, Variability and Changing Literacies in Modern Times . June 2014. Utrecht.
2015 “Nineteenth-Century Institutional (Im)Politeness: Responses of the Colonial Office to Letters from William Parker, 1820 settler”. In Marina Dossena (ed.), Transatlantic Perspectives on Late Modern English, 153–77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2016Genre and Literacies: Historical (Socio)pragmatics of the 1820 Settler Petition. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa
1983Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.Google Scholar