References (37)
Primary sources
Staley, Lynn. 1996. “The Book of Margery Kempe: Introduction”. In Lynn Staley (ed.), The Book of Margery Kempe. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Medieval Institute Publications. Accessed 1 November 2022 at: [URL]
References
Amsler, Mark. 2021. The Medieval Life of Language: Grammar and Pragmatics from Bacon to Kempe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander T. 2004. “Address Pronouns in Late Middle English”. In Francisco Alonso Almeida and Alicia Rodrigues Alvarez (eds), Voices on the Past: Studies in Old and Middle English Language and Literature, 127–138. A Coruña, Spain: Netbiblo.Google Scholar
Blake, Norman. 1992. “The Literary Language”. In Norman Blake (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume 2, 1066–1476, 500–541. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger and Arthur Gilman. 1989. “Politeness Theory and Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies”. Language in Society 18 (2): 159–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burnley, David. 1983. A Guide to Chaucer’s Language. London: Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “The T/V Pronouns in Later Middle English Literature”. In Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas Jucker (eds), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, 27–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja Kytö. 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Finkenstaedt, Thomas. 1963. “You und Thou: Studien zur Anrede im Englischen, mit einem Exkurs über die Anrede im Deutschen” (‘You and Thou: Studies on the Form of Address in English, with an Excursus on the Form of Address in German’). Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2009. “Towards Linguistic Unity in Europe”. In Uwe Hinrichs, Norbert Reiter and Siegfried Tornow (eds), Eurolinguistik: Entwicklungen und Perspektiven: Akten der internationalen Tagung vom 30.9–2.10.2007 in Leipzig (‘Eurolinguistics: Developments and Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference in Leipzig, 30.9–2.10.2007’), 141–164. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2003. “Rectifying a Standard Deficiency: Second Person Pronominal Distinction in Varieties of English”. In Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas Jucker (eds), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, 343–374. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Honegger, Thomas. 2003. “‘And if ye wol nat so, my lady sweete, thanne preye I thee, […]’: Forms of Address in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale”. In Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas Jucker (eds), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, 61–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hope, Jonathan. 1994. “The Use of Thou and You in Early Modern Spoken English: Evidence from Depositions in the Durham Ecclesiastical Court Records”. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 141–152. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2006. “‘Thou Art So Loothly and So Oold Also’: The Use of Ye and Thou in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales ”. Anglistik 17 (2): 57–72.Google Scholar
2014. “Courtesy and Politeness in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight ”. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 49 (3): 5–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020. Politeness in the History of English: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knappe, Gabriele and Michael Schümann. 2006. “ Thou and Ye: A Collocational–Phraseological Approach to Pronoun Change in Chaucer’s ‘Canterbury Tales’”. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 421: 213–238.Google Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas, Tanja Rütten and Ingvilt Marcoe. 2011. Early Modern English Religious Prose – A Conservative Register? University of Helsinki: Varieng. Accessed 1 November 2022 at: [URL]
Mazzon, Gabriella. 1992. “Shakespearean Thou and You Revisited, or Socio-Affective Networks on Stage”. In Carmela Nocera, Nicola Pantaleo and Domenico Pezzini (eds), Early Modern English: Trends, Forms and Texts, 123–136. Bari: Schena.Google Scholar
. 2000. “Social Relations and Forms of Address in the Canterbury Tales ”. In Dieter Kastovsky and Arthur Mettinger (eds), The History of English in a Social Context: A Contribution to Historical Sociolinguistics, 135–168. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Pronouns and Nominal Address in Shakespearean English: A Socio-Affective Marking System in Transition”. In Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, 223–249. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Interactive Dialogue Sequences in Middle English Drama. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Terms of Address”. In Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Historical Pragmatics: Handbooks of Pragmatics 8 1, 351–376. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax, Part 1: Parts of Speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Nathan, N. 1956. “Pronouns of Address in the Friar’s Tale”. Modern Language Quarterly 17 (1): 39–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1959. “Pronouns of Address in the Canterbury Tales”. Mediaeval Studies 211: 193–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1996. “Social Stratification”. In Terttu Nevalainen and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (eds), Sociolinguistics and Language History, 57–76. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. “Processes of Supralocalisation and the Rise of Standard English in the Early Modern Period”. In Ricardo D. Bermúdez-Otero, David Denison, Richard M. Hogg and C. B. McCully (eds), Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10 ICEHL, 329–372. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. 2000. “The Changing Role of London on the Linguistic Map of Tudor and Stuart England”. In Dieter Kastovsky and Arthur Mettinger (eds), The History of English in a Social Context: A Contribution to Historical Sociolinguistics, 279–337. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skeat, Walter W. (ed). 1894. Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sobecki, Sebastian. 2015. “‘The Writyng of this Tretys’: Margery Kempe’s Son and the Authorship of Her Book”. Studies in the Age of Chaucer 371: 257–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenroos, Merja. 2010. “The Pronoun of Address in Piers Plowman: Authorial and Scribal Usage”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 111: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stephens, J. R. 1995. “Censorship”. In Martin Branham (ed.), The Cambridge Guide to Theatre, 178–186. (Second edition.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Timofeeva, Olga. 2024. “Low German in The Book of Margery Kempe ”. Poetica 991, 1001: 23–39.Google Scholar
Timofeeva, Olga and Jonas Keller. 2023. “Multilingual Encounters in The Book of Margery Kempe ”. Etudes Médiévales Anglaises 1021: 11–42.Google Scholar
Woledge, Julia. 1976. The Use of Tu and Vous in Medieval French Verse Romances from 1160 to 1230. (PhD thesis.) London: University of London.