Article published In:
Comparing Crosslinguistic Complexity
Edited by Jenny Ström Herold and Magnus Levin
[Languages in Contrast 24:1] 2024
► pp. 133163
Aarts, B., López-Couso, M. and Méndez-Naya, B.
2012Late Modern English Syntax. In English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook, A. Bergs and L. J. Brinton (eds), 869–887. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Admoni, W.
1990Historische Syntax des Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D.
1996The “Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London,” 1675–1975: A Sociohistorical Discourse Analysis. Language in Society, 25(3), 333–371.Google Scholar
Banks, D.
2008The Development of Scientific Writing. Linguistic Features and Historical Context. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Romero-Barranco, J.
2020Linguistic Complexity across two Early Modern English Scientific Text Types. Atlantis 42(2): 50–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beneš, E.
1981Die formale Struktur der wissenschaftlichen Fachsprachen aus syntaktischer Hinsicht. In Wissenschaftssprache, T. Bungarten (ed.), 185–212. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Biber, D. and Clark, V.
2002Historical Shifts in Modification Patterns with Complex Noun Phrase Structures. In English Historical Morphology, T. Fanego, M. López-Couso and J. Pérez-Guerra (eds). 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. and Gray, B.
2011The Historical Shift of Scientific Academic Prose in English towards less Explicit Styles of Expression: Writing without Verbs. In Researching Specialized Languages, V. Bathia, P. Sánchez, and P. Pérez-Paredes (eds), 11–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Studies in English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De Marneffe, M., Manning, C., Nivre, J. and Zeman, D.
2021Universal Dependencies. Computational Linguistics 47(2): 255–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Smet, H.
2006A Corpus of Late Modern English Texts. ICAME Journal 291: 69–82.Google Scholar
Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Kermes, H., Khamis, A. and Teich, E.
2018An Information-Theoretic Approach to Modelling Diachronic Change in Scientific English. In From Data to Evidence in English Language Research, C. Suhr, T. Nevalainen and I. Taavitsainen (eds), 258–281. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Fischer, S., Menzel, K., Knappen, J. and Teich, E.
2020The Royal Society Corpus 6.0 providing 300+ Years of Scientific Writing for Humanistic Study. Proceedings of the Twelfth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2020). Marseille, France, 11–16 May 2020. European Language Resources Association. 794–802.Google Scholar
Futrell, R., Mahowald, K. and Gibson, E.
2015Large-Scale Evidence of Dependency Length Minimization in 37 languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(33): 10336–10341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gerdes, K. and Kahane, S.
2001Word Order in German: A Formal Dependency Grammar using a Topological Hierarchy. Proceedings of the Thirty-Nineth Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Toulouse, France, 6–11 July. Association for Computational Linguistics. 220–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geyken, A., Boenig, M., Haaf, S., Jurish, B., Thomas, C. and Wiegand, F.
2018Das Deutsche Textarchiv als Forschungsplattform für historische Daten in CLARIN. In Germanistische Sprachwissenschaft um 2020, H. Lobin, R. Schneider and A. Witt (eds), 219–248. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E., Futrell, R., Piantadosi, S., Dautriche, V., Mahowald, K., Bergen, L. and Levy, R.
2019How Efficiency Shapes Human Language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23(5): 389–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E.
2000Dependency Locality Theory: A Distance-Based Theory of Linguistic Complexity. In Image, Language, Brain: Papers from the first Mind Articulation Project Symposium, A. Miyashita, Y. Marantz and W. O’Neil (eds), 95–126. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gildea, D. and Temperley, D.
2010Do Grammars minimize Dependency Length? Cognitive Science 34(2): 286–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonnerman, L. and Hayes, C.
2005The Professor Chewed the Students… out: Effects of Dependency, Length, and Adjacency on Word Order Preferences in Sentences with Verb Particle Constructions. Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 05). Stresa, Italy, July 21–23. 785–790.Google Scholar
Gulordava, K., Merlo, P. and Crabbé, B.
2015Dependency Length Minimisation Effects in Short Spans: A Large-Scale Analysis of Adjective Placement in Complex Noun Phrases. Proceedings of the Fifty-Third Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the Seventh International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. Beijing, China, July 26–31. 477–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habermann, M.
2011Deutsche Fachtexte der Neuzeit. Naturkundlich-medizinische Wissensvermittlung im Spannungsfeld von Latein und Volkssprache. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J.
1993Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
1988On the Language of Physical Science. In Registers of Written English: Situational Factors and Linguistic Features, M. Ghadessy (ed.), 162–177. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Heringer, H., Strecker, B. and Wimmer, R.
1980Syntax: Fragen, Lösungen, Alternativen. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Hudson, R.
1995Measuring Syntactic Difficulty. Manuscript, University College.Google Scholar
Hundt, M., Denison, D. and Schneider, G.
2012Relative Complexity in Scientific Discourse. English Language & Linguistics 16(2): 209–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juzek, T. S., Krielke, M.-P. and Teich, E.
2020Exploring Diachronic Syntactic Shifts with Dependency Length: The Case of Scientific English. Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Universal Dependencies. Barcelona, Spain, 13 December 2020. Association for Computational Linguistics. 109–119.Google Scholar
Krielke, M.-P.
2021Relativizers as Markers of Grammatical Complexity: A Diachronic, Cross-Register Study of English and German. Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies 11(1): 91–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krielke, M.-P., Talamo, L., Fawzi, M. and Knappen, J.
2022Tracing Syntactic Change in the Scientific Genre: Two Universal Dependency-Parsed Diachronic Corpora of Scientific English and German. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2022). Marseille, France, 20–25 June 2022. European Language Resources Association. 4808–4816.Google Scholar
Lei, L. and Wen, J.
2020Is Dependency Distance Experiencing a Process of Minimization? A Diachronic Study Based on the State of the Union Addresses. Lingua 2391: 102762. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, H., Xu, C. and Liang, J.
2017Dependency Distance: A New Perspective on Syntactic Patterns in Natural Languages. Physics of Life Reviews 211: 171–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Möslein, K.
1974Einige Entwicklungstendenzen in der Syntax der wissenschaftlich-technischen Literatur seit dem Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts. Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 941: 156–198.Google Scholar
Nicenboim, B., Vasishth, S., Gattei, C., Sigman, M., and Kliegl, R.
2015Working Memory Differences in Long-Distance Dependency Resolution. Frontiers in Psychology 61: 312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rudnicka, K.
2018Variation of Sentence Length across Time and Genre: Influence on Syntactic Usage in English. In Diachronic Corpora, Genre, and Language Change, R. J. Whitt (ed.), 219–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Straka, M. and Straková, J.
2017Tokenizing, POS Tagging, Lemmatizing and Parsing UD 2.0 with UDPIPE. Proceedings of the Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) 2017. Vancouver, Canada, 3–4 August 2017. 88–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tily, H.
2010The Role of Processing Complexity in Word Order Variation and Change. PhD Thesis, Stanford University.
Wang, G., Wang, H., Sun, X., Wang, N., & Wang, L.
2023Linguistic complexity in scientific writing: A large-scale diachronic study from 1821 to 1920. Scientometrics, 128(1), 441–460. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wasow, T. and Arnold, J.
2003Post-Verbal Constituent Ordering in English. In Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, G. Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf (eds), 119–154. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar