Introduction published in:
The Northumbrian Old English glosses
Edited by Elly van Gelderen
[NOWELE 72:2] 2019
► pp. 119133


Benskin, M.
2011Present Indicative Plural Concord in Brittonic and Early English. Transactions of the Philological Society 109(2). 158–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berndt, R.
1956Form und Funktion des Verbums im nördlichen Spätaltenglischen. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Bergen, L. van
2008Negative contraction and Old English dialects. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 109. 275–312.Google Scholar
Carpenter, H. C. A.
1910Die Deklination in der nordhumbrischen Evangelienübersetzung der Lindisfarner Handschrift. Bonn: Hanstein.Google Scholar
Cole, M.
2014Old Northumbrian verbal morphosyntax and the (Northern) Subject Rule. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016Identifying the author(s) of the Lindisfarne Gloss. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), 169–188.Google Scholar
2018Where did THEY come from? A native origin for THEY, THEIR, THEM. Diachronica 35(2). 165–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 133 ]
Dictionary of Old English (DOE) texts. http://​www​.doe​.utoronto​.ca
2002The Lindisfarne Bible. Munich: Faksimile Verlag.Google Scholar
Fernández Cuesta, J.
2016Revisiting the manuscript of the Lindisfarne Gospels. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 257–285.Google Scholar
Fernández Cuesta, J. & S. Pons-Sanz
(eds.) 2016The Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gelderen, E. van
2000A History of English reflexive pronouns. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013The diachrony of pronouns and demonstratives. In T. Lohndal (ed.), In search of Universal Grammar: From Old Norse to Zoque, 195–218. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmqvist, E.
1922On the history of the English present inflections particularly -th and -s. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O.
1917Negation in English and other languages. Copenhagen: Høst.Google Scholar
Jones, C.
1970Some features of determiner usage in the Old English glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Durham Ritual. Indogermanische Forschungen 75. 198–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, T. D. et al.
1956Evangeliorum quattuor Codex Lindisfarnensis. Lausanne: Graf.Google Scholar
Klemola, J.
2013English as a contact language in the British Isles. In D. Schreier & M. Hundt (eds.), English as a contact language, 75–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lange, C.
2006Reflexivity and intensification in English. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Levin, S.
1958Negative contraction: An Old and Middle English dialect criterion. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 57. 492–501.Google Scholar
Moore, S. & A. H. Marckwardt
1951Historical outlines of English sounds and inflections. Ann Arbor, MI: Wahr.Google Scholar
Mustanoja, T.
1960A Middle English syntax. Helsinki [2016 reprint. Amsterdam: Benjamins].Google Scholar
Nagucka, R.
1997Glossal translation in the Lindisfarne Gospel according to Saint Matthew. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 31. 179–201.Google Scholar
Pons-Sanz, S.
2013The lexical effects of Anglo-Scandinavian linguistic contact on Old English. Turnhout: Brepols. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R. & C. L. Wrenn
1957An Old English grammar, 3rd edn. London: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, A.
1937Studies in the accidence of the Lindisfarne Gospels. Leeds: School of English.Google Scholar
Skeat, W.
1871–87The Gospel according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke and St. John [1970 reprint. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Suárez-Gómez, C.
2009On the syntactic differences between OE dialects: Evidence from the Gospels. English Language and Linguistics 13(1). 57–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.
1992Syntax. In R. Hogg et al. (eds.), The Cambridge history of the English language, 168–286. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vennemann, T.
2001Atlantis Semitica: Structural contact features in Celtic and English. In L. Brinton (ed.), Historical Linguistics 1999, 351–369. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walkden, G.
2016Null subjects in the Lindisfarne Gospels as evidence for syntactic variation in Old English. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), 239–256.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Fernández-Cuesta, Julia & Nieves Rodríguez-Ledesma
2020. Reduced forms in the nominal morphology of the Lindisfarne Gospel Gloss. A case of accusative/dative syncretism?. Folia Linguistica 54:s41-s1  pp. 37 ff. Crossref logo
Pons-Sanz, Sara M.
2021. Aldred’s Glosses to the notae iuris in Durham A.iv.19: Personal, Textual and Cultural Contexts. English Studies 102:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 november 2021. 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.