Article published in:
The Northumbrian Old English glosses
Edited by Elly van Gelderen
[NOWELE 72:2] 2019
► pp. 220244
References

References

Berndt, R.
1956Form und Funktion des Verbums im nördlichen Spätaltenglischen. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Boer, R. C.
1920Oudnoorsch Handboek. Haarlem: Willink.Google Scholar
Bremmer, R. H.
2009An introduction to Old Frisian. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brook, G. & R. Leslie
(eds.) 1963Layamon: Brut. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brookes, S.
2016The shape of things to come? Variation and intervention in Aldred’s gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), The Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context, 103–150. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A.
1959Old English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cole, M.
2014Old Northumbrian verbal morphosyntax and the (Northern) Subject Rule. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018Where did THEY come from? A native origin for THEY, THEIR, THEM. Diachronica 35(2). 165–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DOE
Dictionary of Old English (DOE) texts. http://​www​.doe​.utoronto​.ca
Faarlund, J.
2004The syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Facsimile
2002The Lindisfarne Bible. Munich: Faksimile Verlag.Google Scholar
Filppula, M., J. Klemola & H. Paulasto
2008English and Celtic in contact. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 243 ]
van Gelderen, E.
2000A history of English reflexive pronouns. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019Introduction [this issue]. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, R. M.
2004North Northumbrian and South Northumbrian: A geographical statement? In M. Dossena & R. Lass (eds.), Methods and data in English historical dialectology, 241–255. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Irslinger, B.
2014Intensifiers and reflexives in SAE, Insular Celtic and English. Indogermanische Forschungen 119. 159–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018Reflexive marking in English and Welsh: The “contact hypothesis” revisited. ICEHL 30 presentation.Google Scholar
Janssen, H.
1957Historische Grammatica van het Latijn II. Den Haag: Servire.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
König, E. & L. Vezzosi
2004The role of predicate meaning in the development of reflexivity. In W. Bisang et al. (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? 213–244. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lange, C.
2006Reflexivity and intensification in English. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Lea, E. M.
1894The language of the Northumbrian gloss to the Gospel of St. Mark, Anglia 16. 62–206.Google Scholar
Miller, G. D.
2012External influences on English: From its beginnings to the Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moore, S. & A. H. Marckwardt
1951Historical outlines of English sounds and inflections. Ann Arbor, MI: Wahr.Google Scholar
Ogura, M.
1989Verbs with the reflexive pronoun and constructions with ‘self’ in Old and Early Middle English. Cambridge: Brewer.Google Scholar
Parry, J.
1937Brut y Brenhinedd. Cambridge: The Medieval Academy of America.Google Scholar
Pons-Sanz, S.
2013The lexical effects of Anglo-Scandinavian linguistic contact on Old English. Turnhout: Brepols. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poppe, E.
2009Standard Average European and the Celticity of English intensifiers and reflexives: Some considerations and implications. English Language and Linguistics 13. 251–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quak, A.
1992Formenlehre des Altniederländischen. In R. Bremmer & A. Quak (eds), Zur Phonologie und Morphologie des Altniederländischen, 81–123. Odense: Odense University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schrijver, P.
2011Old British. In E. Ternes (ed.), Brythonic Celtic – Britannisches Keltisch: From Medieval British to Modern Breton, 1–84. Bremen: Hempen.Google Scholar
Skeat, W. W.
(ed.) 1871–87The Gospel according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke and St. John. Reprint: Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Thurneysen, R.
1946A grammar of Old Irish. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Tristram, H. L. C.
1999How Celtic is Standard English? The Annual Celtic Lecture, St. Petersburg: Russian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T.
2013Concerning myself . In R. Mailhammer (ed.), Lexical and structural etymology: Beyond word histories, 121–146. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vezzosi, L.
2005The development of himself in Middle English: A ‘Celtic’ Hypothesis. In N. Ritt & H. Schendl (eds.), Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and literary approaches, 228–43. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Visser, F.
1963An historical syntax of the English grammar, Vol I. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
[ p. 244 ]
Cited by

Cited by 1 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  pp. 37 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 april 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.