Part of
Corpus-based Approaches to Register Variation
Edited by Elena Seoane and Douglas Biber
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 103] 2021
► pp. 179208
References
Biber, Douglas & Clark, Victoria
2002Historical shifts in modification patterns with complex noun phrase structures. How long can you go without a verb? In English Historical Syntax and Morphology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 223], Teresa Fanego, Javier Pérez-Guerra & María José López-Couso (eds), 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Egbert, Jesse
2016Register variation on the searchable web: A multi-dimensional analysis. Journal of English Linguistics 44(2): 95–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Egbert, Jesse & Davies, Mark
2015Exploring the composition of the searchable web: A corpus-based taxonomy of web registers. Corpora 10(1): 11–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany
2010Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9: 2–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011Grammatical change in the noun phrase: The influence of written language use. English Language and Linguistics. 15(2): 223–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016Grammatical Complexity in Academic English. Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johannson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav
2018Statistics in corpus linguistics: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark
2008The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): One Billion Words, 1990–2019. [URL]> (26 May 2021).
2013Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 Billion Words from Speakers in 20 Countries (GloWbE). [URL]> (26 May 2021).
2016Corpus of Online Registers of English (CORE). [URL]> (26 May 2021).
Egbert, Jesse, Biber, Douglas & Davies, Mark
2015Developing a bottom-up, user-based method of web register classification. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66(9): 1817–1831. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gabrielatos, Costas
2018Keyness analysis: Nature, metrics and techniques. In Corpus Approaches to Discourse: A Critical Review, Charlotte Taylor & Anna Marchi (eds), 225–258. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gabrielatos, Costas & Marchi, Anna
2011Keyness: Matching metrics to definitions. Presented at Corpus Linguistics in the South 1, University of Portsmouth, 5 November 2011. [URL]> (26 May 2021).
Garside, Roger
1987The CLAWS word-tagging system. In The Computational Analysis of English: A Corpus-Based Approach. Roger Garside, Geoffrey Leech, & Geoffrey Sampson (eds). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hardie, Andrew
2014Log ratio – An informal introduction 28 April 2014 <[URL]> (26 May 2021).
Kilgariff, Adam
2005Language is never, ever, ever, random. Corpus linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1–2: 263–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009Simple maths for keywords. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference, CL2009, University of Liverpool, July, Michaela Mahlberg, Victorina González-Díaz & Catherine Smith (eds). [URL]> (26 May 2021).
Pojanapunya, Punjaporn & Watson Todd, Richard
2018Log-likelihood and odds ratio: Keyness statistics for different purposes of keyword analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 14(1): 133–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, Paul
2016[URL], last updated 4 July 2016. [URL]> (26 May 2021).
Scott, Mike
1997PC analysis of key words – And key key words. System 25(2): 233–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Andrew
2013Embracing bayes factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability [Language Competence and Language Awareness in Europe 4], Markus Bieswanger & Amei Koll-Stobbe (eds), 3–11, Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar