Chapter in:
Broadening the Spectrum of Corpus Linguistics: New approaches to variability and change
Edited by Susanne Flach and Martin Hilpert
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 105] 2022
► pp. 257284
References
Baayen, R. Harald & Ramscar, Michael
2015Abstraction, storage, and native discriminative learning. In Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Ewa Dąbrowska & Dagmar S. Divjak (eds), 100–120. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bernaisch, Tobias, Gries, Stefan Th., & Mukherjee, Joybrato
2014The dative alternation in South Asian English(es): Modelling predictors and predicting prototypes. English World-Wide 35(1): 7–31.Google Scholar
Boulesteix, Anne-Laure, Janitza, Silke, Hapfelmeier, Alexander, Van Steen, Kristel & Strobl, Carolin
2015Letter to the editor: On the term ‘interaction’ and related phrases in the literature on Random Forests. Briefings in Bioinformatics 16(2): 338–345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daelemans, Walter & van den Bosch, Antal
2005Memory-Based Language Processing. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daelemans, Walter, Zavrel, Jakub, van der Sloot, Ko, & van den Bosch, Antal
2018TiMBL: Tilburg Memory-Based Learner. Version 6.4 Reference Guide. ILK Technical Report – ILK 11–01. https://​github​.com​/LanguageMachines​/timbl​/raw​/master​/docs​/Timbl​_6​.4​_Manual​.pdf (4 April 2022).
Deshors, Sandra C.
2020English as a Lingua Franca: A random forests approach to particle placement in multi-participant interactions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 30(2): 214–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
To appear. Contextualizing past tenses in L2: Combined effects and interactions in the present perfect vs. simple past alternation. Applied Linguistics. Crossref
Deshors, Sandra C. & Gries, Stefan Th.
2016Profiling verb complementation constructions across New Englishes: A two-step random forests analysis to ing vs. to complements. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21(2): 192–218.Google Scholar
Deshors, Sandra C. & Gries, Stefan Th
2020Mandative subjunctive vs. should in world Englishes: A new take on an old alternation. Corpora 15(2): 213–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar S., Arppe, Antti & Dąbrowska, Ewa
2016Machine meets man: Evaluating the psychological reality of corpus-based probabilistic models. Cognitive Linguistics 27(1): 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gower, J. C.
1971A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 27(4): 857–871. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th
2020On classification trees and random forests in corpus linguistics: Some words of caution and suggestions for improvement. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16(3): 517–647. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2021Statistics For Linguistics with R, 3rd rev. and ext. edn. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. & Adelman, Allison S.
2014Subject realization in Japanese conversation by native and non-native speakers: Exemplifying a new paradigm for learner corpus research. In Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2014: New empirical and theoretical paradigms, Jesús Romero-Trillo (ed.), 35–54. Cham: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. & Deshors, Sandra C.
2014Using regressions to explore deviations between corpus data and a standard/target: Two suggestions. Corpora 9(1): 109–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2020There’s more to alternations than the main diagonal of a 2×2 confusion matrix: Improvements of MuPDAR and other classificatory alternation studies. ICAME Journal 44: 69–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heller, Benedikt, Bernaisch, Tobias, & Gries, Stefan Th
2017Empirical perspectives on two potential epicenters: The genitive alternation in Asian Englishes. ICAME Journal 41: 111–144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klavan, Jane & Divjak, Dagmar S.
2016The cognitive plausibility of statistical classification models: Comparing textual and behavioral evidence. Folia Linguistica 50(2): 355–384. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kolbe-Hanna, Daniela & Baldus, Lina
2018The choice between -ing and to complement clauses in English as first, second and foreign language. Paper presented at ICAME 39, University of Tampere.
Kruger, Haidee & De Sutter, Gert
2018Alternation in contact and non-contact varieties: Reconceptualising that-omission in translated and non-translated English using the MuPDAR approach. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 1(2): 251–290. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lester, Nicholas A.
2019 That’s hard: Relativizer use in spontaneous L2 speech. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 5(1): 1–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Milin, Petar, Divjak, Dagmar S., Dimitrijević, Strahinja & Baayen, R. Harald
2016Towards cognitively plausible data science in language research. Cognitive Linguistics 27(4): 507–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Podani, János
1999Extending Gower’s general coefficient of similarity to ordinal characters. Taxon 48: 331–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schweinberger, Martin
2020A corpus-based analysis of differences in the use of very for adjective amplification among native speakers and learners of English. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 6(2): 163–192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torgo, Luis
2011Data Mining with R: Learning with Case Studies. Boca Raton FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Werner, Valentin, Fuchs, Robert, & Götz, Sandra
2020L1 influence vs. universal mechanisms: An SLA-driven corpus study on temporal expression. In Learner Corpora and Second Language Acquisition Research, Bert Le Bruyn & Magali Paquot (eds), 39–66. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Marvin N., Ziegler, Andreas, & König, Inke R.
2016Do little interactions get lost in dark random forests? BMC Bioinformatics 17(145). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wulff, Stefanie & Gries, Stefan Th
2015Prenominal adjective order preferences in Chinese and German L2 English: A multifactorial corpus study. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 5(1): 122–150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019Particle placement in learner English: Measuring effects of context, first language, and individual variation. Language Learning 69(4): 873–910. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2020Explaining individual variation in learner corpus research: Some methodological suggestions. In Learner Corpora and Second Language Acquisition Research, Bert Le Bruyn & Magali Paquot (eds), 191–213. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar