Article published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 39:1 (2015) ► pp. 199229
References
Bauer, Brigitte
2000Archaic syntax in Indo-European: The spread of transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Behrens, Bergliot & Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen
2005The relation accompanying circumstance across languages. Conflict between linguistic expression and discourse subordination? SPRIKreports321. (http://​www​.hf​.uio​.no​/forskningsprosjekter​/sprik).Google Scholar
Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Karen Ebert & Casper de Groot
2000The progressive in Europe. In Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense & aspect in the languages of Europe, 517–558. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad
2009Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blanpain, Kristin
2012Academic writing: A resource for researchers. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
Bock, Kathryn
1986Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology 181. 355–387. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
BNC: The British National Corpus, later part 20th century
100 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Oxford. (http://​www​.natcorp​.ox​.ac​.uk​/corpus​/index​.xml​?ID​=intro)
Callens, Margareta, Hendrik Neel & Sabine Van Bogaert
2004Nieuw talent voor taal aso 6 - handleiding. Berchem: De Boeck.Google Scholar
Carroll, Mary & Monique Lambert
2003Information structure in narratives and the role of grammaticised knowledge: A study of adult French and German learners of English. In Christine Dimroth and Marianne Starren (eds.), Information structure and the dynamics of language acquisition, 267–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ebert, Karen
2000Progressive markers in Germanic languages. In Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense & aspect in the languages of Europe, 605–653. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fonteyn, Lauren & Hubert Cuyckens
2013The development of free adjuncts in English and Dutch. Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics 21. 160–195.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E
2006Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haeseryn, Walter, et al.
1997Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Deurne: Plantyn.Google Scholar
Haff, Marianne Hobæk
2010A contrastive analysis of absolute constructions in French, German and Norwegian. Lingvisticæ Inverstigationes 33(2). 208–223. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A.K
2004An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hannay, Mike & J. Lachlan Mackenzie
2002Effective writing in English: A sourcebook. Bussum: Coutinho.Google Scholar
Holmes, Philip & Ian Hinchliffe
1994Swedish: A comprehensive grammar. London & New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Magnus, Magnus Nissel, Patrick Maiwald & Bianca Widlitzki
2012The Old Bailey Corpus: Spoken English in the 18th and 19th centuries. www​.uni​-giessen​.de​/oldbaileycorpus (accessed 04 June 2013).
Innsbruck Corpus of Middle English Prose
7.8m words. Manfred Markus, et al., Universität Innsbruck. (http://​www​.helsinki​.fi​/varieng​/CoRD​/corpora​/ICoMEP/).
Johansson, Lars
2000Viewpoint operators in European languages. In Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense & aspect in the languages of Europe, 27–187. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Killie, Kristin
2006Internal and external factors in language change: Present participle converbs in English and Norwegian. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 107(4). 447–469.Google Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas
2004Text, Textsorte, Sprachgeschichte: Englische Partizipial- und Gerundialkonstruktionen 1100 bis 1700. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Komen, Johannes H.M
1994Over de ontwikkeling van absolute constructies. Amsterdam: Buijten en Schipperhejn.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Johan van der Auwera
1990Adverbial participles, gerunds and absolute constructions in the languages of Europe. In Johannes Beclert, Giuluano Bernini & Claude Budart (eds.), Toward a Typology of European Languages, 337–355. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
König, Ekkehard
1994English. In Ekkehard König & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The Germanic languages, 532–565. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd
1988Freie Adjunkte und absolute Konstruktionen im Englischen und Deutschen. Papiere zur Linguistik 38(1). 61–89.Google Scholar
1991Free adjuncts and absolutes in English: problems of control and interpretation. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
1995Adverbial participial clauses in English. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König, Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 189–237. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lenker, Ursula
2014Knitting and splitting information. Medial placement of linking adverbials in the history of English In Simone E. Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt & Daniel Schreier (eds.), Contact, variation, and change in the history of English, 11–38. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Loebell, Helga & Kathryn Bock
2003Structural priming across languages. Linguistics 41(5). 791–824. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W.J.M. & S. Kelter
1982Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology 141. 78–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Los, B
2009The consequences of the loss of verb-second in English: Information structure and syntax in interaction. English Language and Linguistics 13(1). 97–125. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Los, B. & M. Starren
2012A typological switch in early Modern English – and the beginning of one in Dutch? Leuvense bijdragen 98(1). 98–126.Google Scholar
Lundin, Katarina
2003Small clauses in Swedish: Towards a unified account. Lund: Studentlitteratur. (http://​lup​.lub​.lu​.se​/luur​/download​?func​=downloadFile​&recordOId​=21018​&fileOId​=912647).Google Scholar
Nicol, Janet
1996Syntactic priming. Language and cognitive processes 111. 675–679. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petré, Peter
2010The functions of weorðan and its loss in the past tense in Old and Middle English. English Language and Linguistics 14(3). 457–484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Constructions and environments: Copular, passive and related Constructions in Old and Middle English (Oxford Studies in the History of English 4). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Semanticization and frequency: On the changing textual functions of [BE Ving] from Old to Early Modern English. English Language and Linguistics. (accepted)
Pickering, Martin J. & Victor S. Ferreira
2008Structural priming: A critical review.’ Psychological Bulletin 134(3). 427–459. (accessed online at: http://​www​.ncbi​.nlm​.nih​.gov​/pmc​/articles​/PMC2657366/) DOI: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
PPCEME: The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English, 1500-1710
1.7 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, 1st edn, (http://​www​.ling​.upenn​.edu​/hist​-corpora/).
PPCMBE
The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Modern British English, 1700-1914, 1 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, 1st edn, (http://​www​.ling​.upenn​.edu​/hist​-corpora/).
Quirk, Ralph, et al.
1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ross, Charles Hunter
1893The Absolute Participle in Middle and Modern English. PMLA 8(3). 245–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt
2006Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis (Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs 177). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swan, Toril
2003Present participles in the history of English and Norwegian. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 1041. 179–195.Google Scholar
Teleman, Ulf, Staffan Hellberg & Erik Andersson
1999Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. Stockholm: Svenska Akademien och författarna.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
2013Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van der Horst, Johannes
2008Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse Syntaxis I & II. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.Google Scholar
van de Pol, Nikki & Hubert Cuyckens
2013aIn absolute detail: The development of English absolute constructions from adverbial to additional-context marker. ICAME, Santiago de Compostella 22-26 May 2013.Google Scholar
2013bGradualness in change in English augmented absolutes. In A. Giacalone Ramat, C. Mauri & P. Molinelli (eds.), Synchrony and diachrony: A dynamic interface. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014The diffusion of English absolutes: A diachronic register study. In K. Davidse, C. Gentens, L. Ghesquière & L. Vandelanotte (eds.), Corpus interrogation and grammatical patterns (Studies in Corpus Linguistics). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van de Pol, Nikki
2012Between copy and cognate: The origin of absolutes in Old and Middle English. In M. Robbeets & L. Johanson (eds.), The Origins of Bound Morphology. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans & Marit Westergaard
2012Syntax and information structure: Verb-second variation in Middle English. In Anneli Meurman-Solin, Maria Jose Lopez-Couso & Bettelou Los (eds.), Information structure and syntactic change in the history of English, 87–118. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Wilderode, Anton
1968De dubbelfuit. Antwerpen: Standaard.Google Scholar
Vandekerckhove, José, Bea Claeys, Bert Cruysweegs, et al.
Frappant Nederlands aso 6: Studieboek. Kalmthout: Pelckmans.
von Stutterheim, Christiane, Martin Andermann, Mary Carroll, Monique Flecken & Barbara Schmiedtová
2012How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in the early phases of language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data and memory performance. Linguistics 50(4). 833–869. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, E.J. & W. Labov
1983Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics 191. 29–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

PETRÉ, PETER
2016. Grammaticalization by changing co-text frequencies, or why [BE Ving] became the ‘progressive’. English Language and Linguistics 20:1  pp. 31 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 april 2022. 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.