Agresti, Alan
2007An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Hoboken NJ: John Wiley and Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asher, Ronald E. & Kumari, T.C
1997Malayalam. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bernard, Lou
(ed.) 2007Reference Guide for the British National Corpus (XML Edition). Published by Research Technologies Service at Oxford University Computing Services. [URL] (12 October 2013)Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan & Reppen, Randi
1998Corpus Linguistics. Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
2000 Give and person suppletion. LINGUIST List 11.1166. [URL] (12 October 2013).Google Scholar
2003Recipient person suppletion in the verb ‘give’. In Language and Life. Essays in Memory of Kenneth L Pike, Mary Ruth Wise, Thomas N. Headland & Ruth Brend (eds), 265–281. Dallas TX: SIL International and The University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Creider, Chet A. & Creider, Jane Tapsubei
1989A Grammar of Nandi. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark
2004– BYU-BNC (Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press). [URL] (15 April 2014).
2008– The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–present. [URL] (15 April 2014).
Dixon, Robert M.W
1991A New Approach to English Grammar, on Semantic Principles. New York and Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2005A Semantic Approach to English Grammar, 2nd edn. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Gahl, Susanne & Garnsey, Susan M
2004Knowledge of grammar, knowledge of usage. Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation. Language 80(4): 748–775. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006Knowledge of grammar includes knowledge of syntactic probabilities. Language 82(2): 405–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gahl, Susanne, Jurafsky, Dan & Roland, Douglas
2004Verb subcategorization frequencies: American English corpus data, methodological studies, and cross-corpus comparisons. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 36: 432–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Thomas
2006Exploring variability within and between corpora. Some methodological considerations. Corpora 1(2): 109–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013aStatistics for Linguistics with R. A Practical Introduction. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013bBasic significance testing. In Research Methods in Linguistics, Robert J. Podesva & Devyani Sharma (eds), 316–336. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L
1972A new perspective on American Indian linguistics. In New Perspectives on the Pueblos, Alfonso Ortiz (ed.), 87–103. Albuquerque NM: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A.K
1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edn. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Rychly, Pavel, Smrz, Pavel & Tugwell, David
2004The Sketch Engine. Proceedings of EURALEX 2004, Lorient, France, 105–116. [URL] (12 October 2013).Google Scholar
Knowles, Gerry & Don, Zuraidah Mohd
2004The notion of a “lemma”. Headwords, roots and lexical sets. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9: 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N
1971Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Manning, Christopher D
2003Probabilistic syntax. In Probabilistic Linguistics, Rens Bod, 
Jennifer Hay & Stefanie Jannedy (eds), 289–341. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Newman, John
1996Give. A Cognitive Linguistic Study [Cognitive Linguistics Research 7]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2005Three-place predicates. A cognitive linguistic perspective. Language Sciences 27: 145–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, John & Rice, Sally
2006Transitivity schemas of English eat and drink in the BNC. In Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, Stefan Thomas Gries & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds), 225–260. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team
2014R. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Reesink, Ger
2013Expressing the GIVE event in Papuan languages. A preliminary survey. Linguistic Typology 17(2): 217–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
2001Local patterns of subjectivity in person and verb type in American English conversation. In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Typological Studies in Language 45], Joan Bybee & Paul Hopper (eds), 61–89. Amsterdam: John 
Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002Point of View and Grammar. Structural Patterns of Subjectivity in American English Conversation [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 11]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
1976Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, Robert M.W. Dixon (ed.), 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John
1991Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Gries, Stefan Thomas
2003Collostructions. Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(2): 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tao, Hongyin
2001Discovering the usual with corpora: The case of remember. In Corpus Linguistics in North America: Selections from the 1999 Symposium, Rita C. Simpson & John Swales (eds), 116–114. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. and Mulac, Anthony
1991A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. II: Focus on Types of Grammatical Markers [Typological Studies in Language 19], 
Elisabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 313–329. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
1998One child’s early talk about possession. In The Linguistics of Giving [Typological Studies in Language 36], John Newman (ed.), 349–373. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Lier, Eva
2012Referential effects on the expression of three-participant events across languages. An introduction in memory of Anna Siewierska. Linguistic Discovery 10(3). [URL] (12 October 2013). DOI logoGoogle Scholar