Chapter published in:
Explorations in English Historical Syntax
Edited by Hubert Cuyckens, Hendrik De Smet, Liesbet Heyvaert and Charlotte Maekelberghe
[Studies in Language Companion Series 198] 2018
► pp. 283306
References

References

Aijmer, Karin
2013Understanding Pragmatic Markers. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Andersen, Gisle
2002Corpora and the double copula. In From the COLT’s mouth ….. and others’: Language corpora studies in honour of Anna-Brita Stenström, Leiv E. Breivik & Angela Hasselgren (eds), 43–58. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Blockley, Mary
2001Subordinate clause without ἀπὸ κοινοῦ in Old English verse, chiefly in Beowulf and chiefly nu and swa . Studia Neophilologica 73: 4–10.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L.
1987The remarkable double is . English Today 9: 39–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2010Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Language Change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Coppock, Elizabeth, Brenier, Jason, Staum, Laura & Michaelis, Laura
2006“The thing is, is” is no mere disfluency. Berkeley Linguistics Society 32: 85–96.Google Scholar
Corminboeuf, Gilles
2012Des apo koinou aux constructions louches. In Le verbe en verve: Réflexions sur la syntaxe et la sémantique verbales, Marleen Van Peteghem, Peter Lauwers, Els Tobback, Annemie Demol & Laurence De Wilde (eds), 215–231. Gent: Academia Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2001Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Curzan, Anne
2012Revisiting the reduplicative copula with corpus-based evidence. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth C. Traugott (eds), 211–221. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W.
2007The stance triangle. In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 164], Robert Englebretson (ed.), 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25(3): 359–410. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Erman, Britt & Warren, Beatrice
2000The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text 20(1): 29–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, John & Forest, Richard W.
2014Signalling Nouns in Academic English: A Corpus-based Discourse Approach. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne
2011 N be that-constructions in everyday German conversation: A reanalysis of ‘die Sache ist/das Ding ist’ (‘the thing is’)-clauses as projector phrases . In Subordination in Conversation: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 24], Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds), 11–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014The dynamics of dass-constructions in everyday German interactions – A dialogical perspective. In Grammar and Dialogism: Sequential, Syntactic, and Prosodic Patterns between Emergence and Sedimentation, Susanne Günthner, Wolfgang Imo & Jörg Bücker (eds), 179–206. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
2004Projection and grammar: Note on the “action-projecting use of the distal demonstrative are in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 36(8): 317–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Sebastian
2005Grammaticalization and English Complex Prepositions: A Corpus-based Study. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J.
2004The openness of grammatical constructions. Chicago Linguistic Society 40(2):153–175.Google Scholar
2007Linguistics and micro-rhetoric: A twenty-first century encounter. Journal of English Linguistics 35(2): 236–252 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 22–44. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
2008Projectability and clause combining in interaction. In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining [Studies in Language 80], Ritva Laury (ed.), 99–123. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie & Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2014‘Pivotage’ in French talk-in-interaction: On the emergent nature of [clause-NP-clause] pivots. Pragmatics 24(3): 593–622. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1949A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part III: Syntax, Second Volume. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Kellner, Leon
1892Historical Outlines of English Syntax. New York NY: Gordon Press.Google Scholar
Kerr, Betsy
2014Left dislocation in French. In Perspectives on Linguistic Structure and Context [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 244], Stacey Katz Bourns & Lindsy L. Myers (eds.), 223–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
1988There was a farmer had a dog: Syntactic amalgams revisited. Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 319–339.Google Scholar
2001A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39: 463–516. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
, 5th edn. 2012 London: Longman.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou
2015A Historical Syntax of English. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian
2009Corpus linguistics meets sociolinguistics. In Corpus Linguistics: Refinements and Reassessments, Antoinette Renouf & Andrew Kehoe (eds), 7–32. Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Massam, Diane
1999 Thing is constructions: The thing is, is what’s the right analysis? English Language and Linguistics 3(1): 335–352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meritt, Herbert D.
1967The Construction ἀπὸ κοινοῦ in the Germanic Languages. New York NY: AMS Press.Google Scholar
Miura, Ayumi
2009 Juliana 329b-30a revisited: Apo koinou or not? Studies in Medieval English Language and Literature 24: 1–19.Google Scholar
Online etymology dictionary
Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
, 8th edn. 2010 Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Ross-Hagebaum, Sebastian
2005The that’s X is Y construction as an information-structure amalgam. Berkeley Linguistics Society 30: 403–414.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2000English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Michael & Haley, Michael C.
2002The reduplicative copula IS IS . American Speech 77(3): 305–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shibasaki, Reijirou
2014aOn the development of the point is and related issues in the history of American English. English Linguistics 31(1): 79–113.Google Scholar
2014bOn the grammaticalization of the thing is and related issues in the history of American English. In Studies in the History of English Language VI, Michael Adams, Robert D. Fulk & Laurel J. Brinton (eds), 99–121. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
2015aChiasmic constructions in Present-day English. Ms, Meiji University.Google Scholar
2015bGendai amerika eigo no nijuu kopyura koobun (Double copula constructions in Present-day American English). In Nichi-Eigo no Bunpooka to Koobunka (Grammaticalization and constructionalization in Japanese and English), Minoji Akimoto, Hirofumi Aoki & Mitsuru Maeda (eds), 147–180. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2014Toward a constructional framework for research on language change. In Grammaticalization – Theory and Data [Studies in Language Companion Series 162], Sylvie Hancil & Ekkehard Köning (eds), 87–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Trousdale, Graeme
2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tuggy, David
1996The thing is is that people talk that way: The question is Why? In Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods, Eugene H. Casad (ed.), 713–752. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ukaji, Masatomo
2003Subject zero relatives in Early Modern English. In Current Issues in English Linguistics, Masatomo Ukaji, Masayuki Ikeuchi & Yoshiki Nishimura (eds), 248–277. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus. Theodorus
1963An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part one: Syntactical Units with One Verb. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison
2009Identifying formulaic language: Persistent challenges and new opportunities. In Formulaic Language, Vol. 1: Distribution and Historical Change [Typological Studies in Language 82], Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen M. Wheatley (eds), 27–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yaguchi, Michiko
2010The historical development of the phrase there’s: An analysis of the Oxford English Dictionary data. English Studies 91(2): 203–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yoshino, Yoshihiro
1984Poetic Syntax in the Old English “Meters of Boethius”: A Comparative Study of Verse and Prose. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Corpora

The British National Corpus (BYU-BNC)
The Corpus of Contemporary American English 1990–2012 (COCA)
The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA)
1810–2000s, 400 mil. words. (http://​corpus​.byu​.edu​/coha/)
The Oxford English (OED)
second edition on CD-ROM Version 4.0 , Oxford: OUP.
The Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English (SBCSAE)
c. 249,000 words, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara. http://​www​.linguistics​.ucsb​.edu​/research​/santa​-barbara​-corpus
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Shibasaki, Reijirou
2021.  In Studies at the Grammar-Discourse Interface [Studies in Language Companion Series, 219],  pp. 102 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 january 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.