References

References

Bergs, Alexander
2008 Shall and shan’t in contemporary English: A case of functional condensation. In Constructional Approaches to English Grammar, Graeme Trousdale & Nikolas Gisborne (eds), 113–143. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas
2004Modal use across register and time. In Studies in the History of the English Language 2, Anne Curzan & Kimberly Emmons (eds), 189–216. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C.
2004You wanna consider a constructional approach to wanna-contraction? In Language, Culture, and Mind, Michael Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (eds), 479–491. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny
2009Semantics and pragmatics in construction grammar: The case of modal verbs. In Contexts and Constructions [Constructional Approaches to Language 9], Alexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 213–241. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert
2010Construction Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Budts, Sara & Petré, Peter
2020Putting connections centre stage in diachronic construction grammar. In Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar, Lotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds), 318–351. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2010Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William
1994The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cappelle, Bert & Depraetere, Ilse
2016aShort-circuited interpretations of modal verb constructions. Constructions and Frames 8(1): 7–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016bResponse to Hilpert. Construction and Frames 8(1): 86–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer
1983The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2001Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William & Cruse, D. Alan
2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daugs, Robert
2017On the development of modals and semi-modals in American English in the 19th and 20th centuries. In Big and Rich Data in English Corpus Linguistics: Methods and Explorations, Turo Hiltunen, Joe McVeigh & Tanja Säily (eds). Helsinki: VARIENG. [URL] (2 June 2020).Google Scholar
To appear. Contractions, constructions and constructional change: Investigating the constructionhood of English modal contractions from a diachronic perspective. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar, Martin Hilpert & Bert Cappelle (eds) Amsterdam John Benjamins
Davies, Mark
2007TIME Magazine Corpus: 100 million words, 1920s–2000s. [URL] (2 June 2020).Google Scholar
2008The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 560 million words, 1990­-2017. [URL] (2 June 2020).Google Scholar
2010The Corpus of Historical American English: 400 million words, 1810–2009. [URL] (2 June 2020).Google Scholar
Dekalo, Volodymyr & Hampe, Beate
2018Networks of meanings: Complementing collostructional analysis by cluster and network analyses. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 5(1): 151–184.Google Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse & Reed, Susan
2011Towards a more explicit taxonomy of root possibility. English Language and Linguistics 15(1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
2011Review article of 'Language, usage and cognition' by Joan Bybee. Language 87(4): 830–844. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele
2009Konstruktionen und Paradigmen. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 37: 445–468. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Smirnova, Elena
2012Paradigmatic integration: The fourth stage in an expanded grammaticalization scenario. In Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections [Studies in Language Companion Series 130], Kristen Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems & Tanja Mortelmans (eds), 111–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flach, Susanne
2017Collostructions: An R implementation for the family of collostructional methods. R package version 0.1.0. [URL] (2 June 2020).
Goldberg, Adele
2003Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Linguistics 7(5): 219–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in English. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2013Constructionist approaches. In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds), 15–31. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan T. & Stefanowitsch, Anatol
2004Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 97–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin
2008Germanic Future Constructions: A Usage-Based Approach to Language Change [Constructional Approaches to Language 7]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012Die englischen Modalverben im Daumenkino: Zur dynamischen Visualisierung von Phänomenen des Sprachwandels. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 42(169): 67–82.Google Scholar
2013Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
2016Change in modal meanings: Another look at the shifting collocates of may . Constructions and Frames 8(1): 66–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin & Gries, Stefan T.
2009Assessing frequency changes in multistage diachronic corpora: Applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition. Literary and Linguistic Computing 24(4): 385–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney
1980Criteria for auxiliaries and modals. In Studies in English Linguistics for Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Jan Svartvik, Randolph Quirk & Geoffrey Leech (eds), 65–78. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krug, Manfred
2000Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
2003Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992. In Modality in Contemporary English, Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred Krug & Frank R. Palmer (eds), 223–240. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004Recent grammatical change in English: Data, description, theory. In Advances in Corpus Linguistics, Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds), 61–81. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013Where have all the modals gone? An essay on the declining frequency of core modal auxiliaries in recent standard English. In English Modality: Core, Periphery and Evidentiality, Juana I. Marín-Arerese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera (eds), 95–115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian & Smith, Nicholas
2009Change in Contemporary English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey & Smith, Nicholas
2009Change and constancy in linguistic change: How grammatical usage in written English evolved in the period 1931–1991. In Corpus Linguistics: Refinements and Reassessments, Antoinette Renouf & Andrew Kehoe (eds), 173–200. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leino, Jaakko & Östman, Jan-Ola
2005Constructions and variability. In Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots [Constructional Approaches to Language 4], Mirjam Fried & Hans C. Boas (eds), 191–213. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, David
2013aContractions of English Semi-Modals: The Emancipating Effect of Frequency. Freiburg: Universitätsbibliothek Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.Google Scholar
2013bFrom reduction to emancipation: Is gonna a word? In Corpus Perspectives on Patterns of Lexis [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 57], Hilde Hasselgård, Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling (eds), 133–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020Converging variations and the emergence of horizontal links: to-contraction in American English. In Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar, Lotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds), 243–274. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian
2015Cross-variety diachronic drifts and ephemeral regional contrasts: An analysis of modality in the extended Brown family of corpora and what it can tell us about the New Englishes. In Grammatical Change in English World-Wide, Peter Collins (ed.), 119–146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Millar, Neil
2009Modal verbs in TIME: Frequency changes 1923–2006. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(2): 191–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nesselhauf, Nadja
2014From contraction to construction? The recent life of ’ll . In Late Modern English Syntax, Marianne Hundt (ed.), 77–89. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sydney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
R Core Team
2017R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL] (2 June 2020).Google Scholar
Schmidtke, Karsten
2009 Going-to-V and gonna-V in child language: A quantitative approach to constructional development. Cognitive Linguistics 20(3): 509–538.Google Scholar
Seggewiß, Frederike
2012Current Changes in English Modals: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Present-Day Spoken English. PhD dissertation University of Freiburg.
Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Flach, Susanne
2016The corpus-based perspective on entrenchment. In Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How we Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge, Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), 101–127. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2008Grammaticalization, constructions and the incremental development of language: Suggestions from the development of degree modifiers in English. In Variation, Selection, Development: Probing the Evolutionary Model of Language Change, Regine Eckardt, Gerhard Jäger & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 219–250. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme
2016Response to Wärnsby. Constructions and Frames 8(1): 54–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Plungian, Vladimir
1998Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2: 79–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wärnsby, Anna
2002Modal constructions? The Department of English in Lund: Working Papers in Linguistics 2.Google Scholar
2016On the adequacy of a constructionist approach to modality. Constructions and Frames 8(1): 40–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Leclercq, Benoît

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 march 2024. 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.