Cover not available
Part of
Grammar of Spoken and Written English
Douglas Biber, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey N. Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan
[Not in series 232] 2021
► pp. 1143–1158

Bibliography

A. Corpus-based studies of present-day English: general
Aarts, J. & W. Meijs (eds) (1984). Corpus Linguistics: Recent Developments in the Use of Computer Corpora in English Language Research, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
(eds) (1986). Corpus Linguistics II. New Studies in the Analysis and Exploitation of Computer Corpora, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
. (eds) (1990). Theory and Practice in Corpus Linguistics, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Aarts, J., P. de Haan, & N. Oostdijk (eds) (1993). English Language Corpora: Design, Analysis and Exploitation, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. & B. Altenberg (eds) (1991). English Corpus Linguistics. Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Allwood, J. & M. Ljung (eds) (1980). ALVAR: A Linguistically Varied Assortment of Readings. Studies Presented to Alvar Ellegård on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Stockholm Papers in English Language and Literature 1, Department of English, University of Stockholm.
Altenberg, B. (1996). ICAME Bibliography 3 (1990–4). Available on line from ICAME Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Aston, G. & L. Burnard. (1998). The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Barnbrook, G. (1996). Language and Computers. A Practical Introduction to the Computer Analysis of Language, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1993). ‘An analytical framework for register studies’, in Biber & Finegan (eds) 1993: 31–56.Google Scholar
(1993). ‘Representativeness in corpus design’, Literary and Linguistic Computing 8: 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). ‘Investigating language use through corpus-based analyses of association patterns’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1: 171–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., S. Conrad & R. Reppen. (1994). ‘Corpus-based approaches to language issues in applied linguistics’, Applied Linguistics 15: 169–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1998). Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. & E. Finegan. (1991). ‘On the exploration of computerized corpora in variation studies’, in Aijmer & Altenberg (eds) 1991: 204–220.Google Scholar
Black, E., R. Garside & G. Leech (eds) (1993). Statistically-driven Computer Grammars of English. The IBM/Lancaster Approach, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1992). ‘The importance of corpus linguistics to understanding the nature of language’, in Svartvik (ed) 1992: 79–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1992). ‘Corpus linguistics’ or ‘Computer-aided armchair linguistics’, in Svartvik (ed) 1992: 35–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, W. N. (1979). ‘Problems of assembling and computerizing large corpora’, in Bergenholtz & Schaeder (eds) 1979: 110–123.Google Scholar
(1980). ‘A tagged corpus: problems and prospects’, in Greenbaum, Leech & Svartvik (eds) 1980: 192–209, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Francis, W. N. & H. Kucera. (1982). Frequency Analysis of English Usage. Lexicon and Grammar, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Fries, U., G. Tottie & P. Schneider. (eds) (1994). Creating and Using English Language Corpora: Papers from the 14th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Zurich 1993, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Garside, R., G. Leech & T. McEnery. (1997). Corpus Annotation. Linguistic Information from Computer Text Corpora, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Garside, R., G. Leech & G. Sampson (eds) (1987). The Computational Analysis of English, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Granger, S. (ed) (1998). Learner English on Computer, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S. (ed) (1996). Comparing English Worldwide: the International Corpus of English, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S., G. Leech & J. Svartvik (eds) (1980). Studies in English Linguistics for Randolph Quirk, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hofland, K. & S. Johansson. (1982). Word Frequencies in British and American English, Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities / London: Longman.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. (ed) (1982). Computer Corpora in English Language Research, Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Johansson, S., in collaboration with E. Atwell, R. Garside & G. Leech. (1986). The Tagged LOB Corpus. Users’ Manual, Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. & K. Hofland. (1989). Frequency Analysis of English Vocabulary and Grammar, vols 1–2, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. & A.-B. Stenström (eds) (1991). English Computer Corpora: Selected Papers and Research Guide, Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G. (1998). An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Klegraf, J. & Nehls, D. (eds) (1988). Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel’s 60th Birthday, Heidelberg: Julius Groos. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kucera, H. & W. N. Francis. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-day American English, Providence, R.I.: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Leech, G. & A. Beale. (1984). ‘Computers in English language research’, Language Teaching and Linguistics: Abstracts 17: 216–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G., G. Myers & J. Thomas (eds) (1995). Spoken English on Computer: Transcription, Mark-up and Application, London: Longman.Google Scholar
McEnery, T. & A. Wilson. (1996). Corpus Linguistics, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Pearson, J. (1998). Terms in Context, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sampson, G. (1995). English for the Computer: The SUSANNE Corpus and Analytic Scheme, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (1982). ‘Reflections on computer corpora in English language research’, in Johansson (ed) 1982: 1–6.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and Corpus Analysis, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. (ed) (1992). Directions in Corpus Linguistics, Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82, Stockholm, 4–8 August 1991, Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo
(ed) (1990). The London-Lund Corpus of Spoken English: Description and Research, Lund Studies in English 82, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. & R. Quirk (eds) (1980). A Corpus of English Conversation, Lund Studies in English 56, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. & M. Short (eds) (1996). Using Corpora for Language Research. Studies in the Honour of Geoffrey Leech, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Tottie, G. & I. Bäcklund (eds) (1986). English in Speech and Writing: A Symposium, Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 60, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Wichmann, A., S. Fligelstone, T. McEnery & G. Knowles (eds) (1997). Teaching and Language Corpora, London: Longman.Google Scholar
B. Corpus-informed grammars of present-day English
Greenbaum, S. (1996). The Oxford English Grammar, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S. & R. Quirk. (1990). A Student’s Grammar of the English Language, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Leech, G. & J. Svartvik. (1994). A Communicative Grammar of English, London: Longman (2nd edn).Google Scholar
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English, London: Longman.Google Scholar
. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (ed-in-chief) (1990). Collins COBUILD English Grammar, London & Glasgow: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
C. Corpus-informed studies of specific areas of present-day English grammar
Aarts, B. (1992). Small Clauses in English: the Nonverbal Types, Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aarts, B. & C. F. Meyer (eds) (1995). The Verb in Contemporary English. Theory and Description, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aarts, F. (1971). ‘On the distribution of noun-phrase types in English clause structure’, Lingua 26: 281–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). ‘ Who, whom, that and Ø in two corpora of spoken English’, English Today 9: 19–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). ‘Imperative sentences in a corpus of English conversation’, Leuvense Bijdragen (Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology) 83: 145–155.Google Scholar
Aarts, J. & F. Aarts (eds) (1995). ‘ Find and want. A corpus-based case study in verb complementation’, in Aarts & Meyer 1995: 159–182.Google Scholar
Abberton, E. (1977). ‘Nominal group premodification structures’, in Bald & Ilson (eds) 1977: 29–72.Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. (1984). ‘ Go to and will in spoken English’, in Ringbom & Rissanen (eds) 1984: 141–157.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘ Sort of and kind of in English conversation’, Studia Linguistica 38: 118–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985). ‘What happens at the end of our utterances? The use of utterance-final tags introduced by and and or ’, in Papers from the 8th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, O. Togeby (ed), 117–127, Institut for Nordisk Filologi, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘Discourse variation and hedging’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1986: 1–18.Google Scholar
(1986a). ‘Why is actually so frequent in spoken English?’ in Tottie & Bäcklund (eds) 1986: 119–129.Google Scholar
(1986b). ‘Speaking with many voices: direct and indirect speech in English conversation’, in Papers from the 9th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Ö. Dahl (ed), 1–14, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘“Now may we have a word on this”: The use of now as a discourse particle’, in Kytö et al. (eds) 1988: 15–34.Google Scholar
(1989). ‘Themes and tails: The discourse functions of dislocated elements’, Nordic Journal of Linguistics 12: 137–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). Conversational Routines in English: Convention and Creativity, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Algeo, J. (1988). ‘British and American grammatical differences’, International Journal of Lexicography 1: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altenberg, B. (1984). ‘Causal linking in spoken and written English’, Studia Linguistica 38: 20–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986). ‘Contrastive linking in spoken and written English’, in Tottie & Bäcklund (eds) 1986: 13–40.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘Causal ordering strategies in English conversation’, in Grammar in the Construction of Texts, J. Monaghan (ed), 50–64, London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
(1993). ‘Recurrent verb-complement constructions in the London-Lund corpus’, in Aarts et al. (eds) 1993: 227–245.Google Scholar
Altenberg, B. & M. Eeg-Olofsson. (1990). ‘Phraseology in spoken English’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1990: 126.Google Scholar
Andersson, E. (1985). On Verb Complementation in Written English, Lund Studies in English 71, Lund: Gleerup/Liber.Google Scholar
Axelsson, M. W. (1998). Contraction in British Newspapers in the Late 20th Century, Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 102, Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Bache, C. (1985). Verbal Aspect. A General Theory and Its Application to Present-day British English, Odense: Odense University Press.Google Scholar
Backlund, I. (1984). Conjunction-headed Abbreviated Clauses in English. Stadia Anglistica Upsalienia 50, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘“Beat until stiff.” Conjunction-headed abbreviated clauses in spoken and written English’, in Tottie & Bäcklund (eds) 1986: 41–55.Google Scholar
Bäcklund, I. (1988). ‘Grounds for prominence. On hierarchies and grounding in English expository text’, Studia Neophilologica 60: 37–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). ‘To begin with, this is the problem, for example. On some reader-oriented structural markers in English expository text’, Studia Linguis-tica 42: 60–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). ‘Cues to the audience. On some structural markers in English monologue’, in Odenstedt & Persson (eds) 1989: 29–39.Google Scholar
Bald, W.-D. (1972). Studien zu den Kopulativen Verben des Englischen, Munich: Hueber.Google Scholar
Bald, W. -D. and R. Ilson (eds) (1977). Studies in English Usage: The resources of a present-day English Corpus for Linguistic Analysis, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bald, W.-D. (1987). ‘Reduced structures in English grammar’, in W. Lörscher & R. Schulze (eds) Perspectives on Language in Performance. Studies in Linguistics, Literary Criticism, and Language Teaching and Learning. To Honour Werner Hüllen, Tübingen: G. Narr. 69–87.Google Scholar
(1988a). ‘A note on the textual distribution of one ’, in Klegraf & Nehls (eds) 1988: 156–160.Google Scholar
(1988b). Kernprobleme der Englischen Grammatik. Sprachliche Fakten and Ihre Vermitt-lung, Berlin & Munich: Langenscheidt-Longman.Google Scholar
(1988c). ‘ If-Sätze im Englischen’, in Bald 1988b: 38–50.Google Scholar
Barkema, H. (1993). ‘Idiomaticity in English NPs’, in Aarts et al. (eds) 1993: 257–278.Google Scholar
Berglund, Y. (1997). ‘Future in present-day English: corpus-based evidence on the rivalry of expressions’, ICAME Journal 21: 7–19.Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1985). ‘Investigating macroscopic textual variation through multi-feature/multi-dimensional analyses’, Linguistics 23: 155–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986). ‘On the investigation of spokenl written differences’, Studia Linguistica 40: 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986). ‘Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: resolving the contradictory findings’, Language 62: 384–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). ‘A textual comparison of British and American writing’, American Speech 62: 99–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). Variation across Speech and Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). ‘A typology of English texts’, Linguistics 27: 3–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992a). ‘On the complexity of discourse complexity: a multidimensional analysis’, Discourse Processes 15: 133–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992b). ‘Using computer-based text corpora to analyze the referential strategies of spoken and written texts’, in Svartvik (ed.) 1992: 213–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. & E. Finegan. (1988). ‘Adverbial stance types in English’, Discourse Processes 11: 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1989). ‘Styles of stance in English. Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect’, Text 9: 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, M. (1977). ‘An investigation into factors influencing the choice between the syllabic and contracted form of is ’, in Bald & Ilson (eds) 1977: 171–189.Google Scholar
Breivik, L. E. (1981). ‘On the interpretation of existential there’, Language 57: 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990 [1983]). Existential ‘there’. A Synchronic and Diachronic Study. Studia Anglistica Norvegica 2, Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Bublitz, W. (1988). Supportive Fellow-speakers and Cooperative Conversations, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). ‘Ausdrücke des Kenntnisnehmens (Hörersignale) oder des Stellungsnehmens (Rede-beitrage): yes und verwandte Formen’, Folia Linguistica 23: 67–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buysschaert, B. (1982). Criteria for the Classification of English Adverbials, Brussels: AWLsK.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L. & D. L. Slobin. (1982). ‘Rules and schemes in the development and use of the English past tense’, Language 58: 165–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caie, G., K. Haastrup, A. L. Jakobsen, J. E. Nielsen, J. Sevaldsen, H. Specht & A. Zettersten (eds) (1990). Proceedings from the 4th Nordic Conference for English Studies (Helsingør, 11–13 May 1989), 2 vols, Department of English, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Carter, R., & M. McCarthy. (1995). ‘Grammar and the spoken language’, Applied Linguistics 16: 141–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Channel, J. 1994. Vague Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Close, R. (1980). ‘ Will in if-clauses’, in Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvik 1980: 100–109.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1977). ‘A corpus study of modifiers in sequence’, in Bald & Ilson (eds) 1977: 9–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1980). ‘On the non-equivalence of may and can ’, Lingua 50: 209–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983). The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘Epistemic modality and spoken discourse’, Transactions of the Philological Society 110–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). ‘The expression of root and epistemic possibility in English’, in Aarts & Meyer 1995: 145–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J. & G. N. Leech. (1980). ‘The meanings of the modals in modem British and American English’, York Papers in Linguistics 8: 23–34.Google Scholar
Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns 1: Verbs (1996), London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Collins, P. (1985). ‘ Th-clefts and all-clefts’ Beitrage zur Phonetik und Linguistik 48: 45–53.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘The semantics of some modals in contemporary Australian English’, Australian Journal of Linguistics 8: 261–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991). Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English, London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(1994). ‘The structure of English comparative clauses’, English Studies 75: 157–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). ‘ Get-passives in English’, World Englishes 15: 43–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S. (1996). ‘Investigating academic texts with corpus-based techniques: an example from biology’, Linguistics and Education 8: 299–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S., & D. Biber. (forthcoming). ‘Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing’, Evaluation in Discourse, ed. by S. Hunston, London: Harper Collins.
Crystal, D. (1980). ‘Neglected grammatical factors in conversational English’, in Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvik (eds) 1980: 153–166.Google Scholar
Dubois, B. L. (1972). ‘Meaning and distribution of the perfect in present-day American English prose’, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, DAI 33/ 12-A, 6892f, University of New Mexico.Google Scholar
Dusková, L. (1971a). ‘Some quantitative aspects of continuous forms in present-day English’, Prague Studies in English 14: 7–39.Google Scholar
(1971b). ‘On some functional and stylistic aspects of the passive voice in present-day English’, Philologica Pragensia 14: 117–144.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M. (1966). The Meanings of the Modals in Present-day American English, The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellegård, A. (1978). The syntactic structure of English texts, Gothenburg Studies in English 43, Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
Elsness, J. (1981). ‘On the syntactic and semantic functions of that-clauses’, in Johansson & Tysdahl (eds) 1981: 281–303, Department of English, Oslo University.Google Scholar
(1982). ‘ That v. zero connective in English nominal clauses’, ICAME News 6: 1–45.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘ That or zero? A look at the choice of object clause connective in a corpus of American English’, English Studies 65: 519–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1997). The Perfect and the Preterite in Contemporary and Earlier English, Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enkvist, N. E. (ed.) (1982). Impromptu Speech: A Symposium. Publications of the Research Institute of the Åbo Akademi Foundation 78, Åbo: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Erman, B. (1986). ‘Some pragmatic expressions in English conversation’, in Tottie & Bäcklund (eds) 1986: 131–147.Google Scholar
(1987). Pragmatic Expressions in English. A Study of ‘you know’, ‘you see’ and ‘I mean’ in Face-to-face Conversation , Stockholm Studies in English 69, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Fletcher, P. & M. Garman. (1995). ‘Transcription, segmentation and analysis: corpora for the language impaired’, in Leech et al. (eds) 1995: 116–127.Google Scholar
Fox, B. A., & S. A. Thopson. (1990). ‘A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation’, Language 66: 297–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, G. (1991). ‘Nominal groups and clause structure’, Word 42: 145–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, W. N. (1992). ‘A versatile suffix: English -en ’, Om språk og utdanning, Festskrift til Eva Sivertsen, ed. by A.-M. Langvall Olsen & A. M. Simensen, 45–54, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fries, U. (1993). ‘The comparison of monosyllabic adjectives’, in The Noun Phrase in English: Its Structure and Variability. Anglistik & Englischun-terricht. 49, Heidelberg: C. Winter, pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
Geisler, C. (1992). ‘Relative Infinitives in spoken and written English’, in Leitner (ed.) 1992: 213–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). Relative Infinitives in English, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Geluykens, R. (1984). ‘Focus phenomena in English. An empirical investigation into cleft and pseudoleft sentences’, Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 36, University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘Tails (right-dislocations) as a repair mechanism in English conversation’, in Getting One’s Words into Line: On Word Order and Functional Grammar, J. Nuyts & G. de Schutter (eds), 119–129, Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). ‘Five types of clefting in English discourse’, Linguistics 26: 823–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991). ‘Information flow in English conversation: a new approach to the given-new distinction’, in Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses, E. Ventola (ed), 141–167, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gnutzmann, C., R. Ilson & J. Webster. (1973). ‘Comparative constructions in contemporary English’, English Studies 54: 417–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, S. (1983). The ‘be’ + past participle Construction in Spoken English with Special Emphasis on the Passive, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S. (1969). Studies in English Adverbial usage, London: Longman.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘Corpus analysis and elicitation tests’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1984: 193–201.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘Syntactic devices for compression in English’, in Klegraf & Nehls (eds) 1988: 3–10.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S. & G. Nelson. (1995a). ‘Nuclear and peripheral clauses in speech and writing’, in G. Melchers and B. Warren, Studies in Anglistics, 181–190, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. (1995b). ‘Clause relationships in spoken and written English’, Functions of Language 2.1: 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1996). ‘Positions of adverbial clauses in British English’, World Englishes 15: 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenbaum, S., G. Nelson & M. Weitzman. (1996). ‘Complement clauses in English’, in Thomas & Short (eds) 1996: 76–92.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, M. (1982). ‘Textual aspects of topicalization in a corpus of English’, ICAME News 6: 46–76.Google Scholar
(1983). ‘Fronting of adverbials in four genres of English’, in Jacobson (ed.) 1983: 7–17.Google Scholar
Haan, P. de. (1984). ‘Relative clauses compared’, ICAME News 8: 47–59.Google Scholar
. (1987). ‘Relative clauses in indefinite noun phrases’, English Studies 68: 171–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1988). ‘A corpus investigation into the behaviour of prepositional verbs’, in Kytö et al. (eds) 1988: 121–135.Google Scholar
. (1989). Postmodifying Clauses in the English Noun Phrase. A Corpus-based Study, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
. (1990). ‘Structure frequency counts of modern English: the set-up of a quantitative study’, Dutch Working Papers in English Language and Linguistics 13: 1–15.Google Scholar
Haase, I. (1988). ‘Temporafolge und Bedingungstyp im Konditionalen Satzgefuge’, in Mindt (ed.) 1988: 69–76.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1983). The Semantics of ‘will’ in Present-day British English: a Unified Account, Brussels: AWLsK.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘Pragmatic conditionals in English’, Folia Linguistica 13: 485–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardy, D., & A. Leuchtmann. (1996). ‘Topic versus cohesion in the prediction of causal ordering in English conversation’, Discourse Processes 21: 237–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasselgård, H. (1991). ‘Sequences of temporal and spatial adverbials in spoken English: some pragmatic considerations’, ICAME Journal 15: 3–17.Google Scholar
(1992). ‘Sequences of spatial and temporal adverbials in spoken and written English’, in Leitner (ed.) 1992: 319–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). ‘Sequences of time and space adverbials in clause-initial position: a survey of ordering principles’, in Proceedings from the 5th Nordic Association of English Studies Conference, Reykjavik 1992, 45–57, J. D’Arcy (ed), Reykjavik: University of Iceland Publishing Co..Google Scholar
(1996). Where and when? Positional and Functional Conventions for Sequences of Time and Space Adverbials in Present-day English, Acta Humaniora 3, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Helt, M. E. (1997). ‘Discourse marker and stance adverbial variation in spoken American English: A corpus-based analysis’, unpublished. Ph.D. dissertation, Northern Arizona University.Google Scholar
Hermerén, L. (1978). On Modality in English: A Study of the Semantics of the Modals, Lund Studies in English 53, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Hermeren, L. (1978). ‘Testing the meanings of modals’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 10: 137–140.Google Scholar
Hermerén, L. (1986). ‘Modalities in spoken and written English. An inventory of forms’, in Tottie & Bäcklund (eds) 1986: 57–91.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. (1971). The Sentence in Written English: A Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of Scientific Texts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hudson, J. (1990). ‘A computerized study of multiword fixed-phrase adverbials’, in Caie et al. (eds) 1990: 335–341.Google Scholar
Hunt, K. W. (1965). ‘Grammatical structures written at three grade levels’, NCTE Research Report No. 3, Champaign, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
Hurk, I. van den, L. Kager, L. Kemp & M. Masereeuw. (1984). ‘To strand or not to’, ICAME News 8: 71–83.Google Scholar
Hüllen, W. (1987). ‘On denoting time in discourse’, in Grammar in the Construction of Texts, J. Monaghan (ed), 50–64, London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Ikegami, Y. (1989). ‘Have + object + past participle’ and ‘get + object + past participle’ in the SEU Corpus’, in Meaning and Beyond, U. Fries & M. Heusser (eds), Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Jacobson, S. (ed.) (1980). Papers from the Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation (Stockholm, 1819 May 1979), Stockholm Studies in English 52, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
(1982). ‘Modality nouns and the choice between to + infinitive and of + ing, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 15: 61–71.Google Scholar
(ed) (1983). Papers from the Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation (Stockholm, 1516 May, 1982), Stockholm Studies in English 57, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
(1985). ‘Form vs. meaning in noun phrases with an of-construction’, in Papers from the 8th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, O. Togeby (ed), 426–436, Institut for Nordisk Filologi, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
(ed) (1986). Papers from the 3rd Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation (Stockholm, 11–12 May 1985), Stockholm Studies in English 65, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
(1989). ‘Some observations on article variation in English’, in Odenstedt & Persson (eds) 1989: 99–108.Google Scholar
Jahr, M.-C. (1981). ‘The s-genitive with non-personal nouns in present-day British and American English’, ICAME News 5: 14–31.Google Scholar
Johannesson, N. L. (1982). ‘On the use of post-modification in English noun phrases’, in The 8th LACUS Forum 1981, W. Gutwinski & G. Jolly (eds), 187–195, Columbia, S.C.: Hornbeam Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, C. (1993). ‘ Whose and of which with nonpersonal antecedents in written and spoken English’, in Souter & Atwell (eds) 1993: 97–116.Google Scholar
(1995). The Relativizers whose and of which in Present-day English. Description and Theory, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. (1980). Plural Attributive Nouns in Present-day English, Lund Studies in English 59, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. & B. Tysdahl. (eds) (1981). Papers from the 1st Nordic Conference for English Studies (Oslo, 1719 September 1980), Department of English, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. (1986). ‘Some observations on the order of adverbial particles and objects in the LOB Corpus’, in Jacobson (ed.) 1986: 51–62.Google Scholar
(1995). ‘Some aspects of verb-adverb combinations’, in Aarts & Meyer (eds) 1995: 219–240.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. & E. H. Norheim. (1988). ‘The subjunctive in British and American English’, ICAME Journal 12: 27–36.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. & S. Oksefjell. (1996). ‘Towards a unified account of the syntax and semantics of GET’, in Thomas & Short (eds) 1996: 57–75.Google Scholar
Kennedy, G. (1987). ‘Expressing temporal frequency in academic English’, TESOL Quarterly 21: 69–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1987). ‘Quantification and the use of English: A case study of one aspect of the learner’s task’, Applied Linguistics 8: 264–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirk, J. M. (1988). ‘Inter-corpus comparisons. The primary verb BE’, in Proceedings of the XIII ALLC Conference, Norwich, 1986, J. Hamesse (ed), 123–133.Google Scholar
Kjellmer, G. (1979). ‘On clause-introductory nor and neither ’, English Studies 60: 280–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1980). ’Accustomed to swim: accustomed to swimming. On verbal forms after to’, in Allwood & Ljung (eds) 1980: 75–99.Google Scholar
(1980). ‘“There is no hiding you in the house”: on a modal use of the English gerund’, English Studies 61: 47–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1982). ‘ Each other and one another. On the use of the English reciprocal pronouns’, English Studies 63: 231–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1982). ‘What to do? On non-finite direct questions in English’, English Studies 63: 446–454. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983). ‘“He is one of the few men in history who plays jazz on a violin”. On number concord in certain relative clauses’, Anglia 101: 299–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1984). ‘On the grammatical number of relative what ’, English Studies 65: 256–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985). ‘ Help to/help revisited’, English Studies 66: 156–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986). “Us Anglos are a cut above the field”: On objective pronouns in nominative contexts’, English Studies 67: 445–449. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). ‘“What a night on which to die!” On symmetry in English relative clauses’, English Studies 69: 559–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). ‘Even if and even though’, English Studies 70: 256–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). ‘ Old as he was: a note on concessiveness and causality’, English Studies 73: 337–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krogvig, I. & S. Johansson. (1984). ‘ Shall and will in British and American English: a frequency study’, Studia Linguistica 38: 70–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krug, M. (1994). ‘Contractions in spoken and written English: A corpus-based study of brachychronic language change’, unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Exeter.Google Scholar
Kussmaul, P. (1978). ‘ In fact, actually, anyway: Indikatoren von Sprechakten in Informellen Ge-sprochenen Englisch’, Die Neueren Sprachen 27: 357–369.Google Scholar
Lange, D. (1988). ‘Tempusrelationen und Verben im Zusammenhang mit that-clauses’, in Mindt (ed) 1988: 84–93.Google Scholar
Leech, G. & J. Coates. (1980). ‘Semantic indeterminacy and the modals’, in Greenbaum, Leech & Svartvik (eds) 1980: 79–90.Google Scholar
Leech, G. & J. Culpeper. (1997). ‘The comparison of adjectives in recent British English’, in T. Nevalainen & L. Kahlas-Tarkka (eds) To Explain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen, 353–374, Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Leech, G. & Li, L. (1995). ‘Indeterminacy between noun phrases and adjective phrases as complements of the English verb’, in Aarts & Meyer 1995: 183–202.Google Scholar
Leech, G., B. Francis & X. Xu. (1994). ‘The use of computer corpora in the textual demonstrability of gradience in linguistic categories’, in Continuity in Linguistic Semantics, C. Fuchs & B. Victorri (eds) 57–76, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leitner, G. (ed.) (1992). New Directions in English Language Corpora. Methodology, Results, Software Developments, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leitzke, E. (1989). (De)nominale Adjektive im heutigen Englisch. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie, Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik von Adjektiv-Nomen-Kombinationen der Typen ‘atomic energy’ und ‘criminal lawyer’, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Lindblad, I. & M. Ljung (eds) (1987). Proceedings from the 3rd Nordic Conference for English Studies (Hässelby, 25–27 September 1986), 2 vols. Stockholm Studies in English 73, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Magnusson, U. (1989). ‘The verb do in the LOB Corpus’, in Odenstedt & Persson (eds) 1989: 131–145.Google Scholar
Mair, C. (1987). ‘ For/to-infinitival clauses in contemporary British English. A study based on the material collected in the Survey of English Usage, University College London’, English Studies 68: 545–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1987). ‘Tough-movement in present-day British English. A corpus-based study’, Studia Linguistica 41: 59–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1987). ‘Instabile Infinitivkonstruktionen im heutigen Englisch’, Linguistische Berichte 3: 381–397.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘Extraposed gerundial subject clauses in present-day British English. An investigation of the corpus of the Survey of English Usage, University College London’, Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 13: 51–63.Google Scholar
(1990). Infinitival Complement Clauses in English: A Study in Discourse, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1994). ‘Is see becoming a conjunction? The study of grammaticalisation as a meeting ground for corpus linguistics and grammatical theory’, in Fries et al. (eds) 1994: 127–137.Google Scholar
(1995). ‘Changing patterns of complementation, and concomitant grammaticalisation, of the verb help in present-day British English’, in Aarts & Meyer (eds) 1995: 258–272.Google Scholar
McCarthy, M. J. and Carter, R A. (1997). ‘Grammar, tails and affect: constructing expressive choices in discourse’, Text 17 (3), 405–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meijs, W. (1984). ‘“You can do so if you want to”-some elliptic structures in Brown and LOB and their syntactic description’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1984: 141–162.Google Scholar
(ed.) (1987). Corpus Linguistics and Beyond. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Meyer, C. F. (1987). A Linguistic Study of American Punctuation, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘Apposition in English’, Journal of Engfish Linguistics 20: 101–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). ‘Restrictive apposition: an intermediate category’, English Studies 70: 147–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991). ‘A corpus-based study of apposition in English’, in Aijmer & Altenberg (eds) 1991: 166–181.Google Scholar
(1991). Apposition in Contemporary English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1995). ‘Coordination ellipsis in spoken and written American English’, Language Sciences 17: 241–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). ‘Coordinate structures in English’, World Englishes 15: 29–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mindt, D. (1987). Sprache. Grammatik, Unterrichts-grammatik: Futurischer Zeitbezug im Englischen I, Frankfurt am Main: Diesterweg (Schule und For-schung, Schrifenreihe für Studium und Praxis).Google Scholar
(1988). EDV in der angewandten Linguistik. Ziele-Methode Ergebnisse, Frankfurt am Main: Diesterweg.Google Scholar
(1995). An Empirical Grammar of the English Verb: Modal Verbs, Berlin: Cornelsen Verlag.Google Scholar
Myhill, J. (1995). ‘Change and continuity in the functions of the American English modals’, Linguistics 33: 157–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1997). ‘ Should and ought: the rise of individually oriented modality in American English’, English Language and Linguistics 1: 3–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, J. (1991). ‘The relationships among genres in the LOB corpus based upon the distribution of grammatical tags’, JACET (The Japan Association of College English Teachers), Bulletin 22: 55–74.Google Scholar
(1992). ‘The comparison of the Brown and the LOB corpora based upon the distribution of grammatical tags’, Journal of Foreign Languages and Literature 3: 43–58, College of General Education, University of Tokushima.Google Scholar
(1993). ‘Quantitative comparison of modals in the Brown and LOB corpora’, ICAME Journal 17: 29–48.Google Scholar
Nässlin, S. (1984). The English Tag Question: A Study of Sentences Containing Tags of the Type ‘isn’t it?’ and ‘is it?’ Stockholm Studies in English 60, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Nattinger, J. R. & J. S. DeCarrico. (1992). Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nehls, D. (1988). ‘Der englische Verbalaspekt’, in Bald 1988b: 192–208.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & M. Rissanen. (1986). ‘“Do you support the do-support?” Emphatic and non-emphatic DO in affirmative statements in present-day spoken English’, in Jacobson (ed.) 1986: 35–50.Google Scholar
Noël, J. (1993). ‘Adjectives and nouns with reported clauses’ ICAME Journal 17: 49–71.Google Scholar
Odenstedt, B. & G. Persson (eds) (1989). Instead of Flowers. Papers in Honour of Mats Rydén on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Umeå Studies in the Humanities 90, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Olofsson, A. (1981). Relative Junctions in Written American English, Gothenburg studies in English 50, Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
(1990). ‘A participle caught in the act. On the prepositional use of following ’, Studia Neophi-lologica 62: 23–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oostdijk, N. (1984). ‘An extended affix grammar for the English noun phrase’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1984: 95–122.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘Coordination and gapping in corpus analysis’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1986: 177–201.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘A corpus linguistic approach to linguistic variation’, Literary and Linguistic Computing 3: 12–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oostdijk, N. & P. de Haan. (1994). ‘Clause patterns in Modern British English: a corpus-based (quantitative) study’, ICAME Journal 18: 41–79.Google Scholar
Opdahl, L. (1990). ‘ Close or closely as verb modifier? In search of explanatory parameters’, in Caie et al. (eds) 1990: 201–212.Google Scholar
(1991). ‘ -ly as adverbial suffix: corpus and elicited material compared’, ICAME Journal 15:19–35.Google Scholar
Övergaard, G. (1987). ‘Duration, progression, and the progressive form in temporal as-clauses’, in Lind-blad & Lung (eds) 1987: 265–280.Google Scholar
(1992). ‘On the use of the andative subjunctive in English language the time machine’, in Papers in Honour of Bengt Odenstedt, L.-E. Edlund & G. Persson (eds), 203–227, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1988). The English Verb, 2nd edn, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Paradis, C. (1997). Degree Modifiers of Adjectives in Spoken British English, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Persson, G. (1974). Repetition in English. Part 1: Sequential Repetition, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
(1989). ‘On the semantics of collective nouns in English’, in Odenstedt & Persson (eds) 1989: 179–188.Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1978). ‘A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse’, Language 54: 883–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R. (1960). ‘Towards a description of English usage’, Transactions of the Philological Society, 40–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1965). ‘Descriptive statement and serial relationship’, Language 41: 205–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1970). ‘Aspect and variant inflexion in English verbs’, Language 46: 300–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1984). ‘Recent work on adverbial realisation and position’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1984: 185–192.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., A. Duckworth, J. Rusiecki, J. Svartvik & A. Colin. (1964). ‘Studies in the correspondence of prosodic to grammatical features in English’, in Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists, 679–691, The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Randow, E. Von. (1986). Valente Substantive des Englischen. Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 294, Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. & M. Rissanen (eds) (1984). Proceedings from the 2nd Nordic Conference for English Studies, (Hanasaari/Hanaholmen, 19–21 May 1983). Publications of the Research Institute of the Åbo Akademi Foundation 92, Åbo: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Rissanen, M. (1980). ‘On the position of only in present day written English’, in Jacobson (ed) 1980: 63–76.Google Scholar
Rudanko, J. (1991). ‘On verbs governing -ing in present-day English’, English Studies 72: 55–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). ‘ Resorting to and turning to: on verbs governing -ing to in present-day English’, English Studies 73: 68–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). ‘ Balking at and working at: On verbs governing -ing at in present-day English’, English Studies 76: 264–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rusiecki, J. (1985). Adjectives and Comparison in English. A semantic study, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rycker, T. De. (1984). Imperative Structures: Form and Function in Conversational English. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 38, Department of Linguistics, University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Sahlin, E. (1979). “Some” and “any” in spoken and written English , Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 38, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1981). ‘Tense variation in narrative’, Language 57: 45–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985a). Multiple constraints on discourse options: A quantitative analysis of causal sequences’, Discourse Processes 8: 281–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985b). ‘Conversational coherence: The role of well ’, Language 61: 640–667. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, E. W. (1992). ‘ Who(m)? Case marking of wh-pronouns in written British and American English’, in Leitner (ed.) 1992: 231–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Souter, C. & E. Atwell (eds) (1993). Corpus-based Computational Linguistics, Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Stein, G. (1979). Studies in the Function of the Passive, Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Stein, G. & R. Quirk. (1991). ‘On having a look in a corpus’, in Aijmer & Altenberg (eds) 1991: 197–203.Google Scholar
Stenström, A.-B. (1982). ‘Feedback’, in Enkvist (ed.) 1982: 319–340.Google Scholar
(1983). ‘Questioning strategies in English and Swedish conversation’, in Cross-language Analysis and Second Language Acquisition 2, K. Sajavaara (ed), 67–78, Jyväskylä Cross Language Studies 10, Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
(1984a). ‘Discourse tags’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1984: 65–81.Google Scholar
(1984b). Questions and Responses in English Conversation, Lund Studies in English 68, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘What does really really do? Strategies in speech and writing’, in Tottie & Backlund (eds) 1986: 149–163, reprinted in Grammar in the Construction of Texts, J. Monaghan (ed.), 65–79, London: Frances Pinter, 1987.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘A study of pauses as demarcators in discourse and syntax’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1986: 203–218.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘Carry-on signals in English conversation’, in Meijs (ed.) 1987: 87–119.Google Scholar
(1990). ‘What is the role of discourse signals in sentence grammar?’, in Aarts & Meijs (eds) 1990: 213–229.Google Scholar
(1995). ‘Some remarks on comment clauses’, in Aarts & Meyer (eds) 1995: 290–301.Google Scholar
Stenström, A.-B. & J. Svartvik. (1993). ‘Imparsable speech: repeats and other nonfluencies in spoken English’, in Oostdijk & de Haan (eds) 1993: 241–254.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. (1966). On Voice in the English Verb, The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
(1968). ‘Plotting divided usage with dare and need ’, Studia Neophilologica 40: 130–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1980). ‘ Well in conversation’, in Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvik (eds) 1980: 167–177.Google Scholar
(1982). ‘The segmentation of impromptu speech’, in Enkvist (ed.) 1982: 131–145.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. & O. Ekedahl. (1995). ‘Verbs in public and private speaking’, in Aarts & Meyer (eds) 1995: 273–289.Google Scholar
Sørheim, M.-C. J. (1981). ‘The genitive in a functional sentence perspective’, in Johansson & Tysdahl (eds) 1981: 405–423.Google Scholar
Taglicht, J. (1977). ‘Relative clauses as postmodifiers: Meaning, syntax and intonation’, in Bald & Ilson (eds) 1977: 73–107.Google Scholar
(1983). Message and Emphasis, London: Longman.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘Relative clauses in English’, in Bald 1988b: 244–253.Google Scholar
Tesch, F. (1988). ‘Some und any in affirmativen und negativen Kontexten’, in Mindt (ed.) 1988: 59–68.Google Scholar
(1990). Die Indeftnitpronomina ‘some’ und ‘any’ im Autentischen Englischen Sprachgebrauch und in Lehrwerken, Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Thavenius, C. (1983). Referential Pronouns in English Conversation, Lund Studies in English 64, Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘Pronominal chains in English conversation’, in Ringbom & Rissanen (eds) 1984: 209–219.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. A. (1983). ‘Grammar and discourse: The English detached participial clause’, in Discourse Perspectives on Syntax, F. Klein-Andreu (ed), 43–65, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1985). ‘Grammar and written discourse: Initial versus final purpose clauses in English’, Text 5: 55–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. A. & A. Mulac. (1991a). ‘The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English’, Journal of Pragmatics 15: 237–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1991a). ‘A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English’, in Approaches to Gram-maticalization: Volume II, E. C. Traugott and B. Heine (eds), Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tottie, G. (1980). ‘Affixal and non-affixal negation. Two systems in (almost) complementary distribution’, Studia Linguistica 34: 101–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1981). ‘Negation and discourse strategy in spoken and written English’, in Variation Omnibus, H. Cedergren & D. Sankoff (eds), 271–284, Edmonton, Alberta: Linguistic Research.Google Scholar
(1982). ‘Where do negative sentences come from?’ Studia Linguistica 36: 88–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983). Much about ‘not’ and ‘nothing’: A Study of the Variation between Analytic and Synthetic Negation in Contemporary American English, Lund: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
(1983). ‘The missing link? or, Why is there twice as much negation in spoken English as in written English?’ in Jacobson (ed) 1983: 67–74.Google Scholar
(1984). ‘Is there an adverbial in this text? (And if so, what is it doing there?)’, in Ringbom & Rissanen (eds) 1984: 299–315.Google Scholar
(1986). ‘The importance of being adverbial. Adverbials of focusing and contingency in spoken and written English’, in Tottie & Backlund (eds) 1986: 93–118.Google Scholar
(1988). ‘ No-negation and not-negation in spoken and written English’, in Kytö et al. (eds) 1988: 245–265.Google Scholar
(1991). Negation in English Speech and Writing. A Study in Variation, San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tottie, G. & G. Övergaard. (1984). ‘The author’s would. A feature of American English?’ Studia Linguistica 38: 148–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tottie, G. & C. Paradis. (1982). ‘From function to structure. Some pragmatic determinants of syntactic frequencies in impromptu speech’, in Enkvist (ed.) 1982: 307–317.Google Scholar
Vandepitte, S. (1993). A Pragmatic Study of the Expression and the Interpretation of Causality Conjuncts and Conjunctions in Modern Spoken British English, Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Turnhout (Belgium): Brepols Publishers.Google Scholar
Varantola, K. (1984). On Noun Phrase Structures in Engineering English, Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
Viitanen, O. (1986). ‘On the position of only in English conversation’, in Tottie & Backlund (eds) 1986: 165–175.Google Scholar
Virtanen, T. (1992a). ‘Temporal adverbials in text structuring: On temporal text strategy’, in Nordic Research on Text and Discourse, NORDTEXT Symposium 1990, A.-C. Lindeberg, N. E. Enkvist & K. Wikberg (eds), 185–197, Åbo: Åbo Academy Press.Google Scholar
(1992b). Discourse Functions of Adverbial Placement in English, Åbo: Åbo Akademy Press.Google Scholar
Wales, K. (1996). Personal Pronouns in Present-day English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Warren, B. (1978). Semantic Patterns of Noun-noun Compounds, Gothenburg Studies in English 41, Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
(1984). Classifying Adjectives, Gothenburg Studies in English 56, Gothenburg: Acta Universi-tatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
(1987). ‘A certain misclassification’, in Lindblad & Ljung (eds) 1987: 363–377.Google Scholar
Wekker, H. (1976). The Expression of Future Time in Contemporary British English, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Westney, P. (1986). ‘How to be more or less certain in English: Scalarity in epistemic modality’, IRAL 24: 311–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wikberg, K. (1989). ‘On the role of the lexical verb in discourse’, in Essays on English Language in Honour of Bertil Sundby, L. E. Breivik, A. Hille & S. Johansson (eds), 375–388. Studia Anglistica Norve-gica 4, Oslo: Novus Forlag.Google Scholar
(1993). ‘Verbs as indicators of text type and/or style: some observations on the LOB Corpus’, in Souter & Atwell (eds) 1993: 127–145.Google Scholar