Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T18:44:42.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Christian Mair
Christian Mair
Affiliation:
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Twentieth-Century English
History, Variation and Standardization
 , pp. 231 - 241
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarts, Flor, and Bas Aarts. 2002. “Relative whom: ‘a mischief-maker.’” In Fischer, Andreas, Tottie, Gunnel, and Lehmann, Hans-Martin, eds. Text types and corpora. Tübingen: Narr. 123–130.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 1991. Language change: progress or decay? 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 2003. “From Armageddon to war: the vocabulary of terrorism.” In Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 193–203.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 1988. “British and American grammatical differences.” International Journal of Lexicography 1: 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algeo, John, ed. 1991. Fifty years among the new words: a dictionary of neologisms, 1941–1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 1998. “Vocabulary.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 57–91.Google Scholar
Amis, Kingsley. 1997. The King's English: a guide to modern usage. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Ammon, Ulrich. 1998a. Ist Deutsch noch internationale Wissenschaftssprache? Englisch auch für die Lehre an den deutschsprachigen Hochschulen. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammon, Ulrich, ed. 1998b. Variationslinguistik = Linguistics of variation = La linguistique variationelle. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Arnaud, René. 1983. “On the progress of the progressive in the private correspondence of famous British people (1800–1880).” In Jacobson, Sven, ed. Papers from the Second Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. 83–91.Google Scholar
Ayto, John. 1999. Twentieth-century words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, and Renouf, Antoinette. 1996. “Chronicling The Times: productive lexical innovations in an English newspaper.” Language 72: 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Richard W. 1996. Nineteenth century English. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Barber, Charles. 1964. Linguistic change in present-day English. London and Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Barnhart, Robert K., Steinmetz, Sol, and Barnhart, Clarence L.. 1990. Third Barnhart dictionary of new English. New York: Wilson.Google Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. 2003. “Why email looks like speech: proofreading, pedagogy and public face.” In Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 85–94.Google Scholar
Barry, John A. 1991. Technobabble. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English change: an introduction to the study of linguistic change in standard Englishes in the twentieth century. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 2002. “Inferring variation and change from public corpora.” In Chambers, Jack, Trudgill, Peter, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie, eds. The handbook of language variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell. 97–111.Google Scholar
Bell, Alan. 1988. “The British base and the American connection in New Zealand media English.” American Speech 63: 326–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 1999. “Stress variation in British and American English.” World Englishes 18: 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berglund, Ylva. 2000. “Gonna and going to in the spoken component of the British National Corpus.” In Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne, eds. Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 35–49.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2003. “Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: the competing demands of popularization vs. economy.” In Jean, Aitchison and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 169–181.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Finegan, Edward. 1989. “Drift and evolution of English style: a history of three genres.” Language 65: 487–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan, and Reppen, Randi. 1998. Corpus linguistics: investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Edward Finegan, and Dwight Atkinson. 1993. “ARCHER and its challenges: compiling and exploring a representative corpus of historical English registers.” In Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel, and Schneider, Peter, eds. Creating and using language corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 1–13.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, and Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Bodine, Ann. 1975. “Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: singular ‘they’, sex-indefinite ‘he’, and ‘he or she’.” Language in Society 4: 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1968. Aspects of language. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1980. Language: the loaded weapon. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bonfiglio, Thomas Paul. 2002. Race and the rise of standard American. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems: aspectualizers and postverbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert. 1989. Unlocking the English language. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert, rev. 1996. The new Fowler's modern English usage. First edited by Henry Watson Fowler. Revised edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1977. Historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Craig M. 1987. American regional dialects: a word geography. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1982. Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Claudius, R. Howard. 1925/1926. “Different – to, from, or than?” American Speech 1: 446.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Compes, Isabel, Kutscher, Silvia, and Rudorf, Carmen. 1993. Pfade der Grammatikalisierung: ein systematischer Überblick. Working paper 17. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei, and Merja Kytö. 1994. “The construction be going to + infinitive in Early Modern English.” In Kastovsky, Dieter, ed. Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei, and Kytö, Merja. 2001. “The go-futures in English and French viewed as an areal feature.” NOWELE: Studies in North-Western European Language Evolution 40: 29–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier. 1975. Number and case relations in 19th century British English: a comparative study of grammar and usage. Antwerp: De Nederlandsche Boekhandel.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1998. “Syntax.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 92–329.Google Scholar
Dennis, Leah. 1940. “The progressive tense: frequency of its use in English.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 55: 855–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse. 2003. “On verbal concord with collective nouns in British English.”English Language and Linguistics 7: 1–43.Google Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse, and An Verhulst. Forthcoming. “Must and have to in ICE-GB; a survey of its meanings.”
Dorsey, Brian. 2000. Spirituality, sensuality, literality: blues, jazz, and rap as music and poetry. Wien: Braumüller.Google Scholar
Eagleson, Robert D. 1989. “Popular and professional attitudes to prestige dialects.” In Collins, Peter and Blair, David, eds. Australian English: the language of a new society. St. Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press. 150–157.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 1976 [1939]. Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation: soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen. 2 vols. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. (English translation The civilizing process: sociogenetic and psychogenetic investigations. [Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.]Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 1989. Studien über die Deutschen: Machtkämpfe und Habitusentwicklung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, ed. Michael Schröter. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Ellis, Alexander J. 1869–1889. On early English pronunciation: with especial reference to Shakspere and Chaucer. London: Trübner.Google Scholar
Elsness, Johan. 1997. The perfect and the preterite in contemporary and earlier English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsness, Johan. forthcoming. “Colonial lead? On the development of the present perfect/preterite opposition in American and British English.” In Günter Rohdenburg and Julia Schlüter, eds. Grammatical differences between British and American English.
Erdmann, Peter. 1997. The for … to construction in English. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Fabricius, Anne. 2002. “Ongoing change in modern RP: evidence for the disappearing stigma of t-glottalling.” English World-Wide 23: 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 1996a. “The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400–1760).” Diachronica 13: 29–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 1996b. “On the historical developments of English retrospective verbs.” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–79.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1988. “The rise of the for NP to V construction: an explanation.” In Nixon, Graham and Honey, John, eds. An historic tongue: studies in English in memory of Barbara Strang. London: Routledge. 67–88.Google Scholar
Foster, Brian. 1968. The changing English language. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Joy. 1986. “The social stratification of (r) in New York City department stores, 24 years after Labov.” Ms., New York University.
Frank, Roberta. 1988. “‘Interdisciplinary’: the first half century.” In Stanley, Eric G. and Hoad, T. F., eds. Words: for Robert Burchfield's sixty-fifth birthday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 91–101.Google Scholar
Gimson, Albert C. 1967. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary: containing over 58,000 words in international phonetic transcription. 13th edition. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy, and Lynne Yang. 1994. “The rise of the English get-passive.” In Fox, Barbara and Hopper, Paul J., eds. Voice: form and function. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 119–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manfred, Görlach. 1999. English in nineteenth century England: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred. 2001. A dictionary of European anglicisms: a usage dictionary of anglicisms in sixteen European languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney. 1986. “The Grammar of contemporary English and A comprehensive grammar of the English language.” In Leitner, Gerhard, ed. The English reference grammar. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 6–14.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney, and Whitcut, Janet. 1988. Longman guide to English usage. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1988. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. 2 vols. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. (English translation Theory of communicative action. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2000, 2001.)Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd edition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne, and Watson, Catherine. 2000. “Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: an acoustic analysis of the Queen's Christmas Broadcasts.” Journal of the International Phonetic Association 30: 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatcher, Anna. 1943. “Mr. Howard amuses easy.” Modern Language Notes, 1 (January): 8–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1986. A comparative typology of English and German: unifying the contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Heacock, Paul, and Carol-June Cassidy. 1998. “Translating a dictionary from British to American.” In Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus, and Estling, Maria, eds. The major varieties of English: papers from MAVEN 97, Växjö, 20–22 November 1997. Växjö: University of Växjö Press. 93–99.Google Scholar
Hempl, George. 1904. “President's address.” PMLA 19: xxxi–liii.Google Scholar
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1995. The de-moralization of society: from Victorian virtues to modern values. London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric. 1994. Age of extremes: a history of the short twentieth century. London: Joseph.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric. 2003. Interesting times: a twentieth-century life. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2004. “Using the OED quotations database as a corpus – a linguistic appraisal.” ICAME Journal 28: 17–30.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Closs Traugott, Elizabeth. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Philip. 1984. The state of the language: English observed. London: Hamilton.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 1988. Words in time: a social history of the English vocabulary. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 1991. Swearing: a social history of foul language, oaths and profanity in English. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 2000. A history of English words. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 1998a. New Zealand English grammar – fact or fiction? A corpus-based study in morphosyntactic variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 1998b. “It is important that this study (should) be based on the analysis of parallel corpora: on the use of the mandative subjunctive in four major varieties of English.” In Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus, and Estling, Maria, eds. The major varieties of English: papers from MAVEN 97, Växjö, 20–22 November 1997. Växjö: Växjö University Press. 159–173.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2001. “What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions.” Studies in Language 25: 49–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2004. “Animacy, agentivity, and the spread of the progressive in Modern English.” English Language and Linguistics 8: 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2006. English mediopassive constructions: a cognitive, corpus-based study of their origin, spread and current status. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne, and Mair, Christian. 1999. “‘Agile’ and ‘uptight’ genres: the corpus-based approach to language change in progress.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyeiri, Yoko, Yaguchi, Michiko, and Okabe, Hiroko. 2004. “To be different from or to be different than in present-day American English.” English Today 20(3): 29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagger, J. Hubert. 1940. English in the future. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons.Google Scholar
James, Henry. 1905. “The question of our speech,” The question of our speech/the lesson of Balzac: two lectures. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Jay, Martin. 1998. Cultural semantics: keywords of our time. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Jennifer. 2003. World Englishes: a resource book for students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1949. A modern English grammar on historical principles. 7 vols. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig, and Hofland, Knut. 1989. Frequency analysis of English vocabulary and grammar: based on the LOB corpus. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1924 [1917]. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Josey, Meredith Pugh. 2004. “A sociolinguistic study of variation and change on the Island of Martha's Vineyard.” PhD, New York University.
Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social stylistics: syntactic variation in British newspapers. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme D. 1998. An introduction to corpus linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Kjellmer, Göran. 1985. “Help to/help θ revisited.” English Studies 66: 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krapp, George Philip. 1969 [1919]. The pronunciation of standard English in America. New York: AMS Reprints.Google Scholar
Kretzschmar, William A. 2004. “Regional dialects.” In Finegan, Edward A. and Rickford, John R., eds. Language in the USA: Themes for the 21st century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krug, Manfred. 2000. Emerging English modals: a corpus-based study of grammaticalization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kytö, Merja, and Suzanne Romaine. 1997. “Competing forms of adjective comparison in Modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective?” In Nevalainen, Terttu and Tarkka, Leena Kahlas, eds. To explain the present: studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 329–352.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja, and Suzanne Romaine. 2000. “Adjective comparison and standardization processes in American and British English from 1620 to the present.” In Wright, Laura, ed. The development of standard English 1300–1800: theories, descriptions, conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 171–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1981. “What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic description?” In Sankoff, David and Cedergren, Henrietta, eds. Variation omnibus. Edmonton, Alberta: Linguistic Research. 177–201.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. I, Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. II, Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Ash, Sharon, and Boberg, Charles. 2006. The atlas of North American English: phonetics, phonology and sound change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2003. “Modality on the move: the English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992.” In Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred, and Palmer, Frank R., eds. Modality in contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2004. “Recent grammatical change in English: data, description, theory.” In Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt, eds. Advances in corpus linguistics: papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 23). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 61–81.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, and Jonathan Culpeper. 1997. “The comparison of adjectives in recent British English.” In Nevalainen, Terttu and Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena, eds. To explain the present: studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 353–374.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, and Nicholas Smith. 2005. “Recent grammatical change in written English: some preliminary findings of a comparison of American and British English.” In Renouf, Antoinette, ed. The changing face of corpus linguistics: papers from the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 24). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 185–204.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1991. “Grammaticalisation and related changes in contemporary German.” In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Heine, Bernd, eds. Approaches to grammaticalisation, vol II. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 493–535.Google Scholar
Levin, Magnus. 2001. Agreement with collective nouns in English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Clive Staples. 1960 [1932]. Studies in words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liedtke, Ernst. 1910. Die numerale Auffassung der Kollektiva im Laufe der englischen Sprachgeschichte. Königsberg: Karg & Manneck.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1999. The development of language: acquisition, change, and evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McMahon, Michael K. C. 1998. “Phonology.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 373–535.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1994. “Crosslinguistic semantic motivation for the use of a grammatical construction in English and German: X is impossible to do/X ist unmöglich zu schaffen.” Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 29: 5–15.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1995. “Changing patterns of complementation, and concomitant grammaticalisation, of the verb help in present-day British English.” In Aarts, Bas and Meyer, Charles F., eds. The verb in contemporary English: theory and description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 258–272.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1997a. “Parallel corpora: a real-time approach to the study of language change in progress.” In Ljung, Magnus, ed. Corpus-based studies in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 195–209.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1997b. “The spread of the going-to-future in written English: a corpus-based investigation into language change in progress.” In Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanisław, eds. Language history and linguistic modelling: a festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th birthday. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1537–1543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2001. “Early or late origin for begin + V-ing? Using the OED on CD-Rom to settle a dispute between Visser and Jespersen.” Anglia: Zeitschrift für Englische Philologie 119: 606–610.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2002. “Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: a real-time study based on matching text corpora.” English Language and Linguistics 6: 105–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian, and Hundt, Marianne. 1995. “Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43: 111–122.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian, and Geoffrey Leech. 2006. “Current Changes.” In Aarts, Bas and McMahon, April, eds. The handbook of English linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian, Hundt, Marianne, Smith, Nicholas, and Leech, Geoffrey. 2002. “Short-term diachronic shifts in part-of-speech frequencies: a comparison of the tagged LOB and F-LOB corpora.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7: 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Brander. 1921. Essays on English. New York: Scribners.Google Scholar
Matthews, Richard. 1993. “‘Copping it’ or ‘bloody asking for it’: the get-passive and related constructions.” In Matthews, Richard, Papers on semantics and grammar. Frankfurt: Lang. 11–54.Google Scholar
Mencken, H. L. 1963. The American language. 4th edition. Revised by Raven I. McDavid. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Meyer, Charles F. 2002. English corpus linguistics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Charles F. 2003. “The Lexis/Nexis database as historical corpus.” Presentation at the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Guernsey (Channel Islands), 24 April 2003, handout.
Meyerhoff, Miriam, and Niedzielski, Nancy. 2003. “The globalization of vernacular variation.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7: 524–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaels, Leonard, and Ricks, Christopher, eds. 1980. The state of the language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1991. Authority in language: investigating language prescription and standardisation. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mish, Frederick C., ed. 1986. 12,000 words: a supplement to Webster's Third New International Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar
Misztal, Barbara A. 2000. Informality: social theory and contemporary practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mondorf, Britta. 2003. “Support for more-support.” In Rohdenburg, Günter and Mondorf, Britta, eds. Determinants of grammatical variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 251–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossé, Fernand. 1947. Esquisse d'une histoire de la langue anglaise. Lyon: éditions IAC.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, Lynda. 2003. “Talking proper”: the rise of accent as social symbol. 2nd edition. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Mühleisen, Susanne. 2003. “Towards global diglossia? English in the sciences and the humanities.” In Mair, Christian, ed. The politics of English as a world language: new horizons in postcolonial cultural studies. ASNEL Papers 7. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 107–118.Google Scholar
Myhill, John. 1995. “Change and continuity in the functions of the American English modals.” Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 33: 157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nehls, Dietrich. 1988. “On the development of the grammatical category of verbal aspect in English.” In Klegraf, Josef and Nehls, Dietrich, eds. Essays on the English language and applied linguistics on the occasion of Gerhard Nickel's 60th birthday. Heidelberg: Groos. 173–198.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2003. Historical sociolinguistics: language change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Olofsson, Arne. 1990. “A participle caught in the act: on the prepositional use of following.” Studia Neophilologica 62: 23–35, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Övergaard, Gerd. 1995. The mandative subjunctive in American and British English in the twentieth century. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank Robert. 1990. Modality and the English modals. 2nd edition. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity: structural constraints in English derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo, Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, and Baayen, Harald. 1999. “Morphological productivity across speech and writing.” English Language and Linguistics 3: 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Simeon 1975. [1969]. Changing English. London: Deutsch. 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Price, Jenny. 2003. “The recording of vocabulary from the major varieties of English in the Oxford English Dictionary.” In Mair, Christian, ed. The politics of English as a world language: new horizons in postcolonial cultural studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 121–136.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Raab-Fischer, Roswitha. 1995. “Löst der Genitiv die of-Phrase ab? Eine korpusgestützte Studie zum Sprachwandel im heutigen Englisch.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43: 123–132.Google Scholar
Rayson, Paul, Leech, Geoffrey, and Hodges, Mary. 1997. “Social differentiation in the use of English vocabulary: some analyses of the conversational component of the British National Corpus.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 2: 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickford, John R., Wasow, Thomas A., Mendoza-Denton, Norma, and Espinoza, Juli. 1995. “Syntactic variation and change in progress: loss of the verbal coda in topic restricting as far as constructions.” Language 71: 102–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricks, Christopher, ed. 1991. The state of the language: 1990s edition. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Ripman, Walter. 1924. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Roach, Peter, and James Hartman. 1997. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. English pronouncing dictionary. 15th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne, ed. 1998. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne, and Lange, Deborah. 1991. “The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: a case of grammaticalization in progress.” American Speech 66: 227–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive variation in English: conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar
Scheible, Silke. 2005. “Upgrading, downsizing & Co: revitalising a moribund word formation pattern in twentieth century English.” Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 30: 177–200.Google Scholar
Serpollet, Noëlle. 2001. “The mandative subjunctive in British English seems to be alive and kicking … Is this due to the influence of American English?” In Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew, McEnery, Tony, Hardie, Andrew, and Khoja, Shereen, eds. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference. Lancaster University: UCREL Technical Papers 13: 531–542.
Siemund, Rainer. 1995. “‘For who the bell tolls’: Or, why corpus linguistics should carry the bell in the study of language change in present-day English.” Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 20: 351–377.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 2002. “Ever moving on? The progressive in recent British English.” In Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter, and Smith, Adam, eds. New frontiers of corpus research: papers from the twenty-first International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Sydney 2002. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 317–330.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 2003. “Changes in the modals and semi-modals of strong obligation and epistemic necessity in recent British English.” In Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred, and Palmer, Frank R., eds. Modality in contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 241–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, Richard A., ed. 1993. NTC's dictionary of acronyms and abbreviations: the most useful and up-to-date guide to American English. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.Google Scholar
Stark, Andrew. 1999. “Now feel the pain.” Review of Andrew Burstein, Sentimental democracy. Times Literary Supplement, 20 August: 6.
Strang, Barbara. 1970. A history of English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara. 1982. “Some aspects of the history of the being construction.” In Anderson, John, ed. Language form and linguistic variation: papers dedicated to Angus Mclntosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 427–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2003. “Be going to vs. will/shall: does syntax matter?” Journal of English Linguistics 31: 295–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taeymans, Martine. 2004. “An investigation into the marginal modals dare and need in British present-day English.” In Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel, and Perridon, Harry, eds. Up and down the cline – the nature of grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The social differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1988. “Norwich revisited: recent linguistic changes in an English urban dialect.” English World-Wide 9: 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1990. The dialects of England. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1999. Dialects. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter, and Hannah, Jean. 2002. International English: a guide to varieties of standard English. 4th edition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Minoru. 1983. “Les Langues internationales dans les publications scientifiques et techniques.” Sophia Linguistica 13: 144–155.Google Scholar
Tulloch, Sara. 1991. The Oxford dictionary of new words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Upton, Clive, Kretzschmar, William A., and Konopka, Rafal. 2001. The Oxford dictionary of pronunciation for current English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Th. 1970–1978. An historical syntax of the English language. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Vosberg, Uwe. 2004. “Cognitive complexity and the establishment of -ing constructions with retrospective verbs in Modern English.” In Dossena, Marina and Jones, Charles, eds. Insights into Late Modern English. Frankfurt: Lang. 197–220.Google Scholar
Wald, Benji, and Lawrence Besserman. 2002. “The emergence of the verb–verb compound in twentieth century English and twentieth century linguistics.” In Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert, eds. Studies in the history of the English language: a millennial perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 417–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 1989.
Weiner, E. Judith, and Labov, William. 1983. “Constraints on the agentless passive.” Journal of Linguistics 19: 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, J. C. 2000. Longman pronunciation dictionary. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Wells, John. 1997. “What's happening to Received Pronunciation.” English Phonetics (English Phonetic Society of Japan) 1: 13–23.Google Scholar
Westin, Ingrid. 2002. Language change in English newspaper editorials. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Westin, Ingrid, and Geisler, Christer. 2002. “A multi-dimensional study of diachronic variation in British newspaper editiorials.” ICAME Journal 26: 133–152.Google Scholar
Wignell, Edel. 2002. “Get to go: this (prepositional) life.” Ozwords: newsletter of the Australian National Dictionary Centre (November): 7. Also available at www.anu.edu.au/andc/pubs/ozwords.php.
Williams, Raymond. [1976] 1983. Keywords: a vocabulary of culture and society. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Williams, Raymond. [1961] 1981. The long revolution. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
Wilson, Kenneth G. 1987. Van Winkle's return: changes in American English, 1966–1986. Hanover, CT: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
Wood, Frederick T. 1962. Current English usage. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zandvoort, Reinhard W. 1957. Wartime English: materials for a linguistic history of World War II. Groningen: Wolters.Google Scholar
Aarts, Flor, and Bas Aarts. 2002. “Relative whom: ‘a mischief-maker.’” In Fischer, Andreas, Tottie, Gunnel, and Lehmann, Hans-Martin, eds. Text types and corpora. Tübingen: Narr. 123–130.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 1991. Language change: progress or decay? 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 2003. “From Armageddon to war: the vocabulary of terrorism.” In Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 193–203.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 1988. “British and American grammatical differences.” International Journal of Lexicography 1: 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algeo, John, ed. 1991. Fifty years among the new words: a dictionary of neologisms, 1941–1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 1998. “Vocabulary.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 57–91.Google Scholar
Amis, Kingsley. 1997. The King's English: a guide to modern usage. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Ammon, Ulrich. 1998a. Ist Deutsch noch internationale Wissenschaftssprache? Englisch auch für die Lehre an den deutschsprachigen Hochschulen. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammon, Ulrich, ed. 1998b. Variationslinguistik = Linguistics of variation = La linguistique variationelle. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Arnaud, René. 1983. “On the progress of the progressive in the private correspondence of famous British people (1800–1880).” In Jacobson, Sven, ed. Papers from the Second Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. 83–91.Google Scholar
Ayto, John. 1999. Twentieth-century words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, and Renouf, Antoinette. 1996. “Chronicling The Times: productive lexical innovations in an English newspaper.” Language 72: 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Richard W. 1996. Nineteenth century English. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Barber, Charles. 1964. Linguistic change in present-day English. London and Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Barnhart, Robert K., Steinmetz, Sol, and Barnhart, Clarence L.. 1990. Third Barnhart dictionary of new English. New York: Wilson.Google Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. 2003. “Why email looks like speech: proofreading, pedagogy and public face.” In Aitchison, Jean and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 85–94.Google Scholar
Barry, John A. 1991. Technobabble. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English change: an introduction to the study of linguistic change in standard Englishes in the twentieth century. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 2002. “Inferring variation and change from public corpora.” In Chambers, Jack, Trudgill, Peter, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie, eds. The handbook of language variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell. 97–111.Google Scholar
Bell, Alan. 1988. “The British base and the American connection in New Zealand media English.” American Speech 63: 326–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 1999. “Stress variation in British and American English.” World Englishes 18: 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berglund, Ylva. 2000. “Gonna and going to in the spoken component of the British National Corpus.” In Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne, eds. Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 35–49.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2003. “Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: the competing demands of popularization vs. economy.” In Jean, Aitchison and Lewis, Diana M., eds. New media language. London: Routledge. 169–181.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Finegan, Edward. 1989. “Drift and evolution of English style: a history of three genres.” Language 65: 487–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan, and Reppen, Randi. 1998. Corpus linguistics: investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Edward Finegan, and Dwight Atkinson. 1993. “ARCHER and its challenges: compiling and exploring a representative corpus of historical English registers.” In Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel, and Schneider, Peter, eds. Creating and using language corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 1–13.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, and Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Bodine, Ann. 1975. “Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: singular ‘they’, sex-indefinite ‘he’, and ‘he or she’.” Language in Society 4: 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1968. Aspects of language. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1980. Language: the loaded weapon. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bonfiglio, Thomas Paul. 2002. Race and the rise of standard American. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems: aspectualizers and postverbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert. 1989. Unlocking the English language. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert, rev. 1996. The new Fowler's modern English usage. First edited by Henry Watson Fowler. Revised edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1977. Historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Craig M. 1987. American regional dialects: a word geography. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1982. Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Claudius, R. Howard. 1925/1926. “Different – to, from, or than?” American Speech 1: 446.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Compes, Isabel, Kutscher, Silvia, and Rudorf, Carmen. 1993. Pfade der Grammatikalisierung: ein systematischer Überblick. Working paper 17. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei, and Merja Kytö. 1994. “The construction be going to + infinitive in Early Modern English.” In Kastovsky, Dieter, ed. Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei, and Kytö, Merja. 2001. “The go-futures in English and French viewed as an areal feature.” NOWELE: Studies in North-Western European Language Evolution 40: 29–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier. 1975. Number and case relations in 19th century British English: a comparative study of grammar and usage. Antwerp: De Nederlandsche Boekhandel.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1998. “Syntax.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 92–329.Google Scholar
Dennis, Leah. 1940. “The progressive tense: frequency of its use in English.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 55: 855–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse. 2003. “On verbal concord with collective nouns in British English.”English Language and Linguistics 7: 1–43.Google Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse, and An Verhulst. Forthcoming. “Must and have to in ICE-GB; a survey of its meanings.”
Dorsey, Brian. 2000. Spirituality, sensuality, literality: blues, jazz, and rap as music and poetry. Wien: Braumüller.Google Scholar
Eagleson, Robert D. 1989. “Popular and professional attitudes to prestige dialects.” In Collins, Peter and Blair, David, eds. Australian English: the language of a new society. St. Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press. 150–157.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 1976 [1939]. Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation: soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen. 2 vols. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. (English translation The civilizing process: sociogenetic and psychogenetic investigations. [Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.]Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 1989. Studien über die Deutschen: Machtkämpfe und Habitusentwicklung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, ed. Michael Schröter. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Ellis, Alexander J. 1869–1889. On early English pronunciation: with especial reference to Shakspere and Chaucer. London: Trübner.Google Scholar
Elsness, Johan. 1997. The perfect and the preterite in contemporary and earlier English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsness, Johan. forthcoming. “Colonial lead? On the development of the present perfect/preterite opposition in American and British English.” In Günter Rohdenburg and Julia Schlüter, eds. Grammatical differences between British and American English.
Erdmann, Peter. 1997. The for … to construction in English. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Fabricius, Anne. 2002. “Ongoing change in modern RP: evidence for the disappearing stigma of t-glottalling.” English World-Wide 23: 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 1996a. “The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400–1760).” Diachronica 13: 29–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 1996b. “On the historical developments of English retrospective verbs.” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–79.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1988. “The rise of the for NP to V construction: an explanation.” In Nixon, Graham and Honey, John, eds. An historic tongue: studies in English in memory of Barbara Strang. London: Routledge. 67–88.Google Scholar
Foster, Brian. 1968. The changing English language. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Joy. 1986. “The social stratification of (r) in New York City department stores, 24 years after Labov.” Ms., New York University.
Frank, Roberta. 1988. “‘Interdisciplinary’: the first half century.” In Stanley, Eric G. and Hoad, T. F., eds. Words: for Robert Burchfield's sixty-fifth birthday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 91–101.Google Scholar
Gimson, Albert C. 1967. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary: containing over 58,000 words in international phonetic transcription. 13th edition. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy, and Lynne Yang. 1994. “The rise of the English get-passive.” In Fox, Barbara and Hopper, Paul J., eds. Voice: form and function. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 119–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manfred, Görlach. 1999. English in nineteenth century England: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred. 2001. A dictionary of European anglicisms: a usage dictionary of anglicisms in sixteen European languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney. 1986. “The Grammar of contemporary English and A comprehensive grammar of the English language.” In Leitner, Gerhard, ed. The English reference grammar. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 6–14.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney, and Whitcut, Janet. 1988. Longman guide to English usage. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1988. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. 2 vols. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. (English translation Theory of communicative action. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2000, 2001.)Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd edition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne, and Watson, Catherine. 2000. “Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: an acoustic analysis of the Queen's Christmas Broadcasts.” Journal of the International Phonetic Association 30: 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatcher, Anna. 1943. “Mr. Howard amuses easy.” Modern Language Notes, 1 (January): 8–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1986. A comparative typology of English and German: unifying the contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Heacock, Paul, and Carol-June Cassidy. 1998. “Translating a dictionary from British to American.” In Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus, and Estling, Maria, eds. The major varieties of English: papers from MAVEN 97, Växjö, 20–22 November 1997. Växjö: University of Växjö Press. 93–99.Google Scholar
Hempl, George. 1904. “President's address.” PMLA 19: xxxi–liii.Google Scholar
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1995. The de-moralization of society: from Victorian virtues to modern values. London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric. 1994. Age of extremes: a history of the short twentieth century. London: Joseph.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric. 2003. Interesting times: a twentieth-century life. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2004. “Using the OED quotations database as a corpus – a linguistic appraisal.” ICAME Journal 28: 17–30.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Closs Traugott, Elizabeth. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Philip. 1984. The state of the language: English observed. London: Hamilton.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 1988. Words in time: a social history of the English vocabulary. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 1991. Swearing: a social history of foul language, oaths and profanity in English. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey. 2000. A history of English words. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 1998a. New Zealand English grammar – fact or fiction? A corpus-based study in morphosyntactic variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 1998b. “It is important that this study (should) be based on the analysis of parallel corpora: on the use of the mandative subjunctive in four major varieties of English.” In Lindquist, Hans, Klintborg, Staffan, Levin, Magnus, and Estling, Maria, eds. The major varieties of English: papers from MAVEN 97, Växjö, 20–22 November 1997. Växjö: Växjö University Press. 159–173.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2001. “What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions.” Studies in Language 25: 49–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2004. “Animacy, agentivity, and the spread of the progressive in Modern English.” English Language and Linguistics 8: 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2006. English mediopassive constructions: a cognitive, corpus-based study of their origin, spread and current status. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne, and Mair, Christian. 1999. “‘Agile’ and ‘uptight’ genres: the corpus-based approach to language change in progress.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyeiri, Yoko, Yaguchi, Michiko, and Okabe, Hiroko. 2004. “To be different from or to be different than in present-day American English.” English Today 20(3): 29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagger, J. Hubert. 1940. English in the future. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons.Google Scholar
James, Henry. 1905. “The question of our speech,” The question of our speech/the lesson of Balzac: two lectures. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Jay, Martin. 1998. Cultural semantics: keywords of our time. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Jennifer. 2003. World Englishes: a resource book for students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1949. A modern English grammar on historical principles. 7 vols. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig, and Hofland, Knut. 1989. Frequency analysis of English vocabulary and grammar: based on the LOB corpus. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1924 [1917]. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Josey, Meredith Pugh. 2004. “A sociolinguistic study of variation and change on the Island of Martha's Vineyard.” PhD, New York University.
Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social stylistics: syntactic variation in British newspapers. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme D. 1998. An introduction to corpus linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Kjellmer, Göran. 1985. “Help to/help θ revisited.” English Studies 66: 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krapp, George Philip. 1969 [1919]. The pronunciation of standard English in America. New York: AMS Reprints.Google Scholar
Kretzschmar, William A. 2004. “Regional dialects.” In Finegan, Edward A. and Rickford, John R., eds. Language in the USA: Themes for the 21st century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krug, Manfred. 2000. Emerging English modals: a corpus-based study of grammaticalization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kytö, Merja, and Suzanne Romaine. 1997. “Competing forms of adjective comparison in Modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective?” In Nevalainen, Terttu and Tarkka, Leena Kahlas, eds. To explain the present: studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 329–352.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja, and Suzanne Romaine. 2000. “Adjective comparison and standardization processes in American and British English from 1620 to the present.” In Wright, Laura, ed. The development of standard English 1300–1800: theories, descriptions, conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 171–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1981. “What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic description?” In Sankoff, David and Cedergren, Henrietta, eds. Variation omnibus. Edmonton, Alberta: Linguistic Research. 177–201.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. I, Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. II, Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Ash, Sharon, and Boberg, Charles. 2006. The atlas of North American English: phonetics, phonology and sound change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2003. “Modality on the move: the English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992.” In Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred, and Palmer, Frank R., eds. Modality in contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2004. “Recent grammatical change in English: data, description, theory.” In Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt, eds. Advances in corpus linguistics: papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 23). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 61–81.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, and Jonathan Culpeper. 1997. “The comparison of adjectives in recent British English.” In Nevalainen, Terttu and Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena, eds. To explain the present: studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 353–374.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, and Nicholas Smith. 2005. “Recent grammatical change in written English: some preliminary findings of a comparison of American and British English.” In Renouf, Antoinette, ed. The changing face of corpus linguistics: papers from the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 24). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 185–204.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1991. “Grammaticalisation and related changes in contemporary German.” In Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Heine, Bernd, eds. Approaches to grammaticalisation, vol II. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 493–535.Google Scholar
Levin, Magnus. 2001. Agreement with collective nouns in English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Clive Staples. 1960 [1932]. Studies in words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liedtke, Ernst. 1910. Die numerale Auffassung der Kollektiva im Laufe der englischen Sprachgeschichte. Königsberg: Karg & Manneck.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1999. The development of language: acquisition, change, and evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McMahon, Michael K. C. 1998. “Phonology.” In Romaine, Suzanne, ed. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 373–535.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1994. “Crosslinguistic semantic motivation for the use of a grammatical construction in English and German: X is impossible to do/X ist unmöglich zu schaffen.” Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 29: 5–15.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1995. “Changing patterns of complementation, and concomitant grammaticalisation, of the verb help in present-day British English.” In Aarts, Bas and Meyer, Charles F., eds. The verb in contemporary English: theory and description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 258–272.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1997a. “Parallel corpora: a real-time approach to the study of language change in progress.” In Ljung, Magnus, ed. Corpus-based studies in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 195–209.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 1997b. “The spread of the going-to-future in written English: a corpus-based investigation into language change in progress.” In Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanisław, eds. Language history and linguistic modelling: a festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th birthday. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1537–1543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2001. “Early or late origin for begin + V-ing? Using the OED on CD-Rom to settle a dispute between Visser and Jespersen.” Anglia: Zeitschrift für Englische Philologie 119: 606–610.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2002. “Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: a real-time study based on matching text corpora.” English Language and Linguistics 6: 105–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian, and Hundt, Marianne. 1995. “Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43: 111–122.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian, and Geoffrey Leech. 2006. “Current Changes.” In Aarts, Bas and McMahon, April, eds. The handbook of English linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian, Hundt, Marianne, Smith, Nicholas, and Leech, Geoffrey. 2002. “Short-term diachronic shifts in part-of-speech frequencies: a comparison of the tagged LOB and F-LOB corpora.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7: 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Brander. 1921. Essays on English. New York: Scribners.Google Scholar
Matthews, Richard. 1993. “‘Copping it’ or ‘bloody asking for it’: the get-passive and related constructions.” In Matthews, Richard, Papers on semantics and grammar. Frankfurt: Lang. 11–54.Google Scholar
Mencken, H. L. 1963. The American language. 4th edition. Revised by Raven I. McDavid. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Meyer, Charles F. 2002. English corpus linguistics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Charles F. 2003. “The Lexis/Nexis database as historical corpus.” Presentation at the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Guernsey (Channel Islands), 24 April 2003, handout.
Meyerhoff, Miriam, and Niedzielski, Nancy. 2003. “The globalization of vernacular variation.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7: 524–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaels, Leonard, and Ricks, Christopher, eds. 1980. The state of the language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1991. Authority in language: investigating language prescription and standardisation. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mish, Frederick C., ed. 1986. 12,000 words: a supplement to Webster's Third New International Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar
Misztal, Barbara A. 2000. Informality: social theory and contemporary practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mondorf, Britta. 2003. “Support for more-support.” In Rohdenburg, Günter and Mondorf, Britta, eds. Determinants of grammatical variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 251–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossé, Fernand. 1947. Esquisse d'une histoire de la langue anglaise. Lyon: éditions IAC.Google Scholar
Mugglestone, Lynda. 2003. “Talking proper”: the rise of accent as social symbol. 2nd edition. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Mühleisen, Susanne. 2003. “Towards global diglossia? English in the sciences and the humanities.” In Mair, Christian, ed. The politics of English as a world language: new horizons in postcolonial cultural studies. ASNEL Papers 7. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 107–118.Google Scholar
Myhill, John. 1995. “Change and continuity in the functions of the American English modals.” Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 33: 157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nehls, Dietrich. 1988. “On the development of the grammatical category of verbal aspect in English.” In Klegraf, Josef and Nehls, Dietrich, eds. Essays on the English language and applied linguistics on the occasion of Gerhard Nickel's 60th birthday. Heidelberg: Groos. 173–198.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2003. Historical sociolinguistics: language change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Olofsson, Arne. 1990. “A participle caught in the act: on the prepositional use of following.” Studia Neophilologica 62: 23–35, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Övergaard, Gerd. 1995. The mandative subjunctive in American and British English in the twentieth century. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank Robert. 1990. Modality and the English modals. 2nd edition. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity: structural constraints in English derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo, Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, and Baayen, Harald. 1999. “Morphological productivity across speech and writing.” English Language and Linguistics 3: 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Simeon 1975. [1969]. Changing English. London: Deutsch. 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Price, Jenny. 2003. “The recording of vocabulary from the major varieties of English in the Oxford English Dictionary.” In Mair, Christian, ed. The politics of English as a world language: new horizons in postcolonial cultural studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 121–136.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Raab-Fischer, Roswitha. 1995. “Löst der Genitiv die of-Phrase ab? Eine korpusgestützte Studie zum Sprachwandel im heutigen Englisch.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43: 123–132.Google Scholar
Rayson, Paul, Leech, Geoffrey, and Hodges, Mary. 1997. “Social differentiation in the use of English vocabulary: some analyses of the conversational component of the British National Corpus.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 2: 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickford, John R., Wasow, Thomas A., Mendoza-Denton, Norma, and Espinoza, Juli. 1995. “Syntactic variation and change in progress: loss of the verbal coda in topic restricting as far as constructions.” Language 71: 102–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricks, Christopher, ed. 1991. The state of the language: 1990s edition. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Ripman, Walter. 1924. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. Everyman's English pronouncing dictionary. London: Dent.Google Scholar
Roach, Peter, and James Hartman. 1997. “Preface.” In Jones, Daniel. English pronouncing dictionary. 15th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne, ed. 1998. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. IV, 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne, and Lange, Deborah. 1991. “The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: a case of grammaticalization in progress.” American Speech 66: 227–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive variation in English: conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar
Scheible, Silke. 2005. “Upgrading, downsizing & Co: revitalising a moribund word formation pattern in twentieth century English.” Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 30: 177–200.Google Scholar
Serpollet, Noëlle. 2001. “The mandative subjunctive in British English seems to be alive and kicking … Is this due to the influence of American English?” In Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew, McEnery, Tony, Hardie, Andrew, and Khoja, Shereen, eds. Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference. Lancaster University: UCREL Technical Papers 13: 531–542.
Siemund, Rainer. 1995. “‘For who the bell tolls’: Or, why corpus linguistics should carry the bell in the study of language change in present-day English.” Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 20: 351–377.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 2002. “Ever moving on? The progressive in recent British English.” In Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter, and Smith, Adam, eds. New frontiers of corpus research: papers from the twenty-first International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Sydney 2002. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 317–330.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 2003. “Changes in the modals and semi-modals of strong obligation and epistemic necessity in recent British English.” In Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred, and Palmer, Frank R., eds. Modality in contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 241–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spears, Richard A., ed. 1993. NTC's dictionary of acronyms and abbreviations: the most useful and up-to-date guide to American English. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.Google Scholar
Stark, Andrew. 1999. “Now feel the pain.” Review of Andrew Burstein, Sentimental democracy. Times Literary Supplement, 20 August: 6.
Strang, Barbara. 1970. A history of English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara. 1982. “Some aspects of the history of the being construction.” In Anderson, John, ed. Language form and linguistic variation: papers dedicated to Angus Mclntosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 427–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2003. “Be going to vs. will/shall: does syntax matter?” Journal of English Linguistics 31: 295–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taeymans, Martine. 2004. “An investigation into the marginal modals dare and need in British present-day English.” In Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel, and Perridon, Harry, eds. Up and down the cline – the nature of grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The social differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1988. “Norwich revisited: recent linguistic changes in an English urban dialect.” English World-Wide 9: 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1990. The dialects of England. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1999. Dialects. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter, and Hannah, Jean. 2002. International English: a guide to varieties of standard English. 4th edition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Minoru. 1983. “Les Langues internationales dans les publications scientifiques et techniques.” Sophia Linguistica 13: 144–155.Google Scholar
Tulloch, Sara. 1991. The Oxford dictionary of new words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Upton, Clive, Kretzschmar, William A., and Konopka, Rafal. 2001. The Oxford dictionary of pronunciation for current English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Th. 1970–1978. An historical syntax of the English language. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Vosberg, Uwe. 2004. “Cognitive complexity and the establishment of -ing constructions with retrospective verbs in Modern English.” In Dossena, Marina and Jones, Charles, eds. Insights into Late Modern English. Frankfurt: Lang. 197–220.Google Scholar
Wald, Benji, and Lawrence Besserman. 2002. “The emergence of the verb–verb compound in twentieth century English and twentieth century linguistics.” In Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert, eds. Studies in the history of the English language: a millennial perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 417–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 1989.
Weiner, E. Judith, and Labov, William. 1983. “Constraints on the agentless passive.” Journal of Linguistics 19: 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, J. C. 2000. Longman pronunciation dictionary. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Wells, John. 1997. “What's happening to Received Pronunciation.” English Phonetics (English Phonetic Society of Japan) 1: 13–23.Google Scholar
Westin, Ingrid. 2002. Language change in English newspaper editorials. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Westin, Ingrid, and Geisler, Christer. 2002. “A multi-dimensional study of diachronic variation in British newspaper editiorials.” ICAME Journal 26: 133–152.Google Scholar
Wignell, Edel. 2002. “Get to go: this (prepositional) life.” Ozwords: newsletter of the Australian National Dictionary Centre (November): 7. Also available at www.anu.edu.au/andc/pubs/ozwords.php.
Williams, Raymond. [1976] 1983. Keywords: a vocabulary of culture and society. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Williams, Raymond. [1961] 1981. The long revolution. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
Wilson, Kenneth G. 1987. Van Winkle's return: changes in American English, 1966–1986. Hanover, CT: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
Wood, Frederick T. 1962. Current English usage. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zandvoort, Reinhard W. 1957. Wartime English: materials for a linguistic history of World War II. Groningen: Wolters.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Christian Mair, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany
  • Book: Twentieth-Century English
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486951.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Christian Mair, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany
  • Book: Twentieth-Century English
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486951.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Christian Mair, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany
  • Book: Twentieth-Century English
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486951.012
Available formats
×