Adamczyk, Elżbieta and Versloot, Arjen P.. 2019. Phonological constraints on morphology: evidence from Old English nominal inflection. Folia Linguistica 40.1: 153–176.10.1515/flih-2019-0008CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, John. 2005. Old English i-umlaut (for the umpteenth time). English Language and Linguistics 9.2: 195–227.10.1017/S1360674305001620CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baumann, Andreas, Prömer, Christina and Ritt, Nikolaus. 2020. Reconstructing the diffusion of Middle English schwa deletion. Italian Journal of Linguistics 32.1: 191–210. https://doi.org/10.26346/1120–2726–154.Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 2015. English phonotactics. English Language and Linguistics 19.3: 437–475.10.1017/S1360674315000179CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 1994. English in New Zealand. In Burchfield, Robert (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. V: English in Britain and Overseas: Origins and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 382–429.Google Scholar

Bailey, George. 2021. Insertion and deletion in Northern English (ng): interacting innovations in the life cycle of phonological processes. Journal of Linguistics 57.3: 465–497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beal, Joan C. 2012. ‘By those provincials mispronounced’: the strut vowel in eighteenth-century pronouncing dictionaries. Language and History 55.1: 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1179/1759753612Z.0000000001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beddor, Patrice Speeter, Arens Krakow, Rena and Goldstein, Louis M.. 1986. Perceptual constraints and phonological change: a study of nasal vowel height. Phonology 3: 197–217.Google Scholar

Benson, Larry D. (gen. ed.) 2008. The Riverside Chaucer. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 1998. Prosodic optimization: the Middle English length adjustment. English Language and Linguistics 2.2: 169–197.10.1017/S1360674300000848CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo and Hogg, Richard M.. 2003. The actuation problem in Optimality Theory. In Eric Holt, D. (ed.), Optimality Theory and Language Change. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 91–119.10.1007/978-94-010-0195-3_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Britton, Derek. 2012. Degemination in English, with special reference to the Middle English period. In Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris B. and Moore, Emma, with the assistance of Miura, Ayumi (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 232–244.Google Scholar

Campbell, Alistair. 1959. Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Cercignani, Fausto. 1981. Shakespeare’s Works and Elizabethan Pronunciation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Silvestre, Conde, Camilo, Juan and Juan Manuel Campoy, Hernández. Forthcoming. Spelling practices and emergent standard writing. In Beal (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. III: Transmission, Change and Ideology.Google Scholar

CoNE = A Corpus of Narrative Etymologies from Proto-Old English to Early Middle English and accompanying Corpus of Changes. Version 1.1, 2013–. Compiled by Roger Lass, Margaret Laing, Rhona Alcorn and Keith Williamson. University of Edinburgh. www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/CoNE.html.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian and Ryan, Des (eds.). 2016. The Routledge Handbook of the English Writing System. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315670003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Côté, Marie-Hélène. 1997. Phonetic salience and consonant cluster simplification. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30: 229–262.Google Scholar

Cruttenden, Alan. 2014. Gimson’s Pronunciation of English. Eighth edition. London: Hodder Education.10.4324/9780203784969CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dinkin, Aaron J. 2012. Toward a unified theory of chain shifting. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 748–760.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0062CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dobson, Eric John. 1957. English Pronunciation, 1500–1700. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

DOE = Dictionary of Old English: A to Le online. 2024. Ed. Angus Cameron, Ashley Crandell Amos, Antonette diPaolo Healey et al. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project. https://dictionary.doe.utoronto.ca/doe/.Google Scholar

Downing, Laura J. 2005. On the ambiguous segmental status of nasals in homorganic NC sequences. In van Oostendorp, Marc and van de Weijer, Jeroen Maarten (eds.), The Internal Organization of Phonological Segments. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 183–216.10.1515/9783110890402.183CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dresher, B. Elan. 2018. Contrastive feature hierarchies in Old English diachronic phonology. Transactions of the Philological Society 116.1: 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467–968X.12105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 2022. Pushing the boundaries: marginal phonemes and dialogic interaction. Russian Journal of Linguistics 26.4: 995–1011. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687–0088–32349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fitzgerald, Colleen M. 2002. Vowel harmony in Buchan Scots English. English Language and Linguistics 6.1: 61–79.10.1017/S1360674302001041CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flemming, Edward. 2004. Contrast and perceptual distinctiveness. In Hayes, Bruce, Kirchner, Robert and Steriade, Donca (eds.), Phonetically Based Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 232–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flemming, Edward. 2009. The phonetics of schwa vowels. In Minkova, Donka (ed.), Phonological Weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 78–98.10.1007/978-0-230-29686-2_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 1992. A History of Old English Meter. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 1998. The role of syllable structure in Old English quantitative sound changes. North-Western European Language Evolution 33.1: 3–35.10.1075/nowele.33.01fulCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 2008. Anglian dialect features in Old English anonymous homiletic literature: A survey, with preliminary findings. In Susan, M. Fitzmaurice and Minkova, Donka (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language IV: Empirical and Analytical Advances in the Study of English Language Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 81–100.10.1515/9783110211801.81CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 2012. Anglian features in late West Saxon prose. In Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris B. and Moore, Emma, with the assistance of Miura, Ayumi (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 63–74.Google Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 2014. An Introductory Grammar of Old English with an Anthology of Readings. Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies (ACMRS).Google Scholar

Fulk, Robert D. 2018. A Comparative Grammar of the Early Germanic Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sigl.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gardner, Matt Hunt and Roeder, Rebecca V.. 2022. Phonological mergers have systemic phonetic consequences: palm, trees, and the Low Back Merger Shift. Language Variation and Change 34.1: 29–52.10.1017/S0954394522000059CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giancarlo, Matthew. 2001. The rise and fall of the Great Vowel Shift? The changing ideological intersections of philology, historical linguistics, and literary history. Representations 76.1: 27–60.10.1525/rep.2001.76.1.27CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giegerich, Heinz J. 1992. English Phonology: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166126CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giegerich, Heinz J. 2015. Lexical Structures: Compounding and the Modules of Grammar. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748630554CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goering, Nelson. 2023. Prosody in Medieval English and Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.5871/bacad/9780197267462.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldsmith, John A. 1995. Phonological theory. In John, A. Goldsmith (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 1–23.Google Scholar

Hammond, Michael. 1999. The Phonology of English: A Prosodic Optimality-Theoretic Approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hayes, Bruce. 2009. Introductory Phonology. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2002. Ebb and flow: a cautionary tale of language change. In Fanego, Teresa, Mendez-Naya, Belén and Seoane, Elena (eds.), Sounds, Words, Texts, Change. Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (11 ICEHL). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 105–128.Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2007. Irish English: History and Present-Day Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511551048CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2016. Phonological change in English. In Kytö, Merja and Pahta, Päivi (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of English Historical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2020. On the recent history of low vowels in English. English Language and Linguistics 24.3: 545–567.10.1017/S1360674320000192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2023. Sounds of English World-Wide. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. Forthcoming. The history of R in English. In Beal (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. III: Transmission, Change and Ideology.Google Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. 1992. A Grammar of Old English. Vol. I: Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. 2000. On the (non-) existence of High Vowel Deletion. In Lahiri, Aditi (ed.) Analogy, Levelling, Markedness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 353–376.10.1515/9783110808933.353CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. and Fulk, Robert D.. 2011. A Grammar of Old English. Vol. II: Morphology. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Honeybone, Patrick. 2019. Can phonotactic constraints inhibit segmental change? Arguments from lenition and syncope. Folia Linguistica Historica 53.40: 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hyman, Larry. 2002. Is there a right-to-left bias in vowel harmony? Paper presented at the Ninth International Phonology Meeting, University of Vienna, 1 November 2002. https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/ ~ hyman/papers/unpub/hyman-rtol-bias.pdf.Google Scholar

Ikegami, Masa T. 1984. Rhyme and Pronunciation: Some Studies of English Rhymes from Kyng Alisaunder to Skelton. Tokyo: Hogaku-Kenkyu-Kai, Keio University.Google Scholar

Jefferson, Judith Anne, Minkova, Donka and Putter, Ad. 2014. Perfect and imperfect rhyme: romances in the abab tradition. Studies in Philology 111.4: 631–651.10.1353/sip.2014.0026CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1909. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part I: Sounds and Spellings. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Jones, Charles. 1989. A History of English Phonology. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Kager, René. 1999. Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511812408CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keenan, Edward L. 2002. Explaining the creation of reflexive pronouns in English. In Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language: A Millennial Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 325–354.10.1515/9783110197143.3.325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 2015a. Phonologization. In Honeybone, Patrick and Salmons, Joseph (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Historical Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 563–582.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 2015b. New perspectives in historical linguistics. In Bowern, Claire and Evans, Bethwyn (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 64–102.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 2016. Labov, sound change, and phonological theory. Journal of Sociolinguistics 20.4: 464–488.10.1111/josl.12196CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kretzschmar, William. 2008. Standard American English pronunciation. In Edgar, W. Schneider (ed.), Varieties of English. Vol. II: The Americas and the Caribbean. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 37–51.Google Scholar

Kretzschmar, William. 2020. The development of standard American English. In Kirkpatrick, Andy (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes. London: Routledge, pp. 96–111.10.4324/9781003128755-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kruger, William W. 2020. Homorganic cluster lengthening, pre-cluster shortening, and preference-based change in early English. Journal of Historical Linguistics 10.1: 87–110.10.1075/jhl.18028.kruCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Labov, William. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change: Internal Factors. Vol. I. 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.10.1515/9783110167467CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ladefoged, Peter. 2006. Vowels and Consonants: An Introduction to the Sounds of Languages. Second edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Ladefoged, Peter and Maddieson, Ian. 1996. The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Oxford/Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

LAEME = A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325. Version 3.2. 2013. Compiled by Margaret Laing. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. (Introduction by Margaret Laing and Roger Lass; Webscripts by Keith Williamson, Vasilis Karaiskos and Sherrylyn Branchaw). www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme2/laeme2.html.Google Scholar

Lahiri, Aditi and Fikkert, Paula. 1999. Trisyllabic shortening in English: past and present. English Language and Linguistics 3.2: 229–267.10.1017/S1360674399000234CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laing, Margaret and Lass, Roger. 2019. Old and Middle English spellings for OE hw-, with special reference to the ‘qu-’ type: in celebration of LAEME, (e) LALME, LAOS and CoNE: In Memoriam Angus McIntosh. In Alcorn, Rhona, Kopaczyk, Joanna, Los, Bettelou and Molineaux, Benjamin (eds.), Historical Dialectology in the Digital Age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 91–112.10.3366/edinburgh/9781474430531.003.0005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1976. English Phonology and Phonological Theory: Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1992. Phonology and morphology. In Blake, Norman (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–155.10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1994. Old English: A Historical Linguistic Companion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621000CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1999. Phonology and morphology. In Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. III: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 56–186.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 2009. On schwa: synchronic prelude and historical fugue. In Minkova, Donka (ed.), Phonological Weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 47–77.10.1007/978-0-230-29686-2_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lass, Roger and Laing, Margaret. 2005. Are front rounded vowels retained in West Midland Middle English? In Schendl, Herbert and Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and Literary Approaches. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 280–290.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger and Laing, Margaret. 2012. ‘Ea’ in early Middle English: from diphthong to digraph. In Denison, David, Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, McCully, Chris and Moore, Emma (eds.), Analysing Older English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 75–118.Google Scholar

Liberman, Anatoly. 1992. Vowel lengthening before resonant + another consonant and svarabhakti in Germanic. In Rauch, Irmengard, Carr, Gerald F. and Kyes, Robert L. (eds.), On Germanic Linguistics: Issues and Methods. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 163–215.10.1515/9783110856446.163CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Luick, Karl. 1898. Beiträge zur englischen Grammatik III. Die Quantitätsveränderungen im Laufe der englischen Sprachentwicklung. Anglia 20: 335–362.Google Scholar

Luick, Karl. 1964 [1914–1940]. Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache. Stuttgart: Bernhard Tauchnitz. Repr. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Macafee, Caroline. 2003. The phonology of older Scots. In John Corbett, J. Derrick McClure, and Stuart-Smith, Jane (eds.), The Edinburgh Companion to Scots. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 138–169.Google Scholar

Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of Sounds. Cambridge Studies in Speech Science and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Maguire, Warren. 2020. The origins of owld in Scots. English Language and Linguistics, 24.3: 569–589. https://doi:10.1017/S1360674320000039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maiwald, Patrick. 2017. The vocalization of semivowels in medieval English: a quantitative study. Dissertation from Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen. https://d-nb.info/1140734989/34.Google Scholar

McCully, Chris B. 2009. The Sound Structure of English: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

MED = Middle English Dictionary. 1952–2001. Ed. Lewis, Robert E., Kurath, Hans, and Kuhn, Sherman M. et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Online edition in the Middle English Compendium, ed. Frances McSparran et al. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000‒2018. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/med.10.3998/mpub.6334CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2004. Philology, linguistics, and the history of [hw] ~ [w]. In Curzan, Ann and Emmons, Kimberly (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language II: Unfolding Conversations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 6–46.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2006. Old and Middle English prosody. In van Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.), The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 95–125.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2008. Prefixation and stress in Old English: In memoriam Richard Hogg (1944–2007). Word Structure 1(1): 21–52.10.3366/E1750124508000056CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2013. Reconstructing stress in Old and Middle English. In Krug, Manfred and Schlüter, Julia (eds.), Research Methods in Language Variation and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 260–277.10.1017/CBO9780511792519.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2014. A Historical Phonology of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2015a. Establishing phonemic contrast in written sources. In Honeybone, Patrick and Salmons, Joseph (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Historical Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 72–86.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2015b. A U-turn and its consequences for the history of final schwa in English. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 16. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/16/minkova/Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2019. Examining the evidence for phonemic affricates: Middle English /t͡ʃ/, /d͡ʒ/ or [t‐ʃ], [d‐ʒ]? In Alcorn, Rhona, Kopaczyk, Joanna, Los, Bettelou and Molineaux, Benjamin (eds.), Historical Dialectology in the Digital Age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 156–184.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2022. Preference theory and the uneven progress of degemination in Middle English. In Hanna, Patrizia Noel Aziz and Smith, Laura Catharine (eds.), Linguistic Preferences. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 265–292. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110721461–012.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert. 1992. Homorganic clusters as moric busters in the history of English: the case of -ld, -nd, -mb. In Rissanen, Matti, Ihalainen, Ossi, Nevalainen, Terttu and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 191–207.10.1515/9783110877007.191CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert. 1997. Against the emergence of the nuclear stress rule in Middle English. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Studies in Middle English Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 301–335.10.1515/9783110814194.301CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert. 1998. The origins of long-short allomorphy in English. In Fisiak, Jacek and Krygier, Marcin (eds.), Advances in English Historical Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 211–239.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert. 2003. English vowel shifts and ‘optimal’ diphthongs: is there a logical link? In Holt, D. Eric (ed.), Optimality Theory and Language Change. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 169–190.10.1007/978-94-010-0195-3_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Ross Zuraw, Kie. 2016. Ambisyllabicity in English: present and past. In Kytö, Merja and Pahta, Päivi (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of English Historical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 424–44310.1017/CBO9781139600231.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Runde, Emily. 2017. Genre, audience, and scribal adaptation to language change: the case of infinitival marking. In Bator, Magdalena, Fisiak, Jacek, and Sylwanowicz, Marta (eds.), Essays and Studies in Middle English. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 95–121.Google Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Lefkowitz, Michael. 2019. The history of /-n/ loss in English: Phonotactic change with lexical and grammatical specificity. Folia Linguistica 53(40): 203–230.10.1515/flih-2019-0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Lefkowitz, Michael. 2021. Middle English open syllable lengthening (MEOSL) or Middle English compensatory lengthening (MECL)? English Language and Linguistics 25.1: 155–180.10.1017/S1360674319000522CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Zhou, Z. L.. 2022. Early metrical and lexicographical evidence for functional stress-shifts. English Language and Linguistics 26.3: 533–558.10.1017/S1360674322000144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mokrowiecki, Tomasz. 2015. Acute accents as graphic markers of vowel quantity in two late Old English manuscripts. English Language and Linguistics 19.3: 407–436.10.1017/S1360674315000015CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moon, An-Nah. 2004. Constraints on homorganic cluster lengthening in early English: A unified account of vowel lengthening and shortening. Language Research 40.2: 353–376.Google Scholar

Moon, An-Nah. 2011. I-umlaut in Old English: a weak trigger effect. The Journal of English Language and Literature 57.6: 1043–1065.10.15794/jell.2011.57.6.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moore-Cantwell, Claire. 2020. Weight and final vowels in the English stress system. Phonology 37.4: 657–695.10.1017/S0952675720000305CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2019. Communities of practice and incipient standardization in Middle English written culture. English Studies 100.2: 117–132.10.1080/0013838X.2019.1566848CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moore, Colette. Forthcoming. Vernacular speech in writing. In Kytö and Smitterberg (eds.), NCEL, Vol. II: Documentation, Sources of Data and Modelling.Google Scholar

Moreton, Elliott and Thomas, Erik R.. 2007. Origins of Canadian Raising in voiceless-coda effects: a case study in phonologization. Laboratory Phonology 9: 37–64.Google Scholar

Needle, Jeremy M. and Tagliamonte, Sali A.. 2022. Orderly obsolescence: the decline of /hw/ in Ontario. American Speech: 1–41.Google Scholar

OED = Oxford English Dictionary. www.oed.com/.Google Scholar

Ogura, Mieko. 1987. Historical English Phonology: A Lexical Perspective. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.Google Scholar

Paster, Mary. 2004. Vowel height harmony and blocking in Buchan Scots. Phonology 21(3): 359–407.10.1017/S0952675704000314CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Phillips, Betty S. 2006. Word Frequency and Lexical Diffusion. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230286610CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pope, Mildred Katharine. 1934. From Latin to Modern French with Especial Consideration of Anglo-Norman: Phonology and Morphology. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Purnell, Thomas C., Raimy, Eric and Salmons, Joseph. 2019. Old English vowels: diachrony, privativity, and phonological representations. Language 95.4: e447–e473. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0083 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rankinen, Wil A. and Albin, Aaron. 2021. Apparent-time evidence of American raising in western and eastern lower Michigan. Publication of the American Dialect Society 106.1: 171–203.10.1215/00031283-9551345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ringe, Don and Taylor, Ann. 2014. The Development of Old English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199207848.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ritt, Nikolaus. 1994. Quantity Adjustment: Vowel Lengthening and Shortening in Early Middle English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597831CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ritt, Nikolaus. 2012. Middle English phonology in the digital age: what written corpora can tell us about sound change. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 81–87.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0007CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Robinson, Orrin W. 1992. Old English and Its Closest Relatives: A Survey of the Earliest Germanic Languages. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Ryan, Des. 2017. Principles of English spelling formation. Unpublished dissertation, Trinity College, Dublin.Google Scholar

Ryan, Kevin M. 2016. Phonological weight. Language and Linguistics Compass 10.12: 720–733.10.1111/lnc3.12229CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ryan, Kevin M. 2019. Prosodic Weight: Categories and Continua. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198817949.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schaefer, Ursula (ed.). 2006. The Beginnings of Standardization: Language and Culture in Fourteenth-Century England. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Schlüter, Julia. 2019. Tracing the (re-)emergence of /h/ and /j/ onsets through 350 years of books: mergers and merger reversals at the interface of phonetics and phonology. Folia Linguistica 53.40: 177–202.10.1515/flih-2019-0009CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schreier, Daniel. 2019. /h/ insertion as a ‘camouflage archaism’? Dialect contact, colonial lag and the feature pool in South Atlantic English. Diachronica 36.1: 37–65.10.1075/dia.17030.schCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scobbie, James M. and Stuart-Smith, Jane. 2008. Quasi-phonemic contrast and the fuzzy inventory: examples from Scottish English. In Peter Avery, B. Elan Dresher and Rice, Keren (eds.), Contrast in Phonology: Theory, Perception, Acquisition: Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 87–113.10.1515/9783110208603.1.87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sharma, Devyani. Forthcoming. Sociolinguistic sources of change. In Hickey (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. IV: Britain, Ireland and Europe.Google Scholar

Smith, Jeremy. 2007. Sound Change and the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199291953.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, Jeremy J. Forthcoming. Early English inscriptions, glosses and documents. In Kytö and Smitterberg (eds.), NCHEL, Vol. II: Documentation, Sources of Data and Modelling.Google Scholar

Sobol, Helena. 2017. Against Old English ‘short’ diphthongs. Crossroads: A Journal of English Studies 16.1: 32–39.10.15290/cr.2017.16.1.03CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stenbrenden, Gjertrud Flermoen. 2016. Long-Vowel Shifts in English, c. 1050–1700: Evidence from Spelling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107295469CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stenbrenden, Gjertrud Flermoen. 2019. The development of Old English ǣ: Middle English spelling evidence. In Alcorn, Rhona, Kopaczyk, Joanna, Los, Bettelou and Molineaux, Benjamin (eds.), Historical Dialectology in the Digital Age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 113–132.Google Scholar

Stenbrenden, Gjertrud Flermoen. 2020. Old English <cg> and its sound correspondences in Old English and Middle English. English Language and Linguistics 24.4: 687–718.10.1017/S1360674319000182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stenbrenden, Gjertrud Flermoen. Forthcoming. Phonological change. In Beal, (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. III: Transmission, Change and Ideology.Google Scholar

Stenroos, Merja. 2005. Spelling conventions and rounded front vowels in the poems of William Herebert. In Schendl, Herbert and Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and Literary Approaches. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 291–308.Google Scholar

Stenroos, Merja. 2019. The development of Old English eo/ço and the systematicity of Middle English spelling. In Alcorn, Rhona, Kopaczyk, Joanna, Los, Bettelou and Molineaux, Benjamin (eds.), Historical Dialectology in the Digital Age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 133–155.Google Scholar

Stenroos, Merja and Smith, Jeremy. 2016. Changing functions: English spelling before 1600. In Cook, Vivian and Ryan, Des (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the English Writing System. New York: Routledge, pp. 145–162.Google Scholar

Stockwell, Robert. 2002a. Retraction and rounding in Old English Breaking. In Restle, David and Zaefferer, Dietmar (eds.), Sounds and Systems: Studies in Structure and Change: A Festschrift for Theo Vennemann. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 121–138.10.1515/9783110894653.121CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stockwell, Robert. 2002b. How much shifting actually occurred in the historical English vowel shift? In Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language: A Millennial Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 267–282.Google Scholar

Stockwell, Robert and Minkova, Donka. 1988. The English vowel shift: problems of coherence and explanation. In Kastovsky, Dieter and Bauer, Gero (eds.), Luick Revisited. Tübingen: Günter Narr, pp. 355–394.Google Scholar

Stockwell, Robert and Minkova, Donka. 2002. Interpreting the Old and Middle English close vowels. Language Sciences 24.3: 447–458.10.1016/S0388-0001(01)00043-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stuart-Smith, Jane and Macdonald, Rachel. Forthcoming. Scots and Scottish Standard English. In Hickey (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. IV: Britain, Ireland and Europe.Google Scholar

Tanner, James, Sonderegger, Morgan and Stuart-Smith, Jane. 2019. Vowel duration and the voicing effect across dialects of English. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 41.1: 1–13.10.33137/twpl.v41i1.32769CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tichý, Ondøej and Čermák, Jan. Forthcoming. The story of English orthography, and its analysis. In Kytö and Smitterberg (eds.), NCHEL, Vol. II: Documentation, Sources of Data and Modelling.Google Scholar

Thomas, Erik R. 2001. An Acoustic Analysis of Vowel Variation in New World English. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Toivonen, Ida, Blumenfeld, Lev, Gormley, Andrea, Hoiting, Leah, Logan, John, Ramlakhan, Nalini, and Stone, Adam. 2015. Vowel height and duration. In Proceedings of the 32nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, vol. 32, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 64–71.Google Scholar

Tokar, Alexander. 2017. Stress Variation in English. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

Yu, Alan C. L. 2021. Toward an individual-difference perspective on phonologization. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 6.1: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.661.Google Scholar

Vachek, Joseph. 1976. Selected Writings in English and General Linguistics. Prague: Academia.10.1515/9783110803853CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vennemann, Theo. 1988. Preference Laws for Syllable Structure and the Explanation of Sound Change with Special Reference to German, Germanic, Italian, and Latin. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Vennemann, Theo. 2009. I and U: glide accretion in Ubian, English, and Celtic. Anglia 127.2: 208–237.Google Scholar

Walker, John. 1797. A critical pronouncing dictionary and expositor of the English language… to which are prefixed principles of English pronunciation … The Second Edition, with considerable Improvements and large additions. N.p.: G.G. and J. Robinson, T. Cadell junior and W. Davies. www.google.com/books/edition/A_critical_pronouncing_dictionary_and_ex/DnwCAAAAQAAJ?hl=en.Google Scholar

Watts, Richard J. 2003. Was the Great Vowel Shift really ‘great’? A reappraisal of research work on an elusive linguistic phenomenon. In Tschichoid, Cornelia (ed.), English Core Linguistics: Essays in Honour of D. J. Allerton. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 13–30.Google Scholar

Watts, Richard J. 2011. Language Myths and the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195327601.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wells, J. C. 1982. Accents of English. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611759CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wełna, Jerzy. 2021. Word-Initial prevocalic [h-] in Middle English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 56.1: 387–409.10.2478/stap-2021-0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar

White, David L. 2004. Why we should not believe in short diphthongs. In Curzan, Anne and Emmons, Kimberly (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language II: Unfolding Conversations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 57–84.10.1515/9783110897661.57CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Włodarczyk, Matylda. Forthcoming. Orality in the history of English. In Kytö and Smitterberg (eds.), NCHEL, Vol. II: Documentation, Sources of Data and Modelling.Google Scholar

Wright, Laura (ed.). 2001. The Development of Standard English, 1300–1800: Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Adamczyk, Elżbieta. 2018. Reshaping of Nominal Inflection in Early Northern West Germanic Languages: A Comparative Corpus Study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/nss.31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adamczyk, Elżbieta. 2021. A multifactorial account of analogical developments in Old English nominal paradigms. NOWELE 74.1: 4–26.10.1075/nowele.00047.adaCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia L. 1995. Case Marking and Reanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198240969.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia L. 2003. Deflexion and the development of the genitive in English. English Language and Linguistics 7.1: 1–28.10.1017/S1360674303211023CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia L. 2008. Genitives in Early English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199216680.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia L. 2016. The definite determiner in Early Middle English: what happened with þe? In Vikner, Sten, Jörgensen, Henrik and van Gelderen, Elly (eds.), Let Us Have Articles betwixt Us: Papers in Historical and Comparative Linguistics in Honour of Johanna L. Wood. Aarhus: Aarhus University, pp. 43–82.Google Scholar

Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2009. The Morphology of English Dialects: Verb-Formation in Non-standard English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511576539CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arista, Javier Martin. 2012. The Old English prefix ge-: a panchronic reappraisal. Australian Journal of Linguistics 32.4: 411–433.10.1080/07268602.2012.744264CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Auer, Anita. 2009. The Subjunctive in the Age of Prescriptivism: English and German Developments During the Eighteenth Century. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Barber, Charles. 1997 [1976]. Early Modern English. Second edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748687541CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Benskin, Michael. 2011. Present indicative plural concord in Brittonic and Early English. Transactions of the Philological Society 109: 158–185.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2011.01279.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergs, Alexander. 2005. Social Networks and Historical Sociolinguistics: Studies in Morphosyntactic Variation in the Paston Letters. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110923223CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Britton, Derek. 1991. On Middle English she, sho: a Scots solution to an English problem. NOWELE 17: 3–51.10.1075/nowele.17.01briCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunner, Karl. 1965. Altenglische Grammatik nach der angelsächsischen Grammatik von Eduard Sievers neubearbeitet. Third edition. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110930894CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunner, Karl. 1970. An Outline of Middle English Grammar. Trans. G. K.W. Johnston. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Burnley, David. 2003. The T/V pronouns in later Middle English literature. In Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 27–45.10.1075/pbns.107.03burCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. 2002. Linguistic Variation in the Shakespeare Corpus: Morpho-Syntactic Variability of Second Person Pronouns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.106CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. 2017. Pronouns. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel (eds.), The History of English, Vol. IV: Early Modern English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 209–223.Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10: 425–55.10.1080/01690969508407111CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Campbell, Alistair. 1977. Old English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cole, Marcelle. 2014. Old Northumbrian Verbal Morphology and the Northern Subject Rule. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/nss.25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cole, Marcelle. 2018. A native origin for present-day English they, their, them. Diachronica 35.2: 165–209.10.1075/dia.16026.colCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cole, Marcelle and Pons-Sanz, Sara M.. 2023. Origin and spread of the personal pronoun they: La estorie del Evangelie, a case study. In Pons-Sanz, Sara M. and Sylvester, Louise (eds.), Medieval English in a Multilingual Context: Current Methodologies and Approaches. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 311–342.10.1007/978-3-031-30947-2_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

CoNE = A Corpus of Narrative Etymologies from Proto-Old English to Early Middle English and accompanying Corpus of Changes. Version 1.1. 2013–. Compiled by Roger Lass, Margaret Laing, Rhona Alcorn and Keith Williamson. University of Edinburgh. www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/CoNE.html.Google Scholar

Crisma, Paola. 2011. The emergence of the definite article in English: a contact-induced change? In Sleeman, Antonia P. and Perridon, Harry (eds.), The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic: Structure, Variation and Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 175–192.10.1075/la.171.13criCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crouch, Tracy A. 1995. The morphological status of Old English ge-. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 7,2: 165–178.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Kytö, Merja. 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction in Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Curzan, Anne. 2003. Gender Shifts in the History of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486913CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dahl, Ivar. 1938. Substantival Inflexion in Early Old English. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.Google Scholar

Dictionary of Old English Corpus in Electronic Form. 2009. Antonette diPaolo Healey et al. Toronto: Toronto University Press, on CD-ROM.Google Scholar

Dolberg, Florian. 2019. Agreement in Language Contact: Gender Development in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.208CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fernández Cuesta, Julia and Pons–Sanz, Sara (eds.). 2016. The Old English Glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, Author and Context. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110449105CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fernández Cuesta, Julia and Rodriguez Ledesma, Nieves. 2020. Reduced forms in the nominal morphology of the Lindisfarne Gospel Gloss: a case of accusative/dative syncretism? Folia Linguistica 54: 37–65.10.1515/flih-2020-0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, Olga. 2004. The development of the modals in English: radical versus gradual changes. In Hart, David (ed.), English Modality in Context: Diachronic Perspectives. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 16–32.Google Scholar

Fisiak, Jacek. 2004. A Short Grammar of Middle English. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie.Google Scholar

Fulk, Robert. 2017. An Introduction to Middle English: Grammar and Texts. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.Google Scholar

Fulk, Robert. 2018. A Comparative Grammar of Early Germanic Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Gardani, Francesco. 2020. Morphology and contact-induced language change. In Grant, Anthony (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 96–122.Google Scholar

Gonzáles-Díaz, Victorina. 2008. English Adjective Comparison: A Historical Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.299CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordon, Moragh S. 2017. The Urban Vernacular of Late Medieval and Renaissance Bristol. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred. 1991. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166010CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gregersen, Sune. 2020. Early English Modals: Form, Function and Analogy. Amsterdam: LOT.Google Scholar

Gregersen, Sune. 2023. Regularized modal verbs in Middle English dialects. English Language and Linguistics 27.1: 23–43.10.1017/S1360674322000053CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gries, Stefan T. and Hilpert, Martin. 2010. Modeling diachronic change in the third person singular: a multifactorial, verb- and author-specific exploratory approach. English Language and Linguistics 14.3: 293–320.10.1017/S1360674310000092CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2003. Rectifying a standard deficiency: pronominal distinctions in varieties of English. In Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 345–374.Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2012. Early English and the Celtic hypothesis. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 497–507.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0042CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2008. Germanic Future Constructions: A Usage-Based Approach to Language Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. 1992a. A Grammar of Old English. Vol. I: Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. 1992b. Phonology and morphology. In Richard, M. Hogg (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. I: The Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 67–167.10.1017/CHOL9780521264747.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. 1997. Some remarks on case marking in Old English. Transactions of the Philological Society 95: 95–109.10.1111/1467-968X.00014CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hogg, Richard M. and Fulk, Robert. 2011. A Grammar of Old English. Vol. II: Morphology. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. 1993. Second person singular pronouns in records of Early Modern spoken English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94: 83–100.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. 2003. Shakespeare’s Grammar. London: The Arden Shakespeare.10.5040/9781474243391CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horobin, Simon and Smith, Jeremy J.. 2002. An Introduction to Middle English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748673124CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hotta, Ryuichi. 2009. The Development of the Nominal Plural Forms in Early Middle English. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar

Howe, Stephen. 1996. The Personal Pronouns in the Germanic Languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110819205CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johannesson, Nils-Lennart and Cooper, Andrew (eds). 2023. Ormulum, edited from Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Junius 1 and London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 783. 2 vols. Early English Text Society O.S. 360. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas. 2020. Politeness in the History of English: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108589147CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 1997. Morphological classification in English historical linguistics: the interplay of diachrony, synchrony and morphological theory. 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, pp. 63–75.Google Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 2006a. Historical morphology from a typological point of view: examples from English. In Nevalainen, Terttu (ed.), Types of Variation: Diachronic, Dialectal and Typological Interfaces. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 53–80.Google Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 2006b. Vocabulary. In Hogg, Richard and Denison, David (eds.), A History of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 199–270.10.1017/CBO9780511791154.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 2012. Morphology. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel (eds.), English Historical Linguistics, Vol. I. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 129–148.Google Scholar

Kilpiö, Matti. 1997. On the forms and functions of the verb be from Old to Modern English. In Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja and Heikkonen, Kirsi (eds.), English in Transition: Corpus-Based Studies in Linguistic Variation and Genre Styles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 87–120.10.1515/9783110811148.87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koike, Takeshi. 2006. The history of the genitive case from the Old English period onwards. English Language and Linguistics 10.1: 49–75.10.1017/S1360674306001808CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krygier, Marcin. 1994. The Disintegration of the English Strong Verb System. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Krygier, Marcin. 1998. On a synchronic approach to Old English morphology. Folia Linguistica Historica 19: 119–128.Google Scholar

Krygier, Marcin. 2001. Reconsidering the history of the English verbal system. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 36: 51–59.Google Scholar

Krygier, Marcin. 2002. A re-classification of Old English nouns. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 38: 311–319.Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja. 1996. The best and most excellentest way: the rivalling forms of adjective comparison in late Middle and early Modern English. In Svartvik, Jan (ed.), Words. Proceedings of an International Symposium, Lund, 25–26 August 1995. Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, pp. 124–144.Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja. 1997. Be/have + past participle: the choice of the auxiliary with intransitives from Late Middle to Modern English. In Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja and Heikkonen, Kirsi (eds.), English in Transition: Corpus-Based Studies in Linguistic Variation and Genre Styles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 17–86.10.1515/9783110811148.17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

LAEME = A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325. Version 3.2. 2013. Compiled by Margaret Laing. (Introduction by Margaret Laing and Roger Lass; webscripts by Keith Williamson, Vasilis Karaiskos and Sherrylyn Branchaw.) Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press. Version 4.0. 2024. www.amc.lel.ed.ac.uk/amc-projects-hub/project/laeme.Google Scholar

Laing, Margaret. 2009. Orthographic indications of weakness in Early Middle English. In Minkova, Donka (ed.), Phonological Weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 237–315.10.1007/978-0-230-29686-2_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laing, Margaret and Lass, Roger. 2006. Early Middle English dialectology: problems and prospects. In van Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.), Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 417–451.10.1002/9780470757048.ch17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laing, Margaret and Lass, Roger. 2014. On Middle English she, sho: a refurbished narrative. Folia Linguistica Historica 35.1: 201–240.Google Scholar

LALME = A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English. 1986. 4 vols. Ed. McIntosh, Angus, Samuels, Michael L. and Benskin, Michael. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. Revised online edition (eLALME) 2013. With revisions and supplements by Michael Benskin and Margaret Laing; webscripts by Vasilis Karaiskos and Keith Williamson. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/elalme/elalme.html.Google Scholar

Lange, Claudia. 2007. Reflexivity and Intensification in English: A Study of Texts and Contexts. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1992. Phonology and morphology. In Blake, Norman (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. II: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–155.10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1997. Why house is an Old English ‘masculine a-stem’. 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, pp. 101–109.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1999. Phonology and morphology. In Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. III: 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–155.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 2006. Phonology and morphology. In Hogg, Richard and Denison, David (eds.), A History of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 43–108.10.1017/CBO9780511791154.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Los, Bettelou. 2015. A Historical Syntax of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748694563CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lutz, Angelika. 1998. The interplay of external and internal factors in morphological restructuring: the case of you. In Fisiak, Jacek and Krygier, Marcin (eds.), Advances in English Historical Linguistics (1996). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 189–210.10.1515/9783110804072.189CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lutz, Angelika. 2009. Celtic influence on Old English and West Germanic. English Language and Linguistics 13: 227–249.10.1017/S1360674309003001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Machan, Tim William. 2012. Chaucer and the history of English. Speculum 87.1: 147–175.10.1017/S0038713411003885CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mengden, Ferdinand von. 2010. Cardinal Numerals: Old English from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110220353CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mengden, Ferdinand von. 2017. Old English: overview. In Brinton, Laurel and Bergs, Alexander (eds.), The History of English, Vol. II: Old English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 32–49.Google Scholar

Middeke, Kirsten. 2019. ‘Subsumed under the dative’? The status of the Old English instrumental. In Claridge, Claudia and Bös, Birte (eds.), Developments in English Historical Morpho-Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 35–56.10.1075/cilt.346.03midCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Millar, Robert McColl. 2000. System Collapse, System Rebirth: The Demonstrative Pronouns of English, 900–1350 and the Birth of the Definite Article. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Millar, Robert McColl. 2002. After Jones: some thoughts on the final collapse of the grammatical gender system in English. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Studies in English Historical Linguistics and Philology: A Festschrift for Akio Oizumi. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 293–306.Google Scholar

Millar, Robert McColl. 2016. At the forefront of linguistic change: the noun phrase morphology of the Lindisfarne Gospels. In Cuesta, Julia Fernández and Pons-Sanz, Sara M. (eds.), The Old English Gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, Author and Context. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 153–168.10.1515/9783110449105-011CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Miller, Gary D. 2012. External Influences on English: From Its Beginnings to the Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654260.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka. 2009. Inflectional syncope: notes on the weak preterites in Middle and Early Modern English. In Minkova, Donka (ed.), Phonological Weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 316–346.10.1007/978-0-230-29686-2_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minkova, Donka and Lefkowitz, Michael. 2019. The history of /-n/ loss in English: phonotactic change with lexical and grammatical specificity. Folia Linguistica 53: 203–230.10.1515/flih-2019-0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moessner, Lilo. 2020. The History of the Present English Subjunctive: A Corpus-Based Study of Mood and Modality. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Mossé, Ferdinand. 1952. A Handbook of Middle English. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.10.56021/9780801804786CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevala, Minna. 2018. ‘Ungenteel’ and ‘rude’? On the use of thou in the eighteenth century. In Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna and Säily, Tanja (eds.), Patterns of Change in Eighteenth-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 77–95.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2006. An Introduction to Early Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748626366CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2018. Going to completion: the diffusion of verbal -s. In Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna and Säily, Tanja (eds.), Patterns of Change in Eighteenth-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 97–116.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1994. Its strength and the beauty of it: the standardization of the third person neuter possessive in Early Modern English. In Stein, Dieter and van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 171–216.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2000. The third-person singular -(E)S and -(E)TH revisited: the morphophonemic hypothesis. In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane and Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words, Structure, Meaning, Function. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 235–248.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2016 [2003]. Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. Second edition. London: Longman.10.4324/9781315475172CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna and Säily, Tanja (eds.). 2018. Patterns of Change in Eighteenth-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nielsen, Hans-Frede. 1998. The Continental Backgrounds of English and Its Insular Development until 1154. Odense: Odense University Press.10.1075/nss.19CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ogura, Mieko and Wang, William S.-Y.. 1996. Snowball effect in lexical diffusion: the development of -s in the third-person singular present indicative in English. In Britton, Derek (ed.), English Historical Linguistics 1994: Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 119–141.10.1075/cilt.135.10oguCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ogura, Mieko. 2009. The interchangeability of the endings -ende and -enne in Old and Early Middle English. English Studies 90.6: 721–734.Google Scholar

Orton, Harold and Dieth, Eugen (eds.). 1962–1971. Survey of English Dialects. 4 vols. Leeds: Arnold and Son.Google Scholar

Palander-Collin, Minna J. 2018. Ongoing change: the diffusion of the third-person neuter possessive its. In Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna and Säily, Tanja (eds.), Patterns of Change in Eighteenth-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 159–177.Google Scholar

Petré, Peter. 2013. On the distribution and merger of is and bið in Old and Middle English. Transactions of the Philological Society 111.3: 301–325.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2012.01320.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pons-Sanz, Sara M. 2013. The Lexical Effects of Anglo-Scandinavian Linguistic Contact on Old English. Turnhout: Brepols.10.1484/M.SEM-EB.5.106260CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Randall, William and Jones, Howard. 2015. On the early origins of the Germanic preterite presents. Transactions of the Philological Society 113.2: 137–176.10.1111/1467-968X.12045CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2005. The diffusion of you: a case study in historical sociolinguistics. Language Variation and Change 17: 55–73.10.1017/S0954394505050039CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena and Nevalainen, Terttu. 1997. Social embedding of linguistic changes in Tudor English. 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, pp. 701–717.10.1515/9783110820751.701CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena and Nevalainen, Terttu. 2007. From mine to my and thine to thy: loss of the nasal in the first and second person possessives. In Smit, Ute, Dollinger, Stefan, Hüttner, Julia, Kaltenböck, Gunther and Lutzky, Ursula (eds.), Tracing English through Time: Explorations in Language Variation. Vienna: Braumüller, pp. 303–314.Google Scholar

Ringe, Don. 2006. A Linguistic History of English. Vol. I: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199284139.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ringe, Don and Taylor, Ann. 2014. The Development of Old English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199207848.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ringe, Don. 2021. A Historical Morphology of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9781474459785CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ringe, Don and Yang, Charles. 2022. The threshold of productivity and the ‘irregularization’ of verbs in Early Modern English. In Los, Bettelou, Cowie, Claire, Honeybone, Patrick and Trousdale, Graeme (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: Change in Structure and Meaning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 91–112.10.1075/cilt.358.04rinCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110899818CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosenbach, Anette. 2014. English genitive variation: the state of the art. English Language and Linguistics 18.2: 215–262.10.1017/S1360674314000021CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosenbach, Anette and Vezzosi, Letizia. 2000. Genitive constructions in Early Modern English: new evidence from a corpus analysis. In Sornicola, Rosanna, Poppe, Erich and Shisha-Halevy, Ariel (eds.), Stability, Variation and Change of Word-Order Patterns over Time. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 285–307.10.1075/cilt.213.20rosCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rütten, Tanja. 2015. For whom the bell tolls, or: Why we predicted the death of the mandative subjunctive. In Sanchez-Stockhammer, Christina (ed.), Can We Predict Language Change? Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, 16. Helsinki: VARIENG. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/series/volumes/16/rutten/.Google Scholar

Schendl, Herbert. 1997. Morphological variation and change in Early Modern English: my/mine, thy/thine. In Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanisław (eds.), Language History and Linguistic Modelling: A Festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th Birthday, Vol. I: Language History. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 179–191.Google Scholar

Schendl, Herbert. 2000. The third person present plural in Shakespeare’s First Folio: a case of interaction of morphology and syntax? In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane and Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words: Structure, Meaning, Function. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 263–276.Google Scholar

Schlüter, Julia. 2001. Why worser is better: the double comparative in sixteenth- to seventeenth-century English. Language Variation and Change 13.2: 193–208.10.1017/S0954394501132047CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shinkawa, Seiji. 2012. Unhistorical Gender Assignment in Laʒamon’s Brut. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.10.3726/978-3-0351-0429-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Siemund, Peter and Dolberg, Florian. 2011. From lexical to referential gender: an analysis of gender change in medieval English based on two historical documents. Folia Linguistica 45.2: 489–534.10.1515/flin.2011.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Skeat, William, Walter. 1871–1887. The Four Gospels in Anglo-Saxon, Northumbrian and Old Mercian Versions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Smith, Jeremy. 1996. An Historical Study of English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Sommerer, Lotte. 2018. Article Emergence in Old English: A Constructionalist Perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110541052CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stein, Dieter. 2003. Pronominal usage in Shakespeare: between sociolinguistics and conversation analysis. In Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 251–307.10.1075/pbns.107.12steCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stenroos, Merja. 2005. The spread of they, their and them in English: the late Middle English evidence. In Krygier, Marcin and Sikorska, Liliana (eds.), Naked Wordes in Englissh. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 67–96.Google Scholar

Stenroos, Merja. 2008. Order out of chaos? The English gender change in the Southwest Midlands as a process of semantically based reorganization. English Language and Linguistics 12.3: 445–473.10.1017/S1360674308002712CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2012. Analyticity and syntheticity in the history of English. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 654–665.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0056CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taylor, Ann. 1994. Variation in past tense formation in the history of English. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 143–158.Google Scholar

van Ostade, Tieken-Boon, Ingrid, . 2009. An Introduction to Late Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748631308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

van Gelderen, Elly. 2000. A History of English Reflexive Pronouns: Person, Self and Interpretability. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.39CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Walker, Terry. 2007. Thou and You in Early Modern English Dialogues: Trials, Depositions and Drama Comedy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.158CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Walker, Terry. 2017. ‘he saith yt he thinkes yt’: linguistic factors influencing third person singular present tense verb inflection in Early Modern English depositions. Studia Neophilologica 89.1: 133–146.10.1080/00393274.2016.1190298CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Walker, Terry and Kytö, Merja. 2011. Linguistic variation and change in the depositions. In Kytö, Merja, Grund, Peter and Walker, Terry (eds.), Testifying to Language and Life in Early Modern England. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 215–245.Google Scholar

Warner, Anthony. 1993. English Auxiliaries: Structure and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511752995CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Warner, Anthony. 2017. English-Norse contact, simplification, and sociolinguistic typology. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 118.2: 317–404.Google Scholar

Wełna, Jerzy. 1996. English Historical Morphology. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.Google Scholar

Wełna, Jerzy. 1997. Weak-to-strong: a shift in English verbs? 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, pp. 215–228.10.1515/9783110820751.215CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wełna, Jerzy. 2005. Nim or take? A competition between two high frequency verbs in Middle English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41: 53–69.Google Scholar

Wischer, Ilse. 2008. Will and shall as markers of modality and/or futurity in Middle English. Folia Linguistica Historica 29: 125–143.Google Scholar

Wojtyś, Anna. 2016. Past Participle Marking in Medieval English: A Corpus-Based Study in Historical Morphology. San Diego, CA: Æcademic Publishing.Google Scholar

Wood, Johanna L. 2007. Demonstratives and possessives: from Old English to present-day English. In Stark, Elisabeth, Weiss, Elisabeth and Abraham, Werner (eds.), Nominal Determination: Typology, Context Constraints and Historical Emergence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 339–331.Google Scholar

Wright, Laura. 1995. Middle English {-ende} and {-ing}: a possible route to grammaticalisation. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.) Linguistic Change under Contact Conditions. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 365–382.10.1515/9783110885170.365CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wright, Laura. 2002. Third person plural present tense markers in London prisoners’ depositions, 1562–1623. American Speech 77: 242–263.10.1215/00031283-77-3-242CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wright, Laura. 2015. Some more on the history of present‐tense‐s, do and zero: West Oxfordshire, 1837. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 1.1: 111–130.10.1515/jhsl-2015-0005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wright, Joseph and Wright, Elizabeth M.. 1982 [1908]. Old English Grammar. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Aarts, Bas. 2012. The subjunctive conundrum. Folia Linguistica 46.1: 1–20.10.1515/flin.2012.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ackema, Peter and Schoorlemmer, Maaike. 2007. Middles. In Everaert, Martin and van Riemsdijk, Henk (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 131–203.Google Scholar

Alcorn, Rhona. 2013. Pronoun placement and pronoun case in Old English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 114.4: 455–472.Google Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 1980. Topics in Diachronic English Syntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 1995. Case-Marking and Reanalysis: Grammatical Relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780198240969.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 2000. Obsolescence and sudden death in syntax: the decline of verb-final order in early Middle English. In Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, Denison, David, Hogg, Richard M. and McCully, B. C. (eds.), Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10 ICEHL. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 2006. Case syncretism and word order change. In van Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.), The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 201–223.Google Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 2008. Genitives in Early English: Typology and Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199216680.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, Cynthia L. 2016. The definite determiner in Early Middle English: what happened with þe? In Vikner, Sten, Jörgensen, Henrik and van Gelderen, Elly (eds.), Let Us Have Articles Betwixt Us: Papers in Historical and Comparative Linguistics in Honour of Johanna L. Wood. Aarhus: Aarhus University, pp. 43–82.Google Scholar

Allen, Cynthia. 2022. Pronominally headed relative clauses in early English. English Language and Linguistics 26.1: 105–132.10.1017/S136067432100006XCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allerton, D. J. 2002. Stretched Verb Constructions in English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Baker, C. L. 1979. Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry 10.4: 533–581.Google Scholar

Ball, Catherine N. 1991. The historical development of the it-cleft. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Bately, Janet M. (ed.). 1980. The Old English Orosius. The Early English Text Society, second series 6. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bech, Kristin. 2012. Word order, information structure, and discourse relations. In Meurman-Solin, Anneli, López-Couso, María José and Los, Bettelou (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 66–86.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860210.003.0004CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bech, Kristin. 2014. Tracing the loss of boundedness in the history of English: the anaphoric status of initial prepositional phrases in Old English and Late Middle English. Anglia 132.3: 506–535.10.1515/ang-2014-0056CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bech, Kristin. 2017. Old ‘truths’, new corpora: revisiting the word order of conjunct clauses in Old English. English Language and Linguistics 21.1: 1–25.10.1017/S1360674315000465CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becher, Viktor. 2010. Differences in the use of deictic expressions in English and German texts. Linguistics 48.4: 1309–1342.10.1515/ling.2010.042CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bethurum, Dorothy (ed.). 1957. The False Gods, in The Homilies of Wulfstan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/actrade/9780198111016.book.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward, 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany. 2013. Nominalizing the verb phrase in academic writing. In Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne, Leech, Geoffrey and Wallis, Sean (eds.), The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change in Corpora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 99–132.10.1017/CBO9781139060998.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bies, Ann. 1996. Syntax and discourse factors in Early New High German: evidence for verb-final word order. MA thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Birner, Betty and Ward, Gregory. 1998. Information Status and Canonical Word Order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Birner, Betty and Ward, Gregory. 2002. Information packaging. In Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.), The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1363–1447.Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight. 1977. Meaning and Form. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Bouso, Tamara. 2021. Changes in Argument Structure: The Transitivizing Reaction Object Construction. Bern: Peter Lang.10.3726/b17960CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Breban, Tine. 2006. English adjectives of general comparison: lexical versus grammaticalized uses. PhD dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar

Breban, Tine. 2012. Functional shifts and the development of English determiners. In Meurman-Solin, Anneli, López-Couso, María José and Los, Bettelou (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 271–300.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860210.003.0012CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bresnan, Joan, Cueni, Anna, Nikitina, Tatiana and Baayen, Harald R.. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In Bouma, Gerlof, Krämer, Irene and Zwarts, Joost (eds.), Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science, pp. 69–94.Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel. 1996. Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110907582CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel. 2017. The Evolution of Pragmatic Markers in English: Pathways to Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316416013CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burnley, J. D. 1986. Curial prose in England. Speculum 61: 593–614.10.2307/2851597CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2001. Main clauses are innovative, subordinate clauses are conservative: consequences for the nature of constructions. In Bybee, Joan and Noonan, Michael (eds.), Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honour of Sandra A. Thompson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar

Cigman, Gloria. (ed.). 1989. Lollard Sermons. Early English Text Society OS 294. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Clemoes, Peter (ed.). 1997. Annunciation. In Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, First Series. Early English Text Society, second series 17. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 281–289.Google Scholar

Clowes, William. 1970. Treatise for the artificiall cure of struma, London 1602 (The English Experience 238) (facsimile). Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum; New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar

Cole, Marcelle. 2017. Pronominal anaphoric strategies in the West Saxon dialect of Old English. English Language and Linguistics 21.2: 381–408.10.1017/S136067431700020XCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Colman, Fran. 1988. Heavy arguments in Old English. In John, M. Anderson and Macleod, Norman (eds.), Edinburgh Studies in the English Language, Vol. I. Edinburgh: John Donald, pp. 33–89.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Crawford, S. J. (ed.). 1922. The Old English Version of the Heptateuch, Ælfric’s Treatise on the Old and New Testament, and his Preface to Genesis. Edited from all existing mss. Early English Text Society 160. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Crisma, Paola. 2011. The emergence of the definite article in English: a contact-induced change? In Sleeman, Petra and Perridon, Harry (eds.), The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic: Structure, Variation, and Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 175–192.10.1075/la.171.13criCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crisma, Paola. 2015. The ‘indefinite article’ from cardinal to operator to expletive. In Gianollo, Chiara, Jäger, Agnes and Penka, Doris (eds.), Language Change at the Syntax–Semantics Interface. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 125–151.10.1515/9783110352306.125CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crisma, Paola and Pintzuk, Susan. 2016. An from Old to Middle English. In Vikner, Sten, Jørgensen, Henrik and van Gelderen, Elly (eds.), Let Us Have Articles Betwixt Us: Papers in Historical and Comparative Linguistics in Honour of Johanna L. Wood. Aarhus: Aarhus University, pp. 161–183.Google Scholar

Cristofaro, Sonia. 2005. Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199282005.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cuyckens, Hubert and De Smet, Hendrik. 2007. For … to-infinitives from Early to Late Modern English. In Pérez-Guerra, Javier, González-Álvarez, Dolores, Bueno-Alonso, Jorge L. and Rama-Martínez, Esperanza (eds.), ‘Of Varying Language and Opposing Creed’: New Insights into Late Modern English. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 77–102.Google Scholar

Davidse, Kristin, Breban, Tine and Van linden, An. 2008. Deictification: the development of secondary deictic meanings by adjectives in the English NP. English Language and Linguistics 12.3: 253–503.10.1017/S1360674308002724CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies, Zoe. 2009. Introduction to Horse Nutrition. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

De Bastiani, Chiara and Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2020. On the syntax of object pronouns in Old English and Early Middle English. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 5.1: 43.Google Scholar

De Smet, Hendrik. 2013. Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

De Smet, Hendrik. Forthcoming. The system of clausal complementation. In Beal (ed.), NCHEL, Vol. III: Transmission, Change and Ideology.Google Scholar

Dehé, Nicole. 2002. Particle Verbs in English: Syntax, Information Structure, and Intonation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.59CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Denison, David. 1990. Auxiliary + Impersonal in Old English. Folia Linguistica Historica 9.1: 139–166.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 1998. Syntax. In Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 92–329.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 2006. Category change and gradience in the determiner system. In van Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.), The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 279–304.10.1002/9780470757048.ch12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Denison, David and Hundt, Marianne. 2013. Defining relatives. Journal of English Linguistics 41: 135–167.10.1177/0075424213483572CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Depraetere, Ilse and Verhulst, An. 2008. Source of modality: a reassessment. English Language and Linguistics 12(1): 187–210.10.1017/S1360674307002481CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dreschler, Gea. 2015. Passives and the Loss of Verb Second: A Study of Syntactic and Information-Structural Factors. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar

Duffley, P. J. 1994. Need and dare: the black sheep of the modal family. Lingua 94: 213–243.10.1016/0024-3841(94)90010-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellegård, Alvar. 1953. The Auxiliary Do: The Establishment and Regulation of Its Use in English. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar

Elsness, Johan. 2014. The present perfect and the preterite in Late Modern and Contemporary English: a longitudinal look. In Davidse, Kristin, Gentens, Caroline, Ghesquière, Lobke and Vandelanotte, Lieven (eds.), Corpus Interrogation and Grammatical Patterns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 81–103.10.1075/scl.63.08elsCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erdmann, Peter. 1997. The for … to construction in English. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Fagan, Sarah M. B. 1992. The Syntax and Semantics of Middle Constructions: A Study with Special Reference to German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fairman, Tony. 2000. English pauper letters 1800–34 and the English language. In Barton, David and Hall, Nigel (eds.), Letter Writing as a Social Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 63–82.10.1075/swll.9.05faiCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fanego, Teresa. 1992. Infinitive Complements in Shakespeare’s English. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (Servicio de Publicacións e Intercambio Científico).Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa. 1996. The gerund in Early Modern English: evidence from the Helsinki Corpus. Folia Linguistica Historica 17: 97–152.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa. 2019. A construction of independent means: the history of the Way construction revisited. English Language and Linguistics 23.3: 671–699.10.1017/S1360674318000059CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, Olga. 1994. The fortunes of the Latin-type accusative and infinitive construction in Dutch and English compared. In Swan, Toril, Mørck, Endre and Jansen, Olaf (eds.), Language Change and Language Structure: Older Germanic Languages in a Comparative Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 91–133.10.1515/9783110886573.91CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, Olga. 1996. The status of to in Old English to-infinitives: a reply to Kageyama. Lingua 99: 107–133.10.1016/0024-3841(96)00012-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, Olga, van Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem and van der Wurff, Wim. 2000. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fludernik, Monika. 1996. Linguistics and literature: prospects and horizons in the study of prose. Journal of Pragmatics 26: 583–611.10.1016/0378-2166(95)00062-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Francis, Gill and John, McH. Sinclair. 1994. I bet he drinks Carling Black Label: a riposte to Owen on corpus grammar. Applied Linguistics 15: 190–200.10.1093/applin/15.2.190CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gärtner, Hans-Martin. 2001. Are there V2 relative clauses in German? Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 3: 97–141.10.1023/A:1011432819119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 1990. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Godfrey, John J. and Holliman, Edward. 1993. Switchboard-1 Release 2 LDC97S62. Web Download. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred. 1991. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166010CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gregory, Michelle and Michaelis, Laura A.. 2001. Topicalization and left-dislocation: a functional opposition revisited. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1665–1706.10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00063-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th. 2003. Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. London: Continuum Press.Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan and Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2004. Extending collostructional analysis: a corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9.1: 97–129.10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06griCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haeberli, Eric. 2002. Observations on the loss of Verb Second in the history of English. In Zwart, C. Jan Wouter and Abraham, Werner (eds.), Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax: Proceedings from the Fifteenth Workshop on Comparative Germanic Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 245–272.10.1075/la.53.15haeCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. 2001. Literacy and linguistics: relationships between spoken and written language. In Burns, Anne and Coffin, Caroline (eds.), Analyzing English in a Global Context: A Reader. New York: Routledge, pp. 181–193.Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. 2004. Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday. Vol. V: The Language of Science, ed. Webster, J.. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Hasselgård, Hilde. 2010. Adjunct Adverbials in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511676253CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Härtl, Holden. 2003. Conceptual and grammatical characteristics of argument alternations: the case of decausative verbs. Linguistics 41.5: 883–916.10.1515/ling.2003.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1986. A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Healey, Antonette di Paolo and Venezky, Richard L.. 1985. A Microfiche Concordance to Old English. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther, Kuteva, Tania and Long, Haiping. 2021. The Rise of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108982856CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2021. Ten Lectures on Diachronic Construction Grammar. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004446793CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. Forthcoming. Construction Grammar and English historical linguistics. In Kytö and Smitterberg (eds.), NCHEL, Vol. II: Documentation, Sources of Data and Modelling.Google Scholar

Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2017. From OV to VO in English: how to Kroch the nut. In Los, Bettelou and de Haan, Pieter (eds.), Word Order Change in Acquisition and Language Contact: Essays in Honour of Ans van Kemenade. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 9–34.10.1075/la.243.02hinCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hinterhölzl, Roland and Petrova, Svetlana. 2010. From V1 to V2 in West Germanic. Lingua 120: 315–328.10.1016/j.lingua.2008.10.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooper, Joan B. and Thompson, Sandra A.. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4.4: 465–497.Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul and Traugott, Elizabeth C.. 2003. Grammaticalization. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139165525CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney D. 1971. The Sentence in Written English: A Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of Scientific Texts. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne. 2007. English Mediopassive Constructions: A Cognitive, Corpus-Based Study of their Origin, Spread, and Current Status. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789401203784CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne. 2014. Books that sell – mediopassives and the modification ‘constraint’. In Hundt, Marianne (ed.), Late Modern English Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 90–110.10.1017/CBO9781139507226.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Gardner, Anne-Christine. 2017. Corpus-based approaches: watching English change. In Brinton, Laurel (ed.), English Historical Linguistics: Approaches and Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 96–130.10.1017/9781316286562.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hunter, James. 1796. A Complete Dictionary of Farriery and Horsemanship Containing the Art of Farriery in all its Branches with an Explanation of the Terms, and a Description of the Various Particulars, Relating to the Manage, and to the Knowledge of Horses. Dublin: Printed for P. Wogan, P. Byrne, J. Rice, and J. Moore. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CW0115430601/ECCO?sid=gale_marc&u=gentGoogle Scholar

Ingham, Richard. 2000. Negation and OV order in Late Middle English. Journal of Linguistics 36: 13–38.10.1017/S0022226799007963CrossRefGoogle Scholar

James, Henry R. (trans.). 1897. The Consolation of Philosophy of Boethius. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1946. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1894. Progress in Language: With Special Reference to English. London: Swan.Google Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 2006. Vocabulary. In Hogg, Richard and Denison, David (eds.), A History of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 199–270.10.1017/CBO9780511791154.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar