The modal auxiliaries have to and must in the corpus of early Ontario English: Gradient change and colonial lag

Canadian Journal of Linguistics

Volumn 51, Issue 2-3, 2006, Pages

  Dollinger, Stefan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248326433     PISSN: 00084131     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0008413100004114     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Avis, Walter S. 1978. Canadian English in its North American context. In Walter S. Avis: Essays and articles, ed. Thomas Vincent, George Parker, and Stephen Bonnycastle, 35-49. Kingston, ON: Royal Military College.
2. Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, and Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Brinton, Laurel J. 1991. The origin and development of quasimodal HAVE To in English. Ms., University of British Columbia, http://www.english.ubc.ca/ ~lbrinton/haveto.pdf, (accessed May 27, 2005).
4. Chambers, J.K. ed. 1975. Canadian English: Origins and structures. Toronto: Methuen.
5. Chambers, J.K. 1998. English: Canadian varieties. In Language in Canada, ed. John Edwards, 252-272. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Chambers, J.K. 2004. 'Canadian dainty': The rise and decline of Briticisms in Canada. In Legacies of colonial English: Studies in transported dialects, ed. Raymond Hickey, 224-241. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.
8. Denison, David. 1998. Syntax. In The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. IV 1776-1997, ed. Suzanne Romaine, 92-329. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Dollinger, Stefan. 2006. Oh Canada! Towards the Corpus of Early Ontario English. In The changing face of corpus linguistics, ed. A. Renouf and A. Kehoe, 7-25. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
10. Fischer, Olga. 1994. The development of quasi-auxiliaries in English and changes in word order. Neophilologus 78:137-164.
11. Fischer, Olga. 2003. The development of the modals in English. In English modality in context: Diachronic perspectives, ed. David Hart, 17-32. Bern: Lang.
12. Gaaf, van der W. 1931. Beon and habban connected with an inflected infinitive. English Studies 13:176-188.
13. Givón, Talmy. 1971. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist's field trip. Papers from the Chicago Linguistic Society 7:394-415. Cited in Hopper 1991:18.
14. Gold, Elaine. 2004. Teachers, texts and Early Canadian English 1791-1841. In Proceedings of the 2003 Canadian Linguistic Association Annual Conference, ed. Sophie Burelle and Stanca Somesfalean, 85-96. Université du Québec à Montréal.
15. Görlach, Manfred. 1987. Colonial lag? The alleged conservative character of American English and other 'colonial' varieties. English World-Wide 8:41-60.
16. Heller, Joseph. 1989. Catch-22. New York: Simon and Schuster. [1955.]
17. Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. In Approaches to grammaticalization, Vol. I, ed. Elizabeth Closs Traugott and Bernd Heine, 18-35. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
18. Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Jacobsson, Bengt. 1994. Recessive and emergent uses of modal auxiliaries in English. English Studies 2:166-182.
20. Jankowski, Bridget. 2004. A transatlantic perspective of variation and change in English deontic modality. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 23(2):85-113.
21. Krug, Manfred G. 1998. Gotta-the tenth central modal in English? Social, stylistic and regional variation in the British National Corpus as evidence of ongoing grammaticalization. In The major varieties of English. Papers from MAVEN 97, ed. Hans Lindquist, Staffan Klintborg, Magnus Levin, and Maria Estling, 177-191. Växjö: Acta Wexionensia.
22. Krug, Manfred G. 2000. Emerging English modals: A corpus-based study on grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
23. Kytö, Merja. 2004. The emergence of American English: Evidence from seventeenth-century records in New England. In Legacies of colonial English: Studies in transported dialects, ed. Raymond Hickey, 121-157. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
25. Lightfoot, David W. 1979. Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Laitinen, Mikko. 2003. Compiling an electronic corpus of the early 19th century pauper letters. In ICAME 2003 Abstracts, ed. Ceri Davis, 70. English Unit, University of Liverpool.
27. Landon, Fred. 1967. Western Ontario and the American frontier. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. [1941.]
28. Lower, J.A. 1970. A nation developing: A brief history of Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
29. Marckwardt, Albert H. 1958. American English. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Mencken, H.L. 1936. The American language. 4th ed. New York: Knopf. Cited in Visser 1969-1973:1478.
31. Meyer, Charles F. 2002. English corpus linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Molencki, Rafal. 2003. What must needs be explained about must needs. In English modality in context: Diachronic perspectives, ed. David Hart, 71-87. Bern: Lang.
33. Mufwene, Salikoko. 1996. The founder principle in creole genesis. Diachronica 13:83-134.
34. Myhill, John. 1995. Change and continuity in the functions of American English modals. Linguistics 33:157-211.
35. Nagle, Stephen J. 1989. Quasi-modals, marginal modals, and the diachrony of the English modal auxiliaries. Folia Linguistica Historica 9(2):93-104.
36. Nevalainen, Terttu, and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. 2003. Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England. Harlow: Pearson Education.
37. Palmer, Frank R. 1990. Modality and the English modals. 2nd ed. London: Longman.
38. Plank, Frans. 1984. The modals story retold. Studies in Language 8:305-364.
39. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
40. Rissanen, Matti, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen, Irma Taavitsainen, eds. 1992. History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
41. Smith, Michael. 1985. A geographical view of the province of Upper Canada, and promiscuous remarks on the government. Hartford: Hale and Hosner, CIHM 49860. [1813.]
42. Sweetser, Eve. 1988. Grammaticalization and semantic bleaching. In Berkeley Linguistics Society: General session and parasession on grammaticalization (Berkeley Linguistics Society 14), ed. Shelley Axmaker, Annie Jaisser, and Helen Singmaster, 389-405. Berkeley: University of California. Cited in Hopper and Traugott 1993:80.
43. Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2004. Have to, gotta, must: Grammaticalisation, variation and specialization in English deontic modality. In Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English, ed. Hans Lindquist and Christian Mair, 33-55. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
44. Talman, J.J. and R. Talman. 1977. The Canadas 1763-1812. In Literary history of Canada: Canadian literature in English. Vol. 1. ed. C.F Klinck, 97-105. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
45. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65:31-55.
46. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1999. Why must is not moot. Paper read at the 14th International Conference of Historical Linguistics, Vancouver.
47. Trudgill, Peter. 2004. New-dialect formation: The inevitability of colonial Englishes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
48. Trudgill, Peter. This volume.
49. Visser, Fredericus Th. 1969-1973. An historical syntax of the English language. Vol. 3(1-2). Leiden: Brill.
50. Warner, Anthony R. 1993. English auxiliaries: Structure and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51. WordSmith. 1998. Version 3.00.00, programmed by Mike Scott.