Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives

Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2023, Pages 1-378

  Fischer, Olga ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85190074221     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199267040.001.0001     Document Type: Book

References (512)

1. Adamson, S. 2000. ‘A lovely little example: word order options and category shift in the premodifying string’, pp. 39-66 of Pathways of Change. Grammaticalization in English, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
2. Ahlqvist, A. (ed.) 1982. Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
3. Aijmer, K. 1999. ‘Epistemic possibility in an English-Swedish contrastive perspective’, pp. 301-21 of Out of Corpora. Studies in Honour of Stig Johansan, edited by H. Hasselga°rd and S. Oksefjell. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
4. Aitchison, J. 1980. ‘Review of Principles of Diachronic Syntax by D. Lightfoot’, Linguistics, 18: 137-46.
5. Aitchison, J. 1987. ‘The language lifegame: prediction, explanation and linguistic change’, pp. 11-32 of Explanation and Linguistic Change, edited by W. Koopman, F. C. v. d. Leek, O. Fischer, and R. Eaton. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
6. Aitchison, J. 1994. '“Say, Say It Again Sam”: the treatment of repetition in linguistics’, Swiss Papers in English Language and Literature, 7: 15-34.
7. Aitchison, J. 2001. Language Change. Progress or Decay?, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Alexiadou, A. 1997. Adverb Placement: A Case Study in Antisymmetric Syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
9. Allen, C. 1975. ‘Old English modals’, pp. 91-100 of Papers in the History and Structure of English, edited by J. Grimshaw. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Department of Linguistics.
10. Allen, C. 1986. ‘Reconsidering the history of like’, Journal of Linguistics, 22: 375-409.
11. Allen, C. 1995. Case Marking and Reanalysis. Grammatical Relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Allen, C. 1997. ‘The origins of the “group genitive” in English’, Transactions of the Philological Society, 95: 111-31.
13. Allen, C. 2001. ‘The development of a new passive in English’, pp. 43-72 of Time over Matter. Diachronic Perspectives on Morphosyntax, edited by M. Butt and T. Holloway King. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
14. Allen, C. 2002. ‘Case and Middle English genitive noun phrases’, pp. 57-80 of Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, edited by D. W. Lightfoot. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Andersen, H. 1973. ‘Abductive and deductive change’, Language, 48: 765-94.
16. Anderson, J. 1993. ‘Parameters of syntactic change: A notional view’, pp. 1-42 of Historical Linguistics. Problems and Perspectives, edited by C. Jones. London:Longman.
17. Anshen, F. and Aronoff, M. 1996. ‘Morphology in real time’, Yearbook of Morphology, 1996: 9-12.
18. Anttila, A. 2002. ‘Variation and phonological theory’, pp. 206-43 of The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, edited by J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, and N. Schilling-Estes. Oxford: Blackwell.
19. Anttila, R. 1977. Analogy. The Hague: Mouton.
20. Anttila, R. 1989. Historical and Comparative Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
21. Anttila, R. 2003. ‘Analogy: The warp and woof of cognition’, pp. 425-40 of The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, edited by B. D. Joseph and R. D. Janda. Oxford:Blackwell.
22. Arbib, M. A. 2003. ‘The evolving mirror system: A neural basis for language readiness’, pp. 182-200 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Austin, J. L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Auwera, J. van de and Plungian, V. A. 1998. ‘Modality’s semantic map’, Linguistic Typology, 2: 79-124.
25. Auwera, J. van de, Schalley, E., and Nuyts, J. 2005. ‘Epistemic possibility in a Slavonic parallel corpus-A pilot study’, pp. 201-18 of Modality in Slavonic Languages. New Perspectives, edited by B. Hansen and P. Karlík. Munich: Otto Sagner.
26. Baayen, R. H. 2003. ‘Probabilistic approaches to morphology’, pp. 229-87 of Probabilistic Linguistics, edited by R. Bod, J. Hay, and S. Jannedy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
27. Baayen, R. H. and Schreuder, R. 1996. ‘Morphology: Why, how, when, when not, and why not’, Yearbook of Morphology, 1996: 1-7.
28. Barber, C. 1976. Early Modern English. London: André Deutsch.
29. Barron, J. 2001. ‘Perception and raising verbs: Synchronic and diachronic relationships’, pp. 73-103 of Time over Matter. Diachronic Perspectives on Morphosyntax, edited by M. Butt and T. Holloway King. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
30. Behe, M. J. 1996. Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. New York: Free Press.
31. Bennett, P. 1979. ‘Observations on the transparency principle’, Linguistics, 17:843-61.
32. Bennett, P. 1981. ‘Is syntactic change gradual?', Glossa, 15: 115-35.
33. Bennis, H. and Hoekstra, T. 1983. De Syntaxis van het Nederlands. Een Inleiding in de Regeer-en Bindtheorie. Dordrecht: Foris.
34. Benskin, M. and Laing, M. 1981. ‘Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English manuscripts’, pp. 55-106 of So Meny People Longages and Tonges. Philological Essays in Scots and Mediaeval English Presented to Angus Mcintosh, edited by M. Benskin and M. L. Samuels. Edinburgh: Middle English Dialect Project.
35. Bergen, B. K. 2004. ‘The psychological reality of phonaesthemes’, Language, 80:290-311.
36. Bergh, G. and Seppänen, A. 1994. ‘Subject extraction in English: The use of the that-complementizer’, pp. 131-43 of English Historical Linguistics 1992, edited by F. Fernández, M. Fuster, and J. J. Calvot. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
37. Berkum, J. v., Zwitserlood, P., Brown, C. M., andHagoort, P. 2003. ‘When and how do listeners relate a sentence to the wider discourse? Evidence from the N400 effect’, Cognitive Brain Research, 17: 701-18.
38. Bermoedez Otero, R. M., Denison, D., Hogg, R. M., and McCully, C. B. (eds) 2000. Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10 ICEHL. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
39. Beths, F. 1999. ‘The history of dare and the status of unidirectionality’, Linguistics, 37: 1069-110.
40. Biber, D. 1986. ‘Spoken and written textual dimensions in English’, Language, 62:384-411.
41. Biber, D. 1991. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Biber, D. and Finegan, E. (eds) 1994. Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Bickerton, D. 2003. ‘Symbolandstructure:Acomprehensive frameworkfor language evolution’, pp. 77-93 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press.
44. Bisang, W. 1998. ‘Grammaticalization and language contact, constructions and positions’, pp. 13-58 of The Limits of Grammaticalization, edited by A. Giacalone Ramat and P. J. Hopper. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
45. Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York: Holt.
46. Bock, H. 1931. ‘Studien zum präpositionalen InWnitiv und Akkusativ mit dem to-InWnitiv’, Anglia, 55: 114-249.
47. Bolinger, D. L. 1952. ‘Linear modiWcation’, PMLA, 67: 1117-44.
48. Bolinger, D. L. 1980. ‘Wanna and the gradience of auxiliaries’, pp. 292-99 of Wege zur Universalienforschung: Sprachwissen-schaftliche Beiträge zum 60. Geburtstag von Hansjakob Seiler, edited by G. Brettschneider and C. Lehmann. Tübingen:Gunter Narr.
49. Bolkestein, A.M. 1989. ‘Parameters in the expression of embedded predications in Latin’, pp. 3-35 of Subordination and Other Topics, edited by G. Calaboli. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
50. Boogaart, R. 2004. ‘Van modale werkwoorden naar modale constructies’, presentation at the ‘Coglingdag’, University of Utrecht (see also for a forthcoming English version http://webhost.ua.ac.be/tisp/viewabstract.php?id1/4820)
51. Bärjars, K., Vincent, N., and Chapman, C. 1996. ‘Paradigms, periphrases and pronominal inXection’, Yearbook of Morphology, 1996: 155-80.
52. Braine, M.D. S. 1988. ‘Modeling the acquisition of syntactic structure’, pp. 217-19 of Categories and Processes in Language Acquisition Theory, edited by Y. Levy, I. M. Schlesinger, andM. D. S. Braine Erlbaum, XX.
53. Bresnan, J. and Aissen, J. 2002. ‘Optimality and functionality: Objections and refutations’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 20: 81-95.
54. Brinton, L. J. 1988. The Development of English Aspectual Systems. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
55. Brinton, L. J. 1996. Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
56. Brinton, L. J. 2002. ‘Grammaticalization versus lexicalization reconsidered: On the “late” use of temporal adverbs’, pp. 86-97 of English Historical Syntax and Morphology. Selected papers from the 11th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, edited by T. Fanego, M.-J. López-Couso, and J. Pérez-Guerra. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
57. Brinton, L. J., and Traugott, E. C. 2005. Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
58. Briscoe, T. 2003. ‘Grammatical assimilation’, pp. 295-316 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59. Brown, G. 1982. ‘The spoken language’, pp. 75-87 of Linguistics and the Teacher, edited by R. Carter. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
60. Burling, R. 2000. ‘Comprehension, production and conventionalisation in the origins of language’, pp. 27-39 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61. Burnley, D. 1992. ‘Lexis and semantics’, pp. 409-99 of The Cambridge History of the English Language Vol II, edited by N. Blake. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
62. Burridge, K. 1998. ‘From modal auxiliary to lexical verb: The curious case of Pennsylvania German wotte’, pp. 19-33 of Historical Linguistics 1995. Volume 2:Germanic Linguistics, edited by R. M. Hogg and L. van Bergen. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
63. Bybee, J. L. 1988. ‘The diachronic dimension in explanation’, pp. 350-79 of Explaining Language Universals, edited by John A. Hawkins. Oxford: Blackwell.
64. Bybee, J. L. 2001. Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65. Bybee, J. L. 2002. ‘Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure’, pp. 109-34 of The Evolution of Language out of Pre-Language, edited by T. Givón and B. F. Malle. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
66. Bybee, J. L. 2003. ‘Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency’, pp. 602-23 of The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, edited by B. D. Joseph and R. D. Janda. Oxford: Blackwell.
67. Bybee, J. L., and Hopper, P. J. (eds) 2001. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
68. Bybee, J. L., and Pagliuca, W. 1985. ‘Cross-linguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning’, pp. 59-83 of Historical Semantics, Historical Word Formation, edited by J. Fisiak. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
69. Bybee, J. L., and Pagliuca, W., and Perkins, R. D. 1991. ‘Back to the future’, pp. 15-58 of Approaches to Grammaticalization, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
70. Bybee, J. L., Perkins, R. D., and Pagliuca, W. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
71. Bybee, J. L., and Scheibman, J. 1999. ‘The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English’, Linguistics, 37: 575-96.
72. Bybee, J. L., and Slobin, D. I. 1982. ‘Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense’, Language, 58: 265-89.
73. Campbell, A. 1959. Old English Grammer. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
74. Campbell, L. 2001a. ‘What is wrong with grammaticalization?', Language Sciences, 23: 113-61.
75. Campbell, L. (ed.) 2001b. Grammaticalization. A Critical Assessment. Special issue of Language Sciences 23: ii-iii.
76. Carstairs-McCarthy, A. 1999. The Origins of Complex Language: An Inquiry into the Evolutionary Beginnings of Sentences, Syllables and Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
77. Carstairs-McCarthy, A. 2000. ‘The distinction between sentences and noun phrases: An impediment to language evolution?' pp. 248-63 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
78. Chafe, W. L. 1985. ‘Linguistic diVerences produced by diVerences between speaking and writing’, pp. 105-23 of Literacy, Language, and Learning, edited by D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, and A. Hildyard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
79. Chambers, J. K. 2002. ‘Patterns of variation including change’, pp. 349-72 of The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, edited by J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, and N. Schilling-Estes. Oxford: Blackwell.
80. Chapman, D. and Skousen, R. 2005. ‘Analogical modeling and morphological change: The case of the adjectival negative preWx in English’, English Language and Linguistics, 9: 333-57.
81. Cheshire, J. and Stein, D. (eds) 1997. Taming the Vernacular: From Dialect to Written Standard Language. Harlow: Longman.
82. Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.
83. Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
84. Chomsky, N. 1975. Reflections on Language. New York: Pantheon.
85. Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
86. Chomsky, N. 1982. The Generative Enterprise: A Discussion with Riny Huybregts and Henk Van Riemsdijk. Dordrecht: Foris.
87. Chomsky, N. 1988. Language and Problems of Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
88. Chomsky, N. 1991. ‘Linguistics and cognitive science: Problems and mysteries’, pp. 26-55 of The Chomskyan Turn: Generative Linguistics, Philosophy, Mathematics and Psychology, edited by A. Kasher. Oxford: Blackwell.
89. Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
90. Chomsky, N. 2002. On Nature and Language (ed. by A. Belletti and L. Rizzi). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
91. Christiansen, M. H. and Kirby, S. (eds) 2003. Language Evolution. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
92. Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
93. Clark, E. V. 2003. First Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
94. Clark, R. and Roberts, I. G. 1993. ‘A computational model of language learnability and language change’, Linguistic Inquiry, 24: 299-345.
95. Coates, R. 1987. ‘Pragmatic sources of analogical reformation’, Journal of Linguistics, 23: 319-40.
96. Coetsem, F. v. 2000. A General and Unified Theory of the Transmission Process in Language Contact. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
97. Coleman, R. 1989. ‘The rise and fall of absolute constructions: A Latin case history’, pp. 353-74 of Subordination and Other Topics, edited by G. Calboli. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
98. Conradie, C. J. 1987. ‘Semantic change in modal auxiliaries as a result of speech act embedding’, pp. 171-80 of Historical Development of Auxiliaries, edited by M. Harris and P. Ramat. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
99. Corballis, M. C. 2003. ‘From hand to mouth: The gestural origins of language, pp. 201-18 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
100. Crain, S. 1991. ‘Language acquisition in the absence of experience’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14: 597-612.
101. Croft, W. 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. The Cognitive Organization of Information. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
102. Croft, W. 2000. Explaining Language Change. An Evolutionary Approach. London:Longman.
103. Croft, W., and Cruse, A. 2004. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
104. Crystal, D. 1987. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
105. Crystal, D. 1997. Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 4th edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
106. Dąbrowska, E. 2004. Language, Mind and Brain: Some Psychological and Neurological Constraints on Theories of Grammar. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
107. Danchev, A. and Kytä, M. 1994. ‘The construction be going to þ inWnitive in Early Modern English’, pp. 59-77 of Studies in Early Modern English, edited by D. Kastovsky. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
108. Dawkins, R. 1986. The Blind Watchmaker. London: Longman (Harmondsworth:Penguin 1988).
109. Deacon, T. W. 1997. The Symbolic Species. The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain. New York: Norton.
110. Deacon, T. W. 2003. ‘Universal grammar and semiotic constraints’, pp. 111-39 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
111. Demske, U. 2001. Merkmale und Relationen. Diachrone Studien zur Nominalphrase des Deutschen. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
112. Denison, D. 1985. ‘The origins of periphrastic “do”: Ellega°rd and Visser reconsidered’, pp. 45-60 of Papers from the Fourth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, edited by R. Eaton, O. Fischer, F. van der Leek, and W. F. Koopman. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
113. Denison, D. 1990. ‘Auxiliary þ impersonal in Old English’, Folia Linguistica Historica, 9: 139-66.
114. Denison, D. 1993. English Historical Syntax. London: Longman.
115. Derwing, B. L. 1977. ‘Is the child really a “little linguist”?' pp. 78-84 of Language Learning and Thought, edited by J. MacNamara. New York: Academic Press.
116. Dessalles, J.-L. 2000. ‘Language and hominid politics’, pp. 62-80 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
117. Detges, U. 2004. ‘How cognitive is grammaticalization? The history of the Catalan perfet perifra`stic’, pp. 211-27 of Up and Down the cline-The Nature of Grammaticalization, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, and H. Perridon. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
118. Deutscher, G. 2000. Syntactic Change in Akkadian. The Evolution of Sentential Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
119. Deutscher, G. 2001. ‘The rise and fall of a rogue relative construction’, Studies in Language, 25: 405-22.
120. Deutscher, G. 2002. ‘On the misuse of the notion of “Abduction” in Linguistics’, Journal of Linguistics, 38: 469-85.
121. Deutscher, G. 2005. The Unfolding of Language. London: Heinemann.
122. Diessel, H. and Tomasello, M. 2001. ‘The acquisition of Wnite complement clauses in English: a corpus-based analysis’, Cognitive Linguistics, 12: 97-141.
123. Dik, S. C. 1997. The Theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The structure of the clause 2nd, rev edn., edited by K. Hengeveld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
124. Dodd, D. and Fogel, A. 1991. ‘Nonnativist alternatives to the negative evidence hypothesis’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14: 617-18.
125. Donner, M. 1986. ‘The gerund in Middle English’, English Studies, 67: 394-400.
126. Dorian, N. C. 1993. ‘Internally and externally motivated change in language contact settings: Doubts about dichotomy’, pp. 131-55 of Historical Linguistics, edited by C. Jones. London: Longman.
127. Dresher, E. and Hornstein, N. 1979. ‘Trace theory and NP movement rules’, Linguistic Inquiry, 10: 65-80.
128. DuBois, J. 1985. ‘Competing motivations’, pp. 343-65 of Iconicity in Syntax, edited by J. Haiman. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
129. Duffley, P. J. 1992. The English Infinitive. London: Longman.
130. Dunbar, R. I. M., Knight, C., and Power, C. (eds) 1999. The Evolution of Culture. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
131. Edhard, A. 2004. ‘Semantic modality map for Sranan Tongo’, MA thesis, English Department, Faculty of Humanities. University of Amsterdam.
132. Eldredge, N. and Gould, S. J. 1972. ‘Punctuated equilibria: An alternative to phyletic gradualism’, pp. 82-115 of Models of Paleobiology, edited by T. J. M. Schopf. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper.
133. Ellegärd, A. 1953. The Auxiliary Do. The Establishment and Regulation of Its Use in English. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
134. Erman, B. D. 1986. ‘Some pragmatic expressions in English conversation’, pp. 131-47 of English in Speech and Writing. A Symposium, edited by G. Tottie and I. Bäcklund. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
135. Evers-Vermeul, J. 2005. The Development of Dutch Connectives. Change and Acquisition as Windows on Form-Function Relations. Utrecht: LOT.
136. Faarlund, J. T. 2004. The Syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
137. Feilke, H., Kappest, K.-P., and Knobloch, C. (eds) 2001. Grammatikalisierung, Spracherwerb und Schriftlichkeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
138. Finegan, E. 1995. ‘Subjectivity and subjectivisation: An introduction’, pp. 1-15 of Subjectivity and Subjectivisation, edited by D. Stein and S. Wright. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
139. Fischer, A. 1994. '“Summer Is Icumen in”: The seasons of the year in Middle English and Early Modern English’, pp. 79-95 of Studies in Early Modern English, edited by D. Kastovsky. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
140. Fischer, A. 1997. '“With This Ring I Thee Wed”: The verbs to wed and to marry in the history of English’, pp. 467-81 of Language History and Linguistic Modelling, edited by R. Hickey and S. Puppel. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
141. Fischer, O. 1979. ‘A comparative study of philosophical terms in the Alfredian and Chaucerian Boethius’, Neophilologus, 63: 622-39.
142. Fischer, O. 1988. ‘The rise of the for NP to V construction: An explanation’, pp. 67-88 of An Historic Tongue. Studies in English Linguistics in Memory of Barbara Strang, edited by G. Nixon and J. Honey. London: Routledge.
143. Fischer, O. 1989. ‘The origin and spread of the accusative and inWnitive construction in English’, Folia Linguistica Historica, 8: 143-217.
144. Fischer, O. 1991. ‘The rise of the passive inWnitive in English’, pp. 141-88 of Historical English Syntax, edited by D. Kastovsky. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
145. Fischer, O. 1992a. ‘Syntactic change and borrowing: The case of the accusative and inWnitive construction in English’, pp. 16-88 of Internal and External Factors in Syntactic Change, edited byM. Gerritsen and D. Stein. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
146. Fischer, O. 1992b. ‘Syntax’, pp. 207-408 of The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. II, edited by N. Blake. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
147. Fischer, O. 1994a. ‘The development of quasi-auxiliaries in English and changes in word order’, Neophilologus, 78: 137-64.
148. Fischer, O. 1994b. ‘The fortunes of the Latin-type accusative and inWnitive construction in Dutch and English compared’, pp. 91-133 of Language Change and Language Structure. Old Germanic Languages in a Comparative Perspective, edited by T. Swan, E. Młrck, and O. Jansen Westvik. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
149. Fischer, O. 1995. ‘The distinction between to and bare inWnitival complements in Late Middle English’, Diachronica, 12: 1-30.
150. Fischer, O. 1996a. ‘The status of to in Old English to-inWnitives: A reply to Kageyama’, Lingua, 99: 107-33.
151. Fischer, O. 1996b. ‘Verbal complementation in Early ME: how do the inWnitives Wt in?' pp. 247-70 of English Historical Linguistics 1994, edited by D. Britton. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
152. Fischer, O. 1997. ‘The grammaticalisation of inWnitival to in English compared with German and Dutch’, pp. 265-80 of Language History and Linguistic Modelling, edited by R. Hickey and S. Puppel. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
153. Fischer, O. 1998. ‘On negative raising in the history of English’, pp. 55-100 of Negation in the History of English, edited by I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade, G. Tottie, and W. van der Wurff. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
154. Fischer, O. 2000a. ‘Grammaticalisation: Unidirectional, non-reversible? The case of to before the inWnitive in English’, pp. 149-69 of Pathways of Change, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
155. Fischer, O. 2000b. ‘The Position of the Adjective in Old English’, pp. 153-81 of Generative Theory and Corpus Studies, edited by R. M. Bermúdez Otero, D. Denison, R. M. Hogg, and C. B. McCully. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
156. Fischer, O. 2004a. ‘Developments in the category adjective from Old to Middle English’, Studies in Medieval English Language and Literature, 19: 1-36.
157. Fischer, O. 2004b. ‘Evidence for iconicity in language’, Logos and Language. Journal of general linguistics and language theory, 5.i: 1-19.
158. Fischer, O. 2004c. ‘Review of Tania Kuteva, Auxiliation: An Enquiry into the Nature of Grammaticalization’, Language, 80: 320-4.
159. Fischer, O. 2006. ‘On the position of adjectives in Middle English’, English Language and Linguistics, 10: 253-88.
160. Fischer, O., Kemenade, A. van, Koopman, W. and Wurff, W. van der 2000a. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
161. Fischer, O. and Leek, F. C. van der 1981. ‘Optional vs. radical reanalysis:Mechanisms of syntactic change (Review of Lightfoot 1979)', Lingua, 55:301-50.
162. Fischer, O. and Leek, F. C. van der 1983. ‘The demise of the Old English impersonal construction’, Journal of Linguistics, 19: 337-68.
163. Fischer, O. and Leek, F. C. van der 1987. ‘A “case” for the Old English impersonal’, pp. 79-120 of Explanation and Linguistic Change, edited by W. Koopman, R. Eaton, O. Fischer, and F. van der Leek. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
164. Fischer, O. and Nänny, M. 1999. ‘Introduction. Iconicity as a creative force in language use’, pp. i-xxxvi of Form Miming Meaning, edited by M. Nänny and O. Fischer, Amsterdam: Benjamins.
165. Fischer, O. and Nänny, M. 2001. The Motivated Sign. Iconicity in Language and Literature 2. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
166. Fischer, O., Norde, M., and Perridon, H. (eds) 2004. Up and Down the Cline-The Nature of Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
167. Fischer, O. and Rosenbach, A. 2000. ‘Introduction’, pp. 1-37 of Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
168. Fischer, O., Rosenbach, A., and Stein, D. 2000b. Pathways of Change. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
169. Fleischman, S. 1982. The Future in Thought and Language: Diachronic Evidence from Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
170. Fodor, F. A. 1985. ‘Precis of the modularity of mind’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8: 1-42.
171. Fónagy, I. 2000. Languages within Language. An Evolutive Approach. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
172. Foolen, A. 2002. ‘Frederick J. Newmeyer’s Language Form and Language Function’, Functions of Language, 9: 87-103.
173. Funke, O. 1922. ‘Die Fügung ginnen mit dem InWnitiv im Mittelenglischen’, Englische Studien, 56: 1-27.
174. Geerts, G., Haeseryn, W., Rooij, J. D. and Toorn, M. C. van de (eds) 1984. Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen: Wolters-NoordhoV.
175. Geerts, G., 1993. The Rise of Functional Categories. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
176. Gelderen, E. van 2000. A History of English Reflexive Pronouns. Person, Self, and Interpretability. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
177. Gelderen, E. van 2004. Grammaticalization as Economy. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
178. Gentner, D. 2003. ‘Why we’re so smart’, pp. 195-235 of Language in Mind. Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, edited by D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
179. Gentner, D. Holyoak, K. J and Kokinov, B. K. (eds) 2001. The Analogical Mind. Perspectives from Cognitive Science. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
180. Gerritson, M. 1987. Syntaktische Verandering in Kontrolezinnen: Een Sociolinguïstische Studie can het Brugs can de 13e tot de 17e Eeuw. Dordrecht: ICG Printing.
181. Gerritson, M. and Stein, D. (eds) 1992a. Internal and External Factors in Syntactic Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
182. Gerritson, M. 1992b. ‘Introduction: On “internal” and “external” in syntactic change’, pp. 1-15 of Internal and External Factors in Syntactic Change, edited by M. Gerritsen and D. Stein (eds), 1-15.
183. Giacalone Ramat, A. and Hopper, P. J. (eds) 1998. The Limits of Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
184. Givän, T. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.
185. Givän, T. 1993. English Grammar. A Function-Based Introduction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
186. Givän, T. 1995a. Functionalism and Grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
187. Givän, T. 1995b. ‘Isomorphism in the grammatical code: cognitive and biological considerations’, pp. 47-76 of Iconicity in Language, edited by R. Simone. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
188. Givän, T. 2002. ‘The visual information processing system as an evolutionary precursor of human language’, pp. 3-50 of The Evolution of Language out of Pre-Language, edited by T. Givón and B. F. Malle. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
189. Goldberg, A. E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
190. Goldberg, A. E. Casenhiser, D. M., and Sthuraman, N. 2004. ‘Learning argument structure generalizations’, Cognitive Linguistics, 15: 289-316.
191. Goldberg, E. 2001. The Executive Brain. Frontal Lobes and the Civilized Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
192. Goossens, L. 1987. ‘The auxiliarization of the English modals: A functional grammar view’, pp. 111-43 of Historical Development of Auxiliaries, edited by M. Harris and P. Ramat. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
193. Gorrell, J. H. 1895. ‘Indirect discourse in Anglo-Saxon’, PMLA, 10: 342-485.
194. Greenbaum, S. 1969. Studies in English Adverbial Usage. London: Longman.
195. Grice, H. P. 1975, ‘Logic and conversation’, pp. 41-58 of Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3, edited by P. Cole and J. Morgan. New York: Academic Press.
196. Guasti, M. T. 2002. Language Acquisition. The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
197. Haiman, J. 1985 (ed.). Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
198. Haiman, J. 1993. ‘Life, the universe, and human language (a brief synopsis)', Language Sciences, 15: 293-322.
199. Haiman, J. 1994. ‘Ritualization and the development of language’, pp. 3-28 of Perspectives on Grammaticalization, edited by W. Pagliuca. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
200. Haiman, J. 1998. Talk is Cheap. Sarcasm, Alienation, and the Evolution of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
201. Haiman, J. 1999. ‘Action, speech, and grammar: The sublimation trajectory’, pp. 37-57 of Form Miming Meaning, edited by M. Nänny and O. Fischer. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
202. Haiman, J. and Thompson, S. A. (eds) 1988. Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
203. Hale, M. 1998. ‘Diachronic syntax’, Syntax, 1: 1-14.
204. Halliday, M. A. K. andHassan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
205. Hampe, B. 2005. ‘On the role of iconic motivation in conceptual metaphor: Has metaphor theory come full circle?' pp. 39-66 of Inside-out and Outside-in, edited by C. Maeder, W. J. Herlofsky, and O. Fischer. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
206. Hampe, B., and Schänefeld, D. 2003. ‘Creative syntax: Iconic principles within the symbolic’, pp. 243-61 of From Sign to Signing, edited by W. G. Mü ller and O. Fischer. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
207. Hanssen, F. 1910. Spanische Grammatik auf historischer Grundlage. Halle a. S.: Max Niemeyer.
208. Harris, A. C. and Campbell, L. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
209. Harris, M. and Ramat, P. (eds) 1987. Historical Development of Auxiliaries. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
210. Haspelmath, M. 1989. ‘From purposive to inWnitive-A universal path of grammaticization’, Folia Linguistica Historica, 10: 287-310.
211. Haspelmath, M. 1992. ‘Review of Traugott and Heine 1991', Lingua, 88: 340-5.
212. Haspelmath, M. 1998. ‘The semantic development of old presents: New futures and subjunctives without grammaticalization’, Diachronica, 15: 29-62.
213. Haspelmath, M. 1999. ‘Why is grammaticalization irreversible?' Linguistics, 37: 1043-68.
214. Haspelmath, M. 2000. ‘Why can’t we talk to each other?' Lingua, 110: 235-55.
215. Haspelmath, M. 2003. ‘Creating economical morphosyntactic patterns in language change’. Paper given for the Workshop ‘Explaining Linguistic Universals: Historical Convergence and Universal Grammar’. UC Berkeley.
216. Haspelmath, M. 2004. ‘Does linguistic explanation presuppose linguistic description?' Studies in Language, 28: 554-79.
217. Haumann, D. 1997. The Syntax of Subordination. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
218. Hauser, M. D. and Fitch, W. T. 2003. ‘What are the uniquely human components of the language faculty?' pp. 158-81 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
219. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., and Fitch, W. T. 2002. ‘The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?', Science, 298: 1569-79.
220. Haussman, R. B. 1974. ‘The origin and development of Modern English periphrastic do’, pp. 159-89 of Historical Linguistics, edited by J. M. Anderson and C. Jones. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing.
221. Hawkins, J. A. 2004. Eficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
222. Heine, B. 1994. ‘Grammaticalization as an explanatory parameter’, pp. 255-88 of Perspectives on Grammaticalization, edited by W. Pagliuca. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
223. Heine, B. 2003. ‘Grammaticalization’, pp. 575-601 of The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, edited by B. D. Joseph and R. D. Janda. Oxford: Blackwell.
224. Heine, B., and Kuteva, T. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
225. Heine, B., and Reh, M. 1984. Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
226. Heine, B., Claudi, U. and Hännemeyer, F. 1991a. ‘From cognition to grammar-Evidence from African languages’, pp. 149-87 of Approaches to Grammaticalization Vol. 1, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
227. Heine, B., Claudi, U. and Hännemeyer, F. 1991b. Grammaticalization. A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
228. Himmelmann, N. P. 2004. ‘Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Opposite or orthogonal?', pp. 21-42 of What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look from its Fringes and its Components, edited by W. Bisang, N. P. Himmelmann, and B. Wiemer. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
229. Hinton, L., Nichols, J. and Ohala, J. (eds) 1994. Sound Symbolism. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
230. Hirvonen, P. 2005. ‘Phonological and morphological aspects of the attrition of Finnish’, Talk given at the 2nd International Conference on First Language Attrition, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, August.
231. Hock, H. H. 1986. Principles of Historical Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
232. Hofstadter, D. 1995. Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies. Computer Models of the Fundamental Mechanisms of Thought. New York: Basic Books.
233. Holyoak, K. J. and Thagard, P. 1995. Mental Leaps. Analogy in Creative Thought. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
234. Hook, P. E. 1991. ‘The emergence of perfective aspect in Indo-Aryan languages’, pp. 59-89 of Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 2, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
235. Hopper, P. J. 1987. ‘Emergent grammar’, Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13: 139-57.
236. Hopper, P. J. 1991. ‘On some principles of grammaticalization’, pp. 17-35 of Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
237. Hopper, P. J. 1998. ‘Emergent grammar (revised version)', pp. 155-75 of The Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, edited by M. Tomasello. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
238. Hopper, P. J. and Thompson, S. A. 1980. ‘Transitivity in grammar and discourse’, Language, 56: 251-99.
239. Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C. 2003 [1993]. Grammaticalization. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
240. Horst, J. M. van de 1981. Kleine Middelnederlandse Syntoxis. Amsterdam: Huis aan de drie grachten.
241. Horst, J. M. van de 1986. Historische Grammatica en Taaltekens, PhD thesis, Faculty of Arts, University of Amsterdam.
242. Horst, J. M. van de (forthcoming). Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse Syntaxis.
243. Huddleston, R. 1971. The Sentence in Written English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
244. Hulk, A. and Kemenade, A. van 1995. ‘Verb-second, pro-drop, functional projections and language change’, pp. 227-56 of Clause Structure and Language Change, edited by A. Battye and I. Roberts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
245. Hurford, J. R. 2000a. ‘Introduction: The emergence of syntax’, pp. 219-30 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
246. Hurford, J. R. 2000b. ‘Social transmission favours linguistic generalisation’, pp. 324-52 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
247. Hurford, J. R. 2003. ‘The language mosaic and its evolution’, pp. 38-57 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
248. Hurford, J. R., Studdert-Kennedy, M., and Knight, C. (eds) 1998. Approaches to the Evolution of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
249. Ijbema, A. 2002. Grammaticalization and Infinitival Complements in Dutch, Leiden:University of Leiden (LOT Series).
250. Itkonen, E. 1994. ‘Iconicity, analogy and universal grammar’, Journal of Pragmatics, 22: 37-53.
251. Itkonen, E. 2005. Analogy as Structure and Process. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
252. Itkonen, E., and Haukioja, J. 1997. ‘A rehabilitation of analogy in syntax (and elsewhere)', pp. 131-77 of Metalinguistik im Wandel. Die ‘kognitive Wende’ in Wissenschaftstheorie und Linguistik, edited by A. Kertész. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
253. Jack, G. B. 1988. ‘The origins of the English gerund’, NOWELE, 12: 15-75.
254. Jackendoff, R. 2002. Foundations of Language. Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
255. Janda, R. D. 1980. ‘On the decline of declensional systems: The overall loss of OE nominal case inXections and the MEreanalysis of - es as his’, pp. 243-52 of Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, edited by E.C. Traugott, R.Labrum, S. Shepherd, andP. Kiparsky. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
256. Janda, R. D. 2001. ‘Beyond “pathways” and “unidirectionality”: On the discontinuity of language transmission and the counterability of grammaticalization’, Language Sciences, 23: 265-340.
257. Janda, R. D., and Joseph, B. D. 2003. ‘On language, change, and language change-or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics’, pp. 3-180 of The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, edited by B. D. Joseph and R. D. Janda. Oxford:Blackwell.
258. Jespersen, O. 1909-1949. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Vols.I-VII. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
259. Johnson, P. E. 2000. The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism. Downer’s Grove III: InterVarsity Press.
260. Joseph, B. D. 2001. ‘Is there such a thing as “grammaticalization”?', Language Sciences, 23: 163-86.
261. Joseph, B. D. 2003. ‘Some thoughts on optimality, optimization, and analogy: Back to basics (and beyond)'. Lecture given at the Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam, May 26.
262. Joseph, B. D. 2004. ‘Rescuing traditional historical linguistics from grammaticalization theory’, pp. 45-71 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, and H. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
263. Joseph, B. D. and Janda R. D. (eds) 2003. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
264. Jucker, A. H. (ed.) 1995. Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
265. Kallen, J. L. 1994. ‘English in Ireland’, in The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. V, English in Britain and Overseas. Origins and Development, edited by R. BurchWeld. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
266. Kalmár, I. 1985. ‘Are there really no primitive languages?' pp. 148-66 of Literacy, Language, and Learning, edited by D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, and A. Hildyard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
267. Katz, J. J. and Fodor, J. 1963. ‘The structure of semantic theory’, Language, 39:170-210.
268. Kayne, R. S. 1981. ‘On certain diVerences between French and English’, Linguistic Inquiry, 12: 349-71.
269. Kayne, R. S. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
270. Keller, R. 1994. On Language Change. The Invisible Hand in Language. London:Routledge (translated from the German by Brigitte Nerlich).
271. Keller, R. 1995. ‘The epistemic weil’, pp. 16-30 of Subjectivity and Subjectivisation, edited by D. Stein and S. Wright. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
272. Keller, R. 1998. A Theory of Linguistic Signs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
273. Kemenade, A. van 1985. ‘Old English inWnitival complements and West-Germanic “V”-raising’, pp. 73-84 of Papers from the Fourth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, edited by R. Eaton, O. Fischer, F. van der Leek, and W. F. Koopman. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
274. Kemenade, A. van 1987. Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in the History of English. Dordrecht: ICG Printing.
275. Kemenade, A. van 1992. ‘Structural factors in the history of English modals’, pp. 287-309 of History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics, edited by M. Rissanen. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
276. Kemenade, A. van 1998. ‘Review of Allen 1995', Journal of Linguistics, 34: 227-32.
277. Kemenade, A. van 2000. ‘Jespersen’s cycle revisited: formal properties of grammaticalization’, pp. 51-74 of Diachronic Syntax, edited by S. Pintzuk, G. Tsoulas, and A. Warner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
278. Kemenade, A. van and Vincent, N. (eds) 1997. Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
279. Kern, J.H. 1912. ‘Demet het participium praeteriti omschreven werkwoordsvormen in ‘t Nederlands’, Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, new series 12: 1-318.
280. Kerstens, J., Ruys, E., and Zwarts, J. 1996-2001 Lexicon of Linguistics (online), http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon.
281. Kiparsky, P. 1974. ‘Remarks on analogical change’, pp. 257-75 of Historical Linguistics, edited by J. M. Anderson and C. Jones. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing.
282. Kiparsky, P. (in press). ‘Grammaticalization as optimization’, Language Universals and Language Change, edited by J. Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (available online at http://www.stanford.edu/_kiparsky/Papers/yalegrammaticalization.pdf).
283. Kirby, C. 2000. ‘Syntax without natural selection: How compositionality emerges from vocabulary in a population of learners’, pp. 303-23 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
284. Kirby, S. and Christiansen, M. H. 2003. ‘From language learning to language evolution’, pp. 272-94 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
285. Klima, E. 1965. Studies in Diachronic Transformational Syntax. PhD thesis, Harvard University.
286. Klooster, W. G. 2000. Geen. Over Verplaatsing en Focus [’No(ne). On Movement and Focus’]. Amsterdam: Vossiuspers AUP.
287. Knight, C. 2000. ‘Play as precursor of phonology and syntax’, pp. 99-119 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
288. Knight, C., Studdert-Kennedy, M. and Hurford, J. R. (eds) 2000. The Evolutionary Emergence of Language. Social Function and the Origins of Linguistic Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
289. Känig, E. and Siemund, P. 2000. ‘The development of complex reXexives and intensiWers in English’, Diachronica, 17: 39-84.
290. Koerner, E. F.K. 1999. Linguistic Historiography.Projects&Prospects. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
291. Koopman, W. F. 1998. ‘Inversion after single and multiple topics in Old English’, pp. 135-50 of Advances in English Historical Linguistics, edited by J. Fisiak and M. Krygier. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
292. Kroch, A. S. 1989a. ‘Function and grammar in the history of English: Periphrastic DO’, pp. 133-72 of Language Change and Variation, edited by R. W. Fasold and D. SchiVrin. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
293. Kroch, A. S. 1989b. ‘ReXexes of grammar in patterns of language change’, Journal of Language Variation and Change, 1: 199-244.
294. Kroch, A. S., and Taylor, A. 1997. ‘Verb movement in Old and Middle English: Dialect variation and language contact’, pp. 297-325 of Parameters of Morphosyntactic change, edited by A. van Kemenade and N. Vincent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
295. Krug, M. G. 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
296. Krug, M. G. 2001. ‘Frequency, iconicity, categorization: Evidence from emerging modals’, pp. 309-35 of Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, edited by J. Bybee and P. J. Hopper. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
297. Krug, M. G. 2003. ‘Frequency as a determinant in grammatical variation and change’, pp. 7-67 of Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, edited by G. Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
298. Kuryłowicz, J. 1964. The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg:Carl Winter.
299. Kuteva, T. 2001. Auxiliation. An Enquiry into the Nature of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
300. Labov, W. 1972a. Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
301. Labov, W. 1972b. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
302. Labov, W. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change. Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
303. Labov, W. 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change. Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
304. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
305. Lakoff, G., and Turner, M. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
306. Lambrecht, K. 1988. ‘Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French’, pp. 135-79 of Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, edited by J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
307. Landsberg, M. E. (ed.) 1995. Syntactic Iconicity and Linguistic Freezes. The Human Dimension. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
308. Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
309. Langacker, R. W. 1995. ‘Raising and transparency’, Language, 71: 1-62.
310. Lass, R. 1980. On Explaining Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
311. Lass, R. 1990. ‘How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution’, Journal of Linguistics, 26: 79-102.
312. Lass, R. 1997. Historical Linguistics and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
313. Lass, R. 2000b. ‘Remarks on (uni)directionality’, pp. 207-27 in Pathways of Change, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
314. Lehmann, C. 1982[1995]. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: Lincom Europa (Wrst published in the series ‘Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projektes’ 48, University of Cologne).
315. Lehmann, C. 1985. ‘Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change’, Lingua e Stile, 20: 303-18.
316. Lehmann, C. 1988. ‘Towards a typology of clause linkage’, pp. 181-225 of Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, edited by J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
317. Lehmann, C. 1989a. ‘Latin subordination in typological perspective’, pp. 153-79 of Subordination and Other Topics, edited by G. Calboli. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
318. Lehmann, C. 1989b. ‘Grammatikalisierung und Lexikalisierung’, Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, 42: 11-19.
319. Lehmann, W. P. 1992. Historical Linguistics, 3rd edn. London: Routledge.
320. Lenker, U. 2000b. ‘Soþlice and Witodlice Discourse markers in Old English’, pp. 229-49 in Pathways of Change, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
321. Lieberman, P. 1991. Uniquely Human. The Evolution of Speech, Thought, and Selfless Behavior. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press.
322. Lightfoot, D.W. 1974. ‘The diachronic analysis of English modals’, pp. 219-49 of Historical Linguistics, edited by J. M. Anderson and C. Jones. Amsterdam:North Holland Publishing.
323. Lightfoot, D.W. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
324. Lightfoot, D.W. 1981. ‘The history of noun phrase movement’, pp. 86-119 of The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, edited by C. L. Baker and J. McCarthy. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
325. Lightfoot, D.W. 1982. The Language Lottery. Towards a Biology of Grammar. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
326. Lightfoot, D.W. 1991. How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change. Cambridge:MIT Press.
327. Lightfoot, D.W. 1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, Change, and Evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
328. Lightfoot, D.W. 2000. ‘The spandrels of the linguistic genotype’, pp. 231-47 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
329. Lightfoot, D.W. 2002a. ‘Introduction’, pp. 1-19 of Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, edited by D. W. Lightfoot. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
330. Lightfoot, D.W. (ed.) 2002b. Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
331. Lightfoot, D.W. 2003. ‘Grammaticalization: Cause or effect?' pp. 99-123 of Motives for Language Change, edited by R. Hickey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
332. Lightfoot, D.W. 2004. ‘Abstraction and performance. a commentary on Fischer’, Studies in Language, 28: 741-4.
333. Lłken, B. 1997. ‘Expressing possibility in English and Norwegian’, ICAME Journal, 21: 43-59.
334. Lombardo Vallauri, E. 2004. ‘The relation between mind and language: The innateness hypothesis and the poverty of the stimulus’, The Linguistic Review, 21: 345-87.
335. Los, B. 2005. The Rise of the to-Infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
336. Lyons, J. 1970. Chomsky. London: Fontana/Collins.
337. Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. Vol. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
338. Maeder, C., Herlofsky, W. J., and Fischer, O. (eds) 2005. Inside-out and Outsidein. Iconicity in Language and Literature 4. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
339. Malkiel, Y. 1993. Etymology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
340. Marchand, H. 1969. Categories and Types of Modern English Word Formation. München: Beck.
341. Matthews, P. 2003. ‘On change in “E-language”', pp. 7-17 of Motives for Language Change, edited by R. Hickey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
342. Matthiessen, C. and Thompson, S. A. 1988. ‘The structure of discourse and “Subordination”', pp. 275-329 of Clause Cambining in Grammar and Discourse, edited by J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
343. McCawley, N. 1976. ‘From OE/ME “impersonal” to “personal” constructions:What is a “subjectless” S?', pp. 129-204 of Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax, edited by S. B. Steever et al. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
344. McMahon, A. 1994. Understanding Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
345. McMahon, A. 2000. Change, Chance and Optimality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
346. Meillet, A. 1912. ‘L’évolution des formes grammaticales’, Scientia, 12: 6.
347. Meillet, A. 1937 [1903], Introduction a` l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes, 8th edn. Paris: Hachette.
348. Meinunger, A. 2004. ‘Interface restrictions on verb second’, Linguistics in Potsdam, 22: 51-81 (also available online at http://www.ling.uni-potsdam.de/lip).
349. Menn, L. and MacWhinney, B. 1984. ‘The repeated morph constraint: Toward an explanation’, Language, 60: 519-41.
350. Meyer, C. F., Grabowski, R., Han, H.-Y., Mantzouranis, K., and Moses, S. 2003. ‘The World Wide Web as Linguistic Corpus’, pp. 241-54 of Corpus Analysis, Language Structure and Language Use, edited by P. Leistyna and C. F. Meyer. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
351. Miller, D. G. 2002. Nonfinite Structures in Theory and Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
352. Miller, J. 2004. ‘Perfect and resultative constructions in spoken and non-standard English’, pp. 229-46 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde and H. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
353. Miller, P. H. 1997. ‘Auxiliary verbs in Old and Middle French: A diachronic study of substitutive faire and a comparison with the Modern English auxiliaries’, pp. 119-33 of Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, edited by A. van Kemenade and N. Vincent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
354. Milroy, J. 1992. Linguistic Variation and Change. On the Historical Sociolinguistics of English. Oxford: Blackwell.
355. Milroy, J. 1993. ‘On the social origins of language change’, pp. 215-36 of Historical Linguistics, edited by C. Jones. London: Longman.
356. Milroy, L. 1987. Language and Social Networks. Oxford: Blackwell.
357. Mitchell, B. 1985. Old English Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
358. Mithun, M. 1988. ‘The grammaticization of coordination’, pp. 331-59 of Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, edited by J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
359. Mithun, M. 1991. ‘The role of motivation in the emergence of grammatical categories: The grammaticization of subjects’, pp. 159-84 of Approaches to Grammaticalization, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
360. Mithun, M. 2003. ‘Functional perspectives on syntactic change’, pp. 553-72 of The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, edited by B. D. Joseph and R. D. Janda. Oxford:Blackwell.
361. Mittwoch, A. 1990. ‘On the distribution of bare inWnitive complements in English’, Journal of Linguistics, 26: 103-31.
362. Moerenhout, M. and Wurff, W. van der. 2000. ‘Remnants of the old order: OV in the Paston Letters’, English Studies, 81: 513-30.
363. Moerenhout, M. and Wurff, W. van der. 2005. ‘Object-verb order in early sixteenth-century English prose:An exploratory study’, English Language and Linguistics, 9: 83-114.
364. Mäller, W. G. and Fischer, O. (eds) 2003. From Sign to Signing. Iconicity in Language and Literature 3. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
365. Muysken, P. 1981. ‘Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexiWcation’, pp. 52-78 of Historicity and Variation in Creole Studies, edited by A. HighWeld and A. Valdman. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.
366. Nagle, S. J. 1989. Inferential Change and Syntactic Modality in English. Frankfurt:Peter Lang.
367. Nagle, S. J. 1994. ‘The English double modal conspiracy’, Diachronica, 11: 199-211.
368. Nagle, S. J. 1997. ‘What is double about double modals?' pp. 1513-26 of Language History and Linguistic Modelling, edited by R. Hickey and S. Puppel. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
369. Nänny, M. and Fischer, O. (eds) 1999. Form Miming Meaning. Iconicity in Language and Literature. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
370. Nevalainen, T. 1997. ‘The processes of adverb derivation in Late Middle English and Early Modern English’, pp. 145-89 of Grammaticalization at Work. Studies of Long-Term Development in English, edited by M. Rissanen, M. Kytö, and K. Heikkonen. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
371. Nevalainen, T., and Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (eds) 1996. Sociolinguistics and Language History:Studies Based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Amsterdam:Rodopi.
372. Newmeyer, F. J. 1998. Language Form and Language Function. Cambridge Mass.:MIT Press.
373. Newmeyer, F. J. 2003. ‘What can the Weld of linguistics tell us about the origin of language?', pp. 58-76 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
374. Newmeyer, F. J. 2004. ‘Typological evidence and universal grammar’, Studies in Language, 38:527-48.
375. Noble, J. 2000. ‘Cooperation, competition and the evolution of prelinguistic communication’, pp. 40-61 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
376. Noël, D. 2005. ‘The productivity of a “source of information” construction: Or, where grammaticalization theory and construction grammar meet’. Paper given at the Fitigra Conference, Leuven, Belgium, February 2005.
377. Norde, M. 2001. ‘DeXexion as a counterdirectional factor in grammatical change’, Language Sciences, 23: 231-64.
378. Ohkado, M. 2005. Clause Structure in Old English, PhD thesis, Faculty of Humanities, University of Amsterdam.
379. Ono, S. 1975. ‘The Old English verbs of knowing’, Studies in English Literature (English number), 1975: 33-60.
380. Pagliuca, W. (ed.) 1994. Perspectives on Grammaticalization. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
381. Paul, H. 1975 [1880]. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
382. Penke, M. and Rosenbach, A. 2004. ‘What counts as evidence in linguistics? an introduction’, Studies in Language, 28: 480-526.
383. Pepicello, W. J. 1982. ‘On the sources of Indo-European conjunctions of purpose, cause and result’, pp. 256-64 of Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, edited by A. Ahlqvist. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
384. Peters, A.M. 1985. ‘Language segmentation: Operating principles for the perception and analysis of language’, pp. 1029-67 of The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, edited by D. I. Slobin. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaun.
385. Pickering, M. J. and Barry, G. 1991. ‘Sentence processing without empty categories’, Language and Cognitive Processes, 6: 229-59.
386. Pickering, M. J., and Branigan, H. P. 1999. ‘Syntactic priming in language production’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3: 136-41.
387. Pinker, S. 1991. ‘Rules of language’, Science, 253: 530-5.
388. Pinker, S. 1994. The Language Instinct. The New Science of Language and Mind. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
389. Pinkster, H. 1987. ‘The strategy and chronology of the development of future and perfect tense auxiliaries in Latin’, pp. 193-223 of Historical Development of Auxiliaries, edited by M. Harris and P. Ramat. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
390. Pintzuk, S. 1991. Phrase Structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old English Word Order. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
391. Pintzuk, S., and Kroch, A. S. 1989. ‘The rightward movement of complements and adjuncts in the Old English of Beowulf’, Language Variation and Change, 1: 115-43.
392. Pintzuk, S., Tsoulas, G., and Warner, A. (eds) 2000. Diachronic Syntax. Models and Mechanisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
393. Plank, F. 1984. ‘The modals story retold’, Studies in Language, 8: 305-64.
394. Plank, F. 1985. ‘Prädikativ und Koprädikativ’, Zeitschrift für germanische Linguistik, 13: 154-85.
395. Plank, F. 1995. ‘Entgrammatisierung-Spiegelbild der Grammatisierung?', pp. 199-219 of Natürlichkeitstheorie und Sprachwandel, edited by N. Boretzky, W. Dressler, T. Orešnik, and W. U. Wurzel. Bochum: Brochmeyer.
396. Pollard, C. and Sag, I. A. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
397. Pulvermäller, F. 2002. The Neuroscience of Language. On Brain Circuits of Words and Serial Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
398. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
399. Radford, A. 1988. Transformational Grammar. A First Course. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
400. Radford, A. 1997. Syntax. A Minimalist Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
401. Ramat, P. 1992. ‘Thoughts on degrammaticalization’, Linguistics, 30: 549-60.
402. Riemann, O. 1927. Syntaxe latine d’après les principes de la grammaire historique. Paris: Klincksieck.
403. Rissanen, M. 1999a. ‘Syntax’, pp. 187-331 of The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. III, 1476-1776, edited by R. Lass. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
404. Rissanen, M. 1999b. ‘Isn’t it? or is it not? On the order of postverbal subject and negative particle in the history of English’, pp. 189-205 of Negation in the History of English, edited by I. Tieken Boon van Ostade, G. Tottie, and W. van der Wurff. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
405. Rissanen, M., Kytä, M., andPalander-Collin, M. (eds). 1993. EarlyEnglish in theComputer Age. Explorations through the Helsinki Corpus. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
406. Roberts, I.G. 1985. ‘Agreement parameters and the development of English modal auxiliaries’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 3: 21-58.
407. Roberts, I.G. 1993a. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
408. Roberts, I.G. 1993b. ‘A formal account of grammaticalization in the history of Romance futures’, Folia Linguistica Historica, 13: 219-58.
409. Roberts, I.G., and Roussou, A. 1999. ‘A formal approach to grammaticalization’, Linguistics, 37: 1011-41.
410. Roberts, I.G., and Roussou, A. 2002. ‘The history of the future’, pp. 23-56 of Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, edited byD.W. Lightfoot.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
411. Roberts, I.G., and Roussou, A. 2003.SyntacticChange.AMinimalistApproach toGrammaticalization. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
412. Rohdenburg, G. 1996. ‘Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English’, Cognitive Linguistics, 7: 149-82.
413. Rohdenburg, G. 2003. ‘Cognitive complexity and Horror Aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English’, pp. 205-49 of Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, edited by G. Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
414. Romaine, S. 1981. ‘The transparency principle: What it is and why it doesn’t work’, Lingua, 55: 277-300.
415. Romaine, S. 1982. Socio-Historical Linguistics, its Status and Methodology. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
416. Rosch, E. 1978. ‘Principles of categorization’, pp. 27-48 of Cognition and Categorization, edited by E. Rosch and B. B. Lloyd. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
417. Rosch, E. 1988. ‘Coherences and categorization: a historical view’, pp. 373-92 of The Development of Language and Language Researchers: Essays in Honor of Roger Brown, edited by F. Kessel. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
418. Rosenbach, A. 2002. Genitive Variation in English. Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
419. Rosenbach, A. 2004. ‘The English -s-genitive: A case of degrammaticalization?' pp. 73-96 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, and H. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
420. Rosenbach, A. Stein, D., and Vezzosi, L. 2000. ‘On the history of the s-genitive’, pp. 183-210 of Generative Theory and Corpus Studies, edited by R. Bermúdez Otero, D. Denison, R. M. Hogg, and C. B. McCully. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
421. Rubba, J. 1994. ‘Grammaticization as semantic change: a case study of preposition development’, pp. 81-101 of Perspectives on Grammaticalization, edited by W. Pagliuca. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
422. Samuels, M. L. 1972. Linguistic Evolution. With Special Reference to English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
423. Sapir, E. 1963 [1929]. ‘A study in phonetic symbolism’, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12: 225-39. (Reprinted in D. G. Mandelbaum (ed.) 1963 Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture and Personality. Berkeley: University of California Press.)
424. Saussure, F. de 1983 [1922]. Course in General Linguistics, Translated and Annotated by R. Harris. London: Duckworth.
425. Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
426. Schlesinger, I. M. 1989. ‘Language acquisition: Dubious assumptions and a specious explanatory principle’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12: 356-7.
427. Schläter, J. 2003. ‘Phonological determinants of grammatical variation in English: Chomsky’s worst possible case’, pp. 68-118 of Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, edited by G. Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
428. Schutter, G. de 2000. ‘Systeem en ontlening in taal: Nog eens het IPP-effect’, Taal en Tongval, 52: 208-28.
429. Searle, J. 1979. Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
430. Shapiro, M. 1991. The Sense of Change. Language as History. Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
431. Shepherd, S. C. 1982. ‘From deontic to epistemic: An analysis of modals in the history of English, creoles, and language acquisition’, pp. 316-23 of Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, edited by A. Ahlqvist. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
432. Simone, R. (ed.) 1994. Iconicity in Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
433. Sinar, B. 2005. ‘Him or himself ? On variation in Middle English reXexives’, paper given at the 4th York-Holland Symposium on the History of English Syntax. Leiden University.
434. Skousen, R. 1989. Analogical Modeling of Language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
435. Skousen, R. 1992. Analogy and Structure. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
436. Slobin, D. I. 1977. ‘Language change in childhood and in history’, pp. 185-214 of Language Learning and Thought, edited by J. T. Macnamara. New York:Academic Press.
437. Slobin, D. I. 1985a. ‘Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity’, pp. 1158-256 of The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition Vol. 2., edited by D. I. Slobin. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
438. Slobin, D. I. (ed.) 1985b. The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. 2. Theoretical Issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
439. Slobin, D. I. 1997 [2001]. ‘The origins of grammaticizable notions: Beyond the individual mind’, pp. 265-323 of The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. 5. Expanding the Contexts, edited by D. I. Slobin. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. (Reprinted in shortened form on pp. 406-49 of Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, edited by M. Bowerman and S. C. Levinson. Cambridge University Press.)
440. Slobin, D. I. 2002. ‘Language evolution, acquisition and diachrony: Probing the parallels’, pp. 375-92 of The Evolution of Language out of Pre-Language, edited by T. Givón and B. F. Malle. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
441. Steele, S., with A. Akmajian, R. Demers, E. Jelinek, C. Kitigawa, R. Oehrle and T.Wasow (eds) 1981. An Encyclopedia of AUX: A Study of Cross-Linguistic Equivalence. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
442. Steels, L. 1997. ‘Synthesising the origins of language andmeaning using co-evolution, self-organisation and level formation’, in Evolution of Human Language, edited by J. Hurford, C. Knight, and M. Studdert-Kennedy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
443. Stein, D. and Wright, S. (eds) 1995. Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
444. Stemberger, J. P. 1981. ‘Morphological haplology’, Language, 57: 791-817.
445. Stockwell, R. P. 1977. ‘Motivations for exbraciation in Old English’, pp. 291-312 of Mechanisms of Syntactic Change, edited by C. N. Li. Austin: University of Texas Press.
446. Swan, T. 1988. Sentence Adverbials in English: A Synchronic and Diachronic Investigation. Oslo: Novus.
447. Sweetser, E. E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
448. Tabor, W. and Traugott, E. C. 1998. ‘Structural scope expansion and grammaticalization’, pp. 229-72 of The Limits of Grammaticalization, edited by A. Giacalone Ramat and P. J. Hopper. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
449. Taeymans, M. 2004. ‘An investigation into the marginal modals dare and need in British present-day English. A corpus-based approach’, pp. 97-114 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, andH. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
450. Tannen, D. 1985. ‘Relative focus on involvement in oral and written discourse’, pp. 124-47 of Literacy, Language, and Learning, edited by D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, and A. Hildyard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
451. Taylor, A. 2005. ‘Prosodic evidence for incipient VO order in Old English’, English Language and Linguistics, 9: 139-56.
452. Thomason, S. G. 2001. Language Contact. An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
453. Thomason, S. G., and Kaufman, T. 1988. Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
454. Thompson, S. A. 2002. "‘Object complements” and conversation. Towards a realistic account’, Studies in Language, 26: 125-64.
455. Thompson, S. A., and Mulac, A. 1991. ‘A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English’, pp. 313-29 of Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 2, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
456. Tinbergen, N. 1952. ‘Derived activities: their causation, biological signiWcance, origin and emancipation during evolution’, Quarterly Review of Biology, 27:1-32.
457. Tomasello, M. 1992. First Verbs: A Case Study in Early Grammatical Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
458. Tomasello, M. 1995. ‘Language is not an instinct’, Cognitive Development, 10: 131-56.
459. Tomasello, M. 2003a. Constructing a Language. A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press.
460. Tomasello, M. 2003b. ‘On the diVerent origins of symbols and grammar’, pp. 94-110 of Language Evolution, edited by M. H. Christiansen and S. Kirby. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
461. Toorn, M. C. van de, Pijnenburg, W. J. J., Leuvensteijn, J. A. van, and Horst, J. M. van der (eds) 1997. Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse Taal. Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press.
462. Traugott, E. C. 1982. ‘From propositional to textual and expressive meanings:Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization’, pp. 245-71 of Perspectives on Historical Linguistics, edited by W. P. Lehmann and Y. Malkiel. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
463. Traugott, E. C. 1989. ‘On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectiWcation in semantic change’, Language, 65: 31-55.
464. Traugott, E. C. 1995. ‘The role of the development of discourse markers in a theory of grammaticalization’. Paper presented at ICHL 12, Manchester University. (www.stanford.edu/_traugott/traugott.html)
465. Traugott, E. C., and Dasher, R. B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
466. Traugott, E. C., and Heine, B. (eds) 1991. Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Vol. 2: Focus on Types of Grammatical Markers. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
467. Travis, C. E. 2005. Discourse Markers in Colombian Spanish. A Study in Polysemy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
468. Trudgill, P. 1974. The Social DiVerentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
469. Trudgill, P. 1983. On Dialect. Social and Geographical Perspectives. Oxford: Blackwell.
470. Trudgill, P. 2002. ‘Linguistic and social typology’, pp. 707-28 of The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, edited by J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, and N. Schilling Estes. Oxford: Blackwell.
471. Tsangalidis, A. 2004. ‘Unidirectionality in the grammaticalization of modality in Greek’, pp. 193-209 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, and H. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
472. van Valin, R. D. Jr. 2000. ‘The acquisition of complex sentences: a case study in the role of theory in the study of language development’, pp. 511-31 of Papers from the Chicago Linguistic Society 36, The Panels, edited by A. Okrent and J. P. Boyle.
473. van Valin, R. D. Jr. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
474. van Valin, R. D. Jr., and LaPolla, R. J. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
475. Velde, F. van de 2004. ‘De Middelnederlandse onpersoonlijke constructie en haar grammaticale concurrenten. semantische motivering van de argumentstructuur’, Nederlandse Taalkunde, 9: 48-76.
476. Vennemann, T. 1974. ‘Topics, subjects and word order: From SXV to SVX via TVX’, pp. 339-76 of Historical Linguistics Vol. I, edited by J. M. Anderson and C. Jones. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing.
477. Vihman, M. M. and DePaolis, R. A. 2000. ‘Role of mimesis in infant language development: Evidence for phylogeny?' pp. 130-45 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
478. Vincent, N. 1982. ‘The development of auxiliaries HABERE and ESSE in Romance’, pp. 71-96 of Studies in the Romance Verb, edited by N. Vincent and M. Harris. London: Croom Helm.
479. Vincent, N. 1995. ‘Exaptation and grammaticalization’, pp. 433-45 of Historical Linguistics 1993, edited by H. Andersen. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
480. Vincent, N. 2001. ‘LFG as a model of syntactic change’, pp. 1-42 of Time over Matter, edited by M. Butt and T. Holloway King. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
481. Visser, F. T. 1963-1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 Vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
482. Voeltz, E. F. K. and Kilian-Hatz, C. (eds) 2001. Ideophones. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
483. Warner, A. R. 1982. Complementation in Middle English and the Methodology of Historical Syntax. London: Croom Helm.
484. Warner, A. R. 1983. ‘Review article of D. W. Lightfoot’, Principles of Diachronic Syntax, Journal of Linguistics, 19: 187-209.
485. Warner, A. R. 1990. ‘Reworking the history of English auxiliaries’, pp. 537-58 of Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Cambridge, 6-9 April 1987, edited by S. Adamson, V. Law, N. Vincent and S. Wright. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
486. Warner, A. R. 1992. ‘Elliptical and impersonal constructions: evidence for auxiliaries in Old English?' pp. 178-210 of Evidence for Old English: Material and Theoretical Bases for Reconstruction, edited by F. Colman. Edinburgh: Donald.
487. Warner, A. R. 1993. English Auxiliaries. Structure and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
488. Warner, A. R. 1995. ‘Predicting the progressive passive: Parametric change within a lexicalist framework’, Language, 71: 533-57.
489. Warner, A. R. 1997. ‘Extending the paradigm: An interpretation of the historical development of auxiliary sequences in English’, English Studies, 78: 162-89.
490. Warner, A. R. 2004. ‘What drove do?' pp. 229-42 of New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics. Volume I: Syntax and Morphology, edited by C. Kay, S. Horobin and J. Smith. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
491. Weinreich, U., Labov, W., and Herzog, M. I. 1968. ‘Empirical foundations for a theory of language change’, pp. 95-195 of Directions for Historical Linguistics edited by W. P. Lehmann and Y. Malkiel. Austin: University of Texas Press.
492. Weiß, H. 2004. ‘A question of relevance: Some remarks on standard languages’, Studies in Language, 28: 647-73.
493. Wiegand, N. 1982. ‘From discourse to syntax: For in early English causal clauses’, pp. 385-93 of Papers fromthe 5th InternationalConference onHistoricalLinguistics, edited by A.Ahlqvist.Amsterdam: Benjamins.
494. Winford, D. 2000. ‘Irrealis in Sranan: Mood and modality in a radical creole’, Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 15: 63-125.
495. Wischer, I. 2000. ‘Grammaticalization versus lexicalization. “Methinks” there is some confusion’, pp. 355-70 in Pathways of Change, edited by O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, and D. Stein. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
496. Wischer, I. and Diewald, G. (eds) 2002. New Reflections on Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
497. Wong, K.-S. 2004. ‘The acquisition of polysemous forms: The case of Bei2 (“Give”) in Cantonese’, pp. 325-43 of Up and Down the Cline, edited by O. Fischer, M. Norde, and H. Perridon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
498. Woodcock, E. C. 1959. A New Latin Syntax. London: Methuen.
499. Wray, A. 1999. ‘Formulaic language in learners and native speakers’, Language Teaching, 32: 213-31.
500. Wray, A. 2000. ‘Holistic utterances in protolanguage: The link from primates to humans’, pp. 285-302 of The Evolutionary Emergence of Language, edited by C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. R. Hurford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
501. Wray, A. and Perkins, M. R. 2000. ‘The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model’, Language and Communication, 20: 1-28.
502. Wunderlich, D. 2004. ‘Why assume UG?' Studies in Language, 28: 615-41.
503. Wurff, W. V. D. 1989. ‘A remarkable gap in the history of English syntax’, Folia Linguistica Historica, 9: 117-59.
504. Wurff, W. V. D. 1990. DiVusion and Reanalysis in Syntax, PhD thesis, Faculty of Arts, University of Amsterdam.
505. Wurff, W. V. D. 1999. ‘Objects and verbs in modern Icelandic and Wfteenth-century English:A word order parallel and its causes’, Lingua, 109: 237-65.
506. Wurff, W. V. D. 2000. ‘Variation and change: Text types and the modelling of syntactic change’, pp. 261-82 of Generative Theory and Corpus Studies, edited by R. Bermúdez Otero, D. Denison, R. M. Hogg, and C. B. McCully. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
507. Yngve, V. H. 1996. From Grammar to Science: New Foundations for General Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
508. Zwart, J.W. 2005. ‘Verb second as a function of merge’, pp. 11-40 of The Function of Function Words and Functional Categories, edited by M. den Dikken and C. M. Tortora. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
509. The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (http://wwwusers. york.ac.uk/_lang22/YcoeHome1.htm)
510. The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, second edition (http://www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/)
511. The Dictionary of Old English Corpus (http://ets.umdl.umich.edu/o/oec/)
512. ICE-GB: the International Corpus of English: the British component (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/english-usage/projects/ice-gb/)