1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. The Present Perfect and the Preterite in Late Modern and Contemporary English

The Present Perfect and the Preterite in Late Modern and Contemporary English

A corpus-based study of grammatical change

image of The Present Perfect and the Preterite in Late Modern and Contemporary English
USD
Buy:$143.00 + Taxes

This book examines developments in the use of the present perfect and the preterite in Late Modern and contemporary English, with a focus on American and British English. Drawing on neo-Gricean pragmatics, it proposes a novel and principled analysis of the verb forms’ context-independent meanings and context-dependent inferences. State-of-the-art corpus linguistic methods are used to track their functional changes over two and a half centuries. The book presents new evidence of grammatical change and offers a compelling, contact-based account of regional variation. It brings together the insights of various fields, including formal semantics, historical linguistics, linguistic typology, and variationist sociolinguistics.

References

  1. Aaron, Jessi E.
    2010 Pushing the envelope: Looking beyond the variable context. Language Variation and Change22(1): 1–36. 10.1017/S0954394509990226
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509990226 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abraham, Werner
    1999 Preterite decay as a European areal phenomenon. Folia Linguistica33(1–2): 11–18. 10.1515/flin.1999.33.1‑2.11
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.1999.33.1-2.11 [Google Scholar]
  3. Akaike, Hirotugu
    1974 A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control19(6): 716–723. 10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
     https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705 [Google Scholar]
  4. Algeo, John
    1991 Language. InThe Reader’s Companion to American History, Eric Foner & John A. Garraty (eds), 637–640. Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 2001 External history. InThe Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume VI: English in North America, John Algeo (ed.), 1–58. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CHOL9780521264792.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264792.002 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2006 British or American English?Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511607240
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607240 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ambrazas, Vytautas
    1997 Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Baltos Lankos.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Andersen, Henning
    2006 Grammation, regrammation, and degrammation: Tense loss in Russian. Diachronica23(2): 231–258. 10.1075/dia.23.2.02and
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.23.2.02and [Google Scholar]
  9. 2013 On the origin of Slavic aspects: Aorist and imperfect. Journal of Slavic Linguistics21(1): 17–43. 10.1353/jsl.2013.0003
     https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2013.0003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Anderson, Kristen L.
    2021 Immigration in American History. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780367815448
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367815448 [Google Scholar]
  11. Arkadiev, Peter & Wiemer, Björn
    2018 Perfects in Baltic and Slavic. InPerfects in Indo-European Languages and Beyond (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 352), Robert Crellin & Thomas Jügel (eds), 123–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Asher, Nicholas
    2004 Discourse topic. Theoretical Linguistics30(2–3): 163–201. 10.1515/thli.2004.30.2‑3.163
     https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.2004.30.2-3.163 [Google Scholar]
  13. Asher, Nicholas & Lascarides, Alex
    2003 Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Atkinson, Dwight
    1999 Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2001 Scientific discourse across history: A combined multi-dimensional/rhetorical analysis of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. InVariation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies, Susan Conrad & Douglas Biber (eds), 45–65. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Baayen, Harald R. , Fermín, Moscoso & Prado, Martín
    2005 Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language81(3): 666–698. 10.1353/lan.2005.0112
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0112 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bach, Kent
    1994 Conversational implicature. Mind and Language9(2): 124–162. 10.1111/j.1468‑0017.1994.tb00220.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1994.tb00220.x [Google Scholar]
  18. Bach, Kent
    2000 Quantification, qualification, and context: A reply to Stanley and Szabo. Mind and Language15(2–3): 262–283. 10.1111/1468‑0017.00131
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00131 [Google Scholar]
  19. Baily, Samuel L.
    1999 Immigrants in the Lands of Promise: Italians in Buenos Aires and New York City, 1870–1914. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Baker, Paul
    2018 American and British English: Divided by a Common Language?Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 2010 Sociolinguistics and Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: EUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Bao, Chenyao , Zhang, Xiaowen , Qu, Yunhua & Feng, Zhiwei
    2017 American English perfect construction across registers. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics25(4): 314–341. 10.1080/09296174.2017.1387961
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2017.1387961 [Google Scholar]
  23. Bartsch, Renate
    1984 Norms, tolerance, lexical change, and context-dependent meaning. Journal of Pragmatics8(3): 367–393. 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90029‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90029-8 [Google Scholar]
  24. Bauer, Gero
    1970 The English “perfect” reconsidered. Journal of Linguistics6(2): 189–198. 10.1017/S0022226700002590
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700002590 [Google Scholar]
  25. Bernaisch, Tobias , Gries, Stefan T. & Mukherjee, Joybrato
    2014 The dative alternation in South Asian English(es): Modelling predictors and predicting prototypes. English World-Wide35(1): 7–31. 10.1075/eww.35.1.02ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.35.1.02ber [Google Scholar]
  26. Bowie, Jill & Aarts, Bas
    2012 Change in the English infinitival perfect construction. InHandbook on the History of English: Rethinking Approaches to the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), 200–210. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0019
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0019 [Google Scholar]
  27. Biber, Douglas
    1988 Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511621024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621024 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2003 Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse. InNew Media Language, Jean Aitchison & Diana M. Lewis (eds), 169–181. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan
    2019 Registers, Genres and Styles. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781108686136
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108686136 [Google Scholar]
  30. Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward
    1989 Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text9: 93–124.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 1992 The linguistic evolution of five written and speech-based English genres from the 17th to the 20th centuries. InHistory of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics, Matti Rissanen , Ossi Ihalainen , Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 688–704. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110877007.688
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110877007.688 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2001 Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. InVariation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies, Susan Conrad & Douglas Biber (eds), 200–214. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany
    2016 Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Biber, Douglas , Johansson, Stig , Leech, Geoffrey , Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
    1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman. (Also published as Biber, Douglas , Johansson, Stig , Leech, Geoffrey , Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward 2021 Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins).
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Binnick, Robert I.
    1991 Time and the Verb: A Guide to Tense and Aspect. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Blakemore, Diane
    1992 Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Bock, Kathryn & Loebell, H.
    1990 Framing sentences. Cognition35(1): 1–39. 10.1016/0010‑0277(90)90035‑I
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(90)90035-I [Google Scholar]
  38. Breiman, Leo
    2001 Random forests. Machine Learning45(1): 5–32. 10.1023/A:1010933404324
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324 [Google Scholar]
  39. Brezina, Vaclav & Meyerhoff, Miriam
    2014 Significant or random? A critical review of sociolinguistic generalisations based on large corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics19(1): 1–28. 10.1075/ijcl.19.1.01bre
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.1.01bre [Google Scholar]
  40. Brinton, Laurel J.
    1988 The Development of English Aspectual Systems: Aspectualizers and Post-Verbal Particles. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Brinton, Laurel J.
    1994 The differentiation of statives and perfects in Early Modern English: The development of the conclusive perfect. InTowards a Standard English 1600–1800, Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds), 135–170. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Brown, Jonathan C.
    2010 A Brief History of Argentina. Freedom CA: Lexington Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Brunner, Karl
    1962 Die Englische Sprache: Ihre Geschlichtliche Entwicklung 2 [The English Language: Its Historical Development]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 1963 An Outline of Middle English Grammar, translated by Grahame, K. W. Johnston. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Bryce, Benjamin
    2018 To Belong in Buenos Aires: Germans, Argentines, and the Rise of a Pluralist Society. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Bybee, Joan
    1985 Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form [Typological Studies in Language 9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.9
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.9 [Google Scholar]
  47. 2010 Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
  48. Bybee, Joan , Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William
    1994 The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Carey, Kathleen
    1994 Pragmatics, Subjectivity, and the Grammaticalization of the English Perfect. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
  50. 1995 Subjectification and the development of the English perfect. InSubjectivity and Subjectivisation, Dieter Stein & Susan Wright (eds), 83–102. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511554469.005
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554469.005 [Google Scholar]
  51. Caro, G.
    1899 Das englische Perfectum und Praeteritum in ihrem Verhältnis zu einander historisch untersucht [The English perfect and preterite in their relationship to each other historically examined]. Anglia21: 56–88. 10.1515/angl.1899.1899.21.56
     https://doi.org/10.1515/angl.1899.1899.21.56 [Google Scholar]
  52. Carston, Robyn
    2002 Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470754603
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754603 [Google Scholar]
  53. Cartagena, Nelson
    1999 Los tiempos compuestos (The composite tenses). InGramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española [Descriptive Grammar of the Spanish language], Vol.2, Ignacio Bosque & Violeta Demonte (eds), 2935–2477. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Catalán, Diego
    1964 El español en Canarias. Ediciones Cultura Hispánica1: 239–280.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Cedergren, Henrietta J. & Sankoff, David
    1974 Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language50(2): 333–355. 10.2307/412441
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412441 [Google Scholar]
  56. Chomsky, Noam
    1965 Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Clancy, Steven J.
    2010 The Chain of Being and Having in Slavic [Studies in Language Companion Series 122]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.122
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.122 [Google Scholar]
  58. Cohen, Jacob
    1988 Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Collins, Peter & Peters, Pam
    2004 Australian English: Morphology and syntax. InA Handbook of Varieties of English, Vol. 2: Morphology and Syntax, Bernd Kortmann , Edgar W. Schneider , Kate Burridge , Rajend Mesthrie , & Clive Upton (eds), 593–610. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Comrie, Bernard
    1976 Aspect. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Comrie, Bernard
    1985 Tense. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139165815
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165815 [Google Scholar]
  62. Copple, Mary T.
    2011 Tracking the constraints on a grammaticalizing perfect(ive). Language Variation and Change23(2): 163–191. 10.1017/S0954394511000044
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394511000044 [Google Scholar]
  63. Cordin, Patrizia
    1997 Tense, mood and aspect in the verb. InThe Dialects of Italy, Martin Maiden & Mair Paerry (eds), 87–98. Routledge: London.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Cotter, Colleen
    2010 News Talk: Investigating the Language of Journalism. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511811975
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811975 [Google Scholar]
  65. Croft, William
    2003 Typology and Universals. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Culpeper, Jonathan & Kytö, Merja
    2010 Early Modern English: Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Curme, George O.
    1931 A Grammar of the English language, Vol. III: Syntax. Boston MA: D. C. Heath and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Currel, Hortènsia
    1990 The Present Perfect in English and in Catalan: Uses and Meanings. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
  69. Dahl, Östen
    1985 Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. 1995 Areal tendencies in tense-aspect systems. InTemporal Reference, Aspect and Actionality, Vol. 2: Typological Perspectives, Pier Marco Bertinetto , Bianchi Valentina , Östen Dahl , & Mario Squartini (eds), 11–28. Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. 1996 Das Tempussystem des Deutschen im typologischen Vergleich. InDeutsch-Typologisch, Ewald Lang & Gisela Zifonun (eds), 359–368. Berlin: De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Dahl, Östen & Hedin, Eva
    2000 Current relevance and event reference. InTense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Östen Dahl (ed.), 385–401. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197099.3.385
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197099.3.385 [Google Scholar]
  73. Dahl, Östen & Velupillai, Viveka
    2013 The past tense. InThe World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. 〈wals.info/chapter/66〉 (26 July 2019).
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Dauzat, Albert
    1937 Le flécissement du passé simple et de l’imparfait du subjonctif [The weakening of the simple past and the imperfective of the subjunctive]. Français Moderne5: 97–112.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Davies, Christopher
    2007 Divided by a Common Language: A Guide to British and American English. Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Davies, Mark
    2012 Expanding horizons in historical linguistics with the 400-million word Corpus of Historical American English. Corpora7(2): 121–157. 10.3366/cor.2012.0024
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2012.0024 [Google Scholar]
  77. 2019 Corpus-based studies of lexical and semantic variation: The importance of both corpus size and corpus design. InFrom Data to Evidence in English Language Research, Carla Suhr , Terttu Nevalainen , & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 66–87. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Davydova, Julia
    2011 The Present Perfect in Non-Native Englishes: A Corpus-Based Study of Variation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110255027
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255027 [Google Scholar]
  79. de Acosta, Diego
    2013 The Old English have-Perfect and its congeners. Journal of English Linguistics41(1): 33–64. 10.1177/0075424212441706
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424212441706 [Google Scholar]
  80. de Swart, Henriette
    2007 A cross-linguistic discourse analysis of the Perfect. Journal of Pragmatics39(12): 2273–2307.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Declerck, Renaat
    2006 The Grammar of the English Verb Phrase, Vol.1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Defromont, Hubert J.
    1973 Les constructions perfectives du verbe Anglais contemporain: Étude comparée de l’aspect transcendant dans les systèmes verbaux Anglais et Français [The Perfective Constructions of the Contemporary English Verb: Comparative Study of the Transcendent Aspect in the English and French Verbal Systems]. The Hague: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Denison, David
    1993 English Historical Syntax. Harlow: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Denison, David
    1998 Syntax. InThe Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. IV: 1776–1997, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 92–329. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Depraetere, Ilse
    1998 On the resultative character of present perfect sentences. Journal of Pragmatics29(5): 597–613. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00084‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00084-2 [Google Scholar]
  86. Deshors, Sandra C.
    2020 English as a Lingua Franca: A random forests approach to particle placement in multi-speaker interactions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics30(2): 214–321. 10.1111/ijal.12275
     https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12275 [Google Scholar]
  87. 2021 Contextualizing past tenses in L2: Combined effects and interactions in the present perfect versus simple past alternation. Applied Linguistics42(2): 269–291. 10.1093/applin/amaa017
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa017 [Google Scholar]
  88. Deshors, Sandra C. & Gries, Stefan T.
    2016 Profiling verb complementation constructions across New Englishes: A two-step random forests analysis of ing vs. to complements. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics21(2): 192–218. 10.1075/ijcl.21.2.03des
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.21.2.03des [Google Scholar]
  89. Diewald, Gabriele
    2002 A model for relevant types of contexts in grammaticalization. InNew Reflections on Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 49], Ilse Wischer and Gabriele Diewald (eds), 103–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.09die
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.09die [Google Scholar]
  90. Dilts, Philip
    2013 Modelling Phonetic Reduction in a Corpus of Spoken English Using Random Forests and Mixed-Effects Regression. PhD dissertation, University of Alberta.
  91. Donaldson, Bruce
    2008 Dutch: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203895320
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203895320 [Google Scholar]
  92. Dowty, David R.
    1979 Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑9473‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7 [Google Scholar]
  93. Drinka, Bridget
    2003 Areal factors in the development of the European periphrastic perfect. Word54(1): 1–38. 10.1080/00437956.2003.12068826
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2003.12068826 [Google Scholar]
  94. 2013 Sources of auxilation in the perfects of Europe. Studies in Language37(3): 599–644. 10.1075/sl.37.3.06dri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.37.3.06dri [Google Scholar]
  95. 2017 Language Contact in Europe: The Periphrastic Perfect Through History. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  96. DuBois, John W. , Chafe, Wallace L. , Meyer, Charles & Thompson, Sandra A.
    2000 Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English Part-I (LDC2000S85). Philadelphia PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Eberenz-Greoles, Rolf
    1979 La categoria temporal del verb català i el problema del temps en la dimensió textual [The temporary category of the Catalan verb and the time problem in the textual dimension]. InEstudis de Llengua i Literatura Catalanes oferts a R. Aramon i Serra [Estudis Universitaris Catalans XXII], 169–180. Barcelona: Curial.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. van Eijck, Jan & Hans, Kamp
    1997 Representing discourse in context. InHandbook of Logic and Language, Johan van Benthem & Alice G. B. ter Meulen (eds), 179–237. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 10.1016/B978‑044481714‑3/50006‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044481714-3/50006-0 [Google Scholar]
  99. Elsness, Johan
    1997 The Perfect and the Preterite in Contemporary and Earlier English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110810264
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110810264 [Google Scholar]
  100. 2003 A contrastive look at the present perfect/preterite opposition in English and Norwegian. Languages in Contrast3(1): 3–40. 10.1075/lic.3.1.03els
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.3.1.03els [Google Scholar]
  101. Engel, Dulcie M. & Ritz, Marie-Eve
    2000 The use of the present perfect in Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics20(2): 119–140. 10.1080/07268600020006030
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268600020006030 [Google Scholar]
  102. Ennis, Juan Antonio
    2015 Italian-Spanish contact in early 20th century Argentina. Journal of Language Contact8(1): 112–145. 10.1163/19552629‑00801006
     https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-00801006 [Google Scholar]
  103. Escobar, Anna María
    1997 Contrastive and innovative uses of the present perfect and the preterite in Spanish in contact with Quechua. Hispania80(4) : 859–870. 10.2307/345107
     https://doi.org/10.2307/345107 [Google Scholar]
  104. Fairclough, Norman
    1996 Border crossings: Discourse and social change in contemporary societies. InChange and Language, Hywel Coleman & Lynne Cameron (eds). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Fenn, Peter
    1987 A Semantic and Pragmatic Examination of the English Perfect. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Ferguson, Charles A.
    1972 Language Structure and Language Use. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  107. 1994 Dialect, register, and genre: Working assumptions about conventionalization. InSociolinguistic Perspectives on Register, Douglas Biber & Edward Finegan (eds), 15–30. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Fiedler, Wilfried
    1999 Tempus, Modus und Aspekt in den Sprachen Südosteuropas [Tense, modality and aspect in Southern European languages]. InHandbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik, Uwe Hinrichs & Uwe Büttner (eds), 487–517. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1997 Lectures on Deixis. Stanford CA: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Fillmore, Charles J. , Kay, Paul & O’Connor, Mary C.
    1988 Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. Language64(3): 501–538. 10.2307/414531
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  111. Fischer, David Hackett
    1989 Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Fischer, Olga
    1992 Syntax. InThe Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. II: 1066–1476, Norman Blake (ed.), 207–408. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.005
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.005 [Google Scholar]
  113. Fischer, Olga & van der Wurff, Wim
    2006 Syntax. InA History of the English Language, Richard Hogg & David Denison (eds), 109–198. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511791154.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791154.004 [Google Scholar]
  114. Fitzmaurice, Susan
    2002 The Familiar Letter in Early Modern English: A Pragmatic Approach [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 95]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.95
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.95 [Google Scholar]
  115. Fleischman, Susan
    1982 The Future in Thought and Language: Diachronic Evidence from Romance. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  116. 1983 From pragmatics to grammar: Diachronic reflections on complex pasts and futures in Romance. Lingua60(2–3): 183–213. 10.1016/0024‑3841(83)90074‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(83)90074-8 [Google Scholar]
  117. Fløgstad, Guro
    2016 Preterit Expansion and Perfect Demise in Porteño Spanish. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004309081
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004309081 [Google Scholar]
  118. Fridén, Georg
    1948 Studies on the Tenses of the English Verb from Chaucer to Shakespeare, with Special Reference to the Late Sixteenth Century. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. Friedman, Victor A.
    2015 Macedonian Studies 2. Skopje: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Garside, Roger & Smith, Nicholas
    1997 A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS4. InCorpus Annotation: Linguistic Information from Computer Text Corpora, Roger Garside , Geoffrey Leech & Tony McEnery (eds), 102–121. London: Longman. 10.4324/9781315841366‑13
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315841366-13 [Google Scholar]
  121. van Gelderen, Elly
    2016 Cyclical change continued: An introduction. InCyclical Change Continued [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 227], Elly van Gelderen (ed.), 3–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.227.01gel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.227.01gel [Google Scholar]
  122. Giger, Markus
    2003 Resultativkonstruktionen im Modernen Tschechischen (unter Berücksichtigung der Sprachgeschichte und der Übrigen Slavischen Sprachen) [Resultative Constructions in Modern Czech (Taking into Account the History of Languages and Other Slavic languages)]. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Giger, Markus
    2016 Kongruenzbrüche in slovakischen possessiven Resultativa (Evidenz aus dem slovakischen Nationalkorpus) [Incongruence in Slovak possessive resultatives: Evidence from the Slovak National Corpus]. Jazykovedný časopis67(3): 283–294.
     [Google Scholar]
  124. Givón, Talmy
    1973 The time-axis phenomenon. Language49(4): 890–925. 10.2307/412067
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412067 [Google Scholar]
  125. 1976 Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. InSubject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 149–188. New York NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 1979 On Understanding Grammar. New York NY: Academic Press. (Also published as Givón, T. 2018 On Understanding Grammar, Revised Edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins).
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  128. Görlach, Manfred
    1991 Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139166010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166010 [Google Scholar]
  129. Greenbaum, Sidney
    1991 ICE: The International Corpus of English. English Today7(4): 3–7. 10.1017/S0266078400005836
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400005836 [Google Scholar]
  130. Greenberg, Joseph H.
    1966 Language Universals, with Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. Grice, Herbert P.
    1957 Meaning. Philosophical Review66(3): 377–388. 10.2307/2182440
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2182440 [Google Scholar]
  132. Gries, Stefan T.
    2006 Some proposals towards more rigorous corpus linguistics. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik54(2): 191–202. 10.1515/zaa‑2006‑0209
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2006-0209 [Google Scholar]
  133. 2015 The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: Multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora10(1): 95–125. 10.3366/cor.2015.0068
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0068 [Google Scholar]
  134. 2019 On classification trees and random forests in corpus linguistics: Some words of caution and suggestions for improvement. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory16(3): 617–647. 10.1515/cllt‑2018‑0078
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2018-0078 [Google Scholar]
  135. 2021 Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110718256
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110718256 [Google Scholar]
  136. Grimes, Joseph E.
    1975 The Thread of Discourse. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110886474
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110886474 [Google Scholar]
  137. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1967 Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Part 2. Journal of Linguistics3(1): 199–244. 10.1017/S0022226700016613
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016613 [Google Scholar]
  138. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya
    1976 Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  139. Halliday, Michael A. K. , Macintosh, Angus & Strevens, Peter
    1964 The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  140. Harre, Catherine E.
    1991 Tener + Past Participle: A Case Study in Language Description. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  141. Hasse, Martin
    1994 Tense and aspect in Basque. InTense Systems in European Languages, Rolf Thieroff & Joachim Ballweg (eds), 279–292. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
     [Google Scholar]
  142. Harris, Martin
    1982 The “past simple” and “present perfect” in Romance. InStudies in the Romance Verb, Martin Harris & Nigel Vincent (eds), 42–70. London: Croom Helm.
     [Google Scholar]
  143. Haspelmath, Martin
    2001 The European Linguistic Area: Standard Average European. InLanguage Typology and Language Universals, Martin Haspelmath , Ekkehard König , Wulf Oesterreicher , & Wolfgang Raible (eds), 1492–1510. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110171549.2.14.1492
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110171549.2.14.1492 [Google Scholar]
  144. 2010 Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language86(3): 663–687. 10.1353/lan.2010.0021
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2010.0021 [Google Scholar]
  145. Hedin, Eva
    1995 The tense aspect system of Modern Greek. InTense Systems in European Languages, II, Rolf Thieroff (ed.), 233–252. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110958911.233
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110958911.233 [Google Scholar]
  146. Heine, Bernd , Claudi, Ulrike & Hünnemeyer, Friederike
    1991 Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  147. Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
    2005 Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511614132
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614132 [Google Scholar]
  148. 2020 Contact and grammaticalization. InThe Handbook of Language Contact, Raymond Hickey (ed.), 93–112. London: Blackwell. 10.1002/9781119485094.ch4
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119485094.ch4 [Google Scholar]
  149. Henderson, Carlos
    2010 El pretérito perfecto compuesto del español de Chile, Paraguay y Uruguay: Aspectos semánticos y discursivos [The Perfect Compound Past Tense in the Spanish of Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay: Semantic and Discursive Aspects]. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University.
  150. Hernández, José E.
    2006 Present perfect for preterit in Salvadoran narratives: The perfective expansion into narrative discourse. InSelected Proceedings of the 9th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, Nuria Sagarra & Almeida Jacqueline Toribio (eds), 297–307. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  151. Holmes, Philip & Hinchliffe, Ian
    2013 Swedish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203381670
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203381670 [Google Scholar]
  152. Hopper, Paul J.
    1991 On some principles of grammaticalization. InApproaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1: Theoretical and Methodological Issues [Typological Studies in Language 19:1], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
  153. Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
    1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language56(2): 251–299. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  154. Hopper, Paul J. & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2003 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  155. Horrock, Geoffrey
    1997 Greek: A History of the Language and Its Speakers. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  156. Hosmer Jr., David W. , Lemeshow, Stanley & Sturdivant, Rodney X.
    2013 Applied Logistic Regression. Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. 10.1002/9781118548387
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118548387 [Google Scholar]
  157. Howe, Chad
    2013 The Spanish Perfects: Pathways of Emergent Meaning. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9781137029812
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029812 [Google Scholar]
  158. Hristov, Bozhil
    2020 Grammaticalising the Perfect and Explanations of Language Change: Have- and be-perfects in the History and Structure of English and Bulgarian. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004414051
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004414051 [Google Scholar]
  159. Huddleston, Rodney
    2002 The verb. InThe Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds), 71–212. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781316423530.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530.004 [Google Scholar]
  160. Hudson, Richard A.
    1996 Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139166843
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166843 [Google Scholar]
  161. Hundt, Marianne
    2009 Colonial lag, colonial innovation or simply language change?InOne Language, Two Grammars? Differences Between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 13–37. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511551970.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551970.002 [Google Scholar]
  162. Hundt, Marianne & Smith, Nicolas
    2009 The present perfect in British and American English: Has there been any change, recently?ICAME Journal33: 45–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  163. Iatridou, Sabine , Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Izvorski, Roumyana
    2003 Observations about the form and meaning of the perfect. InPerfect Explorations, Artemis Alexiadou , Monika Rathert & Arnim von Stechow (eds), 101–132. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110902358.153
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902358.153 [Google Scholar]
  164. Jakobson, Roman
    1984 The structure of the Russian verb. InRussian and Slavic Grammar, Linda R. Waugh & Morris Halle (eds), 1–15. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110822885.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110822885.1 [Google Scholar]
  165. Jankowski, Bridget L.
    2013 A Variationist Approach to Cross-Register Language Variation and Change. PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.
  166. Jara Yupanqui, Ileana Margarita
    2006 The Use of the Preterite and the Present Perfect in the Spanish of Lima. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
  167. Jespersen, Otto
    1917 Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: A.F. Høst.
     [Google Scholar]
  168. 1924 The Philosophy of Grammar. New York NY: Norton.
     [Google Scholar]
  169. 1931 A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part IV: Syntax, Vol. 3: Time and Tense. London: Allen and Unwin.
     [Google Scholar]
  170. Kandolf, Cindy
    1993 On the difference between explicatures and implicatures in relevance theory. Nordic Journal of Linguistics16: 33–46. 10.1017/S0332586500002651
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586500002651 [Google Scholar]
  171. Kany, Charles E.
    1951 American-Spanish Syntax. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  172. Kemmer, Suzanne & Barlow, Michael
    2000 Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. InUsage-Based Models of Language, Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds), i–xxvii. Stanford CA: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  173. Kenny, Anthony
    1963 Action, Emotion and Will. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul.
     [Google Scholar]
  174. Kiefer, Ulrike
    1994 Die Tempusformen im Jiddischen [The tense forms in Yiddish]. InTense Systems in European Languages, Rolf Thieroff & Joachim Ballweg (eds), 135–148. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
     [Google Scholar]
  175. Kilgarriff, Adam
    2005 Language is never, ever, ever, random. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory1(2): 263–276. 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.263
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.263 [Google Scholar]
  176. Klee, Carol A. & Lynch, Andrew
    2009 El Español en Contacto con Otras Lenguas [Spanish in Contact with Other Languages]. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. 10.1353/book13061
     https://doi.org/10.1353/book13061 [Google Scholar]
  177. Klein, Wolfgang
    1992 The present perfect puzzle. Language68(3): 525–552. 10.2307/415793
     https://doi.org/10.2307/415793 [Google Scholar]
  178. 1994 Time in Language. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  179. 2009 How time is encoded. InThe Expression of Time, Wolfgang Klein & Ping Li (eds), 40–81. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199031.39
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199031.39 [Google Scholar]
  180. Kranich, Svenja
    2010 Progressive in Modern English: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization and Related Changes. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789042031449
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042031449 [Google Scholar]
  181. Krapp, George Philip
    1925 The English Language in America, Vol.1. New York NY: Frederick Ungar.
     [Google Scholar]
  182. Kretzschmar, William A.
    2004 Standard American English pronunciation. InA Handbook of Varieties of English, Vol. 1: Phonology, Edgar Schneider , Kate Burridge , Bernd Kortmann , Rajend Mesthrie & Clive Upton (eds), 257–269. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  183. Krifka, Manfred
    1989 Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. InSemantics and Contextual Expressions, Renate Bartsch , Johan van Benthem & Peter van Emde Boas (eds), 75–115. Foris. 10.1515/9783110877335‑005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110877335-005 [Google Scholar]
  184. Kruisinga, Etsko
    1931 Handbook of Present-Day English, Vol.1. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.
     [Google Scholar]
  185. van Kuppevelt, Jan
    1995a Discourse structure, topicality and questioning. Journal of Linguistics31(1): 109–147. 10.1017/S002222670000058X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S002222670000058X [Google Scholar]
  186. 1995b Main structure and side structure in discourse. Linguistics33(4): 809–833. 10.1515/ling.1995.33.4.809
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1995.33.4.809 [Google Scholar]
  187. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
    1975 The evolution of grammatical categories. Esquisses Linguistiques II : 38–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  188. Kytö, Merja
    1997  Be/have + past participle: The choice of the auxiliary with intransitives from Late Middle to Modern English. InEnglish in Transition: Corpus-Based Studies in Linguistic Variation and Genre Styles, Matti Rissanen , Merja Kytö & Kirsi He ikkonen (eds), 18–85. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110811148.17
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110811148.17 [Google Scholar]
  189. L’Hermitte, René
    1978 La Phrase Nominale en Russe [The Nominal Phrase in Russian]. Paris: Institut d’ Études Slaves.
     [Google Scholar]
  190. Labov, William
    1966 The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Arlington VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  191. 1969 Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language45(4): 715–762. 10.2307/412333
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412333 [Google Scholar]
  192. 1972a Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  193. 1972b Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society1(1): 97–120. 10.1017/S0047404500006576
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006576 [Google Scholar]
  194. 1982 Building on empirical foundations. InPerspectives on Historical Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 24], Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds), 17–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.24.06lab
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.24.06lab [Google Scholar]
  195. Labov, William & Waletzky, Joshua
    1997 Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. Journal of Narrative and Life History7(1–4): 3–38. 10.1075/jnlh.7.02nar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jnlh.7.02nar [Google Scholar]
  196. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1987 Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol.1. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  197. 1988 A usage-based model. InTopics in Cognitive Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 50], Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.), 121–161. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.50.06lan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.50.06lan [Google Scholar]
  198. 1999 Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110800524
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110800524 [Google Scholar]
  199. 2000 A dynamic usage-based model. InUsage-Based Models of Language, Michael Barlow and Suzanne Kemmer (eds), 1–64. Stanford CA: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  200. Lass, Roger
    2006 Phonology and morphology. InA History of the English Language, Richard Hogg & David Denison (eds), 44–108. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511791154.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791154.003 [Google Scholar]
  201. Leech, Geoffrey
    1971 Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  202. 1993 100 million words of English. English Today9(1): 9–15. 10.1017/S0266078400006854
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400006854 [Google Scholar]
  203. Leech, Geoffrey , Hundt, Marianne , Mair, Christian & Smith, Nicholas
    2009 Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511642210
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511642210 [Google Scholar]
  204. Legendre, Géraldine
    2007 On the typology of auxiliary selection. Lingua117(9): 1522–1540. 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.06.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.06.005 [Google Scholar]
  205. Levin, Beth
    1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  206. Levinson, Stephen C.
    2000 Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge MA: The MIT press. 10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  207. Levshina, Natalia
    2015 How to Do Linguistics with R: Data Exploration and Statistical Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.195
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.195 [Google Scholar]
  208. Levshina, Natalia
    2020 Conditional inference trees and random forests. InA Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, Magali Paquot & Stefan T. Gries (eds), 611–645. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑46216‑1_25
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46216-1_25 [Google Scholar]
  209. Li, Charles N. , Thompson, Sandra A. & Thompson, R. M.
    1982 The discourse motivation for the perfect aspect: the Mandarin particle LE. InTense-Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, Paul Hopper (ed), 19–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  210. Lindstedt, Jouko
    2000 The perfect – aspectual, temporal and evidential. InTense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, Östen Dahl (ed.), 365–384. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197099.3.365
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197099.3.365 [Google Scholar]
  211. Lope Blanch, Juan M.
    1972 Sobre el uso del pretérito en el español de México [On the use of the preterite in Mexican Spanish]. Estudios Sobre el Español de México2: 131–143.
     [Google Scholar]
  212. Lucas, Christopher & Willis, David
    2012 Never again: The multiple grammaticalization of never as a marker of negation in English. English Language and Linguistics16(3): 459–485. 10.1017/S1360674312000196
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674312000196 [Google Scholar]
  213. Lundskær-Nielsen, Tom & Holmes, Philip
    2010 Danish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  214. Macleod, Morgan
    2014 Synchronic variation in the Old English perfect. Transactions of the Philological Society112(3): 319–343. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12029
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12029 [Google Scholar]
  215. Mair, Christian
    2006 Tracking ongoing grammatical change and recent diversification in present-day standard English: The complementary role of small and large corpora. InThe Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora [ICAME 24], Antoinette Renouf & Andrew Kehoe (eds), 355–376. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
     [Google Scholar]
  216. 2007 British English/American English grammar: Convergence in writing – divergence in speech?Anglia125(1): 84–100. 10.1515/ANGL.2007.84
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ANGL.2007.84 [Google Scholar]
  217. Martinet, André
    1955 Economie des Changements Phonétiques. Traité de Phonologie Diachronique. Berne: A. Francke.
     [Google Scholar]
  218. Matras, Yaron
    2020 Language Contact. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781108333955
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333955 [Google Scholar]
  219. Mesthrie, Rajend , Swann, Joan , Deumert, Ana & Leap, William L.
    2009 Introducing Sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: EUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  220. Meillet, Antoine
    1912 L’évolution des formes grammaticales [The evolution of grammatical forms]. Scientia (Rivista di Scienza) 12/26: 384–400.
     [Google Scholar]
  221. Mendoza, Imke
    2018 Possessive resultative constructions in Old and Middle Polish. InDiachronic Slavonic syntax: The Interplay Between Internal Development, Language Contact and Metalinguistic Factors, Jasmin Grković-Major , Björn Hansen & Barbara Sonnenhauser (eds), 161–186. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110531435‑007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110531435-007 [Google Scholar]
  222. Mencken, Henry L.
    1919 The American Language. New York NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
     [Google Scholar]
  223. Meyer, Matthias
    1992 Das Englische Perfekt. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783111353203
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111353203 [Google Scholar]
  224. McCawley, James D.
    1971 Tense and time reference in English. InStudies in Linguistic Semantics, Charles J. Fillmore & D. Terence Langėndoen (eds), 97–113. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  225. 1981 Notes on the English Present Perfect. Australian Journal of Linguistics1: 81–90. 10.1080/07268608108599267
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268608108599267 [Google Scholar]
  226. McCoard, Robert W.
    1978 The English Perfect: Tense Choice and Pragmatic Inferences. Amsterdam: North-Holland Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  227. McFadden, Thomas & Alexiadou, Artemis
    2010 Perfects, resultatives and auxiliaries in earlier English. Linguistic Inquiry41(3): 389–425. 10.1162/LING_a_00002
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00002 [Google Scholar]
  228. ter Meulen, Alice G. B.
    1995 Representing Time in Natural Language: The Dynamic Interpretation of Tense and Aspect. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5897.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5897.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  229. Michaelis, Laura A.
    1994 The ambiguity of the English present perfect. Journal of Linguistics30(1): 111–157. 10.1017/S0022226700016200
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016200 [Google Scholar]
  230. 1998 Aspectual Grammar and Past-Time Reference. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  231. Milroy, Lesley & Gordon, Matthew
    2003 Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470758359
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470758359 [Google Scholar]
  232. Mitchell, Bruce
    1985 Old English Syntax, 1: Concord, the Parts of Speech, and the Sentence. Oxford: Clarendon. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198119357.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198119357.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  233. Mittwoch, Anita
    2008 The English Resultative perfect and its relationship to the Experiential perfect and the simple past tense. Linguistics and Philosophy31(3): 323–351. 10.1007/s10988‑008‑9037‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-008-9037-y [Google Scholar]
  234. Moens, Marc & Steedman, Mark
    1988 Temporal ontology and temporal reference. Computational Linguistics14(2): 15–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  235. Moss, Norman
    1991 British/American Language Dictionary. Lincolnwood IL: Passport Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  236. Musan, Renate
    2001 The present perfect in German: Outline of its semantic composition. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory19(2): 355–401. 10.1023/A:1010698022098
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010698022098 [Google Scholar]
  237. Mustanoja, Tauno F.
    1960 A Middle English Syntax, I: Parts of Speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
     [Google Scholar]
  238. Nevalainen, Terttu
    2013 English historical corpora in transition: From new tools to legacy corpora?InNew Methods in Historical Corpora, Paul Bennet , Martin Durrell , Silke Scheible , & Richard J. Whitt (eds), Tübingen: Niemeyer.
     [Google Scholar]
  239. Nishiyama, Atsuko
    2006 The meaning and interpretations of the Japanese aspectual marker -te-i- . Journal of Semantics23(2): 185–216. 10.1093/jos/ffh036
     https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffh036 [Google Scholar]
  240. Nishiyama, Atsuko & Koenig, Jean-Pierre
    2010 What is a perfect state?Language86(3): 611–645. 10.1353/lan.2010.0014
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2010.0014 [Google Scholar]
  241. Orr, Robert
    1992 Slavo-Celtica. Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue Canadienne des Slavistes34(3) : 245–68. 10.1080/00085006.1992.11091989
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00085006.1992.11091989 [Google Scholar]
  242. Paden, William D.
    1998 An Introduction to Old Occitan. New York NY: Modern Language Association of America.
     [Google Scholar]
  243. Pallant, Julie
    2007 SPSS Survival Manual, 3rd ed. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill/Open University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  244. Parsons, Terence
    1990 Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge MA: The MIT press.
     [Google Scholar]
  245. Partee, Barbara Hall
    1973 Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. Journal of Philosophy70(18): 601–609. 10.2307/2025024
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2025024 [Google Scholar]
  246. Peduzzi, Peter N. , Concato, John , Kemper, Elizabeth , Holford, Theodore R. , & Feinstein, Alvan R.
    1996 A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology99: 1373–1379. 10.1016/S0895‑4356(96)00236‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00236-3 [Google Scholar]
  247. Penny, Ralph
    2000 Variation and Change in Spanish. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139164566
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164566 [Google Scholar]
  248. Penny, Ralph
    2002 A History of the Spanish Language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511992827
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511992827 [Google Scholar]
  249. Peterson, Hjalmar P. & Adams, Johnathan
    2009 Faroese: A Language Course for Beginners. Grammar. Tórshavn: Stiðin.
     [Google Scholar]
  250. Poplack, Shana & Dion, Nathalie
    2009 Prescription vs prexis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language85(3): 557–587. 10.1353/lan.0.0149
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0149 [Google Scholar]
  251. Poplack, Shana & Tagliamonte, Sali
    1989 There’s no tense like the present: Verbal -s inflection in early Black English. Language Variation and Change1(1): 47–84. 10.1017/S0954394500000119
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000119 [Google Scholar]
  252. Poplack, Shana & Malvar, Elisabete
    2007 Elucidating the transition period in linguistic change. Probus19(1): 121–169. 10.1515/PROBUS.2007.005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2007.005 [Google Scholar]
  253. Portner, Paul
    2003 The (temporal) semantics and (modal) pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy26(4): 459–510. 10.1023/A:1024697112760
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024697112760 [Google Scholar]
  254. 2011 Perfect & progressive. InSemantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol.1, Claudia Maienborn , Klaus von Heusinger , & Paul Portner (eds), 1217–1261. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  255. Pountain, Christopher J.
    1985 Copulas, verbs of possession in Old Spanish: The evidence for structurally interdependent changes. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies62: 337–355.
     [Google Scholar]
  256. Poutsma, Hendrik
    1928 A Grammar of Late Modern English. Groningen: Noordhoff.
     [Google Scholar]
  257. Quirk, Randolph , Greenbaum, Sidney , Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
    1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  258. Rastall, Paul
    1999 Observations on the present perfect in English. World Englishes18(1): 79–83. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00123
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00123 [Google Scholar]
  259. Read, Allen W.
    2002 British recognition of American speech in the eighteenth century. InMilestones in the History of English in America, Richard W. Bailey (ed), 37–54. Durham NC: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  260. Recanati, François
    2004 Literal Meaning. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  261. 2010 Truth-Conditional Pragmatics. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226993.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226993.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  262. Reichenbach, Hans
    1966 Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York NY: The Free Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  263. Rezaee, Abbas Ali & Golparvar, Seyyed Ehsan
    2017 Conditional inference tree modelling of competing motivators of the positioning of concessive clauses: The case of a non-native corpus. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics24(2–3): 89–106. 10.1080/09296174.2016.1265799
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2016.1265799 [Google Scholar]
  264. Rissanen, Matti
    1999 Syntax. InThe Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. III: 1476 to 1776, Roger Lass (ed.), 187–321. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  265. Ritz, Marie-Eve A. & Engel, Dulcie M.
    2008 “Vivid narrative use” and the meaning of the present perfect in spoken Australian English. Linguistics46(1): 131–160. 10.1515/LING.2008.005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2008.005 [Google Scholar]
  266. Rodríguez Louro, Celeste
    2009 Perfect Evolution and Change: A Sociolinguistic Study of Preterit and Present Perfect in Contemporary and Earlier Argentina. PhD dissertation, University of Melbourne.
  267. Rohdenburg, Günter & Schlüter, Julia
    2009 One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511551970
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551970 [Google Scholar]
  268. Rothstein, Björn
    2008 The Perfect Time Span: On the Present Perfect in German, Swedish and English [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 125]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.125
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.125 [Google Scholar]
  269. Rothstein, Susan D.
    2004 Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Aspect. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470759127
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470759127 [Google Scholar]
  270. Roy, Joseph
    2014 The Perfect Approach to Adverbs: Applying Variation Theory to Competing Models. PhD dissertation, University of Ottawa.
  271. Rydén, Mats & Brorstrom, Sverker
    1987 The Be/Have Variation with Intransitives in English. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
     [Google Scholar]
  272. Sankoff, David & Thibault, Pierrette
    1981 Weak complementarity: Tense and aspect in Montreal French. InSyntactic Change, Vol.25, Brenda B. Johns & David R. Strong (eds), 205–216. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan.
     [Google Scholar]
  273. Sankoff, Gillian
    1980 The Social Life of Language. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. 10.9783/9781512809589
     https://doi.org/10.9783/9781512809589 [Google Scholar]
  274. Schaden, Gerhard
    2009 Present perfects compete. Linguistics and Philosophy32(2): 115–141. 10.1007/s10988‑009‑9056‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-009-9056-3 [Google Scholar]
  275. Schneider, Edgar W.
    2007 Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511618901
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618901 [Google Scholar]
  276. Schwenter, Scott A.
    1994a “Hot news” and the grammaticalization of perfects. Linguistics32(6): 995–1028. 10.1515/ling.1994.32.6.995
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1994.32.6.995 [Google Scholar]
  277. 1994b The grammaticalization of an anterior in progress: Evidence from a peninsular Spanish dialect. Studies in Language18(1): 71–111. 10.1075/sl.18.1.05sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18.1.05sch [Google Scholar]
  278. Schwenter, Scott A. & Cacoullos, Rena Torres
    2008 Defaults and indeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The “perfect” road to perfective. Language Variation and Change20(1): 1–39. 10.1017/S0954394508000057
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394508000057 [Google Scholar]
  279. Seoane, Elena & Suárez-Gómez, Cristina
    2013 The expression of the perfect in East and South-East Asian Englishes. English World-Wide34(1): 1–25. 10.1075/eww.34.1.01seo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.34.1.01seo [Google Scholar]
  280. Sgall, Petr , Hajičová, Eva & Benešová, Eva
    1973 Topic, Focus and Generative Semantics. Kronberg: Scriptor Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  281. Siegel, Jeff
    2001 Koine formation and creole genesis. InCreolization and Contact [Creole Language Library 21], Norval Smith & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 175–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cll.23.08sie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cll.23.08sie [Google Scholar]
  282. Sinclair, John
    1991 Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  283. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen
    1994 Language Contact and Change. Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  284. Smith, Carlota S.
    1997 The Parameters of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5606‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5606-6 [Google Scholar]
  285. Smitterberg, Erik
    2014 Syntactic stability and change in nineteenth-century newspaper language. InLate Modern English Syntax, Marianne Hundt (ed.), 311–330. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139507226.023
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507226.023 [Google Scholar]
  286. Sorace, Antonella
    2000 Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs. Language76(4): 859–890. 10.2307/417202
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417202 [Google Scholar]
  287. Sørensen, Holger S.
    1964 On the semantic unity of the perfect tense. English Studies Presented to R. W. Zandvoort on His 70th Birthday, 74–83. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
     [Google Scholar]
  288. Speelman, Dirk , Heylen, Kris & Geeraerts, Dirk
    2018 Mixed-Effects Regression Models in Linguistics. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑69830‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69830-4 [Google Scholar]
  289. Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
    1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  290. Squartini, Mario & Bertinetto, Pier Marco
    2000 The simple and compound past in Romance languages. InTense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Östen Dahl (ed), 403–439. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197099.3.403
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197099.3.403 [Google Scholar]
  291. Strobl, Carolin , Malley, James & Tutz, Gerhard
    2009 An introduction to recursive partitioning: Rationale, application and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging and random forests. Psychological Methods14(4): 323–348. 10.1037/a0016973
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016973 [Google Scholar]
  292. Swales, John M. & Feak, Christine B.
    2012 Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.2173936
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.2173936 [Google Scholar]
  293. Sweet, Henry
    1900 A New English Grammar, Logical and Historical. Oxford: Claredon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  294. Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt
    2006 Morphosyntactic Persistence in Spoken English: A Corpus Study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197808
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197808 [Google Scholar]
  295. 2016a About text frequencies in historical linguistics: Disentangling environmental and grammatical change. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory12(1): 153–171. 10.1515/cllt‑2015‑0068
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2015-0068 [Google Scholar]
  296. 2016b An analytic-synthetic spiral in the history of English. InCyclical Change Continued [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 227], Elly van Gelderen (ed.), 93–112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.227.04szm
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.227.04szm [Google Scholar]
  297. Taavitsainen, Irma
    1995 Interjections in Early Modern English: From imitation of spoken to conventions of written language. InHistorical Pragmatics, Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), 439–468. John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.23taa
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.23taa [Google Scholar]
  298. Tagliamonte, Sali A.
    2000 The grammaticalization of the present perfect in English: Tracks of change and continuity in a linguistic enclave. InPathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English [Studies in Language Companion Series 53], Olga Fischer , Anette Rosenbach , & Dieter Stein (eds), 329–354. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.53.16tag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.16tag [Google Scholar]
  299. 2002 Comparative sociolinguistics. InHandbook of Language Variation and Change, Jack K. Chambers , Peter Trudgill & Natalie Schilling-Estes (eds), 729–763. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  300. 2006 Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511801624
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801624 [Google Scholar]
  301. 2012 Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  302. Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Baayen, R. Harald
    2012 Models, forests and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change24(2): 135–178. 10.1017/S0954394512000129
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394512000129 [Google Scholar]
  303. Tannen, Deborah
    1987 Repetition in conversation: Toward a poetics of talk. Language, 63(2), 574–605.
     [Google Scholar]
  304. 1989 Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  305. Ternes, Elmar
    2008 The Breton language. InThe Celtic Languages, Donald MacAulay (ed.), 371–452. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  306. Thieroff, Rolf
    2000 On the areal distribution of tense-aspect categories in Europe. InTense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Östen Dahl (ed.), 265–308. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197099.1.265
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197099.1.265 [Google Scholar]
  307. Thomason, Sarah G. & Kaufman, Terrence
    1988 Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley CA: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520912793
     https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912793 [Google Scholar]
  308. Thráinsson, Höskuldur
    2007 The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511619441
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619441 [Google Scholar]
  309. Torres Cacoullos, Rena
    2000 Grammaticalization, Synchronic Variation, and Language Contact: A Study of Spanish Progressive ‘-ndo’ Constructions [Studies in Language Companion Series 52]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.52
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.52 [Google Scholar]
  310. Torres Cacoullos, Rena & Walker, James
    2011 Collocations in grammaticalization and variation. InThe Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 225–238. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0018
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0018 [Google Scholar]
  311. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    1972 A History of English Syntax: A Transformational Approach to the History of English Sentence Structure. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  312. 1989 On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language65(1): 31–55. 10.2307/414841
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414841 [Google Scholar]
  313. 1992 Syntax. InThe Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. I: The Beginnings to 1066, Richard M. Hogg (ed.), 168–289. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CHOL9780521264747.005
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264747.005 [Google Scholar]
  314. 2010 (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: a reassessment. InSubjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, Kristin Davidse , Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds), 29–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226102.1.29
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29 [Google Scholar]
  315. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard B.
    2002 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  316. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Heine, Bernd
    1991 Approaches to Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 19]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  317. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme
    2010 Gradience, Gradualness and Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 90]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.90
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.90 [Google Scholar]
  318. 2013 Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  319. Travis, Charles
    1985 On what is strictly speaking true. Canadian Journal of Philosophy15(2): 187–299. 10.1080/00455091.1985.10716416
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1985.10716416 [Google Scholar]
  320. 1997 Pragmatics. InA Companion to the Philosophy of Language, Bob Hale & Crispin Wright (eds), 87–107. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  321. Trnka, Bohumil
    1930 On the Syntax of the English Verb from Caxton to Dryden. Prague: Jednota Československých Matematiků a Fyzik.
     [Google Scholar]
  322. Trudgill, Peter
    2010 Investigations in Sociohistorical Linguistics: Stories of Colonisation and Contact. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511760501
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511760501 [Google Scholar]
  323. 2011 Sociolinguistic Typology: Social Determinants of Linguistic Complexity. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  324. Trudgill, Peter & Hannah, Jean
    2013 International English: A Guide to Varieties of English around the World. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203785225
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203785225 [Google Scholar]
  325. Twaddell, William Freeman
    1968 The English Verb Auxiliaries. Providence RI: Brown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  326. United States Census Office
    United States Census Office 1901 Twelfth Census of the United States, Census Reports, Vol. 1: Population, Part 1, 〈https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/lansingmi1890-1900.pdf〉 (2 June 2022).
     [Google Scholar]
  327. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
    United States Immigration and Naturalization Service 2003 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
     [Google Scholar]
  328. Van Herk, Gerard
    2008 Letter perfect: The present perfect in early African American correspondence. English World-Wide29(1): 45–69. 10.1075/eww.29.1.04van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.29.1.04van [Google Scholar]
  329. 2010 Aspect and the English present perfect: What can be coded?InAspect in Grammatical Variation [Studies in Language Variation 6], James A. Walker (ed.), 49–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/silv.6.04van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.6.04van [Google Scholar]
  330. Vanneck, Gerard
    1958 The colloquial preterite in Modern American English. Word14(2–3): 237–242. 10.1080/00437956.1958.11659668
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1958.11659668 [Google Scholar]
  331. Vendler, Zeno
    1967 Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press. 10.7591/9781501743726
     https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501743726 [Google Scholar]
  332. Verkuyl, Henk J.
    1993 A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction Between Temporal and Atemporal Structure. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511597848
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597848 [Google Scholar]
  333. Visser, Frederik T.
    1966 An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part II: Syntactical Units with One Verb (Continued). Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  334. Visser, Frederik h
    1973 An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part III. 2nd Half: Syntactical Units with Two and with More Verbs. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  335. Vittinghoff, Eric , Glidden, David V. , Shiboski, Stephen C. & McCulloch, Charles E.
    2011 Regression Methods in Biostatistics: Linear, Logistic, Survival, and Repeated Measures Models. Berlin: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  336. Walker, Jim
    2008 The footballer’s perfect – Are footballers leading the way?InThe Linguistics of Football, Eva Lavric , Gerhard Piset , Andrew Skinner & Wolfgang Stadler (eds), 295–303. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  337. 2017 The present perfect has only gone and changed, hasn’t it? The continuing divergence of the narrative perfect. InAorists and Perfects: Synchronic and Diachronic Perspectives, Marc Fryd & Pierre-Don Giancarli (eds), 25–41. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004326651_004
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004326651_004 [Google Scholar]
  338. Wardhaugh, Ronald
    2010 An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  339. Watkins, Calvert
    2000 An American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots. Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin.
     [Google Scholar]
  340. Weiner, E. Judith & Labov, William
    1983 Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics19(1): 29–58. 10.1017/S0022226700007441
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700007441 [Google Scholar]
  341. Weinreich, Uriel , Labov, William , & Herzog, Marvin
    1968 Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. InDirections for Historical Linguistics, Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds), 95–188. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  342. Werner, Valentin
    2014 The Present Perfect in World Englishes: Charting Unity and Diversity. Bamberg: Bamberg University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  343. Werner, Valentin , Seoane, Elena & Suárez-Gómez, Cristina
    2016 Re-assessing the Present Perfect. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110443530
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110443530 [Google Scholar]
  344. Westin, Ingrid
    2002 Language Change in English Newspaper Editorials. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004334007
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334007 [Google Scholar]
  345. Westmoreland, Maurice
    1988 The distribution and the use of the present perfect and the past perfect forms in American Spanish. Hispania71(2): 379–384. 10.2307/343085
     https://doi.org/10.2307/343085 [Google Scholar]
  346. Wheeler, Max
    1988 Occitan. InThe Romance Languages, Martin Harris & Nigel Vincent (eds), 246–278. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  347. Wiemer, Björn & Giger, Markus
    2005 Resultativa in den Nordslavischen und Baltischen Sprachen: Bestandsaufnahme unter Arealen und Grammatikalisierungstheoretischen Gesichtspunkten [Resultatives in the North Slavic and Baltic languages: Taking Stock from an Areal and Grammatical Theoretical Perspective]. Munich: Lincom.
     [Google Scholar]
  348. Wilson, Deirdre & Sperber, Dan
    1993 Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua90(1–2): 1–25. 10.1016/0024‑3841(93)90058‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(93)90058-5 [Google Scholar]
  349. 2004 Relevance theory. InThe Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  350. Wischer, Ilse
    2004 The have-perfect in Old English. InNew Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 251], Christian J. Kay , Simon Horobin , & Jeremy Smith (eds), 243–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.251.15wis
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.251.15wis [Google Scholar]
  351. Wolfram, Walt & Schilling-Estes, Natalie
    1998 American English: Dialects and Variation. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  352. Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria
    2011 ARCHER past and present (1990–2010). ICAME Journal35: 205–236.
     [Google Scholar]
  353. Yao, Xinyue
    2016 The evolution of the “hot news” perfect in English: A study of register-specific linguistic change. Journal of Historical Pragmatics17(1): 129–152. 10.1075/jhp.17.1.06yao
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.17.1.06yao [Google Scholar]
  354. Yao, Xinyue & Collins, Peter
    2012 The present perfect in world Englishes. World Englishes31(3): 386–403. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2012.01756.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2012.01756.x [Google Scholar]
  355. 2013 Recent change in non-present perfect constructions in British and American English. Corpora8(1): 115–135. 10.3366/cor.2013.0036
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2013.0036 [Google Scholar]
  356. Zandvoort, Reinard W.
    1962 A Handbook of English Grammar. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  357. Zimmermann, Rüdiger
    1972 Structural change in the English auxiliary system: On the replacement of be by have . Folia Linguistica6(1–2): 107–117.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/books/9789027248602
Loading

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027248602
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027248602
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027248602
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error