1887

Corpora, Constructions, New Englishes

A constructional and variationist approach to verb patterning

image of Corpora, Constructions, New Englishes

This book takes an integrated approach to the fields of Corpus Linguistics, Construction Grammar, and World Englishes through a thorough constructional and corpus-based examination of the patterning of the versatile high-frequency verb make in British English and New Englishes. It contributes to Construction Grammar theory by adopting a verb-based, rather than construction-based, perspective on argument structure. This allows the probing of the interface between verb-independent generalizations and item-specificity from an underexplored angle that offers new insights into the shape of the constructicon. From a variationist perspective, it seeks to (i) identify features of New Englishes and gauge whether these features exhibit traces of conventionalization, and (ii) assess whether the degree of institutionalization of the New Englishes correlates with linguistic behavior, both from a social and cognitive perspective, thereby contributing to the budding effort to integrate the cognitive and social dimensions into the modeling of linguistic variation in World Englishes.

References

  1. Aarts, B. 2004 Modelling linguistic gradience. Studies in Language28(1): 1–49. 10.1075/sl.28.1.02aar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.28.1.02aar [Google Scholar]
  2. Algeo, J.
    1995 Having a look at the expanded predicate. InThe Verb in Contemporary English, B. Aarts & C. F. Meyer (eds), 203–217. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2006British or American English? A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511607240
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607240 [Google Scholar]
  4. Allerton, D. J.
    2002Stretched Verb Constructions in English. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Alsagoff, L.
    2010 English in Singapore: Culture, capital and identity in linguistic variation. World Englishes29(3): 336–348. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2010.01658.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2010.01658.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Altenberg, B. & Granger, S.
    2001 The grammatical and lexical patterning of make in native and non-native student writing. Applied Linguistics22(2): 173–194. 10.1093/applin/22.2.173
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.2.173 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ansaldo, U.
    2004 The evolution of Singapore English Finding the matrix. InSingapore English: A Grammatical Description, L. Lim (ed.), 129-149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g33.08ans
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g33.08ans [Google Scholar]
  8. 2010 Contact and Asian varieties of English. InThe Handbook of Language Contact, R. Hickey (ed.), 498–517. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 10.1002/9781444318159.ch24
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318159.ch24 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ansaldo, U. & Lim, L.
    2012 English in Asia. InAreal Features of the Anglophone World, R. Hickey (ed.), 187–210. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110279429.187
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279429.187 [Google Scholar]
  10. Anthony, L.
    2014aAntConc (version 3.4.4)[computer software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. www.laurenceanthony.net/software (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2014bAntWordProfiler (version 1.4.1)[computer software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. www.laurenceanthony.net/software (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Arppe, A. , Gilquin, G. , Glynn, D. , Hilpert, M. & Zeschel, A.
    2010 Cognitive Corpus Linguistics: Five points of debate on current theory and methodology. Corpora5(1): 1–27. 10.3366/cor.2010.0001
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2010.0001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Axler, M. , Yang, A. & Stevens, T.
    1998 Current language attitudes of Hong Kong Chinese adolescents and young adults. InLanguage in Hong Kong at Century’s End, M. C. Pennington (ed.), 329–338. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Baayen, R. H. & Prado Martin, F. M. del.
    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]
  15. Bakshi, R. N.
    1991 Indian English. English Today7(3): 43–46. 10.1017/S0266078400005757
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400005757 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bamgbose, A.
    1998 Torn between the norms: Innovations in World Englishes. World Englishes17(1): 1–14. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00078
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00078 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bao, Z.
    1995Already in Singapore English. World Englishes14(2): 181–188. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1995.tb00348.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1995.tb00348.x [Google Scholar]
  18. Barðdal, J.
    2008Productivity: Evidence from Case and Argument Structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.8 [Google Scholar]
  19. Baron, I. & Herslund, M. 1998 Support verb constructions as predicate formation. InThe Structure of the Lexicon in Functional Grammar, H. Olbertz , K. Hengeveld & J. Sánchez García (eds), 99–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.43.09bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.43.09bar [Google Scholar]
  20. Bartoń, K.
    2018 MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference, R package version 1.42.1. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MuMIn/index.html (20April 2020)
  21. Bates, D. , Maechler, M. , Bolker, B. , Walker, S.
    2015 Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67(1): 1-48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2019 lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models using ‘Eigen’ and S4, R package version 1.1-21. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html (20April 2020)
  23. Bauer, L.
    2002An Introduction to International Varieties of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Beckner, C. , Blythe, R. , Bybee, J. , Christiansen, M. H. , Croft, W. , Ellis, N. C. , Holland, J. , Ke, J. , Larsen-Freeman, D. , Schoenemann, T.
    2009 Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning59, Supplement 1: 1–26. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00533.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Bergs, A.
    2008 Can we take Construction Grammar beyond sneezing napkins off tables?InProceedings of the Anglistentag Münster 2007, K. Stierstorfer (ed.), 269–276. Trier: WVT.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Bernaisch, T.
    2013 The verb complementational profile of offer in Sri Lankan English. InCorpus linguistics and Variation in English: Focus on Non-native Englishes, M. Huber & J. Mukherjee (eds). Helsinki: Research unit for variation, contacts and change in English. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/series/volumes/13/bernaisch/ (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2015The Lexis and Lexicogrammar of Sri Lankan English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g54
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g54 [Google Scholar]
  28. Bernaisch, T. , Gries, S. T. & Mukherjee, J.
    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]
  29. Bernaisch, T. & Koch, C.
    2016 Attitudes towards Englishes in India. World Englishes35(1): 118–132. 10.1111/weng.12174
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12174 [Google Scholar]
  30. Bernaisch, T. & Zipp, L.
    2012 Particle verbs across first and second language varieties of English. InMapping unity and diversity world-wide: corpus-based studies of New Englishes, M. Hundt & U. Gut (eds), 167–196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g43.07zip
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.07zip [Google Scholar]
  31. Berns, M. , De Bot, K. & Hasebrink, U.
    2007In the presence of English: Media and European youth. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑36894‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36894-8 [Google Scholar]
  32. Bhatt, R. M.
    2001 World Englishes. Annual Review of Anthropology30(1): 527–550. 10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.527
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.527 [Google Scholar]
  33. Biber, D. , Johansson, S. , Leech, G. , Conrad, S. & Finegan, E.
    (eds). 1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Bird, N.
    2001 The most common Hong Kong English language errors and how to avoid them. The Hong Kong Linguist, Journal of the Institute of Linguists, Hong Kong Regional Society22: 7–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Bley-Vroman, R.
    1983 The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning33(1): 1–17. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1983.tb00983.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00983.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Bloomfield, L.
    1933Language. New York: Holt.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Blumenthal-Dramé, A.
    2012Entrenchment in Usage-based Theories: What Corpus Data do and do not Reveal about the Mind. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110294002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110294002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Boas, H. 2003aA Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 2003b Towards a lexical-constructional account of the locative alternation. InProceedings of the 2001 Western Conference in Linguistics, L. Carmichael , C.-H. Huang & V. Samiian (eds), 27–42. Fresno: California State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 2007 Construction Grammar in the twenty-first century. English Language and Linguistics11(3): 569–585. 10.1017/S1360674307002390
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674307002390 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2008a Resolving form-meaning discrepancies in Construction Grammar. InConstructional Reorganization, J. Leino (ed.), 11–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.5.02boa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.5.02boa [Google Scholar]
  42. 2008b Determining the structure of lexical entries and grammatical constructions in Construction Grammar. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics6(1): 113–144. 10.1075/arcl.6.06boa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.6.06boa [Google Scholar]
  43. 2010 The syntax-lexicon continuum in Construction Grammar: A case study of English communicative verbs. Belgian Journal of Linguistics24: 54–82. 10.1075/bjl.24.03boa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.24.03boa [Google Scholar]
  44. 2013 Cognitive Construction Grammar. InThe Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds), 233–254. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 2014 Lexical and phrasal approaches to argument structure: Two sides of the same coin. Theoretical Linguistics40(1–2): 89-112. 10.1515/tl‑2014‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2014-0003 [Google Scholar]
  46. Bolinger, D.
    1961 Syntactic blends and other matters. Language37(3): 366–381. 10.2307/411078
    https://doi.org/10.2307/411078 [Google Scholar]
  47. 1976 Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum1(1): 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Bolt, P. & Bolton, K.
    1996 The International Corpus of English in Hong Kong. In Comparing English Worldwide: The International Corpus of English, S. Greenbaum (ed.), 197–214. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Bolton, K.
    2000 The sociolinguistics of Hong Kong and the space for Hong Kong English. World Englishes19(3): 265–285. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00179
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00179 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2002 Introduction. InHong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity, K. Bolton (ed.), 1–25. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 2003Chinese Englishes. A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 2006 World Englishes Today. In The Handbook of World Englishes, B. B. Kachru , Y. Kachru & C. L. Nelson (eds), 240–269. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 10.1002/9780470757598.ch15
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757598.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2012 Language policy and planning in Hong Kong: The historical context and current realities. InEnglish in Southeast Asia: Features, Policy and Language in Use, E. Low & A. Hashim (eds), 220–238. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g42.18bol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g42.18bol [Google Scholar]
  54. Bolton, K. & Lim, S.
    2000 Futures for Hong Kong English. World Englishes19(3): 429–443. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00191
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00191 [Google Scholar]
  55. Bolton, K. & Ng, B. C.
    2014 The dynamics of multilingualism in contemporary Singapore. World Englishes33(3): 307–318. 10.1111/weng.12092
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12092 [Google Scholar]
  56. Boyd, J. K. & Goldberg, A. E.
    2011 Learning what NOT to say: The role of statistical preemption and categorization a-adjective production. Language87(1): 55–83. 10.1353/lan.2011.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0012 [Google Scholar]
  57. Brinton, L. J.
    2011 The grammaticalization of complex predicates. InThe Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, B. Heine & H. Narrog (eds), 559–569.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Brinton, L. J. & Traugott, E. C.
    2005Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615962
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615962 [Google Scholar]
  59. Bruckmaier, E. 2017Getting at GET in World Englishes: A Corpus-based Semasiologicalsyntactic Analysis. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110497311
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110497311 [Google Scholar]
  60. Brugman, C.
    2001 Light verbs and polysemy. Language Sciences23(4–5): 551–578. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(00)00036‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(00)00036-X [Google Scholar]
  61. Brunner, T.
    2014 Structural nativization, typology and complexity: Noun phrase structures in British, Kenyan and Singaporean English. English Language and Linguistics18(1): 23–48. 10.1017/S1360674313000269
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674313000269 [Google Scholar]
  62. Bruthiaux, P.
    2003 Squaring the circles: Issues in modeling English worldwide. International Journal of Applied Linguistics13(2): 159–178. 10.1111/1473‑4192.00042
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00042 [Google Scholar]
  63. Brutt-Griffler, J.
    2002World English: A Study of its Development. Clevedon, UK & Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853595790
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595790 [Google Scholar]
  64. Bunton, D.
    1989Common English Errors in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 2012More Common English Errors in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Buschfeld, S.
    2013English in Cyprus or Cyprus English: An Empirical Investigation of Variety Status. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g46
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g46 [Google Scholar]
  67. Buschfeld, S. , Hoffmann, T. , Huber, M. & Kautzsch, A.
    2014 Introduction. InThe evolution of Englishes: the Dynamic Model and beyond, S. Buschfeld , T. Hoffmann , M. Huber & A. Kautzsch (eds), 1–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g49.01int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.01int [Google Scholar]
  68. Butler, S.
    1997 Corpus of English in Southeast Asia: Implications for a regional dictionary. InEnglish is an Asian Language: The Philippine Context, M. L. Bautista (ed.), 103–124. Sydney: Macquarie Library.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Butt, M.
    2010 The light verb jungle: Still hacking away. InComplex Predicates: Cross-linguistic Perspectives on Event Structure, M. Amberber , B. Baker & M. Harvey (eds), 48–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511712234.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712234.004 [Google Scholar]
  70. Bybee, J.
    2006 From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language82(4): 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  71. 2008 Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. InHandbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition, P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (eds), 216–236. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 2010Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
  73. Bybee, J. & Hopper, P.
    2001 Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, J. Bybee & P. Hopper (eds), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.01byb
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.01byb [Google Scholar]
  74. Bybee, J. & Scheibman, J.
    1999 The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics37(4): 575–596. 10.1515/ling.37.4.575
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.4.575 [Google Scholar]
  75. Cappelle, B.
    2006 Particle placement and the case for ‘allostructions’. Constructions online, sv1–7: 1–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Carnie, A.
    2010Constituent Structure (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Cavallaro, F. , Ng, B. C. & Seilhamer, M. F.
    2014 Singapore Colloquial English: Issues of prestige and identity. World Englishes33(3): 378–397. 10.1111/weng.12096
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12096 [Google Scholar]
  78. Chew, P. G. L.
    1995 Lectal power in Singapore English. World Englishes14(2): 163–180. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1995.tb00347.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1995.tb00347.x [Google Scholar]
  79. Chomsky, N. & Lasnik, H.
    1993 The theory of principles and parameters. InSyntax: an international handbook of contemporary research, J. Jacobs , A. von Stechow , W. Sternefeld & T. Vennemann (eds), 506–569. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110095869.1.9.506
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110095869.1.9.506 [Google Scholar]
  80. Church, K. & Hanks, P.
    1990 Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational Linguistics16(1): 22–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Cinkova, S. & Hanks, P. 2010 Validation of Corpus Pattern Analysis: Assigning pattern numbers to random verb samples. https://nlp.fi.muni.cz/projects/cpa/CPA_valiman.pdf (20April 2020)
  82. Cogo, A. & Dewey, M.
    2012Analyzing English as a Lingua Franca: A Corpus-driven Investigation. London & New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Collins COBUILD English Grammar
    Collins COBUILD English Grammar . Digital edition 2017 (3rd edition). Collins COBUILD.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Collins, P.
    2012 Singular agreement in there-existentials: An intervarietal corpus-based study. English World-Wide33(1): 53–68. 10.1075/eww.33.1.03col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.1.03col [Google Scholar]
  85. Collins, P. & Yao, X.
    2013 Colloquial features in Word Englishes. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics18(4): 479–505. 10.1075/ijcl.18.4.02col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.4.02col [Google Scholar]
  86. Contreras-Cabrera, M. , Bravo-Dutt, M. & Valles, E. T.
    (eds). 2015Get Lucky: An Anthology of Philippine and Singapore Writings. Singapore: Ethos Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Cook, V.
    1991 The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multicompetence. Second Language Research7(2): 103–117.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 1999 Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly33(2): 185–209. 10.2307/3587717
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587717 [Google Scholar]
  89. 2016 Where is the native speaker now?TESOL Quarterly50(1): 186–189. 10.1002/tesq.286
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.286 [Google Scholar]
  90. Corder, S. P.
    1967 The significance of learner’s errors. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching5(4): 161-170. 10.1515/iral.1967.5.1‑4.161
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1967.5.1-4.161 [Google Scholar]
  91. Croft, W.
    2000Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow, England & New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  93. 2003 Lexical rules vs. constructions: A false dichotomy. InMotivation in Language: Studies in Honor of Günter Radden, H. Cuyckens , T. Berg , R. Dirven & K.-U. Panther (eds), 49–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.243.07cro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.243.07cro [Google Scholar]
  94. 2005 Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. InConstruction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, J.-O. Östman & M. Fried (eds), 273–314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.3.11cro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.3.11cro [Google Scholar]
  95. 2007 Construction Grammar. InThe Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds), 463–508. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. 2009 Toward a social cognitive linguistics. InHuman Cognitive Processing, V. Evans & S. Pourcel (eds), 395–420. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.24.25cro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.25cro [Google Scholar]
  97. Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A.
    2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  98. Crystal, D.
    2003English as a Global Language (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486999
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486999 [Google Scholar]
  99. Culicover, P. W.
    1999Syntactic Nuts: Hard Cases, Syntactic Theory, and Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Cummings, P. J. & Wolf, H.-G.
    2011A Dictionary of Hong Kong English: Words from the Fragrant Harbor. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Dabrowska, E. & Divjak, D.
    2015 Introduction. InHandbook of Cognitive Linguistics, E. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (eds), 1–9. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110292022‑001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110292022-001 [Google Scholar]
  102. Davies, M. & Fuchs, R.
    2015 Expanding horizons in the study of World Englishes with the 1.9 billion word Global Web-based English Corpus (GloWbE). English World-Wide36(1): 1–28. 10.1075/eww.36.1.01dav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.36.1.01dav [Google Scholar]
  103. De Cuypere, L. & Verbeke, S. 2013 Dative alternation in Indian English: A corpus-based analysis. World Englishes32(2):169–184. 10.1111/weng.12017
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12017 [Google Scholar]
  104. Deshors, S. C.
    2015 A multifactorial approach to gerundial and to-infinitival verb-complementation patterns in native and non-native English. English Text Construction8(2): 207–235. 10.1075/etc.8.2.04des
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.8.2.04des [Google Scholar]
  105. 2017 Structuring subjectivity in Asian Englishes: Multivariate approaches to mental predicates across genres and functional uses. English Text Construction10(1): 132–164. 10.1075/etc.10.1.07des
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.10.1.07des [Google Scholar]
  106. Deshors, S. C. , Götz, S. & Laporte, S.
    2016 Linguistic innovations in EFL and ESL: Rethinking the linguistic creativity of non-native English speakers. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 131–150. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.01des
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.01des [Google Scholar]
  107. Deshors, S. C. & Götz, S.
    2017 Common ground across globalized English varieties: A multivariate exploration of mental predicates in World Englishes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, published online ahead of print.
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Deshors, S. C. & Gries, S. Th.
    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]
  109. De Smet, H.
    2016 How gradual change progresses: The interaction between convention and innovation. Language Variation and Change28(1): 83–102. 10.1017/S0954394515000186
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394515000186 [Google Scholar]
  110. Deterding, D.
    2007Singapore English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748625444.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748625444.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  111. Dewaele, J.-M.
    2018 Why the dichotomy ‘L1 versus LX user’ is better than ‘native versus Non-native speaker’. Applied Linguistics39(2): 236–240.
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Diessel, H.
    2007 Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change. New Ideas in Psychology25(2): 108–127. 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.02.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  113. Dirven, R. , Goossens, L. , Putseys, Y. & Vorlat, E.
    1982The Scene of Linguistic Action and its Perspectivization by Speak, Talk, Say and Tell. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pb.iii.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.iii.6 [Google Scholar]
  114. Dixon, R. M. W.
    2005A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Downes, J.
    2018 Mainland Chinese immigration in Hong Kong: Analysing anti-immigrant sentiment. InCitizenship, Identity and Social Movements in the New Hong Kong, W. Lam & L. Cooper (eds), 51-71. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Dunlap, T. R.
    1997 Ecology and environmentalism in the Anglo settler colonies. InEcology and Empire: Environmental History of Settler Societies, L. Robin & T. Griffiths (eds), 76–86. Keele: Keele University press.
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Edwards, A. 2014English in the Netherlands: Functions, Forms and Attitudes. PhD Dissertation. Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 2016English in the Netherlands: Functions, Forms and Attitudes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g56
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g56 [Google Scholar]
  119. Edwards, A. & Lange, R.-J.
    2016In case of innovation: Academic phraseology in the Three Circles. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 252–277. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.06edw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.06edw [Google Scholar]
  120. Edwards, A. & Laporte, S.
    2015 Outer and Expanding Circle Englishes: The competing roles of norm orientation and proficiency levels. English World-Wide36(2): 135–169. 10.1075/eww.36.2.01edw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.36.2.01edw [Google Scholar]
  121. Ellis, N. C.
    2002 Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition24(2): 143–188. 10.1017/S0272263102002024
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102002024 [Google Scholar]
  122. Ellis, N. C. & Ferreira-Junior, F.
    2009 Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal93(3): 370–385. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00896.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00896.x [Google Scholar]
  123. Ellis, N. C. , Römer, U. & O’Donnell, M. B.
    2016Usage-based Approaches to Language Acquisition and Processing: Cognitive and Corpus Investigations of Construction Grammar. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Evans, S.
    2009 The medium of instruction in Hong Kong revisited: Policy and practice in the reformed Chinese and English streams. Research Papers in Education24(3): 287–309. 10.1080/02671520802172461
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520802172461 [Google Scholar]
  125. 2010 Business as usual: The use of English in the professional world in Hong Kong. English for Specific Purposes29(3): 153–167. 10.1016/j.esp.2009.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  126. 2011 Hong Kong English and the professional world: Hong Kong English and the professional world. World Englishes30(3): 293–316. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2011.01655.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2011.01655.x [Google Scholar]
  127. Evans, V. & Green, M.
    2006Cognitive linguistics: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Faulhaber, S.
    2011a Idiosyncrasy in verb valency patterns. Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik59(4): 331–346. 10.1515/zaa‑2011‑0405
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2011-0405 [Google Scholar]
  129. 2011bVerb Valency Patterns: A Challenge for Semantics-based Accounts. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110240788
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110240788 [Google Scholar]
  130. Fellbaum, C.
    2011 20. Idioms and collocations. InSemantics, C. Maienborn , K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (eds), 441–456. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226614.441
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226614.441 [Google Scholar]
  131. Fillmore, C. J.
    1968 The case for case. InUniversals in Linguistic Theory, E. Bach & R. Harms (eds), 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 1976 Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences280(1): 20–32. 10.1111/j.1749‑6632.1976.tb25467.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb25467.x [Google Scholar]
  133. 2000 Describing polysemy: the case of ‘crawl.’InPolysemy: Theoretical and Computation approaches, Y. Ravin & C. Leacock (eds), 91–110. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Fillmore, C.J. , Kay, P. & O’Conner, C.
    1988 Regularity and Idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language64(3): 501–38. 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  135. Fillmore, C. J. , Lee-Goldman, R. R. & Rhomieux, R.
    2012 The FrameNet constructicon. InSign-based Construction Grammar, H. Boas & I. A. Sag (eds), 283–299. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Fischer, O.
    2013 An inquiry into unidirectionality as a foundational element of grammaticalization: On the role played by analogy and the synchronic grammar system in processes of language change. Studies in Language37(3): 515–533. 10.1075/sl.37.3.03fis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.37.3.03fis [Google Scholar]
  137. Fischer, R.
    2014 Lexical creativity reconsidered: GUI, cyborg, cred, pay-per-view, techno and cyber . InThe Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond, S. Buschfeld , T. Hoffmann , M. Huber & A. Kautzsch (eds), 448–469. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g49.26fis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.26fis [Google Scholar]
  138. Fodor, J. 1975The Language of Thought. Hassock, Sussex: Harvester Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Fuchs, R.
    2012 Focus marking and semantic transfer in Indian English: The case of also . English World-Wide33(1): 27–53. 10.1075/eww.33.1.02fuc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.1.02fuc [Google Scholar]
  140. 2016Speech Rhythm in Varieties of English: Evidence from Educated Indian English and British English. New York, NY: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 10.1007/978‑3‑662‑47818‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47818-9 [Google Scholar]
  141. Geeraerts, D.
    1993 Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cognitive Linguistics4:223–272. 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.223
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.223 [Google Scholar]
  142. 2006 Introduction: A rough guide to Cognitive Linguistics. InCognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings, D. Geeraerts (ed.), 1–28. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110199901.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199901.1 [Google Scholar]
  143. 2010Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Giles, H.
    1973 Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics15(2): 87–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Gilquin, G.
    2006 The verb slot in Causative constructions: Finding the best fit. Constructions1(3): 1–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  146. 2007 To err is not all: What corpus and elicitation can reveal about the use of collocations by learners. Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik55(3): 273–291. 10.1515/zaa.2007.55.3.273
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa.2007.55.3.273 [Google Scholar]
  147. 2008 What you think ain’t what you get: Highly polysemous verbs in mind and language. InFrom Gram to Mind: Grammar as Cognition, J.-R. Lapaire , G. Desagulier & J.-B. Guignard (eds), 235–255. Bordeaux: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 2010Corpus, Cognition and Causative Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.39
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.39 [Google Scholar]
  149. 2011 Corpus linguistics to bridge the gap between World Englishes and Learner Englishes. InComunicación Social en el siglo XXI Vol. II, 638–642.
    [Google Scholar]
  150. 2012 The non-finite verb slot in English Causative constructions: Comparing native and learner collostructions. InAnalytical Causatives: From ‘Give’ and ‘Come’ to ‘Let’ and ‘Make’, J. Leino & R. von Waldenfels (eds), 41-63. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  151. 2013 Making sense of collostructional analysis: On the interplay between verb senses and constructions. Constructions and Frames5(2): 119–142. 10.1075/cf.5.2.01gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.5.2.01gil [Google Scholar]
  152. 2015 At the interface of contact linguistics and second language acquisition research: New Englishes and Learner Englishes compared. English World-Wide36(1): 91–124. 10.1075/eww.36.1.05gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.36.1.05gil [Google Scholar]
  153. 2016 Input-dependent L2 acquisition: Causative constructions in English as a foreign and second language. InApplied Construction Grammar, S. De Knop & G. Gilquin (eds), 115–148. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110458268‑006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110458268-006 [Google Scholar]
  154. Giparaitè, J.
    2016 Complementation of light verb constructions in World Englishes: A Corpus-based Study. Zmogus Ir Zodis18(3): 19–39. 10.15823/zz.2016.14
    https://doi.org/10.15823/zz.2016.14 [Google Scholar]
  155. Gisborne, N.
    2009 Aspects of the morphosyntactic typology of Hong Kong English. English World-Wide30(2): 149–169. 10.1075/eww.30.2.03gis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.30.2.03gis [Google Scholar]
  156. Glynn, D.
    2010 Corpus-driven cognitive semantics: Introduction to the field. InQuantitative Methods in Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-Driven Approaches, D. Glynn & K. Fischer (eds), 1–42. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226423.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226423.1 [Google Scholar]
  157. Goldberg, A. E. 1995Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  158. 1996 Construction Grammar. InConcise Encylcopedia of Syntactic Theories, K. Brown & J. Miller (eds), 68–71. New York: Pergamon.
    [Google Scholar]
  159. 1999 The emergence of the semantics of argument structure constructions. InEmergence of Language, B. MacWhinney (ed.), 197–212. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  160. 2000 Patient arguments of Causative verbs can be omitted. Language Sciences23(4–5): 503–524. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(00)00034‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(00)00034-6 [Google Scholar]
  161. 2002 Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics13(4): 327–356. 10.1515/cogl.2002.022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2002.022 [Google Scholar]
  162. 2003 Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences7(5): 219–224. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00080‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 [Google Scholar]
  163. 2005 Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. InConstruction Grammar: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, J.-O. Östman & M. Fried (eds), 17–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.3.03gol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.3.03gol [Google Scholar]
  164. 2006aConstructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  165. 2006b The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English Ditransitive construction. InCognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings, D. Geeraerts (ed.), 401–437. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199901.401
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199901.401 [Google Scholar]
  166. 2011 Corpus evidence of the viability of statistical preemption. Cognitive Linguistics22(1):131–153. 10.1515/cogl.2011.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2011.006 [Google Scholar]
  167. 2013 Constructionist approaches. InThe Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds), 15–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  168. 2015 Tuning in to the Verb-Particle construction in English. InApproaches to Complex Predicates, L. Nash & P. Samvelian (eds), 110–141. Boston: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  169. Goldberg, A. E. & Casenhiser, D.
    2006 English constructions. InThe Handbook of English linguistics, B. Aarts & A. McMahon (eds), 343–355. Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9780470753002.ch15
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  170. Goldberg, A. E. & Jackendoff, R.
    2004 The English Resultative as a family of constructions. Language80(3): 532–568. 10.1353/lan.2004.0129
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0129 [Google Scholar]
  171. Görlach, M.
    1990Studies in the History of the English Language. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  172. Granger, S. & Gilquin, G.
    2011 From EFL to ESL: Evidence from the International Corpus of Learner English. InExploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap, J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (eds), 55-78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.44.04gra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.44.04gra [Google Scholar]
  173. Granger, S. & Paquot, M.
    2008 Disentangling the phraseological web. InPhraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, S. Granger & F. Meunier (eds), 27–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.139.07gra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.07gra [Google Scholar]
  174. Greenbaum, S. 1986 The Grammar of contemporary English and a comprehensive grammar of the English Language. InThe English Reference Grammar, G. Leitner (ed.), 6–14. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  175. 1988 A proposal for an international computerized corpus of English. World Englishes7(3): 315–315. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1988.tb00241.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1988.tb00241.x [Google Scholar]
  176. (ed.). 1996Comparing English Worldwide: The International Corpus of English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  177. Greenbaum, S. & Nelson, G.
    1996 The International Corpus of English (ICE) Project. World Englishes15(1): 3–15. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1996.tb00088.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1996.tb00088.x [Google Scholar]
  178. Gries, S. Th.
    2003Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  179. 2006 Exploring variability within and between corpora: Some methodological considerations. Corpora1(2): 109–151. 10.3366/cor.2006.1.2.109
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2006.1.2.109 [Google Scholar]
  180. 2007 Coll.analysis 3.2a. A program for R for Windows 2.x. www.stgries.info/teaching/groningen/index.html (20April 2020)
  181. 2008 Phraseology and linguistic theory: A brief survey. InPhraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, S. Granger & F. Meunier (eds), 3–25. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.139.06gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.06gri [Google Scholar]
  182. 2010 Useful statistics for corpus linguistics. InA Mosaic of Corpus Linguistics: Selected Approaches, A. Sánchez Pérez & M. Almela Sánchez (eds), 269–291. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  183. 2013Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction (2nd edition). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110307474
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110307474 [Google Scholar]
  184. 2018 On over-and underuse in learner corpus research and multifactoriality in corpus linguistics more generally. Journal of Second Language Studies1(2): 276–308. 10.1075/jsls.00005.gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00005.gri [Google Scholar]
  185. Gries, S. Th. & Bernaisch, T.
    2016 Exploring epicentres empirically: Focus on South Asian Englishes. English World-Wide37(1): 1–25. 10.1075/eww.37.1.01gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.37.1.01gri [Google Scholar]
  186. Gries, S. Th. , Bernaisch, T. & Heller, B.
    2018 A corpus-linguistic account of the history of the genitive alternation in Singapore English. InModeling World Englishes: Assessing the Interplay of Emancipation and Globalization of ESL Varieties, S. C. Deshors (ed.), 245–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g61.10gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g61.10gri [Google Scholar]
  187. Gries, S. Th. & Mukherjee, J.
    2010 Lexical gravity across varieties of English: An ICE-based study of n-grams in Asian Englishes. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics15(4): 520–548. 10.1075/ijcl.15.4.04gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.04gri [Google Scholar]
  188. Gries, S. Th. & Stefanowitsch, A.
    2004a Covarying collexemes in the into-Causative. InLanguage, Culture, and Mind, M. Achard & S. Kemmer (eds), 225–236. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  189. 2004b Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspectives on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics9(1): 97–129. 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri [Google Scholar]
  190. 2010 Cluster analysis and the identification of collexeme classes. InEmpirical and Experimental Methods in Cognitive/Functional Research, J. Newman & S. Rice (eds), 73–90. Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  191. Groves, J.
    2009 Hong Kong English: Does it exist (yet)?HKBU Papers in Applied Linguistics13: 54-79.
    [Google Scholar]
  192. 2010 Error or feature? The issue of interlanguage and deviations in Non-Native Varieties of English. HKBU Papers in Applied Language Studies14: 108–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  193. 2011 ‘Linguistic schizophrenia’ in Hong Kong. English Today27(4): 33–42. 10.1017/S0266078411000514
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078411000514 [Google Scholar]
  194. Gupta, A. F. 1991 Almost a creole: Singapore Colloquial English. California Linguistic Notes23: 9–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  195. 1997 Colonisation, migration, and functions of English. InEnglishes around the World, Volume 1: General Studies, British Isles, North America, Studies in Honour of Manfred Görlach, E. W. Schneider (ed.), 47-58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g18.08gup
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g18.08gup [Google Scholar]
  196. 1998 The situation of English in Singapore. InEnglish in New Cultural Contexts: Reflections from Singapore, J. A. Foley , T. Kandiah , Z. Bao , A. F. Gupta , L. Alsagoff , C. L. Ho , W. Bokhorst-Heng (eds), 106–126. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  197. Gut, U. & Coronel, L.
    2012 Relatives worldwide. InMapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes, M. Hundt & U. Gut (eds), 215–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/veaw.g43.09gut
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.09gut [Google Scholar]
  198. Gut, U. & Fuchs, R.
    2017 Exploring speaker fluency with phonologically annotated ICE corpora. World Englishes36(3): 387–403. 10.1111/weng.12278
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12278 [Google Scholar]
  199. Haiman, J.
    1980 Dictionaries and encyclopedia. Lingua50: 329–357. 10.1016/0024‑3841(80)90089‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(80)90089-3 [Google Scholar]
  200. Hampe, B. & Schönefeld, D.
    2003 Creative syntax: Iconic principles within the symbolic. InIconicity in Language and Literature, W. G. Müller & O. Fischer (eds), 243–261. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ill.3.18ham
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.3.18ham [Google Scholar]
  201. 2006 Syntactic leaps or lexical variation? More on ‘creative syntax’. InCorpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, S. Th. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (eds), 127–158. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  202. Hanks, P.
    2004 The syntagmatics of metaphor and idiom. International Journal of Lexicography17(3): 245–274. 10.1093/ijl/17.3.245
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/17.3.245 [Google Scholar]
  203. 2007 Preference syntagmatics. InWords and intelligence II: Essays in Honor of Yorick Wilks, K. Ahmad & C. Brewster (eds), 119–135. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/1‑4020‑5833‑0_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5833-0_6 [Google Scholar]
  204. 2008a How to say new things: An essay on linguistic creativity. Brno Studies in English34: 39–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  205. 2008b The lexicographical legacy of John Sinclair. International Journal of Lexicography21(3): 219–229. 10.1093/ijl/ecn031
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecn031 [Google Scholar]
  206. 2009a Computational lexicography-mapping meaning onto use. www.patrickhanks.com/powerpoint.html (20April 2020)
  207. 2009b The linguistic double helix: Norms and exploitations. InAfter Half a Century of Slavonic Natural Language Processing (Festschrift for Karel Pala), D. Hlavácˇková , A. Horák , K. Osolsobe & P. Rychlý (eds), 63-80. Brno: Masaryk University.
    [Google Scholar]
  208. 2010 Elliptical arguments: A problem in relating meaning to use. IneLexicography in the 21st Century: New Challenges, New Applications. Proceedings of ELEX2009, S. Granger & M. Paquot (eds), 109–124. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
  209. 2012 How people use words to make meanings: Semantic types meet valencies. InInput, Process and Product: Developments in Teaching and Language Corpora, A. Bulton & J. Thomas (eds), 54–69. Brno: Masaryk University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  210. 2013Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262018579.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262018579.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  211. Hanks, P. & Jezek, E.
    2008 Shimmering lexical sets. InProceedings of the XIII EURALEX International Congress, E. Bernal & J. DeCesaris (eds), 391–402. Bercelona: Institut Universitari de Lingüística Aplicada – Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    [Google Scholar]
  212. Harrel, F. 2019 Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous, R package version 4.2-0. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/Hmisc/index.html (20April 2020)
  213. Hasselgren, A.
    1994 Lexical teddy-bears and advanced learners: A study into the ways Norwegian students cope with English vocabulary. International Journal of Applied Linguistics4(2): 237–260. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.1994.tb00065.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1994.tb00065.x [Google Scholar]
  214. Hebb, D. O.
    1949The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological theory. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  215. Herbst, T.
    1987 A Proposal for a Valency Dictionary of English. InA Spectrum of Lexicography: Papers from AILA Brussels 1984, R. Ilson (ed.), 115-127. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.28.04her
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.28.04her [Google Scholar]
  216. 2007 Valency complements or valency patterns?InValency: Theoretical, Descriptive and Cognitive Issues, T. Herbst & K. Götz-Votteler (eds), 15–35. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110198775.1.15
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198775.1.15 [Google Scholar]
  217. 2009 Valency: Item-specificity and idiom principle. InExploring the Lexis-Grammar Interface, U. Römer & R. Schulze (eds), 49–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.35.05her
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.35.05her [Google Scholar]
  218. 2010 Valency constructions and clause constructions or how, if at all, valency grammarians might sneeze the foam off the cappuccino. InCognitive Foundations of Linguistic Usage Patterns: Empirical Approaches, H.-J. Schmid & S. Handl (eds), 225–256. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110216035.225
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216035.225 [Google Scholar]
  219. 2011 The status of generalizations: Valency and argument structure constructions. Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik59(4): 347–367. 10.1515/zaa‑2011‑0406
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2011-0406 [Google Scholar]
  220. 2014a Idiosyncrasies and generalizations: Argument structure, semantic roles and the valency realization principle. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association2(1): 253–289. 10.1515/gcla‑2014‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2014-0015 [Google Scholar]
  221. 2014b The valency approach to argument structure constructions. InConstructions, Collocations, Patterns, T. Herbst , H.-J. Schmid & S. Faulhaber (eds), 159–207. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110356854.167
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110356854.167 [Google Scholar]
  222. Herbst, T. , Heath, D. , Roe, I. F. & Götz, D.
    2004A valency dictionary of English: A corpus-based analysis of the complementation patterns of English verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110892581
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110892581 [Google Scholar]
  223. Hilpert, M.
    2012 Diachronic collostructional analysis meets the noun phrase: Studying many a noun in COHA. InThe Oxford Handbook of the History of English, T. Nevalainen & E. C. Traugott (eds), 233–244. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  224. 2014Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  225. Höder, S.
    2014 Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. InThe Sociolinguistics of Grammar, T. A. Åfarli & B. Maehlum (eds), 137–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.154.07hod
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.154.07hod [Google Scholar]
  226. Hoffmann, S. 2004 Are low-frequency complex prepositions grammaticalized? On the limits of corpus data — and the importance of intuition. InCorpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English, H. Lindquist & C. Mair (eds), 171–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.13.09hof
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.13.09hof [Google Scholar]
  227. Hoffmann, S. , Hundt, M. & Mukherjee, J.
    2011 Indian English: an emerging epicentre? A pilot study on light verbs in web-derived corpora of South Asian Englishes. Anglia129(3–4): 258–280. 10.1515/angl.2011.083
    https://doi.org/10.1515/angl.2011.083 [Google Scholar]
  228. Hoffmann, S. & Mukherjee, J.
    2007 Ditransitive verbs in Indian English and British English: A corpus-linguistic study. Arbeiten Aus Anglistik Und Amerikanistik32(1): 5–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  229. Hoffmann, T.
    2007 Complements versus adjuncts: A Construction Grammar approach of English prepositional phrases. Occasional papers in language and linguistics (University of Nairobi)3: 92-119.
    [Google Scholar]
  230. 2014 The cognitive evolution of Englishes: The role of constructions in the Dynamic Model. InThe Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond, S. Buschfeld , T. Hoffmann , M. Huber & A. Kautzsch (eds), 160–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof [Google Scholar]
  231. 2017a Construction Grammars. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, B. Dancygier (ed.), 284–309. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316339732.019
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339732.019 [Google Scholar]
  232. 2017b Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory. Linguistics Vanguard3(1). 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0042 [Google Scholar]
  233. Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G.
    (eds). 2013The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  234. Hohenthal, A.
    2003 English in India: Loyalty and attitudes. Language in India3(5).
    [Google Scholar]
  235. Hopper, P. & Thompson, S.
    1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56(2), 251–299. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  236. Horch, S.
    2016 Innovative conversions in South-East Asian Englishes: Reassessing ESL status. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 278–301. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.07hor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.07hor [Google Scholar]
  237. Hosmer, D. W. , Lemeshow, S. & Sturdivant, R. X.
    2013Applied Logistic Regression (Third edition). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. 10.1002/9781118548387
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118548387 [Google Scholar]
  238. Huang, C.-T. J.
    1984 On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry15(4): 531–574.
    [Google Scholar]
  239. Huber, M.
    2012 Ghanaian English. InThe Mouton World Atlas of Variation in English, B. Kortmann & K. Lunkenheimer (eds), 382-393. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110280128.382
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110280128.382 [Google Scholar]
  240. Huddleston, R.
    1984Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165785
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165785 [Google Scholar]
  241. Huddleston, R. & Pullum, G.
    2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316423530
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530 [Google Scholar]
  242. Hugon, C.
    2008 High-frequency verbs: Starting block or stumbling block for advanced L2 communication? Insights from native and learner corpora. InTaal aan den Lijve: Het Gebruik van Corpora in Taalkundig Onderzoek en Taalonderwijs, G. Rawoens (ed.), 69–98. Gent: Academia Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  243. Hundt, M. 2001 Grammatical variation in national varieties of English — The corpus-based approach. Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire79(3): 737–756. 10.3406/rbph.2001.4545
    https://doi.org/10.3406/rbph.2001.4545 [Google Scholar]
  244. 2009 How often do things get V-ed in Philippine and Singapore English? A case study on the get-passive in two outer-circle varieties of English. InCorpora and Discourse – and Stuff: Papers in Honour of Karin Aijmer, R. Bowen , M. Mobärg & S. Ohlander (eds), 121–129. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
    [Google Scholar]
  245. 2016 Error, feature, (incipient) change – or something else altogether? On the role of low-frequency deviant patterns for the description of Englishes. InWorld Englishes: New Theoretical and Methodological Considerations, E. Seoane & C. Suárez-Gómez (eds), 37–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g57.03hun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g57.03hun [Google Scholar]
  246. Hundt, M. & Vogel, K.
    2011 Overuse of the progressive in ESL and learner Englishes – fact or fiction?InExploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap, J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (eds), 145–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.44.08vog
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.44.08vog [Google Scholar]
  247. Hung, T. T. N.
    2000 Towards a phonology of Hong Kong English. World Englishes19(3): 337–356. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00183
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00183 [Google Scholar]
  248. Hunston, S.
    2017 Corpus Linguistics in 2017: A personal view. Presented at the Corpus Linguistics conference, 24-28July2017, Birmingham.
    [Google Scholar]
  249. 2019 Patterns, constructions, and applied linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics24(3): 324–353. 10.1075/ijcl.00015.hun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.00015.hun [Google Scholar]
  250. Hyland, K.
    1997 Language attitudes at the handover: Communication and identity in 1997 Hong Kong. English World-Wide18(2): 191–210. 10.1075/eww.18.2.03hyl
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.18.2.03hyl [Google Scholar]
  251. Ide, N. & Wilks, Y.
    2006 Making sense about sense. InWord Sense Disambiguation: Algorithms and Applications, E. Agirre & P. Edmonds (eds), 47–73. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4809‑8_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4809-8_3 [Google Scholar]
  252. Ike, S.
    2012 Japanese English as a Variety: Features and Intelligibility of an Emerging Variety of English. PhD dissertation, The University of Melbourne.
    [Google Scholar]
  253. Ingham, M.
    2003 Writing on the margin: Hong Kong English poetry, fiction and creative non-fiction. InCity Voices: Hong Kong Writing in English, 1945 to the Present, Xu Xi & M. Ingham (eds), 1–16. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  254. Jenkins, J.
    2003World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  255. Jezek, E. & Hanks, P.
    2010 What lexical sets tell us about conceptual categories. Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology4: 7–22. 10.4000/lexis.555
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.555 [Google Scholar]
  256. Kachru, B. B. 1965 The Indianness in Indian English. Word21: 391–410. 10.1080/00437956.1965.11435436
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1965.11435436 [Google Scholar]
  257. 1976 Models of English for the third world: Whiteman’s linguistic burden or language pragmatics. TESOL Quarterly10(2): 221–239. 10.2307/3585643
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3585643 [Google Scholar]
  258. 1982 Models for Non-Native Englishes. InThe Other Tongue: English across Cultures, B. B. Kachru (ed.), 31–57. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  259. 1983 Models for non-native Englishes. InWorld Englishes: Concepts in Linguistics, K. Bolton & B. B. Kachru (eds), 108–130. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  260. 1985 Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the Outer Circle. InEnglish in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures, R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (eds), 11–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  261. 1986The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions and Models of Non-Native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  262. 1988 The sacred cows of English. English Today4(4): 3–8. 10.1017/S0266078400000973
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400000973 [Google Scholar]
  263. 1991 Liberation linguistics and the Quirk Concern. English Today7(1): 1-13. 10.1017/S026607840000523X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S026607840000523X [Google Scholar]
  264. 1997 World Englishes and English-using communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics17: 66–87. 10.1017/S0267190500003287
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500003287 [Google Scholar]
  265. 2005Asian Englishes: Beyond the Canon. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  266. Kachru, B. B. & Nelson, C. L.
    1996 World Englishes. InSociolinguistics and Language Teaching, S. L. McKay & N. Hornberger (eds), 71–102. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  267. Kachru, B. B. & Smith, L. E.
    1985 Editorial. World Englishes4(2): 209–212. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1985.tb00408.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1985.tb00408.x [Google Scholar]
  268. Kachru, Y.
    1993 Interlanguage and language acquisition research. World Englishes12(2): 265–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  269. 1994 Monolingual bias in SLA research. TESOL Quarterly28(4): 795. 10.2307/3587564
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587564 [Google Scholar]
  270. 2005 Teaching and learning of World Englishes. InHandbook of Research in Second Language Learning and Teaching, E. Hinkel (ed.), 155–173. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  271. Kay, P.
    2005 Argument structure constructions and the argument-adjunct distinction. InGrammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots, M. Fried & H. Boas (eds), 71–98. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.4.05kay
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.4.05kay [Google Scholar]
  272. Kearns, K.
    1988/2002 Light Verbs in English. MA dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  273. Kim, J.-B. & Sag, I. A.
    2005 English object extraposition: A constraint-based approach. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, S. Müller (ed.), 192–212. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  274. Kirkpatrick, A.
    2007World Englishes: Implications for International Communication and English Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  275. Klein, U. , Kracht, M. & Vogel, R.
    2012 Creation constructions and frames. Paper presented at the Concept Types and Frames in Language, Cognition, and Science conference, University of Düsseldorf.
    [Google Scholar]
  276. Koch, C. & Bernaisch, T.
    2013 Verb complementation in South Asian Englishes: The range and frequency of new Ditransitives. InEnglish Corpus Linguistics: Variation in Time, Space and Genre, Selected Papers from ICAME 32, G. Andersen & K. Bech (eds), 69–89. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  277. Koch, C. , Lange, C. & Leuckert, S.
    2016 “This hair-style called as ‘duck tail’”: The ‘intrusive as’-construction in South Asian varieties of English and Learner Englishes. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 151–176. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.02koc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.02koc [Google Scholar]
  278. Kortmann, B. , Burridge, K. , Mesthrie, R. , Schneider, E. W. & Upton, C.
    (eds). 2004A Handbook of Varieties of English. Vol. II: Morphology and Syntax. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110175325
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110175325 [Google Scholar]
  279. Kortmann, B. & Lunkenheimer, K.
    (eds). 2013The Electronic World Atlas of Varieties of English. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
    [Google Scholar]
  280. Kortmann, B. & Szmrecsanyi, B.
    2004 Global synopsis: Morphological and syntactic variation in English. InA Handbook of Varieties of English, Vol. II: Morphology and Syntax., B. Kortmann , K. Burridge , R. Mesthrie , E. W. Schneider & C. Upton (eds), 1142–1202. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110175325.2.1142
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110175325.2.1142 [Google Scholar]
  281. Labov, W.
    1972Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  282. Lai, M.-L.
    2001 Hong Kong students’ attitudes towards Cantonese, Putonghua and English after the change of sovereignty. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development22(2): 112–133. 10.1080/01434630108666428
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630108666428 [Google Scholar]
  283. Lakoff, G.
    1987Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  284. 1990 The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reasoning based on image schemas?Cognitive Linguistics1(1): 39–74. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 [Google Scholar]
  285. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.
    1980Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  286. Langacker, R. W. 1987aFoundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  287. 1987b Nouns and verbs. Language63(1): 53–94. 10.2307/415384
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415384 [Google Scholar]
  288. 1991Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  289. 2000 A dynamic usage-based model. InUsage-based Models of Language, M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (eds), 1–63. Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  290. 2005 Integration, grammaticization, and constructional meaning. InGrammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots, M. Fried & H. Boas (eds), 157–189. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.4.11lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.4.11lan [Google Scholar]
  291. 2008Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  292. 2013Essentials of Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  293. Lange, C.
    2012The Syntax of Spoken Indian English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g45
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g45 [Google Scholar]
  294. 2016 The ‘intrusive as’-construction in South Asian varieties of English. World Englishes35(1): 133–146. 10.1111/weng.12173
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12173 [Google Scholar]
  295. Langer, S.
    2004 A linguistic test battery for support verb constructions. Lingvisticae Investigationes27(2): 171–184. 10.1075/li.27.2.03lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/li.27.2.03lan [Google Scholar]
  296. Laporte, S.
    2012 Mind the gap! Bridge between World Englishes and Learner Englishes in the making. English Text Construction5(2): 265–292. 10.1075/etc.5.2.05lap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.5.2.05lap [Google Scholar]
  297. Lee, D.
    2001Cognitive linguistics: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  298. Lee, K.
    1996 Getting at the meaning of make. InCognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods, E. H. Casad (ed.), 389–422. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110811421.389
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110811421.389 [Google Scholar]
  299. Lee, T.
    2009 Singapore. InEncyclopedia of Journalism, C. Sterling (ed.), 1291–1293. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. 10.4135/9781412972048.n354
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412972048.n354 [Google Scholar]
  300. Leech, G.
    1992 Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. InDirections in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Noberl Symposium 82, J. Svartvik (ed.), 105–122. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110867275.105
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110867275.105 [Google Scholar]
  301. Legallois, D.
    2005 Du bon usage des expressions idiomatiques dans l’argumentation de deux modèles anglo-saxon: La Grammaire de Construction et la Grammaire des Patterns. Cahiers de l’Institut de Linguistique de Louvain31(2–4): 109–127.
    [Google Scholar]
  302. Legallois, D. & François, J.
    2006 Autour des grammaires de constructions et de patterns. Cahier Du CRISCO21.
    [Google Scholar]
  303. Leimgruber, J. R. E.
    2009Modelling Variation in Singapore English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  304. 2013Singapore English: Structure, Variation, and Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139225755
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139225755 [Google Scholar]
  305. Levin, B.
    1993English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  306. 2013 Argument structure. InOxford Bibliographies in Linguistics, M. Aronoff (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/obo/9780199772810‑0099
    https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0099 [Google Scholar]
  307. Levin, B. & Hovav, M. R.
    2005Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511610479
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610479 [Google Scholar]
  308. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B.
    2007 Polysemy, prototypes, and radial categories. InHandbook of Cognitive Linguistics, D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds), 139–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  309. Li., C. & Thompson, S.
    1981Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  310. Li, D. C. S. 1999 The functions and status of English in Hong Kong: A post-1997 update. English World-Wide20(1): 67–110. 10.1075/eww.20.1.03li
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.20.1.03li [Google Scholar]
  311. 2000 Cantonese-English code-switching research in Hong Kong: A Y2K review. World Englishes19(3): 305–322. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00181
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00181 [Google Scholar]
  312. 2010 When does an unconventional form become an innovation?InThe Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, A. Kirkpatrick (ed.), 617–633. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  313. Lim, L.
    2010 Migrants and ‘Mother Tongues’: Extralinguistic forces in the ecology of English in Singapore. InEnglish in Singapore. Modernity and Management, L. Lim , A. Pakir & L. Wee (eds), 19–54. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  314. 2001 Ethnic group varieties of Singapore English: Melody or harmony? In Evolving Identities. The English Language in Singapore and Malaysia, V. B. Ooi (ed.), 53–58. Singapore: Times Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  315. (ed.) 2004Singapore English: A Grammatical Description. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g33
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g33 [Google Scholar]
  316. Lim, L. & Foley, J. A.
    2004 English in Singapore and Singapore English. InSingapore English: A Grammatical Description, L. Lim (ed.), 1–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g33.03lim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g33.03lim [Google Scholar]
  317. Lim, L. , Pakir, A. & Wee, L.
    2010 English in Singapore: Policies and prospects. InEnglish in Singapore. Modernity and Management, L. Lim , A. Pakir & L. Wee (eds), 3-18. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  318. Ling, L. E.
    2010 English in Singapore and Malaysia: Differences and similarities. InThe Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, A. Kirkpatrick (ed.), 229–246. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  319. Liu, E. T. & Shaw, P.
    2001 Investigating learner vocabulary: A possible approach to looking at EFL/ESL learners’ qualitative knowledge of the word. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching39(3): 171–194. 10.1515/iral.2001.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2001.001 [Google Scholar]
  320. Lowenberg, P. H.
    1986 Sociolinguistic context and second-language acquisition: Acculturation and creativity in Malaysian English. World Englishes5(1): 71–83. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1986.tb00641.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1986.tb00641.x [Google Scholar]
  321. Luke, K. K. & Richards, J. C.
    1982 English in Hong Kong: Functions and status. English World-Wide3(1): 47–64. 10.1075/eww.3.1.04kan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.3.1.04kan [Google Scholar]
  322. Mair, C.
    2002 Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: A real-time study based on matching text corpora. English Language and Linguistics6(1): 105-131. 10.1017/S1360674302001065
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674302001065 [Google Scholar]
  323. 2007 Varieties of English around the world: Collocational and cultural profiles. InPhraseology and Culture in English, P. Skandera (ed.), 437–468. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197860.437
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197860.437 [Google Scholar]
  324. 2013 The World System of Englishes: Accounting for the transnational importance of mobile and mediated vernaculars. English World-Wide34(3): 253–278. 10.1075/eww.34.3.01mai
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.34.3.01mai [Google Scholar]
  325. 2016 Englishes beyond and between the three circles: World Englishes research in the age of globalization. InWorld Englishes: New Theoretical and Methodological Considerations, E. Seoane & C. Suárez-Gómez (eds), 17–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g57.02mai
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g57.02mai [Google Scholar]
  326. 2017 Crisis of the ‘Outer Circle’? Globalisation, the weak nation state, and the need for new taxonomies in World Englishes research. InChanging English: Global and Local Perspectives, M. Filppula , A. Mauranen , J. Klemola & S. Vetchinnikova (eds), 5–24. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110429657‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110429657-002 [Google Scholar]
  327. Makkai, A.
    1972Idiom Structure in English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110812671
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110812671 [Google Scholar]
  328. McArthur, T.
    1987 The English languages?English Today3(3): 9-11. 10.1017/S0266078400013511
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400013511 [Google Scholar]
  329. 2003 World English, Euro-English, Nordic English?English Today19(1): 54-58. 10.1017/S026607840300107X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S026607840300107X [Google Scholar]
  330. McLuhan, M.
    1962The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  331. McMahon, A. M. S.
    1994Understanding Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166591
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166591 [Google Scholar]
  332. Mehl, S.
    2016 Corpus Onomasiology: A Study in World Englishes. PhD dissertation, University College London.
    [Google Scholar]
  333. 2018 What we talk about when we talk about corpus frequency: The example of polysemous verbs with light and concrete senses. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, published online ahead of print. 10.1515/cllt‑2017‑0039
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2017-0039 [Google Scholar]
  334. Mehrotra, R. R.
    1998Indian English: Texts and Interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.t7
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.t7 [Google Scholar]
  335. Melchers, G. & Shaw, P.
    2003World Englishes: An Introduction. Great Britain: Hodder Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  336. 2011World Englishes: An Introduction (2nd edition). Great Britain: Hodder Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  337. Mel’cuk, I. A.
    2006 The explanatory combinatorial dictionary. InOpen Problems in Linguistics and Lexicography, S. Giandomenico (ed.), 225–355. Monza: Polimetrica.
    [Google Scholar]
  338. Mesthrie, R.
    1993 South African Indian English. English Today9(2): 12-16. 10.1017/S0266078400000286
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400000286 [Google Scholar]
  339. 2006 Anti-deletions in an L2 grammar: A study of Black South African English mesolect. English World-Wide27(2): 111–145. 10.1075/eww.27.2.02mes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.27.2.02mes [Google Scholar]
  340. Mesthrie, R. & Bhatt, R. M.
    2008World Englishes: The Study of New Linguistic Varieties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791321
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791321 [Google Scholar]
  341. Meyer, D. , Zeileis, A. & Hornik, K.
    2017vcd: Visualizing categorical data. R package version 1.44. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vcd (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  342. Meyers, A. , Macleod, C. & Grishman, R.
    1996 Standardization of the complement adjunct distinction. InProceedings of Euralex ’96, M. Gellerstam , J. Järborg , S.-G. Malmgren , K. Norén , L. Rogström & C. R. Papmehl (eds), 141–150. Göteborg: Göteborg University.
    [Google Scholar]
  343. Michaelis, L. A.
    2004 Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics15(1): 1–67. 10.1515/cogl.2004.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.001 [Google Scholar]
  344. Mindt, I.
    2011Adjective Complementation: An Empirical Analysis of Adjectives Followed by that-Clauses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.42 [Google Scholar]
  345. Moag, R. F.
    1982 The life cycle of non-native Englishes: A case study. InThe Other Tongue: English across Cultures, B. B. Kachru (ed.), 270–288. Oxford: Pergamon.
    [Google Scholar]
  346. Modiano, M.
    1999 Standard English(es) and educational practices for the world’s lingua franca. English Today15(4): 3-13. 10.1017/S0266078400011196
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400011196 [Google Scholar]
  347. Mollin, S.
    2006Euro-English: Assessing Variety Status. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  348. 2007 New variety or learner English? Criteria for variety status and the case of Euro-English. English World-Wide28(2): 167–185. 10.1075/eww.28.2.04mol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.28.2.04mol [Google Scholar]
  349. Moody, A. 2010 The Englishes of popular cultures. InThe Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, A. Kirkpatrick (ed.), 535–549. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  350. Moon, R.
    1998Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus-based Approach. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  351. Mufwene, S. S.
    1993 African substratum: Possibility and evidence. A discussion of Alleyne’s and Hancock’s papers. InAfricanisms in Afro-American language varieties, S. S. Mufwene (ed.), 192–208. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  352. 2001The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511612862
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612862 [Google Scholar]
  353. Mukherjee, J.
    2007 Steady states in the evolution of New Englishes: Present-day Indian English as an equilibrium. Journal of English Linguistics35(2): 157–187. 10.1177/0075424207301888
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424207301888 [Google Scholar]
  354. 2004 Corpus data in a usage-based Cognitive Grammar. InAdvances in Corpus Linguistics. Papers from ICAME 23, K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (eds), 85–100. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004333710_006
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004333710_006 [Google Scholar]
  355. 2005English Ditransitive Verbs: Aspects of Theory, Description and a Usage-based Model. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004333079
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004333079 [Google Scholar]
  356. 2010 Corpus-based insights into verb-complementational innovations in Indian English: Cases of nativised semantico-structural analogy. InGrammar between Norm and Variation, A. N. Lenz & P. Albrecht (eds), 219–241. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  357. Mukherjee, J. & Bernaisch, T.
    2015 Cultural keywords in context: A pilot study of linguistic acculturation in South Asian Englishes. InGrammatical Change in English World-Wide, P. Collins (ed.), 411-435. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.67.17muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.67.17muk [Google Scholar]
  358. Mukherjee, J. & Gries, S. Th.
    2009 Collostructional nativisation in New Englishes: Verb-construction associations in the International Corpus of English. English World-Wide30(1): 27–51. 10.1075/eww.30.1.03muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.30.1.03muk [Google Scholar]
  359. Mukherjee, J. & Hoffmann, S.
    2006 Describing verb-complementational profiles of New Englishes: A pilot study of Indian English. English World-Wide27(2): 147–173. 10.1075/eww.27.2.03muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.27.2.03muk [Google Scholar]
  360. Mukherjee, J. & Hundt, M.
    (eds). 2011Exploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.44
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.44 [Google Scholar]
  361. Mukherjee, J. & Schilk, M.
    2008 Verb complementational profiles across varieties of English: Comparing verb-classes in Indian and British English. InThe Dynamics of Linguistic Variation. Corpus Evidence on English Past and Present, T. Nevalainen , I. Taavitsainen & P. Korhonen (eds), 163–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/silv.2.14muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.2.14muk [Google Scholar]
  362. 2012 Exploring variation and change in New Englishes: Looking into the International Corpus of English (ICE) and beyond. InThe Oxford Handbook of the History of English, T. Nevalainen & E. C. Traugott (eds), 189–199. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  363. Müller, S.
    2006 Discussion note: Phrasal or lexical constructions?Language82(4): 850–883. 10.1353/lan.2006.0213
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0213 [Google Scholar]
  364. Nam, C. F. H. , Mukherjee, S. , Schilk, M. & Mukherjee, J.
    2013 Statistical analysis of varieties of English. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society)176(3): 777–793. 10.1111/j.1467‑985X.2012.01062.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01062.x [Google Scholar]
  365. Nehls, D. 1991 English DO/MAKE compared with German TUN/MACHEN and Dutch DOEN/MAKEN. A synchronic-diachronic approach. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching29(4), 303–316. 10.1515/iral.1991.29.4.303
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1991.29.4.303 [Google Scholar]
  366. Nelson, G. & Hongtao, R.
    2012 Particle verbs in African Englishes: Nativization and innovation. InMapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes, M. Hundt & U. Gut (eds), 197–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g43.08nel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.08nel [Google Scholar]
  367. Nesselhauf, N.
    2004Collocations in a Learner Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.14 [Google Scholar]
  368. 2009 Co-selection phenomena across New Englishes: Parallels (and differences) to foreign learner varieties. English World-Wide30(1): 1–25. 10.1075/eww.30.1.02nes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.30.1.02nes [Google Scholar]
  369. 2011 Exploring the phraseology of ESL and EFL varieties. InThe Phraseological View of Language: A tribute to John Sinclair, T. Herbst , S. Faulhaber & P. Uhrig (eds), 159–177. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110257014.159
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110257014.159 [Google Scholar]
  370. Nihalani, P. , Tongue, R. K. & Hosali, P.
    1979Indian and British English. A Handbook of Usage and Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  371. Nihalani, P. , Tongue, R. K. , Hosali, P. & Crowther, J.
    2004Indian and British English. a Handbook of Usage and Pronunciation (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  372. Ninio, A.
    1996 Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development. Paper presented at the 7th International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Istanbul, Turkey.
    [Google Scholar]
  373. Nunberg, G. , Sag, I. A. & Wasow, T.
    1994 Idioms. Language70(3): 491–538. 10.1353/lan.1994.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1994.0007 [Google Scholar]
  374. Olavarría de Ersson, E. & Shaw, P.
    2003 Verb complementation patterns in Indian Standard English. English World-Wide24(2): 137–161. 10.1075/eww.24.2.02ers
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.24.2.02ers [Google Scholar]
  375. Ong, H. T.
    2016 Singapore Economy and Environment in 2065. InSingapore 2065: Leading Insights on Economy and Environment from 50 Singapore Icons and Beyond, E. Quah (ed.), 373–380. New Jersey: New Scientific.
    [Google Scholar]
  376. Ortega, L.
    2018 Ontologies of language, Second Language Acquisition, and World Englishes. World Englishes37(1), 64–79. 10.1111/weng.12303
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12303 [Google Scholar]
  377. Pang, A. & Shankar, R.
    (eds). 2015UNION: 15 Years of Drunken Boat, 50 Years of Writing from Singapore. Singapore: Ethos Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  378. Papafragou, A.
    2010 Source-goal asymmetries in motion representation: Implications for language production and comprehension. Cognitive Science34(6): 1064–1092. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2010.01107.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01107.x [Google Scholar]
  379. Paquot, M.
    2010Academic Vocabulary in Learner Writing: From Extraction to Analysis. London & New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  380. Parés, R.
    1961 The economic factors in the history of the Empire. InThe Historian’s Business, and Other Essays, R. A. Humphreys & E. Humphreys (eds), 49–76. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  381. Parviainen, H.
    2017 Omission of direct objects in New Englishes. InChanging English: Global and Local Perspectives, M. Filppula , J. Klemola , A. Mauranen & S. Vetchinnikova (eds), 129–153. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110429657‑008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110429657-008 [Google Scholar]
  382. Paul, P.
    2003 The master’s language and its Indian uses. InThe Politics of English as a World Language: New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies, C. Mair (ed.), 359–365. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  383. Pawley, A. & Syder, E. 1983 Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native-like selection and native-like fluency. InLanguage and communication, J. C. Richards & R. Schmidt (eds), 191–226. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  384. Percillier, M.
    2016World Englishes and Second Language Acquisition: Insights from Southeast Asian Englishes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g58
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g58 [Google Scholar]
  385. Perek, F.
    2009 Distributional characterization of constructional meaning. Paper presented at the Corpus Linguistics 2009 conference, Liverpool.
    [Google Scholar]
  386. 2015 Argument Structure in Usage-based Construction Grammar: Experimental and Corpus-based Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.17 [Google Scholar]
  387. 2018 Recent change in the productivity and schematicity of the way-construction: A distributional semantic analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory14(1): 65–97. 10.1515/cllt‑2016‑0014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0014 [Google Scholar]
  388. Perek, F. & Lemmens, M.
    2010 Getting at the meaning of the English at-construction: The case of a constructional split. CogniTextes5. 10.4000/cognitextes.331
    https://doi.org/10.4000/cognitextes.331 [Google Scholar]
  389. Platt, J. T.
    1975 The Singapore English speech continuum and its basilect ‘Singlish’ as a ‘creoloid.’Anthropological Linguistics17: 363–374.
    [Google Scholar]
  390. 1977 The subvarieties of Singapore English and their sociolectal and functional status. InThe English language in Singapore, W. J. Crewe (ed.), 83–95. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  391. 1991 Social and linguistic constraints on variation in the use of two grammatical variables in Singapore English. InEnglish around the Wold: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, J. Cheshire (ed.), 376-387. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611889.026
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611889.026 [Google Scholar]
  392. Platt, J. T. & Weber, H.
    1980English in Singapore and Malaysia: Status, Features, Functions. Oxford: Oup .
    [Google Scholar]
  393. Platt, J. T. , Weber, H. & Ho, M. L.
    1984The New Englishes. London & Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    [Google Scholar]
  394. Proctor, L. M.
    2014 English and globalization in India: The fractal nature of discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology24(3): 294–314. 10.1111/jola.12056
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jola.12056 [Google Scholar]
  395. Proshina, Z. G.
    2007The ABC and controversies of World Englishes. Хабаровск: ДВИИЯ. https://proshinazoyag.weebly.com/uploads/1/0/3/5/10358342/abc.pdf (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  396. Pullum, G.
    2015English and its undeserved good luck. wordwidefx.com/en/blog/post/english-and-its-undeserved-good-luck (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  397. Quirk, R.
    1990 Language varieties and standard language. English Today6(1): 3-10. 10.1017/S0266078400004454
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400004454 [Google Scholar]
  398. Quirk, R. , Greenbaum, S. , Leech, G. & Svartvik, J.
    1972A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  399. 1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  400. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2013R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org/ (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  401. Radden, G. & Dirven, R.
    2007Cognitive English grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clip.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clip.2 [Google Scholar]
  402. Radford, A.
    1988Transformational Grammar: A First Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511840425
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840425 [Google Scholar]
  403. Rappaport Hovav, M. & Levin, B. 1998 Building verb meaning. InThe Projection of Arguments, M. Butt & W. Geuder (eds), 97–134. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  404. Rayson, P.
    2009 Wmatrix: A web-based corpus processing environment. Computing Department, Lancaster University. Accessible at ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/wmatrix/ (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  405. Rice, S. , Sandra, D. & Vanrespaille, M.
    1999 Prepositional semantics and the fragile link between space and time. InCultural, Typology and Psycholinguistic Issues in Cognitive Linguistics, M. Hiraga , C. Sinha & S. Wilcox (eds), 107–127. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.152.10ric
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.152.10ric [Google Scholar]
  406. Richards, J. C.
    1979 Rhetorical and communicative styles in the new varieties of English. Language Learning29(1): 1–25. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1979.tb01049.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1979.tb01049.x [Google Scholar]
  407. Rickheit, G. & Sichelschmidt, L.
    2007 Valency and cognition - A notion in transition. InValency: Theoretical, Descriptive and Cognitive Issues, T. Herbst & K. Götz-Votteler (eds), 163–182. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  408. Ringböm, H.
    1998 Highfrequency verbs in the ICLE corpus. InExplorations in Corpus Linguistics, A. Renouf (ed.), 191–200. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  409. Rodríguez, H. , Climent, S. , Vossen, P. , Bloksma, L. , Peters, W. , Alonge, A. , Bertagna, F. , Roventini, A.
    1998 The top-down strategy for building eurowordnet: Vocabulary coverage, base concepts and top ontology. Computers and the Humanities32(2–3): 117–152. 10.1023/A:1001169525131
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001169525131 [Google Scholar]
  410. Römer, U.
    2009 The inseparability between lexis and grammar: Corpus linguistic perspectives. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics7: 141–163. 10.1075/arcl.7.06rom
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.06rom [Google Scholar]
  411. Ronan, P. & Schneider, G.
    2015 Determining light verb constructions in contemporary British and Irish English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics20(3): 326–354. 10.1075/ijcl.20.3.03ron
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.20.3.03ron [Google Scholar]
  412. Rosch, E.
    1999 Principles of categorization. InConcepts: Core Readings, E. Margolis & S. Laurence (eds), 189-206. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  413. Rosen, A.
    2016 The fate of linguistic innovations: Jersey English and French learner English compared. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 302–322. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.08ros
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.08ros [Google Scholar]
  414. Röthlisberger, M.
    2018 Syntactic variation, constructional entrenchment and World Englishes: Inside the English dative alternation. Paper presented at the 51th annual meeting of the SLE, 29August – 01September 2018, Tallin, Estonia.
    [Google Scholar]
  415. Röthlisberger, M. , Grafmiller, J. & Szmrecsanyi, B.
    2017 Cognitive indigenization effects in the English dative alternation. Cognitive Linguistics28(4): 673-710. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0051
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0051 [Google Scholar]
  416. Rubdy, R.
    2001 Creative destruction: Singapore’s Speak Good English movement. World Englishes20(3): 341–355. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00219
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00219 [Google Scholar]
  417. Ruppenhofer, J. & Michaelis, L. A.
    2010 A constructional account of genre-based argument omissions. Constructions and Frames2(2): 158–184. 10.1075/cf.2.2.02rup
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.2.2.02rup [Google Scholar]
  418. Sahgal, A.
    1991 Patterns of language use in a bilingual setting in India. InEnglish around the World: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, J. Cheshire (ed.), 299–307. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611889.021
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611889.021 [Google Scholar]
  419. Sand, A. 2004 Shared morpho-syntactic features in contact varieties of English: Article use. World Englishes23(2): 281–298. 10.1111/j.0883‑2919.2004.00352.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919.2004.00352.x [Google Scholar]
  420. 2005 The effects of language contact on the morpho-syntax of English. InAnglistentag 2004 Aachen: Proceedings, L. Moessner & C. M. Schmidt (eds), 449–460. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.
    [Google Scholar]
  421. Saraceni, M.
    2010The Relocation of English: Shifting Paradigms in a Global Era. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑29691‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-29691-6 [Google Scholar]
  422. Schiffmann, H. F.
    2005 Bilingualism in South Asia: Friend or foe?InISB4: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism, J. Cohen , K. T. McAlister , K. Rolstad & J. MacSwan (eds), 2104–2114. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  423. Schilk, M.
    2011Structural Nativization in Indian English Lexicogrammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.46
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.46 [Google Scholar]
  424. Schilk, M. , Bernaisch, T. & Mukherjee, J.
    2012 Mapping unity and diversity in South Asian English lexicogrammar: Verb-complementational preferences across varieties. InMapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes, M. Hundt & U. Gut (eds), 137–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g43.06sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.06sch [Google Scholar]
  425. Schilk, M. , Mukherjee, J. , Nam, C. & Mukherjee, S.
    2013 Complementation of Ditransitive verbs in South Asian Englishes: A multifactorial analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory9(2): 187-225. 10.1515/cllt‑2013‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0001 [Google Scholar]
  426. Schmied, J.
    1996 Second-language corpora. InComparing English Worldwide: The International Corpus of English, S. Greenbaum (ed.), 182–196. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  427. Schneider, E. W.
    2003 The Dynamics of New Englishes: From identity construction to dialect birth. Language79(2): 233–281. 10.1353/lan.2003.0136
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0136 [Google Scholar]
  428. 2004 How to trace structural nativization: Particle verbs in world Englishes. World Englishes23(2): 227–249. 10.1111/j.0883‑2919.2004.00348.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919.2004.00348.x [Google Scholar]
  429. 2007Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511618901
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618901 [Google Scholar]
  430. 2012 Exploring the interface between World Englishes and Second Language Acquisition – and implications for English as a Lingua Franca. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca1(1): 57-91. 10.1515/jelf‑2012‑0004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2012-0004 [Google Scholar]
  431. 2014 New reflections on the evolutionary dynamics of world Englishes. World Englishes33(1): 9–32. 10.1111/weng.12069
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12069 [Google Scholar]
  432. Schneider, E. W. , Burridge, K. , Kortmann, B. , Mesthrie, R. & Upton, C.
    (eds). 2004A Handbook of Varieties of English. Vol. I: Phonology. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  433. Schneider, G. & Gilquin, G.
    2016 Detecting innovations in a parsed corpus of learner English. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research2(2): 177–204. 10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.03sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.2.2.03sch [Google Scholar]
  434. Schneider, G. & Zipp, L.
    2013 Discovering new verb-preposition combinations in New Englishes. InCorpus linguistics and Variation in English: Focus on Non-native Englishes, M. Huber & J. Mukherjee (eds). Helsinki: Research unit for variation, Contacts and change in English. www.helsinki.fi/varieng/series/volumes/13/schneider_zipp/ (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  435. Scott, M.
    2004WordSmith Tools Version 4. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  436. Seargeant, P.
    2012Exploring World Englishes: Language in a Global Context. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203115510
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203115510 [Google Scholar]
  437. Sedlatschek, A.
    2009Contemporary Indian English Variation and Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g38
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g38 [Google Scholar]
  438. Seoane, E. 2016 World Englishes Today. InWorld Englishes: New Theoretical and Methodological Considerations, E. Seoane & C. Suárez-Gómez (eds), 1–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g57.01seo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g57.01seo [Google Scholar]
  439. Setter, J. , Wong, C. S. P. & Chan, B. H.-S.
    2010Hong Kong English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  440. Shahrokny-Prehn, A. & Höche, S.
    2011 Rising through the registers: A corpus-based account of the stylistic constraints on light verb constructions. Corpus10: 239–257. 10.4000/corpus.2110
    https://doi.org/10.4000/corpus.2110 [Google Scholar]
  441. Sharma, D.
    2005 Language transfer and discourse universals in Indian English article use. Studies in Second Language Acquisition27: 535–566. 10.1017/S0272263105050242
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050242 [Google Scholar]
  442. 2009 Typological diversity in New Englishes. English World-Wide30(2): 170–195. 10.1075/eww.30.2.04sha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.30.2.04sha [Google Scholar]
  443. 2012 Shared features in New Englishes. InAreal Features of the Anglophone World, R. Hickey (ed.), 211–232. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110279429.211
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279429.211 [Google Scholar]
  444. Shatz, C. J.
    1992 The developing brain. Scientific American267(3): 60–67. 10.1038/scientificamerican0992‑60
    https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0992-60 [Google Scholar]
  445. Sheskin, D.
    2011Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures (5th edition). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  446. Siemund, P. , Schulz, M. E. & Schweinberger, M.
    2014 Studying the linguistic ecology of Singapore: A comparison of college and university students. World Englishes33(3): 340–362. 10.1111/weng.12094
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12094 [Google Scholar]
  447. Simpson, J.
    1983 Resultatives. InPapers in Lexical-Functional Grammar, L. Levin , M. Rappaport & A. Zaenen (eds), 143-157. Bloomington: Indiana University/Linguistics Club.
    [Google Scholar]
  448. Sinclair, J.
    1991Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  449. 1996 The search for units of meaning. TEXTUSIX(1): 75–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  450. 1998 The lexical item. InConstrastive Lexical Semantics, E. Weigand (ed.), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.171.02sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.171.02sin [Google Scholar]
  451. 2004 The search for units of meaning. InTrust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse, 24–48. London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203594070‑6
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203594070-6 [Google Scholar]
  452. Smith, Adam.
    2009 Light verbs in Australian, New Zealand and British English. InComparative Studies in Australian and New Zealand English: Grammar and beyond, P. Peters , P. Collins & A. Smith (eds), 139-155. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g39.09smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g39.09smi [Google Scholar]
  453. Spencer, B.
    2011 International sporting events in South Africa, identity re-alignment, and Schneider’s EVENT X. African Identities9(3): 267–278. 10.1080/14725843.2011.591225
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14725843.2011.591225 [Google Scholar]
  454. Sridhar, K. K. & Sridhar, S. N.
    1986 Bridging the paradigm gap: Second language acquisition theory and indigenized varieties of English. World Englishes5(1): 3–14. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1986.tb00636.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1986.tb00636.x [Google Scholar]
  455. Sridhar, S. N.
    1986Sociolinguistic Contexts and Non-native Varieties of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  456. 1994 A reality check for SLA theories. TESOL Quarterly28(4): 800–805. 10.2307/3587565
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587565 [Google Scholar]
  457. Staples, S. & Biber, D.
    2015 Cluster analysis. InAdvancing quantitative methods in second language research, L. Plonsky (ed.), 243–274. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315870908‑11
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315870908-11 [Google Scholar]
  458. Stefanowitsch, A. 2001 Constructing Causation: A Construction Grammar Approach to Analytic Causatives. PhD dissertation, Rice University.
    [Google Scholar]
  459. 2003 A construction-based approach to indirect speech acts. InMetonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing, K.-U. Panther & L. L. Thornburg (eds), 105–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.113.09ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.113.09ste [Google Scholar]
  460. 2011 Argument structure: Item-based or distributed?Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik59(4): 369–386. 10.1515/zaa‑2011‑0407
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2011-0407 [Google Scholar]
  461. Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. Th.
    2003 Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics8(2): 209–243. 10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste [Google Scholar]
  462. 2008 Channel and constructional meaning: A collostructional case study. InCognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems, G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (eds), 129–152. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110199154.2.129
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199154.2.129 [Google Scholar]
  463. Stubbs, M.
    2009 Technology and phraseology: With notes on the history of corpus linguistics. InExploring the Lexis-Grammar Interface, U. Römer & R. Schulze (eds), 15–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.35.03stu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.35.03stu [Google Scholar]
  464. Szmrecsanyi, B. , Grafmiller, J. , Bresnan, J. , Rosenbach, A. , Tagliamonte, S. & Todd, S.
    2017 Spoken syntax in a comparative perspective: The dative and genitive alternation in varieties of English. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics2(1):86.1–27. 10.5334/gjgl.310
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.310 [Google Scholar]
  465. Szmrecsanyi, B. , Grafmiller, J. , Heller, B. & Röthlisberger, M.
    2016 Around the world in three alternations: Modeling syntactic variation in varieties of English. English World-Wide37(2): 109–137. 10.1075/eww.37.2.01szm
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.37.2.01szm [Google Scholar]
  466. Szmrecsanyi, B. & Kortmann, B.
    2011 Typological profiling: Learner Englishes versus indigenized L2 varieties of English. InExploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap, J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (eds), 167–188. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.44.09kor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.44.09kor [Google Scholar]
  467. Talib, I. S.
    1994 Responses to the language of Singaporean literature in English. InLanguage, Education and Society in Singapore Issues and Trends, S. Gopinathan , A. Pakir , W. K. Ho & V. Saravanan (eds), 153–174. Singapore: Times Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  468. Taylor, C.
    2008 What is Corpus Linguistics? What the data says. ICAME Journal32: 179–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  469. Taylor, J. R.
    2002Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  470. 2012The Mental Corpus: How Language is Represented in the Mind. Oxford: Oup . 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199290802.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199290802.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  471. Terziev, A. , Kiryakov, A. & Manov, D.
    2005D1.8.1 Base Upper-level Ontology (BULO) Guidance. ontotext.com/documents/proton/Proton-Ver3.0B.pdf (20April 2020)
    [Google Scholar]
  472. Teubert, W.
    2005 My version of corpus linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics10(1): 1–13. 10.1075/ijcl.10.1.01teu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.10.1.01teu [Google Scholar]
  473. Thomason, S.
    2007 Language contact and deliberate change. Journal of Language Contact1(1): 41–62. 10.1163/000000007792548387
    https://doi.org/10.1163/000000007792548387 [Google Scholar]
  474. (fc.). Can rules be borrowed?InFestschrift for Terrance Kaufman, T. Smith-Stark & R. Zavala eds
    [Google Scholar]
  475. Thompson, S. & Hopper, P.
    2001 Transitivity, clause structure and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. InFrequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, J. Bybee & P. Hopper (eds), 27–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.03tho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.03tho [Google Scholar]
  476. Tomasello, M. 2003Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  477. Trotta, J.
    2000Wh-clauses in English: Aspects of Theory and Description. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004333895
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004333895 [Google Scholar]
  478. Trousdale, G.
    2008 Constructions in grammaticalization and lexicalization: Evidence from the history of a composite predicate construction in English. InConstructional approaches to English grammar, G. Trousdale & N. Gisborne (eds), 33–67. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110199178.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199178.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  479. 2015 Multiple inheritance and constructional change. InOn Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change, H. De Smet , L. Ghesquière & F. Van de Velde (eds), 19–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.79.02tro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.79.02tro [Google Scholar]
  480. Trudgill, P.
    2003A Glossary of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  481. Tuggy, D.
    1993 Ambiguity, polysemy, and vagueness. Cognitive Linguistics4(3): 273–290. 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.273
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.273 [Google Scholar]
  482. Tummers, J. , Heylen, K. & Geeraerts, D.
    2005 Usage-based approaches in Cognitive Linguistics: A technical state of the art. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory1(2): 225–261. 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.225
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.225 [Google Scholar]
  483. Uhrig, P.
    2015 Why the principle of no synonymy is overrated. Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik63(3): 323–337. 10.1515/zaa‑2015‑0030
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2015-0030 [Google Scholar]
  484. Van der Auwera, J. & Gast, V.
    2011 Categories and prototypes. InThe Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, J. J. Song (ed.), 166–189. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  485. Van der Auwera, J. , Noël, D. & De Wit, A.
    2012 The diverging need (to)’s of Asian Englishes. InMapping Unity and Diversity World-Wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes, M. Hundt & U. Gut (eds), 55–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g43.03van
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.03van [Google Scholar]
  486. Van Rooy, B.
    2010 Social and linguistic perspectives on variability in World Englishes. World Englishes29(1): 3–20. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2009.01621.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2009.01621.x [Google Scholar]
  487. 2011 A principled distinction between error and conventionalized innovation in African Englishes. InExploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap, J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (eds), 189–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.44.10roo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.44.10roo [Google Scholar]
  488. 2014 Convergence and endonormativity at phase four of the Dynamic Model. InThe Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and beyond, S. Buschfeld , T. Hoffmann , M. Huber & A. Kautzsch (eds), 21–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g49.02roo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.02roo [Google Scholar]
  489. Van Rooy, B. & Terblanche, L.
    2010 Complexity in word-formation processes in New Varieties of South African English. Southern African linguistics and applied language studies28(4): 357–374. 10.2989/16073614.2010.548022
    https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2010.548022 [Google Scholar]
  490. Viberg, A.
    1996 Cross-linguistic lexicology: the case of English go and Swedish . InLanguages in Contrast: Papers from a Symposium on Text-based Cross-linguistic Studies, Lund4-5March 1994, K. Aijmer , B. Altenberg & M. Johansson (eds), 151–182. Lund: Lund University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  491. 2002 Basic verbs in Second Language Acquisition. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée7(2): 51–69. 10.3917/rfla.072.0061
    https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.072.0061 [Google Scholar]
  492. Vogel, R.
    2016 Optimal constructions. InOptimality-theoretic Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics, G. Legendre , M. T. Putnam , H. de Swart & E. Zaroukian (eds), 55–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198757115.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198757115.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  493. Wee, L. 2014 Linguistic chutzpah and the Speak Good Singlish movement. World Englishes33(1): 85–99. 10.1111/weng.12055
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12055 [Google Scholar]
  494. Weinreich, U. , Labov, W. & Herzog, M.
    1968 Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. InDirections for Historical Linguistics: A Symposium, W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (eds), 95–188. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  495. Werner, J. & Mukherjee, J.
    2012 Highly polysemous verbs in New Englishes: A corpus-based study of Sri Lankan and Indian English. InCorpus Linguistics: Looking Back – Moving Forward, S. Hoffmann , P. Rayson & G. Leech (eds), 249–266. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789401207478_018
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401207478_018 [Google Scholar]
  496. Werner, V.
    2013 Temporal adverbials and the present perfect/past tense alternation. English World-Wide34(2): 202–240. 10.1075/eww.34.2.04wer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.34.2.04wer [Google Scholar]
  497. 2016 Overlap and divergence: Aspects of the present perfect in World Englishes. InWorld Englishes: New Theoretical and Methodological Considerations, E. Seoane & C. Suárez-Gómez (eds), 113–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g57.06wer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g57.06wer [Google Scholar]
  498. Wickham, H. , Chang, W. , Henry, L. , Pedersen, T. L. , Takahashi, K. , Wilke, C. , Woo, K.
    2019 ggplot2: Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics, R package version 3.1.0. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ggplot2/index.html (20April 2020)
  499. Widdowson, H. G.
    1994 The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly28(2): 377. 10.2307/3587438
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587438 [Google Scholar]
  500. Wierzbicka, A.
    1972 Semantic Primitives. Frankfurt: Athenäum-Verl.
    [Google Scholar]
  501. 1982 Why can you have a drink when you can’t have an eat?Language58(4): 753–799. 10.2307/413956
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413956 [Google Scholar]
  502. Williams, J.
    1987 Non-native varieties of English: A special case of language acquisition. English World-Wide8(2): 161–199. 10.1075/eww.8.2.02wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.8.2.02wil [Google Scholar]
  503. Winford, D.
    2013 Substrate influence and universals in the emergence of contact Englishes: Re-evaluating the evidence. InEnglish as a Contact Language, D. Schreier & M. Hundt (eds), 222–241. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  504. Wolf, H.-G. & Polzenhagen, F.
    2007 Fixed expressions as manifestations of cultural conceptualizations: Examples from African varieties of English. InPhraseology and Culture in English, P. Skandera (ed.), 399-435. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197860.399
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197860.399 [Google Scholar]
  505. 2009World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110199222
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199222 [Google Scholar]
  506. Wong, J.
    2014The Culture of Singapore English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139519519
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519519 [Google Scholar]
  507. Wong, M. L.-Y.
    2014 Verb-preposition constructions in Hong Kong English: A cognitive semantic account. Linguistics52(3): 603-635. 10.1515/ling‑2014‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2014-0001 [Google Scholar]
  508. Wray, A.
    2002Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519772
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772 [Google Scholar]
  509. Wulff, S.
    2006Go-V vs. go-and-V in English: A case of constructional synonymy?InCorpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, S. Th. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (eds), 101–126. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  510. 2008Rethinking Idiomaticity: A Usage-based Approach. New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  511. Wulff, S. , Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. Th. 2007 Brutal Brits and persuasive Americans: Variety-specific meaning construction in the into-Causative. InAspects of Meaning Construction, G. Radden , K.-M. Köpcke , T. Berg & P. Siemund (eds), 265–281. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.136.17wul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136.17wul [Google Scholar]
  512. Xi, X. & Ingham, M.
    (eds). 2003City Voices: Hong Kong Writing in English, 1945 to the Present. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  513. Yamaguchi, T. & Deterding, D.
    2016 English in Malaysia: Background, status and use. InEnglish in Malaysia: Current Use and Status, T. Yamaguchi & D. Deterding (eds), 3–24. Leiden & Boston: Brill. 10.1163/9789004314306_002
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004314306_002 [Google Scholar]
  514. Yano, Y.
    2001 World Englishes in 2000 and beyond. World Englishes20(2): 119–132. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00204
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00204 [Google Scholar]
  515. Yao, X.
    2016 Cleft constructions in Hong Kong English. English World-Wide37(2): 197–220. 10.1075/eww.37.2.07yao
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.37.2.07yao [Google Scholar]
  516. Yuen-Ying, C.
    2000 The English-language media in Hong Kong. World Englishes19(3): 323–335. 10.1111/1467‑971X.00182
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00182 [Google Scholar]
  517. Zeileis, A. , Meyer, D. & Hornik, K.
    2007 Residual-based shadings for visualizing conditional independence. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics16(3): 507–525. 10.1198/106186007X237856
    https://doi.org/10.1198/106186007X237856 [Google Scholar]
  518. Ziegeler, D.
    2015Converging Grammars: Constructions in Singapore English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781614514091
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614514091 [Google Scholar]
  519. Zipf, G. K.
    1945 The meaning-frequency relationship of words. The Journal of General Psychology33(2): 251–256. 10.1080/00221309.1945.10544509
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1945.10544509 [Google Scholar]
  520. Zipp, L.
    2014Educated Fiji English: Lexico-Grammar and Variety Status. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g47
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g47 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/books/9789027260086
Loading
/content/books/9789027260086
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027260086
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