oa Tracing the development of the perfect alternation in Early Modern English

References

1. Anderwald, Lieselotte
   2014 The decline of the be-perfect, linguistic relativity, and grammar writing in the nineteenth century. InMarianne Hundt (ed.) Late modern English syntax, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139507226.004
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507226.004 [Google Scholar]
2. Anderwald, Lieselotte
   2016 Language between description and prescription. Verbs and verb categories in nineteenth-century grammars of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190270674.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190270674.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
3. Anthony, Laurence
   2021 AntConc 4.0 [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brinton, Laurel J.
   1994 The differentiation of statives and perfects in Early Modern English: The development of the conclusive perfect. InDieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.). Towards a standard English, 1600–1800, –. Berlin: de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Denison, David
   1993 English historical syntax. London: Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Elsness, Johan
   1997 The perfect and the preterite in comtemporary and earlier English. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110810264
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110810264 [Google Scholar]
7. Fokkema, Marjorie & Achim Zeileis
   2019 Package “glmertree”. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/glmertree/glmertree.pdf (accessed8 December 2022).
8. Fokkema, Marjolein, Julian Edbrooke-Childs & Miranda Wolpert
   2020 Generalized linear mixedmodel (GLMM) trees: A !exible decision-tree method for multilevel and longitudinal data. Psychotherapy Research. –.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Fokkema, Marjolein, Niels Smits, Achim Zeileis, Torsten Hothorn & Henk Kelderman
   2018 Detecting treatment-subgroup interactions in clustered data with generalized linear mixed effects model trees. Behavior Research Methods. –. 10.3758/s13428‑017‑0971‑x
   https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0971-x [Google Scholar]
10. Hilpert, Martin
    2017 Frequencies in diachronic corpora and knowledge of language. InMarianne Hundt, Sandra Mollin & Simone Pfenninger (eds.). The changing English language: Psycholinguistic perspectives, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316091746.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316091746.003 [Google Scholar]
11. Hosaka, Michio, Shimpei Okuda & Kazutoshi Sasahara
    2020 Evolutionary forces in the development of the English perfect construction. InAndrea Ravignani (ed.), Chiara Barbieri, Molly Flaherty, Yannick Jadoul, Ella Lattenkamp, Hannah Little, Mauricio Martins, Katie Mudd & Tessa Verhoef (eds.). The evolution of language. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference, –. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Hristov, Bozhil
    2020 Grammaticalising the perfect and explanations of language change. Have- and be-perfects in the history and structure of English and Bulgarian. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004414051
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004414051 [Google Scholar]
13. Hundt, Marianne
    2014 The demise of the being to V construction. Transactions of the Philological Society(). –. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12035
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12035 [Google Scholar]
14. Hundt, Marianne
    2021 “The next Morning I got a Warrant for the Man and his Wife, but he was fled”: Did sociolinguistic factors play a role in the loss of the be-perfect?InTine Breban & Svenja Kranich (eds.). Lost in change: Causes and processes in the loss of grammatical elements and constructions, –. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.218.07hun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.218.07hun [Google Scholar]
15. Hundt, Marianne & Geoffrey Leech
    2012 Small is beautiful: On the value of standard reference corpora for observing recent grammatical change. InTerttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.). The Oxford handbook of the history of English, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0017
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0017 [Google Scholar]
16. Jespersen, Otto
    1931 A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part IV, Syntax, vol. 3, time and tense. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Kranich, Svenja & Tine Breban
    (eds.) 2021 Lost in change: Causes and processes in the loss of grammatical elements and constructions. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.218
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.218 [Google Scholar]
18. Kytö, Merja
    1997 Be/have + past participle: The choice of the auxiliary with intransitives from late middle to modern English. InMatti Rissanen, Merja Kytö & Kirsi Heikkonen (eds.). English in transition: Corpus-based studies in linguistic variation and genre styles, –. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110811148.17
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110811148.17 [Google Scholar]
19. Lieberman, Erez, Jean-Baptiste Michel, Joe Jackson, Tina Tang & Martin A. Nowak
    2007 Quantifying the evolutionary dynamics of language. Nature. –. 10.1038/nature06137
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06137 [Google Scholar]
20. McFadden, Thomas & Artemis Alexiadou
    2006 Auxiliary selection and counterfactuality in the history of English and Germanic. InJutta M. Hartmann & László Molnárfi (eds.), Comparative studies in Germanic syntax: From Afrikaans to Zurich German, –. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/la.97.12mcf
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.97.12mcf [Google Scholar]
21. McFadden, Thomas & Artemis Alexiadou
    2010 Perfects, resultatives, and auxiliaries in Earlier English. Linguistic Inquiry(). –. 10.1162/LING_a_00002
    https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00002 [Google Scholar]
22. McWhorter, John
    2002 What happened to English?Diachronica(). –. 10.1075/dia.19.2.02wha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.19.2.02wha [Google Scholar]
23. Petré, Peter & Lynn Anthonissen
    2020 Individuality in complex systems: A constructionist approach. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/cog‑2019‑0033
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0033 [Google Scholar]
24. Petré, Peter, Lynn Anthonissen, Sara Budts, Enrique Manjavacas, Emma-Louise Silva, William Standing & Odile A. O. Strik
    2019 Early Modern Multiloquent Authors (EMMA): Designing a large-scale corpus of individuals’ languages. ICAME Journal. –. 10.2478/icame‑2019‑0004
    https://doi.org/10.2478/icame-2019-0004 [Google Scholar]
25. Rissanen, Matti
    1999 Syntax. InRoger Lass (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language, vol., –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Rydén, Mats
    1991 The be/have variation in its crucial phases. InDieter Kastovsky, (ed.). Historical English syntax, –. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110863314.343
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863314.343 [Google Scholar]
27. Rydén, Mats & Sverker Brorström
    1987 The be/have variation with intransitives in English. With special reference to the late modern period. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Smith, K. Aaron
    2007 Language use and auxiliary selection in the perfect. InRaúl Aranovich (ed.). Split auxiliary systems: A cross-linguistic perspective, –. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.69.12smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.69.12smi [Google Scholar]
29. Sorace, Antonella
    2000 Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs. Language(). –. 10.2307/417202
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417202 [Google Scholar]
30. Tagliamonte, Sali & Harald Baayen
    2012 Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change(). –. 10.1017/S0954394512000129
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394512000129 [Google Scholar]
31. Tuggy, David
    1993 Ambiguity, polysemy, and vagueness. Cognitive Linguistics. –. 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.273
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.3.273 [Google Scholar]
32. Visser, Fredericus Th.
    1973 An historical syntax of the English language, Part 3, second half: Syntactical units with two or more verbs. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Zehentner, Eva
    2022 Revisiting gradience in diachronic construction grammar: PPs and the complement-adjunct distinction in the history of English. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(). –. 10.1515/zaa‑2022‑2066
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2022-2066 [Google Scholar]