Select Bibliography

doi:10.1017/9781316443668.017

Select Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2019

Edited by

Lynne Magnusson and

David Schalkwyk

Show author details

Lynne Magnusson: Affiliation:
University of Toronto
David Schalkwyk: Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare's Language , pp. 279 - 286

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316443668.017 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Select Bibliography

Abbott, E. A., A Shakespearian Grammar. 2nd edn. London: Macmillan, 1870.Google Scholar

Adamson, Sylvia, ‘Literary Language’, The Cambridge History of the English Language, ed. Lass, Roger. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, vol. 3, pp. 539–653.Google Scholar

Adamson, Sylvia, ‘Questions of Identity in Renaissance Drama: New Historicism Meets Old Philology’, Shakespeare Quarterly 61.1 (2010): 56–77.CrossRef Google Scholar

Adamson, Sylvia, ‘Understanding Shakespeare’s Grammar: A Study in Small Words’, Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language, ed. S. Adamson, , L. Hunter, L. Magnusson, A. Thompson, and K. Wales. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2001, pp. 210–236.Google Scholar

Adamson, S., Hunter, L., Magnusson, L., Thompson, A., and Wales, K. (eds.), Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language: A Guide. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2001.Google Scholar

Alexander, Catherine M. S. (ed.), Shakespeare and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

Altman, Joel B., The Improbability of Othello: Rhetorical Anthropology and Shakespearean Selfhood. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Altman, Joel B., The Tudor Play of Mind: Rhetorical Inquiry and the Development of Elizabethan Drama. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Aristotle, , On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse, trans. G. A. Kennedy, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

Attridge, Derek, The Rhythms of English Poetry. London: Longman, 1982.Google Scholar

Attridge, Derek, Well-Weighed Syllables: Elizabethan Verse in Classical Metres. London: Cambridge University Press, 1974.Google Scholar

Austin, J. L., How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.Google Scholar

Bakhtin, M. M., The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. Holquist, Michael, trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Bakhtin, M. M., ‘The Problem of Speech Genres’, Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, ed. Emerson, Caryl and Holquist, Michael. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986, pp. 60–102.Google Scholar

Baldwin, T. W., William Shakspere’s Small Latine and Lesse Greeke. 2 vols. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1944.Google Scholar

Barber, Charles, Joan C. Beal, and Philip A. Shaw, The English Language: A Historical Introduction. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Barker, William (ed.), The Adages of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Barton, Anne, ‘Leontes and the Spider: Language and Speaker in Shakespeare’s Last Plays’, Essays, Mainly Shakespearean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 161–181.Google Scholar

Barton, John, Playing Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 1984.Google Scholar

Basu, Anupam, Hope, Jonathan, and Witmore, Michael, ‘The Professional and Linguistic Communities of Early Modern Dramatists’, Community-Making in Early Stuart Theatres: Stage and Audience, ed. Sell, Roger D., Wilcox, Helen, and Johnson, Anthony W.. London: Routledge, 2014, pp. 63–94.Google Scholar

Beier, Lee, ‘Anti-Language or Jargon? Canting in the English Underworld in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, Languages and Jargons: Contributions to a Social History of Language, ed. Burke, Peter and Porter, Roy. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995, pp. 64–101.Google Scholar

Bell, Allan, The Guidebook to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2014.Google Scholar

Bergen, Benjamin K., Louder Than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning. New York: Basic Books, 2006.Google Scholar

Black, James, ‘Henry IV: A World of Figures Here’, Shakespeare: The Theatrical Dimension, ed. McGuire, Philip C. and Samuelson, David A.. New York: AMS Press, 1979, pp. 165–183.Google Scholar

Blake, N. F., A Grammar of Shakespeare’s Language. New York: Palgrave, 2002.Google Scholar

Blake, N. F., Non-Standard Language in English Literature. London: Deutsch, 1981.Google Scholar

Blake, N. F., Shakespeare’s Language: An Introduction. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1983.Google Scholar

Blake, N. F., Shakespeare’s Non-Standard English: A Dictionary of his Informal Language. New York: Continuum, 2004.Google Scholar

Blank, Paula, Broken English: Dialects and the Politics of Language in Renaissance Writings. London: Routledge, 1996.Google Scholar

Booth, Stephen, An Essay on Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969.Google Scholar

Booth, Stephen, Precious Nonsense: The Gettysburg Address, Ben Jonson’s Epitaphs on his Children, and Twelfth Night. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, ‘The Economics of Linguistic Exchanges’, Social Science Information 16 (1977): 645–668.Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre, Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity, 1991.Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope, and Levinson, Stephen C., Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.Google Scholar

Brown, Roger, and Gilman, Albert, ‘Politeness Theory and Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies’, Language in Society 18 (1989): 159–212.Google Scholar

Burkert, Mattie, ‘Plotting the “Female Wits” Controversy: Gender, Genre, and Printed Plays, 1670–1699’, Early Modern Studies after the Digital Turn, ed. Estill, Laura, Jackaki, Diane, and Ullyot, Michael. Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2016, pp. 35–59.Google Scholar

Burt, Richard, ‘To e- or not to e-? Disposing of Schlockspeare in the Age of Digital Media’, Shakespeare after Mass Media, ed. Burt, Richard. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar

Calderwood, James L., Metadrama in Shakespeare’s Henriad: ‘Richard II’ to ‘Henry V’. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.Google Scholar

Cavell, Stanley, Philosophy the Day after Tomorrow. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2006.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chambers, J. K., and Schilling, Natalie (eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. 2nd edn. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.Google Scholar

Cook, Amy, Shakespearean Neuroplay: Reinvigorating the Study of Dramatic Texts and Performance Through Cognitive Science. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.Google Scholar

Cormack, Bradin, ‘Tender Distance: Latinity and Desire in Shakespeare’s Sonnets’, A Companion to Shakespeare’s Sonnets, ed. Schoenfeldt, Michael. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, pp. 242–260.Google Scholar

Coulthard, Malcolm, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. 2nd edn. London: Routledge, 1985.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh, ‘Shakespeare’s Vocabulary: Myth and Reality’, Shakespeare Quarterly 62.1 (2011): 53–74.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh, ‘Stylistic Analysis and Authorship Studies’, A Companion to Digital Humanities, ed. Schreibman, Susan, Siemens, Ray, and Unsworth, John. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004, pp. 273–288.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh, and Greatley-Hirsch, Brett, Style, Computers, and Early Modern Drama. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh, and Kinney, Arthur F. (eds.), Shakespeare, Computers, and the Mystery of Authorship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

Crane, Mary Thomas, Framing Authority: Sayings, Self, and Society in Sixteenth-Century England. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.Google Scholar

Crane, Mary Thomas, Shakespeare’s Brain: Reading with Cognitive Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Crystal, David, The Oxford Dictionary of Original Shakespearean Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.CrossRef Google Scholar

Crystal, David, Think on My Words: Exploring Shakespeare’s Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan, Language and Characterisation in Plays and Texts: People in Plays and Other Texts, Textual Explorations. Harlow: Longman, 2001.Google Scholar

Cummings, Brian, The Literary Culture of the Reformation: Grammar and Grace. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Delabastita, Dirk, and D’hulst, Lieven (eds.), European Shakespeares: Translating Shakespeare in the Romantic Age. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1993.Google Scholar

Delabastita, Dirk, and Hoenselaars, Ton (eds.), Multilingualism in the Drama of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2015.Google Scholar

Dent, R. W., Shakespeare’s Proverbial Language: An Index. Berkeley and London: University of California Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Donawerth, Jane, Shakespeare and the Sixteenth-Century Study of Language. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1984.Google Scholar

Drakakis, John, ‘Shakespeare in Quotations’, Studying British Culture: An Introduction, ed. Bassnett, Susan. London: Routledge, 1997, pp. 152–172.Google Scholar

Edelman, Charles, Shakespeare’s Military Language: A Dictionary. London and New Brunswick: Athlone, 2000.Google Scholar

Edwards, Philip, Inga-Stina Ewbank, and G. K. Hunter (eds.), Shakespeare’s Styles: Essays in Honour of Kenneth Muir. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.Google Scholar

Elam, Keir, Shakespeare’s Universe of Discourse: Language-Games in the Comedies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.Google Scholar

Elliott, Ward E. Y., and Valenza, Robert J., ‘Shakespeare’s Vocabulary: Did It Dwarf All Others?’, Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches, ed. Ravassat, Mireille and Culpeper, Jonathan. London: Continuum, 2011, pp. 34–57.Google Scholar

Empson, William, Seven Types of Ambiguity. London: Chatto & Windus, 1930.Google Scholar

Enterline, Lynn, Shakespeare’s Schoolroom. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Erasmus, , Collected Works of Erasmus, trans. C. Fantazzi, 25. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985.Google Scholar

Erasmus, , De conscribendis epistolis, ed. Margolin, J. C., in Erasmus, , Opera omnia, I-2. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1971, pp. 205–579.Google Scholar

Erasmus, , De copia, ed. Knott, B., Opera omnia, I-6. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1988; trans. B. Knott, Collected Works of Erasmus, 24. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Escolme, Bridget, Talking to the Audience: Shakespeare, Performance, Self. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005.Google Scholar

Ewbank, Inga-Stina, ‘Shakespeare Translation as Cultural Exchange’, Shakespeare Survey 48 (1995): 1–12.Google Scholar

Eyre, Richard, and Wright, Nicholas, Changing Stages. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley E., ‘How to Do Things with Austin and Searle: Speech Act Theory and Literary Criticism’, MLN 91.5 (1976): 983–1025.CrossRef Google Scholar

Flint, Lorna, Shakespeare’s Third Keyboard: The Significance of Rime in Shakespeare’s Plays. London: Associated University Presses, 2000.Google Scholar

Foakes, R. A., and Rickert, R. T. (eds.), Henslowe’s Diary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968.Google Scholar

Freedman, Penelope, Power and Passion in Shakespeare’s Pronouns: Interrogating ‘You’ and ‘Thou’. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.Google Scholar

Freeman, Donald, ‘“Catch[ing] the Nearest Way”: Macbeth and Cognitive Metaphor’, Journal of Pragmatics 24 (1995): 689–708.Google Scholar

Garber, Marjorie, ‘Character Assassination: Shakespeare, Anita Hill, and JFK’ and ‘Shakespeare as Fetish’, Symptoms of Culture. New York: Routledge, 1998, pp. 153–178.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred, ‘Regional and Social Variation’, The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. 3: 1476–1776, ed. Lass, Roger. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 459–538.Google Scholar

Graham, Kenneth J. E., The Performance of Conviction: Plainness and Rhetoric in the Early English Renaissance. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Griffiths, Eric, ‘On Lines and Grooves from Shakespeare to Tennyson’, Tennyson among the Poets: Bicentenary Essays, ed. Douglas-Fairhurst, Robert and Perry, Seamus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 132–159.Google Scholar

Herman, Vimala, Dramatic Discourse: Dialogue as Interaction in Plays. London and New York: Routledge, 1995.Google Scholar

Hoenselaars, Ton. ‘Shakespeare and the Cultures of Translation’, Shakespeare Survey 66 (2013): 206–219.Google Scholar

Hoenselaars, Ton. (ed.), Shakespeare and the Language of Translation. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2004.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, The Authorship of Shakespeare’s Plays: A Socio-linguistic Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, Shakespeare’s Grammar. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2003.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, Shakespeare and Language: Reason, Eloquence and Artifice in the Renaissance. London: Arden, 2010.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, ‘Shakespeare’s “Natiue English”’, A Companion to Shakespeare, ed. Kastan, David Scott. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999, pp. 239–255.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, ‘Who Invented “Gloomy”? Lies People Want to Believe about Shakespeare’, Memoria di Shakespeare 3 (2016): 21–45.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, and Witmore, Michael, ‘The Hundredth Psalm to the Tune of “Green Sleeves”: Digital Approaches to Shakespeare’s Language of Genre’, Shakespeare Quarterly 61.3 (2010): 357–390.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, and Witmore, Michael, ‘The Language of Macbeth’, Macbeth: The State of Play, ed. Thompson, Ann. London: Bloomsbury, 2014, pp. 183–208.Google Scholar

Houston, John Porter, Shakespearean Sentences: A Study in Style and Syntax. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Hussey, S. S., The Literary Language of Shakespeare. London: Longman, 1982.Google Scholar

Hutson, Lorna, Circumstantial Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar

Hutson, Lorna, The Invention of Suspicion: Law and Mimesis in Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Jakobson, Roman, ‘On Linguistic Aspects of Translation’, On Translation, ed. Brower, Reuben A.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1959, pp. 232–239.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Andrew K., Dramatic Dialogue: The Duologue of Personal Encounter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Dennis (ed.), Foreign Shakespeare: Contemporary Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.Google Scholar

Kennedy, G. A., Progymnasmata: Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and Rhetoric. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.Google Scholar

Kermode, Frank, Shakespeare’s Language. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2000.Google Scholar

Kerrigan, John, Shakespeare’s Binding Language. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.Google Scholar

King, Arthur H., The Language of Satirized Characters in Poetaster: A Socio-Stylistic Analysis, 1597–1602. Lund: Gleerup, 1941.Google Scholar

Kolentsis, Alysia, ‘“Grammar Rules” in the Sonnets: Sidney and Shakespeare’, The Oxford Handbook of Shakespeare’s Poetry, ed. Post, Jonathan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, pp. 168–184.Google Scholar

Kolentsis, Alysia, ‘Shakespeare’s Lexical Style’, Shakespeare In Our Time: A Shakespeare Association of America Companion, ed. Callaghan, Dympna and Gossett, Suzanne. London: Arden Bloomsbury, 2016, pp. 306–311.Google Scholar

Kolentsis, Alysia, ‘Shakespeare’s Linguistic Creativity: A Reappraisal’, Literature Compass 11.4 (2014): 258–266.Google Scholar

Lakoff, George, and Johnson, Mark, Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar

Lamb, Jonathan P., Shakespeare in the Marketplace of Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Lanham, Richard A., A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. 2nd edn. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Lanier, Douglas, ‘Marketing’, The Oxford Handbook to Shakespeare, ed. Kinney, Arthur. London: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 499–515.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III, 1476–1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Leith, Dick. A Social History of English. 2nd edn. London: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C., Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.Google Scholar

Lyne, Raphael, Shakespeare, Rhetoric and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, Elizabethan Rhetoric: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, A History of Renaissance Rhetoric 1380–1620. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, ‘Learning and Transforming Conventional Wisdom: Reading and Rhetoric in the Elizabethan Grammar School’, Renaissance Studies 32.3 (2018): 427–445.Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, Reading and Rhetoric in Montaigne and Shakespeare. London: Bloomsbury, 2010.Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, (ed.), Renaissance Rhetoric. London: Macmillan, 1994.Google Scholar

Mack, Peter, (ed.), Rhetoric’s Questions, Reading and Interpretation. London: Palgrave, 2017.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, ‘Dialogue’, Reading Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language, ed. S. Adamson, , L. Hunter, L. Magnusson, A. Thompson, and K. Wales. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2001, pp. 130–143.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, ‘Grammatical Theatricality in Richard III: Schoolroom Queens and Godly Optatives’, Shakespeare Quarterly 64.1 (2013): 32–43.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, ‘Language’, The Oxford Handbook of Shakespeare, ed. Kinney, Arthur. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 239–257.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, ‘A Play of Modals: Grammar and Potential Action in Early Shakespeare’, Shakespeare Survey 62 (2009): 69–80.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, ‘Shakespeare and the Language of Possibility’, A Folger Shakespeare Library podcast: Shakespeare’s Birthday Lecture 2015, 16 April 2015 folgerpedia.folger.edu.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne, Shakespeare and Social Dialogue: Dramatic Language and Elizabeth Letters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Matoesian, Gregory M., ‘The Turn-Taking Model for Natural Conversation’, Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993, pp. 72–97.Google Scholar

Maxwell, Julie, and Rumbold, Kate (eds.), Shakespeare and Quotation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.Google Scholar

McDonald, Russ, Shakespeare and the Arts of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

McDonald, Russ, Shakespeare Reread: The Texts in New Contexts. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

McDonald, Russ, Shakespeare’s Late Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

Morgan, Oliver, Turn-Taking in Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.Google Scholar

Morris, Pam (ed.), The Bakhtin Reader: Selected Writings of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov. London: Edward Arnold, 1994.Google Scholar

Morse, Ruth, Truth and Convention in the Middle Ages: Rhetoric, Representation, and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Moss, Ann, Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar

Musgrove, S., ‘Thieves’ Cant in King Lear’, English Studies 62 (1981): 5–13.Google Scholar

Nicholson, Catherine, Uncommon Tongues: Eloquence and Eccentricity in the English Renaissance. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Palfrey, Simon, Late Shakespeare: A New World of Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Palfrey, Simon, and Stern, Tiffany, Shakespeare in Parts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Parker, Patricia, Literary Fat Ladies: Rhetoric, Gender, Property. London and New York: Methuen, 1987.Google Scholar

Parker, Patricia, Shakespeare from the Margins: Language, Culture, Context. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.Google Scholar

Porter, Joseph A., The Drama of Speech Acts: Shakespeare’s Lancastrian Tetralogy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.Google Scholar

Porter, Joseph A., ‘Eloquence and Liminality: Glossing Mercutio’s Speech Acts’, Romeo and Juliet, ed. White, R. S.. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001, pp. 166–193.Google Scholar

Quintilian, , Institutio oratoria, trans. D. A. Russell. 5 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Ravassat, Mireille, and Culpeper, Jonathan (eds.), Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches. London: Continuum, 2011.Google Scholar

Reddy, William M., The Navigation of Feeling: A Framework for the History of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Rhetorica ad Herennium, trans. H. Caplan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1954.Google Scholar

Rokison, Abigail, Shakespearean Verse Speaking: Text and Theatre Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Rutter, Carol Chillington, ‘Shakespeare and School’, Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy, ed. Edmondson, Paul and Wells, Stanley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 133–144.Google Scholar

Salmon, Vivian, and Burness, Edwina (eds.), A Reader in the Language of Shakespeare, Love and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Shakespearean Drama: Collected Essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1987.Google Scholar

Schalkwyk, David, ‘Cursing to Learn: Theatricality and the Creation of Character in The Tempest’, Shakespeare Survey 66 (2013): 67–81.Google Scholar

Schalkwyk, David, Literature and the Touch of the Real. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2004.Google Scholar

Schalkwyk, David, Shakespeare, Love and Language: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.Google Scholar

Schalkwyk, David, Speech and Performance in Shakespeare’s Sonnets and Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Schalkwyk, David, ‘Shakespeare’s Speech’, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 40.2 (2010): 373–400.Google Scholar

Searle, John, ‘A Classification of Speech Acts’, Language and Society 5 (1979): 1–23.Google Scholar

Searle, John, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.Google Scholar

Sher, Antony, Beside Myself. London: Arrow Books, 2002.Google Scholar

Shore, Daniel, Cyberformalism: Histories of Linguistic Forms in the Digital Archive. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018.Google Scholar

Shore, Daniel, ‘Shakespeare’s Constructicon’, Shakespeare Quarterly 66.2 (2015): 113–136.Google Scholar

Siemon, James, Word Against Word: Shakespearean Utterance. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002.Google Scholar

‘Silva rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric’, ed. G. Burton at http://rhetoric.byu.edu.Google Scholar

Skinner, Quentin, Forensic Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Smith, Bruce, The Acoustic World of Early Modern England: Attending to the O-Factor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.Google Scholar

Smith, Bruce, Phenomenal Shakespeare. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.Google Scholar

Smith, G. Gregory (ed.), Elizabethan Critical Essays. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1904.Google Scholar

Sokol, B. J., and Sokol, Mary, Shakespeare’s Legal Language: A Dictionary. London and New Brunswick: Athlone, 2000.Google Scholar

Stern, Tiffany, Documents of Performance in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

Tarlinskaja, Marina, Shakespeare and the Versification of English Drama, 1561–1642. Farnham: Ashgate, 2014.Google Scholar

Tarlinskaja, Marina, Shakespeare’s Verse: Iambic Pentameter and the Poet’s Idiosyncrasies. New York: Peter Lang, 1987.Google Scholar

Taylor, Gary, ‘Artiginality: Authorship after Postmodernism’, The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion, ed. Taylor, Gary and Egan, Gabriel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar

Tootalian, Jacob, ‘Without Measure: The Language of Shakespeare’s Prose’, Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 13.4 (2013): 47–60.Google Scholar

Van Es, Bart, Shakespeare in Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Vickers, Brian, The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose. London: Methuen, 1968.Google Scholar

Vickers, Brian, Shakespeare, Co-Author: A Historical Study of Five Collaborative Plays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Vickers, Brian, ‘Shakespeare’s Use of Rhetoric’, A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies, ed. Muir, K. and Schoenbaum, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971, pp. 83–98.Google Scholar

Walter, Harriet, Brutus and Other Heroines: Playing Shakespeare’s Roles for Women. London: Nick Hern Books, 2016.Google Scholar

Walter, Harriet, Other People’s Shoes. London: Nick Hern Books, 1999.Google Scholar

Weimann, Robert, Author’s Pen and Actor’s Voice: Playing and Writing in Shakespeare’s Theatre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar

Witmore, Michael, Hope, Jonathan, and Gleicher, Mike, ‘Digital Approaches to the Language of Shakespearean Tragedy’, The Oxford Handbook of Shakespearean Tragedy, ed. Neill, Michael and Schalkwyk, David. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 316–335.Google Scholar

Wofford, Susanne L., ‘“To you I give myself, for I am yours”: Erotic Performance and Theatrical Performatives in As You Like It’, Shakespeare Reread, ed. McDonald, Russ. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994, pp. 147–169.Google Scholar

Wright, George T., Shakespeare’s Metrical Art. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Yachnin, Paul (ed.), Shakespeare’s World of Words. London: The Arden Shakespeare, Bloomsbury, 2015.Google Scholar

Book contents

Select Bibliography

Summary

Access options

References

Select Bibliography

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive