Adamson, Sylvia. 1994. From empathetic deixis to empathetic narrative: Stylisation and (de-)subjectivisation as processes of language change. Transactions of the Philological Society 92(1). 55–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1994.tb00428.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adamson, Sylvia. 2001. The rise and fall of empathetic narrative: A historical perspective on perspective. In Willie, van Peer and Chatman, Seymour (eds.), New perspectives on narrative perspective, 83–99. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Aijmer, Karin. 1996. Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. New York: Longman. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845128Google Scholar

Aijmer, Karin. 2015. Quotative markers in A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. In Arendholz et al. (eds.), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-011Google Scholar

Aijmer, Karin and Rühlemann, Christoph (eds.). 2015. Corpus pragmatics: A handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493Google Scholar

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco. 2008. The pragmatics of and-conjunctives in Middle English medical recipes: A Relevance Theory description. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(2). 171–199. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.02aloCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco. 2013. Genre conventions in English recipes (1600–1800). In DiMeo and Pennell (eds.), 68–92.Google Scholar

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco and Cabrera-Abreu, Mercedes. 2002. The formulation of promise in medieval English medical recipes: A Relevance-Theoretic approach. Neophilologus 86. 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1012940619214CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco, Ortega-Barrera, Ivalla, and Quintana-Toledo, Elena. 2012. Corpus of Early English recipes: Design and implementation. In Vázquez (ed.), 37–50.Google Scholar

Ameka, Felix. 1992. Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 18. 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-GGoogle Scholar

Archer, Dawn. 2005. Questions and answers in the English courtroom (1640–1760): A sociopragmatic analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.135Google Scholar

Archer, Dawn. 2010. Speech acts. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 397–417. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.6.379Google Scholar

Archer, Dawn. 2012. Early Modern English: Pragmatics and discourse. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 1, 652–667. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251593.652CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Dawn. 2014. Exploring verbal aggression in English historical texts using USAS: The possibilities, the problems and potential solutions. In Taavitsainen, Jucker, and Tuominen (eds.), 277–301. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243.17arcCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Dawn. 2017. Context and historical (socio)pragmatics twenty years on. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18(2). 315–336. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00008.arcCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, Dawn and Culpeper, Jonathan. 2003. Sociopragmatic annotation: New directions and possibilities in historical corpus linguistics. In Wilson, Andrew, Rayson, Paul, and McEnery, Tony (eds.), Corpus linguistics by the Lune: A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech, 37–58. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Archer, Dawn and Culpeper, Jonathan. 2009. Identifying key sociophilological usage in plays and trial proceedings (1640–1760): An empirical approach via corpus annotation. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(2). 286–309. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.10.2.07arcGoogle Scholar

Archer, Dawn, Culpeper, Jonathan, and Davies, Matthew. 2008. Pragmatic annotation. In Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, vol. 1, 613–642. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Arendholz, Jenny, Bublitz, Wolfram, Kirner, Monika, and Zimmermann, Iris. 2013. Food for thought – or, what’s (in) a recipe: A diachronic analysis of cooking instructions. In Gerhardt et al. (eds.), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.10.05areCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arendholz, Jenny, Bublitz, Wolfram, and Kirner-Ludwig, Monika (eds.). 2015. The pragmatics of quoting now and then. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561Google Scholar

Arnovick, Leslie K. 1999. Diachronic pragmatics: Seven case studies in English illocuttionary development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.68Google Scholar

Arnovick, Leslie K. 2006. Written reliquaries: The resonance of orality in medieval English texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.153CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkinson, Dwight. 1999. Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601704Google Scholar

Austin, John L. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Banfield, Ann. 1982. Unspeakable sentences: Narration and representation in the language of fiction. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315746609Google Scholar

Bator, Magdalena. 2016. On the development of the English culinary recipe. Academic Journal of Modern Philology 5. 7–15.Google Scholar

Bator, Magdalena and Sylwanowicz, Marta. 2017. The typology of medieval recipes – culinary vs. medical. In Fisiak, Jacek, Bator, Magdalena, and Sylwanowicz, Marta (eds.), Essays and studies in Middle English. 9th International Conference on Middle English, Philological School of Higher Education in Wrocław, 2015, 11–33. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Beeching, Kate. 2016. Pragmatic markers in British English: Meaning in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507110Google Scholar

Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.). 2012a. English historical linguistics: An international handbook, 2 vols. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel J.. 2012b. History of English historical linguistics: Overview. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 2, 1289–1295. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251609.1289Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2004. Historical patterns for the grammatical marking of stance. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(1). 107–136. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.5.1.06bibCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 1989. Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language 65(3). 487–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/415220CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 1992. The linguistic evolution of five written and speech-based English genres from the 17th to the 20th centuries. In Rissanen, Matti, Ihalainen, Ossi, Nevalainen, Terttu, and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics, 688–704. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110877007.688CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, and Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar

Bieswanger, Markus. 2015. Variational pragmatics and responding to thanks – revisited. Multilingua 34(3). 527–546. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2014-0106CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Black, Bill. 2019. Why is everyone suddenly saying “y’all”? Mel Magazine. https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/why-is-everyone-suddenly-saying-yall (accessed October 20, 2022)Google Scholar

Boye, Kasper and Harder, Peter. 2007. Complement-taking predicates: Usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language 31(3). 569–606. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.31.3.03boyGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 1980. “Represented perception”: A study of narrative style. Poetics 9. 363–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-422X(80)90028-5Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110907582CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551789CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2010. Discourse markers. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 285–314. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.5.285Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2014. The extremes of insubordination: Exclamatory as if! Journal of English Linguistics 42(2). 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424214521425Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2015. Historical discourse analysis. In Tannen, Deborah, Hamilton, Heidi E., and Schiffrin, Deborah (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis, 2nd ed., 222–243. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118584194.ch10Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. (ed.). 2017a. English historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286562CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2017b. The evolution of pragmatic markers in English: Pathways of change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316416013Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2017c. Historical pragmatic approaches. In Brinton (ed.), 245–275. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286562.010Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. 2021. Responding to thanks: From you’re welcome to you bet. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 22(2). 180–201. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00052.briCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615962CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, Keith (ed.). 2006. Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope and Levinson, Stephen C.. 1987[1978]. Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085Google Scholar

Brown, Roger and Gilman, Albert. 1960. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.), Style in language, 256–276. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Brown, Roger and Gilman, Albert. 1989. Politeness theory and Shakespeare’s four major tragedies. Language in Society 18(2). 159–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500013464Google Scholar

Brownlees, Nicholas (ed.). 2006. News discourse in Early Modern Britain. Selected Papers of CHINED 2004. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Bublitz, Wolfram and Bednarek, Monika. 2006. Reported speech: Pragmatic aspects. In Brown (ed.), 540–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00369-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2014. Quotatives: New trends and sociolinguistic implications. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118584415Google Scholar

Burnley, David. 1983. A guide to Chaucer’s language. London: Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86048-7Google Scholar

Burnley, David. 2003. The T/V pronouns in Middle English literature. In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.03burGoogle Scholar

Busse, Beatrix. 2006. Vocative constructions in the language of Shakespeare. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.150Google Scholar

Busse, Beatrix. 2020. Speech, writing and thought presentation in 19th-century narrative fiction: A corpus-assisted approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190212360.001.0001Google Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. 2002. Linguistic variation in the Shakespeare corpus: Morpho-syntactic variability of second person pronouns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.106Google Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. 2003. The co-occurrence of nominal and pronominal address forms in the Shakespeare corpus: Who says thou or you to whom? In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 193–221. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.10busCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. 2008. An inventory of directives in Shakespeare’s King Lear. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 85–114. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.06busGoogle Scholar

Busse, Ulrich and Busse, Beatrix. 2010. Shakespeare. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 247–281. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.4.247Google Scholar

Butters, Ronald R. 1980. Narrative go “say.” American Speech 55(4). 304–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/454573Google Scholar

Campbell, Lyle. 2021. Historical linguistics: An introduction, 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carroll, Ruth. 1999. The Middle English recipe as text-type. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 100(1). 27–42. www.jstor.org/stable/43315278Google Scholar

Carroll, Ruth. 2004. Middle English recipes: Vernacularisation of a text-type. In Taavitsainen, Irma and Pahta, Päivi (eds.), Medical and scientific writing in late Medieval English, 174–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chapman, Don. 2008. “You belly-guilty bag”: Insulting epithets in Old English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1). 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.02chaCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cichosz, Anna. 2018. Parenthetical reporting clauses in the history of English: The development of quotative inversion. English Language and Linguistics 23(1). 183–214. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674317000594CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2010. News discourse. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 587–620. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.587Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2012. Styles, registers, genres, text types. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 1, 237–253. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251593.237Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2013. The evolution of three pragmatic markers: As it were, so to speak/say and if you like. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 14(2). 162–184. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.14.2.01claCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2017a. Discourse-based approaches. In Brinton (ed.), 185–217. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286562.008Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2017b. Voices in medieval history writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies 17(1). 7–40. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.393Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia. 2021. Discourse representation in Early Modern English historiography. In Grund and Walker (eds.) 212–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0009Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia and Arnovick, Leslie. 2010. Pragmaticalisation and discursisation. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 165–192. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.3.165Google Scholar

Claridge, Claudia and Kytö, Merja (eds.). 2020. Punctuation in context: Past and present perspectives. Bern: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b16021Google Scholar

Cohn, Dorrit. 1978. Transparent minds: Narrative modes for presenting consciousness in fiction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691213125Google Scholar

Collins, Daniel E. 2001. Reanimated voices: Speech reporting in a historical-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.85Google Scholar

Conboy, Martin. 2010. The language of newspapers: Sociohistorical perspectives. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Crystal, David. 2015. Making a point: The persnickety story of English punctuation. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar

Crystal, David and Crystal, Ben. 2002. Shakespeare’s words: A glossary and language companion. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. 1996. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics 25. 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. 2009. Historical sociopragmatics: An introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(2). 179–186. (Reprinted in Culpeper [ed.] 2011a.) https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.10.2.02culCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. 2010. Historical pragmatics. In Cummings (ed.), 188–192.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan (ed.). 2011a. Historical sociopragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins (Originally published as Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(2) 2009.) https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.31Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011b. Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Archer, Dawn. 2008. Requests and directives in Early Modern English trial proceedings and play texts, 1640–1760. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 45–84. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.05culGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Demmen, Jane. 2011. Nineteenth-century English politeness: Negative politeness, conventional indirect requests and the rise of the individual self. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (Special issue on “Understanding historical (im)politeness” ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár) 12(1–2). 49–81. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.03culGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja, Kytö. 2000. Data in historical pragmatics: Spoken interaction (re)cast as writing. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2). 175–199. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.1.2.03culGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja, Kytö. 2010. Early Modern English dialogues: Spoken interaction as writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan and Semino, Elena. 2000. Constructing witches and spells: Speech acts and activity types in Early Modern England. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1). 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.1.1.08culGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan, Haugh, Michael, and Kádár, Dániel Z (eds.). 2017. The Palgrave handbook of linguistic (im)politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7Google Scholar

Culy, Christopher. 1996. Null objects in English recipes. Language Variation and Change 8. 91–124. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500001083Google Scholar

Cummings, Louise (ed.). 2010. The pragmatics encyclopedia. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203873069Google Scholar

Cummins, Chris. 2019. Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474440042Google Scholar

D’Arcy, Alexandra. 2017. Discourse-pragmatic variation in context: Eight hundred years of LIKE. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.187Google Scholar

D’Arcy, Alexandra. 2021. Reconfiguring quotation over time and the system-internal rise of BE like. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 73–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0004Google Scholar

Davidse, Kristen, Simon, De Wolf, and Linden, An Van. 2015. The development of modal and discourse marker uses of (there/it is/I have) no doubt. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16(1). 25–58. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.16.1.02davGoogle Scholar

Devitt, Amy J. 2020. The blurring boundaries of genres-in-use: Principles and implications for rhetorical genre studies for English historical linguistics. In Grund, Peter and Harman, Megan (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language VIII: Boundaries and boundary-crossings in the history of English, 45–72. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110643282-003Google Scholar

Diemer, Stefan. 2013. Recipes and food discourse in English – a historical menu. In Gerhardt et al. (eds.), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.10.06dieGoogle Scholar

Diewald, Gabriele. 2011. Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics 49(2). 365–390. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.011Google Scholar

Diller, Hans-Jürgen and Görlach, Manfred (eds.). 2001. Towards the history of English as a history of genres. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar

DiMeo, Michelle and Pennell, Sara (eds.). 2013. Reading and writing recipe books 1500–1800, 68–92. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Dinkin, Aaron J. 2018. It’s no problem to be polite: Apparent-time change in responses to thanks. Journal of Sociolinguistics 22(2). 190–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12278Google Scholar

Doty, Kathleen. 2010. Courtroom discourse. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 621–650. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.621Google Scholar

El-Mahallawi, Basma Mahmoud Mohamed. 2018. The use of thanking expressions and their intensifiers from Early Modern to Present Day English. FJHJ (Journal of Arts and Humanities, Minia University) 86(4). 903–920. https://journals.ekb.eg/article_174628.html (accessed August 24, 2021).Google Scholar

Enkvist, Nils Erik. 1986. More about the textual functions of the Old English adverbial þa. In Kastovsky, Dieter and Szwedek, Aleksander (eds.), Linguistics across historical and geographical boundaries: In honour of Jacek Fisiak on the occasion of his fiftieth birthday, vol. 1, 301–309. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110856132.301Google Scholar

Enkvist, Nils Erik and Brita, Wårvik. 1987. Old English þa, temporal chains, and narrative structure. In Ramat, Anna Giacalone, Carruba, Onofrio, and Bernini, Giuliano (eds.), Papers from the 7th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, 221–237. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.48.17enkGoogle Scholar

Erman, Britt and Kotsinas, Ulla-Britt. 1993. Pragmaticalization: The case of ba’ and you know. Studier i modern språkvetenskap (Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, Stockholm Studies in Modern Philology, New Series 10), 76–93 Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar

Evans, Mel. 2021. “Saying the woordes or the lyke”: Speech representation in sixteenth-century correspondence. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 183–211. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0008Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Nikolaeva, Irina (ed.), Finiteness: Theoretical and empirical foundations, 366–431. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Facchinetti, Roberta, Brownlees, Nicholas, Bös, Birte, and Fries, Udo. 2012. News as changing texts: Corpora, methodologies and analysis. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1515/east-2012-0006Google Scholar

Farrelly, Michael and Seoane, Elena. 2012. Democratization. In Nevalainen and Traugott (eds.), 392–401. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0033Google Scholar

Fischer, Kerstin (ed.). 2006. Approaches to discourse particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1163/9780080461588Google Scholar

Fischer, Olga. 2007. Morphosyntactic change: Formal and functional perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette, and Stein, Dieter (eds.). 2000. Pathways of change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53Google Scholar

Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2004. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: From stance markers to discourse markers. Discourse Studies 6. 427–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604046585Google Scholar

Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2010. Literary discourse. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 679–704. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.679Google Scholar

Fitzmaurice, Susan M. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.). 2007. Methods in historical pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197822Google Scholar

Fleischman, Suzanne. 1990. Philology, linguistics, and the discourse of the medieval text. Speculum 65. 19–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/2864470Google Scholar

Fludernik, Monika. 1993. The fictions of language and languages of fiction: The linguistic representation of speech and consciousness. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Fraser, Bruce. 1988. Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 38. 19–33.Google Scholar

Fries, Udo. 1983. Diachronic textlinguistics. In Hattori, Shiro and Inoue, Kazuko (eds.), Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Linguists, August 29–September 4, 1982, 1013–1015. Tokyo: Tokyo Press.Google Scholar

Fries, Udo. 2009. Crime and punishment. In Jucker (ed.), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.187.04friGoogle Scholar

Fries, Udo. 2012. Newspapers. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 1, 1063–1075. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251593.1063Google Scholar

Gehweiler, Elke. 2008. From proper name to primary interjection: The case of gee! Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1). 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.05gehGoogle Scholar

Gerhardt, Cornelia, Forbenius, Maximiliane, and Ley, Susanne (eds.). 2013. Culinary linguistics: The chef’s special. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.10Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred. 2001. A history of text types: A componential analysis. In Diller and Görlach (eds.), 47–88.Google Scholar

Görlach, Manfred. 2008. Text types and language history: The cooking recipe. In Text types and the history of English, 121–140. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197167.121Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2003. The golden formula: Genre conventions of alchemical recipes in the Middle English period. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104(4). 455–475. www.jstor.org/stable/43343990Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2007. From tongue to text: The transmission of the Salem witchcraft examination records. American Speech 82(2). 119–150. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2007-005Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2017a. Description, evaluation and stance: Exploring the forms and functions of speech descriptors in Early Modern English. Nordic Journal of English Studies 16(1). 41–73. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.394Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2017b. Sociohistorical approaches. In Brinton (ed.), 218–244. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286562.009Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2018. Beyond speech representation: Describing and evaluating speech in Early Modern English prose fiction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 19(2). 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00022.gruGoogle Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2020. What it means to describe speech: Pragmatic variation and change in speech descriptors in Late Modern English. In Kytö, Merja and Smitterberg, Erik (eds.), Late Modern English: Novel encounters, 295–314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.214.13gruGoogle Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2021a. The metalinguistic description of speech and fictional language: Exploring speech reporting verbs and speech descriptors in Late Modern English. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 102–130. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0005Google Scholar

Grund, Peter. 2021b. The sociopragmatics of stance: Community, language, and the witness depositions from the Salem witch trials. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004390652_009Google Scholar

Grund, Peter J. and Walker, Terry. 2021a. Speech representation in the history of English: Introduction. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0001Google Scholar

Grund, Peter J. and Walker, Terry (eds.). 2021b. Speech representation in the history of English: Topics and approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0001Google Scholar

Grzega, Joachim. 2005. Adieu, bye-bye, cheerio: The ABC of leave-taking in English language history. Onomasiology Online 6. 56–64. www1.ku.de/SLF/EngluVglSW/grzega1051.pdf (accessed August 24, 2021)Google Scholar

Grzega, Joachim. 2008. Hāl, Hail, Hello, Hi: Greetings in English language history. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.10grzGoogle Scholar

Güldemann, Tom, Manfred, von Roncador, and Wim, van der Wurff. 2002. A comprehensive bibliography of reported discourse. In Güldemann, Tom and Manfred, von Roncador (eds.), Reported discourse: A meeting ground for different linguistic domains, 363–415. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.52.23gulCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Häcker, Martina. 2019. Kinship or friendship? The word cousin as a term of address for non-relatives in Middle English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 20(1). 96–131. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.17005.hacGoogle Scholar

Haselow, Alexander. 2012. Discourse organization and the rise of final then in the history of English. In Hegedüs, Irén and Fodor, Alexandra (eds.), English historical linguistics 2010, 153–175. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.325.07hasGoogle Scholar

Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther, Kuteva, Tania, and Long, Haiping. 2021. The rise of discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108982856Google Scholar

Herlyn, Anne. 1999. So he says to her, he says, “Well,” he says … Multiple dialogue introducers from a historical perspective. In Jucker, Andreas H., Fritz, Gerd, and Lebsanft, Franz (eds.), Historical discourse analysis, 313–330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.66.13herGoogle Scholar

Hernández-Campoy, Juan Manuel, and Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo. 2012. The handbook of historical sociolinguistics. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118257227Google Scholar

Hirota, Tomoharu and Brinton, Laurel J.. 2023. “You betcha I’m a Merican”: The rise of YOU BET as a pragmatic marker. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics Published online February 23, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl21060.hir.Google Scholar

Höglund, Mikko and Kaj, Syrjänen. 2016. Corpus of Early American Literature. ICAME Journal 40(1). 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1515/icame-2016-0003Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet. 1988. Paying compliments: A sex preferential politeness strategy. Journal of Pragmatics 12(4). 445–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90005-7Google Scholar

Honegger, Thomas. 2003. “And if ye wol nat so, my lady sweete, thane preye I thee, […].”: Forms of address in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale. In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.05honGoogle Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. 1993. Second person singular pronouns in records of Early Modern “spoken” English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94(1). 83–100. www.jstor.org/stable/43345931Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. 2003. Shakespeare’s grammar. London: The Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. In Traugott and Heine (eds.), vol. 1, 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hopGoogle Scholar

Hopper, Paul J. and Closs Traugott, Elizabeth. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huang, Yan. 2010. Anglo-American and European continental traditions. In Cummings (ed.), 13–15.Google Scholar

Huang, Yan. 2017a. Introduction: What is pragmatics. In Huang (ed.), 1–18.Google Scholar

Huang, Yan (ed.). 2017b. The Oxford handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.001.0001Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K. et al. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Gardner, Anne-Christine. 2017. Corpus-based approaches: Watching English change. In Brinton (ed.), 96–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286562.005Google Scholar

Jacobs, Andreas and Jucker, Andreas H.. 1995. The historical perspective in pragmatics. In Jucker (ed.), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.04jacCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacobsson, Mattias. 2002. Thank you and thanks in Early Modern English. ICAME Journal 26. 63–80.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.). 1995. Historical pragmatics: Pragmatic developments in the history of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 1997. The discourse marker well in the history of English. English Language and Linguistics 1(1). 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067430000037XGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 1998. Historical pragmatics: An interdisciplinary approach. In Borgmeier, Raimund, Grabes, Herbert, and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Anglistentag 1997 Giessen proceedings, 3–7. Trier: Wissentschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2000a. Slanders, slurs and insults on the road to Canterbury: Forms of verbal aggression in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. In Taavitsainen, Irma, Nevalainen, Terttu, Pahta, Päivi, and Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Placing Middle English in context, 369–390. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869514.369Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2000b. Thou in the history of English: A case for historical semantics or pragmatics? In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane and Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words: Structure, meaning, function: A Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, 153–163. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809169.153Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2002. Discourse markers in Early Modern English. In Watts, Richard and Trudgill, Peter (eds.), Alternative histories of English, 210–230. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2006a. Historical pragmatics. In Brown (ed.), 329–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00340-0Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2006b. “Thou art so loothly and so oold also”: The use of ye and thou in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. Anglistik 17(2). 57–72.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2008. Historical pragmatics. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5). 894–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00087.xGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.) 2009a. Early Modern English news discourse: Newspapers, pamphlets and scientific news discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.187Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2009b. Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory: The case of compliments. Journal of Pragmatics 41(8). 1611–1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.004Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2011a. Greetings and farewells in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. In Pahta, Päivi and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.), Communicating early English manuscripts, 229–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2011b. Positive and negative face as descriptive categories in the history of English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (Special issue on “Understanding historical (im)politeness” ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár) 12(1–2). 178–197. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.08jucGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2012a. Changes in politeness cultures. In Nevalainen and Traugott (eds.), 422–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0036Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2012b. Pragmatics in the history of linguistic thought. In Allan, Keith and Jaszczolt, Kasia M. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 495–512. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022453.027Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2013. Corpus pragmatics. In Östmann, Jan-Ola and Verschueren, Jef (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics (2013), 1–17. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.17.cor3Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2015. Pragmatics of fiction: Literary uses of uh and um. Journal of Pragmatics 86. 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/pragma.2015.05.012Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2017. Speech acts and speech act sequences: Greetings and farewells in the history of American English. Studia Neophilologica 89(s1). 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393274.2017.1358662Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2018. Apologies in the history of English: Evidence from the Corpus of Historical American English. Corpus Pragmatics 2(4). 375–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-018-0038-yGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2019. Speech act attenuation in the history of English: The case of apologies. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 4(1). 1–25. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.878Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. 2020. Politeness in the history of English: From the Middle Ages to the present day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589147CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Berger, Manuel. 2014. The development of discourse presentation in The Times 1833–1988. Media History 20(1). 67–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688804.2013.879793Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Kopaczyk, Joanna. 2017. Historical (im)politeness. In Culpeper et al. (eds.), 433–459. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2000. Diachronic speech act analysis: Insults from flyting to flaming. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1). 67–95. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.1.1.07jucCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2008a. Apologies in the history of English: Routinized and lexicalized expressions of responsibility and regret. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.12jucGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.). 2008b. Speech acts in the history of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.). 2010. Historical pragmatics. (Handbooks of Pragmatics, vol. 8.) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2013. English historical pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748644704Google Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2014a. Complimenting in the history of American English: A metacommunicative expression analysis. In Taavitsainen et al. (eds.), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243.16jucGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2014b. Diachronic corpus pragmatics: Intersections and interactions. In Taavitsainen et al. (eds.), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243.03jucGoogle Scholar

Jucker, Andreas H., Taavitsainen, Irma, and Schneider, Gerold. 2012. Semantic corpus trawling: Expressions of “courtesy” and “politeness” in the Helsinki Corpus. In Carla Suhr and Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Developing corpus methodology for historical pragmatics (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, vol. 11) https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/11/jucker_taavitsainen_schneider/ (accessed June 7, 2022)Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2000. Explicit performatives in Old English: A corpus-based study of directives. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2). 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.1.2.07kohCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2004. Methodological problems in corpus-based historical pragmatics. The case of English directives. In Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), Advances in corpus linguistics. Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 23) Göteborg 22–26 May 2002, 237–247. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2007a. “Connective profiles” in the history of English texts: Aspects of orality and literacy. In Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin (eds.), Connectives in the history of English, 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.283.14kohGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2007b. Text types and the methodology of diachronic speech act analysis. In Fitzmaurice and Taavitsainen (eds.), 139–166. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197822.139Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2008a. Directives in Old English. Beyond politeness? In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.04kohCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2008b. Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? A study of Old English address terms. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1). 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.11kohGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2008c. Tracing directives through text and time. Towards a methodology of a corpus-based diachronic speech act analysis. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.16kohGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2010. Religious discourse. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 523–547. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.523Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2011. Understanding Anglo-Saxon “politeness”: Directive constructions with ic wille / ic wolde. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (Special issue on “Understanding historical (im)politeness” ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár) 12(1–2). 230–254. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.10kohGoogle Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2012a. Bible translations. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 1, 1039–1050. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251593.1039Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2012b. Prayers in the history of English: A corpus-based study. In Kytö, Merja (ed.), English corpus linguistics: Crossing paths, 165–180. Amsterdam: Rodopi. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401207935_009Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2015a. Religious discourse and the history of English. In Taavitsainen, Irma, Kytö, Merja, Claridge, Claudia, and Smith, Jeremy (eds.), Developments in English: Expanding electronic evidence, 178–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2015b. Speech acts: A diachronic perspective. In Aijmer and Rühlemann (eds.), 52–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.004Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2017a. Anglo-Saxon expressives: Automatic historical speech-act analysis and philological intervention. Anglistik 28(1). 43–56.Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas. 2017b. Non-canonical speech acts in the history of English. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 65(3). 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2017-0030Google Scholar

Kohnen, Thomas, Rütten, Tanja, and Marcoe, Ingvilt. 2011. Early Modern English religious prose: A conservative genre? In Rayson, Paul, Hoffmann, Sebastian, and Leech, Geoffrey (eds.), Methodological and historical dimensions of corpus linguistics (Varieng: Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change, vol. 6). https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/06/kohnen_et_al/Google Scholar

Kopytko, Roman. 1995. Linguistic politeness strategies in Shakespeare’s plays. In Jucker (ed.), 515–540. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.27kopGoogle Scholar

Krug, Manfred. 1998. British English is developing a new discourse marker, innit? A study in lexicalisation based on social, regional and stylistic variation. Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 23. 145–197.Google Scholar

Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara. 2006. Impoliteness in Early Modern English courtroom discourse. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 7(2). 213–243. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.7.2.04kryGoogle Scholar

Kytö, Merja. 2010. Data in historical pragmatics. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 33–67. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.2.33CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kytö, Merja and Walker, Terry. 2003. The linguistic study of Early Modern English speech-related texts: How “bad” can “bad” be? Journal of English Linguistics 31(3). 221–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424203257260Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja, Grund, Peter J., and Walker, Terry. 2011. Testifying to language and life in Early Modern England. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CD-ROM, https://doi.org/10.1075/z.162Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1972. Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1(1). 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006576Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 1: Internal factors. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Lakoff, Robin Tolmach. 1973. The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. In Corum, Claudia and Cedric Smith-Stark, T. (eds.), Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 292–305. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

Lakoff, Robin Tolmach. 2005. Civility and its discontents: Or, getting in your face. In Lakoff, Robin T. and Sachiko, Ide, Broadening the horizon of linguistic politeness, 23–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.139.05lakGoogle Scholar

Landert, Daniela. 2019. Function-to-form mapping in corpora: Historical corpus pragmatics and the study of stance expressions. In Suhr, Carla, Nevalainen, Terttu, and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.), From data to evidence in English language research, 169–190. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004390652_009Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1999. Phonology and morphology. In Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. III, 1476–1776, 56–186. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264761.004Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835976Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. In Hasselgård, Hilde and Oksefjell, Signe (eds.), Out of corpora: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson, 117–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2014. The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey and Short, Mick. 2007[1981]. Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose, 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey and Weisser, Martin. 2003. Generic speech act annotation for task-oriented dialogues. In Archer, Dawn, Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew, and McEnery, Tony (eds.), Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2003 Conference, 441–446. Lancaster: Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language Technical Papers, Lancaster University. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.371.4462&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed October 19, 2021)Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianna, Mair, Christian, and Smith, Nicholas. 2009. Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511642210Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian 2015[1995]. Thoughts on grammaticalization, 3rd ed. Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/88 (accessed June 7, 2022)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leitner, Magdalena. 2013. Thou and you in Late Middle Scottish and Early Modern Northern English witness depositions. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 23(1). 100–129. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.14.1.04leiGoogle Scholar

Lenker, Ursula 2000. Soþlice and witodlice: Discourse markers in Old English. In Fischer et al. (eds.), 224–249. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.12lenGoogle Scholar

Lenker, Ursula. 2010. Argument and rhetoric: Adverbial connectives in the history of English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216066Google Scholar

Lewis, Diane M. 2012. Late Modern English: Pragmatics and discourse. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 1, 901–915. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251593.901Google Scholar

Locher, Miriam A. and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.). 2017. Pragmatics of fiction. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110431094Google Scholar

Longacre, Robert E. 1976. Mystery particles and affixes. In Mufwene, Salikoko S., Walker, Carol A., and Steever, Sanford B. (eds.), Papers from the twelfth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 468–475. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

López-Couso, María José and Méndez-Naya, Belén. 2014. On the origin of parenthetical constructions: Epistemic/evidential parentheticals with seem and impersonal think. In Taavitsainen et al. (eds.), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243.12lopGoogle Scholar

Los, Bettelou and Ans, van Kemenade. 2012. Information structure and syntax in the history of English. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 2, 1475–1490. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251609.1475Google Scholar

Louviot, Elise. 2016. Direct speech in Beowulf and other Old English narrative poems. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer. www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt19x3hzxGoogle Scholar

Lutzky, Ursula 2012a. Discourse markers in Early Modern English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.227Google Scholar

Lutzky, Ursula. 2012b. Why and what in Early Modern English drama. In Markus, Manfred, Iyeiri, Yoko, and Heuberger, Reinhard (eds.), Middle and Modern English corpus linguistics: A multi-dimensional approach, 177–189. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.50.16lutGoogle Scholar

Lutzky, Ursula. 2015. Quotations in Early Modern English witness depositions. In Arendholz et al. (eds.), 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-016Google Scholar

Lutzky, Ursula. 2021. Initiating direct speech in Early Modern prose fiction and witness depositions. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0003Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne. 1999. Shakespeare and social dialogue: Dramatic language and Elizabethan letters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511483745Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2006. Twentieth-century English: History, variation and standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486951Google Scholar

Manes, Joan and Wolfson, Nessa. 1981. The compliment formula. In Coulmas, Florian (ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech, 115–132. The Hague: Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809145.115Google Scholar

Mazzon, Gabriella. 2000. Social relations and forms of address in the Canterbury Tales. In Kastovsky, Dieter and Mettinger, Arthur (eds.), The history of English in a social context: A contribution to historical sociolinguistics, 135–168. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110810301.135Google Scholar

Mazzon, Gabriella. 2003. Pronouns and nominal address in Shakespearean English: A socio-affective marking system in transition. In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.11mazGoogle Scholar

Mazzon, Gabriella. 2010. Address terms. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.5.351Google Scholar

McColm, Daniel and Trousdale, Graeme. 2019. Whatever happened to whatever? In Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria, Moore, Emma, Linda, van Bergen, and Hollman, Willem (eds.), Categories, constructions and change in English syntax, 81–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

McHale, Brian. 1978. Free indirect discourse: A survey of recent accounts. PTL: A Journal for Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature 3. 249–287.Google Scholar

McIntyre, Dan and Walker, Brian. 2011. Discourse presentation in Early Modern English writing: A preliminary corpus-based investigation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 6(1). 101–130. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16.1.05mciGoogle Scholar

Meehan, Teresa. 1991. It’s like, “What’s happening in the evolution of like?” A theory of grammaticalization. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics (ed. by Kumiko Ichihasi and Mary Sarah Lim) 16. 37–52. https://doi.org/10.17161/KWPL.1808.423Google Scholar

Mey, Jacob L. 2001. Pragmatics: An introduction, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Miranda García, Antonio and Calle-Martín, Javier. 2012. Compiling the Málaga Corpus of Late Middle English Scientific Prose. In Vázquez (ed.), 51–65.Google Scholar

Moessner, Lilo. 2010. Directive speech acts: A cross-generic diachronic study. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 11(2). 219–249. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.11.2.03moeGoogle Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2002. Reporting direct speech in Early Modern slander depositions. In Minkova, Donka and Stockwell, Robert (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language: A millennial perspective, 399–416. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/97831100197143.3.399Google Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2006. The use of videlicit in Early Modern slander depositions: A case of genre-specific grammaticalization. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 7(2). 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.7.2.05mooGoogle Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2011. Quoting speech in early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2015. Histories of talking about talk: Quethen, quoth, quote. In Arendholz et al. (eds.), 254–270. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-012Google Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2016. Visual pragmatics: Speech presentation and Middle English manuscripts. In Kytö, Merja and Pahta, Päivi (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English historical linguistics, 481–496. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139600231.029Google Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2020. The path not taken: Parentheses and written direct speech in Early Modern printed books. In Claridge and Kytö (eds.), 85–101.Google Scholar

Moore, Colette. 2021. Before quotation marks: Quotative parentheses in early printed works. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0002Google Scholar

Moskowich, Isabel, Puente-Castelo, Luis, Crespo-García, Begoña, and Gonzalo, Camiña-Rioboó. 2021. The Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing: Challenges and reward. www.researchgate.net/publication/348338219_The_Coruna_Corpus_of_English_Scientific_Writing_Challenge_and_RewardGoogle Scholar

Mulo Farenkia, Bernard. 2012. Face-saving strategies in responding to gratitude expressions: Evidence from Canadian English. International Journal of English Linguistics 2(4): 1–11.Google Scholar

Narrog, Heiko and Heine, Bernd. 2021. Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nevala, Minna. 2002. Youre moder send a letter to the: Pronouns of address in private correspondence from Late Middle to Late Modern English. In Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena, Nevala, Minna, Nurmi, Arja, and Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Variation past and present: VARIENG studies on English for Terttu Nevalainen, 135–159. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar

Nevala, Minna. 2003. Family first: Address and subscription formulae in English family correspondence from the fifteenth to the seventeenth century. In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 147–176. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.08nevGoogle Scholar

Nevala, Minna. 2004. Inside and out: Address forms in 17th- and 18th-century letters. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(2). 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.5.2.07nevGoogle Scholar

Nevala, Minna. 2010. Politeness. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 419–450. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.6.419Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2006a. An introduction to Early Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748626366Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu. 2006b. Synchronic and diachronic variation. In Brown (ed.), 356–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/01521-2Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1995. Constraints on politeness. The pragmatics of address formulae in early English. In Jucker (ed.), 541–601. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.28nevGoogle Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 2003. Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.). 2012. The Oxford handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.001.0001Google Scholar

Noë, Alva. 2015. A case against the phrase “no problem.” NPR: Cosmos & Culture, Commentary on Science and Society 13(7). February 11. www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/02/01/383060338/a-case-against-the-phrase-no-problem (accessed August 24, 2021).Google Scholar

Overstreet, Maryann and Yule, George. 2021. General extenders: The forms and functions of a new linguistic category. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108938655Google Scholar

Pahta, Päivi and Taavitsainen, Irma. 2010. Scientific discourse. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 549–586. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.549Google Scholar

Pakis, Valentine. A. 2011. Insults, violence, and the meaning of lytegian in the Old English Battle of Maldon. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 12(1). 198–229. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.09pakGoogle Scholar

Pakkala-Weckström, Mari. 2005. The dialogue of love, marriage and maistrie in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, LXVII.) Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar

Pakkala-Weckström, Mari. 2008. “No botmeles bihestes.” Various ways of making promises in Middle English. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.08pakGoogle Scholar

Pakkala-Weckström, Mari. 2010. Chaucer. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.4.219Google Scholar

Palander-Collin, Minna. 1997. A medieval case of grammaticalization, me thinks. In Rissanen, Matti, Kytö, Merja, and Heikkonen, Kirsi (eds.), Grammaticalization at work: Studies of long-term developments in English, 371–403. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110810745.371Google Scholar

Palander-Collin, Minna. 2010. Correspondence. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 651–677. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.7.651Google Scholar

Parkes, M. B. 1992. Pause and effect: An introduction to the history of punctuation in the West. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Pilkington, Adrian. 2010. Literary pragmatics. In Cummings, (ed.), 251–253.Google Scholar

Pons-Sanz, Sara M. 2019. Speech representation as a narrative technique in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The Review of English Studies 70(294). 209–230. https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgy094Google Scholar

Quintana-Toledo, Elena. 2009. Middle English medical recipes. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 45(2). 21–38. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10121-009-0014-5Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph. 1971. Shakespeare and the English language. In Muir, Kenneth and Schoenbaum, S. (eds.), A new companion to Shakespeare studies, 67–82. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Reprinted in Salmon and Burgess (eds.) 1987, 3–21.)Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1996. Forms of address in early English correspondence. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language history: Studies based on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence, 167–181. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Replogle, Carol. 1973. Shakespeare’s salutations: A study in stylistic etiquette. Studies in Philology 70(2). 172–186. (Reprinted in Salmon and Burgess (eds.), 101–116.)Google Scholar

Richman, Gerald. 1986. Artful slipping in Old English. Neophilologus 70(2). 279–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00553322Google Scholar

Romaine, Suzanne and Lange, Deborah. 1991. The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: A case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech 66(30). 227–279. https://doi.org/10.2307/455799Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani. 1993. Pragmatic approaches to Shakespeare: Essays on Othello, Coriolanus and Timon of Athens. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani. 2004. “I wol sterve”: Negotiating the issue of a lady’s consent in Chaucer’s poetry. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(1). 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.5.1.07rudGoogle Scholar

Rütten, Tanja. 2012. Forms of early mass communication: The religious domain. In Nevalainen and Traugott (eds.), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0026Google Scholar

Salmon, Vivian. 1967. Elizabethan colloquial English in Falstaff plays. Leeds Studies in English n.s. 1. 37–70. (Reprinted in Salmon and Burgess (eds.), 37–70.)Google Scholar

Salmon, Vivian and Burgess, Edwina (eds.). 1987. A reader in the language of Shakespearean drama: Essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sihols.35Google Scholar

Schneider, Klaus P. 2005. No problem, you’re welcome, anytime: Responding to thanks in Ireland, England, and the USA. In Barron, Anne and Schneider, Klaus P. (eds.), The Pragmatics of Irish English, 101–139. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110898934.101Google Scholar

Schuelke, Gertrude L. 1958. “Slipping” in indirect discourse. American Speech 33(2). 90–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/453177Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1975. Indirect speech acts. In Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, 59–82. New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1976. A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society 5(1). 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006837Google Scholar

Sell, Roger D. (ed.). 1985. Politeness in Chaucer: Suggestions towards a methodology for pragmatic stylistics. Studia Neophilologica 57. 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393278508587918Google Scholar

Sell, Roger D. 1991. Literary pragmatics. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978315735849Google Scholar

Sell, Roger D. 1994. Postdisciplinary philology: Culturally relativistic pragmatics. In Fernández, Francisco, Fuster, Miguel, and Calvo, Juan José (eds.), English historical linguistics 1992, 29–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.113.05selGoogle Scholar

Semino, Elena and Short, Mick. 2004. Corpus stylistics: Speech, writing and thought representation in a corpus of English writing. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203494073Google Scholar

Skeat, Walter W. 1894. The complete works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Stein, Dieter. 1985. Perspectives on historical pragmatics. Folia Linguistica Historica 6. 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.1985.6.2.347Google Scholar

Stein, Dieter. 2003. Pronominal usage in Shakespeare: Between sociolinguistics and conversational analysis. In Taavitsainen and Jucker (eds.), 251–307. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.12steGoogle Scholar

Su, Hang. 2020. Local grammars and diachronic speech act analysis: A case study of apology in the history of American English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 21(1). 109–133. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00038.suGoogle Scholar

Sylwanowicz, Marta. 2016. And þan it wole be a good oynement restoratif … Pre- and postnominal adjectives in Middle English medical recipes. Anglica – An International Journal of English Studies 2. 57–71.Google Scholar

Sylwanowicz, Marta. 2017. Medieval medical writings and their readers: Communication of knowledge in Middle English medical recipes. Linguistica Silensiana 38. 111–124.Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma. 2001. Middle English recipes: Genre characteristics, text type features and underlying traditions of writing. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 2. 85–114. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.2.1.05taaGoogle Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma. 2012. Historical pragmatics. In Bergs and Brinton (eds.), vol. 2, 1457–1474. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110251609.1457Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma. 2015. Historical pragmatics. In Biber, Douglas and Reppen, Randi (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics, 252–268. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139764377.015Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Fitzmaurice, Susan. 2007. Historical pragmatics: What it is and how to do it. In Fitzmaurice and Taavitsainen (eds.), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197822.11Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Hiltunen, Turo. 2019. Late Modern English medical texts: Writing medicine in the eighteenth century. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CD-ROM. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.221Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H. (eds.). 2003. Diachronic perspectives on address term systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2007. Speech act verbs and speech acts in the history of English. In Fitzmaurice and Taavitsainen (eds.), 107–138. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197822.107Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2008. “Methinks you seem more beautiful than ever”: Compliments and gender in the history of English. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 195–228. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.11taaGoogle Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2010a. Expressive speech acts and politeness in eighteenth-century English. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change, 159–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781643.010Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2010b. Trends and developments in historical pragmatics. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.1.3Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2015. Twenty years of historical pragmatics: Origins, developments and changing thought styles. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16(1). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.16.1.01taaGoogle Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2016. Forms of address. In Hough, Carole (ed.), The Oxford handbook of names and naming. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199656431.013.54Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Jucker, Andreas H.. 2020. Digital pragmatics in English. In Adolphs, Svenja and Knight, Dawn (eds.), Routledge handbook of English language and digital humanities, 107–124. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003031758-7Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma and Pahta, Päivi. 2010. Early Modern English medical texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CD-ROM. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.160Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma, Pahta, Päivi, and Mäkinen, Martti (eds.). 2005. Middle English medical texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Taavitsainen, Irma, Jucker, Andreas H., and Tuominen, Jukka (eds.). 2014. Diachronic corpus pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.243Google Scholar

Thompson, Sandra A. and Mulac, Anthony. 1991. A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In Traugott and Heine (eds.), vol. 2, 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.16thoGoogle Scholar

Toolan, Michael. 2006. Speech and thought: Representation of. In Brown (ed.), 698–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00546-0Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In Lehmann, Winfred P. and Malkiel, Yakov (eds.), Perspectives on historical linguistics, 245–271. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.24.09cloGoogle Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995/97 (version of 11/97). The role of the development of discourse markers in a theory of grammaticalization. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Manchester, UK, August 1995. https://web.stanford.edu/~traugott/papers/discourse.pdf (accessed June 7, 2022).Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1997. Subjectification and the development of epistemic meaning: The case of promise and threaten. In Swan, Toril and Westvik, Olaf Jansen (eds.), Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives, 185–210. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110889932.185Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2006. Historical pragmatics. In Horn, Laurence R. and Ward, Gregory (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, 538–561. Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch24Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2008. The state of English language studies: A linguistic perspective. In Thormählen, Marianne (ed.), English now: Selected papers from the 20th IAUPE Conference in Lund 2007, 199–225. Lund: Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University.Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2020. The development of “digressive” discourse-topic shift markers in English. Journal of Pragmatics 156. 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.02.002Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2022. Discourse structuring markers in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.33Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Dasher, Richard B.. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Heine, Bernd (eds.). 1991. Approaches to Grammaticalization, 2 vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1, https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2Google Scholar

Valkonen, Petteri. 2008. Showing a little promise: Identifying and retrieving explicit illocutionary acts from a corpus of written prose. In Jucker and Taavitsainen (eds.), 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.14valGoogle Scholar

Vandelanotte, Lieven. 2009. Speech and thought representation in English: A cognitive-functional approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215373Google Scholar

Vandelanotte, Lieven. 2012. Quotative go and be like: Grammar and grammaticalization. In Buchstaller, Isabelle and Ingrid, van Alphen (eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives, 173–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.15.11vanGoogle Scholar

Vandelanotte, Lieven. 2021. Clearer contours: The stylisation of free indirect speech in nineteenth-century fiction. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0006Google Scholar

Vázquez, Nila (ed.). 2012. Creation and use of historical English corpora in Spain. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar

Visser, F. Th. 1972. An historical syntax of the English language. Part two: Syntactical units with one verb. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar

Wales, Kathleen M. 1983. Thou and you in Early Modern English: Brown and Gilman re-appraised. Studia Linguistica 37. 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1983.tb00316.xGoogle Scholar

Walkden, George. 2013. The status of hwæt in Old English. English Language and Linguistics 17(3). 465–488. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674313000129Google Scholar

Walker, Terry. 2007. Thou and you in Early Modern English dialogues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.158Google Scholar

Walker, Terry and Grund, Peter J.. 2017. “Speaking base approbious words”: Speech representation in Early Modern English witness depositions. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18(1). 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18.1.01walGoogle Scholar

Walker, Terry and Grund, Peter J.. 2020. Saying, crying, replying, and pursuing: Speech reporting expressions in Early Modern English. In Jonsson, Ewa and Larsson, Tove (eds.), Voices of the past and present – Studies of involved, speech-related and spoken texts. In honor of Merja Kytö, 64–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.97.05walGoogle Scholar

Walker, Terry and Grund, Peter J.. 2021. Free indirect speech, slipping, or a system in flux? Exploring the continuum between direct and indirect speech in Early Modern English. In Grund and Walker (eds.), 156–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190918064.003.0007Google Scholar

Walker, Terry and Merja, Kytö. 2011. Linguistic variation and change in the depositions. In Kytö, et al., 215–245. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.162.07ch7Google Scholar

Waltereit, Richard. 2006. The rise of discourse markers in Italian: A specific type of language change. In Fischer (ed.), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1163/9780080461588_005Google Scholar

Wårvik, Brita. 2013. Perspectives on narrative discourse markers: Focus on Old English þa. Turku: Åbo Akademi University.Google Scholar

Weisser, Martin. 2015. Speech act annotation. In Aijmer and Rühlemann (eds.), 84–113. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.005Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2006. Anglo scripts against “putting pressure” on other people and their linguistic manifestations. In Goddard, Cliff (ed.), Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context, 31–63. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110911114.31Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2012. The history of English seen as the history of ideas: Cultural change reflected in different translations of the New Testament. In Nevalainen and Traugott (eds.), 434–445. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0037Google Scholar

Williams, Graham. 2017. Wine min Unferð: Courtly speech and a reconsideration of (supposed) sarcasm in Beowulf. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (Special issue on “Historical (socio)pragmatics at present” ed. by Matylda Włodarczyk and Irma Taavitsainen) 18(2). 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00001.wilGoogle Scholar

Williams, Graham. 2018. Sincerity in medieval English language and literature. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54069-0Google Scholar

Wiltschko, Martina. 2021. The grammar of interactional language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108693707Google Scholar

Wischer, Ilse. 2000. Grammaticalization versus lexicalization: “Methinks” there is some confusion. In Fischer et al. (eds.), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.17wisGoogle Scholar

Włodarczyk, Matylda. 2007. Pragmatic aspects of reported speech: The case of Early Modern English courtroom discourse. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

ARCHER-3.2 = A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers 3.2. 1990–1993/2002/2007/2010/2013/2016. Originally compiled under the supervision of Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan at Northern Arizona University and University of Southern California; modified and expanded by subsequent members of a consortium of universities. Current member universities are Bamberg, Freiburg, Heidelberg, Helsinki, Lancaster, Leicester, Manchester, Michigan, Northern Arizona, Santiago de Compostela, Southern California, Trier, Uppsala, Zurich.Google Scholar

Benson, Larry D. 1986. The Riverside Chaucer, 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Bosworth, Joseph. 2014. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Online (Bosworth-Toller). Ed. by Thomas Northcote Toller, Christ Sean, and Ondřej Tichy. Prague: Faculty of Arts, Charles University. https://bosworthtoller.comGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). 2008–. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/cocaGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Early American Literature (CEAL). See Höglund and Syrjänen (2016).Google Scholar

Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler (CEECS). 1998. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen (leader), Jukka Keränen, Minna Nevala (née Aunio), Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. www2.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/varieng/corpus-of-early-english-correspondenceGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Early English Recipes (CoER). 2002–. See Alonso Almeida et al. (2012).Google Scholar

Corpus of Early English Medical Writing (CEEM). 2005–. See Taavitsainen et al. (eds.)(2005), Taavitsainen and Pahta (eds.) (2010), Taavitsainen and Hiltunen (eds.) (2019). https://varieng.helsinki.fi/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/Google Scholar

A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760 (CED). 2006. Compiled under the supervision of Merja Kytö (Uppsala University) and Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University). www.engelska.uu.se/research/english-language/electronic-resources/english-dialogues/Google Scholar

The Corpus of English Novels (CEN). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/Google Scholar

Corpus of English Religious Prose (COERP). 2015–1800. Compiled by Thomas Kohnen (project leader), Tanja Rütten, Ingvilt Marcoe, Kirsten Gather, Dorothee Groeger, Anne Döring, and Stefanie Leu. http://coerp.uni-koeln.de/Google Scholar

The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA). 2010. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/coha/Google Scholar

A Corpus of Late 18c Prose. 2003–2010. Compiled by David Denison, Linda van Bergen, and Joana Soliva (formerly Proud). University of Manchester. https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/david.denison/late18c.html. Available online at www.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/llc/files/david-denison/orford1.htmGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English (CLMET). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmet.htmGoogle Scholar

A Corpus of Late Modern English Prose. 1994. Compiled by David Denison with assistance from Graeme Trousdale and Linda van Bergen. University of Manchester. https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/david.denison/LModE_Prose.htmlGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0 (CLMET3.0). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet, Hans-Jürgen Diller, and Jukka Tyrkkö. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmet3_0.htmGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (extended version) (CLMETEV). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmetev.htmGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Middle English Prose and Verse (CMEPV). 2006. The Humanities Text Initiative, University of Michigan. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/Google Scholar

Corpus of Scottish Correspondence (CSC). 2007. Compiled by Anneli Meurman-Solin. University of Helsinki. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/CoRD/corpora/CSC/Google Scholar

Charles, Darwin. 1887. The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 1, ed. by Darwin, Francis. London: John Murray. www.gutenberg.org/files/2087/2087-h/2087-h.htm#link2HCH0006.Google Scholar

Davis, Norman (ed.). 2009. The Paston letters: A selection in modern spelling. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE). Frederic G. Cassidy and Joan Houston Hall (eds.). 6 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://dare.wisc.eduGoogle Scholar

Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus (DOEC). 2009. Compiled by Antonette diPaolo Healey with John Price Wilkin and Xin Xiang. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project. Available by subscription. https://tapor-library-utoronto-ca.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doecorpus/index.htmlGoogle Scholar

Early English Books Online Corpus (EEBO). 2017. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/eebo/. See https://proquest.libguides.com/eebopqp. Full version available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebogroup/Google Scholar

Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO). 2003–. Gale Cengage. See www.gale.com/primary-sources/eighteenth-century-collections-online. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/Google Scholar

Eighteenth-Century Fiction (ECF). 1996–2015. Ed. by Judith Hawley, Tom Keymer, and John Mullan. Chadwyck-Healey. ProQuest LLC. Available by subscription. http://collections.chadwyck.co.uk/marketing/products/about_ilc.jsp?collection=ecfGoogle Scholar

An Electronic Text Edition of Depositions 1560–1760. See Kytö et al. (2011).Google Scholar

English Drama (ED). 1996–2014. Ed. by John Barnard et al. Chadwyck-Healey Ltd. ProQuest LLC. Available by subscription. http://collections.chadwyck.com/marketing/home_ed.jspGoogle Scholar

Early American Imprints, 1639–1800: A Readex microprint of the works listed in Evan’s American Bibliography, Evans numbers 1–39162 (Evans). Worcester, MA: American Antiquarian Society, Readex Microprint. See www.readex.com/products/early-american-imprints-series-i-evans-1639-1800. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/evans/Google Scholar

Hamilton, Saskia (ed.). 2005. The letters of Robert Lowell. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Hanham, Alison (ed.). 1975. The Cely letters, 1472–1488. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hansard Corpus. 2015. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/hansard/Google Scholar

The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts (HC). 1991. Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. Compiled by Matti Rissanen (Project leader), Merja Kytö (Project secretary); Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, Matti Kilpiö (Old English); Saara Nevanlinna, Irma Taavitsainen (Middle English); Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (Early Modern English). Available online at https://helsinkicorpus.arts.gla.ac.uk/display.py?what=indexGoogle Scholar

Historical Thesaurus of English. 2020–. 2nd ed. online. Ed. by Michael Samuels, Christian Kay, Marc Alexander et al. University of Glasgow. https://ht.ac.ukGoogle Scholar

The Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts. Compiled by Josef Schmied, Eva Hertal, Claudia Claridge and Rainer Siemund. http://korpus.uib.no/icame/manuals/LAMPETER/LAMPHOME.HTMGoogle Scholar

Middle English Dictionary (MED). 1952–2001. Kurath, Hans and Kuhn, Sherman (eds.). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Part of the Middle English compendium. Francis McSparran (chief ed.). Available online at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mec/Google Scholar

The Movie Corpus (Movies). 2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/movies/Google Scholar

Newsbooks at Lancaster. Compiled by Tony McEnery. Lancaster University. www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/newsbooks/Google Scholar

The New York Times. Chadwyck-Healey Historical Newspapers. http://historynews.chadwyck.comGoogle Scholar

Nicolson, Marjorie Hope (ed.). 1992. The Conway letters: The correspondence of Anne, Viscountess Conway, Henry More, and their friends, 1642–1684. Revised by Sarah Hutton. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Open Source Shakespeare (OSS). 2003. George Mason University. www.opensourceshakespeare.org/Google Scholar

The Old Bailey Corpus, 2.0, 1720–1913. 2016. Compiled by Magnus Huber, Magnus Nissel and Karin Puga. hdl:11858/00-246C-0000-0023-8CFB-2Google Scholar

The Old Bailey Proceedings Online, 1674–1913. 2003–2018. Edited by Tim Hitchcock, Robert Showmaker, Clive Emsley, Sharon Hoard, and Jamie McLauglin et al. Version 8.0, March 2018. www.oldbaileyonline.orgGoogle Scholar

Oxford English Dictionary (OED). 2000–. 3rd ed. online. Michael Proffitt (editor). www.oed.comGoogle Scholar

ProQuest Historical Newspapers^TM. Available by subscription. https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/pq-hist-news/Google Scholar

Rosenthal, Bernard (general ed.). 2013. Records of the Salem witch-hunts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

The Times Digital Archive. Available by subscription. Gage Cengage. www.gale.com/intl/c/the-times-digital-archiveGoogle Scholar

The TV Corpus (TV). 2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/tv/Google Scholar

Zurich English Newspaper Corpus (ZEN). 1993–2003. Compiled by Udo Fries, Hans Martin Lehmann et al. www.es.uzh.ch/en/Subsites/Projects/zencorpus.htmlGoogle Scholar

ARCHER-3.2 = A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers 3.2. 1990–1993/2002/2007/2010/2013/2016. Originally compiled under the supervision of Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan at Northern Arizona University and University of Southern California; modified and expanded by subsequent members of a consortium of universities. Current member universities are Bamberg, Freiburg, Heidelberg, Helsinki, Lancaster, Leicester, Manchester, Michigan, Northern Arizona, Santiago de Compostela, Southern California, Trier, Uppsala, Zurich.Google Scholar

Benson, Larry D. 1986. The Riverside Chaucer, 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Bosworth, Joseph. 2014. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Online (Bosworth-Toller). Ed. by Thomas Northcote Toller, Christ Sean, and Ondřej Tichy. Prague: Faculty of Arts, Charles University. https://bosworthtoller.comGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). 2008–. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/cocaGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Early American Literature (CEAL). See Höglund and Syrjänen (2016).Google Scholar

Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler (CEECS). 1998. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen (leader), Jukka Keränen, Minna Nevala (née Aunio), Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. www2.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/varieng/corpus-of-early-english-correspondenceGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Early English Recipes (CoER). 2002–. See Alonso Almeida et al. (2012).Google Scholar

Corpus of Early English Medical Writing (CEEM). 2005–. See Taavitsainen et al. (eds.)(2005), Taavitsainen and Pahta (eds.) (2010), Taavitsainen and Hiltunen (eds.) (2019). https://varieng.helsinki.fi/CoRD/corpora/CEEM/Google Scholar

A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760 (CED). 2006. Compiled under the supervision of Merja Kytö (Uppsala University) and Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University). www.engelska.uu.se/research/english-language/electronic-resources/english-dialogues/Google Scholar

The Corpus of English Novels (CEN). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/Google Scholar

Corpus of English Religious Prose (COERP). 2015–1800. Compiled by Thomas Kohnen (project leader), Tanja Rütten, Ingvilt Marcoe, Kirsten Gather, Dorothee Groeger, Anne Döring, and Stefanie Leu. http://coerp.uni-koeln.de/Google Scholar

The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA). 2010. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/coha/Google Scholar

A Corpus of Late 18c Prose. 2003–2010. Compiled by David Denison, Linda van Bergen, and Joana Soliva (formerly Proud). University of Manchester. https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/david.denison/late18c.html. Available online at www.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/llc/files/david-denison/orford1.htmGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English (CLMET). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmet.htmGoogle Scholar

A Corpus of Late Modern English Prose. 1994. Compiled by David Denison with assistance from Graeme Trousdale and Linda van Bergen. University of Manchester. https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/david.denison/LModE_Prose.htmlGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0 (CLMET3.0). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet, Hans-Jürgen Diller, and Jukka Tyrkkö. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmet3_0.htmGoogle Scholar

The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (extended version) (CLMETEV). Compiled by Hendrik De Smet. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmetev.htmGoogle Scholar

Corpus of Middle English Prose and Verse (CMEPV). 2006. The Humanities Text Initiative, University of Michigan. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/Google Scholar

Corpus of Scottish Correspondence (CSC). 2007. Compiled by Anneli Meurman-Solin. University of Helsinki. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/CoRD/corpora/CSC/Google Scholar

Charles, Darwin. 1887. The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 1, ed. by Darwin, Francis. London: John Murray. www.gutenberg.org/files/2087/2087-h/2087-h.htm#link2HCH0006.Google Scholar

Davis, Norman (ed.). 2009. The Paston letters: A selection in modern spelling. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE). Frederic G. Cassidy and Joan Houston Hall (eds.). 6 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://dare.wisc.eduGoogle Scholar

Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus (DOEC). 2009. Compiled by Antonette diPaolo Healey with John Price Wilkin and Xin Xiang. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project. Available by subscription. https://tapor-library-utoronto-ca.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doecorpus/index.htmlGoogle Scholar

Early English Books Online Corpus (EEBO). 2017. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/eebo/. See https://proquest.libguides.com/eebopqp. Full version available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebogroup/Google Scholar

Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO). 2003–. Gale Cengage. See www.gale.com/primary-sources/eighteenth-century-collections-online. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/Google Scholar

Eighteenth-Century Fiction (ECF). 1996–2015. Ed. by Judith Hawley, Tom Keymer, and John Mullan. Chadwyck-Healey. ProQuest LLC. Available by subscription. http://collections.chadwyck.co.uk/marketing/products/about_ilc.jsp?collection=ecfGoogle Scholar

An Electronic Text Edition of Depositions 1560–1760. See Kytö et al. (2011).Google Scholar

English Drama (ED). 1996–2014. Ed. by John Barnard et al. Chadwyck-Healey Ltd. ProQuest LLC. Available by subscription. http://collections.chadwyck.com/marketing/home_ed.jspGoogle Scholar

Early American Imprints, 1639–1800: A Readex microprint of the works listed in Evan’s American Bibliography, Evans numbers 1–39162 (Evans). Worcester, MA: American Antiquarian Society, Readex Microprint. See www.readex.com/products/early-american-imprints-series-i-evans-1639-1800. Available online at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/evans/Google Scholar

Hamilton, Saskia (ed.). 2005. The letters of Robert Lowell. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Hanham, Alison (ed.). 1975. The Cely letters, 1472–1488. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hansard Corpus. 2015. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/hansard/Google Scholar

The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts (HC). 1991. Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. Compiled by Matti Rissanen (Project leader), Merja Kytö (Project secretary); Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, Matti Kilpiö (Old English); Saara Nevanlinna, Irma Taavitsainen (Middle English); Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (Early Modern English). Available online at https://helsinkicorpus.arts.gla.ac.uk/display.py?what=indexGoogle Scholar

Historical Thesaurus of English. 2020–. 2nd ed. online. Ed. by Michael Samuels, Christian Kay, Marc Alexander et al. University of Glasgow. https://ht.ac.ukGoogle Scholar

The Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts. Compiled by Josef Schmied, Eva Hertal, Claudia Claridge and Rainer Siemund. http://korpus.uib.no/icame/manuals/LAMPETER/LAMPHOME.HTMGoogle Scholar

Middle English Dictionary (MED). 1952–2001. Kurath, Hans and Kuhn, Sherman (eds.). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Part of the Middle English compendium. Francis McSparran (chief ed.). Available online at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mec/Google Scholar

The Movie Corpus (Movies). 2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/movies/Google Scholar

Newsbooks at Lancaster. Compiled by Tony McEnery. Lancaster University. www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/newsbooks/Google Scholar

The New York Times. Chadwyck-Healey Historical Newspapers. http://historynews.chadwyck.comGoogle Scholar

Nicolson, Marjorie Hope (ed.). 1992. The Conway letters: The correspondence of Anne, Viscountess Conway, Henry More, and their friends, 1642–1684. Revised by Sarah Hutton. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Open Source Shakespeare (OSS). 2003. George Mason University. www.opensourceshakespeare.org/Google Scholar

The Old Bailey Corpus, 2.0, 1720–1913. 2016. Compiled by Magnus Huber, Magnus Nissel and Karin Puga. hdl:11858/00-246C-0000-0023-8CFB-2Google Scholar

The Old Bailey Proceedings Online, 1674–1913. 2003–2018. Edited by Tim Hitchcock, Robert Showmaker, Clive Emsley, Sharon Hoard, and Jamie McLauglin et al. Version 8.0, March 2018. www.oldbaileyonline.orgGoogle Scholar

Oxford English Dictionary (OED). 2000–. 3rd ed. online. Michael Proffitt (editor). www.oed.comGoogle Scholar

ProQuest Historical Newspapers^TM. Available by subscription. https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/pq-hist-news/Google Scholar

Rosenthal, Bernard (general ed.). 2013. Records of the Salem witch-hunts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

The Times Digital Archive. Available by subscription. Gage Cengage. www.gale.com/intl/c/the-times-digital-archiveGoogle Scholar

The TV Corpus (TV). 2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Available online at www.english-corpora.org/tv/Google Scholar

Zurich English Newspaper Corpus (ZEN). 1993–2003. Compiled by Udo Fries, Hans Martin Lehmann et al. www.es.uzh.ch/en/Subsites/Projects/zencorpus.htmlGoogle Scholar