Ädel, A. and Erman, B.. (2012). ‘Recurrent word combinations in academic writing by native and non-native speakers of English: a lexical bundles approach’. English for Specific Purposes, 31(2), 81–92.Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. (2007). ‘Idiomaticity in a cultural and activity type perspective: the conventionalization of routine phrases in answering-machine messages’. In Skandera, P. (ed.), Phraseology and culture in English . Berlin: de Gruyter. 323–49.Google Scholar

Aitchison, J. (2001). Language change: progress or decay? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Aitchison, J. (2003). ‘Psycholinguistic perspectives on language change’. In Janda, R. D. and Joseph, B. D. (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 736–43.Google Scholar

Alexander, J. (1988). ‘The new theoretical movement’. In Smelser, N. (ed.), Handbook of sociology. London: Sage. 77–101.Google Scholar

Allan, K. (2009). Concise encyclopedia of semantics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Allerton, D. J. (1984). ‘Three (or four) levels of word cooccurence restriction’. Lingua, 63(1), 17–40.Google Scholar

Altenberg, B. (1998). ‘On the phraseology of spoken English: the evidence of recurrent word-combinations’. In Cowie, A. P. (ed.), Phraseology: theory, analysis and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 101–22.Google Scholar

Altenberg, B. and Eeg-Olofsson, M.. (1990). ‘Phraseology in spoken English: presentation of a project’. In Aarts, J. and Meijs, W. (eds.), Theory and practice in corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 1–26.Google Scholar

Anastasiou, D., Hashimoto, C., Nakov, P. and Kim, S. (eds.). (2009). Proceedings of the workshop on multiword expressions: identification, interpretation, disambiguation and applications. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar

Anderson, S. R. and Lightfoot, D.. (2002). The language organ: linguistics as cognitive physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Arnon, I. and Snider, N.. (2010). ‘More than words: frequency effects for multi-word phrases’. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(1), 67–82.Google Scholar

Auer, P. (2005). ‘Projection in interaction and projection in grammar’. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 25(1), 7–36.Google Scholar

Bach, E. (1974). ‘Explanatory inadequacy’. In Cohen, D. (ed.), Explaining linguistic phenomena. New York: Wiley and Sons. 153–72.Google Scholar

Bachmann-Medick, D. (2003). ‘Kulturanthropologie’. In Nünning, A. and Nünning, V. (eds.), Konzepte der Kulturwissenschaften: theoretische Grundlagen, Ansätze, Perspektiven. Stuttgart: Metzler. 86–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baker, P. (2011). ‘Times may change, but we will always have money: diachronic variation in recent British English’. Journal of English Linguistics, 39(1), 65–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baldwin, T., Bannard, C., Tanaka, T. and Widdows, D.. (2003). ‘An empirical model of multiword expression decomposability’. In Proceedings of the ACL 2003 workshop on multiword expressions: analysis, acquisition and treatment-Volume 18. Sapporo, Japan. 89–96.Google Scholar

Bally, C. (1909). Traité de stylistique française, premier volume. Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck.Google Scholar

Battye, A. and Roberts, I. G.. (1995). ‘Introduction’. In Roberts, I. G. and Battye, A. (eds.), Clause structure and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, U. and Lau, C.. (2005). ‘Second modernity as a research agenda: theoretical and empirical explorations in the ‘meta-change’ of modern society’. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(4), 525–57.Google Scholar

Becker, J. D. (1975). ‘The phrasal lexicon’. In Shank, R. and Nash-Webber, B. L. (eds.), Theoretical issues in natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: Bolt Beranek & Newman. 60–3.Google Scholar

Belica, C. (1995). Statistische Kollokationsanalyse und -clustering: korpuslinguistische Analysemethode [Computer Software]. Mannheim: Institut für Deutsche Sprache. www.ids-mannheim.de/cosmas2/ [accessed 19 December 2017].Google Scholar

Belica, C. (1996). ‘Analysis of temporal changes in corpora’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 1(1), 61–73.Google Scholar

Belica, C. (2001). Kookkurrenzdatenbank CCDB [Computer Software]. Mannheim: IDS. http://corpora.ids-mannheim.de/ccdb/ [accessed 19 December 2017].Google Scholar

Belica, C. and Perkuhn, R.. (n.d.). ‘Teilprojekt Kookkurrenzanalyse und deren Erschließung’. www.ids-mannheim.de/kl/projekte/methoden/ka.html [accessed 27 December 2010].Google Scholar

Bennett, T., Grossberg, L., Morris, M. and Williams, R.. (2005). New keywords: a revised vocabulary of culture and society. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Bergs, A. and Diewald, G.. (2008a). ‘Introduction: constructions and language change’. In Bergs, A. and Diewald, G. (eds.), Constructions and language change. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1–21.Google Scholar

Bergs, A. and Diewald, G. (eds.), (2008b). Constructions and language change. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Bernhard, B., Scheven, E., Kipple, E. and Bee, G.. (2012). ‘Subject Headings Authority File (SWD)’. www.dnb.de/EN/Standardisierung/Normdaten/SWD/swd_node.html [accessed 24 September 2012].Google Scholar

Bestgen, Y. (2018). ‘Evaluating the frequency threshold for selecting lexical bundles by means of an extension of the Fisher’s exact test.’ Corpora, 13(2), 205–28.Google Scholar

Biber, D. (2006). University language: a corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Biber, D. (2009). ‘A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: multiword patterns in speech and writing’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 275–311.Google Scholar

Biber, D. and Barbieri, F.. (2007). ‘Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers’. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–86.Google Scholar

Biber, D. and Finegan, E.. (1989). ‘Drift and the evolution of English style: a history of three genres’. Language, 65(3), 487–517.Google Scholar

Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Cortes, V.. (2003). ‘Lexical bundles in speech and writing: an initial taxonomy’. In Wilson, A., Rayson, P. and McEnery, T. (eds.), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune: a festschrift for Geoffrey Leech. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 71–92.Google Scholar

Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Cortes, V.. (2004). ‘If you look at …: lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks’. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405.Google Scholar

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E.. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Bickel, H., Gasser, M., Häcki Buhofer, A., Hofer, L. and Schön, C.H.. (2009). ‘Schweizer Text Korpus – theoretische Grundlagen, Korpusdesign und Abfragemöglichkeiten’. Linguistik Online, 39(3), 5–31.Google Scholar

Bischof, B. B. (2008). Französische Kollokationen diachron: Eine korpusbasierte Analyse. Universität Stuttgart. http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/frontdoor.php?source_opus=3418 [accessed 29 November 2010].Google Scholar

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: H. Holt and Company.Google Scholar

Blout, B. G. (2009). ‘Anthropological linguistics’. In Verschueren, J., Östman, J.-O. and Senft, G. (eds.), Culture and language use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 29–40.Google Scholar

Bod, R. (2003). ‘Introduction to elementary probability theory and formal stochastic language theory’. In Bod, R., Jannedy, S. and Hay, J. (eds.), Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 11–37.Google Scholar

Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H. and Demecheleer, M.. (2006). ‘Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: putting a Lexical Approach to the test’. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245–61.Google Scholar

Bolinger, D. L. (1961). ‘Syntactic blends and other matters’. Language, 37(3), 366–81.Google Scholar

Bolinger, D. L. (1985). ‘Defining the indefinable’. In Ilson, R. (ed.), Dictionaries, lexicography and language learning. Oxford: Pergamon. 69–73.Google Scholar

Booij, G. E. (2010). Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bouamor, D., Semmar, N. and Zweigenbaum, P.. (2011). ‘Improved statistical machine translation using multiword expressions’. In LIHMT 2011. Barcelona: Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. 15–20.Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bovay, C. (2004). Religionslandschaft in der Schweiz. Neuchâtel: Bundesamt für Statistik.Google Scholar

Bowie, J. and Aarts, B.. (2012). ‘Change in the English infinitival perfect construction.’ In Traugott, E. C. and Nevalainen, T. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 200–10.Google Scholar

Braune, W. (1994 [1875]). Althochdeutsches Lesebuch: Zusammengestellt und mit Wörterbuch versehen, 17th ed. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Breidt, E. (1993). ‘Extraction of NV-collocations from text corpora: a feasibility study for German’. In Proceedings of the 1st ACL workshop on very large Corpora, Columbus, Ohio. http://arxiv.org/abs/cmp-lg/9603006 [accessed 22 February 2011].Google Scholar

Brown, P. F., Pietra, V. J. D., Pietra, S. A. D. and Mercer, R. L.. (1993). ‘The mathematics of statistical machine translation: parameter estimation’. Computational Linguistics, 19(2), 263–311.Google Scholar

Bruce, L. P. (1988). ‘Serialization: from syntax to lexicon’. Studies in Language, 12(1), 19–49.Google Scholar

Brunner, A. and Steyer, K.. (2007). ‘Corpus-driven study of multi-word expressions based on collocations from a very large corpus’. In Proceedings of CL2007, University of Birmingham, UK, 27–30 July 2007. http://corpus.bham.ac.uk/corplingproceedings07/paper/182_Paper.pdf.Google Scholar

Bubenhofer, N. (2009). Sprachgebrauchsmuster: Korpuslinguistik als Methode der Diskurs- und Kulturanalyse. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2004). ‘English hearts and what they tell us about language and mind’. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 13, 247–67.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2011). ‘SubString [Computer Software]’. http://buerki.github.com/SubString/ [accessed 9 November 2011].Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2012). ‘Korpusgeleitete Extraktion von Mehrwortsequenzen aus (diachronen) Korpora’. In Filatkina, N., Kleine-Engel, A., Dräger, M., and Burger, H. (eds.), Aspekte der historischen Phraseologie und Phraseographie. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter. 263–92.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2014). ‘N-Gram processor 0.4.1: a short user guide’. http://buerki.github.io/ngramprocessor/manual_0.4.pdf [accessed 13 November 2014].Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2016). ‘Formulaic sequences: a drop in the ocean of constructions or something more significant?’ European Journal of English Studies, 20(1), 15–34.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2017). ‘Frequency consolidation among word n-grams: a practical procedure.’ In Mitkov, R. (ed.), Computational and corpus-based phraseology. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2019). ‘Furiously fast: on the speed of change in formulaic language’. Yearbook of Phraseology, 10, 5–38.Google Scholar

Buerki, A. (2020). ‘(How) is Formulaic Language Universal? Insights from Korean, German and English’. In Piirainen, E. et al. (eds.), Formulaic language and new data: theoretical and methodological implications. Berlin: deGruyter.Google Scholar

Bundesamt für Statistik. (n.d.). ‘Bilanz der ständigen Wohnbevölkerung, 1861–2010’. Statistisches Lexikon der Schweiz. http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/01/02/blank/data/01.html [accessed 25 September 2012].Google Scholar

Burger, H. (1977). ‘Problem einer historischen Phraseologie des Deutschen’. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur Tübingen, 99(1), 1–24.Google Scholar

Burger, H. (1999). ‘Phraseologie in der Presse’. In Fernandez-Bravo, N., Behr, I. and Rozier, C. (eds.), Phraseme und typisierte Rede. Tuebingen: Stauffenburg-Verlag. 77–89.Google Scholar

Burger, H. (2010). Phraseologie: eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen, 4th ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar

Burger, H. and Buhofer, A.. (1981). ‘Phraseologie als Indikator für Text- und Stiltypen’. Wirkendes Wort, 6, 377–98.Google Scholar

Burger, H. and Linke, A.. (1998). ‘Historische phraseologie’. In Besch, W., Betten, A., Richmann, O. and Sonderegger, S. (eds.), Sprachgeschichte. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung, vol 1. Berlin: de Gruyter. 743–55.Google Scholar

Burger, H., Häcki Buhofer, A. and Gréciano, G. (eds.). (2003). Flut von Texten – Vielfalt der Kulturen: Ascona 2001 zur Methodologie und Kulturspezifik der Phraseologie. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag.Google Scholar

Burger, H., Häcki Buhofer, A. and Sialm, A.. (1982). Handbuch der Phraseologie. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Burger, H., Bobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.). (2007). Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Burger, H., Dobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R.. (2007). ‘Phraseology: subject area, terminology and research topics’. In Burger, H., Bobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 11–9.Google Scholar

Busch, A. and Stenschke, O.. (2007). Germanistische Linguistik: eine Einführung. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

Butler, C. S. (1997). ‘Repeated word combinations in spoken and written text: some implications for functional grammar’. In Butler, C. S., Connolly, J. H., Gatward, R. A. and Vismans, R. M. (eds.), A fund of ideas: recent developments in functional grammar. Amsterdam: IFOTT. 60–77.Google Scholar

Butler, C. S. (2005). ‘Formulaic language: an overview with particular reference to the cross-linguistic perspective’. Pragmatics & Beyond. New series, 140, 221–42.Google Scholar

Büchi, C. (2001). ”Röstigraben”: das Verhältnis zwischen deutscher und französischer Schweiz: Geschichte und Perspektiven, 2nd ed. Zürich: Verlag Neue Zürcher Zeitung.Google Scholar

Bybee, J. (2003). ‘Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: the role of frequency’. In Janda, R. D. and Joseph, B. D. (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 602–23.Google Scholar

Bybee, J. (2006). ‘From usage to grammar: the mind’s response to repetition’. Language, 82(4), 711–33.Google Scholar

Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bybee, J. and Cacoullos, R. T.. (2009). ‘The role of prefabs in grammaticization’. In Corrigan, R., Moravcsik, A., Ouali, H. and Wheatley, K. M. (eds.), Formulaic language: distribution and historical change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 187–218.Google Scholar

Bynon, T. (1977). Historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Callaway, N. (n.d.). ‘Planning Your Wedding Ceremony: a sample wedding ceremony and order of service’. About.com Guide [Web page]. http://weddings.about.com/od/yourweddingceremony/a/SampleCeremony.htm [accessed 2012].Google Scholar

Calzolari, N., Fillmore, C., Grishman, R., Ide, N., Lenci, A., MacLeod, C. and Zampolli, A.. (2002). ‘Towards best practice for multiword expressions in computational lexicons.’ In Proceedings of LREC. 1934–40. www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2002/pdf/259.pdf [accessed 28 September 2012].Google Scholar

Candlin, S. and Candlin, C. N.. (2007). ‘Nursing through time and space: some challenges to the construct of community of practice’. In Iedema, R. (ed.), The discourse of hospital communication: tracing complexities in contemporary health care organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 244–67.Google Scholar

Candlin, C., Crichton, J. and Moore, S. H.. (2017). Exploring discourse in context and in action. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Caruana-Galizia, P. (2016). ‘Politics and the German language: testing Orwells hypothesis using the Google n-gram corpus’. Digital Scholarship Humanities Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 31(3), 441–56.Google Scholar

Cavallin, K. (2012). ‘Automatic extraction of potential examples of semantic change using lexical sets’. In Proceedings of KONVENS 2012, Vienna. gup.ub.gu.se/records/fulltext/163823.pdf [accessed 23 November 2012].Google Scholar

Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. and Schilling-Estes, N.. (eds.) (2002). The handbook of language variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Chang, N. C. L. (2008). ‘Constructing grammar: a computational model of the emergence of early constructions’. (PhD thesis). University of California, Berkeley. www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~nchang/diss.html [accessed 28 August 2012].Google Scholar

Cheng, W., Greaves, C. and Warren, M.. (2006). ‘From n-gram to skipgram to concgram’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11, 411–33.Google Scholar

Cheng, W., Greaves, C., Sinclair, J. and Warren, M.. (2009). ‘Uncovering the extent of the phraseological tendency: towards a systematic analysis of concgrams’. Applied Linguistics, 30(2), 236–52.Google Scholar

Chesley, P. and Baayen, R. H.. (2010). ‘Predicting new words from newer words: lexical borrowings in French’. Linguistics, 48(6), 1343–74.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cyffka, A. and Wolski, W. (2012). PONS Kompaktwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremd-sprache. Stuttgart: PONS.Google Scholar

De Cock, S., Granger, S., Leech, G. and McEnery, T.. (1998). ‘An automated approach to the phrasicon of EFL learners’. In Granger, S. (ed.), Learner English on computer. London: Longman. 67–79.Google Scholar

Code, C. (1994). ‘Speech automatism production in aphasia’. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 8(2), 135–48.Google Scholar

Colson, J. (2003). ‘Corpus linguistics and phraseological statistics: a few hypotheses and examples’. In Burger, H., Häcki Buhofer, A. and Gréciano, G. (eds.), Flut von Texten - Vielfalt der Kulturen. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag. 47–59.Google Scholar

Conklin, K. and Schmitt, N.. (2008). ‘Formulaic sequences: are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers?’. Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89.Google Scholar

Constant, M., Eryiğit, G., Monti, J., Van Der Plas, L., Ramisch, C., Rosner, M. and Todirascu, A. (2017). ‘Multiword expression processing: a survey’. Computational Linguistics. 43(4), 837–92.Google Scholar

Corten, I. H. (1992). Vocabulary of Soviet society and culture: a selected guide to Russian words, idioms and expressions of the post-Stalin era, 1953–1991. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Cortes, V. (2002). ‘Lexical bundles in freshman composition’. In Reppen, R., Fitzmaurice, S. M. and Biber, D. (eds.), Using Corpora to explore linguistic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 131–46.Google Scholar

Cortes, V. (2004). ‘Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: examples from history and biology’. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397–423.Google Scholar

Cortes, V. (2015). ‘Situating lexical bundles in the formulaic language spectrum: origins and functional analysis developments’. In Cortes, V. and Csomay, E. (eds.), Corpus-based research in applied linguistics: studies in Honor of Doug Biber. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 197–218.Google Scholar

Coulmas, F. (1979). ‘On the sociolinguistic relevance of routine formulae’. Journal of Pragmatics, 3(3–4), 239–66.Google Scholar

Coulmas, F. (1981). ‘Introduction: conversational routine’. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), Conversational routine. The Hague: Mouton. 1–18.Google Scholar

Coupland, N. (2014). ‘Language change, social change, sociolinguistic change: a meta-commentary’. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 277–86.Google Scholar

Coussé, E. and von Mengden, F.. (2014). Usage-based approaches to language change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Cowie, A. P. (1981). ‘The treatment of collocations and idioms in learners’ dictionaries’. Applied Linguistics, 2(3), 223–35.Google Scholar

Cowie, A. P. (1991). ‘Multiword units in newspaper language’. Cahiers de I’lnstitut de Linguistique de Louvain, 17(1–3), 101–16.Google Scholar

Cowie, A. P. (1998). ‘Introduction’. In Cowie, A. P. (ed.), Phraseology: theory, analysis and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1–20.Google Scholar

Croft, W. (2000). Explaining language change: an evolutionary approach. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Crowley, T. (1992). An introduction to historical linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Crowley, T. and Bowern, C.. (2010). An introduction to historical linguistics, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Crowther, J., Dignan, S., Lea, D., Deuter, M., Greenan, J., Noble, J. and Phillips, J. (eds.). (2003). Oxford collocations dictionary for students of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

de Cruys, T. and Moiron, B. V.. (2007). ‘Semantics-based multiword expression extraction’. ACL-2007 workshop on multiword expressions: a broader perspective on multiword expressions. Association for Computational Linguistics. 25–32.Google Scholar

Crystal, D. (1963). ‘A language must change to keep pace with society’. Liverpool Daily Post, 16 May. 9–10.Google Scholar

Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, E. (2004). Language, mind and brain: some psychological and neurological constraints on theories of grammar. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, E. and Lieven, E.. (2005). ‘Towards a lexically specific grammar of children’s question constructions’. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(3), 437–74.Google Scholar

Dahlmann, I. and Adolphs, S.. (2007). ‘Pauses as an indicator of psycholinguistically valid multi-word expressions (MWEs)?’. In Proceedings of the workshop on a broader perspective on multiword expressions. Association for Computational Linguistics. Prague, Czech Republic. 49–56.Google Scholar

D’Andrade, R. (1996). ‘Culture’. In Kuper, J. and Kuper, A. (eds.), The social science encyclopedia. London: Routledge. 161–3.Google Scholar

Davies, M. (2012). ‘Expanding horizons in historical linguistics with the 400-million word corpus of historical American English’. Corpora, 7(2), 121–57.Google Scholar

Davies, M. (2014). ‘Making Google books n-grams useful for a wide range of research on language change’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(3), 401–16.Google Scholar

Davis, F. (1979). Yearning for yesterday: a sociology of nostalgia. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Dias, G., Guilloré, S. and Lopes, J. G. P.. (2000). ‘Normalization of association measures for multiword lexical unit extraction’. In International conference on artificial and computational intelligence for decision, control and automation in engineering and industrial applications, Monastir, Tunisia. www.di.ubi.pt/~ddg/publications/acidca2000.pdf [accessed 16 December 2010].Google Scholar

Diessel, H. (2007). ‘Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change’. New Ideas in Psychology, 25(2), 108–27.Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. and Aikhenvald, A. Y. (eds.). (2002). Word: a cross-linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dobrovol’skij, D. (2007). ‘Cognitive approaches to idiom analysis’. In Burger, H., Dobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 789–818.Google Scholar

Dominey, P. (2006). ‘From holophrases to abstract grammatical constructions: insights from simulation studies’. In Clark, E. V. and Kelly, B. P. (eds.), Constructions in acquisition. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 137–62.Google Scholar

Duden, K. (1880). Vollständiges Orthographisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Leipzig: Verlage des Bibliographischen Instituts.Google Scholar

Duden, K. (1903). Ortographisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache: Nach den für Deutschland Österreich und die Schweiz gültigen amtlichen Regeln. Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar

Duden, K. (2007). Deutsches Universalwörterbuch. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar

Duranti, A. (2009). ‘Linguistic anthropology: history, ideas and issues’. In Duranti, A. (ed.), Linguistic anthropology: a reader. Chichester: Blackwell. 1–60.Google Scholar

Duranti, A. and Goodwin, C. (1992). Rethinking context: language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Durrant, P. and Doherty, A.. (2010). ‘Are high-frequency collocations psychologically real? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming’. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6(2), 125–55.Google Scholar

Durrell, M. (2004). ‘Sociolect’. In Ammon, U., Dittmar, N., Mattheier, K. and Trudgill, P. (eds.), Sociolinguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter. 200–5.Google Scholar

Dutton, K. L. (2009). Exploring the boundaries of fomulaic sequences: a corpus-based study of lexical substitution and insertion in contemporary British English. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag.Google Scholar

Eickhoff, B. (ed.). (2010). Duden, Das Synonymwörterbuch: ein Wörterbuch sinnver-wandter Wörter, 5th ed. Mannheim, Zürich: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar

Ellis, N. C. and Larsen-Freeman, D.. (2006). ‘Language emergence: implications for applied linguistics – introduction to the special issue’. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 558–89.Google Scholar

Ellis, N. C. and Larsen-Freeman, D.. (2009). ‘Constructing a second language: analyses and computational simulations of the emergence of linguistic constructions from usage’. Language Learning, 59, 90–125.Google Scholar

Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R. and Maynard, C.. (2008). ‘Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics and TESOL’. TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 375–96.Google Scholar

Enfield, N. (ed.), Ethnosyntax: explorations in grammar and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Erman, B. (2007). ‘Cognitive processes as evidence of the idiom principle’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 12(1), 25–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erman, B. and Warren, B.. (2000). ‘The idiom principle and the open choice principle’. Text, 20(1), 29–62.Google Scholar

Evert, S. and Krenn, B.. (2001). ‘Methods for the qualitative evaluation of lexical association measures’. In Proceedings of the 39th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics. Toulouse, France. 188–95. www.aclweb.org/anthology/P01-1025 [accessed 29 March 2010].Google Scholar

Evert, S. and Krenn, B.. (2005). ‘Using small random samples for the manual evaluation of statistical association measures’. Computer Speech & Language, 19(4), 450–66.Google Scholar

Evert, S., Heid, U. and Lezius, W.. (2000). ‘Methoden zum qualitativen Vergleich von Signifikanzmassen zur Kollokationsidentifikation’. In Zühlke, W. and Schukat-Talamazzini, E. G. (eds.), Proceedings of KONVENS-2000 in Ilmenau, Germany. Berlin: VDE-Verlag. 215–20.Google Scholar

Fabiszak, M. (2005). ‘Semantic and lexical change’. In Ammon, U., Dittmar, N., Mattheier, K. and Trudgill, P. (eds.), Sociolinguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1737–46.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Fazly, A. and Stevenson, S.. (2006). ‘Automatically constructing a lexicon of verb phrase idiomatic combinations’. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European chapter of the association for computational linguistics (EACL-2006). Trento, Italy. 337–44. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary? doi=10.1.1.78.1644 [accessed 5 October 2012].Google Scholar

Feilke, H. (1994). Common sense-Kompetenz: Überlegungen zu einer Theorie des “sympathischen” und “natürlichen” Meinens und Verstehens. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Feilke, H. (1996). Sprache als soziale Gestalt. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Feilke, H. (2003). ‘Textroutine, Textsemantik und sprachliches Wissen’. In Linke, A., Ortner, H. and Portmann-Tselikas, P. (eds.), Sprache und mehr. Ansichten einer Linguistik der sprachlichen Praxis. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 209–30.Google Scholar

Feilke, H. (2004). ‘Kontext – Zeichen – Kompetenz’. In Steyer, K. (ed.), Wortverbindungen – mehr oder weniger fest. Berlin: de Gruyter. 41–64.Google Scholar

Feilke, H. (2007). ‘Syntaktische Aspekte der Phraseologie III: Construction Grammar und verwandte Ansätze’. In Burger, H., Bobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 62–76.Google Scholar

Fennell, B. A. (2001). A history of English: a sociolinguistic approach. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar

Fellbaum, C. (ed.). (2007). Idioms and collocations: corpus-based linguistic and lexicographic studies. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Fellbaum, C., Geyken, A., Herold, A., Koerner, F. and Neumann, G.. (2006). ‘Corpus-based studies of German idioms and light verbs’. International Journal of Lexicography, 19(4), 349–60.Google Scholar

Ferreira da Silva, J. and Pereira Lopes, G.. (1999). ‘A local maxima method and a fair dispersion normalization for extracting multi-word units from corpora’. In Proceedings of the sixth meeting on mathematics of language., Orlando, USA http://hlt.di.fct.unl.pt/jfs/MOL99.pdf [accessed 21 December 2010].Google Scholar

Fiedler, S. (2017, 5). ‘Phraseological borrowing from English into German: cultural and pragmatic implications’. Journal of Pragmatics, 113, 89–102.Google Scholar

Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics 1934–1951. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. (1992). ‘Corpus linguistics or computer-aided armchair linguistics’. In Svartvik, J. (ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics. Proceedings of Nobel Symposium. Berlin: de Gruyter. 35–60.Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P. and O’Connor, M. C.. (1988). ‘Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone’. Language, 64(3), 501–38.Google Scholar

Fischer, A. (2012). ‘Ein Fräulein, ein peppiges’. Zürcher Tages-Anzeiger, 3 July. http://blog.tagesanzeiger.ch/mamablog/index.php/24642/ein-fraulein-ein-peppiges/ [accessed 6 September 2012].Google Scholar

Fishman, J. (1996). ‘Language and culture’. In Kuper, J. and Kuper, A. (eds.), The social science encyclopedia, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. 452–3.Google Scholar

Fivian, C. (2008). ‘1968: Eine Generation bricht auf’. Zürcher Landzeitung, 3 May 2008, 11.Google Scholar

Fix, U., Habscheid, S. and Klein, J.. (2001). ‘Einführung’. In Zur Kulturspezifik von Textsorten. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 7–11.Google Scholar

Fleischer, W. (1982). Phraseologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar

Fletcher, W. H. (2010). ‘Phrases in English’. http://phrasesinenglish.org [accessed 1 October 2012].Google Scholar

Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A. and Thompson, S. A.. (2003). ‘Social interaction and grammar’. In Tomasello, M. (ed.), The new psychology of language: cognitive and functional approaches to language structure. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 119–43.Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (1969). Archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Friedrich, J. (2006). Phraseologisches Wörterbuch des Mittelhochdeutschen. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Friedrich, J. (2007). ‘Historische Phraseologie des Deutschen’. In Burger, H., Dobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1092–106.Google Scholar

Furrer, M., Messmer, K., Weder, B. and Ziegler, B.. (2008). Die Schweiz im kurzen 20. Jahrhundert: 1914 bis 1989 - mit Blick auf die Gegenwart. Zürich: Verlag Pestalozzianum.Google Scholar

Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: theory and method. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Gelbukh, A. (ed.). (2003). Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Geyken, A. (2007). ‘The DWDS corpus: a reference corpus for the German language of the 20th century’. In Fellbaum, C. (ed.). Idioms and collocations: corpus-based linguistic and lexicographic studies. London: Continuum. 23–40.Google Scholar

Geyken, A. Barbaresi, J. Didakowski, B. Jurish, F. Wiegand and Lemnitzer, L.. (2017). ‘Die korpusplattform des digitalen Wörterbuchs der deutschen Sprache (DWDS)’. Zeitschrift Für Germanistische Linguistik, 45(2), 327–44.Google Scholar

Gläser, R. (1999). ‘Indigenous idioms and phrases in Australian and New Zealand English’. In Form, function and variation in English. Berne: Peter Lang. 155–68.Google Scholar

Goddard, C. (2009). ‘Cultural scripts’. In Verschueren, J., Östman, J. -O. and Senft, G. (eds.), Culture and language use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 68–80.Google Scholar

Goddard, C. and Wierzbicka, A.. (2004). ‘Cultural scripts: what are they and what are they good for’. Intercultural pragmatics, 1(2), 153–66.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E. (2003). ‘Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language’. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219–24.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: the nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E. and Casenhiser, D.. (2006). ‘English constructions’. In Aarts, B. and McMahon, A. (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 343–55.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D. M. and Sethuraman, N.. (2004). ‘Learning argument structure generalizations’. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(3), 289–316.Google Scholar

Goodenough, W. H. (1964). ‘Cultural anthropology and linguistics’. In Hymes, H. (ed.), Language in culture and society: a reader in linguistics and anthropology. New York: Harper and Row. 36–9.Google Scholar

Gooding, P. (2013). ‘Mass digitization and the garbage dump: the conflicting needs of quantitative and qualitative methods’. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 28(3), 425–31.Google Scholar

Granger, S. and Paquot, M.. (2008). ‘Disentangling the phraseological web’. In Granger, S. and Meunier, F. (eds.), Phraseology: an interdisciplinary perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 27–49.Google Scholar

Gray, B. and Biber, D.. (2013). ‘Lexical frames in academic prose and conversation’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 109–36.Google Scholar

Greaves, C. (2009). Concgram 1.0: a phraseological search engine [Computer Software]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Gries, S. (2008). ‘Dispersions and adjusted frequencies in corpora’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 403–37.Google Scholar

Gries, S. and Hilpert, M.. (2008). ‘The identification of stages in diachronic data: variability-based neighbor clustering’. Corpora, 1, 59–81.Google Scholar

Gries, S. and Wahl, A.. (2017). ‘MERGE: A new recursive approach towards multiword expression extraction and four small validation case studies’. In paper presented at Corpus Linguistics 2017, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, 25 July 2017.Google Scholar

Guentherodt, I. (1980). ‘Behördliche Sprachregelungen gegen und für eine sprachliche Gleichbehandlung von Frauen und Männern’. Linguistische Berichte Braunschweig, 69, 22–36.Google Scholar

Guentherodt, I., Hellinger, M., Pusch, L. F., and Tromel-Plotz, S.. (1980). ‘Richtlinien zur Vermeidung sexistischen Sprachgebrauchs. (Principes pour éviter les usages sexistes dans la langue)’. Linguistische Berichte Braunschweig, 69, 15–21.Google Scholar

Gumperz, J. (2009). ‘The speech community’. In Duranti, A. (ed.), Linguistic anthropology: a reader. Oxford: Blackwell. 66–73.Google Scholar

Gumperz, J. J. and Levinson, S. C.. (1996). ‘Introduction: linguistic relativity re-examined’. In Gumperz, J. and Levinson, S. C. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–18.Google Scholar

Guy, G. R. (1990). ‘The sociolinguistic types of language change’. Diachronica Diachronica, 7(1), 47–67.Google Scholar

Günthner, S. (2003). ‘Eine Sprachwissenschaft der ‘lebendingen Rede”. In Linke, A., Ortner, H. and Portmann-Tselikas, P. R. (eds.), Sprache und mehr: Ansichten einer Linguistik der sprachlichen Praxis. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 189–208.Google Scholar

Günthner, S. and Linke, A.. (2006). ‘Linguistik und Kulturanalyse – Ansichten eines symbiotischen Verhältnisses’. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 34(1–2), 1–27.Google Scholar

Haas, W. (2006). ‘Die Schweiz’. In Ammon, U., Dittmar, N., Mattheier, K. and Trudgill, P. (eds.), Sociolinguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1772–87.Google Scholar

Habermann, M. (2010). ‘Kollokationen und ihre Funktion in der mittelhochdeutschen Syntax’. In Schmid, H. -U. (ed.), Perspektiven der Germanistischen Sprachgeschichtsforschung. Berlin: de Gruyter. 104–22.Google Scholar

Harrington, J., Palethorpe, S. and Watson, C.. (2000). ‘Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: an acoustic analysis of the Queen’s Christmas broadcasts’. JIPA Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 30, 1–2.Google Scholar

Harris, J. W. (1969). ‘Sound change in Spanish and the theory of markedness’. Language, 45(3), 538–52.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. (1999). ‘Optimality and diachronic adaptation’. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 18(2), 180–205.Google Scholar

Hausmann, F. J., Ivir, V. and Kalogjera, D.. (1991). ‘Collocations in monolingual and bilingual English dictionaries’. In Ivir, V. and Kalogjera, D. (eds.), Languages in contact and contrast: essays in contact linguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter. 225–36.Google Scholar

Häcki Buhofer, A. (1999). ‘Psycholinguistik der Phraseologie’. In Fernandez Bravo, N., Behr, I. and Rozier, C. (eds.), Phraseme und typisierte Rede. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 63–76.Google Scholar

Häcki Buhofer, A. (2004). ‘Spielräume des Sprachverstehens’. In Steyer, K. (ed.), Wortverbindungen - mehr oder weniger fest. Berlin: de Gruyter. 144–66.Google Scholar

Häcki Buhofer, A. (2007). ‘Spracherwerb und Didaktik der Phraseme’. In Burger, H., Bobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 854–69.Google Scholar

Häcki Buhofer, A. and Burger, H.. (1994). ‘Phraseologismen im Urteil von Sprecherinnen und Sprechern’. In Sandig, B. (ed.), Europhras 92 – Tendenzen der Phraseolo-gieforschung. Bochum: Bockmeyer. 1–33.Google Scholar

Heid, U. (2007). ‘Computational linguistic aspects of phraseology II’. In Burger, H., Bobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P. and Norrick, N. R. (eds.), Phraseology: an international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1036–44.Google Scholar

Hilpert, M. (2008). Germanic future constructions: a usage-based approach to language change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hilpert, M. (2013). Constructional change in English: developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hilpert, M. and Gries, S.. (2009). ‘Assessing frequency changes in multistage diachronic corpora: applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition’. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 24(4), 385–401.Google Scholar

Hinrichs, L. and Szmrecsanyi, B.. (2007). ‘Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: a multivariate analysis of tagged corpora’. English Language and Linguistics, 11(03), 437–74.Google Scholar

Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: a new theory of words and language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hoffmann, T. and Trousdale, G.. (2013). ‘Construction Grammar: introduction’. In Trousdale, G. and Hoffmann, T. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1–13.Google Scholar

Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C.. (2003). Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Howarth, P. (1998). ‘Phraseology and second language proficiency’. Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 24–44.Google Scholar

Howarth, P. (2000). ‘Describing diachronic change in English phraseology’. In Pastor, G. C. (ed.), Las lenguas de Europa: estudios de fraseología, fraseografía y tradución . Granada: Comares. 213–30.Google Scholar

Hörning, K. H. and Reuter, J.. (2004). ‘Doing culture: Kultur als Praxis’. In Hörning, K. H. and Reuter, J. (eds.), Doing culture. Bienefeld: transcipt Verlag. 9–15.Google Scholar

Hughes, G. (1989). Words in time: the social history of English vocabulary. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hundt, M. and Mair, C.. (1999). “‘Agile” and “uptight” genres: the corpus-based approach to language change in progress’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(2), 221–42.Google Scholar

Hyland, K. and Jiang, F. K.. (2018). ‘Academic lexical bundles: how are they changing?’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(4), 383–407.Google Scholar

Hymes, D. H. (1968). ‘The ethnography of speaking’. In Fishman, J. A. (ed.), Readings in the sociology of language. The Hague: Mouton. 99–138.Google Scholar

Idström, A. and Piirainen, E.. (2012). Endangered metaphors. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Imhof, K. (1996). ‘Das kurze Leben der geistigen Landesverteidigung’. In Imhof, K., Kleger, H. and Gaetano, R. (eds.), Konkordanz und Kalter Krieg. Zürich: Seismo. 19–83.Google Scholar

Independent Commission of Experts Switzerland - Second World War. (2002). Switzerland, National Socialism and the Second World War: final report. Zürich: Pendo.Google Scholar

Irvine, J. T. (2009). ‘Honorifics’. In Verschueren, J., Östman, J. -O. and Senft, G. (eds.), Culture and language use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 156–72.Google Scholar

Itkonen, E. (1984). ‘On the “rationalist” conception of linguistic change’. Diachronica, 1(2), 203–16.Google Scholar

James, R. (2010). ‘An assessment of the legibility of Google books’. Journal of Access Services, 7(4), 223–28.Google Scholar

James, R. and Weiss, A.. (2012). ‘An assessment of google books’ metadata’. Journal of Library Metadata, 12(1), 15–22.Google Scholar

Janssen, N. and Barber, H. A.. (2012). ‘Phrase frequency effects in language production’. PLoS ONE, 7(3), 1–11.Google Scholar

Jatowt, A. and Duh, K.. (2014). ‘A framework for analyzing semantic change of words across time’. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM joint conference on digital libraries (JCDL). London, UK. 229–38.Google Scholar

Jespersen, O. (1904). How to teach a foreign language. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Jespersen, O. (1922). Language: its nature, development and origin. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Jiang, N. and Nekrasova, T. M.. (2007). ‘The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers’. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 433–45.Google Scholar

Johnson, L. (1976). ‘A rate of change index for language’. Language in Society, 5(2), 165–72.Google Scholar

Jones, M. C. and Singh, I.. (2005). Exploring language change. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jones, S. and Sinclair, J.. (1974). ‘English lexical collocations: a study in computational linguistics’. Cahiers de lexicologie, 24(1), 15–61.Google Scholar

Jorio, M. (2011). ‘Geistige Landesverteidigung’. In Jorio, M. (ed.), Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz. Basel: Schwabe.Google Scholar

Juola, P. (2013). ‘Using the Google n-gram corpus to measure cultural complexity’. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 28(4), 668–75.Google Scholar

Justeson, J. S. and Katz, S. M.. (1995). ‘Technical terminology: some linguistic properties and an algorithm for identification in text’. Natural Language Engineering, 1(01), 9–27.Google Scholar

Kammerer, P., Müller, M., Tanner, J. and Woitek, U.. (n.d.). ‘Historical statistics of Switzerland online’. Zurich: University of Zurich. www.fsw.uzh.ch/hstat/ [accessed 16 November 2012].Google Scholar

Katz, S. M. (1996). ‘Distribution of content words and phrases in text and language modelling’. Natural Language Engineering, 2(1), 15–59.Google Scholar

Keibel, H. and Belica, C.. (2007). ‘CCDB: a corpus-linguistic research and development workbench’. In Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2007. Lancaster, UK. http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/CL2007/paper/134_Paper.pdf [accessed 21 December 2010].Google Scholar

Keller, R. (1994). On language change: the invisible hand in language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Keller, R. (1995). ‘Sprachwandel, ein Zerrspiegel des Kulturwandels?’. In Lönne, K. (ed.), Kulturwandel im Spiegel des Sprachwandels. Tübingen: Francke. 207–18.Google Scholar

Kestemont, M., Karsdorp, F. and Düring, M.. (2014). ‘Mining the twentieth century’s history from the time magazine corpus’. In Proceedings of the 8th workshop on language technology for cultural heritage, social sciences, and humanities (LaTeCH). www.aclweb.org/anthology/W/W14/W14-06.pdf#page=72 [accessed 27 November 2017].Google Scholar

Kilgarriff, A. (1996). ‘Comparing word frequencies across corpora: why chi-square doesn’t work and an improved LOB-Brown comparison’. In ALLC-ACH conference, Bergen, Norway.Google Scholar

Kim, Y. (2009). ‘Korean lexical bundles in conversation and academic texts’. Corpora, 4(2), 135–65.Google Scholar

King, J. and Syddall, C.. (2011). ‘Changes in the phrasal lexicon of Maori: mauri and moe’. Yearbook of Phraseology, 2011, 45–69.Google Scholar

Klein, D., Smarr, J., Nguyen, H. and Manning, C. D.. (2003). ‘Named entity recognition with character-level models’. In Proceedings of the seventh conference on Natural language learning at HLT-NAACL 2003, Volume 4. Association for Computational Linguistics. Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar

Klimke, M. and Scharloth, J.. (2008). 1968 in Europe: a history of protest and activism, 1956–77. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Koerner, E., Jespersen, O. and McCawley, J. D.. (1993 [1894]). ‘Foreword by E. F. K. Koerner’. In Progress in language with special reference to English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. vii.Google Scholar

Koplenig, A. (2015). ‘The impact of lacking metadata for the measurement of cultural and linguistic change using the Google ngram data sets: reconstructing the composition of the German corpus in times of WWII’. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 32(1), 169–88.Google Scholar

Koplenig, A. (2017). ‘Why the quantitative analysis of diachronic corpora that does not consider the temporal aspect of time-series can lead to wrong conclusions’. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 32(1), 159–68.Google Scholar

Koplenig, A. and Müller-Spitzer, C.. (2016). ‘Population size predicts lexical diversity, but so does the mean sea level – why it is important to correctly account for the structure of temporal data’. PLoS ONE, 11(3), 1–14.Google Scholar

Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kraushaar, W. (1998). 1968: Das Jahr, das alles verändert hat. Zürich: Piper.Google Scholar

Kreis, G. (1992). Der “homo alpinus helveticus”: zum schweizerischen Rassendiskurs der 30er Jahre. Zürich: Chronos.Google Scholar

Kremmel, B., Brunfaut, T. and Alderson, J.C.. (2017). ‘Exploring the role of phraseological knowledge in foreign language reading’. Applied Linguistics, 38(6), 848–70.Google Scholar

Krenn, B. (2000). The usual suspects: data-oriented models for identification and representation of lexical collocations. Saarbrücken: German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar

Kriesi, H. (1996). Le clivage linguistique: problèmes de compréhension entre les communautés linguistiques en Suisse. Berne: Bundesamt für Statistik.Google Scholar

Kristiansen, G, Achard, M., Dirven, R. and Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. (eds.). (2006). Cognitive linguistics: current applications and future perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kronenfeld, D. B. (2008). Culture, society and cognition collective goals, values, action and knowledge. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Krupnik, I. and Müller-Wille, L.. (2010). ‘Franz Boas and Inuktitut terminology for ice and snow: from the emergence of the field to the “Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax”‘. In Krupnik, I., Aporta, C., Gearheard, S., Laidler, G. J. and Kielsen Holm, L. (eds.). SIKU: knowing our ice. Berlin: Springer. 377–400.Google Scholar

Kučera, K. (2007). ‘Mapping the time continuum: a major raison d’être for diachronic corpora’. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference CL 2007, University of Birmingham 27–30 July 2007. http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/CL2007/paper/27_Paper.pdf [accessed 29 March 2010].Google Scholar

Kuiper, K. (2007). ‘Cathy Wilcox meets the phrasal lexicon. Creative deformation of phrasal lexical items for humorous effect’. In Munat, J. (ed.), Lexical creativity, texts and contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 93–112.Google Scholar

Kuiper, K. (2009). Formulaic genres. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Kuiper, K. and Lin, D. T. G.. (1989). ‘Cultural congruence and conflict in the acquisition of formulae in a second language’. In Otheguy, R. and Garcia, O. (eds.), English across cultures: cultures across english. The Hague: Mouton. 281–304.Google Scholar

Kulkarni, V., Al-Rfou, R., Perozzi, B. and Skiena, S.. (2015). ‘Statistically significant detection of linguistic change’. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on world wide web. Geneva: International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee. 625–635. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2736277.2741627 [accessed 24 July 2018].Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (2001). Principles of linguistic change: social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M.. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Landsbergen, F., Lachlan, R., Ten Cate, C. and Verhagen, A.. (2010). ‘A cultural evolutionary model of patterns in semantic change’. Linguistics, 48(2), 363–90.Google Scholar

Langacker, R. W. (2002). ‘A study in unified diversity: English and mixtec locatives’. In Enfield, N. (ed.), Ethnosyntax: explorations in grammar and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 138–61.Google Scholar

Langlotz, A. (2006). Idiomatic creativity: a cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-representation and idiom-variation in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Lass, R. (1980). On explaining language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (2003). ‘Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992’. Topics in English Linguistics, 44, 223–40.Google Scholar

Leech, G. N. (2011). ‘The modals ARE declining: reply to Neil Millar’s “modal verbs in TIME: frequency changes 1923–2006”, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14:2 (2009), 191–220’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(4), 547–64.Google Scholar

Lehmann, W. P. (1992). Historical linguistics: an introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.Google Scholar

Lewis, M. (2005). ‘Towards a lexical view of language – a challenge for teachers’. Babylonia, 3, 7–10.Google Scholar

Lezius, W. (2002). ‘Automatische Extrahierung idiomatischer Bigramme aus Textkorpora’. In Rapp, R. (ed.), Linguistik International: Vol. II. Sprachwissenschaft auf dem Weg in das dritte Jahrtausend. Akten des 34. Linguistischen Kolloquiums in Germersheim 1999 (Vols. II). Bern: Peter Lang. 715–24.Google Scholar

Lieven, E., Salomo, D. and Tomasello, M.. (2009). ‘Two-year-old children’s production of multiword utterances: a usage-based analysis’. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(3), 481–507.Google Scholar

Lin, P. (2010). ‘The phonology of formulaic sequences: A review’. In Wood, D. (ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: acquisition and communication, London: Continuum. 174–93.Google Scholar

Lin, P. (2018). The prosody of formulaic sequences: a corpus and discourse approach. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Lindquist, H. (2009). ‘A corpus study of lexicalized formulaic sequences with preposition + hand’. In Corrigan, R., Moravcsik, A., Ouali, H., and Wheatley, K. M. (eds.), Formulaic language: distribution and historical change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 239–56.Google Scholar

Linke, A. (1996). Sprachkultur und Bürgertum: zur Mentalitätsgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar

Linke, A. (2001). ‘Trauer, Öffentlichkeit und Intimität. Zum Wandel der Textsorte Todesanzeige inder zweiten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts’. In Fix, U., Habscheid, S. and Klein, J. (eds.), Zur Kulturspezifik von Textsorten. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 195–223.Google Scholar

Linke, A. (2003). ‘Sprachgeschichte - Gesellschaftsgeschichte - Kulturanalyse’. In Henne, H., Sitta, H. and Wiegand, H. (eds.), Germanistische Linguistik: Konturen eines Faches. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 25–66.Google Scholar

Linke, A., Scharloth, J. and Bubenhofer, N. (eds.). (2008). Der Zürcher Sommer 1968: zwischen Krawall, Utopie und Bürgersinn. Zürich: Verlag Neue Zürcher Zeitung.Google Scholar

Liu, Z. (2016). ‘A diachronic study on British and Chinese cultural complexity with Google books ngrams’. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 23(4), 1–13.Google Scholar

Liu, J., He, T. and Liu, X.. (2003). ‘Extracting Chinese multi-word units from large-scale balanced corpus’. In The 17th Pacific Asia conference on language, information and computation. www.aclweb.org/anthology/Y/Y03/Y03-1032.pdf [accessed 16 December 2010].Google Scholar

Lüdi, G. and Werlen, I.. (2005). Sprachenlandschaft in der Schweiz. Berne: Bundesamt für Statistik.Google Scholar

Mair, C. (2006). Twentieth-century English: history, variation and standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mair, C. (2007). ‘Varieties of English around the world: collocational and cultural profiles’. In Skandera, P. (ed.), Phraseology and culture in English. Berlin: de Gruyter. 437–68.Google Scholar

Mair, C. and Leech, G.. (2006). ‘Current changes in English syntax’. In Aarts, B. and McMahon, A. (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 318–42.Google Scholar

Mair, C., Hundt, M., Leech, G. and Smith, N.. (2003). ‘Short term diachronic shifts in part-of-speech frequencies: a comparison of the tagged LOB and F-LOB corpora’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(2), 245–64.Google Scholar

Maissen, T. (2010). Geschichte der Schweiz. Baden: Hier + Jetzt.Google Scholar

Makkai, A. (1972). Idiom structure in English. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Manning, C. D. and Schütze, H.. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Martinet, A. (1955). Économie des changements phonétiques. Berne: A. Francke.Google Scholar

Matthews, P. H. (2007). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

McCarthy, M. and Carter, R.. (2002). ‘This that and the other: multi-word clusters in spoken English as visible patterns of interaction’. Teanga (Yearbook of the Irish Association for Applied Linguistics), 21, 30–52.Google Scholar

McEnery, T., Brezina, V. and Baker, H.. (2019) ‘Usage fluctuation analysis. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 24(4): 413–44.Google Scholar

McEnery, T., Xiao, R. and Tono, Y.. (2006). Corpus-based language studies: an advanced resource book. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

McMahon, A. M. (1994). Understanding language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Meillet, A. (1903). Introduction a l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar

Mel’čuk, I. (1998). ‘Collocations and lexical functions’. In Cowie, A. P. (ed.), Phraseology. Oxford: Oxford Universtiy Press. 23–54.Google Scholar

Meuwly, O. (2011). ‘Rechtsradikalismus’. In Jorio, M. (ed.), Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz. Basel: Schwabe.Google Scholar

Meyerhoff, M. (2002). ‘Communities of practice’. In Chambers, Trudgill and Schilling-Estes (eds.). 526–48.Google Scholar

Michel, J. B., Shen, Y. K., Aiden, A. P., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., Pickett, J. P. et al. (2010). ‘Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books’. Science, 331(6014), 176–82.Google Scholar

Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y. K., Aiden, A. P. et al. (2010a). ‘Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of Digitized Books (Supporting Online Material)’. Science [Online] 331. www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2010/12/15/science.1199644/suppl/DC1 (accessed 5 March 2014).Google Scholar

Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs: a handbook. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar

Millar, N. (2009). ‘Modal verbs in TIME: frequency changes 1923–2006’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(2), 191–220.Google Scholar

Miller, D. G. (2010). Language change and linguistic theory (Vols. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Milroy, J. (1992). Linguistic variation and change: on the historical sociolinguistics of English. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Milroy, L. (2002). ‘Social networks’. In Chambers, Trudgill and Schilling-Estes (eds.). 549–72.Google Scholar

Mischler, J. J. (2009). ‘The embodiment/culture continuum’. In Formulaic language: distribution and historical change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 257–72.Google Scholar

Mithun, M. (2003). ‘Functional perspectives on syntactic change’. In Joseph, B. D. and Janda, R. D. (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. 552–72.Google Scholar

Mittmann, B. (2004). Mehrwort-Cluster in der englischen Alltagskonversation: Unter-schiede zwischen britischem und amerikanischem gesprochenen Englisch als Indikatoren für den präfabrizierten Charakter der Sprache. Tübingen: G. Narr.Google Scholar

Moon, R. (1995). ‘Introduction’. In Sinclair, J. (ed.), Collins COBUILD dictionary of idioms. London: HarperCollins. iv–vii.Google Scholar

Moon, R. (1998). ‘Frequencies and forms of phrasal lexemes in English’. In Cowie, A. P. (ed.), Phraseology: theory, analysis and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 79–100.Google Scholar

Mooser, J. (1997). ‘Die “Geistige Landesterteidigung” in den 1930er Jahren’. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte, 47(4), 685–708.Google Scholar

Mühlhäusler, P. and Harré, R.. (1990). Pronouns and people: the linguistic construction of social and personal identity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Munske, H. H. (1993). Wie entstehen Phraseologismen?. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Murphy, A. C. (2013). ‘On “true” portraits of letters to shareholders – and the importance of phraseological analysis’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 57–82.Google Scholar

Myles, F. (2012). ‘Complexity, accuracy and fluency: the role played by formulaic sequences in early interlanguage development’. In Housen, A., Kuiken, F. and Vedder, I. (eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 71–94.Google Scholar

Myles, F., Hooper, J. and Mitchell, R.. (1998). ‘Rote or rule? exploring the role of formulaic language in classroom foreign language learning’. Language Learning, 48(3), 323–64.Google Scholar

Nattinger, J. R. and DeCarrico, J. S.. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Neidhart, K. (2004). Nationalsozialistisches Gedankengut in der Schweiz: eine ver-gleichende Studie schweizerischer und deutscher Schulbücher zwsichen 1900 und 1945. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Nelson, R. (2018). ‘How “chunky” is language? some estimates based on Sinclair’s idiom principle’. Corpora, 13 (3), 431–60.Google Scholar

Nesselhauf, N. (2004). Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nübling, D. and Dammel, A.. (2010). Historische Sprachwissenschaft des Deutschen: eine Einführung in die Prinzipien des Sprachwandels. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

O’Donnell, M. B., Römer, U. and Ellis, N. C.. (2013). ‘The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 83–108.Google Scholar

Oesterreicher, W. (2005). ‘Über die Geschilchtlichkeit der Sprache’. In Trabant, J. and Müller-Luckner, E. (eds.), Sprache der Geschichte. München: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag. 3–26.Google Scholar

Okamura, S. (2006). ‘Das Fräulein ist tot! Es lebe das Fräulein! - Fräulein im Archiv der Süddeutschen Zeitung (1994–2005)’. Waseda Global Forum, 3, 83–94.Google Scholar

O’Keeffe, A., McCarthy, M. and Carter, R.. (2007). From corpus to classroom: language use and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ort, C. (2003). ‘Kulturbegriffe und Kulturtheorien’. In A. Nünning, Ansgar and Nünning, V. (eds.), Konzepte der Kulturwissenschaften: theoretische Grundlagen, Ansätze, Perspektiven. Stuttgart: Metzler. 19–38.Google Scholar

Palmer, G. B. (2006). ‘Energy through fusion at last: Synergies in cognitive anthropology and cognitive linguistics’. In Kristiansen et al. (2006). 263–304.Google Scholar

Palmer, H. (1933). ‘Aids to conversational skill’. The Bulletin of the Institute for Research in English Teaching, 90, 1–3.Google Scholar

Patrick, P. L. (2002). ‘The speech community’. In Chambers, Trudgill and Schilling-Estes (eds.). 573–97.Google Scholar

Pawley, A. (1985). ‘Lexicalization’. In Tannen, D. and Alatis, J. (eds.), 1985 Georgetown round table in langauges and linguistics. Washington: Georgetown University Press. 98–120.Google Scholar

Pawley, A. (2001). ‘Phraseology, linguistics and the dictionary’. International Journal of Lexicography, 14(2), 122–34.Google Scholar

Pawley, A. and Syder, F.. (1983). ‘Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency’. In Richards, J. C. and Schmidt, R. W. (eds.), Language and communication. Harlow: Longman. 191–226.Google Scholar

Pazos Bretaña, J.-M. and Pamies Bertrán, A.. (2008). ‘Combined statistical and grammatical criteria for the retrieval of phraseological units in an electronic corpus’. In Granger, S. and Meunier, F. (eds.), Phraseology: an interdisciplinary perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 391–406.Google Scholar

Pearce, D. (2002). ‘A comparative evaluation of collocation extraction techniques’. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC 2002). 1530–6.Google Scholar

Pechenick, E. A., Danforth, C. M. and Dodds, P. S. (2015). ‘Characterizing the Google books corpus: strong limits to inferences of socio-cultural and linguistic evolution’. PLoS ONE, 10(10), 1–24.Google Scholar

Pecina, P. (2010). ‘Lexical association measures and collocation extraction’. Language Resources and Evaluation, 44(1–2), 137–58.Google Scholar

Pedersen, T., Banerjee, S., Joshi, M., Kohli, S., Liu, Y., McInnes, B. and Puran-dare, A.. (2008 [2000]). ‘Ngram Statistics Package (v. 1.09) [Computer Software]’. http://ngram.sourceforge.net/ [accessed 29 March 2010].Google Scholar

Peters, A. M. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pickering, M. and Keightley, E.. (2006). ‘The modalities of nostalgia’. Current Sociology, 54(6), 919–41.Google Scholar

Piirainen, E. (1996). Symbole in Sprache und Kultur: Studien zur Phraseologie aus kultursemiotischer Perspektive. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar

Piirainen, E. (2002). ‘Er zahlt keine Steuern mehr. Phraseologismen für sterben in den deutschen Umgangssprachen’. In Piirainen, E. and Piirainen, I. T. (eds.), Phraseologie in Raum und Zeit. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider. 213–38.Google Scholar

Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct . London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Polenz, P. V. and Wolf, N. R.. (2009). Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Posner, R. (2003). ‘Kultursemiotik’. In A. Nünning, Ansgar and Nünning, V. (eds.), Konzepte der Kulturwissenschaften: theoretische Grundlagen, Ansätze, Perspektiven. Stuttgart: Metzler. 39–72.Google Scholar

Postal, P. M. (1968). Aspects of phonological theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Quasthoff, U. and Schmidt, F.. (2010). ‘Die korpusbasierte Identifikation fester Wortverbindungen’. In Ďurčo, P. (ed.), Feste Wortverbindungen und Lexikographie. Berlin: deGruyter. 125–38.Google Scholar

Ramisch, C. (2015). Multiword expressions acquisition: a generic and open framework. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar

Rathkolb, O. (2010). Das Jahr 1968 - Ereignis, Symbol, Chiffre. Göttingen: V & R unipress.Google Scholar

Rayson, P., Piao, S., Sharoff, S., Evert, S. and Moirón, B. V.. (2010). ‘Multiword expressions: hard going or plain sailing?’. Language Resources and Evaluation, 44(1), 1–5.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, V. (2011). Die Geschichte der Schweiz: von den Anfängen bis heute. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar

Ren, Z., Lü, Y., Cao, J., Liu, Q. and Huang, Y.. (2009). ‘Improving statistical machine translation using domain bilingual multiword expressions’. In Proceedings of the workshop on multiword expressions: identification, interpretation, disambiguation and applications. Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore. 47–54. www.aclweb.org/anthology/W/W09/W09-29.pdf#page=57 [accessed 10 August 2012].Google Scholar

Renouf, A. (1987). ‘Corpus development’. In Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD project in lexical computing and the development of the Collins COBUILD English language dictionary. London: Collins ELT. 1–40.Google Scholar

Renouf, A. and Sinclair, J.. (1991). ‘Collocational frameworks in English’. In Aijmer, K. and Altenberg, B. (eds.), English corpus linguistics: studies in honour of Jan Svartvik. Harlow: Longman. 128–43.Google Scholar

Reyer, C. (2012). ‘Ich finde Fräulein ein witziges Wort’. Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 28 February. www.nzz.ch/aktuell/startseite/ich-finde-fraeulein-ein-wit-ziges-wor-t-1.5103089 [accessed 6 September 2012].Google Scholar

Rickford, J. R. and Wasow, T. A.. (1995). ‘Syntactic variation and change in progress: loss of the verbal coda in topic-restricting as far as constructions’. Language, 71(1), 102–31.Google Scholar

Rigotti, E., Rocci, A., van Eemeren, F. H. and Houtlosser, P.. (2005). ‘From argument analysis to cultural keywords (and back again)’. In Argumentation in practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 125–42.Google Scholar

Risager, K. (2006). Language and culture: global flows and local complexity. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Roberts, S. and Winters, J.. (2013). ‘Linguistic diversity and traffic accidents: lessons from statistical studies of cultural traits’. PLoS ONE, 8(8), 1–13.Google Scholar

Romaine, S. (1980). ‘The relative clause marker in Scots English: diffusion, complexity and style as dimensions of syntactic change’. Language in Society, 9(02), 221–47.Google Scholar

Romaine, S. (1981). ‘Syntactic complexity, relativization and stylistic levels in Middle Scots’. Folia Linguistica Historica, 2(1), 71–97.Google Scholar

Romaine, S. (1994). Language in society: an introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Römer, C. (2006). Morphologie der deutschen Sprache. Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar

Römer, U. (2009). ‘The inseparability of lexis and grammar’. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 141–63.Google Scholar

Römer, U. and O’Donnell, M. B.. (2009). ‘Exploring the variation and distribution of academic phrase-frames in MICUSP’. In presentation at the Corpus Linguistics 2009, Liverpool, UK.Google Scholar

Russ, C. V. J. (1994). The German language today: a linguistic introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Sabban, A. (2007). ‘Culture-boundness and problems of cross-cultural phraseology’. In N. R. Norrick, H. Burger, D. Dobrovol’skij and P. Kühn (eds.), Handbook of phraseology. 590–605.Google Scholar

Sabban, A. (2008). ‘Critical observations on the culture-boundness of phraseology’. In Granger, S. and Meunier, F. (eds.), Phraseology: an interdisciplinary perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 229–41.Google Scholar

Sag, I., Baldwin, T., Bond, F., Copestake, A. and Flickinger, D.. (2002). ‘Multiword expressions: a pain in the neck for NLP’. In Gelbukh, A. (ed.), Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing. Berlin: Springer. 189–206.Google Scholar

Salton, G. and McGill, M. J.. (1983). Introduction to modern information retrieval. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Sapir, E. (2006 [1921]). Language, an introduction to the study of speech,. Teddington: Echo Library.Google Scholar

Sarangi, S. (2009). ‘Culture’. In Senft, G., Östman, J. -O. and Verschueren, J. (eds.), Culture and language use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 81–104.Google Scholar

de Saussure, F. (1974 [1916]). Course in general linguistics. London: Peter Owen.Google Scholar

Schindler, W. (1998). ‘Review: Helmuth Feilke: Sprache als soziale Gestalt’. Lexicology, 4(1), 155–62.Google Scholar

Schmitt, N. (2004). Formulaic sequences: acquisition, processing, and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schroeter, S. (1994). Die Sprache der DDR im Spiegel ihrer Literatur: Studien zum DDR-typischen Wortschatz. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Bundeskanzlei, Schweizerische (ed.). (2008). Rechtschreibung: Leitfaden zur deutschen Rechtschreibung (3., vollständig neu bearb. Aufl. ed.). Bern: Edgenössische Drucksachen- und Materialzentrale.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, B. (2009). ‘Accommodation and the idiom principle in English as a lingua franca’. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(2), 195–215.Google Scholar

Seretan, V. (2011). Syntax-based collocation extraction. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Seretan, V. and Wehrli, E.. (2009). ‘Multilingual collocation extraction with a syntactic parser’. Language Resources and Evaluation, 43(1), 71–85.Google Scholar

Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Simmel, G. (1957). ‘Fashion’. American Journal of Sociology, 62(6), 541–58.Google Scholar

Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sinclair, J. (ed.). (1995). Collins COBUILD dictionary of idioms. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the text. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, A. and Pellicer-Sánchez, A.. (2019). Understanding formulaic language: a second language acquisition perspective. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K. and van Heuven, W. J.. (2011). ‘Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: the role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 37(3), 776–84.Google Scholar

Skandera, P. (2007a). ‘Preface’. In Skandera, P. (ed.), Phraseology and culture in English . Berlin: de Gruyter. v–vi.Google Scholar

Skandera, P. (ed.). (2007b). Phraseology and culture in English. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Sohn, H.-M. (2001). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sorhus, H. B. (1977). ‘To hear ourselves – implications for teaching English as a second language’. English Language Teaching Journal, 31(3), 211–21.Google Scholar

Sosa, A. V. and MacFarlane, J.. (2002). ‘Evidence for frequency-based constituents in the mental lexicon: collocations involving the word of’. Brain and Language, 83(2), 227–36.Google Scholar

Speake, J. and Simpson, J. (eds.). (2008). The Oxford dictionary of proverbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Stehr, N. (2001). The fragility of modern societies: knowledge and risk in the information age. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Steels, L. (2011). ‘Modeling the cultural evolution of language’. Physics of Life Reviews, 8(4), 339–56.Google Scholar

Stenschke, O. (2007). ‘ “Ende diesen Jahres”: Die Flexionsvariatien von Demonstrativpronomia als ein Beispiel für Degrammatikalisierung’. Deutsche Sprache, 35(1), 63–85.Google Scholar

Stergiou, K. I. and Tsikliras, A. C.. (2014). ‘Global university reputation and rankings: Insights from culturomics’. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. 13(2), 193–202.Google Scholar

Stevenson, A. (ed.). (2010). Oxford dictionary of English, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Steyer, K. (2000). ‘Usuelle Wortverbindungen des Deutschen’. Deutsche Sprache, 28, 101–25.Google Scholar

Street, B. (1993). ‘Culture is a verb: anthropological aspects of language and cultural process’. In Thompson, L. (ed.), Language and culture. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters . 23–43.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. (1995). ‘Collocations and cultural connotations of common words’. Linguistics and Education, 7(4), 379–90.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and corpus analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. (2002). Words and phrases: corpus studies of lexical semantics . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. (2007a). ‘An example of frequent English phraseology: distributions, structures and functions’. In Facchinetti, R. (ed.), Corpus linguistics 25 years on. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 89–105.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. (2007b). ‘Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: the case of the word world’. In Hoey, M., Mahlberg, M., Stubbs, M. and Teubert, W. (eds.), Text, discourse and corpora: theory and analysis. London: Continuum. 163–90.Google Scholar

Stubbs, M. and Barth, I.. (2003). ‘Using recurrent phrases as text-type discriminators: a quantitative method and some findings’. Functions of Language, 10, 61–104.Google Scholar

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tagliamonte, S. A. (2011). Variationist sociolinguistics: change, observation, interpretation. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Tanner, J. (2015). Geschichte der Schweiz im 20. Jahrhundert. Munich: Beck.Google Scholar

Taylor, J. R. (2012). The mental corpus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar