Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T06:59:51.825Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

T-to-R and the Northern Subject Rule: questionnaire-based spatial, social and structural linguistics1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2013

ISABELLE BUCHSTALLER ,
KAREN P. CORRIGAN ,
ANDERS HOLMBERG ,
PATRICK HONEYBONE  and
WARREN MAGUIRE
ISABELLE BUCHSTALLER
Affiliation:
School of English, Leipzig University, Beethovenstrasse 15, 04107 Leipzig, [email protected]
KAREN P. CORRIGAN
Affiliation:
School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics, Percy Building, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 [email protected], [email protected]
ANDERS HOLMBERG
Affiliation:
School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics, Percy Building, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 [email protected], [email protected]
PATRICK HONEYBONE
Affiliation:
Linguistics and English Language, School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Dugald Stewart Building, 3 Charles StreetEdinburgh EH8 9AD, [email protected], [email protected]
WARREN MAGUIRE
Affiliation:
Linguistics and English Language, School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Dugald Stewart Building, 3 Charles StreetEdinburgh EH8 9AD, [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Accents and dialects of English and Scots in Britain have been under active investigation for many decades, as reported through the Survey of English Dialects (Orton et al. 1962–71) and the Linguistic Atlas of Scotland (Mather et al. 1975–86), Wells’ three-volume compendium (1982), and a host of detailed studies of individual varieties. There are also welcome recent signs of the reintegration of variation data into theoretical discussion (see Henry 2002, Cornips & Corrigan 2005a and Trousdale & Adger 2007 for morphosyntax, as well as Anttila 2002 and Coetzee & Pater 2011 for phonology). Nonetheless, the precise structural, geolinguistic and sociolinguistic patterning of many features of vernacular Englishes in the UK is still largely unknown.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 85 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

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

Footnotes

1

The authors wish to acknowledge the intellectual contribution to the British Academy project that generated this research by April McMahon, Aberystwyth University. We are, of course, also grateful to the British Academy for their financial contribution to the research via its Small Grants Scheme (see: www.lel.ed.ac.uk/dialects/nesps.html).

References

Adger, David & Smith, Jennifer. 2010. Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach. Lingua 120, 1109–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitken, Adam Jack. 1971. Variation and variety in written Middle Scots. In Aitken, Adam Jack, McIntosh, Angus & Pálsson, Hermann (eds.), Edinburgh studies in English and Scots, 177–209. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Anttila, Arto. 2002. Variation and phonological theory. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), Handbook of language variation and change, 206–43. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Asprey, Ester. 2008. The sociolinguistic stratification of a connected speech process – the case of the T to R rule in the Black Country. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 13, 109–40.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Maynor, Natalie & Cukor-Avila, Patricia. 1989. Variation in subject–verb concord in Early Modern English. Language Variation and Change 1, 285–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom & Tillery, Jan. 1997. The effects of methods on results in dialectology. English World-Wide 18, 35–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbiers, Sjef. 2005. Word order variation in three-verb clusters and the division of labour between generative linguistics and sociolinguistics. In Cornips, Leonie & Corrigan, Karen P. (eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social, 233–64. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins,Google Scholar
Beal, Joan & Corrigan, Karen P.. 2000. Comparing the present with the past to predict the future for Tyneside English. Newcastle and Durham Working Papers in Linguistics 6, 13–30.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 2002. Back in style: Reworking audience design. In Eckert, Penelope & Rickford, John R. (eds.), Style and sociolinguistic variation, 139–69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. In preparation. Stratal Optimality Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Börjars, Kersti & Chapman, Carol. 1998. Agreement and pro-drop in some dialects of English. Linguistics 36, 71–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2009. Unifying first and last conjunct agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27, 455–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, Peter & Mackenzie, Ian. 2004. Spanish: An essential grammar. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadbent, Judith M. 2008. t-to-r in West Yorkshire English. English Language and Linguistics 12, 141–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucheli, Claudia & Glaser, Elvira. 2002. The syntactic atlas of Swiss German dialects: Empirical and methodological problems. In Barbiers, Sjef, Cornips, Leonie & van der Kleij, Susanne (eds.), Syntactic microvariation. Electronic publication of the Meertens Instituut. www.meertens.knaw.nl/projecten/sand/synmic/Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & Alvanides, Seraphim. Forthcoming. Employing geographical principles for sampling in state of the art dialectological projects. Journal of Dialect Geography.Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & Corrigan, Karen P.. 2011a. How to make intuitions succeed. In McMahon, April & Maguire, Warren (eds.), Analysing variation in English, 30–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & Corrigan, Karen P.. 2011b. Judge not lest ye be judged: Exploring methods for the collection of socio-syntactic data. In Gregersen, Frans, Parrott, Jeffrey K. & Quist, Pia (eds.), Language variation – European perspectives III, 149–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Caffrey, Catherine. 2011. T-to-R in Liverpool English. Unpublished MA (Hons) dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Carr, Philip. 1991. Lexical properties of postlexical rules: Postlexical derived environment and the Elsewhere Condition. Lingua 85, 255–68.Google Scholar
Carr, Philip. 1999. Sociophonetic variation and generative phonology: The case of Tyneside English. Cahiers de Grammaire 24, 7–15.Google Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny, Edwards, Viv & Whittle, Pamela. 1989. Urban British dialect grammar. English World-Wide 10, 185–225.Google Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny, Kerswill, Paul & Williams, Ann. 2005. On the non-convergence of phonology, grammar and discourse. In Auer, Peter, Hinskens, Frans & Kerswill, Paul (eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages, 135–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Childs, Claire. 2012. Verbal -s and the Northern Subject Rule: Spatial variation in linguistic and sociolinguistic constraints. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Limits and Areas in Dialectology (LimiAr). Lisbon, 2011, 319–44. Lisbon: Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Clark, Lynn & Watson, Kevin. 2011. Testing claims of a usage-based phonology with Liverpool English t-to-r. English Language and Linguistics 15 (3), 523–47.Google Scholar
Coetzee, Andries W. & Pater, Joe. 2011. The place of variation in phonological theory. In Goldsmith, John, Riggle, Jason & Yu, Alan (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 401–34. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cole, Marcelle. 2008. What is the Northern Subject Rule? The resilience of a medieval constraint in Tyneside English. In Guzmán González, T. & Fernández-Corugedo, S. G. (eds.), Journal of the Spanish Society for Medieval Language and Literature (SELIM) 15, 91–114.Google Scholar
Collings, Sarah. 2009. A century not out: Exploring a longitudinal corpus of Northern English for changing linguistic trends across 4 generations. Poster presented at the Vacation Scholarship Conference, Newcastle University.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cornips, Leonie & Corrigan, Karen P. (eds.). 2005a. Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 265). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornips, Leonie & Corrigan, Karen P.. 2005b. Toward an integrated approach to syntactic variation: A retrospective and prospective synopsis. In Cornips, Leonie & Corrigan, Karen P. (eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social, 1–30 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 265). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornips, Leonie & Poletto, Cecilia. 2005. On standardising syntactic elicitation techniques. Part I. Lingua 115 (7), 939–57.Google Scholar
Cornips, Leonie & Poletto, Cecilia. Forthcoming. Field linguistics meets formal research: How a microcomparative view can deepen our theoretical investigation. Part II (sentential negation). Lingua.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Karen P. 2010. Irish English, vol. 1: Northern Ireland. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Karen P., Edge, Richard & Lonergan, John. 2012. Is Dublin English ‘alive alive oh’? In Migge, Bettina & Chíosáin, Máire Ní (eds.), New perspectives on Irish English. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1–28.Google Scholar
Cowart, Wayne. 1997. Experimental syntax: Applying objective methods to sentence judgments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
de Haas, Nynke K. 2011. Morphosyntactic variation in Northern English: The Northern Subject Rule, its origins and early history. Dissertation. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Dinkin, Aaron J. 2008. The real effect of word frequency on phonetic variation. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 14, 97–106.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J. & Foulkes, Paul. 1999. Derby and Newcastle: Instrumental phonetics and variationist studies. In Foulkes & Docherty (eds.), 47–71.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., Foulkes, Paul, Milroy, James, Milroy, Lesley & Walshaw, David. 1997. Descriptive adequacy in phonology: A variationist perspective. Journal of Linguistics 33, 275–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., Watt, Dominic, Llamas, Carmen, Hall, Damien & Nycz, Jen. 2011. Variation in voice onset time along the Scottish-English border. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, August 2011, 591–4.Google Scholar
Dollinger, Stefan. 2012. The written questionnaire as a sociolinguistic data gathering tool: Testing its validity. Journal of English Linguistics 40 (1), 74–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einhorn, Elsabe. 1974. Old French: A concise handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eisikovits, Edina. 1991. Variation in subject-verb agreement in Inner Sydney English. In Cheshire, Jenny (ed.), English around the world: Sociolinguistic perspectives, 235–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fasold, Ralph. 1984. The sociolinguistics of society. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Filppula, Marku. 1999. The grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian style. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Foulkes, Paul & Docherty, Gerard J. (eds.). 1999. Urban voices. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Giegerich, H. 1992. English phonology: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Godfrey, Elizabeth & Tagliamonte, Sali. 1999. Another piece for the verbal -s story: Evidence from Devon in Southwest England. Language Variation and Change 11, 87–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Nancy. 2007. R-Dissimilation in English. MS, California State University, Long Beach. Available at: www.csulb.edu/~nhall2/.Google Scholar
Hargus, Sharon & Kaisse, Ellen M. (eds.). 1993. Studies in lexical phonology (Phonetics and Phonology 4). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78 (3), 482–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John. 1989. Towards a lexical analysis of sound change in progress. Journal of Linguistics 25, 35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazen, Kirk. 1996. Dialect affinity and subject-verb concord: The Appalachian–Outer Banks connection, SECOL Review 20, 25–53.Google Scholar
Henry, Alison. 1995. Belfast English and Standard English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Henry, Alison. 2002. Variation and syntactic theory. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 267–82. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2009. Weak segments in Irish English. In Minkova, Donka (ed.), Phonological weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English, 116–29. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinskens, Frans. 1998. Variation studies in dialectology and three types of sound change. Sociolinguistica 12, 155–93.Google Scholar
Honeybone, Patrick. 2001. Lenition inhibition in Liverpool English. English Language and Linguistics 5, 213–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffreyet al. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, Arthur & Trudgill, Peter. 1979. English accents and dialects: An introduction to social and regional varieties of British English. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Johannesen, Janne Bondi. 1998. Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Paul. 1997. Regional variation. In Jones, Charles (ed.), The Edinburgh history of the Scots language, 433–513. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1956. The pronunciation of English, 4th edn.London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L. 1991. Intra-language transfer and plural subject concord in Irish and Appalachian English. Teanga 11, 20–34.Google Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L. 2005. Internal and external factors in phonological convergence: The case of English /t/ lenition. In Auer, Peter, Hinskens, Frans & Kerswill, Paul (eds.), Dialect change: The convergence and divergence of dialects in contemporary societies, 51–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, John & Local, John K.. 1986. Long-domain resonance patterns in English. In Proceedings of IEE Conference on Speech Input/Output: Techniques and applications, 304–9. London: Institution of Electrical Engineers.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Lexical morphology and phonology. In In-Seok Yang for the Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm: Selected papers from SICOL-1981 (vol. 1), 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 2000. Opacity and cyclicity. In Ritter, Nancy A. (ed.), A review of Optimality Theory. Special issue, The Linguistic Review 17 (2–4), 351–67.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1975. Empirical foundations of linguistic theory. In Austerlitz, Robert (ed.), The scope of American linguistics: The first golden anniversary symposium of the Linguistic Society of America, 77–133. Lisse: The Peter de Ridder Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 1: Internal factors. Malden, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1996. When intuitions fail. In Dobrin, Lise M., Singer, Kora & McNair, Lisa (eds.), Papers from the 32nd regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 32: 76–106. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Cohen, Paul, Robins, Clarence & Lewis, John. 1968. A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto-Rican speakers in New York City, Cooperative Research Report 3288, vols. I and II, Philadelphia: US Regional Survey.Google Scholar
Llamas, Carmen. 2007. A place between places: Language and identities in a border town. Language in Society 36 (4), 579–604.Google Scholar
Llamas, Carmen. 2010. Convergence and divergence across a national border. In Llamas, Carmen & Watt, Dominic (eds.), Language and identities, 227–36. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Llamas, Carmen, Watt, Dominic & Johnson, Daniel Ezra. 2009. Linguistic accommodation and the salience of national identity markers in a border town. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 28 (4), 381–407.Google Scholar
Lodge, Ken R. 1984. Studies in the phonology of colloquial English. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Mather, J. Y., Speitel, H. & Leslie, G.. 1975–86. The linguistic atlas of Scotland, Scots section. 3 vols. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2003. The Northern Subject Rule in Ulster: How Scots, how English? Language Variation and Change 15, 105–39.Google Scholar
McCafferty, Kevin. 2004. ‘[T]hunder storms is verry dangese in this countrey they come in less than a minnits notice. . .’: The Northern Subject Rule in Southern Irish English. English World-Wide 25, 51–79.Google Scholar
McIntosh, Angus. 1983. Present indicative plural forms in the later Middle English of the North Midlands. In Gray, Douglas & Stanley, Eric Gerald (eds.), Middle English studies: Presented to Norman Davis in honour of his seventieth birthday, 235–54. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Miller, James. 1993. The grammar of Scottish English. In Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley (eds.), Real English: The grammar of non-standard dialects, 99–138. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Mompeán-Gonzalez, Jose A. & Mompeán-Guillamón, Pilar. 2009. /r/-liaison in English: An empirical study. Cognitive Linguistics 20, 733–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Michael. 1994. The evolution of verb concord in Scots. In Fenton, Alexander & McDonald, Donald (eds.), Studies in Scots and Gaelic: Proceedings of the third International Conference on the Languages of Scotland, 81–95. Edinburgh: Canongate.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Michael. 1997. Making transatlantic connections between varieties of English: The case of plural verbal -s. Journal of English Linguistics 25, 122–41.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Michael & Fuller, Janet. 1996. What was verbal -s in 19th century African American English? In Schneider, Edgar W. (ed.), Focus on the USA, 211–30. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Michael, Fuller, Janet & DeMarse, Sharon. 1993. ‘The Black Men has wives and sweet hearts (and third person plural -s) jest like the white men’: Evidence for verbal -s from the written documents on 19th century African American speech. Language Variation and Change 5, 335–57.Google Scholar
Murray, James A. H. 1873. The dialect of the southern counties of Scotland. London: Philological Society.Google Scholar
Neilson, Jimmi & Honeybone, Patrick. In preparation. On (the absence of) frequency effects in phonology: A cautionary tale from TH-fronting in Glasgow. MS, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Orton, Harold, Barry, Michael V., Halliday, Wilfried J., Tilling, Philip M. & Wakelin, Martyn F.. 1962–71. Survey of English dialects, 4 vols. (each in 3 parts). Leeds: E. J. Arnold.Google Scholar
Parrott, Jeffrey K. 2007. Distributed morphological mechanisms of Labovian variation in morphosyntax. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Petyt, Keith. 1985. Dialect and accent in industrial West Yorkshire. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. 2001. Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast. In Bybee, Joan L. & Hopper, Paul L. (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 137–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2005. ‘Some do and some doesn't’: Verbal concord variation in the north of the British Isles. In Kortmann, Bernd, Herrmann, Tanja, Pietsch, Lukas & Wagner, Susanne (eds.), A comparative grammar of British English dialects: Agreement, gender, relative clauses, 125–209. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Tagliamonte, Sali A.. 1989. There's no tense like the present: Verbal -s inflection in early Black English. Language Variation and Change 1, 47–84.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Varieties of French and the null-subject parameter. In Biberauer, Theresa, Holmberg, Anders, Roberts, Ian & Sheehan, Michelle (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory, 303–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rupp, Laura. 2006. The scope of the Northern Subject Rule. In Vliegen, M. (ed.), Variation in linguistic theory and language acquisition (Proceedings of the 39th Linguistics Colloquium), 295–304. Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schendl, Herbert. 2000. The third person present plural in Shakespeare's First Folio: A case of interaction of morphology and syntax? In Dalton-Puffer, Christiane & Ritt, Nikolaus (eds.), Words, structure, meaning, function: A festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, 263–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson T. 1996. The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Shorrocks, Graham. 1998. A grammar of the dialect of the Bolton area, part 1: Introduction, phonology. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Smith, Jennifer, Durham, Mercedes & Fortune, Laura. 2007. ‘Mam, ma troosers is fa'in doon!’ Community, caregiver and child in the acquisition of variation in Scottish dialect. Language Variation and Change 19 (1), 63–99.Google Scholar
Stoddart, Jana, Upton, Clive & Widdowson, John. 1999. Sheffield dialect in the 1990s: Revisiting the concept of NORMs. In Foulkes & Docherty (eds.), 72–89.Google Scholar
Stuart-Smith, Jane. 1999. Glasgow: Accent and voice quality. In Foulkes & Docherty (eds.), 203–22.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. 1985. On voice in the English verb. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 1998. Was/were variation across the generations: View from the city of York. Language Variation and Change 10, 153–91.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2001. Comparative sociolinguistics. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 729–63. Malden, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tollfree, Laura. 1999. South East London English: Discrete versus continuous modelling of consonantal reduction. In Foulkes & Docherty (eds.), 163–84.Google Scholar
Tortora, Christina & den Dikken, Marcel. 2010. Subject agreement variation: Support for the configurational approach. Lingua 120, 1089–1108.Google Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme & Adger, David (eds.). 2007. English dialect syntax. Special issue of English Language and Linguistics 11(2).Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1986. On dialect: Social and geographical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Tasaku. 1985. Remarks on transitivity. Journal of Linguistics 21, 385–96.Google Scholar
Viereck, Wolfgang. 1966. Phonematische Analyse des Dialekts von Gateshead-upon-Tyne, Co. Durham. Hamburg: Cram, de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. 1963–73. An historical syntax of the English language, 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Watt, Dominic & Milroy, Lesley. 1999. Patterns of variation and change in three Newcastle vowels: Is this dialect levelling? In Foulkes & Docherty (eds.), 25–46.Google Scholar
Watt, Dominic, Llamas, Carmen & Johnson, Daniel Ezra. 2010. Levels of linguistic accommodation across a national border. Journal of English Linguistics 38 (3), 270–89.Google Scholar
Wells, J. C. 1982. Accents of English, 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfram, Walt & Christian, Donna. 1976. Appalachian speech. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wright, Laura. 2002. Third person present tense markers in London prisoners’ depositions, 1562–1623. American Speech 77, 242–63.Google Scholar
Youssef, Valerie. 1995. Tense-aspect in Tobagonian English: A dynamic transitional system. English World-Wide 16, 195–213.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella & Bernstein, Judy B.. 2011. Micro-comparative syntax in English verbal agreement. In Lima, S., Mullin, K. & Smith, B. (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 39, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, vol. 2, 839–54.Google Scholar