Andersen, H. 1973. ‘Abductive and deductive change’, Language 49: 567–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 1987. ‘From auxiliary to desinence’, in Harris, M. and Ramat, P. (eds.), Historical development of auxiliaries. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 21–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 1989. ‘Understanding linguistic innovations’, in Breivik, L. E. an Jahr, E. H. (eds.), Language change: Contributions to the study of its causes. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 1990. ‘The structure of drift’, in Andersen, H. and Konrad, K. (eds.), Historical linguistics 1987: Papers from the 8th international Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 2001a. ‘Markedness and the theory of linguistic change’, in Andersen, (ed.), pp. 19–57.Google Scholar

Andersen, H. 2001b. ‘Actualization and the (uni)directionality of change’, in Andersen, (ed.), pp. 225–48.Google Scholar

Andersen, H. (ed.) 2001c. Actualization: Linguistic change in progress. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 2006. ‘Synchrony, diachrony, and evolution’, in Thomsen, (ed.), pp. 59–90.Google Scholar

Andersen, H. 2008. ‘Grammaticalization in a speaker-oriented theory of change’, in Eythórsson, T. (ed.), Grammatical change and linguistic theory. The Rosendal Papers (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 11–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anttila, R. [1972] 1989. Historical and comparative linguistics (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 6). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Burch, R. 2014. ‘Charles Sanders Peirce’, in Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (winter 2014 edition), available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce/. Accessed 30 May 2015.Google Scholar

Coseriu, E. 1957. ‘Sincronía, diacronía e historia: El problema del cambio lingüístico’, Revista de la Faculdad de Humanidades y Ciencias 15: 201–355. Also as Sincronía, diacronía e historia: El problema del cambio lingüístico. Montevideo: Universidad de la Republica, Faculdad de Humanidades y Ciencias, Investigaciones y estudios, 1958, 3rd edition. Madrid: Gredos, 1978.Google Scholar

Coseriu, E. [1968] 1970. ‘Synchronie, Diachronie und Typologie’, in Petersen, U., Bertsch, H. and Köhler, G. (eds.), Sprache: Strukturen und Funktionen. 12 Aufsätze zur allgemeinen und romanischen Sprachwissenschaft. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, pp. 91–108. (Translated from ‘Sincronía, diacronía y tipología’, Actas del 11 Congreso Internacional de Lingüística i Filología Romanicas, 1: 269–83. Madrid 1968.)Google Scholar

Deutscher, G. 2002. ‘On the misuse of the notion of “abduction” in linguistics’, Journal of Linguistics 38: 469–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feibleman, J. K. 1970. An introduction to the philosophy of Charles S. Peirce. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Harris, A. and Campbell, L. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, B. 2003. ‘Grammaticalization’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 575–601.Google Scholar

Janda, R. and Joseph, B. 2003. ‘On language, change, and language change – or, Of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 3–180.Google Scholar

Joseph, B. and Janda, R. (eds.) 2003. The handbook of historical linguistics. Malden, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ketner, K. L. and Putnam, H. (eds.) 1992. Reasoning and the logic of things: The Cambridge conference lectures of 1898 of Charles Peirce. Introduction by Ketner, K. L. and Putnam, H.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Ledgeway, A. 2012. From Latin to Romance: Morphosyntactic typology and change. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Milroy, J. 1992. Linguistic variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. 1931–66. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, ed. Hartshorne, C., Weiss, P and Burks, A. W., vols. 1–8. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Rittel, T. 1975. Szyk członów w obrębie form czasu przeszłego i trybu przypuszczającego. Wrocław: Ossolineum.Google Scholar

Ross, W. D. 1949. Aristotle. Prior and posterior analytics: A revised text with introduction and commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sapir, E. [1921] 1949. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar

Slobin, D. I. 1985. ‘The child as linguistic icon maker’, in Haiman, J. (ed.), Iconicity in syntax: Proceedings of a symposium on iconicity in syntax, Stanford, June 24–6, 1983 (Typological studies in language, 6). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 221–48.Google Scholar

Smith, R. 1989. Aristotle. Prior analytics, trans., with introduction, notes and commentary. Indianapolis: Hacket.Google Scholar

Soukharov, A. H. et al. (eds.) 1992. The American heritage dictionary of the English language, 3rd edn. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Tarde, G. 1903. Laws of imitation. New York: Holt. English translation of de Tarde, Gabriel, Les lois de l’imitation: Étude sociologique. Paris: F. Alcan, 1873.Google Scholar

Thomsen, O. N. 2006a. ‘Towards an integrated functional-pragmatic theory of language and language change. In commemoration of Eugenio Coseriu (1921–2002)’, in Thomsen, (ed.), pp. 307–38.Google Scholar

Thomsen, O. N. (ed.). 2006b. Competing models of linguistic change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Timberlake, A. 1977. ‘Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change’, in Li, C N. (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 141–77.Google Scholar

Topolińska, Z. 1961. Z historii akcentu polskiego od wieku XVI do dziś. (Prace językoznawcze, 27). Warsaw: Ossolineum.Google Scholar

Vaillant, A. 1964. Manuel du vieux slave, vol. 1: Grammaire. Paris: Institut d’Études Slaves.Google Scholar

Whewell, W. 1837. History of the inductive sciences, 3rd edition. London: J. W. Parker.Google Scholar