Recent Grammatical Change in English

doi:10.1017/9781009205870.021

18 - Recent Grammatical Change in English

from Part II - Tracking Change in the History of English

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 October 2025

Jill Bowie and

Bas Aarts

Edited by

Joan C. Beal

Show author details

Joan C. Beal: Affiliation:
University of Sheffield

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter surveys the field of recent grammatical change in English. We focus on the period since 1900 but also discuss how certain recent changes relate to longer-term trends. Many of our examples involve the verb phrase or verbal complementation, but changes in other areas such as the noun phrase are also noted. We address methodological issues that arise in researching recent change, considering the various kinds of corpora available and the complexities involved in tracking grammatical change over time. We then discuss how patterns of change vary between spoken and written language and across different genres. Finally, we consider a range of possible explanations or motivations for change, including grammaticalisation, economy and social influences.

Keywords

syntax grammar grammatical change syntactic change diachronic syntax

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The New Cambridge History of the English Language
Transmission, Change and Ideology
, pp. 505 - 535

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009205870.021 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2025

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aarts, Bas, Bowie, Jill and Popova, Gergana (eds.). 2020. The Oxford Handbook of English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Aarts, Bas and Close, Joanne. 2010. Current change in the modal system of English: a case study of must, have to and have got to. In Lenker, Ursula, Huber, Judith and Mailhammer, Robert (eds.), The History of English Verbal and Nominal Constructions. Vol. 1 of English Historical Linguistics 2008: Selected Papers from the Fifteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 15), Munich 24–30 August 2008. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 165–181.Google Scholar

Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne, Leech, Geoffrey and Wallis, Sean (eds.). 2013. The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne and Wallis, Sean. 2010. Recent changes in the use of the progressive construction in English. In Cappelle, Bert and Wada, Naoaki (eds.), Distinctions in English Grammar, Offered to Renaat Declerck. Tokyo: Kaitakusha, pp. 148–167.Google Scholar

Aarts, Bas, Wallis, Sean and Bowie, Jill. 2014. Profiling the English verb phrase over time: modal patterns. In Taavitsainen, Irma, Kytö, Merja, Claridge, Claudia and Smith, Jeremy (eds.), Developments in English: Expanding Electronic Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 48–76.10.1017/CBO9781139833882.006CrossRef Google Scholar

Baayen, Harald. 1992. Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In Gert, E. Booij and van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1991. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 109–149.CrossRef Google Scholar

Baayen, Harald. 1993. On frequency, transparency, and productivity. In Gert, E. Booij and van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1992. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 181–208.Google Scholar

Baayen, Harald. 2009. Corpus linguistics in morphology: morphological productivity. In Lüdeling, Anke and Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 899–919.10.1515/9783110213881.2.899CrossRef Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Conrad, Susan. 2019. Register, Genre, and Style. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108686136CrossRef Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 2001. Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In Conrad, Susan and Biber, Douglas (eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies. Harlow: Longman, pp. 66–83.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany. 2011. Grammatical change in the noun phrase: the influence of written language use. English Language and Linguistics 15.2: 223–250.10.1017/S1360674311000025CrossRef Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany. 2012. The competing demands of popularization vs. economy: written language in the age of mass literacy. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 314–328.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas and Gray, Bethany. 2016. Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Bowie, Jill and Aarts, Bas. 2012. Change in the English infinitival perfect construction. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 200–210.Google Scholar

Bowie, Jill and Wallis, Sean. 2016. The to-infinitival perfect: a study of decline. In Werner, Valentin, Seoane, Elena and Suárez Gómez, Cristina (eds.), Re-assessing the Present Perfect. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 43–94.10.1515/9783110443530-005CrossRef Google Scholar

Bowie, Jill, Wallis, Sean and Aarts, Bas. 2013a. The perfect in spoken British English. In Aarts, , Close, , Leech, and Wallis, (eds.), pp. 318–352.Google Scholar

Bowie, Jill, Wallis, Sean and Aarts, Bas. 2013b. Contemporary change in modal usage in spoken British English: mapping the impact of ‘genre’. In Marín‐Arrese, , Carretero, , Arús Hita, and van der Auwera, (eds.), pp. 57–94.Google Scholar

Brezina, Vaclav, Hawtin, Abi and McEnery, Tony. 2021. The Written British National Corpus 2014: design and comparability. Text & Talk 41.5–6: 595–615.Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel (ed.). 2001. Historical Linguistics 1999. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel (ed.). 2017. English Historical Linguistics: Approaches and Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2013. Quotatives: New Trends and Sociolinguistic Implications. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar

Buchstaller, Isabelle, Rickford, John R., Closs Traugott, Elizabeth, Wasow, Thomas and Zwicky, Arnold. 2010. The sociolinguistics of a short-lived innovation: tracing the development of quotative all across spoken and internet newsgroup data. Language Variation and Change 22: 191–219.Google Scholar

Buerki, Andreas. 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, Andreas. 2019. Furiously fast: on the speed of change in formulaic language. Yearbook of Phraseology 10.1: 5–38.Google Scholar

Buerki, Andreas. 2020. Formulaic Language and Linguistic Change: A Data-Led Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Collins, Peter (ed.). 2015. Grammatical Change in English World-Wide. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.67CrossRef Google Scholar

Collins, Peter and Yao, Xinyue. 2019. AusBrown: a new diachronic corpus of Australian English. ICAME Journal 43: 5–21.Google Scholar

Curzan, Anne. 2012. Revisiting the reduplicative copula with corpus-based evidence. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 211–221.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2007. TIME Magazine Corpus. www.english-corpora.org/time/.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2008–. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). www.english-corpora.org/coca/.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2010–. The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA): 400 million words, 1810–2009. www.english-corpora.org/coha/.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2012. Some methodological issues related to corpus-based investigations of recent syntactic changes in English. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 167–174.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2013. Recent shifts with three nonfinite verbal complements in English: data from the 100-million-word Time corpus (1920s–2000s). In Aarts, , Close, , Leech, and Wallis, (eds.), pp. 46–67.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2016–. Corpus of News on the Web (NOW). www.english-corpora.org/now/.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2020. English-Corpora.org: A guided tour. www.english-corpora.org/pdf/english-corpora.pdf.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 1998. Syntax. In Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume IV: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 92–329.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 2001. Gradience and linguistic change. In Brinton, (ed.), pp. 119–144.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 2003. Log(ist)ic and simplistic S-curves. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Motives for Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 54–70.Google Scholar

Denison, David. 2004. Do grammars change when they leak? In Kay, Christian (ed.), New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 15–29.Google Scholar

Dorgeloh, Heidrun and Wanner, Anja. 2020. Genre variation. In Aarts, , Bowie, and Popova, (eds.), pp. 654–672.Google Scholar

Facchinetti, Roberta, Krug, Manfred and Palmer, Frank R. (eds.). 2003. Modality in Contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa. 1996. On the historical development of English retrospective verbs. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–79.Google Scholar

Fanego, Teresa. 2007. Drift and the development of sentential complements in British and American English from 1700 to the present day. In Pérez-Guerra, Javier, González-Álvarez, Dolores, Bueno-Alonso, Jorge L. and Rama-Martínez, Esperanza (eds.), ‘Of Varying Language and Opposing Creed’: New Insights into Late Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 161–235.Google Scholar

Farrelly, Michael and Seoane, Elena. 2012. Democratization. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 392–401.Google Scholar

Gatto, Maristella. 2014. The Web as Corpus: Theory and Practice. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Geeraert, Kristina and Newman, John. 2015. I haven’t drank in weeks: the use of past tense forms as past participles in English corpora. In Newman, John, Baayen, Harald and Rice, Sally (eds.), Corpus-Based Studies in Language Use, Language Learning, and Language Documentation. Leiden: Brill, pp. 11–33.Google Scholar

Hansen, Beke. 2018. Corpus Linguistics and Sociolinguistics: A Study of Variation and Change in the Modal Systems of World Englishes. Leiden: Brill.CrossRef Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd, Claudi, Ulrike and Hünnemeyer, Frederike. 1991. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd and Narrog, Heiko (eds.). 2011. The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin and Gries, Stefan Th.. 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

Hilpert, Martin and Mair, Christian. 2015. Grammatical change. In Biber, Douglas and Reppen, Randi (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 180–200.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hinrichs, Lars and Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2007. Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: a multivariate analysis of tagged corpora. English Language and Linguistics 11.3: 437–474.10.1017/S1360674307002341CrossRef Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Sebastian. 2005. Grammaticalization and English Complex Prepositions: A Corpus‐Based Study. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Grammaticalization. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne. 2001. What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions. Studies in Language 25.1: 49–87.10.1075/sl.25.1.03hunCrossRef Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne. 2020. Change in grammar. In Aarts, , Bowie, and Popova, (eds.), pp. 581–603.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Gardner, Anne-Christine. 2017. Corpus-based approaches: watching English change. In Brinton, (ed.), pp. 96–130.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Leech, Geoffrey. 2012. ‘Small is beautiful’: on the value of standard reference corpora for observing recent grammatical change. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 175–188.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne and Mair, Christian. 1999. ‘Agile’ and ‘uptight’ genres: the corpus‐based approach to language change in progress. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 221–242.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne, Nesselhauf, Nadja and Biewer, Carolin (eds.). 2007. Corpus Linguistics and the Web. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kaatari, Henrik and Larsson, Tove. 2019. Using the BNC and the Spoken BNC2014 to study the syntactic development of I think and I’m sure. English Studies 100.6: 710–727.10.1080/0013838X.2018.1558702CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaltenböck, Gunther. 2013. The development of comment clauses. In Aarts, , Close, , Leech, and Wallis, (eds.), pp. 286–317.Google Scholar

Kastronic, Laura and Poplack, Shana. 2014. The (North) American English mandative subjunctive in the twenty-first century: revival or remnant? University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20.2, Article 9. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol20/iss2/9.Google Scholar

Kehoe, Andrew. 2020. Web corpora. In Th. Gries, Stefan and Paquot, Magali (eds.), A Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. Cham: Springer, pp. 329–351.Google Scholar

Keller, Rudi. 1985. Towards a theory of linguistic change. In Ballmer, Thomas T. (ed.), Linguistic Dynamics: Discourses, Procedures and Evolution. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 211–237.Google Scholar

Keller, Rudi. 1989. Invisible-hand theory and language evolution. Lingua 77.2: 113–127.CrossRef Google Scholar

Krug, Manfred 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Krug, Manfred and Schützler, Ole. 2013. Recent change and grammaticalization. In Aarts, , Close, , Leech, and Wallis, (eds.), pp. 155–184.Google Scholar

Kuteva, Tania and Heine, Bernd. 2008. On the explanatory value of grammaticalization. In Good, Jeff (ed.), Linguistic Universals and Language Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 215–230.Google Scholar

Kuteva, Tania, Heine, Bernd, Hong, Bo, Long, Haiping, Narrog, Heiko and Rhee, Seongha. 2019. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kytö, Merja. 2019. Register in historical linguistics. Register Studies 1.1: 136–167.Google Scholar

Lass, Roger. 1994. Proliferation and option-cutting: the strong verb in the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries. In Stein, Dieter and Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid (eds.), Towards a Standard English: 1600–1800. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 81–113.Google Scholar

Laws, Jacqueline. 2023. A Constructional Account of Verb-Forming Suffixation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Laws, Jacqueline, Ryder, Chris and Jaworska, Sylvia. 2017. A diachronic corpus-based study into the effects of age and gender on the usage patterns of verb-forming suffixation in spoken British English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22.3: 375–402.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2000. Diachronic linguistics across a generation gap: from the 1960s to the 1990s. Paper read at the symposium ‘Grammar and Lexis’, University College London.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2003. Modality on the move: the English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992. In Facchinetti, , Krug, and Palmer, (eds.), pp. 223–240.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2004. Recent grammatical change in English: data, description, theory. In Aijmer, Karin and Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), Advances in Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 61–81.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2011. The modals ARE declining: reply to Neil Millar [2009]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16: 547–564.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2013. Where have all the modals gone? On the declining frequency of modal auxiliaries in American and British English. In Marín‐Arrese, , Carretero, , Arús Hita, and van der Auwera, (eds.), pp. 95–115.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian and Smith, Nicholas. 2009. Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2005. Extending the possibilities of corpus‐based research on English in the twentieth century: a prequel to LOB and FLOB. ICAME Journal 29: 83–98.Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2009. Change and constancy in linguistic change: how grammatical usage in written English evolved in the period 1931–1991. In Renouf, Antoinette and Kehoe, Andrew (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: Refinements and Reassessments. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 173–200.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 1995 [1982]. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: Lincom Europa. (First published in 1982.)Google Scholar

Levin, Magnus. 2006. Collective nouns and language change. English Language and Linguistics 10: 321–343.Google Scholar

Levin, Magnus. 2013. The progressive verb in modern American English. In Aarts, , Close, , Leech, and Wallis, (eds.), pp. 187–216.Google Scholar

Love, Robbie, Dembry, Claire, Hardie, Andrew, Brezina, Vaclav and McEnery, Tony. 2017. The Spoken BNC2014: designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22.3: 319–344.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 1995. Changing patterns of complementation and concomitant grammaticalisation of the verb help in present-day English. In Aarts, Bas and Meyer, Charles F. (eds.), The Verb in Contemporary English: Theory and Description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 258–272.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 1997a. Parallel corpora: a real-time approach to the study of language change in progress. In Ljung, Magnus (ed.), Corpus-Based Studies in English: Papers from the Seventeenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 195–209.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 1997b. The spread of the going‐to‐future in written English: a corpus‐based investigation into language change in progress. In Hickey, Raymond and Puppel, Stanislav (eds.), Language History and Linguistic Modelling: A Festschrift for Jacek Fisiak. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1537–1543.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2002. Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: a real‐time study based on matching text corpora. English Language and Linguistics 6: 105–131.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2006a. Nonfinite complement clauses in the nineteenth century: the case of remember. In Kytö, Merja, Rydén, Mats and Smitterberg, Erik (eds.), Nineteenth-Century English: Stability and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 215–228.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2006b. Twentieth-Century English: History, Variation, and Standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2010. Grammaticalisation of new patterns of clausal subordination: ‘on (the) basis (that) + finite clause’ and ‘(on) account (of) + finite clause’ in present‐day English. In Mala, Markéta and Šaldová, Pavlína (eds.), … for thy speech bewrayeth thee: A Festschrift for Libuše Dušková. Prague: Charles University/Philosophical Faculty, pp. 153–168.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian. 2012. From opportunistic to systematic use of the web as corpus: Do-support with got (to) in contemporary American English. In Nevalainen, and Traugott, (eds.), pp. 245–255.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne. 1995. Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English? A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 43.2: 111–122.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian and Hundt, Marianne. 1997. The corpus-based approach to language change in progress. In Böker, Uwe and Sauer, Hans (eds.), Proceedings of the Anglistentag 1996, Dresden. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, pp. 71–82.Google Scholar

Mair, Christian, Hundt, Marianne, Leech, Geoffrey and Smith, Nicholas. 2002. 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: 245–264.10.1075/ijcl.7.2.05maiCrossRef Google Scholar

Mair, Christian and Leech, Geoffrey. 2021. Current changes in English syntax. In Aarts, Bas, McMahon, April and Hinrichs, Lars (eds.), The Handbook of English Linguistics. Second edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 249–276.Google Scholar

Marín‐Arrese, Juana I., Carretero, Marta, Hita, Jorge Arús and van der Auwera, Johan (eds.). 2013. English Modality: Core, Periphery and Evidentiality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

McMahon, April. 1994. Understanding Language Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Millar, Neil. 2009. Modal verbs in Time: frequency changes 1923–2006. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14: 191–220.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.). 2012. The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Noël, Dirk, van Rooy, Bertus and van der Auwera, Johan (eds.). 2014. Diachronic approaches to modality in world Englishes. Special issue, Journal of English Linguistics 42.1.CrossRef Google Scholar

Perek, Florent. 2018. Recent changes in the productivity and schematicity of the way-construction: a distributional semantic analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 14.1: 65–97.Google Scholar

Põldvere, Nele, Johansson, Victoria and Paradis, Carita. 2021a. On The London-Lund Corpus 2: design, challenges and innovations. English Language and Linguistics 25.3. 459–483.Google Scholar

Põldvere, Nele, Johansson, Victoria and Paradis, Carita. 2021b. Challenges of releasing audio material for spoken data: the case of the London-Lund Corpus 2. Research in Corpus Linguistics 9.1: 35–62.Google Scholar

Rautionaho, Paula and Fuchs, Robert. 2021. Recent change in stative progressives: a collostructional investigation of British English in 1994 and 2014. English Language and Linguistics 25.1: 35–60.10.1017/S136067431900042XCrossRef Google Scholar

Romaine, Suzanne and Lange, Deborah. 1991. The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: a case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech 66: 227–279.Google Scholar

Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani. 2006. Watching English grammar change: a case study on complement selection in British and American English. English Language and Linguistics 10: 31–48.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rudanko, Juhani. 2011. Changes in Complementation in British and American English: Corpus‐Based Studies on Non‐finite Complements in Recent English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1916/1959). Course in General Linguistics. Edited by Bally, Charles and Sechehaye, Albert, in collaboration with Albert Reidlinger. Translated from the French by Wade Baskin. New York: The Philosophical Library.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. 2020. English around the World: An Introduction. Cambridge Introductions to the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Seggewiß, Friederike. 2013. Current changes in the English modals: a corpus‐based analysis of present‐day spoken English. PhD thesis, University of Freiburg. https://d-nb.info/1123480818/34.Google Scholar

Smith, Adam. 1776. Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. (Reprint 1812). London: Ward.Google Scholar

Smith, Nicholas. 2002. Ever moving on? The progressive in recent British English. In Peters, Pam, Collins, Peter and Smith, Adam (eds.), New Frontiers of Corpus Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 317–330.Google Scholar

Smith, Nicholas. 2003a. A quirky progressive? A corpus-based exploration of the will + be + -ing construction in recent and present day British English. In Archer, Dawn, Rayson, Paul, Wilson, Andrew and McEnery, Tony (eds.), Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2003: UCREL Technical Papers 16. Lancaster: Lancaster University, pp. 714–723.Google Scholar

Smith, Nicholas. 2003b. Changes in modals and semi-modals of strong obligation and epistemic necessity in recent British English. In Facchinetti, , Krug, and Palmer, (eds.), pp. 241–266.Google Scholar

Smith, Nicholas. 2005. A corpus-based investigation of recent change in the use of the progressive in British English. Doctoral thesis, Lancaster University.Google Scholar

Smith, Nicholas, Broccias, Cristiano and Waters, Cathleen. 2024. Addressing comparability and retrieval issues in conversation corpora: a case study on the Spoken British National Corpora (1994 and 2014), using the past perfect. Research in Corpus Linguistics 12.2. 80–110.Google Scholar

Smitterberg, Erik. 2005. The Progressive in Nineteenth-Century English: A Process of Integration. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Smitterberg, Erik. 2021. Syntactic Change in Late Modern English: Studies on Colloquialization and Densification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2011. Grammaticalization and mechanisms of change. In Heine, and Narrog, (eds.), pp. 19–30.Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Varela Pérez, Jose Ramon. 2007. Negation of main verb have: evidence of a change in progress in spoken and written British English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 108: 223–246.Google Scholar

Vosberg, Uwe. 2009. Non-finite complements. In Rohdenburg, Günter and Schlüter, Julia (eds.), One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 212–227.Google Scholar

Waller, Tim. 2017. The subjunctive in present-day English. PhD thesis, University College London.Google Scholar

Wallis, Sean. 2021. Statistics in Corpus Linguistics Research: A New Approach. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wolfram, Walt. 2003. Enclave dialect communities in the south. In Stephen, J. Nagle and Sara, L. Sanders (eds.), English in the Southern United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 141–158.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wright, Susan. 1994. The mystery of the modal progressive. In Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 467–486.10.1515/9783110879599.467CrossRef Google Scholar

Yao, Xinyue and Collins, Peter. 2019. Developments in Australian, British, and American English grammar from 1931 to 2006: an aggregate, comparative approach to dialectal variation and change. Journal of English Linguistics 47.2: 120–149.CrossRef Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter conforms to version 2.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic (A) level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.

Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.

Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.

Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.

Structural and Technical Features

ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.