oa 150 years of written Dutch

References

1. Al-Rfou’, R., B.Perozzi & S.Skiena (2013). Polyglot: Distributed Word Representations for Multilingual NLP. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning. Association for Computational Linguistics.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Anthonissen, L. & P.Petré (2019). Grammaticalization and the linguistic individual: new avenues in lifespan research. Linguistics Vanguard5.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Baayen, R.H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baxter, G. & W.Croft (2016). Modeling language change across the lifespan: individual trajectories in community change. Language Variation and Change28(2), 129-173.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Booij, G. E. & A.van Santen (1998). Morfologie: dewoordstructuur van het Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Buchstaller, I. (2015). Exploring linguistic malleability across the life-span: age-specific patterns in quotative use. Language in Society44(4), 457-496.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Butler, C. (1985). Statistics in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Claridge, C. (2008). Historical corpora. In: A.Lüdeling & M.Kytö (red.). Corpus linguistics. An international handbook, Volume 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 242-259.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Clyne, M. (1992). Pluricentric languages – Introduction. In: M.Clyne (red.), Pluricentric languages: Differing norms in different nations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1-9.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Cowpertwait, P.S.P. & A.W.Metcalfe (2008). Introductory time series with R. Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Coussé, E. (2010). Een digitaal compilatiecorpus historisch Nederlands. Lexikos20, 123-142.
    [Google Scholar]
12. De Caluwe, J. (2017). Van AN naar BN, NN, SN… Het Nederlands als pluricentrische taal. In G.De Sutter (red.), De vele gezichten van het Nederlands in Vlaanderen. Een inleiding tot de variatietaalkunde. Leuven: Acco, 119-139.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Field, A., J.Miles & Z.Field (2012). Discovering statistics using R. London : Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Geeraerts, D. & H.Van de Velde (2013). Supra-regional characteristics of colloquial Dutch. In: F.Hinskens & J.Taeldeman (red.), Language and space: Dutch. Berlin: De Gruyter, 532-556.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Gries, S. (2015). The most underused statistical method in corpus linguistics: multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora10(1), 95-125.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Gries, S. (2013). Statistics for linguistics with R. A practical introduction. 2deed.Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gysseling, M. (1977-1987). Corpus Gysseling. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Honnibal, M. & I.Montani (2017). spaCy 2: Natural language understanding with Bloom embeddings, convolutional neural networks and incremental parsing.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Haeseryn, W., K.Romijn, G.Geerts, J.de Rooij & M.C.van den Toorn (1997). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. 2de ed. Groningen/Deurne: Martinus Nijhoff/Wolters Plantyn.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Haeseryn, W. (1999). Normatieve studies. In: W.Smedts & P.C.Paardekooper (red.,) De Nederlandse taalkunde in kaart. Leuven: Acco, 237-247.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Hendrickx, E. (2013). Het effect van lexicale taaladvisering ophet Belgisch-Nederlandse taalgebruik: Een diachroon corpusonderzoek naar factoren van invloed. Doct. Diss., KU Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hendrickx, I., A.van den Bosch, M.van Gompel & K.van der Sloot (2016). Frog, A Natural Language Processing Suite for Dutch. Language and Speech Technology Technical Report Series. Radboud University Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Hoeksema, J. (2002). Polarity-sensitive scalar particles in early modern and present-day Dutch: distributional differences and diachronic developments. Belgian Journal of Linguistics16, 53-64.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Hopper, P. & E.C.Traugott (2003). Grammaticalization. 2de ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Impe, L. (2010). Mutual intelligibility of national and regional varieties of Dutch in the Low Countries. Doct. Diss. KU Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Janda, L. (red.) (2013). Cognitive Linguistics – The Quantitative Turn. The Essential Reader. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Keuleers, E., M.Brysbaert & B.New (2010). SUBTLEX-NL: A new frequency measure for Dutch words based on film subtitles. Behavior Research Methods42(3), 643-650.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Levshina, N. (2015). How to do linguistics with R. Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Loonen, N. (2003). Stante pede gaande van dichtbij langs AF bestemming @. Doct. Diss. Universiteit Utrecht.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Manning, C. & H.Schütze (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. McEnery, T. & A.Hardy (2012). Corpus linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Oostdijk, N., M.Reynaert, V.Hoste & I.Schuurman (2013). The construction of a 500-million-word Reference Corpus of Contemporary Written Dutch. Essential Speech and Language Technology for Dutch: resources, tools and application. Springer, 219-247.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Ordelman, R., F.de Jong, A.van Hessen & H.Hondorp (2007). TwNC: a Multifaceted Dutch News Corpus. ELRA Newsletter12, 3-4. <http://doc.utwente.nl/68090/>
    [Google Scholar]
34. Petré, P., L.Anthonissen, S.Budts, E.Manjavacas, E.L.Silva, W.Standing & O.Strik (2019). Early modern multiloquent authors (EMMA): Designing a large-scale corpus of individuals’ languages. ICAME Journal43, 83-122.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Petré, P. & F.Van de Velde (2018). The real-time dynamics of the individual and the community in grammaticalization. Language94(4), 867-901.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (2009). Lifespan changes in the language of three early modern gentlemen. In: A.Nurmi, M.Nevala & M.Palander-Collin (red.), The language of daily life in England (1400-1800). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 165-198.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Reenen, P. van and M.Mulder (2000). ‘Un corpus linguistique de 3000 chartes en Moyen Néerlandais du 14e siècle’. In: M.Bilger (red.), Corpus, méthodologie et applications linguistiques. Paris: Champion et Presses Universitaires de Perpignan, 209-217.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Rutten, G. & M.van der Wal (2014). Letters as Loot. A sociolinguistic approach to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Dutch. Amsterda: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Sankoff, G. (2018). Language change across the lifespan. Annual Review of Linguistics4, 297-316.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Speelman, D., K.Heylen & D.Geeraerts. (red.) (2018). Mixed-effects regression models in linguistics. Cham: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
41. TEI Consortium (red.) (2020). TEI P5: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. 4.1.0 (18/08/2020). TEI Consortium. <http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/P5/>
    [Google Scholar]
42. Van Boven, E. (1998). Het pseudoniem als strategie. Pseudoniemen van vrouwelijke auteurs 1850-1900, Nederlandse Letterkunde3, 309-326.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Van Canegem-Ardijns, I. (2006). The extraposition of prepositional objects of adjectives in Dutch. Linguistics44, 425-457.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Van den Bosch, A., G.J.Busser, W.Daelemans & S.Canisius (2007). An efficient memory-based morphosyntactic tagger and parser for Dutch. Proceedings of the 17th Meeting of Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands,ILK Research group.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Van der Horst, J.M. & K.Van der Horst (1999). Geschiedenis van het Nederlands in de twintigste eeuw. ’s-Gravenhage: Sdu Uitgevers.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Van der Horst, J.M. (2008). Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Van der Horst, J.M. (2010). Met (het) oog op morgen: opstellen over taal, taalverandering en standaardtaal. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Van der Horst, J.M. (2013). Taal op drift. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Van der Sijs, N. (2019). Historische taalkunde en Digital Humanities: samen naar een mooie toekomst. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde135 (4), 384-405.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Van de Velde, F, J.Piersoul & I.De Smet (2020). De wervelkolom van taalverandering. Nederlandse Taalkunde25(2-3), 371-385
    [Google Scholar]
51. Van de Velde, F. & P.Petré (2020). Historical linguistics. In: S.Adolphs & D.Knight (red.), The Routledge handbook of English language and digital humanities. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Van de Velde, F., K.Franco, & D.Geeraerts (2019). Reality check voor de kwantitatieve Nederlandse taalkunde: laveren tussen de Scylla van het conservatisme en de Charybdis van de zelfgenoegzaamheid. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde135(4), 329-343.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Van de Velde, F. & P.Petré (2017). Linking grammaticalization to historical demography. Paper presented at Examining the Social in Historical Sociolinguistics: Methods and Theory. New York City, 6-7april2017.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Van de Velde, F. & T.Ruette (2013). Moroccorp: tien miljoen woorden uit twee Marokkaans-Nederlandse chatkanalen. Lexikos23, 1-21.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Van de Velde, F. (2009). De nominale constituent. Structuur en geschiedenis. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Van de Velde, H., M.Kissine, E.Tops, S.van der Harst & R.van Hout (2010). Will Dutch become Flemish? Autonomous developments in Belgian Dutch. Multilingua29, 385-416.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Van Eerten, L (2007). Over het Corpus Gesproken Nederlands,Nederlandse Taalkunde12 (3), 194-215.
    [Google Scholar]
58. van Gompel, M. (2012). FoLiA: Format for Linguistic Annotation. ILK Technical Report 12-03. Tilburg University
    [Google Scholar]
59. Van Hoof, S. & J.Jaspers (2012). Hyperstandaardisering,Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde128(1), 97-125.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Van Olmen, D. (2019). A diachronic corpus study of prenominal zo’n ‘so a’ in Dutch: pathways, analogy and (inter)subjectification. Functions of Language26(2), 217-248.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Van Eynde, F. (2004). Part of Speech tagging and Lemmatizing of the Corpus Gesproken Nederlands (Spoken Dutch Corpus). Centrum voor Computerlinguïstiek K.U.Leuven: 62.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Van Halteren, H. & N.Oostdijk (2015). Word distributions in Dutch tweets. A quantitative appraisal of the distinction between function and content words. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde131(3), 189-226.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Vis, K., J.Sanders & W.Spooren (2012). Diachronic changes in subjectivity and stance – a corpus-based linguistic study of Dutch news texts. Discourse, Context & Media1, 95-102.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Weerman, F. & P.de Wit (1998). De ondergang van de genitief. Nederlandse Taalkunde3(1), 18-46.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Weighted-Levenshtein. <https://pypi.org/project/weighted-levenshtein/>
66. Winter, B. (2019). Statistics for linguistics. An introduction using R. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Wouters, C. (2007). Informalization: manners and emotions since 1890. Los Angeles: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Xiao, R. (2008). Well-known and influential corpora. In: A.Lüdeling & M.Kytö (red.), Corpus linguistics: an international handbook, Volume1. Berlin: De Gruyter, 38-45.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Zwart, J.W. (2011). The syntax of Dutch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]