This essay introduces a special issue exploring strategies for complicating corpus methods in historical English language studies: both the ways that corpus methods can accommodate the complications of historical work and the ways that scholars can productively complicate the tools in order to enrich our use of digital archives. It highlights limitations of data, issues of variable orthography, and deductive versus inductive approaches. The essay also addresses why it is valuable to use mixed methods, statistical models, LLMs, and interdisciplinary approaches in corpus work—insights that may benefit scholars working with language from any historical period, including the present day. This introduction provides brief summaries of the three research articles in the special issue.
AhmadDohra. 2007. Rotten English: A literary anthology. New York, NY: Norton.
2.
AijmerKarinRühlemannChristoph (eds.). 2014. Corpus pragmatics: A handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AlcornRhonaKopaczykJoannaLosBettelouMolineauxBenjamin (eds.). 2019. Historical dialectology in the digital age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
4.
BaayenHarald. 1992. Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In BooijGeertvan MarleJaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology1991, 109-149. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
5.
BakerPaul. 2006. Using corpora in discourse analysis. London: Bloomsbury.
6.
BergsAlexander. 2012. The uniformitarian principle and the risk of anachronisms in language and social history. In Hernández-CampoyJuan ManuelConde-SilvestreJuan Camilo (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 80-98. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118257227.ch5.
7.
BrintonLaurel J.2012. Historical pragmatics and corpus linguistics: Problems and strategies. In KytöMerja (ed.), English corpus linguistics: Crossing paths, 101-131. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
8.
BrownDavid West. 2019. Online resources for illustrating and researching historical language. In MooreColettePalmerChris C. (eds.), Teaching the history of the English language, 315-319. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.
9.
BrownDavid WestPalmerChris C.2015. The phrasal verb in American English: Using corpora to track down historical trends in particle distribution, register variation, and noun collocations. In AdamsMichaelBrintonLaurel J.FulkR. D. (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language VI: Evidence and method in histories of English, 71-97. Berlin: De Gruyter.
10.
BrownDavid WestWetzelDanielle Zawodny (eds.). 2023. Corpora and rhetorically informed text analysis: The diverse applications of DocuScope. John Benjamins.
11.
BurketteAllison P.2015. Language and material culture. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.38.
12.
CharmazKathy. 2006. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications.
13.
ClaridgeClaudia. 2008. Historical corpora. In LüdelingAnkeKytöMerja (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, 242-259. Berlin: De Gruyter.
14.
ClaridgeClaudia. 2012. ‘Upon These Heads I Shall Discourse’: Lexicographical and corpus evidence for senses and phrases. In KytöMerja (ed.), English corpus linguistics: Crossing paths, 133-163. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
15.
CowieClaireDalton-PufferChristiane. 2002. Diachronic word-formation and studying changes in productivity over time: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In Díaz VeraJavier E. (ed.), A changing world of words, 410-437. Amsterdam & New York, NY: Rodopi.
16.
CulpeperJonathanKytöMerja. 2010. Early Modern English dialogues: Spoken interaction as writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
CurzanAnne. 2008. Historical corpus linguistics and evidence of language change. In LüdelingAnkeKytöMerja (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, 1091-1109. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
18.
CurzanAnneMooreColettePalmerChris C.2019. Suggested word list. In MooreColettePalmerChris C. (eds.), Teaching the history of the English language, 337-338. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.
19.
CurzanAnnePalmerChris C.2006. The importance of historical corpora, reliability, and reading. In FacchinettiRobertaRissanenMatti (eds.), Corpus-based studies of diachronic English, 17-34. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
20.
DaviesMark. 2017. Using large online corpora to examine lexical, semantic, and cultural variation in different dialects and time periods. In FriginalEric (ed.), Studies in corpus-based sociolinguistics, 19-82. London: Routledge.
21.
DaviesMark. 2019. Using (and useful) corpora for the study of HEL. In MooreColettePalmerChris C. (eds.), Teaching the history of the English language, 320-323. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.
DurrellMartin. 2015. “Representativeness,” “bad data,” and legitimate expectations. What can an electronic historical corpus tell us that we didn’t actually know already (and how)? In GippertJostGehrkeRalf (eds.), Historical corpora: Challenges and perspectives, 13-34. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
25.
DurrellMartinBennettPaulWhittRichard J.ScheibleSilke (eds.). 2013. New methods in historical corpora. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
26.
FacchinettiRobertaRissanenMatti (eds.). 2006. Corpus-based studies of diachronic English. Bern: Peter Lang.
27.
GillingsMathewMautnerGerlindeBakerPaul. 2023. Corpus-assisted discourse studies. Elements in Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
GriesStefan Th. 2022. How to use statistics in quantitative corpus analysis. In O’KeeffeAnneMcCarthyMichael J. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics, 2nd edn., 168-181. New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
GrundPeter J.2006. Manuscripts as sources for linguistic research: A methodological case study based on theMirror of Lights. Journal of English Linguistics34(2). 105-125. doi:10.1177/0075424206290255.
30.
GrundPeter J.2012. The nature of knowledge: Evidence and evidentiality in the witness depositions from the Salem Witch Trials. American Speech87(1). 7-38. doi:10.1215/00031283-1599941.
HilpertMartinCuyckensHubert. 2016. How do corpus-based techniques advance description and theory in English historical linguistics? An introduction to the special issue. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory12(1). 1-5.
33.
HilpertMartinGriesStefan Thomas. 2012. Variability-based neighbor clustering: A bottom-up approach to periodization in historical linguistics. In NevalainenTerttuTraugottElizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 100-124. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
HundtMarianneGardnerAnne-Christine. 2017. Corpus-based approaches: Watching English change. In BrintonLaurel J. (ed.), English historical linguistics: Approaches and perspectives, 96-130. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
KaunistoMarkSchilkMarco (eds.). 2024. Challenges in corpus linguistics: Rethinking corpus compilation and analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
36.
KohnenThomas. 2007. From Helsinki through the centuries: The design and development of English diachronic corpora. In PahtaPäiviTaavitsainenIrmaNevalainenTerttuTyrkköJukka (eds.), Towards multimedia in corpus studies (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 2). Helsinki: VARIENG.
37.
KytöMerjaPahtaPäivi. 2012. Evidence from historical corpora up to the twentieth century. The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 123-133. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
KytöMerjaWalkerTerry. 2003. The linguistic study of Early Modern English speech-related texts: How “bad” can “bad” data be?Journal of English Linguistics31(3). 221-248.
39.
LandertDaniela. 2024. Methods in historical corpus pragmatics: Epistemic stance in Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
LeclercqBenoîtMorinCameron. 2023. No equivalence: A new principle of no synonymy. Constructions15. 1-16.
41.
MooreColette. 2026. Vernacular speech in writing. In KytöMerjaSmitterbergErik (eds.), The Cambridge history of the English language Vol. II, 50-74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
MooreColettePalmerChris C. (eds.). 2019. Teaching the history of the English language. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.
43.
NevalainenTerttuRaumolin-BrunbergHelena. 2016. Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England. 2nd edn.New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315475172.
44.
NevalainenTerttuSuhrCarlaTaavitsainenIrma. 2019. Corpus linguistics as digital scholarship: Big data, rich data and uncharted data. In SuhrCarlaNevalainenTerttuTaavitsainenIrma (eds.), From data to evidence in English language research, 1-26. Amsterdam: Brill. doi:10.1163/9789004390652_002.
45.
O’CallaghanTamara F.2019. Exploring the history of a word or phrase. In MooreColettePalmerChris C. (eds.), Teaching the history of the English language, 334-336. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.
46.
PalmerChris C.2015. Measuring productivity diachronically: Nominal suffixes in English letters, 1400–1600. English Language & Linguistics19(1). 107-129. doi:10.1017/S1360674314000264.
47.
PalmerChris C.SladekAmandaStoneJennifer C.2024. Confluences of writing studies and the history of the English language: An introduction. Across the Disciplines21(2/3). 74-81. doi:10.37514/ATD-J.2024.21.2-3.01.
48.
RigginsColemanSladekAmanda. 2024. A historical perspective on gendered language in writing studies journals. Across the Disciplines21(2/3). 190-212. doi:10.37514/ATD-J.2024.21.2-3.08.
49.
RissanenMatti. 1989. Three problems connected with the use of diachronic corpora. ICAME Journal13(1). 16-19.
50.
RissanenMatti. 2000. The world of English historical corpora: From Caedmon to the computer age. Journal of English Linguistics28(1). 7-20.
51.
RissanenMatti. 2012. Corpora and the study of the history of English. Language and Computers76(1). 197-220.
52.
Rodríguez-PuentePaula. 2017. Tracking down phrasal verbs in the spoken language of the past: Late Modern English in focus. English Language & Linguistics21(1). 69-97.
53.
Rodríguez-PuentePaulaSäilyTanjaSuomelaJukka. 2022. New methods for analysing diachronic suffix competition across registers: How -ity gained ground on -ness in Early Modern English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics27. 506-528.
54.
RubinoRaphaelDegaetano-OrtliebStefaniaTeichElkevan GenabithJosef. 2016. Modeling diachronic change in scientific writing with information density. In MatsumotoYujiPrasadRashmi (eds.), Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th international conference on computational linguistics: Technical papers, 750-761. Osaka, Japan: The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.
55.
SäilyTanja. 2014. Sociolinguistic variation in English derivational productivity: Studies and methods in diachronic corpus linguistics. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
56.
StoneJennifer. 2025. Metalanguage and ideology in action: The making of an English-speaking Alaska, 1870-1902. The Journal of English Linguistics53(3). 236-262.
57.
StrattonJames M.2020a. Corpora and diachronic analysis of English. In FriginalEricHardyJack A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus approaches to discourse analysis, 202-218. London & New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429259982-13.
58.
StrattonJames M.2020b. A diachronic analysis of the adjective intensifier well from Early Modern English to Present Day English. Canadian Journal of Linguistics65(2). 216-245.
59.
SuhrCarlaNevalainenTerttuTaavitsainenIrma (eds.). 2019. From data to evidence in English language research. Amsterdam: Brill.
60.
SuhrCarlaTaavitsainenIrma (eds.). 2012. Developing corpus methodology for historical pragmatics. Studies in Variation, Contacts, and Change in English 11. Helsinki: VARIENG. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/11/.
61.
TaavitsainenIrmaJuckerAndreas H.TuominenJukka (eds.). 2014. Diachronic corpus pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
62.
TrudgillPeter. 2020. Prehistoric sociolinguistics and the Uniformitarian Hypothesis: What were Stone-Age languages like? In TrudgillPeter (ed.), Millennia of language change: Sociolinguistic studies in deep historical linguistics, 7-16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63.
VesseyRachelle. 2017. Corpus approaches to language ideology. Applied Linguistics38(3). 277-296.
64.
WhittRichard J. (ed.). 2018. Diachronic corpora, genre, and language change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.85.
65.
WongAngeliaTupasRuanni. 2018. Durable and changing views of English: A diachronic thematic analysis of National Day Rally speeches in Singapore. Asian Englishes21(3). 224-242.
66.
XinWen. 2024. What can the history of the English language research offer? A diachronic corpus-based approach to research in writing studies. Across the Disciplines21(2/3). 213-236. doi:10.37514/ATD-J.2024.21.2-3.09.
67.
ZampieriMarcosMalmasiShervinDrasMark. 2016. Modeling language change in historical corpora: The case of Portuguese. In CalzolariNicolettaChoukriKhalidDeclerckThierryGoggiSaraGrobelnikMarkoMaegaardBenteMarianiJosephMazoHeleneMorenoAsuncionOdijkJanPiperidisStelios (eds.), Proceedings of the tenth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’16), 4098-4104. Portorož, Slovenia: European Language Resources Association.
68.
ZhuDanYangLiruLiangXin. 2022. Gender classification in classical fiction: A computational analysis of 1113 fictions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering19(9). 8892-8907. doi:10.3934/mbe.2022412.
