A database of North American double modals and self-repairs from YouTube

Androutsopoulos, J. (2013). Participatory culture and metalinguistic discourse: Performing and negotiating German dialects on YouTube. In D. Tannen & A. M. Trester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 47–72). Georgetown University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Antieau, L. (2006). A distributional analysis of rural Colorado English [Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia] UGA Athaneum. https://esploro.libs.uga.edu/esploro/outputs/doctoral/A-distributional-analysis-of-rural-Colorado-English/9949332921302959 Search in Google Scholar

Bailey, G., & Tillery, J. (1999). The Rutledge effect: The impact of interviewers on survey results in linguistics. American Speech, 74(4), 389–402. Search in Google Scholar

Battistella, E. L. (1995). The syntax of the double modal construction. Linguistica Atlantica, 17, 19–44. Search in Google Scholar

Beal, J. (2004). English dialects in the north of England: Morphology and syntax. In B. Kortmann, K. Burridge, R. Mesthrie, E. W. Schneider, & C. Upton (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English vol. 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 114–141). Mouton de Gruyter. Search in Google Scholar

Bell, A. (1991). The language of news media. Blackwell. Search in Google Scholar

Bernstein, C. (2003). Grammatical features of southern speech: Yall, might could, and fixin to. In S. J. Nagle & S. L. Sanders (Eds.), English in the Southern United States (pp. 106–118). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486715.007 Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D. (1994) An analytical framework for register studies. In D. Biber, D. & E. Finegan (Eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register variation (pp. 31–56). Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1988). Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse Processes, 11, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538809544689 Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1989). Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language, 65, 487–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/415220 Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1992). The linguistic evolution of five written and speech-based English genres from the 17th to the 20th centuries. In M. Rissanen, O. Ihalainen, T. Nevalainen, & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics (pp. 688–704). Mouton de Gruyter. Search in Google Scholar

Bortfeld, H., Leon, S. D., Bloom, J. E., Schober, M. F., & Brennan, S. E. (2001). Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech, 44(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309010440020101 Search in Google Scholar

Bou-Franch, P., Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2012). Social interaction in YouTube text-based polylogues: A study of coherence. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 17, 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01579.x Search in Google Scholar

Brown, K. (1991). Double modals in Hawick Scots. In P. Trudgill & J. Chambers (Eds.), Dialects of English: Studies in grammatical variation (pp. 74–103). Longman.10.4324/9781315505459-8 Search in Google Scholar

Butters, R. (1973). Acceptability judgments for double modals in Southern dialects. In R. Bailey & R. Shuy (Eds.), New ways of analyzing variation in linguistics. Georgetown University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Clark, H. H., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84, 73–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00017-3 Search in Google Scholar

Close, J. (2004). English auxiliaries: A syntactic study of contraction and variation [Doctoral Dissertation, University of York]. White Rose eTheses Online. https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/9870/1/424126.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Coats, S. (2019). A corpus of regional American language from YouTube. In C. Navarretta, M. Agirrezabal, & B. Maegaard (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Digital Humanities in the Nordic Countries Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, March 6–8, 2019 (pp. 79–91). CEUR. Search in Google Scholar

Coats, S. (2020). Articulation rate in American English in a corpus of YouTube videos. Language and Speech, 63(4), 799–831. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830919894720 Search in Google Scholar

Coats, S. (forthcoming). Dialect corpora from YouTube. Search in Google Scholar

Coats, S. (2022). Naturalistic double modals in North America. American Speech. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-9766889 Search in Google Scholar

Corrigan, K. (2010). Irish English, volume 1: Northern Ireland. Edinburgh University Press.10.3366/edinburgh/9780748634286.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Di Paolo, M. (1989). Double modals as single lexical items. American Speech, 64(3), 195–224. https://doi.org/10.2307/455589 Search in Google Scholar

Dynel, M. (2014). Participation framework underlying YouTube interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 73, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.04.001 Search in Google Scholar

Feagin, C. (1979). Variation and change in Alabama English: A sociolinguistic study of the white community. Georgetown University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Fennell, B. A., & Butters, R. R. (1996). Historical and contemporary distribution of double modals in English. In E. W. Schneider (Ed.), Focus on the USA: Varieties of English around the world (pp. 265–88). John Benjamins.10.1075/veaw.g16.14fen Search in Google Scholar

Fox, B. A., Hayashi, M. & Jasperson R. (1996). Resources and repair: A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 185–237). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620874.004 Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Blackwell. Search in Google Scholar

Hasty, J. D. (2012). We might should oughta take a second look at this: A syntactic re-analysis of double modals in Southern United States English. Lingua, 122(14), 1716–1738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.09.005 Search in Google Scholar

Hasty, J. D. (2014). We might should be thinking this way: Theory and practice in the study of syntactic variation. In R. Zanuttini & L. R. Horn (Eds.), Micro-syntactic variation in North American English (pp. 269–293). Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199367221.003.0009 Search in Google Scholar

Hasty, J. D., Hesson, A., Wagner, S. E., & Lannon, R. (2012). Finding needles in the right haystack: Double modals in medical consultations. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 18(2), 41–47. Search in Google Scholar

Herring, S. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4. https://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2007/761/ Search in Google Scholar

Honnibal, M., Montani, I., Van Landeghem, S., & Boyd, A. (2020). spaCy: Industrial-strength natural language processing in Python. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1212303 Search in Google Scholar

Hutchby, I. (2006). Media talk: Conversation analysis and the study of broadcasting. Open University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kaur, J. (2011). Raising explicitness through self-repair in English as a lingua franca. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2704–2715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.012 Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the black English vernacular. University of Pennsylvania Press. Search in Google Scholar

Leech, G. (2003). Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992. In R. Facchinetti, F. Palmer, & M. Krug (Eds.), Modality in contemporary English (pp. 223–240). De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110895339.223 Search in Google Scholar

Leech, G., Hundt, M., Mair, C., & Smith, N. (2009). Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511642210 Search in Google Scholar

Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14(4), 41–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4 Search in Google Scholar

Levelt, W. J. M., & Cutler, A. (1983). Prosodic marking in speech repair. Journal of Semantics, 2, 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1093/semant/2.2.205 Search in Google Scholar

Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x99001776 Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, S. (1988). Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. In P. Drew & A. Wootton (Eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order (pp. 161–227). Polity Press. Search in Google Scholar

Lickley, R. J. (2015). Fluency and disfluency. In M. A. Redford (Ed.), The handbook of speech production (pp. 445–469). Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118584156.ch20 Search in Google Scholar

Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schutze, H. (2008). Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511809071 Search in Google Scholar

McDavid, R. I., & O’Cain, R. K. (1980). Linguistic atlas of the Middle and South Atlantic states, fascicles 1–2. University of Chicago Press. Search in Google Scholar

Montgomery, M. (1989). Exploring the roots of Appalachian English. English World-Wide, 10(2), 227–278. https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.10.2.03mon Search in Google Scholar

Montgomery, M. (1998). Multiple Modals in LAGS and LAMSAS. In M. Montgomery & T. E. Nunnally (Eds.), From the Gulf States and beyond: The legacy of Lee Pederson and LAGS (pp. 90–122). University of Alabama Press Search in Google Scholar

Montgomery, M., & Nagle. S. J. (1994). Double modals in Scotland and the Southern United States: Trans-Atlantic inheritance or independent development? Folia Linguistica Historica, 14(1–2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.1993.14.1-2.91 Search in Google Scholar

Myhill, J. (1995). Change and continuity in the function of the American English modals. Linguistics, 33, 157–211. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1995.33.2.157 Search in Google Scholar

Nagle, S. J. (2003). Double modals in the southern United States: Syntactic structure or syntactic structures? In R. Facchinetti, F. Palmer, & M. Krug (Eds.), Modality in contemporary English (pp. 349–371). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895339.349 Search in Google Scholar

Nakatani, C., & Hirschberg, J. (1993). A speech-first model for repair detection and correction. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 46–53). https://doi.org/10.3115/1075671.1075748 Search in Google Scholar

Palmer, F. R. (1990). Modality and the English modals (2nd ed.). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

Pederson, L., McDaniel, S. L., & Adams, C. M. (1986–1992). Linguistic Atlas of the Gulf States (7 vols.). University of Georgia Press. Search in Google Scholar

Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., & Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825–2830. Search in Google Scholar

Plevoets, K. & Defrancq, B. (2018). The cognitive load of interpreters in the European Parliament: A corpus-based study of predictors for the disfluency uh(m). Interpreting, 20(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00001.ple Search in Google Scholar

Postma, A. (2000). Detection of errors during speech production: A review of speech monitoring models. Cognition, 77, 97–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00090-1 Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language (2nd ed.). Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Reed, P., & Montgomery, M. (Eds.). (2016). MultiMo: The database of multiple modals. http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/multimo/welcome Search in Google Scholar

Ribeiro, M. T., S. Singh, & C. Guestrin. (2016). Why should I trust you?: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. arXiv:1602.04938 [cs.LG].10.1145/2939672.2939778 Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organisation. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 70–85). Multilingual Matters. Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361– 382. https://doi.org/10.2307/413107 Search in Google Scholar

Schneider, E. W. (2003). Shakespeare in the coves and hollows? Toward a history of Southern English. In S. J. Nagle & S. L. Sanders (Eds.), English in the Southern United States (pp. 17–35). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486715.003 Search in Google Scholar

Schneider, E. W. (2004). The English dialect heritage of the southern United States. In R. Hickey (Ed.), Legacies of colonial English: Studies in transported dialects (pp. 262–309). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486920.012 Search in Google Scholar

Shriberg, E., Bear, J., & Dowding, J. (1992). Automatic detection and correction of repairs in human-computer dialog. In M. Marcus, (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth DARPA Speech and Natural Language Workshop (pp. 419–424). Harriman.10.3115/1075527.1075628 Search in Google Scholar

Williamson, S. L. (2018). Might should we consider this? Patterns of double modal inversion in Southern United States English [Master’s thesis, Simon Fraser University]. SFU Summit. https://summit.sfu.ca/item/19080 Search in Google Scholar

Zullo, D., Pfenninger, S. E., & Schreier, D. (2021). A pan-Atlantic ‘multiple modal belt’? American Speech, 96(1), 7–44. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-8620506 Search in Google Scholar