References
- Beths, Frank. 1999. The history of dare and the status of unidirectionality. Linguistics 37. 1069-1110.
- BECD = British English Cambridge Dictionary online. Available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org.
- Bryant, Margaret. 1944. The preterite-present verbs of Present-Day English. College English 5. 259-264.
- Cameron, Angus et al. 2003. The Dictionary of Old English (A-G). (CD-ROM version) Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.
- Canon, Elizabeth Bell. 2010. The use of modal expression preference as a marker of style and attribution: The case of William Tyndale and the 1533 English Enchiridion Militis Christini. (Berkeley Insights in Linguistics and Semiotics 76.) New York: Peter Lang.
- Denison, David. 1990. Auxiliary + impersonal in Old English. Folia Linguistica Historica 9: 139-166.
- Denison, David. 1993. English historical syntax. London and New York: Longman.
- Fischer, Olga. 1992. Syntax. In Norman Blake (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. 2. 1066-1476, 207-408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hogg, Richard. 2002. An introduction to Old English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Hogg, Richard M. & Robert D. Fulk. 2011. A grammar of Old English. Vol. 2: Morphology. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.) Approaches to grammaticalization. Vol 1: Focus on theoretical and methodological issues, 17-35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Lightfoot, David W. 1979. Principles of diachronic syntax. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 23.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Lightfoot, David W. 2009. Cuing a new grammar. In Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los (eds.), The handbook of the history of English, 24-44. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Markus, Manfred et al. (eds.). 1999. Innsbruck Computer Archive of Machine-Readable English Texts. (CD-ROM version.) Innsbruck: University of Innsbruck.
- MED = Middle English Dictionary online - http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/med
- MD=Macmillan Dictionary online - http://www.macmillan.pl Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English syntax. Vols. 1-2. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Molencki, Rafał. 2002. The status of dearr and þearf in Old English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 38. 363-380.
- Molencki, Rafał. 2005. The confusion between tharf and dare in Middle English. In Herbert Schendl et al. (eds.), Rediscovering Middle English philology, 147-160. Frankfurt/ Main: Peter Lang.
- Rissanen, Matti. 1991. Spoken language and the history of do-periphrasis. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Historical English syntax. (Topics in English Linguictics 2.), 321-342. Berlin- New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Taeymans, Martine. 2004. An investigation into the marginal modals DARE and NEED in British present-day English. A corpus-based approach. In Olga Fischer et al. (eds.), Up and down the cline: The nature of grammaticalization, 97-114. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
- Tomaszewska, Magdalena. 2012. On the auxiliary status of dare in Middle English: A corpus based study. In Joanna Esquibel & Anna Wojtyś (eds.), Explorations in the English language: Middle Ages and beyond. Festschrift for Professor Jerzy Wełna on the occasion of his 70th birthday, 309-317. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
- Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1992. Syntax. In Richard M. Hogg (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. 1. The beginnings to 1066, 168-289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. 1963-1973. An historical syntax of the English language, 3 parts, 4 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
- Warner, Anthony R. 1993. English auxiliaries: Structure and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.