Abstract

Verb complementation in New Englishes’ perspective has attracted extensive scholarly attention (Nihalani et al., 2004). A valuable deviation due to emergence of locally characteristic linguistic patterns in Pakistani English can be captured in the domain of verb complementation called ‘New Ditransitives’(NDTs) (Bernaisch & Koch, 2015), on a broad syntactic level, NDTs are verbs used in double-object construction in new Englishes but not in standard British English. This paper is an attempt to find out NDTs in Pakistani English as compared to British English by using comparable corpora and as well as Predication phrase analysis of Larson (1988) compatible with Chomsky’s ideas about arguments’ interpretations in the area of vp is used for syntactic analysis. The theoretical significance shows that the main difference in producing NDTs is due to different parameters and system of lexicon.

Key Words

Non- native English, Comparative study, Syntactic Analysis, NDTs

What is known?

English as Lingua Franca consists of different varieties and every variety has its own pattern reflecting not only its local languages but also its cultural and social values (Dewey, 2007). Over the past few years, linguists are much engrossed in finding the different linguistic patterns in use of English language referring as distinct varieties (Gee & Hayes, 2011). According to Poole (1999) on all linguistic levels, varieties of a language reveal external and internal differences exhibiting the influence of different cultures. It is already established that every language is a mirror reflection of a particular culture, so it can be assumed that indigenous languages and cultural and social values induce variations but still some researchers such as Bartsch (1987) and Hamid and Baldauf (2013) are in search of definite scale on which deviation can be counted for variation and vice versa. 

On all linguistic levels, accounting for differences in terms of New Englishes has led to an increasing interest. English is used as second but official language in Pakistan. According to Hussain and Mahmood (2014) Pakistanis are using English in their own systematic and regular expressions which are clearly caused by cultural values and influence of indigenous languages. Further, he believes that any variation among American, British and Standard English in terms of systematization and regulation is not ungrammatical rather it is considered as non-native variety of English.

Moreover, for Ali (1993) Baumgardner and Brown (2003) Khan (2012) Kachru (1996) Mahboob (2012) Sheikh (2012) Hussain and Mehmood (2014), Pakistani English has gained a status of non-native variety of English. Further, verb complementation in New Englishes’ perspective has attracted extensive scholarly attention, and it is a well investigated area in different non-native varieties of English (Nihalani et al., 2004). Same phenomenon is observed in Pakistani English (Hussain & Mahmood, 2014) and different unique features are also captured in this study.

 

What this Paper Adds?

Different patterns of verb complementation with different frequencies are used in Pakistani English and internal variations are observed which are caused by local cultural values (Hussain & Mehmood, 2014). Another valuable deviation due to emergence of locally characteristic linguistic patterns can be captured in the domain of verb complementation called ‘New Ditransitives’(NDTs) (Bernaisch & Koch, 2015), on a broad syntactic level, NDTs are verbs used in double-object construction in new Englishes, but not in standard British English. Moreover, these new ditransitives are derived in terms of semantico-structural analogy, and it holds between the class of verbs used in double object construction in British English whereas the new set of verbs are observed in the same basic ditransitive construction in varieties of English outside the Great Britain (Hoffmann & Mukherjee, 2007).

In terms of syntactic variation, the focus is on modality, aspect and tense in research of non-native varieties (Ersson & Shaw, 2003). According to them, Verb complementation is one of the significant elements in defining the semantics of a verb as aspect, tense and modality. According to Saleemi (1993) verb complementation is of significant theoretical interest in generative grammar. Thus, this research comprehensively focuses on NDTs in Pakistani English and their syntactic analysis under Minimalist Program (MP) (Chomsky, 1995; 2000; 2001; 2008).

 

Construction of New Ditransitives in Pakistani English         

In this paper NDTs have been captured in written English texts. Pakistani English newspaper corpus and British newspaper corpus have been used as a data for this research in order to consider the frequent and distinct use of NDTs in Pakistani Newspaper corpus as compared to British Newspaper corpus. For example, an object noun phrase happens to be complemented with convey in Indian English (e.g.  Please convey him my best wishes) whereas this verb takes ‘to-phrase’ in British English (e.g. Please convey my best wishes to him). According to Ersson and Shaw (2003), different patterns of complementation e.g. pelt, supply, provide and some other semantically related verbs are present in Indian English. Same semantically related verbs are also searched in this paper and a large number of NDTs are captured in News Paper Corpus of Pakistani English (NCPE) by using Sketch Engine, and they are quite differently used in News Paper Corpus of British English (NCBE). Examples are given below:

1.       This will also provide us an opportunity to identify the office-bearers whose overall performance has not been………                         (NCPE)  

2.       It provides protection to a degree.                                            (NCBE)

Above examples show that ‘Provide’ is used as NDT in the targeted data whereas it is not used in British English as verb complementation construction. Another verb cremate is used as NDT in Pakistani English whereas in British English, this verb does not behave like ditransitive. Examples are given below:

3.        “Fortunately, I am here and therefore I can save you a trip, Bernard”        (NCBE)

Whereas no ditransitive of save is found in NCPE. Table 1 shows NDTs captured in targeted data. Some verbs are used in both British and Pakistani English but their use is quite different in both varieties. Table marks these verbs with “D” (different) whereas  û shows that the targeted verb is not present in corpus, and ü indicates the presence of NDTs in corpus.

 

Table 1. NDTs in Pakistani English

Verbs	NCBE	(NCPE)	Verbs	NCBE	(NCPE)
Address	û	ü	Impart	û	ü
Allow	D	ü	Interest	û	ü
Attract	û	ü	Issue	û	ü
Award	D	ü	Leave	D	ü
Bale	û	ü	Let	D	ü
Build	D	ü	Manipulate	û	ü
Commit	û	ü	Provide	û	ü
Cremate	û	ü	Put	D	ü
Earn	D	ü	Raise	û	ü
Enjoy	û	ü	Read	D	ü
Examine	û	ü	Save	D	ü
Guarantee	û	ü	Stage	û	ü
Hand	û	ü	Submit	û	ü
Help	D	ü	Supply	û	ü
Hike	û	ü	Term	û	ü
Hold	D	ü	Win	D	ü

Need and Significance of the Research

This research work has great importance in verb complementation, and it will also help to explore Pakistani English as distinct variety where there is a scarcity of linguistic research especially in terms of syntactic analysis. The work will pave the way for other researchers who have the understanding of syntactic structure of verb complementation or who want to study this structure for research purposes. It will also assist to draw a line between verb complementation and NDTs in Pakistani English and British English. 

Moreover, the theoretical significance of this study deals with MP in terms of the absence of dative construction as an indirect object in verb complementation of Pakistani English and presence of this dative construction as an indirect object in ditransitive constructions of British English.  The dative construction takes the indirect object as complement to the upper vp head whereas at lower vp, the direct object. At this point, the direct object leaves its place and reaches to specifier position of upper vp. On reaching the specifier position, it checks its accusative case assignment. VP head moves twice, first to lower PrP and then reaches to upper head. Finally, this vp head reaches to upper PrP for operation merge with (+Caus).

This theoretical significance shows that syntactically there is no difference between British and Pakistani English but the main difference in producing NDTs is due to different parameters and system of lexicon. English speakers by having English as first language have fixed verb complementation restrictions in lexicon whereas Pakistanis are using English as second language. Therefore, they access the second language via their mother tongue and they do not have any restriction in lexicon in terms of generating NDTs.




Research Objectives

This research is an attempt

1. To find out new ditransitives in Pakistani English in comparison of British   English

2. To analyze the NDTs syntactically in Pakistani English 




Research Questions

Following are the research questions of this study:

1. What are the variant forms of verb complementation in Pakistani English as compared to British English?

2. How can the NDTs in Pakistani English be analyzed syntactically as compared to British English? 

Review of Literature

The literature on non-native varieties of English asserts that the overall population and English instructors respect American English (AmE), British English (BrE) and the related Received Pronunciation (RP) as the measuring stick of linguistic accuracy (Matsuda, 2013). AmE and BrE specifically have been characteristically concurred a higher status in English instructing and training arrangement and are viewed as loftier than different Englishes, while different varieties are considered as being 'an insufficient English' and loaded with 'errors made by students of English' (Darus & Subramaniam, 2009; James, 2013; Selinker & Rutherford, 2013). 

However, the past few decades show an immense increasing interest in New Englishes around the world keeping in view the linguistic differences between different varieties of English. In this background, the focus is on different features of New Englishes (e.g. idioms, article usage, collocation, tense usage and particle verbs) which become cluster on the interface level of lexis and grammar (Schneider, 2001). In this context, another important linguistic feature in the area of lexico-grammar is verb complementation as Mair (2002) reports that differences in verb complementation between varieties of English are usually gradual in nature and can be observed at an early stage in terms of more or less subtle shifts in frequency. 

Actually, the verb complementation is a process that is often related to variety specific. Different patterns of this process in different non-native varieties are observed in literature for example, Kiparsky and Kiparsky (1970) investigated the infinitival verb complements in English which are results of a process in which an embedded verb fails to bear the agreement of person and number because the embedded subject disappears from complement clause due to deletion or oblique marking or due to raising of NP (subject) following ‘for’. The taxonomy of Huddleston (1971) is also consistent with this view. It is grounded on the subject’s derivational history of embedded sentence and as well as on the intransitive, transitive and ditransitive processes.

Research into World Englishes has brought forth a variety of literature over the previous decades including the work by Kachru (1983, 2005), Shastri (1988, 1992) and Mehrotra (1998). Another study investigated the verb complementation in Indian English which has been so far generally ignored as a particular area of variety-specific standard formation (Shastri, 1996). Moreover, in outer circle-Pakistani English, a study has examined the same phenomenon in which the main focus was its frequency and distribution (Hussain & Mahmood, 2014). In this research, different patterns and their frequencies of verb complementation were analyzed and it was claimed that different patterns of verb complementation are used in Pakistani English and some of them are very frequent. This study is an attempt to highlight the internal and external variations in Pakistani English in terms of local cultural values if the findings of this research are compared with the results of Altenberg (1993) who worked on British English.

Moreover, another research of Ersson and Shaw (2003) on complementation patterns of provide, supply, pelt and other semantically related verbs have been conducted. They showed the comparison of British English and South Asian English. They discovered that pelt complemented with an object noun phrase and a with-phrase in British English while in South Asian English, this verb shows an invert order of post verbal components with at-phrase (e.g. they are pelting cans at him). Ersson and Shaw (2003) perceptions verify that verb complementation is one of the structural features at the lexis-grammar interface that are important in shaping local lexico-grammatical standards in assortments of English. The verb complementation profile of South Asian Englishes commonly contrasts from British English as to the scope of verbs verified in individual ditransitive patterns.

Syntactically, the verb complementation is also an attractive phenomenon for investigation as Paikeday and Chomsky (1985) has closely investigated this process and claimed that patterns in their deep structures are different instead of surface structure. Chomsky exemplified persuade and expect and explained different transformations involved in them by introducing Raising (expect) and EQUI-NP (Persuade). Examples are given below:

i. He expected John to go to the store for milk.

ii. He expected that John would go to the store for milk.              (Raising)

iii. Harry Persuaded John to go to the store for milk.

iv. *Harry persuaded that John (would) go to the store for milk.   (EQUI-NP)

The logical argument structure of verb (expect) construes a complement clause sharing no argument with matrix clause. Moreover, the matrix verb being an intransitive verb is superordinate to complement clause in deep structure. The study is also focusing to analyze the verb complementation syntactically in terms of NDTS to check the distinctive patterns present in Pakistani English and how these patterns are different from British English. Moreover, this research work is in a direction of getting differences in logical argument and surface structure, and how lexicon allows the transformation in verb complementation process in terms of NDTs.

Materials and Methods

This section will discuss the research methodology in detail. Firstly, the design of the study is explained and this is followed by a discussion on population and sample size.  The researcher has also explained in length the instruments used for data collection, description of data collection technique and pattern of data analysis.




Design of the Study

“A research design describes a flexible set of guidelines that connect theoretical paradigms to strategies of inquiry and methods for collecting empirical material” (Denzin & Lincoln 1994, p. 14). In this research, mixed method is used to study verb complementation. Creswell (2003) gave two main types of mixed methodology: sequential and concurrent mixed methods. They are further subdivided into following types: Sequential Transformative Design, Sequential Explanatory Design, Concurrent Triangulation Design, Concurrent Embedded Design and Sequential Exploratory Design.

The researcher has used sequential embedded mixed methodology to study syntax of verb complementation in Pakistani English. In this methodology, the quantitative data is analyzed by using Minimalist Program. In this course of above said methodology, the qualitative results will be used for assistance in terms of interpretation and explanation of quantitative results.




Population and Sampling

The population is “All instances of individuals (or situations) that share certain characteristics” (Mackey & Gass, 2005, p.18). The population of the present study is Pakistani English. Sampling is a technique of choosing samples (Hadi, 1983) and this sample is finite portion of statistical population. The properties of selected sample are targeted to get information to the whole (Webster, 1985). The Sampling techniques are as follow: Probability sampling technique and non- probability technique. Alvi (2016) discusses that both have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Probability sampling is generally held to be more representative because it allows every element of the population a chance, non-zero probability, to be included in the research. Although this technique reduces the possibility of sampling error, this is not applicable in all situations. In researches where the population is too large and too general, it is unlikely for all the elements to have some chance of selection. It becomes very time consuming and expensive in such cases. Non-probability sampling is suitable if the research has a shortage of time and excessive availability of samples. 

For this research work, all samples were taken from non-native speakers of English and the researcher used purposive non- probability technique to capture NDTs in Pakistani English. For this purpose, British and Pakistani Newspaper corpora (2017-2018) are used. For the present research, following Pakistani English newspapers are selected: Daily Times, Dawn, The Nation and The News.

Linguistic Patterns and Syntactic Analysis

different linguistic patterns of NDTs are extracted by using following formulas: [tag= "VV"] [tag= "PP"] [tag= "NN"] and [tag= "VV"] [tag= "PP"] [tag= "DT"] [tag= "NN"]. After extracting, these linguistic patterns are analyzed syntactically by using Minimalist Program. According to Hunston (2002), linguistic patterns are very important as they indicate sequence of grammatical words, clause types and word types. Moreover, these patterns are also responsible for language production which is highly concerned in this study in terms of analyzing the verb complementation process in Pakistani English.

The current study deals with Pakistani English (Outer Circle English) and British English (Inner Circle English) to capture and analyze the verb complementation by using Sketch Engine. Two corpora are used i.e. Pakistani English Newspaper corpus and British English Newspaper corpus. To make both the corpora comparable, written text type and different domains of written texts are taken; Table 1 demonstrates the selected data with whole number of words for each corpus used for this study. 

Table 2. Comparable Corpora

S. No Corpus Name Kachru’s Circle Info. Text Type Domain Total number of Words

1 British National Corpus 

(BNC) Inner Circle

British English

 (B.E) i. Written Books & Periodicals.

ii. Written Miscellaneous.

iii. Written to be spoken. i. Imaginative

ii. Informative.

a) Applied Sc.

b) Social Sc.

c) Natural & Pure Sc.

d) World Affairs.

e) Leisure.

f) Arts.

g) Belief & Thoughts

h) Commerce & Finance. 81,354,121

2 Newspaper Corpus

(N.C) Outer  Circle

Pakistani English

 (Pak.E) i. Periodicals

ii. Written Miscellaneous.

iii. Written to be spoken.

i. Imaginative

ii. Informative.

a) Applied Sc.

b) Social Sc.

c) Natural & Pure Sc.

d) World Affairs.

e) Leisure.

f) Arts.

g) Belief & Thoughts

h) Commerce & Finance. 11,226,817




To capture all the NDTs in corpora, CQL (corpus query language) feature is used, and it requires a special inquiry formula. The pilot study has used the following formulas i.e. [tag= "VV"] [tag= "PP"] [tag= "NN"] and [tag= "VV"] [tag= "PP"] [tag= "DT"] [tag= "NN"]. By using these formulas, some adverbs are captured after pronouns but this can be neglected manually while maintaining and arranging the data. The retrieved data is analyzed qualitatively within the theoretical framework, Minimalist Program (MP) (Chomsky, 1995, 2000, 2001, 2008). 




Representations in the Minimalist Program

The Interface Levels

MP and GB have different levels of representation e.g. GB consists of four levels of representation while MP contains two levels of representation. Deep structure, Surface structure, Logical Form (LF) and Phonological Form (PF) are associated with GB whereas LF and PF are part of MP (Chomsky, 1981). They are the interface levels mainly associated with the interpretability of features.




4.5.2: Features Interpretability

According to Chomsky (2000), Phonological, formal and semantic features are associated with lexical items in lexicon. Derivational Operations like Merge and Move are only triggered by formal features (Bukhari, 2009). Phi-features (?-features) e.g. (person, gender, number), extended projection principle (EPP) and abstract case feature are considered and discussed frequently. 

Alharbi (2017) has explained that during Derivation, the only Phi-features of the nominal gain value while its abstract case features have no significance in semantic interpretation. Then the unvalued case features enter into the derivation. Phi-features which exhibit morphological reflexes e.g. (number, gender and person) are also present on the heads of Tense (T) and Verb (V). Just like abstract features on nominals, these ?-features have no significance in semantic interpretation and therefore remain uninterpretable and enter into the derivation unvalued. 

Chomsky (2005) proposes that (T) head inherits these features from complementizer (C) because it does not have these features. Now interpretable features finally reach at LF in the process of semantic interpretability. After reaching at LF, the derivation becomes converged.  

4.5.3: Representation of Minimalist Model

The following diagram shows the minimalist model’s representation.



Clause derivation starts from numeration. In this process, the items are selected then the two derivational operations e.g. Move and Merge are applied. 




Derivational Operations

4.6.1: The Operation Merge

In the numeration, this operation applies to the items and it selects two items X and Y. A larger syntactic unit Z is formed when X and Y are merged, whereas Z is a projection of either X or Y (i.e. either X or Y is the head of Z). This operation occurs successively to build larger and larger units adding one item at a time (Bukhari, 2009).




The Operation Move

According to Chomsky (2000), after the first operation Merge, for making a well formed sentence, the derivational operation Move is ready to apply. According to Alharbi (2017), the function of this operation is to move uninterpretable features from their base position to a specifier position. Here, the moved elements in functional phrase check their uninterpretable features against interpretable features. 




The Operation Agree

In operation agree, a relationship is developed between two elements. This particular relationship shows how these elements match their features. The following tree diagram shows the process of derivation and explains how it works under the proposition of Agree-based theory (Chomsky, 2000).

It also describes the process of derivation in which elements are merged, uninterpretable features remain unvalued and interpretable features become valued. 

Figure 3

Derivational Operations



The above diagram throws light on Agree-based theory where the uninterpretable features and their deletion process are shown. The Agree relation develops between a probe and a goal. Probe contains uninterpretable features while goal consists of interpretable features. The probe searches a goal so that its uninterpretable features become valued (Bukhari, 2009).

In this diagram the little (v) acts as a probe and has a set of uninterpretable features such as [µ ?], and DP2 is its appropriate goal because it has matching interpretable features. Another point is that that DP2 also consists of an uninterpretable case feature and during the process of derivation it also needs to get valued (Alharbi, 2017). So the basic requirement of Agree-relation is now satisfied. Little (v) and DP2 enter into Agree-relation. The Phi-features of little (v) and case features of DP2 get valued during derivation. Finally the process of deletion of uninterpretable case feature is done at this moment. The same relation is developed between T and DP1 (Chomsky, 2000).

Results and Discussion

For syntactic analysis of verb complementation, Predication phrase analysis of Larson (1988) is very significant which is compatible with Chomsky’s ideas regarding interpretation of arguments in terms of VP. Moreover, there is lack of co-indexation of the direct object and the pronoun morpheme are affixed to the indirect object when not being c-commanded by the direct object. According to Karimi (2005), both the objects in ditransitive construction occupy the same position i.e. complement of V, not on two different positions.

Figure 4

Syntactic Representation of NDTs



This predication phrase is also taken as substitute for VP shell nod proposed by Larson (1990). According to Bowers’ analysis, the small and main clause bear same structural relations. Moreover, he emphasizes that predication belongs to a functional category where subject occupies the position of specifier of PrP whereas object is located on specifier of VP. Here, movement of verb takes place and it reaches to PrP head. Transitive Phrase as functional category is another modification in Bower’s paradigm. He further examines the position of transitive phrase (TrP) and placed them in between PrP and VP. Moreover, NPs moves through TrP head for checking accusitivity.

According to Bowers (1993, 2001), ditransitive construction in English bears two PrPs; one is causative (e.g. make and have) whereas the other one is non-causative. One PrP is complement of TP which in turn becomes the complement of VP whereas the subject occupies the position of specifier. The VP head moves from its original position in the lower VP to the lower PrP head and from there to the upper VP head to check the characteristic of [+Caus] and then to the upper PrP head for case marking to the subject of the lower PrP. 

According to this theory, ditransitives’ derivation process and deep structure share similar characteristics with complex causative constructions but the only one difference which is observed is that causative construction bears one causative and one non-causative lexical verb whereas ditransitive construction has only one lexical verb present in lower PrP. In ditransitive construction, the upper PrP consists of abstract [+Caus] for checking causativity of the lower verb. Example is given on next page:

Figure 5

John gave Marry a book.

In terms of NDTs captured in Pakistani English, no difference is observed in D structures of British English and Pakistani English. See the example below:

Figure 6

He gifted her dream.

The above tree shows that there is no difference between British and Pakistani English in terms of surface structure but the main difference in producing NDTs is due to different parameters and system of lexicon. English speakers by having English as first language have fixed verb complementation restrictions in lexicon whereas Pakistanis are using English as second language. Therefore, they access the second language via their mother tongue and they do not have any restriction in lexicon in terms of generating NDTs.

Figure 6

He gifted her dream.

The above tree shows that there is no difference between British and Pakistani English in terms of surface structure but the main difference in producing NDTs is due to different parameters and system of lexicon. English speakers by having English as first language have fixed verb complementation restrictions in lexicon whereas Pakistanis are using English as second language. Therefore, they access the second language via their mother tongue and they do not have any restriction in lexicon in terms of generating NDTs.

References

• Ali, A. (1993). English in South Asia: A historical perspective.The English Language inPakistan,3(2),3-12
• Altenberg, B. (1993). Recurrent word combinations in spoken English. InProceedings ofthe fifth Nordic association for English studies conference. Reykjavik, Iceland: University of Iceland.
• Ahn, H. (2014). Teachers' attitudes towards Korean English in South Korea.World Englishes,33(2), 195-222.
• Baumgardner, R. J., & Brown, K. (2003). World Englishes: Ethics and pedagogy.World Englishes,22(3), 245-251
• Bell, A. (1991).The language of news media. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Bernaisch, T., & Koch, C. (2015). Attitudes towards Englishes in India.World Englishes,35(1), 118-132
• Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2005). Embodied construction grammar in simulation-basedlanguage understanding.Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions,3(4), 147-190
• Bowers,J.(1993).The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 24(3),591-652.
• Chomsky,N.(1981).Lecturesongovernmentandbinding.Dordrecht:Foris.
• Chomsky, N. (2008). On phases.Current Studies in Linguistics Series,4(5), 133-144.
• reswell, J. W., Plano, C.V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs.Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research,5(2)209-240.
• Darus, S., & Subramaniam, K. (2009). Error analysis of the written English essays of secondary school students in Malaysia: A case study.European Journal of Social Sciences,8(3), 483-495
• De Ersson, E. O., & Shaw, P. (2003). Verb complementation patterns in Indian standard English.English World-Wide,24(2), 137-161.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research thousand Oaks.SagePublisher.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research thousand Oaks.SagePublisher.
• Dewey, M. (2007). English as a lingua franca and globalization: An interconnected perspective.International Journal of Applied Linguistics,17(3), 332-346
• Ersson, E. O., & Shaw, P. (2003). Verb complementation patterns in Indian standard English.English World Wide,24(2), 137-161
• Gibbs, R. W. (1997).Identifying the factors of meaning in the home. University of Minnesota
• Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. R. (2011).Language and learning in the digital age. Routledge.
• Hamid, M. O., & Baldauf, J. R. B. (2013). Second language errors and features of world Englishes.World Englishes,32(4), 476-494.
• Hoffmann, S., & Mukherjee, J. (2007). Ditransitive verbs in Indian English and BritishEnglish: A corpus-linguistic study.AAA: Arbeiten Aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 2(4), 5-24.
• Hunston, S. (2002).Corpora in applied linguistics. Ernst Klett SprachenPublisher.
• Hussain, Z., & Mahmood, M. A. (2014). Invariant tag questions in Pakistani English: A comparison with native and other non-native Englishes.Asian Englishes,16(3), 229-238
• Huddleston, R. (1971). The sentence in written English: A syntactic study based on an analysis of scientific texts.Cambridge University Press.
• James, C. (2013).Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Routledge
• Kachru, B. B. (1983). South Asian English: toward an identity in diaspora.South Asian English: Structure, Use, and Users, 7(3), 9-28
• Kachru, B.B. (1983).The Indianization of English: The English Language in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press
• Kachru, B.B. (2005).Asian Englishes: Beyond the Canon.Hong Kong University Press
• Kirkpatrick, A. (2008).Linguistic imperialism? English as a global language.Handbook of languageand communication: Diversity and change,9(3), 333-344
• Khan, H. I. (2012). English teachers' perceptions about creativity and teaching creativewriting in Pakistan.American International Journal of Contemporary Research,2(3), 57-67
• Larson,R.(1988).Onthedoubleobjectconstruction.LinguisticInquiry,19(1),335-391
• Larson,R.(1990).DoubleObjectRevisited:ReplytoJackendoff.LinguisticInquiry,21(3),589-632.Macalister, J. (2001). Introducing a New Zealand newspaper corpus.New Zealand English Journal,15(4), 35-50
• Marlina, R. (2014). The pedagogy of English as an international language (EIL): More reflections and dialogues. The Pedagogy of English as an International Language,3(2), 1-19
• Mukherjee, J., & Hoffmann, S. (2007). Describing verb complementationprofiles of new englishes: A pilot study of Indian english.English World Wide,27(2), 147-173
• Mahboob, A. (2012). English as an Islamic language: Acase study of Pakistani english.World Englishes,28(2), 175-189
• Mair, C. (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(1), 105-131
• Matsuda, P. K. (2013). It's the wild west out there: A new linguistic frontier in US college composition.Literacy as translingual practice: Between communities and classrooms,6(2),128-138
• Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Common data collection measures.Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum,8(3)43-99
• Nihalani, P.,Tongue, R. K., &Hosali, P.(1979).Indian and British English: A Handbook of Usage and Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Nihalani, P.T. R. K., Hosali, P., &Crowther, J.(2004).Indian and British English. A handbook of usage and pronunciation (2ndedn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Poole, S. C. (1999).An introduction to linguistics. Macmillan International HigherEducationPublisher
• Saleemi, A. (1993). Universal grammarand language learnability.Cambridge University Press.
• Schneider, E. W. (2001). The dynamics of new Englishes: From identity construction to dialect birth.Language,79(2), 233-281
• Selinker, L., & Rutherford, W. E. (2013).Rediscovering interlanguage. Routledge
• Shastri, S. V. (1996). Using computer corpora in the description of language with special reference to complementation in Indian English.South Asian English: Structure, Use, and Users, 2(4), 70-8
• Shastri,S. V. (1992). Opaque and transparent features ofIndianEnglish.New directions in English language corpora:Methodology, Results, Software Developments, 13(4), 263-275
• Shastri, L. (1988).A connectionist approach to knowledge representation and limited inference. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 331-392.
• Sheikh, Q. A. (2012). An analysis ofthe vowel sounds of Pakistani english.Bulletin of Education and Research,34(1), 1-18.
• Yoo, I. W. (2014).Nonnative teachers in the expanding circle and the ownership of English.Applied linguistics,35(1), 82-86