modern english research paper

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Linguistic variation and change in 250 years of english scientific writing: a data-driven approach.

• 1 Language Science and Technology, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
• 2 Digital Linguistics, Institut für Deutsche Sprache, Mannheim, Germany

We trace the evolution of Scientific English through the Late Modern period to modern time on the basis of a comprehensive corpus composed of the Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, the first and longest-running English scientific journal established in 1665. Specifically, we explore the linguistic imprints of specialization and diversification in the science domain which accumulate in the formation of “scientific language” and field-specific sublanguages/registers (chemistry, biology etc.). We pursue an exploratory, data-driven approach using state-of-the-art computational language models and combine them with selected information-theoretic measures (entropy, relative entropy) for comparing models along relevant dimensions of variation (time, register). Focusing on selected linguistic variables (lexis, grammar), we show how we deploy computational language models for capturing linguistic variation and change and discuss benefits and limitations.

1. Introduction

The language of science is a socio-culturally firmly established domain of discourse that emerged in the Early Modern period (ca. 1500–1700) and fully developed in the Late Modern period (ca. 1700–1900). While considered fairly stable linguistically (cf. Görlach, 2001 ; Leech et al., 2009 ), the Late Modern period is a very prolific time when it comes to the formation of text types, with many of the registers we know today developing during that period—including the language of science (see Görlach, 2004 for a diachronic overview).

Socio-culturally, register diversification is connected to the growing complexity of modern societies, labor becoming increasingly divided with more different and increasingly specialized activities across all societal sectors 1 . Also, driven by science as well as early industry, standardization (e.g., agreements on weights and measures) and routinization of procedures become important issues. At the same time, enlightenment and the scientific and industrial revolutions support a general climate of openness and belief in technological advancement. In the domain of science, the eighteenth century is of course the epoch of encyclopedias 2 but also that of the scientific academies which promoted the scientific method and distributed scientific knowledge through their publications. The two oldest scientific journals are the French Journal des Sçavans and the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London . At the beginning of publication (both started in 1665), the journals were no more than pamphlets and included articles written in the form of letters to the editor and reviews of scientific works ( Gleick, 2010 ). Professionalization set in around the mid eighteenth century, as witnessed by the introduction of a reviewing process in the Royal Society ( Moxham and Fyfe, 2018 ; Fyfe et al., 2019 ).

While there is a fair stock of knowledge on the development of scientific language from socio-cultural and historical-pragmatic perspectives (see section 2), it is less obvious what are the underlying, more general principles of linguistic adaptation to new needs of expression in an increasingly diversified and specialized setting such as science. This provides the motivation for the present research. Using a comprehensive diachronic corpus of English scientific writing composed of the Philosophical Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of London [henceforth: Royal Society Corpus (RSC); Kermes et al., 2016 ; Fischer et al., 2020 ], we trace the evolution of Scientific English looking for systematic linguistic reflexes of specialization and diversification, yielding a distinctive “scientific style” and forming diverse sublanguages (sublanguage of chemistry, physics, biology etc.). In terms of theory, our work is specifically rooted in register linguistics ( Halliday, 1985b ; Biber, 1988 ) and more broadly in theories of language use, variation and change that acknowledge the interplay of social, cognitive and formal factors (e.g., Bybee, 2007 ; Kirby et al., 2015 ; Aitchison, 2017 ; Hundt et al., 2017 ). While we zoom in on the language of science, we are ultimately driven by the more general questions about language change: What changes and how? What drives change? How does change proceed? What are the effects of change? Thus, we aim at general insights about the dynamics of language use, variation and change.

In a similar vein, the methodology we present can be applied to other domains and related analysis tasks as well as other languages. Overall, we pursue an exploratory, data-driven approach using state-of-the-art computational language models (ngram models, topic models, word embeddings) combined with selected information-theoretic measures (entropy, relative entropy) to compare models/corpora along relevant dimensions of variation (here: time and register) and to interpret the results with regard to effects on language system and use. Since the computational models we use are word-based, words act as the anchor unit of analysis. However, style is primarily indicated by lexico-grammatical usage, so we investigate both the lexical and the grammatical side of words. While we consider lexis and grammar as intricately interwoven, in line with various theories of grammar ( Halliday, 1985a ; Hunston and Francis, 2000 ; Goldberg, 2006 ), for expository purposes, we here consider the lexico-semantic and the lexico-grammatical contributions to change separately.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. We start with an overview of previous work in corpus and computational linguistics in modeling diachronic change with special regard to register and style (section 2). In section 3 we introduce our data set (section 3.1) and elaborate on the methods employed (section 3.3). Section 4 shows analyses of diachronic trends at the levels of lexis and grammar (section 4.1), the development of topics over time (section 4.2) and paradigmatic effects of changing language use (section 4.3). Finally, we summarize our main results and briefly assess benefits and shortcomings of the different kinds of models and measures applied to the analysis of linguistic variation and change (section 5).

2. Related Work

The present work is placed in the area of language variation and change with special regard of social and register variation and computational models of variation and change (for overviews see Aragamon, 2019 for computational register studies and Nguyen et al., 2016 for computational socio-linguistics).

Regarding the language of science, there is an abundance of linguistic-descriptive work, including diachronic aspects, providing many valuable insights (e.g., Halliday, 1988 ; Halliday and Martin, 1993 ; Atkinson, 1999 ; Banks, 2008 ; Biber and Gray, 2011 , 2016 ). However, most of the existing work is either based on text samples or starts from predefined linguistic features. Further, there are numerous studies on selected scientific domains, such as medicine or astronomy, e.g., Nevalainen (2006) ; Moskowich and Crespo (2012) and Taavitsainen and Hiltunen (2019) , which work on the basis of fairly small corpora containing hand-selected and often manually annotated material. Typically, such studies are driven from a historical socio-linguistic or pragmatic perspective and focus on selected linguistic phenomena, e.g., forms of address ( Taavitsainen and Jucker, 2003 ). For overviews on recent trends in historical pragmatics/socio-linguistics (see Jucker and Taavitsainen, 2013 ; Säily et al., 2017 ). Studies on specific domains, registers or text types provide valuable resources and insights into the socio-historical conditions of language use. Here, we build upon these insights, adding to it the perspective of general mechanisms of variation and change.

More recently, the diachronic perspective has attracted increasing attention in computational linguistics and related fields. Generally, diachronic analysis requires a methodology for comparison of linguistic productions along the time line. Such comparisons may range over whole epochs (e.g., systemic changes from early Modern English to Late Modern English), or involve short ranges (e.g., the issues of 1 year of The New York Times to detect topical trends). Applying computational language models to diachronic analysis requires a computationally valid method of comparison of language use along the time line, i.e., one that captures linguistic change if it occurs.

Different kinds of language models are suitable for this task and three major strands can be identified. First, a number of authors from fields as diverse as literary studies, history and linguistics have used simple ngram models to find trends in diachronic data using relative entropy (Kullback-Leibler Divergence, Jensen-Shannon Divergence) as a measure of comparison. For instance, Juola (2003) used Kullback-Leibler Divergence (short: KLD) to measure rate of linguistic change in 30 years of National Geographic Magazine. In more recent, large-scale analyses on the Google Ngram Corpus ( Bochkarev et al., 2014 ; Kim et al., 2014 ) analyze change in frequency distributions of words within and across languages. Specifically humanistic research questions are addressed by e.g., Hughes et al. (2012) who use relative entropy to measure stylistic influence in the evolution of literature; or Klingenstein et al. (2014) who analyze different speaking styles in criminal trials comparing violent with non-violent offenses; or Degaetano-Ortlieb and Teich (2018) applying KLD as dynamic slider over the time line of a diachronic corpus of scientific text.

Second, probabilistic topic models ( Steyvers and Griffiths, 2007 ) have become a popular means to summarize and analyze the content of text corpora, including topic shifts over time. In linguistics and the digital humanities, topic models have been applied to various analytic goals including diachronic linguistic analysis ( Blei and Lafferty, 2006 ; Hall et al., 2008 ; Yang et al., 2011 ; McFarland et al., 2013 ). Here again, a valid method of comparing model outputs along the time line has to be provided. In our work, we follow the approach proposed in Fankhauser et al. (2016) using entropy over topics as a measure to assess topical diversification over time.

Third, word embeddings have become a popular method for modeling linguistic change, with a focus on lexical semantic change (e.g., Hamilton et al., 2016 ; Dubossarsky et al., 2017 , 2019 ; Fankhauser and Kupietz, 2017 ). Word embeddings are weakly neural models that capture usage patterns of words and are used in a variety of NLP tasks. While well-suited to capture the summative effects of change (groups of words or whole vocabularies, see e.g., Grieve et al., 2016 ), the primary focus lies on lexis 3 . Other linguistic levels, e.g., grammar ( Degaetano-Ortlieb and Teich, 2016 , 2018 ; Bizzoni et al., 2019a ), collocations ( Xu and Kemp, 2015 ; Garcia and Garćia-Salido, 2019 ), or specific aspects of change, e.g., spread of change ( Eisenstein et al., 2014 ), specialization ( Bizzoni et al., 2019b ) or life-cycles of language varieties ( Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil et al., 2013 ), are only rarely considered. Once again, while word embeddings offer a specific model of language use, using them to capture diachronic change and to assess effects of change calls for adequate instruments for comparison along the time line. Here, we use the commonly applied measure of cosine distance for a general topological analysis of diachronic word embedding spaces; and we use entropy for closer inspection of specific word embeddings clusters to measure the more fine-grained paradigmatic effects of change.

In sum, in this paper we address some of the core challenges in modeling diachronic change by (a) looking at the interplay of different linguistic levels (here: lexis and grammar), (b) elaborating on the formation of style and register from a diachronic perspective, and (c) enhancing existing computational methods with explicit measures of linguistic change. Since we are driven by the goal of explanation rather than high-accuracy prediction (as in NLP tasks), qualitative interpretation by humans is an integral step. Here, micro-analytic and visual support are doubly important if one wants to explore linguistic conditions and effects of change. To support this, good instruments for human inspection and analysis of data are crucial—see, for instance, Jurish (2018) and Kaiser et al. (2019) providing visualization tools for various aspects of diachronic change, partly with interactive function ( Fankhauser et al., 2014 ; Fankhauser and Kupietz, 2017 ); or Hilpert and Perek (2015) 's application of motion charts to the analysis of meaning change. We developed a number of such visualization tools made available as web applications for inspection of the Royal Society Corpus (cf. section 3).

3. Data and Methods

The corpus used for the present analysis is the Royal Society Corpus 6.0 ( Fischer et al., 2020 ). The full version is composed of the Philosophical Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society from 1665 to 1996. In total, it contains 295,895,749 tokens and 47,837 documents. Here, we use a version that is open-source under a creative commons license covering the period of 1665 to 1920. In terms of periods of English, this reflects the Late Modern period (1700–1900) plus a bit of material from the last decades of the Early Modern period (before 1700) as well as a number of documents from modern English. Altogether this open version contains 78,605,737 tokens and 17,520 documents.

Note that the RSC is not balanced, later periods containing substantially more material than earlier ones (see Table 1 ), which calls for caution regarding frequency effects. Other potentially interesting features of the corpus are that the number of different authors increases over time; so does the number of papers with more than one author.

Table 1 . Size of RSC 6.0 by 50-year periods.

The documents in the corpus are marked up with meta-data including author, year of publication, text type and time period (1-, 10-, 50-year periods). The corpus is tokenized, lemmatized, annotated with part-of-speech tags and normalized (keeping both normalized and original word forms) using standard tools ( Schmid, 1995 ; Baron and Rayson, 2008 ). The corpus is made available under a Creative Commons license, downloadable and accessible via a web concordance (CQPWeb; Hardie, 2012 ) as well as interactive visualization tools 4 .

3.2. Methods

There are two important a priori considerations regarding modeling linguistic change and variation. First, one of the key concepts in language variation is use in context . Apart from extra-linguistic, situational context (e.g., field, tenor, and mode; Quirk et al., 1985 ), intra-linguistic context directly impacts on linguistic choice, both syntagmatically (as e.g., in collocations) and paradigmatically (i.e., shared context of alternative expressions). Different computational models take into account different types of context and accordingly reveal different kinds of linguistic patterns. Topic models take into account the distribution of words in document context and are suitable to capture the field of discourse (see section 3.2.2 below). Plain ngram models take into account the immediately preceding words of a given word and can reveal syntagmatic usage patterns (see section 3.2.1 below). Word embeddings take into account left and right context (e.g., ± five words) and allow clustering words together depending on similar, surrounding contexts; thus, they are suited for capturing linguistic paradigms (see section 3.2.3 below).

Second, diachronic linguistic analysis essentially consists of comparison of corpora representing language use at different time periods. Computational language models being representations of corpora, the core task consists in comparing model outputs and elicit significant differences between them. Common measures of comparing language models are perplexity and relative entropy, typically used for assessing the quality or fit of a model by estimating the difference between models in bits using a log base. Here, we use the asymmetric version of relative entropy, Kullback-Leibler Divergence, to assess differences between language models according to time. An intimately related measure is entropy. Entropy considers the richness and (un)evenness of a sample and is a common means to measure diversity, e.g., the lexical diversity of a language sample ( Thoiron, 1986 ). Here, we use entropy as a measure of diversification at two levels, the level of topics (field of discourse) and the level of paradigmatic word clusters, where greater entropy over time is interpreted as a signal of linguistic diversification and lower entropy as a signal of consolidated language use. The most basic way of exploring change in a given data set is to test whether the entropy over a simple bag-of-words model changes or not. For diversification to hold, we would expect the entropy to rise over time in the RSC, also because of the increase in size of the more recent corpus parts as well as in number of authors. As will be seen, this is not the case, entropy at this level being fairly stable (section 4.2).

3.2.1. Ngram Based Models

To obtain a more fine-grained and linguistically informed overview of the overall diachronic tendencies in the RSC than possible with token ngrams, we consider lexical and grammatical usage separately using lemmas and part-of-speech (POS) sequences as modeling units. On this basis, models of different time periods (e.g., decades) are compared with the asymmetric variant of relative entropy, Kullback-Leibler Divergence (KLD; Kullback and Leibler, 1951 ); cf. Equation (1) where A and B here denote different time periods.

KLD is a common measure for comparing probability distributions in terms of the number of additional bits needed for encoding when a non-optimal model is used. Applied to diachronic comparison, we obtain a reliable index of difference between two corpora A and B: the higher the amount of bits, the greater the diachronic difference. Also, we know which specific units/features contribute to the overall KLD score by their pointwise KLD. Thus, we can inspect particular points in time (e.g., by ranking features by pointwise KLD in 1 year) or time spans (e.g., by standard deviation across several years) to dynamically observe changes in a feature's contribution. This gives us two advantages over traditional corpus-based approaches: no predefined features are needed and results are more directly interpretable.

Apart from comparing predefined time periods with each other as is commonly done in diachronic corpus-linguistic studies (cf. Nevalainen and Traugott, 2012 for discussion), KLD can be used as a data-driven periodization technique ( Degaetano-Ortlieb and Teich, 2018 , 2019 ). KLD is dynamically pushed over the time line comparing past and future (or, as KLD is asymmetric, future vs. past). As we will show below, using KLD in this way allows detecting diachronic trends that are hard to see on a token level or with predefined, more coarse time periods. The granularity of diachronic comparison can be varied depending on the corpus and the analytic goal (year-, month-, day-based productions); again, no a priori assumptions have to be made regarding the concrete linguistic features involved in change other than selecting the linguistic level of comparison (e.g., lemmas, parts of speech). Hence, the method is generic and at the same time sensitive to the data.

3.2.2. Topic Models

To obtain a picture of the diachronic development in terms of field of discourse—a crucial component in register formation—we need to consider the usage of words in the context of whole documents. To this end, we use topic models. We follow the overall approach of applying topic models to diachronic corpora mapping topics to documents ( Blei and Lafferty, 2006 ; Steyvers and Griffiths, 2007 ; Hall et al., 2008 ; Yang et al., 2011 ; McFarland et al., 2013 ). The principle idea is to model the generation of documents with a randomized two-stage process: For every word w i in a document d select a topic z k from the document-topic distribution P ( z k | d ) and then select the word from the topic-word distribution P ( w i | z k ) . Consequently, the document-word distribution is factored as: P ( w i | d ) = ∑ k P ( w i | z k ) P ( z k | d ) . This factorization effectively reduces the dimensionality of the model for documents, improving their interpretability: Whereas P ( w i | d ) requires one dimension for each distinct word (tens of thousands) per document, P ( z k | d ) only requires one dimension for each topic (typically in the range of 20–100). To estimate the document-topic and topic-word distributions from the observable document-word distributions we use Gibbs-Sampling as implemented in MALLET 5 .

To investigate topical trends over time, we average the document-topic distributions for each year y :

where n is the number of documents per year.

For further interpretation, we cluster topics hierarchically on the basis of the distance 6 between their topic-document distributions (Equation 3).

Topics that typically co-occur in documents have similar topic-document distributions, and thus will be placed close in the cluster tree.

To assess diachronic diversification in discourse field as a central part of register formation, we measure the entropy over topics (cf. Equation 4), and the mean entropy of topic-word distributions per time period.

Note that all measures operate on relative frequencies per time period in order to control for the lack of balance in our data set (more recent periods contain considerably more data than earlier ones).

3.2.3. Word Embeddings

Word embeddings ( WE s) capture lexical paradigms, i.e., sets of words sharing similar syntagmatic contexts. Word embeddings build on the principle underlying distributional semantics that it is possible to capture important aspects of the semantics of words by modeling their context ( Harris, 1954 ; Lenci, 2008 ).

Here, we apply WE s diachronically to explore the overall development of word paradigms in our corpus with special regard to register/sublanguage formation as well as scientific style. Using the approach and tools provided by Fankhauser and Kupietz (2017) we compute WE s with a structured skip-gram approach ( Ling et al., 2015 ). This is a variant of the popular Word2Vec approach ( Mikolov et al., 2013 ). Word2Vec is a way of maximizing the likelihood of a word given its context, by training a d x V matrix where V is the vocabulary and d an arbitrary number of dimensions.

The goal of the algorithm is to maximize

where T is a text and c is the number of left and right context words to be taken into consideration. In short, the model tries to learn the probability of a word given its context, p ( w o | w i ). To this end, the model learns a set of weights that maximizes the probability of having a word in a given context. Such set of weights constitutes a word's embedding.

Usually, skip-gram considers a term's context as a bag-of-words. In Ling et al. (2015) 's variant, the order of the word context is also taken into consideration which is important to capture words with grammatical functions rather than lexical words only. For diachronic application, we calculate WE s per time period (e.g., 1-/10-/50-year periods), where the first period is randomly initialized, and each subsequent period is initialized by the model for its preceding period. Thereby, WE s are comparable across periods.

To perform analyses on our models, we then apply simple similarity measures commonly used in distributional semantics, where the similarity between two words is assessed by the cosine similarity of their vectors:

where w 1 and w 2 are the vectors of the two words taken into consideration, and | w | is a vector's norm. Alternatively, the semantic distance between words can be considered, which is the complement of their similarity:

To detect the semantic tightness or level of clustering of a group of words (how semantically similar they are), one can thus compute the average cosine similarity between all the words in a group of words:

where V (vocabulary) is the group of words taken into consideration. Reversely, it is possible to compute the average distance of a group of words from another group of words by iterating the sums on two different sets.

To detect semantic shifts over time, one of the simplest and most popular approaches is that of computing the change of the cosine similarity between a group of pre-defined words in a chronologically ordered set of WE spaces. As we will show, the WE space of the RSC as a whole expands over time. At the same time, it becomes more fragmented and specific clusters of words become more densely populated while others disappear. We base such observations on an analysis of the word embeddings' topology using cosine similarity as explained above as well as entropy. For example, since the period under investigation witnesses the systematization of several scientific disciplines, we are likely to observe a narrowing of the meaning of many individual words—mainly technical terms—which would push them further away from one another. Similarly, for specific WE clusters, we expect growth or decline, e.g., chemical terms explode in the late eighteenth century, pointing to the emergence of the field of chemistry with the associated technical language, or many Latin words disappear. Such developments can be measured by the entropy H ( P (.| w )) over a given cluster around word w , by estimating the conditional probability of words w i in the close neighborhood of word w as follows:

where w k ranges over all words (including w ) with sufficient similarity (e.g., >0.6) to w . The neighbors are weighted by their similarity to the given word, thus, a word with many near neighbors and rather uniform distribution has a large entropy, indicating a highly diversified semantic field.

4. Analyses

Our analyses are driven by two basic assumptions: register diversification (linguistic variation focused on field of discourse) and formation of “scientific style” (convergence on specific linguistic usages within the scientific domain). We carry out three kinds of analysis on the Royal Society Corpus showing these two major diachronic trends at the levels of lexis and grammar (section 4.1), development of topic over time (section 4.2) as well as paradigmatic effects (section 4.3).

4.1. Diachronic Trends in Lexis and Grammar

We trace the overall diachronic development in the RSC considering both lexical and grammatical levels. Lexis is captured by lemmas and grammar by sequences of three parts of speech (POS). Using the data-driven periodization technique described in section 3.2.1 based on KLD, we dynamically compare probability distributions of lemma unigrams and POS trigrams along the time line.

Figures 1A,B plot the temporal development for the lexical and the grammatical level, respectively. The black line visualizes relative entropy of the future modeled by the past, i.e., how well at a particular point in time the future can be modeled by a model of the past (here: 10 year slices). The gray line visualizes the reverse, i.e., how well the past is modeled by the future (again on 10-year slices). Peaks in the black line indicate changes in the future which are not captured by a model of the past, such as new terminology. Peaks in the gray line indicate differences from the opposite perspective, i.e., the future not encompassing the past, e.g., obsolete terminology. Troughs for both lines indicate convergence of future and past. A fairly persistent, low-level relative entropy indicates a period of stable language use.

Figure 1 . Relative entropy based on lemmas and part-of-speech trigrams with 2-year slider and 10-year past and future periods. (A) Lemmas. (B) Part-of-speech trigrams.

Comparing the two graphs in Figure 1 , we observe a particularly strong decreasing tendency for the grammatical level (see Figure 1B ) and a slightly declining tendency at the lexical level with fairly pronounced oscillations of peaks and troughs ( Figure 1A ). Basically, peaks indicate innovative language use, troughs indicate converging use, the future being less and less “surprised” by the past. Thus, while grammatical usage consolidates over time, the lexical level is more volatile as it reacts directly to the pressure of expressing newly emerging things or concepts in peoples' (changing) domains of experience (here: new scientific discoveries). The downward trend at the grammatical level is a clear sign of convergence, possibly related to the formation of a scientific style; peaks at the lexical level signal innovative use and may indicate register diversification.

To investigate this in more detail, we look at specific lexical and grammatical developments. We use pointwise KLD (i.e., the contribution of individual features to overall KLD) to rank features. For example, there is a major increase in overall KLD around the 1790s at the lemma level. Considering features contributing to the highest peak in 1791 for the FUTURE model (black line), we see a whole range of words from the chemistry field around oxygen (see Figure 2 ). At the same time, we can inspect which features leave language use and contribute to an increase in KLD for the PAST model (i.e., features not well-captured by the future anymore). From Figure 3 , we observe words related to phlogiston and experiments with air contributing to the formation of the oxygen theory of combustion (represented by Lavoisier, Priestley as well as Scheele). In fact, the oxygen theory replaced Becher and Stahl's 100-years old phlogiston theory, marking a chemical revolution in the eighteenth century—it is this shift of scientific paradigm that we encounter here in the RSC.

Figure 2 . Pointwise relative entropy based on lemmas for the FUTURE model in 1791.

Figure 3 . Pointwise relative entropy based on lemmas for the PAST model in 1791.

At the grammatical level, after a fairly high KLD peak in the early 1700's, there is a step-wise, steady decrease with only local, smaller peaks. As an example of a typical development at the grammatical level consider the features involved in the 1771 peak (see Figure 4 ). These are passive voice and relational verb patterns (e.g., NOUN-BE-PARTICIPLE as in air is separated ; blue), nominal patterns with prepositions [e.g., indicating measurements such as the NOUN-PREPOSITION-ADJECTIVE as in the quantity of common (air) ; gray], gerunds (e.g., NOUN-PREPOSITION- ing VERB , such as method of making ; yellow), and relative clauses (e.g., DETERMINER-NOUN-RELATIVIZER , such as the air which/that ; red). While the contribution of these patterns to the overall KLD is high in 1771, it becomes zero for all of them by 1785—a clear indication of consolidation in grammatical usage pointing to the development of a uniform scientific style.

Figure 4 . Pointwise relative entropy based on POS trigrams for the PAST model in 1771.

Regarding the lexical level, to verify that the observed tendencies point to significant diversification effects, we need to explore the systematic association of words with discourse fields. For this, we turn to topic models.

4.2. Diachronic Development of Discourse Fields

To analyse the development of discourse fields over time as the core component in register diversification, we trained a topic model with 30 topics 7 . Stop words were excluded and documents were split into parts of at most 5000 tokens each to control for largely varying document lengths.

Table 2 shows four of the 30 topics with their most typical words. Note that topics do not only capture the field of discourse ( BIOLOGY 3 ) but also genre ( REPORTING ), mode ( FORMULAE ), or simply reoccurring boiler plate text ( HEADMATTER ).

Table 2 . Top five words for selected topics.

Figure 5A displays the topic hierarchy resulting from clustering the topics based on the Pearson Distance between their topic-document distributions 8 . Labels for topics and topic clusters have been assigned manually, and redundant topics with very similar topic word distributions, such as BIOLOGY , have been numbered through.

Figure 5 . Overview on topics. (A) Topic hierarchy. (B) Combined topics over time.

Figure 5B shows the probabilities of the combined topics over time. As can be seen, the first hundred years are dominated by the rather generic combined topic REPORTING , which covers around 70% of the topic space. Indeed, the underlying topic REPORTING makes for more than 50% of the topic space during the first 50 years. Starting in 1750, topics become more diversified into individual disciplines, indicating register diversification in terms of discourse field. In addition, in line with the analysis in section 3.1, we clearly see the rise of the CHEMISTRY topic around the 1790s.

As shown in Figure 6A diversification is evidenced by the clearly increasing entropy of the topic distribution over time. However, the mean entropy of the individual document-topic distributions remains remarkably stable, even though the mean number of authors per document and document length increase over time. Even the mean entropy weighted by document length (not shown) remains stable. This may be in part due to using asymmetric priors for the document-topic distributions, which generally skews them toward topics containing common words shared by many documents ( Wallach et al., 2009 ), thus stabilizing the document-topic distributions over time.

Figure 6 . Entropies over time. (A) Entropy of topics. (B) Entropy of words.

Figure 6B shows the diachronic development of entropies at the level of words. The overall entropy of the unigram language model as well as the mean entropy of the topic word distributions weighted by the topic probabilities are also remarkably stable. However, the (unweighted) mean entropy of topic word distributions clearly increases over time. Indeed, due to the fairly high correlation of 0.81 (Spearman) between topic probability and the topic word entropy, evolving topics with increasing probability also increase in their word entropy, i.e., their vocabulary becomes more diverse. Figure 7 demonstrates this for the evolving topics in the group LIFESCIENCE 2 . All topics increase over time both in probability and entropy 9 . As will be seen in section 4.3, this trend is mirrored in the analysis of paradigmatic word clusters by word embeddings.

Figure 7 . LIFESCIENCE 2 over time. (A) Probability. (B) Entropy of topic word distributions.

4.3. Paradigmatic Effects

To gain insights into the paradigmatic effects of the diachronic trends detected by the preceding analyses, we need to consider word usage according to syntagmatic context. To capture grammatical aspects as well (rather than just lexical-semantic patterns), we take word forms rather than lemmas as a unit for modeling and we do not exclude function words.

Based on the word embedding model as shown in section 3.2.3, we observe that the word embedding space of the RSC grows over time both in terms of vocabulary size and in terms of average distance between words. While a growing vocabulary can be interpreted in many ways, it is more informative to look at the increase in average distance between words. Here, not every term grows apart from all other terms (in fact, many pairs of words get closer through time) but when we take two random terms the average distance between them is likely to increase—see Figure 8 : (A) shows the diachronic trend for the distance between 2,000 randomly selected pairs of words and (B) for the distance of 1,000 randomly selected words from the rest of the vocabulary. The words were selected among those terms that appear at least once in every decade. In both cases, the trend toward a growing distance is clearly visible.

Figure 8. (A) Average distance and standard deviation of 2,000 randomly selected pairs of words. (B) Average distance from the whole vocabulary (mean and standard deviation) of 1,000 randomly selected words.

Given that WE s are based on similarity in context, this means that overall, words are used increasingly in different contexts, a clear sign of diversification in language use. For example, the usage of magnify and glorify diverges through the last centuries resulting in a meaning shift for magnify which becomes more associated with the aggrandizing effects of optical lenses while glorify remains closer to its original sense of elevating or making glorious. If we look for these two words in the WE space, what we see is, in fact, a progressive decrease of the distributional similarity between them: for example, in 1860 their cosine distance is 0.48, while in 1950 it has gone up to 0.62. The nature of their nearest neighbors also diverges: magnify increasingly shows specialized, optic-related neighborhoods ( blood-globule in 1730, object-lens in 1780, eyeglass in 1810) while the neighbors of glorify remain more mixed (mainly specific but non-technical verbs, such as bill, reread, ingratiate , with low similarity). Finally, their movement with respect to originally close neighbors is also consistent: e.g., the distance between glorify and exalt does not change between 1860 and 1920, while magnify appears to move away and back toward exalt through the decades and is more than 25 degrees further from it in 1920 than in 1670 (from 0.45 to 0.70).

To provide another example, a similar evolution is apparent for filling and saturating : their distance grows from 0.37 in 1700 to 0.65 in 1920, a difference of almost 30 degrees. In the same lapse of time, the distance between saturating and packing goes from 0.27 to 0.70. Actually, the meaning of saturating was originally closer to that of satisfying and packing : its usage as a synonym of imbuing , and its technical sense in chemistry are more recent, and have progressively drawn the word's usage apart from that of filling .

As noted above, we observe an overall expansion of the WE space. To test whether this expansion is not a simple effect of the increase of frequency and number of words in each decade, we select a set of function words which exhibit stable frequency and should not change in usage over time (e.g., the functions of the, and , and for did not change in the period considered). If the expansion we observe is due to raw frequency effects, function words should drift apart from each other at a similar rate as content words. This appears not to be the case. As shown in Table 3 , if we compare the group of function words to a group of randomly selected content words, such as verbs and nouns, we can see that the distances between the elements of such group grow much faster than the distances between function words. Purely functional words drift apart considerably less than words having a lexical meaning, indicating that the latter are probably causing most of the lexical expansion. Thus, words having a proper lexical meaning grow apart much faster on average than words having a purely functional role.

Table 3 . Average cosine distance between function words vs. 2,000 randomly selected content words in the first and last decade of RSC 6.0 Open.

This behavior is not consistent with a raw frequency effect, or with the side effects of changes in the magnitude of training data. It looks like the distributional profile of words is, on average, growing more distinct in this specific corpus. And this does not happen only for new vocabulary, created ad hoc for specific contexts: even when we factor out the changes in lexicon and we consider only those words that appear in every decade (Persistent Vocabulary in Table 3 ), the effect is still visible. This interpretation is supported when we inspect the entropy on specific WE clusters over time. We consider two cases: increasing and decreasing entropy on a cluster, the former signaling lexical diversification, the latter signaling converging linguistic usage. For instance, coming back to the field of chemistry, we observe increasing entropy in particular clusters of content words: see Figure 9 for an example, showing (A) relative frequency of selected terms denoting chemical compounds and (B) entropy on the WE cluster containing those terms (radius of cosine similarity > 0.6).

Figure 9 . Entropy increase on specific WE clusters signals terminological diversification. (A) Relative frequency. (B) Entropy.

As an example of the opposite trend, i.e., decreasing entropy, consider the use of ing -forms which diversify according to the analysis above shown for filling and saturating , i.e., they spread to different syntagmatic contexts. In the example in Figure 10 , the terms in the cluster containing assuming exhibit a skewed frequency over time with decreasing entropy, reflecting in this case stylistic convergence, i.e., the tacit agreement on using particular linguistic forms rather than others. In particular, assuming has 30 close neighbors (including supposing, assume, considering ) in the first decade, but only 13 close neighbors in the last decade, with assuming, assume dominating by frequency.

Figure 10 . Entropy decrease on specific WE clusters signals convergence in usage. (A) Relative frequency. (B) Entropy.

The effect of stylistic convergence on the reduction of the cluster entropy of assuming is visible also through a cursory look at some corpus concordances. Uses of assuming in the sense of “adopting” disappear (see example 1). Over time, assuming comes to be used increasingly at the beginning of sentences (example 2), the dominant use being the non-finite alternative to a conditional clause ( If we assume a/the/that .). In terms of frequency, the dominant choice in the cluster is assume , presumably as a short form of let us/let's assume (example 3), a usage that is often associated with mathematical reasoning.

(1) No notice is taken of any effervescence or discharge of air while it was assuming this color ( Cavendish, 1786 ).

(2) Assuming a distribution of light of the form when x is the distance along the spectrum from the center of the line, the half breadth is defined as the distance in which the intensity is reduced to half the maximum ( Strutt, 1919 ).

(3) Assume any three points a, b, c in the surface, no two of which are on one generator, [.] ( Gardiner, 1867 ).

5. Summary and Future Work

We have explored patterns of variation and change in language use in Scientific English from a diachronic perspective, focusing on the Late Modern period. Our starting assumption was that we will find both traces of diversification in terms of discourse field, thus pointing to register formation, as well as convergence in linguistic usage as indicator of an emerging scientific style. As a data set we used 250+ years of publications of the Royal Society of London [Royal Society Corpus (RSC), Version 6.0 Open].

We have elaborated a data-driven approach using three kinds of computational language models that reveal different aspects of diachronic change. Ngram models (both lemma and POS-based) point to an overall trend of consolidation in linguistic usage. But the lexical level dynamically oscillates between high peaks marking lexical innovation and lows marking stable linguistic use, where the peaks typically reflect new scientific discoveries or insights. At the grammatical level, we observe similar tendencies but at a much lower level and rate and the consolidation trend is much more obvious. Inspecting the specific grammatical patterns involved, we find that they mark what we commonly refer to as “scientific style,” such as relational and passive clauses or specific nominal patterns for hosting terminology.

To investigate further the tendencies at the level of words, we have looked at aggregations of words from two perspectives—how words group together to form topics (development of fields of discourse as the core factor in register formation) and how specific words group together to form paradigms based on their use in similar contexts. Diversification is fully born out from both perspectives with glimpses of consolidation as well. Analysis on the basis of a diachronic topic model shows that topics diversify over time, indexed by increasing entropy over topic/word distributions, a clear signal of register formation. Analysis on the basis of diachronic word embeddings reveals that the overall paradigmatic organization of the vocabulary changes quite dramatically: the lexical space expands overall and it becomes more fragmented, the latter being a clear signal of diversification in word usage. Here, bursts of innovation are shown by increasing entropy on specific word clusters, such as terms for chemical compounds, mirroring the insights from lemma-based analysis with KLD. Also, patterns of convergence (confined uses of words) as well as obsolescence (word uses leaving the language) are shown by decreasing entropy on particular word clusters, such as the cluster of ing -forms. Taken together, we encounter converging evidence of diversification at different levels of analysis; and at the same time we find signs of linguistic convergence as an overarching trend—an emerging tacit agreement on “how to say things”, a “scientific style.”

In terms of methods, we have elaborated a data-driven methodology for diachronic corpus comparison using state-of-the-art computational language models. To analyze and interpret model outputs, we have applied selected information-theoretic measures to diachronic comparison. Relative entropy used as a data-driven periodization technique provides insights into overall diachronic trends. Entropy provides a general measure of diversity and is applied here to capture diversification as well as converging language use for lexis (word embeddings) overall and discourse fields (topic models) in particular.

In future work, we will exploit more fully the results from topic modeling and the word embeddings model of the RSC. For instance, we want to systematically inspect high and low-entropy word embedding clusters to find more features marking expansion (vs. obsolescence) and diversification (vs. convergence). Also, annotating the corpus with topic labels from our diachronic topic model will allow us to investigate discipline-specific language use (e.g., chemistry) and contrast it with “general” scientific language (represented by the whole RSC) as well as study the life cycles of registers/sublanguages. Especially interesting from a sociocultural point of view would be to trace the spread of linguistic change across disciplines and authors (e.g., Did people adopt specific linguistic usages from famous scientists?). Finally, we would like to contextualize our findings from an evolutionary perspective and possibly devise predictive models of change. Our results seem to be in accordance not only with our intuitive understanding of the evolution of science but also with evolutionary studies on vocabulary formation (e.g., Smith, 2004 ) showing how populations using specialized vocabularies are more likely to develop and take over when the selective ratio is pure efficacy in information exchange.

Data Availability Statement

The Royal Society Corpus (RSC) 6.0 Open is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11119/0000-0004-8E37-F (persistent handle). Word embedding models of the RSC with different parameter settings including visualization are available at: http://corpora.ids-mannheim.de/openlab/diaviz1/description.html .

Author Contributions

YB curated the analyses on word embeddings showing the diachronic expansion of the scientific semantic space and lexical-semantic specialisation. SD-O carried out the analysis on diachronic trends in lexis and grammar using data-driven periodization and elaborating on features' contribution to change. PF trained the word embeddings and the topic models and designed and implemented the entropy-based diachronic analysis. ET provided the historical background and was involved in hypothesis building and interpretation of results.

Funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Project-ID 232722074 - SFB 1102. The authors also acknowledge support by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) under grant CLARIN-D, the German Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure. Also, the authors are indebted to Dr. Louisiane Ferlier, digitisation project manager at Royal Society Publishing, for providing advice and access to sources.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

1. ^ An example in point are production and experimentation, which used to be carried out hand in hand in the workshops of alchemists and apothecaries but were separated later on, also physically, with experimentation becoming a scientific activity carried out in dedicated laboratories ( Burke, 2004 ; Schmidgen, 2011 ).

2. ^ For example, the publication of the famous Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (1751–1765).

3. ^ For more comprehensive overviews on computational approaches to lexical semantic change see Tahmasebi et al. (2018) and on diachronic word embeddings see Kutuzov et al. (2018) .

4. ^ RSC 6.0 Open: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11119/0000-0004-8E37-F .

5. ^ http://mallet.cs.umass.edu

6. ^ We use Pearson distance, which consistently results in more intuitive hierarchies than Jensen-Shannon Divergence.

7. ^ For the corpus at hand, a smaller number of topics leads to conflated topics, a larger number to redundant topics.

8. ^ Clustering by Jensen-Shannon Divergence results in a less intuitive hierarchy.

9. ^ A similar correlation between probability and entropy can be observed in other rising topic groups.

Aitchison, J. (2017). “Psycholinguistic perspectives on language change,” in The Handbook of Historical Linguistics , eds D. Joseph and R. D. Janda (London, UK: Blackwell), 736–743. doi: 10.1002/9781405166201.ch25

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Aragamon, S. (2019). Register in computational language research. Register Stud . 1, 100–135. doi: 10.1075/rs.18015.arg

Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975 . New York, NY: Erlbaum. doi: 10.4324/9781410601704

Banks, D. (2008). The Development of Scientific Writing: Linguistic Features and Historical Context . London; Oakville, OM: Equinox.

Google Scholar

Baron, A., and Rayson, P. (2008). “VARD 2: a tool for dealing with spelling variation in historical corpora,” in Proceedings of the Postgraduate Conference in Corpus Linguistics (Birmingham).

Biber, D. (1988). Variation Across Speech and Writing . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511621024

Biber, D., and Gray, B. (2011). “The historical shift of scientific academic prose in English towards less explicit styles of expression: writing without verbs,” in Researching Specialized Languages , eds V. Bathia, P. Sánchez, and P. Pérez-Paredes (Amsterdam: John Benjamins), 11–24. doi: 10.1075/scl.47.04bib

Biber, D., and Gray, B. (2016). Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Studies in English Language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511920776

Bizzoni, Y., Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Menzel, K., Krielke, P., and Teich, E. (2019a). “Grammar and meaning: analysing the topology of diachronic word embeddings,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Approaches to Historical Language Change (Florence: Association for Computational Linguistics), 175–185. doi: 10.18653/v1/W19-4722

Bizzoni, Y., Mosbach, M., Klakow, D., and Degaetano-Ortlieb, S. (2019b). “Some steps towards the generation of diachronic WordNets,” in Proceedings of the 22nd Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (NoDaLiDa'19) (Turku: ACL).

Blei, D. M., and Lafferty, J. D. (2006). “Dynamic topic models,” in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning (Pittsburgh, PA), 113–120. doi: 10.1145/1143844.1143859

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bochkarev, V., Solovyev, V. D., and Wichmann, S. (2014). Universals versus historical contingencies in lexical evolution. J. R. Soc. Interface 11, 1–8. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2014.0841

Burke, P. (2004). Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe . Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511617362

Bybee, J. (2007). Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001

Cavendish, H. (1786). XIII. An account of experiments made by Mr. John McNab, at Henley House, Hudson's Bay, relating to freezing mixtures. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 76, 241–272. doi: 10.1098/rstl.1786.0013

Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., West, R., Jurafsky, D., Leskovec, J., and Potts, C. (2013). “No country for old members: user lifecycle and linguistic change in online communities,” in Proceedings of the 22nd International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (Rio de Janeiro). doi: 10.1145/2488388.2488416

Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., and Teich, E. (2016). “Information-based modeling of diachronic linguistic change: from typicality to productivity,” in Proceedings of the 10th Joint SIGHUM Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, Humanities and Literature at ACL2016 , 165–173. doi: 10.18653/v1/W16-2121

Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., and Teich, E. (2018). “Using relative entropy for detection and analysis of periods of diachronic linguistic change,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Joint SIGHUM Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, Humanities and Literature at COLING2018 (Santa Fe, NM), 22–33.

Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., and Teich, E. (2019). Toward an optimal code for communication: the case of scientific English. Corpus Linguist. Linguist. Theory 1–33. doi: 10.1515/cllt-2018-0088. [Epub ahead of print].

Dubossarsky, H., Hengchen, S., Tahmasebi, N., and Schlechtweg, D. (2019). “Time-out: temporal referencing for robust modeling of lexical semantic change,” in Proceedings of the 57th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL2019) (Florence: ACL), 457–470. doi: 10.18653/v1/P19-1044

Dubossarsky, H., Weinshall, D., and Grossman, E. (2017). “Outta control: laws of semantic change and inherent biases in word representation models,” in Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Copenhagen: Association for Computational Linguistics), 1136–1145. doi: 10.18653/v1/D17-1118

Eisenstein, J., O'Connor, B., Smith, N. A., and Xing, E. P. (2014). Diffusion of lexical change in social media. PLoS ONE 9:e113114. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113114

Fankhauser, P., Knappen, J., and Teich, E. (2014). “Exploring and visualizing variation in language resources,” in Proceedings of the 9th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) (Reykjavik), 4125–4128.

Fankhauser, P., Knappen, J., and Teich, E. (2016). “Topical diversification over time in the Royal Society Corpus,” in Proceedings of Digital Humanities (DH) (Krakow).

Fankhauser, P., and Kupietz, M. (2017). “Visual correlation for detecting patterns in language change,” in Visualisierungsprozesse in den Humanities. Linguistische Perspektiven auf Prägungen, Praktiken, Positionen (VisuHu 2017) (Zürich).

Fischer, S., Knappen, J., Menzel, K., and Teich, E. (2020). “The Royal Society Corpus 6.0. Providing 300+ years of scientific writing for humanistic study,” in Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) (Marseille).

Fyfe, A., Squazzoni, F., Torny, D., and Dondio, P. (2019). Managing the growth of peer review at the Royal Society journals, 1865-1965. Sci. Technol. Human Values . 45, 405–429. doi: 10.1177/0162243919862868

Garcia, M., and Garćia-Salido, M. (2019). “A method to automatically identify diachronic variation in collocations,” in Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Computational Approaches to Historical Language Change (Florence: ACL), 71–80. doi: 10.18653/v1/W19-4709

Gardiner, M. (1867). Memoir on Undevelopable Uniquadric Homographics. [Abstract]. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 16:389–398. Available online at: www.jstor.org/stable/112537

Gleick, J. (2010). “At the beginning: More things in heaven and earth,” in Seeing Further. The Story of Science and The Royal Society , ed B. Bryson (London, UK: Harper Press), 17–36.

Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalizations in Language . Oxford: OUP.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Görlach, M. (2001). Eighteenth-Century English . Heidelberg: Winter.

Görlach, M. (2004). Text Types and the History of English . Berlin, New York, NY: de Gruyter.

Grieve, J., Nini, A., and Guo, D. (2016). Analyzing lexical emergence in Modern American English online. Engl. Lang. Linguist . 20, 1–29. doi: 10.1017/S1360674316000526

Hall, D., Jurafsky, D., and Manning, C. D. (2008). “Studying the history of ideas using topic models,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Honolulu, HI: Association for Computational Linguistics). doi: 10.3115/1613715.1613763

Halliday, M. (1985a). An Introduction to Functional Grammar . London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. (1985b). Written and Spoken Language . Melbourne, VIC: Deakin University Press.

Halliday, M. (1988). “On the language of physical science,” in Registers of Written English: Situational Factors and Linguistic Features , ed M. Ghadessy (London: Pinter), 162–177.

Halliday, M., and Martin, J. (1993). Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power . London: Falmer Press.

Hamilton, W. L., Leskovec, J., and Jurafsky, D. (2016). “Cultural shift or linguistic drift? Comparing two computational models of semantic change,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Austin, TX). doi: 10.18653/v1/D16-1229

Hardie, A. (2012). CQPweb – combining power, flexibility and usability in a corpus analysis tool. Int. J. Corpus Linguist . 17, 380–409. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har

Harris, Z. S. (1954). Distributional structure. Word 10, 146–162. doi: 10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520

Hilpert, M., and Perek, F. (2015). Meaning change in a petri dish: constructions, semantic vector spaces, and motion charts. Linguist. Vanguard 1, 339–350. doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2015-0013

Hughes, J. M., Foti, N. J., Krakauer, D. C., and Rockmore, D. N. (2012). Quantitative patterns of stylistic influence in the evolution of literature. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A . 109, 7682–7686. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1115407109

Hundt, M., Mollin, S., and Pfenninger, S. E., (eds). (2017). The Changing English Language: Psycholinguistic Perspectives . Cambridge, UK: CUP. doi: 10.1017/9781316091746

Hunston, S., and Francis, G. (2000). Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English . Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.4

Jucker, A. H., and Taavitsainen, I. (2013). English Historical Pragmatics . Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Juola, P. (2003). The time course of language change. Comput. Humanit . 3, 77–96. doi: 10.1023/A:1021839220474

Jurish, B. (2018). “Diachronic collocations, genre, and DiaCollo,” in Diachronic Corpora, Genre, and Language Change , ed R. J. Whitt (Benjamins: Amsterdam), 41–64. doi: 10.1075/scl.85.03jur

Kaiser, G. A., Butt, M., Kalouli, A.-L., Kehlbeck, R., Sevastjanova, R., and Kaiser, K. (2019). “Parhistvis: visualization of parallel multilingual historical data,” in Workshop on Computational Approaches to Historical Language Change (Florence: Association for Computational Linguistics), 109–114.

Kermes, H., Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Khamis, A., Knappen, J., and Teich, E. (2016). “The Royal Society Corpus: from uncharted data to corpus,” in Proceedings of the 10th LREC (Portoroz).

Kim, Y., Chiu, Y.-I., Hanaki, K., Hegde, D., and Petrov, S. (2014). “Temporal analysis of language through neural language models,” in Proceedings of the ACL 2014 Workshop on Language Technologies and Computational Social Science (Baltimore, MD: Association for Computational Linguistics), 61–65. doi: 10.3115/v1/W14-2517

Kirby, S., Tamariz, M., Cornish, H., and Smith, K. (2015). Compression and communication in the cultural evolution of linguistic structure. Cognition 141, 87–102. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.03.016

Klingenstein, S., Hitchcock, T., and DeDeo, S. (2014). The civilizing process in London's Old Bailey. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A . 111, 9419–9424. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1405984111

Kullback, S., and Leibler, R. A. (1951). On information and sufficiency. Ann. Math. Stat . 22, 79–86. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177729694

Kutuzov, A., Øvrelid, L., Szymanski, T., and Velldal, E. (2018). “Diachronic word embeddings and semantic shifts: a survey,” in Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling) (Sante Fe, NM: ACL), 1384–1397.

Leech, G., Hundt, M., Mair, C., and Smith, N. (2009). Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511642210

Lenci, A. (2008). Distributional semantics in linguistic and cognitive research. Ital. J. Linguist . 20, 1–31.

Ling, W., Dyer, C., Black, A. W., and Trancoso, I. (2015). “Two/too simple adaptations of Word2Vec for syntax problems,” in Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Denver, CO: Association for Computational Linguistics), 1299–1304. doi: 10.3115/v1/N15-1142

McFarland, D. A., Ramage, D., Chuang, J., Heer, J., Manning, C. D., and Jurafsky, D. (2013). Differentiating language usage through topic models. Poetics 41, 607–625. doi: 10.1016/j.poetic.2013.06.004

Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S., and Dean, J. (2013). “Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Lake Tahoe, NV), 3111–3119.

Moskowich, I., and Crespo, B., (eds.). (2012). Astronomy Playne and Simple: The Writing of Science between 1700 and 1900 . Amsterdam: Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.173

Moxham, N., and Fyfe, A. (2018). The royal society and the prehistory of peer review, 1665-1965. Historical J . 61, 863–889. doi: 10.1017/S0018246X17000334

Nevalainen, T. (2006). “Historical sociolinguistics and language change,” in Handbook of the History of English , eds A. van Kemenade and B. Los (London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell), 558–588. doi: 10.1002/9780470757048.ch22

Nevalainen, T., and Traugott, E. C., (eds.). (2012). The Oxford Handbook of the History of English . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.001.0001

Nguyen, D., Dogruöz, A. S., Rosé, C. P., and de Jong, F. (2016). Computational sociolinguistics: a survey. Comput. Linguist . 42, 537–593. doi: 10.1162/COLI_a_00258

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language . London: Longman.

Säily, T., Nurmi, A., Palander-Collin, M., and Auer, A., (eds.). (2017). “Exploring future paths for historical sociolinguistics,” in Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics (Amsterdam: Benjamins). doi: 10.1075/ahs.7.01sai

Schmid, H. (1995). “Improvements in Part-of-Speech Tagging with an application to German,” in Proceedings of the ACL SIGDAT-Workshop (Kyoto).

Schmidgen, H. (2011). Das Labor/The Laboratory . Europäische Geschichte Online/European History Online (EGO).

Smith, K. (2004). The evolution of vocabulary. J. Theoret. Biol . 228, 127–142. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2003.12.016

Steyvers, M., and Griffiths, T. (2007). Probabilistic Topic Models . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Strutt, R. J. (1919). Bakerian lecture: A study of the line spectrum of sodium as excited by fluorescence. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 96:272–286. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1919.0054

Taavitsainen, I., and Hiltunen, T., (eds.) (2019). Late Modern English Medical Texts: Writing Medicine in the Eighteenth Century . Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.221

Taavitsainen, I., and Jucker, A. H., (eds.). (2003). Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems . Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.107

Tahmasebi, N., Borin, L., and Jatowt, A. (2018). Survey of computational approaches to diachronic conceptual change. arXiv[Preprint]a.rXiv:1811.06278 .

Thoiron, P. (1986). Diversity index and entropy as measures of lexical richness. Comput. Humanit . 20, 197–202. doi: 10.1007/BF02404461

Wallach, H. M., Mimno, D. M., and McCallum, A. (2009). “Rethinking LDA: why priors matter,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22 , eds Y. Bengio, D. Schuurmans, J. D. Lafferty, C. K. I. Williams, and A. Culotta (Vancouver, BC: Curran Associates, Inc.), 1973–1981.

Xu, Y., and Kemp, C. (2015). “A computational evaluation of two laws of semantic change,” in Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci) (Pasadena, CA).

Yang, T.-I., Torget, A., and Mihalcea, R. (2011). “Topic modeling on historical newspapers,” in Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, and Humanities (LaTeCH) (Portland, OR).

Keywords: linguistic change, diachronic variation in language use, register variation, evolution of Scientific English, computational language models

Citation: Bizzoni Y, Degaetano-Ortlieb S, Fankhauser P and Teich E (2020) Linguistic Variation and Change in 250 Years of English Scientific Writing: A Data-Driven Approach. Front. Artif. Intell. 3:73. doi: 10.3389/frai.2020.00073

Received: 03 February 2020; Accepted: 07 August 2020; Published: 16 September 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Bizzoni, Degaetano-Ortlieb, Fankhauser and Teich. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Yuri Bizzoni, yuri.bizzoni@uni-saarland.de

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• DOI: 10.53682/jeltec.v1i1.3728
• Corpus ID: 265331062

William Shakespeare and Modern English: To What Extent the Influence of Him in Modern English

• D. Tatipang
• Published in Journal of English Language… 25 March 2022
• History, Art
• Journal of English Language Teaching, Literature and Culture

2 Citations

Criticism and reflection on rhythm in ancient literary theory, speech to text by using the sindhi language, 31 references, ‘he shall signify from time to time’. romeo and juliet in modern english, issues and challenges in compiling a corpus of early modern english plays for comparison with those of william shakespeare, the interpersonal meaning realized in the lyrics of christina perri’s album “lovestrong” and the contribution for teaching a modern english grammar, recent shakespearean adaptation and the mutations of cultural capital, shakespeare and his contemporaries: designing a genre classification scheme for early english books online 1560–1640, hypocrisy in narayan’s the guide, the study of “s” as a verbal agreement marker in modern english grammar, sacrifice in a stephanie meyer’s breaking dawn (2008), the secret dreamworld of a shopaholic.

• Highly Influential

The Making of the Modern English State, 1460-1660

Related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Recommended pages

• Undergraduate open days
• Postgraduate open days
• Accommodation
• Information for teachers
• Maps and directions
• Sport and fitness

Modern and contemporary literature

Our research in modern and contemporary literature is rich and diverse, covering the full sweep of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries across the English-speaking world.

Chronologically it begins with work on the classic writers of High Modernism, including Henry James, Ford Madox Ford, Virginia Woolf, Wyndham Lewis and Dorothy Richardson, and comes right up to date with the study of digital culture both as a proliferation of new cultural forms and reading experiences, and as a subject within contemporary literature and the arts.

The geographical and cultural range of work is reflected in our research on English and Irish fantasy fiction, early twentieth-century American magazines, reading cultures in Canada, African American literary and visual culture, Black British and British Asian fiction, and South African novels and poetry.

As this suggests, much of our work is interdisciplinary. In addition to visual culture, which stands alongside literary culture in our research from modernism to the contemporary, we explore the relationship between modern literature and several other disciplines and fields in our work, including the law, evolutionary biology and the history of science. 

Researchers

• Dr Amy Burge - Popular fiction and romance
• Dr Rona Cran - Twentieth century American literature
• Dr John Fagg - American art and literature
• Dr Rex Ferguson - Historical specificity of texts
• Professor Andrzej Gasiorek - Twentieth century British literature and Modernism
• Dr Richard Graham - Contemporary digital culture
• Dr Dave Gunning - Contemporary Anglophone literature and postcolonial studies
• Professor Alexandra Harris - British art and literature, especially in relation to landscape
• Dr Matt Hayler - Contemporary literature and digital cultures
• Dr Oliver Herford - British and American literature of the long nineteenth century, with a special focus on the late writings of Henry James
• Dr Andrew Hodgson - English poetry and individualism
• Professor John Holmes - Scientific ideas and cultural forms in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, including poetry, architecture and the visual arts
• Professor Tom Lockwood - Early modern and into the Romantic periods
• Professor Deborah Longworth - Nineteenth and twentieth century women writers
• Dr Daniel Moore - Nineteenth and twentieth century literature and visual culture
• Professor Peter Morey - 20th century, contemporary and postcolonial literary studies
• Dr Jimmy Packham - American Gothic literature and maritime writing
• Dr Rebecca Roach - Literature, media and book history
• Dr Asha Rogers - Modern and contemporary writing in English from across the postcolonial world
• Dr Philippa Semper - Modern fantasy literature
• Professor Max Saunders - Modern literature and culture
• Professor Lyndsey Stonebridge - Twentieth-century and contemporary literature, political theory, and history
• Dr Rachel Sykes - The twenty-first century American novel
• Dr Nathan Waddell - Early twentieth-century and Modernist literature
• Dr Sara K Wood - American literature and culture

Major publications

• Cran, Rona,  Collage in Twentieth-Century Art, Literature, and Culture   (2014)
• Ellis, Stephen,  British writers and the approach of World War II   (2014)
• Gasiorek, Andrzej,  A History of Modernist Literature   (2015)
• James, David,  Discrepant Solace: Contemporary Literature and the Work of Consolation   (2019)   
• Moore, Daniel,  Insane Acquaintances: Visual Modernism and Public Taste in Britain, 1910-1951   (2020)
• Morey, Peter,  Islamophobia and the Novel   (2018)
• Roach, Rebecca,  Literature and the Rise of the Interview   (2019)
• Rogers, Asha,  State Sponsored Literature: Britain and Cultural Diversity after 1945   (2020)
• Saunders, Max,  Imagined Futures: Writing, Science, and Modernity in the To-Day and To-Morrow Book Series, 1923-31  (2019)
• Stonebridge, Lyndsey,  Placeless People: Wrights, Rights, and Refugees   (2018) Winner, 2019 Modernist Studies Association Book Prize
• Sykes, Rachel,  The Quiet Contemporary American Novel   (2017)
• Waddell, Nathan,  Moonlighting: Beethoven and Literary Modernism   (2019) 
• Imagined Futures
• Arts of Place
• The art of identification (2015-2016)

Find out more

• Research in English
• Doctoral research
• Research seminars

Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies

• Current Issue

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Peer Review Process

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

Journal Metrics

Guide for authors

Terms & Conditions

Reviewers2021

member publons

The process of Reviewing

Reviewers2019

Reviewers2020

• Articles in Press

Volume 11 (2024)

Volume 10 (2023), volume 9 (2022), volume 8 (2021), volume 7 (2020), volume 6 (2019), volume 5 (2018), volume 4 (2017), volume 3 (2016), volume 2 (2015), volume 1 (2014).

                        Journal Metrics

Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies is an open access double-blind peer reviewed publication, which is published by Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran . It is concerned with new concepts and innovative technologies in "issues in language teaching". Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies is a quarterly publication, and publishes original research papers related to journal scope. This journal is following Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and complies with the highest ethical standards in accordance with ethical laws. All submitted manuscripts are checked for similarity through 'ithenticate' software to ensure their authenticity and originality and then rigorously peer-reviewed by expert reviewers. 

Call for Papers 

Quality Issues in Applied Linguistics Qualitative Research

This special issue of Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies invites submissions that target quality issues in applied linguistics qualitative research.

Guest editors:

Hessameddin Ghanbar, Islamic Azad University, Fereshtegaan International Branch ([email protected])

Reza Rezvani,  Shiraz University/Yasouj University ( rezvanireza@ gmail.com)

There have been ongoing debates regarding the quality of qualitative research and what defines good qualitative research. Generally, there are four main positions when it comes to determining the quality of qualitative research: utilizing traditional quantitative research criteria, redefining conventional criteria, creating alternative criteria, or questioning the use of any predetermined generic criteria (Riazi et al., 2023a). Also, Creswell and Miller (2000) suitably delved into the concept of validity in qualitative research and decipher its complexity and labyrinthine nature. In tandem, qualitative researchers have access to various methodological sources with different approaches (e.g., Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Lincoln & Guba, 2005; Maxwell, 1996; Starfield, 2013), which present a complex array of quality terminology (e.g., trustworthiness, credibility, plausibility, validity, rigor, reflexivity, etc.), typologies (e.g., Maxwell, 2013; Tracy, 2020), and perspectives (e.g., Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Given the significance of quality in research methodology, the fluidity of quality across different contexts (Tracy, 2010), the diversity of methodological qualitative approaches (Riazi et al., 2023b) and the variations in quality nomenclature which have been expounded upon above, this special issue aims to ease the tensions surrounding quality in qualitative research by targeting issues including but not limited to the following:

• Credibility in qualitative research and steps to ensure trustworthiness of interpretations in qualitative studies
• Transferability in qualitative research and providing thick description to boost applicability and resonance of qualitative research results in different contexts
• Dependability of qualitative research (reflexivity as well as researchers' positionality)
• Confirmability and objectivity of qualitative research
• Methodological rigor (methodological coherence) and transparency in qualitative research
• Ethics in qualitative research (procedural ethics, situational and culturally specific ethics, relational ethics, exiting ethics)

Types of manuscripts that are appropriate for the special issue include, but are not limited to the following:

• Conceptual or position papers
• Critical reviews (exploring prevalent views relating to quality and validity of qualitative research and offering alternative perspectives)
• Systematic research syntheses
• Methodological syntheses (assessing methodological issues pertaining to quality in qualitative research, for example, data analytic transparency)
• Empirical studies (studies reporting fully-fledged attempts to establish quality of data collection and/or data analysis in qualitative research)

We hope that the contributions will be useful to those in the qualitative research community in Applied Linguistics, providing a platform for new insights, ideas, discussions, and ultimately, more practical guidelines.

Interested authors are invited to send an abstract of no more than 500 words with a title and author information (with references not included in the word count) to  Hessameddin Ghanbar ([email protected]) by 30 th  September 2024.

The deadline for submissions of abstracts  is  30 th  September 2024.

Authors will be notified by 21 th  October 2024

Full manuscript deadline  is 21 th  April 2025

In case of any queries, please feel free to reach out to the Guest editors.

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into practice, 39 (3), 124-130.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 191-215). Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry . Sage.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach . Sage.

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Sage

Riazi, M., Ghanbar, H., & Rezvani, R. (2023a). Qualitative data coding and analysis: A systematic review of the papers published in the Journal of Second Language Writing. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research ,  11 (1), 25-47.

Riazi, A. M., Rezvani, R., & Ghanbar, H. (2023b). Trustworthiness in L2 writing research: A review and analysis of qualitative articles in the Journal of Second Language Writing. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics ,  2 (3), 100065.

Starfield, S. (2013). Researcher reflexivity. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1-7). Wiley-Blackwell.

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight big-tent criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16 (10), 837-851.

Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell

• Most Visited Articles

Detrimental Effects of School Organizational Climate on Teacher Job Motivation in EFL Context of Iran: A Phenomenological Approach

Parisa Ashkani; Ehsan Namaziandost; Karamollah Javanmard

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.19427.2270

• View Article
• PDF 750.38 K

Exploring the Effectiveness of Pre- and Post-Reading Activities on the Development of Reading Motivation and Self-Regulation as Essentials for Reading Comprehension

Parviz Ajideh; Mohammad - Zohrabi; Behnaz Khojand

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19503.2277

• PDF 920.51 K

Development and Validation of Iranian EFL Learners’ Preference for Anxiety Reducing Strategies Questionnaire

Alireza Bekhrad; Behdokht Mall-Amiri; Nacim Shangarffam

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19169.2247

Written Corrective Feedback on Intermediate EFL Learners’ Formulaic Errors: The Impact of a Teacher Awareness-Raising Program

Servat Shirkhani; Samaneh Omidi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.19517.2278

Conceptualization of Iranian EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Professional Learning Practices: Implications for Teacher Development

Faranak Shapouran; Roya Ranjbar Mohammadi Bonab; Mohammad Hossein Yousefi; Hassan Asadollahfam

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19379.2268

Exploring the Impact of Computer-Supported Input Enhancement on Enhancing Parallel Structures in EFL Learners' Writing: A Comparative Study in Flipped Online and Face-to-Face Higher Education Settings

Mehri Farzaneh; Farzaneh Khodabandeh; Ehsan Rezvani

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19542.2281

• PDF 902.96 K

Exploring assessment methods used by Grade Four English First Additional Language Teachers

Kofi Nkonkonya Mpuangnan; Gladys Phumzile Mngomezulu; Samantha Govender

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19589.2288

• PDF 917.97 K

The Role of Learning-oriented Language Assessment in Promoting Interactional Metadiscourse in Ectenic and Synoptic EFL Learners

Rajab Esfandiari; Omid Allaf-Akbary

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19777.2305

The Effects of Three Types of Flipped Learning through Shad Application on EFL Learners’ Lexical and Grammatical Achievement

Mahmoud Nabilou; Abbas Ali Zarei

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.18868.2219

• PDF 991.37 K

Face in Intercultural Communication: A Meta-synthesis

Mohammad Ahmadi Safa; Moslem Yousefi; Naser Ranjbar

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2019.10264.1274

• PDF 653.04 K

The Contribution of Gender and Teaching Experience to Iranian EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of Critical Pedagogy

Abdullah Sarani; Rasool Najjarbaghseyah; Mohammad Nasser Vaezi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2019.10595.1328

• PDF 707.05 K

Knowledge of L2 Speech Acts: Impact of Gender and Language Learning Experience

Zia Tajeddin; Ali Malmir

• PDF 661.77 K

Iranian EFL Teachers’ Understanding and Beliefs of Critical Pedagogy: A Multiple Case Study

Esmaeel Ali Salimi; Meysam Khazaee Kouhpar

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.18569.2189

EFL Students' Engagement with Readers in Expository Writing: Contribution of Gender and Proficiency Level

Zahra Alimorad; Sasan Nobahar

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19596.2290

The Mediating Role of Teacher Burnout and School Climate in EFL Teachers’ Commitment: Focus on Iranian Teachers

Akram Bagheri; Masood Siyyari; Mojgan Rashtchi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19486.2273

Sociolinguistic Factors Influencing the Acquisition of English Vocabulary in Multilingual Contexts: Insights from Selected Secondary School Teachers in Dodoma, Tanzania

Godson Robert Mtallo; Gerald Kimambo

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19603.2292

Google Translate as a Repelling or Propelling Tool: Evidence from Less-Resourced Languages

Zahra Fakher Ajabshir

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.18709.2205

Investigating English Language Teaching Policies for Online Courses at an Iranian Language Institute

Maryam Khosravi; Seyyedeh Susan Marandi; Leila Tajik

https://doi.org/10.30479/JMRELS.2024.19529.2280

Experienced and Novice EFL Teachers’ Cognition and Practices on Intercultural Communicative Competence: A Mixed-Methods Study in Iranian Context

Ashraf Sadat Hosseyni; Moussa - Ahmadian; Majid Amerian

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19354.2265

Improving EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension Through Raising Metacultural Competence: Comparing Teacher- Generated and Teacher/Learner-Generated Materials

Hamid Marashi; Atefeh Moradian

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19605.2294

The Effectiveness of Oral Corrective Feedback in the Acquisition of Third-Person Singular 's' in Iranian EFL Context

Navid Bahrami Maleki; Ali Akbar Ansarin; Yaser Hadidi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19640.2297

Developing a Technology-Mediated EFL Teacher Program Based on Critical Pedagogy: The Context of Iran in Focus

Zahra Sabaghzade; Neda Fatehi Rad; Leila Anjomshoa

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19295.2261

Development and Validation of an EFL Teachers’ Quality Assurance Questionnaire

Giti Sabadoust; Kobra Tavassoli; Gholamhassan Famil Khalili

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19667.2299

Charting New Horizons in Teacher Education: How Practicum Students Empower and Support In-Service Teachers

Masoume Ahmadi; Nasser Sabourianzadeh; Mobina Nazari

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19795.2310

Face-to-Face or Flipped Learning Classroom: Which Method Enhances Iranian EFL Sixth Grade Students’ Self-Efficacy in Virtual Learning Environment?

Vahid Norouzi Larsari; Farahman Farrokhi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19783.2307

A Mixed-Methods Study into the Discipline-Specific Effect of Critical EAP on Reading Comprehension

Tahereh Movahhedi; Amir Sarkeshikian; Mohammad Golshan

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19950.2326

Analyzing the Development of a Longitudinal Error-Tagged English Learner Corpus: Exploring Accuracy Development in Iranian EFL Learners' Writing

Samaneh Yadollahi; Amirsaeid Moloodi; Mohammad Rahimi

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.19996.2333

The Effect of Teaching Through Three Types of Mind Maps (Bubble, Double-Bubble, and Multi-Flow) on Iranian EFL Learners' Comprehension and Production of English Collocations

Davood Gholami; Abbas Ali Zarei

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20357.2376

Teachers’ Emotions and Experiences as influential Factors in Using Technology in EFL Classes

Behzad Nezakatgoo; Fatemeh Mirzapour; Maryam Mohseni

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20181.2356

EFL Teachers' Creativity and L2 Learners' Academic Attainment: The Moderating Role of Teaching Experience

Elnaz Zariholhosseini; Sajad Shafiee; Omid Tabatabaei

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20247.2364

The Impact of Brain-Based Teaching on Iranian EFL Learners' Vocabulary Retention and Recall

Davoud Amini; Mahsa Rahmani Asl; Abolfazl Ghasemzadeh

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20173.2354

Iraqi Novice vs. Experienced EFL Teachers’ Beliefs about Classroom Interactional Competence

Zeena Hameed; Hamid Allami; Zia tajeddin

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20179.2355

An Emphasis on the Critical Roles of Academic Simplified Material and its Influences on Learners' Boredom in Online Instruction, Attitudes to Electronic Learning, Self-regulated Online Learning, and Language Achievement

Goodarz Shakibaei; Arash Hashemifardnia; Maryam Amini

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20542.2405

IELTS and TOEFL Applicants’ Self-assessment and Actual Test Performance: A Mixed-Methods Study of Relationship and Variation

Reza Rezvani; Farshad Khadivikia

https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2024.20367.2378

Publisher: Imam Khomeini International University

Editor-in-Chief: Abbas Ali Zarei

International Editorial Board: Mahdi Riazi Jarosław Krajka Jana Bírová Hossein Shokouhi Zohreh Eslami Ali Rahimi Edward Schaefer

Editorial Board: Firooz Sadighi Ataollah Maleki Seyyed Mohammed Alavi Mahmoud Reza Atai Mohammad Aliakbari Ali Akbar Ansarin Vahid Sadeghi Rajab Esfandiari

Frequency: Quarterly

Print ISSN: 2676-5357

Online ISSN: 2676-5985

ADVANCED SCIENCES INDEX

Directory of Research Journals Indexing

Islamic World Science Citation Database (ISC)

Google Scholar

journals.msrt.ir

Indexcopernicus

«مجلۀ پژوهش های نوین در آموزش زبان انگلیسی» Journal of Modern research in English Language Studies با همکاری «انجمن آموزش و ادبیات زبان انگلیسی ایران» (تلسی) منتشر می شود.

Plagiarism detector

Keywords Cloud

• University of Michigan Library
• Research Guides

English Language & Literature

• Early Modern
• Reference Resources
• Indexes to Articles
• Manuscript and Archive Materials
• Book Reviews
• 18th Century
• 19th Century
• 20th and 21st Centuries
• Critical Approaches and Methodologies
• History of the Book / Reception History
• Rhetoric and Composition
• Full-text by Genre
• How to Locate Digital Archives on the Free Web
• General Full Text
• Tools and Training

Early Modern Resources

• Bodleian Library Broadside Ballads
• Early Modern London Theaters
• Editions and Adaptations of Shakespeare. (Alexandria, VA: Chadwyck-Healey, 1996-)
• English Broadside Ballad Archive
• English Short-Title Catalogue
• Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland (Online Comparative editions 1577 & 1587)
• LEME: Lexicons of Early Modern English
• Shakespeare Plays (BBC Streaming Video collection)
• Spenser Archive Finding Aid The Spenser Archive Finding Aid is a bibliographical database with links to collections all over the world that house sixteenth- and seventeenth-century copies of works by the English poet and colonial administrator Edmund Spenser.
• State Papers Online, 1509-1714
• Universal Short Title Catalogue The Universal Short Title Catalogue (USTC) is a collective database of all books published in Europe between the invention of printing and the end of the sixteenth century.
• Women Writers Online Contains over 230 texts by pre-Victorian women that can be browsed, searched and analysed. Additionally, Renaissance Women Online contains a subset of 100 WWP texts, introductions of individual works & essays on the cultural context of the period.
• Annotated Books Online A digital archive of early modern annotated books.
• Rotunda This link opens in a new window Rotunda is a digital collection of critical and documentary editions. The Literature and Culture Collection includes The Digital Temple: A Documentary Edition of George Herbert's English Verse.
• Milton: A Bibliography (1624-1799) This link opens in a new window Bibliography of the English writer John Milton which includes manuscripts, editions, criticism, allusions, quotations, and imitations.
• Early English Books Online (EEBO) This link opens in a new window Contains digital facsimile page images of works printed between 1473 and 1700.

Secondary Sources

• Bibliography of English Women Writers, 1500-1640 This link opens in a new window A comprehensive record of scholarship on 738 known women writers and their texts, canonical and non-canonical.
• ITER: Gateway to the Middle Ages and Renaissance This link opens in a new window Includes index to citations from more than 1,600 scholarly journals in all areas of Medieval and Renaissance studies (400-1700).
• World Shakespeare Bibliography Online This link opens in a new window Provides annotated entries for all scholarly and popular materials related to Shakespeare and published or produced between 1960 and 2013.
• Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies: Web Resources

Key Scholarly Journals

• Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies (JMEMS)
• Milton Studies
• Modern Philology
• Studies in English Literature (SEL)
• English Literary History (ELH)
• English Literary Renaissance (ELR)
• Sixteenth Century Journal
• Shakespeare Quarterly

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

MLA Sample Paper

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

This resource contains a sample MLA paper that adheres to the 2016 updates. To download the MLA sample paper, click this link .

More From Forbes

A psychologist explains how the ‘lion’s gate portal’ can benefit you.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Days like 8/8 can benefit you regardless of your belief in them as they create the perfect storm of ... [+] positivity, placebo and manifestation practice.

Research has confirmed time and again that the gaps between psychological science and spirituality are wide. While one uses treatment modalities developed through scientific rigor, the other banks on faith, belief and optimism.

Paradoxically, however, psychological healing often intersects with spirituality in the realm of practice. “Manifestation” exercises such as meditation and chanting, positive visualization, journaling and affirmations are prescribed in both spaces regularly and are often rooted in gaining more knowledge of and control over the subconscious and unconscious mind.

Research published in 2023 also indicates that certain psychological constructs, like being in a “flow state,” mirror spiritual experiences. The study further argues that incorporating spirituality into your life may enhance self-understanding and potential through self-belief, a goal therapists often set for clients they treat.

All of this is to say that there are many paths that lead to a desired destination. Whether you are a realist with elaborate plans for the future or you’re a spiritual soul building a deeper connection with the universe, manifestation exercises can help you break substantial ground on the journey you’re already on.

And while there is no perfect time to start this journey, many swear by certain fated days, meant to be more powerful and “bountiful” than others. Today is supposed to be one such day, marking the opening of the “Lion’s Gate portal.” Here’s the lore behind the popular legend.

Musk-Trump X Interview: Trump Takes Friendly Questions From Musk After Glitch-Plagued Start

Today’s nyt mini crossword clues and answers for tuesday, august 13, wwe raw results, winners and grades on august 12, 2024, the astrological tale behind lion’s gate portal.

Spiritual practitioners claim the eighth of August to be the day the universe supposedly opens a cosmic gateway known as the Lion’s Gate Portal. With Sirius rising and the Sun in Leo, believers claim this is a magical window for transformation and manifestation, as if the universe itself is conspiring to grant all wishes.

For those who believe the lore, it presents a tantalizing chance to harness the universe’s supposed powers. Whether it’s celestial truth or just a fanciful story lacking scientific or cosmic corroboration, the intent to start manifesting in your life is never unuseful. Regardless of these beliefs, manifestation can always help people achieve their best potential.

Why Does Manifestation Work Well With Spirituality?

While they may use vastly different language, construct different arguments and are trying to prove different things—spiritual healing and psychological healing often coincide when it comes to execution. Here’s a psychologist’s take on why manifestation works in both worlds:

• The placebo effect of faith and positive outcomes. Research published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B suggests that belief systems, including spiritual practices, can impact physical health and well-being. Another study examining the Covid-19 pandemic found that patients with higher emotional, social, physical and spiritual resilience experienced less severe symptoms and recovered more quickly, illustrating how faith can influence outcomes through the placebo effect. And finally, in a 2020 article discussing the power of religious practices, psychiatrist Harold Koening notes: “Placebos have been used in medicine since antiquity and may have significantly improved health and quality of life when little was known about the causes of most illnesses. Many outcomes were likely due to the placebo effect, as available treatments were either unproven or later disproven.” In the same vein, practices like manifestation may rely on the placebo effect, where believing in positive outcomes creates a psychological environment that supports achieving those outcomes.
• The powerful role of self-efficacy. Prolific researcher Albert Bandura's work on self-efficacy highlights the power of one’s belief in their own ability to succeed. When individuals engage in manifestation practices, spiritual or not, they are essentially boosting their self-efficacy—which can lead to better performance and greater resilience in the face of challenges. This helps in building a positive self-image and enhances strength to take righteous actions towards one's ambitions.
• Principles of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). CBT , a well-established psychological treatment modality, emphasizes the importance of changing negative thought patterns to improve mental health. Manifestation techniques, such as affirmations and visualization, align closely with CBT principles by encouraging individuals to focus on positive thoughts and outcomes, thereby reducing anxiety and self-sabotaging thoughts.

How You Can Harness The “Magic” Of Days Like 8/8

Whether ordained by the universe or not, there may not be a better time than now to channelize your mental and spiritual energy toward manifesting the goals you desire to achieve. Here’s why the efficacy of these tools can feel like magic:

• Meditation and visualization. Meditation and visualization are powerful tools that help individuals focus their intentions and reduce stress. Research led by epidemiologists at West Virginia University shows that regular meditation can enhance cognitive function and emotional regulation.
• Journaling. Writing down aspirations and goals can clarify intentions and create a tangible blueprint for success. Journaling has been shown to improve mental health by allowing individuals to process emotions and articulate their own thoughts.
• Environmental enhancements. Creating a conducive environment for manifestation, such as lighting candles or using fragrances, can enhance mood and focus. Research published in Scientia Pharmaceutica suggests that certain olfactory stimulation can positively affect mood and cognitive function.
• Affirmations. Repeating affirmations can reinforce positive beliefs and motivate individuals to pursue their goals. A 2015 study indicates that affirmations, when practiced consistently and spoken as if true, can improve performance and self-perception through a sense of achieving rewards.

While the myths surrounding events like the Lion’s Gate portal may blend astrological assumptions into daily life, the practice of manifestation itself holds significant psychological value at all times in life. The power of intention, belief and structured practice can have profound effects on cognitive health and personal growth. By understanding and harnessing these psychological techniques, individuals can achieve positive transformations, regardless of their spiritual beliefs.

Test your levels of spirituality by taking the science-backed Ego Dissolution Scale, here .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

•  We're Hiring!
•  Help Center

Early Modern English

• Most Cited Papers
• Most Downloaded Papers
• Newest Papers
• Middle English Follow Following
• Margery Kempe Follow Following
• Early Modern English Language Follow Following
• Historical Phonology of English Follow Following
• English historical corpora Follow Following
• Fantastic Follow Following
• English Spelling and Pronunciation Follow Following
• Letteratura Di Viaggio Follow Following
• John Capgrave Follow Following
• Genre Criticism Follow Following

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• Academia.edu Journals
•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Jump to navigation

CFP Medieval Monsters as Modern Monsters (virtual) (9/15/2024; ICMS Kalamazoo 5/8-10/2025)

Medieval Monsters as Modern Monsters: Exploring Continuums of the Monstrous (virtual)

Sponsored by Association for the Advancement of Scholarship and Teaching of the Medieval in Popular Culture and Monsters & the Monstrous Area of the Northeast Popular Culture Association

Organized by Michael A. Torregrossa

60th International Congress on Medieval Studies

Western Michigan University (Kalamazoo, Michigan)

Hybrid event: Thursday, 8 May, through Saturday, 10 May, 2025

Please Submit Proposals by 15 September 2024

Session Information

Medieval monsters and ideas about them remain at the base of many of our modern conceptions of monsters and the monstrous, but few studies have explored the tracks of these ongoing traditions for representing monstrosities in the post-medieval world. It is our intention in this session to shed some light on these creations and their impact today.  

We seek in this panel to unite the fields of Medieval Studies, Medievalism Studies, Monster Studies, and Popular Culture Studies to highlight the links between medieval monstrosities and their post-medieval incarnations and successors. 

We hope presenters will explore both continuity and change in addressing how terrors rooted in the medieval world have been portrayed beyond the Middle Ages and/or how modern monstrosities seem to draw indirectly from medieval traditions.

Thank you for your interest in our session. Please address questions and/or concerns to the organizers at [email protected] . 

Submission Information

The process for proposing contributions to sessions of papers, roundtables and poster sessions for the International Congress on Medieval Studies uses an online submission system powered by Confex. Be advised that submissions cannot be accepted through email. Rather, access the direct link in Confex to our session at https://icms.confex.com/icms/2025/paper/papers/index.cgi?sessionid=6429 . You can also view the full Call for Papers list at https://wmich.edu/medievalcongress/call . 

Within Confex, proposals to sessions of papers, poster sessions and roundtables require the author's name, affiliation and contact information; an abstract (300 words) for consideration by session organizer(s); and a short description (50 words) that may be made public. Proposals to sessions of papers and poster sessions also require a title for the submission (contributions to roundtables are untitled).

Proposers of papers or contributions to roundtables for hybrid sessions should indicate in their abstracts whether they intend to present in person or virtually.

If you need help with your submissions, the Congress offers some resources at the Particpating in the Congress page at https://wmich.edu/medievalcongress/participating-congress . Click to open the section labeled “Propose a Paper” and scroll down for the Quick Guide handouts. 

Be advised of the following policies for participating in the Congress: 

You are invited to propose one paper (as a sole author or as a co-author) for one session of papers. You may propose a paper for a sponsored or special session or for the general sessions, but not both. You may propose an unlimited number of contributions to roundtables and poster sessions, but you will not be scheduled to actively participate (as paper presenter, roundtable discussant, poster author, presider, respondent, workshop leader, demonstrator or performer) in more than three sessions.

Further details on the Congress’s Policies can be found at https://wmich.edu/medievalcongress/policies-guidelines . 

A reminder: Presenters accepted to the Congress must register for the full event. The registration fee is the same for on-site and virtual participants. For planning, the cost for the previous year’s event is posted at the Congress’s Registration page at https://wmich.edu/medievalcongress/registration . 

If necessary, the Medieval Institute and Richard Rawlinson Center at Western Michigan University offer limited funding to presenters. These include both subsidized registration grants and travel awards. Please see the Awards page at the Congress site for details at https://wmich.edu/medievalcongress/awards . 

For more information on the Association for the Advancement of Scholarship and Teaching of the Medieval in Popular Culture, please visit our website at https://medievalinpopularculture.blogspot.com/ . 

For more information on the Monsters & the Monstrous Area of the Northeast Popular Culture Association, please visit our website at https://popularpreternaturaliana.blogspot.com/ . 

Importance of Romantic Period in Modern Day English

• September 2021
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Albaha University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Mohamed Jabraddar Mahil Abd Allah
• Leendert van der Miesen
• BMC MED RES METHODOL

• Simon Lewin

• Joanne Wilkes
• Susan L. Anderson
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up