Reconsidering Corpus Methods in HEL

Turning text into numbers—and ultimately into an interpretable result—typically involves a processing pipeline. Whether explicit or hidden inside code, each step in that pipeline involves a host of decisions. This article follows a pipeline and unpacks some of the attendant decisions that analysts face at various stages, highlighting the specific challenges that confront analysts investigating historical data. Data, for example, can be less available; the quality of those data can be poor; and the development of tools and models can lag when compared to what is available for present-day English. In the face of such challenges, options are explored, but no argument is made for a particular approach or method—results and their interpretation will be shaped by analysts’ epistemic commitments and expertise. An argument is made, however, that an effective processing pipeline will be generative. It will be one that not only can be explained and defended but also can help us see the histories of English—its structures, its uses, and its users—in new ways. In that spirit, a processing pipeline can be understood not as a series of immobilizing decisions, but as an invitation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of English Linguistics
Published
2026-05-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00754242261432217
Primary Topic
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reconsidering Corpus Methods in HEL

David West Brown
Journal of English Linguistics
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
article

Reconsidering Corpus Methods in HEL

David West Brown
article en

Abstract

Turning text into numbers—and ultimately into an interpretable result—typically involves a processing pipeline. Whether explicit or hidden inside code, each step in that pipeline involves a host of decisions. This article follows a pipeline and unpacks some of the attendant decisions that analysts face at various stages, highlighting the specific challenges that confront analysts investigating historical data. Data, for example, can be less available; the quality of those data can be poor; and the development of tools and models can lag when compared to what is available for present-day English. In the face of such challenges, options are explored, but no argument is made for a particular approach or method—results and their interpretation will be shaped by analysts’ epistemic commitments and expertise. An argument is made, however, that an effective processing pipeline will be generative. It will be one that not only can be explained and defended but also can help us see the histories of English—its structures, its uses, and its users—in new ways. In that spirit, a processing pipeline can be understood not as a series of immobilizing decisions, but as an invitation.

Journal of English Linguistics
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.