Part of
Advances in Research on Semantic Roles
Edited by Seppo Kittilä and Fernando Zúñiga
[Benjamins Current Topics 88] 2016
► pp. 5178
References (47)
References
Arkadiev, Peter M. 2008. Differential argument marking in two-term case systems and its implications for the general theory of case marking. In Peter de Swart & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Differential subject marking, 151–171. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Barddal, Johanna. 2008. Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2011. Grammatical relations typology. In Jae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford handbook of language typology, 399–444. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2009. Case marking and alignment. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 304–321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Manoj Rai, Netra Paudyal, Goma Banjade, Toya Nath Bhatta, Martin Gaenszle, Elena Lieven, Iccha Purna Rai, Novel K. Rai & Sabine Stoll. 2010. The syntax of three-argument verbs in Chintang and Belhare (Southeastern Kiranti). In Andrej Malchukov, Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions: A comparative handbook, 382–408. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Jonni Kanerva. 1989. Locative inversion in Chichewa: A case study in factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 1–50.Google Scholar
Bryant, David & Vincent Moulton. 2004. Neighbor-Net: An agglomerative method for the construction of phylogenetic networks. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21. 255–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butt, Miriam. 2008. Case in Lexical-Functional Grammar. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook ofcase, 59–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1978. Ergativity. In Winfred P. Lehmann (ed.), Syntactic typology: Studies in the phenomenology oflanguage. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Alignment of case marking. In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds.), The world atlas of language structures, 398–405. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). 2015. Valency classes: A comparative handbook. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary & Irina Nikolaeva. 2011. Objects and information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13. 257–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. Are grammatical relations universal? In Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type dedicated to T. Givon, 117–143. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. Non-canonical marking of core arguments in European languages. In Aleksandra Y. Aikhenvald, R.M.W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds.), Non-canonical marking ofsubjects and objects, 53–84. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment typology. Linguistic Typology 15. 535–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holisky, Dee A. 1987. The case of the intransitive subject in Tsova-Tush (Batsbi). Lingua 71. 103–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huson, Daniel H. & David Bryant. 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23. 254–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Leonard & Peter J. Rousseeuw. 1990. Finding groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. New York: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maechler, Martin, Peter J. Rousseeuw, Anja Struyf & Mia Hubert. 2005. cluster: Cluster analysis basics and extensions. R package, [URL].Google Scholar
Malchukov, A. 2005. Case pattern splits, verb types and construction competition. In Mengistu Ambember & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Competition and variation in natural languages: the case for case, 73–118. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie. 2010. Ditransitive constructions: A typological overview. In Studies in ditransitive constructions: a comparative handbook, 1–35. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Merlan, Francesca. 1985. Split intransitivity: Functional oppositions in inflections. In Johanna Nichols & Anthony C. Woodbury (eds.), Grammar inside and outside the clause: Some approaches to theory from the field, 324–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Molochieva, Zarina. 2010. Tense, aspect, and mood in Chechen. Leipzig: University of Leipzig PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2008. Why are stative-active languages rare in Eurasia? A typological perspective on split subject marking. In Mark Donohue & Soren Wichmann (eds.), The typology ofsemantic alignment, 121–139. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna, Alena Witzlack-Makarevich & Balthasar Bickel. 2013. The autotyp genealogy and geography database: 2013 release. Electronic database, [URL].Google Scholar
Onishi, Masayuki. 2001. Introduction: Non-canonically marked subjects and objects: Parameters and properties. In Aleksandra Y. Aikhenvald, R.M.W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds.), Non-canonical marking of subjects and objects, 1–52. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pandharipande, Rajeshwari V. 1997. Marathi. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice. 1999. Cases and thematic roles. Tubingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Mismatches in semantic role hierarchies and the dimensions of role semantics. In Ina Bornkessel, Matthias Schlesewsky, Bernard Comrie & Angela D. Friederici (eds.), Semantic role universals and argument linking: Theoretical, typological and psycholinguistic perspectives, 53–87. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pustet, Regina. 2002. Split intransitivity revisited: Comparing Lakota and Osage. International Jounral of American Linguistics 68(4). 381–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, [URL].Google Scholar
Rokach, Lior. 2010. A survey of clustering algorithms. In Oded Maimon & Lior Rokach (eds.), Data mining and knowledge discovery handbook, 269–298. New York: Springer [second edition]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sava, Graziano. 2005. A grammar of Ts’amakko. Cologne: Köppe.Google Scholar
Say, Sergey. 2011. Nekanoničeskoe markirovanie aktantov mnogomestnyx predikatov: opyt kvantitativno-tipologičeskogo issledovanija. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana 7. 424–430 [[URL]].Google Scholar
Schikowski, Robert. 2013. Object-conditioned differential marking in Chintang and Nepali. Zurich: University of Zurich PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Song, Jae Jung. 2001. Linguistic typology: Morphology and syntax. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Tasaku. 1985. Remarks on Transitivity. Journal of Linguistics 21. 385–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Issues in case-marking. In Peri Bhaskararao & Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (eds.), Non-nominative subjects, vol. 2, 197–208. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. 2005. Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. & David P. Wilkins. 1996. The case for ‘effector’: Case roles, agents, and agentivity revisited. In Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Grammatical constructions, 289–322. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena. 2011. Typological variation in grammatical relations. Leipzig: University of Leipzig PhD dissertation.Google Scholar