References (54)
References
Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21(3). 435–483. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter M. 2009. Differential argument marking in two-term case systems and its implications for the general theory of case marking. In Helen de Hoop & Peter de Swart (eds.), Differential Subject Marking (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 72), 151–171. Dordrecht: Springer. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen. 2025. Semantic research: An empirical introduction (to appear).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowe, Heather J. 1990. Categories, constituents, and constituent order in Pitjantjatjara: An aboriginal language of Australia. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1988. The diachronic dimension in explanation. In John A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 350–379. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caldwell, Robert. 1856. A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages. London: Harrison.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coghill, Eleanor. 2010. Ditransitive constructions in the Neo-Aramaic dialect of Telkepe. In Andrej L. Malchukov, Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comri, (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions: A comparative handbook, 221–242. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1977. Subjects and direct objects in Uralic languages: A functional explanation of case marking systems. Études Finno-Ougriennes 12. 5–17. ([URL])
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2019. Taking diachronic evidence seriously: Result-oriented vs. source-oriented explanations of typological universals. In Karsten Schmidtke-Bode, Natalia Levshina, Susanne Maria Michaelis & Ilja A. Seržant (eds.), Explanation in typology, 25–46. Berlin: Language Science Press. ([URL])
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Typology and universals. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik & Marie-Anne Markey. 2021. The spark or the fuel? On the role of ambiguity in language change. Journal of Historical Syntax 5(32–39). 1–24. ()Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 1985. Competing motivations. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 343–365. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fenk-Oczlon, Gertraud. 2001. Familiarity, information flow, and linguistic form. In Joan L. Bybee & Paul Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic Structure, 431–448. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgakopoulos, Thanasis & Stéphane Polis. 2018. The semantic map model: State of the art and future avenues for linguistic research. Language and Linguistics Compass 12(2). e12270. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, Edward, et al. 2019. How efficiency shapes human language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23(5). 389–407. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1969. Some methods of dynamic comparison in linguistics. In Jan Puhvel (ed.), Substance and structure of language, 147–203. Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. Optimality and diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18(2). 180–205. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and crosslinguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The New Psychology of Language, volume 2, 211–243. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. (10.5281/zenodo.831410)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Explaining the Ditransitive Person-Role Constraint: A usage-based approach. Constructions 2. () ([URL])
. 2019a. Can cross-linguistic regularities be explained by constraints on change? In Karsten Schmidtke-Bode, Natalia Levshina, Susanne Maria Michaelis & Ilja A. Seržant (eds.), Competing explanations in linguistic typology, 1–23. Berlin: Language Science Press. ([URL])
. 2019b. Differential place marking and differential object marking. STUF — Language Typology and Universals 72(3). 313–334. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021a. Explaining grammatical coding asymmetries: Form-frequency correspondences and predictability. Journal of Linguistics 57(3). 605–633. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021b. Role-reference associations and the explanation of argument coding splits. Linguistics 59(1). 123–174. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023a. Coexpression and synexpression patterns across languages: Comparative concepts and possible explanations. Frontiers in Psychology 14. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023b. Word class universals and language-particular analysis. In Eva van Lier (ed.), The Oxford handbook of word classes, 15–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ([URL])
. 2026. The non-unity of differential object marking: Flagging versus indexing. Open Journal of Romance Linguistics 12(1), 1–32. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 2009. Grammaticalization of cases. In Andrej L. Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 458–469. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoop, Helen de & Bhuvana Narasimhan. 2005. Differential case-marking in Hindi. In Mengistu Amberber & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Competition and variation in natural languages: The case for case, 321–345. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. Florian. 2010. Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density. Cognitive Psychology 61(1). 23–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keine, Stefan & Gereon Müller. 2010. Non-zero/non-zero alternations in differential object marking. In Patrick Brandt & Marco García García (eds.), Transitivity: Form, meaning, acquisition, and processing, 119–140. Amsterdam: Benjamins. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2008. Animacy and asymmetries in differential case marking. Lingua 118. 203–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melis, Chantal & Marcela Flores. 2009. On the interplay between forces of erosion and forces of repair in language change A case study. Folia Linguistica Historica 43. 271–310. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith A. 1978. On the limits of subject-object ambiguity tolerance. Research on Language & Social Interaction 11(1–2). 255–259. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Igor. 1997. Evenki. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piantadosi, Steven T.; Harry Tily & Edward Gibson. 2012. The communicative function of ambiguity in language. Cognition 122(3). 280–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1980. Encoding grammatical relations: Acceptable and unacceptable non-distinctness. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical morphology, 289–326. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1996. Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English. Cognitive Linguistics 7(2). 149–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. Ambiguity avoidance by means of function words in English? Providing additional corpus-based counterevidence. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 69(3). 207–236. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rubin, Aaron D. 2005. Studies in Semitic grammaticalization (Harvard Semitic Museum Publications Number 57). Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Senft, Gunter. 1986. Kilivila, the language of the Trobriand Islanders (Mouton Grammar Library, 3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2019. Weak universal forces: The discriminatory function of case in differential object marking systems. In Karsten Schmidtke-Bode, Natalia Levshina, Susanne Maria Michaelis & Ilja A. Seržant, Ilja A. (eds.), Explanation in typology: Diachronic sources, functional motivations and the nature of the evidence, 149–178. Berlin: Language Science Press. ([URL])
2025. Diachronic and typological evidence from argument marking confirms generic audience-design effects and strong effects of ambiguity avoidance in the domain. (Ms., University of Potsdam)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinnemäki, Kaius. 2014. A typological perspective on Differential Object Marking. Linguistics 52(2). 281–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas, Nataliya Levkovych & Aina Urdze. 2017. When zero is just enough … In support of a Special Toponymic Grammar in Maltese. Folia Linguistica 51(2). 453–482. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tal, Shira, Kenny Smith, Jennifer Culbertson, Eitan Grossman & Inbal Arnon. 2022. The Impact of Information structure on the emergence of differential object marking: An experimental study. Cognitive Science 46(3). e13119. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Temperley, David. 2003. Ambiguity avoidance in English relative clauses. Language 79(3). 464–484. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Terzi, Arhonto. 2010. On null spatial Ps and their arguments. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 9. 167–187. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2010. Animacy and information structure in the system of ergative marking in Umpithamu. Lingua 120(7). 1637–1651. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 2015. Ambiguity avoidance is overrrated. In Susanne Winkler (ed.), Ambiguity: Language and communication, 21–51. Berlin: De Gruyter. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena & Ilja A. Seržant. 2018. Differential argument marking: An introduction. In Ilja Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), The diachronic typology of differential argument marking. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zehentner, Eva. 2022. Ambiguity avoidance as a factor in the rise of the English dative alternation. Cognitive Linguistics 33(1). 3–33. ( )Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue