Article published in:
Diachronica
Vol. 35:1 (2018) ► pp. 134

Full-text

Areal pressure in grammatical evolution
References

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2007Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact, 1–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald
2008Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown & Greville Corbett
(eds.) 2015Understanding and measuring morphological complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte
2007The definite article in Indo-European: Emergence of a new grammatical category? In Elisabeth Stark, Elisabeth Leiss & Werner Abraham (eds.), Nominal determination: Typology, context constraints, and historical emergence, 103–139. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beaulieu, Jeremy M. & Brian C. O’Meara
2014Hidden Markov models for studying the evolution of binary morphological characters. In László Zsolt Garamszegi (ed.), Modern phylogenetic comparative methods and their application in evolutionary biology: Concepts and practice, 395–408. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Bentz, Christian & Bodo Winter
2013Languages with more second language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change 3(1). 1–27.Google Scholar
[ p. 30 ]
Bickel, Balthasar
2011Statistical modeling of language universals. Linguistic Typology 15. 401–413. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bollback, Jonathan P.
2006SIMMAP: Stochastic character mapping of discrete traits on phylogenies. BMC Bioinformatics 7. 88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Botero, Carlos A., Beth Gardner, Kathryn R. Kirby, Joseph Bulbulia, Michael C. Gavin & Russell D. Gray
2014The ecology of religious beliefs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111(47). 16784–16789. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braunmüller, Kurt
1984Morphologische Undurchsichtigkeit – ein Charakteristikum kleiner Sprachen. Kopenhagener Beiträge zur Germanistischen Linguistik 22. 48–68.Google Scholar
Carling, Gerd
(ed.) 2017Diachronic atlas of comparative linguistics online. Lund: Lund University, https://​diacl​.ht​.lu​.se/ (30 July 2016).
Chang, William, Chundra Cathcart, David Hall & Andrew Garrett
2015Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European Steppe Hypothesis. Language 91(1). 194–244. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Philip J. & Francis C. Evans
1954Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35(4). 445–453. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Darlington, Richard B. & Andrew F. Hayes
2017Regression analysis and linear models: Concepts, applications, and implementation. London: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Daumé, Hal
2009Non-parametric Bayesian areal linguistics. In Human language technologies: The 2009 annual conference of the North American chapter of the ACL, 593–601. Boulder, CO: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Dediu, Dan
2010A Bayesian phylogenetic approach to estimating the stability of linguistic features and the genetic biasing of tone. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 278(1704). 474–479. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold
1900Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen, vol. 3. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.Google Scholar
Drummond, A. J., M. A. Suchard, D. Xie & A. Rambaut
2012Bayesian phylogenetics with BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29(8). 1969–1973. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S.
1989Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13(2). 257–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, Michael
2015Language phylogenies. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 190–211. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dunn, Michael, Tonya Kim Dewey, Carlee Arnett, Thórhallur Eythórsson & Jóhanna Barðdal
2017Dative sickness: A phylogenetic analysis of argument structure evolution in Germanic. Language 93(1). e1–e22.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, Michael, Simon J. Greenhill, Stephen C. Levinson & Russell D. Gray
2011Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature 473(7345). 79–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, Michael, Stephen C. Levinson, Eva Lindström, Ger Reesink & Angela Terrill
2008Structural phylogeny in historical linguistics: Methodological explorations applied in Island Melanesia. Language 84(4). 710–759. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, Joseph
2004Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Fortson, Benjamin W.
2015Indo-European: Methods and problems. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 645–656. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
[ p. 31 ]
François, Alexandre
2011Social ecology and language history in the northern Vanuatu linkage: A tale of divergence and convergence. Journal of Historical Linguistics 1(2). 175–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, Paul
1975Proto-Indo-European syntax: The order of meaningful elements (Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph 1). Butte, MT: Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Gamkrelidze, Tamaz & Vyacheslav I. Ivanov
1995Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans (translated by Johanna Nichols). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Andrew
2006Convergence in the formation of Indo-European subgroups: Phylogeny and chronology. In Peter Forster & Colin Renfrew (eds.), Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, 139–151. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew & Donald B. Rubin
1992Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science 7. 457–511. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Graham, Christopher
2016Geographical correlates of rare word orders: A computational approach to quantitative typology and language contact. University of California, Davis dissertation.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. & Robert Wilson
1971Convergence and creolization. In Dell Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages, 151–168. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie
2005The world atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haug, Dag
2015Treebanks in historical linguistic research. In Carlotta Viti (ed.), Perspectives on historical syntax, 187–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Haynie, Hannah, Claire Bowern & Hannah LaPalombara
2014Sound symbolism in the languages of Australia. PloS One 9(4). e92852. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich
1996 [1993]Subversion or convergence? The issue of pre-Vedic retroflexion reexamined. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 23(2). 73–115.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.
1960Language change and linguistic reconstruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1966Criteria for the subgrouping of languages. In Henrik Birnbaum & Jaan Puhvel (eds.), Ancient Indo-European dialects, 1–12. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Jäger, Gerhard & Johann-Mattis List
. Forthcoming. Using ancestral state reconstruction methods for onomasiological reconstruction in multilingual word lists. Language Dynamics and Change 8.
Jordan, Michael
2004Graphical models. Statistical Science 19(1). 140–155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony, Ann Taylor & Donald Ringe
2000The Middle English verb-second constraint: A case study in language contact and language change. In Susan C. Herring, Pieter Th. van Reenen & Lene Schøsler (eds.), Textual parameters in older languages, 353–392. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kusters, Wouter
2008Complexity in linguistic theory, language learning and language change. In Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 3–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lass, Roger
1997Historical linguistics and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Liggett, Thomas M.
2010Continuous time Markov processes: An introduction, vol. 113 Graduate Studies in Mathematics. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 32 ]
List, Johann-Mattis, Shijulal Nelson-Sathi, William Martin & Hans Geisler
2014Using phy-logenetic networks to model Chinese dialect history. In Søren Wichmann & Jeff Good (eds.), Quantifying language dynamics, 125–154. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lupyan, Gary & Rick Dale
2010Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS One 5. 1–10. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martinet, André
1975Évolution des langues et reconstruction. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Meid, Wolfgang
1975Probleme der räumlichen und zeitlichen Gliederung des Indogermanischen. In Helmut Rix (ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung, 204–19. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine
1925La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Oslo: H. Aschehoug & Co.Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson
(eds.) 2008Complexity in linguistic theory, language learning and language change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nakhleh, Luay, Donald Ringe & Tandy Warnow
2005Perfect phylogenetic networks: A new methodology for reconstructing the evolutionary history of natural languages. Language 81(2). 382–420. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
1986Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62. 56–119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998The Eurasian spread zone and the Indo-European dispersal. In Roger M. Blench & Matthew Spriggs (eds.), Archaeology and language II: Correlating archaeological and linguistic hypotheses, 220–266. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Diversity and stability in languages. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical linguistics, 283–310. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 110–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Tandy Warnow
2008Tutorial on computational linguistic phylogeny. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5). 760–820. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Rasmus
2002Mapping mutations on phylogenies. Systematic Biology 51(5). 729–739. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Emmanuel
2014Simulation of phylogenetic data. In László Zsolt Garamszegi (ed.), Modern phylogenetic comparative methods and their application in evolutionary biology: Concepts and practice, 335–350. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin
2000At the edge of knowability: Towards a prehistory of languages. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10(1). 7–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, Jeffrey S.
2011Optimal proposal distributions and adaptive MCMC. In Steve Brooks, Andrew Gelman, Galin L. Jones & Xiao-Li Meng (eds.), Handbook of Markov chain Monte Carlo, 93–112. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Malcolm
2013Diagnosing contact processes from their outcomes: The importance of life stages. Journal of Language Contact 6(1). 5–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward
1921Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Schaller, Helmut Wilhelm
1975Die Balkansprachen: eine Einführung in die Balkanphilologie. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
[ p. 33 ]
Swadesh, Morris
1952Lexicostatistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 96. 452–463.Google Scholar
1955Towards greater accuracy in lexicostatistic dating. International Journal of American Linguistics 21. 121–137. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter
1974Linguistic change and diffusion: Description and explanation in sociolinguistic dialect geography. Language in Society 3(2). 215–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001Contact and simplification: Historical baggage and directionality in linguistic change. Linguistic Typology 5. 371–374.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Theo
1994Linguistic reconstruction in the context of European prehistory. Transactions of the Philological Society 92. 215–284. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Viti, Carlotta
2010The information structure of OVS in Vedic. In Gisella Ferraresi & Rosemarie Lühr (eds.), Diachronic studies on information structure: Language acquisition and change, 37–62. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2014Reconstructing syntactic variation in Proto-Indo-European. Indo-European Linguistics 2. 73–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Søren
2015Diachronic stability and typology. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 212–224. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Willis, David
1998Syntactic change in Welsh: A study of the loss of the verb-second. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Winford, Donald
2005Contact-induced changes: Classification and processes. Diachronica 22(2). 373–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Ziheng
2014Molecular evolution: A statistical approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yanovich, Igor
2016Genetic drift explains Sapir’s “drift” in semantic change. In Seán G. Roberts, Christine Cuskley, Luke McCrohon, Lluis Barceló-Coblijn, Olga Fehér & Tessa Verhoef (eds.), The evolution of language: Proceedings of the 11th international conference (EVOLANGX11), Online at http://​evolang​.org​/neworleans​/papers​/24​.html.
[ p. 34 ]
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Carling, Gerd, Filip Larsson, Chundra A. Cathcart, Niklas Johansson, Arthur Holmer, Erich Round, Rob Verhoeven & Muhammad Zubair Asghar
2018. Diachronic Atlas of Comparative Linguistics (DiACL)—A database for ancient language typology. PLOS ONE 13:10  pp. e0205313 ff. Crossref logo
List, Johann‐Mattis
2019. Automated methods for the investigation of language contact, with a focus on lexical borrowing. Language and Linguistics Compass 13:10 Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 august 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.