Article published in:
Vol. 37:4 (2020) ► pp. 474513


Interrogatives as relativization markers in Indo-European


Alster, Bendt
2002Relative clauses and case relations in Sumerian. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 92: 7–31.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1989Relative clauses. In Language universals and linguistic typology 138–164. 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2006Syntactic typology: Just how exotic ARE European-type relative clauses. In Ricardo Mairal & Juana Gil (eds.), Linguistic universals, 130–154. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deutscher, Guy
2002The Akkadian relative clauses in cross-linguistic perspective. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 92(1): 86–105. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
2003The relationship between demonstratives and interrogatives. Studies in Language 27(3): 635–655. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eska, Joseph F.
2009The emergence of the Celtic languages. In The Celtic languages, 36–41. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fiorentino, Giuliana
2007European relative clauses and the uniqueness of the relative pronoun type. Italian Journal of Linguistics 19(2): 263–291.Google Scholar
Fortson IV, Benjamin W.
2010Indo-European language and culture: An introduction. 2nd edn. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gamkrelidze, Thomas V. & Vyacheslav V. Ivanov
1990The early history of Indo-European languages. Scientific American 262(3): 110–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: A reconstruction and historical analysis of a proto-language and proto-culture part i: The text. part ii: Bibliography, indexes. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hackstein, Olav
2012The evolution of finite complementation in Tocharian. In Georges-Jean Pinault, Michael Peyrot, Jens Elmegård Rasmussen & Thomas Olander (eds.), Tocharian and Indo-European studies, vol. 13, 117–148. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel & Martin Haspelmath
2019Glottolog 4.1. Available online at http://​glottolog​.org
Haspelmath, Martin
2001aThe European linguistic area: Standard Average European. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, 1492–1510. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001bIndefinite pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
2006From question to subordination. In The changing languages of Europe, 204–243. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hendery, Rachel
2012Relative clauses in time and space: A case study in the methods of diachronic typology. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoffner, Harold & H. Craig Melchert
2008A grammar of the Hittite language. Winona Lake, ID: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Igla, Birgit
1996Das Romani von Ajia Varvara: Deskriptive und historisch-vergleichende Darstellung eines Zigeunerdialekts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, Jay H.
1999Some relative forms of the verb in Old Irish. In Compositiones Indogermanicae in memoriam Jochem Schindler, 205–222. Prague: Enigma.Google Scholar
Kahle, David & Hadley Wickham
2013ggmap: Spatial visualization with ggplot2. The R Journal 5(1): 144–161. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Ronald
1999Observations on the absolute and relative chronology of Tocharian loanwords and sound changes. Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 8: 111–138.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1984Der Relativsatz. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Leiwo, Martti
2002From contact to mixture: Bilingual inscriptions from Italy. In J. N. Adams, Mark Janse & Swain Simon (eds.), Bilingualism in ancient society, 168–194. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luján, Eugenio R.
2009Relative clauses in Proto-Indo-European. In Vit Bubenik, John Hewson & Sarah Rose (eds.), Grammatical change in Indo-European languages, 221–234. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Leonardo M. Savoia
2014From Latin to Romance: Case loss and preservation in pronominal systems. Probus 26(2): 217–248. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron
2004Romani – a linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Melchert, H. Craig
2012Genitive case and possessive adjective in Anatolian. In Vincenzo Orioles (ed.), Per Roberto Gusmani. Studi in ricordo. Linguistica storica e teoretica, vol. 2, 273–286. Udine: Forum.Google Scholar
Meyer, Robin
2017Iranian-Armenian language contact in and before the 5th century CE. Oxford Wolfson College, University of Oxford dissertation.Google Scholar
Morgenstierne, Georg, Josef Elfenbein, D. N. MacKenzie & Nicholas Sims-Williams
2003A new etymological vocabulary of Pashto. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, Mangesh V.
1975Bilingualism and syntactic change in Konkani. Language 51(3): 672–683. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Neukom, Lukas & Manideepa Patnaik
2003A grammar of Oriya (ASAS 17). Universität Zürich.Google Scholar
Orel, Vladimir Ė.
2000A concise historical grammar of the Albanian language: Reconstruction of Proto-Albanian. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Paudyal, Netra
2009The syntax of three-argument verbs in Nepali. Qualifying paper.Google Scholar
Penney, John
2011Archaic and old Latin. In James Clackson (ed.), A companion to the Latin language, 220–235. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Perder, Emil
2013A grammatical description of Dameli. Stockholm University dissertation.Google Scholar
Ringe, Don
2017Indo-European dialectology. In Jared Klein, Brian D. Joseph & Matthias Fritz (eds.), Handbook of comparative and historical Indo-European linguistics, vol. 1, 62–75. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Widmer, Manuel, Sandra Auderset, Johanna Nichols, Paul Widmer & Balthasar Bickel
2017NP recursion over time: Evidence from Indo-European. Language 93(4): 799–826. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yakubovich, Ilya
2008The origin of Luwian possessive adjectives. In Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela Della Volpe & Miriam Robbins (eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, November 3–4, 2007, vol. 54 JIES Monograph, 193–217.Google Scholar