Article in:
Diachronica
Vol. 38:1 (2021) ► pp. 111150
References

References

Aasen, Ivar
1864Norsk grammatik. Kristiania (=Oslo): Malling.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell & Robert Malouf
2013Morphological organization: The low conditional entropy conjecture. Language 89(3): 429–464. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell, Greg T. Stump & Gert Webelhuth
2011Lexicalism, periphrasis and implicative morphology. In Robert D. Borsley and Kersti Börjars (eds.), Non-transformational Theories of Grammar, 325–58. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Albright, Adam
2003A quantitative study of Spanish paradigm gaps. In Gina Garding & Mimu Tsujimura (eds.), Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 22, 1–14. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
2009Lexical and morphological conditioning of paradigm gaps. In Curt Rice & Sylvia Blaho (eds.), Modeling ungrammaticality in optimality theory, 117–164. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte
2007‘He rung the bell’ and ‘she drunk ale’ – Non-standard past tense forms in traditional British dialects and on the internet’. In Marianne Hundt, Nadja Nesselhauf & Carolin Biewer (eds.), Corpus linguistics and the web, 271–285. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Are non-standard dialects more natural than the standard? A test case from English verb morphology. Journal of Linguistics 47: 251–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo
1989Historical and comparative linguistics, 2nd rev. edn. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Audring, Jenny
2006Pronominal gender in spoken Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 18(2): 85–116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Calibrating complexity: How complex is a gender system? Language Sciences 60: 53–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019Canonical, complex, complicated?. In Francesca Di Garbo, Bernhard Wälchli & Bruno Olsson (Eds.) Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity, 15–52. Berlin: Language Sciences Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Ton Dijkstra, and Robert Schreuder
1997Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual–route model. Journal of Memory and Language 37(1): 94–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, James M. McQueen, Ton Dijkstra & Robert Schreuder
2003Frequency effects in regular inflectional morphology: Revisiting Dutch plurals. In Harald R. Baayen & Robert Schreuder (eds.), Morphological structure in language processing, 355–390. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baerman, Matthew
2016Seri verb classes: Morphosyntactic motivation and morphological autonomy. Language, 92(4): 792–823. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown, Dunstan & Greville G. Corbett
2017Morphological complexity (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, Vol. 153). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Michael
2008A new introduction to Old Norse. Part I: Grammar. 3rd edn. London: Viking Society for Northern Research, University College London.Google Scholar
Blanc, H.
1970Dual and Pseudo-Dual in the Arabic Dialects. Language 46(1): 42–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette
1996The syllable in phonological theory. In John Goldsmith (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory, 206–244. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bond, Oliver, Helen Sims-Williams & Matthew Baerman
Forthcoming. Contact and linguistic typology. In Raymond Hickey ed. The handbook of language contact 2nd edn. Wiley-Blackwell
Booij, Geert
1994Against split morphology. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1993, 27–49. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
1995Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Jaap van Marle & Geert Booij (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995, 1–16. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire
2009Defining complexity: Historical reconstruction and Nyulnyulan subordination. Rice Working Papers in Linguistics, 1. Houston: Rice University. https://​hdl​.handle​.net​/1911​/21848
Bull, Tove
1990Målet i Troms og Finnmark. In Ernst Håkon Jahr (ed.), Den store dialektboka, 157–178. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
1985Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., & Carol. L. Moder
1983Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59(2), 251–270. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carstairs, Andrew
1986Macroclasses and paradigm economy in German nouns. STUF-Language Typology and Universals 39(1–4): 3–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carstairs, Andrew D.
1987Allomorphy in inflexion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew
1994Inflection classes, gender, and the principle of contrast. Language 70(4): 737–788. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000Article 65: Inflection classes. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphologie/Morphology: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung, vol. 1, 630–638. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G.
1979The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15(2): 203–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2009Canonical inflectional classes. In Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé & Jesse Tseng (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes: Morphology in Bordeaux, 1–11. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen
2004The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Testing the assumption of complexity invariance: The case of Elfdalian and Swedish. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 50–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dammel, Antje & Kürschner, Sebastian
2018The diachrony of inflectional classes in four Germanic languages. What happens after transparency is lost? In William B. McGregor & Søren Wichmann (eds.), The diachrony of classification systems, 283–314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dammel, Antje & Damaris Nübling
2006The superstable marker as an indicator of categorial weakness? Folia Linguistica XL: 97–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, Don Roger
2015A reconstruction of Proto-Sogeram. PhD dissertation, UC Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav
2004On the relation between gender and declension: A diachronic perspective from Norwegian. Studies in Language 28(1): 51–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007The No Blur Principle meets Norwegian dialects. Studia Linguistica 61(3): 278–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Inflectional change, ‘sound laws’ and the autonomy of morphology. Diachronica 30(1): 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Reinforcement in inflection classes: Two cues may be better than one. Word Structure 7(2): 153–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav & Phillipp Conzett
2016Kapittel 3: Morfologi. In Helge Sandøy (ed.), Norsk språkhistorie I: Mønster, 213–317. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav & Greville G. Corbett
2012Definiteness, gender, and hybrids: Evidence from Norwegian Dialects. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 24(4): 287–324. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Svein Lie & Kjell Ivar Vannebo
1997Norsk referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Falk, Hjalmar & Alf Torp
1900Dansk-norskens syntax i historisk fremstilling. Kristiania (=Oslo): H. Aschehoug & Co.Google Scholar
Fertig, David
2013Analogy and Morphological Change. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fleischer, Jürg & Horst Simon
2011What are exceptions? And what can be done about them? In Jürg Fleischer & Horst Simon (eds.), Expecting the unexpected: Exceptions in grammar (TiL, SaM 216), 3–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gardani, Francesco
2008Borrowing of inflectional morphemes in language contact. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Erik & Lars Heltoft
2011Grammatik over det Danske Sprog. 3 volumes Copenhagen: Det danske sprog- og litteraturselskab (/Syddansk universitetsforlag).Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2000Article 68: Periphrasis. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann & Joachim Mugdan (eds.), Morphology: A handbook on inflection and word formation, vol. 1. 654–664. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Haugen, Odd Einar
2002Grunnbok i norrønt språk. Oslo: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer
2001Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics 39(6): 1041–1070. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Philip & Hans-Olav Enger
2018Norwegian: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray & Audring, Jenny
2019Relational morphology in the parallel architecture. In Jenny Audring & Francesca Masini (eds.), The Oxford handbook of morphological theory, 390–408. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Josefsson, Gunlög
2014Pancake sentences and the semanticization of formal gender in Mainland Scandinavian. Language Sciences 43: 62–76. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian
2011A localistic approach to universals and variation. In Peter Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation, 404–425. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Abby
2015The evidence for homophony avoidance in language change: Reply to Sampson (2013). Diachronica 32(2): 268–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kristoffersen, Gjert & Arne Torp
2016Fonologi. In Norsk språkhistorie I: Mønster, 101–213. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders & Torodd Kinn
2016Språkets mønstre, 4th edn. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Kürschner, Sebastian
2016Die Interaktion von Genus und Deklinationsklasse in oberdeutschen Dialekten. In Andreas Bittner & Constanze Spieß (eds.) Formen und Funktionen. Morphosemantik und grammatische Konstruktion, 35–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kusters, Wouter
2003Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection. PhD dissertation, University of Leiden. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Losiewicz, Beth L.
1992The effect of frequency on linguistic morphology. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Löwenadler, John
2010Restrictions on productivity: Defectiveness in Swedish adjective paradigms. Morphology 20(1): 71–107. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lundskær-Nielsen, Tom & Philip Holmes
2010Danish: A comprehensive grammar, 2nd edn. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin
2018The Romance verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marchese, Lynnel
1988Noun classes and agreement systems in Kru: A historical approach. In Michael Barlow & Charles A. Ferguson (eds.), Agreement in natural languages: Approaches, theory, descriptions, 323–341. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Milin, Petar, Victor Kuperman, Aleksandar Kostic & R. Harald Baayen
2009Paradigms bit by bit: An information theoretic approach to the processing of paradigmatic structure in inflection and derivation. In James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds.), Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, 214–252. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nesse, Agnete
2002Språkkontakt mellom norsk og tysk i hansatidens Bergen. (Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi, II. Hist.-Filos. Klasse, Skrifter og avhandlinger nr. 2). Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
2009Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey. In Sampson, Geoffrey, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 110–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Noreen, Adolf
1970 [1923]Altnordische Grammatik I: Altisländische und altnorwegische Grammatik (Laut- und Flexionslehre)… Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nübling, Damaris
2008Was tun mit Flexionsklassen? Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik LXXV, 282–329.Google Scholar
Nygaard, Marius
1905Norrøn syntax. Kristiania: Aschehoug.Google Scholar
Refsum, Helge
1954Romeriksmål. Oslo: Fellestrykk.Google Scholar
Riad, Tomas
1999«Allting ryms i varje frö»: Om suffixet -(i)sk. Språk och Stil 9: 35–70.Google Scholar
Ridge, Eleanor
2019Variation in Vatlongos verbal morphosyntax: Speaker communities in Southeast Ambrym and Mele Maat. PhD dissertation, SOAS.Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey
2013A counterexample to homophony avoidance. Diachronica 30: 579–591. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey, David Gil & Peter Trudgill
2009Language complexity as an evolving variable. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sandøy, Helge
1988Samsvarbøying av adjektiv og perfektum partisipp i norske dialektar. In Andreas Bjørkum & Arve Borg (eds.), Nordiske studiar: Innlegg frå den tredje nordiske dialektologkonferansen, 85–118. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Schulte, Michael
2005Article 122: Phonological developments from Old Nordic to Early Modern Nordic I: West Scandinavian. In Oskar Bandle et al. (eds.), The Nordic languages, vol. 2, 1081–1097. HSK 22. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sims, Andrea D.
2015Inflectional defectiveness. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skautrup, Peter
1968Det danske sprogs historie, Første bind: Fra guldhornene til Jydske lov. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Sornicola, Rosanna
2011Romance linguistics and historical linguistics: Reflections on synchrony and diachrony. In Martin Maiden, J. C. Smith & Adam Ledgeway, (eds.), The Cambridge history of the Romance languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spilling, Eivor Finset
2012Gradbøying i norsk: en korpusbasert undersøkelse av talespråk. MA thesis, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Spilling, Eivor Finset & Tor Arne Haugen
2013Gradbøying i norsk: en bruksbasert tilnærming. Maal og Minne 2013/2: 1–40.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, Edgar H.
1947An introduction to linguistic science. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Taft, Marcus
1979Recognition of affixed words and the word frequency effect. Memory & Cognition 7(4): 263–272. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, George
1983A comparison of the morphological adaptation of loanwords ending in a vowel in contemporary Czech, Russian, and Serbo-Croatian. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 25(1): 180–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torp, Arne
1998Nordiske språk i nordisk og germansk perspektiv. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter
2012Gender reduction in Bergen Norwegian: A North-Sea perspective. In Lennart Elmevik and Ernst Håkon Jahr (eds.), Contact between Low German and Scandinavian in the late Middle Ages, 57–75. Uppsala: Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademien för svensk folkkultur.Google Scholar
Unbegaun, B. O.
1947Les substantifs indéclinables en russe. Revue des études slaves, 23(1/4): 130–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vindenes, Urd & Hans-Olav Enger
2020Det umulige er mulig. Forthcoming. In Janne B. Johannessen (ed.), Leksikografi og korpus. Special issue of Oslo Studies in Language. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wessén, Elias
1992a [1969]Svensk språkhistoria I: Ljudlära och ordböjningslära. Åttonde upplagan. Nytryck i nordiska språk 4. Edsbruk: Akademitryck.Google Scholar
1992bSvensk språkhistoria II: Ordbildningslära. Femte upplagan. Nytryck I nordiska språk 5. Edsbruk: Akademitryck.Google Scholar
Wetås, Åse
2008Kasusbortfallet i mellomnorsk [PhD dissertation, Univ. of Oslo]. Oslo: Unipub.Google Scholar