Cover not available
Review published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 33:4 (2016) ► pp.530–537
Book review

Martine Robbeets. Diachrony of verb morphology: Japanese and the Transeurasian languages
Martine Robbeets. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 2015. xviii, 550 pp.

Reviewed by
| Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Published online: 31 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.33.4.04alo
References
Alonso de la Fuente, José Andrés
2014 Written Manchu ferguwecuke ‘astonishing’ and the oldest causative formations in Tungusic. In Agata Bareja-Starzyńska, Jan Rogala & Filip Majkowski (eds.), A window onto the other: Contributions on the study of the Mongolian, Turkic, and Manchu-Tungusic peoples, languages and cultures dedicated to Jerzy Tulisow on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, 105–123. Warsaw: Elipsa.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter
1998 Structural similarities of clause combining in Turkic, Mongolian, Manchu-Tungusic and Japanese: A typological alternative to the hypothesis of a genetic relationship. In Lars Johanson (ed.), The Mainz Meeting. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, 199–223. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Boldyrev, Boris V.
1987 Slovoobrazovanie imen suščestvitel’nyx v tunguso-man’čžurskix jazykax v sravnitel’no-istoričeskom osveščenii. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Google Scholar
Boller, Anton
1857 Nachweis, daß das Japanische zum ural-altaischen Stamme gehört. Wien: K.K. Hof- und Staatsdruckerei.Google Scholar
Cincius, Vera I.
(ed.) 1975–1977 Sravnitel’nyj slovar’ tunguso-man’čžurskix jazykov, vols. 1–21. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Finch, Roger
1988 Verb classes in the Altaic languages. Sophia Linguistica. Working Papers in Linguistics 261. 41–61.Google Scholar
1989 Verb classes in the Altaic languages. Sophia Linguistica. Working Papers in Linguistics 271. 115–135.Google Scholar
1999 Verb classes in the Altaic languages (2). Sophia Linguistica. Working Papers in Linguistics 44–45. 63–90.Google Scholar
Georg, Stefan
2008 Review of M.I. Robbeets 2005 Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic? Bochumer Jahrbuch zur Ostasienforschung 321. 247–278.Google Scholar
Gorelova, Liliya M.
2002 Manchu Grammar. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Jì, Yǒnghǎi
1993 «Shīyǔ gùshì» zài Mǎnzú zhōng de liúchuán. Mínzú wénxué yánjiū 1993: 41. 15–23.Google Scholar
Lebedeva, Elena P. & Gorelova Lilija M.
1994 Sidi Kur. Sibinskaja versija ‘Volšebnogo mertveca’. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Lie, Hiu
1972 Die Mandschu-Sprachkunde in Korea (Uralic and Altaic Series, 1141.) Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew
2007 Review of M.I. Robbeets (2005): Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic? Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher (N.F.) 181. 274–279.Google Scholar
Norman, Jerry
2004–2005 Notes on Manchu pronunciation. Saksaha 91. 25–30.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf J.
1952 Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft, vol. 21: Formenlehre. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerry M.
1999 The nominalist theory of Eskimo: A case study in scientific self-deception. International Journal of American Linguistics 65(4). 383–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, Kenji
2003 Review of Gorelova (2002). Saksaha 81. 53–59.Google Scholar
Sunik, Orest P.
1962 Glagol v tunguso-man’čžurskix jazykax. Morfologičeskaja struktura i sistema form glagol’nogo slova. Moskva & Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Yin, Tiechao & Wu Xuejuan
2012 The study of the sixth vowel ū in Manchu language. Saksaha 111. 49–59.Google Scholar