Article published in:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 48:1 (2021) ► pp. 2559
References

References

Alberizzi, Valerio
2014 “An introduction to kunten glossed texts and their study in Japan”. Les dossiers de HEL : [supplément électronique à la revue Histoire Epistémologie Langage] 7. 1–9.Google Scholar
Bailey, T. Grahame
1921aReview of: Linguistic Survey of India: The Dardic or Pisachā Languages. By Sir George Grierson, KCIE., D.Litt, Ph.D. 14x10 1/4, xi + 567 pp. Calcutta: Government Press 1919 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 467–471.Google Scholar
1921bReview of: Linguistic Survey of India: Sindhi and Lahnda. By Sir George Grierson, KCIE, D.Litt, PhD. 14x10 1/4, viii + 584 pp. Calcutta: Government Press 1919 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 471–475.Google Scholar
Barbe, Katharina
1996 “The Dichotomy Free and Literal Translation”. Meta 41(3). 328–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Franz
(ed.) 1911Handbook of American Indian Languages (Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 40). Vol. 1. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Borin, Lars, Shafqat Mumtaz Virk & Anju Saxena
2018 “Language Technology for Digital Linguistics: Turning the Linguistic Survey of India into a Rich Source of Linguistic Information”. In A. Gelbukh (ed.), Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. CICLing 2017 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science 10761), 550–563. Cham: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, David, Randy LaPolla, Boyd Michailovsky & Graham Thurgood
(eds.) 2003Language variation: Papers on variation and change in the Sinosphere and in the Indosphere in honour of James A. Matisoff (Pacific Linguistics 555). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Campbell, G.
1874Specimens of Languages of India including the Aboriginal Tribes of Bengal, the Central Provinces, and the Eastern Frontier. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press.Google Scholar
Chelliah, Shobhanna & Willem de Reuse
2011Handbook of descriptive linguistic fieldwork. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cinato, Franck
2015Priscien glosé : l’Ars grammatica de Priscien vue à travers les gloses carolingiennes (Studia Artistarum 41). Turnhout (Belgium): Brepols. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Csoma de Körös, Alexander
1834A grammar of the Tibetan language. Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press.Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael & Bernhard Wälchli
2007 “Parallel texts: Using translational equivalents in linguistic typology”. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 60(2). 95–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Driem, George L. van
2004Hodgson’s Tibeto-Burman and Tibeto-Burman today. In David Waterhouse (ed.), The Origins of Himalayan Studies: Brian Houghton Hodgson in Nepal and Darjeeling 1820–1858, 227–248. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon.Google Scholar
Finck, Franz Nikolaus
1909Die Haupttypen des Sprachbaus. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
François, Alexandre
2019A proposal for conversational questionnaires. In Aimée Lahaussois & Marine Vuillermet (eds.), Methodological Tools for Linguistic Description and Typology (Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publications 16), 155–196. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
François, Jacques
2013Deux pionniers de la formalisation en morphologie linguistique au XIXe siècle : August Schleicher et Hugo Schuchardt. Histoire Epistémologie Langage 35(1). 111–142.Google Scholar
Grierson, G. A.
1903Linguistic Survey of India Vol. 3.2 Tibeto-Burman Family, Specimens of the Bodo, Naga, and Kachin Groups. Vol. 3.2. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, India.Google Scholar
1906Linguistic Survey of India Vol. 4 Munda and Dravidian Languages. Vol. 4. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, India.Google Scholar
1909Linguistic Survey of India Vol. 3.1 Tibeto-Burman Family, General Introduction, Specimens of the Tibetan Dialects, the Himalayan Dialects, and the North Assam Group. Vol. 3.1. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing, India.Google Scholar
1919Linguistic Survey of India Vol. 8.2 Specimens of the Dardic or Pisacha Languages (including Kashmiri). Vol. 8.2. Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, India.Google Scholar
1927Linguistic Survey of India Vol. 1.1 Introductory. Vol. 1.1. Calcutta: Government of India, Central Publication Branch.Google Scholar
Hamans, Camiel
2017The Return of the Prodigal Son. Scripta Neophilologica Posnaniensia 17. 103–116.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Brian H.
1857aComparative vocabulary of the languages of the broken tribes of Nepal [Vocabulary and grammar of the Vayu tribe]. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 26. 317–522 [372–485].Google Scholar
1857bComparative vocabulary of the languages of the broken tribes of Nepal [Vocabulary of the Bahing tribe]. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 26. 317–522 [486–522].Google Scholar
1858Comparative vocabulary of the languages of the broken tribes of Nepal (contined from vol 26) [Grammar of the Bahing tribe]. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 27. 393–456 [393–442].Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von
1968 [1836]Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluß auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts. Bonn: Dümmler. https://​archive​.org​/details​/berdieverschied00humbgoog​/mode​/2up
Hunter, William Wilson
1896The Life of Brian Houghton Hodgson, British resident at the court of Nepal, member of the Institute of France; fellow of the Royal society; a vice-president of the Royal Asiatic society, etc. London: John Murray. https://​archive​.org​/details​/lifeofbrianhough00hunt​/page​/n8
Jones, William & Truman Michelson
1911Algonquian (Fox). In Franz Boas (ed.), Handbook of American Indian Languages (Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 40), vol. 1, 735–874. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Kosukegawa, Teiji
2014Explaining what kundoku is in the premodern Sinosphere. Les dossiers de HEL : [supplément électronique à la revue Histoire Epistémologie Langage] 7. 1–20.Google Scholar
Koul, Omar N. & Kashi Wali
2006Modern Kashmiri Grammar. Springfield: Dunwoody Press.Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée
2016The translation tier in Interlinear Glossed Text: Changing practices in the description of endangered languages. In Patricia M. Phillips-Batoma & Florence Xiangyun Zhang (eds.), Translation as Innovation: Bridging the Sciences and the Humanities, 261–278. Victoria, TX: Dalkey Archive Press.Google Scholar
2020aThe shapes of verbal paradigms in Kiranti languages. Faits de Langues 50(2). 71–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2020bDescriptive and methodological issues in Kiranti grammar(s). Paris, France: Université de Paris Habilitation à diriger des recherches.Google Scholar
forthcoming. Glossing practices in 1850–1911 descriptions of languages with complex verbal morphology. In Franck Cinato, Aimée Lahaussois & John Whitman eds. Glossing Practice: Comparative Perspectives Lexington
Lehmann, Christian
1982Directions for interlinear morphemic translations. Folia Linguistica 16. 199–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004Interlinear morphemic glossing. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, Joachim Mugdan & Stavros Skopeteas (eds.), Morphologie. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung. (Handbücher Der Sprach- Und Kommunikationswissenschaft 17/2), 1834–1857. Berlin & New York: W. de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Majeed, Javed
2019aColonialism and Knowledge in Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2019bNation and Region in Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2019cThe politics of Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India. In. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Masica, Colin
1991The Indo-Aryan Languages (Cambridge Language Surveys). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James
1990On megalocomparison. Language 66(1). 106–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd
2017Kiranti languages. In Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (Routledge Language Family Series 3), 646–679. 2nd edn. Oxford & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1988A textbook of translation. Hertforshire: Prentice Hall International.Google Scholar
Ohannessian, Sirarpi & Gilbert Ansre
1975Some reflections on the use of sociolinguistic surveys. In Sirarpi Ohannessian, Charles A. Ferguson & Edgar C. Polomé (eds.), Language Surveys in Developing Nations: Papers and Reports on Sociolinguistic Surveys, 51–69. Arlington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Solleveld, Floris
2019Language, People, and Maps: The Ethnolinguistics of George Grierson and Franz Boas. History of Humanities 4(2). 461–471. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Teeuwen, Mariken & Irene van Renswoude
(eds.) 2017The Annotated Book in the Early Middle Ages: Practices of Reading and Writing (Utrecht Studies in Medieval Literacy 38). Turnhout (Belgium): Brepols. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Unsigned
1928Sir George Grierson and the “Linguistic Survey of India.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 3. 711–718.Google Scholar
Waterhouse, David
(ed.) 2004The Origins of Himalayan Studies: Brian Houghton Hodgson in Nepal and Darjeeling 1820–1858. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whitman, John
2011The ubiquity of the gloss. Scripta 3. 95–121.Google Scholar
2014Présentation du projet Reading Classical texts in the Vernacular. Les dossiers de HEL : [supplément électronique à la revue Histoire Epistémologie Langage] 7. 1–21.Google Scholar
Whitman, John, Miyoung Oh, Jinho Park, Valerio Alberizzi, Masayuki Tsukimoto, Teiji Kosukegawa & Tomokazu Takada
2010Toward an International Vocabulary for Research on Vernacular Readings of Chinese Texts. Scripta 2. 61–83.Google Scholar
Wieland, Gernot
1983The Latin Glosses on Arator and Prudentius in Cambridge University Library MS Gg. 5.35 (Studies and Texts 61). Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
Wolfenden, Stuart
1929Outlines of Tibeto-Burman Linguistic Morphology, with special reference to the Prefixes, Infixes and Suffixes of Classical Tibetan and the Languages of the Kachin, Bodo, Naga, Kuki-Chin and Burma Groups. London: Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
1933A specimen of the Sāngpāng Dialect. Acta Orientalia 12. 71–79.Google Scholar
1934A Specimen of the Kûlung Dialect. Acta Orientalia 13. 35–43.Google Scholar
1935A Specimen of the Thūlung Dialect. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 67(4). 629–653. CrossrefGoogle Scholar