Article published In:
Historiographia LinguisticaVol. 14:1/2 (1987) ► pp.163–172
Bloomfield as an Indo-Europeanist
In Bloomfield’s day, Indo-European studies had become ingrown and isolated from general linguistics. Bloomfield was one of those who contributed to restoring Indo-European linguistics to its proper place. His training, especially at Leipzig, gave him control of the data and the theory by which the achievements of the “Neo-Grammarians” had been effected. His mastery of these doctrines is evident in his 1933 Language, whose chapters 17–27 embody an admirable demonstration of the findings of classical Indo-European linguistics. To these, he added considerations of geographical and social variation, leading to the distinction between alterations due to phonetic change and those due to borrowing, both internal (analogical) and external (social). Confirmation of his view of the regularity of sound-change, and hence of the validity of comparative method, was furnished by his well-known reconstruction of Proto-Central Algonquian [çk]. In this way, Bloomfield contributed majorly to the re-incorporation of Indo-European studies into general linguistics.
References
Benveniste, Emile
1935 Origines de la formation des noms en indo-européen. Paris: Maisonneuve.
Bloomfield, Leonard
1909–10 “A Semasiologic Differentiation in Germanie Secondary Ablaut”. Modern Philology 71.245–288, 345–382. 
1911a “Review of Heinrich Schröder: Ablautstudien
”. (Heidelberg: C. Winter 1910) JEGP 101.122–129.
1911b “Review of Francis A. Wood: Indo-European ax : axi : ax u : A Study in Ablaut and in Word-Formation
” (Strassburg: K.J. Trübner 1905) JEGP 101.628–631. (Repr. in Hockett 1970.26–29.)
1911c “The Indo-European Palatals in Sanskrit”. American Journal of Philology 321.36–57. (Repr. in Hockett 1970.7–25.)
1912 “Etymologisches”. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 371.245–61.
1914 “Review of S. Feist: Kultur, Ausbreitung und Herkunft der Indogermanen
” (Berlin: Weidmann 1913) JEGP 131.472–75.
1914. 1933 Language. New York: Henry Holt.
Brugmann, Karl
1904 Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indo-germani-schen Sprachen. Strassburg: Trübner.
Collinge, N. E.
Gamkrelidze, Thomas V., and Vyacheslav V. Ivanov
1973 “Rekonstruktion der indogermanischen Verschlusse”. Phonetica 271.150–56.
1984 Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. I1 & II1. Tbilisi: Publishing House of the Tbilisi State University. In Russian.
Hamp, Eric
1976 “Why Syntax Needs Phonology”. In Steever et al. (eds.) 1976:348–64.
Hockett, Charles F.
ed. 1970 A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press. (Abbreviated H. plus page number.)
Hopper, Paul J.
1973 “Glottalized and Murmured Occlusives in Indo-European”. Glossa 71.141–66.
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
1927 “ә indo-européen et ḫ hittite”. Symbolae Gram-maticae in Honorem loannis Rozwadowski 11.95–104 (Kraków).
1935 Etudes indo-européennes. Kraków: Gebethner & Wolff.
Szemerényi Oswald
1970 (1st ed.); 1980 (2nd ed.) Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Steever, Sanford, et al.
(eds.) 1976 Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1982 “From Propositional to Textual and Expressive Meanings: Some Semantic-Pragmatic Aspects of Gram-maticalization”. In W. P. Lehmann and Y. Malkiel (eds.): Perspectives on Historical Linguistics, 245–71 (Amsterdam: Benjamins).
Watkins, Calvert
1976 “Towards Proto-Indo-European Syntax: Problems and Pseudo-Problems”. In Steever et al. (eds.) 1976:305–326.