Article published in:
Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages
Edited by Eva van Lier
[Studies in Language 41:2] 2017
► pp. 255293
References
Croft, William
2001Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan
1986Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Nick & Toshiki Osada
2005Mundari: The myth of a language without word classes. Linguistic Typology 9(3). 351–390.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff
2008Natural semantic metalanguage: the state of the art. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 1–13. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
2014Words and meanings. Lexical semantics across domains, languages and cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees
2013Parts-of-speech systems as a basic typological determinant. In Jan Rijkhoff & Eva van Lier, Flexible word classes. Typological studies of underspecified parts of speech, 31–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Jan Rijkoff
2005Mundari as a flexible language. Linguistic Typology 9(3). 406–431.Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek
2009Attributive and possessive constructions in Oceanic. In William McGregor (ed.). The expression of possession, 249–292. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lynch, John, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley
2002The Oceanic languages. Richmond: Curzon.Google Scholar
Mahaka, Mark, Enoch Horai Magum, Joyce Maion, Naphtaly Maion, Ruth Siimaa Rigamu, Ruth Saovana Spriggs, & Jeremiah Vaabero with Ulrike Mosel, Marcia Schwartz & Yvonne Thiesen
Mahaka, Mark, Jubilee Kamai, Owen Kasinori, Enoch Horai Magum, Shalom Magum, Joyce Maion, Naphtaly Maion, Janet Nasin, Ruth Siimaa Rigamu, Ruth Saovana Spriggs, Ondria Tavagaga, & Jeremiah Vaabero with Ulrike Mosel, Marcia Schwartz & Yvonne Thiesen
2012O Naono. The Teop-English plant encyclopedia. Kiel: Kalipho – Kieler Arbeiten zur Linguistik und Phonetik. ISFAS.Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike
2010aDitransitive constructions and their alternatives in Teop. In Andrej Malchukov, Martin Haspelmath, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions: a comparative handbook, 486–509. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010bThe fourth person in Teop. In John Bowden, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, & Malcolm Ross (eds.), A journey through Austronesian and Papuan linguistic and cultural space: Papers in honour of Andrew K. Pawley, 391–404. Pacific Linguistics. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
2012Advances in the accountability of grammatical analysis and description by using regular expressions. In Sebastian Nordhoff (ed.), Electronic grammaticiography. Language Documentation and Conversation, 235–250. Special Publication No. 4. Honolulu: University of Hawaii at Manoa. http://​scholarspace​.manoa​.hawaii​.edu​/bitstream​/handle​/10125​/4537​/mosel​.pdf. Accessed 1 Oct 2016.
2014aCorpus linguistic and documentary approaches in writing a grammar of a previously undescribed language. In Toshihide Nakayama & Keren Rice (eds.), The art and practice of grammar writing, 135–157. Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 8 (July 2014). https://​scholarspace​.manoa​.hawaii​.edu​/bitstream​/handle​/10125​/4589​/9​_Mosel​.pdf. Accessed 1 Oct 2016.
2014bType shifts of nouns under determination in Teop, an Oceanic language of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. In Doris Gerland, Christian Horn, Anja Latrouite & Albert Ortmann (eds.), Meaning and grammar of nouns and verbs. Düsseldorf: dup. http://​dup​.oa​.hhu​.de​/9​/1​/Beitrag03​-Mosel​.pdf. Accessed 19 Jun 2016.
Mosel, Ulrike, Enoch Horai Magum, Shalom Magum, Joyce Maion, Naphtaly Maion, Jessika Reinig, Ruth Siimaa Rigamu, Ruth Saovana Spriggs, & Yvonne Thiesen
2007The Teop Language Corpus. http://​www​.mpi​.nl​/dobes​/projects​/teop. Accessed 19 June 2016.
Seiler, Hansjakob
1978Determination: A functional dimension for interlanguage comparison. In Hansjakob Seiler (ed.), Language universals, 301–328. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon
1985Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
2013Comparative constructions. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://​wals​.info​/chapter. Accessed 4 Oct 2016.
Wierzbicka, Anna
1988The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000Language prototypes as a universal basis for cross-linguistic identification of “parts of speech”. In Petra M. Vogel & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes, 285–317. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittenburg, P., H. Brugman, A. Russel, A. Klassmann & H. Sloetjes
2006ELAN: a professional framework for multimodality research. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006), 1556–1559. http://​pubman​.mpdl​.mpg​.de​/pubman​/item​/escidoc:60436:2​/component​/escidoc:60437​/LREC%202006​_Elan​_Wittenburg​.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2016.
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Alfieri, Luca
2021.  In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132],  pp. 313 ff. Crossref logo
Stanojević, Miloš & Mark Steedman
2021. Formal Basis of a Language Universal. Computational Linguistics 47:1  pp. 9 ff. Crossref logo
van Lier, Eva
2016. Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages . Linguistic Typology 20:2  pp. 197 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 january 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.