Article published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 41:3 (2017) ► pp. 577614
References

References

Barðdal, Jóhanna
2013Construction-based historical-comparative reconstruction. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 438–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Valgerður Bjarnadóttir, Serena Danesi, Tonya Kim Dewey, Thórhallur Eythórsson, Chiara Fedriani & Thomas Smitherman
2013The story of “woe.” Journal of Indo-European Studies 41(3–4). 321–377.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Thórhallur Eythórsson
2012a “Hungering and lusting for women and fleshly delicacies”: Reconstructing grammatical relations for Proto-Germanic. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(3). 363–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012bReconstructing syntax: Construction grammar and the comparative method. In Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds.), Sign-Based Construction Grammar, 257–308. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Thomas Smitherman
2013The quest for cognates: A reconstruction of oblique subject constructions in Proto-Indo-European. Language Dynamics and Change 3(1). 28–67.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Thomas Smitherman, Valgerður Bjarnadóttir, Serena Danesi, Gard B. Jenset & Barbara McGillivray
2012Reconstructing constructional semantics: The dative subject construction in Old Norse-Icelandic, Latin, Ancient Greek, Old Russian and Old Lithuanian. Studies in Language 36(3). 511–547. Crossref.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert
2013Morphology in Construction Grammar. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 255–273. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire
2008aSyntactic change and syntactic borrowing in generative grammar. In Gisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach (eds.), Principles of syntactic reconstruction (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302), 187–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008bThe diachrony of complex predicates. Diachronica 25(2). 161–185. Crossref.Google Scholar
2014Complex predicates in Australian languages. In Harold Koch & Rachel Nordlinger (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Australia: A comprehensive guide, 263–294. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
[ p. 611 ]
Campbell, Lyle & Alice C. Harris
2002Syntactic reconstruction and demythologizing “Myths and the prehistory of grammars.” Journal of Linguistics 38(3). 599–618. Crossref.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2001Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press (5 July 2013). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, Don
2010A preliminary phonological history of the Sogeram languages of Papua New Guinea. Oceanic Linguistics 49(1). 163–193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015A reconstruction of Proto-Sogeram: Phonology, lexicon, and morphosyntax. University of California, Santa Barbara Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
2016Magɨ: An undocumented language of Papua New Guinea. Oceanic Linguistics 55(1). 199–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Donohue, Mark
2005Configurationality in the languages of New Guinea. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25(2). 181–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Epps, Patience
2007Grammatical borrowing in Hup. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 551–565. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013Inheritance, calquing, or independent innovation? Reconstructing morphological complexity in Amazonian numerals. Journal of Language Contact 6(2). 329–357. Crossref.Google Scholar
Ferraresi, Gisella & Maria Goldbach
(eds.) 2008Principles of syntactic reconstruction (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor
1988Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64(3). 501–538. Crossref.Google Scholar
Foley, William A.
1986The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2010Clause linkage and nexus in Papuan languages. In Isabelle Bril (ed.), Clause linking and clause hierarchy: Syntax and pragmatics, 27–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E.
1995Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2013Constructionist approaches. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 15–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. & Johan van der Auwera
2012This is to count as a construction. Folia Linguistica 46(1). 109–132. Crossref.Google Scholar
Harris, Alice C.
2008Reconstruction in syntax: Reconstruction of patterns. In Gisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach (eds.), Principles of syntactic reconstruction (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302), 73–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell
1995Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Kyle
n.d. Nend texts. Electronic files, Pioneer Bible Translators.
1990Nend grammar essentials. In John R. Roberts (ed.), Two grammatical studies (Data Papers on Papua New Guinea Languages 37), 73–156. Ukarumpa: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
2003On contact-induced grammaticalization. Studies in Language 27(3). 529–572. Crossref.Google Scholar
[ p. 612 ]
2005Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
2003Grammaticalization. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kay, Paul & Charles J. Fillmore
1999Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language 75(1). 1–33. Crossref.Google Scholar
Kikusawa, Ritsuko
2003The development of some Indonesian pronominal systems. In Barry J. Blake, Kate Burridge & J. Taylor (eds.), Historical linguistics 2001: Selected papers from the 15th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Melbourne, 13–17 August 2001 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 237), 237–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
King, Ruth
2000Lexical basis of grammatical borrowing: A Prince Edward Island French case study (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koch, Harold
1996Reconstruction in morphology. In Mark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 218–263. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
1987Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David W.
2002aMyths and the prehistory of grammars. Journal of Linguistics 38(1). 113–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002bMore myths. Journal of Linguistics 38(3). 619–626. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mallory, James P. & Douglas Q. Adams
2006The Oxford introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Næss, Åshild & Mathias Jenny
2011Who changes language? Bilingualism and structural change in Burma and the Reef Islands. Journal of Language Contact 4(2). 217–249. Crossref.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew
2005The chequered career of the Trans New Guinea hypothesis: Recent research and its implications. In Andrew Pawley, Robert Attenborough, Jack Golson & Robin Hide (eds.), Papuan pasts: Cultural, linguistic and biological histories of Papuan-speaking peoples, 67–107. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
2006Madang languages. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, vol. 7: 429–432. 2nd ed. Boston: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012How reconstructible is Proto Trans New Guinea? Problems, progress, prospects. In Harald Hammarström & Wilco van den Heuvel (eds.), History, contact and classification of Papuan languages (Special issue of Language and Linguistics in Melanesia), 88–164.Google Scholar
Reesink, Ger
1994Domain-creating constructions in Papuan languages. In Ger Reesink (ed.), Topics in descriptive Papuan linguistics (Semaian 10), 98–121. Leiden: Vakgroep Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden.Google Scholar
2014Topic management and clause combination in the Papuan language Usan. In Rik van Gijn, Jeremy Hammond, Dejan Matić, Saskia van Putten & Ana Vilacy Galucio (eds.), Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences (Typological Studies in Language 105), 231–262. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 613 ]
Roberts, John R.
1997Switch-reference in Papua New Guinea: A preliminary survey. In Andrew Pawley (ed.), Papers in Papuan linguistics No. 3 (Pacific Linguistics A 87), 101–241. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm
1996Contact-induced change and the comparative method: Cases from Papua New Guinea. In Mark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 180–217. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005Pronouns as a preliminary diagnostic for grouping Papuan languages. In Andrew Pawley, Robert Attenborough, Jack Golson & Robin Hide (eds.), Papuan pasts: Cultural, linguistic and biological histories of Papuan-speaking peoples, 15–65. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
2007Calquing and metatypy. Journal of Language Contact 1(1). 116–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008A history of metatypy in the Bel languages. Journal of Language Contact 2(1). 149–164. Crossref.Google Scholar
2015The argument indexing of Early Austronesian verbs: A reconstructional myth? In Dag T. T. Haug (ed.), Historical linguistics 2013: Selected papers from the 21st International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Oslo, 5–9 August 2013, 257–279. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A.
2015An approach to syntactic reconstruction. In Carlotta Viti (ed.), Perspectives on historical syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sweeney, Mike
n.d. Mum texts. Electronic files, Pioneer Bible Translators.
1994A description of the phonology of the Katiati (Mum) language. Unpublished ms, Pioneer Bible Translators.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman
1988Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
2013Constructionalization and constructional changes (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 6). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wade, Martha
n.d. Apalɨ texts. Electronic files, Pioneer Bible Translators.
1989A survey of the grammatical structures and semantic functions of the Apalɨ (Emerum) language. Ms, Pioneer Bible Translators.Google Scholar
Walkden, George
2013The correspondence problem in syntactic reconstruction. Diachronica 30(1). 95–122. Crossref.Google Scholar
2014Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 12). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Willis, David
2011Reconstructing last week’s weather: Syntactic reconstruction and Brythonic free relatives. Journal of Linguistics 47(2). 407–446. Crossref.Google Scholar
Z’graggen, John A.
1975aThe Madang-Adelbert Range subphylum. In Stephen A. Wurm (ed.), Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene (Pacific Linguistics C 38), 569–612. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
1975bThe languages of the Madang District, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics B 41). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
1980A comparative word list of the Southern Adelbert Range languages, Madang Province, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics D 33). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Barlow, Russell
2021. Review of Daniels (2020): Grammatical reconstruction: The Sogeram languages of New Guinea. Diachronica Crossref logo
Daniels, Don
2019. Using phonotactics to reconstruct degrammaticalization. Diachronica 36:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Daniels, Don
2020. The history of tense and aspect in the Sogeram family. Journal of Historical Linguistics 10:2  pp. 167 ff. Crossref logo
Daniels, Don
2021. The issue of arbitrariness in syntactic reconstruction. Folia Linguistica 55:s42-s2  pp. 393 ff. Crossref logo
Daniels, Don, Danielle Barth & Wolfgang Barth
2019. Subgrouping the Sogeram languages. Journal of Historical Linguistics 9:1  pp. 92 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 09 november 2021. 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.