Chapter published in:
Information Structure in Lesser-described Languages: Studies in prosody and syntax
Edited by Evangelia Adamou, Katharina Haude and Martine Vanhove
[Studies in Language Companion Series 199] 2018
► pp. 195216
References

References

Aissen, Judith
1999Markedness and subject choice in Optimality Theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17: 673–711.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21: 435–483.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter M.
2008Differential argument marking in two-term case systems and its implications for the general theory of case marking. In Differential Subject Marking, Helen de Hoop & Peter de Swart (eds), 151–172. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bearth, Thomas
1995Nominal periphrasis and the origin of the predicative marker in the Mande languages – An alternative view. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 41: 89–117.Google Scholar
Bird, Charles S. & Kendall, Martha B.
1986Postpositions and auxiliaries in Northern Mande: Syntactic indeterminacy and linguistic analysis. Anthropological Linguistics 28(4): 389–403.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul
1998Functional Phonology: Formalizing the Interactions between Articulatory and Perceptual Drives. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Hayes, Bruce
2001Empirical tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 45–86.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Dingare, Shipra & Manning, Christopher
2001Soft constraints mirror hard constraints: Voice and person in English and Lummi. In Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds). Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Nikitina, Tatiana
2009The gradience of the dative alternation. In Reality Exploration and Discovery: Pattern Interaction in Language and Life, Linda Uyechi & Lian Hee Wee (eds), 161–184. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1976Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Subject and Topic, Charles Li (ed.), 25–55. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1978Ergativity. In Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language, Winfred P. Lehmann (ed.), 329–394. Austin TX: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1989Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis
1997Postpositions as a possible origin of certain predicative markers in Mande. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 50: 5–17.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis & Diagne, Anna Marie
2013Transitivity in Bakel Soninke. Mandenkan 50: 1–35.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis & Sambou, Pierre
2013Le mandinka: Phonologie, grammaire, textes. Paris: Karthala.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary & Nikolaeva, Irina
2011Objects and Information Structure. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Hoop, Helen & de Swart, Peter
2008Cross-linguistic variation in differential subject marking. In Differential Subject Marking, Helen de Hoop & Peter de Swart (eds), 1–16. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
de Hoop, Helen & Malchukov, Andrej L.
2007On fluid differential case marking: A bidirectional OT approach. Lingua 117(9): 1636–1656.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Case-marking strategies. Linguistic Inquiry 39(4): 565–587.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
2011“Optional” “ergativity” in Tibeto-Burman languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 34: 9–20.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
1979Ergativity. Language 55: 59–138.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Stefanie
2011Differential agent marking and animacy. Lingua 121(3): 533–547.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Stefanie & Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
2014A and O as each other’s mirror image? Problems with markedness reversal. Linguistic Typology 18(1): 3–49.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1976Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Subject and Topic, Charles Li (ed.), 149–188. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey
2007Bidirectional case-marking and linear adjacency. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25: 83–101.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Recent case work reviewed. Linguistic Typology 13: 451–461.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1980Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2): 251–299.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Iemmolo, Giorgio
2010Topicality and differential object marking: Evidence from Romance and beyond. Studies in Language 34(2): 239–272.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jenny, Mathias & San San Hnin Tun
2013Differential subject marking without ergativity: The case of colloquial Burmese. Studies in Language 37: 693–735.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kastenholz, Raimund
1989Grundkurs Bambara (Manding) mit Texten. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
2003Auxiliaries, grammaticalization, and word order in Mande. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 24: 31–53.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, Edward
1976Towards a universal definition of “subject”. In Subject and Topic, Charles Li (ed.), 303–333. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
König, Christa
2008Case in Africa. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
1994Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J.
1992Anti-ergative marking in Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 15: 1–9.Google Scholar
1995“Ergative” marking in Tibeto-Burman. In New Horizons in Tibeto-Burman Morphosyntax, Yoshio Nishi, James Matisoff & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds), 189–228. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar
2004On nominal relational morphology in Tibeto-Burman. In Studies on Sino-Tibetan Languages: Papers in honor of Professor Hwang-cheng Gong on the occasion of his 70th birthday, Ying-jin Lin, Fang-min Hsu, Chun-chih Lee, Jackson T-S. Sun, Hsiu-fang Yang, & Dah-an Ho (eds), 43–73. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej L.
2008Anymacy and asymmetries in differential case marking. Lingua 118(2): 203–221.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matić, Dejan & Wedgwood, Daniel
2012The meaning of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics 49: 127–163.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McGregor, William B.
2006Focal and optional ergative marking in Warrwa (Kimberley, Western Australia). Lingua 116: 393–423.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Typology of ergativity. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 480–508.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nikitina, Tatiana
2007Time reference of aspectual forms in Wan (Southeastern Mande). In Selected Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, Doris L. Payne & Jaime Peña (eds), 125–133. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
2008The Mixing of Syntactic Properties and Language Change. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
2009The syntax of postpositional phrases in Wan, an “SOVX” language. Studies in Language 33(4): 910–933.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Categorial reanalysis and the origin of the SOVX word order in Mande. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 32(2): 251–273.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Forthcoming a. Verb phrase external arguments in Mande: New evidence for obligatory extraposition. To appear in Natural Language & Linguistic Theory.
Forthcoming b. When linguists and speakers do not agree: The endangered grammar of verbal art in West Africa. To appear in Journal of Linguistic Anthropology.
Ravenhill, Philip L.
1973/1974 [Philip L. Ravenhill Papers, Box 4]. National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
1976Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), 112–71. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas
1991The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 14: 93–107.Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
2010Animacy and information structure in the system of ergative marking in Umpithamu. Lingua 120: 1637–1651.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Nikitina, Tatiana
2020. Logophoricity and shifts of perspective. Functions of Language 27:1  pp. 78 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 september 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.