Cover not available
Part of
Negation in Uralic Languages
Edited by Matti Miestamo, Anne Tamm and Beáta Wagner-Nagy
[Typological Studies in Language 108] 2015
► pp. 1–42

Negation in Uralic languages – Introduction

| University of Helsinki
| Central European University and Károli Gáspár University of the Hungarian Reformed Church
| University of Hamburg
Published online: 24 June 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.108.01int
References
Ackerman, Farrell & Nikolaeva, Irina
2013 Descriptive Typology and Linguistics Theory: A Study in the Morphosyntax of Relative Clauses. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2010 Imperatives and Commands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan
2010 On the diachrony of negation. In The Expression of Negation, Laurence R. Horn (ed.), 73–101. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Lejeune, Ludo (with Valentin Goussev
) 2005 The prohibitive. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 290–293. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bakró-Nagy, Marianne
2006 Az uráli nyelvek tipológiai jellemzése (The typological characterization of Uralic languages). In Magyar nyelv, Ferenc Kiefer & Péter Siptár (eds), 267–287. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
2012 The Uralic languages. Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 90: 1001–1028. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bereczki, Gábor
1974 Sushchestvovala li pravolzhskaja obshchnost’ finno-ugrov? (Was there a pre-Volgaic stage in the development of Finno-Ugric languages?). Acta Linguistica Hungarica 24: 81–85.Google Scholar
Bowden, John
1997 Taba (Makian Dalam): Description of an Austronesian Language from Eastern Indonesia. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Melbourne.
Chamoreau, Claudine
2000 Grammaire du purépecha [Lincom Studies in Native American Linguistics 34]. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Churchward, C. Maxwell
1953 Tongan Grammar. London: OUP.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1981 Negation and other verb categories in the Uralic languages. In Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Vol. VI, Osmo Ikola (ed.), 350–355. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
Contini-Morava, Ellen
1989 Discourse Pragmatics and Semantic Categorization: The Case of Negation and Tense-Aspect with Special Reference to Swahili [Discourse Perspectives on Grammar 1]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cornyn, William
1944 Outline of Burmese grammar [Language Dissertation 38. Supplement to Language 20(4)]. Baltimore MD: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Croft, William
1991 The evolution of negation. Journal of Linguistics 27: 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen
1979 Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17: 79–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Typology of negation. In The Expression of Negation, Laurence R. Horn (ed.), 9–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Donner, Otto
1879 Die gegenseitige Verwandtschaft der finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen [Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae 11]. Helsingfors: Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew
2005 Negative morphemes. In The Word Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 454–457. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S
2011a Order of negative morpheme and verb. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), Ch. 143. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
2011b Position of negative morpheme with respect to subject, object, and verb. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), Ch. 144. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin
1995 Discourse-Configurational Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
1998 Discourse-configurationality in the languages of Europe. In Constituent order in the Languages of Europe, Anna Siewierska (ed.), 681–729. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epps, Patience
2010 Linguistic typology and language documentation. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Jae Jung Song (ed.). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, Pål Kristian
2011 'To not be' or not 'to not be': The typology of negation of non-verbal predicates. Studies in Language 35 (2): 275–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1978 Negation in language: Pragmatics, function, ontology. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 9: Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed.), 69–112. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1984 Syntax: A Functional-typological Introduction, Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gyarmathi, Sámuel
1799 Affinitas linguae hungaricae cum linguis fennicae originis grammatice demonstrata. Göttingen.
Hajdú, Péter
1985 The main characteristic features of the Uralic languages. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 33: 101–112.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, Jaakko
2013 Historiallisen kielitieteen vertailevat menetelmät (The comparative methods of historical linguistics). In Kielten vertailun metodiikkaa, Leena Kolehmainen, Matti Miestamo & Taru Nordlund (eds), 171–218. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
2005 Negative indefinite pronouns and predicate negation. In The Word Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 466–469. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Helimski, Eugen
1995 Proto-Uralic gradation: Continuation and traces. In Congressus Octavus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Pars I: Orationes plenariae et conspectus quinquennales, 17–51. Jyväskylä.
Hoeksema, Jack
2010 Negative and positive polarity items: An investigation of the interplay of lexical meaning and global conditions on expression. In The Expression of Negation, Laurence R. Horn (ed.), 187–224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack, Rullmann, Hotze, Sánchez-Valencia, Victor
& Van Der Wouden, Ton (eds) 2001 Perspectives on Negation and Polarity Items [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 40]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Honti László
1997 Die Negation im Uralischen I–III. Linguistica Uralica 33: 81–96, 161–176, 241–252.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2010 A nyelvrokonságról. Az török, sumer és egyéb áfium ellen való orvosság (On the genetic relatedness of languages: Debunking the Turkic, Sumerian and other myths). Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R
1989 A Natural History of Negation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence & Kato, Yasuhiko
(eds) 2000 Negation and Polarity: Syntactic and Semantic Perspectives. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Janhunen, Juha
2009 Proto-Uralic: What, where, and when? In The Quasquicentennial of the Finno-Ugrian Society [Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 257], Jussi Ylikoski (ed.), 57–78. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1917 Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: Høst.Google Scholar
Kahrel, Peter
1996 Aspects of Negation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Kimball, Geoffrey D
1991 Koasati Grammar. Lincoln NB: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
2001 Structural case in Finnish. Lingua 111: 315–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koehn, Edward & Koehn, Sally
1986 Apalai. In Handbook of Amazonian Languages, Vol. 1, Desmond C. Derbyshire & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds), 33–127. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Michael
1992 The world’s languages in crisis. Language 68: 4–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laakso, Johanna
2010 Contact and the Finno-Ugric Languages. In The Handbook of Language Contact [Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics], Raymond Hickey (ed.), 598–617. Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laury, Ritva
1997 Demonstratives in Interaction: The Emergence of a Definite Article in Finnish [Studies in Discourse Grammar 7]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse
1965 The function of quantity in Finnish and Estonian. Language 41: 447–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti
2004 Suomen kieltoverbikonstruktio typologisessa valossa (A typological perspective on the Finnish negative verb construction). Virittäjä 108(3): 364–388.Google Scholar
2005a Standard Negation: The Negation of Declarative Verbal Main Clauses in a Typological Perspective [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2005b Subtypes of asymmetric standard negation. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 462–465. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2006 Negation. In Handbook of Pragmatics: The 2006 Installment, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds), 1–25. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Negation – An overview of typological research. Language and Linguistics Compass 1(5): 552–570. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Partitives and negation: A cross-linguistic survey. In Partitive Cases and Related Categories [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 54], Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds), 63–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Moseley, Christopher
(ed.) 2010 Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger, 3rd edn. Paris: UNESCO. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Nedyalkov, Igor
1994 Evenki. In Typological Studies in Negation [Typological Studies in Language 29], Peter Kahrel & René van den Berg (eds), 1–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, John R
1985 Negation. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. I: Clause Structure, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 197–242. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E
1997 Describing Morphosyntax. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Sajnovics, János
1770 Demonstratio idioma Ungarorum et Lapponum idem esse. Hafniae: Salicath.Google Scholar
Salminen, Tapani
2002 Problems in the taxonomy of the Uralic languages in the light of modern comparative studies. In Lingvističeskij bespredel: sbornikstatek k 70-letiju А. I. Kuznecovoj, 44–55. Moskva: Izd. Moskovskogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka
1988 Historical phonology of the Uralic languages with special reference to Samoyed, Ugric and Permic. In Uralic languages: Description, History and Foreign Influences, Denis Sinor (ed.), 478–554. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna
1997 Ways of Scope Taking. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R.C
1969 Bagirmi grammar [Linguistic Monograph Series 3]. Khartoum: Sudan Research Unit, University of Khartoum.Google Scholar
Tauli, Valter
1963 Structural Tendencies in Uralic Languages [Indiana University Publications, Uralic and Altaic Series 17.] The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Tamm, Anne
2011a Cross-categorial spatial case in the Finnic nonfinite system: Focus on the absentive TAM semantics and pragmatics of the Estonian inessive m-formative nonfinites. Linguistics 49(4): 835–944. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b The case of Nincstelenek (‘the destitute’): Nounless and verbless in the Uralic grammar. In Proceedings of Congressus XI Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum: Piliscsaba, Hungary, August 9–14, 2010, Sándor Csúcs, Nóra Falk, Viktória Tóth & Gábor Zaicz (eds), 270–276. Piliscsaba: Reguly Társaság.Google Scholar
2014 The partitive concept versus linguistic partitives: From abstract concepts to evidentiality in the Uralic languages. In Partitive Cases and Related Categories [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 54], Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds), 89–151. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne & Brattico, Pauli
2014 The Finnish accusative: Long-distance case assignment under agreement. Linguistics 52(1): 73–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Der Wouden, Ton
1997 Negative Contexts: Collocation, Polarity and Multiple Negation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Veselinova, Ljuba
2013 Negative existentials: A cross-linguistic study. Rivista di linguistica 25(1): 107–145.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Lejeune, Ludo (with Valentin Goussev
) 2005 The prohibitive. In The Word Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 290–293. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Available online at 〈[URL]〉]Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen
1979 Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17: 79–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S
2005 Negative morphemes. In The Word Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 454–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Available online at 〈[URL]〉]Google Scholar
2011a Order of negative morpheme and verb. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), Chapter 143. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
2011b Position of negative morpheme with respect to subject, object, and verb. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), Chapter 144. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastassia
2007 N-words and negative concord, In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Negative indefinite pronouns and predicate negation. In The Word Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 466–469. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Available online at 〈[URL]〉]Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R
1978 Remarks on neg-raising In Syntax and Semantics vol. 9. Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed.), 129–220. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1985 Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language 61: 121–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989 A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti
2005a Standard Negation: The Negation of Declarative Verbal Main Clauses in a Typological Perspective [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2005b Symmetric and asymmetric standard negation. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 458–461. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Available online at 〈[URL]〉]Google Scholar
2005c Subtypes of asymmetric standard negation. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 462–465. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Available online at 〈[URL]〉]Google Scholar
2007 Negation – an overview of typological research. Language and Linguistics Compass 1 (5): 552–570. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, John R
1985 Negation. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol I, Clause Structure, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 197–242, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E
1997 Describing morphosyntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rédei, Károly
1978 Syrjänische Chrestomathie. Mit Grammatik und Glossar [Studia Uralica 1]. Wien: Verband der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften Österreichs.Google Scholar
Zeijlstra, Hedde
2004 Sentential Negation and Negative Concord. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

de Groot, Casper
2017. Chapter 1. Discovering the assignment. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
de Groot, Casper
2017. Chapter 21. The typology of the essive in the Uralic Languages. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 497 ff. DOI logo
Krasnoukhova, Olga & Johan van der Auwera
2019. Standard negation in Awa Pit: From synchrony to diachrony. Folia Linguistica 53:s40-s2 ► pp. 439 ff. DOI logo
Lindström, Liina, Maarja-Liisa Pilvik & Helen Plado
2021. Variation in negation in Seto. Studies in Language 45:3 ► pp. 557 ff. DOI logo
Shor, Leon
2020. Chapter 16. Negation in Modern Hebrew. In Usage-Based Studies in Modern Hebrew [Studies in Language Companion Series, 210], ► pp. 583 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 2024. 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.