Article published in:
Grammatical Relations and their Non-Canonical Encoding in Baltic
Edited by Axel Holvoet and Nicole Nau
[Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic 1] 2014
► pp. 207255
Sources

Sources

Ādama stāsts. Mazsalaciešu dzīve, ieradumi un tikumi Ā. Purmaļa autobiogrāfijā 19. un 20. gs. mijā
2008 Ed. Sanita Reinsone. Rīga: Zinātne.Google Scholar
KS =
Kur sauleitei sāta , short story by Ilze Sperga published 2008 on her former web-site at http://​saprge​.wordpress​.com
Mar =
Marabeju kolns , short story by Ilze Sperga, published 2011 on her web-site at http://​www​.naktineica​.lv​/?p​=5490.
Miljons-1.0 = corpus of contemporary Latvian, 1 million words
. Access through www​.korpuss​.lv. [accessed in August 2013]
Miljons-2.0 = corpus of contemporary Latvian, 3.5 million words
. Access through www​.korpuss​.lv. [accessed April-August 2013]]
MuLa-1.0 = corpus of contemporary written Latgalian, 1 million words
. Access through www​.korpuss​.lv. [accessed April-August 2013]
UP = Ulanowska, Stefania
1895Łotysze Inflant polskich, a w szczególności gminy Wielońskiej, powiatu Rzeżyckiego. Obraz etnograficzny. Część III. Zbiór wiadomości do antropologii krajowej , t. XVIII, 232–406.Google Scholar
VL = texts written by Valentins Lukaševičs
published in a Latvian newspaper ( Latvijas Avīze ) and on the Internet, available at the portal www​.lakuga​.lv.
References
Bossong, Georg
1991Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In New analyses in Romance linguistics, Dieter Wanner & Douglas A. Kibbee (eds), 143–170. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bukšs, Miķelis & Placinskis, Jurs
1973 Latgaļu volūdas gramatika un pareizraksteibas vōrdneica [Latgalian Grammar and orthographic dictionary]. 2nd edn. München: Latgalischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Cibuļs, Jurs & Leikuma, Lidija
2003 Vasals! Latgaliešu valodas mācība . Rīga: n.i.m.s.Google Scholar
de Hoop, Helen & Malchukov, Andrej L.
2008Case marking strategies. Linguistic Inquiry 39: 565–587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Endzelin, Jan
1922 Lettische Grammatik . Riga: Kommisionsverlag A. Gulbis.Google Scholar
Filip, Hana
2005On accumulating and having it all. Perfectivity, prefixes and bare arguments. In Perspectives on aspect, Henk J. Verkuyl, Henriëtte de Swart & Angeliek van Hout (eds), 125–148. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gāters, Alfrēds
1977 Die lettische Sprache und ihre Dialekte . The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2001Non-canonical marking of core arguments in European languages. In Non-canonical marking of subjects and objects [Typological Studies in Languages 46], Alexandra Aikhenvald, R.M.W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds), 56–83. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment typology. Linguistic Typology 15: 535–567. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1980Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56: 251–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kagan, Olga
2010Genitive objects, existence and individuation. Russian Linguistics 34: 17–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 Semantics of genitive objects in Russian . Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leikuma, Lidija
2010Par dažiem Latgales latviešu folkloras pieraksta jautājumiem: Lettische Volkslieder (1869). Baltu Filoloģija 19: 53–70.Google Scholar
Lindāne, Irma
1986 Dignājas izloksne . Rīga: Zinātne.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej L.
2005Case pattern splits, verb types and construction competition. In Competition and variation in natural languages: The case for case, Mengistu Amber & Helen de Hoop (eds), 73–117. London: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nau, Nicole
2011a A short grammar of Latgalian . München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2011bDeclension classes in Latvian and Latgalian: Morphomics vs. Morphophonology. Baltic Linguistics 2: 141–177.Google Scholar
Næss, Åshild
2007 Prototypical transitivity [Typological Studies in Languages 72]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Noonan, Michael
2007Complementation. In Language typology and syntactic description. Volume II: Complex constructions, Timothy Shopen (ed), 52–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Onishi, Masayuki
2001Introduction: Non-canonically marked subjects and objects: Parameters and Properties. In Non-canonical marking of subjects and objects [Typological Studies in Languages 46], Alexandra Aikhenvald, R.M.W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds), 1–51. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sinnemäki, Kaius
2012msA typological perspective to differential object marking. Manuscript, version 24 Aug 2012 <http://​people​.uta​.fi​/∼kaius​.sinnemaki​/dom​_web​.pdf > (02 March 2013).
Strods, Pīters
1933 Pareizraksteibas vōrdneica . Rēzekne [published by the author].Google Scholar
Tsunoda, Tasaku
1985Remarks on transitivity. Journal of Linguistics 21: 385–396. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ūsele, Veneranda
1998 Tilžas izloksnes apraksts . Rīga: Latviešu valodas institūts.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Arkadiev, Peter M.
2016.  In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3],  pp. 37 ff. Crossref logo
Holvoet, Axel & Nicole Nau
2016.  In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3],  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Seržant, Ilja A.
2021. Typology of partitives. Linguistics 59:4  pp. 881 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 october 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.