Cover not available

Introduction published In: Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 14:1 (2024) ► pp.58–65

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
Thematic section

The diachronic emergence of alignment cross‑linguistically

Theoretical and empirical perspectives

 | Sorbonne Université
 | University of Turin


This article is available free of charge.

Published online: 6 February 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.00015.cri
References (41)
References
Anderson, S. R. 2005. Morphological Universals and Diachrony. Yearbook of Morphology 2004 ed. by G. Booij & J. van Marle, 1–17. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016. Synchronic vs. Diachronic Explanations and the Nature of the Language Faculty. Annual Review of Linguistics 21:11–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bisang, W. 1992. Das Verb im Chinesischen, Hmong, Vietnamesischen, Thai und Khmer. Ver- gleichende Grammatik im Rahmen der Verbserialisierung, der Grammatikalisierung und der Attraktorpositionen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. 1988. The Diachronic Dimension in Explanation. Explaining Language Universals ed. by J. A. Hawkins, 350–379. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Language Change and Universals. Linguistic Universals ed. by R. Mairal & J. Gil, 179–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chappell, H. 2013. Pan-Sinitic Object Markers: Morphology and Syntax. Breaking Down the Barriers: Interdisciplinary Studies in Chinese Linguistics and Beyond ed. by G. Cao, H. Chappell, R. Djamouri & T. Wiebusch, 785–816. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chappell, H., A. Peyraube & Y. Wu. 2011. A Comitative Source for Object Markers in Sinitic Languages: kai55 in Waxiang and kang7 in Southern Min. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 201:291–338. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coghill, E. 2016. The Rise and Fall of Ergativity in Aramaic: Cycles of Alignment Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, B. 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. 2nd edition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Creissels, D. 2008. Direct and Indirect Explanations of Typological Regularities: The Case of Alignment Variations. Folia Linguistica 421:1–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2014. Competing Motivations and Diachrony: What Evidence for What Motivations? Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage ed. by B. MacWhinney, A. Malchukov, and E. Moravcsik, 282–298. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(ed.). 2022a. Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2022b. Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family and Beyond. Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family ed. by E. Dahl, 1–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLancey, S. 1981. An Interpretation of Split Ergativity and Related Patterns. Language 571:626–657. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1979. Ergativity. Language 551:59–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryer, M. 2006. Functionalism and the Metalanguage – Theory Confusion. Phonology, Morphology, and the Empirical Imperative: Papers in Honour of Bruce Derwing ed. by G. W. G. Libben, T. Priestly, R. Smyth & S. Wang, 27–59. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John A. 1985. Competing Motivations. Iconicity in Syntax ed. by John Haiman, 343–366. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, J. A. 1987. The Discourse Basis of Ergativity. Language 631:805–855. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gildea, S. 1998. On Reconstructing Grammar: Comparative Cariban Morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haig, G. 2008. Alignment Change in Iranian Languages; A Construction Grammar Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. Deconstructing Iranian Ergativity. The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity ed. by J. Coon, D. Massam & L. D. Travis. 465–500. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, A. C. 1985. Diachronic Syntax: The Kartvelian Case. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, A. C. & L. Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kibrik, A. E. 1997. Beyond Subject and Object: Towards a Comprehensive Relational Typology. Linguistic Typology 11:279–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, C. 2008. Case in Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, C. N. & S. A. Thompson. 1973. Serial Verb Constructions in Mandarin Chinese: Coordination or Subordination? You Take the High Node and I will Take the Low Node: Papers from the Comparative Syntax Festival, Chicago Linguistics Society ed. by C. Corum, T. C. Smith-Stark & A. Weiser, 96–103. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. An Explanation of Word Order Change SVO → SOV Foundations of Language 121:201–214.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, M. 1991. Active / Agentive Case Marking and Its Motivation. Language 671:510–546. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, M. & W. Chafe. 1999. What are S, A, and O? Studies in Language 23:3.569–596. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moravcsik, E. A. 1978. On the Distribution of Ergative and Accusative Patterns. Lingua 451:233–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verbeke, S. 2013. Alignment and Ergativity in New Indo-Aryan Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zúñiga, F. 2018. The Diachrony of Morphosyntactic Alignment. Language and Linguistics Compass 12:9.e12300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue