In:Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology
Edited by Luca Alfieri, Giorgio Francesco Arcodia and Paolo Ramat
[Typological Studies in Language 132] 2021
► pp. 313–366
Chapter 9Parts of speech, comparative concepts and Indo-European linguistics
Published online: 9 July 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.09alf
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.09alf
The paper adopts and further elaborates on the distinction between comparative concepts (CC) and descriptive categories (DC) by proposing a partly new definition of the parts of speech (PoS), and uses that definition to provide a new analysis of PoS in Latin and RV Sanskrit. More, specifically, the paper shows that in Latin three major classes of morphemes are found (nouns, adjectives and verbs), whereas in the RV only two major classes are found (verbal roots and nouns) and the typical “adjective” is a derived stem built on a verbal root meaning a quality (i.e. roughly a nominalization). The data described are then used to contribute to the CC debate in the field of PoS, by showing its relation with historical Indo-European linguistics, by critically analysing traditional labels such as noun, adjective, verb, root, stem and lexeme, and by questioning the alleged incommensurability between CCs and DCs.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The comparative concept debate in the field of the PoS
- 3.The PoS in Latin and in Sanskrit: State of the art
- 3.1The former (Western) classifications of Sanskrit
- 3.1.1 Joshi (1967) and Bhat (1994, 2000)
- 3.1.2Works following Dixon’s approach (2004)
- 3.1The former (Western) classifications of Sanskrit
- 4.A relatively new PoS theory
- 4.1PoS-concepts
- 4.2PoS-constructions
- 4.3PoS-lexemes
- 5.The Latin PoS system
- 6.The RV Sanskrit PoS system
- 7.Discussion and conclusion
- 7.1Historical IE linguistics
- 7.2Linguistic terminology
- 7.3Further research prospects
List of abbreviations Notes References
References (193)
Alfieri, Luca. Forthcoming. The lexicalization of the adjective as an innovative feature in the Indo-European Family. Monograhic issue of Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics
, Artemij
Keidan, Leonid
Kulikov & Nikolaos
Lavidas
(eds).
. 2018. La definizione tipologica della radice e la teoria del segno lessicale. In
Linguistica filologia e storia culturale. In ricordo di Palmira Cipriano, Alfieri
Luca, Benvenuto Maria
Carmela, Ciancaglini Claudia
Angela, De Angelis
Alessandro, Milizia
Paolo & Pompeo
Flavia
(eds), 25–44. Roma: Il Calamo.
. 2017. A proposito di Thomas Lindner, 200 Jahre Indogermanistik (Salzburg-Wien 2016), ovvero la rilevanza della Grammer di Ravio (1648) per la storia della linguistica indoeuropea. Archivio Glottologico Italiano
102(2): 225–237.
. 2016. The typological definition of the (apparently historical) notion of root. Archivio Glottologico Italiano
102(1): 129–169.
. 2014a. Qualifying modifier encoding and adjectival typology. In
Simone & Masini
(eds), 119–139.
. 2014b. The birth of a grammatical category: The case of the adjective class. Studi e Saggi Linguistici
52(1): 141–175.
. 2014c. The arrival of the Indian notion of root into Western linguistics. Rivista degli Studi Orientali
87(2): 59–84.
. 2013a. Review of: Ansaldo, Umberto, Don, Jan & Pfau, Roland
(eds.). 2010. Parts of Speech: Empirical and Theoretical Advances. Special issue of Studies in Language
37(2): 425–434.
. 2013b. L’ipotesi indoeuropea di Bopp e il problema del contatto tra grammatiche. In
Le lingue del Mediterraneo antico. Culture, mutamenti, contatti, Mancini
Marco & Lorenzetti
Luca
(eds), 15–35. Roma: Carocci.
Anslado, Umberto & Don, Jan & Pfau, Roland
(eds). 2010. Parts of Speech. Empirical and Theoretical Advances. Special issue of Studies in Language
32(3), 2008. See Alfieri (2013) for review.
Anward, Jan. 2000. A dynamic model of part-of-speech differentiation. In
Vogel & Comrie
(eds), 3–45.
Anward, Jan, Moravcsik, Edith & Stassen, Leon. 1997. Parts of speech: A challenge for typology. Linguistic Typology
1(2): 167–183.
Aronoff, Mark. 2012. Morphological stems: What William of Ockham really said. Word Structure
5: 28–51.
Backhouse, Anthony E.
2004. Inflected and uninflected adjectives in Japanese. In
Dixon & Aikhenvald
(eds), 50–73.
Beck, David. 2016. Some language-particular terms are comparative concepts. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 995–402.
. 2013. Unidirectional flexibility and the noun-verb distinction in Lushootseed. In
Rijkhoff & van Lier
(eds), 185–220.
Belardi, Walter. 2008. Le “unità di lingua concrete”, la parola e la frase. Incontri Linguistici
31: 11–39.
. 1993. Sulla tipologia della struttura formale della parola nelle lingue indoeuropee. Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, s. 9, v. 4, f. 4: 525–570.
. 1990. Genealogia, tipologia, ricostruzione, leggi fonetiche. In
Linguistica, filologia e critica dell’espressione, Walter
Belardi
(ed.), 155–218. Roma: Il Calamo.
. 1985. Considerazioni sulla ricostruzione dell’indoeuropeo. In
Tra linguistica storica e linguistica generale. Scritti in onore di Tristano Bolelli, Ambrosini
Roberto
(ed.), 39–66. Pisa: Giardini.
Benedetti, Marina
(ed.). 2001. Fare etimologia. Passato, presente e future nella ricerca etimologica. Atti del convegno tenutosi presso l’Università per Stranieri di Siena, 2–3 ottobre 1998. Roma: il Calamo.
Benveniste, Émile. 19623[19361]. Origines de la formation des noms en indo-européen. Paris: Adrienne-Maisonneuve.
Bertram, Raymond & Schreuder, Robert & Baayen, Harald R.
2000. The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition
26(2): 489–511.
Bhat, Darbhe Narayana Shankara. 2000. Word classes and sentential function. In
Vogel & Comrie
(eds), 47–64.
. 1994. The Adjectival Category. Criteria for Differentiation and Identification [Studies in Language Companion Series 24]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bisang, Walter. 2013. Word-classes. In
The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Song Jae
Jung
(ed.), 280–302. Oxford: OUP.
. 2008. Precategoriality and syntax based parts of speech: The case of Late Archaic Chinese. Studies in Language
32(3): 65–86.
Booij, Gert. 2007 [2015]1. The Grammar of Words. An Introduction to Linguistic Morphology. Oxford: OUP.
Booij, Gert, Lehman, Christian & Mugdan, Joachim
(eds). 2000–2004. Morphology. An International Handbook on Inflection and Word-formation, Vol. 1 (2000); Vol. 2 (2004). Berlin: Mouton de Gryuter.
. 1824. Vergleichende Zergliederung des Sanskrits und der mit ihr verwandten Sprachen. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, philosophische-historische Klasse
1824: 117–148 (Repr. 1972. Kleine Schriften zur vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft, 1–33. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der deutschen demokratischen Republik).
Bossong, Georg. 1992. Reflections on the history of the study of universals. The case of the partes orationis
. In
Meaning and Grammar. Cross-linguistic Perspectives, Michel
Kefer & Johan
van der Auwera
(eds). Belgian Journal of Linguistics
4: 27–51.
Bozzone, Chiara. 2016. The origin of the Caland system and the typology of adjectives. Indo-European Linguistics
4: 15–52.
Broschart, Jürgen. 1997. Why Tongan does it differently: Categorial distinctions in a language without nouns and verbs. Linguistic Typology
1: 123–165.
Brereton, Joel P. & Jamison, Stephanie W.
2014. The Rig-Veda. The Earliest Religious Poetry of India. Oxford: OUP.
Brugmann, Karl. 1904. Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Straßburg: Trubner.
Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalizations. In
Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Roderick A.
Jacobs & Peter S.
Rosenbaum
(eds), 184–221. Waltham MA: Ginn.
Cipriano, Palmira. 2007. Evoluzione tipologica e mutamento fonologico nell’area del persiano. Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche s. 9, v. 18, f. 1: 21–80.
. 2001. Il ruolo delle etimologie iraniche nello studio dell’indoeuropeo preistorico. In
Benedetti
(ed.), 107–120.
. 1988. Le implicazioni metodologiche e fattuali della teoria di W. Belardi sull’indoeuropeo. Studi e Saggi Linguistici
28: 101–126.
Coseriu, Eugenio. 2001. Les universaux linguistiques (et les autres). In
L’Homme et son langage, Hiltraud
Dupuy-Engelhardt, Jean-Pierre
Durafour & Françoise
Rastier
(eds), 69–107. Louvain: Peeters.
Cowgill, Warren. 1963. A search for universals in Indo-European diachronic morphology. In
Universals of Language, Joseph H.
Greenberg
(ed.), 114–141. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2009. Grammatical categories and relations: Language-universality vs. language-specificity and construction-specificity. Language and Linguistic Compass
3(1): 441–479.
Croft, William. 2016. Comparative concepts and language-specific categories: Theory and practice. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 377–393.
. 2000. Parts of speech as language universals and language-particular categories. In
Vogel & Comrie
(eds), 65–102.
Croft, William & van Lier, Eva. 2012. Language universals without universal categories. Theoretical Linguistics
38(1): 57–72.
Dahl, Östen. 2016. Thoughts on language-specific and cross-linguistic entities. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 427–437.
. 2010. Time, Tense and Aspect in Early Vedic Grammar: Exploring Inflectional Semantics in the Rigveda. Leiden: Brill.
Demirdache, Hamida & Matthewson, Lisa. 1995. On the universality of syntactic categories. Proceedings of the North-West Linguistic Society
25: 70–93.
Di Giovine, Paolo. 2001. Etimologia indoeuropea ed etimologia romanza: Due metodi a confronto. In
Benedetti
(ed.), 285–293.
Di Giovine, Paolo, Flamini, Sara & Pozza, Marianna. 2007. Internal structure of verbal stems in the Germanic languages. In
Europe and the Mediterranean as a Linguistic Area. Convergencies from a Historical and Typological Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 88], Paolo
Ramat & Elisa
Roma
(eds), 49–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dixon, Robert M.W.
2004. Adjective classes in typological perspective. In
Dixon & Aikhenvald
(eds), 1–50.
1977. Where have all adjectives gone?
Studies in Languages
1: 19–77. (Repr. 1982. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter).
Dixon, Robert M.W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
(eds). 2004. Adjective Classes: A Cross-linguistic Typology. Oxford: OUP.
Dressler, Wolfgang U.
1987. Word-formation as a part of natural morphology. In
Dressler
et al.. (eds), 99–126.
Dressler, Wolfgang U., Mayerthaler, Willi, Panagl, Oswald & Wurzel, Wolfgang U.
(eds). 1987. Leitmotivs in Natural Morphology [Studies in Language Companion Series 10]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dryer, Matthew S.
2016. Cross-linguistic categories, comparative concepts, and the Walman diminutive. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 305–331.
1997. Are grammatical relations universal?
Essays on Language Function and Language Type Dedicated to T. Givón, Joan L.
Bybee, John
Haiman, Sandra A. & Thompson
(eds), 115–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Evans, Nicholas. 2000. Word classes in the world’s languages. In
Booij
et al.. (eds), Vol. I, 708–731.
Everett, Daniel L. & Kern, Barbara. 1997. Wari: The Pacaas Novos Language of Western Brazil. London: Routledge.
EWAia = Mayrhofer, Manfred. 1986–1996. Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Gil, David. 2016. Describing languoids: When incommensurability meets the language-dialect continuum. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 439–462.
. 2000. Syntactic categories, cross-linguistic variation and Universal Grammar. In
Vogel & Comrie
(eds), 173–216.
Gren-Eklund, Gunilla. 1978. A Study of Nominal Sentences in the Oldest Upaniṣad. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
Haspelmath, Martin. Forthcoming. The morph as a minimum linguistic form. Draft, May 2019.
. 2021. Toward standardization of morphosyntactic terminology for general linguistics. In
Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 132]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume)
. 2014[2003]1. The geometry of grammatical meanings: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In
The New Psychology of Language. Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, vol. 2, Michael
Tomasello
(ed.), 211–242. New York NY: Psychology Press.
. 2012. How to compare major word-classes across languages. In
Theories of Everything in honor of Edward Keenan [UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 17, Article 16], Thomas
Graf, Denis
Paperno, Anna
Szabolcsi & Jos
Tellings
(eds), 109–130. Los Angeles CA: UCLA. <[URL]> (11 November 2020).
. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica
45(1): 31–80.
. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language
86(3): 663–687.
. 2007. Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology
11: 119–132.
. 1996. Word-class-changing-inflection and morphological theory. In
Yearbook of Morphology 1995, Geert
Booij & Jaap
van Marle
(eds), 43–67. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hengeveld, Kees. 2013. Parts-of-speech system as a basic typological determinant. In
Rijkhoff & van Lier
(eds), 31–55.
Hengeveld, Kees, Rijkhoff, Jan & Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Parts-of-speech and word-order. Journal of Linguistics
40(3): 527–570.
Hengeveld, Kees & Rijkhoff, Jan. 2005. Mundari as a flexible language. Linguistic Typology
9(3): 406–431.
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in Universal Grammar. Language
60(4): 703–752.
Janda, Richard D. & Joseph, Brian D.
2003. On language, change and language change – Or of history, linguistics and historical linguistics. In
Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Richard D.
Janda & Brian D.
Joseph
(eds), 4–113. London: Blackwell.
Jelinek, Eloise & Deemers, Richard. 1994. Predicates and pronominal arguments in Strait Salish. Language
70(4): 697–737.
Ježek, Elisabetta & Ramat, Paolo. 2009. On parts-of-speech transcategorization. Folia Linguistica
43: 391–416.
Joshi, Shivaram D.
1967. Adjectives and substantives as a single class in the parts of speech. Journal of the University of Poona, Humanities Section
25: 19–30.
Kastovsky, Dieter. 1996. Verbal derivation in English: A historical survey. Or much ado about nothing. In
English Historical Linguistics 1994 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 135], Derek
Britton
(ed.), 93–117. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1992. Typological reorientation as a result of level interaction: The case of English morphology. In
Diachrony within Synchrony: Language History and Cognition, Günter
Kellermann & Michael D.
Morrissey
(eds), 411–428. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Lander, Yury & Arkadiev, Peter. 2016. On the right of being a comparative concept. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 403–416.
LaPolla, Randy J.
2016. On categorization: Stick to the facts of the languages. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 365–375.
Launey, Michel. 1994. Une grammaire omnipredicative: Essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique. Paris: CNRS Editions.
Lazard, Gilbert. 2001a. On the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics
33: 359–367.
. 2001b. Transitivity revisited as an example of a more strict approach in typological research. Folia linguistica
36: 141–200.
. 1997. Pour une terminologie rigoureuse: Quelques principes et propositions. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris (nouvelle série)
6: 111–133.
. 1992. Y a-t-il des catégories interlanguagières?
In
Texte, Sätze, Wörter und Moneme. Festschrift für Klaus Heger zum 65. Geburtstag, Susanne R.
Anschüz
(ed.), 427–434. Heidelberger Orientverlag.
Lazzeroni, Romano. 2013. Divagazioni sul comparativo indoeuropeo. λεξÎνδρεια – Alessandria. Rivista di Glottologia
6–7: 265–276.
. 2008. Il vedico tra varianti e standardizzazione. In
Standard e non standard tra scelta e norma. Atti del XXX convegno della Società Italiana di Glottologia, Bergamo 20–22 ottobre 2005, Molinelli
Piera
(ed.), 109–116. Roma: Il Calamo.
. 2005. Fra mondo indiano e mondo mediterraneo: Categorie scalari e gradi di comparazione. Archivio Glottologico Italiano
95: 1–18.
Law, Vivien. 1993. Process of assimilation. European grammars of Sanskrit in the early decades of the nineteenth century. In
La linguistique entre mythe et histoire, Daniel
Droixhe & Chantal
Grell
(eds), 237–261. Münster: Nodus.
Lehmann, Christian. 2008. Roots, stems and word classes. Studies in Language
32(3): 546–567. (Reprint: Ansaldo
et al.. 2010, 43–64).
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo. 2000. Gli aggettivi giapponesi fra nome e verbo. Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata
29(2): 311–345.
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium, Alexis
Dimitriadis, Laura
Siegel, Clarissa
Surek-Clark & Alexander
Williams
(eds), 201–225. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania.
Matthews, Peter H.
1974. Morphology. An Introduction to the Theory of Word-Structure. Cambridge: CUP.
1972. Inflectional Morphology: A Theoretical Study Based on Aspects of Latin Verb Conjugation. Cambridge: CUP.
Mayerthaler, Willi. 1981. Morphologisches Natürlichkeit. Wiesbaden: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Athenaion.
Meillet, Antoine. 1903[1934]7. Introduction à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Paris: Hachette.
Mel’čuk, Igor. 1982. Towards a Language of Linguistics. A System of Formal Notions for Theoretical Morphology, Philip A.
Luelsdorf
(ed.). München: Fink.
Morgenroth, Wolfgang. 19772. Lehrbuch des Sanskrit. Grammatik – Lektionen – Glossar. Leipzig: Max Hueber.
Mosel, Ulrike. 2017. Teop – An Oceanic language with multifunctional nouns, verbs and adjectives. Studies in Language
41(2): 255–293.
Mugdan, Joachim. 2015. Units of word-formation. In
Word Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, Vol. I, Peter O.
Müller, Ingeborg
Ohnheiser, Susan
Olsen & Franz
Rainer
(eds), 235–300. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
. 1986. Was ist eigentlich ein Morphem?
Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung
39(1): 29–43.
Panagl, Oswald. 2006. Zur verbale Konstruktion deverbativer Nomina. In
Word-Classes and Related Topics in Ancient Greek, Emilio
Crespo, Jesus
de la Villa & Antonio R.
Revuelta
(eds), 47–57. Louvain la Neuve: Peeters.
. 1987. Productivity and diachronic change in morphology. In
Dressler
et al.. (eds), 127–152.
Peterson, John. 2013. Parts of Speech in Kharia: A formal account. In
Rijkhoff & van Lier
(eds), 131–168.
. 2005. There’s a grain of truth in every “myth”, or, Why the discussion on Mundari isn’t quite over yet. Linguistic Typology
9: 351–390.
Plank, Franz. 1997. Word classes in typology: Recommended readings (a bibliography). Linguistic Typology
1(2): 185–192.
Pontillo, Tiziana & Candotti, Maria P.
2011. Discriminare tra aggettivo e sostantivo: Appunti sulla tradizione pāṇiniana. Atti del Sodalizio Glottologico Milanese (n.s.)
6: 66–84.
Radicchi, Anna. 1973–1974. Le parti del discorso nella tradizione grammaticale indiana. In
Materiali dell’Istituto di Glottologia dell’Università di Cagliari, 1–64. Cagliari: Pubblicazioni dell’istituto di glottologia.
Ramat, Paolo. 2014. Categories, features and values in the definition of word-classes. Studi e Saggi Linguistici
52(2): 9–24.
Renou, Louis. 1965. Remarques générales sur la phrase védique. In
Symbolae linguisticae in honorem Georgii Kuryłowicz, Stanisław
Drewniak
(ed.), 230–234. WrocÅ‚aw: ZakÅ‚ad Narodowy Imienia OssoliÅ„skich.
Rijkhoff, Jan. 2016. Crosslinguistic categories in morphosyntactic typology: Problems and prospects. Linguistic Typology
20(2): 333–363.
Rijkhoff, Jan & van Lier, Eva. 2013. Flexible word classes in linguistic typology and grammatical theory. In
Rijkhoff & van Lier
(eds), 1–30.
Rijkhoff, Jan. 2013. (ed.). Flexible Word-Classes. Typological Studies of Underspecified Parts of Speech. Oxford: OUP.
Robins, Robert H.
1964. General Linguistics. An Introductory Survey. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.
Roth, Heinrich. 1660–1668. Grammatica linguae sanscretanae bracmanum Indiae orientalis. Facsimile edition Arnulf Camp & Jean Claude Muller. 1988. The Sanskrit Grammar and Manuscripts of Father Heinrich Roth S.J. (1620–1668). Biblioteca Nazionale, Roma, Mss. Or. 171 e 172. Leiden: Brill.
Rousseau, Jean. 1984. La racine arabe et son traitement par les grammairiens européens (1505–1810). Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris
79(1): 285–321.
Sapir, Eduard. 1921. Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 2001. Scales of nouniness and verbiness. In
Language Typology and Linguistic Universals: An International Handbook, Vol. 2, Martin
Haspelmath, Ekkehard
König, Wulf
Österreicher & Wolfgang
Raible
(eds), 495–509. Berlin: De Gruyter.
. 1993a. Das Nomen – Eine universale Kategorie?
Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung
46(3): 187–221.
. 1993b. Syntactic categories and sub-categories. In
Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, 2 Vols, Joachim
Jacobs, Arnim
von Stechow, Wolfgang
Sternefeld & Theo
Vennemann
(eds), 646–686. Berlin: De Gruyter.
de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1922[1916]1. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot. [Italian translation: T.
De Mauro
(eds.). 1999. Corso di linguistica generale, Roma-Bari: Laterza].
. 1878. Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes. Leipzig: Teubner.
Schachter, Paul & Shopen, Timothy. 20072[1985]1. Parts of speech systems. In
Linguistic Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 1: Clause Structure, Timothy
Shopen
(ed.), 1–60. Cambridge: CUP.
Simone, Raffaele. 2007. Constructions and categories in verbal and signed languages. In
Verbal and Signed Languages. Comparing Structures, Constructs, and Methodologies, Elena
Pizzuto, Paola
Pietrandrea & Raffaele
Simone
(eds), 198–252. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Simone, Raffaele & Masini, Francesca
(eds). 2014. Word Classes. Nature, Typology and Representations [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 332]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Thieme, Paul. 1967. Kr̥ṣṭí und carṣaṇí. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung
81: 233–244. (Reprint: Thieme
Paul. 1971. Kleine Schriften, 2 Vols, G.
Buddruss
(ed.), Vol. 1, 247–258. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner).
Thompson, Sandra A.
1988. A discourse approach to the cross-linguistic category ‘adjective’. In
Explaining Language Universals, John
Hawkins
(ed.), 167–185. Oxford: Blackwell.
Touratier, Christian. 2009. Questions surrounding the basic notions of word, lexie, morpheme and lexeme. In
Form and Function in Language Research. Papers in Honor of Christian Lehmann, Trends in Linguistics. [Studies and Monographs 210], Johannes
Helmbrecht
(ed.), 157–166. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Troupeau, Gérard. 1984. La notion de ‘racine’ chez les grammairiennes arabes ancien. In
History of Language Science. An International Handbook of the Evolution of the Study of Language from the Beginnings to the Present, Vol. I, Sylvain
Auroux, E.F. Konrad
Koerner, Hans-Josef
Niederehe & Kees
Versteegh
(ed.), 239–246. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Uehara, Satoshi. 1998. Syntactic Categories in Japanese: A Cognitive and Typological Introduction. Tokyo: Kurosio.
VIA = Werba, Chlodwig H.
1997. Verba Indoarica. Die primären und sekundären Wurzeln der Sanskrit Sprache, Pars I: Radices Primariae. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen.
van Lier, Eva
(ed.). 2017
Lexical flexibility in Oceanic Languages. Studies in Language
41(2): 241–254 (monographic issue on Lexical Flexibility in Oceanic Languages
).
Vogel, Petra M.
2000. Grammaticalization and part of speech systems. In
Vogel & Comrie
(eds), 259–284.
Vogel, Petra M. & Comrie, Bernard. 2000. Approaches to the Typology of Word Classes. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Völkel, Svenja. 2017. Word classes and the scope of lexical flexibility in Tongan. Studies in Language
41(2): 445–495.
Wakernagel, Jakob. 1905. Altindische Grammatik, Vol. II.1: Einleitung zur Wortlehre. Nominalkomposition. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Dedè, Francesco
Reiner, Tabea
2021. Comparative concepts are not a different kind of thing. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], ► pp. 211 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 december 2025. 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.
