Cover not available
Review published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 34:1 (2017) ► pp.110–116
Book review

Proto-Slavic inflectional morphology: A comparative handbook. By Thomas Olander

Reviewed by
| University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 25 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.34.1.05iga
References
Arumaa, Peter
1985 Urslavische Grammatik: Einführung in das vergleichende Studium der slavischen Sprachen. Band 31: Formenlehre. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert
1996 Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1995, 1–16. Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borkovskij, Viktor I. & Petr S. Kuznecov
2004 [1963] Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka. Moscow: URSS.Google Scholar
Debrunner, Albert & Jacob Wackernagel
1975 [1929/1930] Altindische Grammatik. Band 31: Nominalflexion, Zahlwort, Pronomen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Halla-aho, Jussi
2006 Problems of Proto-Slavic historical nominal morphology (Slavica Helsingensia 26). Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, Eugen
2013 Historical phonology in service of subgrouping: Two laws of final syllables in the common prehistory of Baltic and Slavonic. Baltistica 481. 161–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Igartua, Iván
2005 Origen y evolución de la flexión nominal eslava. Bilbao: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco.Google Scholar
2009 Morphological effects of feminine animacy in 16th century Sorbian. Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie 66(1). 61–74.Google Scholar
2016 Review of How Russian came to be the way it is: A student’s guide to the history of the Russian language, by Tore Nesset (2015) Journal of Historical Linguistics 6(1). 114–123.Google Scholar
Krys´ko, Vadim B.
1994 Razvitie kategorii oduševlënnosti v istorii russkogo jazyka. Moscow: Lyceum.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine
1897 Recherches sur l’emploi du génitif-accusatif en vieux-slave. Paris: Bouillon.Google Scholar
Nesset, Tore
2015 How Russian came to be the way it is: A student’s guide to the history of the Russian language. Bloomington: Slavica.Google Scholar
Olander, Thomas
2010 Proto-Indo-European final nasals in Slavic. Scando-Slavica 561. 84–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Proto-Indo-European *-os in Slavic. Russian Linguistics 36(3). 319–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orr, Robert
2000 Common Slavic nominal morphology: A new synthesis. Bloomington: Slavica.Google Scholar
Poljakov, Oleg
1995 Das Problem der balto-slavischen Sprachgemeinschaft (Heidelberg Publikationen zur Slavistik. A. Linguistische Reihe 18). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Scholvin, Robert
1877 Die Declination in den pannonisch-slovenischen Denkmälern des Altkirchenslavischen. Archiv für slavische Philologie 21. 482–569.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth
2010 Linguistic typology and the reconstruction of the Indo-European accusative plural. Emerita 78(1). 33–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Villanueva Svensson, Miguel
2015 Review of Proto-Slavic inflectional morphology: A comparative handbook, by Thomas Olander (2015) Kratylos 601. 103–111.Google Scholar
Viredaz, Rémy
2009 Two unrecognized vowel phonemes in Proto-Slavic: On Auslautgesetze in North Russian vs. the rest of Slavic. Talk given at the 4th Annual Meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society, Zadar, September 3–6, 2009.Google Scholar