Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 40:3 (2016) ► pp.681704
References (85)
Ackrill, J.L. (ed.). 1963. Aristotle Categories and de Interpretatione. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. The Categories. In J.L. Ackrill (ed.). 1963. Aristotle Categories and de Interpretatione. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. De Generationem Animalium. In J. Barnes (ed.). 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 1963. De Interpretatione . In J.L. Ackrill (ed.), Aristotle Categories and de Interpretatione. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984. De Partibus Animalium . In J. Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 1984. Posterior Analytic . In J. Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, J., (ed.). 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. 1922. Review of Sapir’s language. The Classical Weekly 181.Google Scholar
. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. 1977. The forms of language. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Bopp, F. 1816. Uber des Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache in Vergleichung mit Jenem der Griechischen, Lateinischen, Persischen und Germanischen Sprache.Google Scholar
Bostock, D. 1994. Plato on understanding language. In S. Everson (ed.), Language, (Companion to Ancient Thought 3), 10–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, J., R. Perkins & W. Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1963. The Philosophy of Rudolph Carnap, P.A. Schillp (ed.), LaSalle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspect of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. 2004. English and Russian passives revisited. Segundo Seminario de Voz, Cambio de Valencia y Formación de Palabras, Universidad de Sonora, Hermosillo.Google Scholar
. 2008. What is a passive? In Z. Estrada-Fernandez, S. Wichman, C. Chamoreau & A. Alvarez-Gonzalez (eds.), Studies in voice and transitivity, 1–18. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Crouch, J.E. 1978. Functional Human Anatomy (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Lea and FabigerGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Everson, S. (ed.). 1994. Language, companion to ancient thought 31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fernald, R.D. & S.A. White. 2000. Social control of brain: From behavior to genes. In M. Gazzaniga (ed.), The New cognitive neuroscience, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fox, B. & P. Hopper (eds.). 1994. Voice, form and function (Typological Studies in Language 27). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Futuyma, D.J. 1986. Evolutionary Biology (2nd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Assoc.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1971. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist’s field Trip. Chicago Linguistic Society 71, 394–415. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
. 1975. Serial verbs and syntactic change: Niger-Congo. In C. Li (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Typology and functional domains. Studies in Language 5(2). 163–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: Quantified cross-language studies. (Typological Studies in Language 3). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1988. The pragmatics of word-order: Predictability, importance and attention. In Hammond et al. (eds.), Studies in syntactic typology (Typological Studies in Language 17), 243–284. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). 1994. Voice and inversion (Typological Studies in Language 28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). 1997. Grammatical relations: A functionalist perspective (Typological Studies in Language 35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Context as other minds. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. The genesis of syntactic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Ute reference grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Beyond structuralism: Should we set apriori limits on our curiosity? Studies in Language 37(2). 413–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The diachrony of grammar, 2 vols1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. & B. Kawasha. 2001. Indiscrete grammatical relations: The Lunda passive [TR 01-05]. Institute of Cognitive and Decision Sciences, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Givón, T. & M. Shibatani (eds.). 2009. Syntactic complexity (Typological Studies in Language 85). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. & L. Yang. 1994. The rise of the English GET-passive. In B. Fox & P. Hopper (eds.), Voice, form and function (Typological Studies in Language 27), 119–149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. 1969. Some methods of dynamic comparison in linguistics. In J. Puhvel (ed.), Substance and structure of language, 147–203. Berkeley: U.C. Press.Google Scholar
. 1978. Diachrony, synchrony and language universals. In J. Greenberg et al. (eds.), Universals of human language, vol. 11, 61–91. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1979. Rethinking linguistic diachrony. Language 551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J., C. Ferguson & E. Moravcsik (eds.). 1978. Universals of human language. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, E. & H. Cairns (eds.). 1961. Plato: The collected dialogues (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, M., E. Moravcsik & J. Wirth (eds.). 1988. Studies in syntactic typology (Typological Studies in Language 17). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanson, R.N. 1958. Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. 1990. The grammaticalization of passive morphology. Studies in Language 14(1). 25–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 111. 119–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Framework-free grammatical theory. In B. Heine &H. Narong (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 341–365. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B., U. Claudi & F. Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B. & T. Kuteva. 2007. The genesis of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B. & H. Narong (eds.). 2010. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. & E. Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Humboldt, W. von. 1836. Linguistic variation and intellectual development, Trans. by G.C. Buck. Coral Gables, FL: University of Florida press [1971].Google Scholar
Itkonen, E. 2010. Philosophy of linguistics. Oxford Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1921. Language: Its nature, development and origin. NY: Modern Library.Google Scholar
. 1924. The philosophy of grammar. New York/London: W.W. Norton & Co. [1965].Google Scholar
Kawasha, B. 1999. Some aspects of Lunda grammar. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon MA Thesis (ms).Google Scholar
Keenan, E. 1975. Some universals of passive in relational grammar. Chicago Linguistic Society 111. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
. 1976. Towards a universal definition of ‘subject’. In C. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 303–333. NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kirsner, R. 1976. On the subjectless pseudo-passive in standard Dutch and the problem of background agent. In C. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 384–415. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lazard, G. 2012. The case for pure linguistics. Studies in Language 36(2). 241–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, C. (ed.). 1976. Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Li, C. & S. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese. Berkeley: U.C. Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1976. Evolution and the diversity of life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1982. The growth of biological thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. 2006. Structural parameters of clause integration: Elusive complementation. Seminario de Complexidad Syntáctica, University of Sonora, Hermosillo, November 2006 (ms).Google Scholar
. 2007a. Threads in the tapestry of syntax: Complementation and Mohawk. UC Santa Barbara (ms).Google Scholar
. 2007b. Alternative pathways to relativization. Seminario de Complexidad Syntáctica, University of Sonora, Hermosillo, November 2007 (ms).Google Scholar
. 2009. Re(e)volving complexity: Adding intonation. In T. Givon & M. Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paul, H. 1890. Principles of the history of language, trans. by H.A. Strong, London: Swann, Sonnenschein & Co.Google Scholar
Peirce, C.S. 1934. Collected writings, vol. V1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1940. The philosophy of Peirce, J. Buchler (ed.), NY: Harcourt, Brace. Google Scholar
Plato. 1961. Cratylus . In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (eds.), Plato: The collected dialogues (Bolingen Series). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1934/1959. The logic of scientific discovery. NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Rabi, I.I. 1975. Interview in The New Yorker, Oct. 20, 1975.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1956. Logic and knowledge: Selected essays, 1901-1950, E.C. Marsh (ed.), London: Rutledge.Google Scholar
Sapir, E. 1921. Language. NY: Harcourt, Brace & World [1929].Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de. 1915. Course in general linguistics, ed. by C. Bally &S. Sechehaye , Trans. by W. Baskin,NY: Philosophical Library [19591].Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. 1988. Voice in Philippine languages. In M. Shibatani (ed.), Passive and voice, (Typological Studies in Language 8), 85–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). 1988. Passive and voice (Typological Studies in Language 8). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. & B. Heine (eds.). 1991. Approaches to grammaticalization, vol. 11 (Typological Studies in Language 19.1). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
West-Eberhard, M.J. 2003. Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, B. 1994. Cratylus theory of names and its refutation. In S. Everson (ed.), Language (Companion to Ancient Thought 3), 28–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zipf, G. 1935. The psycho-biology of language: An introduction to dynamic philology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Körtvélyessy, Lívia
2024. In search of a semiotic model for onomatopoeia. Folia Linguistica 0:0 DOI logo
Welke, Klaus
2020. Konstruktionsgrammatik: Konstruktionen ohne Grammatik?. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 48:2  pp. 389 ff. DOI logo
Givón, T.
Karstens, Bart
2017. “The Lonely Form Dies”: How Epistemic Virtues Connect Roman Jakobson’s New Science of Language and His Personality. In Epistemic Virtues in the Sciences and the Humanities [Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, 321],  pp. 149 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 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.