What, if anything, is typology?

Linguistic Typology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 231-238

  Nichols, Johanna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51249153202     PISSN: 14300532     EISSN: 1613415X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/LINGTY.2007.017     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Aissen, Judith (2003). Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21: 435-483
2. Baker, Mark C. & Jim McCloskey (2007). On the relationship of typology to theoretical syntax. Linguistic Typology 11: 285-296
3. Bickel, Balthasar (2003). Referential density in discourse and syntactic typology. Language 79: 708-736
4. - (2007). Typology in the 21st century: Major current developments. Linguistic Typology 11: 239-251
5. Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols (2005). Inclusive/exclusive as person vs. number categories worldwide. In Elena Filimonova (ed.), Clusivity, 47-70. Amsterdam: Benjamins
6. Bossong, Georg (1998). Le marquage différential de l'objet dans les langues d'Europe. In Jack Feuillet (ed.), Actance et valence dans les langues de l'Europe, 193-258. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
7. Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Alberto Piazza, Paolo Menozzi, & Joanna Mountain (1988). Reconstruction of human evolution: Bringing together genetic, archaeological, and linguistic data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the U.S.A. 85: 6002-6006
8. Comrie, Bernard (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
9. Croft, William (2003). Typology and Universals. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
10. Cysouw, Michael (2003). The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Based on doctoral dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, 2001
11. Dixon, R. M. W. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
12. - (1997). The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
13. Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.) (2000). Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
14. Dryer, Matthew (1986). Primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language 62: 808-845
15. - (1989). Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13: 257-292
16. - (2006). Descriptive theories, explanatory theories, and basic linguistic theory. In Felix Ameka, Alan Dench, & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching Language: Issues in Grammar Writing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
17. Dunn, Michael, Angela Terrill, Ger P. Reesink, Robert A. Foley, & Stephen C. Levinson (2005). Structural phylogenetics and the reconstruction of ancient language history. Science 309: 2072-2075
18. Foley, William A. & Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. (1984). Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
19. Gensler, Orin D. (1993). A typological evaluation of Celtic/Hamito- Semitic syntactic parallels. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley
20. Greenberg, Joseph H. (1963). Some universals of language with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of Language, 73-113. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press
21. Hale, Kenneth L., Michael Krauss, Lucille J. Watahomigie, Akira Y. Yamamoto, Colette Craig, LaVerne Masayesva Jeanne, & Nora C. England (1992). Endangered languages. Language 68: 1-42
22. Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.) (2005). World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press
23. Maslova, Elena (2000). A dynamic approach to the verification of distributional universals. Linguistic Typology 4: 307-333
24. Newmeyer, Frederick J. (1998). The irrelevance of typology for grammatical theory. Syntaxis 1: 161-197
25. Nichols, Johanna (1982). Ingush transitivization and detransitivization. Berkeley Linguistics Society 8: 445-462
26. - (1986). Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 66: 56-119
27. - (1992). Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
28. Nichols, Johanna & David A. Peterson (1996). The Amerind personal pronouns. Language 72: 336-371
29. Nichols, Johanna, David A. Peterson, & Jonathan Barnes (2004). Transitivizing and detransitivizing languages. Linguistic Typology 8: 149-211
30. Peterson, David A. (1999). Discourse-functional, historical, and typological aspects of applicative constructions. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley
31. Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender (2007). Linguistic typology and theory construction: Common challenges ahead. Linguistic Typology 11: 273-283
32. Renfrew, Colin (1987). Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
33. Slobin, Dan I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Sven Strömqvist & Ludo Verhoeven (eds.), Relating Events in Narrative, Volume 2: Typological and Contextual Perspectives, 219-257. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum
34. Song, Jae Jung (2001). Linguistic Typology: Morphology and Syntax. Harlow: Longman
35. Talmy, Leonard (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Lexical Description, Volume 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
36. Wälchli, Bernhard (2005). Co-compounds and Natural Coordination. New York: Oxford University Press. Based on doctoral dissertation, Stockholms universitet, 2003
37. Whaley, Lindsay J. (1997). Introduction to Typology: The Unity and Diversity of Language. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage