The limits of convergence in language contact

Journal of Language Contact

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 213-224

  Silva Corvalán, Carmen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 69849119777     PISSN: 18774091     EISSN: 19552629     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/000000008792525246     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Brody, Jill. 1995. Lending the "unborrowable": Spanish discourse markers in indigenous American languages. In Carmen Silva-Corvalán, Spanish in four continents: Studies in bilingualism and language contact, 132-147. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
2. Campbell, Lyle. 1987. Syntactic change in Pipil. International Journal of American Linguistics 53:253-280.
3. Campbell, Lyle. 1993. On proposed universals of grammatical borrowing. In Henk Aertsen & Robert Jeffers, Historical Linguistics 1989, 91-109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4. Campbell, Lyle & Martha C. Muntzel. 1989. The structural consequences of language death. In Nancy C. Dorian, Investigating obsolescence, 181-196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Day, Jennifer C. 1996. Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050. US Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, P25-1130. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office.
6. Dorian, Nancy, ed. 1989. Investigating obsolescence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Foulet, Lucien. 1977. Petite syntaxe de l'Ancien Français. 13th edition. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion.
8. García, Erica. 1995. Frecuencia (relativa) de uso como síntoma de estrategias etnopragmáticas. In Klaus Zimmermann, Lenguas en contacto en Hispanoamérica, 51-72. Frankfurt: Vervuert.
9. Gumperz, John & Robert Wilson. 1971. Convergence and creolization. In Dell Hymes, Pidginization and creolization of languages, 151-167. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Gutiérrez Ordóñez, Salvador. 1997. Temas, remas, focos, tópicos y comentarios. Madrid: Arco/Libros.
11. Hekking, Ewald & Pieter Muysken. 1995. Otomí y Quechua: una comparación de los elementos gramaticales prestados del español. In Klaus Zimmermann, Lenguas en contacto en Hispanoamérica, 101-118. Frankfurt: Vervuert.
12. King, Ruth. 2000. The lexical basis of grammatical borrowing: A Prince Edward Island case study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
13. Landa, Alazne. 1995. Conditions on null objects in Basque Spanish and their relation to leísmo and clitic doubling. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California.
14. Landa, Alazne. 2000. Del paralelismo estructural a la convergencia gramatical: contacto españolvasco. In Annick Englebert, Michel Pierrard, Laurence Rosier & Dan Van Raemdonck, Actes du XXIIe Congrés de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes, vol. VI, 285-292. Tübingen/Max Niemeyer Verlag.
15. Landa, Alazne & Agurtzane Elordui.1999. Gramáticas en contacto: Condiciones de permeabilidad y tendencias universales. In Angel Yanguas & Francisco J. Salguero, Estudios de lingüística descriptiva y comparada, 229-238. Sevilla: Kronos.
16. Louden, Mark L. 1997. Linguistic structure and sociolinguistic identity in Pennsylvania German society. In James R. Dow & Michéle Wolff, Languages and lives: Essays in honor of Werner Enninger, 79-91. New York: Peter Lang.
17. Martineau, Frances. 1988. Variable deletion of que in the spoken French of Ottawa-Hull. In J.P. Montreuil & D. Birdsong, Advances in Romance Linguistics, 275-287. Dordrecht: Foris.
18. Martineau, Frances. 1993. Rection forte et rection faible des verbes: l'ellipse de que en français du Québec et de l'Ontario. Francophonies d'Amérique 3:79-90.
19. Nadkarni, Mangesh V. 1975. Bilingualism and syntactic change in Konkani. Language 51:672-83.
20. Otheguy, Ricardo. 1995. When contact speakers talk, linguistic theory listens. In E. Contini-Morava, & B. Sussman, Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory, 213-242. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
21. Prince, Ellen. 1992. On syntax in discourse, in language contact situations. In Claire Kramsch & S. McConnell-Ginet, Text and context: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study, 98-112. Boston: D.C. Heath.
22. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1994. Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon.
23. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1998. On borrowing as a mechanism of syntactic change. In A. Schwegler et al., Romance linguistics: Theoretical perspectives, 225-246. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
24. Subirats-Rüggeberg, Carlos. 1987. Sentential complementation in Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25. Thomason, Sarah G. 1986. On establishing external causes of language change. In Soonja Choi et al., Proceedings of the Second Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, 243-251. Columbus: Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University.
26. Thomason, Sarah, & Terence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
27. Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
28. US Bureau of the Census. 2005. Population Division. Washington, D.C.: US Government.
29. Wald, Benji. 1983. Referents and topic within and across discourse units: Observations from current vernacular English. In Flora Klein-Andreu, Discourse perspectives on syntax, 91-116. New York: Academic Press.
30. Weinreich, Uriel. [1953] 1974. Languages in contact, eighth printing. The Hague: Mouton.
31. Weinreich, Uriel, William Labov & M. Herzog. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Winifred Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel, Directions for historical linguistics, 95-195. Austin: University of Texas Press.
32. Winford, Donald. 2007. Some issues in the study of language contact. Journal of Language Contact, Thema 1:22-39. www.jlc-journal.org.