Reconstruction, typology and reality

Motives for Language Change

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 243-257

  Comrie, Bernard ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958070863     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511486937.0015     Document Type: Chapter

References (9)

1. Comrie, Bernard. 1992. ‘Before complexity’, in John A. Hawkins and Murray Gell-Mann (eds.), The Evolution of Human Languages(Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity 11), Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley, 193–211.
2. Comrie, Bernard. 2000. ‘From potential to realization: an episode in the origin of language’, in Jacques Arends (ed.), Creoles, Pidgins, and Sundry Languages: Essays in Honor of Pieter Seuren (= Linguistics 38.5), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 989–1004.
3. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi and Friederike H¨unnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Lass, Roger. 1977. ‘Internal reconstruction and generative phonology’, Transactions of the Philological Society 1975: 1–26.
5. Lass, Roger. 1993. ‘How real(ist) are reconstructions’, in Charles Jones (ed.), Historical Linguistics: Problems and Perspectives, London: Longman, 156–89.
6. Lyell, Charles. 1830-3. Principles of Geology. 3 volumes. London: Murray. (Reprinted 1990–1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
7. McWhorter, John. 2001. ‘The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars’, Linguistic Typology, 125–66.
8. Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn. 2000. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. 3rd edition. London: Thames & Hudson.
9. Wray, Alison. 1998. ‘Protolanguage as a holistic system for social interaction’, Language and Communication18: 47–67.