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

References

1. Arumaa, Peter
   1985 Urslavische Grammatik: Einführung in das vergleichende Studium der slavischen Sprachen. Band 3: Formenlehre. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   [Google Scholar]
2. 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: 10.1007/978‑94‑017‑3716‑6_1
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3716-6_1 [Google Scholar]
3. Borkovskij, Viktor I. & Petr S. Kuznecov
   2004 [1963] Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka. Moscow: URSS.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Debrunner, Albert & Jacob Wackernagel
   1975 [1929/1930] Altindische Grammatik. Band 3: Nominalflexion, Zahlwort, Pronomen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Halla-aho, Jussi
   2006 Problems of Proto-Slavic historical nominal morphology (Slavica Helsingensia 26). Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Hill, Eugen
   2013 Historical phonology in service of subgrouping: Two laws of final syllables in the common prehistory of Baltic and Slavonic. Baltistica48. 161–204. doi: 10.15388/Baltistica.48.2.2170
   https://doi.org/10.15388/Baltistica.48.2.2170 [Google Scholar]
7. Igartua, Iván
   2005 Origen y evolución de la flexión nominal eslava. Bilbao: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Igartua, Iván
   2009 Morphological effects of feminine animacy in 16th century Sorbian. Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie66(1). 61–74.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Igartua, Iván
   2016 Review ofHow 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 Linguistics6(1). 114–123.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Krys´ko, Vadim B.
    1994 Razvitie kategorii oduševlënnosti v istorii russkogo jazyka. Moscow: Lyceum.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Meillet, Antoine
    1897 Recherches sur l’emploi du génitif-accusatif en vieux-slave. Paris: Bouillon.
    [Google Scholar]
12. 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]
13. Olander, Thomas
    2010 Proto-Indo-European final nasals in Slavic. Scando-Slavica56. 84–98. doi: 10.1080/00806765.2010.483778
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00806765.2010.483778 [Google Scholar]
14. Olander, Thomas
    2012 Proto-Indo-European *-os in Slavic. Russian Linguistics36(3). 319–341. doi: 10.1007/s11185‑012‑9097‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-012-9097-z [Google Scholar]
15. Orr, Robert
    2000 Common Slavic nominal morphology: A new synthesis. Bloomington: Slavica.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Poljakov, Oleg
    1995 Das Problem der balto-slavischen Sprachgemeinschaft (Heidelberg Publikationen zur Slavistik. A. Linguistische Reihe 18). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Scholvin, Robert
    1877 Die Declination in den pannonisch-slovenischen Denkmälern des Altkirchenslavischen. Archiv für slavische Philologie2. 482–569.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Shields, Kenneth
    2010 Linguistic typology and the reconstruction of the Indo-European accusative plural. Emerita78(1). 33–42. doi: 10.3989/emerita.2010.v78.i1.323
    https://doi.org/10.3989/emerita.2010.v78.i1.323 [Google Scholar]
19. Villanueva Svensson, Miguel
    2015 Review ofProto-Slavic inflectional morphology: A comparative handbook, by Thomas Olander (2015) Kratylos60. 103–111.
    [Google Scholar]
20. 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]