Significance testing of the Altaic family

References

1. Barbançon, François , Steven N. Evans , Luay Nakhleh , Donald A. Ringe & Tandy Warnow
   2013 An experimental study comparing linguistic phylogenetic reconstruction methods. Diachronica30(2). 143–170. 10.1075/dia.30.2.01bar
   https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.30.2.01bar [Google Scholar]
2. Baxter, William H.
   1998 Response to Oswalt and Ringe. In Joseph Salmons & Brian Joseph (eds.), Nostratic: Sifting the evidence, 217–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.142.12bax
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.142.12bax [Google Scholar]
3. Baxter, William H. & Alexis Manaster Ramer
   2000 Beyond lumping and splitting: Probabilistic issues in historical linguistics. InColin Renfrew, April McMahon & Larry Trask (eds.), Time depth in historical linguistics167–188. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bomhard, Allan R.
   1996 Indo-European and the Nostratic hypothesis. Charleston: Signum Desktop Publishing.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bomhard, Allan R.
   2008 Reconstructing Proto-Nostratic: Comparative phonology, morphology and vocabulary. Leiden: Brill.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bomhard, Allan R.
   2011 The Nostratic hypothesis in 2011: Trends and issues. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Comrie, Bernard
   1981 The languages of the Soviet Union. Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Comrie, Bernard
   1998 Regular sound correspondences and long-distance genetic comparison. In Joseph Salmons & Brian Joseph (eds.), Nostratic: Sifting the evidence, 271–276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.142.16com
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.142.16com [Google Scholar]
9. Doerfer, Gerhard
   1973 Lautgesetz und Zufall: Betrachtungen zum Omnicomparatismus. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Dolgopolsky, Aaron B.
    1986 A probabilistic hypothesis concerning the oldest relationships among the language families in Northern Eurasia. In Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin & Thomas L. Markey (eds.), Typology, relationship and time, 27–50. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Dybo, Anna & George Starostin
    2008 In defence of the comparative method, or the end of the Vovin controversy. Papers of the Institute of Oriental and Classical Studies19.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Georg, Stefan
    1999 Haupt und Glieder der Altaischen Hypothese: die Körperteilbezeichnungen im Türkischen, Mongolischen und Tungusischen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher16. 143–182.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Georg, Stefan
    2008 Review article of Martine Robbeets, 2005, Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic?Bochumer Jahrbuch zur Ostasienforschung32. 247–278.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Greenberg, Joseph H.
    1957 Essays in linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hangin, John G. , John R. Krueger & Robert G. Service
    1986 A modern Mongolian-English dictionary. Indiana University, Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Hock, Hans Henrich & Brian D. Joseph
    1996 Language change, and language relationship. An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Illič-Svityč, Vladislav Markovič
    1971 Opyt sravnenija nostratičeskych jazykov. Moscow: Nauka.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Kassian, Alexei , Mikhail Zhivlov & George Starostin
    2015 Proto-Indo-European-Uralic comparison from the probabilistic point of view. The Journal of Indo-European Studies43(3–4). 301–347.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Kessler, Brett
    2001 The significance of word lists. Stanford, California: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Kessler, Brett
    2007 Word similarity metrics and multilateral comparison. InProceedings of Ninth Meeting of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Morphology and Phonology, 6–14. Association for Computational Linguistics. 10.3115/1626516.1626518
    https://doi.org/10.3115/1626516.1626518 [Google Scholar]
21. Kessler, Brett
    2015 Response to Kassian et al., 2015, Proto-Indo-European-Uralic comparison from the probabilistic point of view. Journal of Indo-European Studies43(3–4). 357–367.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kessler, Brett & Annukka Lehtonen
    2006 Multilateral comparison and significance testing of the Indo-Uralic question. In Peter Forster & Colin Renfrew (eds.), Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, 33–42. Cambridge, England: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Li, Gertraude Roth
    2000 Manchu: A textbook for reading documents. Manoa: University of Hawaii Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Ligeti, Lajos
    1960 Les anciens éléments mongols dans le mandchou. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae10(3). 231–248.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Longobardi, Giuseppe , Cristina Guardiano , Giuseppina Silvestri , Alessio Boattini & Andrea Ceolin
    2013 Toward a syntactic phylogeny of modern Indo-European languages. Journal of Historical Linguistics3(1). 122–152. 10.1075/jhl.3.1.07lon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.3.1.07lon [Google Scholar]
26. Longobardi, Giuseppe , Andrea Ceolin , Luca Bortolussi , Cristina Guardiano , Monica Alexandrina Irimia , Dimitris Michelioudakis , Nina Radkevich & Andrea Sgarro
    2016 Mathematical modeling of grammatical diversity supports the historical reality of formal syntax. InProceedings of the Leiden Workshop on Capturing Phylogenetic Algorithms for Linguistics, Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Manaster Ramer, Alexis & Paul Sidwell
    1997 The truth about Strahlenberg’s classification of the languages of Northeastern Eurasia. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne87. 139–160.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Menges, Karl Heinrich
    1975 Altajische Studien: II. Japanisch und Altajisch, vol.41, 3. Steiner Franz Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Miller, Roy Andrew
    1971 Japanese and the other Altaic languages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Miller, Roy Andrew
    1996 Languages and History: Japanese, Korean, and Altaic. Bangkok: White Orchid Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Nichols, Johanna
    1996 The Comparative Method as Heuristic. In Mark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 39–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Norman, Jerry
    1978 A concise Manchu-English lexicon. University of Washington.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Oswalt, Robert L.
    1970 The detection of remote linguistic relationships. Computer Studies in the Humanities and Verbal Behavior3(3). 117–129.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Oswalt, Robert L.
    1998 A probabilistic evaluation of North Eurasiatic Nostratic. In Joseph Salmons & Brian Joseph (eds.), Nostratic: Sifting the evidence, 199–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.142.11osw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.142.11osw [Google Scholar]
35. Poppe, Nicholas
    1960 Vergleichende Grammatik Der Altaischen Sprachen; Teil 1: Vergleichende Lautlehre. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Poppe, Nicholas
    1965 Introduction to Altaic Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Ramstedt, Gustav John
    1957 Introduction to Altaic linguistics. Moscow: Publishing House of Foreign. lit.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Redhouse, James
    1968 New Redhouse Turkish-English Dictionary. Publications Department of the American Board.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Ringe, Donald A.
    1992 On calculating the factor of chance in language comparison. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society82(1). 1–110. 10.2307/1006563
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1006563 [Google Scholar]
40. Ringe, Donald A.
    1998 Probabilistic evidence for Indo-Uralic. In Joseph Salmons & Brian Joseph (eds.), Nostratic: Sifting the evidence, 153–197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.142.10rin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.142.10rin [Google Scholar]
41. Ringe, Donald A.
    2015 Response to Kassian et al., 2015, Proto-Indo-European-Uralic comparison from the probabilistic point of view. Journal of Indo-European Studies43(3–4). 348–356.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Robbeets, Martine
    2005 Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic?, vol.64. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Robbeets, Martine
    2015 Diachrony of verb morphology: Japanese and the Transeurasian languages, vol.291. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110399943
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110399943 [Google Scholar]
44. Ross, Alan S. C.
    1950 Philological probability problems. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological)19–59. 10.1111/j.2517‑6161.1950.tb00040.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1950.tb00040.x [Google Scholar]
45. Rozycki, William
    1994 Mongol elements in Manchu, vol.157. Indiana University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Salmons, Joseph & Brian Joseph
    1998 Nostratic: Sifting the evidence, vol.142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.142
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.142 [Google Scholar]
47. Sinor, Denis
    1988 The Uralic languages. Description, history and foreign influences. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Starostin, Sergei
    1991 On the hypothesis of a genetic connection between the Sino-Tibetan languages and the Yeniseian and North Caucasian languages. In Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin (ed.), Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages, 12–41. Ann Arbor: Brockmeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Starostin, Sergei , Anna Dybo , Oleg Mudrak & Ilya Gruntov
    2003 Etymological dictionary of the Altaic languages. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Swadesh, Morris
    1955 Towards greater accuracy in lexicostatistic dating. International Journal of American Linguistics21(2). 121–137. 10.1086/464321
    https://doi.org/10.1086/464321 [Google Scholar]
51. Swadesh, Morris
    1971 The origin and diversification of language. Piscataway, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Unger, Marshall J.
    1990 Summary report of the Altaic panel. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs45. 479–482.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Villemin, François
    1983 Un essai de détection des origines du japonais à partir de deux méthodes statistiques. In Barron Brainerd (ed). Historical linguistics, 116–135. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Vovin, Alexander
    2005 The end of the Altaic controversy. In memory of Gerhard Doerfer. Central Asiatic Journal49(1). 71–132.
    [Google Scholar]