Using phonotactics to reconstruct degrammaticalization

References

1. Ahern, Christopher & Robin Clark
   2017 Conflict, cheap talk, and Jespersen’s cycle. Semantics and Pragmatics10. doi:  10.3765/sp.10.11
   https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.10.11 [Google Scholar]
2. Auwera, Johan van der
   2002 More thoughts on degrammaticalization. InIlse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization, 19–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.04auw
   https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.04auw [Google Scholar]
3. Balles, Irene
   2008 Principles of syntactic reconstruction and “morphology as paleosyntax”: The case of some Indo-European secondary verbal formations. InGisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach (eds.), Principles of syntactic reconstruction. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302), 161–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.302.08bal
   https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.302.08bal [Google Scholar]
4. Barðdal, Jóhanna
   2013 Construction-based historical-comparative reconstruction. InThomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 438–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols
   2007 Inflectional morphology. InTimothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol.III: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 169–240. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511618437.003
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618437.003 [Google Scholar]
6. Börjars, Kersti & Nigel Vincent
   2011 Grammaticalization and directionality. InHeiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 163–176. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bybee, Joan
   2001 Phonology and language use. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 94.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511612886
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612886 [Google Scholar]
8. Bybee, Joan
   2006 From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language82(4). 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
   https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
9. Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
   1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Campbell, Lyle & Alice C. Harris
    2002 Syntactic reconstruction and demythologizing “Myths and the prehistory of grammars.” Journal of Linguistics38(3). 599–618. doi:  10.1017/S0022226702001706
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226702001706 [Google Scholar]
11. Carroll, Matthew
    2016 The Ngkolmpu language, with special reference to distributed exponence. Canberra: Australian National University Ph.D. dissertation.
12. Craig, Colette
    1991 Ways to go in Rama: A case study in polygrammaticalization. InElizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization II. (Typological Studies in Language 19), vol.II: Focus on Types of Grammatical Markers, 455–492. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.2.20cra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.20cra [Google Scholar]
13. Croft, William
    2001 Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
14. Dahl, Östen
    2001 Inflationary effects in language and elsewhere. InJoan Bybee & Paul J. Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. (Typological Studies in Language 45), 471–480. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.24dah
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.24dah [Google Scholar]
15. Daniels, Don
    2015 A reconstruction of Proto-Sogeram: Phonology, lexicon, and morphosyntax. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California, Santa Barbara Ph.D. dissertation.
16. Daniels, Don
    2016 Magɨ: An undocumented language of Papua New Guinea. Oceanic Linguistics55(1). 199–224. 10.1353/ol.2016.0004
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2016.0004 [Google Scholar]
17. Daniels, Don
    2017a Gants is a Sogeram language. Language and Linguistics in Melanesia35. 82–93.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Daniels, Don
    2017b A method for mitigating the problem of borrowing in syntactic reconstruction. Studies in Language41(3). 577–614. 10.1075/sl.41.3.02dan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.41.3.02dan [Google Scholar]
19. Daniels, Don
    2018 Papuan Languages Collection. Archival collection, 960 items. Pacific and Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures (PARADISEC). catalog.paradisec.org.au/collections/DD1
20. Daniels, Don, Danielle Barth & Wolfgang Barth
    . Forthcoming. Subgrouping the Sogeram languages: A critical appraisal of historical glottometry. Journal of Historical Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Daniels, Don & Joseph D. Brooks
    . Forthcoming. The history of *=a: Contact and reconstruction in northeast New Guinea. Journal of Language Contact.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Evans, Nicholas & Stephen C. Levinson
    2009 The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences32(5). 429–448. doi:  10.1017/S0140525X0999094X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999094X [Google Scholar]
23. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Harris, Alice C.
    2008 Reconstruction in syntax: Reconstruction of patterns. InGisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach (eds.), Principles of syntactic reconstruction. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302), 73–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.302.05har
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.302.05har [Google Scholar]
25. Harris, Kyle
    . n.d.Nend texts. Electronic files, Pioneer Bible Translators.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Harris, Kyle
    1990 Nend grammar essentials. InJohn R. Roberts (ed.), Two grammatical studies (Data Papers on Papua New Guinea Languages 37), 73–156. Ukarumpa: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Haspelmath, Martin
    1999 Why is grammaticalization irreversible?Linguistics37. 1043–1068. 10.1515/ling.37.6.1043
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.6.1043 [Google Scholar]
28. Haspelmath, Martin
    2004 On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization. InOlga Fischer, Muriel Norde & Harry Perridon (eds.), Up and down the cline: The nature of grammaticalization, 17–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.59.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.59.03has [Google Scholar]
29. Heine, Bernd
    2003a On degrammaticalization. InBarry J. Blake & Kate Burridge (eds.), Historical linguistics 2001: Selected papers from the 15th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Melbourne, 13–17 August 2001, 163–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.237.12hei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.237.12hei [Google Scholar]
30. Heine, Bernd
    2003b Grammaticalization. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 575–601. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch18
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch18 [Google Scholar]
31. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Frederike Hünnemeyer
    1991 Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
    2002 World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613463
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463 [Google Scholar]
33. Heine, Bernd & Kyung-An Song
    2011 On the grammaticalization of personal pronouns. Journal of Linguistics47(3). 587–630. doi:  10.1017/S0022226711000016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226711000016 [Google Scholar]
34. Hetzron, Robert
    1976 Two principles of genetic reconstruction. Lingua38(2). 89–108. 10.1016/0024‑3841(76)90074‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(76)90074-7 [Google Scholar]
35. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    2004 Lexicalization and grammaticization: Opposite or orthogonal?InWalter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale
    2013 Construction Grammar: Introduction. InThomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 1–12. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Hopper, Paul J.
    1991 On some principles of grammaticization. InElizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization. (Typological Studies in Language 19), 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
38. Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2003 Grammaticalization. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
39. Joseph, Brian D.
    2014 What counts as (an instance of) grammaticalization?Folia Linguistica48(2). 361–383. doi:  10.1515/flin.2014.013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2014.013 [Google Scholar]
40. Koch, Harold
    1996 Reconstruction in morphology. InMark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 218–263. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Kulick, Don
    1992 Language shift and cultural reproduction: Socialization, self, and syncretism in a Papua New Guinean village. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Lehmann, Christian
    2002 Thoughts on grammaticalization. 2nd ed.Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Lightfoot, David W.
    2002 Myths and the prehistory of grammars. Journal of Linguistics38(1). 113–136. 10.1017/S0022226701001268
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226701001268 [Google Scholar]
44. Matsumoto, Yoshiko, Bernard Comrie & Peter Sells
    (eds.) 2017 Noun-modifying clause constructions in languages of Eurasia: Rethinking theoretical and geographical boundaries. (Typological Studies in Language 116.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Mengden, Ferdinand von
    2008 Reconstructing complex structures: A typological perspective. InGisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach (eds.), Principles of syntactic reconstruction. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 302), 97–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.302.06men
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.302.06men [Google Scholar]
46. Narrog, Heiko & Bernd Heine
    (eds.) 2011 The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Nevis, Joel A.
    1986 Decliticization and deaffixation in Saame: Abessive taga. InBrian D. Joseph (ed.), Studies on language change. (The Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 34), 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Newmeyer, Frederick J.
    1998 Language form and language function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Norde, Muriel
    2009 Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199207923.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199207923.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
50. Norde, Muriel
    2010 Degrammaticalization: Three common controversies. InKaterina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler & Ekkehard König (eds.), Grammaticalization: Current views and issues, 123–150. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.119.08nor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.119.08nor [Google Scholar]
51. Norde, Muriel
    2011 Degrammaticalization. InHeiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 475–487. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Pawley, Andrew
    1995 C. L. Voorhoeve and the Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis. InConnie Baak, Mary Bakker & Dick van der Meij (eds.), Tales from a concave world: Liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve, 83–123. Leiden: Leiden University.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Pawley, Andrew
    1998 The Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis: A reassessment. InJelle Miedema, Cecilia Odé & Rien A. C. Dam (eds.), Perspectives on the Bird’s Head of Irian Jaya, Indonesia: Proceedings of the conference, Leiden, 13–17 October 1997, 655–690. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Pawley, Andrew
    2005 The chequered career of the Trans New Guinea hypothesis: Recent research and its implications. InAndrew Pawley, Robert Attenborough, Jack Golson & Robin Hide (eds.), Papuan pasts: Cultural, linguistic and biological histories of Papuan-speaking peoples, 67–107. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Pawley, Andrew
    2012 How reconstructible is Proto Trans New Guinea? Problems, progress, prospects. InHarald Hammarström & Wilco van den Heuvel (eds.), History, contact and classification of Papuan languages. (Special issue of Language and Linguistics in Melanesia), 88–164.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Pawley, Andrew & Harald Hammarström
    2017 The Trans New Guinea family. InBill Palmer (ed.), The languages and linguistics of the New Guinea area: A comprehensive guide, 21–195. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110295252‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110295252-002 [Google Scholar]
57. Pelkey, Jamin
    2011 A Phula comparative lexicon: Phola, Phuza, Muji, Phowa, Azha. SIL International.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Reinöhl, Uta & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
    2017 Renewal: A figure of speech or a process sui generis?Language93(2). 381–413. doi:  10.1353/lan.2017.0018
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0018 [Google Scholar]
59. Ross, Malcolm
    2000 A preliminary subgrouping of the Madang languages based on pronouns. Unpublished ms, Australian National University.
60. Ross, Malcolm
    2005 Pronouns as a preliminary diagnostic for grouping Papuan languages. InAndrew Pawley, Robert Attenborough, Jack Golson & Robin Hide (eds.), Papuan pasts: Cultural, linguistic and biological histories of Papuan-speaking peoples, 15–65. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Ross, Malcolm
    2015 The argument indexing of Early Austronesian verbs: A reconstructional myth?InDag T. T. Haug (ed.), Historical linguistics 2013: Selected papers from the21st International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Oslo, 5–9 August 2013, 257–279. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
62. Sweeney, Mike
    . n.d.Mum texts. Electronic files, Pioneer Bible Translators.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
    2013 Constructionalization and constructional changes. (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 6.) Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
64. Viti, Carlotta
    2015 On degrammaticalization: Controversial points and possible explanations. Folia Linguistica49(2). 381–419. 10.1515/flin‑2015‑0014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2015-0014 [Google Scholar]
65. Wade, Martha
    1989 A survey of the grammatical structures and semantic functions of the Apalɨ (Emerum) language. Ms, Pioneer Bible Translators.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Walkden, George
    2013 The correspondence problem in syntactic reconstruction. Diachronica30(1). 95–122. doi:  10.1075/dia.30.1.04wal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.30.1.04wal [Google Scholar]
67. Wilkins, David P.
    1996 Natural tendencies of semantic change and the search for cognates. InMark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method reviewed: Regularity and irregularity in language change, 264–304. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Willis, David
    2010 Degrammaticalization and obsolescent morphology: Evidence from Slavonic. InKaterina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler & Ekkehard König (eds.), Grammaticalization: Current views and issues, 151–177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.119.09wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.119.09wil [Google Scholar]
69. Ylikoski, Jussi
    2016 Degrammaticalization in North Saami: Development of adpositions, adverbs and a free lexical noun from inflectional and derivational suffixes. Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen40. 113–173.
    [Google Scholar]
70. Z’graggen, John A.
    1971 Classificatory and typological studies in languages of the Madang District (Pacific Linguistics C 19). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Z’graggen, John A.
    1975a The Madang-Adelbert Range subphylum. InStephen A. Wurm (ed.), Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene. (Pacific Linguistics C 38), 569–612. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Z’graggen, John A.
    1975b The languages of the Madang District, Papua New Guinea. (Pacific Linguistics B 41.) Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
73. Z’graggen, John A.
    1980 A comparative word list of the Southern Adelbert Range languages, Madang Province, Papua New Guinea. (Pacific Linguistics D 33.) Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]