1887
Volume 39, Issue 5
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Grammaticalization is characterized by robust directional asymmetries (e.g., Kuteva et al. 2019). For instance, body-part nominals develop into spatial adpositions, minimizers develop into negation markers and subject pronouns become agreement markers. Changes in the opposite direction are either rare or unattested (Garrett 2012: 52). Such robust cross-linguistic asymmetries have led some scholars to reify grammaticalization trajectories as universal mechanistic forces (Heath 1998: 729). One consequence of such a view is that the ambient morphosyntax of a language has little or even no relevance for grammaticalization. This paper uses Bayesian phylogenetic methods to demonstrate the critical role that pre-existing morphosyntax can play in grammaticalization. The empirical basis for this claim is the grammaticalization of definite and indefinite articles in the history of Indo-European: indefinite articles developed at a faster rate among languages in which a definite article had already emerged compared to those lacking a definite article. The two changes are thus correlated. The results of this case study suggest that there is much more to be learned about when and why grammaticalization occurs by investigating its relationship to the pre-existing linguistic system (cf. Reinöhl and Himmelmann 2017: 381).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20033.gol
2022-06-01
2024-03-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbott, Barbara
    1999 Support for a unique theory of definite descriptions. InTanya Matthews & Devon Strolovitch (eds.), Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory91. 1–15. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2008 Issues in the semantics and pragmatics of definite descriptions in English. InJeanette K. Gundel & Nancy Hedberg (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary perspectives, 61–72. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331639.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331639.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  3. Abel, Fritz
    1971L’adjectif démonstratif dans la langue de la Bible latine : Étude sur la formation des systèmes déictiques et de l’article défini des langues romanes. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Adams, James N. & Nigel Vincent
    (eds.) 2016Early and late Latin: Continuity or change?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781316450826
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316450826 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aebischer, Paul
    1948 Contribution à la protohistoire des articles ille et ipse dans les langues romanes. Cultura Neolatina81. 181–203.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Axenov, Serge
    2006The Balochi language of Turkmenistan: A corpus-based grammatical description. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bailyn, John F.
    2012The syntax of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511984686
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511984686 [Google Scholar]
  8. Baldinger, Kurt
    1968 Post- und Prädeterminierung im Französischen. InKurt Baldinger (ed.), Festschrift Walther von Wartburg zum 80. Geburtstag, 87–106. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bashir, Elena
    2009 Wakhi. InGernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 825–858. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Becker, Laura
    2018 Articles in the world’s languages. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität Leipzig. https://laurabecker.gitlab.io/papers/articles-manuscript.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2019The crosslinguistic distribution and development of articles. Universität Bamberg. https://laurabecker.gitlab.io/presentations/pres-bamberg.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Berger, Tilman
    2007 Tendencies of the evolution of a definite article in the Sorbian languages. Slavic Linguistic Society. https://homepages.uni-tuebingen.de/tilman.berger/Handouts/BerlinSLS2007.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bielenstein, August Johann Gottfried
    1863Lettische Grammatik. Mitau: Fr. Lucas.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Birner, Betty J. & Gregory Ward
    1994 Uniqueness, familiarity, and the definite article in English. InSusanne Gahl, Andy Dolby & Christopher Johnson (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 93–102. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v20i1.1479
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v20i1.1479 [Google Scholar]
  15. Börjars, Kersti, Pauline Harries & Nigel Vincent
    2016 Growing syntax: The development of a DP in North Germanic. Language92(1). e1–e37. 10.1353/lan.2016.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0002 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr.
    2009An introduction to old Frisian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.147
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.147 [Google Scholar]
  17. Breu, Walter
    2012 The grammaticalization of an indefinite article in Slavic micro-languages. InBjörn Wiemer (ed.), Grammatical replication and borrowability in language contact, 275–322. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110271973.275
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110271973.275 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bybee, Joan L.
    1988 The diachronic dimension in explanation. InJohn A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 350–379. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2006 Language change and universals. InRicardo Mairal & Juana Gil (eds.), Linguistic universals, 179–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511618215.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618215.009 [Google Scholar]
  20. Carlier, Anne & Béatrice Lamiroy
    2018 The emergence of the grammatical paradigm of nominal determiners in French and in Romance: Comparative and diachronic perspectives. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique63(2). 141–166. 10.1017/cnj.2017.43
    https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2017.43 [Google Scholar]
  21. Carlier, Anne & Walter de Mulder
    2010 The emergence of the definite article: ille in competition with ipse in Late Latin. InHubert Cuyckens, Lieven van de Lanotte & Kristin Davidse (eds.), Subjectifcation, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 241–275. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110226102.3.241
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.3.241 [Google Scholar]
  22. Carling, Gerd
    (ed.) 2019The Mouton atlas of languages and cultures: Europe and west, central, and south Asia, vol.11. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110367416
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110367416 [Google Scholar]
  23. Cathcart, Chundra Aroor
    2018 Modeling linguistic evolution: A look under the hood. Linguistics Vanguard4(1). 1–11. 10.1515/lingvan‑2017‑0043
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2017-0043 [Google Scholar]
  24. Cathcart, Chundra Aroor, Gerd Carling, Filip Larsson, Niklas Johansson & Erich R. Round
    2018 Areal pressure in grammatical evolution: An Indo-European case study. Diachronica35(1). 134. 10.1075/dia.16035.cat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.16035.cat [Google Scholar]
  25. Cathcart, Chundra Aroor, Andreas Hölzl, Gerhard Jäger, Paul Widmer & Balthasar Bickel
    2020 Numeral classifiers and number marking in Indo-Iranian. Language Dynamics and Change11(2). 1–53. 10.1163/22105832‑bja10013
    https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-bja10013 [Google Scholar]
  26. Chandralal, Dileep
    2010Sinhala. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/loall.15
    https://doi.org/10.1075/loall.15 [Google Scholar]
  27. Chang, Will, Chundra Aroor Cathcart, David P. Hall & Andrew J. Garrett
    2015a Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis. Language91(1). 194–244. 10.1353/lan.2015.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0005 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2015b Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis: Supplementary materials. Language91(1). 10.1353/lan.2015.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0007 [Google Scholar]
  29. Christophersen, Paul
    1939The articles: A study of their theory and use in English. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Clackson, James P. T.
    2008 Classical Armenian. InRoger D. Woodard (ed.), The ancient languages of Asia Minor, 124–144. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486845.014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486845.014 [Google Scholar]
  31. Crisma, Paola
    2011 The emergence of the definite article in English: A contact-induced change?InPetra Sleeman & Harry Perridon (eds.), The noun phrase in Romance and Germanic: Structure, variation, and change, 175–192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.171.13cri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.171.13cri [Google Scholar]
  32. Cysouw, Michael
    2011 Understanding transition probabilities. Linguistic Typology15(2). 415–431. 10.1515/lity.2011.028
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.028 [Google Scholar]
  33. Dahl, Östen
    2003 Definite articles in Scandinavian: Competing grammaticalization processes in standard and non-standard varieties. InBernd Kortmann (ed.), Dialectology meets typology, 147–180. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197327.147
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197327.147 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2004The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.71
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.71 [Google Scholar]
  35. Dryer, Matthew S.
    2013a Definite articles. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online, Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://wals.info/chapter/37
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2013b Indefinite articles. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online, Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://wals.info/chapter/38
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2014 Competing methods for uncovering linguistic diversity: The case of definite and indefinite articles (Commentary on Davis, Gillon and Matthewson). Language90(4). 232–249. 10.1353/lan.2014.0070
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0070 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dum-Tragut, Jasmine
    2009Armenian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/loall.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/loall.14 [Google Scholar]
  39. Dunn, Michael, Tonya Kim Dewey, Carlee Arnett, Thórhallur Eythórsson & Jóhanna Barðdal
    2017 Dative sickness: A phylogenetic analysis of argument structure evolution in Germanic. Language93(1). e1–e22. 10.1353/lan.2017.0012
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0012 [Google Scholar]
  40. Dunn, Michael, Simon J. Greenhill, Stephen C. Levinson & Russell D. Gray
    2011 Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature4731. 79–82. 10.1038/nature09923
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09923 [Google Scholar]
  41. Ebert, Karen H.
    1971aReferenz, Sprachsituation und die bestimmten Artikel in einem nordfriesischen Dialekt, vol.41. Bredstedt: Nordfriisk Instituut.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 1971b Zwei Formen des bestimmten Artikels. InDieter Wunderlich (ed.), Probleme und Fortschritte der Transformationsgrammatik: Referate des 4. Linguistischen Kolloquiums Berlin 6. bis 10. Oktober 1969, 159–174. München: Hueber.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Edelman, Joy I. & Leila R. Dodykhudoeva
    2009a The Pamir languages. InGernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 773–786. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 2009b Shughni. InGernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 787–824. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Epstein, Richard
    2002 The definite article, accessibility, and the construction of discourse referents. Cognitive Linguistics12(4). 333–378. 10.1515/cogl.2002.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2002.007 [Google Scholar]
  46. Erschler, David
    2019 A new argument for existence of the DP in languages without articles. Journal of Linguistics55(4). 879–887. 10.1017/S0022226719000288
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226719000288 [Google Scholar]
  47. Estrada Fernández, Zarina
    1996Pima Bajo. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Faarlund, Jan Terje
    2004The syntax of old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Flick, Johanna
    2019 „Alte” Daten, neue Methoden. Jahrbuch für Germanistische Sprachgeschichte10(1). 151–175. 10.1515/jbgsg‑2019‑0010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jbgsg-2019-0010 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2020Die Entwicklung des Definitartikels im Althochdeutschen. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.3932780
    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3932780 [Google Scholar]
  51. Friedman, Victor A. & Brian D. Joseph
    2022The Balkan languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Fruyt, Michèle
    2003 Anaphore, cataphore et déixis dans l’Itinerarium d’Egérie. InHeikki Solin, Martti Leiwo & Hilla Halla-Aho (eds.), Latin vulgaire / latin tardif: Actes du vie colloque international sur le latin vulgaire et tardif, Helsinki, 29 août-2 septembre 2000, vol.61, 99–119. Hildesheim: Olms.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Gair, James W.
    2003 Sinhala. InGeorge Cardona & Dhanesh Jain (eds.), The Indo-Aryan languages, 766–817. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Garland, Jennifer
    2006 Morphological typology and the complexity of nominal morphology in Sinhala. InRobert Englebretson & Carol Genetti (eds.), Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics171. 1–19. Santa Barbara: Department of Linguistics at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Garrett, Andrew J.
    2012 The historical syntax problem: Reanalysis and directionality. InDianne Jonas, John Whitman & Andrew J. Garrett (eds.), Grammatical change: Origins, nature, outcomes, 52–72. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. van Gelderen, Elly
    2007 The definiteness cycle in Germanic. Journal of Germanic Linguistics19(4). 275–308. 10.1017/S147054270700013X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S147054270700013X [Google Scholar]
  57. 2011The linguistic cycle: Language change and the language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199756056.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199756056.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  58. Gilbertson, George Waters
    1923The Balochi language: A grammar and manual. Hertford: Stephen Austin & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Giusti, Giuliana
    2001 The birth of a functional category: From Latin ille to the Romance article and personal pronoun. InGuglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current studies in ltalian syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 157–171. Amsterdam: North Holland.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Giusti, Giuliana & Rossella Iovino
    2016 Latin as a split-DP language. Studia Linguistica70(3). 221–249. 10.1111/stul.12045
    https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12045 [Google Scholar]
  61. Goldstein, David M.
    2022 The old Irish article. Journal of Celtic Linguistics231. 1–34. 10.16922/jcl.23.2
    https://doi.org/10.16922/jcl.23.2 [Google Scholar]
  62. Greenberg, Joseph H.
    1966Language universals: With special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 1978 How does a language acquire gender markers?InJoseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of human language31. 47–82. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Guardiano, Cristina
    2012 Parametric changes in the history of the Greek article. InDianne Jonas, John Whitman & Andrew J. Garrett (eds.), Grammatical change: Origins, nature, outcomes, 179197. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199582624.003.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199582624.003.0009 [Google Scholar]
  65. 2013 The Greek definite article across time. Studies in Greek Linguistics331. 76–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Haig, Geoffrey L. J.
    2016 Deconstructing Iranian ergativity. InJessica Coon, Diane Massam & Lisa Travis (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ergativity, 465–500. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Haspelmath, Martin
    2018 Revisiting the anasynthetic spiral. InHeiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), Grammaticalization from a typological perspective, 97–115. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198795841.003.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795841.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
  68. Hawkins, John A.
    1978Definiteness and indefniteness: A study in reference and grammaticality. London: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 1991 On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal ofLinguistics271. 405–442. 10.1017/S0022226700012731
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012731 [Google Scholar]
  70. 2004Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  71. Haynie, Hannah J. & Claire Bowern
    2016 Phylogenetic approach to the evolution of color term systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America113(48). 13666–13671. 10.1073/pnas.1613666113
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1613666113 [Google Scholar]
  72. Heath, Jeffrey
    1998 Hermit crabs: Formal renewal of morphology by phonologically mediated affix substitution. Language741. 728–759. 10.2307/417001
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417001 [Google Scholar]
  73. Heim, Irene
    1991 Artikel und Definitheit. InArnim von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung / An international handbook of contemporary research, 487–535. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110126969.7.487
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.7.487 [Google Scholar]
  74. 2011 Definiteness and indefiniteness. InKlaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul H. Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning21. 996–1025. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Heine, Bernd
    1997Cognitive foundations of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
    2011 The areal dimension of grammaticalization. InBernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 291–301. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  77. Hertzenberg, Mari Johanne Bordal
    2015Third person reference in Late Latin: Demonstratives, definite articles and personal pronouns in the Itinerarium Egeriae. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110401943
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110401943 [Google Scholar]
  78. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    1997Deiktikon, Artikel, Nominalphrase: Zur Emergenz syntaktischer Struktur. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110929621
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110929621 [Google Scholar]
  79. Höhna, Sebastian, Michael J. Landis & Tracy A. Heath
    2017 Phylogenetic inference using RevBayes. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics57(1). 6.16.1–6.16.34. 10.1002/cpbi.22
    https://doi.org/10.1002/cpbi.22 [Google Scholar]
  80. Höhna, Sebastian, Michael J. Landis, Tracy A. Heath, Bastien Boussau, Nicolas Lartillot, Brian R. Moore, John P. Huelsenbeck & Fredrik Ronquist
    2016 Revbayes: Bayesian phylogenetic inference using graphical models and an interactive model-specification language. Systematic Biology65(4). 726–736. 10.1093/sysbio/syw021
    https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw021 [Google Scholar]
  81. Holvoet, Axel
    2018 The syntax of Baltic. InJared S. Klein, Brian D. Joseph & Matthias A. Fritz (eds.), Handbook of comparative and historical Indo-European linguistics: An international handbook of language comparison and the linguistic reconstruction of Indo-European (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 41) 31. 1668–1681. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110542431‑011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110542431-011 [Google Scholar]
  82. Horrocks, Geoffrey C.
    2010Greek: A history of the language and its speakers. Malden, MA: Blackwell 2nd edn. 10.1002/9781444318913
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318913 [Google Scholar]
  83. van der Horst, Joop
    2008Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Irslinger, Britta S.
    2013 Standard Average European and the western fringe: A reconsideration. Historische Sprachforschung126(1). 33–88. 10.13109/hisp.2013.126.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.13109/hisp.2013.126.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  85. Jäger, Gerhard
    2019a Computational historical linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics45 (3–4). 151–182. 10.1515/tl‑2019‑0011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2019-0011 [Google Scholar]
  86. 2019b Model evaluation in computational historical linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics45(3–4). 299–307. 10.1515/tl‑2019‑0020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2019-0020 [Google Scholar]
  87. Jahani, Carina & Agnes Korn
    2009 Balochi. InGernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 634–692. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Jasbi, Masoud
    2016 Three types of indefinites in Persian: Simple, complex, and antidefinite. InMary Moroney, Carol-Rose Little, Jacob Collard & Dan Burgdorf (eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, held at the University of Texas at Austin May 12–15, 2016, 244–263. Linguistic Society of America. 10.3765/salt.v26i0.3807
    https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3807 [Google Scholar]
  89. 2020 The meaning of the Persian object marker : What it is not, and what it (probably) is. InRichard K. Larson, Sedigheh Moradi & Vida Samiian (eds.), Advances in Iranian linguistics, 119–135. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.351.07jas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.351.07jas [Google Scholar]
  90. Kadmon, Nirit
    2001Formal pragmatics: Semantics, pragmatics, presupposition, and focus. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Keller, Rudolf Ernst
    1978The German language. London: Faber & Faber.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Kent, Roland G.
    1944 The Old Persian relative and article. Language201. 1–10. 10.2307/410376
    https://doi.org/10.2307/410376 [Google Scholar]
  93. Kiparsky, Paul
    2008 Universals constrain change; change results in typological generalizations. InJeff Good (ed.), Linguistic universals and language change, 23–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199298495.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199298495.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  94. Klein, Jared S.
    1996On personal deixis in classical Armenian: A study of the syntax and semantics of the n-, s-, and d-demonstratives in manuscripts E and M of the Old Armenian Gospels. Dettelbach: Röll.
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Korn, Agnes & Maryam Nourzaei
    2018 “Those were the hungry years”: A glimpse of Coastal Afro-Balochi. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society28(4). 661–695. 10.1017/S1356186318000238
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186318000238 [Google Scholar]
  96. Kovari, Geoffrey
    1984Studien zum germanischen Artikel: Entstehung und Verwendung des Artikels im Gotischen. Wien: Halosar.
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Kraiss, Andrew
    2014 The evolution of the definite article in Old High German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics26(2). 127–155. 10.1017/S1470542714000038
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542714000038 [Google Scholar]
  98. Kurzová-Jedličkova, Helena
    1963 Die Demonstrativa im Vulgärlatein (4.–6. Jahrhundert). Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae11(1–2). 121–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee
    2019World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press2nd edn. 10.1017/9781316479704
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316479704 [Google Scholar]
  100. Lakoff, Robin T.
    1972 Another look at drift. InRobert P. Stockwell & Ronald K. S. Macauley (eds.), Linguistic change and generative theory, 172–198. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Ledgeway, Adam
    2012From Latin to Romance: Morphosyntactic typology and change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584376.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584376.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  102. 2016 Functional categories. InAdam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds.), The Oxford guide to the Romance languages, 761–771. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199677108.003.0046
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199677108.003.0046 [Google Scholar]
  103. Leiss, Elisabeth
    2007 Covert patterns of definiteness/indefiniteness and aspectuality in Old Icelandic, Gothic and Old High German. InElisabeth Stark, Elisabeth Leiss & Werner Abraham (eds.), Nominal determination: Typology, context constraints and historical emergence, 73–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.89.06lei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.89.06lei [Google Scholar]
  104. Levinson, Stephen C., Simon J. Greenhill, Russell D. Gray & Michael Dunn
    2011 Universal typological dependencies should be detectable in the history of language families. Linguistic Typology15(2). 509–534. 10.1515/lity.2011.034
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.034 [Google Scholar]
  105. Löbner, Sebastian
    1985 Definites. Journal of Semantics4(4). 279–326. 10.1093/jos/4.4.279
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/4.4.279 [Google Scholar]
  106. 1998 Definite associative anaphora. InSimon Botley, Julia Glass, Tony McEnery & Andrew Wilson (eds.), Approaches to discourse anaphora: Proceedings of DAARC96 – Discourse Anaphora and Resolution Colloquium, Lancaster University July 17th-18th 1996, Lancaster: University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language.
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Lockwood, William B.
    1968Historical German syntax. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Lyons, Christopher
    1999Defniteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511605789
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605789 [Google Scholar]
  109. Mallory, James P. & Douglas Q. Adams
    2006The Oxford introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Manolessou, Io
    2001 The evolution of the demonstrative system in Greek. Journal of Greek Linguistics2(1). 119–148. 10.1075/jgl.2.05man
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jgl.2.05man [Google Scholar]
  111. Manolessou, Io & Geoffrey C. Horrocks
    2007 The development of the definite article in Greek. Studies in Greek Linguistics271. 224–236.
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Masica, Colin P.
    1986 Definiteness marking in South Asian languages. InBhadriraju Krishnamurti (ed.), South Asian languages: Structure, convergence and diglossia, 123–146. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
    [Google Scholar]
  113. 1991The Indo-Aryan languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Mathiassen, Terje
    1997A short grammar of Latvian. Columbus: Slavica.
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Matras, Yaron
    2002Romani. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486791
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486791 [Google Scholar]
  116. Matzinger, Joachim
    2006Der altalbanische Text Mbsuame e krështerë (Dottrina cristiana) des Lekë Matrënga von 1592: Eine Einführung in die albanische Sprachwissenschaft. Dettelbach: J. H. Röll.
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Maþiulis, Vytautas
    . n.d.Historical grammar of Old Prussian. donelaitis.vdu.lt/prussian/mazgr.pdf
  118. McColl Millar, Robert
    2000 Some suggestions for explaining the origin and development of the definite article in English: Grammaticalization in English. InOlga Fischer, Anette Rosenbach & Dieter Stein (eds.), Pathways of change, 275–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.53.14mil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.14mil [Google Scholar]
  119. Miller, D. Gary
    2018The Oxford Gothic grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Moravcsik, Edith A.
    1969 Determination. InWorking Papers in Language Universals11. 63–98. Stanford: Stanford University.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. de Mulder, Walter & Anne Carlier
    2011 The grammaticalization of definite articles. InBernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 522–534. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0042
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0042 [Google Scholar]
  122. Müth, Angelika
    2011 Categories of definiteness in Classical Armenian. InErik Welo (ed.), Indo-European syntax and pragmatics: Contrastive approaches, 11–25. Oslo: University of Oslo. 10.5617/osla.37
    https://doi.org/10.5617/osla.37 [Google Scholar]
  123. Napoli, Maria
    2009 Aspects of definiteness in Greek. Studies in Language33(3). 569–611. 10.1075/sl.33.3.03nap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.33.3.03nap [Google Scholar]
  124. 2019 Functions of the definite article from classical Greek to New Testament Greek. InDaniel King (ed.), The article in post-Classical Greek, 15–55. Dallas: SIL International.
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Nichols, Johanna
    2003 Diversity and stability in language. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 283–310. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch5
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch5 [Google Scholar]
  126. Nocentini, Alberto
    1990 L’uso dei dimostrativi nella Peregrinatio Egeriae e la genesi dell’articolo romanzo. InAlberto Fatucchi (ed.), Atti del convegno internazionale sulla Peregrinatio Egeriae, 137–158. Arezzo: Accademia Petrarca.
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Pagel, Mark
    1994 Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: A general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences255(1342). 37–45. 10.1098/rspb.1994.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1994.0006 [Google Scholar]
  128. Pagel, Mark & Andrew Meade
    2006 Bayesian analysis of correlated evolution of discrete characters by reversible-jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo. The American Naturalist167(6). 808–825. 10.1086/503444
    https://doi.org/10.1086/503444 [Google Scholar]
  129. Paliga, Sorin
    2019 The definite article as a reference point in defining the Balkansprachbund. InValeriu Sîrbu, Alexandra Comsa & Dumitru Hortopan (eds.), Digging in the past of Old Europe: Studies in honor of Christian Schuster at his 60th anniversary, TârguJiu: Editura Istros a Muzeului Brăilei “Carol I”.
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Paranavitana, Senarath
    1956Sigiri graffiti: Being Sinhalese verses of the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries, vol.11. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Paul, Ludwig
    1998Zazaki: Grammatik und Versuch einer Dialektologie. Reichert.
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 2009 Zazaki. InGernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 545–586. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Pereltsvaig, Asya
    2007 The universality of DP: A view from Russian. Studia Linguistica61(1). 59–94. 10.1111/j.1467‑9582.2007.00129.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00129.x [Google Scholar]
  134. Perry, John R.
    2005A Tajik Persian reference grammar. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047414919
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047414919 [Google Scholar]
  135. Pimenova, Natalie
    2017 Дистрибуция протоартиклевого sa ‘этот, тот’ и jains ‘тот’ на ранней стадии грамматикализации готского артикля. InNikolai N. Kazansky (ed.), Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология [Indo-European linguistics and classical philology] 211. 661–671. Санкт-Петербург: Наука.
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Prauliņš, Dace
    2012Latvian. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Reinöhl, Uta & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
    2017 Renewal: A figure of speech or a process sui generis?Language93(2). 381–413. 10.1353/lan.2017.0018
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0018 [Google Scholar]
  138. Ringe, Donald A.
    2017A linguistic history of English: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic, vol.11. Oxford: Oxford University Press2nd edn. 10.1093/oso/9780198792581.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198792581.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  139. Russell, Bertrand
    1905 On denoting. Mind141. 479–493. 10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479
    https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479 [Google Scholar]
  140. SanGregory, Erin
    2018 Differential subject marking in Wakhi. Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Sauvageot, Aurelien
    1929L’emploi de l’article en gotique. Paris: Champion.
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Schaarschmidt, Gunter
    1984 Theme-rheme structure and the article in Sorbian. InWorking Papers of the Linguistics Circle of the University of Victoria411. 75–90. Victoria: University of Victoria.
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Schumacher, Stefan
    2009 Lehnbeziehungen zwischen Protoalbanisch und balkanischem Latein bzw. Romanisch. InOliver Jens Schmitt & Eva Anne Frantz (eds.), Albanische Geschichte: Stand und Perspektiven der Forschung, 37–60. München: Oldenbourg.
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Schwarz, Florian
    2013 Two kinds of definites cross-linguistically. Language and Linguistics Compass7(10). 534–559. 10.1111/lnc3.12048
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12048 [Google Scholar]
  145. Schwyzer, Eduard
    1936 Die nominale Determination in den indogermanischen Sprachen. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der Indogermanischen Sprachen63(3/4). 145–167.
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Selig, Maria
    1992Die Entwicklung der Nominaldetermination im Spätlatein: Romanischer Sprachwandel und lateinische Schriftlichkeit. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Sommerer, Lotte
    2012 Investigating the emergence of the definite article in Old English: About categorization, gradualness and constructions. Folia Linguistica461. 175–214. 10.1515/flih.2012.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.2012.007 [Google Scholar]
  148. 2015 The influence of constructions in grammaticalization: Revisiting category emergence and the development of the definite article in English. InJóhanna Barðdal, Spike Gildea, Elena Smirnova & Lotte Sommerer (eds.), Diachronic construction grammar, 107–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.04som
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.04som [Google Scholar]
  149. Szczepaniak, Renata
    2011Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen. Tübingen: Narr2nd edn.
    [Google Scholar]
  150. Todd, Terry Lynn
    2008A grammar of Dimili: Also known as Zaza. Kandern: Forum Linguistik 3rd edn.
    [Google Scholar]
  151. Trager, George L.
    1932The use of the Latin demonstratives (especially ille and ipse) up to 600 ad, as the source of the Romance article. New York: Publications of the Institute of French Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  152. Van de Velde, Freek
    2010 The emergence of the determiner in the Dutch NP. Linguistics48(2). 263–299. 10.1515/ling.2010.009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.009 [Google Scholar]
  153. Van de Velde, Freek & Joop van der Horst
    2013 Homoplasy in diachronic grammar. Language Sciences361. 66–77. 10.1016/j.langsci.2012.03.020
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2012.03.020 [Google Scholar]
  154. de la Villa Polo, Jesús
    2011 Numerals. InPhilip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax: Quantification, numerals, possession, anaphora31. 175–238. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110215465.175
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215465.175 [Google Scholar]
  155. Vincent, Nigel
    1997 The emergence of the D-system in Romance. InAns van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds.), Parameters of morphosyntactic change, 149–169. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  156. 1999 The evolution of C-structure: Prepositions and PPs from Indo-European to Romance. Linguistics371. 1111–1153. 10.1515/ling.37.6.1111
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.6.1111 [Google Scholar]
  157. 2018 Definiteness in diachrony: Romance vs. Germanic. Specificity, definiteness and article systems across languages, 40th Annual Meeting of the DGfS.
    [Google Scholar]
  158. Wali, Kashi, Omkar Nath Koul & Omakāra Aina Kaula
    1997Kashmiri: A cognitive-descriptive grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  159. Wandruszka, Ulrich
    1980 ,Post-‘ oder ,Prädetermination‘ in den romanischen Sprachen?Romanistisches Jahrbuch311. 56–72. 10.1515/9783110244885.56
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110244885.56 [Google Scholar]
  160. Wemke, Matthias, Kathrin Kunkel-Razum & Werner Scholze-Stubenrecht
    (eds.) 1995Die Grammatik. Mannheim: Dudenverlag8th edn.
    [Google Scholar]
  161. Wendtland, Antje
    2011Die Entwicklung von Demonstrativpronomina zu Artikeln im Soghdischen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 10.2307/j.ctvbqs61b
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvbqs61b [Google Scholar]
  162. Widmer, Paul
    2018 Indogermanische Stammbäume: Datentypen, Methoden. InElisabeth Rieken, Ulrich Geupel & Theresa Maria Roth (eds.), 100 Jahre Entzifferung des Hethitischen: Morphosyntaktische Kategorien in Sprachgeschichte und Forschung Akten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft vom 21. bis 23. September 2015 in Marburg, 373–388. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
    [Google Scholar]
  163. Wood, Johanna L.
    2003 Definiteness and number: Determiner phrase and number phrase in the history of EnglishPhD dissertation, Arizona State University.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20033.gol
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20033.gol
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error