The ongoing eclipse of possessive suffixes in North Saami

References

1. Abuladze, Lia & Andreas Ludden
   2013 The vocative in Georgian. In Barbara Sonnenhauser & Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna (eds.), Vocative! Addressing between system and performance (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 261), 25–42. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Aikio, Ante , Laura Arola & Niina Kunnas
   2015 Variation in North Saami. In Dick Smakman & Patrick Heinrich (eds.), Globalising sociolinguistics: Challenging and expanding theory, 243–255. Oxford: Taylor and Francis.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Andersen, Henning
   2012 The new Russian vocative: Synchrony, diachrony, typology. Scando-Slavica51. 122–167. doi: 10.1080/00806765.2012.669918
   https://doi.org/10.1080/00806765.2012.669918 [Google Scholar]
4. Antonsen, Lene , Laura A. Janda & Berit Anne Bals Baal
   2012 Njealji davvisámi adposišuvnna geavahus. The use of four North Saami adpositions. Sámi dieđalaš áigečála2012(2). 7–38. Online at:site.uit.no/aigecala/sda-2-2012-antonsen-ja-janda-ja-baal/
   [Google Scholar]
5. Antonsen, Lene & Laura A. Janda
   2015 Oamastanráhkadusat davvisámi girjjálašvuođas. The use of possessive constructions in North Saami prose. Dieđut2015(2), 9–43.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Baayen, Harald R. , Anna Endresen , Laura A. Janda , Anastasia Makarova & Tore Nesset
   2013 Space and time in Russian temporal expressions, a special issue of Russian Linguistics (37)3. 253–291. doi: 10.1007/s11185‑013‑9118‑6.
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-013-9118-6 [Google Scholar]
7. Bentz, Christian & Bodo Winter
   2013 Languages with more second language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change3. 1–27.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bethin, Christina Y
   2012 On paradigm uniformity and contrast in Russian vowel reduction. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory30(2). 425–63. doi: 10.1007/s11049‑012‑9166‑4
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-012-9166-4 [Google Scholar]
9. Blythe, Richard A. & William Croft
   2012 S-curves and the mechanisms of propagation in language change. Language88. 269–304. doi: 10.1353/lan.2012.0027
   https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0027 [Google Scholar]
10. Collinder, Björn
    1960 Comparative grammar of the Uralic languages. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Collinder, Björn
    1965 An introduction to the Uralic languages. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Dahl, Östen
    2004 The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.71
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.71 [Google Scholar]
13. Daniel, Michael & Andrew Spencer
    2009 The vocative – an outlier case. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 626–634. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Endresen, Anna , Laura A. Janda , Robert Reynolds & Francis M. Tyers
    2016 Who needs particles? A challenge to the classification of particles as a part of speech in Russian. Russian Linguistics. 1–30. DOI 10.1007/s11185‑016‑9160‑2.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-016-9160-2 [Google Scholar]
15. Fink, Robert O
    1972 Person in nouns: Is the vocative a case?The American Journal of Philology93(1). 61–68. doi: 10.2307/292901
    https://doi.org/10.2307/292901 [Google Scholar]
16. Greenberg, Robert D
    1996 The Balkan Slavic appellative. Munich: Lincom.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Grömping, Ulrike
    2009 Variable importance assessment in regression: Linear regression versus random forest. The American Statistician63(4). 308–391. doi: 10.1198/tast.2009.08199
    https://doi.org/10.1198/tast.2009.08199 [Google Scholar]
18. Heine, Bernd
    1997 Possession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511581908
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511581908 [Google Scholar]
19. Hill, Virginia
    2014 Vocatives: How syntax meets with pragmatics (Empirical Approaches to Linguistics Theory 5). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hoek, Karen van
    1995 Conceptual reference points: A cognitive grammar account of pronominal anaphora constraints. Language71. 310–340. doi: 10.2307/416165
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416165 [Google Scholar]
21. Isačenko, Alexander
    1962 Die russische Sprache der Gegenwart: Formenlehre. Munich: Hueber.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Jakobson, Roman O
    1971 Zur Struktur des russischen Verbums. Roman Jakobson, selected writings. Vol. II, 3–15. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Janda, Laura A
    1996 Back from the brink: A study of how relic forms in languages serve as source material for analogical extension (LINCOM Studies in Slavic Linguistics 01). Munich: LINCOM EUROPA.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Janda, Laura A. , Lene Antonsen & Berit Anne Bals Baal
    2014 A Radial Category Profiling Analysis of North Sámi Ambipositions. In Benjamin Anible , Keiko Beers , Laura Hirrel & Deborah Wager (eds.), High Desert Linguistics Society Proceedings, 10. Online at:linggraduate.unm.edu/HDLS10Proceedings.html
    [Google Scholar]
25. Julien, Marit
    2014 Vokativar i norsk. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift32. 130–165.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Kaškin, E.V
    2008 Posessivnoe sklonenie v muževskom govore užemskogo dialekta komi-zyrjanskogo jazyka. Naučnyj vestnik Jamalo-Neneckogo avtonomnogo okruga, vyp. 6 (58). 33–46. Salexard: Krasnyj Sever.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Keskitalo, Pigga , Kaarina Määttä & Satu Uusiautti
    2013 Sámi education. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑01975‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-01975-9 [Google Scholar]
28. Kilgarriff, Adam
    2005 Language is never, ever, ever, random. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory1/2. 263–276.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kiparsky, Valentin
    1967 Russische historische Grammatik, vol. 2. Die Entwicklung des Formensystems. Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Langacker, Ronald W
    2008 Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
31. Lass, Roger
    1990 How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution. Linguistics26. 79–102. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700014432
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700014432 [Google Scholar]
32. McWhorter, John H
    2007 Language interrupted: Signs of non-native acquisition in standard language grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309805.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309805.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
33. McWhorter, John H
    2011 Linguistic simplicity and complexity: Why do languages undress?Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9781934078402
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781934078402 [Google Scholar]
34. Michael, Lev
    2013 Possession in Nanti. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon (eds.), Possession and ownership, 149–166. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Mühlhäusler, Peter
    1977 Pidginisation and simplification of language. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Nesset, Tore & Laura A. Janda
    2010 Paradigm structure: Evidence from Russian suffix shift. Cognitive Linguistics21. 699–725. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2010.022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2010.022 [Google Scholar]
37. Nickel, Klaus Peter & Pekka Sammallahti
    2011 Nordsamisk grammatikk. Karasjok: Davvi Girji.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Nielsen, Konrad
    1979 [1926–1929] Lærebok i lappisk (samisk). Bind I: Grammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Nikolaeva, Irina
    2003 Possessive affixes as markers of information structuring: Evidence from Uralic. In Pirkko Suihkonen & Bernard Comrie (eds.), International symposium on deictic systems and quantification in languages spoken in Europe and North and Central Asia, 130–145. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology and Udmurt State University.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Polinsky, Maria
    2006 Incomplete acquisition: American Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics14. 191–262.
    [Google Scholar]
41. R Development Core Team
    (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, Online at:www.R-project.org.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Sammallahti, Pekka
    1998 The Saami languages: An introduction. Karasjok, Norway: Davvi Girji.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Sonnenhauser, Barbara & Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna
    2013 Introduction: Vocative!In Barbara Sonnenhauser & Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna (eds.), Vocative! Addressing between system and performance (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 261), 1–23. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110304176.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110304176.1 [Google Scholar]
44. Stassen, Leon
    2013 Predicative possession. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Online at:wals.info/chapter/117, Accessed on2016-06-15.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Strobl, Carolin , James Malley , & Gerhard Tutz
    2009 An introduction to recursive partitioning: Rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychological Methods14. 323–348. doi: 10.1037/a0016973
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016973 [Google Scholar]
46. Trudgill, Peter
    2002 Sociolinguistic variation and change. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Trudgill, Peter
    2011 Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Wierzbicka, Anna
    1980 Lingua mentalis: The semantics of natural language. Sydney: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Ylikoski, Jussi
    2009 Non-finites in North Saami. Helsinki: Société Finno-Ougrienne.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Ylikoski, Jussi
    2014 Davvisámegiela -ráigge – substantiiva, advearba, postposišuvdna vai kásus?. North Saami -ráigge-noun, adv, adverb, postposition or case?. Sámi dieđalaš áigeála2014 (2).
    [Google Scholar]
51. Zwicky, Arnold M
    1985 Clitics and particles. Language61(2). 283–305. doi: 10.2307/414146
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414146 [Google Scholar]