The role of disambiguation in pragmatic agentivity

References

1. Bisang, Walter
   2009 On the evolution of complexity: Sometimes less is more in East and mainland Southeast Asia. In Geoffrey Sampson , David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, 34–49. Oxford: OUP.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Chelliah, Shobhana L.
   2001 The role of text collection and elicitation in linguistic fieldwork. In Paul Newman & Martha Ratliff (eds.), Linguistic Fieldwork, 152–165. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511810206.008
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810206.008 [Google Scholar]
3. Chelliah, Shobhana L. & Gwendolyn Hyslop
   2011 Introduction to special issue on optional case marking in Tibeto-Burman. LTBA34: 1–7.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Coupe, Alexander R.
   2011 On core case marking patterns in two Tibeto-Burman languages of Nagaland. LTBA34: 21–47.
   [Google Scholar]
5. DeLancey, Scott
   2011 “Optional” “Ergativity” in Tibeto-Burman languages. LTBA34: 9–20.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Dixon, Robert M. W.
   1979 Ergativity. Language55: 59–138. doi: 10.2307/412519
   https://doi.org/10.2307/412519 [Google Scholar]
7. Donlay, Chris
   2014 The pragmatic agent marker in Khatso. Paper presented atthe 46th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, Kunming, China, October 17, 2014.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Donlay, Chris
   2015 A functional grammar of Khatso. PhD dissertation, University of California at Santa Barbara.
9. Du Bois, John W.
   1987 The discourse basis of ergativity. Language63: 805–855. doi: 10.2307/415719
   https://doi.org/10.2307/415719 [Google Scholar]
10. Du Bois, John W.
    2013 Representing discourse. Ms, University of California at Santa Barbara.
11. Gerner, Matthias
    2013 A Grammar of Nuosu. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110308679
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110308679 [Google Scholar]
12. Gil, David
    2004 Riau Indonesian sama: Explorations in macrofunctionality. In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 58], 371–426. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.58.20gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.58.20gil [Google Scholar]
13. Haspelmath, Martin
    2004 Coordinating constructions: An overview. In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 58], 3–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.58.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.58.03has [Google Scholar]
14. Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
    2004 World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hopper, Paul J.
    1991 On some principles of grammaticalization. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1: Theoretical and Methodological Issues [Typological Studies in Language 19], 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
16. Huang, Chun
    2009 Mengguzu jianshi (Concise history of Mongolians). Kunming: Yunnan Renmin Chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Hyslop, Gwendolyn
    2010 Kurtöp case: The pragmatic ergative and beyond. LTBA33: 1–40.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Jenny, Mathias & San San Hnin Tun
    2013 Differential subject marking in Burmese. Studies in Language37: 693–735. doi: 10.1075/sl.37.4.01jen
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.37.4.01jen [Google Scholar]
19. LaPolla, Randy J.
    1993 Arguments against ‘subject’ and ‘direct object’ as viable concepts in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology63: 759–813.
    [Google Scholar]
20. LaPolla, Randy J.
    1995 ‘Ergative’ marking in Tibeto-Burman. In Yoshio Nishi , James A. Matisoff & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds.), New Horizons in Tibeto-Burman Morphosyntax, 189–228. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Lewis, M. Paul , Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig
    (eds.) 2013 Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 17th edn.Dallas, TX: SIL International. www.ethnologue.com
    [Google Scholar]
22. Lidz, Liberty
    2011 Agentive marking in Yongning Na (Mosuo). LTBA34: 49–72.
    [Google Scholar]
23. McGregor, William B.
    2006 Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective. Lingua116: 393–423. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2005.02.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.02.002 [Google Scholar]
24. McGregor, William B.
    2009 Typology of ergativity. Language and Linguistics Compass3: 480–508. doi: 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00118.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00118.x [Google Scholar]
25. Morey, Stephen
    2012 The Singpho agentive–functions and meanings. LTBA35: 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Moseley, Christopher
    (ed.) 2010 Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. www.unesco.org/culture/en/endangeredlanguages/atlas
    [Google Scholar]
27. Mu, Shihua
    2002 Kazhuoyu yanjiu (A study of Kazhuo). Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Ozerov, Pavel
    2014 The system of information packaging in colloquial Burmese. PhD dissertation, La Trobe University.
29. Peterson, David A.
    2011 Core participant marking in Khumi. LTBA34: 73–100.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Sawada, Hideo
    2012 Optional marking of NPs with core case functions: P and A in Lhaovo. LTBA35: 15–34.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Stassen, Leon
    2000  and-languages and with-languages. Linguistic Typology4: 1–54. doi: 10.1515/lity.2000.4.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2000.4.1.1 [Google Scholar]
33. Suzuki, Hiroyuki
    2012 Ergative marking in Nyagrong-Minyag (Xinlong, Sichuan). LTBA35: 35–48.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Teo, Amos
    2012 Sumi agentive and topic markers: no and ye . LTBA35: 49–74.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Tonghaixian Xingmengxiang 2010 nian tongji nianjian (Tonghai County Xingmeng Village 2010 Statistical Yearbook. Xingmeng: Tonghaixian Xingmengxiang Tongjizhan.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Tournadre, Nicolas
    1991 The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative. LTBA14: 93–107.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Willis, Christina M.
    2011 Optional case marking in Darma (Tibeto-Burman)LTBA34: 101–131.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Zeisler, Bettina
    2012 Practical issues of pragmatic case marking variations in the Kenhat varieties of Ladakh. LTBA35: 75–106.
    [Google Scholar]