1887
Volume 43, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The morphological expression of non-verbal predication is a geographically widespread, although not very frequent, typological feature. This paper highlights the existence of two radically contrasting types of non-verbal predicative inflection. Construction A has already been described in the literature. It consists of attaching person-sensitive inflection markers to non-verbal predicates, possibly extending this treatment to adverbs and adverbial phrases (locational and temporal), pronouns and quantifiers. This type is well attested in Uralic, Turkic, and Paleosiberian, as well as in some Amazonian language families (most notably Chicham), but it has also been pointed out for some sparse languages of Oceania and Africa. Such non-verbal person inflections diachronically stem from incorporation of conjugated copula elements. Construction B, by contrast, is much rarer and is described here for the first time. It also consists of a dedicated morphological form of the non-verbal predicate (limited, however, to nouns and adjectives), but such form stands out as morphologically lighter than any other form to be found in nouns or adjectives in argument or attribute position. While the latter forms carry some kind of case marker, the noun/adjective predicate merely consists (or historically did) of the word’s root. This type of construction can be found in the small Zamucoan family and still survives in some Tupí-Guaraní languages. Diachronic inspection of Semitic indicates, however, that this predicative strategy was possibly adopted in some ancient varieties, although at later stages it intertwined with the expression of referential specificity. The paper compares the two construction types, highlighting similarities and differences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.17013.ber
2019-06-12
2019-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aasmae, Niina
    2014An introductory course of the Erzya language. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Paul Ariste Soome.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Adelaar, Willem F. H.
    1997 O sufixo onomático e a preservação das consoantes do fim de raiz em Guarani paraguaio. Boletim da Associação Brasileira de Lingüística20. 11–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2002 Typological parameters for the study of clitics, with special reference to Tariana. In R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Word. A cross-linguistic typology, 42–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2003A grammar of Tariana, from north-west Amazonia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107050952
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107050952 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2010 Language contact and pragmatic notions: Tariana in its multi-lingual context. In José Camacho , Rodrigo Gutiérrez-Bravo & Liliana Sánchez (eds.), Information structure in indigenous languages of the Americas: Syntactic approaches, 17–38. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2012The languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593569.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593569.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Arnold, Werner
    1989Lehrbuch des Neuwestaramäischen. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Barbosa, Lemos Pe. A.
    1956Curso de tupi antigo: Gramática, exercícios, textos. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria São José.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Beeston, Alfred F. L.
    1984Sabaic grammar (Journal of Semitic Studies Monograph 6). Manchester: University of Manchester Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Behnke, Anja
    2010 Die Struktur der Nominalphrase im Tersaamischen. Berlin: Humboldt Universität MA thesis.
  11. Berta, Árpád
    1998 Tatar and Bashkir. In Lars Johansson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds.), The Turkic languages, 283–300. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bertheau, Ernest
    1843Gregorii Bar Hebraei qui et Abulpharag grammatica linguae syriacae in metro ephraemeo. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bertinetto, Pier Marco
    2006 On the tense-aspect system of Bolivian Chaco Guaraní. In Wolf Dietrich (ed.), Guaraní y ‘mawetí-tupí-guaraní’. Estudios históricos y descriptivos sobre una familia lingüística de América del Sur, 105–167. Münster: LIT.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2014 [2009] Ayoreo. In Mily Crevels & Pieter C. Muysken (eds.), Lenguas de Bolivia, Tomo 3: Oriente, 369–413. La Paz: Plural Editores. English version [Ayoreo (Zamuco). A grammatical sketch, 2009] atlinguistica.sns.it/QLL/QLL09/Bertinetto_1.PDF. (30March 2018.)
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Blau, Joshua
    2006 Some reflections on the disappearance of cases in Arabic. In Pier Giorgio Borbone , Alessandro Mengozzi & Mauro Tosco (eds.), Loquentes linguis: Studi in onore di Fabrizio A. Pennacchietti, 79–90. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Borges, Mônica V.
    2006 Aspectos fonológicos e morfossintáticos do avá-canoeiro (tupi-guarani). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas doctoral dissertation.
  17. Briggs, Janet
    1972Quiero contarles unos casos del Beni. Cochabamba: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano & Ministerio de Educación y Cultura, Dirección Nacional de Antropología. 2vols.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Buccellati, Giorgio
    1968 An interpretation of the Akkadian stative as a nominal sentence. Journal of Near Eastern Studies27. 1–12. 10.1086/371927
    https://doi.org/10.1086/371927 [Google Scholar]
  19. Butts, Aaron M.
    2013 Language change in the wake of empire: Syriac in its Greco-Roman context. Chicago: University of Chicago doctoral dissertation.
  20. Cabral, Ana S. A. C.
    1995 Contact-induced language change in the Western Amazon: the non-genetic origin of the Kokama language. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh doctoral dissertation.
  21. 2001 Observações sobre a história do morfema -a da família tupi-guarani. In Francesc Queixalós (ed.), Des noms et des verbes en tupi-guarani: état de la question, 133–162. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cabral, Ana S. A. C. , Ariel P. C. E. Silva & Suseile A. Sousa
    2013 Expressão do caso argumentativo em três línguas tupí-guaraní: asuriní do tocantins, avá-canoeiro e zo’é. Anais do SILEL. Simpósio Internacional de Letras e Linguística3(1). 1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Carvalho, Márcia G. P. de
    2001 Sinais de morte ou de vitalidade? Mudanças estruturais na língua tembé: Contribuição ao estudo dos efeitos de contato lingüístico na Amazônia Oriental. Belém: Universidade Federal do Pará MA thesis.
  24. Carver, Daniel E.
    2016 The Akkadian stative: A non-finite verb. Ancient Near Eastern Studies53. 1–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Castrén, Matthias A.
    1858Versuch einer jenissei-ostjanischen und kottischen Sprachlehre. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Chomé, Ignace
    1958 [ante 1745] Arte de la lengua zamuca. Présentation de Suzanne Lussagnet. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris47. 121–178. 10.3406/jsa.1958.1154
    https://doi.org/10.3406/jsa.1958.1154 [Google Scholar]
  27. Ciucci, Luca
    2016 [2013]Inflectional morphology in the Zamucoan languages. Asunción: CEADUC.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Ciucci, Luca & Pier Marco Bertinetto
    2015 A diachronic view of the Zamucoan verb in-flection. Folia Linguistica Historica36(1). 19–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 2017 Possessive inflection in Proto-Zamucoan: A reconstruction. Diachronica34. 283–330. 10.1075/dia.34.3.01ciu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.34.3.01ciu [Google Scholar]
  30. Ciucci, Luca & Pier Marco Bertinetto
    2019 Possessive classifiers in Zamucoan. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Elena Mihas (eds.), Genders and classifiers: A cross-linguistic typology, 144–175. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ciucci, Luca & Pier Marco Bertinetto
    . In preparation. Towards the reconstruction of Proto-Zamucoan nominal suffixation.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Coppock, Elizabeth & David Beaver
    2015 Definiteness and determinacy. Linguistics and Philosophy38. 377–435. 10.1007/s10988‑015‑9178‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-015-9178-8 [Google Scholar]
  33. Creissels, Denis
    . Forthcoming. Inverse-locational predication and other ‘existential’ constructions in typological perspective. Italian Journal of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Décsy, Gy
    1970 Das Existentialverb in den prädikativen Fügungen des Selkupischen. In Wolf-gang Schlachter (ed.), Symposion über die Syntax der uralischen Sprachen, 50–64. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Dietrich, Wolf
    1986El idioma chiriguano. Gramática, textos, vocabulario. Madrid: Instituto de Cooperación Iberoamericana.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2001 Categorias lexicais nas línguas tupi-guarani (visão comparativa). In Francesc Queixalós (ed.), Des noms et des verbes en tupi-guarani: état de la question, 21–37. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2018 Tupian Languages. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. linguistics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-362. (30March 2018.)
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Dixon, R. M. W.
    2010Basic linguistic theory. Vol.2, 159–188. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Dobson, Rose M.
    1988Aspectos da língua kayabi. Cuiabá: Sociedade Internacional de Lingüística.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Fabre, Alain
    2016Gramática de la lengua nivacle (familia mataguayo, Chaco Paraguayo). München: Lincom.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Feist, Timothy
    2010 A Grammar of Skolt Saami. Manchester: University of Manchester doctoral dissertation.
  42. Fullilove, William
    2014 Definiteness in Qumran Aramaic. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America doctoral dissertation.
  43. García Martínez, Florentino & Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar
    1997The Dead Sea Scrolls. Study edition. Vol.1. Leiden – Boston & Grand Rapids (Michigan): Brill & Eerdmans.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 1998The Dead Sea Scrolls. Study edition. Vol.2. Leiden – Boston & Grand Rapids (Michigan): Brill & Eerdmans.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Georg, Stephan
    2007A descriptive grammar of Ket (Yenisei-Ostyak). Kent, UK: Global Oriental. 10.1163/ej.9781901903584.i‑328
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9781901903584.i-328 [Google Scholar]
  46. Goldenberg, Gideon
    1983 On Syriac sentence structure. In Michael Sokoloff (ed.), Arameans, Aramaic and the Aramaic literary tradition, 97–140. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 1991 On predicative adjectives and Syriac syntax. Bibliotheca Orientalis48. 716–726.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Guildea, Spike
    2018 Reconstructing the copula and nonverbal predicate constructions in Cariban. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Amazonian languages, 365–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.14gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.14gil [Google Scholar]
  49. Hasselbach, Rebecca
    2007 External plural markers in Semitic: A new assessment. In Cynthia L. Miller (ed.), Studies in Semitic and Afroasiatic linguistics presented to Gene B. Gragg, 123–138. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 2013Case in Semitic. Roles, relations and reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199671809.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199671809.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  51. Haude, Katharina
    2018 Nonverbal predication in Movima. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Amazonian languages, 217–244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.08hau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.08hau [Google Scholar]
  52. Helimski, Eugene
    1998a Nganasan. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 480–515. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 1998b Selkup. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 548–579. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Hengeveld, Kees
    1992Non-verbal predication. Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110883282
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883282 [Google Scholar]
  55. Heusinger, Klaus von
    2002 Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics9. 245–274. 10.1093/jos/19.3.245
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/19.3.245 [Google Scholar]
  56. Higham, Alice , Maxine Morarie & Greta Paul
    2000Ayoré-English dictionary. Sanford, FL: New Tribes Mission. 3vols.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Huehnergard, John
    1987 Stative, predicative form, pseudo-verb. Journal of Near Eastern Studies46. 215–232. 10.1086/373246
    https://doi.org/10.1086/373246 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2005A grammar of Akkadian. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 2017 Arabic in its Semitic context. In Ahmad Al-Jallad (ed.), Arabic in context, 3–34. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004343047_002
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004343047_002 [Google Scholar]
  60. Jastrow, Otto
    1997 The Neo-Aramaic languages. In Robert Hetzron (ed.), The Semitic languages, 334–377. New York & London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 2005 Der bestimmte Artikel im Aramäischen – ein Blick auf 3000 Jahre Sprachgeschichte. In Bogdan Burtea , Josef Tropper & Helen Younansardaroud (eds.), Studia semitica et semitohamitica. Festschrift für Rainer Voigt anläßlich seines 60. Geburtstages am 17. Januar 2004, 137–150. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Jensen, Cheryl
    1998 Comparative Tupí-Guaraní morphosyntax. In Desmond C. Derbyshire and Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages, Vol.4., 399–618. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 1999 Tupí-Guaraní. In R. M. W. Dixon and Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), The Amazonian languages, 125–164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Johansson, Lars
    1998 The structure of Turkic. In Lars Johansson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds.), The Turkic languages, 30–66. London & New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Joosten, Jan
    1989 The predicative adjective in the status emphaticus in Syriac. Bibliotheca Orientalis46. 18–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Kangasmaa-Minn, Eeva
    1998 Mari. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 219–248. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Kelm, Heinz
    1964 Das Zamuco: eine lebende Sprache. Anthropos59. 457–516, 770–842.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Keresztes, Lázló
    1998 Mansi. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 387–427. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Khan, Geoffrey
    2008The Neo-Aramaic dialect of Barwar (3vols.). Leiden & Boston: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004167650.i‑2198
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004167650.i-2198 [Google Scholar]
  70. 2018 Remarks on the historical development and syntax of the copula in North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic dialects. Aramaic Studies16. 234–269. 10.1163/17455227‑01602010
    https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-01602010 [Google Scholar]
  71. Kouwenberg, Norbertus J. C.
    2000 Nouns and verbs: the verbal nature of the Akkadian stative. Orientalia69. 21–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Kraus, Fritz R.
    1984Nominalsätze in altbabylonischen Briefen und der Stativ. Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
    1972Studies in Semitic grammar and metrics. Wrocław: Zakładim Ossolińskich.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Launey, Michel
    1994Une grammaire omniprédicative. Essai sur la morphosyntaxe du nahuatl classique. Paris: CRNS Editions.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 2004 The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung57. 49–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Lemaréchal, Alain
    1989Les parties du discours. Sémantique et syntaxe. PUF, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Magalhâes, Marina M. S.
    2016 Os dois diferentes tipos de sintagmas nominais complexos com núcleo verbal estativo da língua guajá. In Francesc Queixalós & Dioney M. Gomes (eds.), O sintagma nominal em línguas amazônicas, 187–202. Campinas: Pontes Editores.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Mattissen, Johanna
    2003Dependent-head synthesis in Nivkh. A contribution to a typology of polysynthesis. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.57
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.57 [Google Scholar]
  79. Meira, Sérgio
    2006 Stative verbs vs. nouns in Sateré-Mawé and the Tupian family. In Grażyna J. Rowicka & Eithne B. Carlin (eds.), What’s in a verb?, 189–214. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Michael, Lev
    2014 On the pre-Columbian origin of Proto-Omagua-Kokama. Journal of Language Contact7(2). 309–344. 10.1163/19552629‑00702004
    https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-00702004 [Google Scholar]
  81. Miestamo, Matti
    2011 Skolt Saami: A typological profile. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Ai-kakauskirja & Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne93. 111–145.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Mihas, Elena
    2015A grammar of Alto Perené (Arawak). Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Mikkelsen, Lise
    2005Copular clause. Specification, predication and equation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.85
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.85 [Google Scholar]
  84. Mithun, Marianne
    1999The languages of Native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Morarie, Maxine
    1980Simplified Ayoreo grammar. Cochabamba: Publicaciones Nueva Vida (mimeo).
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Morarie, Maxine & Janet Briggs
    1985Génesis erámi taningai. Cochabamba & Asunción: Misión Nuevas Tribus.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Moro, Andrea
    1997The raising of predicates. Predicative noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519956
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519956 [Google Scholar]
  88. 2005 Copular sentences. In Martin Everaert , Henk van Riemsdjik , Rob Goedemans & Bart Hollebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, Vol.2, 1–23. London: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Müller, Ana & Luciana Sanchez-Mendes
    2016 The semantics of bare nouns in Karitiana. In Francesc Queixalós & Dioney M. Gomes (eds.), O sintagma nominal em línguas amazônicas, 241–261. Campinas: Pontes Editores.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. & Galina A. Otaina
    2013A syntax of the Nivkh language. The Amur dialect. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins (translation of the Russian original). 10.1075/slcs.139
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.139 [Google Scholar]
  91. Nikolaeva, Irina
    2014A grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110320640
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110320640 [Google Scholar]
  92. Nöldeke, Theodor
    1898 [1966]Kurzgefasste syrische Grammatik. Darmstadt: Wissen-schaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Overall, Simon
    2018 Nonverbal predication and copula constructions in Aguaruna. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Ama-zonian languages, 135–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.05ove
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.05ove [Google Scholar]
  94. Overall, Simon , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea
    (eds.) 2018aNonverbal predication in Amazonian languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122 [Google Scholar]
  95. 2018b Nonverbal predication in Amazonia: Typological and diachronic considerations. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Amazonian languages, 1–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.01ove
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.01ove [Google Scholar]
  96. Pat-El, Na’ma
    2009 The development of the Semitic definite article: A syntactic approach. Journal of Semitic Studies54. 19–50. 10.1093/jss/fgn039
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/fgn039 [Google Scholar]
  97. Payne, Thomas E.
    1997Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805066
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805066 [Google Scholar]
  98. Peña, Germán
    2015 A grammar of Wampis. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon doctoral dissertation.
  99. Pennacchietti, Fabrizio
    2005 Ripercussioni sintattiche in conseguenza dell’introduzione dell’articolo determinativo proclitico in semitico. Aula Orientalis23. 175–184.
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Praça, Walkíria N.
    2007 Morfossintaxe da língua tapirapé. Brasília, Brazil: Universidade de Brasília doctoral dissertation.
  101. Queixalós, Francesc
    2001 Le suffixe référentiant en émérillon. In Francesc Queixalós (ed.), Des noms et des verbes en tupi-guarani: état de la question, 115–132. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  102. 2006 The primacy and fate of predicativity in Tupi-Guarani. In Ximena Lois & Valentina Vapnarsky (eds.), Lexical categories and root classes in Am-erindian languages, 249–287. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Reinisch, Leo
    1893Die Bedauye-Sprache in Nordost-Afrika. Vienna: Gewold. 2vols.
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Rodrigues, Aryon D.
    1996 Argumento e predicado em tupinambá. Boletim da Associação Brasileira de Lingüística19. 57–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 2001 Sobre a natureza do caso argumentativo. In Francesc Queixalós (ed.), Des noms et des verbes en tupi-guarani: état de la question, 103–114. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Rodrigues, Aryon D. & Ana S. A. C. Cabral
    2012 Tupían. In Lyle Campbell & Verónica Grondona (eds.), The Indigenous languages of South America. A comprehen-sive guide, 495–574. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110258035.495
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110258035.495 [Google Scholar]
  107. Rose, Françoise
    2002 My hammock = I have a hammock. Possessed nouns constituting pos-sessive clauses in Emérillon (Tupi-Guarani). In Ana S. A. C. Cabral & Aryon D. Rodrigues (eds.), Línguas indígenas brasileiras. Fonologia, gramática e história. Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL, 392–402. Belém, Brazil: CNPQ & Universidade federal do Para.
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 2003 Morphosyntaxe de l’émérillon. Une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française. Lyon: Université Lumière Lyon 2 doctoral dissertation.
  109. 2018 Nonverbal predication and the nonverbal clause type of Mojeño Trinita-rio. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Amazonian languages, 53–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.02ros
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.02ros [Google Scholar]
  110. Roy, Isabelle
    2013Nonverbal predication: Copular sentences at the syntax-semantics interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543540.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543540.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  111. Rubin, Aaron D.
    2005Studies in Semitic grammaticalization. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Sammallahti, Pekka
    1998The Saami languages. An introduction. Kárášjohka: Davvi Girji.
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
    1988Der irokesische Sprachtyp (Arbeitspapier 9). Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln. 10.1515/ZFSW.1988.7.2.173
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ZFSW.1988.7.2.173 [Google Scholar]
  114. Schwarz, Anne
    2018 Between verb and noun: Explorations into the domain of nonverbal predication in Ecuadorian Secoya. In Simon Overall , Rosa Vallejos & Spike Guildea (eds.), Nonverbal predication in Amazonian languages, 193–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.122.07sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.07sch [Google Scholar]
  115. Seki, Lucy
    2000Gramática do kamaiurá. Língua tupi-guarani do Alto Xingu. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  116. 2001 Classes de palavras e categorias sintático-funcionais em kamaiurá. In Francesc Queixalós (ed.), Des noms et des verbes en tupi-guarani: état de la question, 39–66. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Souza, Patrícia O. B.
    2004 Estudos de aspectos da língua kaiabi (Tupi). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas MA thesis.
  118. Stassen, Leon
    1997Intransitive predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 2013 Nominal and locational predication. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. wals.info/chapter/119. (27December 2017.)
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Stone, Gerald
    1980An introduction to Polish. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Tropper, Joseph
    2001 Die Herausbildung des bestimmten Artikels im Semitischen. Journal of Semitic Studies46. 1–31. 10.1093/jss/46.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/46.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  122. Tucker, Archibald N. & Margaret A. Bryan
    1966Linguistic analysis: the non-Bantu languages of North-Eastern Africa. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Turunen, Rigina
    2009 A typology of non-verbal predication in Erzya. Acta Linguistica Hungarica56. 251–313. 10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2‑3.4
    https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.56.2009.2-3.4 [Google Scholar]
  124. 2010 Non-verbal predication in Erzya. Studies on morphosyntactic varia-tion and part of speech distinctions. Helsinki: University of Helsinki doctoral disser-tation.
  125. Ulrich, Matthew & Rosemary Ulrich
    2000Diccionario I̵shɨro (Chamacoco) – Español / Español – I̵shɨro (Chamacoco). Asunción: Misión Nuevas Tribus Paraguay.
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Vallejos, Rosa
    2016A grammar of Kukama-Kukamiria. A language from the Amazon. Leiden & Boston: Brill. 10.1163/9789004314528
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004314528 [Google Scholar]
  127. Wilbur, Joshua K.
    2014A grammar of Pite Saami. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_533870
    https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_533870 [Google Scholar]
  128. Wintschalek, Walter
    1993Die Areallinguistik am Beispiel syntaktischer Übereinstimmungen im Wolga-Kama-Areal. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Wright, William
    1871Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, I. The Syriac texts. London: Williams and Norgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Voigt, Rainer M.
    1998 Der Artikel im Semitischen. Journal of Semitic Studies43. 221–258. 10.1093/jss/43.2.221
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/43.2.221 [Google Scholar]
  131. von Heusinger, Klaus
    (see Heusinger).
  132. Zaicz, Gábor
    1998 Mordva. In Daniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages, 184–218. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.17013.ber
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.17013.ber
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