Volume 47, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The present paper examines a hypothetical correlation between language endangerment and the simplification of nominal and verbal inflections. After contrasting the complexities exhibited by two endangered languages (Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl and Wymysorys) with the complexities of their non-endangered predecessors (Older Nahuatl and Middle High German, respectively), the authors conclude that the endangerment-simplification entanglement cannot be demonstrated. First, although Wymysorys (a more endangered code) is slightly more simplified than Nahuatl (a less endangered code) as far as the nominal domain is concerned, this relationship is reversed in the verbal domain. Second, simplifying tendencies are not radical, with a number of innovative complexifying processes being also present. Third, when attested, simplification constitutes part of a “natural” language evolution rather than a process resulting from the endangerment.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra
    2007 Grammars in contact. A cross-linguistic perspective. InAlexandra Aikhenvald & Robert M. W. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact. A cross-linguistic typology, 1–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, Arthur J., Frances Berdan & James Lockhart
    (eds.) 1976Beyond the codices. The Nahua view of colonial Mexico. Los Angeles: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520320826
    https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520320826 [Google Scholar]
  3. Andrason, Alexander
    2010 Expressions of futurity in the Vilamovicean language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus401. 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2011 The Vilamovicean passive. Linguistica Copernicana51. 221–242. 10.12775/LinCop.2011.014
    https://doi.org/10.12775/LinCop.2011.014 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2014a The Polish component in the Vilamovicean language. GLOSSOS121. 1–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2014b Morphological case systems of the Vilamovicean noun – from the 20th to the 21st century. Studies in Polish Linguistics9(1). 1–19
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2016a A complex system of complex predicates: Tense, taxis, aspect and mood in Basse Mandinka from a grammaticalization and cognitive perspective. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University PhD Dissertation.
  8. 2016b Modern Vilamovicean – complex decay of a case system. Oxford German Studies45(2). 212–235. 10.1080/00787191.2016.1156851
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00787191.2016.1156851 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2021 Polish borrowings in Wymysorys: A formal linguistic analysis of Germano-Slavonic language contact in Wilamowice. Reykjavík: University of Iceland PhD dissertation.
  10. . Forthcoming. Complexity of severely endangered minority languages – the case of Wymysorys. InMatt Coler & Andrew Nevins eds. Contemporary research in minority and diaspora languages of Europe. Berlin: Language Science Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Andrason, Alexander & Tymoteusz Król
    2014a A fuzzy model of the Vilamovicean language. Sorbian Revue481. 265–292.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2014b A contribution to the documentation of a nearly extinct language – Present Tense morphology in Modern Vilamovicean. Studia Linguistica (University of Wrocław) 331. 7–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2014c Pronominal system of Modern Vilamovicean. Brünner Beiträge zur Germanistik und Nordistik281. 93–122.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2016a A note on the morphology of the Vilamovicean verb – principal parts. Language Documentation and Description131. 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2016bA grammar of Wymysorys. Durham: Duke University, SEELRC.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Andrews, J. Richard
    2003Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Revised edition. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Austin, Peter
    1986 Structural change in language obsolescence: Some eastern Australian examples. Australian Journal of Linguistics61. 201–230. 10.1080/07268608608599363
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07268608608599363 [Google Scholar]
  18. Austin, Peter & Julia Sallabank
    2011 Introduction. InPeter Austin & Julia Sallabank (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Auyang, Sunny
    1998Foundations of complex-system theories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511626135
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626135 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bastardas-Boada, Albert
    2014 Cap a la ‘complèxica’ com a transdisciplina. InAntònia Martí & Mariona Taulé (eds.), Homenatge a Sebastià Serrano, 63–77. Barcelona: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2019From language shift to language revitalization and sustainability. A complexity approach to linguistic ecology. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Benecke, Georg, Wilhelm Müller & Friedrich Zarncke
    1990 [1854–1866]Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch. Stuttgard: Hirzel Verlag
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Bickhard, Mark
    2011 Systems and process metaphysics. InCliff Hooker (ed.), Philosophy of complex systems, 91–104. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑444‑52076‑0.50002‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52076-0.50002-X [Google Scholar]
  24. Boor, Helmut de & Roswitha Wisniewski
    1973Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110863871
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863871 [Google Scholar]
  25. Campbell, Lyle, Terrence Kaufman & Thomas Smith-Stark
    1986 Meso-America as a linguistic area. Language62(3). 530–570. 10.1353/lan.1986.0105
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1986.0105 [Google Scholar]
  26. Campbell, R. Joe & Frances Karttunen
    1989Foundation course in Nahuatl grammar. 21Vols.Austin: Institute of Latin American Studies, University of Texas.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Canger, Una
    1988 Nahuatl dialectology: A survey and some suggestions. International Journal of American Linguistics541. 28–73. 10.1086/466074
    https://doi.org/10.1086/466074 [Google Scholar]
  28. Carochi, S. J. Horacio
    2001 (1645)Grammar of the Mexican language with an explanation of its adverbs. Translated and edited with commentary byJames Lockhart. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Chicontepec
    Chicontepec 2014Audio recording. Interview conducted by Eduardo de la Cruz Cruz in the municipality of Chicontepec, Veracruz, September 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanitzin, Don Domingo de San Antón Muñón
    2006 (1608–1615)Annals of his time. Edited and translated byJames Lockhart, Susan Schroeder, and Doris Namala. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Chromik, Bartłomiej
    2019 Mikro- i makroideologie językowe. Przykład języka wilamowskiego. Warsaw: University of Warsaw dissertation.
  32. Cilliers, Paul
    1998Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Cilliers, Paul, Harry Biggs, Sonja Blignaut, Aiden Choles, Jan-Hendrik Hofmeyer, Graham Jewitt & Dirk Roux
    2013 Complexity, modeling, and natural resource management. Ecology and Society18(3). 1–12. 10.5751/ES‑05382‑180301
    https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05382-180301 [Google Scholar]
  34. Dahl, Östen
    2004The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.71
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.71 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2009 Testing the assumption of complexity invariance: the case of Elfdalian and Swedish. InGeoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 50–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Dakin, Karen
    1996 El náhuatl de las Memorias: los rasgos de una lingua franca indígena. InKaren Dakin & Cristopher H. Lutz (eds.), Nuestro pesar, nuestra aflicción, tunetuliniliz, tucucuca, 167–189. Mexico: Universidad Autónoma de Mexico.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2010 Lenguas francas y lenguas locales en la época prehispánica. InRebeca Barriga Villanueva & Pedro Martin Butragueño (eds.), Historia sociolingüística de México. Vol.11, 161–183. Mexico: Colegio de Mexico.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Deutscher, Guy
    2009 Overall complexity – a wild goose chase?InGeoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 243–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Dixon, Robert M. W.
    1994Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611896
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611896 [Google Scholar]
  40. Dorian, Nancy
    1978 The fate of morphological complexity in language death: Evidence from East Gaelic. Language54(3). 590–609. 10.1353/lan.1978.0024
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1978.0024 [Google Scholar]
  41. 1980 Language shift in community and individual: The phenomenon of the laggard semi-speaker. International Journal of the Sociology of Language251. 85–94. 10.1515/ijsl.1980.25.85
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1980.25.85 [Google Scholar]
  42. 1981Language death: The life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 10.9783/9781512815580
    https://doi.org/10.9783/9781512815580 [Google Scholar]
  43. Dressler, Wolfgang
    2011 Early linguistic indicators of language decay. InEmanuele Miola & Paolo Ramat, (eds.), Language contact and language decay: Socio-political and linguistic perspectives, 89–108. Pavia: IUSS Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Edmonds, Bruce
    1999 Syntactic measures of complexity. Manchester: University of Manchester PhD dissertation.
  45. Filipović, Luna & Martin Pütz
    2016 Introduction. Endangered languages and languages in danger. InLuna Filipović & Martin Pütz (eds.), Endangered languages and languages in danger: Issues of documentation, policy, and language rights, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.42.01fil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.42.01fil [Google Scholar]
  46. Flores Farfán, José Antonio
    1999Cuatreros somos y Toindioma hablamos. Contactos y conflictos entre el náhuatl y el español en el sur de México. Tlalpan, D.F.: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Flores Farfán, José Antonio & Justyna Olko
    2020 Types of communities and speakers. InJustyna Olko & Julia Sallabank (eds.), Revitalizing endangered languages. A practical guide, 75–86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Gärtner
    2006–2019 = Gärtner, Kurt, Klaus Grubmüller, Jens Haustein & Karl Stackmann 2006–2019 Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch. Stuttgard: Hirzel Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Gell-Mann, Murray
    1995 What is complexity?Complexity1(1). 16–19. 10.1002/cplx.6130010105
    https://doi.org/10.1002/cplx.6130010105 [Google Scholar]
  50. Gell-Mann, Murray & Seth Lloyd
    2004 Effective complexity. InMurray Gell-Mann & Constantino Tsallis (eds.), Nonextensive entropy – Interdisciplinary applications, 387–398. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195159769.003.0028
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195159769.003.0028 [Google Scholar]
  51. Grinevald Craig, Colette
    1998 Language contact and language degeneration. In: Floriam Coulmas (ed.), The handbook of sociolingusitics, 257–270. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Grinevald, Colette & Michel Bert
    2011 Speakers and communities. InPeter K. Austin & Julia Sallabank (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, 45–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Hammarström, Harald
    2008 Complexity in numeral systems with an investigation into pidgins and creoles. InMatti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 287–304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.18ham
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.18ham [Google Scholar]
  54. Heath, Shirley Brice
    1972Telling tongues: Language policy in Mexico, colony to nation. New York: Teachers College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Hennings, Thordis
    2012Einführung in das Mittelhochdeutsche. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110259599
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110259599 [Google Scholar]
  56. Hill, Jane & Kenneth C. Hill
    1986Speaking Mexicano: Dynamics of syncretic language in Central Mexico. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Hooker, Cliff
    2011 Introduction to philosophy of complex systems: A. InCliff Hooker (ed.), Philosophy of complex systems, 3–90. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑444‑52076‑0.50001‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52076-0.50001-8 [Google Scholar]
  58. Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott
    2003Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  59. Ixhuatlán de Madero
    Ixhuatlán de Madero 1985Audio recording. Chicomexochitl, story 107. From Sandstrom and Sandstrom (1985–98). “Nahuatl Collection of Alan and Pamela Sandstrom” [myths, stories, chants, and other narratives recorded in northern Veracruz, Mexico]. The Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America, LLILAS Benson Latin American Studies and Collections, University of Texas at Austin. Available after free registration athttps://ailla.utexas.org/islandora/object/ailla%3A124452.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Jones, Howard & Martin Jones
    2019The Oxford guide to Middle High German. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199654611.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199654611.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  61. Karttunen, Frances
    1992An analytical dictionary of Nahuatl. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Key, Harold & Mary Ritchie de Key
    1953Vocabulario Mejicano de la Sierra de Zacapoaxtla, Puebla. México: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano, Secretaría de Educación Pública.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Köbler, Gerhard
    2014Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch. https://www.koeblergerhard.de/mndwbhin.html (last access16 February 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Król, T.
    2018 Powojenne wywózki i wysiedlenia: Przypadek Wilamowic. Warsaw: University of Warsaw MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Kusters, Wouter
    2003Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 2008 Complexity in linguistic theory, language learning and language change. InMatti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 3–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.03kus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.03kus [Google Scholar]
  67. Launey, Michel
    2011An introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Translated and adapted byChristopher Mackey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511778001
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511778001 [Google Scholar]
  68. Leiss, Elisabeth
    2015 The construction ‘sein’ (‘be’) + infinitive from Old High German to New High German. InMichail L. Kotin & Richard Whitt (eds.), To be or not to be? The verbum substantivum from synchronic, diachronic and typological perspectives, 123–141. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Lindgren, Kaj B.
    1980 Mittelhochdeutsch. InHans P. Althaus, Helmut Henne & Herbert E. Wiegand (eds.), Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik. Vol.III1, 580–584. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Lindström, Eva
    2008 Language complexity and interlinguistic difficulty. InMatti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 217–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.14lin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.14lin [Google Scholar]
  71. Lockhart, James
    1992The Nahuas after the conquest. A social and cultural history of the Indians of Central Mexico, sixteenth through eighteenth centuries. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Lockhart, James, Frances Berdan & Arthur J. O. Anderson
    (eds.) 1986The Tlaxcalan actas. A compendium of the records of the Cabildo of Tlaxcala (1545–1627). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Lockwood, William B.
    1968Historical German syntax. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. McWhorter, John
    2005Defining creole. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 2007Language interrupted: Signs of non-native acquisition in standard language grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309805.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309805.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  76. 2009 Oh nɔɔ!: a bewilderingly multifunctional Saramaccan word teaches us how a creole language develops complexity. InGeoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 141–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Meakins, Felicity, Xia Hua, Cassandra Algy & Lindell Bromham
    2019 Birth of a contact language did not favor simplification. Language95(2). 294–332. 10.1353/lan.2019.0032
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0032 [Google Scholar]
  78. Mesthrie, Rajend, Joan Swann, Ana Deumert & Williams L. Leap
    2009Introducing sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Miestamo, Matti
    2006 On the feasibility of complexity metrics. InKrista Kerge & Maria-Maren Sepper (eds.), Finest linguistics: Proceedings of the Annual Finnish and Estonian Conference of Linguistics, Tallinn, May 6–7, 2004, 11–26. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 2008 Grammatical complexity in a cross-linguistic perspective. InMatti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 23–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.04mie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.04mie [Google Scholar]
  81. 2009 Implicational hierarchies and grammatical complexity. InGeoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 80–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Mitchell, Melanie
    2009Complexity: A guided tour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Molina, P. Fr. Alonso de
    1880 (1555–1571)Vocabulario de la lengua mexicana. Edición facsimilaria publicada por Julio Platzmann. Leipsig: B. G. Teubner.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Moseley, Christopher
    2010Atlas of the world’s languages in danger. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Neels, Rinaldo
    2016 Language and identity in Wilamowice: A complex history of language choices and language attitudes. InJustyna Olko, Tomasz Wicherkiewicz & Robert Borges (eds.), Integral Strategies for Language Revitalization, 111–130. Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Ness, Silke van
    1990Changes in an obsolescing language: Pennsylvania German in West Virginia. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Newmeyer, Frederick J. & Laurel B. Preston
    2014 Introduction. InFrederick J. Newmeyer & Laurel B. Preston (eds.). Measuring grammatical complexity, 1–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  88. Nutini, Hugo H. & Barry L. Isaac
    2009Social stratification in Central Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Ocotepec
    Ocotepec 1638Conjunto de testamentos en lengua náhuatl. Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia (México). Tercera serie, papeles sueltos, registro número 9 caja 7, legajo 28, f.35r-v.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Olko, Justyna
    2018 Unbalanced language contact and the struggle for survival: Bridging diachronic and synchronic perspectives on Nahuatl. European Review26(1). 207–228. 10.1017/S1062798717000382
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798717000382 [Google Scholar]
  91. 2019 Language attitudes and educational opportunities: Challenging a history of oppression and assimilation among Indigenous communities in Mexico. Dutkansearvvi dieđalaš áigečála / Journal of the Sámi Language and Culture Research Association11. 1–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Olko, Justyna & Agnieszka Brylak
    2018 Defending local autonomy and facing cultural trauma: A Nahua order against idolotry, Tlaxcala 1543. Hispanic American Historical Review98(4). 573–604. 10.1215/00182168‑7160325
    https://doi.org/10.1215/00182168-7160325 [Google Scholar]
  93. Olko, Justyna & John Sullivan
    2014 Toward a comprehensive model for Nahuatl research and revitalization. Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, February 7–9, 2014, 369–397. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v40i0.3149
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v40i0.3149 [Google Scholar]
  94. 2016 Bridging gaps and empowering native speakers: An inclusive, partnership-based approach to Nahuatl research and revitalization. InJustyna Olko, Tomasz Wicherkiewicz & Robert Borges (eds.), Integral strategies for language revitalization, 347–385. Warsaw: University of Warsaw.
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Olko, Justyna, John Sullivan & Jan Szemińsk
    (eds.) 2018Dialogue with Europe, dialogue with the past. Colonial Nahua and Quechua elites in their own words. Louisville: University of Colorado Press. 10.5876/9781607328346
    https://doi.org/10.5876/9781607328346 [Google Scholar]
  96. Palosaari, Noami & Lyle Campbell
    2011 Structural aspects of language endangerment. InPeter Austin & Julia Sallabank (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, 100–119. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Paul, Hermann
    2007Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. 25th ed.Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Pharao Hansen, Magnus
    2014 The East-West split in Nahuan dialectology: Reviewing the evidence and consolidating the grouping. Conference paper presented atFriends of Uto-Aztecan Annual Meeting, Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico.
  99. Pizzigoni, Caterina
    ed. 2007Testaments of Toluca. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Reyes García, Luis
    2001¿Cómo te confundes? ¿Acaso somos conquistados? Anales de Juan Bautista. México: CIESAS.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de
    1982Florentine Codex. Historia general de las cosas de la Nueva España. Translated from the Aztec, with notes and illustrations byCharles E. Dibble and Arthur J. O. Anderson. Santa Fe: The School of American Research and the University of Utah.
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Sallabank, Julia
    2012 Diversity and language policy for endangered languages. InBernard Spolsky (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of language policy, 100–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511979026.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979026.008 [Google Scholar]
  103. 2013Attitudes to endangered languages: Identities and policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139344166
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139344166 [Google Scholar]
  104. Schmidt, Hans U.
    2017Einführung in die deutsche Sprachgeschichte. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler. 10.1007/978‑3‑476‑04325‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-04325-2 [Google Scholar]
  105. Schwaller, John
    2012 The expansion of Nahuatl as a Lingua Franca among priests in sixteenth-century Mexico. Ethnohistory59(4). 675–676. 10.1215/00141801‑1642707
    https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-1642707 [Google Scholar]
  106. Sell, Barry D., Louise M. Burkhart & Elizabeth R. Wright
    2008Nahuatl theater. Volume31: Spanish Golden Age drama in Mexican translation. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Shalizi, Cosma R.
    2006 Methods and techniques of complex science: An overview. arXiv:nlin/0307015v4 [nlin.AO]. InThomas S. Deisboeck & J. Yasha Kresh (eds.), Complex systems science in biomedicine, 33–114. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑33532‑2_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-33532-2_2 [Google Scholar]
  108. Sinnemäki, Kaius
    2008 Complexity trade-offs in core argument marking. InMatti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 67–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.06sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.06sin [Google Scholar]
  109. 2009 Complexity in core argument marking and population size. InGeoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 126–140. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  110. 2011 Language universals and linguistic complexity: Three case studies in core argument marking. Helsinki: University of Helsinki dissertation.
  111. Sonderegger, Stefan
    1979Grundzüge deutscher Sprachgeschichte: Einführung, Genealogie, Konstanten. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110842005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110842005 [Google Scholar]
  112. Sullivan, John, Eduardo de la Cruz Cruz, Abelardo de la Cruz de la Cruz, Delfina de la Cruz de la Cruz, Victoriano de la Cruz Cruz, Sabina Cruz de la Cruz, Ofelia Cruz Morales, Catalina Cruz de la Cruz & Manuel de la Cruz Cruz
    2016Tlahtolxitlauhcayotl: Chicontepec, Veracruz (Totlahtol Series). Warsaw: IDIEZ/University of Warsaw.
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Swiggers, Pierre
    2007 Two key concepts of language endangerment: Language obsolescence and language death. Linguistica47(1). 21–33. 10.4312/linguistica.47.1.21‑33
    https://doi.org/10.4312/linguistica.47.1.21-33 [Google Scholar]
  114. Tepoztlan
    Tepoztlan c. 1540 Biblioteka Jagellońska in Kraków, Ms. Amer. 3.
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Townsend, Camilla
    (ed.) 2010Here in this year. Seventeenth-century Nahuatl annals of the Tlaxcala-Puebla valley. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  116. UNESCO
    UNESCO 2003 Language vitality and endangerment. UNESCO ad hoc expert group on endangered languages document adopted by the International Expert Meeting on UNESCO programmeSafeguarding of Endangered Languages Paris, 10–12 March 2003, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000183699 (last access16 February 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Villavicencio Zarza, Frida
    2010 Entre una realidad plurilingüe y un anhelo de nación. Apuntespara un estudio sociolingüístico del siglo XIX. InRebeca Barriga Villanueva & Pedro Martín Butragueño (eds.), Historia sociolingüística de México. Vol.21, 713–793. Mexico: Colegio de Mexico.
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Vocabulario Trilingüe
    Vocabulario Trilingüe c. 1540 Newberry Library (Chicago), Ayer Collection, MS 1478.
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Wicherkiewicz, Tomasz, Tymoteusz Król & Justyna Olko
    2018 Awakening the language and speakers’ community of Wymysiöeryś. European Review26(1). 1–13. 10.1017/S1062798717000424
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798717000424 [Google Scholar]
  120. Wicherkiewicz, Tomasz & Justyna Olko
    2016 Researching, documenting and reviving Wymysiöeryś: A historical outline. InJustyna Olko, Tomasz Wicherkiewicz & Robert Borges (eds.), Integral strategies for language revitalization, 17–53. Warsaw: University of Warsaw.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Wicherkiewicz, Tomasz
    2003The making of a language. The case of the idiom of Wilamowice (Southern Poland). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Wright, Joseph
    1917Middle High German primer. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Zapata y Mendoza, Juan Buenaventura
    1995 (1662–1692)História cronológica de la Noble Ciudad de Tlaxcala. Transcripción paleográfica, traducción, presentación y notas de Luis Reyes García y Andrea Martínez Baracs. Tlaxcala: Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala, CIESAS.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): complexity; language endangerment; Nahuatl; simplification; Wymysorys
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