1887
Volume 40, Issue 4
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Nominalized verb phrases have been identified as a possible source of passive and impersonal constructions by Langacker & Munro (1975), Langacker (1976), and Givón (1981), with exemplification drawn almost exclusively from Uto-Aztecan languages, but have received relatively less attention than other sources (reflexive markers, generalized subject constructions, 3rd person plural constructions, inactive auxiliaries + resultative participles, etc.). The aim of this article is to review the available evidence concerning passive and impersonal constructions derived from nominalized VPs, with a view to establishing whether they are cross-linguistically recurrent and robust as a type. Such a review reveals that there are overall a few instances of passive/impersonal constructions that are likely to derive from nominalized VPs. In many of the other cases in which a nominalized VP has been hypothesized to be the source of a given passive or impersonal construction there is no conclusive evidence for reconstructing such a source, and in some cases even an alternative source can be posited. Even in this unfavourable situation, however, a tentative scenario of how nominalized VPs might evolve into passive and impersonal constructions may be sketched, in order to account for the few cases in which such a development is likely to have taken place. The onset stage of this development, in particular, capitalizes on the possibility offered by nominalized VPs to manipulate the argument structure of the verb by keeping the initiator of the event off the stage.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.40.4.05san
2017-01-30
2019-12-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y
    2011 Word-class changing derivation in typological perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M.W. Dixon (eds.), Language at large. Essays on syntax and semantics, 221–289. Leiden: Brill. doi: 10.1163/ej.9789004206076.i‑606.55
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004206076.i-606.55 [Google Scholar]
  2. Armendáriz, Rolando Gpe. Félix
    2005A grammar of River Warihío. PhD Dissertation, Houston, Rice University.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. van den Berg, René
    2008 Integration and interdependence in Oceanic research: An SIL perspective. Paper presented at the Conference on Directions in Oceanic Research , Newcastle, Australia, December 9-11.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. van den Berg, René & Brenda H. Boerger
    2011 A Proto-Oceanic passive? Evidence from Bola and Natügu. Oceanic Linguistics50(1): 221–246. doi: 10.1353/ol.2011.0000
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2011.0000 [Google Scholar]
  5. Braithwaite, Ben
    2003 Syntactic approaches to possessive constructions in Nuuchahnulth. In J.C. Brown & Michele Kalmar (eds.), Papers for the 38th International Conference on Salish and Neighbouring Languages, 7–22. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bugaeva, Anna
    2011 A diachronic study of the impersonal passive in Ainu. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal Constructions. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, 517–546. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.124.18bug
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.18bug [Google Scholar]
  7. Burgess, Don
    1984 Western Tarahumara. In Ronald W. Langacker (ed.), Studies in Uto-Aztecan Grammar, Vol. 4: Southern Uto-Aztecan Grammatical Sketches, 1–150. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Caballero, Gabriela
    2008Choguita Rarámuri (Tarahumara) Phonology and Morphology. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2014 Uto-Aztecan. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 724–742. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Casad, Eugene H
    1984 Cora. In Ronald W. Langacker (ed.), Studies in Uto-Aztecan Grammar, Vol. 4: Southern Uto-Aztecan Grammatical Sketches, 151–459. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Chapman, Shirley & Desmond C. Derbyshire
    1991 Paumarí. In Desmond C. Derbyshire & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian Languages, Vol. 3, 161–352. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, Cheng-Fu
    2005 Object voice and nominalization in Rukai. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics12: 35–47.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Comrie, Bernard & Sandra A. Thompson
    2007 Lexical nominalization. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, 334–381. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511618437.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618437.006 [Google Scholar]
  14. Coupe, Alexander
    2007A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110198522
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198522 [Google Scholar]
  15. Crevels, Mily
    2011 Who did what to whom in Magdalena (Itonama). International Journal of American Linguistics77 (4): 577–594. doi: 10.1086/662157
    https://doi.org/10.1086/662157 [Google Scholar]
  16. DeLancey, Scott
    2011 Finite structures from clausal nominalization in Tibeto-Burman. In Foong >Ha Yap , Karen >Grunow-Hårsta & Janick >Wrona (eds.), Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives, 343–360. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.96.12del
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.96.12del [Google Scholar]
  17. Dienst, Stefan
    2014A grammar of Kulina. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110341911
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110341911 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dixon, Robert M.W
    1999The Amazonian languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2004The Jarawara Language of Southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Dixon, Robert M.W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald
    1997 A typology of argument-determined constructions. In Joan Bybee , John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Essays on Language Function and Language Type. Dedicated to T. Givón, 71–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.82.08dix
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.82.08dix [Google Scholar]
  21. Ehrich, Veronika & Irene Rapp
    2000 Sortale Bedeutung und Argumentstruktur: ung-Nominalisierungen im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft19 (2): 245–303. doi: 10.1515/zfsw.2000.19.2.245
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsw.2000.19.2.245 [Google Scholar]
  22. Escalante, Fernando
    1990 Setting the record straight on Yaqui passives. International Journal of American Linguistics56 (2): 289–92. doi: 10.1086/466155
    https://doi.org/10.1086/466155 [Google Scholar]
  23. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
    1989A grammar of Pero. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Giacalone Ramat, Anna & Andrea Sansò
    2007 The spread and decline of indefinite man-constructions in European languages. An areal perspective. In Paolo Ramat & Elisa Roma (eds.), Europe and the Mediterranean as Linguistic Areas. Convergences from a Historical and Typological Perspective, 95–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.88.07gia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.88.07gia [Google Scholar]
  25. 2011 From passive to impersonal. A case study from Italian and its implications. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective, 189–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.124.07ram
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.07ram [Google Scholar]
  26. 2014Venire (‘come’) as a passive auxiliary in Italian. In Maud Devos & Jenneke van der Wal (eds.), COME and GO off the beaten grammaticalization path, 21–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Gildea, Spike
    1994 Semantic and pragmatic inverse: ‘Inverse alignment’ and ‘inverse voice’ in Carib of Surinam. In Talmy Givón (ed.), Voice and inversion, 187–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.28.11gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.28.11gil [Google Scholar]
  28. 1998On reconstructing grammar. Comparative Cariban morphosyntax. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Givón, Talmy
    1981 Typology and functional domains. Studies in Language5(2): 163–193. doi: 10.1075/sl.5.2.03giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.5.2.03giv [Google Scholar]
  30. 1988 Tale of two passives in Ute. In Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), Passive and voice, 417–440. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.16.14giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.16.14giv [Google Scholar]
  31. 1994a The pragmatics of de-transitive voice: Functional and typological aspects of inversion. In Talmy Givón (ed.), Voice and Inversion, 3–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.28.03giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.28.03giv [Google Scholar]
  32. 2006 Grammatical relations in passive clauses: A diachronic perspective. In Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö (eds.), Passivization and Typology. Form and Function, 337–350. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.68.19giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.68.19giv [Google Scholar]
  33. 2011Ute Reference Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/clu.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Givón, Talmy & Boniface Kawasha
    2006 Indiscrete grammatical relations. The Lunda passive. In Tasaku Tsunoda & Taro Kageyama (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations. In Honor of Masayoshi Shibatani, 15–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.65.05giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.65.05giv [Google Scholar]
  35. Guerrero Valenzuela, Lilián Graciela
    2004The syntax-semantic interface in Yaqui complex sentences: A Role and Reference Grammar analysis. Buffalo, NY: SUNY, Buffalo PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Haspelmath, Martin
    1990 The grammaticization of passive morphology. Studies in Language14(1): 25–72. doi: 10.1075/sl.14.1.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.14.1.03has [Google Scholar]
  37. Haugen, Jason D
    2008 Denominal verbs in Uto-Aztecan. International Journal of American Linguistics74(4): 439–470. doi: 10.1086/595573
    https://doi.org/10.1086/595573 [Google Scholar]
  38. Heath, Jeffrey
    1977 Review of Non-Distinct Arguments in Uto-Aztecan by Ronald W. Langacker. Language53(2): 457–461.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 1998 Hermit crabs: Formal renewal of morphology by phonologically mediated affix substitution. Language74: 728–750. doi: 10.2307/417001
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417001 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hengeveld, Kees
    1992Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110883282
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883282 [Google Scholar]
  41. Hill, Jane H
    2005A grammar of Cupeño. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2003Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  43. Horie, Kaoru
    2008 The grammaticalization of nominalizers in Japanese and Korean: A contrastive study. In María José López-Couso & Elena Seoane (eds.), Rethinking Grammaticalization: New perspectives, 169–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.76.09hor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.76.09hor [Google Scholar]
  44. Jacques, Guillaume
    2014 Denominal affixes as sources of antipassive markers in Japhug Rgyalrong. Lingua138: 1–22. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.09.011 [Google Scholar]
  45. Jacques, Guillaume & Anton Antonov
    2014 Direct/inverse systems. Language and Linguistics Compass 8/7: 301–318. doi: 10.1111/lnc3.12079
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12079 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kim, Eun-Sook
    2004 The Morphological Status of -ʔat in Nuu-chah-nulth. Berkeley Linguistics Society30(2): 61–72. doi: 10.3765/bls.v30i2.918
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v30i2.918 [Google Scholar]
  47. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria
    1993Nominalizations. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Kornfilt, Jaklin & John Whitman
    2011 Afterword: Nominalizations in syntactic theory. Lingua121(7): 1297–1313. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.01.008 [Google Scholar]
  49. Langacker, Ronald W
    1976Non-Distinct Arguments in Uto-Aztecan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Langacker, Ronald W. & Pamela Munro
    1975 Passives and their meaning. Language51(4): 789–830. doi: 10.2307/412694
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412694 [Google Scholar]
  51. Langdon, Margaret
    1992 Yuman Plurals: From Derivation to Inflection to Noun Agreement. International Journal of American Linguistics58(4): 405–424. doi: 10.1086/ijal.58.4.3519776
    https://doi.org/10.1086/ijal.58.4.3519776 [Google Scholar]
  52. LaPolla, Randy J
    2008 Nominalization in Rawang. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area31(2): 45–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Lynch, John , Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley
    2002The Oceanic languages. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Malchukov, Andrej
    2006 Constraining nominalization: Function/form competition. Linguistics44(5): 973–1009. doi: 10.1515/LING.2006.032
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.032 [Google Scholar]
  55. Malchukov, Andrej & Anna Siewierska
    2011 Introduction. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective, 1–15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.124.01mal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.01mal [Google Scholar]
  56. Matisoff, James A
    1972 Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genetivization. In John P. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 1, 237–257. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Meira, Sérgio & Sebastian Drude
    2013 Sobre a origem histórica dos “prefixos relacionais” das línguas Tupí-Guaraní. Cadernos de Etnolingüística5(1). www.etnolinguistica.org/issue:vol5n1
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Meira, Sérgio , Spike Gildea & Berend J. Hoff
    2010 On the origin of Ablaut in the Cariban Family. International Journal of American Linguistics76(4): 477–515. doi: 10.1086/658055
    https://doi.org/10.1086/658055 [Google Scholar]
  59. Munro, Pamela
    1974Topics in Mojave syntax. San Diego, CA: University of California at San Diego PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Nakayama, Toshihide
    1997 Functions of the Nootka (Nuu-chah-nulth) “Passive” Suffix. International Journal of American Linguistics63(3): 412–431. doi: 10.1086/466338
    https://doi.org/10.1086/466338 [Google Scholar]
  61. Noonan, Michael
    1992A grammar of Lango. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110850512
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110850512 [Google Scholar]
  62. 2008 Nominalization in Bodic languages. In María José López-Couso & Elena Seoane (eds.), Rethinking Grammaticalization: New perspectives, 219–237. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.76.11noo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.76.11noo [Google Scholar]
  63. Olawsky, Knut J
    2006A grammar of Urarina. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110892932
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110892932 [Google Scholar]
  64. Pardeshi, Prashant
    2007 No smoke without fire: Invisible agent constructions in South Asian languages. Kobe Papers in Linguistics5: 175–191.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Payne, Doris
    1994 The Tupí-Guaraní inverse. In Barbara Fox & Paul J. Hopper (eds.), Voice. Form and Function, 313–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.27.13pay
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.27.13pay [Google Scholar]
  66. Post, Mark W
    2011 Nominalization-based constructions in Tibeto-Burman: Typology and evolution. Paper presented at the 9th Biennial Conference of the Association for Linguistic Typology , University of Hong Kong, July 22, 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Ravinski, Christine
    2005Grammatical possession in Nuu-chah-nulth. Vancouver: University of British Columbia MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Refsing, Kirsten
    1986The Ainu language: The morphology and syntax of the Shizunai Dialect. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Riehl, Claudia Maria
    2001 Zur Grammatikalisierung der deutschen werden-Periphrasen (vom Germanischen zum Frühneuhochdeutschen). In Birgit Igla & Th. Stolz (eds.), “Was ich noch sagen wollte…” – A multilingual Festschrift for Norbert Boretzky on occasion of his 65th birthday, 469–487. Berlin: Akademie.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Rose, Françoise
    2009 A hierarchical indexation system: The example of Emerillon (Teko). In Patience Epps & Alexander Arkhipov (eds.), New challenges in typology. Transcending the borders and refining the distinctions, 63–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Ross, Malcolm
    2002 The history and transitivity of western Austronesian voice and voice-marking. In Fay Wouk & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The history and typology of Western Austronesian voice systems, 17–62. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 2009 Proto-Austronesian verbal morphology: A reappraisal. In Alexander Adelaar & Andrew Pawley (eds.), Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history: A Festschrift for Robert Blust, 295–326. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Sansò, Andrea
    2003Degrees of event elaboration. Passive constructions in Italian and Spanish. Milan: Franco Angeli.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 2015 Where do antipassives come from? A study in diachronic typology. Paper presented at the 22nd International Conference on Historical Linguistics . Naples (Italy), July 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Sansò, Andrea & Anna Giacalone Ramat
    2016 Deictic motion verbs as passive auxiliaries. The case of Italian andare ‘go’ (and venire ‘come’). Transactions of the Philological Society114(1): 1–24. doi: 10.1111/1467‑968X.12059
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12059 [Google Scholar]
  76. Sapir, Edward
    1930 Southern Paiute, A Shoshonean Language. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 65: 1–296.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Schneider, Cynthia
    2011Na passive and na- associative in Abma: Shared properties; Shared origin?Oceanic Linguistics50(2): 380–398. doi: 10.1353/ol.2011.0030
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2011.0030 [Google Scholar]
  78. Siewierska, Anna
    2008 Introduction: Impersonalization from a subject-centered vs. agent-centered perspective. Transactions of the Philological Society (Special issue: Impersonal Constructions in Grammatical Theory) 106(2): 1–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2008.00211.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2008.00211.x [Google Scholar]
  79. 2010 From 3pl to passive: Incipient, emergent and established passives. Diachronica27(3): 73–109. doi: 10.1075/dia.27.1.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.27.1.03sie [Google Scholar]
  80. 2011 Overlap and complementarity in reference impersonals. Man-constructions vs. third person plural-impersonals in the languages of Europe. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective, 57–89. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.124.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.03sie [Google Scholar]
  81. 2013 Passive Constructions. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: MPI for Evolutionary Anthropology. (wals.info/chapter/107).
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Sohn, Ho-Min
    2001The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Sridhar, Shikaripur R
    1990Kannada. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Starosta, Stanley , Andrew K. Pawley & Lawrence A. Reid
    1982 The evolution of focus in Austronesian. In Amran Halim , Lois Carrington & Stephen A. Wurm (eds.), Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Vol. 2: Tracking the Travellers, 145–170. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 2009[1982] The evolution of focus in Austronesian. [Unabridged version of Starosta, et al. 1982.] In Elizabeth Zeitoun (ed.), Formosan Linguistics: Stanley Starosta’s Contributions, Vol. 2, 329–481. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Sung, Li-May
    2011 Clausal nominalization in Budai Rukai. InFoong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona(eds.), Nominalization in Asian languages: Diachronic and typological perspectives, 523–559. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.96.19sun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.96.19sun [Google Scholar]
  87. Toosarvandani, Maziar
    2010 Patterns of nominalization in Numic. International Journal of American Linguistics76(1): 71–100. doi: 10.1086/652755
    https://doi.org/10.1086/652755 [Google Scholar]
  88. Vajda, Edward , Andrey Nefedov & Andrej Malchukov
    2011 Impersonal constructions in Ket. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective, 439–458. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.124.15vaj
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.15vaj [Google Scholar]
  89. van den Berg, René (see Berg).
  90. Van Dijk, Teun A
    2008 Critical discourse analysis and nominalization: problem or pseudo-problem?Discourse and Society19(6): 821–828. doi: 10.1177/0957926508095897
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508095897 [Google Scholar]
  91. Velázquez-Castillo, Maura
    2008 Voice and transitivity in Guaraní. In Mark Donohue & Søren Wichmann (eds.), The typology of semantic alignment, 380–395. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238385.003.0015
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238385.003.0015 [Google Scholar]
  92. Vogel, Petra Maria
    2006Das unpersönliche Passiv. Eine funktionale Untersuchung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Deutschen und seiner historischen Entwicklung. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110919431
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919431 [Google Scholar]
  93. Vries, Lourens de
    1995 Demonstratives, referent identification and topicality in Wambon and some other Papuan languages. Journal of Pragmatics24: 513–533. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00068‑P
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00068-P [Google Scholar]
  94. Weber, David John
    1989A grammar of Huallaga (Huánuco) Quechua. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Wiemer, Bjorn
    2004 The evolution of passives as grammatical constructions in Northern Slavic and Baltic languages. In Walter Bisang , Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Bjorn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and components, 271–331. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197440
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197440 [Google Scholar]
  96. Xu, Huiling & Stephen Matthews
    2011 On the polyfunctionality and grammaticalization of the morpheme kai in the Chaoxhou dialect. InFoong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wronaet al.(eds.), Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives, 109–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.96.03xu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.96.03xu [Google Scholar]
  97. Yap, Foong Ha & Stephen Matthews
    2008 The development of nominalizers in East Asian and Tibeto-Burman languages. In María José López-Couso & Elena Seoane (eds.), Rethinking Grammaticalization: New perspectives, 309–341. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.76.15yap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.76.15yap [Google Scholar]
  98. Yap, Foong Ya , Fanny Pik-ling Choi & Kam-siu Cheung
    2010 Delexicalizing di: How a Chinese noun has evolved into an attitudinal nominalizer. In An Van linden , Jean-Christophe Verstraete & Kristin Davidse (eds.), Formal Evidence in Grammaticalization Research, 63–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.94.04yap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.94.04yap [Google Scholar]
  99. Yap, Foong Ha , Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona
    2011 Introduction: Nominalization strategies in Asian languages. In F. Yap , et al. (eds.), Nominalization in Asian languages: Diachronic and typological perspectives, 1–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.96.01yap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.96.01yap [Google Scholar]
  100. Zigmond, Maurice L. , Curtis G. Booth & Pamela Munro
    1990Kawaiisu: A grammar and dictonary with texts. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.40.4.05san
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