Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures, tables, and charts
- Acknowledgments
- Preface
- 1 Introduction: how are languages shown to be related to one another?
- 2 The beginning of comparative linguistics
- 3 “Asiatic Jones, Oriental Jones”: Sir William Jones’ role in the raise of comparative linguistics
- 4 Consolidation of comparative linguistics
- 5 How some languages were shown to belong to Indo-European
- 6 Comparative linguistics of other language families and regions
- 7 How to show languages are related: the methods
- 8 The philosophical–psychological– typological–evolutionary approach to language relationships
- 9 Assessment of proposed distant genetic relationships
- 10 Beyond the comparative method?
- 11 Why and how do languages diversify and spread?
- 12 What can we learn about the earliest human language by comparing languages known today?
- 13 Conclusions: anticipating the future
- Appendix: Hypothesized distant genetic relationships
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures, tables, and charts
- Acknowledgments
- Preface
- 1 Introduction: how are languages shown to be related to one another?
- 2 The beginning of comparative linguistics
- 3 “Asiatic Jones, Oriental Jones”: Sir William Jones’ role in the raise of comparative linguistics
- 4 Consolidation of comparative linguistics
- 5 How some languages were shown to belong to Indo-European
- 6 Comparative linguistics of other language families and regions
- 7 How to show languages are related: the methods
- 8 The philosophical–psychological– typological–evolutionary approach to language relationships
- 9 Assessment of proposed distant genetic relationships
- 10 Beyond the comparative method?
- 11 Why and how do languages diversify and spread?
- 12 What can we learn about the earliest human language by comparing languages known today?
- 13 Conclusions: anticipating the future
- Appendix: Hypothesized distant genetic relationships
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Language ClassificationHistory and Method, pp. 416 - 507Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2008
References
Aalto, Pentti.1971. The alleged affinity of Dravidian and Fenno-Ugrian. Proceedings of the second International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies, 1968, ed. , 262–6. Madras: International Association of Tamil Research.Google Scholar
.1980. Nostraattisen kielisukulaisuuden onglema [The problem of Nostratic linguistic relationship].Societas Scientiarum Fennica ⅬⅧ, B 9.1–22.Google Scholar
.1988. The problem of “Nostratic.”AIWN 10.49–65. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
. 1982. From Locke to Saussure: essays on the study of language and intellectual history. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
.1988. Introduction. On language: the diversity of human language-structure and its influence on the mental development of mankind, Wilhelm von Humboldt, trans. Peter Heath, ⅶ–lⅹⅴ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Abondolo, Daniel. 1998. Introduction. The Uralic languages, ed. , 1–42. London: Blackwell.
. 1881. Les classifications de la linguistique. Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie Comparée 14.217–68.Google Scholar
1984. Grammatical vowel length and the classification of Quechua dialects. International Journal of American Linguistics 50.25–47.Google Scholar
.1986. La relación quechua-aru: perspectivas para la separación del léxico. Revista Andina 4.379–426.Google Scholar
. 1781. Über den Ursprung der Sprachen und den Bau der Wörter, besonders der deutschen. Berlin: Voss. (Reprinted 1975. Frankfurt am Main: Minerva.)Google Scholar
[with ]. 1806–17. Mithridates, oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde mit dem Vater Unser als Sprachprobe in bey nahe fünfhundert Sprachen und Mundarten. [4 vols. complete in Adelung's life time; the remaining 3 were completed by Johann Severin Vater.] Berlin: Voss. [Vol. 3, 1813–16, contains American and African languages; prepared largely by Vater.]Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y..2001. Areal diffusion, genetic inheritance, and problems of subgrouping: a North Arawak case study. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 167–94. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and R. M. W. Dixon. 2001. Introduction. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 1–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald-Angenot, Alexandra Y. and Jean-Pierre Angenot. 1989. The South-American Proto-Ge and the Old World. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 403–18. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1996. The seeds of speech: language origin and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1931. Siouan and Iroquoian. International Journal of American Linguistics 6.185–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1953. Relationship in comparative linguistics. Transactions of the Philological Society, 52–108. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alpher, Barry. 1990. Some Proto-Pama-Nyungan paradigms: a verb in the hand is worth two in the phylum. Studies in comparative Pama-Nyungan, ed. and , 155–71. (Pacific Linguistics C–111.) Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, the Australian National University.Google Scholar
Alpher, Barry.2004. Pama-Nyungan: phonological reconstruction and status as a philogenetic group. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 93–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammerman, A. J. and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1973. A population model for the diffusion of early farming in Europe. The explanation of cultural change, ed. , 343–57. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
1973. Dravidian-Greek connections. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 2.180–6.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning. 1988. Center and periphery: adoption, diffusion and spread. Historical dialectology, ed. , 39–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1975. Grammar-meaning universals and proto-language: reconstruction of proto-world now! ChicagoLinguistic Society 11.15–36.
1879. Studien zur Vergleichung der indogermanischen und finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen. (Gelehrte Ethnische Gesellschaft, Verhandlungen 9.)
. 1836. Remarks on the Hawaiian dialect of the Polynesian language. Chinese Repository 5(2).12–21.Google Scholar
1970. Correspondencias fonológicas entre el lenca y una lengua mayanse. Estudios de Cultura Maya 8.341–87. (Reprinted 1979 [Colección Antropología e Historia 15; Administración del Patrimonio Cultural.] San Salvador: Ministerio de Educación.)Google Scholar
1971. Comparative studies on the nature of Dravido-Uralian parallels: a peep into the prehistory of language families. Proceedings of the First International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 2(1).267–77.Google Scholar
Anttila, Raimo and Sheila Embleton. 1988. Review of Typology, relationship and time, ed. and . Canadian Journal of Linguistics 33.79–89.Google Scholar
. 1963. On Sahaptian-Klamath linguistic affiliations. International Journal of American Linguistics 29.107–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleyard, David. 1999. Afroasiatic and the Nostratic hypothesis. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 289–314. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1847. Hottentot grammar, Bushman dialects. The South African Christian Watchman and Missionary Magazine, 2.Google Scholar
.1850. The Kafir language: comprising a sketch of its history, which includes a general classification of South African dialects, ethnographical and geographical remarks upon its nature and a grammar. King William's Town: Wesleyan Methodist Mission Press.Google Scholar
. 1968. Posibles relaciones externas del grupo lingüístico maya. Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 6th series, 19(48).111–34. Mexico.Google Scholar
1946. Asiatic Jones: the life and influence of Sir William Jones (1746–1794): pioneer of Indian studies. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., published for The British Council.Google Scholar
. 1955. Sprachwissenschaft: der Gang ihrer Entwicklung von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Freiburg: Karl Alber. (2nd edition 1969.)Google Scholar
. 1971. Review of Uesson 1970. Sovjetskoje finno-ugrovedenije 1 2.144–6. Tallin, Estonia.Google Scholar
1969. Jones and Cœurdoux: correction to a footnote. Journal of the American Oriental Society 89.416–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. Proto-Witotoan. (Publications in Linguistics 114.) Arlington: SIL and University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Auroux, Sylvain. 1990. Representation and the place of linguistic change before comparative grammar. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 213–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1981. Court de Gébelin (1725–1784) et le comparatisme, deux textes inédits. Histoire épistémologie langage 3.21–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert. 1972. Long-range comparisons of Tamil and Dravidian with other language families in Eurasia. Proceedings of the Second International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 1.254–61, ed. . Madras: International Association for Tamil Research.Google Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert.1983. Genetic affiliation among proto-languages. Symposium Saeculare Societatis Fenno-Ugricae, ed. , and , 51–8. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 185.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert.1991. Alternatives in long-range comparison. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 353–64. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1986. Linguistique et histoire des pygmées de l'ouest du Bassin Congolais. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7.73–103.
Bakker, Peter. 2000. Rapid language change: creolization, intertwining, convergence. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , and , 585–620. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2004. Phoneme inventories, language contact, and grammatical complexity: a critique of Trudgill. Linguistic Typology 8.368–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. Zur Frage der indo-uralischen Verwandtschaft. Congressus Secundus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 1.37–45. Helsinki.
. 1826. Atlas ethnographique du globe, ou classification des peuples anciens et modernes d'après leurs langues précédé d'un discours, sur l'utilité et l'importance de l’étude des langues appliquée à plusiers branches des connaissances humaines. Paris: Rey et Gravier.Google Scholar
Baldi, Phillip. 1990. Introduction: the comparative method. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 1–13. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1874–6. The native races of the Pacific states of North America. 5 vols. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
Bartholomew, Doris A. 1967. Review (article) of Studies in southwestern ethnolinguistics: meaning and history in the languages of the American Southwest, ed. and . Lingua 23.66–86.Google Scholar
. 1797. New views on the origin of the tribes and nations of America. Philadelphia: Benjamin Smith Barton. (2nd edition, 1798, “corrected and greatly enlarged.”)Google Scholar
, , , , , , and . 1990a. The feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language. Current Anthropology 31.1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , , and . 1990b. On human phylogeny and linguistic history: reply to comments. Current Anthropology 31.177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte L. M. 1995. Language loss in Gaul: a case study of language conflict. Paper presented at the Symposium on Language Loss and Public Policy, University of New Mexico Linguistics Institute, Albuquerque, NM, July 1995.
1957. A history of the English language. 2nd edition. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.Google Scholar
Baxter, William H. and Alexis Manaster Ramer. 2000. Beyond lumping and splitting: probabilistic issues in historical linguistics. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , , and , 167–88. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1949. The Venetic language. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 4.) Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1991. The Austronesian dispersal and the origin of languages. Scientific American 265(1).88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1994. An archaeologist's view of language macrofamily relationships. Oceanic Linguistics 33.391–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1995. Language families and human dispersal. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5.271–4.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.1996. The origins and spread of agriculture in the Indo-Pacific region: gradualism and diffusion or revolution and colonization? The origins and spread of agriculture and pastoralism in Eurasia, ed. , 465–98. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.1997. The prehistoric cultural explanations for the existence of widespread language families. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 23–34. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.2000. The time depth of major language families: an archaeologist's perspective. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , , and , 109–40. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2001. Early agriculturalist population diasporas? Farming, languages and genes. Annual Review of Anthropology 30.181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.2002. Farmers, foragers, languages, genes: the genesis of agricultural societies. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 17–28. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2002. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1969. Chance CVC correspondences in unrelated languages. Language 45.519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1971. The languages of Ethiopia: a new lexicostatistic classification and some problems of diffusion. Anthropological Linguistics 13(5).165–288.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1987. First steps towards Proto-Omotic. Current approaches to African linguistics, vol. 4, ed. , 21–35. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1989. Nilo-Saharan pronouns/demonstratives. Topics in Nilo-Saharan linguistics, ed. , 1–34. (Nilo-Saharan: Linguistic Analyses and Documentation 3.) Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1991. Sub-classification of Nilo-Saharan. Proceedings of the Fourth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, ed. , 1–35. (Nilo-Saharan: Linguistic Analyses and Documentation 7.) Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1993a. Is Nilo-Saharan really a phylum? Paper presented at the 24th African Linguistics Conference, July 23–25, Columbus, Ohio.
.1997a. The Nilo-Saharan languages: a comparative essay. 2nd edition. (LINCOM Handbooks in Linguistics 6.) Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.2000. Nilo-Saharan. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 43–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1989. The Niger-Congo languages: a classification and description of Africa's largest language family. Lanham, NY: University Press of America.Google Scholar
1942. Thai, Kadai, and Indonesian: a new alignment in southeastern Asia. American Anthropologist 44.576–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedict, Paul K.1972. Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus, ed. James A. Matisoff. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
.1975a. Austro-Thai language and culture, with a glossary of roots. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files.Google Scholar
.1975b. Where it all began: memories of Robert Shafer and the “Sino-Tibetan linguistics project,” Berkeley 1939–40. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 2(1).81–91. Berkeley.Google Scholar
.1990. Japanese/Austro-Tai. (Linguistica Extranea, Studia 20.) Ann Arbor: Karoma Press.Google Scholar
Benediktsson, Hreinn. 1980. Discussion: Rask's position in genetic and typological linguistics. Typology and genetics of language: proceedings of the Rask-Hjelmslev Symposium, ed. , , , , and , 17–28. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 20.) Copenhagen: The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
. 1861. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland. Munich: Cotta.Google Scholar
.1869. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland seit dem Anfange des 19.Jahrhunderts mit einem Rückblick auf die früheren Zeiten. (Geschichte der Wissenschaften in Deutschland.) Munich: J. G. Gotta.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D. 1989. On the fallacy of “diminishing returns” in long range lexical comparison. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 30–3. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991a. Some Macro-Caucasian etymologies. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 130–41. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991b. Paleolexicology: a tool towards language origins. Studies in language origins, vol. 2, ed. , , and , 175–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991c. Notes on Sino-Caucasian. Dene–Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 67–129. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1992. The Macro-Caucasian phonology: the Dene-Caucasian macrophylum. Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 342–51. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
.1995. Some questions and theses for the American Indian language classification debate (ad Campbell, 1994). Mother Tongue (newsletter) 24.57–9.Google Scholar
.1997a. Ein Vergleich von Buruschaski und Nordkaukasich [A comparison of Burushaski and (North) Caucasian]. Georgica 20.88–94.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D. and Merritt Ruhlen. 1994a. Global etymologies. On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy, ed. Merritt Ruhlen, 277–336. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
and .1994b. Another look at ∗tik ‘finger, one.’California Linguistic Notes 24(2).9–11.Google Scholar
and .1997. In defense of multilateral comparison. California Linguistic Notes 25(3–4). 57.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Geoffrey. 1976. Austroasiatic subgrouping and prehistory in the Malay Peninsula. Austroasiatic studies, vol. 1, ed. , , and , 37–128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, Patrick R. 1983. Adamawa-Eastern: problems and prospects. Current approaches to African linguistics, ed. , 23–48. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 1995. The Pueblo region as a linguistic area. Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.Google Scholar
1956. Mittelmeerische Kulturpflanzennamen aus dem Burushaski. Indo-Iranian Journal 3.17–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 61.1–29. Helsinki.Google Scholar
.1978. Reflections on the comparison of Eskimo and Uralic. Tartu Riikliku Ülikooli Toimetised 455.131–8.Google Scholar
. 1983. Some California Penutian morphological elements. International Journal of American Linguistics 49.400–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1989. More California Penutian morphological elements. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 9.3–18.Google Scholar
.1992. A comment on the Yurok and Kalapuya data in Greenberg's Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.230–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1996. The position of Molala in Plateau Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 62.1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertolazo Stella, Jorge, 1929. As linguas indigenas da America. Offprint from Revista do Instituto Historico e Geographica de São Paulo 26, 1928.) São Paulo: Irmãos Ferraz.
1983. Comments on “Dravidian and Indo-European” by F. C. Southworth. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 12.212–13.Google Scholar
. 1548. De ratione communi omnium linguarum et literarum commentarius. Zurich: Froschauer.Google Scholar
1988. Redefining Pama-Nyungan: towards the prehistory of Australian languages. Aboriginal Linguistics 1.1–90.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J..1990. The significance of pronouns in the history of Australian languages. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 435–50. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, Barry J..1994. Australian languages. The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. and , vol. 1.266–73. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
1930. Die werschikisch-buruschkische Sprache im Pamijr-Gebiet und ihre Stellung zu den Japhetitensprachen des Kaukasus. Wiener Beiträge zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 1.289–331.Google Scholar
Blench, Roger. 1995. Is Niger-Congo simply a branch of Nilo-Saharan? Proceedings of the Fifth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, ed. and Franz , 83–130. (Nilo-Saharan Analysis and Documentation 10.) Cologne: Köppe.Google Scholar
. 1954. The grammatical structure of Dravidian languages. Poona: Deccan College. (English translation of Structure grammaticale des langues dravidiennes, by Ramkrishna Ganesh Harshé, 1946.)Google Scholar
1990. Comments on “Speaking of forked tongues: the feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language” by R. Bateman et al. Current Anthropology 31.15.Google Scholar
. 1911. Introduction to the Handbook of American Indian languages. Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 40, part 1, pp. 1–70. Washington. (Reprinted by Georgetown University, Institute of Languages and Linguistics.)Google Scholar
.1917. Introduction. International Journal of American Linguistics. 1.1–8. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 199–210.)Google Scholar
.1920. The classification of American languages. American Anthropologist 22.367–76. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 211–18.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1929. Classification of American languages. Language 5.1–7. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 219–25.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Franz.1933. Relations between north-west America and north-east Asia. The American aborigines: their origin and antiquity, ed. , 357–70. (Reprinted 1973. New York: Cooper Square Publishers.)Google Scholar
1982. Race, language and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
, , , and . 2004. Problematic use of Greenberg's linguistic classification of the Americas in studies of Native American genetic variation. American Journal of Human Genetics 75.519–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
.1986a. Common Indo-European/Afroasiatic roots: supplement 1. General Linguistics 24.225–57.Google Scholar
.1986b. Review of Markey and Shevoroshkin 1986. Diachronica 3.269–82. (Reprinted Mother Tongue [newsletter], April 10, 1990.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bomhard, Allan R..1998. Review of The Nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology, by Aharon Dolgopolsky. Nostratic: evaluating a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and . Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.1989. Lexical parallels between Proto-Indo-European and other languages. Supplement to Mother Tongue 9 (November/December).Google Scholar
Bomhard, Allan R..1990. A survey of the comparative phonology of the so-called “Nostratic” languages. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 331–58. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1994. The Nostratic macrofamily: a study in distant linguistic relationship. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1953. Ideas on the kinship of the European languages from 1200 to 1800. Cahiers d'Histoire Mondiale 1.679–99.Google Scholar
. 1971. Is there any relationship between Eskimo-Aleut and Uralo-Altaic?Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 21(3–4).401–7.Google Scholar
.1975. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅰ. Orbis 24.251–75.Google Scholar
.1978. A comparison between Eskimo-Aleut and Ural-Altaic demonstrative elements, numerals, and other semantic problems. International Journal of American Linguistics 44.40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1979. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅱ. Orbis 28.27–44.Google Scholar
.1984. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅲ. Orbis 33.256–72.Google Scholar
. 1816. Über das Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache in Vergleich- ung mit jenem der griechischen, lateinischen, persischen und germanischen Sprache, nebst Episoden des Ramajan und Mahabharat in genauen, metrischen Übersetzungen aus dem Originaltexte und einigen Abschnitten aus den Vega's. Frankfurt am Main: Andreäische Buchhandlung. (Reprinted 1974: Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics, 15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)
.1833–52. Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Armenischen, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litauischen, Altslavischen, Gothischen und Deutschen. 6 vols. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz1841[1840]. Über die Verwandtschaft der malayisch-polynesischen Sprache mit der indisch-europäischen. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 171–246. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 235–310. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz.1842. Über die Übereinstimmung der Pronomina des malayisch-polynesischen und indisch-europäischen Sprachstammes. Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 247–332. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleich- enden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 311–96. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz.1846. Über das Georgische in sprachverwandtschaftlicher Beziehung. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 259–339. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 250–339. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
.1854. Über das Albanische in seinen verwandschaftlichen Beziehungen. Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin, Abhandlungen Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 459–549. Berlin.Google Scholar
. 1982. Das indogermanische Sprachwandelmodell und Wandel in exotischen Sprachen. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 95.49–80.Google Scholar
.1984. The Indo-European model of sound change and genetic affinity and change in exotic languages. Diachronica 1.1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. Die Tschuktschische Gruppe und das Utoaztekische. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe. Acta Salmanticensia, Filosofía y Letras 5(6).69–78. Salamanca.Google Scholar
.1960a. Tungusisch und Ketschua. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 110.99–113.Google Scholar
.1961. Tschuktschisch und Uralisch Ⅰ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 111.335–60.Google Scholar
.1963. Zoque, ein zentralamerikanischer Brückenpfeiler zwischen Westasien (Kaukasus) und Peru. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 113.144–67.Google Scholar
.1965b. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅱ. AIWN 6.161–85. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
.1969. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe. Orbis 19.130–6.Google Scholar
.1970a. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅲ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 119.60–85.Google Scholar
.1970b. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅳ. Orbis 19.130–6.Google Scholar
Bouda, Karl.1979. Giljakisch und Uralisch Ⅱ. Explanationes et tractationes fenno-ugricae in honorem Hans Fromm, ed. , 29–36. (Münchener Universitätsschriften, Finnisch-Ugrische Bibliothek 3.) Munich: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
.1980. Giljakisch und Uralisch Ⅲ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 130.393–6.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2004a. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowern, Claire and Harold Koch.2004b. Introduction: subgrouping methodology in historical linguistics. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 1–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowlby, John. 1990. Charles Darwin: a new life. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
[anonymous pamphlet]. 1647. Antwoord von M[arcus] Z[uerius] van B[oxhorn] op de Vraaghen, hem voorgestelt over de Bediedinge van de tot noch toe onbekende Afgodinne Nehalennia, onlancx uytgegeven. In welcke de ghemeine herkomste van der Griecken, Romeinen, ende Duytschen Tale uyt den Scythen duydelijck bewesen, ende verscheiden Oudheden van dese Volckeren grondelijck ontdeckt ende verklaert. Leyden: Willem Cristiaens van der Boxe.Google Scholar
1978. A propos des ressemblances lexicales entre Niger-Congo et Nilo-Sahariennes. Etudes comparatives BSELAF 65.43–94. Paris.Google Scholar
.1906. Ein Prodromus zu einem vergleichenden Wörterbuch der malaio-polynesischen Sprachen für Sprachforscher und Ethnographen. Lucerne: E. Haag.Google Scholar
.1916. An introduction to Indonesian linguistics, trans. C. O. Blagden. London: The Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
and . 1982. Evolution of tribal social networks: theory and prehistoric North American evidence. American Antiquity 47.504–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1983. Sanctius’ theory of language: a contribution to the history of renaissance linguistics. (Studies in the History of Linguistics 27.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bright, William. 1954. Some Northern Hokan relationships: a preliminary report. Papers from the symposium on American Indian linguistics, ed. , , , and , 57–62. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 10.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1955. A bibliography of the Hokan-Coahuiltecan languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 21.276–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bright, William.1970. On linguistic unrelatedness. International Journal of American Linguistics 36.288–90.CrossRef
.1984. The classification of North American and Meso-American Indian languages. American Indian linguistics and literature, 3–29. Berlin: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1991. Sapir and distant linguistic relationship. The Edward Sapir Society of Japan (newsletter) 5.19–25. Tokyo.Google Scholar
1859. Notes on the Floridian Peninsula, its literary history, Indian tribes and antiquities. Philadelphia: Joseph Sabin.Google Scholar
.1869. The nature of the Maya group of languages. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 11.4–6.Google Scholar
.1885a. American Indian languages and why we should study them. Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 9.15–35. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 308–27.)Google Scholar
Brinton, Daniel G..1885b. Wilhelm von Humboldt's researches in American languages. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 328–48.)
1888. The language of palæolithic man. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society3–16. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 390–409.)Google Scholar
1890. The earliest form of human speech, as revealed by American tongues: essays of an Americanist. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates.
.1891. The American race: a linguistic classification and ethnographic description of the native tribes of North and South America. New York: N. D. C. Hodges.Google Scholar
Broadbent, Sylvia M. and Harvey Pitkin. 1964. A comparison of Miwok and Wintun. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 19–45. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1908. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, vol. 1: Laut- und Formenlehre. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.Google Scholar
1989. Particles borrowed from Spanish as discourse markers in Mayan languages. Anthropological Linguistics 29.507–521.Google Scholar
Brody, Jill M..1995. Lending the “unborrowable”: Spanish discourse markers in indigenous American languages. Spanish in four continents: studies in language contact and bilingualism, ed. , 132–47. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1979. Aspects of the phonological history of Mayan-Zoquean. International Journal of American Linguistics 45. 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1884. Zur Frage nach den Verwandtschaftsverhältnissen der indogermanischen Sprachen. Internationale Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 1.226–56.Google Scholar
1969. Die gemeinsamen Wurzeln des semitischen und des indogermanischen Wortschatzes. Versuch einer Etymologie. Bern and Munich: Francke.Google Scholar
Bugge, Sophus. 1902. Bemerkungen. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache, by , 57–107. Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
. 1996. Deep linguistic prehistory with particular reference to Andamanese. Working Papers 45.5–214. Lund University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 1943. Dravidian studies Ⅳ: the body in Dravidian and Uralian. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11.328–56.Google Scholar
1944. The body in Dravidian and Uralian. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 9.328–56.
and . 1961. A Dravidian etymological dictionary. (2nd edition 1984.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. 1856. Der athapaskische Sprachstamm. Abhandlungen der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1855.149–319.Google Scholar
1859. Die Spuren der aztekischen Sprache im nördlichen Mexico und höheren amerikanischen Norden. Abhandlungen der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1854, supplementary vol. 2. Berlin.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1986. August Schleicher: Indo-Europeanist and general linguist. Studies in the history of Western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 129–49. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1856. A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages. London: Harrison. (2nd edition 1875; 3rd edition 1913: London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Reprinted 1974, New Delhi: Oriental Books.)Google Scholar
1958. California Penutian: history and bibliography. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1967. Miwok-Costanoan as a subfamily of Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 33.224–7.Google Scholar
Callaghan, Catherine A..1980. An “Indo-European” type paradigm in Proto Eastern Miwok. American Indian and Indo-European studies: papers in honor of Madison S. Beeler, ed. , , and , 331–8. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callaghan, Catherine A..1991. Climbing a low mountain. A festschrift for William F. Shipley, ed. and , 47–59. Santa Cruz: Syntax Research Center, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
and . 1962. Swadesh's Macro-Mixtecan hypothesis and English. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 18.278–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1816. A grammar of the Teloogoo language commonly called the Gentoo. (Reprinted, 3rd edition (from 1849), 1991. Madras: Asian Educational Services.)Google Scholar
. 1972. Mayan loan words in Xinca. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.187–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1973. Distant genetic relationships and the Maya-Chipaya hypothesis. Anthropological Linguistics 15(3).113–35. (Reprinted 1993, in Special issue: a retrospective of the Journal of Anthropological Linguistics: selected papers, 1959–1985. AnthropologicalLinguistics 35(1–4).66–89.
.1977. Quichean linguistic prehistory. (University California Publications in Linguistics 81.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1978. Distant genetic relationship and diffusion: a Mesoamerican perspective. Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists 52.595–605. Paris.Google Scholar
1979. Middle American languages. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. Lyle Campbell and Marianne Mithun, 902–1000. Austin: University of Texas Press.
.1987. Syntactic change in Pipil. International Journal of American Linguistics 53.253–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1988. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph H. Greenberg. Language 64.591–615.
.1994a. The American Indian classification controversy: an insider's view. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 23.41–55.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1994b. Problems with the pronouns in proposals of remote relationships among Native American languages. Proceedings of the meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas and the Hokan-Penutian workshop, ed. , 1–20. (Survey of Californian and other Indian Languages, Report 8.) Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
.1995. The Quechumaran hypothesis and lessons for distant genetic comparison. Diachronica 12.157–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997a. American Indian languages: the historical linguistics of Native America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1997c. Genetic classification, typology, areal linguistics, language endangerment, and languages of the north Pacific rim. Languages of the North Pacific Rim, vol. 2, ed. and , 179–242. Kyoto: Kyoto University.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1997d. The linguistic prehistory of Guatemala. Papers in honor of William Bright, ed. , , and , 183–92. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1998. Nostratic: a personal assessment. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 107–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1999. Nostratic and linguistic palaeontology in methodological perspective. Nostratic: evaluating a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 179–230. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
2000. Review of Language relations across Bering Strait: reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence by Michael Fortescue. Anthropological Linguistics 42.572–9.
Campbell, Lyle.2002. What drives linguistic diversity and language spread? Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 49–63. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.2003a. How to show languages are related: methods for distant genetic relationship. Handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 262–82. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.2003b. Beyond the comparative method? Historical linguistics, ed. and , 33–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
.2004. Historical linguistics: an introduction. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Ives Goddard. 1990. American Indian languages and principles of language change. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 17–32. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1988. Word order universals: refinements and clarifications. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 33.209–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1983. Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship: getting it straight. American Anthropologist 85.362–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Marianne Mithun. 1979. North American Indian historical linguistics in current perspective. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 3–69. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1952. Sir William Jones, orientalist: an annotated bibliography of his works. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
.1964. Oriental Jones: a biography of Sir William Jones (1756–1794). London: Asia Publishing House for India Council for Cultural Relations.Google Scholar
.1990. The life and mind of oriental Jones: Sir William Jones, the father of modern linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland H., Jr..1991. Jones's “sprung from some common source”: 1786–1986. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 23–47. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1956. A new approach to Australian linguistics. (Oceania Linguistic Monographs 1.) Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
.1962. Some linguistic types in Australia (Handbook of Australian languages, part 2.) (Oceania Linguistic Monographs 7.) Sydney: University of Sydney.
.1975. Ergative constructions in Australian languages. Working papers in language and linguistics 2.1–7. Tasmanian College of Advanced Education, Launceston.Google Scholar
Capell, A..1979. The history of Australian languages: a first approach. Australian linguistic studies, ed. , 419–619. (Pacific Linguistics C-71.) Canberra: Australian National University.
. 1840. A brief essay on the Feejeean language, addressed to the secretaries of the Wesleyan Missionary Society. Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society Report 8.132–43.Google Scholar
. 1847. Lettre de M. le Dr. Castrén à l'Académicien Sjoegren. Lue 30 janv. 1846. Bulletin de la classe historico-philologique de l'Academie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 3.225–44.Google Scholar
.1850. De affixibus personalibus linguarum altaicarum dissertatio. Helsinki: Litteris Frenckellianis.Google Scholar
.1856. Reiseberichte und Briefe aus den Jahren 1845–49. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
.1857. Ethnologische Vorlesungen über die altaischen Völker, nebst samojedischen Märchen und tatarischen Heldensagen. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
.1862. Über die Personalaffixe in den altaischen Sprachen. Kleinere Schriften, 151–222. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
. 1998. Basic Burushaski etymologies: the Indo-European and Paleo-Balkanic affinities of Burushaski. Munich: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Catford, J. C. 1991. The classification of Caucasian languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 232–68. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1988. Reconstruction of human evolution: bringing together genetic, archaeological, and linguistic data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 85.6002–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and . 1992. Coevolution of genes and languages revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 89.5620–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 1986. Comentario [sobre] Willem F. H. Adelaar, La relación quechua-aru: perspectiva para la separación del léxico. Revista Andina 4. 403–8.Google Scholar
.1987. Lingüística quechua. (Biblioteca de la tradición oral andina 8.) Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Rurales Andinos “Bartolomé de las Casas.”Google Scholar
.1964. Another look at Siouan and Iroquoian. American Anthropologist 66.852– 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L.1973. Siouan, Iroquoian, and Caddoan. Linguistics in North America, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok, 1164–1209. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton. (Reprinted 1976, in Native languages of the Americas, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok, 527–72. New York: Plenum Press.)
.1987. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph H. Greenberg. Current Anthropology 28.652–3.Google Scholar
. 1910. The Uran: a new South American linguistic stock. American Anthropologist 12.417–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, Hilary. 2001. Language contact and areal diffusion in Sinitic languages. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 328–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, [, ]. 1870. Notice sur quelques familles de langues du Mexique. Le Havre: Imprimerie Lepellatier.Google Scholar
, [, ].1872. Recherches sur les lois phonétiques dans les idiomes de la famille mame-huastèque. Paris: Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
, [, ].1883. Mélanges de philologie et de paléographie américaines. Paris: Ernest Leroux. [Includes: Sur les lois phonétiques dans les idiomes de la famille mame-huastèque, 91–121; reprint of 1872.]Google Scholar
1932. Polynesian and Oceanic elements in the Chimu and Inca languages. Journal of the Polynesian Society 41.144–56.Google Scholar
Christy, T. Craig. 1980. Uniformitarianism in nineteenth-century linguistics: implications for a reassessment of the neogrammarian sound-law doctrine. Progress in linguistic historiography, ed. , 249–56. (Studies in the History of Linguistics 20.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christy, T. Craig.1983. Uniformitarianism in linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
1985. Baskskii i sevepokavkazskie yazuki [Basque and North-Caucasian languages]. Drevnyaya Anatoliya, 95–105. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Clark, Ross. 1987. Austronesian languages. The world's major languages, ed. , 899–912. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1973. Problèmes d'une comparison indo-ouralien. Cahiers de l'Institute de Linguistique 1(2).279–92. (Université Catholique de Louvain.)Google Scholar
Clauson, Gerard.1959a. The earliest Turkish loan words in Mongolian. Akten des vierundzwanzigsten Internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, ed. , 593–5. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Clauson, Gerard.1959b. The case for the Altaic theory examined. Akten des vierundzwanzigsten Internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, ed. , 599–601. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
.1969. A lexicostatistical appraisal of the Altaic theory. Central Asiatic Journal 13.1–23.Google Scholar
Cœurdoux, Gaston Laurent. 1784–93[1767]. [Letter to Abbé Barthélémy published in] Mémoires de littérature de […] l'Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 49.647–67, by . Paris.Google Scholar
Cohen, Marcel. 1924. Langues chamito-sémitiques. Les langue du monde, 2 vols., ed. André Meillet and Marcel Cohen, 81–151. Paris: Champion.
.1947. Essai comparatif sur le vocabulaire et la phonétique du chamito-sémitique. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
. 1994. Phyletic links between Proto-European and Proto-Northwest Caucasian. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 21.8–20.Google Scholar
Cole, Desmond T. 1971. The history of African linguistics to 1945. Linguistics in Sub-Saharan Africa, ed. and , 1–29. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1934. Indo-uralisches Sprachgut: die Urverwandtschaft zwischen der indoeuropäischen und der uralischen (finnischugrisch-samojedischen) Sprachfamilie. Uppsala Universitets årsskrift 1.1–116.
Collinder, Björn.1943. Indo-uralische Nachlese. Språkvetenskapliga Sällskapets i Uppsala Förhandlingar, 1943–1945. 1–6. (Reprinted in Collinder 1964b: 133–40.)
.1946–8. La parenté linguistique et le calcul des probabilités. Språkvetenskapliga sällskapets i Uppsala Förhandlingar, 1946–1948. Uppsala Universitets årsskrift 13.1–24.Google Scholar
.1954. Zur indo-uralischen Frage. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Språkvetenskapliga sällskapets i Uppsala förhandlingar, 1952–1954 10.79–91. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells.Google Scholar
.1955b/1977. Fenno-Ugric vocabulary: an etymological dictionary of the Uralic languages. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. (2nd edition 1977. Hamburg: Buske.)Google Scholar
Collinder, Björn.1964a. La regle de succession dans le calcul des probabilités. (Reprinted in Collinder 1964b: 184–202.)
.1965a. An introduction to the Uralic languages. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1965b. Hat das Uralische Verwandte? Eine sprachvergleichende Untersuchung. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 1(4).109–80.Google Scholar
.1967. Die indouralische Sprachvergleichung und die Laryngaltheorie. Die Sprache 13.179–80.Google Scholar
.1970. Nachtrag zum Aufsatz “Die indouralische Sprachvergleichung und die Laryngaltheorie.”Die Sprache 16.174–5.Google Scholar
.1974. Indo-Uralisch oder gar Nostratisch? “Antiquitates Indogermanicae” Gedenkschrift für H. Güntert. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 12.363–75.Google Scholar
. 1657. Opera didactica omnia. Variis hucusque occasionibus scripta, diversisque locis edita: nunc autem non tantum in unum, ut simul sint, collecta, sed et ultimo conatu in systema unum mechanice constructum, redacta. Amsterdam: D. Laurentius de Geer. (Reprinted 1952, Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemslovenicae, 3 vols.)Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1981. The genetic affiliation of Kamchadal: some morphological evidence. Studies in the languages of the USSR, ed. , 109–20. Edmonton: Linguistic Research.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1989. Genetic classification, contact, and variation. Synchronic and diachronic approaches to linguistic variation and change, ed. , 81–93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1992. Before complexity. The evolution of human languages, ed. and , 193–210. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Google Scholar
.1993. Review of Altajskaja problema i proisxoždenie japonskogo jazyka [The Altaic problem and the origin of the Japanese language], by Sergej A. Starostin. Language 69.828–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1999. Nostratic language and culture: some methodological reflections. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 243–55. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1896. Eine indochinesische causativ-denominativ-Bildung und ihr Zusammenhang mit den Tonaccenten: ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Grammatik der indochinesischen Sprachen, insonderheit des Tibetischen, Barmanischen und Chinesischen.Leipzig: Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
. 1987. Elementos de fonología comparada de las lenguas misumalpas. Filología y Lingüística 13.129–61. San José, Costa Rica.Google Scholar
.1991. Las lenguas del área intermedia: introducción a su estudio areal. San José: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica.Google Scholar
. 1777. A voyage towards the South Pole, and round the world, performed in His Majesty's ships the Resolution and Adventure, in the years 1772, 1773, 1774, and 1775. London: Strahan and Cadell.
. 1970a. Die indouralische Sprachverwandtschaft und die indogermanische Laryngaltheorie. Slovenska Akademija Znanosti in Umetnosti 7(5).185–229. Ljubljana.Google Scholar
.1970c. Indouralica Ⅶ. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 84.151–74.Google Scholar
.1974b. Indouralica VIII. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 24.87–116. Budapest.Google Scholar
.1974c. Indouralica Ⅴ. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 88.41–58.Google Scholar
.1975. Die indogermanische Deklination im Lichte der indouralischen vergleichenden Grammatik. (Slovenska Akademija Znanosti in Umetnosti 31.) Ljubljana.Google Scholar
Čop, Bojan.1979. Indogermanisch-Anatolisch und Uralisch. Hethitisch und Indogermanisch, ed. , 8–24. Innsbruck: E. Neu.Google Scholar
1995. The Tower of Babel and Babylon, Gilgamesh, Ningizzida, Gudea. (www.mazzaroth.com/ChapterThree/TowerOfBabel.htm)
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1977. Sobre la tipología lingüística de Wilhelm von Humboldt. Tradición y novedad en la ciencia del lenguaje, 142–84. Madrid: Gredos. (Originally in 1972 Beiträge zur vergleichenden Literaturgeschichte, Festschrift für Kurt Wais, 235–66. Tübingen: Niemeyer.)
. 1773–82 [1776]. Monde primitif analysé et comparé avec le monde moderne. 9 vols. Paris: Antoine Court de Gébelin.Google Scholar
1962. Statistical determination of linguistic relationships. Studia Linguistica 16.57–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, James M. 1976. A comparison of Chimariko and Yuman. Hokan studies: papers from the first conference on Hokan languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 177–91. (Janua Linguarum, series practica 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, James M..1979. Timucua and Yuchi: two language isolates of the Southeast. The languages of Native America: historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 327–54. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, James M..1988. On the relationship of Timucua to Muskogean. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native America linguistics, ed. , 157–64. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2005. Editor's introduction. Genetic linguistics: essays on theory and method, by , ed. , ⅺ–ⅹⅹⅹⅵ. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crosby, Alfred W. 1993. Ecological imperialism: the biological expansion of Europe, 900–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crowley, Terry. 1992. An introduction to historical linguistics. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
1997. Chipping away at the past: a northern New South Wales perspective. Archaeology and linguistics: Aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. Patrick McConvell and Nicholas Evans, 275–95. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
1999. Review of The rise and fall of languages by R. M. W. Dixon. Australian Journal of Linguistics 19.109–15.
Crowley, Terry and R. M. W. Dixon. 1981. Tasmania. Handbook of Australian languages, vol. 2, ed. and , 394–421. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1912. Notes de phonétique historique: Indo-européen et sémitique. Revue de Phonétique 2.101–32.Google Scholar
.1924. Etudes prégrammaticales sur le domaine des langues indo-européenes et chamito-sémitiques. Paris: E. Champion.Google Scholar
.1943. Recherches sur le vocalisme, le consonantisme et la formation des racines en “nostratique,” ancéstre de l'indo-européen et du chamito-sémitique. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
.1946. Invitation à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennės et des langues chamito-sémitiques. Bordeaux: Editions Biére.Google Scholar
. 1870. Zur Geschichte der griechischen zusammengezogenen Verbalformen. Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik 3.377–401. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
.1871. Zur Erklärung der Personal endungen. Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik 4.211–30. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Cyffer, Norbert. 2000. Linguistic properties of the Saharan languages. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description: Africa south of the Sahara, ed. , 30–59. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
and . 1836. Etudes grammaticales sur la langue euskarienne. Paris: Arthus Bertrand.
Dahl, Östen. 2001. Principles of areal typology. Language universals and language typology: an international handbook, ed. , , , and , 1456–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1930. Quechua and Maori. Mitteilungen der Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien 60.343–51.Google Scholar
. c.1305. De vulgari eloquentia. (English translation 1981, Dante in hell: the De vulgari eloquentia, introduction, translation, and commentary by Warman Welliver. Ravenna: Longo Editore.)Google Scholar
. 1969. The development of American anthropology 1879–1920: from the Bureau of American Ethnology to Franz Boas. University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. dissertation, Philadelphia.
.1990. Edward Sapir: linguist, anthropologist, humanist. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo. 1975. Language classification in the nineteenth century. Historiography of linguistics, ed. , 607–717. (Current Trends in Linguistics 13.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo.1986. Karl Brugmann and late nineteenth-century linguistics. Studies in the history of Western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 150–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo.1992. Comparative-historical linguistics. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , 2.159–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine. 1968. Some Macro-Jê relationships. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.42–7. (Reprinted 1985 in South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 287–303. Austin: University of Texas Press.)Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine.1974. Keresan-Caddoan comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 40.265–7.CrossRef
Davis, Irvine.1979. The Kiowa-Tanoan, Keresan, and Zuni languages. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 390–443. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine.1989. A new look at Aztec-Tanoan. General and Amerindian ethnolinguistics: in remembrance of Stanley Newman, ed. and , 365–79. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1980. Neue Aspekte zum Sprachverhältnis Uralisch-Indogermanisch. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 52.11–20.Google Scholar
.1988. Bojan Čop's contribution to Nostratic studies. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 60.199–200.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1977. Eurasia Nostratica: Festschrift für K. H. Menges. (Biblioteca Nostratica 1.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
de Guignes, Joseph. 1770. See Guignes, Joseph de. 1770.
de Laet, Johannes. 1643. See Laet, Johannes de.
DeLancey, Scott. 1987. Morphological parallels between Klamath and Wintu. Papers of the 1987 Hokan-Penutian languages workshop and Friends of Uto-Aztecan workshop, ed. , 50–60. (Occasional Papers on Linguistics 14.) Carbondale, IL: Department of Linguistics, Southern Illinois University.
.1988a. Klamath and Wintu pronouns. International Journal of American Linguistics 53.461–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott.1988b. Klamath stem structure in genetic and areal perspective. Papers from the 1988 Hokan-Penutian languages workshop, ed. , 50–168. Eugene: Department of Linguistics, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott.1990. Sino-Tibetan languages. The major languages of Asia and SE Asia, ed. , 69–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
.1992. Klamath and Sahaptian numerals. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.235–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott, Carol Genetti, and Noel Rude. 1988. Some Sahaptian-Klamath-Tsimshianic lexical sets. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native American linguistics, ed. , 193–224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1880. Einleitung in das Sprachstudium: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und Methodik der Vergleichenden Sprachforschung. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Haertel. (2nd edition, 1884.) [English translation, 1989: Introduction to the study of language: a critical survey of the history and methods of comparative philology of Indo-European languages, by Konrad Koerner. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.]Google Scholar
1981. Consonantal symbolism in American Indian languages. Journal of the Linguistic Association of the Southwest 4.130–42.Google Scholar
. 1971. Aportes jesuíticos a la filología colonial venezolana. 2 vols. Caracas: Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, Seminario de Lenguas Indígenas.Google Scholar
. 1934–8. Vergleichende Lautlehre des austronesischen Wortschatzes 3 vols. (Supplements to Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen-Sprachen 15 [1934], 17 [1937], and 19 [1938]). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
. 1994. The historical development of pronoun paradigms in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. Australian Journal of Linguistics 14.155–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dench, Alan.2001. Descent and diffusion: the complexity of the Pilbara situation. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 105–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1913. Mexican linguistics: including Nauatl or Mexican in Aryan phonology, the primitive Aryans of America, a Mexican-Aryan comparative vocabulary, morphology and the Mexican verb, and the Mexican-Aryan sibilants, with an appendix on comparative syntax. Chicago: T. S. Denison & Company.Google Scholar
1995. Darwin's dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
1990. Uralic and Indo-European in the Northern Eurasian Area: typological characterization and comparison. Congressus Septimus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. and , 3.23–9. Debrecen.Google Scholar
Diakonof, I. M. 1990. Language contacts in the Caucasus and the Near East. When worlds collide, ed. and , 53–65. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, Paul. 1974. The foundation of comparative linguistics: revolution or continuation? Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 277–306. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
.1994. The lexical evidence for Austric, so far. Oceanic Linguistics 34.309–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 2001. Areal diffusion versus genetic inheritance: an African perspective. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 358–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W..1990. Summary report: linguistic change and reconstruction in the Australian language family. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 393–401. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W..2001. The Australian linguistic area. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 64–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. and Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. 1999. Introduction. The Amazonian languages, ed. and , 1–21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1905. The Shasta-Achomawi: a new linguistic stock with four new dialects. American Anthropologist 7.213–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1913a. Relationship of the Indian languages of California. Science, n.s., 37.225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1913b. New linguistic families in California. American Anthropologist 15.647–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1919. Linguistic families of California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 16.47–118.Google Scholar
.1796. Litterarische Nachrichten von einer auf Veranlassung der böhmischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften im Jahre 1792 unternommenen Reise nach Schweden und Rußland. Nebest einer Vergleichung der Russischen und Böhmischen Sprache nach dem Petersburger Vergleichungs-Wörterbuch aller Sprachen. Prague.Google Scholar
.1799. [Review of] Gyarmathi Sámuel, Affinitas …Allgemeine Literaturzeitung zu Jena 3.49–54, 57–9. Jena.Google Scholar
Doerfer, G. 1963–75. Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung älterer neupersischer Geschichtquellen, von allem der Mongolen- und Timuridenzeit. 4 vols. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.
.1966. Zur Verwandtschaft der altaischen Sprachen. Indogermanische Forschungen 71.81–123.Google Scholar
.1968. Zwei wichtige Probleme der Altaistik. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 69.3–21.Google Scholar
Doerfer, G..1973. Lautgesetz und Zufall: Betrachtungen zum Omnikomparatismus. (Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 10, ed. .) Innsbruck: Institut für Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
.1974. Ist das Japanische mit den altaischen Sprachen verwandt?Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 124.103–42.Google Scholar
.1988. Zwei wichtige Probleme der Altaistik. Journal de la Société Finno-ougrienne 69.3–21.Google Scholar
.1993. Nostratismus: Illich-Svitich und die Folgen. Ural-Altäische Jahrbücher 12.17–35.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron. 1964a. Gipoteza drevnejsego rodstva jazykovyx semej Severnoj Evraziji s verojatnostnoj tochki zrenija. Voprosy jazykoznanija 2.53–63. [English translation 1986: see below.]
.1964b. Metody rekonstrukciji obshcheindoevropejskogo jazyka i vneindoevropejskije sopostavlenija [Methods in the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European and external comparison]. Problemy sravnitel'noj grammatiki indoevropejskix jazykov. Tezisy doklodov, 27–30. Moscow: Moscow State University.Google Scholar
.1965. Metody rekonstrukciji obshcheindoevropejskogo jazyka i sibiroevropejskaja gipoteza [Methods in the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European and the Sibero-European hypothesis].Etimologija 1965.259–70.Google Scholar
.1969. Nostraticheskije osnovy s sochetainijem shumnyh soglasnyh. Etimologija 1967.296–313.Google Scholar
.1970. A long-range comparison of some languages of Northern Eurasia (problems of phonetic correspondences). Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences 5.620–28. Moscow.Google Scholar
.1971. Nostraticheskije etimologiji i proisxozhdenije glagol'nyx formantov. Etimologija 1968.237–42.Google Scholar
.1972. Nostraticheskije korni s sochetanijem lateral'nogo i zvonkogo laringala. Etimologija 1970.356–69.Google Scholar
.1974. O nostraticheskoj sisteme affrikat i sibil'antov: korni s fonemoj ∗Ʒ. [On the system of Nostratic affricates and sibilants: roots with the phoneme ∗Ʒ.]Etimologija 1972.163–75.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1984. On personal pronouns in the Nostratic languages. Linguistica et philologica: Gedenkschrift für Björn Collinder, ed. , , and , 65–112. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1986. A probabilistic hypothesis concerning the oldest relationships among the language families. Typology relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed and , 27–50. [Translation of Dolgopolsky 1964a.] Ann Arbor: Karoma.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1989. Problems of Nostratic comparative phonology (preliminary report). Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 90–8. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
.1998. The Nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
, , and . 1984. Genetic relationship between Chinese and Dong-Tai languages. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 22.105–21. Tokyo.Google Scholar
Drechsel, Emanuel J. 1988. Wilhelm von Humboldt and Edward Sapir: analogies and homologies in their linguistic thoughts. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native American linguistics, ed. , 225–63. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droixhe, Daniel.1980. Le prototype défiguré: l'idée scythique et la France Gauloise. Progress in linguistic historiography: papers from the International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences, ed. , 123–37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droixhe, Daniel1984. Avant-Propos. Genèse du comparatisme indo-européen, ed. , 5–16. (Histoire Epistémologie Langage, vol. 6, Fascicule 2.) Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
. 1954. Remarques sur les six premiers noms du nombres de turc. Studia Linguistica 8.1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. Remarques complémentaires sur les six premiers noms du nombres de turc et du quechua. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 44.17– 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1819. Report of the corresponding secretary to the committee of his progress in the investigation committed to him of the general character and forms of the languages of the American Indians. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 1.ⅹⅶ–ⅹⅺv.Google Scholar
.1838. Mémoire sur le système grammatical des langues de quelques nations indiennes de l'Amérique du Nord. Paris: Pihan de la Forest.Google Scholar
1989. Methods in Systemic reconstruction of Altaic and Nostratic lexics. Lingvističeskaja rekonstrukcija 1.196–209.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A. 1989a. V. M. Illich-Svitych and the development of Uralic and Dravidian linguistics (preliminary report). Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 20–7. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A..1989b. Comparative-phonetic tables. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 114–21. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A..1990. Comparative-phonetic tables for Nostratic reconstructions. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 168–75. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
. 1953. Review of Malgache et Maajan: une comparaison linguistique, by Otto Dahl. Language 29.577–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1966. Koreanisch und Indogermanisch: Untersuchung über die Zugehörigkeit des Koreanischen zur indogermanischen Sprachfamilie. Heidelberg: Groos.Google Scholar
.1973. Review of Illič-Svityc 1971. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 26.395–401.Google Scholar
. 1943. Notes on early American work in linguistics. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 87.25–34.Google Scholar
.1946. Sir William Jones: 1746–1794. Journal of the American Oriental Society 66.230–9.Google Scholar
1992. Sick societies: challenging the myth of primitive harmony. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1988. Comparative Kadai: linguistic studies beyond Tai. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of Texas at Arlington Press.Google Scholar
1788[1787]. Observations on the language of the Muhhekaneew Indians; in which the extent of that language in North America is shewn; its genius is grammatically traced; some of its peculiarities, and some instances of analogy between that and the Hebrew are pointed out. (Communicated to the Connecticut Society of Arts and Sciences, and published at the request of the Society.) New Haven: Josiah Meigs. (Reprinted 1788. London: W. Justins, Shoemaker-Row, Blackfriars. Reprinted with notes by , 1823 in the Massachusetts Historical Society Collection, 2nd series, 10:81–160, and Boston: Phelps and Farnham.)Google Scholar
1973. Review of Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus, by Paul Benedict. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1(3). 498–505.Google Scholar
.1976. Benedict's Austro-Thai hypothesis: pro and con. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 6.51–60.Google Scholar
. 1995. Reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic (Proto-Afrasian): vowels, tone, consonants, and vocabulary. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.2001. A comparative historical reconstruction of Proto-Nilo-Saharan. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Ehret, Christopher.2002. Language family expansions: broadening our understanding of cause from an African perspective. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 163–76. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Eldredge, Niles and Stephen Jay Gould. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. Methods in paleobiology, ed. , 82–115. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper.Google Scholar
. 1640. Tabula cebetis Graece, Arabice, Latine. Item aurea carmina Pythagorae cum Paraphrasi Arabica. Leiden: Iohannis Maire.Google Scholar
. 1663. The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New, translated into the Indian language and ordered to be printed by the commissioners of the United Colonies in New-England. Cambridge, MA: Samuel Green and Marmaduke Johnson.Google Scholar
Eliot, John.1666. The Indian grammar begun: a grammar of the Massachusetts Indian language. Cambridge, MA: Samuel Green and Marmaduke Johnson. (New edition 1822: A grammar of the Massachusetts Indian language, ed. John Pickering. Boston: Phelps and Farnham.)
. 1847. Observations on the language of the Gonds and the identity of many of its terms with Telugu, Tamil and Canarese. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 16 (2).Google Scholar
. 1816. Note to the introduction of A Grammar of the Teloogoo Language, by Alexander Duncan Campbell, 1–31. Madras: Hindu Press. (Reprinted, 3rd edition [from 1849], 1991. Madras: Asian Educational Services.)Google Scholar
1963. Yukian–Siouan lexical similarities. International Journal of American Linguistics 29.300–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1964. Item and set comparison in Yuchi, Siouan, and Yukian. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.328–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emeneau, Murray B. 2000. Linguistics in India: past and future. Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 545–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Enrico, John. 2004. Toward Proto-Na-Dene. Anthropological Linguistics 46.229–302.
1977. Uralo-dravidalaisista yhteyksistä. [About Uralic-Dravidian connections.] Suomen Antropologi 1977 33–8. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1988. Arguments for Pama-Nyungan as a genetic subgroup, with reference to initial laminalization. Aboriginal Linguistics 1.91–110.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2003a. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas.2003b. Comparative non-Pama-Nyungan and Australian historical linguistics. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region, ed. , 3–25. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Evans, Nick and Patrick McConvell. 1998. The enigma of Pama-Nyungan expansion in Australia. Archaeology and language Ⅱ: archaeological data and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 174–91. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. 1990. Syntactic and pragmatic principles as arguments in the interpretation of runic inscriptions. Historical linguistics and philology, ed. , 165–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahey, Bede. 2004. Mayan, a Sino-Tibetan language? A comparative study. Sino-Platonic Papers 130. [www.sino-platonic.org/abstracts/ spp130_chinese.html]
1980. Sumerian–Dravidian interconnections: the linguistic, archeological and textual evidence. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 9.286–305.Google Scholar
.1971. Kriterien zum Nachweis genetischer Sprachverwandtschaft. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Ernst Moritz Ardt Universität Greifswald 20.99–136.Google Scholar
.1988. Lexikalische Parallelen zwischen indoeuropäischen und kartvelischen Sprachen. Papiere zur Linguistik 39.49–54. Tübingen.Google Scholar
. 1990. Etymology of the Lower Mississippian languages, part 1. Epigraphic Society Occasional Papers 19.35–47.Google Scholar
.1978. Semitic linguistics and Indo-European comparative and historical grammar. Linguistics 206.51–3.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1976. The Ethiopian language area. Language in Ethiopia, ed. , , , and , 63–76. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1933. La investigación lingüística y el parentesco extra-continental de la lengua “qhexwa.” Revista de la Sociedad “Amigos de la Arqueología” 7.89–120. Montevideo, Uruguay.Google Scholar
.1938. Della possible parentela fra le indue “altaiche” en alcune americaine. Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti 19.210–23. Rome: Tipographia della Reale Accademia dei Lincei del Dott.Google Scholar
1770[1756]. De origine Ungarorum. (Published in Quaestiones Petropolitanae, by August Ludwig Schlözer.) Göttingen.Google Scholar
Fischer, J. E..1995[1747]. Vocabularium Sibiricum (1747): der etymologisch-vergleichende Abteil, ed. . Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
1974. Omotic as a branch of Afroasiatic. Studies in African linguistics, supplement 5.81–94.Google Scholar
Fleming, Harold C..1976a. Omotic overview. The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia, ed. , 299–323. East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center.Google Scholar
Fleming, Harold C..1976b. Cushitic and Omotic. Language in Ethiopia, ed. , , , and , 34–58. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
.1987. Review article: Towards a definitive classification of the world's languages (review of A guide to the world's languages, by Merritt Ruhlen). Diachronica 4.159–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, E. D. 1981. Levels of phonological restriction in Greek affixes. Bono Homini donum: essays in historical linguistics in memory of J. Alexander Kerns, ed. and , 87–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1969. The problems in the classification of the African languages: methodological and theoretical conclusions concerning the classification system of Joseph H. Greenberg. 3rd edition (1st edition 1966). Budapest: Center for Afro-Asian Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. (Republished 1982. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.)Google Scholar
.1976. Are the Sumerians and the Hungarians or the Uralic peoples related?Current Anthropology 17.115–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, John [Johann] Reinhold. 1778. Observations made during a voyage round the world. London: G. Robinson. (Reprinted 1996, ed. Nicholas Thomas, Harriet Guest, and Michael Dettelbach. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.)
. 1988. The Eskimo-Eleut-Yukagir relationship: an alternative to the genetic/contact dichotomy. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 21.21–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortescue, Michael.1994. The role of typology in the establishment of the genetic relationship between Eskimo and Aleut – and beyond. Languages of the north Pacific rim, ed. , 9–36. (Hokkaido University Publications in Linguistics 7.) Sapporo, Japan: Department of Linguistics, Hokkaido University.Google Scholar
.1998. Language relations across Bering Strait: reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
1983. Some lexical clues to Uto-Aztecan prehistory. International Journal of American Linguistics 49.224–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982. Review of Nilal: Über die Urverwandtschaft des Hamito-Semitischen, Indogermanischen, Uralischen und Altaischen, by Kalevi E. Koskinen. Language 58.726–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. Proto-Mayan accent, morpheme structure conditions, and velar innovations. University of Chicago Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
1918. Comparative studies in Takelman, Kalapuyan, and Chinookan lexicography: a preliminary paper. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.175–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984a. Las relaciones externas entre las lenguas mayances y altaicas. Investigaciones recientes en el área maya. ⅩⅦ Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología 1.209–25. Mexico.Google Scholar
.1984b. Los morfemas vocálicos para derivaciones verbales en los grupos mayance y túrquico. Investigaciones recientes en el área maya. ⅩⅦ Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología 2.517–24. Mexico.Google Scholar
Franklin, K. J. 1973. The gulf area in light of Greenberg's Indo-Pacific hypothesis. The linguistic situation in the gulf district and adjacent areas, ed. , 377–408. (Pacific Linguistics C-26.) Canberra.Google Scholar
1930. The relationship of Mixe to the Penutian family. International Journal of American Linguistics 6.28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1970. Proto-Indo-European trees: the arboreal system of a prehistoric people. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1975. Proto-indo-European syntax: the order of meaningful elements. Journal of Indo-European Studies, memoir 1. Butte, MT: College of Mineral Science.Google Scholar
. 1974. A comparative vocabulary of parts of the body of Japanese and Uralic languages with the backing up of Altaic languages, Kokuryöan and Korean. Gengo Kenkyu 65.74–9.Google Scholar
.1975a. Japanese and Dravidian with special reference to words beginning with original ∗k-. Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Kiuki University, Dec.Google Scholar
.1975b. Animals and vegetables in Japanese and Uralian. Uralica 3.91–103.
.1981. The Japanese-Dravidian vocabulary of flora and fauna. Bulletin of the International Institute for Linguistic Sciences 2.73–97. Kyoto Sangyo University.Google Scholar
. 1973. Einige Aspekte zur Erforschung der uralischen-tungusischen Sprachbeziehungen. Festschrift für Wolfgang Schlachter zum 65. Geburtstag, 25–34. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Futaky, István[Futaki, I.]1988. Uralisch und Tungusisch. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 781–81. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Georg von der. 1891. Die Sprachwissenschaft: ihre Aufgaben, Methoden, und bisherigen Ergebnisse. Leipzig: T. O. Weigel Nachfolger. (Reprinted, 1972[1901/1891], Tübingen: Gunter Narr.)
. 1861. Die melanisischen Sprachen nach ihrem grammatischen Bau und ihrer Verwandtschaft unter sich und mit den malaiisch-polynesischen Sprachen. Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Classe der königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, vol. 1. Leipzig: Hirzel.Google Scholar
1967. Kartvelian and Indo-European: a typological comparison of reconstructed linguistic systems. To honour Roman Jakobson, 707–17. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
and . 1984. Indoevropejskij jazyk i indoevropejtsy. 2 vol. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University.Google Scholar
and 1985. The ancient Near East and the Indo-European question: temporal and territorial characteristics of Proto-Indo-European based on linguistic and historico-cultural data. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 13.3–48.Google Scholar
1922. El idioma japonés y sus afinidades con lenguas americanas. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras 73.114–22. Buenos Aires, Argentina.Google Scholar
1981. Camito-semitico e indoeuropeo. Atti del Sodalizio Glottologico Milanese 21.4–18.Google Scholar
1977. Review of Illich-Svitych 1971, 1976. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 72.83–5.Google Scholar
2000. Bicultural versatility as a frontier adaptation among Paliyan foragers of south India. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellon Press.Google Scholar
1894. The progress of English philology. Proceedings of the American Philological Association 25.ⅹⅺ–ⅹⅹⅲ.Google Scholar
. 1999. A new model of Indo-European subgrouping and dispersal. Berkeley Linguistics Society 25.146–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1882. Indian languages of the Pacific states and territories and of the Pueblos of New Mexico. The Magazine of American History with Notes and Queries 8.254–63.Google Scholar
.1886. On the affinity of the Cheroki to the Iroquois dialects. Transactions of the American Philological Association 16.xl–xlv.Google Scholar
Gébelin, Antoine Court de. See Court de Gébelin, Antoine.
Gedney, William J. 1976. On the Thai evidence for Austro-Tai. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 6.65–82. (Reprinted with revisions, 1989, in Selected papers on comparative Tai studies, ed. , , , and , 117–63. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Centers for South and Southeast Asian Studies.)Google Scholar
[, ]. 1537. Lexicum symphonum quo quatuor linguarum Europae familiarium, Graecae scilicet, Latinae, Germanicae ac Sclauinicae concordia consonatiaque indicatur. Basel: Ieronymus Frobenius et Nicolaus Episcopius.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1999. Telling general linguists about Altaic. Journal of Linguistics 35.65–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2003. From mass comparison to mess comparison: Greenberg's Indo-European and its closest relatives (review article.) Diachronica 20.331–62.
and 2005. Review of Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family, vol. 2: The lexicon, by Joseph H. Greenberg.Diachronica 22.184–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. The journey through Wales and the description of Wales, translated and introduced by Lewis Thorpe. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Ges[s]ner, Konrad. 1555. Mithridates de differentiis linguarum tum veterum tum quae hodie apud diversas nationes in toto orbe terrarum in usu sunt. Zurich: Froschauer. (Reprinted 1974, ed. . Darmstadt: Scientia Verlag Aalen.)Google Scholar
Gibbon, Edward. See Williams (ed.) 1979.
. 1908. The journey through Wales, description of Wales. London: Dent and Sons; New York: Dutton & Co.Google Scholar
. 1895. A short manual of comparative philology for classical students. New York: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
. 1780–4. Saggio di storia americana; o sia, storia naturale, civile e sacra de regni, e delle provincie spagnuole di Terra-Ferma nell’ America Meridionale descritto dall’ abate F. S. Gilij. 4 vols. Rome: Perigio. (1965[1782], Ensayo de historia americana, Spanish translation by Antonio Tovar. [Fuentes para la Historia Colonial de Venezuela, vols. 71–3.] Caracas: Biblioteca de la Academia Nacional de la Historia.)Google Scholar
1980 [1982]. Deux correspondences grammaticales entre l'indoeuropéen et les langues ouralo-altaiques. Orbis 29.162–8.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1975. Algonquian, Wiyot, and Yurok: proving a distant genetic relationship. Linguistics and anthropology in honor of C. F. Voegelin, ed. , , and , 249–62. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1979. The languages of South Texas and the Lower Rio Grande. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 355–89. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1986. Sapir's comparative method. New perspectives in language, culture, and personality: proceedings of the Edward Sapir centenary conference, ed. , , and , 191–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1987. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. Current Anthropology 28.656–7.
Goddard, Ives.1988. Pre-Cheyenne ∗y. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native America linguistics, ed. , 345–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990a. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. Linguistics 28.557–8.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1990b. Algonquian linguistic change and reconstruction. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 99–114. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives and Lyle Campbell. 1994. The history and classification of American Indian languages: what are the implications for the peopling of the Americas. Method and theory for investigating the peopling of the Americas, ed. and , 189–207. (Center for the Study of the First Americans.) Corvallis: Oregon State University.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives and William W. Fitzhugh. 1979. A statement concerning America B.C. Man in the Northeast 17.166–72. (Also in Biblical Archeologist 41.85–8 [1978].)
1967. Sir William Jones and Père Cœurdoux: a philological footnote. Journal of the American Oriental Society 87.57–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golla, Victor. 1980. Some Yokuts–Maidun comparisons. American Indian and Indo-European studies: papers in honor of Madison S. Beeler, ed. , , and , 57–63. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1984. The Sapir–Kroeber correspondence. (Survey of California and Other Indian Languages, report 6.) Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
.1988. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. American Anthropologist 90.434–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golla, Victor.1991. Comparative Penutian glosses, edited by Victor Golla, based on “comparative Penutian glosses of Sapir,” edited by (1964). The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. Ⅵ: American Indian languages, part 2, ed. , 299–315. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Golla, Victor.2000. Language families of North America. America past, America present: genes and languages in the Americas and beyond, ed. , 59–73. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Golovko, Evgenij. 1994. Mednyj Aleut or Copper Island Aleut: an Aleut-Russian mixed language. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 113–21. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
. 1970. Some questions on the classification of African languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 36.117–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Morris.1971. The strange case of Mbugu (Tanzania). Pidginization and creolization of languages, ed. , 243–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Evaluation of the Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Unpublished paper, University of Michigan.
.1995. The phonological composition of personal pronouns: implications for genetic hypotheses. Berkeley Linguistics Society 21.117–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984. Chamulas in the world of the sun: time and space in a Maya oral tradition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. Time's arrow, time's cycle: myth and metaphor in the discovery of geological time. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
1959. The position of the Polynesian languages within the Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) language family. (Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, memoir 16, supplement to International Journal of American Linguistics 25 [3].) Baltimore: Waverly Press.Google Scholar
Granberry, Julian. 1991a. Amazonian origins and affiliations of the Timucua language. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 195–242. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1991b. Was Ciguayo a West Indian Hokan language?International Journal of American Linguistics 57.514–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1890. De la famille linguistique Pano. Congrès International des Américanistes 7.438–49 [1888 meeting]. Berlin.Google Scholar
1999. New World Babel: languages and nations in early America.Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1934. Introduction to Semitic comparative linguistics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
1949a. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅰ: the Niger-Congo family. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1949b. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅱ: the position of Fulani. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.190–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1949c. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅲ: the position of Bantu. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.309–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950a. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅳ: Hamito-Semitic. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950b. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅴ: the Eastern Sudanic family. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.143–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950c. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅳ: the Click languages. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.223–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950d. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅶ: smaller families; index of languages. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.388–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H..1953. Historical linguistics and unwritten languages. Anthropology today, ed. , 265–86. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
.1954. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅷ: further remarks on method. Revisions and corrections. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10.405–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. Studies in African linguistic classification. Bradford, CT: Compass Publishing Company.Google Scholar
. 1957. Genetic relationship among languages. Essays in linguistics, Chapter 3, 35–45. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1960. The general classification of Central and South American languages. Men and cultures: selected papers of the 5th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 1956, ed. , 791–94. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1963. The languages of Africa. (Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics, publication 25, International Journal of American Linguistics 29.1.Ⅱ). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (2nd edition with additions and corrections, 1966. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.)Google Scholar
. 1969. Review of The problems in the classification of the African languages, by István Fodor. Language 45.427–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1971a. Nilo-Saharan and Meroitic. Sub-Saharan Africa, ed. and , 426–42. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1971b. The Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Linguistics in Oceania, ed. , 807–71. (Current Trends in Linguistics 8.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1973. The typological method. Diachronic, areal, and typological linguistics, ed. and , 149–93. (Current Trends in Linguistics 11.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.1977. Niger-Congo noun class markers: prefixes, suffixes, both or neither. Papers from the Eighth Conference on African Linguistics, ed. and , 97–104. (Studies in African Linguistics, supplement 7.)Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers? Universals of human language, ed. vol. 2, 47–82. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1979. The classification of American Indian languages. Papers of the 1978 Mid-America Linguistics Conference at Oklahoma, ed. , 7–22. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
. 1981a. Nilo-Saharan movable k- as a state Ⅲ article (with a Penutian parallel). Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 3.105–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1981b. The external relationships of the Uto-Aztecan languages. Paper presented at the Uto-Aztecan Conference. Tucson, AZ.
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1983. Some areal characteristics of African languages. Current approaches to African linguistics, vol. 1, ed. , 3–21. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
. 1989. Classification of American Indian languages: a reply to Campbell. Language 65.107–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.1990b. The prehistory of the Indo-European vowel system in comparative and typological perspective. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 77–136. Bochum: Brockmeyer. [Published also in 1989, Predystorija indoevropejskoj sistemy glasnyh v sravnitel'noj I tipologicheskoj perspektive. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 1989.4–31. See also in Reconstructing languages and cultures: abstracts and materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 47–50. Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1989.]
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1991. Some problems of Indo-European in historical perspective. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 125–40. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Linguistic typology and history: review of Linguistic diversity in space and time, by Johanna Nichols. Current Anthropology 34.503–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. On the Amerind affiliations of Zuni and Tonkawa. California Linguistic Notes 24.4–6.Google Scholar
. 1996a. In defense of Amerind. International Journal of American Linguistics 62.131–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1996b. The linguistic evidence. American beginnings: the prehistory and palaeoecology of Beringia, ed. , 525–36. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1997. Does Altaic exist? Indo-European, Nostratic and beyond: a Festschrift for Vitaly V. Shevoroshkin, ed. , , and , 88–93. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1999. Are there mixed languages? Essays in poetics, literary history and linguitics, presented to Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, ed. , , , , , , , and , 626–33. Moscow: OGI.Google Scholar
. 2000a. Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2000b. The concept of proof in genetic linguistics. Reconstructing grammar: comparative linguistics and grammaticalization, ed. , 161–75. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2000c. From first and second person: the history of Amerind ∗k(i). Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 413–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2002. Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family, vol. 2: The lexicon. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2005. Indo-Europeanist practice and American Indianist theory in linguistic classification. Genetic linguistics: essays on theory and method by Joseph H. Greenberg, ed. , 153–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1992. Linguistic origins of Native Americans. Scientific American 267(5).94–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1953. Jicaque as a Hokan language. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.216–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1986. The settlement of the Americas: a comparison of the linguistic, dental, and genetic evidence. Current Anthropology 27.477–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1960 Early scientific interest in the American Indian: comparative linguistics. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 104.511–17.Google Scholar
(ed.). 1903. Linguistic survey of India, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅱ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and (eds.). 1904. Linguistic survey of India Ⅰ, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅲ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1909. Linguistic survey of India, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅰ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1927. Linguistic survey of India Ⅰ, vol. 1, part Ⅰ, Introduction. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1928. Linguistic survey of India, vol. Ⅰ, part Ⅱ, Comparative vocabulary.Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
2004. Ethnologue: languages of the world. 14th edition. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington. (www.ethnologue.com.)Google Scholar
. 1642. De origine gentium Americanarum. Paris. (Trans. E. Goldsmid, 1884: On the origin of the native races of America, a dissertation. Edinburgh: Unwin Bross.)Google Scholar
. 1988. Linguistic evidence in support of the coastal route of earliest entry into the New World. Man 23.77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1895. Entwurf einer vergleichenden Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen nebst einem vergleichenden Wörter buch. Leipzig: Wilhelm Friedrich.Google Scholar
Guichard, Estienne. 1606. L'Harmonie etymologique des langues Hébraïque, Chaldaique, Syriaque – Greque – Latin, Françoise, Italienne, Espagnole – Alemande, Flamende, Anglaise, &c. Paris.
Güldemann, Tom and Rainer Vossen. 2000. Khoisan. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 99–122. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1990. Die Protokultur der Uralier und Indoeuropäer: eine Vergleichsstudie. Uralo-Indogermanica 2.142–8.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1996. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gurevich, Naomi. 1999. Phylumphile or phylumfoe? Examining Greenberg's method of mass comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 119–43. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.Google Scholar
. 1989. Kusunda – sinokavkazskie leksicheskie paralleli. Lingvisticheskaja rekonstrukcija I drevnejshaja istorija vostoka. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo ‘Nauka’.Google Scholar
. 1965. Ein lexikalischer Vergleich der Algonkin-Gulf- und Hoka-Subtiaba Sprachen. Orbis 14.160–215.Google Scholar
. 1966–7. Ein Vergleich der grammatischen Morpheme der Golf-Sprachen und der Hoka-Subtiaba-Sprachen. Orbis 15.511–37.Google Scholar
. 1968. Gulf and Hokan-Subtiaban: new lexical parallels. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1974. Der Hoka-Sprachstamm: eine Bestandsaufnahme des lexikalischen Beweismaterials. Orbis 23.170–215.Google Scholar
. 1794. Okoskodva tanító magyar nyelvmester [Hungarian grammar taught rationally], 2 vols. Cluj and Sibiu: Hochmeister.Google Scholar
Gyarmathi, Sámuel. 1799. Affinitas linguae Hungaricae cum linguis Fennicae originis grammatice demonstrata. Göttingen: Joann. Christian Dieterich. (Photolithic reproduction of 2nd edition 1968, ed. [Ural and Altaic Series 95.] Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton.) (English translation, see Hanzeli 1983.)
Gyula, János. 1974. Some eighteenth century antecedents of nineteenth century linguistics: the discovery of Finno-Ugrian. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 258–76. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Haarmann, Harald. 1979. Die Klassifikation der romanischen Sprachen in den Werken der Komparativisten aus der zweiten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts (Rüdiger, Hervás, Pallas). Wissenschaftsgeschichtliche Beiträge zur Erforschung indogermanischer, finnisch-ugrischer und kaukasischer Sprachern bei Pallas, ed. , 45–69. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R. 1941. The classification of Muskogean languages. Language, culture, and personality: essays in memory of Edward Sapir, ed. , , and , 41–56. Menasha, WI: Sapir Memorial Publication Fund.Google Scholar
. 1951. The Proto-Gulf word for water (with notes on Siouan-Yuchi). International Journal of American Linguistics 17.71–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. The Proto-Gulf word for land (with a note on Siouan-Yuchi). International Journal of American Linguistics 18.238–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1958a. Algonkian-Ritwan: the end of a controversy. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.159–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1958b. A new linguistic relationship in North America: Algonkian and the Gulf languages. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 14.231–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1960. Some genetic affiliations of Algonkian. Culture in history: essays in honor of Paul Radin, ed. , 977–92. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1964a. California Hokan. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 73–87. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1966. Wiyot–Yurok–Algonkian and problems of comparative Algonkian. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.101–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. Roger Williams’ sound shift: a study in Algonkian. To honor Roman Jakobson: essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, 1.816–32. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1969. Grammar or lexicon: the American Indian side of the question from Duponceau to Powell. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.239–55. (Reprinted 1978, with changed title: The problem of classifying American Indian languages: from Duponceau to Powell. Language, culture, and history: essays by Mary R. Haas, 130–63. Stanford: Stanford University Press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1976. The Northern California linguistic area. Hokan studies, ed. and , 347–59. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Consonant inventories as an areal feature of the New Guinea-Pacific region: testing Trudgill's hypotheses. Linguistic Typology 8.343–50.
. 1984. Wäre es schon an der Zeit, den Stammbaum zu fällen? Theorien über die gegenseitigen Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 4.1–4.
Häkkinen, Kaisa. 2001. Prehistoric Finno-Ugric culture in the light of historical lexicology. Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: linguistics and archaeological considerations, ed. Christian Carpelan, Asko Parpola, and Petteri Koskikallio, 169–86. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 242.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
. 1997. Duraljan vocabulary: lexical similarities in the major agglutinative languages. Kuopio: H. P. A. Hakola. (Kuopio University Printing Office.)Google Scholar
. 2000. 1000 Duraljan etyma: an extended study in the lexical similarities in the major agglutinative languages. Kuopio: H. P. A. Hakola. (Kuopio University Printing Office.)Google Scholar
. 1968. Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys [The structure and history of the Finnish language]. Helsinki: Otava.Google Scholar
. 1846. United States exploring expedition, during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy, vol. 6: Ethnography and philology. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
. 1890[1888]. Was America peopled from Polynesia?International Congress of Americanists 7.374–88. (1888 meeting.) Berlin.Google Scholar
. 1964. Classification of Northern Paman languages, Cape York Peninsula, Australia: a research report. Oceanic Linguistics 3.248–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 1976. Phonological developments in particular Northern Paman languages. Languages of Cape York, ed. , 7–40. (Research and Regional Studies 6.) Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
. 1997. Book review article: Campbell, Lyle (1997) American Indian Languages: the Historical Linguistics of Native America. Mother Tongue (journal) 3.145–58.Google Scholar
. 1776. A code of Gentoo laws, or, ordinations of the Pundits, from a Persian translation made from the original, written in the Shanscrit language. London: East India Company.Google Scholar
. 1778. A grammar of the Bengal language. Bengal: Hoogly. (Reprinted 1969, Menston, UK: Scholar Press.)Google Scholar
1951. Can Eskimo be related to Indo-European?International Journal of American Linguistics 17.217–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. On Maya-Chipayan. International Journal of American Linguistics 33.74–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. On the problem of Ainu and Indo-European. Eighth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 100–2. Tokyo.Google Scholar
. 1971. On Mayan-Araucanian comparative phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 37.156–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1975. On Zuni-Penutian consonants. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.310–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamp, Eric P.. 1976. On Eskimo-Aleut and Luoravetlan. Papers on Eskimo and Aleut linguistics, ed. , 81–92. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
. 1977. On some questions of areal linguistics. Berkeley Linguistics Society 3.279–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983. Gyarmathi and his Affinitas. Grammatical proof of the affinity of the Hungarian language with languages of Fennic origin, translated, annotated, and introduced by , xi–lv. (Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics 15.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hardman[-de-Bautista], Martha J. 1985. Quechua and Aymara: languages in contact. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 617–43. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. Losing species, losing languages: connections between biological and linguistic diversity. Paper presented at the Symposium on Language Loss and Public Policy, University of New Mexico, July 1995.
Harms, Robert T. 1977. The Uralo-Yukaghir focus system: a problem in remote genetic relationship. Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann, ed. , 301–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1913. [Untitled note on the relationship of Yuman and Chumash.] American Anthropologist 15.716.Google Scholar
. 1917. [Untitled note on the relationship of Washo and Chumash.]American Anthropologist 19.154.Google Scholar
. 1928. Vocabulary of the Kiowa language. Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 84. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
. 1943. Hokan discovered in South America. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 33.334–44.Google Scholar
and . 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, Mark. 2003. Reconstruction of pronominals among the non-Pama-Nyungan languages. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region, ed. , 475–513. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 1976. The Scandinavian languages: an introduction to their history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hayward, Richard J. 2000. Afroasiatic. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 74–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1978. Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1990. Verbal inflection and macro-subgroupings of Australian languages: search for conjugation markers in non-Pama-Nyungan. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 4003–17. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Review of Linguistic diversity in time and space, by Johanna Nichols. Anthropological Linguistics 36.92–6.Google Scholar
. 1997. Lost wax: abrupt replacement of key morphemes in Australian agreement complexes. Diachronica 14.197–232,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1988. Morphologische Übereinstimmungen in der uralischen, altaischen und einigen paläosibirischen Sprachen. Specimina Sibirica, ed. , 1.71–86.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1989. Applicability of exact methods in Nostratic research. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 30–9. Bochum: Brockmeier.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1992a. Bibliographia Nostratica 1960–1990 (a list of publications on, or relevant for Nostratic studies). Specimina Sibirica, ed. , vol. 4. Szombathely: Druckerei der Berzsenyi-Hochschule.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1992b. Reconstructing Nostratic morphology: derivational elements. Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind, ed. , 34–47. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1970. Eastern Sudanic subfamily – a linguistic relationship. (East Africa and Nile Valley Seminars, paper Ⅳ.) Nairobi: Department of History, University of Nairobi.Google Scholar
. 1972. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics in Africa. Journal of African Languages 2.7–20.Google Scholar
1976. A typology of African languages (based on the order of meaningful elements). Berlin: Reimer.
Heine, Bernd. 1992. African languages. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , 1.31–5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2001. Convergence and divergence in the development of African languages. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 393–411. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva 2002. On the evolution of grammatical forms. The transition to language, ed. , 376–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2000a. African languages: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Derek Nurse. 2000b. Introduction. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Helimskij, E. A. 1985. Samodijsko-tungusskije leksicheskije svjazi i ih etnoistoriceskije interpretaciji. Uralo-Altaistika arheologija, etnografija, jazyk, ed. , 206–13. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1987. A “new approach” to Nostratic comparison: review of Bomhard 1984. Journal of the American Oriental Society 107.97–100.Google Scholar
. 1772. Abhandlung über den Ursprung der Sprache. Berlin: C. F. Voss. (New edition 1966, Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam.)Google Scholar
. 1784. Catalogo delle lingue conosciute e notizia della loro affinità e diversità. Cesena: Gregorio Biasini all'Insegna oli Pallade.
. 1800–5. Catálogo de las lenguas de las naciones conocidas y numeracion, division, y clases de estas segun la diversidad de sus idiomas y dialectos. Madrid: Administracion del Real Arbitrio de Beneficiencia.Google Scholar
. 1972. Ethiopian Semitic: studies in classification. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
. 1935. Neue Finnisch-Ugrische Sprachen (Die Mundasprachen Indiens). Atti del Congresso di Linguistica tenuto in Roma, 275–84.Google Scholar
. 1968. Beothuk and Algonkian: evidence old and new. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. Beothuk consonant correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 37.244–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. Beothuk vocabularies: a comparative study. (Technical papers of the Newfoundland Museum 2.) St. John's, Newfoundland: Department of Tourism, Historic Resources Division.Google Scholar
Hewson, John. 1982. Beothuk and the Algonkian Northeast. Languages in Newfoundland and Labrador, ed. , 176–87. St. John's, Newfoundland: Department of Linguistics, Memorial University.Google Scholar
1978. Language contact systems and human adaptations. Journal of Anthropological Research 34.1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Linguistic models of early American history. Archaeology Southwest, Spring: 9. Tucson, AZ: Desert Archaeology Foundation.
Hill, Jane H.. 2001a. Language on the land: towards an anthropological dialectology. Archaeology, language, and history: essays on culture and ethnicity, ed. , 257–82. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, Greenwood Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2001b. Proto-Uto-Aztecan: a community of cultivators in central Mexico?American Anthropologist 103.913–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Jane H.. 2002. Proto-Uto-Aztecan cultivation and the northern devolution. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 331–40. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1981. Savages and scientists: the Smithsonian Institution and the development of American anthropology, 1846–1910. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis. 1966[1950–1]. Commentaires sur la vie et l’œuvre de Rasmus Rask. Conferences de l'Institut de Linguistique de l'Université de Paris 10.143–57. (Reprinted 1966 in Portraits of linguists: a biographical source book for the history of Western linguistics, 1746–1963, ed. , 1.179–99. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.)Google Scholar
1993. SWALLOTALES: Chance and the “world etymology” MALIQ'A ‘swallow, throat.’Chicago Linguistic Society 29.215–38.Google Scholar
and . 1996. Language history, language change, and language relationship: an introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles. 1960. The origins of speech. Scientific American 208.88–96.
Hodge, Carleton T. 1983. Relating Afroasiatic to Indo-European. Studies in Chadic and Afroasiatic linguistics, ed. and , 33–50. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Hodge, Carleton T.. 1991. Indo-European and Afroasiatic. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 141–65. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hodge, Carleton T.. 1998. The implications of Laslakh for Nostratic. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 237–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1828. Notices of the Languages, literature and religion of the Bauddhas of Nepal and Bhot. Asiatik Researches 16.409–49.Google Scholar
1963. On the history of the comparative method. Anthropological Linguistics 5(1).1–11.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1974. Fallacies in the history of linguistics: notes on the appraisal of the nineteenth century. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 346–58. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1985. Sir William Jones and historiography. For Gordon H. Fairbanks, ed. and , 64–6. (Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication 20.) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1990a. Descent, perfection and the comparative method since Leibniz. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 119–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1990b. Is the “comparative” method general or family specific? Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 375–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoijer, Harry. 1954. Some problems of American Indian linguistic research. Papers from the Symposium on American Indian Linguistics, ed. , , , and , 3–12. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 10.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. History of the Paya sound system. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
. 1957. De quelques éléments communs a l’égyptien et aux langues dravidienne. Kemi 14.26–34.Google Scholar
. 1915. Zweihundert sumero-türkisch Wortvergleichungen als Grundlage zu einem neuen Kapitel der Sprachwissenschaft. Munich.Google Scholar
. 1982. Foundations of western linguistics: from the beginning to the end of the first millen[n]ium A. D.New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
. 1877. The science of languages: linguistics, philology, etymology. London: Chapman and Hall; Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.Google Scholar
. 1915. Die Lösung des hethitischen Problems. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 56.17–50.Google Scholar
. 1875. Über die Stellung des armenischen im Kreise der indogermanischen Sprachen. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 23.5–42.Google Scholar
. 1905. A comparative grammar of the Korean language and the Dravidian languages of India. Seoul: The Methodist Publishing House.Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhelm [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1822. Ueber das Entstehen der grammatischen Formen, und ihren Einfluss auf die Ideenentwicklung. Abhandlungen der königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 401–30. (Reprinted 1963: Wilhelm von Humboldt Werke in fünf Bänden, ed. and , 3.31–63. Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta.)Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1836. Ueber die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechtes. Berlin: Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften. (Reprinted 1963: Wilhelm von Humboldt Werke in fünf Bänden, ed. and , 3.368–756. Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta.) (English translation 1988, On language: the diversity of human language-structure and its influence on the mental development of mankind, trans. Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.)Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1836–9. Über die Kawi-Sprache auf der Insel Java, nebst einer Einleitung über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues (3 vols.). Berlin: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin.
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1903–36. Gesammelte Schriften, ed. . 17 vols. Berlin: Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
. 1975. Words for owls in North American Indian languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.237–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1955. Positional analysis of categories: a frame for reconstruction. Word 11.10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1956. Na-Dene and positional analysis of categories. American Anthropologist 58.624–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1957. Some Penutian elements and the Penutian hypothesis. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 13.69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. Genetic classification: retrospect and prospect. Anthropological Linguistics 1(2).50–66.Google Scholar
. 1961. Review of Tungusisch und Ketschua, by Karl Bouda. International Journal of American Linguistics 27.362–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1964a. Evidence for Penutian in lexical sets with initial ∗C- and ∗S-. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.213–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1964b. ‘Hail’ and ‘bead’: two Penutian etymologies. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 94–8. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1971. Morris Swadesh: from the first Yale School to world prehistory, appendix to The origin and diversification of language, by Morris Swadesh, ed. , 285–92. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1974. Speech and language: on the origins and foundations of inequality among speakers. Language as a human problem, ed. and , 45–71. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
. 1964. Lenguas indígenas de Bolivia. Cochabamba, Bolivia: Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Museo Arqueológico.Google Scholar
1963. Altajskije dental'nyje ∗t, ∗d, ∗δ. [Altaic dentals ∗t, ∗d, ∗δ]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 6.37–56.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1964a. Genezis indoevropejskix rjadov guttural'nyx v svete dannyx vneshego sravnenija [The genesis of the Indo-European series of gutturals in the light of external comparison]. Problemy sravnitel'noj grammatiki indoevropejskix jazykov, ed. and , 22–6. Moscow: Moscow State University.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1964b. Drevnejshije indoevropejsko-semitskije jazykovje kontakty [The earliest contacts of the Indo-European and Semitic languages]. Problemy indoevropejskogo jazykoznanija, ed. , 3–12. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1965a. Altajskije guttural'nyje ∗k’, ∗k, ∗g. [Altaic gutturals ∗k’, ∗k, ∗g]. Etimologija 1964.338–43.Google Scholar
. 1967a. Materialy k sravnitel'nomu slovarju nostraticheskix jazykov [Materials for the comparative dictionary of the Nostratic languages]. Etimologija 1965.321–96.Google Scholar
. 1967b. Rekonstrukcija ural'skogo vokalizma v svete dannyx vneshnego sravnenija [Reconstruction of Uralic vocalism in light of the data from external comparison]. Voprosy Finnougorskogo Jazykoznanija 4.95–100. Izhevsk.Google Scholar
. 1968a. Sootvetsvia smychnyx v nostraticheskix jazykax [Correspondences of stop sounds in the Nostratic languages]. Etimologija 1966.304–55.Google Scholar
. 1968b. Opyt sravnenija nostraticheskix jazykov [An experiment for the comparison of Nostratic languages]. Slavjanskoje jazykoznanije 6: Mezhdunarodnyj s'jezd slavistov (Praga, avgust 1968). Doklady sovjetskoj delegaciji, 407–26. Moscow.Google Scholar
. 1971a, 1976, 1984. Opyt sravnenija nostraticheskix jazykov (semitoxamitskij, kartvel'skij, indoevropejskij, ural'skij, dravidijskij, altajskij) [An experiment for the comparison of Nostratic languages (Semitic, Kartvelian, Indo-European, Uralic, Dravidian, Altaic)]. 3 vols. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1971b. Lichnyje mestoimenija mi ‘ja’ i mä ‘my’ v nostraticheskom. [The personal pronouns mi ‘I’ and mä ‘we’] Issledovanija po slavjanskomu jazykoznaniju, 396–403. Moscow.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989a. The relationship of the Nostratic family languages: a probabilistic evaluation of the similarities in question [English translation of the introduction to Illich-Svitych 1971a]. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 111–21. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989b. Three entries from the Nostratic dictionary [Entries from vol. 1 Illich-Svitych 1971a]. [Translation of entries 8 and 32 was first published in General Linguistics 21.36–7.] Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 122–7. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989c. A Nostratic word list: reconstructions by V. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Jim Parkinson. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 128–62. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989d. The early reconstructions of Nostratic by V. M. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Mark Kaiser. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 131–74. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1990. The Nostratic reconstructions of V. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Mark Kaiser. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 138–67. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1926. La esfinge indiana: antiguos y nuevos aspectos del problema de los orígenes americanos. Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
. 1928[1926]. L'idioma Kichua nel sistema linguistico dell'Oceano Pacifico. International Congress of Americanists 22(2).495–509. Rome.Google Scholar
1986. Review of Illich-Svitych's dictionary of the Nostratic languages (vols. 1–2). Typology, relationship, and time, ed. and , 51–6, 57–65. Ann Arbor: Karoma. [English translation of Ivanov's review in Etimologija 1972.182–4.]Google Scholar
Jackson, Wayne. 1999. The Tower of Babel – Legend or History? (www.christiancourier.com/archives/babel.htm).
1958. Washo and Karok: an approach to comparative Hokan. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.195–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1976. Observations on the Yana stop series in relationship to problems of comparative Hokan phonology. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 129–48. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1979. Hokan inter-branch comparisons. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 545–91. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1980. Inclusive/exclusive: a diffused pronominal category in native Western North America. Papers from the parasession on pronouns and anaphora, ed. and , 204–27. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.1990. Comments on The feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language, by Richard M. Bateman, Ives Goddard, Richard O'Grady, V. A. Fund, Rich Mooi, W. John Kress, and Peter Cannell (in CA 31.1–24). Unpublished manuscript. Reno, Nevada.
. 1993. Another look at Sapir's evidence for inclusion of Haida in Na-Dene. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, January 8, 1993, Los Angeles.
. 1994. Characterizing and evaluating evidence for distant genetic relationships. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Associations for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco.
. 1929. Remarques sur l’évolution phonologique du russe comparée à celle des autres langues slaves. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 2.) (Reprinted 1962 in Selected writings of Roman Jakobson, vol. I: Phonological studies. The Hague: Mouton.)Google Scholar
. 1931. Über die phonologischen Sprachbünde. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 4.234–40.Google Scholar
. 1938. Sur la théorie des affinités phonologiques entre les langues. Actes du quatrième congrès international de linguistes(tenu à Copenhague du 27 aoÛt au 1 septembre, 1936), 48–58. (Reprinted 1949, as an appendix to Principes de phonologie, by N. S. Troubetzkoy, 351–65. Paris: Klincksieck.)Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Why “mama” and “papa”? Perspectives in psychological theory, ed. and , 21–9. New York: International Universities Press. (Reprinted 1962 in Selected writings of Roman Jakobson, vol. 1: Phonological studies, 538–45. The Hague: Mouton.)Google Scholar
. 1814. Hermes Scythicus or the radical affinities of the Greek and Latin languages to the Gothic. Edinburgh: The University Press for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown.Google Scholar
Janda, Richard D. and Brian D. Joseph. 2003. On language, change, and language change – or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 3–180. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1977. Samoyed-Altaic contacts. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.123–9. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1981. Uralilaisen kantakielen sanastosta [On the vocabulary of Proto-Uralic]. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 77.219–74.Google Scholar
. 1983. On early Indo-European-Samoyed contacts. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 185. 115–27. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1989. Any chances for long-range comparisons in North Asia?Mother Tongue (newsletter) 6.28–30.Google Scholar
. 1996. Manchuria: an ethnic history. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 222.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
. 2002. Hittite and the Indo-European verb. New York: Oxford University Press.
. 1894. Progress in language, with special reference to English. London: S. Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Johnson, Steve. 1990. Social parameters of linguistic change in an unstratified Aboriginal society. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 419–33. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joki, Aulis J. 1963. Uralte Lehnwörter oder Zufälle? Congressus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. , 105–7. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1972. Sur la parenté des langues. Mélanges offerts à Aurélien Sauvageot pour son soixante-quinzième anniversaire, 117–24. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1973. Uralier und Indogermanen: die älteren Berührungen zwischen den uralischen und indogermanischen Sprachen. (Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 151.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Joki, Aulis J.. 1975. Affinität und Interferenz in den Sprachen des Nordeurasischen Areals. Congressus Quartus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. , 71–86. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1976. Some Samoyed–Tunguz word comparisons. Tractata Altaica: Sinor Festschrift, 321–3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. 1977. Die Tungusen und ihre Kontakte mit anderen Völkern. Studia Orientalia 47.109–18.Google Scholar
. 1980. Die altaische Einwirkung auf die uralische Naturterminologie. Journal of Turkic Studies 4.57–60.Google Scholar
Joki, Aulis J.. 1988. Zur Geschichte der uralischen Sprachgemeinschaft unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Ostfinnischen [The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences], ed. , 575–95. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1989. Australian and the Mana languages. Oceanic Linguistics 28(2).181–96. [Compares Tamil, Warlpirri (sic), Sedang, and Finnish vocabulary using a “statistical” method, and concludes that Tamil, Warlpiri, and Finnish are related, but that Sedang (the control language) is not.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1798 [delivered February 2, 1786]. Third anniversary discourse: on the Hindus. Asiatick Researches 1.415–31.Google Scholar
. 1799a [delivered February 19, 1789]. Sixth anniversary discourse: on the Persians. Asiatick Researches 2.43–66. (Republished 1979c [1789]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 35–53.)Google Scholar
. 1799b [delivered February 25, 1790]. Seventh anniversary discourse: on the Chinese. Asiatick Researches 2.365–81.Google Scholar
. 1799c [delivered February 24, 1791]. Eighth anniversary discourse: on the borderers, mountaineers, and islanders of Asia. Asiatick Researches 3.1–20. (Republished 1979d [1791]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1–17.)
. 1799d [delivered February 23, 1792]. Ninth anniversary discourse: on the origin and families of nations. Asiatick Researches 3.418–35. (Republished 1979e [1792]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 479–92.)Google Scholar
. 1799e. The tenth anniversary discourse, delivered 28 February 1793: on Asiatic history, civil and natural. Asiatick Researches 4.ⅰ–ⅹⅹⅹⅴ. (Republished 1979f [1793]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, ⅰ–ⅹⅹⅹⅴ.)Google Scholar
. 1979a [1787]. The fourth anniversary discourse, delivered 15th February 1787: on the Arabs. Asiatick Researches 1. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 5–17.Google Scholar
. 1979b [1788]. The fifth anniversary discourse, delivered 21st February 1788: on the Tartars. Asiatick Researches 2. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 18–34.Google Scholar
. 1979c [1789]. See Jones 1799a.
. 1979d [1791]. See Jones 1799c.
. 1979e [1792]. See Jones 1799d.
. 1979f [1793]. See Jones 1799e.
Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 2000. Chadic: a network of genetic and areal relationships. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description: Africa south of the Sahara, ed. , 90–8. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Justeson, John S. and Laurence D. Stephens. 1980. Chance cognation: a probabilistic model and decision procedure for historical inference. Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Rebecca Labrum, and Susan Shepherd, 37–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2004. Acquiring phonology is not acquiring inventories but contrasts: the loss of Turkic and Korean primary long vowels. Linguistic Typology 8.351–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Mark. 1989. Remarks on historical phonology: from Nostratic to Indo-European. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 51–6. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1990. Lexical archaisms in Slavic: from Nostratic to Common Slavic. (Bochum Publications in Evolutionary Cultural Semiotics 26.) Bochum: Brockmeyer.
and . 1986. Inheritance versus borrowing in Indo-European, Kartvelian and Semitic. Journal of Indo-European Studies 14.365–78.Google Scholar
and . 1987. On recent comparisons between language families: the case of Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic. General Linguistics 27.34–46.Google Scholar
Kaltz, Barbara. 1985. Christian Jacob Kraus’ review of Linguarum totius orbis vocabularia comparativa, ed. (St. Petersburg, 1787), introduction, translation and notes by Barbara Kaltz. Historiographia Linguistica 12. 229–60.Google Scholar
Kate, Lambert ten. See Ten Kate, Lambert.
Kaufman, Terrence. 1964a. Materiales lingüísticos para el estudio de las relaciones internas y externas de la familia de idiomas Mayanos. Desarrollo cultural de los Mayas, ed. E. Vogt, 81–136. (Special publication of the Seminario de Cultura Maya.) Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Kaufman, Terrence1964b. Evidence for the Macro-Mayan hypothesis. Unpublished paper.
. 1974. Idiomas de Mesoamérica. (Seminario de Integración Social Guatemalteca, publication 33.) Guatemala.Google Scholar
. 1976. Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Mayaland and associated areas of Meso-America. World Archaeology 8.101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1990. Language history in South America: what we know and how to know more. Amazonian linguistics: studies in Lowland South America languages, ed. , 13–67. Austin: University of Austin Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1994. The native languages of South America. Atlas of the world's languages, ed. Christopher Moseley and R. E. Asher, 46–76. London: Routledge.
Kaufman, Terrence S. and Willam M. Norman. 1984. An outline of proto-Cholan phonology, morphology, and vocabulary. Phoneticism in Mayan hieroglyphic writing, ed. and , 77–166. (Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, publication 9.) Albany: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State Unviversity of New York.Google Scholar
1977–8. Towards a comparative Japanese-Austronesian. Bulletin of the Nara University of Education 26.23–49 (part I), 27.1–24 (part Ⅱ).Google Scholar
1985. Review of Toward Proto-Nostratic: a new approach, by Allan Bomhard.Language 61.57–60.Google Scholar
Kaye, Allan S.. 1989. Review of Typology relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and . Journal of Afroasiatic Languages 2.222–6.Google Scholar
Kaye, Allan S.1999 The current state of Nostratic linguistics. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 357–58. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Achaeological Research.Google Scholar
1974. Uralic-Japanese linguistic relations: a preliminary investigation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
. 1980a. Japanese–Uralic language comparison: locating Japanese origins with the help of Samoyed, Finnish, Hungarian, etc.: an attempt. Hamburg: Tsurusaki Books.Google Scholar
. 1980b. Open monosyllabic words and possible word formation hereof in the Uralic languages and Japanese, with side-glances at the Altaic languages. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 52.42–72.Google Scholar
1880. On the relations of the Indo-Chinese and Inter-Oceanic races and languages. Journal of the Anthropological Institute 9.254–89.Google Scholar
, 1996. War before civilization: the myth of the peaceful savage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1957. Our elder brother Coyote. Harvard University Ph.D. dissertation. (Appendix: Uto-Aztecan lexemes with morphological functions having Rotuman or Polynesian parallels, 188–237.)
. 1856. On the probable origin of the American Indians, with particular reference to that of the Caribs. Journal of the Ethnological Society 4.226–67.Google Scholar
. 1886. De Fidjitaal vergeleken met hare verwanten in Indonesië en Polynesië. (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen 16.) Amsterdam: J. Müller.Google Scholar
. 1906. Taalvergelijkende verhandeling over het Ancityumsch. (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen n.s. 8.) Amsterdam.Google Scholar
. 1978. Araucanian genetic relationships. International Journal of American Linguistics 44.280–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980–1. South American relationships with North American Indian languages. Homenaje a Ambrosio Rabanales. Boletín de Filología 31.331–50. Santiago, Chile: Universidad de Chile.Google Scholar
. 1981a. Intercontinental linguistic connections. (Humanities Inaugural Lecture Series.) Irvine: University of California.Google Scholar
. 1983. Comparative methodology for distant relationships in North and South American languages. Language Sciences 5(2).133–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984. Polynesian and American linguistic connections. (Edward Sapir Monograph Series in Language, Culture, and Cognition 12; supplement to Forum Linguisticum 8:3.) Lake Bluff, IL: Jupiter Press.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1991a. Language change in South American Indian languages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, Mary Ritchie. 1991b. A résumé of comparative studies in South American Indian languages. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 3–19. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1978. Fuegian and central South American language relationships. International Congress of Americanists 52(4).635–46. Paris.Google Scholar
1975. An etymological study of similarities between Korean and the Uralic languages. Congressus Tertius Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 1.105–10. Tallin: Valgus.Google Scholar
1976. The relationship between the Korean and Japanese languages. Hangeul173–4.657–66.Google Scholar
. 1992. A critique of Muskogean, “Gulf,” and Yukian material in Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.447–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimball, Geoffrey. 1994. Comparative difficulties of the “Gulf” languages. Proceedings of the meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas and the Hokan-Penutian workshop, ed. , 31–9. (SCOIL, report 8.) Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1974. From paleogrammarians to Neogrammarians. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 331–45. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
. 1975. Indogermanisch und Uralisch – die erste Synthese. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 41.176–80.Google Scholar
. 1826. Mémoires relatifs à l'Asie, contenant des recherches historiques, géographiques et philosophiques. 2 vols.Paris: Société Asiatique de Paris.Google Scholar
. 1977. Topics in historical Chumash grammar. University of California, Berkeley PhD dissertation.
1902. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache. Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J. 1997. Comparative linguistics and Australian prehistory. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 27–43. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J.. 2003. The case for Pama-Nyungan: evidence from inflectional morphology. Proceedings of the ⅩⅦ International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and . CD-ROM. Prague: Matfyzpress, Matematicko-Fyzikální Fakulty, University Karlovi.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J.. 2004. A methodological history of Australian linguistic classification. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. , and , 17–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1854. Polyglotta Africana, or a comparative vocabulary of nearly three hundred words and phrases in more than one hundred distinct African languages. London: Church Missionary House.Google Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1983. Editor's foreword. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel, and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , ⅸ–ⅹⅵ. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1990a. Jacob Grimm's position in the development of linguistics as a science. The Grimm brothers and the Germanic past, ed. , 5–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1990b. Wilhelm von Humboldt and North American ethnolinguistics: Boas (1894) to Hymes (1961). Historiographia Linguistica 17.111–38.CrossRef
Koerner, Konrad. 1990c. The place of Friedrich Schlegel in the development of historical-comparative linguistics. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 239–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köhler, Oswin. 1975. Geschichte und Probleme der Gliederung der Sprachen Afrikas. Die Völker Afrikas und ihre traditionellen Kulturen, ed. , 135–373. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
. 1991. Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie. (Österreichsche Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 566.) Vienna: Der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
1980. Eskimo as a member of the Uralo-Altaic family: some structural similarities. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 7.216–24. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
1929. Ostasiatische Zahlwörter in süd-amerikanischen Sprachen. International Archiv für Ethnographie 30.77–118. Leiden.Google Scholar
1975. On the Nostratic language family hypothesis. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 77.109–15. Budapest.Google Scholar
1980. Nilal: über die Urverwandtschaft des Hamito-Semitischen, Indogermanischen, Uralischen und Altaischen. Helsinki: Akateeminen Kirjakauppa.Google Scholar
. 1950. Das Venetische: seine Stellung im Kreise der verwandten Sprachen. (Abhandlungen der Sitzungsberichte der Heidelbergische Akademie der Wissenschaft.) Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
. 1787. Rezension des Allgemeinen vergleichenden Wörterbuchs von Pallas. Allgemeinen Literatur-Zeitung235–7. (Reprinted in Arens 1969.136–45; English translation and notes by Barbara Kaltz, 1985: Historiographia Linguistica 12.229–60.)Google Scholar
1964. Proto-Athapaskan-Eyak and the problem of Na-Dene I: the phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.118–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1965. Proto-Athapaskan-Eyak and the problem of Na-Dene Ⅱ: morphology. International Journal of American Linguistics 31.18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1969. On the classification in the Athapascan, Eyak, and Tlingit verb. Supplement to International Journal of American Linguistics 35(4), part Ⅱ. (Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, memoir 24.) Bloomington.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1973a. Eskimo-Aleut. Linguistics in North America, ed. , 796–902. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1973b. Na-Dene. Linguistics in North America, ed. , 903–78. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1979. Na-Dene and Eskimo-Aleut. The Languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 803–901. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1986. Edward Sapir and Athabaskan linguistics. New perspectives in language, culture, and personality: proceedings of the Edward Sapir Centenary Conference (Ottawa, 1–3 Oct., 1984), ed. , , and , 147–90. (Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 41.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Michael E. and Victor K. Golla. 1981. Northern Athabaskan languages. Handbook of North American Indians, ed. , vol. 6: Subarctic, ed. , 67–85. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
1990a. The Altaic component of a Nostratic dictionary. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 11.30–41.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1990b. A new contribution to Japanese-Korean phonological comparison. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 62.138–40.
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1969. Comparative Dravidian studies. Linguistics in South Asia, ed. , 309–33. (Current Trends in Linguistics 5.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1985. An overview of comparative Dravidian studies since Current Trends 5 (1969). For Gordon H. Fairbanks, ed. and , 212–31. (Oceanic Linguistics, special publication 20.) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1994. Dravidian languages. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , vol. 1, 337–8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 2001. Comparative Dravidian linguistics: current perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 1915. Serian, Tequestlatecan, and Hokan. University of California publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 11.279–90.Google Scholar
Kroeber, Alfred L.. 1940. Conclusions: the present status of Americanistic problems. The Maya and their neighbors: essays on Middle American anthropology and archaeology, ed. , , , , and , 460–87. New York: D. Appleton-Century. (Reissued 1970. New York: Dover.)Google Scholar
1993. Language, history, and identity: ethnolinguistic studies of the Arizona Tewa. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
1983. Concerning the problem of Uralic affinity with Indo-European. Lingua Posnaniensis 26.99–104.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1992–2000. Suomen sanojen alkuperä: etymologinen sanakirja [The origin of Finnish words: etymological dictionary]. 3 vols. (Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 556; Kotimaisten Kielten Tutkimuksen Julkasuja 62.) Jyväskylä: Gummerus.Google Scholar
. 1924. Preliminary results of researches into the original relationship between the Nipponese and the Malay-Polynesian languages. Journal of the Polynesian Society 33.244–80.Google Scholar
. 1643. Notae ad Dissertationem Hugonis Grotii. Amsterdam/Paris: apud viduam Gvilielmi Pele.Google Scholar
. 1877. Amenische Studien. (Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaft zu Göttingen 22.) Göttingen: Dieterich.Google Scholar
. 1974. Comparative Hokan-Coahuiltecan studies: a survey and appraisal. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langdon, Margaret. 1979. Some thoughts on Hokan with particular reference to Pomoan and Yuman. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 593–649. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2001.The role of migration and language contact in the development of the Sino-Tibetan language family. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 225–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1982. Some remarks on the hypothesis of an Uralo-Dravidian genetic linguistic relationship. Fenno-Ugrica Suecana 5.169–84.Google Scholar
. 1844. Die Brahui und ihre Sprache. Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 5.337–409.Google Scholar
Latham, Robert Gordon. 1843[1847]. On the general affinities of the languages of the Oceanic blacks. Narrative of the surveying voyage of H. M. S. Fly, commanded by Captain F. P. Blackwood, R. N., in Torres Strait, New Guinea, and other islands of the eastern archipelago, during the years 1842–1846; together with an excursion into the interior of the eastern part of Java, appendix Ⅳ, 313–20. ed. . London: T. & W. Boone.Google Scholar
1986. Correspondence entre l’égyptien et l'indo-européen. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique 80.5–12.Google Scholar
Law, Vivian. 1990. Language and its students: the history of linguistics. An encyclopaedia of language, ed. , 784–842. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
and . 1977. Haida dictionary. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar
Laycock, Donald A. 1976. A history of Papuan linguistic research: Eastern New Guinea area. New Guinea area languages and language study, vol. 1: Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene, ed. , 43–115. (Pacific Linguistics C-38.) Sydney: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, Steven A. 2002. Conflict and language dispersal: issues and a New World example. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 357–65. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1958. A comparative study of Manchu and Korean. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 30.104–20.Google Scholar
. 1748. En Lappisk grammatica, efter den dialect, som bruges af Field-Lapperne udi Porsanger-Fjorden, samt et register over de udi samme grammatica anførte obervationers indhold. Copenhagen: Gottman Friederich Risel.Google Scholar
. 1768–81. Lexicon Lapponicum bipartitum: Lapponico-Danica-Latinum & Danico-Latino-Lappinicum, cum indice Latino. Vol. 1 Trondheim, vol. 2 Copenhagen.Google Scholar
. 1991. Evidence for a Northern Northwest Coast language area: promiscuous number marking and periphrastic possessive constructions in Haida, Eyak, and Aleut. International Journal of American Linguistics 57.158–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1903. Comparative philology: a comparison between Semitic and American languages. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1994. DCM [distant comparison method] vs. CM [comparative method]. California Linguistic Notes 24.1–3.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1692. Conjecture de Monsr. Leibniz sur l'origine du mot blason. Journal des Sçavans 20.513–15. (In 1768, Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 6.2:185. Geneva.)
. 1697. Dissertatio de Origine Germanorum.
. 1709. Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain.
. 1710a. Brevis designatio meditationum de originibus gentium, ductis potissimum ex indicio linguarum [Brief exposition of thoughts concerning the origins of nations, principally drawn from the evidence of languages]. Miscellanea Berolinensia, 1–16.Google Scholar
. 1710b. Dissertatio de origine Germanorum, seu brevis disquisitio, utros incolarum Germaniae citerioris aut Scandicae ex alteris initio profectos verisimilius sit judicandum.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1717. Leibnitii collectanea etymologica illustrationi linguarum, veteris Celticae, Germanicae, Gallicae, aliarumque inservientia, ed. . Hanover. (In 1768, Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii. […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 6.s:6–232. Geneva.)Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1768. De originibus gentium. Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 4.186–98. Geneva.
. 1984. Duponceau, Humboldt et Pott: la place structurale des concepts de “polysynthèse” et d'incorporation.”Amerindia 6.65–77.Google Scholar
. 1880. Nubische Grammatik, mit einer Einleitung über die Völker und Sprachen Afrika's. Berlin: Wilhelm Hertz.Google Scholar
. 1945. The influence of Cushitic on the Semitic languages of Ethiopia: a problem of substratum. Word 1.59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. The influence of Sidamo on the Ethiopic languages of Gurage. Language 28.63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. The Indo-European and Semitic languages. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
. 1975. The Indo-European and Semitic languages: a reply to Oswald Szemerényi. General Linguistics 15.197–205.Google Scholar
Levin, Saul. 1977. “Something stolen”: a Semitic participle and an Indo-European neuter substantive. Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: Festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann, ed. , 317–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Levin, Saul1991. Full and other key words shared by Indo-European and Semitic. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 166–77. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Semitic and Indo-European Ⅱ: comparative morphology, syntax and phonetics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1979. Haida and Na-Dene: a new look at the evidence. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.157–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1928. Review of Dravidisch und Uralisch, by Otto Schrader. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung145.Google Scholar
1976. Japanese and Korean: the problems and history of a linguistic comparison. Journal of Japanese Studies 2.389–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1707. Archaeologia Britannica, giving some account additional to what has been hitherto published, of the languages, histories and customs of the original inhabitants of Great Britain: from collections and observations in travels through Wales, Cornwall, Bas-Bretagne, Ireland and Scotland. Oxford: Printed at the Theater for the Author. (Reprinted 1969, English linguistics 1500–1800, no. 136, a collection of fascimile reprints selected and edited by . Menston, UK: The Scolar Press.)Google Scholar
. 1976. Sino-Tai. Computational analysis of Asian and African languages 3.39–48. Tokyo.Google Scholar
. 1808. Bemerkungen über die Sprachen der südafrikanischen wilden Völkerstämme, nebst einem kleinem Wörterverzeichnisse aus den gebräuchlichsten Dialecten der Hottentotten und Kaffern. Weimar: Allgemeines Archiv für Ethnographie und Linguistik.
. 1991. Indianersprachen Vergleich und Klassifizierung: eine ethnolinguistische Einführung in die Grundlagen und Methoden. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1690. An essay concerning human understanding. [Recent version: ed. . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.]Google Scholar
1859. Ethnology of the Indo-Pacific Islands. The affiliation of the Tibeto-Burman, Mon-Anna. Papuanasian and Malayo-Polynesian pronouns and definitives, as varieties of the ancient Himalayo-Polynesian system; and the relation of that system to the Dravido-Australian. Journal of the Indian Archipelago and Eastern Asia, n.s. 3.1.Google Scholar
. 1755. Rossijskaja grammatika [Russian grammar]. (Reprinted 1952: Polnoe sobranie socinenij [Complete collection of works]. Moscow: Nauka. Facsimile edition 1972, Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
. 1968. Classification of South American Indian languages. (Reference Series 7.) Los Angeles: University of California, Latin American Center.Google Scholar
. 1702. Dissertatio de harmonia linguae aethiopicae cum ceteris orientalibus. Frankfurt am Main: Johannis David Zunner and Nicolas Wilhem Helvig.Google Scholar
. 1830[1830–3]. Principles of geology, being an attempt to explain the former changes of the earth's surface by reference to causes now in operation. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
and . 2000. On the origin of internal structure of word forms. Science 288.527–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and . 1997. Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture. London and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.Google Scholar
. 1993a. Is Tonkawa Na-Dene? A case study of the validity of the Greenbergian classification. California Linguistic Notes 24.21–5.Google Scholar
. 1994. Clusters or affricates in Kartvelian and Nostratic?Diachronica 11.157–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannheim, Bruce. 1985. Contact and Quechua-external genetic relationships. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. Harriet E. Manelis Klein and Louisa R. Stark, 644–88. Austin: University of Texas Press.
. 1986. Comentario a Willem Adelaar, “La relación quechua-aru: perspectivas para la separación del léxico.” Revista Andina 4.413–18.Google Scholar
Markey, Thomas L. and Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin. 1986. Foreword. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and trans. and , ⅶ–ⅹⅼⅳ. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
1974. More on the Uralo-Dravidian relationship: comparison of Uralic and Dravidian etymological vocabularies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
. 1980. Uralic-Dravidian hypothesis: what evidence? Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 2.245–50. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
. 1818[1816]. Letter on “Congolese” languages.
. 1834. On the Polynesian or East-Insular languages. Miscellaneous works of William Marsden, 1–114. London: Parbury, Allen, and Co.Google Scholar
and . 1951. Kleinschmidt centennial Ⅴ: Eskimo Aleut correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 17.209–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1919. Cáractère indo-Européen de la langue hittite. (Vedenskapsselskapets Skrifter, Ⅱ. Historisk-Filosofisk Klasse 2.) Christiania: Jacob Dywad.Google Scholar
and . 1990. Deixis pronominal en el chimane del oriente boliviana. International Journal of American Linguistics 56.574–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. Grammatical elements relating Korean to Japanese. Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences 9.405–7.Google Scholar
. 1975. Problems in establishing the prehistoric relationships of Korean and Japanese. Proceedings of the International Symposium Commemorating the Thirtieth Anniversary of Korean Liberation, 159–72. Seoul: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Martin, Samuel E.. 1990. Morphological clues to the relationship of Japanese and Korean. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 483–509. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Samuel E.. 1991. Recent research on the relationship of Japanese and Korean. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 269–92. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Mason, J. Alden. 1950. The languages of South American Indians. Handbook of South American Indians, ed. , 6.157–317. (Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 143.) Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1976. Austro-Thai and Sino-Tibetan: an examination of body-part contact relationships. Genetic relationship, diffusion, and typological similarities of East and Southeast Asian languages, ed. , 256–89. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.Google Scholar
. 1991. Sino-Tibetan linguistics: present state and future prospects. Annual Review of Anthropology 20.469–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: system and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 135.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Matteson, Esther. 1972. Towards Proto Amerindian. Comparative studies in Amerindian languages, ed. , 21–89. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 127.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1963. Animal species and evolution. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1974b. Elamite and Dravidian: the morphological evidence. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 3.343–58.Google Scholar
. 1975. Elamite and Dravidian: further evidence of relationship. Current Anthropology 16.105–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: the evidence and implications. (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 71, part 3.) Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
. 2001. Review of Linguistic diversity, by Daniel Nettle. Language in Society 30.97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1964. Northern Hokan (B) and (C): a comparison of Eastern Pomo and Yana. University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.126–44. Berkeley: University of California Press.
and 1995. Linguistics, genetics and archaeology: internal and external evidence in the Amerind controversy. Transactions of the Philological Society 93.125–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1942. Una posible síntesis lingüística macro-mayance. Mayas y Olmecas, 37–8. Tuxtla Gutiérrez: Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología, Reunión de Mesa Redonda sobre problemas antropológicos de México y Centro América.Google Scholar
. 1948/1949. Observations sur quelque caractères communs des langues dravidiennes et des langues altaïques. Actes du ⅩⅩe/ⅩⅪ Congrès International des Orientalistes, 207–9. Paris.Google Scholar
. 1914. Le problème de la parenté des langues. Rivista di Scienza 15.35:3. (Reprinted in Meillet 1948[1921]: 76–101.)Google Scholar
. 1925. La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Paris: Champion. (English translation 1967: The comparative method in historical linguistics. Paris: Champion.)Google Scholar
. 1966[1954/1925]. La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
. 1899. Grundriss einer Lautlehre der Bantusprachen. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. (English translation: Introduction to the phonology of the Bantu languages, by N. J. van Warmelo, 1932.)Google Scholar
. 1905. Probleme der afrikanischen Linguistik. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 19.77–90.Google Scholar
. 1906. Grundzüge einer vergleichenden Grammatik der Bantusprachen. Berlin. (2nd edition 1948. Hamburg: Reimer.)Google Scholar
. 1897. Hondureñismos: vocabulario de los provincialismos de Honduras. 2nd edition. Tegucigalpa: Tipografía Nacional.Google Scholar
. 1963. Zum ural-altaischen -u-/-w- des Medio-Passives Aspekts im Türkischen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 35.422–4.Google Scholar
. 1975. Altajischen Studien, Ⅱ: Japanisch und Altajisch. (Abhandlungen für Kunde des Morgenlandes 41.3.) Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Menges, Karl H.. 1989. East-Nostratic: Altaic and Dravidian. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 59–62. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Menges, Karl H.. 1990. Altaic and East Nostratic. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 26–32. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Menovshchikov, Gregory A. 1968. Aleutskij jazyk. Mongol'skie, tunguso-man'czurskie i paleoaziatskie jazyki, ed. . (Jazyki narodov SSSR series, ed. et al., vol. 5.) Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Messerschmidt, D. G. 1962–77. Forschungsreise durch Siberien 1720–1727, ed. , , , and . 5 vols. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
. 1953b. Abraham Mylius on historical linguistics. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 68.535–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalf, George J.. 1974. The Indo-European hypothesis in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 233–57. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Micelli, Luisa. 2004. Pama-Nyungan as a genetic entity. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 61–8. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1998. Current issues in linguistic taxonomy. Annual Review of Anthropology 27.451–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Truman. 1914. Two alleged Algonquian languages of California. American Anthropologist 16.361–7. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 553–7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
. 1915. Rejoinder [to Edward Sapir's “Algonkin languages of California: a reply”]. American Anthropologist 17.194–8.Google Scholar
. 1998. Random coincidence in mass comparison: preliminary analysis of the Nilo-Saharan lexicon. Nordic Journal of African Studies 7.63–92.Google Scholar
. 1960. Similarities between the Asiatic and American Indian languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 26.265–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. Etudes typologiques sur les langues indigènes de l'amérique / Typological studies of the American Indian languages. (Oddzial w Krakowie, Prace Komisji Orientalistycznej, 7.) Crakow: Polska Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
. 1968. The Japanese reflexes of Proto-Altaic ∗D-, ∗Ʒ- and č-. Journal of the American Oriental Society 88.753–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971b. The Old Japanese reflexes of Proto-Altaic ∗l2. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 42.127–47.Google Scholar
. 1974. Sino-Tibetan: inspection of a conspectus. Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.195–209.
. 1975. Japanese-Altaic lexical evidence and Proto-Turkic “zetacism-sigmatism.” Researches in Altaic languages (PIAC 14), 157–72. Budapest.Google Scholar
. 1976. Reply to Doerfer. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 126.53–76.Google Scholar
. 1977. The Altaic accusatives in the light of Old and Middle Korean. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.157–69.Google Scholar
. 1979a. Japanese, Altaic, and Indo-European. Journal of Indo-European Studies 7.307–13.Google Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1981. Altaic origins of the Japanese verb classes. Bono Homini Donum: essays in historical linguistics in memory of J. Alexander Kerns, ed. and , 845–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1983. Review of Nihongo to tamirugo [Japanese and Tamil], by Ono Susumu, and Nihongo wa doko kara kita ka [Where did Japanese come from], by Fujiwara Akira. Language 59.207–11.
. 1985. Altaic connections of the Old Japanese negatives. Central Asiatic Journal 29.35–84.Google Scholar
. 1986. Tamil and Japanese?Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49.557–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1991. Genetic connections among the Altaic languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 293–327. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1971. The death of language or serendipity among the Shoshoni. Anthropological Linguistics 13.114–20.
1984. The classification of the Uto-Aztecan languages based on lexical evidence. International Journal of American Linguistics 50.1–24.CrossRef
and . 1992. Social networks and social class: toward an integrated sociolinguistic model. Language in Society 21.1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1990. Studies of North American Indian languages. Annual Review of Anthropology 9.309–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1911. Vergleichendes indogermanisch-semitisches Wörterbuch. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
[]. 1773–92. Of the origin and progress of language. Edinburgh: J. Balfour; London: T. Caldwell.Google Scholar
[]. 1779–99. Antient metaphysics. 6 vols. Edinburgh: Bell and Bradfute; London: T. Caldwell.Google Scholar
1994. Putting anthropology back together again: the ethnogenetic critique of cladistic theory. American Anthropologist 96. 925–48.
1891. The Déné languages, considered in themselves and in their relations to non-American idioms. Transactions of the Canadian Institute 1.170–212. Toronto.Google Scholar
. 1907. The unity of speech among the Northern and Southern Déné. American Anthropologist 9.721–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, A[nna]. See Davies, Anna Morpurgo.
, , , and . 1964. An introduction to the comparative grammar of the Semitic languages: phonology and morphology. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Mous, Maarten. 1994. Ma'a or Mbugu. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 175–200. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar
Mous, Maarten. 2003. Loss of linguistic diversity in Africa. Language death and language maintenance: theoretical, practical and descriptive approaches, ed. and , 157–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter. 1989. On the causes of accelerated linguistic change in the Pacific area. Language change: contributions to the study of its causes, ed. and , 137–72. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1981. Einige hamito-semitische und baskische Wortstämme. Berliner Afrikanische Vorträge, 103–18. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
1968. Sir William Jones: a study in eighteenth-century British attitudes to India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muller, Jean-Claude. 1984. Saumise, Monboddo, Adelung: vers la grammaire comparée. Matériaux pour une histoire des theories linguistiques, ed. , , , , and , 389–96. Lille: Université de Lille Ⅲ.Google Scholar
. 1986. Early stages of language comparison from Sassetti to Sir William Jones (1786). Kratylos 31.1–31.Google Scholar
Müller, Max. 1854. Letter to Chevalier Bunsen, on the classification of the Turanian languages. Printed in Christianity and mankind, ed. . London.Google Scholar
. 1855. The languages of the seat of war in the East: with a survey of three families of languages, Semitic, Arian, and Turanian. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
. 1861[1866/99]. Lectures on the science of language. (2nd edition; last revision 1899.) New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
. 1862–5. Lectures on the science of language: first and second series. 5th edition. New York: Charles Scribner. (Reprinted 1965[1861]. Delhi: Munshi Ram Manohar Lal.)Google Scholar
. 1544. Cosmographei oder Beschreibung aller Länder, Herrschaften und fürnemesten Stetten, des gantzen Erdbodens. Basil: Sebastianum Henricpetri.Google Scholar
1966. Mongolisch und Japanisch – ein Versuch zum lexikalisches Vergleich. Collectanea Mongolica, 153–6. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
. 1975. Altaische Komponente der japanischen Sprache. Researches in Altaic Languages (PI ac 14), 181–8. Budapest.Google Scholar
1959. Cross-language parallels in parental kin terms. Anthropological Linguistics 1.9:1–5.Google Scholar
. 1823. History of the European language, or researches into the affinities of the Teutonic, Greek, Celtic, Sclavonic, and Indian nations. Edinburgh: Archibald Constable & Co.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1998. Sir William Jones, 1746–1794: a commemoration. Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of University College, Oxford.Google Scholar
1989. Comments on Nostratic reconstructions of Illich-Svitych (revised edition). Mother Tongue (newsletter) 9.1–15.Google Scholar
Musayev, Kenesbay. 1996. Dravidian–Turkic–Sanskrit lexical comparisons. Symbolae Turcologicae: studies in honour of Lars Johanson on his sixtieth birthday, ed. , , and , 169–74. (Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, Transactions 6.) Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. 1612. Lingua Belgica: de linguae illius communitate tum cum plerisque alijs, tum presertim cum Latinâ, Graecâ, Persicâ; deque communitatis illius causis; tum de linguae illius origine & latissimâ per nationes quamplurimas diffusione; ut & de ejus prestantiâ. Quâ tum occasione, hic simul quaedam tractantur consideratu non indigna, ad linguas in universum omnes pertinentia.Google Scholar
. 2000a. The Aynu protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots (revised and enlarged edition of The Aynu language and the Indo-European protolanguage.) Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku Center.Google Scholar
. 2000b. The Japanese protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots. Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku Center.Google Scholar
. 2001. The Japanese protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots (revised and enlarged edition of The origin of Japanese and English languages). Tokyo: Shinpusha.Google Scholar
. 1996. Language diversity in West Africa: an ecological approach. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 15.403–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1999b. Linguistic diversity of the Americas can be reconciled with a recent colonization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96 (March).3325–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2000. Vanishing voices: the extinction of the world's languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Newman, Paul. 1993. Greenberg's American Indian classification: a report on the controversy. Historical linguistics 1991: papers from the tenth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 229–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1995. On being right: Greenberg's African linguistic classification and the methodological principles which underlie it. Bloomington, IN: Institute for the Study of Nigerian Languages and Cultures, African Studies Program, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Newman, Paul. 2000. Comparative linguistics. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 259–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1964. Comparison of Zuni and California Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1977. The Salish independent pronoun system. International Journal of American Linguistics 43.302–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1979a. A history of the Salish possessive and subject forms. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.207–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1979b. The Salish object forms. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980. Functional changes in the Salish pronominal system. International Journal of American Linguistics 46.155–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2000. On the reconstruction of “Proto-World” word order. The evolutionary emergence of language: social function and the origins of linguistic form, ed. , , and , 372–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. Diminutive consonant symbolism in Western North America. Language 47.826–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990a. Linguistic diversity and the first settlement of the New World. Language 66.475–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990b. More on human phylogeny and linguistic history. Current Anthropology 31.313–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1992. Linguistic diversity in time and space. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1993. Ergativity and linguistic geography. Australian Journal of Linguistics 13. 39–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1994. Language at 40,000 BC. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, Feb. 21, 1994.Google Scholar
.1995a. The spread of language around the Pacific Rim. Evolutionary Anthropology 3(6).206–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1995b. Diachronically stable structural features. Historical linguistics 1993: selected papers from the eleventh International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 337–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1996a. The comparative method as heuristic. The comparative method revised, ed. and , 39–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
.1996b. The geography of language origins. Berkeley Linguistics Society 22.267–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1997a. Modeling ancient population structures and movement in linguistics. Annual Review of Anthropology 26.359–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1997b. Sprung from two common sources: Sahul as a linguistic area. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 135–68. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1997c. The epicenter of the Indo-European linguistic spread. Archaeology and language, vol. 1: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 122–48. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1998a. The Eurasian spread zone and the Indo-European dispersal. Archaeology and language, vol. Ⅱ: Archaeological data and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 220–66. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1998b. The origins and dispersal of languages: linguistic evidence. The origin and diversification of language, ed. and , 127–70. San Francisco, CA: California Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.2003. Diversity and stability in language. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 283–310. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert. 1992. Utilisation des structurations lexicales pour la recherche comparative: circularité, et enroulement en songhay et touareg. Komparative Afrikanistik: Sprach-, geschichts- und literaturwissenschaftliche Aufsätze zu Ehren von Hans G. Mukarovsky anlässlich seines 70. Geburtstags, ed. , , and , 257–67. (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien, vol. 61. Beiträge zur Afrikanistik, vol. 44.) Vienna: Institut für Afrikanistik.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert.1995. Parentés du songhay: répondre aux questions, questionner les réponses. Actes du Cinquième Colloque de Linguistique Nilo-Saharienne/Proceedings of the fifth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, 24–29 aoÛt 1992/August 24th–29th, 1992, Université de Nice – Sophia Antipolis. Nilo-Saharan linguistic analyses and documentation (NISA), vol. 10, ed. and , 391–411. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
.1996. Problems of grouping and subgrouping: the question of Songhay. (Papers from the sixth Nilo-Saharan Conference, Santa Monica.) Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 45.27–52.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert.2002. Du songhay, du nilo-saharien et des problèmes récurrents. Lexical and structural diffusion:interplay of internal and external factors of language development in the West African Sahel, ed. and (CORPUS, Les Cahiers 1), 111–214. Nice: Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis.Google Scholar
.2003. La force des choses, ou, L’épreuve “nilo-saharienne”: questions sur les reconstructions archéologiques et l’évolution des langues. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika (SUGIA), supplement 13. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L. 1989. Eyak-Athapascan – North Caucasian sound correspondences. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 63–5. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L.1991. Sino-Caucasian languages in America. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 42–66. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L. and O. Mudrak. 1989. Gilyak and Chukchi-Kamchatkan as Almosan Keresiouan languages: lexical evidence. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 67–87. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1991. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics: the case of Mwiini. Berkeley Linguistic Society 17.177–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurse, Derek.1994. South meets North: Ilwana = Bantu + Cushitic on Kenya's Tana River. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 213–22. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar
.1997. The contributions of linguistics to the study of history in Africa. Journal of African History 38.359–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Toward a Proto-Pama-Nyungan stem list, part I: sets J1–J25. Oceanic Linguistics 37.209–33.Google Scholar
O'Grady, Geoffrey and Ken Hale. 2004. The coherence and distinctiveness of the Pama-Nyungan language family within the Australian linguistic phylum. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 69–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1966. Languages of the world, fascicle 6: Indo-Pacific. Anthropological Linguistics 8.1–199.Google Scholar
. 1980. Sound correspondences between Tamil and Japanese. (Gakushuin Series of Treatises 8.) Tokyo: Gakushuin Educational Foundation.Google Scholar
.1983. A study of the relationship between Tamil and Japanese. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 12.366–96.Google Scholar
Ohno, Susumu.1987. Morpheme correspondences between Japanese and Tamil. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and , 2499–503. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
1964. Mayan affinities with Chipaya of Bolivia Ⅰ: correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.313–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1965. Mayan affinities with Chipaya of Bolivia Ⅱ: cognates. International Journal of American Linguistics 31.29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1977. Proto Jicaque-Subtiaba-Tequistlateco: a comparative reconstruction. Two studies in Middle American comparative linguistics, 1–52. Arlington: University of Texas at Arlington Press, Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Orël, Vladimir and Sergei Starostin. 1990. Etruscan as an East Caucasian language. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 60–6. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
and . 1995. Hamito-Semitic etymological dictionary: materials for a reconstruction. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
and . 1878. Morphologische Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
. 2005. Empires of the word: a language history of the world. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
. 1907. Zur Frage von der Urverwandtschaft der finnisch-ugrischen und indoeuropäischen Sprachen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 7.13–31.Google Scholar
. 1926. Glosario comparado Quičua-Maori. International Congress of Americanists 22(2).517–25. Rome.Google Scholar
. 1786–9. Linguarum totius orbis vocabularia comparativa. (Reprinted 1997, Hamburg: Buske.)Google Scholar
1978. Parent language: genetic or contact relationship?Indogermanische Forschungen 82.50–60.Google Scholar
.1986. New contributions to “Proto-Nostratic” [review of Bomhard 1984]. Indogermanische Forschungen 90.305–17.Google Scholar
1969. Comparative Quechua phonology and grammar Ⅳ: the evolution of Quechua A. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics 1(9).149–204.Google Scholar
. 1982. The genetic relationship of the Ainu language. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
. 1907. Nuevos estudios sobre lenguas americanas: origen del kechua y del aimará/Nouvelles études sur les langues Américaines: origine du kechua et de l-aimará. Leipzig: Brockhaus.Google Scholar
. 1920[1898]. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. (5th edition; 1st 1880; 1970 printing.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
. 1885. Die Inschriften nordetruskischen Alphabets. (Altitalische Forschungen, 1.) Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.Google Scholar
.1891. Die Veneter und ihre Schriftdenkmäler. (Altitalische Forschungen, 3.) Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.1995. Voorhoeve and the Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis. Tales from a concave world: liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve, ed. , and , 83–122. Leiden: Leiden University, Projects Division, Department of Languages and Cultures of South-East Asia and Oceania.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.1998. The Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis: a reassessment. Perspectives on the Bird's Head of Irian Jaya, Indonesia, ed. , , and , 655–89. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.2001. The Proto Trans New Guinea obstruents: arguments from top-down reconstruction. The boy from Bundaberg: studies in Melanesian linguistics in honour of Tom Dutton, ed. , and , 261–300. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
.2004. Recent research on the historical relationships of the Papuan languages, or, what can linguistics add to the stories of archaeology and other disciplines about the prehistory of Melanesia? Paper presented at the 2004 annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Podium Symposium: The second garden of Eden – Island Melanesian genetic diversity.Google Scholar
and . 1993. Austronesian linguistics and culture history. Annual Review of Anthropology 22.425–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1933. Zur Frage nach Urverwandtschaft des Indoeuropäischen und dem Ugrofinnischen. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 67.308–25. Helsinki.Google Scholar
.1935. Il problema delle parentele tra grandi gruppi linguistici. Atti del Ⅲ Congresso Internazionale dei Linguisti, 328–33. Florence: Felice de Monier.Google Scholar
.1962[1931]. The discovery of language: linguistic science in the nineteenth century. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger.1983[1916]. A glance at the history of linguistics with particular regard to the historical study of phonology, translated from Danish by Caroline C. Henriksen, ed. . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Percival, W. Keith. 1986a. The reception of Hebrew in sixteenth-century Europe: impact of the Cabbala. The history of linguistics in Spain, ed. and , 21–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percival, W. Keith.1986b. Renaissance linguistics: the old and the new. Studies in the history of western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 56–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. There is no correlation between the size of a community speaking a language and the size of the phonological inventory of that language. Linguistic Typology 8.376–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Manfred. 1974. Einleitung. Mithridates de differentiis linguarum tum veterum tum quae hodie apud diversas nationes in toto orbe terrarum in usu sunt, von Konrad Gessner [1555], ed. . Darmstadt: Scientia Verlag Aalen.Google Scholar
1982. La racine en indoeuropéen et en chamito-sémitique et leurs perspectives comparatives. AIWN 42.381–402. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
. 1998. The case against global etymologies: evidence from Algonquian. International Journal of American Linguistics 64.141–7. [Published also 1995: On the nature of the Algonquian evidence for global etymologies. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 24. 50–4.]Google Scholar
(ed.) 1833. Sebastian Rasles [Sébastien Râle], A dictionary of the Abnaki language of North America. [With Supplementary notes and observations on Father Rasles’ Dictionary of the Abnaki language, by John Pickering.]Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Science 1.375–565.Google Scholar
.1966. Genetic comparisons and Hanis, Miluk, Alsea, Siuslaw, and Takelma. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.379–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. Versuch einer historischen Lautlehre der Kharia-Sprache. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1964. On the historical position of Tlingit. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.155–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinnow, Heinz-Jürgen.1966. A comparative study of the verb in the Munda languages. Studies in comparative Austroasiatic linguistics, ed. , 96–193. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1968. Genetic relationship vs. borrowing in Na-Dene. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.204–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1976. Geschichte der Na-Dene Forschung. (Indiana, supplement 5.) Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag.Google Scholar
.1985. Das Haida als Na-Dene-Sprache. 4 parts. (Abhandlungen der Völkerkundlichen Arbeitsgemeinschaft, vols. 43, 44, 45, and 46.) Nortorf, Germany.Google Scholar
.1990. Die Na-Dene-Sprachen in Lichte der Greenberg-Klassifikation. (Abhandlungen der Völkerkundlichen Arbeitsgemeinschaft, vol. 64.) Nortorf, Germany.
and . 1958. Comparative survey of California Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.174–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1905. Über die Sprache der Hottentotten und Buschmänner. Mitteil- ungen des Seminars für orientalische Sprache 8.104–76.Google Scholar
Pons, Jean François. 1743. [Letter to Du Halde.] Lettres edifiantes et curieuses, 224–6.
. 1960. Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen, vol. 1: Vergleichende Lautlehre. (Porta Linguarum Orientalium 4.) Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1965. Introduction to Altaic linguistics. (Ural-Altaische Bibliotek 14.) Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1972. Ein vergleichendes Wörterbuch der nostratischen Sprachen: review of Illich-Svitych 1971. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 39.365–9.Google Scholar
.1973. Über einige Verbalstammbildungssuffixe in den altaischen Sprachen. Orientalia Suecana 21.119–41.Google Scholar
.1974. Remarks on comparative study of the vocabulary of the Altaic languages. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 46.120–34.Google Scholar
.1977. The problem of Uralic and Altaic affinity. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.221–5.Google Scholar
.1979. Comparative dictionary of the Nostratic languages: review of Illich-Svitych 1976. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 43.222–5.Google Scholar
1988. On methodological problems of the genetic classification of the Afrasian (Hamito-Semitic) languages. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Ethiopian Studies, 99–103. Moscow: USSR Academy of Sciences Africa Institute.Google Scholar
1992. The Salinan and Yurumanguí data in Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.202–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1992. Indo-European practice and historical methodology. Berkeley Linguistics Society 18.214–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1870. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen, unter Berücksichtigung ihrer Hauptformen. 2nd edition. Detmold: Meyer.Google Scholar
Powellm, John Wesley. 1891. Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico. Seventh annual report, Bureau of American Ethnology, 1–142. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. [Reprinted 1966 in Franz Boas, Introduction to handbook of American Indian languages; J. W. Powell, Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico, ed. . Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.]Google Scholar
1826. Researches into the physical history of mankind. London: Sherwood, Gibert & Piper.Google Scholar
.1837. Comparative vocabularies of languages of western and central Africa, northward of the Equator. Researches into the physical history of mankind. 3rd edition, vol. 2. London: Sherwood.Google Scholar
1978. Vergleichende Syntax der ural-altaischen (turanischen) Sprachen. (Biblioteca Nostratica 4.) Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
. 1776. Histoire de Loango, Kakongo, et autres royaumes d'Afrique. Paris: C. P. Berton & N. Crapart.Google Scholar
Puhvel, Jaan. 1991. Whence the Hittite: whither the Jonesian vision? Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 51–66. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1980. Sprachgeschichtliche Arealien im sibirischen Sprachraum. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 7.251–6. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
1964. The Andaman Islanders. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe. [First published 1922, London: Cambridge University Press.]Google Scholar
. 1916. On the relationship of Huave and Mixe. American Anthropologist 18.411–21. (Also Journal de La Société des Américanistes [1919] 11.489–99 [Paris].)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1919. The genetic relationship of the North American Indian languages. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 14.489–502.Google Scholar
.1924. The relationship of Maya to Zoque-Huave. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 16.317–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1956–9. Etymological vocabulary of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Ainu, part Ⅰ (Monumenta Nipponica, monograph 16) Tokyo: Sophia University; parts Ⅱ and Ⅲ privately printed, New Haven (1959).Google Scholar
1978. Are the Korean and Japanese languages related? The current state of theorizing. Korean Studies Forum 4.23–33.Google Scholar
. 1903. Über die Konjugation des Khalkha-Mongolischen. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 19.) Helsinki: Finnische Litteraturgesellschaft.Google Scholar
.1924. A comparison of the Altaic languages with Japanese. Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan 1. Tokyo.Google Scholar
.1946–7. The relation of the Altaic languages to other language groups. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 53.1–13.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf John.1952. Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft, II: Formenlehre, ed. . (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 104.2.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf John.1957. Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft, I: Lautlehre, ed. . (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 104.1.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
1981. Review of The Caddoan, Iroquoian, and Siouan languages, by Wallace Chafe. International Journal of American Linguistics 47.172–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1992. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph Greenberg. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.324–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1998. Siouan, Yuchi, and the question of grammatical evidence for genetic relationship. Presidential address, presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Jan. 10, 1998.Google Scholar
. 1954–5. [Edited a version of A. D. Campbell's A Grammar of the Teloogoo language.]
. 1955. Uralaltaische Wortforschungen. (Studia Orientalia Edidit Societas Orientalis Fennica, 18.3:1–57.) Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Kirjapaino.Google Scholar
.1965. Über die ural-altaische Sprachverwandtschaft. Sitzungsberichte der Finnischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1963 161–72. Helsinki.Google Scholar
1818. Undersøgelse om det gamle nordiske eller Islandiske sprogs oprindelse. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. [English translation by Niels Ege, 1993, Investigations of the origin of the Old Norse or Icelandic language. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 26.) Copenhagen: The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen.]Google Scholar
1820a. The endings and forms of the Danish grammar explained by derivation from the Icelandic language. See Diderichsen 1974.
Rask, Rasmus K..1820b. See Thalbitzer 1922.
Rask, Rasmus K..1832–7[1820]. Udvalgte afhandlinger. 3 vols., ed. Louis Hjelmslev. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.
.1834. Den skytiske sproget. Samlede tildels forhen utrykte afhandlinger, vol. Ⅰ. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
[]. 1650. A generall grammar for the ready attaining of the Ebrew, Samaritan, Calde, Syriac, Arabic and Ethiopic languages. London: W. Wilson.Google Scholar
. 1926. A comparative study of the Melanesian Island languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986–8. Uralisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. 7 fascicles. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Rédei, Károly.1988. Die ältesten indogermanischen Lehnwörter der uralischen Sprachen. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 638–64. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1988. Holzwege der nostratischen Sprachwissenschaft. Akten der österreichischen Linguistentagung 13.275–85. Graz.Google Scholar
Renan, Ernest. 1855. Histoire générale et système comparé des langues sémitiques, Part 1. Paris: Imprimerie impériale. (Reprinted in uvres complètes de Ernest Renan, vol. 8, ed. , 129–589. Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1947–61.)Google Scholar
.1878. Histoire générale et système comparé des langues sémitiques. 5th edition. Paris: Ancienne Maison Michel Lévy Frères.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin. 1973. Problems in the general correlations of archaeological and linguistic strata in prehistoric Greece: the model of autochthonous origin. Bronze Age migrations in the Aegean, ed. R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall, 263–76. London: Duckworth.
Renfrew, Colin.1987. Archaeology and language: the puzzle of Indo-European origins. London: Jonathan Cape.
Renfrew, Colin.1988. Author's précis. Current Anthropology 29, 437–41.
Renfrew, Colin.1989. Models of change in language and archaeology. Transactions of the Philological Society 87.103–55.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.1991. Before Babel: speculations on the origins of linguistic diversity. Cambridge Archeological Journal 1.3–23.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.1992. World languages and human dispersals: a minimalist view. Transition to modernity, essays on power, wealth and belief, ed. and , 11–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.1996. Language families and the spread of farming. The origins and spread of agriculture and pastoralism in Eurasia, ed. , 70–92. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.1997. World linguistic diversity and farming dispersals. Archaeology and language, vol. Ⅰ: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 82–90. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.2000a. At the edge of knowability: towards a prehistory of languages. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10.7–34.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.(ed.) 2000b. America past, America present: genes and languages in the Americas and beyond. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Renfrew, Colin.2002. “The emerging synthesis”: the archaeogenetics of farming/language dispersals and other spread zones. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 3–16. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and (eds.), 2002. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.), 2000. Time depth in historical linguistics. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and . 1999. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin R. 1973. Otomanguean isoglosses. Diachronic, areal, and typological linguistics, ed. , 295–316. (Current Trends in Linguistics 11.) Mouton: The Hague.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin R..1976. Comparative Otomanguean phonology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
.1977. Classification of the Otomanguean languages and the position of Tlapanec. Two studies in Middle American comparative linguistics, 53–108. Arlington: University of Texas at Arlington Press, Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Rensch, Karl H. 1996. Forster's Polynesian linguistics. Observations made during a voyage round the world by Johann Reinhold Forster, ed. , , and , 383–401. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Reuchlin, Johannes. 1506. De rudimentis Hebraicis libri tres. Pforzheim: Thomas Anselm. (Reprinted 1974, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.)
1985. Dravidian and Indo-European: the neglected hypothesis. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 14.316–19.Google Scholar
Rhodes, Richard. 1977. French Cree – a case of borrowing. Actes du huitième congrès des Algonquinistes, ed. , 6–25. Ottawa: Carleton University.Google Scholar
. 2004. Language contact, phonemic inventories, and the Athapaskan language family. Linguistic Typology 8.321–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1966. On Cayuse-Molala relatability. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.369–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1969. The Waiilatpuan problem: more on Cayuse-Molala relatability. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 3.68–146.Google Scholar
1992. On calculating the factor of chance in language comparison. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 82(1).1–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1993. A reply to Professor Greenberg. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137.91–109.Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald A., Jr..1994. Multilateral comparison: an empirical Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
.1995b. The “Mana” languages and the three-language program. Oceanic Linguistics 34.99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringe, Donald A., Jr..1998. Probabilistic evidence for Indo-Uralic. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 153–97. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
.1999. How hard is it to match CVC-roots?Transactions of the Philological Society 97.213–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2002. Indo-European computational cladistics. Transactions of the Philological Society 100.59–129.
Rivet, Paul. 1924. Langues americaines. Les langues du monde, ed. and , 597–712. (Collection linguistique 16.) Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
.1925. Les Australiens en Amérique. Journal de la Société Linguistique de Paris 26.23–63.Google Scholar
.1926. Les Malayo-Polynésiaines en Amérique. Journal de la Société des Americanistes de Paris 18.141–278.Google Scholar
.1942. Un dialecte Hoka Colombien: le Yurumangí. Journal de la Société des Américanistes 34.1–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1943. La influencia karib en Colombia. Revista del Instituto Etnológico Nacional 1(1).55–93. Bogotá.Google Scholar
.1957[1943]. Les origines de l'homme Américain. 8th edition. Paris: Gallimard. (Spanish translation 1960[1943], Los orígenes del hombre americano. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura.)Google Scholar
Rivet, Paul, and Chestmír Loukotka. 1952. Langues de l'Amérique du Sud et des Antilles. Les langues du monde, ed. Antoine Meillet and Marcel Cohen, 1099–1161. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
1992. The history of tense/aspect/mood/voice in the Mayan verbal complex. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1769. The history of the reign of the Emperor Charles Ⅴ, with a view of the progress of society in Europe, from the subversion of the Roman Empire to the beginning of the sixteenth century. 3 vols. London: W. Strahan, T. Cadell and J. Balfour.Google Scholar
1987. The life and work of Sir William Jones. Transactions of the Philological Society 1987.1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, Robert H..1990. Leibniz and Wilhelm von Humboldt and the history of comparative linguistics. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and . 85–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980a. Lord Monboddo, Sanskrit and comparative linguistics. Journal of the American Oriental Society 100.12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocher, Rosane.1980b. Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, Sir William Jones, and comparative Indo-European linguistics. Recherches de linguistique: hommages a Maurice Leroy, ed. , , and , 173–80. Bruxelles; Editions de l'université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon. 1985a. Evidence for Tupi-Carib relationships. South American Indian languages: Retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 371–404. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon.1985b. The present state of the study of Brazilian Indian languages. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 405–39. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
.1986. Linguas brasileiras: para o conhecimento das linguas indígenas. São Paulo: Edições Loyola.Google Scholar
Róna-Tas, András. 1974. Obshcheje nasledije ili zaimstvovanije? (K probleme rodstva altajskih jazykov). [Common inheritance or borrowing? (On the problem of the relationship of Altaic languages.)] Voprosy Jazykoznanija 1972.31–45.
Róna-Tas, András.1983. De hypothesi Uralo-altaica. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ugrienne. Helsinki. (Reprinted in Róna-Tas 1986:234–61.)
.1985. Verwandtschaftsartige Verbindung – kritische Bemerkung über die ural-altaische Hypothese. Congressus Sextus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 2.93. Syktyvkar.Google Scholar
.1986. Language and history: contributions to comparative altaistics. (Studia Uralo-Altaica 25.) Szeged: Universitatis Szegediensis de Attila József.Google Scholar
Róna-Tas, András.1988. Turkic influence on the Uralic languages. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 742–80. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1973. Swadesh's Keres-Caddo comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 39.189–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. An investigation of the Korean material in Poppe's Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen. Central Asiatic Journal 30.78–91.Google Scholar
Rosenfelder, Mark. 1999. Deriving Proto-World with tools you probably have at home. www.zompist.com/proto.html
1966. Zur indo-uralischen Frage. Instituto Orientali di Napoli, Annali, Sezione Linguistica 7.155–79.Google Scholar
Rosiello, Luigi. 1987. Turgot's “étymologie” and modern linguistics. Speculative grammar, universal grammar and philosophical analysis of language, ed. and , 75–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1988. Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of western Melanesia. (Pacific Linguistics C-98.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1995a. Some current issues in Austronesian linguistics. Comparative Austronesian dictionary: an introduction to Austronesian studies, part 1, fascicle 1, ed. , 45–120. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ross, Malcolm D..1995b. The great Papuan pronoun hunt: recalibrating our sights. Tales from a concave world: liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve, ed. , and , 139–68. Leiden: Leiden University, Projects Division, Department of Languages and Cultures of South-East Asia and Oceania.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1996. Contact-induced change and the comparative method: cases from Papua New Guinea. The Comparative method reviewed: regularity and irregularity in language change, ed. and , 180–217. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1997. Social networks and kinds of speech community events. Archaeology and language, vol. 1: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 209–61. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1998. Sequencing and dating linguistic events in Oceania: the linguistics/archaeology interface. Archaeology and language, vol. 2: Correlating archaeological and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 141–73. London: Routledge.
Ross, Malcolm D..2001. Is there an East Papuan phylum? Evidence from pronouns. The boy from Bundaberg: studies in Melanesian linguistics in honour of Tom Dutton, ed. , and , 301–21. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
1991. Hard words. Scientific American (April), 139–47.
1846. Ueber den Genetiv in den dekhanischen Sprachen. Jahresbericht der Deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft. 209–17. Leipzig: Brockhaus und Avenarius.
Rudbeck, Olof [Olaus], Jr. 1717. Specimen usus linguae Gothicae, in eruendis atque illustrandis obscurissimis quibusvis sacrae scipturae locis: Addita analogia linguae Gothicae cum Sinica, nec non Finnonicae cum Ungraica. Upsala.
. 1987. Some Klamath-Sahaptian grammatical correspondences. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 12.67–83.Google Scholar
1974. Sound changes separating Siouan-Yuchi from Iroquois-Caddoan. International Journal of American Linguistics 40.117–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1987a. A guide to the world's languages, vol. 1: Classification. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
.1989a. Phylogenetic relations of Native American languages. Paper presented at the Symposium on Prehistoric Mongoloid Dispersals, Sapporo, Japan, Dec. 18–19.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1989b. Nostratic-Amerind cognates. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 75–83. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Ruhlen, Merritt.1990. An overview of genetic classification. The evolution of human languages. Proceedings of the workshop on the evolution of human languages, August 1989, Santa Fe, NM. SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity 10.1–22, ed. and . Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1991. The Amerind phylum and the prehistory of the New World. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 328–50. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1992. An overview of genetic classification. The evolution of human languages, ed. John A. Hawkins and Murray Gell-Mann, 159–89. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
.1994a. On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
.1994b. The origin of language: tracing the evolution of the Mother Tongue. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994c. On the origin of the Amerind pronominal pattern. In honor of William S-Y. Wang: interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, ed. and , 405–7. Taipei: Pyramid Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994d. Is Algonquian Amerind? On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy, by , 111–26. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994e. Linguistic evidence for the peopling of the Americas. Method and theory for investigating the peopling of the Americas, ed. and , 177–88. (Center for the Study of the First Americans.) Corvallis: Oregon State University. [Also in 1994. Journal of Biogeography 17.131–43.]Google Scholar
.1998. The origin of Na-Dene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 95.13994–6. [Possibly publisher error on author; perhaps Joseph H. Greenberg was the true author.]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruhlen, Merritt.2000a. Why kaka and aya? Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 521–5. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.2000b. Some unanswered linguistic questions. America past, America present, ed. , 163–75. Cambridge: McDonald Institute.
Ryan, Patrick. 2001. Proto-language monosyllables: with their principal meanings. www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/ProtoLanguage-Monosyllables.htm
1981. Ob-Ugrian elements in the adverbs, verbal prefixes and postpositions of California Wintuan. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 6.237–43. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
.1984. The discovery of California, breaking the silence of the Siberia-to-America migrators. The Californians 2(2).9–20 (Nov./Dec.)Google Scholar
.1996. The discovery of California: a Cal–Ugrian comparative study. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. (International Society for Trans-Oceanic Research, Los Angeles.)Google Scholar
Sajnovics, Jo[h]annis [János]. 1770. Demonstratio idioma Ungarorum et Lapponum idem esse. Copenhagen: Typis Collegi societatis Iesu; 2nd edition 1770, Trnava (Tyrnau), Hungary. (Photolithic reproduction of 2nd edition 1968, ed. (Ural and Altaic Series 91.) Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton.) (German translation 1972, by M. Ehlers. Wiesbaden: Harassowitz.)Google Scholar
[Saumaise, Claude]. 1640. Preface to Tabula cebetis Graece, Arabice, Latine. Item aurea carmina Pythagorae cum Paraphrasi Arabica, by Johann Elichman. Leiden: Iohannis Maire.Google Scholar
.1643. De hellenistica commentarius, controversiam de lingua hellenistica decidens et plenissime pertractans originem ac dialectos graecae linguae. Leiden: Elseviers.Google Scholar
Salminen, Tapani.2001. The rise of the Finno-Ugric language family. Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: linguistic and archaeological considerations, ed. Christian Carpelan, Asko Parpola, and Petteri Koskikallio, 385–96. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 242.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
Salmons, Joe. 1992a. A look at the data for a global etymology: ∗tik “finger.” Explanation in historical linguistics, ed. and , 207–28. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 84.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
.1992b. Theory and practice of global etymology. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Linguists, vol 1.153–5. Quebec.Google Scholar
.1997. “Global etymology” as pre-Copernican linguistics. California Linguistic Notes 25(1).5–7.Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka. 1988. Historical phonology of the Uralic languages. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 478–554. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
(), [ ()]. 1585/7. Minerva seu de causis linguae latinae. Salamanca: Ioannes & Andreas Renaut fratres.Google Scholar
. 1998. Eastern and Southern African Khoisan: evaluating claims of distant linguistics relationship. (Research in Khoisan Studies 14.) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Sanmugadas, Arunasalam. 1989. Japanese-Tamil relationship: supporting evidences for Susumu Ohno's hypothesis. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and , 1445–7. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Santa Fe Institute. 2000. Annual research Report.www.santafe.edu/sfi/organization/ annualReport/00/activities/evolution.html.
. 1907–8. Herder's “Ursprung der Sprache”. Modern Philology 5.109–42. (Reprinted 1984 in Historiographia Linguistica 11.355–88.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1913a. Wiyot and Yurok, Algonkin languages of California. American Anthropologist 15.617–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1913b, 1915–19. Southern Paiute and Nahuatl: a study in Uto-Aztecan. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris, part 1, 10.379–425, part 2, 11.433–88. (Part 2 also printed 1915 American Anthropologist 17.98–120.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1915a. Algonkin languages of California: a reply. American Anthropologist 17.188–94. (Reprinted 1990, The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 485–9. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1915b. The Na-Dene languages, a preliminary report. American Anthropologist 17.534–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1917. The position of Yana in the Hokan stock. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 13.1–34.Google Scholar
.1918. Review of Moseteno vocabulary and treatises, by Benigno Bibolotti. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.183–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1920. The Hokan and Coahuiltecan languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.280–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1921a. A bird's-eye view of American languages north of Mexico. Science 54.408. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 5: American Indian languages, part 1, ed. , 93–4. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1921b. Language: an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace. (Reissued 1949, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1921c. A characteristic Penutian form of stem. International Journal of American Linguistics 2.58–67. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 6: American Indian languages, part 2, ed. , 263–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1923. The Algonkin affinity of Yurok and Wiyot kinship terms. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 15.37–74.Google Scholar
.1925a. The Hokan affinity of Subtiaba in Nicaragua. American Anthropologist 27.402–35, 491–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1929a. Central and North American languages. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 14th edition. 5.138–41. (Reprinted 1990, The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 95–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1929b. The status of linguistics as a science. Language 5.207–14. (Reprinted 1949, Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture, and personality, ed. , 160–6. Berkeley: University of California Press.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1990[n.d.]. Lecture notes (and map). The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 5: American Indian languages, part 1, ed. William Bright, 84–91. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1986. A southwest Ethiopian language area and its cultural background. The Fergusonian impact, vol. 1: From phonology to society, ed. , 327–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sassetti, Pilippo. 1585. See Marcucci 1855.
Saumaise. 1643. See Salmasius.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. See de Saussure, Ferdinand.
. 1924. Eskimo et Ouralien. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 16.279–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1930. Recherches sur le vocabulaire des langues ouralo-altaïques. (Collection linguistique publiée par la Société de linguistique de Paris 30.) Paris.Google Scholar
.1953. Caractère ouraloïde du verbe eskimo. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris 49.107–21.Google Scholar
. 1610[1599]. Diatriba de Europaeorum linguis, 119–22; Diatriba de varia literarum aliquot pronuntiatione, 127–32. Opuscula varia antehac non edita. Paris.Google Scholar
Schadeberg, Thilo C. 1981. The classification of the Kadugli language group. Nilo-Saharan: proceedings of the first Nilo-Saharan linguistics colloquium, ed. and , 291–304. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Scheffer [Schefferus], Johannes. 1673. Lapponia. Frankfurt am Main. (English translation 1674, The history of Lapland. Oxford. Later version: Sheffer, John. 1751. A history of Lapland: the original manners, habits, religion and trade of that people. London: R. Griffith.)
. 1987. Which way did they grow? Morphology and the Austro-Thai/Macro-Austric debate. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13.235–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1895. L'affinité des langues des Bushmans et des Hottentots. Compte rendu de 2ème congrès scientifique international des catholiques 6.5–11. Brussels.Google Scholar
and . 1964 [1965]. Zur uraltaischen Sprachverwandtschaft. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 36.167–78.Google Scholar
, [] . 1808. Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier. Heidelberg: Mohr und Zimmer. (Reprinted 1977, Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics 1; introduction by Sebastiano Timpanaro, translation by Peter Maher. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)Google Scholar
Schleicher, August.1850. Die Sprachen Europas in systematischer Übersicht: linguistische Untersuchungen. Bonn: H. B. König. (Reprinted in new edition, 1983, ed. . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)Google Scholar
.1861–2. Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indo-germanischen Sprachen: kurzer Abriss einer Laut- und Formenlehre der indogermanishcen Ursprache. (3rd edition, 1871.) Weimar: Hermann Böhlau.Google Scholar
Schleicher, August.1983[1863]. The Darwinian theory and the science of language. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel, and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , 1–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schleicher, August.1983[1865]. On the significance for the natural history of man. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , 73–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1781. Von den Chaldäer. Repertorium für biblische und morgenländische Literatur 8.161–76. Leipzig: Weidmann.
. 1899. Die sprachlichen Verhältnisse Ozeaniens (Melanesiens, Polynesiens, Mikronesiens und Indonesiens) in ihrer Bedeutung für Ethnologie. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien 29.245–58.Google Scholar
.1906. Die Mon-Khmer-Völker, ein Bindeglied zwischen Völkern Zentralasiens und Austronesiens. Archiv für Anthropologie 33.59–109.Google Scholar
.1919. Die Gliederung der australischen Sprachen. Vienna: Mecharisten Buchdrückerei. [English translation 1972 by D. Clark: Classification of the Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, ms.]Google Scholar
.1930. Die Beziehungen der austrischen Sprachen zum japanischen. Wiener Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik 1.239–52. Vienna.Google Scholar
.1853. Das Zahlwort in der tschudischen Sprachklasse, wie auch in Türkischen, Tungusischen und Mongolischen. Berlin.Google Scholar
.1860. Altaische Studien oder Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der Altai-Sprachen. Berlin.Google Scholar
Schottelius, Justus-Georgius (Schottel, Justus Georg). 1663[1641]. Ausführliche Arbeit von der teutschen Haubt-Sprache. Brunswick: C. F. Zilliger.
.1936. On the “Uralian” element in the Drāid̥a and Mun̥d̥ā languages. Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies 8.751–62.Google Scholar
[]. 1614. Van t’ beghin der eerster volcken van Europen, insoder heyt van den oorsppronck ende saecken der Nederlandren. Ypres: F. Bellet.Google Scholar
. 1969. Finnougrisch-indogermanische Wurzelvergleichungen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.373–4.Google Scholar
1989 Basque and the other Dene-Caucasian languages. Le Langage et l'Homme 24.3(71).262–3.Google Scholar
1991. “Ado about nothing” or “evidence”: Austronesian and Eskaleut. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 44.290–4.Google Scholar
1919–20. Zur sprachlichen Verwandtschaft der Maya-Qu'itsé mit der Carib-Aruác. Anthropos 14.465–91.Google Scholar
Schultze, Benjamin. 1725. [In a letter, comparing numbers in German, Latin, and Sanskrit; cited in Benfey 1861: 24.]
1994. The voices of Eden: a history of Hawaiian language studies. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
1945. Finno-Ugric and the languages of India. Journal of the American Oriental Society 65.59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1950. The importance of areal linguistics in Uralic studies. Memoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 98.99–106.Google Scholar
. 1887. Das Konjugationssystem der Mayasprachen. Berlin: Unger. (Reprinted 1902 in Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Altertumskunde 1.65–26. Berlin: Ascher; reissued 1960, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt.)Google Scholar
1975. Why create a department of Indo-African studies at Dakar University?International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 4.1–13.Google Scholar
Serebrennikov, B. A. 1982[1986]. Problema dostatochnosti osnovanija v gipotezah, kasajusshchihsja geneticheskogo rodstva jazykov, 3; Nostraticheskje jazyki. Teoreticheskije osnovy klassifikaciji jazykov mira: problemy rodstva, ed. B. A. Serebrennikov, 6–62. Moscow: Nauka. [English translation: 1986, Theoretical foundations for the classification of the world's languages: problems of genetic relationship. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and trans. with a critical foreword by Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin and T. L. Markey, 66–86. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.]
1912. Über Art, Umfang und Alter des Stufenwechsels im Finnisch-Ugrischen und Samojedischen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 12.1.Google Scholar
1913–18. Zur Frage nach der Verwandtschaft der finnisch-ugrischen und samojedischen Sprachen. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 30.1–104.Google Scholar
.1952. Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 18.12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1957. Note on Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 23.116–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1969. A few more Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1985. Azteco-Tanoan ∗∗∗-l/r-.International Journal of American Linguistics 51.584–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1976. An areal-typological study of American Indian languages north of Mexico. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
. 1982. Research report: Penutian labial stop correspondences. California-Oregon Languages Newsletter (I) 5(2); (II) 5(3).5–6.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1989a. A symposium on the deep reconstruction of languages and cultures. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 6–8. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1989b. Introductory remarks. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 4–15. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1990. Introduction. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 8–12. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1991. Introduction. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 6–9. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly and Alexis Manaster-Ramer. 1991. Some recent work on remote relations of languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 178–203. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1986. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1999. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.
1966. O xaraktere leksicheskix vzaimosvyazei tyurkskix, mongol'skix i tunguso-man'chzhurskix yazykov. Voprosy yazykoznaniya 3:21–35.Google Scholar
1986a. Tyurksko-mongol'skie yazykovye svyazi. (K probleme vzaïmodeistviya i smesheniya yazykov.)Voprosy yazykoznaniya 4:47–59.Google Scholar
1986b. Problema rotacizma i perspektivy dal'neishego izucheniya tyurksko-mongol'skix yazykovyx svyazei. Istoriko-kul'turnye kontakty narodov altaiskoi yazykovoi obshhnosti 2. Tezisy dokladov ⅩⅪⅩ sessiï Postoyannoi Mezhdunarodnoi Altaïsticheskoi Konferenciï [Tashkent 1986]. Lingvistika. Moscow: ANSSSR.Google Scholar
1973. Indogermanisch und Finnisch-ugrisch – Versuch einer typologisch-vergleichenden Grammatik. Gengogaku Ronso 12.68–85.Google Scholar
. 1957. Some Yukian-Penutian lexical resemblances. International Journal of American Linguistics 23.269–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1969. Proto-Takelman. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.226–30.
Shipley, William.1973. California. Linguistics in North America, ed. , , , , and , 1046–78. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1980. Penutian among the ruins: a personal assessment. Berkeley Linguistics Society 6.437–41.Google Scholar
1931. Ethnological and linguistical aspects of the Ural-Altaic hypothesis. Tsing Hua Journal, vol. 6. (Reprinted 1970, Oosterhout, the Netherlands: Anthropological Publications.)Google Scholar
1976. In defense of Austric. Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 6.96–104.Google Scholar
. 1964. Shasta and Karok: a binary comparison. University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.170–81.Google Scholar
Silver, Shirley.1976. Comparative Hokan and the Northern Hokan languages. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 193–202. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1975. On two California Penutian roots for two. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.369–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1979a. Penutian: an assessment. The languages of native America: historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 650–91. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1975a. Uralo-Tungus lexical correspondences. Researches in Altaic languages, 245–65. Budapest.Google Scholar
.1975b. The present state of Uralic and Altaic comparative studies. Proceedings of the International Symposium Commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Korean Liberation, 117–46. Seoul.Google Scholar
.1976. The ∗t ∼ ∗d local suffix in Uralic and Altaic. Hungaro-Turcica: studies in honour of Julius Németh, 119–27. Budapest.Google Scholar
Sinor, Denis.1977. Altaica and Uralica. Studies in Finno-Ugric linguistics in honor of A. Raun, ed. , 319–31. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Sinor, Denis.1978. The nature of possessive suffixes in Uralic and Altaic. Linguistics and literary studies in honor of A. A. Hill, ed. et al., vol. 3: Historical and comparative linguistics, 257–66. The Hague: Mouton.
Sinor, Denis.1988. The problem of the Ural-Altaic relationship. The Uralic languages: description, history and foreign influences, ed. , 706–41. (Handbuch der Orientalistik, part 8.) Leiden: E.-J. Brill. (Reprinted 1990 in Denis Sinor, Essays in comparative Altaic linguistics, 706–41. Bloomington, In: Indiana University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.)
Sinor, Denis.1990. Introduction: the concept of Inner Asia. The Cambridge history of early Inner Asia, ed. , 1–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sinor, Denis.1999. Some thoughts on the Nostratic theory and its historical implications. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 387–400. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas C. 1992. El método de Sapir para establecer relaciones genéticas remotas. Reflexiones lingüísticas y literarias, vol. 1: Lingüística, ed. Villanueva and Josefina García Fajardo. (Centro de Estudios Lingüísticos y Literarios, Serie Estudios de Lingüística y Literatura 25.) Mexico: El Colegio de México.
. 1924. Zur venetischen Schrift und Sprache. Indogermanische Forschungen 42.90–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Linguistic typology: morphology and syntax. Harlow, UK: Longman.
1982. Dravidian and Indo-European – the neglected hypothesis. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 11.1–21.Google Scholar
Spuhler, James N. 1979. Genetic distances, trees, and maps of North American Indians. The first Americans: origins, affinities, and adaptations, ed. and , 135–83. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer.
1998. The social behavior of chimpanzees and bonobos. Current Anthropology 39.399–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward. 1974. The dithyramb to the verb in eighteenth and nineteenth century linguistics. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 157–90. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
1972. Maya-Yunga-Chipayan: a new linguistic alignment. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.119–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A. 1984. Gipoteza o geneticheskih sv'az'ah sinotibetskih jazykov s enisejskimi i severnokavkazskimi jazykami. Lingvisticheskaja rekonstruktsija i drevnejsaja istorija vostoka 4.19–38. Moscow: Nauka. [Translation by W. H. Baxter Ⅲ, in Genetic classification of languages, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin.]
1986. Problema geneticheskoi obshchnosti altajskih jazykov. Istoriko-kul'turnye kontakty narodov altajskoj jazykovoj obshchnosti. Tezisy doklodow ⅩⅪⅩ sessii Postoiannoi Medunarodnoi Altajsticheskoj konferencij[PIAC], vol. 2, 94–112. Moscow.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1989. Nostratic and Sino-Caucasian. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 42–65. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1991a. On the hypothesis of a genetic connection between the Sino-Tibetan languages and the Yeniseian and North-Caucasian languages. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 12–41. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
1991b. Altajskaja problema proischoshdenie japonskovo jazyka [The Altaic problem and the genesis of the Japanese language]. Moscow. http://starling.rinet.ru/ Texts/Texts.htm.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1999a. Comparative-historical linguistics and lexicostatistics. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 61–6. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language. (Reprinted from 1992 Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 75–9. Bochum: Brockmeyer.)
Starostin, Sergei A.1999b. Methodology of long-range comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 3–50. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.
Starostin, Sergei A.1999c. Subgrouping of Nostratic: comments on Aharon Dolgopolsky's The nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 137–56. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1855. Grammatik, Logik und Psychologie, ihre Prinzipien und ihr Verhältnis zueinander. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
.1860. Charakteristik der hauptsächlichsten Typen des Sprachbaues. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler. Steinthal.Google Scholar
.1890. Das Verhältniss, das zwischen dem Ketschua und Aimará besteht. Congrès International des Américanistes 7.462–5. [1888 meeting.] Berlin.
Stephens, Thomas. 1583. See Muller 1986:14–15.
1852. A comparative vocabulary of non-Sanskrit vocables of the vernacular languages of India. Journal of the Bengal Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 5.Google Scholar
1991. The Dene and Na-Dene Indian migration – 1233 A.D.: escape from Genghis Khan to America. Columbus, GA: Institute for the Study of American Cultures.Google Scholar
Stiernhielm, Georg. 1670. Glossarium Ulphila-Gothicum, Linguis affinibus, per Fr. Junium, nunc etiam Sveo-Gothica auctum & illustratum. Holm.
.1671. De linguarum origine Praefatio [On the origin of languages]. D. N. Jesu Christi SS. Evangelia ab Ulfila Gothorum translata. Stockholm.Google Scholar
. 1884[1958]. Zur Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala. Zurich: Füssli. (Spanish translation 1958, Etnografía de Guatemala, trans. Antonio Goubaud Carrera. [Seminario de Integración Social Guatemalteca, publication 8.] Guatemala: Ministerio de Educación Pública.)Google Scholar
Stoll, Otto.1885. Supplementary remarks to the grammar of the Cakchiquel language, ed. Daniel G. Brinton. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 22.255–68.
.1912–13. Zur Psychologie der indianischen Hochlandsprachen von Guatemala. Festschrift der Geographisch-ethnographischen Gesellschaft in Zürich34–96.
. 1972. Structure of Bushman and its traces in Indo-European. Polska Akademia Nauk. – Oddzial w Krakowie. (Prace Komisji Orientalistycznej 10.) Wroclaw: Zaklid Narodowy im. ossolinskich.Google Scholar
Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert von. 1730. Das nord- und östliche Theil von Europa und Asia, in so weit solches das ganze Russische Reich mit Siberien und der grossen Tataren in sich begreiffet, in einer historisch-geographischen Beschreivung der alten und neuen Zeiten, und vielen andern unbekannten Nachrichten vorgestellet, nebst einer noch niemahls ans Licht gegebenen Tabula Polygotta. Stockholm: In Berlegung des Autoris. (Also published in Leipzig.) (Reprinted 1975, Szeged [Studia Uralo-altaica 8.]) (English translation, 1970, Russia, Siberia and great Tartary. New York: Arno Press.)
.1981. Remarks on the phonological comparison of Japanese with Altaic. Bulletin of the International Institute for Linguistic Sciences [Kyto Sangy University] 2(4).293–307.Google Scholar
.1985. Japanese reflexes of the Proto-Altaic lateral. Journal of the American Oriental Society 105.637–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1933. A comparative grammar of the Hittite language. Philadelphia: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
.1973. Macro-Pano-Tacanan. International Journal of American Linguistics 39.137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1979. Observaciones sobre la evolución fonológica del tlapaneco. Anales de Antropología 16.371–86.Google Scholar
.1983b. The Mesoamerican Indian languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985. Loan etymologies in historic method. International Journal of American Linguistics 51.574–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suárez, Jorge A..1986. Elementos gramaticales otomangues en tlapaneco. Language in global perspective: papers in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1935–1985, ed. , 267–84. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Suhonen, Seppo. 1988. Die baltischen Lehnwörter der Finnisch-Ugrischen Sprachen. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. Denis Sinor, 596–615. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Suthiwan, Titima. 2003. Loanwords in Thai. Paper presented at the Loanword Typology workshop, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany, July 21–22, 2003.
[a.k.a. Mauricio]. 1946. Phonologic formulas for Atakapa-Chitimacha. International Journal of American Linguistics 12.113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1947. Atakapa-Chitimacha ∗kw. International Journal of American Linguistics 13.120–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1951. Diffusional cumulation and archaic residue as historical explanation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 7.1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1952. Review of Shafer's Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 18.178–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1953a. Mosan Ⅰ: a problem of remote common origin. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.26–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1953b. Mosan Ⅱ: comparative vocabulary. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.223–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1954. Perspectives and problems of Amerindian comparative linguistics. Word 10.306–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. On the Penutian vocabulary survey. International Journal of American Linguistics 20.123–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1959. The mesh principle in comparative linguistics. Anthropological Linguistics 1(2).7–14.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1960. On interhemisphere linguistic connections. Culture in history: essays in honor of Paul Radin, ed. , 894–924. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
.1961. The culture historic implications of Sapir's linguistic classification. A William Cameron Townsend en el vigésimoquinto aniversario del Instituto Lingüístico de Verano, 663–7. Cuernavaca: Tipográfica Indígena.Google Scholar
.1962. Linguistic relations across the Bering Strait. American Anthropologist 64.1262–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1964a. Comparative Penutian glosses of Sapir. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 182–91. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.
Swadesh, Morris.1964b. Linguistic overview. Prehistoric man in the New World, ed. and , 527–56. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
.1965. Lingvisticheskije svjazi Ameriki i Evraziji [Linguistic connections of America and Eurasia].Etimologija 1964.271–322.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1967. Lexicostatistic classification. Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 5: Linguistics, ed. , 79–115. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Swanton, John R. 1911. Haida. Handbook of American Indian languages, ed. , 1.205–82. (Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 40.) Washington, DC.
.1919. A structural and lexical comparison of the Tunica, Chitimacha, and Atakapa languages. Bulletin of the Bureau of American Ethnology68.Google Scholar
.1924. The Muskhogean connection of the Natchez language. International Journal of American Linguistics 3.46–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984. Les langues amérindiennes à la Société de Linguistique de Paris (1863–1932). Amerindia 6.383–404.Google Scholar
Swiggers, Pierre.1990. Comparatismo e grammatica comparata: tipologia linguistica e forma grammaticale. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 281–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Swiggers, Pierre.1992. Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe. International encyclopedia of Linguistics, ed. 2.155–9. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
.1975. The Indo-European and Semitic languages: a rejoinder to Saul Levin's reply. General Linguistics 15.206–13.Google Scholar
Tadmor, Uri. 2003. Loanwords in Indonesian. Paper presented at the Loanword typology workshop, Max-Planck Institute for Evaluationary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany, July 21–22, 2003.
Tai, James H.-Y. 1976. On the change from SVO to SOV in Chinese. Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax, ed. , , and , 291–304. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1960. La place du ghiliak parmi les langues paléosibériennes. Lingua 9.113–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1961. Sur une explication de l'Aïnou par l'Indo-Européen. Zeitschrift für vergliechende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 77.1–30.Google Scholar
1964. Algonquian languages and genetic relationship. Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists, 1026–33. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
[John Shore]. 1804. Memoirs of the life, writings, and correspondence of Sir William Jones. London: John Hachard. (1805, Philadelphia: William Poyntell.)Google Scholar
Tekin, T. 1994. Altaic languages. The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. , 1.82–5. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Téné, David. 1980. The earliest comparisons of Hebrew with Aramaic and Arabic. Progress in linguistic historiography, ed. , 355–77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1723. Aenleiding tot de Kennisse van het Verhevene Deel der Nederduitsche Sprake [Introduction to the elevated portion of the Low German language]. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
. 1922. The Aleutian languages compared with Greenlandic: a manuscript by Rasmus Rask, dating from 1820, now in the Royal Library at Copenhagen. International Journal of American Linguistics 2.40–57.Google Scholar
.1928. Is there any connection between the Eskimo language and the Uralian?Acts of the International Congress of Americanists 2.551–67. Rome.Google Scholar
.1945. Uhlenbeck's Eskimo-Indoeuropean hypothesis: a critical revision. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 1.66–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thalbitzer, William.1952. Possible contacts between Eskimo and Old World languages. Indian tribes of aboriginal America: selected papers of the 29th International Congress of Americanists, vol. 3, ed. , 50–4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thelwall, Robin. 1982. Linguistic aspects of Greater Nubian history. The archaeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history, ed. and , 39–56. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. 1980. Morphological instability, with and without language contact. Historical morphology, ed. , 359–72. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G..1993. Coping with partial information in historical linguistics. Historical linguistics 1989: papers from the 9th International Conference of Historical Linguistics, ed. and . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
and . 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. The Tai-Kadai and Austronesian: the nature of the historical relationship. Oceanic Linguistics 34.345–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987. Processes of change in the languages of northwestern New Britain. Pacific Linguistics B99.1–163.Google Scholar
Thurston, W. R..1989. How exoteric languages build a lexicon. VICAL 1: Oceanic languages: papers of the 5th International Conference of Austronesian Linguistics, ed. and , 555–80. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
, , , , , and . 1955–81. Suomen kielen etymologinen sanakirja [Etymological dictionary of the Finnish language]. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1955. Indejcy Ameriki. (Trudy Instituta Etnografii, novaja serija, 25.) Moscow: Akademija Nauk.Google Scholar
and . 1884. Comparative vocabularies of the Indian tribes of British Columbia. (Geological and Natural History Survey of Canada.) Montreal: Dawson Brothers.Google Scholar
. 1912. Die sprachliche Urverwandtschaft der Indogermanen, Semiten, und Indianer. Vienna: Heinrich Kirsch.Google Scholar
1971. Burushaski and Yeniseian languages: some parallels. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 4.107–25.Google Scholar
. 1997. Mounted archers: the beginnings of Central Asian history. Edinburgh: Durham Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1902. Bemerkungen. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache, by Jørgen Alexander Knudtzon, 108–22. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
. 1995. Basque and Dené-Caucasian: a critique from the Basque side. Mother Tongue 1.3–82.Google Scholar
.1996. Historical linguistics. London: Arnold.
Trask, Richard L[arry].1999. Why should languages have any relatives? Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 157–76. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2000. The dictionary of historical and comparative linguistics. Edingburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
.2001. How do we do historical work on languages? Unpublished ms., University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Trautmann, Thomas R. 1998. The lives of Sir William Jones. Sir William Jones, 1746–1794: a commemoration, ed. , 93–121. Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of University College, Oxford.
.1928[1926]. Origine asiatica delle lingue e popolazioni americane. International Congress of Americanists 22(1).169–246. Rome.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1989. Contact and isolation in linguistic change. Language change: contributions to the study of its causes, ed. and , 227–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Trudgill, Peter.2002. Linguistic and social typology. Handbook of language variation and change, ed. , , and , 707–28, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
.2004a. Linguistic and social typology: Austronesian migrations and phoneme inventories. Linguistic Typology 8.305–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1869–70. On the best method of studying the North American languages. Transactions of the American Philological Association55–79.Google Scholar
Tryon, Darrell T. 1995. The Austronesian languages. Comparative Austronesian dictionary: an introduction to Austronesian studies, part 1: fascicle 1, ed. , 5–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1959. Das Sumerische und das Georgische. Revue de kartvelologie, 32–3. [Original 1912, in Georgian, in Tbilisi Collection ‘Gvirgvini’.]Google Scholar
and . 1956. The non-Bantu languages of north-eastern Africa. (Handbook of African Languages, part 3.) London: International African Institute, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and .1966. Linguistic analyses: the non-Bantu languages of north-eastern Africa. (Handbook of African Languages, part 3.) London: International African Institute, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tuite, Kevin. 1998. Evidence for prehistoric links between the Caucasus and Central Asia: the case of the Burushos. The Bronze Age and early Iron Age peoples of eastern central Asia, vol. 1: Archeology, migration and nomadism, ed. , 447–75. (Journal of Indo-European Studies, monograph 26.) Washington, DC: The Institute for the Study of Man in collaboration with the University of Pennsylvania Museum Publications.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne Robert Jacques. 1756. Etymologie. Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers 6.98–111. ed. and . Paris. (New edition 1961, introduction, annotations by Maurice Piron. Brugge: De Tempel; facsimile edition: 1967. Stuttgart: Frommann.)Google Scholar
1967. Seri and Chontal (Tequistlateco). International Journal of American Linguistics 33.235–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1972. On linguistic unrelatedness – a rejoinder. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.146–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Paul R..1976. Pluralization of nouns in Seri and Chontal. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 297–303. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1864. Outlines of grammar of Malagasy language. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 8.2.Google Scholar
.1864/7. Tobasche spraakkunst. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Muller.
. 1871. Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Tyler, Stephen A..1990. Summary of noun and verb inflectional correspondences in Proto-Dravidian and Proto-Uralic. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 68–76. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1970. On linguistic affinity: the Indo-Uralic Problem. Malmö: Estonian Post Publishing.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius. 1905. Uralische Anklänge in den Eskimosprachen. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 59.757–65.
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius.1942–5. Ur- und altindogermanische Anklänge im Wortschatz des Eskimos. Anthropos 37–40.133–48.
Ullendorff, Edward. 1970. Comparative Semitics. Linguistics in South West Asia and North Africa, ed. , , and , 261–73. (Current Trends in Linguistics 6.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1977. Studies in early Japanese morphophonemics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Unger, J. Marshall.1990a. Summary report of the Altaic panel. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 479–82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Unger, J. Marshall.1990b. Japanese and what other Altaic languages? Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 547–61. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
1972. Kuruba: a Dravidian language. Proceedings of Seminar on Dravidian Linguistics 3.307–28. Annamalainagar: Annamalai University.Google Scholar
1976. Dravidian and Negro-African. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5.32–64.Google Scholar
1978. The problem of the genetic relationship of the Mongolian and Dravidian languages. Archiv Orientální 46.141–51.Google Scholar
.1981. The Dravido-Altaic relationship – lexical and sound correspondences. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 1.159–70.Google Scholar
.1983. Dravido-Altaic: the Mongolian and Dravidian verbal bases. Journal of Tamil Studies 23.1–17.Google Scholar
Vacek, J.1985. The Mongolian and Dravidian verb phrase (its pattern and the underlying verbal forms). (Asian and African Linguistic Studies Ⅱ, ed. J. Vochala.) Studia Orientalia Pragensia 14.26–45.
, 1995. New linguistic evidence and “the Bantu expansion.” Journal of African History 36.173–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1810. Untersuchungen über Amerika's bevölkerung aus dem alten Kontinente. Leipzig: Vogel.Google Scholar
1969. Verwandtschaft zwischen dem Finnougrischen und entfernteren Sprachgruppen?Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.360–71.Google Scholar
, 2001. Evidencias del parentesco de las lenguas Lule y Vilela. (Colección Folklore y Antropología 4.) Santa Fe, Argentina: Subsecretaría de la Provincia de Santa Fe.
1971. Preliminary data on the relation of California Penutian to Uralic and other Nostratic languages. Sovjetskoje Finno-Ugrovedenije 7.119–28. Tallin.Google Scholar
. 1875. La langue basque et aux langues américaines. Congrès International des Américanistes. 40–79. Nancy.Google Scholar
Voegelin, Carl F. and Florence M. Voegelin. 1965. Languages of the world: Sino-Tibetan, fascicles 4 and 5. Anthropological Linguistics 7.5, 7.6.
1985. From comparative method to phylum linguistics and back again. International Journal of American Linguistics 51.608–9.CrossRef
von der Gabelentz. See Gabelentz, von der.
von Humboldt, Wilhelm. See Humboldt, Wilhelm von.
von Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert. See Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert von.
Vovin, Alexander.1999. Notes on linguistic comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 67–94. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.Google Scholar
Waterhouse, Viola G. 1976. Another look at Chontal and Hokan. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference onHokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 325–43. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1978. Leibniz and Ludolf on things linguistic: excerpts from their correspondence (1683–1703). (University of California Publications in Linguistics 88.) Berkeley: University of California Press.
Watkins, Calvert. 1990. Etymologies, equations, and comparanda: types and values, and criteria for judgement. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 289–303. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Calvert.1995. El proto-indoeuropea. Las lenguas indoeuropeas, ed. and , 57–117. Madrid: Cátedra.Google Scholar
.2000. The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European roots. 2nd edition (1st edition 1985). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Watkins, Calvert.2001. An Indo-European linguistic area and its characteristics: ancient Anatolia. Areal diffusion as a challenge to the comparative method? Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 44–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1971. A statement of some phonological correspondences among the Pomo languages. Supplement of International Journal of American Linguistics, 37(3).Google Scholar
Webb, Nancy M..1976. Yuman language interrelationships: the lexical evidence. Proceedings of the 1976Hokan–Yuman language workshop, ed. , 60–8. (University Museum Studies 11.) Carbondale, IL: University Museum and Art Galleries, Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
Webb, Nancy M..1980. Esselen–Hokan relationships. Proceedings of the 1979 Hokan languages workshop, ed. , 72–80. (Occasional Papers on Linguistics 7.) Carbondale: Department of Linguistics, Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
1862. Evidence of the Scythian affinities of the Dravidian languages, condensed and arranged from Rev. R. Caldwell's Comparative Dravidian grammar. Journal of the American Oriental Society 7.271–96.Google Scholar
. 1985. Thoughts when drawing a map of tone languages. Afrikanist- ische Arbeitspapiere 1.105–24.Google Scholar
. 1856a. On the connexion of the Finn and Lapp with the other European languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 1856.1–19. London.Google Scholar
.1856b. Further observations on the connexion of the Finnish and Indo-Germanic classes of languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 1856.172–9. London.Google Scholar
Wells, Rulon. 1979. Linguistics as a science: the case of the comparative method. The European background of American linguistics, ed. , 23–61. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1973. African language structures. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1911. Die Sudansprachen: eine sprachvergleichende Studie. (Abhandlungen des Hamburgischen Kolonialinstituts 3.) Hamburg: L. Friederichsen.Google Scholar
.1927. Die Westlichen Sudansprachen und ihre Beziehungen zum Bantu. (Mitteil- ungen des Seminars für Orientalische Sprachen, supplementary vol. 30.) Berlin: De Gruyter.
and 1952. The languages of West Africa. (Handbook of African languages, part 2.) Oxford: Oxford University Press for International African Institute.Google Scholar
Westphal, E. O. J. 1971. The click languages of southern and eastern Africa. Linguistics in sub-Saharan Africa, ed. , 367–420. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wetterstrom, W. 1993. Foraging and farming in Egypt: the transition from hunting and gathering to horticulture in the Nile Valley. The archaeology of Africa, ed. and , 165–226. London: Routledge.
Wexionius [von Gyldenstolpe], Michael O. 1650. Epitome descriptionis Sueciae, Gothiae, Fenningiae et subiectarum provinciarum. Aboae.
, , , and 2004. Kusunda: an Indo-Pacific language in Nepal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101.5692–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 1985. The phonological basis for the comparison of Japanese and Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
. 1887[1867]. Language and the study of language: twelve lectures on the principles of linguistic science. 5th edition (1st edition 1867).New York: Scribner's.Google Scholar
and 1937. The relationship of Uto-Aztecan and Tanoan. American Anthropologist 39.609–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 1999. On the relationship between Mixe-Zoquean and Uto-Aztecan. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 24.101–13.
. 1969. Die Verwandtschaft des Finnougrischen mit anderen Sprachen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.310–16.Google Scholar
. 1967. Maya and Altaic: is the Maya group of languages related to the Altaic family?Ethnos 32.141–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Terrence H. 1977. Introduction. The Lautgesetz-controversy: a documentation, ed. , ix–xcv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1994. The phonetics of pronouns: articulatory bases of markedness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Williams, Roger. 1643. Key into the language of America. London: Gregory Dexter. (Ed. with a critical introduction by and , 1973. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.)Google Scholar
(ed.). 1979. Gibbon's Decline and fall of the Roman Empire,abridged and illustrated. London: Bison Books.Google Scholar
Williamson, Kay. 1989. Niger-Congo overview. The Niger-Congo languages: a classification and description of Africa's largest language family, ed. , 3–45. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Williamson, Kay and Roger Blench. 2000. Niger-Congo. African languages:an introduction, ed. and , 11–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windischmann, Friedrich Heinrich Hugo. 1846. Die Grundlage des armenischen im arischen Sprachstamme. (Sprachlich-historische Abhandlungen der Königlichen Bayerischen Academie der Wissenschaften 5.)
.1914. Tungusisch und Finnisch-ugrisch Ⅰ. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 30; Tungusisch und Finnisch-ugrisch Ⅱ. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 39.1–34.Google Scholar
1966. Greenberg's classification of African languages. African Language Studies 7.160–9.Google Scholar
1984. Further notes on Japanese and Tamil. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 13.347–53.Google Scholar
Wistrand-Robinson, Lila. 1991. Uto-Aztecan affinities with Panoan of Peru Ⅰ: correspondences. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 243–76. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1978. Mesoamerican: a proposed language phylum. American Anthropologist 80.942–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1981. Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship. American Anthropologist 83.905–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witsen, Nicolaas. 1692. Noord en Oost Tartarye. Amsterdam. (2nd edition 1905.) [German translation of 2nd edition by , 1975: Berichte über die uralischen Völker. (Studia Uralo-Altaica 7.) Szeged.]Google Scholar
Wolfart, H. Christoph. 1982. Historical linguistics and metaphilology. Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 395–403. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1929. Outlines of Tibeto-Burman linguistic morphology,with special reference to the prefixes, infixes and suffixes of classical Tibetan, and the languages of the Kachin, Bodo, Naga, Kuki Chin, and Burma groups. (Royal Asiatic Society Prize Publication 12). London: Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
Wonderly, William L. 1953. Sobre la propuesta filiación lingüística de la familia totonaca con las familias zoqueana y mayense. Huastecos, totonacos y sus vecinos, ed. and Revista mexicana de estudios antropológicos 13.105–13.
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1984. Eskimo and Aleut languages. Handbook of North American Indians, ed. , vol. 5: Arctic, ed. , 49–63. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
. 1730[1713]. A discourse concerning the confusion of languages at Babel. London: S. Austen and W. Bowyer.Google Scholar
Wurm, Stephen A. 1971. The Papuan linguistic situation. Oceania, ed. , 541–657. (Current Trends in Linguistics 8.) The Hague: Mouton.
(ed.) 1975. New Guinea area languages, vol. 1: Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene. (Pacific Linguistics C-38.) Canberra.
Wurm, Stephen A..1981. Possible wider connections of Papuan languages: Papuan and Australian: Greenberg's Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Language atlas of the Pacific area, part 1: New Guinea area, Oceania, Australia, ed. and , 925–32. 1981. (Pacific Linguistics C-66.) Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities.
and . 1981–3. Language atlas of the Pacific area. (Vol. 1, 1981; vol. 2, 1983.) Canberra: Australian Academy for the Humanities in collaboration with the Japanese Academy.Google Scholar
. c.1702. Arte de las tres lenguas cakchiquel, quiche y tzutuhil. [1952, Microfilm collection of manuscripts on Middle American cultural anthropology 26.] Chicago: University of Chicago Library.
1922. Consultas: etimologías araucanas. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras 73.770–1. Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
. 1967. Problemgeschichte der vergleichenden (indogermanischen)Sprachwissenschaft. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2000. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description:Africa south of the Sahara. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
.1974. Dravidian and Elamite – a real breakthrough?Journal of the American Oriental Society 93.384–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985a. Review of Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: the evidence and its implications, by David McAlpin. Journal of the American Oriental Society 105.364–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985b. Tamil and Japanese – are they related? The hypothesis of Susumu Ohno. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 48(1).116–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990. Dravidian linguistics: an introduction. Pondicherry: Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture.Google Scholar
.1991. Long-range language comparison in new models of language development: the case of Dravidian. Journal of Dravidian Studies 1.21–31.Google Scholar
Zvelebil, Kamil V..1994. Dravidian languages. The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. and , 2:1063–5. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Zvelebil, Marek. 2002. Demography and dispersal of early farming populations at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition: linguistic implications. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 379–94. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and , 1988. Agricultural transition and Indo-European dispersals. Antiquity 62.574–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aalto, Pentti.1971. The alleged affinity of Dravidian and Fenno-Ugrian. Proceedings of the second International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies, 1968, ed. , 262–6. Madras: International Association of Tamil Research.Google Scholar
.1980. Nostraattisen kielisukulaisuuden onglema [The problem of Nostratic linguistic relationship].Societas Scientiarum Fennica ⅬⅧ, B 9.1–22.Google Scholar
.1988. The problem of “Nostratic.”AIWN 10.49–65. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
. 1982. From Locke to Saussure: essays on the study of language and intellectual history. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
.1988. Introduction. On language: the diversity of human language-structure and its influence on the mental development of mankind, Wilhelm von Humboldt, trans. Peter Heath, ⅶ–lⅹⅴ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Abondolo, Daniel. 1998. Introduction. The Uralic languages, ed. , 1–42. London: Blackwell.
. 1881. Les classifications de la linguistique. Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie Comparée 14.217–68.Google Scholar
1984. Grammatical vowel length and the classification of Quechua dialects. International Journal of American Linguistics 50.25–47.Google Scholar
.1986. La relación quechua-aru: perspectivas para la separación del léxico. Revista Andina 4.379–426.Google Scholar
. 1781. Über den Ursprung der Sprachen und den Bau der Wörter, besonders der deutschen. Berlin: Voss. (Reprinted 1975. Frankfurt am Main: Minerva.)Google Scholar
[with ]. 1806–17. Mithridates, oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde mit dem Vater Unser als Sprachprobe in bey nahe fünfhundert Sprachen und Mundarten. [4 vols. complete in Adelung's life time; the remaining 3 were completed by Johann Severin Vater.] Berlin: Voss. [Vol. 3, 1813–16, contains American and African languages; prepared largely by Vater.]Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y..2001. Areal diffusion, genetic inheritance, and problems of subgrouping: a North Arawak case study. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 167–94. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and R. M. W. Dixon. 2001. Introduction. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 1–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald-Angenot, Alexandra Y. and Jean-Pierre Angenot. 1989. The South-American Proto-Ge and the Old World. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 403–18. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1996. The seeds of speech: language origin and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1931. Siouan and Iroquoian. International Journal of American Linguistics 6.185–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1953. Relationship in comparative linguistics. Transactions of the Philological Society, 52–108. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alpher, Barry. 1990. Some Proto-Pama-Nyungan paradigms: a verb in the hand is worth two in the phylum. Studies in comparative Pama-Nyungan, ed. and , 155–71. (Pacific Linguistics C–111.) Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, the Australian National University.Google Scholar
Alpher, Barry.2004. Pama-Nyungan: phonological reconstruction and status as a philogenetic group. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 93–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammerman, A. J. and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1973. A population model for the diffusion of early farming in Europe. The explanation of cultural change, ed. , 343–57. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
1973. Dravidian-Greek connections. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 2.180–6.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning. 1988. Center and periphery: adoption, diffusion and spread. Historical dialectology, ed. , 39–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1975. Grammar-meaning universals and proto-language: reconstruction of proto-world now! ChicagoLinguistic Society 11.15–36.
1879. Studien zur Vergleichung der indogermanischen und finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen. (Gelehrte Ethnische Gesellschaft, Verhandlungen 9.)
. 1836. Remarks on the Hawaiian dialect of the Polynesian language. Chinese Repository 5(2).12–21.Google Scholar
1970. Correspondencias fonológicas entre el lenca y una lengua mayanse. Estudios de Cultura Maya 8.341–87. (Reprinted 1979 [Colección Antropología e Historia 15; Administración del Patrimonio Cultural.] San Salvador: Ministerio de Educación.)Google Scholar
1971. Comparative studies on the nature of Dravido-Uralian parallels: a peep into the prehistory of language families. Proceedings of the First International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 2(1).267–77.Google Scholar
Anttila, Raimo and Sheila Embleton. 1988. Review of Typology, relationship and time, ed. and . Canadian Journal of Linguistics 33.79–89.Google Scholar
. 1963. On Sahaptian-Klamath linguistic affiliations. International Journal of American Linguistics 29.107–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleyard, David. 1999. Afroasiatic and the Nostratic hypothesis. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 289–314. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1847. Hottentot grammar, Bushman dialects. The South African Christian Watchman and Missionary Magazine, 2.Google Scholar
.1850. The Kafir language: comprising a sketch of its history, which includes a general classification of South African dialects, ethnographical and geographical remarks upon its nature and a grammar. King William's Town: Wesleyan Methodist Mission Press.Google Scholar
. 1968. Posibles relaciones externas del grupo lingüístico maya. Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 6th series, 19(48).111–34. Mexico.Google Scholar
1946. Asiatic Jones: the life and influence of Sir William Jones (1746–1794): pioneer of Indian studies. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., published for The British Council.Google Scholar
. 1955. Sprachwissenschaft: der Gang ihrer Entwicklung von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Freiburg: Karl Alber. (2nd edition 1969.)Google Scholar
. 1971. Review of Uesson 1970. Sovjetskoje finno-ugrovedenije 1 2.144–6. Tallin, Estonia.Google Scholar
1969. Jones and Cœurdoux: correction to a footnote. Journal of the American Oriental Society 89.416–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993. Proto-Witotoan. (Publications in Linguistics 114.) Arlington: SIL and University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Auroux, Sylvain. 1990. Representation and the place of linguistic change before comparative grammar. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 213–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1981. Court de Gébelin (1725–1784) et le comparatisme, deux textes inédits. Histoire épistémologie langage 3.21–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert. 1972. Long-range comparisons of Tamil and Dravidian with other language families in Eurasia. Proceedings of the Second International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 1.254–61, ed. . Madras: International Association for Tamil Research.Google Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert.1983. Genetic affiliation among proto-languages. Symposium Saeculare Societatis Fenno-Ugricae, ed. , and , 51–8. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 185.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Austerlitz, Robert.1991. Alternatives in long-range comparison. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 353–64. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1986. Linguistique et histoire des pygmées de l'ouest du Bassin Congolais. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7.73–103.
Bakker, Peter. 2000. Rapid language change: creolization, intertwining, convergence. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , and , 585–620. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2004. Phoneme inventories, language contact, and grammatical complexity: a critique of Trudgill. Linguistic Typology 8.368–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. Zur Frage der indo-uralischen Verwandtschaft. Congressus Secundus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 1.37–45. Helsinki.
. 1826. Atlas ethnographique du globe, ou classification des peuples anciens et modernes d'après leurs langues précédé d'un discours, sur l'utilité et l'importance de l’étude des langues appliquée à plusiers branches des connaissances humaines. Paris: Rey et Gravier.Google Scholar
Baldi, Phillip. 1990. Introduction: the comparative method. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 1–13. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1874–6. The native races of the Pacific states of North America. 5 vols. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
Bartholomew, Doris A. 1967. Review (article) of Studies in southwestern ethnolinguistics: meaning and history in the languages of the American Southwest, ed. and . Lingua 23.66–86.Google Scholar
. 1797. New views on the origin of the tribes and nations of America. Philadelphia: Benjamin Smith Barton. (2nd edition, 1798, “corrected and greatly enlarged.”)Google Scholar
, , , , , , and . 1990a. The feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language. Current Anthropology 31.1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , , and . 1990b. On human phylogeny and linguistic history: reply to comments. Current Anthropology 31.177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte L. M. 1995. Language loss in Gaul: a case study of language conflict. Paper presented at the Symposium on Language Loss and Public Policy, University of New Mexico Linguistics Institute, Albuquerque, NM, July 1995.
1957. A history of the English language. 2nd edition. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.Google Scholar
Baxter, William H. and Alexis Manaster Ramer. 2000. Beyond lumping and splitting: probabilistic issues in historical linguistics. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , , and , 167–88. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1949. The Venetic language. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 4.) Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1991. The Austronesian dispersal and the origin of languages. Scientific American 265(1).88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1994. An archaeologist's view of language macrofamily relationships. Oceanic Linguistics 33.391–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1995. Language families and human dispersal. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5.271–4.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.1996. The origins and spread of agriculture in the Indo-Pacific region: gradualism and diffusion or revolution and colonization? The origins and spread of agriculture and pastoralism in Eurasia, ed. , 465–98. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.1997. The prehistoric cultural explanations for the existence of widespread language families. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 23–34. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.2000. The time depth of major language families: an archaeologist's perspective. Time depth in historical linguistics, ed. , , and , 109–40. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2001. Early agriculturalist population diasporas? Farming, languages and genes. Annual Review of Anthropology 30.181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellwood, Peter.2002. Farmers, foragers, languages, genes: the genesis of agricultural societies. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 17–28. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2002. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1969. Chance CVC correspondences in unrelated languages. Language 45.519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1971. The languages of Ethiopia: a new lexicostatistic classification and some problems of diffusion. Anthropological Linguistics 13(5).165–288.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1987. First steps towards Proto-Omotic. Current approaches to African linguistics, vol. 4, ed. , 21–35. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1989. Nilo-Saharan pronouns/demonstratives. Topics in Nilo-Saharan linguistics, ed. , 1–34. (Nilo-Saharan: Linguistic Analyses and Documentation 3.) Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1991. Sub-classification of Nilo-Saharan. Proceedings of the Fourth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, ed. , 1–35. (Nilo-Saharan: Linguistic Analyses and Documentation 7.) Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.1993a. Is Nilo-Saharan really a phylum? Paper presented at the 24th African Linguistics Conference, July 23–25, Columbus, Ohio.
.1997a. The Nilo-Saharan languages: a comparative essay. 2nd edition. (LINCOM Handbooks in Linguistics 6.) Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Bender, Marvin Lionel.2000. Nilo-Saharan. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 43–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1989. The Niger-Congo languages: a classification and description of Africa's largest language family. Lanham, NY: University Press of America.Google Scholar
1942. Thai, Kadai, and Indonesian: a new alignment in southeastern Asia. American Anthropologist 44.576–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedict, Paul K.1972. Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus, ed. James A. Matisoff. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
.1975a. Austro-Thai language and culture, with a glossary of roots. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files.Google Scholar
.1975b. Where it all began: memories of Robert Shafer and the “Sino-Tibetan linguistics project,” Berkeley 1939–40. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 2(1).81–91. Berkeley.Google Scholar
.1990. Japanese/Austro-Tai. (Linguistica Extranea, Studia 20.) Ann Arbor: Karoma Press.Google Scholar
Benediktsson, Hreinn. 1980. Discussion: Rask's position in genetic and typological linguistics. Typology and genetics of language: proceedings of the Rask-Hjelmslev Symposium, ed. , , , , and , 17–28. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 20.) Copenhagen: The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
. 1861. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland. Munich: Cotta.Google Scholar
.1869. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland seit dem Anfange des 19.Jahrhunderts mit einem Rückblick auf die früheren Zeiten. (Geschichte der Wissenschaften in Deutschland.) Munich: J. G. Gotta.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D. 1989. On the fallacy of “diminishing returns” in long range lexical comparison. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 30–3. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991a. Some Macro-Caucasian etymologies. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 130–41. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991b. Paleolexicology: a tool towards language origins. Studies in language origins, vol. 2, ed. , , and , 175–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1991c. Notes on Sino-Caucasian. Dene–Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 67–129. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D..1992. The Macro-Caucasian phonology: the Dene-Caucasian macrophylum. Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 342–51. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
.1995. Some questions and theses for the American Indian language classification debate (ad Campbell, 1994). Mother Tongue (newsletter) 24.57–9.Google Scholar
.1997a. Ein Vergleich von Buruschaski und Nordkaukasich [A comparison of Burushaski and (North) Caucasian]. Georgica 20.88–94.Google Scholar
Bengtson, John D. and Merritt Ruhlen. 1994a. Global etymologies. On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy, ed. Merritt Ruhlen, 277–336. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
and .1994b. Another look at ∗tik ‘finger, one.’California Linguistic Notes 24(2).9–11.Google Scholar
and .1997. In defense of multilateral comparison. California Linguistic Notes 25(3–4). 57.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Geoffrey. 1976. Austroasiatic subgrouping and prehistory in the Malay Peninsula. Austroasiatic studies, vol. 1, ed. , , and , 37–128. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, Patrick R. 1983. Adamawa-Eastern: problems and prospects. Current approaches to African linguistics, ed. , 23–48. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 1995. The Pueblo region as a linguistic area. Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.Google Scholar
1956. Mittelmeerische Kulturpflanzennamen aus dem Burushaski. Indo-Iranian Journal 3.17–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 61.1–29. Helsinki.Google Scholar
.1978. Reflections on the comparison of Eskimo and Uralic. Tartu Riikliku Ülikooli Toimetised 455.131–8.Google Scholar
. 1983. Some California Penutian morphological elements. International Journal of American Linguistics 49.400–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1989. More California Penutian morphological elements. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 9.3–18.Google Scholar
.1992. A comment on the Yurok and Kalapuya data in Greenberg's Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.230–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1996. The position of Molala in Plateau Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 62.1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertolazo Stella, Jorge, 1929. As linguas indigenas da America. Offprint from Revista do Instituto Historico e Geographica de São Paulo 26, 1928.) São Paulo: Irmãos Ferraz.
1983. Comments on “Dravidian and Indo-European” by F. C. Southworth. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 12.212–13.Google Scholar
. 1548. De ratione communi omnium linguarum et literarum commentarius. Zurich: Froschauer.Google Scholar
1988. Redefining Pama-Nyungan: towards the prehistory of Australian languages. Aboriginal Linguistics 1.1–90.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J..1990. The significance of pronouns in the history of Australian languages. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 435–50. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, Barry J..1994. Australian languages. The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. and , vol. 1.266–73. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
1930. Die werschikisch-buruschkische Sprache im Pamijr-Gebiet und ihre Stellung zu den Japhetitensprachen des Kaukasus. Wiener Beiträge zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 1.289–331.Google Scholar
Blench, Roger. 1995. Is Niger-Congo simply a branch of Nilo-Saharan? Proceedings of the Fifth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, ed. and Franz , 83–130. (Nilo-Saharan Analysis and Documentation 10.) Cologne: Köppe.Google Scholar
. 1954. The grammatical structure of Dravidian languages. Poona: Deccan College. (English translation of Structure grammaticale des langues dravidiennes, by Ramkrishna Ganesh Harshé, 1946.)Google Scholar
1990. Comments on “Speaking of forked tongues: the feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language” by R. Bateman et al. Current Anthropology 31.15.Google Scholar
. 1911. Introduction to the Handbook of American Indian languages. Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 40, part 1, pp. 1–70. Washington. (Reprinted by Georgetown University, Institute of Languages and Linguistics.)Google Scholar
.1917. Introduction. International Journal of American Linguistics. 1.1–8. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 199–210.)Google Scholar
.1920. The classification of American languages. American Anthropologist 22.367–76. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 211–18.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1929. Classification of American languages. Language 5.1–7. (Reprinted in Boas 1982: 219–25.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Franz.1933. Relations between north-west America and north-east Asia. The American aborigines: their origin and antiquity, ed. , 357–70. (Reprinted 1973. New York: Cooper Square Publishers.)Google Scholar
1982. Race, language and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
, , , and . 2004. Problematic use of Greenberg's linguistic classification of the Americas in studies of Native American genetic variation. American Journal of Human Genetics 75.519–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
.1986a. Common Indo-European/Afroasiatic roots: supplement 1. General Linguistics 24.225–57.Google Scholar
.1986b. Review of Markey and Shevoroshkin 1986. Diachronica 3.269–82. (Reprinted Mother Tongue [newsletter], April 10, 1990.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bomhard, Allan R..1998. Review of The Nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology, by Aharon Dolgopolsky. Nostratic: evaluating a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and . Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.1989. Lexical parallels between Proto-Indo-European and other languages. Supplement to Mother Tongue 9 (November/December).Google Scholar
Bomhard, Allan R..1990. A survey of the comparative phonology of the so-called “Nostratic” languages. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 331–58. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1994. The Nostratic macrofamily: a study in distant linguistic relationship. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1953. Ideas on the kinship of the European languages from 1200 to 1800. Cahiers d'Histoire Mondiale 1.679–99.Google Scholar
. 1971. Is there any relationship between Eskimo-Aleut and Uralo-Altaic?Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 21(3–4).401–7.Google Scholar
.1975. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅰ. Orbis 24.251–75.Google Scholar
.1978. A comparison between Eskimo-Aleut and Ural-Altaic demonstrative elements, numerals, and other semantic problems. International Journal of American Linguistics 44.40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1979. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅱ. Orbis 28.27–44.Google Scholar
.1984. Some probable phonological connections between Ural-Altaic and Eskimo-Aleut Ⅲ. Orbis 33.256–72.Google Scholar
. 1816. Über das Conjugationssystem der Sanskritsprache in Vergleich- ung mit jenem der griechischen, lateinischen, persischen und germanischen Sprache, nebst Episoden des Ramajan und Mahabharat in genauen, metrischen Übersetzungen aus dem Originaltexte und einigen Abschnitten aus den Vega's. Frankfurt am Main: Andreäische Buchhandlung. (Reprinted 1974: Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics, 15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)
.1833–52. Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Armenischen, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litauischen, Altslavischen, Gothischen und Deutschen. 6 vols. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz1841[1840]. Über die Verwandtschaft der malayisch-polynesischen Sprache mit der indisch-europäischen. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 171–246. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 235–310. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz.1842. Über die Übereinstimmung der Pronomina des malayisch-polynesischen und indisch-europäischen Sprachstammes. Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 247–332. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleich- enden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 311–96. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz.1846. Über das Georgische in sprachverwandtschaftlicher Beziehung. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, 259–339. (Reprinted 1972 in Kleine Schriften zur vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft, ed. , 250–339. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
.1854. Über das Albanische in seinen verwandschaftlichen Beziehungen. Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin, Abhandlungen Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 459–549. Berlin.Google Scholar
. 1982. Das indogermanische Sprachwandelmodell und Wandel in exotischen Sprachen. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 95.49–80.Google Scholar
.1984. The Indo-European model of sound change and genetic affinity and change in exotic languages. Diachronica 1.1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. Die Tschuktschische Gruppe und das Utoaztekische. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe. Acta Salmanticensia, Filosofía y Letras 5(6).69–78. Salamanca.Google Scholar
.1960a. Tungusisch und Ketschua. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 110.99–113.Google Scholar
.1961. Tschuktschisch und Uralisch Ⅰ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 111.335–60.Google Scholar
.1963. Zoque, ein zentralamerikanischer Brückenpfeiler zwischen Westasien (Kaukasus) und Peru. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 113.144–67.Google Scholar
.1965b. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅱ. AIWN 6.161–85. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
.1969. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe. Orbis 19.130–6.Google Scholar
.1970a. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅲ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 119.60–85.Google Scholar
.1970b. Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der tschuktschischen Sprachgruppe Ⅳ. Orbis 19.130–6.Google Scholar
Bouda, Karl.1979. Giljakisch und Uralisch Ⅱ. Explanationes et tractationes fenno-ugricae in honorem Hans Fromm, ed. , 29–36. (Münchener Universitätsschriften, Finnisch-Ugrische Bibliothek 3.) Munich: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
.1980. Giljakisch und Uralisch Ⅲ. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 130.393–6.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2004a. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowern, Claire and Harold Koch.2004b. Introduction: subgrouping methodology in historical linguistics. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 1–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowlby, John. 1990. Charles Darwin: a new life. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
[anonymous pamphlet]. 1647. Antwoord von M[arcus] Z[uerius] van B[oxhorn] op de Vraaghen, hem voorgestelt over de Bediedinge van de tot noch toe onbekende Afgodinne Nehalennia, onlancx uytgegeven. In welcke de ghemeine herkomste van der Griecken, Romeinen, ende Duytschen Tale uyt den Scythen duydelijck bewesen, ende verscheiden Oudheden van dese Volckeren grondelijck ontdeckt ende verklaert. Leyden: Willem Cristiaens van der Boxe.Google Scholar
1978. A propos des ressemblances lexicales entre Niger-Congo et Nilo-Sahariennes. Etudes comparatives BSELAF 65.43–94. Paris.Google Scholar
.1906. Ein Prodromus zu einem vergleichenden Wörterbuch der malaio-polynesischen Sprachen für Sprachforscher und Ethnographen. Lucerne: E. Haag.Google Scholar
.1916. An introduction to Indonesian linguistics, trans. C. O. Blagden. London: The Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
and . 1982. Evolution of tribal social networks: theory and prehistoric North American evidence. American Antiquity 47.504–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1983. Sanctius’ theory of language: a contribution to the history of renaissance linguistics. (Studies in the History of Linguistics 27.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bright, William. 1954. Some Northern Hokan relationships: a preliminary report. Papers from the symposium on American Indian linguistics, ed. , , , and , 57–62. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 10.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1955. A bibliography of the Hokan-Coahuiltecan languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 21.276–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bright, William.1970. On linguistic unrelatedness. International Journal of American Linguistics 36.288–90.CrossRef
.1984. The classification of North American and Meso-American Indian languages. American Indian linguistics and literature, 3–29. Berlin: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1991. Sapir and distant linguistic relationship. The Edward Sapir Society of Japan (newsletter) 5.19–25. Tokyo.Google Scholar
1859. Notes on the Floridian Peninsula, its literary history, Indian tribes and antiquities. Philadelphia: Joseph Sabin.Google Scholar
.1869. The nature of the Maya group of languages. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 11.4–6.Google Scholar
.1885a. American Indian languages and why we should study them. Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 9.15–35. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 308–27.)Google Scholar
Brinton, Daniel G..1885b. Wilhelm von Humboldt's researches in American languages. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 328–48.)
1888. The language of palæolithic man. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society3–16. (Reprinted in Brinton 1890: 390–409.)Google Scholar
1890. The earliest form of human speech, as revealed by American tongues: essays of an Americanist. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates.
.1891. The American race: a linguistic classification and ethnographic description of the native tribes of North and South America. New York: N. D. C. Hodges.Google Scholar
Broadbent, Sylvia M. and Harvey Pitkin. 1964. A comparison of Miwok and Wintun. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 19–45. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1908. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, vol. 1: Laut- und Formenlehre. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.Google Scholar
1989. Particles borrowed from Spanish as discourse markers in Mayan languages. Anthropological Linguistics 29.507–521.Google Scholar
Brody, Jill M..1995. Lending the “unborrowable”: Spanish discourse markers in indigenous American languages. Spanish in four continents: studies in language contact and bilingualism, ed. , 132–47. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1979. Aspects of the phonological history of Mayan-Zoquean. International Journal of American Linguistics 45. 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1884. Zur Frage nach den Verwandtschaftsverhältnissen der indogermanischen Sprachen. Internationale Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 1.226–56.Google Scholar
1969. Die gemeinsamen Wurzeln des semitischen und des indogermanischen Wortschatzes. Versuch einer Etymologie. Bern and Munich: Francke.Google Scholar
Bugge, Sophus. 1902. Bemerkungen. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache, by , 57–107. Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
. 1996. Deep linguistic prehistory with particular reference to Andamanese. Working Papers 45.5–214. Lund University, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 1943. Dravidian studies Ⅳ: the body in Dravidian and Uralian. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11.328–56.Google Scholar
1944. The body in Dravidian and Uralian. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 9.328–56.
and . 1961. A Dravidian etymological dictionary. (2nd edition 1984.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. 1856. Der athapaskische Sprachstamm. Abhandlungen der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1855.149–319.Google Scholar
1859. Die Spuren der aztekischen Sprache im nördlichen Mexico und höheren amerikanischen Norden. Abhandlungen der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1854, supplementary vol. 2. Berlin.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1986. August Schleicher: Indo-Europeanist and general linguist. Studies in the history of Western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 129–49. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1856. A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages. London: Harrison. (2nd edition 1875; 3rd edition 1913: London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Reprinted 1974, New Delhi: Oriental Books.)Google Scholar
1958. California Penutian: history and bibliography. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1967. Miwok-Costanoan as a subfamily of Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 33.224–7.Google Scholar
Callaghan, Catherine A..1980. An “Indo-European” type paradigm in Proto Eastern Miwok. American Indian and Indo-European studies: papers in honor of Madison S. Beeler, ed. , , and , 331–8. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callaghan, Catherine A..1991. Climbing a low mountain. A festschrift for William F. Shipley, ed. and , 47–59. Santa Cruz: Syntax Research Center, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
and . 1962. Swadesh's Macro-Mixtecan hypothesis and English. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 18.278–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1816. A grammar of the Teloogoo language commonly called the Gentoo. (Reprinted, 3rd edition (from 1849), 1991. Madras: Asian Educational Services.)Google Scholar
. 1972. Mayan loan words in Xinca. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.187–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1973. Distant genetic relationships and the Maya-Chipaya hypothesis. Anthropological Linguistics 15(3).113–35. (Reprinted 1993, in Special issue: a retrospective of the Journal of Anthropological Linguistics: selected papers, 1959–1985. AnthropologicalLinguistics 35(1–4).66–89.
.1977. Quichean linguistic prehistory. (University California Publications in Linguistics 81.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1978. Distant genetic relationship and diffusion: a Mesoamerican perspective. Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists 52.595–605. Paris.Google Scholar
1979. Middle American languages. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. Lyle Campbell and Marianne Mithun, 902–1000. Austin: University of Texas Press.
.1987. Syntactic change in Pipil. International Journal of American Linguistics 53.253–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1988. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph H. Greenberg. Language 64.591–615.
.1994a. The American Indian classification controversy: an insider's view. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 23.41–55.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1994b. Problems with the pronouns in proposals of remote relationships among Native American languages. Proceedings of the meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas and the Hokan-Penutian workshop, ed. , 1–20. (Survey of Californian and other Indian Languages, Report 8.) Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
.1995. The Quechumaran hypothesis and lessons for distant genetic comparison. Diachronica 12.157–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997a. American Indian languages: the historical linguistics of Native America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1997c. Genetic classification, typology, areal linguistics, language endangerment, and languages of the north Pacific rim. Languages of the North Pacific Rim, vol. 2, ed. and , 179–242. Kyoto: Kyoto University.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1997d. The linguistic prehistory of Guatemala. Papers in honor of William Bright, ed. , , and , 183–92. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1998. Nostratic: a personal assessment. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 107–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.1999. Nostratic and linguistic palaeontology in methodological perspective. Nostratic: evaluating a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 179–230. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
2000. Review of Language relations across Bering Strait: reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence by Michael Fortescue. Anthropological Linguistics 42.572–9.
Campbell, Lyle.2002. What drives linguistic diversity and language spread? Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 49–63. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.2003a. How to show languages are related: methods for distant genetic relationship. Handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 262–82. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle.2003b. Beyond the comparative method? Historical linguistics, ed. and , 33–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
.2004. Historical linguistics: an introduction. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Ives Goddard. 1990. American Indian languages and principles of language change. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 17–32. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1988. Word order universals: refinements and clarifications. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 33.209–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1983. Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship: getting it straight. American Anthropologist 85.362–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Marianne Mithun. 1979. North American Indian historical linguistics in current perspective. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 3–69. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1952. Sir William Jones, orientalist: an annotated bibliography of his works. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
.1964. Oriental Jones: a biography of Sir William Jones (1756–1794). London: Asia Publishing House for India Council for Cultural Relations.Google Scholar
.1990. The life and mind of oriental Jones: Sir William Jones, the father of modern linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland H., Jr..1991. Jones's “sprung from some common source”: 1786–1986. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 23–47. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1956. A new approach to Australian linguistics. (Oceania Linguistic Monographs 1.) Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
.1962. Some linguistic types in Australia (Handbook of Australian languages, part 2.) (Oceania Linguistic Monographs 7.) Sydney: University of Sydney.
.1975. Ergative constructions in Australian languages. Working papers in language and linguistics 2.1–7. Tasmanian College of Advanced Education, Launceston.Google Scholar
Capell, A..1979. The history of Australian languages: a first approach. Australian linguistic studies, ed. , 419–619. (Pacific Linguistics C-71.) Canberra: Australian National University.
. 1840. A brief essay on the Feejeean language, addressed to the secretaries of the Wesleyan Missionary Society. Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society Report 8.132–43.Google Scholar
. 1847. Lettre de M. le Dr. Castrén à l'Académicien Sjoegren. Lue 30 janv. 1846. Bulletin de la classe historico-philologique de l'Academie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 3.225–44.Google Scholar
.1850. De affixibus personalibus linguarum altaicarum dissertatio. Helsinki: Litteris Frenckellianis.Google Scholar
.1856. Reiseberichte und Briefe aus den Jahren 1845–49. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
.1857. Ethnologische Vorlesungen über die altaischen Völker, nebst samojedischen Märchen und tatarischen Heldensagen. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
.1862. Über die Personalaffixe in den altaischen Sprachen. Kleinere Schriften, 151–222. St. Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
. 1998. Basic Burushaski etymologies: the Indo-European and Paleo-Balkanic affinities of Burushaski. Munich: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Catford, J. C. 1991. The classification of Caucasian languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 232–68. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1988. Reconstruction of human evolution: bringing together genetic, archaeological, and linguistic data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 85.6002–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and . 1992. Coevolution of genes and languages revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 89.5620–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 1986. Comentario [sobre] Willem F. H. Adelaar, La relación quechua-aru: perspectiva para la separación del léxico. Revista Andina 4. 403–8.Google Scholar
.1987. Lingüística quechua. (Biblioteca de la tradición oral andina 8.) Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Rurales Andinos “Bartolomé de las Casas.”Google Scholar
.1964. Another look at Siouan and Iroquoian. American Anthropologist 66.852– 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L.1973. Siouan, Iroquoian, and Caddoan. Linguistics in North America, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok, 1164–1209. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton. (Reprinted 1976, in Native languages of the Americas, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok, 527–72. New York: Plenum Press.)
.1987. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph H. Greenberg. Current Anthropology 28.652–3.Google Scholar
. 1910. The Uran: a new South American linguistic stock. American Anthropologist 12.417–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, Hilary. 2001. Language contact and areal diffusion in Sinitic languages. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 328–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
, [, ]. 1870. Notice sur quelques familles de langues du Mexique. Le Havre: Imprimerie Lepellatier.Google Scholar
, [, ].1872. Recherches sur les lois phonétiques dans les idiomes de la famille mame-huastèque. Paris: Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
, [, ].1883. Mélanges de philologie et de paléographie américaines. Paris: Ernest Leroux. [Includes: Sur les lois phonétiques dans les idiomes de la famille mame-huastèque, 91–121; reprint of 1872.]Google Scholar
1932. Polynesian and Oceanic elements in the Chimu and Inca languages. Journal of the Polynesian Society 41.144–56.Google Scholar
Christy, T. Craig. 1980. Uniformitarianism in nineteenth-century linguistics: implications for a reassessment of the neogrammarian sound-law doctrine. Progress in linguistic historiography, ed. , 249–56. (Studies in the History of Linguistics 20.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christy, T. Craig.1983. Uniformitarianism in linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
1985. Baskskii i sevepokavkazskie yazuki [Basque and North-Caucasian languages]. Drevnyaya Anatoliya, 95–105. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Clark, Ross. 1987. Austronesian languages. The world's major languages, ed. , 899–912. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1973. Problèmes d'une comparison indo-ouralien. Cahiers de l'Institute de Linguistique 1(2).279–92. (Université Catholique de Louvain.)Google Scholar
Clauson, Gerard.1959a. The earliest Turkish loan words in Mongolian. Akten des vierundzwanzigsten Internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, ed. , 593–5. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Clauson, Gerard.1959b. The case for the Altaic theory examined. Akten des vierundzwanzigsten Internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, ed. , 599–601. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
.1969. A lexicostatistical appraisal of the Altaic theory. Central Asiatic Journal 13.1–23.Google Scholar
Cœurdoux, Gaston Laurent. 1784–93[1767]. [Letter to Abbé Barthélémy published in] Mémoires de littérature de […] l'Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 49.647–67, by . Paris.Google Scholar
Cohen, Marcel. 1924. Langues chamito-sémitiques. Les langue du monde, 2 vols., ed. André Meillet and Marcel Cohen, 81–151. Paris: Champion.
.1947. Essai comparatif sur le vocabulaire et la phonétique du chamito-sémitique. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
. 1994. Phyletic links between Proto-European and Proto-Northwest Caucasian. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 21.8–20.Google Scholar
Cole, Desmond T. 1971. The history of African linguistics to 1945. Linguistics in Sub-Saharan Africa, ed. and , 1–29. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1934. Indo-uralisches Sprachgut: die Urverwandtschaft zwischen der indoeuropäischen und der uralischen (finnischugrisch-samojedischen) Sprachfamilie. Uppsala Universitets årsskrift 1.1–116.
Collinder, Björn.1943. Indo-uralische Nachlese. Språkvetenskapliga Sällskapets i Uppsala Förhandlingar, 1943–1945. 1–6. (Reprinted in Collinder 1964b: 133–40.)
.1946–8. La parenté linguistique et le calcul des probabilités. Språkvetenskapliga sällskapets i Uppsala Förhandlingar, 1946–1948. Uppsala Universitets årsskrift 13.1–24.Google Scholar
.1954. Zur indo-uralischen Frage. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Språkvetenskapliga sällskapets i Uppsala förhandlingar, 1952–1954 10.79–91. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells.Google Scholar
.1955b/1977. Fenno-Ugric vocabulary: an etymological dictionary of the Uralic languages. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. (2nd edition 1977. Hamburg: Buske.)Google Scholar
Collinder, Björn.1964a. La regle de succession dans le calcul des probabilités. (Reprinted in Collinder 1964b: 184–202.)
.1965a. An introduction to the Uralic languages. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.1965b. Hat das Uralische Verwandte? Eine sprachvergleichende Untersuchung. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 1(4).109–80.Google Scholar
.1967. Die indouralische Sprachvergleichung und die Laryngaltheorie. Die Sprache 13.179–80.Google Scholar
.1970. Nachtrag zum Aufsatz “Die indouralische Sprachvergleichung und die Laryngaltheorie.”Die Sprache 16.174–5.Google Scholar
.1974. Indo-Uralisch oder gar Nostratisch? “Antiquitates Indogermanicae” Gedenkschrift für H. Güntert. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 12.363–75.Google Scholar
. 1657. Opera didactica omnia. Variis hucusque occasionibus scripta, diversisque locis edita: nunc autem non tantum in unum, ut simul sint, collecta, sed et ultimo conatu in systema unum mechanice constructum, redacta. Amsterdam: D. Laurentius de Geer. (Reprinted 1952, Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemslovenicae, 3 vols.)Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1981. The genetic affiliation of Kamchadal: some morphological evidence. Studies in the languages of the USSR, ed. , 109–20. Edmonton: Linguistic Research.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1989. Genetic classification, contact, and variation. Synchronic and diachronic approaches to linguistic variation and change, ed. , 81–93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1992. Before complexity. The evolution of human languages, ed. and , 193–210. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Google Scholar
.1993. Review of Altajskaja problema i proisxoždenie japonskogo jazyka [The Altaic problem and the origin of the Japanese language], by Sergej A. Starostin. Language 69.828–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard.1999. Nostratic language and culture: some methodological reflections. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 243–55. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1896. Eine indochinesische causativ-denominativ-Bildung und ihr Zusammenhang mit den Tonaccenten: ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Grammatik der indochinesischen Sprachen, insonderheit des Tibetischen, Barmanischen und Chinesischen.Leipzig: Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
. 1987. Elementos de fonología comparada de las lenguas misumalpas. Filología y Lingüística 13.129–61. San José, Costa Rica.Google Scholar
.1991. Las lenguas del área intermedia: introducción a su estudio areal. San José: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica.Google Scholar
. 1777. A voyage towards the South Pole, and round the world, performed in His Majesty's ships the Resolution and Adventure, in the years 1772, 1773, 1774, and 1775. London: Strahan and Cadell.
. 1970a. Die indouralische Sprachverwandtschaft und die indogermanische Laryngaltheorie. Slovenska Akademija Znanosti in Umetnosti 7(5).185–229. Ljubljana.Google Scholar
.1970c. Indouralica Ⅶ. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 84.151–74.Google Scholar
.1974b. Indouralica VIII. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 24.87–116. Budapest.Google Scholar
.1974c. Indouralica Ⅴ. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 88.41–58.Google Scholar
.1975. Die indogermanische Deklination im Lichte der indouralischen vergleichenden Grammatik. (Slovenska Akademija Znanosti in Umetnosti 31.) Ljubljana.Google Scholar
Čop, Bojan.1979. Indogermanisch-Anatolisch und Uralisch. Hethitisch und Indogermanisch, ed. , 8–24. Innsbruck: E. Neu.Google Scholar
1995. The Tower of Babel and Babylon, Gilgamesh, Ningizzida, Gudea. (www.mazzaroth.com/ChapterThree/TowerOfBabel.htm)
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1977. Sobre la tipología lingüística de Wilhelm von Humboldt. Tradición y novedad en la ciencia del lenguaje, 142–84. Madrid: Gredos. (Originally in 1972 Beiträge zur vergleichenden Literaturgeschichte, Festschrift für Kurt Wais, 235–66. Tübingen: Niemeyer.)
. 1773–82 [1776]. Monde primitif analysé et comparé avec le monde moderne. 9 vols. Paris: Antoine Court de Gébelin.Google Scholar
1962. Statistical determination of linguistic relationships. Studia Linguistica 16.57–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, James M. 1976. A comparison of Chimariko and Yuman. Hokan studies: papers from the first conference on Hokan languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 177–91. (Janua Linguarum, series practica 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, James M..1979. Timucua and Yuchi: two language isolates of the Southeast. The languages of Native America: historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 327–54. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, James M..1988. On the relationship of Timucua to Muskogean. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native America linguistics, ed. , 157–64. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2005. Editor's introduction. Genetic linguistics: essays on theory and method, by , ed. , ⅺ–ⅹⅹⅹⅵ. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crosby, Alfred W. 1993. Ecological imperialism: the biological expansion of Europe, 900–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crowley, Terry. 1992. An introduction to historical linguistics. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
1997. Chipping away at the past: a northern New South Wales perspective. Archaeology and linguistics: Aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. Patrick McConvell and Nicholas Evans, 275–95. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
1999. Review of The rise and fall of languages by R. M. W. Dixon. Australian Journal of Linguistics 19.109–15.
Crowley, Terry and R. M. W. Dixon. 1981. Tasmania. Handbook of Australian languages, vol. 2, ed. and , 394–421. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1912. Notes de phonétique historique: Indo-européen et sémitique. Revue de Phonétique 2.101–32.Google Scholar
.1924. Etudes prégrammaticales sur le domaine des langues indo-européenes et chamito-sémitiques. Paris: E. Champion.Google Scholar
.1943. Recherches sur le vocalisme, le consonantisme et la formation des racines en “nostratique,” ancéstre de l'indo-européen et du chamito-sémitique. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
.1946. Invitation à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennės et des langues chamito-sémitiques. Bordeaux: Editions Biére.Google Scholar
. 1870. Zur Geschichte der griechischen zusammengezogenen Verbalformen. Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik 3.377–401. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
.1871. Zur Erklärung der Personal endungen. Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik 4.211–30. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Cyffer, Norbert. 2000. Linguistic properties of the Saharan languages. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description: Africa south of the Sahara, ed. , 30–59. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
and . 1836. Etudes grammaticales sur la langue euskarienne. Paris: Arthus Bertrand.
Dahl, Östen. 2001. Principles of areal typology. Language universals and language typology: an international handbook, ed. , , , and , 1456–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1930. Quechua and Maori. Mitteilungen der Anthropologische Gesellschaft in Wien 60.343–51.Google Scholar
. c.1305. De vulgari eloquentia. (English translation 1981, Dante in hell: the De vulgari eloquentia, introduction, translation, and commentary by Warman Welliver. Ravenna: Longo Editore.)Google Scholar
. 1969. The development of American anthropology 1879–1920: from the Bureau of American Ethnology to Franz Boas. University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. dissertation, Philadelphia.
.1990. Edward Sapir: linguist, anthropologist, humanist. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo. 1975. Language classification in the nineteenth century. Historiography of linguistics, ed. , 607–717. (Current Trends in Linguistics 13.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo.1986. Karl Brugmann and late nineteenth-century linguistics. Studies in the history of Western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 150–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Anna Morpurgo.1992. Comparative-historical linguistics. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , 2.159–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine. 1968. Some Macro-Jê relationships. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.42–7. (Reprinted 1985 in South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 287–303. Austin: University of Texas Press.)Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine.1974. Keresan-Caddoan comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 40.265–7.CrossRef
Davis, Irvine.1979. The Kiowa-Tanoan, Keresan, and Zuni languages. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 390–443. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Irvine.1989. A new look at Aztec-Tanoan. General and Amerindian ethnolinguistics: in remembrance of Stanley Newman, ed. and , 365–79. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1980. Neue Aspekte zum Sprachverhältnis Uralisch-Indogermanisch. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 52.11–20.Google Scholar
.1988. Bojan Čop's contribution to Nostratic studies. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 60.199–200.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1977. Eurasia Nostratica: Festschrift für K. H. Menges. (Biblioteca Nostratica 1.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
de Guignes, Joseph. 1770. See Guignes, Joseph de. 1770.
de Laet, Johannes. 1643. See Laet, Johannes de.
DeLancey, Scott. 1987. Morphological parallels between Klamath and Wintu. Papers of the 1987 Hokan-Penutian languages workshop and Friends of Uto-Aztecan workshop, ed. , 50–60. (Occasional Papers on Linguistics 14.) Carbondale, IL: Department of Linguistics, Southern Illinois University.
.1988a. Klamath and Wintu pronouns. International Journal of American Linguistics 53.461–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott.1988b. Klamath stem structure in genetic and areal perspective. Papers from the 1988 Hokan-Penutian languages workshop, ed. , 50–168. Eugene: Department of Linguistics, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott.1990. Sino-Tibetan languages. The major languages of Asia and SE Asia, ed. , 69–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
.1992. Klamath and Sahaptian numerals. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.235–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott, Carol Genetti, and Noel Rude. 1988. Some Sahaptian-Klamath-Tsimshianic lexical sets. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native American linguistics, ed. , 193–224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1880. Einleitung in das Sprachstudium: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und Methodik der Vergleichenden Sprachforschung. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Haertel. (2nd edition, 1884.) [English translation, 1989: Introduction to the study of language: a critical survey of the history and methods of comparative philology of Indo-European languages, by Konrad Koerner. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.]Google Scholar
1981. Consonantal symbolism in American Indian languages. Journal of the Linguistic Association of the Southwest 4.130–42.Google Scholar
. 1971. Aportes jesuíticos a la filología colonial venezolana. 2 vols. Caracas: Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, Seminario de Lenguas Indígenas.Google Scholar
. 1934–8. Vergleichende Lautlehre des austronesischen Wortschatzes 3 vols. (Supplements to Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen-Sprachen 15 [1934], 17 [1937], and 19 [1938]). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
. 1994. The historical development of pronoun paradigms in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. Australian Journal of Linguistics 14.155–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dench, Alan.2001. Descent and diffusion: the complexity of the Pilbara situation. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 105–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1913. Mexican linguistics: including Nauatl or Mexican in Aryan phonology, the primitive Aryans of America, a Mexican-Aryan comparative vocabulary, morphology and the Mexican verb, and the Mexican-Aryan sibilants, with an appendix on comparative syntax. Chicago: T. S. Denison & Company.Google Scholar
1995. Darwin's dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
1990. Uralic and Indo-European in the Northern Eurasian Area: typological characterization and comparison. Congressus Septimus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. and , 3.23–9. Debrecen.Google Scholar
Diakonof, I. M. 1990. Language contacts in the Caucasus and the Near East. When worlds collide, ed. and , 53–65. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, Paul. 1974. The foundation of comparative linguistics: revolution or continuation? Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 277–306. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
.1994. The lexical evidence for Austric, so far. Oceanic Linguistics 34.309–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 2001. Areal diffusion versus genetic inheritance: an African perspective. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 358–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W..1990. Summary report: linguistic change and reconstruction in the Australian language family. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 393–401. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W..2001. The Australian linguistic area. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 64–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. and Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. 1999. Introduction. The Amazonian languages, ed. and , 1–21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1905. The Shasta-Achomawi: a new linguistic stock with four new dialects. American Anthropologist 7.213–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1913a. Relationship of the Indian languages of California. Science, n.s., 37.225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1913b. New linguistic families in California. American Anthropologist 15.647–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1919. Linguistic families of California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 16.47–118.Google Scholar
.1796. Litterarische Nachrichten von einer auf Veranlassung der böhmischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften im Jahre 1792 unternommenen Reise nach Schweden und Rußland. Nebest einer Vergleichung der Russischen und Böhmischen Sprache nach dem Petersburger Vergleichungs-Wörterbuch aller Sprachen. Prague.Google Scholar
.1799. [Review of] Gyarmathi Sámuel, Affinitas …Allgemeine Literaturzeitung zu Jena 3.49–54, 57–9. Jena.Google Scholar
Doerfer, G. 1963–75. Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung älterer neupersischer Geschichtquellen, von allem der Mongolen- und Timuridenzeit. 4 vols. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.
.1966. Zur Verwandtschaft der altaischen Sprachen. Indogermanische Forschungen 71.81–123.Google Scholar
.1968. Zwei wichtige Probleme der Altaistik. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 69.3–21.Google Scholar
Doerfer, G..1973. Lautgesetz und Zufall: Betrachtungen zum Omnikomparatismus. (Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 10, ed. .) Innsbruck: Institut für Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
.1974. Ist das Japanische mit den altaischen Sprachen verwandt?Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 124.103–42.Google Scholar
.1988. Zwei wichtige Probleme der Altaistik. Journal de la Société Finno-ougrienne 69.3–21.Google Scholar
.1993. Nostratismus: Illich-Svitich und die Folgen. Ural-Altäische Jahrbücher 12.17–35.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron. 1964a. Gipoteza drevnejsego rodstva jazykovyx semej Severnoj Evraziji s verojatnostnoj tochki zrenija. Voprosy jazykoznanija 2.53–63. [English translation 1986: see below.]
.1964b. Metody rekonstrukciji obshcheindoevropejskogo jazyka i vneindoevropejskije sopostavlenija [Methods in the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European and external comparison]. Problemy sravnitel'noj grammatiki indoevropejskix jazykov. Tezisy doklodov, 27–30. Moscow: Moscow State University.Google Scholar
.1965. Metody rekonstrukciji obshcheindoevropejskogo jazyka i sibiroevropejskaja gipoteza [Methods in the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European and the Sibero-European hypothesis].Etimologija 1965.259–70.Google Scholar
.1969. Nostraticheskije osnovy s sochetainijem shumnyh soglasnyh. Etimologija 1967.296–313.Google Scholar
.1970. A long-range comparison of some languages of Northern Eurasia (problems of phonetic correspondences). Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences 5.620–28. Moscow.Google Scholar
.1971. Nostraticheskije etimologiji i proisxozhdenije glagol'nyx formantov. Etimologija 1968.237–42.Google Scholar
.1972. Nostraticheskije korni s sochetanijem lateral'nogo i zvonkogo laringala. Etimologija 1970.356–69.Google Scholar
.1974. O nostraticheskoj sisteme affrikat i sibil'antov: korni s fonemoj ∗Ʒ. [On the system of Nostratic affricates and sibilants: roots with the phoneme ∗Ʒ.]Etimologija 1972.163–75.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1984. On personal pronouns in the Nostratic languages. Linguistica et philologica: Gedenkschrift für Björn Collinder, ed. , , and , 65–112. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1986. A probabilistic hypothesis concerning the oldest relationships among the language families. Typology relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed and , 27–50. [Translation of Dolgopolsky 1964a.] Ann Arbor: Karoma.Google Scholar
Dolgopolsky, Aaron.1989. Problems of Nostratic comparative phonology (preliminary report). Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 90–8. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
.1998. The Nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
, , and . 1984. Genetic relationship between Chinese and Dong-Tai languages. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 22.105–21. Tokyo.Google Scholar
Drechsel, Emanuel J. 1988. Wilhelm von Humboldt and Edward Sapir: analogies and homologies in their linguistic thoughts. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native American linguistics, ed. , 225–63. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droixhe, Daniel.1980. Le prototype défiguré: l'idée scythique et la France Gauloise. Progress in linguistic historiography: papers from the International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences, ed. , 123–37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droixhe, Daniel1984. Avant-Propos. Genèse du comparatisme indo-européen, ed. , 5–16. (Histoire Epistémologie Langage, vol. 6, Fascicule 2.) Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
. 1954. Remarques sur les six premiers noms du nombres de turc. Studia Linguistica 8.1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. Remarques complémentaires sur les six premiers noms du nombres de turc et du quechua. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 44.17– 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1819. Report of the corresponding secretary to the committee of his progress in the investigation committed to him of the general character and forms of the languages of the American Indians. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 1.ⅹⅶ–ⅹⅺv.Google Scholar
.1838. Mémoire sur le système grammatical des langues de quelques nations indiennes de l'Amérique du Nord. Paris: Pihan de la Forest.Google Scholar
1989. Methods in Systemic reconstruction of Altaic and Nostratic lexics. Lingvističeskaja rekonstrukcija 1.196–209.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A. 1989a. V. M. Illich-Svitych and the development of Uralic and Dravidian linguistics (preliminary report). Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 20–7. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A..1989b. Comparative-phonetic tables. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 114–21. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Dybo, Vladimir A..1990. Comparative-phonetic tables for Nostratic reconstructions. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 168–75. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
. 1953. Review of Malgache et Maajan: une comparaison linguistique, by Otto Dahl. Language 29.577–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1966. Koreanisch und Indogermanisch: Untersuchung über die Zugehörigkeit des Koreanischen zur indogermanischen Sprachfamilie. Heidelberg: Groos.Google Scholar
.1973. Review of Illič-Svityc 1971. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 26.395–401.Google Scholar
. 1943. Notes on early American work in linguistics. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 87.25–34.Google Scholar
.1946. Sir William Jones: 1746–1794. Journal of the American Oriental Society 66.230–9.Google Scholar
1992. Sick societies: challenging the myth of primitive harmony. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1988. Comparative Kadai: linguistic studies beyond Tai. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of Texas at Arlington Press.Google Scholar
1788[1787]. Observations on the language of the Muhhekaneew Indians; in which the extent of that language in North America is shewn; its genius is grammatically traced; some of its peculiarities, and some instances of analogy between that and the Hebrew are pointed out. (Communicated to the Connecticut Society of Arts and Sciences, and published at the request of the Society.) New Haven: Josiah Meigs. (Reprinted 1788. London: W. Justins, Shoemaker-Row, Blackfriars. Reprinted with notes by , 1823 in the Massachusetts Historical Society Collection, 2nd series, 10:81–160, and Boston: Phelps and Farnham.)Google Scholar
1973. Review of Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus, by Paul Benedict. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1(3). 498–505.Google Scholar
.1976. Benedict's Austro-Thai hypothesis: pro and con. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 6.51–60.Google Scholar
. 1995. Reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic (Proto-Afrasian): vowels, tone, consonants, and vocabulary. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
.2001. A comparative historical reconstruction of Proto-Nilo-Saharan. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Ehret, Christopher.2002. Language family expansions: broadening our understanding of cause from an African perspective. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 163–76. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Eldredge, Niles and Stephen Jay Gould. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. Methods in paleobiology, ed. , 82–115. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper.Google Scholar
. 1640. Tabula cebetis Graece, Arabice, Latine. Item aurea carmina Pythagorae cum Paraphrasi Arabica. Leiden: Iohannis Maire.Google Scholar
. 1663. The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New, translated into the Indian language and ordered to be printed by the commissioners of the United Colonies in New-England. Cambridge, MA: Samuel Green and Marmaduke Johnson.Google Scholar
Eliot, John.1666. The Indian grammar begun: a grammar of the Massachusetts Indian language. Cambridge, MA: Samuel Green and Marmaduke Johnson. (New edition 1822: A grammar of the Massachusetts Indian language, ed. John Pickering. Boston: Phelps and Farnham.)
. 1847. Observations on the language of the Gonds and the identity of many of its terms with Telugu, Tamil and Canarese. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 16 (2).Google Scholar
. 1816. Note to the introduction of A Grammar of the Teloogoo Language, by Alexander Duncan Campbell, 1–31. Madras: Hindu Press. (Reprinted, 3rd edition [from 1849], 1991. Madras: Asian Educational Services.)Google Scholar
1963. Yukian–Siouan lexical similarities. International Journal of American Linguistics 29.300–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1964. Item and set comparison in Yuchi, Siouan, and Yukian. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.328–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emeneau, Murray B. 2000. Linguistics in India: past and future. Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 545–54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Enrico, John. 2004. Toward Proto-Na-Dene. Anthropological Linguistics 46.229–302.
1977. Uralo-dravidalaisista yhteyksistä. [About Uralic-Dravidian connections.] Suomen Antropologi 1977 33–8. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1988. Arguments for Pama-Nyungan as a genetic subgroup, with reference to initial laminalization. Aboriginal Linguistics 1.91–110.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2003a. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas.2003b. Comparative non-Pama-Nyungan and Australian historical linguistics. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region, ed. , 3–25. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Evans, Nick and Patrick McConvell. 1998. The enigma of Pama-Nyungan expansion in Australia. Archaeology and language Ⅱ: archaeological data and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 174–91. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. 1990. Syntactic and pragmatic principles as arguments in the interpretation of runic inscriptions. Historical linguistics and philology, ed. , 165–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahey, Bede. 2004. Mayan, a Sino-Tibetan language? A comparative study. Sino-Platonic Papers 130. [www.sino-platonic.org/abstracts/ spp130_chinese.html]
1980. Sumerian–Dravidian interconnections: the linguistic, archeological and textual evidence. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 9.286–305.Google Scholar
.1971. Kriterien zum Nachweis genetischer Sprachverwandtschaft. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Ernst Moritz Ardt Universität Greifswald 20.99–136.Google Scholar
.1988. Lexikalische Parallelen zwischen indoeuropäischen und kartvelischen Sprachen. Papiere zur Linguistik 39.49–54. Tübingen.Google Scholar
. 1990. Etymology of the Lower Mississippian languages, part 1. Epigraphic Society Occasional Papers 19.35–47.Google Scholar
.1978. Semitic linguistics and Indo-European comparative and historical grammar. Linguistics 206.51–3.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1976. The Ethiopian language area. Language in Ethiopia, ed. , , , and , 63–76. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1933. La investigación lingüística y el parentesco extra-continental de la lengua “qhexwa.” Revista de la Sociedad “Amigos de la Arqueología” 7.89–120. Montevideo, Uruguay.Google Scholar
.1938. Della possible parentela fra le indue “altaiche” en alcune americaine. Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti 19.210–23. Rome: Tipographia della Reale Accademia dei Lincei del Dott.Google Scholar
1770[1756]. De origine Ungarorum. (Published in Quaestiones Petropolitanae, by August Ludwig Schlözer.) Göttingen.Google Scholar
Fischer, J. E..1995[1747]. Vocabularium Sibiricum (1747): der etymologisch-vergleichende Abteil, ed. . Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
1974. Omotic as a branch of Afroasiatic. Studies in African linguistics, supplement 5.81–94.Google Scholar
Fleming, Harold C..1976a. Omotic overview. The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia, ed. , 299–323. East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center.Google Scholar
Fleming, Harold C..1976b. Cushitic and Omotic. Language in Ethiopia, ed. , , , and , 34–58. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
.1987. Review article: Towards a definitive classification of the world's languages (review of A guide to the world's languages, by Merritt Ruhlen). Diachronica 4.159–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, E. D. 1981. Levels of phonological restriction in Greek affixes. Bono Homini donum: essays in historical linguistics in memory of J. Alexander Kerns, ed. and , 87–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1969. The problems in the classification of the African languages: methodological and theoretical conclusions concerning the classification system of Joseph H. Greenberg. 3rd edition (1st edition 1966). Budapest: Center for Afro-Asian Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. (Republished 1982. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.)Google Scholar
.1976. Are the Sumerians and the Hungarians or the Uralic peoples related?Current Anthropology 17.115–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, John [Johann] Reinhold. 1778. Observations made during a voyage round the world. London: G. Robinson. (Reprinted 1996, ed. Nicholas Thomas, Harriet Guest, and Michael Dettelbach. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.)
. 1988. The Eskimo-Eleut-Yukagir relationship: an alternative to the genetic/contact dichotomy. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 21.21–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortescue, Michael.1994. The role of typology in the establishment of the genetic relationship between Eskimo and Aleut – and beyond. Languages of the north Pacific rim, ed. , 9–36. (Hokkaido University Publications in Linguistics 7.) Sapporo, Japan: Department of Linguistics, Hokkaido University.Google Scholar
.1998. Language relations across Bering Strait: reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
1983. Some lexical clues to Uto-Aztecan prehistory. International Journal of American Linguistics 49.224–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982. Review of Nilal: Über die Urverwandtschaft des Hamito-Semitischen, Indogermanischen, Uralischen und Altaischen, by Kalevi E. Koskinen. Language 58.726–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. Proto-Mayan accent, morpheme structure conditions, and velar innovations. University of Chicago Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
1918. Comparative studies in Takelman, Kalapuyan, and Chinookan lexicography: a preliminary paper. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.175–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984a. Las relaciones externas entre las lenguas mayances y altaicas. Investigaciones recientes en el área maya. ⅩⅦ Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología 1.209–25. Mexico.Google Scholar
.1984b. Los morfemas vocálicos para derivaciones verbales en los grupos mayance y túrquico. Investigaciones recientes en el área maya. ⅩⅦ Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología 2.517–24. Mexico.Google Scholar
Franklin, K. J. 1973. The gulf area in light of Greenberg's Indo-Pacific hypothesis. The linguistic situation in the gulf district and adjacent areas, ed. , 377–408. (Pacific Linguistics C-26.) Canberra.Google Scholar
1930. The relationship of Mixe to the Penutian family. International Journal of American Linguistics 6.28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1970. Proto-Indo-European trees: the arboreal system of a prehistoric people. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1975. Proto-indo-European syntax: the order of meaningful elements. Journal of Indo-European Studies, memoir 1. Butte, MT: College of Mineral Science.Google Scholar
. 1974. A comparative vocabulary of parts of the body of Japanese and Uralic languages with the backing up of Altaic languages, Kokuryöan and Korean. Gengo Kenkyu 65.74–9.Google Scholar
.1975a. Japanese and Dravidian with special reference to words beginning with original ∗k-. Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Kiuki University, Dec.Google Scholar
.1975b. Animals and vegetables in Japanese and Uralian. Uralica 3.91–103.
.1981. The Japanese-Dravidian vocabulary of flora and fauna. Bulletin of the International Institute for Linguistic Sciences 2.73–97. Kyoto Sangyo University.Google Scholar
. 1973. Einige Aspekte zur Erforschung der uralischen-tungusischen Sprachbeziehungen. Festschrift für Wolfgang Schlachter zum 65. Geburtstag, 25–34. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Futaky, István[Futaki, I.]1988. Uralisch und Tungusisch. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 781–81. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Georg von der. 1891. Die Sprachwissenschaft: ihre Aufgaben, Methoden, und bisherigen Ergebnisse. Leipzig: T. O. Weigel Nachfolger. (Reprinted, 1972[1901/1891], Tübingen: Gunter Narr.)
. 1861. Die melanisischen Sprachen nach ihrem grammatischen Bau und ihrer Verwandtschaft unter sich und mit den malaiisch-polynesischen Sprachen. Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Classe der königlich sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, vol. 1. Leipzig: Hirzel.Google Scholar
1967. Kartvelian and Indo-European: a typological comparison of reconstructed linguistic systems. To honour Roman Jakobson, 707–17. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
and . 1984. Indoevropejskij jazyk i indoevropejtsy. 2 vol. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University.Google Scholar
and 1985. The ancient Near East and the Indo-European question: temporal and territorial characteristics of Proto-Indo-European based on linguistic and historico-cultural data. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 13.3–48.Google Scholar
1922. El idioma japonés y sus afinidades con lenguas americanas. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras 73.114–22. Buenos Aires, Argentina.Google Scholar
1981. Camito-semitico e indoeuropeo. Atti del Sodalizio Glottologico Milanese 21.4–18.Google Scholar
1977. Review of Illich-Svitych 1971, 1976. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 72.83–5.Google Scholar
2000. Bicultural versatility as a frontier adaptation among Paliyan foragers of south India. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellon Press.Google Scholar
1894. The progress of English philology. Proceedings of the American Philological Association 25.ⅹⅺ–ⅹⅹⅲ.Google Scholar
. 1999. A new model of Indo-European subgrouping and dispersal. Berkeley Linguistics Society 25.146–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1882. Indian languages of the Pacific states and territories and of the Pueblos of New Mexico. The Magazine of American History with Notes and Queries 8.254–63.Google Scholar
.1886. On the affinity of the Cheroki to the Iroquois dialects. Transactions of the American Philological Association 16.xl–xlv.Google Scholar
Gébelin, Antoine Court de. See Court de Gébelin, Antoine.
Gedney, William J. 1976. On the Thai evidence for Austro-Tai. Computational Analysis of Asian and African Languages 6.65–82. (Reprinted with revisions, 1989, in Selected papers on comparative Tai studies, ed. , , , and , 117–63. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Centers for South and Southeast Asian Studies.)Google Scholar
[, ]. 1537. Lexicum symphonum quo quatuor linguarum Europae familiarium, Graecae scilicet, Latinae, Germanicae ac Sclauinicae concordia consonatiaque indicatur. Basel: Ieronymus Frobenius et Nicolaus Episcopius.Google Scholar
, , , and . 1999. Telling general linguists about Altaic. Journal of Linguistics 35.65–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2003. From mass comparison to mess comparison: Greenberg's Indo-European and its closest relatives (review article.) Diachronica 20.331–62.
and 2005. Review of Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family, vol. 2: The lexicon, by Joseph H. Greenberg.Diachronica 22.184–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. The journey through Wales and the description of Wales, translated and introduced by Lewis Thorpe. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Ges[s]ner, Konrad. 1555. Mithridates de differentiis linguarum tum veterum tum quae hodie apud diversas nationes in toto orbe terrarum in usu sunt. Zurich: Froschauer. (Reprinted 1974, ed. . Darmstadt: Scientia Verlag Aalen.)Google Scholar
Gibbon, Edward. See Williams (ed.) 1979.
. 1908. The journey through Wales, description of Wales. London: Dent and Sons; New York: Dutton & Co.Google Scholar
. 1895. A short manual of comparative philology for classical students. New York: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
. 1780–4. Saggio di storia americana; o sia, storia naturale, civile e sacra de regni, e delle provincie spagnuole di Terra-Ferma nell’ America Meridionale descritto dall’ abate F. S. Gilij. 4 vols. Rome: Perigio. (1965[1782], Ensayo de historia americana, Spanish translation by Antonio Tovar. [Fuentes para la Historia Colonial de Venezuela, vols. 71–3.] Caracas: Biblioteca de la Academia Nacional de la Historia.)Google Scholar
1980 [1982]. Deux correspondences grammaticales entre l'indoeuropéen et les langues ouralo-altaiques. Orbis 29.162–8.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1975. Algonquian, Wiyot, and Yurok: proving a distant genetic relationship. Linguistics and anthropology in honor of C. F. Voegelin, ed. , , and , 249–62. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1979. The languages of South Texas and the Lower Rio Grande. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 355–89. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1986. Sapir's comparative method. New perspectives in language, culture, and personality: proceedings of the Edward Sapir centenary conference, ed. , , and , 191–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1987. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. Current Anthropology 28.656–7.
Goddard, Ives.1988. Pre-Cheyenne ∗y. In honor of Mary Haas: from the Haas festival conference on Native America linguistics, ed. , 345–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990a. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. Linguistics 28.557–8.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives.1990b. Algonquian linguistic change and reconstruction. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 99–114. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives and Lyle Campbell. 1994. The history and classification of American Indian languages: what are the implications for the peopling of the Americas. Method and theory for investigating the peopling of the Americas, ed. and , 189–207. (Center for the Study of the First Americans.) Corvallis: Oregon State University.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives and William W. Fitzhugh. 1979. A statement concerning America B.C. Man in the Northeast 17.166–72. (Also in Biblical Archeologist 41.85–8 [1978].)
1967. Sir William Jones and Père Cœurdoux: a philological footnote. Journal of the American Oriental Society 87.57–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golla, Victor. 1980. Some Yokuts–Maidun comparisons. American Indian and Indo-European studies: papers in honor of Madison S. Beeler, ed. , , and , 57–63. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1984. The Sapir–Kroeber correspondence. (Survey of California and Other Indian Languages, report 6.) Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
.1988. Review of Language in the Americas by Joseph H. Greenberg. American Anthropologist 90.434–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golla, Victor.1991. Comparative Penutian glosses, edited by Victor Golla, based on “comparative Penutian glosses of Sapir,” edited by (1964). The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. Ⅵ: American Indian languages, part 2, ed. , 299–315. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Golla, Victor.2000. Language families of North America. America past, America present: genes and languages in the Americas and beyond, ed. , 59–73. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Golovko, Evgenij. 1994. Mednyj Aleut or Copper Island Aleut: an Aleut-Russian mixed language. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 113–21. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
. 1970. Some questions on the classification of African languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 36.117–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Morris.1971. The strange case of Mbugu (Tanzania). Pidginization and creolization of languages, ed. , 243–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Evaluation of the Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Unpublished paper, University of Michigan.
.1995. The phonological composition of personal pronouns: implications for genetic hypotheses. Berkeley Linguistics Society 21.117–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984. Chamulas in the world of the sun: time and space in a Maya oral tradition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. Time's arrow, time's cycle: myth and metaphor in the discovery of geological time. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
1959. The position of the Polynesian languages within the Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) language family. (Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, memoir 16, supplement to International Journal of American Linguistics 25 [3].) Baltimore: Waverly Press.Google Scholar
Granberry, Julian. 1991a. Amazonian origins and affiliations of the Timucua language. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 195–242. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1991b. Was Ciguayo a West Indian Hokan language?International Journal of American Linguistics 57.514–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1890. De la famille linguistique Pano. Congrès International des Américanistes 7.438–49 [1888 meeting]. Berlin.Google Scholar
1999. New World Babel: languages and nations in early America.Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1934. Introduction to Semitic comparative linguistics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
1949a. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅰ: the Niger-Congo family. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1949b. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅱ: the position of Fulani. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.190–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1949c. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅲ: the position of Bantu. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 5.309–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950a. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅳ: Hamito-Semitic. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950b. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅴ: the Eastern Sudanic family. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.143–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950c. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅳ: the Click languages. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.223–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1950d. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅶ: smaller families; index of languages. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 6.388–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H..1953. Historical linguistics and unwritten languages. Anthropology today, ed. , 265–86. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
.1954. Studies in African linguistic classification Ⅷ: further remarks on method. Revisions and corrections. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10.405–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. Studies in African linguistic classification. Bradford, CT: Compass Publishing Company.Google Scholar
. 1957. Genetic relationship among languages. Essays in linguistics, Chapter 3, 35–45. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1960. The general classification of Central and South American languages. Men and cultures: selected papers of the 5th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 1956, ed. , 791–94. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1963. The languages of Africa. (Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics, publication 25, International Journal of American Linguistics 29.1.Ⅱ). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (2nd edition with additions and corrections, 1966. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.)Google Scholar
. 1969. Review of The problems in the classification of the African languages, by István Fodor. Language 45.427–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1971a. Nilo-Saharan and Meroitic. Sub-Saharan Africa, ed. and , 426–42. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1971b. The Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Linguistics in Oceania, ed. , 807–71. (Current Trends in Linguistics 8.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1973. The typological method. Diachronic, areal, and typological linguistics, ed. and , 149–93. (Current Trends in Linguistics 11.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.1977. Niger-Congo noun class markers: prefixes, suffixes, both or neither. Papers from the Eighth Conference on African Linguistics, ed. and , 97–104. (Studies in African Linguistics, supplement 7.)Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers? Universals of human language, ed. vol. 2, 47–82. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1979. The classification of American Indian languages. Papers of the 1978 Mid-America Linguistics Conference at Oklahoma, ed. , 7–22. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
. 1981a. Nilo-Saharan movable k- as a state Ⅲ article (with a Penutian parallel). Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 3.105–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1981b. The external relationships of the Uto-Aztecan languages. Paper presented at the Uto-Aztecan Conference. Tucson, AZ.
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1983. Some areal characteristics of African languages. Current approaches to African linguistics, vol. 1, ed. , 3–21. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
. 1989. Classification of American Indian languages: a reply to Campbell. Language 65.107–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.1990b. The prehistory of the Indo-European vowel system in comparative and typological perspective. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 77–136. Bochum: Brockmeyer. [Published also in 1989, Predystorija indoevropejskoj sistemy glasnyh v sravnitel'noj I tipologicheskoj perspektive. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 1989.4–31. See also in Reconstructing languages and cultures: abstracts and materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 47–50. Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1989.]
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1991. Some problems of Indo-European in historical perspective. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 125–40. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Linguistic typology and history: review of Linguistic diversity in space and time, by Johanna Nichols. Current Anthropology 34.503–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. On the Amerind affiliations of Zuni and Tonkawa. California Linguistic Notes 24.4–6.Google Scholar
. 1996a. In defense of Amerind. International Journal of American Linguistics 62.131–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1996b. The linguistic evidence. American beginnings: the prehistory and palaeoecology of Beringia, ed. , 525–36. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1997. Does Altaic exist? Indo-European, Nostratic and beyond: a Festschrift for Vitaly V. Shevoroshkin, ed. , , and , 88–93. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 1999. Are there mixed languages? Essays in poetics, literary history and linguitics, presented to Viacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, ed. , , , , , , , and , 626–33. Moscow: OGI.Google Scholar
. 2000a. Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2000b. The concept of proof in genetic linguistics. Reconstructing grammar: comparative linguistics and grammaticalization, ed. , 161–75. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2000c. From first and second person: the history of Amerind ∗k(i). Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 413–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2002. Indo-European and its closest relatives: the Eurasiatic language family, vol. 2: The lexicon. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.. 2005. Indo-Europeanist practice and American Indianist theory in linguistic classification. Genetic linguistics: essays on theory and method by Joseph H. Greenberg, ed. , 153–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 1992. Linguistic origins of Native Americans. Scientific American 267(5).94–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1953. Jicaque as a Hokan language. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.216–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1986. The settlement of the Americas: a comparison of the linguistic, dental, and genetic evidence. Current Anthropology 27.477–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1960 Early scientific interest in the American Indian: comparative linguistics. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 104.511–17.Google Scholar
(ed.). 1903. Linguistic survey of India, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅱ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and (eds.). 1904. Linguistic survey of India Ⅰ, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅲ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1909. Linguistic survey of India, vol. 3: Tibeto-Burman family, part Ⅰ. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1927. Linguistic survey of India Ⅰ, vol. 1, part Ⅰ, Introduction. Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
and . 1928. Linguistic survey of India, vol. Ⅰ, part Ⅱ, Comparative vocabulary.Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing. (Reprinted 1967, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.)Google Scholar
2004. Ethnologue: languages of the world. 14th edition. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington. (www.ethnologue.com.)Google Scholar
. 1642. De origine gentium Americanarum. Paris. (Trans. E. Goldsmid, 1884: On the origin of the native races of America, a dissertation. Edinburgh: Unwin Bross.)Google Scholar
. 1988. Linguistic evidence in support of the coastal route of earliest entry into the New World. Man 23.77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1895. Entwurf einer vergleichenden Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen nebst einem vergleichenden Wörter buch. Leipzig: Wilhelm Friedrich.Google Scholar
Guichard, Estienne. 1606. L'Harmonie etymologique des langues Hébraïque, Chaldaique, Syriaque – Greque – Latin, Françoise, Italienne, Espagnole – Alemande, Flamende, Anglaise, &c. Paris.
Güldemann, Tom and Rainer Vossen. 2000. Khoisan. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 99–122. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1990. Die Protokultur der Uralier und Indoeuropäer: eine Vergleichsstudie. Uralo-Indogermanica 2.142–8.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1996. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gurevich, Naomi. 1999. Phylumphile or phylumfoe? Examining Greenberg's method of mass comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 119–43. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.Google Scholar
. 1989. Kusunda – sinokavkazskie leksicheskie paralleli. Lingvisticheskaja rekonstrukcija I drevnejshaja istorija vostoka. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo ‘Nauka’.Google Scholar
. 1965. Ein lexikalischer Vergleich der Algonkin-Gulf- und Hoka-Subtiaba Sprachen. Orbis 14.160–215.Google Scholar
. 1966–7. Ein Vergleich der grammatischen Morpheme der Golf-Sprachen und der Hoka-Subtiaba-Sprachen. Orbis 15.511–37.Google Scholar
. 1968. Gulf and Hokan-Subtiaban: new lexical parallels. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1974. Der Hoka-Sprachstamm: eine Bestandsaufnahme des lexikalischen Beweismaterials. Orbis 23.170–215.Google Scholar
. 1794. Okoskodva tanító magyar nyelvmester [Hungarian grammar taught rationally], 2 vols. Cluj and Sibiu: Hochmeister.Google Scholar
Gyarmathi, Sámuel. 1799. Affinitas linguae Hungaricae cum linguis Fennicae originis grammatice demonstrata. Göttingen: Joann. Christian Dieterich. (Photolithic reproduction of 2nd edition 1968, ed. [Ural and Altaic Series 95.] Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton.) (English translation, see Hanzeli 1983.)
Gyula, János. 1974. Some eighteenth century antecedents of nineteenth century linguistics: the discovery of Finno-Ugrian. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 258–76. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Haarmann, Harald. 1979. Die Klassifikation der romanischen Sprachen in den Werken der Komparativisten aus der zweiten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts (Rüdiger, Hervás, Pallas). Wissenschaftsgeschichtliche Beiträge zur Erforschung indogermanischer, finnisch-ugrischer und kaukasischer Sprachern bei Pallas, ed. , 45–69. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R. 1941. The classification of Muskogean languages. Language, culture, and personality: essays in memory of Edward Sapir, ed. , , and , 41–56. Menasha, WI: Sapir Memorial Publication Fund.Google Scholar
. 1951. The Proto-Gulf word for water (with notes on Siouan-Yuchi). International Journal of American Linguistics 17.71–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. The Proto-Gulf word for land (with a note on Siouan-Yuchi). International Journal of American Linguistics 18.238–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1958a. Algonkian-Ritwan: the end of a controversy. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.159–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1958b. A new linguistic relationship in North America: Algonkian and the Gulf languages. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 14.231–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1960. Some genetic affiliations of Algonkian. Culture in history: essays in honor of Paul Radin, ed. , 977–92. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1964a. California Hokan. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 73–87. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1966. Wiyot–Yurok–Algonkian and problems of comparative Algonkian. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.101–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. Roger Williams’ sound shift: a study in Algonkian. To honor Roman Jakobson: essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, 1.816–32. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1969. Grammar or lexicon: the American Indian side of the question from Duponceau to Powell. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.239–55. (Reprinted 1978, with changed title: The problem of classifying American Indian languages: from Duponceau to Powell. Language, culture, and history: essays by Mary R. Haas, 130–63. Stanford: Stanford University Press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, Mary R.. 1976. The Northern California linguistic area. Hokan studies, ed. and , 347–59. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Consonant inventories as an areal feature of the New Guinea-Pacific region: testing Trudgill's hypotheses. Linguistic Typology 8.343–50.
. 1984. Wäre es schon an der Zeit, den Stammbaum zu fällen? Theorien über die gegenseitigen Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der finnisch-ugrischen Sprachen. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 4.1–4.
Häkkinen, Kaisa. 2001. Prehistoric Finno-Ugric culture in the light of historical lexicology. Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: linguistics and archaeological considerations, ed. Christian Carpelan, Asko Parpola, and Petteri Koskikallio, 169–86. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 242.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
. 1997. Duraljan vocabulary: lexical similarities in the major agglutinative languages. Kuopio: H. P. A. Hakola. (Kuopio University Printing Office.)Google Scholar
. 2000. 1000 Duraljan etyma: an extended study in the lexical similarities in the major agglutinative languages. Kuopio: H. P. A. Hakola. (Kuopio University Printing Office.)Google Scholar
. 1968. Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys [The structure and history of the Finnish language]. Helsinki: Otava.Google Scholar
. 1846. United States exploring expedition, during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy, vol. 6: Ethnography and philology. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
. 1890[1888]. Was America peopled from Polynesia?International Congress of Americanists 7.374–88. (1888 meeting.) Berlin.Google Scholar
. 1964. Classification of Northern Paman languages, Cape York Peninsula, Australia: a research report. Oceanic Linguistics 3.248–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 1976. Phonological developments in particular Northern Paman languages. Languages of Cape York, ed. , 7–40. (Research and Regional Studies 6.) Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
. 1997. Book review article: Campbell, Lyle (1997) American Indian Languages: the Historical Linguistics of Native America. Mother Tongue (journal) 3.145–58.Google Scholar
. 1776. A code of Gentoo laws, or, ordinations of the Pundits, from a Persian translation made from the original, written in the Shanscrit language. London: East India Company.Google Scholar
. 1778. A grammar of the Bengal language. Bengal: Hoogly. (Reprinted 1969, Menston, UK: Scholar Press.)Google Scholar
1951. Can Eskimo be related to Indo-European?International Journal of American Linguistics 17.217–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. On Maya-Chipayan. International Journal of American Linguistics 33.74–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. On the problem of Ainu and Indo-European. Eighth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 100–2. Tokyo.Google Scholar
. 1971. On Mayan-Araucanian comparative phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 37.156–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1975. On Zuni-Penutian consonants. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.310–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamp, Eric P.. 1976. On Eskimo-Aleut and Luoravetlan. Papers on Eskimo and Aleut linguistics, ed. , 81–92. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
. 1977. On some questions of areal linguistics. Berkeley Linguistics Society 3.279–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1983. Gyarmathi and his Affinitas. Grammatical proof of the affinity of the Hungarian language with languages of Fennic origin, translated, annotated, and introduced by , xi–lv. (Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics 15.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hardman[-de-Bautista], Martha J. 1985. Quechua and Aymara: languages in contact. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 617–43. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. Losing species, losing languages: connections between biological and linguistic diversity. Paper presented at the Symposium on Language Loss and Public Policy, University of New Mexico, July 1995.
Harms, Robert T. 1977. The Uralo-Yukaghir focus system: a problem in remote genetic relationship. Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann, ed. , 301–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1913. [Untitled note on the relationship of Yuman and Chumash.] American Anthropologist 15.716.Google Scholar
. 1917. [Untitled note on the relationship of Washo and Chumash.]American Anthropologist 19.154.Google Scholar
. 1928. Vocabulary of the Kiowa language. Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 84. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
. 1943. Hokan discovered in South America. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 33.334–44.Google Scholar
and . 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, Mark. 2003. Reconstruction of pronominals among the non-Pama-Nyungan languages. The non-Pama-Nyungan languages of northern Australia: comparative studies of the continent's most linguistically complex region, ed. , 475–513. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 1976. The Scandinavian languages: an introduction to their history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hayward, Richard J. 2000. Afroasiatic. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 74–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1978. Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1990. Verbal inflection and macro-subgroupings of Australian languages: search for conjugation markers in non-Pama-Nyungan. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 4003–17. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Review of Linguistic diversity in time and space, by Johanna Nichols. Anthropological Linguistics 36.92–6.Google Scholar
. 1997. Lost wax: abrupt replacement of key morphemes in Australian agreement complexes. Diachronica 14.197–232,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1988. Morphologische Übereinstimmungen in der uralischen, altaischen und einigen paläosibirischen Sprachen. Specimina Sibirica, ed. , 1.71–86.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1989. Applicability of exact methods in Nostratic research. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 30–9. Bochum: Brockmeier.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1992a. Bibliographia Nostratica 1960–1990 (a list of publications on, or relevant for Nostratic studies). Specimina Sibirica, ed. , vol. 4. Szombathely: Druckerei der Berzsenyi-Hochschule.Google Scholar
Hegedüs, Irén. 1992b. Reconstructing Nostratic morphology: derivational elements. Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind, ed. , 34–47. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1970. Eastern Sudanic subfamily – a linguistic relationship. (East Africa and Nile Valley Seminars, paper Ⅳ.) Nairobi: Department of History, University of Nairobi.Google Scholar
. 1972. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics in Africa. Journal of African Languages 2.7–20.Google Scholar
1976. A typology of African languages (based on the order of meaningful elements). Berlin: Reimer.
Heine, Bernd. 1992. African languages. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , 1.31–5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2001. Convergence and divergence in the development of African languages. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, ed. and , 393–411. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva 2002. On the evolution of grammatical forms. The transition to language, ed. , 376–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2000a. African languages: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Derek Nurse. 2000b. Introduction. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Helimskij, E. A. 1985. Samodijsko-tungusskije leksicheskije svjazi i ih etnoistoriceskije interpretaciji. Uralo-Altaistika arheologija, etnografija, jazyk, ed. , 206–13. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1987. A “new approach” to Nostratic comparison: review of Bomhard 1984. Journal of the American Oriental Society 107.97–100.Google Scholar
. 1772. Abhandlung über den Ursprung der Sprache. Berlin: C. F. Voss. (New edition 1966, Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam.)Google Scholar
. 1784. Catalogo delle lingue conosciute e notizia della loro affinità e diversità. Cesena: Gregorio Biasini all'Insegna oli Pallade.
. 1800–5. Catálogo de las lenguas de las naciones conocidas y numeracion, division, y clases de estas segun la diversidad de sus idiomas y dialectos. Madrid: Administracion del Real Arbitrio de Beneficiencia.Google Scholar
. 1972. Ethiopian Semitic: studies in classification. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
. 1935. Neue Finnisch-Ugrische Sprachen (Die Mundasprachen Indiens). Atti del Congresso di Linguistica tenuto in Roma, 275–84.Google Scholar
. 1968. Beothuk and Algonkian: evidence old and new. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. Beothuk consonant correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 37.244–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1978. Beothuk vocabularies: a comparative study. (Technical papers of the Newfoundland Museum 2.) St. John's, Newfoundland: Department of Tourism, Historic Resources Division.Google Scholar
Hewson, John. 1982. Beothuk and the Algonkian Northeast. Languages in Newfoundland and Labrador, ed. , 176–87. St. John's, Newfoundland: Department of Linguistics, Memorial University.Google Scholar
1978. Language contact systems and human adaptations. Journal of Anthropological Research 34.1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Linguistic models of early American history. Archaeology Southwest, Spring: 9. Tucson, AZ: Desert Archaeology Foundation.
Hill, Jane H.. 2001a. Language on the land: towards an anthropological dialectology. Archaeology, language, and history: essays on culture and ethnicity, ed. , 257–82. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, Greenwood Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2001b. Proto-Uto-Aztecan: a community of cultivators in central Mexico?American Anthropologist 103.913–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Jane H.. 2002. Proto-Uto-Aztecan cultivation and the northern devolution. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 331–40. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
1981. Savages and scientists: the Smithsonian Institution and the development of American anthropology, 1846–1910. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis. 1966[1950–1]. Commentaires sur la vie et l’œuvre de Rasmus Rask. Conferences de l'Institut de Linguistique de l'Université de Paris 10.143–57. (Reprinted 1966 in Portraits of linguists: a biographical source book for the history of Western linguistics, 1746–1963, ed. , 1.179–99. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.)Google Scholar
1993. SWALLOTALES: Chance and the “world etymology” MALIQ'A ‘swallow, throat.’Chicago Linguistic Society 29.215–38.Google Scholar
and . 1996. Language history, language change, and language relationship: an introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles. 1960. The origins of speech. Scientific American 208.88–96.
Hodge, Carleton T. 1983. Relating Afroasiatic to Indo-European. Studies in Chadic and Afroasiatic linguistics, ed. and , 33–50. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Hodge, Carleton T.. 1991. Indo-European and Afroasiatic. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 141–65. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hodge, Carleton T.. 1998. The implications of Laslakh for Nostratic. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 237–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1828. Notices of the Languages, literature and religion of the Bauddhas of Nepal and Bhot. Asiatik Researches 16.409–49.Google Scholar
1963. On the history of the comparative method. Anthropological Linguistics 5(1).1–11.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1974. Fallacies in the history of linguistics: notes on the appraisal of the nineteenth century. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 346–58. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1985. Sir William Jones and historiography. For Gordon H. Fairbanks, ed. and , 64–6. (Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication 20.) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1990a. Descent, perfection and the comparative method since Leibniz. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 119–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M.. 1990b. Is the “comparative” method general or family specific? Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 375–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoijer, Harry. 1954. Some problems of American Indian linguistic research. Papers from the Symposium on American Indian Linguistics, ed. , , , and , 3–12. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 10.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. History of the Paya sound system. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
. 1957. De quelques éléments communs a l’égyptien et aux langues dravidienne. Kemi 14.26–34.Google Scholar
. 1915. Zweihundert sumero-türkisch Wortvergleichungen als Grundlage zu einem neuen Kapitel der Sprachwissenschaft. Munich.Google Scholar
. 1982. Foundations of western linguistics: from the beginning to the end of the first millen[n]ium A. D.New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
. 1877. The science of languages: linguistics, philology, etymology. London: Chapman and Hall; Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.Google Scholar
. 1915. Die Lösung des hethitischen Problems. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 56.17–50.Google Scholar
. 1875. Über die Stellung des armenischen im Kreise der indogermanischen Sprachen. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 23.5–42.Google Scholar
. 1905. A comparative grammar of the Korean language and the Dravidian languages of India. Seoul: The Methodist Publishing House.Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhelm [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1822. Ueber das Entstehen der grammatischen Formen, und ihren Einfluss auf die Ideenentwicklung. Abhandlungen der königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 401–30. (Reprinted 1963: Wilhelm von Humboldt Werke in fünf Bänden, ed. and , 3.31–63. Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta.)Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1836. Ueber die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechtes. Berlin: Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften. (Reprinted 1963: Wilhelm von Humboldt Werke in fünf Bänden, ed. and , 3.368–756. Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta.) (English translation 1988, On language: the diversity of human language-structure and its influence on the mental development of mankind, trans. Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.)Google Scholar
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1836–9. Über die Kawi-Sprache auf der Insel Java, nebst einer Einleitung über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues (3 vols.). Berlin: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin.
Humboldt, [Friedrich] Wilhem [Christian Karl Ferdinand] von. 1903–36. Gesammelte Schriften, ed. . 17 vols. Berlin: Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
. 1975. Words for owls in North American Indian languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.237–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1955. Positional analysis of categories: a frame for reconstruction. Word 11.10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1956. Na-Dene and positional analysis of categories. American Anthropologist 58.624–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1957. Some Penutian elements and the Penutian hypothesis. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 13.69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. Genetic classification: retrospect and prospect. Anthropological Linguistics 1(2).50–66.Google Scholar
. 1961. Review of Tungusisch und Ketschua, by Karl Bouda. International Journal of American Linguistics 27.362–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1964a. Evidence for Penutian in lexical sets with initial ∗C- and ∗S-. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.213–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1964b. ‘Hail’ and ‘bead’: two Penutian etymologies. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 94–8. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1971. Morris Swadesh: from the first Yale School to world prehistory, appendix to The origin and diversification of language, by Morris Swadesh, ed. , 285–92. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H.. 1974. Speech and language: on the origins and foundations of inequality among speakers. Language as a human problem, ed. and , 45–71. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
. 1964. Lenguas indígenas de Bolivia. Cochabamba, Bolivia: Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Museo Arqueológico.Google Scholar
1963. Altajskije dental'nyje ∗t, ∗d, ∗δ. [Altaic dentals ∗t, ∗d, ∗δ]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 6.37–56.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1964a. Genezis indoevropejskix rjadov guttural'nyx v svete dannyx vneshego sravnenija [The genesis of the Indo-European series of gutturals in the light of external comparison]. Problemy sravnitel'noj grammatiki indoevropejskix jazykov, ed. and , 22–6. Moscow: Moscow State University.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1964b. Drevnejshije indoevropejsko-semitskije jazykovje kontakty [The earliest contacts of the Indo-European and Semitic languages]. Problemy indoevropejskogo jazykoznanija, ed. , 3–12. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1965a. Altajskije guttural'nyje ∗k’, ∗k, ∗g. [Altaic gutturals ∗k’, ∗k, ∗g]. Etimologija 1964.338–43.Google Scholar
. 1967a. Materialy k sravnitel'nomu slovarju nostraticheskix jazykov [Materials for the comparative dictionary of the Nostratic languages]. Etimologija 1965.321–96.Google Scholar
. 1967b. Rekonstrukcija ural'skogo vokalizma v svete dannyx vneshnego sravnenija [Reconstruction of Uralic vocalism in light of the data from external comparison]. Voprosy Finnougorskogo Jazykoznanija 4.95–100. Izhevsk.Google Scholar
. 1968a. Sootvetsvia smychnyx v nostraticheskix jazykax [Correspondences of stop sounds in the Nostratic languages]. Etimologija 1966.304–55.Google Scholar
. 1968b. Opyt sravnenija nostraticheskix jazykov [An experiment for the comparison of Nostratic languages]. Slavjanskoje jazykoznanije 6: Mezhdunarodnyj s'jezd slavistov (Praga, avgust 1968). Doklady sovjetskoj delegaciji, 407–26. Moscow.Google Scholar
. 1971a, 1976, 1984. Opyt sravnenija nostraticheskix jazykov (semitoxamitskij, kartvel'skij, indoevropejskij, ural'skij, dravidijskij, altajskij) [An experiment for the comparison of Nostratic languages (Semitic, Kartvelian, Indo-European, Uralic, Dravidian, Altaic)]. 3 vols. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 1971b. Lichnyje mestoimenija mi ‘ja’ i mä ‘my’ v nostraticheskom. [The personal pronouns mi ‘I’ and mä ‘we’] Issledovanija po slavjanskomu jazykoznaniju, 396–403. Moscow.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989a. The relationship of the Nostratic family languages: a probabilistic evaluation of the similarities in question [English translation of the introduction to Illich-Svitych 1971a]. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 111–21. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989b. Three entries from the Nostratic dictionary [Entries from vol. 1 Illich-Svitych 1971a]. [Translation of entries 8 and 32 was first published in General Linguistics 21.36–7.] Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 122–7. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989c. A Nostratic word list: reconstructions by V. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Jim Parkinson. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 128–62. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1989d. The early reconstructions of Nostratic by V. M. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Mark Kaiser. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 131–74. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Illich-Svitych, Vladislav M.. 1990. The Nostratic reconstructions of V. Illich-Svitych, translated and arranged by Mark Kaiser. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 138–67. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1926. La esfinge indiana: antiguos y nuevos aspectos del problema de los orígenes americanos. Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
. 1928[1926]. L'idioma Kichua nel sistema linguistico dell'Oceano Pacifico. International Congress of Americanists 22(2).495–509. Rome.Google Scholar
1986. Review of Illich-Svitych's dictionary of the Nostratic languages (vols. 1–2). Typology, relationship, and time, ed. and , 51–6, 57–65. Ann Arbor: Karoma. [English translation of Ivanov's review in Etimologija 1972.182–4.]Google Scholar
Jackson, Wayne. 1999. The Tower of Babel – Legend or History? (www.christiancourier.com/archives/babel.htm).
1958. Washo and Karok: an approach to comparative Hokan. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.195–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1976. Observations on the Yana stop series in relationship to problems of comparative Hokan phonology. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 129–48. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1979. Hokan inter-branch comparisons. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 545–91. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.. 1980. Inclusive/exclusive: a diffused pronominal category in native Western North America. Papers from the parasession on pronouns and anaphora, ed. and , 204–27. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William R., Jr.1990. Comments on The feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language, by Richard M. Bateman, Ives Goddard, Richard O'Grady, V. A. Fund, Rich Mooi, W. John Kress, and Peter Cannell (in CA 31.1–24). Unpublished manuscript. Reno, Nevada.
. 1993. Another look at Sapir's evidence for inclusion of Haida in Na-Dene. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, January 8, 1993, Los Angeles.
. 1994. Characterizing and evaluating evidence for distant genetic relationships. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Associations for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco.
. 1929. Remarques sur l’évolution phonologique du russe comparée à celle des autres langues slaves. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 2.) (Reprinted 1962 in Selected writings of Roman Jakobson, vol. I: Phonological studies. The Hague: Mouton.)Google Scholar
. 1931. Über die phonologischen Sprachbünde. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 4.234–40.Google Scholar
. 1938. Sur la théorie des affinités phonologiques entre les langues. Actes du quatrième congrès international de linguistes(tenu à Copenhague du 27 aoÛt au 1 septembre, 1936), 48–58. (Reprinted 1949, as an appendix to Principes de phonologie, by N. S. Troubetzkoy, 351–65. Paris: Klincksieck.)Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Why “mama” and “papa”? Perspectives in psychological theory, ed. and , 21–9. New York: International Universities Press. (Reprinted 1962 in Selected writings of Roman Jakobson, vol. 1: Phonological studies, 538–45. The Hague: Mouton.)Google Scholar
. 1814. Hermes Scythicus or the radical affinities of the Greek and Latin languages to the Gothic. Edinburgh: The University Press for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown.Google Scholar
Janda, Richard D. and Brian D. Joseph. 2003. On language, change, and language change – or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 3–180. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1977. Samoyed-Altaic contacts. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.123–9. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1981. Uralilaisen kantakielen sanastosta [On the vocabulary of Proto-Uralic]. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 77.219–74.Google Scholar
. 1983. On early Indo-European-Samoyed contacts. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 185. 115–27. Helsinki.Google Scholar
. 1989. Any chances for long-range comparisons in North Asia?Mother Tongue (newsletter) 6.28–30.Google Scholar
. 1996. Manchuria: an ethnic history. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 222.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
. 2002. Hittite and the Indo-European verb. New York: Oxford University Press.
. 1894. Progress in language, with special reference to English. London: S. Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Johnson, Steve. 1990. Social parameters of linguistic change in an unstratified Aboriginal society. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 419–33. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joki, Aulis J. 1963. Uralte Lehnwörter oder Zufälle? Congressus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. , 105–7. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1972. Sur la parenté des langues. Mélanges offerts à Aurélien Sauvageot pour son soixante-quinzième anniversaire, 117–24. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1973. Uralier und Indogermanen: die älteren Berührungen zwischen den uralischen und indogermanischen Sprachen. (Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 151.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Joki, Aulis J.. 1975. Affinität und Interferenz in den Sprachen des Nordeurasischen Areals. Congressus Quartus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, ed. , 71–86. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1976. Some Samoyed–Tunguz word comparisons. Tractata Altaica: Sinor Festschrift, 321–3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. 1977. Die Tungusen und ihre Kontakte mit anderen Völkern. Studia Orientalia 47.109–18.Google Scholar
. 1980. Die altaische Einwirkung auf die uralische Naturterminologie. Journal of Turkic Studies 4.57–60.Google Scholar
Joki, Aulis J.. 1988. Zur Geschichte der uralischen Sprachgemeinschaft unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Ostfinnischen [The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences], ed. , 575–95. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1989. Australian and the Mana languages. Oceanic Linguistics 28(2).181–96. [Compares Tamil, Warlpirri (sic), Sedang, and Finnish vocabulary using a “statistical” method, and concludes that Tamil, Warlpiri, and Finnish are related, but that Sedang (the control language) is not.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1798 [delivered February 2, 1786]. Third anniversary discourse: on the Hindus. Asiatick Researches 1.415–31.Google Scholar
. 1799a [delivered February 19, 1789]. Sixth anniversary discourse: on the Persians. Asiatick Researches 2.43–66. (Republished 1979c [1789]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 35–53.)Google Scholar
. 1799b [delivered February 25, 1790]. Seventh anniversary discourse: on the Chinese. Asiatick Researches 2.365–81.Google Scholar
. 1799c [delivered February 24, 1791]. Eighth anniversary discourse: on the borderers, mountaineers, and islanders of Asia. Asiatick Researches 3.1–20. (Republished 1979d [1791]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1–17.)
. 1799d [delivered February 23, 1792]. Ninth anniversary discourse: on the origin and families of nations. Asiatick Researches 3.418–35. (Republished 1979e [1792]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 479–92.)Google Scholar
. 1799e. The tenth anniversary discourse, delivered 28 February 1793: on Asiatic history, civil and natural. Asiatick Researches 4.ⅰ–ⅹⅹⅹⅴ. (Republished 1979f [1793]. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, ⅰ–ⅹⅹⅹⅴ.)Google Scholar
. 1979a [1787]. The fourth anniversary discourse, delivered 15th February 1787: on the Arabs. Asiatick Researches 1. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 5–17.Google Scholar
. 1979b [1788]. The fifth anniversary discourse, delivered 21st February 1788: on the Tartars. Asiatick Researches 2. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 18–34.Google Scholar
. 1979c [1789]. See Jones 1799a.
. 1979d [1791]. See Jones 1799c.
. 1979e [1792]. See Jones 1799d.
. 1979f [1793]. See Jones 1799e.
Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 2000. Chadic: a network of genetic and areal relationships. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description: Africa south of the Sahara, ed. , 90–8. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Justeson, John S. and Laurence D. Stephens. 1980. Chance cognation: a probabilistic model and decision procedure for historical inference. Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Rebecca Labrum, and Susan Shepherd, 37–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2004. Acquiring phonology is not acquiring inventories but contrasts: the loss of Turkic and Korean primary long vowels. Linguistic Typology 8.351–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Mark. 1989. Remarks on historical phonology: from Nostratic to Indo-European. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 51–6. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1990. Lexical archaisms in Slavic: from Nostratic to Common Slavic. (Bochum Publications in Evolutionary Cultural Semiotics 26.) Bochum: Brockmeyer.
and . 1986. Inheritance versus borrowing in Indo-European, Kartvelian and Semitic. Journal of Indo-European Studies 14.365–78.Google Scholar
and . 1987. On recent comparisons between language families: the case of Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic. General Linguistics 27.34–46.Google Scholar
Kaltz, Barbara. 1985. Christian Jacob Kraus’ review of Linguarum totius orbis vocabularia comparativa, ed. (St. Petersburg, 1787), introduction, translation and notes by Barbara Kaltz. Historiographia Linguistica 12. 229–60.Google Scholar
Kate, Lambert ten. See Ten Kate, Lambert.
Kaufman, Terrence. 1964a. Materiales lingüísticos para el estudio de las relaciones internas y externas de la familia de idiomas Mayanos. Desarrollo cultural de los Mayas, ed. E. Vogt, 81–136. (Special publication of the Seminario de Cultura Maya.) Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Kaufman, Terrence1964b. Evidence for the Macro-Mayan hypothesis. Unpublished paper.
. 1974. Idiomas de Mesoamérica. (Seminario de Integración Social Guatemalteca, publication 33.) Guatemala.Google Scholar
. 1976. Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Mayaland and associated areas of Meso-America. World Archaeology 8.101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1990. Language history in South America: what we know and how to know more. Amazonian linguistics: studies in Lowland South America languages, ed. , 13–67. Austin: University of Austin Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1994. The native languages of South America. Atlas of the world's languages, ed. Christopher Moseley and R. E. Asher, 46–76. London: Routledge.
Kaufman, Terrence S. and Willam M. Norman. 1984. An outline of proto-Cholan phonology, morphology, and vocabulary. Phoneticism in Mayan hieroglyphic writing, ed. and , 77–166. (Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, publication 9.) Albany: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State Unviversity of New York.Google Scholar
1977–8. Towards a comparative Japanese-Austronesian. Bulletin of the Nara University of Education 26.23–49 (part I), 27.1–24 (part Ⅱ).Google Scholar
1985. Review of Toward Proto-Nostratic: a new approach, by Allan Bomhard.Language 61.57–60.Google Scholar
Kaye, Allan S.. 1989. Review of Typology relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and . Journal of Afroasiatic Languages 2.222–6.Google Scholar
Kaye, Allan S.1999 The current state of Nostratic linguistics. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 357–58. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Achaeological Research.Google Scholar
1974. Uralic-Japanese linguistic relations: a preliminary investigation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
. 1980a. Japanese–Uralic language comparison: locating Japanese origins with the help of Samoyed, Finnish, Hungarian, etc.: an attempt. Hamburg: Tsurusaki Books.Google Scholar
. 1980b. Open monosyllabic words and possible word formation hereof in the Uralic languages and Japanese, with side-glances at the Altaic languages. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 52.42–72.Google Scholar
1880. On the relations of the Indo-Chinese and Inter-Oceanic races and languages. Journal of the Anthropological Institute 9.254–89.Google Scholar
, 1996. War before civilization: the myth of the peaceful savage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1957. Our elder brother Coyote. Harvard University Ph.D. dissertation. (Appendix: Uto-Aztecan lexemes with morphological functions having Rotuman or Polynesian parallels, 188–237.)
. 1856. On the probable origin of the American Indians, with particular reference to that of the Caribs. Journal of the Ethnological Society 4.226–67.Google Scholar
. 1886. De Fidjitaal vergeleken met hare verwanten in Indonesië en Polynesië. (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen 16.) Amsterdam: J. Müller.Google Scholar
. 1906. Taalvergelijkende verhandeling over het Ancityumsch. (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen n.s. 8.) Amsterdam.Google Scholar
. 1978. Araucanian genetic relationships. International Journal of American Linguistics 44.280–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980–1. South American relationships with North American Indian languages. Homenaje a Ambrosio Rabanales. Boletín de Filología 31.331–50. Santiago, Chile: Universidad de Chile.Google Scholar
. 1981a. Intercontinental linguistic connections. (Humanities Inaugural Lecture Series.) Irvine: University of California.Google Scholar
. 1983. Comparative methodology for distant relationships in North and South American languages. Language Sciences 5(2).133–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984. Polynesian and American linguistic connections. (Edward Sapir Monograph Series in Language, Culture, and Cognition 12; supplement to Forum Linguisticum 8:3.) Lake Bluff, IL: Jupiter Press.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1991a. Language change in South American Indian languages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, Mary Ritchie. 1991b. A résumé of comparative studies in South American Indian languages. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 3–19. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1978. Fuegian and central South American language relationships. International Congress of Americanists 52(4).635–46. Paris.Google Scholar
1975. An etymological study of similarities between Korean and the Uralic languages. Congressus Tertius Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 1.105–10. Tallin: Valgus.Google Scholar
1976. The relationship between the Korean and Japanese languages. Hangeul173–4.657–66.Google Scholar
. 1992. A critique of Muskogean, “Gulf,” and Yukian material in Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.447–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimball, Geoffrey. 1994. Comparative difficulties of the “Gulf” languages. Proceedings of the meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas and the Hokan-Penutian workshop, ed. , 31–9. (SCOIL, report 8.) Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1974. From paleogrammarians to Neogrammarians. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 331–45. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
. 1975. Indogermanisch und Uralisch – die erste Synthese. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 41.176–80.Google Scholar
. 1826. Mémoires relatifs à l'Asie, contenant des recherches historiques, géographiques et philosophiques. 2 vols.Paris: Société Asiatique de Paris.Google Scholar
. 1977. Topics in historical Chumash grammar. University of California, Berkeley PhD dissertation.
1902. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache. Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J. 1997. Comparative linguistics and Australian prehistory. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 27–43. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J.. 2003. The case for Pama-Nyungan: evidence from inflectional morphology. Proceedings of the ⅩⅦ International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and . CD-ROM. Prague: Matfyzpress, Matematicko-Fyzikální Fakulty, University Karlovi.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold J.. 2004. A methodological history of Australian linguistic classification. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. , and , 17–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1854. Polyglotta Africana, or a comparative vocabulary of nearly three hundred words and phrases in more than one hundred distinct African languages. London: Church Missionary House.Google Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1983. Editor's foreword. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel, and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , ⅸ–ⅹⅵ. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1990a. Jacob Grimm's position in the development of linguistics as a science. The Grimm brothers and the Germanic past, ed. , 5–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Koerner, Konrad. 1990b. Wilhelm von Humboldt and North American ethnolinguistics: Boas (1894) to Hymes (1961). Historiographia Linguistica 17.111–38.CrossRef
Koerner, Konrad. 1990c. The place of Friedrich Schlegel in the development of historical-comparative linguistics. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 239–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köhler, Oswin. 1975. Geschichte und Probleme der Gliederung der Sprachen Afrikas. Die Völker Afrikas und ihre traditionellen Kulturen, ed. , 135–373. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
. 1991. Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie. (Österreichsche Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 566.) Vienna: Der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
1980. Eskimo as a member of the Uralo-Altaic family: some structural similarities. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 7.216–24. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
1929. Ostasiatische Zahlwörter in süd-amerikanischen Sprachen. International Archiv für Ethnographie 30.77–118. Leiden.Google Scholar
1975. On the Nostratic language family hypothesis. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 77.109–15. Budapest.Google Scholar
1980. Nilal: über die Urverwandtschaft des Hamito-Semitischen, Indogermanischen, Uralischen und Altaischen. Helsinki: Akateeminen Kirjakauppa.Google Scholar
. 1950. Das Venetische: seine Stellung im Kreise der verwandten Sprachen. (Abhandlungen der Sitzungsberichte der Heidelbergische Akademie der Wissenschaft.) Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
. 1787. Rezension des Allgemeinen vergleichenden Wörterbuchs von Pallas. Allgemeinen Literatur-Zeitung235–7. (Reprinted in Arens 1969.136–45; English translation and notes by Barbara Kaltz, 1985: Historiographia Linguistica 12.229–60.)Google Scholar
1964. Proto-Athapaskan-Eyak and the problem of Na-Dene I: the phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.118–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1965. Proto-Athapaskan-Eyak and the problem of Na-Dene Ⅱ: morphology. International Journal of American Linguistics 31.18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1969. On the classification in the Athapascan, Eyak, and Tlingit verb. Supplement to International Journal of American Linguistics 35(4), part Ⅱ. (Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, memoir 24.) Bloomington.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1973a. Eskimo-Aleut. Linguistics in North America, ed. , 796–902. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1973b. Na-Dene. Linguistics in North America, ed. , 903–78. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1979. Na-Dene and Eskimo-Aleut. The Languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 803–901. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1986. Edward Sapir and Athabaskan linguistics. New perspectives in language, culture, and personality: proceedings of the Edward Sapir Centenary Conference (Ottawa, 1–3 Oct., 1984), ed. , , and , 147–90. (Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 41.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krauss, Michael E. and Victor K. Golla. 1981. Northern Athabaskan languages. Handbook of North American Indians, ed. , vol. 6: Subarctic, ed. , 67–85. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
1990a. The Altaic component of a Nostratic dictionary. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 11.30–41.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael E.. 1990b. A new contribution to Japanese-Korean phonological comparison. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 62.138–40.
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1969. Comparative Dravidian studies. Linguistics in South Asia, ed. , 309–33. (Current Trends in Linguistics 5.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1985. An overview of comparative Dravidian studies since Current Trends 5 (1969). For Gordon H. Fairbanks, ed. and , 212–31. (Oceanic Linguistics, special publication 20.) Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 1994. Dravidian languages. International encyclopedia of linguistics, ed. , vol. 1, 337–8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 2001. Comparative Dravidian linguistics: current perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 1915. Serian, Tequestlatecan, and Hokan. University of California publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 11.279–90.Google Scholar
Kroeber, Alfred L.. 1940. Conclusions: the present status of Americanistic problems. The Maya and their neighbors: essays on Middle American anthropology and archaeology, ed. , , , , and , 460–87. New York: D. Appleton-Century. (Reissued 1970. New York: Dover.)Google Scholar
1993. Language, history, and identity: ethnolinguistic studies of the Arizona Tewa. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
1983. Concerning the problem of Uralic affinity with Indo-European. Lingua Posnaniensis 26.99–104.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1992–2000. Suomen sanojen alkuperä: etymologinen sanakirja [The origin of Finnish words: etymological dictionary]. 3 vols. (Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 556; Kotimaisten Kielten Tutkimuksen Julkasuja 62.) Jyväskylä: Gummerus.Google Scholar
. 1924. Preliminary results of researches into the original relationship between the Nipponese and the Malay-Polynesian languages. Journal of the Polynesian Society 33.244–80.Google Scholar
. 1643. Notae ad Dissertationem Hugonis Grotii. Amsterdam/Paris: apud viduam Gvilielmi Pele.Google Scholar
. 1877. Amenische Studien. (Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaft zu Göttingen 22.) Göttingen: Dieterich.Google Scholar
. 1974. Comparative Hokan-Coahuiltecan studies: a survey and appraisal. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langdon, Margaret. 1979. Some thoughts on Hokan with particular reference to Pomoan and Yuman. The languages of Native America: an historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 593–649. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2001.The role of migration and language contact in the development of the Sino-Tibetan language family. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 225–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1982. Some remarks on the hypothesis of an Uralo-Dravidian genetic linguistic relationship. Fenno-Ugrica Suecana 5.169–84.Google Scholar
. 1844. Die Brahui und ihre Sprache. Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 5.337–409.Google Scholar
Latham, Robert Gordon. 1843[1847]. On the general affinities of the languages of the Oceanic blacks. Narrative of the surveying voyage of H. M. S. Fly, commanded by Captain F. P. Blackwood, R. N., in Torres Strait, New Guinea, and other islands of the eastern archipelago, during the years 1842–1846; together with an excursion into the interior of the eastern part of Java, appendix Ⅳ, 313–20. ed. . London: T. & W. Boone.Google Scholar
1986. Correspondence entre l’égyptien et l'indo-européen. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique 80.5–12.Google Scholar
Law, Vivian. 1990. Language and its students: the history of linguistics. An encyclopaedia of language, ed. , 784–842. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
and . 1977. Haida dictionary. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar
Laycock, Donald A. 1976. A history of Papuan linguistic research: Eastern New Guinea area. New Guinea area languages and language study, vol. 1: Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene, ed. , 43–115. (Pacific Linguistics C-38.) Sydney: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, Steven A. 2002. Conflict and language dispersal: issues and a New World example. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 357–65. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1958. A comparative study of Manchu and Korean. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 30.104–20.Google Scholar
. 1748. En Lappisk grammatica, efter den dialect, som bruges af Field-Lapperne udi Porsanger-Fjorden, samt et register over de udi samme grammatica anførte obervationers indhold. Copenhagen: Gottman Friederich Risel.Google Scholar
. 1768–81. Lexicon Lapponicum bipartitum: Lapponico-Danica-Latinum & Danico-Latino-Lappinicum, cum indice Latino. Vol. 1 Trondheim, vol. 2 Copenhagen.Google Scholar
. 1991. Evidence for a Northern Northwest Coast language area: promiscuous number marking and periphrastic possessive constructions in Haida, Eyak, and Aleut. International Journal of American Linguistics 57.158–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1903. Comparative philology: a comparison between Semitic and American languages. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1994. DCM [distant comparison method] vs. CM [comparative method]. California Linguistic Notes 24.1–3.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1692. Conjecture de Monsr. Leibniz sur l'origine du mot blason. Journal des Sçavans 20.513–15. (In 1768, Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 6.2:185. Geneva.)
. 1697. Dissertatio de Origine Germanorum.
. 1709. Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain.
. 1710a. Brevis designatio meditationum de originibus gentium, ductis potissimum ex indicio linguarum [Brief exposition of thoughts concerning the origins of nations, principally drawn from the evidence of languages]. Miscellanea Berolinensia, 1–16.Google Scholar
. 1710b. Dissertatio de origine Germanorum, seu brevis disquisitio, utros incolarum Germaniae citerioris aut Scandicae ex alteris initio profectos verisimilius sit judicandum.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1717. Leibnitii collectanea etymologica illustrationi linguarum, veteris Celticae, Germanicae, Gallicae, aliarumque inservientia, ed. . Hanover. (In 1768, Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii. […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 6.s:6–232. Geneva.)Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1768. De originibus gentium. Gothofredi Guillelmi Leibnitii […] opera omnia, ed. Louis Dutens, 4.186–98. Geneva.
. 1984. Duponceau, Humboldt et Pott: la place structurale des concepts de “polysynthèse” et d'incorporation.”Amerindia 6.65–77.Google Scholar
. 1880. Nubische Grammatik, mit einer Einleitung über die Völker und Sprachen Afrika's. Berlin: Wilhelm Hertz.Google Scholar
. 1945. The influence of Cushitic on the Semitic languages of Ethiopia: a problem of substratum. Word 1.59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1952. The influence of Sidamo on the Ethiopic languages of Gurage. Language 28.63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. The Indo-European and Semitic languages. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
. 1975. The Indo-European and Semitic languages: a reply to Oswald Szemerényi. General Linguistics 15.197–205.Google Scholar
Levin, Saul. 1977. “Something stolen”: a Semitic participle and an Indo-European neuter substantive. Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: Festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann, ed. , 317–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Levin, Saul1991. Full and other key words shared by Indo-European and Semitic. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 166–77. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Semitic and Indo-European Ⅱ: comparative morphology, syntax and phonetics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1979. Haida and Na-Dene: a new look at the evidence. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.157–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1928. Review of Dravidisch und Uralisch, by Otto Schrader. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung145.Google Scholar
1976. Japanese and Korean: the problems and history of a linguistic comparison. Journal of Japanese Studies 2.389–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1707. Archaeologia Britannica, giving some account additional to what has been hitherto published, of the languages, histories and customs of the original inhabitants of Great Britain: from collections and observations in travels through Wales, Cornwall, Bas-Bretagne, Ireland and Scotland. Oxford: Printed at the Theater for the Author. (Reprinted 1969, English linguistics 1500–1800, no. 136, a collection of fascimile reprints selected and edited by . Menston, UK: The Scolar Press.)Google Scholar
. 1976. Sino-Tai. Computational analysis of Asian and African languages 3.39–48. Tokyo.Google Scholar
. 1808. Bemerkungen über die Sprachen der südafrikanischen wilden Völkerstämme, nebst einem kleinem Wörterverzeichnisse aus den gebräuchlichsten Dialecten der Hottentotten und Kaffern. Weimar: Allgemeines Archiv für Ethnographie und Linguistik.
. 1991. Indianersprachen Vergleich und Klassifizierung: eine ethnolinguistische Einführung in die Grundlagen und Methoden. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1690. An essay concerning human understanding. [Recent version: ed. . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.]Google Scholar
1859. Ethnology of the Indo-Pacific Islands. The affiliation of the Tibeto-Burman, Mon-Anna. Papuanasian and Malayo-Polynesian pronouns and definitives, as varieties of the ancient Himalayo-Polynesian system; and the relation of that system to the Dravido-Australian. Journal of the Indian Archipelago and Eastern Asia, n.s. 3.1.Google Scholar
. 1755. Rossijskaja grammatika [Russian grammar]. (Reprinted 1952: Polnoe sobranie socinenij [Complete collection of works]. Moscow: Nauka. Facsimile edition 1972, Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.)Google Scholar
. 1968. Classification of South American Indian languages. (Reference Series 7.) Los Angeles: University of California, Latin American Center.Google Scholar
. 1702. Dissertatio de harmonia linguae aethiopicae cum ceteris orientalibus. Frankfurt am Main: Johannis David Zunner and Nicolas Wilhem Helvig.Google Scholar
. 1830[1830–3]. Principles of geology, being an attempt to explain the former changes of the earth's surface by reference to causes now in operation. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
and . 2000. On the origin of internal structure of word forms. Science 288.527–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and . 1997. Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture. London and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.Google Scholar
. 1993a. Is Tonkawa Na-Dene? A case study of the validity of the Greenbergian classification. California Linguistic Notes 24.21–5.Google Scholar
. 1994. Clusters or affricates in Kartvelian and Nostratic?Diachronica 11.157–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannheim, Bruce. 1985. Contact and Quechua-external genetic relationships. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. Harriet E. Manelis Klein and Louisa R. Stark, 644–88. Austin: University of Texas Press.
. 1986. Comentario a Willem Adelaar, “La relación quechua-aru: perspectivas para la separación del léxico.” Revista Andina 4.413–18.Google Scholar
Markey, Thomas L. and Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin. 1986. Foreword. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and trans. and , ⅶ–ⅹⅼⅳ. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
1974. More on the Uralo-Dravidian relationship: comparison of Uralic and Dravidian etymological vocabularies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
. 1980. Uralic-Dravidian hypothesis: what evidence? Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 2.245–50. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
. 1818[1816]. Letter on “Congolese” languages.
. 1834. On the Polynesian or East-Insular languages. Miscellaneous works of William Marsden, 1–114. London: Parbury, Allen, and Co.Google Scholar
and . 1951. Kleinschmidt centennial Ⅴ: Eskimo Aleut correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 17.209–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1919. Cáractère indo-Européen de la langue hittite. (Vedenskapsselskapets Skrifter, Ⅱ. Historisk-Filosofisk Klasse 2.) Christiania: Jacob Dywad.Google Scholar
and . 1990. Deixis pronominal en el chimane del oriente boliviana. International Journal of American Linguistics 56.574–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. Grammatical elements relating Korean to Japanese. Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences 9.405–7.Google Scholar
. 1975. Problems in establishing the prehistoric relationships of Korean and Japanese. Proceedings of the International Symposium Commemorating the Thirtieth Anniversary of Korean Liberation, 159–72. Seoul: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Martin, Samuel E.. 1990. Morphological clues to the relationship of Japanese and Korean. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 483–509. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Samuel E.. 1991. Recent research on the relationship of Japanese and Korean. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 269–92. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Mason, J. Alden. 1950. The languages of South American Indians. Handbook of South American Indians, ed. , 6.157–317. (Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 143.) Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1976. Austro-Thai and Sino-Tibetan: an examination of body-part contact relationships. Genetic relationship, diffusion, and typological similarities of East and Southeast Asian languages, ed. , 256–89. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.Google Scholar
. 1991. Sino-Tibetan linguistics: present state and future prospects. Annual Review of Anthropology 20.469–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: system and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 135.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Matteson, Esther. 1972. Towards Proto Amerindian. Comparative studies in Amerindian languages, ed. , 21–89. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 127.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1963. Animal species and evolution. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1974b. Elamite and Dravidian: the morphological evidence. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 3.343–58.Google Scholar
. 1975. Elamite and Dravidian: further evidence of relationship. Current Anthropology 16.105–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: the evidence and implications. (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 71, part 3.) Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
. 2001. Review of Linguistic diversity, by Daniel Nettle. Language in Society 30.97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1964. Northern Hokan (B) and (C): a comparison of Eastern Pomo and Yana. University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.126–44. Berkeley: University of California Press.
and 1995. Linguistics, genetics and archaeology: internal and external evidence in the Amerind controversy. Transactions of the Philological Society 93.125–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1942. Una posible síntesis lingüística macro-mayance. Mayas y Olmecas, 37–8. Tuxtla Gutiérrez: Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología, Reunión de Mesa Redonda sobre problemas antropológicos de México y Centro América.Google Scholar
. 1948/1949. Observations sur quelque caractères communs des langues dravidiennes et des langues altaïques. Actes du ⅩⅩe/ⅩⅪ Congrès International des Orientalistes, 207–9. Paris.Google Scholar
. 1914. Le problème de la parenté des langues. Rivista di Scienza 15.35:3. (Reprinted in Meillet 1948[1921]: 76–101.)Google Scholar
. 1925. La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Paris: Champion. (English translation 1967: The comparative method in historical linguistics. Paris: Champion.)Google Scholar
. 1966[1954/1925]. La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
. 1899. Grundriss einer Lautlehre der Bantusprachen. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. (English translation: Introduction to the phonology of the Bantu languages, by N. J. van Warmelo, 1932.)Google Scholar
. 1905. Probleme der afrikanischen Linguistik. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 19.77–90.Google Scholar
. 1906. Grundzüge einer vergleichenden Grammatik der Bantusprachen. Berlin. (2nd edition 1948. Hamburg: Reimer.)Google Scholar
. 1897. Hondureñismos: vocabulario de los provincialismos de Honduras. 2nd edition. Tegucigalpa: Tipografía Nacional.Google Scholar
. 1963. Zum ural-altaischen -u-/-w- des Medio-Passives Aspekts im Türkischen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 35.422–4.Google Scholar
. 1975. Altajischen Studien, Ⅱ: Japanisch und Altajisch. (Abhandlungen für Kunde des Morgenlandes 41.3.) Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Menges, Karl H.. 1989. East-Nostratic: Altaic and Dravidian. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 59–62. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Menges, Karl H.. 1990. Altaic and East Nostratic. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 26–32. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Menovshchikov, Gregory A. 1968. Aleutskij jazyk. Mongol'skie, tunguso-man'czurskie i paleoaziatskie jazyki, ed. . (Jazyki narodov SSSR series, ed. et al., vol. 5.) Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Messerschmidt, D. G. 1962–77. Forschungsreise durch Siberien 1720–1727, ed. , , , and . 5 vols. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
. 1953b. Abraham Mylius on historical linguistics. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 68.535–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalf, George J.. 1974. The Indo-European hypothesis in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 233–57. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Micelli, Luisa. 2004. Pama-Nyungan as a genetic entity. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 61–8. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1998. Current issues in linguistic taxonomy. Annual Review of Anthropology 27.451–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Truman. 1914. Two alleged Algonquian languages of California. American Anthropologist 16.361–7. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 553–7. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
. 1915. Rejoinder [to Edward Sapir's “Algonkin languages of California: a reply”]. American Anthropologist 17.194–8.Google Scholar
. 1998. Random coincidence in mass comparison: preliminary analysis of the Nilo-Saharan lexicon. Nordic Journal of African Studies 7.63–92.Google Scholar
. 1960. Similarities between the Asiatic and American Indian languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 26.265–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1967. Etudes typologiques sur les langues indigènes de l'amérique / Typological studies of the American Indian languages. (Oddzial w Krakowie, Prace Komisji Orientalistycznej, 7.) Crakow: Polska Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
. 1968. The Japanese reflexes of Proto-Altaic ∗D-, ∗Ʒ- and č-. Journal of the American Oriental Society 88.753–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971b. The Old Japanese reflexes of Proto-Altaic ∗l2. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 42.127–47.Google Scholar
. 1974. Sino-Tibetan: inspection of a conspectus. Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.195–209.
. 1975. Japanese-Altaic lexical evidence and Proto-Turkic “zetacism-sigmatism.” Researches in Altaic languages (PIAC 14), 157–72. Budapest.Google Scholar
. 1976. Reply to Doerfer. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 126.53–76.Google Scholar
. 1977. The Altaic accusatives in the light of Old and Middle Korean. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.157–69.Google Scholar
. 1979a. Japanese, Altaic, and Indo-European. Journal of Indo-European Studies 7.307–13.Google Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1981. Altaic origins of the Japanese verb classes. Bono Homini Donum: essays in historical linguistics in memory of J. Alexander Kerns, ed. and , 845–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1983. Review of Nihongo to tamirugo [Japanese and Tamil], by Ono Susumu, and Nihongo wa doko kara kita ka [Where did Japanese come from], by Fujiwara Akira. Language 59.207–11.
. 1985. Altaic connections of the Old Japanese negatives. Central Asiatic Journal 29.35–84.Google Scholar
. 1986. Tamil and Japanese?Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49.557–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1991. Genetic connections among the Altaic languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 293–327. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1971. The death of language or serendipity among the Shoshoni. Anthropological Linguistics 13.114–20.
1984. The classification of the Uto-Aztecan languages based on lexical evidence. International Journal of American Linguistics 50.1–24.CrossRef
and . 1992. Social networks and social class: toward an integrated sociolinguistic model. Language in Society 21.1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1990. Studies of North American Indian languages. Annual Review of Anthropology 9.309–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1911. Vergleichendes indogermanisch-semitisches Wörterbuch. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
[]. 1773–92. Of the origin and progress of language. Edinburgh: J. Balfour; London: T. Caldwell.Google Scholar
[]. 1779–99. Antient metaphysics. 6 vols. Edinburgh: Bell and Bradfute; London: T. Caldwell.Google Scholar
1994. Putting anthropology back together again: the ethnogenetic critique of cladistic theory. American Anthropologist 96. 925–48.
1891. The Déné languages, considered in themselves and in their relations to non-American idioms. Transactions of the Canadian Institute 1.170–212. Toronto.Google Scholar
. 1907. The unity of speech among the Northern and Southern Déné. American Anthropologist 9.721–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, A[nna]. See Davies, Anna Morpurgo.
, , , and . 1964. An introduction to the comparative grammar of the Semitic languages: phonology and morphology. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Mous, Maarten. 1994. Ma'a or Mbugu. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 175–200. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar
Mous, Maarten. 2003. Loss of linguistic diversity in Africa. Language death and language maintenance: theoretical, practical and descriptive approaches, ed. and , 157–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter. 1989. On the causes of accelerated linguistic change in the Pacific area. Language change: contributions to the study of its causes, ed. and , 137–72. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1981. Einige hamito-semitische und baskische Wortstämme. Berliner Afrikanische Vorträge, 103–18. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
1968. Sir William Jones: a study in eighteenth-century British attitudes to India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muller, Jean-Claude. 1984. Saumise, Monboddo, Adelung: vers la grammaire comparée. Matériaux pour une histoire des theories linguistiques, ed. , , , , and , 389–96. Lille: Université de Lille Ⅲ.Google Scholar
. 1986. Early stages of language comparison from Sassetti to Sir William Jones (1786). Kratylos 31.1–31.Google Scholar
Müller, Max. 1854. Letter to Chevalier Bunsen, on the classification of the Turanian languages. Printed in Christianity and mankind, ed. . London.Google Scholar
. 1855. The languages of the seat of war in the East: with a survey of three families of languages, Semitic, Arian, and Turanian. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
. 1861[1866/99]. Lectures on the science of language. (2nd edition; last revision 1899.) New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
. 1862–5. Lectures on the science of language: first and second series. 5th edition. New York: Charles Scribner. (Reprinted 1965[1861]. Delhi: Munshi Ram Manohar Lal.)Google Scholar
. 1544. Cosmographei oder Beschreibung aller Länder, Herrschaften und fürnemesten Stetten, des gantzen Erdbodens. Basil: Sebastianum Henricpetri.Google Scholar
1966. Mongolisch und Japanisch – ein Versuch zum lexikalisches Vergleich. Collectanea Mongolica, 153–6. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
. 1975. Altaische Komponente der japanischen Sprache. Researches in Altaic Languages (PI ac 14), 181–8. Budapest.Google Scholar
1959. Cross-language parallels in parental kin terms. Anthropological Linguistics 1.9:1–5.Google Scholar
. 1823. History of the European language, or researches into the affinities of the Teutonic, Greek, Celtic, Sclavonic, and Indian nations. Edinburgh: Archibald Constable & Co.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1998. Sir William Jones, 1746–1794: a commemoration. Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of University College, Oxford.Google Scholar
1989. Comments on Nostratic reconstructions of Illich-Svitych (revised edition). Mother Tongue (newsletter) 9.1–15.Google Scholar
Musayev, Kenesbay. 1996. Dravidian–Turkic–Sanskrit lexical comparisons. Symbolae Turcologicae: studies in honour of Lars Johanson on his sixtieth birthday, ed. , , and , 169–74. (Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, Transactions 6.) Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. 1612. Lingua Belgica: de linguae illius communitate tum cum plerisque alijs, tum presertim cum Latinâ, Graecâ, Persicâ; deque communitatis illius causis; tum de linguae illius origine & latissimâ per nationes quamplurimas diffusione; ut & de ejus prestantiâ. Quâ tum occasione, hic simul quaedam tractantur consideratu non indigna, ad linguas in universum omnes pertinentia.Google Scholar
. 2000a. The Aynu protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots (revised and enlarged edition of The Aynu language and the Indo-European protolanguage.) Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku Center.Google Scholar
. 2000b. The Japanese protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots. Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku Center.Google Scholar
. 2001. The Japanese protolanguage and the Indo-European protolanguage: a search for common roots (revised and enlarged edition of The origin of Japanese and English languages). Tokyo: Shinpusha.Google Scholar
. 1996. Language diversity in West Africa: an ecological approach. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 15.403–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1999b. Linguistic diversity of the Americas can be reconciled with a recent colonization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96 (March).3325–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2000. Vanishing voices: the extinction of the world's languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Newman, Paul. 1993. Greenberg's American Indian classification: a report on the controversy. Historical linguistics 1991: papers from the tenth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 229–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1995. On being right: Greenberg's African linguistic classification and the methodological principles which underlie it. Bloomington, IN: Institute for the Study of Nigerian Languages and Cultures, African Studies Program, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Newman, Paul. 2000. Comparative linguistics. African languages: an introduction, ed. and , 259–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1964. Comparison of Zuni and California Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1977. The Salish independent pronoun system. International Journal of American Linguistics 43.302–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1979a. A history of the Salish possessive and subject forms. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.207–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1979b. The Salish object forms. International Journal of American Linguistics 45.299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980. Functional changes in the Salish pronominal system. International Journal of American Linguistics 46.155–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2000. On the reconstruction of “Proto-World” word order. The evolutionary emergence of language: social function and the origins of linguistic form, ed. , , and , 372–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1971. Diminutive consonant symbolism in Western North America. Language 47.826–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990a. Linguistic diversity and the first settlement of the New World. Language 66.475–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990b. More on human phylogeny and linguistic history. Current Anthropology 31.313–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1992. Linguistic diversity in time and space. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1993. Ergativity and linguistic geography. Australian Journal of Linguistics 13. 39–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1994. Language at 40,000 BC. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, Feb. 21, 1994.Google Scholar
.1995a. The spread of language around the Pacific Rim. Evolutionary Anthropology 3(6).206–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1995b. Diachronically stable structural features. Historical linguistics 1993: selected papers from the eleventh International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 337–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1996a. The comparative method as heuristic. The comparative method revised, ed. and , 39–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
.1996b. The geography of language origins. Berkeley Linguistics Society 22.267–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1997a. Modeling ancient population structures and movement in linguistics. Annual Review of Anthropology 26.359–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1997b. Sprung from two common sources: Sahul as a linguistic area. Archaeology and linguistics: aboriginal Australia in global perspective, ed. and , 135–68. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1997c. The epicenter of the Indo-European linguistic spread. Archaeology and language, vol. 1: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 122–48. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1998a. The Eurasian spread zone and the Indo-European dispersal. Archaeology and language, vol. Ⅱ: Archaeological data and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 220–66. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.1998b. The origins and dispersal of languages: linguistic evidence. The origin and diversification of language, ed. and , 127–70. San Francisco, CA: California Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna.2003. Diversity and stability in language. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. and , 283–310. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert. 1992. Utilisation des structurations lexicales pour la recherche comparative: circularité, et enroulement en songhay et touareg. Komparative Afrikanistik: Sprach-, geschichts- und literaturwissenschaftliche Aufsätze zu Ehren von Hans G. Mukarovsky anlässlich seines 70. Geburtstags, ed. , , and , 257–67. (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien, vol. 61. Beiträge zur Afrikanistik, vol. 44.) Vienna: Institut für Afrikanistik.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert.1995. Parentés du songhay: répondre aux questions, questionner les réponses. Actes du Cinquième Colloque de Linguistique Nilo-Saharienne/Proceedings of the fifth Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, 24–29 aoÛt 1992/August 24th–29th, 1992, Université de Nice – Sophia Antipolis. Nilo-Saharan linguistic analyses and documentation (NISA), vol. 10, ed. and , 391–411. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
.1996. Problems of grouping and subgrouping: the question of Songhay. (Papers from the sixth Nilo-Saharan Conference, Santa Monica.) Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 45.27–52.Google Scholar
Nicolaï, Robert.2002. Du songhay, du nilo-saharien et des problèmes récurrents. Lexical and structural diffusion:interplay of internal and external factors of language development in the West African Sahel, ed. and (CORPUS, Les Cahiers 1), 111–214. Nice: Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis.Google Scholar
.2003. La force des choses, ou, L’épreuve “nilo-saharienne”: questions sur les reconstructions archéologiques et l’évolution des langues. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika (SUGIA), supplement 13. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L. 1989. Eyak-Athapascan – North Caucasian sound correspondences. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 63–5. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L.1991. Sino-Caucasian languages in America. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 42–66. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Sergei L. and O. Mudrak. 1989. Gilyak and Chukchi-Kamchatkan as Almosan Keresiouan languages: lexical evidence. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 67–87. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1991. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics: the case of Mwiini. Berkeley Linguistic Society 17.177–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurse, Derek.1994. South meets North: Ilwana = Bantu + Cushitic on Kenya's Tana River. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, ed. and , 213–22. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar
.1997. The contributions of linguistics to the study of history in Africa. Journal of African History 38.359–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Toward a Proto-Pama-Nyungan stem list, part I: sets J1–J25. Oceanic Linguistics 37.209–33.Google Scholar
O'Grady, Geoffrey and Ken Hale. 2004. The coherence and distinctiveness of the Pama-Nyungan language family within the Australian linguistic phylum. Australian languages: classification and the comparative method, ed. and , 69–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1966. Languages of the world, fascicle 6: Indo-Pacific. Anthropological Linguistics 8.1–199.Google Scholar
. 1980. Sound correspondences between Tamil and Japanese. (Gakushuin Series of Treatises 8.) Tokyo: Gakushuin Educational Foundation.Google Scholar
.1983. A study of the relationship between Tamil and Japanese. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 12.366–96.Google Scholar
Ohno, Susumu.1987. Morpheme correspondences between Japanese and Tamil. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and , 2499–503. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
1964. Mayan affinities with Chipaya of Bolivia Ⅰ: correspondences. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.313–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1965. Mayan affinities with Chipaya of Bolivia Ⅱ: cognates. International Journal of American Linguistics 31.29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1977. Proto Jicaque-Subtiaba-Tequistlateco: a comparative reconstruction. Two studies in Middle American comparative linguistics, 1–52. Arlington: University of Texas at Arlington Press, Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Orël, Vladimir and Sergei Starostin. 1990. Etruscan as an East Caucasian language. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the first International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 60–6. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
and . 1995. Hamito-Semitic etymological dictionary: materials for a reconstruction. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
and . 1878. Morphologische Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
. 2005. Empires of the word: a language history of the world. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
. 1907. Zur Frage von der Urverwandtschaft der finnisch-ugrischen und indoeuropäischen Sprachen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 7.13–31.Google Scholar
. 1926. Glosario comparado Quičua-Maori. International Congress of Americanists 22(2).517–25. Rome.Google Scholar
. 1786–9. Linguarum totius orbis vocabularia comparativa. (Reprinted 1997, Hamburg: Buske.)Google Scholar
1978. Parent language: genetic or contact relationship?Indogermanische Forschungen 82.50–60.Google Scholar
.1986. New contributions to “Proto-Nostratic” [review of Bomhard 1984]. Indogermanische Forschungen 90.305–17.Google Scholar
1969. Comparative Quechua phonology and grammar Ⅳ: the evolution of Quechua A. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics 1(9).149–204.Google Scholar
. 1982. The genetic relationship of the Ainu language. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
. 1907. Nuevos estudios sobre lenguas americanas: origen del kechua y del aimará/Nouvelles études sur les langues Américaines: origine du kechua et de l-aimará. Leipzig: Brockhaus.Google Scholar
. 1920[1898]. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. (5th edition; 1st 1880; 1970 printing.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
. 1885. Die Inschriften nordetruskischen Alphabets. (Altitalische Forschungen, 1.) Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.Google Scholar
.1891. Die Veneter und ihre Schriftdenkmäler. (Altitalische Forschungen, 3.) Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.1995. Voorhoeve and the Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis. Tales from a concave world: liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve, ed. , and , 83–122. Leiden: Leiden University, Projects Division, Department of Languages and Cultures of South-East Asia and Oceania.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.1998. The Trans New Guinea Phylum hypothesis: a reassessment. Perspectives on the Bird's Head of Irian Jaya, Indonesia, ed. , , and , 655–89. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew.2001. The Proto Trans New Guinea obstruents: arguments from top-down reconstruction. The boy from Bundaberg: studies in Melanesian linguistics in honour of Tom Dutton, ed. , and , 261–300. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
.2004. Recent research on the historical relationships of the Papuan languages, or, what can linguistics add to the stories of archaeology and other disciplines about the prehistory of Melanesia? Paper presented at the 2004 annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Podium Symposium: The second garden of Eden – Island Melanesian genetic diversity.Google Scholar
and . 1993. Austronesian linguistics and culture history. Annual Review of Anthropology 22.425–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1933. Zur Frage nach Urverwandtschaft des Indoeuropäischen und dem Ugrofinnischen. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 67.308–25. Helsinki.Google Scholar
.1935. Il problema delle parentele tra grandi gruppi linguistici. Atti del Ⅲ Congresso Internazionale dei Linguisti, 328–33. Florence: Felice de Monier.Google Scholar
.1962[1931]. The discovery of language: linguistic science in the nineteenth century. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger.1983[1916]. A glance at the history of linguistics with particular regard to the historical study of phonology, translated from Danish by Caroline C. Henriksen, ed. . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Percival, W. Keith. 1986a. The reception of Hebrew in sixteenth-century Europe: impact of the Cabbala. The history of linguistics in Spain, ed. and , 21–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percival, W. Keith.1986b. Renaissance linguistics: the old and the new. Studies in the history of western linguistics, in honour of R. H. Robins, ed. and , 56–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. There is no correlation between the size of a community speaking a language and the size of the phonological inventory of that language. Linguistic Typology 8.376–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Manfred. 1974. Einleitung. Mithridates de differentiis linguarum tum veterum tum quae hodie apud diversas nationes in toto orbe terrarum in usu sunt, von Konrad Gessner [1555], ed. . Darmstadt: Scientia Verlag Aalen.Google Scholar
1982. La racine en indoeuropéen et en chamito-sémitique et leurs perspectives comparatives. AIWN 42.381–402. (Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico, Sezione Linguistica, Naples.)Google Scholar
. 1998. The case against global etymologies: evidence from Algonquian. International Journal of American Linguistics 64.141–7. [Published also 1995: On the nature of the Algonquian evidence for global etymologies. Mother Tongue (newsletter) 24. 50–4.]Google Scholar
(ed.) 1833. Sebastian Rasles [Sébastien Râle], A dictionary of the Abnaki language of North America. [With Supplementary notes and observations on Father Rasles’ Dictionary of the Abnaki language, by John Pickering.]Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Science 1.375–565.Google Scholar
.1966. Genetic comparisons and Hanis, Miluk, Alsea, Siuslaw, and Takelma. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.379–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. Versuch einer historischen Lautlehre der Kharia-Sprache. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1964. On the historical position of Tlingit. International Journal of American Linguistics 30.155–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinnow, Heinz-Jürgen.1966. A comparative study of the verb in the Munda languages. Studies in comparative Austroasiatic linguistics, ed. , 96–193. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1968. Genetic relationship vs. borrowing in Na-Dene. International Journal of American Linguistics 34.204–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1976. Geschichte der Na-Dene Forschung. (Indiana, supplement 5.) Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag.Google Scholar
.1985. Das Haida als Na-Dene-Sprache. 4 parts. (Abhandlungen der Völkerkundlichen Arbeitsgemeinschaft, vols. 43, 44, 45, and 46.) Nortorf, Germany.Google Scholar
.1990. Die Na-Dene-Sprachen in Lichte der Greenberg-Klassifikation. (Abhandlungen der Völkerkundlichen Arbeitsgemeinschaft, vol. 64.) Nortorf, Germany.
and . 1958. Comparative survey of California Penutian. International Journal of American Linguistics 24.174–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1905. Über die Sprache der Hottentotten und Buschmänner. Mitteil- ungen des Seminars für orientalische Sprache 8.104–76.Google Scholar
Pons, Jean François. 1743. [Letter to Du Halde.] Lettres edifiantes et curieuses, 224–6.
. 1960. Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen, vol. 1: Vergleichende Lautlehre. (Porta Linguarum Orientalium 4.) Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1965. Introduction to Altaic linguistics. (Ural-Altaische Bibliotek 14.) Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
.1972. Ein vergleichendes Wörterbuch der nostratischen Sprachen: review of Illich-Svitych 1971. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 39.365–9.Google Scholar
.1973. Über einige Verbalstammbildungssuffixe in den altaischen Sprachen. Orientalia Suecana 21.119–41.Google Scholar
.1974. Remarks on comparative study of the vocabulary of the Altaic languages. Ural-altaische Jahrbücher 46.120–34.Google Scholar
.1977. The problem of Uralic and Altaic affinity. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 158.221–5.Google Scholar
.1979. Comparative dictionary of the Nostratic languages: review of Illich-Svitych 1976. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 43.222–5.Google Scholar
1988. On methodological problems of the genetic classification of the Afrasian (Hamito-Semitic) languages. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Ethiopian Studies, 99–103. Moscow: USSR Academy of Sciences Africa Institute.Google Scholar
1992. The Salinan and Yurumanguí data in Language in the Americas. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.202–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1992. Indo-European practice and historical methodology. Berkeley Linguistics Society 18.214–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1870. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen, unter Berücksichtigung ihrer Hauptformen. 2nd edition. Detmold: Meyer.Google Scholar
Powellm, John Wesley. 1891. Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico. Seventh annual report, Bureau of American Ethnology, 1–142. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. [Reprinted 1966 in Franz Boas, Introduction to handbook of American Indian languages; J. W. Powell, Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico, ed. . Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.]Google Scholar
1826. Researches into the physical history of mankind. London: Sherwood, Gibert & Piper.Google Scholar
.1837. Comparative vocabularies of languages of western and central Africa, northward of the Equator. Researches into the physical history of mankind. 3rd edition, vol. 2. London: Sherwood.Google Scholar
1978. Vergleichende Syntax der ural-altaischen (turanischen) Sprachen. (Biblioteca Nostratica 4.) Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
. 1776. Histoire de Loango, Kakongo, et autres royaumes d'Afrique. Paris: C. P. Berton & N. Crapart.Google Scholar
Puhvel, Jaan. 1991. Whence the Hittite: whither the Jonesian vision? Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 51–66. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1980. Sprachgeschichtliche Arealien im sibirischen Sprachraum. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 7.251–6. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
1964. The Andaman Islanders. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe. [First published 1922, London: Cambridge University Press.]Google Scholar
. 1916. On the relationship of Huave and Mixe. American Anthropologist 18.411–21. (Also Journal de La Société des Américanistes [1919] 11.489–99 [Paris].)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1919. The genetic relationship of the North American Indian languages. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 14.489–502.Google Scholar
.1924. The relationship of Maya to Zoque-Huave. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 16.317–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1956–9. Etymological vocabulary of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Ainu, part Ⅰ (Monumenta Nipponica, monograph 16) Tokyo: Sophia University; parts Ⅱ and Ⅲ privately printed, New Haven (1959).Google Scholar
1978. Are the Korean and Japanese languages related? The current state of theorizing. Korean Studies Forum 4.23–33.Google Scholar
. 1903. Über die Konjugation des Khalkha-Mongolischen. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 19.) Helsinki: Finnische Litteraturgesellschaft.Google Scholar
.1924. A comparison of the Altaic languages with Japanese. Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan 1. Tokyo.Google Scholar
.1946–7. The relation of the Altaic languages to other language groups. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 53.1–13.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf John.1952. Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft, II: Formenlehre, ed. . (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 104.2.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf John.1957. Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft, I: Lautlehre, ed. . (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 104.1.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
1981. Review of The Caddoan, Iroquoian, and Siouan languages, by Wallace Chafe. International Journal of American Linguistics 47.172–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1992. Review of Language in the Americas, by Joseph Greenberg. International Journal of American Linguistics 58.324–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1998. Siouan, Yuchi, and the question of grammatical evidence for genetic relationship. Presidential address, presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Jan. 10, 1998.Google Scholar
. 1954–5. [Edited a version of A. D. Campbell's A Grammar of the Teloogoo language.]
. 1955. Uralaltaische Wortforschungen. (Studia Orientalia Edidit Societas Orientalis Fennica, 18.3:1–57.) Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Kirjapaino.Google Scholar
.1965. Über die ural-altaische Sprachverwandtschaft. Sitzungsberichte der Finnischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1963 161–72. Helsinki.Google Scholar
1818. Undersøgelse om det gamle nordiske eller Islandiske sprogs oprindelse. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. [English translation by Niels Ege, 1993, Investigations of the origin of the Old Norse or Icelandic language. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 26.) Copenhagen: The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen.]Google Scholar
1820a. The endings and forms of the Danish grammar explained by derivation from the Icelandic language. See Diderichsen 1974.
Rask, Rasmus K..1820b. See Thalbitzer 1922.
Rask, Rasmus K..1832–7[1820]. Udvalgte afhandlinger. 3 vols., ed. Louis Hjelmslev. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.
.1834. Den skytiske sproget. Samlede tildels forhen utrykte afhandlinger, vol. Ⅰ. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
[]. 1650. A generall grammar for the ready attaining of the Ebrew, Samaritan, Calde, Syriac, Arabic and Ethiopic languages. London: W. Wilson.Google Scholar
. 1926. A comparative study of the Melanesian Island languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986–8. Uralisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. 7 fascicles. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Rédei, Károly.1988. Die ältesten indogermanischen Lehnwörter der uralischen Sprachen. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 638–64. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1988. Holzwege der nostratischen Sprachwissenschaft. Akten der österreichischen Linguistentagung 13.275–85. Graz.Google Scholar
Renan, Ernest. 1855. Histoire générale et système comparé des langues sémitiques, Part 1. Paris: Imprimerie impériale. (Reprinted in uvres complètes de Ernest Renan, vol. 8, ed. , 129–589. Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1947–61.)Google Scholar
.1878. Histoire générale et système comparé des langues sémitiques. 5th edition. Paris: Ancienne Maison Michel Lévy Frères.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin. 1973. Problems in the general correlations of archaeological and linguistic strata in prehistoric Greece: the model of autochthonous origin. Bronze Age migrations in the Aegean, ed. R. A. Crossland and A. Birchall, 263–76. London: Duckworth.
Renfrew, Colin.1987. Archaeology and language: the puzzle of Indo-European origins. London: Jonathan Cape.
Renfrew, Colin.1988. Author's précis. Current Anthropology 29, 437–41.
Renfrew, Colin.1989. Models of change in language and archaeology. Transactions of the Philological Society 87.103–55.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.1991. Before Babel: speculations on the origins of linguistic diversity. Cambridge Archeological Journal 1.3–23.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.1992. World languages and human dispersals: a minimalist view. Transition to modernity, essays on power, wealth and belief, ed. and , 11–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.1996. Language families and the spread of farming. The origins and spread of agriculture and pastoralism in Eurasia, ed. , 70–92. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.1997. World linguistic diversity and farming dispersals. Archaeology and language, vol. Ⅰ: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 82–90. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin.2000a. At the edge of knowability: towards a prehistory of languages. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10.7–34.CrossRef
Renfrew, Colin.(ed.) 2000b. America past, America present: genes and languages in the Americas and beyond. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Renfrew, Colin.2002. “The emerging synthesis”: the archaeogenetics of farming/language dispersals and other spread zones. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 3–16. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and (eds.), 2002. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.), 2000. Time depth in historical linguistics. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and . 1999. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin R. 1973. Otomanguean isoglosses. Diachronic, areal, and typological linguistics, ed. , 295–316. (Current Trends in Linguistics 11.) Mouton: The Hague.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin R..1976. Comparative Otomanguean phonology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
.1977. Classification of the Otomanguean languages and the position of Tlapanec. Two studies in Middle American comparative linguistics, 53–108. Arlington: University of Texas at Arlington Press, Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Rensch, Karl H. 1996. Forster's Polynesian linguistics. Observations made during a voyage round the world by Johann Reinhold Forster, ed. , , and , 383–401. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Reuchlin, Johannes. 1506. De rudimentis Hebraicis libri tres. Pforzheim: Thomas Anselm. (Reprinted 1974, Hildesheim: Georg Olms.)
1985. Dravidian and Indo-European: the neglected hypothesis. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 14.316–19.Google Scholar
Rhodes, Richard. 1977. French Cree – a case of borrowing. Actes du huitième congrès des Algonquinistes, ed. , 6–25. Ottawa: Carleton University.Google Scholar
. 2004. Language contact, phonemic inventories, and the Athapaskan language family. Linguistic Typology 8.321–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1966. On Cayuse-Molala relatability. International Journal of American Linguistics 32.369–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1969. The Waiilatpuan problem: more on Cayuse-Molala relatability. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 3.68–146.Google Scholar
1992. On calculating the factor of chance in language comparison. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 82(1).1–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1993. A reply to Professor Greenberg. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137.91–109.Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald A., Jr..1994. Multilateral comparison: an empirical Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
.1995b. The “Mana” languages and the three-language program. Oceanic Linguistics 34.99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringe, Donald A., Jr..1998. Probabilistic evidence for Indo-Uralic. Nostratic: sifting the evidence, ed. and , 153–97. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
.1999. How hard is it to match CVC-roots?Transactions of the Philological Society 97.213–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2002. Indo-European computational cladistics. Transactions of the Philological Society 100.59–129.
Rivet, Paul. 1924. Langues americaines. Les langues du monde, ed. and , 597–712. (Collection linguistique 16.) Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
.1925. Les Australiens en Amérique. Journal de la Société Linguistique de Paris 26.23–63.Google Scholar
.1926. Les Malayo-Polynésiaines en Amérique. Journal de la Société des Americanistes de Paris 18.141–278.Google Scholar
.1942. Un dialecte Hoka Colombien: le Yurumangí. Journal de la Société des Américanistes 34.1–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1943. La influencia karib en Colombia. Revista del Instituto Etnológico Nacional 1(1).55–93. Bogotá.Google Scholar
.1957[1943]. Les origines de l'homme Américain. 8th edition. Paris: Gallimard. (Spanish translation 1960[1943], Los orígenes del hombre americano. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura.)Google Scholar
Rivet, Paul, and Chestmír Loukotka. 1952. Langues de l'Amérique du Sud et des Antilles. Les langues du monde, ed. Antoine Meillet and Marcel Cohen, 1099–1161. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
1992. The history of tense/aspect/mood/voice in the Mayan verbal complex. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1769. The history of the reign of the Emperor Charles Ⅴ, with a view of the progress of society in Europe, from the subversion of the Roman Empire to the beginning of the sixteenth century. 3 vols. London: W. Strahan, T. Cadell and J. Balfour.Google Scholar
1987. The life and work of Sir William Jones. Transactions of the Philological Society 1987.1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, Robert H..1990. Leibniz and Wilhelm von Humboldt and the history of comparative linguistics. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and . 85–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1980a. Lord Monboddo, Sanskrit and comparative linguistics. Journal of the American Oriental Society 100.12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocher, Rosane.1980b. Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, Sir William Jones, and comparative Indo-European linguistics. Recherches de linguistique: hommages a Maurice Leroy, ed. , , and , 173–80. Bruxelles; Editions de l'université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon. 1985a. Evidence for Tupi-Carib relationships. South American Indian languages: Retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 371–404. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon.1985b. The present state of the study of Brazilian Indian languages. South American Indian languages: retrospect and prospect, ed. and , 405–39. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
.1986. Linguas brasileiras: para o conhecimento das linguas indígenas. São Paulo: Edições Loyola.Google Scholar
Róna-Tas, András. 1974. Obshcheje nasledije ili zaimstvovanije? (K probleme rodstva altajskih jazykov). [Common inheritance or borrowing? (On the problem of the relationship of Altaic languages.)] Voprosy Jazykoznanija 1972.31–45.
Róna-Tas, András.1983. De hypothesi Uralo-altaica. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ugrienne. Helsinki. (Reprinted in Róna-Tas 1986:234–61.)
.1985. Verwandtschaftsartige Verbindung – kritische Bemerkung über die ural-altaische Hypothese. Congressus Sextus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, 2.93. Syktyvkar.Google Scholar
.1986. Language and history: contributions to comparative altaistics. (Studia Uralo-Altaica 25.) Szeged: Universitatis Szegediensis de Attila József.Google Scholar
Róna-Tas, András.1988. Turkic influence on the Uralic languages. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 742–80. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
1973. Swadesh's Keres-Caddo comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 39.189–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. An investigation of the Korean material in Poppe's Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen. Central Asiatic Journal 30.78–91.Google Scholar
Rosenfelder, Mark. 1999. Deriving Proto-World with tools you probably have at home. www.zompist.com/proto.html
1966. Zur indo-uralischen Frage. Instituto Orientali di Napoli, Annali, Sezione Linguistica 7.155–79.Google Scholar
Rosiello, Luigi. 1987. Turgot's “étymologie” and modern linguistics. Speculative grammar, universal grammar and philosophical analysis of language, ed. and , 75–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1988. Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of western Melanesia. (Pacific Linguistics C-98.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1995a. Some current issues in Austronesian linguistics. Comparative Austronesian dictionary: an introduction to Austronesian studies, part 1, fascicle 1, ed. , 45–120. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ross, Malcolm D..1995b. The great Papuan pronoun hunt: recalibrating our sights. Tales from a concave world: liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve, ed. , and , 139–68. Leiden: Leiden University, Projects Division, Department of Languages and Cultures of South-East Asia and Oceania.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1996. Contact-induced change and the comparative method: cases from Papua New Guinea. The Comparative method reviewed: regularity and irregularity in language change, ed. and , 180–217. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1997. Social networks and kinds of speech community events. Archaeology and language, vol. 1: Theoretical and methodological orientations, ed. and , 209–61. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm D..1998. Sequencing and dating linguistic events in Oceania: the linguistics/archaeology interface. Archaeology and language, vol. 2: Correlating archaeological and linguistic hypotheses, ed. and , 141–73. London: Routledge.
Ross, Malcolm D..2001. Is there an East Papuan phylum? Evidence from pronouns. The boy from Bundaberg: studies in Melanesian linguistics in honour of Tom Dutton, ed. , and , 301–21. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
1991. Hard words. Scientific American (April), 139–47.
1846. Ueber den Genetiv in den dekhanischen Sprachen. Jahresbericht der Deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft. 209–17. Leipzig: Brockhaus und Avenarius.
Rudbeck, Olof [Olaus], Jr. 1717. Specimen usus linguae Gothicae, in eruendis atque illustrandis obscurissimis quibusvis sacrae scipturae locis: Addita analogia linguae Gothicae cum Sinica, nec non Finnonicae cum Ungraica. Upsala.
. 1987. Some Klamath-Sahaptian grammatical correspondences. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 12.67–83.Google Scholar
1974. Sound changes separating Siouan-Yuchi from Iroquois-Caddoan. International Journal of American Linguistics 40.117–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1987a. A guide to the world's languages, vol. 1: Classification. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
.1989a. Phylogenetic relations of Native American languages. Paper presented at the Symposium on Prehistoric Mongoloid Dispersals, Sapporo, Japan, Dec. 18–19.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1989b. Nostratic-Amerind cognates. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 75–83. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Ruhlen, Merritt.1990. An overview of genetic classification. The evolution of human languages. Proceedings of the workshop on the evolution of human languages, August 1989, Santa Fe, NM. SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity 10.1–22, ed. and . Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1991. The Amerind phylum and the prehistory of the New World. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 328–50. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1992. An overview of genetic classification. The evolution of human languages, ed. John A. Hawkins and Murray Gell-Mann, 159–89. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
.1994a. On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
.1994b. The origin of language: tracing the evolution of the Mother Tongue. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994c. On the origin of the Amerind pronominal pattern. In honor of William S-Y. Wang: interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, ed. and , 405–7. Taipei: Pyramid Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994d. Is Algonquian Amerind? On the origin of languages: studies in linguistic taxonomy, by , 111–26. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.1994e. Linguistic evidence for the peopling of the Americas. Method and theory for investigating the peopling of the Americas, ed. and , 177–88. (Center for the Study of the First Americans.) Corvallis: Oregon State University. [Also in 1994. Journal of Biogeography 17.131–43.]Google Scholar
.1998. The origin of Na-Dene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 95.13994–6. [Possibly publisher error on author; perhaps Joseph H. Greenberg was the true author.]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruhlen, Merritt.2000a. Why kaka and aya? Functional approaches to language, culture, and cognition: papers in honor of Sydney B. Lamb, ed. , , and , 521–5. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, Merritt.2000b. Some unanswered linguistic questions. America past, America present, ed. , 163–75. Cambridge: McDonald Institute.
Ryan, Patrick. 2001. Proto-language monosyllables: with their principal meanings. www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/ProtoLanguage-Monosyllables.htm
1981. Ob-Ugrian elements in the adverbs, verbal prefixes and postpositions of California Wintuan. Congressus Quintus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 6.237–43. Turku: Suomen Kielen Seura.Google Scholar
.1984. The discovery of California, breaking the silence of the Siberia-to-America migrators. The Californians 2(2).9–20 (Nov./Dec.)Google Scholar
.1996. The discovery of California: a Cal–Ugrian comparative study. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. (International Society for Trans-Oceanic Research, Los Angeles.)Google Scholar
Sajnovics, Jo[h]annis [János]. 1770. Demonstratio idioma Ungarorum et Lapponum idem esse. Copenhagen: Typis Collegi societatis Iesu; 2nd edition 1770, Trnava (Tyrnau), Hungary. (Photolithic reproduction of 2nd edition 1968, ed. (Ural and Altaic Series 91.) Bloomington: Indiana University; The Hague: Mouton.) (German translation 1972, by M. Ehlers. Wiesbaden: Harassowitz.)Google Scholar
[Saumaise, Claude]. 1640. Preface to Tabula cebetis Graece, Arabice, Latine. Item aurea carmina Pythagorae cum Paraphrasi Arabica, by Johann Elichman. Leiden: Iohannis Maire.Google Scholar
.1643. De hellenistica commentarius, controversiam de lingua hellenistica decidens et plenissime pertractans originem ac dialectos graecae linguae. Leiden: Elseviers.Google Scholar
Salminen, Tapani.2001. The rise of the Finno-Ugric language family. Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: linguistic and archaeological considerations, ed. Christian Carpelan, Asko Parpola, and Petteri Koskikallio, 385–96. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 242.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
Salmons, Joe. 1992a. A look at the data for a global etymology: ∗tik “finger.” Explanation in historical linguistics, ed. and , 207–28. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 84.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
.1992b. Theory and practice of global etymology. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Linguists, vol 1.153–5. Quebec.Google Scholar
.1997. “Global etymology” as pre-Copernican linguistics. California Linguistic Notes 25(1).5–7.Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka. 1988. Historical phonology of the Uralic languages. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. , 478–554. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
(), [ ()]. 1585/7. Minerva seu de causis linguae latinae. Salamanca: Ioannes & Andreas Renaut fratres.Google Scholar
. 1998. Eastern and Southern African Khoisan: evaluating claims of distant linguistics relationship. (Research in Khoisan Studies 14.) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Sanmugadas, Arunasalam. 1989. Japanese-Tamil relationship: supporting evidences for Susumu Ohno's hypothesis. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Linguists, ed. , , and , 1445–7. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Santa Fe Institute. 2000. Annual research Report.www.santafe.edu/sfi/organization/ annualReport/00/activities/evolution.html.
. 1907–8. Herder's “Ursprung der Sprache”. Modern Philology 5.109–42. (Reprinted 1984 in Historiographia Linguistica 11.355–88.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1913a. Wiyot and Yurok, Algonkin languages of California. American Anthropologist 15.617–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1913b, 1915–19. Southern Paiute and Nahuatl: a study in Uto-Aztecan. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris, part 1, 10.379–425, part 2, 11.433–88. (Part 2 also printed 1915 American Anthropologist 17.98–120.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1915a. Algonkin languages of California: a reply. American Anthropologist 17.188–94. (Reprinted 1990, The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 485–9. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1915b. The Na-Dene languages, a preliminary report. American Anthropologist 17.534–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1917. The position of Yana in the Hokan stock. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 13.1–34.Google Scholar
.1918. Review of Moseteno vocabulary and treatises, by Benigno Bibolotti. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.183–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1920. The Hokan and Coahuiltecan languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 1.280–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1921a. A bird's-eye view of American languages north of Mexico. Science 54.408. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 5: American Indian languages, part 1, ed. , 93–4. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1921b. Language: an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace. (Reissued 1949, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1921c. A characteristic Penutian form of stem. International Journal of American Linguistics 2.58–67. (Reprinted 1990 in The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 6: American Indian languages, part 2, ed. , 263–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
.1923. The Algonkin affinity of Yurok and Wiyot kinship terms. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 15.37–74.Google Scholar
.1925a. The Hokan affinity of Subtiaba in Nicaragua. American Anthropologist 27.402–35, 491–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1929a. Central and North American languages. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 14th edition. 5.138–41. (Reprinted 1990, The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 1: American Indian languages, ed. , 95–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1929b. The status of linguistics as a science. Language 5.207–14. (Reprinted 1949, Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture, and personality, ed. , 160–6. Berkeley: University of California Press.)Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward.1990[n.d.]. Lecture notes (and map). The collected works of Edward Sapir, vol. 5: American Indian languages, part 1, ed. William Bright, 84–91. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1986. A southwest Ethiopian language area and its cultural background. The Fergusonian impact, vol. 1: From phonology to society, ed. , 327–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sassetti, Pilippo. 1585. See Marcucci 1855.
Saumaise. 1643. See Salmasius.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. See de Saussure, Ferdinand.
. 1924. Eskimo et Ouralien. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 16.279–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1930. Recherches sur le vocabulaire des langues ouralo-altaïques. (Collection linguistique publiée par la Société de linguistique de Paris 30.) Paris.Google Scholar
.1953. Caractère ouraloïde du verbe eskimo. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris 49.107–21.Google Scholar
. 1610[1599]. Diatriba de Europaeorum linguis, 119–22; Diatriba de varia literarum aliquot pronuntiatione, 127–32. Opuscula varia antehac non edita. Paris.Google Scholar
Schadeberg, Thilo C. 1981. The classification of the Kadugli language group. Nilo-Saharan: proceedings of the first Nilo-Saharan linguistics colloquium, ed. and , 291–304. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Scheffer [Schefferus], Johannes. 1673. Lapponia. Frankfurt am Main. (English translation 1674, The history of Lapland. Oxford. Later version: Sheffer, John. 1751. A history of Lapland: the original manners, habits, religion and trade of that people. London: R. Griffith.)
. 1987. Which way did they grow? Morphology and the Austro-Thai/Macro-Austric debate. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13.235–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1895. L'affinité des langues des Bushmans et des Hottentots. Compte rendu de 2ème congrès scientifique international des catholiques 6.5–11. Brussels.Google Scholar
and . 1964 [1965]. Zur uraltaischen Sprachverwandtschaft. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 36.167–78.Google Scholar
, [] . 1808. Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier. Heidelberg: Mohr und Zimmer. (Reprinted 1977, Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics 1; introduction by Sebastiano Timpanaro, translation by Peter Maher. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)Google Scholar
Schleicher, August.1850. Die Sprachen Europas in systematischer Übersicht: linguistische Untersuchungen. Bonn: H. B. König. (Reprinted in new edition, 1983, ed. . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.)Google Scholar
.1861–2. Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indo-germanischen Sprachen: kurzer Abriss einer Laut- und Formenlehre der indogermanishcen Ursprache. (3rd edition, 1871.) Weimar: Hermann Böhlau.Google Scholar
Schleicher, August.1983[1863]. The Darwinian theory and the science of language. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel, and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , 1–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schleicher, August.1983[1865]. On the significance for the natural history of man. Linguistic and evolutionary theory: three essays by August Schleicher, Ernst Haeckel and Wilhelm Bleek, ed. , 73–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1781. Von den Chaldäer. Repertorium für biblische und morgenländische Literatur 8.161–76. Leipzig: Weidmann.
. 1899. Die sprachlichen Verhältnisse Ozeaniens (Melanesiens, Polynesiens, Mikronesiens und Indonesiens) in ihrer Bedeutung für Ethnologie. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien 29.245–58.Google Scholar
.1906. Die Mon-Khmer-Völker, ein Bindeglied zwischen Völkern Zentralasiens und Austronesiens. Archiv für Anthropologie 33.59–109.Google Scholar
.1919. Die Gliederung der australischen Sprachen. Vienna: Mecharisten Buchdrückerei. [English translation 1972 by D. Clark: Classification of the Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, ms.]Google Scholar
.1930. Die Beziehungen der austrischen Sprachen zum japanischen. Wiener Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik 1.239–52. Vienna.Google Scholar
.1853. Das Zahlwort in der tschudischen Sprachklasse, wie auch in Türkischen, Tungusischen und Mongolischen. Berlin.Google Scholar
.1860. Altaische Studien oder Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der Altai-Sprachen. Berlin.Google Scholar
Schottelius, Justus-Georgius (Schottel, Justus Georg). 1663[1641]. Ausführliche Arbeit von der teutschen Haubt-Sprache. Brunswick: C. F. Zilliger.
.1936. On the “Uralian” element in the Drāid̥a and Mun̥d̥ā languages. Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies 8.751–62.Google Scholar
[]. 1614. Van t’ beghin der eerster volcken van Europen, insoder heyt van den oorsppronck ende saecken der Nederlandren. Ypres: F. Bellet.Google Scholar
. 1969. Finnougrisch-indogermanische Wurzelvergleichungen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.373–4.Google Scholar
1989 Basque and the other Dene-Caucasian languages. Le Langage et l'Homme 24.3(71).262–3.Google Scholar
1991. “Ado about nothing” or “evidence”: Austronesian and Eskaleut. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 44.290–4.Google Scholar
1919–20. Zur sprachlichen Verwandtschaft der Maya-Qu'itsé mit der Carib-Aruác. Anthropos 14.465–91.Google Scholar
Schultze, Benjamin. 1725. [In a letter, comparing numbers in German, Latin, and Sanskrit; cited in Benfey 1861: 24.]
1994. The voices of Eden: a history of Hawaiian language studies. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
1945. Finno-Ugric and the languages of India. Journal of the American Oriental Society 65.59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1950. The importance of areal linguistics in Uralic studies. Memoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 98.99–106.Google Scholar
. 1887. Das Konjugationssystem der Mayasprachen. Berlin: Unger. (Reprinted 1902 in Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Altertumskunde 1.65–26. Berlin: Ascher; reissued 1960, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt.)Google Scholar
1975. Why create a department of Indo-African studies at Dakar University?International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 4.1–13.Google Scholar
Serebrennikov, B. A. 1982[1986]. Problema dostatochnosti osnovanija v gipotezah, kasajusshchihsja geneticheskogo rodstva jazykov, 3; Nostraticheskje jazyki. Teoreticheskije osnovy klassifikaciji jazykov mira: problemy rodstva, ed. B. A. Serebrennikov, 6–62. Moscow: Nauka. [English translation: 1986, Theoretical foundations for the classification of the world's languages: problems of genetic relationship. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists, ed. and trans. with a critical foreword by Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin and T. L. Markey, 66–86. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.]
1912. Über Art, Umfang und Alter des Stufenwechsels im Finnisch-Ugrischen und Samojedischen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 12.1.Google Scholar
1913–18. Zur Frage nach der Verwandtschaft der finnisch-ugrischen und samojedischen Sprachen. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 30.1–104.Google Scholar
.1952. Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 18.12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1957. Note on Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 23.116–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1969. A few more Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan comparisons. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1985. Azteco-Tanoan ∗∗∗-l/r-.International Journal of American Linguistics 51.584–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1976. An areal-typological study of American Indian languages north of Mexico. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
. 1982. Research report: Penutian labial stop correspondences. California-Oregon Languages Newsletter (I) 5(2); (II) 5(3).5–6.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1989a. A symposium on the deep reconstruction of languages and cultures. Reconstructing languages and cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 6–8. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1989b. Introductory remarks. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 4–15. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1990. Introduction. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 8–12. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly.1991. Introduction. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 6–9. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly and Alexis Manaster-Ramer. 1991. Some recent work on remote relations of languages. Sprung from some common source: investigations into the prehistory of languages, ed. and , 178–203. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1986. Typology, relationship and time: a collection of papers on language change and relationship by Soviet linguists. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1999. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.
1966. O xaraktere leksicheskix vzaimosvyazei tyurkskix, mongol'skix i tunguso-man'chzhurskix yazykov. Voprosy yazykoznaniya 3:21–35.Google Scholar
1986a. Tyurksko-mongol'skie yazykovye svyazi. (K probleme vzaïmodeistviya i smesheniya yazykov.)Voprosy yazykoznaniya 4:47–59.Google Scholar
1986b. Problema rotacizma i perspektivy dal'neishego izucheniya tyurksko-mongol'skix yazykovyx svyazei. Istoriko-kul'turnye kontakty narodov altaiskoi yazykovoi obshhnosti 2. Tezisy dokladov ⅩⅪⅩ sessiï Postoyannoi Mezhdunarodnoi Altaïsticheskoi Konferenciï [Tashkent 1986]. Lingvistika. Moscow: ANSSSR.Google Scholar
1973. Indogermanisch und Finnisch-ugrisch – Versuch einer typologisch-vergleichenden Grammatik. Gengogaku Ronso 12.68–85.Google Scholar
. 1957. Some Yukian-Penutian lexical resemblances. International Journal of American Linguistics 23.269–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1969. Proto-Takelman. International Journal of American Linguistics 35.226–30.
Shipley, William.1973. California. Linguistics in North America, ed. , , , , and , 1046–78. (Current Trends in Linguistics 10.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1980. Penutian among the ruins: a personal assessment. Berkeley Linguistics Society 6.437–41.Google Scholar
1931. Ethnological and linguistical aspects of the Ural-Altaic hypothesis. Tsing Hua Journal, vol. 6. (Reprinted 1970, Oosterhout, the Netherlands: Anthropological Publications.)Google Scholar
1976. In defense of Austric. Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 6.96–104.Google Scholar
. 1964. Shasta and Karok: a binary comparison. University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.170–81.Google Scholar
Silver, Shirley.1976. Comparative Hokan and the Northern Hokan languages. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 193–202. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1975. On two California Penutian roots for two. International Journal of American Linguistics 41.369–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1979a. Penutian: an assessment. The languages of native America: historical and comparative assessment, ed. and , 650–91. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
. 1975a. Uralo-Tungus lexical correspondences. Researches in Altaic languages, 245–65. Budapest.Google Scholar
.1975b. The present state of Uralic and Altaic comparative studies. Proceedings of the International Symposium Commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Korean Liberation, 117–46. Seoul.Google Scholar
.1976. The ∗t ∼ ∗d local suffix in Uralic and Altaic. Hungaro-Turcica: studies in honour of Julius Németh, 119–27. Budapest.Google Scholar
Sinor, Denis.1977. Altaica and Uralica. Studies in Finno-Ugric linguistics in honor of A. Raun, ed. , 319–31. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Sinor, Denis.1978. The nature of possessive suffixes in Uralic and Altaic. Linguistics and literary studies in honor of A. A. Hill, ed. et al., vol. 3: Historical and comparative linguistics, 257–66. The Hague: Mouton.
Sinor, Denis.1988. The problem of the Ural-Altaic relationship. The Uralic languages: description, history and foreign influences, ed. , 706–41. (Handbuch der Orientalistik, part 8.) Leiden: E.-J. Brill. (Reprinted 1990 in Denis Sinor, Essays in comparative Altaic linguistics, 706–41. Bloomington, In: Indiana University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies.)
Sinor, Denis.1990. Introduction: the concept of Inner Asia. The Cambridge history of early Inner Asia, ed. , 1–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sinor, Denis.1999. Some thoughts on the Nostratic theory and its historical implications. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 387–400. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas C. 1992. El método de Sapir para establecer relaciones genéticas remotas. Reflexiones lingüísticas y literarias, vol. 1: Lingüística, ed. Villanueva and Josefina García Fajardo. (Centro de Estudios Lingüísticos y Literarios, Serie Estudios de Lingüística y Literatura 25.) Mexico: El Colegio de México.
. 1924. Zur venetischen Schrift und Sprache. Indogermanische Forschungen 42.90–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Linguistic typology: morphology and syntax. Harlow, UK: Longman.
1982. Dravidian and Indo-European – the neglected hypothesis. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 11.1–21.Google Scholar
Spuhler, James N. 1979. Genetic distances, trees, and maps of North American Indians. The first Americans: origins, affinities, and adaptations, ed. and , 135–83. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer.
1998. The social behavior of chimpanzees and bonobos. Current Anthropology 39.399–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward. 1974. The dithyramb to the verb in eighteenth and nineteenth century linguistics. Studies in the history of linguistics: traditions and paradigms, ed. , 157–90. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
1972. Maya-Yunga-Chipayan: a new linguistic alignment. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.119–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A. 1984. Gipoteza o geneticheskih sv'az'ah sinotibetskih jazykov s enisejskimi i severnokavkazskimi jazykami. Lingvisticheskaja rekonstruktsija i drevnejsaja istorija vostoka 4.19–38. Moscow: Nauka. [Translation by W. H. Baxter Ⅲ, in Genetic classification of languages, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin.]
1986. Problema geneticheskoi obshchnosti altajskih jazykov. Istoriko-kul'turnye kontakty narodov altajskoj jazykovoj obshchnosti. Tezisy doklodow ⅩⅪⅩ sessii Postoiannoi Medunarodnoi Altajsticheskoj konferencij[PIAC], vol. 2, 94–112. Moscow.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1989. Nostratic and Sino-Caucasian. Explorations in language macrofamilies: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 42–65. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1991a. On the hypothesis of a genetic connection between the Sino-Tibetan languages and the Yeniseian and North-Caucasian languages. Dene-Sino-Caucasian languages: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 12–41. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
1991b. Altajskaja problema proischoshdenie japonskovo jazyka [The Altaic problem and the genesis of the Japanese language]. Moscow. http://starling.rinet.ru/ Texts/Texts.htm.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A.1999a. Comparative-historical linguistics and lexicostatistics. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 61–6. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language. (Reprinted from 1992 Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, Austric and Amerind, ed. Vitaly Shevoroshkin, 75–9. Bochum: Brockmeyer.)
Starostin, Sergei A.1999b. Methodology of long-range comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 3–50. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.
Starostin, Sergei A.1999c. Subgrouping of Nostratic: comments on Aharon Dolgopolsky's The nostratic macrofamily and linguistic palaeontology. Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 137–56. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
. 1855. Grammatik, Logik und Psychologie, ihre Prinzipien und ihr Verhältnis zueinander. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
.1860. Charakteristik der hauptsächlichsten Typen des Sprachbaues. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler. Steinthal.Google Scholar
.1890. Das Verhältniss, das zwischen dem Ketschua und Aimará besteht. Congrès International des Américanistes 7.462–5. [1888 meeting.] Berlin.
Stephens, Thomas. 1583. See Muller 1986:14–15.
1852. A comparative vocabulary of non-Sanskrit vocables of the vernacular languages of India. Journal of the Bengal Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 5.Google Scholar
1991. The Dene and Na-Dene Indian migration – 1233 A.D.: escape from Genghis Khan to America. Columbus, GA: Institute for the Study of American Cultures.Google Scholar
Stiernhielm, Georg. 1670. Glossarium Ulphila-Gothicum, Linguis affinibus, per Fr. Junium, nunc etiam Sveo-Gothica auctum & illustratum. Holm.
.1671. De linguarum origine Praefatio [On the origin of languages]. D. N. Jesu Christi SS. Evangelia ab Ulfila Gothorum translata. Stockholm.Google Scholar
. 1884[1958]. Zur Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala. Zurich: Füssli. (Spanish translation 1958, Etnografía de Guatemala, trans. Antonio Goubaud Carrera. [Seminario de Integración Social Guatemalteca, publication 8.] Guatemala: Ministerio de Educación Pública.)Google Scholar
Stoll, Otto.1885. Supplementary remarks to the grammar of the Cakchiquel language, ed. Daniel G. Brinton. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 22.255–68.
.1912–13. Zur Psychologie der indianischen Hochlandsprachen von Guatemala. Festschrift der Geographisch-ethnographischen Gesellschaft in Zürich34–96.
. 1972. Structure of Bushman and its traces in Indo-European. Polska Akademia Nauk. – Oddzial w Krakowie. (Prace Komisji Orientalistycznej 10.) Wroclaw: Zaklid Narodowy im. ossolinskich.Google Scholar
Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert von. 1730. Das nord- und östliche Theil von Europa und Asia, in so weit solches das ganze Russische Reich mit Siberien und der grossen Tataren in sich begreiffet, in einer historisch-geographischen Beschreivung der alten und neuen Zeiten, und vielen andern unbekannten Nachrichten vorgestellet, nebst einer noch niemahls ans Licht gegebenen Tabula Polygotta. Stockholm: In Berlegung des Autoris. (Also published in Leipzig.) (Reprinted 1975, Szeged [Studia Uralo-altaica 8.]) (English translation, 1970, Russia, Siberia and great Tartary. New York: Arno Press.)
.1981. Remarks on the phonological comparison of Japanese with Altaic. Bulletin of the International Institute for Linguistic Sciences [Kyto Sangy University] 2(4).293–307.Google Scholar
.1985. Japanese reflexes of the Proto-Altaic lateral. Journal of the American Oriental Society 105.637–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1933. A comparative grammar of the Hittite language. Philadelphia: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
.1973. Macro-Pano-Tacanan. International Journal of American Linguistics 39.137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1979. Observaciones sobre la evolución fonológica del tlapaneco. Anales de Antropología 16.371–86.Google Scholar
.1983b. The Mesoamerican Indian languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985. Loan etymologies in historic method. International Journal of American Linguistics 51.574–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suárez, Jorge A..1986. Elementos gramaticales otomangues en tlapaneco. Language in global perspective: papers in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1935–1985, ed. , 267–84. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Suhonen, Seppo. 1988. Die baltischen Lehnwörter der Finnisch-Ugrischen Sprachen. The Uralic languages: description, history, and foreign influences, ed. Denis Sinor, 596–615. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Suthiwan, Titima. 2003. Loanwords in Thai. Paper presented at the Loanword Typology workshop, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany, July 21–22, 2003.
[a.k.a. Mauricio]. 1946. Phonologic formulas for Atakapa-Chitimacha. International Journal of American Linguistics 12.113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1947. Atakapa-Chitimacha ∗kw. International Journal of American Linguistics 13.120–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1951. Diffusional cumulation and archaic residue as historical explanation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 7.1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1952. Review of Shafer's Athapaskan and Sino-Tibetan. International Journal of American Linguistics 18.178–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1953a. Mosan Ⅰ: a problem of remote common origin. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.26–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1953b. Mosan Ⅱ: comparative vocabulary. International Journal of American Linguistics 19.223–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1954. Perspectives and problems of Amerindian comparative linguistics. Word 10.306–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1955. On the Penutian vocabulary survey. International Journal of American Linguistics 20.123–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1959. The mesh principle in comparative linguistics. Anthropological Linguistics 1(2).7–14.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1960. On interhemisphere linguistic connections. Culture in history: essays in honor of Paul Radin, ed. , 894–924. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
.1961. The culture historic implications of Sapir's linguistic classification. A William Cameron Townsend en el vigésimoquinto aniversario del Instituto Lingüístico de Verano, 663–7. Cuernavaca: Tipográfica Indígena.Google Scholar
.1962. Linguistic relations across the Bering Strait. American Anthropologist 64.1262–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1964a. Comparative Penutian glosses of Sapir. Studies in Californian linguistics, ed. , 182–91. (University of California Publications in Linguistics 34.) Berkeley: University of California Press.
Swadesh, Morris.1964b. Linguistic overview. Prehistoric man in the New World, ed. and , 527–56. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
.1965. Lingvisticheskije svjazi Ameriki i Evraziji [Linguistic connections of America and Eurasia].Etimologija 1964.271–322.Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris.1967. Lexicostatistic classification. Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 5: Linguistics, ed. , 79–115. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Swanton, John R. 1911. Haida. Handbook of American Indian languages, ed. , 1.205–82. (Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, bulletin 40.) Washington, DC.
.1919. A structural and lexical comparison of the Tunica, Chitimacha, and Atakapa languages. Bulletin of the Bureau of American Ethnology68.Google Scholar
.1924. The Muskhogean connection of the Natchez language. International Journal of American Linguistics 3.46–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1984. Les langues amérindiennes à la Société de Linguistique de Paris (1863–1932). Amerindia 6.383–404.Google Scholar
Swiggers, Pierre.1990. Comparatismo e grammatica comparata: tipologia linguistica e forma grammaticale. Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism, ed. and , 281–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Swiggers, Pierre.1992. Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe. International encyclopedia of Linguistics, ed. 2.155–9. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
.1975. The Indo-European and Semitic languages: a rejoinder to Saul Levin's reply. General Linguistics 15.206–13.Google Scholar
Tadmor, Uri. 2003. Loanwords in Indonesian. Paper presented at the Loanword typology workshop, Max-Planck Institute for Evaluationary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany, July 21–22, 2003.
Tai, James H.-Y. 1976. On the change from SVO to SOV in Chinese. Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax, ed. , , and , 291–304. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1960. La place du ghiliak parmi les langues paléosibériennes. Lingua 9.113–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1961. Sur une explication de l'Aïnou par l'Indo-Européen. Zeitschrift für vergliechende Sprachforschung (Kuhns Zeitschrift) 77.1–30.Google Scholar
1964. Algonquian languages and genetic relationship. Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists, 1026–33. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
[John Shore]. 1804. Memoirs of the life, writings, and correspondence of Sir William Jones. London: John Hachard. (1805, Philadelphia: William Poyntell.)Google Scholar
Tekin, T. 1994. Altaic languages. The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. , 1.82–5. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Téné, David. 1980. The earliest comparisons of Hebrew with Aramaic and Arabic. Progress in linguistic historiography, ed. , 355–77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1723. Aenleiding tot de Kennisse van het Verhevene Deel der Nederduitsche Sprake [Introduction to the elevated portion of the Low German language]. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
. 1922. The Aleutian languages compared with Greenlandic: a manuscript by Rasmus Rask, dating from 1820, now in the Royal Library at Copenhagen. International Journal of American Linguistics 2.40–57.Google Scholar
.1928. Is there any connection between the Eskimo language and the Uralian?Acts of the International Congress of Americanists 2.551–67. Rome.Google Scholar
.1945. Uhlenbeck's Eskimo-Indoeuropean hypothesis: a critical revision. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 1.66–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thalbitzer, William.1952. Possible contacts between Eskimo and Old World languages. Indian tribes of aboriginal America: selected papers of the 29th International Congress of Americanists, vol. 3, ed. , 50–4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thelwall, Robin. 1982. Linguistic aspects of Greater Nubian history. The archaeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history, ed. and , 39–56. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. 1980. Morphological instability, with and without language contact. Historical morphology, ed. , 359–72. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G..1993. Coping with partial information in historical linguistics. Historical linguistics 1989: papers from the 9th International Conference of Historical Linguistics, ed. and . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
and . 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. The Tai-Kadai and Austronesian: the nature of the historical relationship. Oceanic Linguistics 34.345–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987. Processes of change in the languages of northwestern New Britain. Pacific Linguistics B99.1–163.Google Scholar
Thurston, W. R..1989. How exoteric languages build a lexicon. VICAL 1: Oceanic languages: papers of the 5th International Conference of Austronesian Linguistics, ed. and , 555–80. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
, , , , , and . 1955–81. Suomen kielen etymologinen sanakirja [Etymological dictionary of the Finnish language]. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1955. Indejcy Ameriki. (Trudy Instituta Etnografii, novaja serija, 25.) Moscow: Akademija Nauk.Google Scholar
and . 1884. Comparative vocabularies of the Indian tribes of British Columbia. (Geological and Natural History Survey of Canada.) Montreal: Dawson Brothers.Google Scholar
. 1912. Die sprachliche Urverwandtschaft der Indogermanen, Semiten, und Indianer. Vienna: Heinrich Kirsch.Google Scholar
1971. Burushaski and Yeniseian languages: some parallels. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 4.107–25.Google Scholar
. 1997. Mounted archers: the beginnings of Central Asian history. Edinburgh: Durham Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1902. Bemerkungen. Die zwei Arzawa-Briefe: die ältesten Urkunden in indogermanischer Sprache, by Jørgen Alexander Knudtzon, 108–22. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
. 1995. Basque and Dené-Caucasian: a critique from the Basque side. Mother Tongue 1.3–82.Google Scholar
.1996. Historical linguistics. London: Arnold.
Trask, Richard L[arry].1999. Why should languages have any relatives? Nostratic: examining a linguistic macrofamily, ed. and , 157–76. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
.2000. The dictionary of historical and comparative linguistics. Edingburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
.2001. How do we do historical work on languages? Unpublished ms., University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Trautmann, Thomas R. 1998. The lives of Sir William Jones. Sir William Jones, 1746–1794: a commemoration, ed. , 93–121. Oxford: Oxford University Press on behalf of University College, Oxford.
.1928[1926]. Origine asiatica delle lingue e popolazioni americane. International Congress of Americanists 22(1).169–246. Rome.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1989. Contact and isolation in linguistic change. Language change: contributions to the study of its causes, ed. and , 227–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Trudgill, Peter.2002. Linguistic and social typology. Handbook of language variation and change, ed. , , and , 707–28, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
.2004a. Linguistic and social typology: Austronesian migrations and phoneme inventories. Linguistic Typology 8.305–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1869–70. On the best method of studying the North American languages. Transactions of the American Philological Association55–79.Google Scholar
Tryon, Darrell T. 1995. The Austronesian languages. Comparative Austronesian dictionary: an introduction to Austronesian studies, part 1: fascicle 1, ed. , 5–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1959. Das Sumerische und das Georgische. Revue de kartvelologie, 32–3. [Original 1912, in Georgian, in Tbilisi Collection ‘Gvirgvini’.]Google Scholar
and . 1956. The non-Bantu languages of north-eastern Africa. (Handbook of African Languages, part 3.) London: International African Institute, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and .1966. Linguistic analyses: the non-Bantu languages of north-eastern Africa. (Handbook of African Languages, part 3.) London: International African Institute, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tuite, Kevin. 1998. Evidence for prehistoric links between the Caucasus and Central Asia: the case of the Burushos. The Bronze Age and early Iron Age peoples of eastern central Asia, vol. 1: Archeology, migration and nomadism, ed. , 447–75. (Journal of Indo-European Studies, monograph 26.) Washington, DC: The Institute for the Study of Man in collaboration with the University of Pennsylvania Museum Publications.Google Scholar
Turgot, Anne Robert Jacques. 1756. Etymologie. Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers 6.98–111. ed. and . Paris. (New edition 1961, introduction, annotations by Maurice Piron. Brugge: De Tempel; facsimile edition: 1967. Stuttgart: Frommann.)Google Scholar
1967. Seri and Chontal (Tequistlateco). International Journal of American Linguistics 33.235–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1972. On linguistic unrelatedness – a rejoinder. International Journal of American Linguistics 38.146–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Paul R..1976. Pluralization of nouns in Seri and Chontal. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference on Hokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 297–303. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1864. Outlines of grammar of Malagasy language. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 8.2.Google Scholar
.1864/7. Tobasche spraakkunst. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Muller.
. 1871. Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Tyler, Stephen A..1990. Summary of noun and verb inflectional correspondences in Proto-Dravidian and Proto-Uralic. Proto-languages and proto-cultures: materials from the First International Interdisciplinary Symposium on Language and Prehistory, ed. , 68–76. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 1970. On linguistic affinity: the Indo-Uralic Problem. Malmö: Estonian Post Publishing.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius. 1905. Uralische Anklänge in den Eskimosprachen. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 59.757–65.
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius.1942–5. Ur- und altindogermanische Anklänge im Wortschatz des Eskimos. Anthropos 37–40.133–48.
Ullendorff, Edward. 1970. Comparative Semitics. Linguistics in South West Asia and North Africa, ed. , , and , 261–73. (Current Trends in Linguistics 6.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
.1977. Studies in early Japanese morphophonemics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Unger, J. Marshall.1990a. Summary report of the Altaic panel. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 479–82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Unger, J. Marshall.1990b. Japanese and what other Altaic languages? Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 547–61. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
1972. Kuruba: a Dravidian language. Proceedings of Seminar on Dravidian Linguistics 3.307–28. Annamalainagar: Annamalai University.Google Scholar
1976. Dravidian and Negro-African. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5.32–64.Google Scholar
1978. The problem of the genetic relationship of the Mongolian and Dravidian languages. Archiv Orientální 46.141–51.Google Scholar
.1981. The Dravido-Altaic relationship – lexical and sound correspondences. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference-Seminar of Tamil Studies 1.159–70.Google Scholar
.1983. Dravido-Altaic: the Mongolian and Dravidian verbal bases. Journal of Tamil Studies 23.1–17.Google Scholar
Vacek, J.1985. The Mongolian and Dravidian verb phrase (its pattern and the underlying verbal forms). (Asian and African Linguistic Studies Ⅱ, ed. J. Vochala.) Studia Orientalia Pragensia 14.26–45.
, 1995. New linguistic evidence and “the Bantu expansion.” Journal of African History 36.173–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1810. Untersuchungen über Amerika's bevölkerung aus dem alten Kontinente. Leipzig: Vogel.Google Scholar
1969. Verwandtschaft zwischen dem Finnougrischen und entfernteren Sprachgruppen?Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.360–71.Google Scholar
, 2001. Evidencias del parentesco de las lenguas Lule y Vilela. (Colección Folklore y Antropología 4.) Santa Fe, Argentina: Subsecretaría de la Provincia de Santa Fe.
1971. Preliminary data on the relation of California Penutian to Uralic and other Nostratic languages. Sovjetskoje Finno-Ugrovedenije 7.119–28. Tallin.Google Scholar
. 1875. La langue basque et aux langues américaines. Congrès International des Américanistes. 40–79. Nancy.Google Scholar
Voegelin, Carl F. and Florence M. Voegelin. 1965. Languages of the world: Sino-Tibetan, fascicles 4 and 5. Anthropological Linguistics 7.5, 7.6.
1985. From comparative method to phylum linguistics and back again. International Journal of American Linguistics 51.608–9.CrossRef
von der Gabelentz. See Gabelentz, von der.
von Humboldt, Wilhelm. See Humboldt, Wilhelm von.
von Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert. See Strahlenberg, Philip Johan Tabbert von.
Vovin, Alexander.1999. Notes on linguistic comparison. Historical linguistics and lexicostatistics, ed. and , 67–94. (AHL Studies in the Science and History of Language 3.) Canberra: Association for the History of Language.Google Scholar
Waterhouse, Viola G. 1976. Another look at Chontal and Hokan. Hokan studies: papers from the First Conference onHokan Languages held in San Diego, California, April 23–25, 1970, ed. and , 325–43. (Janua Linguarum, series practica, 181.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1978. Leibniz and Ludolf on things linguistic: excerpts from their correspondence (1683–1703). (University of California Publications in Linguistics 88.) Berkeley: University of California Press.
Watkins, Calvert. 1990. Etymologies, equations, and comparanda: types and values, and criteria for judgement. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. , 289–303. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Calvert.1995. El proto-indoeuropea. Las lenguas indoeuropeas, ed. and , 57–117. Madrid: Cátedra.Google Scholar
.2000. The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European roots. 2nd edition (1st edition 1985). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Watkins, Calvert.2001. An Indo-European linguistic area and its characteristics: ancient Anatolia. Areal diffusion as a challenge to the comparative method? Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: problems in comparative linguistics, ed. and , 44–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1971. A statement of some phonological correspondences among the Pomo languages. Supplement of International Journal of American Linguistics, 37(3).Google Scholar
Webb, Nancy M..1976. Yuman language interrelationships: the lexical evidence. Proceedings of the 1976Hokan–Yuman language workshop, ed. , 60–8. (University Museum Studies 11.) Carbondale, IL: University Museum and Art Galleries, Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
Webb, Nancy M..1980. Esselen–Hokan relationships. Proceedings of the 1979 Hokan languages workshop, ed. , 72–80. (Occasional Papers on Linguistics 7.) Carbondale: Department of Linguistics, Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
1862. Evidence of the Scythian affinities of the Dravidian languages, condensed and arranged from Rev. R. Caldwell's Comparative Dravidian grammar. Journal of the American Oriental Society 7.271–96.Google Scholar
. 1985. Thoughts when drawing a map of tone languages. Afrikanist- ische Arbeitspapiere 1.105–24.Google Scholar
. 1856a. On the connexion of the Finn and Lapp with the other European languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 1856.1–19. London.Google Scholar
.1856b. Further observations on the connexion of the Finnish and Indo-Germanic classes of languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 1856.172–9. London.Google Scholar
Wells, Rulon. 1979. Linguistics as a science: the case of the comparative method. The European background of American linguistics, ed. , 23–61. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1973. African language structures. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
. 1911. Die Sudansprachen: eine sprachvergleichende Studie. (Abhandlungen des Hamburgischen Kolonialinstituts 3.) Hamburg: L. Friederichsen.Google Scholar
.1927. Die Westlichen Sudansprachen und ihre Beziehungen zum Bantu. (Mitteil- ungen des Seminars für Orientalische Sprachen, supplementary vol. 30.) Berlin: De Gruyter.
and 1952. The languages of West Africa. (Handbook of African languages, part 2.) Oxford: Oxford University Press for International African Institute.Google Scholar
Westphal, E. O. J. 1971. The click languages of southern and eastern Africa. Linguistics in sub-Saharan Africa, ed. , 367–420. (Current Trends in Linguistics 7.) The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wetterstrom, W. 1993. Foraging and farming in Egypt: the transition from hunting and gathering to horticulture in the Nile Valley. The archaeology of Africa, ed. and , 165–226. London: Routledge.
Wexionius [von Gyldenstolpe], Michael O. 1650. Epitome descriptionis Sueciae, Gothiae, Fenningiae et subiectarum provinciarum. Aboae.
, , , and 2004. Kusunda: an Indo-Pacific language in Nepal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101.5692–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 1985. The phonological basis for the comparison of Japanese and Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
. 1887[1867]. Language and the study of language: twelve lectures on the principles of linguistic science. 5th edition (1st edition 1867).New York: Scribner's.Google Scholar
and 1937. The relationship of Uto-Aztecan and Tanoan. American Anthropologist 39.609–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 1999. On the relationship between Mixe-Zoquean and Uto-Aztecan. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 24.101–13.
. 1969. Die Verwandtschaft des Finnougrischen mit anderen Sprachen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 41.310–16.Google Scholar
. 1967. Maya and Altaic: is the Maya group of languages related to the Altaic family?Ethnos 32.141–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Terrence H. 1977. Introduction. The Lautgesetz-controversy: a documentation, ed. , ix–xcv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1994. The phonetics of pronouns: articulatory bases of markedness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Williams, Roger. 1643. Key into the language of America. London: Gregory Dexter. (Ed. with a critical introduction by and , 1973. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.)Google Scholar
(ed.). 1979. Gibbon's Decline and fall of the Roman Empire,abridged and illustrated. London: Bison Books.Google Scholar
Williamson, Kay. 1989. Niger-Congo overview. The Niger-Congo languages: a classification and description of Africa's largest language family, ed. , 3–45. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Williamson, Kay and Roger Blench. 2000. Niger-Congo. African languages:an introduction, ed. and , 11–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windischmann, Friedrich Heinrich Hugo. 1846. Die Grundlage des armenischen im arischen Sprachstamme. (Sprachlich-historische Abhandlungen der Königlichen Bayerischen Academie der Wissenschaften 5.)
.1914. Tungusisch und Finnisch-ugrisch Ⅰ. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 30; Tungusisch und Finnisch-ugrisch Ⅱ. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 39.1–34.Google Scholar
1966. Greenberg's classification of African languages. African Language Studies 7.160–9.Google Scholar
1984. Further notes on Japanese and Tamil. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 13.347–53.Google Scholar
Wistrand-Robinson, Lila. 1991. Uto-Aztecan affinities with Panoan of Peru Ⅰ: correspondences. Language change in South American Indian languages, ed. , 243–76. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1978. Mesoamerican: a proposed language phylum. American Anthropologist 80.942–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1981. Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship. American Anthropologist 83.905–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witsen, Nicolaas. 1692. Noord en Oost Tartarye. Amsterdam. (2nd edition 1905.) [German translation of 2nd edition by , 1975: Berichte über die uralischen Völker. (Studia Uralo-Altaica 7.) Szeged.]Google Scholar
Wolfart, H. Christoph. 1982. Historical linguistics and metaphilology. Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. , 395–403. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1929. Outlines of Tibeto-Burman linguistic morphology,with special reference to the prefixes, infixes and suffixes of classical Tibetan, and the languages of the Kachin, Bodo, Naga, Kuki Chin, and Burma groups. (Royal Asiatic Society Prize Publication 12). London: Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
Wonderly, William L. 1953. Sobre la propuesta filiación lingüística de la familia totonaca con las familias zoqueana y mayense. Huastecos, totonacos y sus vecinos, ed. and Revista mexicana de estudios antropológicos 13.105–13.
Woodbury, Anthony C. 1984. Eskimo and Aleut languages. Handbook of North American Indians, ed. , vol. 5: Arctic, ed. , 49–63. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
. 1730[1713]. A discourse concerning the confusion of languages at Babel. London: S. Austen and W. Bowyer.Google Scholar
Wurm, Stephen A. 1971. The Papuan linguistic situation. Oceania, ed. , 541–657. (Current Trends in Linguistics 8.) The Hague: Mouton.
(ed.) 1975. New Guinea area languages, vol. 1: Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene. (Pacific Linguistics C-38.) Canberra.
Wurm, Stephen A..1981. Possible wider connections of Papuan languages: Papuan and Australian: Greenberg's Indo-Pacific hypothesis. Language atlas of the Pacific area, part 1: New Guinea area, Oceania, Australia, ed. and , 925–32. 1981. (Pacific Linguistics C-66.) Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities.
and . 1981–3. Language atlas of the Pacific area. (Vol. 1, 1981; vol. 2, 1983.) Canberra: Australian Academy for the Humanities in collaboration with the Japanese Academy.Google Scholar
. c.1702. Arte de las tres lenguas cakchiquel, quiche y tzutuhil. [1952, Microfilm collection of manuscripts on Middle American cultural anthropology 26.] Chicago: University of Chicago Library.
1922. Consultas: etimologías araucanas. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras 73.770–1. Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
. 1967. Problemgeschichte der vergleichenden (indogermanischen)Sprachwissenschaft. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2000. Areal and genetic factors in language classification and description:Africa south of the Sahara. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
.1974. Dravidian and Elamite – a real breakthrough?Journal of the American Oriental Society 93.384–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985a. Review of Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: the evidence and its implications, by David McAlpin. Journal of the American Oriental Society 105.364–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1985b. Tamil and Japanese – are they related? The hypothesis of Susumu Ohno. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 48(1).116–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
.1990. Dravidian linguistics: an introduction. Pondicherry: Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture.Google Scholar
.1991. Long-range language comparison in new models of language development: the case of Dravidian. Journal of Dravidian Studies 1.21–31.Google Scholar
Zvelebil, Kamil V..1994. Dravidian languages. The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. and , 2:1063–5. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Zvelebil, Marek. 2002. Demography and dispersal of early farming populations at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition: linguistic implications. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis, ed. and , 379–94. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
and , 1988. Agricultural transition and Indo-European dispersals. Antiquity 62.574–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar