Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T06:28:16.296Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Historical Morphology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Martti Nyman
Martti Nyman
Affiliation:
Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki, Hallituskatu 11–13, SF-00100 Helsinki 10, Finland.
Get access

Abstract

An abstract 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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , December 1983 , pp. 129 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, H. 1973: Abductive and deductive change. Language 49, 567–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, H. 1974: Towards a typology of change: Bifurcating changes and binary relations. In Anderson, J.M. & Jones, C. (eds.) Historical Linguistics 2. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 18–62.Google Scholar
Baldi, P. 1977: Morpho-syntax and the Latin genitive. Folia Linguistica 11, 93–108.Google Scholar
Baldi, P. 1978: The influence of speech perception on inflectional morphology in Latin. General Linguistics 18, 61–89.Google Scholar
Bickerton, D. 1981: Roots of Language. Karoma Publishers, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.L. & Slobin, D.I. 1982: Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 58, 265–89.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. 1977: Subjects and direct objects in Uralic languages: A functional explanation of case marking systems. Études Finno-Ougriennes 12, 5–17.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. 1980: Against autonomous linguistics. In Perry, T.A. (ed.) Evidence and Argumentation in Linguistics. Walter de Gruyter, New York, pp. 163–189.Google Scholar
Emeneau, M.B. 1980: Language and Linguistic Area: Essays by Murray B. Emeneau. Selected and introduced by A.S. Dil. Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, A. & Karlsson, F. 1979: Nykysuomen lauseoppia. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
Hermann, E. 1931: Lautgesetz und Analogie. Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Phil.-hist. Klasse (N.F.) 23:3. Weidmann, Berlin.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, L. 1980: Axiom, theorem, and rule. In Perry, T.A. (ed.) Evidence and Argumentation in Linguistics. Walter de Gruyter, New York, pp. 203–218.Google Scholar
Itkonen, E. 1981a: Review of Lass (1980). Language 57, 688–697.Google Scholar
Itkonen, E. 1981b: The limits of algorithmic description in semantics. In Sananmuodostuksen ongelmia. Publications of The Linguistic Association of Finland 7. Turku, pp. 99–119.Google Scholar
Itkonen, E. 1982: Short-term and long-term teleology in linguistic change. In Mäher, J.P., Bomhard, A. & Koerner, E.F.K. (eds.) Papers from the 3rd International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 13. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 85–118.Google Scholar
Itkonen, E. 1983: Causality in Linguistics. Groom Helm, London.Google Scholar
Karlsson, F. 1977: Syntaktisten kongruenssijärjestelmien luonteesta ja funktioista. Virittäjä 81, 359–389. (On the nature and functions of syntactic concord systems, 390–391).Google Scholar
Kilani-Schoch, M. 1982: Processus phonologiques, processus morphologiques et lapsus dans un corpus aphasique. Lang: Berne, Francfort/m.Google Scholar
Krause, W. & Thomas, W. 1960: Tocharisches Elementarbuch I. Carl Winter, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, J. 1949: La nature des procès dits “analogiques’. Acta Linguistica 5, 15–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lass, R. 1980: On Explaining Language Change. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 27. University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lineli, P. 1982: The concept of phonological form and the activities of speech production and speech perception. Journal of Phonetics 10, 37–72.Google Scholar
Mańczak, W. 1958: Tendances générales des changements analogiques. Lingual, 298–325, 387–420.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. 1921: Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Champion, Paris.Google Scholar
Neisser, U. 1976: Cognition and Reality. Freeman & Co, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Nyman, M. 1977: On Gestalt-preserving strategies in Sanskrit. Papers from the Conference on General Linguistics. Publications of The Linguistic Association of Finland 1. Turku, pp. 63–75.Google Scholar
Nyman, M. 1981: Paradigms and transderivational constraints: Stress and yod in Modern Greek. Journal of Linguistics 17, 231–246.Google Scholar
Nyman, M. 1982: Relational and Reconstructive Aspects of Grammatical Syslematization. Publications of the Dept. of General Linguistics (Univ. of Helsinki) 8. Helsinki.Google Scholar
Pisani, V. 1978: Mantissa. Paideia, Brescia.Google Scholar
Plank, F. 1979: The functional basis of case systems and declension classes: from Latin to Old French. Linguistics 17:611–640.Google Scholar