References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 February 2020
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
- World Lexicon of Grammaticalization , pp. 517 - 611Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Aarts, Bas. 2007. Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aberra, Daniel. 2016. Grammaticalization of the Amharic word fit ‘face’ from a body part to grammatical meanings. Journal of Languages and Culture 7, 9: 86–92.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner (ed.). 1991a. Discourse particles: Descriptive and theoretical investigations on the logical, syntactic and pragmatic properties of discourse particles in German. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner 1991b. Disourse particles in German: How does their illocutive force come about? In Abraham 1991a, pp. 203–52.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner 1991c. The grammaticalization of the German modal particles. In Traugott and Heine 1991b, pp. 331–80.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner 1993. Einleitung zum Thema dieses Bandes. Grammatikalisierung und Reanalyse: Einanderausschließende oder ergänzende Begriffe? Folia Linguistica Historica 13, 1–2: 7–26.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner 2000. Modal particles in German: Word classification and legacy beyond grammaticalization. In Vogel and Comrie 2000, pp. 321–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abraham, Werner 2003. Autonomous and non-autonomous components of “grammaticalization”: Economic criteria in the emergence of German negation. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 56, 4: 325–65.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner 2004. The grammaticalization of the infinitival preposition: Toward a theory of “grammaticalizing reanalysis”. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7, 2: 111–70.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner, Givón, T., and Thompson, Sandra A. (eds.). 1995. Discourse, grammar and typology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner and Leisiö, Larisa (eds.). 2006. Passivization and typology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John BenjaminsGoogle Scholar
Adams Liclan, Patsy and Marlett, Stephen. 1990. Madija noun morphology. International Journal of American Linguistics 56: 102-20.Google Scholar
Adelaar, Alexander and Pawley, Andrew (eds.). 2009. Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history: A festschrift for Robert Blust. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Adone, Dany and Plag, Ingo (eds.). 1994. Creolization and language change. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Ahlqvist, Anders (ed.). 1982. Papers from the 5th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ahn, Joo-Hoh. 1996. A study of the phenomena of grammaticization in the Korean noun. PhD dissertation, Yonsei University, Korea.Google Scholar
Ahn, Joo-Hoh 2003. A study on quotation sentence and grammaticalization of quotation markers in Korean. Discourse and Cognition 10, 1: 145–165.Google Scholar
Ahn, Joo-Hoh 2006. Syntactic characteristics of ‘sipta’ phrase and its semantic development in Modern Korean. Korean Semantics 20: 371–91.Google Scholar
Ahn, Kyou Dong. 2005. Semantic generality dilemma in grammaticalization: A case of cappacita. Journal of Linguistic Science 32: 159–78.Google Scholar
Ahn, Mikyung. 2009. Emergence of causality in grammar: Causal complex prepositions in English. Seoul: Hankookmunhwasa.Google Scholar
Ahn, Mikyung 2010. From ‘favor’ to ‘cause’: The English causal adposition thanks to and its Korean counterpart tekpwuney. Language Sciences 32: 579–87.Google Scholar
Ahn, Mikyung 2016. Surprise in discourse: The mirative meanings of ta(ha)-derived sentence final particles in Korean. Language and Linguistics 71: 95–114.Google Scholar
Ahn, Mikyung and Yap, Foong Ha. 2013. Negotiating common ground in discourse: A diachronic and discourse analysis of maliya in Korean. Language Sciences 37: 36–51.Google Scholar
Ahn, Mikyung and Yap, Foong Ha 2015. Evidentiality in interaction: A pragmatic analysis of Korean hearsay evidential markers. Studies in Language 39, 1: 46–84.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin 1997. I think – an English modal particle. In Swan and Westvik 1997, pp. 1–47.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin 2002. English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin 2004. The semantic path from modality to aspect: be able to in a crosslinguistic perspective. In Lindquist and Mair 2004, pp. 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 1996. Areal diffusion in northwest Amazonia: The case of Tariana. Anthropological Linguistics 38: 73–116.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 1997. Areal typology and grammaticalization: The emergence of new verbal morphology in an obsolescent language. Paper presented at the symposium On the Interface between Comparative Linguistics and Grammaticalization Theory: Languages of the Americas, Rice University, Houston, TX, 26–29 March 1997.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2000. Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2002. Language contact in Amazonia. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2003. Mechanisms of change in areal diffusion: New morphology and language contact. Journal of Linguistics 39: 1–29.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2008. The Manambu language of East Sepik, Papua New Guinea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2010. Imperatives and commands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2011. The grammaticalization of evidentiality. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 602–10.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2012. Languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2013. Areal diffusion and parallelism in drift: Shared grammaticalization patterns. In Robbeets and Cuyckens 2013, pp. 23–41.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2018a. Areal diffusion and the limits of grammaticalization: An Amazonian perspective. In Narrog and Heine 2018, pp. 337–49.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.). 2018b. The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, R. M. W. (eds.). 2001. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: Problems in comparative linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.). 2003. Studies in evidentiality. (Typological Studies in Language 54.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.). 2006a. Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology
. (Explorations in Linguistic Typology 2.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.). 2006b. Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.). 2014. The grammar of knowledge: A cross-linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.). 2017. The Cambridge handbook of linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 1996. The seeds of speech: Language origin and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Akimoto, Minoji. 2000. The grammaticalization of the verb ʽprayʼ. In Fischer et al. 2000, pp. 67–84.Google Scholar
Akimoto, Minoji (ed.). 2004. Linguistic studies based on corpora. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Albright, Adam. 2008. Explaining universal tendencies and language particulars in analogical change. In Good 2008, pp. 144–81.Google Scholar
Alexandre, R. P. 1953a. La langue moré, vol. 1: Introduction, grammaire moré, dictionnaire français–moré. Dakar: Institut Fondamental de l’Afrique Noire (IFAN).Google Scholar
Alexandre, R. P. 1953b. La langue moré, vol. 2: Dictionnaire moré–français. Dakar: IFAN.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis and Fanselow, Gisbert. 2001. Laws of diachrony as a source for syntactic generalisations: The case of V to I. GLOW Newsletter 46: 57–8.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis and Fanselow, Gisbert 2002. On the correlation between morphology and syntax: The case of V-to-I. In Zwart and Abraham 2002, pp. 219–42.Google Scholar
Allen, Andrew. 1995. Regrammaticalization and degrammaticalization of the inchoative suffix. In Andersen 1995, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Amborn, Hermann, Minker, Gunter, and Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1980. Das Dullay. (Kölner Beiträge zur Afrikanistik 6.) Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix. 1990. The grammatical packaging of experiences in Ewe: A study in the semantics of syntax. Australian Journal of Linguistics 10: 139–81.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix 2006. Grammars in contact in the Volta Basin (West Africa): On contact-induced grammatical change in Likpe. In Aikhenvald and Dixon 2006b, pp. 114–42.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix, Dench, Alan, and Evans, Nicholas (eds.). 2006. Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Amiridze, Nino 2006. Reflexivization strategies in Georgian. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning (ed.). 1995. Historical linguistics 1993. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning 2001a. Actualization: Linguistic change in progress. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning 2001b. Actualization and the (uni)directionality. In Andersen 2001a, pp. 225–48.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning 2008. Grammaticalisation in a speaker-oriented theory of change. In Eythórsson 2008, pp. 11–44.Google Scholar
Anderson, Gregory. 2006. Auxiliary verb constructions. (Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M. 1971. The grammar of case: Towards a localistic theory. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lloyd B. 1975. Grammar-meaning universals and proto-language reconstruction, or Proto-World NOW! Chicago Linguistics Society 11, pp. 15–36.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1980. On the development of morphology from syntax. In Fisiak 1985, pp. 51–69.Google Scholar
Andersson, Peter. 2008. Swedish må and the (de)grammaticalization debate. In Seoane and López-Couso 2008, pp. 15–32.Google Scholar
Angelo, Denise and Schultze-Berndt, Eva. 2016. “Beware bambai – lest it be apprehensive”. In Meakins and O´Shannessy 2016, pp. 255–96.Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto. 1999. Comparative constructions in Sinitic: Areal typology and patterns of grammaticalization. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto 2010. Surpass comparatives in Sinitic and beyond: Typology and grammaticalization. Linguistics 48, 4: 919–50.Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto, Bisang, Walter, and Szeto, P-Y. 2018. Grammaticalization in isolating languages and the notion of complexity. In Narrog and Heine 2018, pp. 219–34.Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto and Lim, Lisa. 2004. Phonetic absence as syntactic prominence: Grammaticalization in isolating tonal languages. In Fischer, Norde, and Perridon 2004, pp. 345–62.Google Scholar
Antonov, Anton. 2013. Grammaticalization of allocutivity markers in Japanese and Korean in a crosslinguistic perspective. In Robbeets and Cuyckens 2013, pp. 317–39.Google Scholar
Anttila, Raimo. [1972] 1989. An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. 2nd edn. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Arends, Jacques. 1986. Genesis and development of the equative copula in Sranan. In Muysken and Smith 1986, pp. 103–27.Google Scholar
Arends, Jacques (ed.). 1995. The early stages of creolization. (Creole Language Library 13.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Arends, Jacques, Muysken, Pieter, and Smith, Norval (eds.). 1995. Pidgins and creoles: An introduction. (Creole Language Library 15.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Arensen, Jon. 1982. Murle grammar. (Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages 2.) Juba: College of Education.Google Scholar
Aristar, Anthony Rodrigues. 1991. On diachronic sources and synchronic pattern: An investigation into the origin of linguistic universals. Language 67, 1: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristar, Anthony Rodrigues 1999. Typology and the Saussurean dichotomy. In Justus and Polomé 1999, pp. 409–28.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter and Maisak, Timur. 2018. Grammaticalization in the North Caucasian languages. In Narrog and Heine 2018, pp. 116–45.Google Scholar
Arn, M. J. and Wirtjes, H. (eds.). 1985. Historical and editorial studies in Medieval and Early Modern English. For Johan Gerritsen. Groningen: Wolters-Nordhoff.Google Scholar
Arroyo, José Blas, Luis. 2011. From politeness to discourse marking: The process of pragmaticalization of muy bien in vernacular Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 855–74.Google Scholar
Ashby, William J. 1981. The loss of the negative particle ne in French: A syntactic change in progress. Language 57: 674–87.Google Scholar
Ashton, E. O. 1959. Swahili grammar (including intonation). 7th impression. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Askedal, John Ole. 1997. Drohen und versprechen als sog. ‘Modalitätsverben’ in der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 34: 12–19.Google Scholar
Askedal, John Ole 2005. Grammatikalisierung und Persistenz im deutschen “Rezipienten Passiv” mit bekommen/kriegen/erhalten. In Leuschner et al. 2005, pp. 211–27.Google Scholar
Askedal, John Ole 2008. Degrammaticalization versus typology: Reflections on a strained relationship. In Eythórsson 2008, pp. 45–77.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 1996. The pre-front field position in spoken German and its relevance as a grammaticalization position. Pragmatics 6: 295–322.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter and Günthner, Susanne. 2005. Die Entstehung von Diskursmarkern im Deutschen: Ein Fall von Grammatikalisierung? In Leuschner, Mortelmans, and De Groodt 2005, pp. 335–62.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter. 1981. A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter (ed.). 1988. Complex sentence constructions in Australian languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter 1998. ‘Crow is sitting chasing them’: Grammaticalisation and the verb ‘to sit’ in the Mantharta languages, Western Australia. In Siewierska and Song 1998, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
Autenrieth, Tanja. 2002. Heterosemie und Grammatikalisierung bei Modalpartikeln. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der (ed.). 1998. Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe. (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology/EUROTYP, 20–3.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der 1999. Periphrastic ‘do’, typological prolegomena. In Tops, Devriendt, and Geukens 1999, pp. 457–70.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der 2002. More thoughts on degrammaticalization. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 19–29.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der 2008. In defense of classical semantic maps. Theoretical Linguistics 34, 1: 39–46.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der and Plungian, Vladimir A.. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2, 1: 79–124.Google Scholar
Awoyale, Yiwola. 1986. Reflexivization in Kwa languages. In Dimmendaal 1986, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Babel, Anne. 2009. Dizque, evidentiality and stance in Valley Spanish. Language in Society 38: 487–511.Google Scholar
Backus, Angus. 1996. Two in one: Bilingual speech of Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Backus, Ad, Dogruöz, Seza, and Heine, Bernd. 2011. Salient stages in contact-induced grammatical change: Evidence from synchronic vs diachronic contact situations. Language Sciences 33, 5: 738–52.Google Scholar
Baek, Nak-Chen. 1999. A study on grammaticalization and restructured compound conjunctive ending in Korean. Journal of Dongguk Language and Literature 10–11: 259–82.Google Scholar
Baek, Nak-Chen 2005. Morpho-syntactic properties of the auxiliary verbs in Korean. Journal of Korean Language and Culture 28: 229–48.Google Scholar
Baik, Junghye. 2011. From ‘follow’ to ‘counter-expectation’ concepts: A case of Korean postposition ttala(se). Journal of Linguistic Science 58: 93–110.Google Scholar
Baik, Junghye 2012. On the emergence of diverse functions of as: A grammaticalization perspective. Discourse and Cognition 19, 3: 157–72.Google Scholar
Baik, Junghye 2015. From nominals to epistemic markers: With reference to the Korean defective noun moyang ‘appearance’. Journal of Linguistic Science 74: 109–26.Google Scholar
Baik, Junghye 2016. On the grammatical evolution of Korean displacement verb pelita ʽthrow awayʼ: From a grammaticalization perspective. International Journal of Language and Linguistics 3, 1: 49–56.Google Scholar
Bak, Sung-Yun. 1997. Pakkey: A case of grammaticalization in Korean. Korean Journal of Linguistics 22, 1: 57–70.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Philip. 1995. Some developmental inferences from the historical studies of pidgins and creoles. In Arends 1995, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Baker, Philip and Syea, Anand (eds.). 1996. Changing meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact languages. (Westminster Creolistics Series 2.) London: University of Westminster Press.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter and Mous, Maarten (eds.). 1994. Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining. (Studies in Language and Language Use 13.) Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use (IFOTT).Google Scholar
Bamgbose, Ayo. 1966. A grammar of Yoruba. (West African Language Monographs 5.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bamgbose, Ayo 1974. On serial verbs and verbal status. Journal of West African Languages 9, 1: 17–48.Google Scholar
Bao, Zhiming and Wee, Lionel. 1999. The passive in Singapore English. World Englishes 18: 1–11.Google Scholar
Barlow, A. Ruffell. 1960. Studies in Kikuyu grammar and idiom. Edinburgh: Blackwood and Sons.Google Scholar
Baron, Irene, Herslund, Michael, and Srensen, Finn (eds.). 2001. Dimensions of possession. (Typological Studies in Language, 47.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar and Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2002. On the development of final though: A case of grammaticalization? In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 345–61.Google Scholar
Battye, Adrian, and Roberts, Ian (eds.). 1995. Clause structure and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte. 1995. The definite article in Indo-European: Emergence of a new category. In Stark et al. 2007, pp. 103–40.Google Scholar
Bavin, Edith L. 1983. Morphological and syntactic divergence in Lango and Acholi. In Vossen and Bechhaus-Gerst 1983, pp. 147–68.Google Scholar
Bavin, Edith L. 1995. The obligation modality in Western Nilotic languages. In Bybee and Fleischman 1995, pp. 107–34.Google Scholar
Becker, Alton L. 1975. A linguistic image of nature: The Burmese numerative classifier system. Linguistics 165: 109–21.Google Scholar
Becker-Donner, Etta. 1965. Die Sprache der Mano. (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Phil.-Hist. Klasse. Sitzungsberichte 245, 5.) Graz, Vienna, and Cologne: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger.Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2002. Gender, politeness and pragmatic particles in French. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Beijering, Karin. 2012. Expressions of epistemic modality in Mainland Scandinavian: A study into the lexicalization-grammaticalization-pragmaticalization interface. PhD dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Beijering, Karin 2017a. Grammaticalization and (inter)subjectification: The case of the Swedish modals må and måtte. In Van Olmen et al. 2017, pp. 47–80.Google Scholar
Beijering, Karin 2017b. The lexicalization-grammaticalization-pragmaticalization interface: The case of Mainland Scandinavian jeg tror. In Smith et al. 2017, pp. 67–91.Google Scholar
Bencini, Giulia. 2003. Toward a diachronic typology of yes/no question constructions with particles. In Kaiser et al. 2003, pp. 604–21.Google Scholar
Bender, M. Lionel (ed.). 1976. The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia. East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Bentley, Delia and Ledgeway, Adam (eds.). 2007. Si dialetti italoromanzi: Saggi in onore di Nigel B. Vincent. Norfolk: Biddles.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Editions Gallimard.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile 1968. Mutations of linguistic categories. In Lehmann and Malkiel 1968, pp. 83–94.Google Scholar
Bereczki, Andras, Csepregi, Márta, and Klima, Laszlo (eds.). 2008. Unnepi irasok Havas Ferenc tiszteletere. (Urálisztikai Tanulmányok 18.) Budapest: ELTE Finnugor Tanszék.Google Scholar
Linda van, Bergen and Hogg, Richard M. (eds.). 1997. Papers from the 12th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander and Diewald, Gabriele (eds.). 2008. Constructions and language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bernander, Rasmus. 2017. Grammar and grammaticalization in Manda: An analysis of the wider TAM domain in a Tanzanian Bantu language. PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Besnier, Niko. 2000. Tuvaluan: A Polynesian language of the Central Pacific. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beths, Frank. 1999. The history of dare and the status of unidirectionality. Linguistics 37, 6: 1069–1110.Google Scholar
Beyer, Klaus. 2017. Grammaticalization as it happens? A usage-based approach to morphosyntactic variation in Pana. In Kramer and Kießling 2017, pp. 27–44.Google Scholar
Bhat, Darbhe N. S. 1999. The prominence of tense, aspect and mood. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bhat, Darbhe N. S. 2013. Third person pronouns and demonstratives. In Dryer, Matthew S. and Haspelmath, Martin 2013. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. http://wals.info/chapter/43Google Scholar
Binnick, Robert I. 1976. How aspect languages get tense. In Steever, Walker, and Mufwene 1976, pp. 40–9.Google Scholar
Binnick, Robert I. (ed.) 2012. The Oxford handbook of tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bird, Charles S. and Kendall, Martha B.. 1986. Postpositions and auxiliaries in Northern Mande: Syntactic indeterminacy and linguistic analysis. Anthropological
Linguistics 28, 4: 389–403.Google Scholar
Bíró, Bernadett. 2017. From nouns into nominalizers and even further – Grammaticalization processes in Northern Mansi. Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen (FUM ) 41: 1–23.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter. 1996. Areal typology and grammaticalization: Processes of grammaticalization based on nouns and verbs in East and Mainland South East Asian languages. Studies in Language 20, 3: 519–97.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 1998a. Grammaticalization and language contact, constructions and positions. In Ramat, Giacalone and Hopper 1998, pp. 13–58.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 1998b. Adverbiality: The view from the Far East. In van der Auwera 1998, pp. 643–812.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 1999. Classifiers in East and Southeast Asian languages. Counting and beyond. In Grozdanovič 1999, pp. 113–85.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 2004. Grammaticalization without coevolution of form and meaning as an areal phenomenon in East and mainland Southeast Asia – the case of tense-aspect-mood (TAM). In Bisang, Himmelmann, and Wiemer 2004, pp. 109–38.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 2008. Grammaticalization and the areal factor: The perspective of East and mainland Southeast Asian languages. In López-Couso and Seoane 2008, pp. 15–35.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 2009. On the evolution of complexity: Sometimes less is more in East and mainland Southeast Asia. In Sampson et al. 2009, pp. 34–49.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 2010. Grammaticalization in Chinese. A construction-based account. In Traugott and Trousdale 2010, pp. 245–77.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter 2011. Grammaticalization and typology. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 105–17.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter, Himmelmann, Nikolaus, and Wiemer, Björn (eds.). 2004. What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter and Malchukov, Andrej (eds.). 2017. Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 99.) Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter and Malchukov, Andrej. In prep. Cross-linguistic variation in grammaticalization scenarios and areal patterns in grammaticalization: A comparative handbook. (Comparative Handbooks of Linguistics 4.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter and Rinderknecht, Peter (eds.). 1991. Von Europa bis Ozeanien – von der Antonymie zum Relativsatz. (Arbeiten des Seminars für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Zürich 11.) Zürich: Universität Zürich.Google Scholar
Bischoff, Shannon and Jany, Carmen (eds.). 2013. Functional approaches to language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blackings, Mairi and Fabb, Nigel. 2003. A grammar of Ma’di. (Mouton Grammar Library 32.) Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry, Burridge, Kate, and Taylor, John (eds.). 2003. Historical linguistics 2001. Selected papers from the 15th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Melbourne, 13–17 August 2001. (Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Series IV: Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 237.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blake, Frank R. 1934. The origin of pronouns of the first and second persons. American Journal of Philology 55: 244–8.Google Scholar
Blank, Andreas. 2001. Pathways of lexicalizaion. In Haspelmath et al. 2001, pp. 1596–1608.Google Scholar
Blansitt, Edward L. Jr. 1975. Progressive aspect. Working Papers on Language Universals (Stanford, CA) 18: 1–34.Google Scholar
Blansitt, Edward L. 1988. Datives and allatives. In Hammond, Moravcsik, and Wirth 1988, pp. 173–91.Google Scholar
Bleek, Dorothea F. 1956. A Bushman dictionary. (American Oriental Series 41.) New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.Google Scholar
Blass, Regina. 1989. Grammaticalization of interpretive use: The case of ré in Sissala. Lingua 79: 299–326.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2008. Consonant epenthesis: Natural and unnatural histories. In Good 2008, pp. 79–107.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz (ed.). 1922. Handbook of American Indian languages, vol. 2. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Bogaert, Julie van. 2011. I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 49, 2: 295–332.Google Scholar
Bolden, Galina B. 2009. Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 974–98.Google Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny. 2009. Een retorische straks-constructie. In Boogaart, Lalleman, Mooijaart, and van der Wal 2009, pp. 167–83.Google Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny Lalleman, Josien, Mooijaart, Marijke, and van der Wal, Marijke (eds.). 2009. Woorden wisselen: Voor Ariane van Santen bij haar afscheid van de Leidse universiteit. Leiden: Stichting Neerlandistiek Leiden (SNL-reeks 20).Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2005. Compounding and derivation: Evidence for construction morphology. In Dressler et al. 2005, pp. 109–32.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert, Lehmann, Christian, Mugdan, Joachim, and Skopeteas, Stavros (eds.). 2004. Morphologie – Morphology: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung, vol. 2 (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 17, 2.) Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert and van Marle, Jaap (eds.). 1994. Yearbook of morphology. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert. 1983. Kreolsprachen, Substrate und Sprachwandel. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert 1988. Zur grammatischen Struktur des Nubi (Beziehungen zum Arabischen und zu möglichen Substraten). In Boretzky, Enninger, and Stolz 1988, pp. 45–88.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert 1989. Zum Interferenzverhalten des Romani. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 42, 3: 357–74.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert 1996. Entlehnte Wortstellungssyntax im Romani. In Boretzky et al. 1996, pp. 95–119.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, and Stolz, Thomas (eds.). 1985. Akten des 1. Essener Kolloquiums über Kreolsprachen und Sprachkontakte. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, and Stolz, Thomas (eds.). 1989. Beiträge zum 4. Essener Kolloquium über “Sprachkontakt, Sprachwandel, Sprachwechsel, Sprachtod” vom 9.10. – 10. 10.1987 an der Universität Essen. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, and Stolz, Thomas (eds.). 1991. Beiträge zum 6. Essener Kolloquium über “Kontakt und Simplifikation” vom 18. – 19. 11.1989 an der Universität Essen. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, and Stolz, Thomas (eds.). 1996. Areale, Kontakte, Dialekte, Sprachen und ihre Dynamik in mehrsprachigen Situationen. (Bochum-Essener Beiträge zur Sprachwandelforschung 24.) Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, Jeßing, Benedikt, and Stolz, Thomas (eds.). 1993. Sprachwandel und seine Prinzipien: Beiträge zum 8. Bochum-Essener Kolloquium über “Sprachwandel und seine Prinzipien”, vom 19.10. – 21. 10.1990 an der Ruhruniversität Bochum. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Borg, Albert and Plank, Frans (eds.). 1996. The Maltese noun phrase meets typology. Rivista di Linguistica, special issue, 8, 1.Google Scholar
Börjars, Kersti. 2003. Morphological status and (de)grammaticalisation: The Swedish possessive. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 26, 2: 133–63.Google Scholar
Börjars, Kersti and Vincent, Nigel. 2011. Grammaticalization and directionality. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 163–76.Google Scholar
Bossong, Georg. 1985. Zur Entwicklungsdynamik von Kasussystemen. Folia Linguistica Historica 6, 2: 285–321.Google Scholar
Botha, Rudie and de Swart, Henriette (eds.). 2009. Language evolution: The view from restricted linguistic systems. Utrecht: LOT (Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics).Google Scholar
Botne, Robert. 1989. Reconstruction of a grammaticalized auxiliary in Bantu. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 19, 2: 169–86.Google Scholar
Bouquiaux, Luc (ed.). 1980. L’expansion bantoue, vol. 2. Paris: Société d’Études Linguistiques et Anthropologiques de France (SELAF).Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philippe. 1999. The grammaticalization of deictic directionals as modulators of temporal distance. Paper presented at the international conference on New Reflections on Grammaticalization, Potsdam, Germany, June 1999.Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philippe 2002. The grammaticalization of deictic directionals into modulators of temporal distance. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 181–99.Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philippe 2008. On the grammaticalization of ‘come’ and ‘go’ into markers of textual connectivity. In López-Couso and Seoane 2008, pp. 37–56.Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philippe 2014. When come and go go necessive. In Devos, Maud, and Jenneke van der Waal 2014, pp. 103–64.Google Scholar
Bowden, John. 1992. Behind the preposition: Grammaticalization of locatives in Oceanic languages. (Pacific Linguistics Series B, 107.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Bowden, John. 2001. Taba: Description of a South Halmahera language. (Pacific Linguistics 521.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper. 2009. Evidentiality: Linguistic categories and grammaticalization. Functions of Language 16: 9–43.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper and Harder, Peter. 2012. A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 88, 1: 1–44.Google Scholar
Henry, Bradley C. and Hollenbach, Barbara E. (eds.). 1988. Studies in the syntax of Mixtecan languages, vol. 1. (Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics 83.) Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas, Arlington.Google Scholar
Brauner, Siegmund 1993. Innovationsprozesse im Verbalsystem des Schona. In Möhlig, Brauner, and Jungraithmayr 1993, pp. 105–14.Google Scholar
Bravo, Ana 2014. The Spanish auxiliary ir ʽto goʼ: From resultative motion verb to focus marker. In Devos and van der Wal 2014, pp. 187–218.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2008. Grammaticalization, subjectification, and leftward movement of adjectives of difference in the noun phrase. Folia Linguistica 42: 259–306.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine 2010. Reconstructing paths of secondary grammaticalization of same from emphasizing to phoric and nominal-aspectual postdeterminer uses. Transactions of the Philological Society 108, 1: 68–87.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine 2014. What is secondary grammaticalization? Trying to see the wood for the trees in a confusion of interpretations. Folia Linguistica 48, 2: 469–502.Google Scholar
Breeze, Mary J. 1990. A sketch of the phonology and grammar of Gimira (Benchnon). In Hayward 1990, pp. 1–67.Google Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte. 2007. The grammaticalization of Small Size Nouns: reconsidering frequency and analogy. Journal of English Linguistics 35, 4: 293–324.Google Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte 2010. Size noun constructions as collocationally constrained constructions: Lexical and grammaticalized uses. English Language and Linguistics 14, 1: 83–109.Google Scholar
Brenzinger, Matthias and König, Christa (eds.). 2010. Khoisan languages and linguistics: The Riezlern Symposium 2003. 2004. (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 17.) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Brenzinger, Matthias and Kraska-Szlenk, Iwona (eds.). 2015. The body in language: Comparative studies of linguistic embodiment. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Breu, Walter. 1996. Überlegungen zu einer Klassifizierung des grammatischen Wandels im Sprachkontakt (am Beispiel slavischer Kontaktfälle). Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 49, 1: 21–38.Google Scholar
Breu, Walter 2003. Der indefinite Artikel in slavischen Mikrosprachen: Grammatikalisierung im totalen Sprachkontakt. In Kuße 2003, pp. 27–68.Google Scholar
Breu, Walter 2004. Der definite Artikel in der obersorbischen Umgangssprache. In Krause and Sappok 2004, pp. 9–57.Google Scholar
Breu, Walter 2012. The grammaticalization of an indefinite article in Slavic micro-languages. In Wiemer et al. 2012, pp. 275–322.Google Scholar
Bright, William. 1957. The Karok language. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bright, William 1992 (ed.). International encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems. Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 49.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2001. From matrix clause to pragmatic marker: The history of look-forms. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 2: 177–99.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2002. Grammaticalization versus lexicalization reconsidered: On the “late” use of temporal adverbs. In Fanego et al. 2002, pp. 67–97.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2004. Subject clitics in English: A case of degrammaticalization. In Lindquist and Mair 2004, pp. 227–56.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008a. The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic development. (Studies in English Language.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008b. “Where grammar and lexis meet”: Composite predicates in English. In Seoane and López-Couso 2008, pp. 33–54.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2011. The grammaticalization of complex predicates. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 556–66.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. (Research Surveys in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brisson, Robert and Boursier, Daniel. 1979. Petit-dictionnaire baka-français. MS, Douala, Cameroon.Google Scholar
Brown, Lea and Dryer, Matthew. 2008. The verb for ‘and’ in Walman, a Torricelli language of Papua New Guinea. Language 84, 3: 528–65.Google Scholar
Brucale, Luisa and Mocciaro, Egle. 2017. Paths of grammaticalization of the Early Latin per/per-: A cognitive hypothesis. In Van Olmen et al. 2017, pp. 199–235.Google Scholar
Bruce, Les. 1984. The Alamblak language of Papua New Guinea (East Sepik). (Pacific Linguistics, Series C, 81.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Brugman, Claudia and Macaulay, Monica. 1986. Interacting semantic systems: Mixtec expressions of location. Berkeley Linguistics Society 12: 315–27.Google Scholar
Bruyn, Adrienne. 1995a. Relative clauses in early Sranan. In Arends 1995, pp. 149–202.Google Scholar
Bruyn, Adrienne 1996. On identifying instances of grammaticalization in Creole languages. In Baker and Syea 1996, pp. 29–46.Google Scholar
Bruyn, Adrienne 2009. Grammaticalization in creoles: Ordinary and not-so-ordinary cases. Studies in Language 33, 2: 312–27.Google Scholar
Buchholz, Oda and Fiedler, Wilfried. 1987. Albanische Grammatik. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Buchholz, Oda, Fiedler, Wilfried, and Uhlisch, Gerda. 1993. Wörterbuch Albanisch – Deutsch. Berlin and Munich: Langenscheidt Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Burridge, Kate. 1995. From modal auxiliary to lexical verb: The curious case of Pennsylvania German wotte. In Hogg and van Bergen 1995, pp. 19–33.Google Scholar
Butterworth, Brian, Comrie, Bernard, and Dahl, Östen. 1984. Explanations for language universals. Berlin, New York, and Amsterdam: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1985a. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. (Typological Studies in Language 9.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1985b. On the nature of grammatical categories. Paper presented at the Second Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Buffalo, NY, 3 October 1985.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1988. Semantic substance vs contrast in the development of grammatical meaning. Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 247–64.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2003a. Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In Tomasello 2003, pp. 145–67.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2003b. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In Joseph and Janda 2003, pp. 602–23.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82, 4: 711–33.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2008. Grammaticization: Implications for a theory of language. In Guo et al. 2008, 345–56.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2009. Language universals and usage-based theory. In Christiansen et al. 2009, pp. 17–39.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2011. Usage-based theory and grammaticalization. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 69–78.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Beckner, Clay. 2010. Usage-based theory. In Heine and Narrog 2010, pp. 827–56.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Dahl, Östen. 1989. The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13, 1: 51–103.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Fleischman, Suzanne (eds.). 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse. (Typological Studies in Language 32.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Haiman, John, and Thompson, Sandra A. (eds.). 1997. Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givón. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Hopper, Paul J. (eds.). 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. (Typological Studies in Language 45.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Noonan, Michael (eds.). 2001. Complex sentences in grammar and discourse: Studies presented to Sandra Thompson. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Pagliuca, William. 1985. Cross linguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning. In Fisiak 1985, pp. 59–83.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Pagliuca, William, and Perkins, Revere D.. 1990. On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. In Croft et al. 1990, pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Pagliuca, William, and Perkins, Revere D. 1991. Back to the future. In Traugott and Heine 1991b, pp. 17–58.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Perkins, Revere D., and Pagliuca, William. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Thompson, Sandra. 1997. Three frequency effects in syntax. Berkeley Linguistics Society 23: 378–88.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 2009. The role of prefabs in grammaticization: How the particular and the general interact in language change. In Corrigan et al. 2009, pp. 187–217.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. and Cacoullos, Rena Torres 2015. Grammaticalization and variation of will and shall in Shakespeare’s comedies. In Torres Cacoullos et al. 2015, pp. 131–46.Google Scholar
Byrd, Steven Eric. 2006. Calunga, an Afro-Brazilian speech of the Triangulo Mineiro. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Services.Google Scholar
Byrne, Francis X. 1988. Deixis as a noncomplementizer strategy for creole subordination marking. Linguistics 26, 3: 335–64.Google Scholar
Byrne, Francis X. and Holm, John A. (eds.). 1993. Atlantic meets Pacific: A global view of pidginization and creolization. (Creole Language Library 11.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Byrne, Francis X. and Winford, Donald (eds.). 1993. Focus and grammatical relations in Creole languages. (Creole Language Library 12.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Calame-Griaule, Geneviève. 1968. Dictionnaire dogon (dialect toro): Langue et civil-isation. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1985. The Pipil language of El Salvador. (Mouton Grammar Library 1.) Berlin, New York, and Amsterdam: Mouton.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle 1987. Syntactic change in Pipil. International Journal of American Linguistics 53, 3: 253–80.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle 1991. Some grammaticalization changes in Estonian and their implications. In Traugott and Heine 1991a, pp. 285–99.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle 1997. Approaches to reanalysis and its role in the explanation of syntactic change. In van Bergen and Hogg 1997.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle 2001. What’s wrong with grammaticalization? Language Sciences 23, 2–3: 113–61.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Janda, Richard. 2001. Introduction: Conceptions of grammaticalization and their problems. Language Sciences 23, 2–3: 93–112.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Mixco, Mauricio J.. 2007. A glossary of historical linguistics. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Canon, Rev. and Gore, Edward C. [1931] 1952. Zande and English dictionary. Revised edn. London: Sheldon Press.Google Scholar
Canu, Gaston. 1976. La langue mò:ré, dialecte de Ouagadougou (Haute-Volta): Déscription synchronique. Paris: SELAF.Google Scholar
Cao, Guangshun, Chappell, Hilary, Djamouri, R., and Wiebusch, Thekla (eds.). 2013. Breaking down the barriers: Interdisciplinary studies in Chinese linguistics and beyond. 2 vols. Taipei: Academia Sinitica.Google Scholar
Carden, Guy. 1993. The Mauritian Creole ‘lekor’ reflexive: Substrate influence on the target-location parameter. In Byrne and Holm 1993, pp. 105–17.Google Scholar
Carden, Guy and Stewart, William A.. 1988. Binding theory, bioprogram, and creolization: Evidence from Haitian Creole. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 3: 1–67.Google Scholar
Carden, Guy and Stewart, William A. 1989. Mauritian Creole reflexives: A reply to Corne. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 4, 1: 65–101.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne. 2007. From preposition to article: The grammaticalization of the French partitive. Studies in Language 31: 1–49.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne and Lamiroy, Béatrice. 2014. The grammaticalization of the prepositional partitive in Romance. In Luraghi and Huumo 2014, pp. 477–522.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne and De Mulder, Walter. 2010. The emergence of the definite article in Late Latin ille in competition with ipse. In Cuyckens et al. 2010, pp. 241–76.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne, De Mulder, Walter, and Lamiroy, Béatrice. 2012. Introduction: The pace of grammaticalization in a typological perspective. Folia Linguistica 46, 2: 287–301.Google Scholar
Carlin, Eithne. 1993. The So language. (Afrikanistische Monographien 2.) Cologne: Institut für Afrikanistik, Universität zu Köln.Google Scholar
Carlson, Robert. 1991. Grammaticalization of postpositions and word order in Senufo languages. In Traugott and Heine 1991b, pp. 201–23.Google Scholar
Carlson, Robert 1994. A grammar of Supyire. (Mouton Grammar Library 14.) Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Carlson, Robert 2014. The grammaticalization of ʽgoʼ as an intensifier in Supyire. In Devos and van der Wal 2014, pp. 249–80.Google Scholar
Carrasquel, José. 1995. The evolution of demonstrative ille from Latin to Modern Spanish: A grammaticalization analysis. PhD dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar
Casad, Eugene H. and Palmer, Gary B.. 2003. Cognitive linguistics and non-Indo-European languages. Berlin, New York: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Cennamo, Michela. 2005. Passive auxiliaries in Late Latin. In Kiss and Salvi 2005, pp. 179–96.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela 2006. The rise and grammaticalization paths in Latin fieri and facere as passive auxiliaries. In Abraham and Leisiö 2006, pp. 311–36.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela 2007. Auxiliaries and serials between late Latin and early Romance. In Bentley and Ledgeway 2007, pp. 63–87.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela 2015. Paths of grammaticalization in Romance voice systems. Paper presented at the symposium on “Areal Patterns of Grammaticalization and Crosslinguistic Variation in Grammaticalization Scenarios”, Mainz, 12–14 March 2015.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 1977. The evolution of third person verb agreement in the Iroquoian languages. In Li 1977, pp. 493–524.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 2000. Florescence as a force in grammaticalization. In Gildea 2000, pp. 39–64.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 2002. Putting grammaticalization in its place. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 395–412.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. and Nichols, Johanna (eds.). 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Chaker, Salem. 1997. Quelques faits de grammaticalisation dans le système verbal berbère. In Lemaréchal 1997, pp. 103–21.Google Scholar
Chang, Roland Chiang-Jen. 1977. Co-verbs in spoken Chinese. Taipei: Cheng Chung Book Company.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Chapin, Paul G. 1978. Easter Island: A characteristic VSO language. In Lehmann 1978, pp. 139–68.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 1986. Formal and colloquial adversity passives in standard Chinese. Linguistics 24, 6: 1025–52.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. (ed.). 2001a. Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2001b. Synchrony and diachrony of Sinitic languages: A brief history of Chinese dialects. In Chappell 2001a, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2001c. A typology of evidential markers in Sinitic languages. In Chappell 2001a, pp. 56–84.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2001d. Dialect grammar in two early modern Southern Min texts: A comparative study of dative kit, comitative cang, and diminutive -guia. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 28,2: 247–302.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2006. From Eurocentrism to Sinocentrism: the case of disposal constructions in Sinitic languages. In Ameka, Dench, and Evans, pp. 441–86.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2008. Variation in the grammaticalization of complementizers from verba dicendi in Sinitic languages. Linguistic Typology 12: 45–98.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2013. Pan-Sinitic object markers: morphology and syntax. In Cao et al. 2013, pp. 785–816.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. (ed.). 2015a. Diversity in Sinitic languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2015b. Introduction: Ways of tackling diversity in Sinitic languages. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2105c. Linguistic areas in China for differential object marking, passive, comparative constructions. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 13–52.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. 2017. From verb of saying to discourse marker in Southern Min: (Inter)subjectification and grammaticalization. In Van Olmen et al. 2017, pp. 139–65.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. and McGregor, William (eds.). 1996. The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part–whole relation. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M., Ming, Li, and Peyraube, Alain. 2007. Chinese linguistics and typology: The state of the art. Linguistic Typology 11, 1: 187–211.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. and Peyraube, Alain. 2011. Grammaticalization in Sinitic languages. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 784–94.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary M. and Peyraube, Alain 2015. The comparative construction in Sinitic languages: Synchronic and diachronic variation. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 134–54.Google Scholar
Chen, Cheng-Fu. 2005. Object voice and nominalization in Rukai. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 35–47.Google Scholar
Chen, Weirong. 2015. Comparative constructions of inequality in the Southern Min dialect of Huiʼan. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 248–72.Google Scholar
Chen, Weirong Forthcoming. A grammar of Southern Min: The Hui’an dialect. (Sinitic languages of China: Typological descriptions.) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Chen, Yujie. 2015. The semantic differentiation of demonstratives in Sinitic languages. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 81–109.Google Scholar
Chen, Zhangtai and Xingjian, Li. 1996. Putonghua Jichu Fangyan Jiben Cihuiji (Anthology of the basic vocabulary of the main varieties of Mandarin.) Beijing: Yuwen Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Childs, G. Tucker. 1995. A grammar of Kisi, a Southern Atlantic language. (Mouton Grammar Library 16.) Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chirikba, Viacheslav. 2003. Evidential category and evidential strategy in Abkhaz. In Aikhenvald and Dixon 2003, pp. 243–72.Google Scholar
Chisholm, William S. Jr., T. Milic, Louis, and Greppin, John A. C. (eds.). 1984. Interrogativity. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Christaller, Johann G. [1875] 1964. A grammar of the Asante and Fante language called Tshi. Basel. Reprinted: Ridgewood, NJ: Gregg Press.Google Scholar
Choi-Jonin, Injoo, Duval, Marc, and Soutet, Olivier (eds.). 2010. Typologie et Comparatisme: Hommages offerts à Alain Lemaréchal. (Supplementa 28.) Leuven and Paris: Peeters, Orbis.Google Scholar
Christiansen, Morten H. et al. (eds.). 2009. Language universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chung, Jae-Young. 1993. A study on the grammaticalization of dA syntagma in Middle Korean. PhD dissertation, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Korea.Google Scholar
Chung, Jae-Young 1997. Myengsauy mwunpephwa [Grammaticalization of nouns]. Kyujanggak 20: 127–51.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1976. Case marking and grammatical relations in Polynesian. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Clancy, Patricia M. and Thompson, Sandra A. (eds.). 1991. Asian discourse and grammar. Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics 3. Santa Barbara: University of California.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Fox Tree, Jean E.. 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition 84: 73–111.Google Scholar
Clark, Marybeth. 1979. Coverbs: Evidence for the derivation of prepositions from verbs – new evidence from Hmong. Working Papers in Linguistics (Hawaii) 11, 2: 1–12.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike. 1985. Zur Entstehung von Genussystemen: Überlegungen zu einigen theoretischen Aspekten, verbunden mit einer Fallstudie des Zande. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike 1986. To have or not to have: On the conceptual base of predicative possession in some African languages. MS, University of Cologne.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike 1993. Die Stellung von Verb und Objekt in Niger-Kongo-Sprachen: Ein Beitrag zur Rekonstruktion historischer Syntax. (Afrikanistische Monographien 1.) Cologne: Universität zu Köln.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike 1994. Word order change as category change: The Mande case. In Pagliuca 1994, pp. 191–232.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike and Heine, Bernd. 1986. On the metaphorical base of grammar. Studies in Language 10, 2: 297–335.Google Scholar
Claudi, Ulrike and Heine, Bernd 1989. On the nominal morphology of ‘alienability’ in some African languages. In Newman and Botne 1989, pp. 3–19.Google Scholar
Clyne, Paul R., Hanks, William F., and Hofbauer, Carol L. (eds.). 1979. Papers from the Fifteenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1995. The expression of root and epistemic possibility in English. In Bybee and Fleischman 1995, pp. 55–66.Google Scholar
Cole, Desmond T. [1955] 1987. An introduction to Tswana grammar. 5th impression. Cape Town and Johannesburg: Longman.Google Scholar
Colibri, Ediçoes (ed.). 1992. Actas do Colóquio Sobre Crioulos de Base Lexical Portuguesa. Lisbon.Google Scholar
Company Company, Concepción. 2002. Grammaticalization and category weakness. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 201–15.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard 1981. Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard 2002. Reconstruction, typology and reality. In Hickey 2003, pp. 243–57.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard and Estrada-Fernández, Zarina (eds.). 2012. Relative clauses in the languages of the Americas: A typological overview. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard and Kuteva, Tania, 2005. The evolution of grammatical structures and ‘functional need’ explanations. In Tallerman, Maggie, Language origins: Perspectives on evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Condillac, Etienne Bonnot de. 1746. Essai sur l’origine des connaissances humaines. Paris.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville. 1987. The morphology/syntax interface: Evidence from possessive adjectives in Slavonic. Language 63, 2: 299–345.Google Scholar
Corne, Chris. 1971. Le patois créole français de la Guyane (St.-Laurent-du-Maroni): Esquisse de grammaire. Te Reo 14: 81–103.Google Scholar
Corne, Chris 1977. Seychelles Creole grammar: Elements for Indian Ocean Proto-Creole reconstruction. (Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 91.) Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Corne, Chris 1988a. Patterns of subject-object coreference in Seychelles Creole. Te Reo 31: 73–84.Google Scholar
Corne, Chris 1988b. Mauritian Creole reflexives. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 3: 69–94.Google Scholar
Corne, Chris 1989. On French influence in the development of Creole reflexive patterns. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 4: 103–15.Google Scholar
Cornillie, Bert. 2004. The shift from lexical to subjective readings in Spanish prometer ‘to promise’ and amenazar ‘to threaten’: A corpus-based account. Pragmatics 14, 1: 1–30.Google Scholar
Cornillie, Bert 2008. On the grammaticalization and (inter)subjectivity of evidential (semi-) auxiliaries in Spanish. In Seoane and López-Couso 2008, pp. 55–76.Google Scholar
Cornillie, Bert and Toledo y Huerta, Álvaro S. Octavio de. 2017. The diachrony of subjective amenazar ‘threaten’: On Latin-induced grammaticalization in Spanish. In Smith et al. 2017, pp. 187–207.Google Scholar
Corominas, J. 1954a. Diccionario crítico etimológico de la lengua castellana, vol. 2: CH–K, indices. Bern: Francke Verlag.Google Scholar
Corominas, J. 1954b. Diccionario crítico etimológico de la lengua castellana, vol. 4: Ri–Z, indices. Bern: Francke Verlag.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Roberta L., Moravcsik, Edith A., Ouali, Hamid, and Wheatley, Kathleen (eds.). 2009. Formulaic language, vol. 1: Distribution and historical change. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert and van Riemsdijk, Henk (eds.). 1994. Studies on scrambling: Movement and non-movement approaches to free word-order phenomena. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1976. Das romanische Verbalsystem, ed. Bertsch, Hansbert. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio 1980. Vom Primat der Geschichte: Oswald Szemerényi zu seinem 65. Geburtstag. Sprachwissenschaft 5: 125–45.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2007. A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2011. On core case marking patterns in two Tibeto-Burman languages of Nagaland. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 34: 21–47.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2016. On grammaticalization processes in Ao: sources, pathways, and functional extensions. Lecture presented at the University of Düsseldorf, July 2016.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2018. Grammaticalization processes in the languages of South Asia. In Narrog and Heine 2018, pp. 189–218.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2011. Grammaticalization and conversation. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 424–37.Google Scholar
Coveney, Aidan. 2000. Vestiges of nous and the 1st person plural verb in informal spoken French. Language Sciences 22: 447–81.Google Scholar
Cowan, J. Ronayne and Schuh, Russell G.. 1976. Spoken Hausa, part 1: Hausa language-grammar. Ithaca, NY: Spoken Language Services.Google Scholar
Cowie, Claire. 1995. Grammaticalization and the snowball effect (review of Grammaticalization [1993]). Language and Communication 15, 2: 181–93.Google Scholar
Craig, Colette G. 1986a. Jacaltec noun classifiers: A study in grammaticalization. Lingua 70: 241–84.Google Scholar
Craig, Colette G. (ed.). 1986b. Noun Classes and Categorization. (Proceedings of a Symposium on Categorization and Noun Classification, Eugene, OR, October 1983.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Craig, Colette G. 1987. Rama relational prefixes: From postpositions to verbal prefixes. In DeLancey and Tomlin 1987, pp. 51–71.Google Scholar
Craig, Colette G. 1991. Ways to go in Rama: A case study of polygrammaticalization. In Traugott and Heine 1991b, pp. 455–92.Google Scholar
Crass, Joachim. 2017. Similarity and related functions in Libido. In Treis and Vanhove 2017, pp. 389–417.Google Scholar
Crass, Joachim and Meyer, Ronny (eds.). 2009. Language contact and language change in Ethiopia. (Topics in Interdisciplinary African Studies 14.) Cologne: Köppe.Google Scholar
Crazzolara, Joseph P. [1938] 1955. A study of the Acooli language. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crazzolara, Joseph P. 1960. A study of the Logbara (Ma’di) language: Grammar and vocabulary. London, New York, and Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis. 2017a. Similarity, suitability, and non-epistemic modalities (volitionality, ability, and obligation). In Treis and Vanhove 2017, pp. 79–89.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis 2017b. Copulas originating from the imperative of ʽsee/lookʼ verbs in Mande languages. In Bisang and Malchukov 2017, pp. 45–66.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis In prep.a. Grammaticalization in Tswana. In Bisang and Malchukov, in prep.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis In prep.b. Grammaticalization in Manding languages. In Bisang and Malchukov, in prep.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis and Nouguier-Voisin, Sylvie. 2008. Valency-changing operations in Wolof and the notion of co-participation. In König and Gast 2008, pp. 289–305.Google Scholar
Crellin, Robert and Jügel, Th.. Forthcoming. The perfect in Indo-European. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia. 1998. Grammaticalization and clause linkage strategies: A typological approach with particular reference to Ancient Greek. In Giacalone Ramat and Hopper 1998, pp. 59–88.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1990. Typology and universals. (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William 1991b. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William 2000. Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Croft, William 2003. Typology and universals. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William 2006. The relevance of an evolutionary model. In Thomsen 2006, pp. 91–132.Google Scholar
Croft, William 2007. The origins of grammar in the verbalization of experience. Cognitive Linguistics 18, 3: 339–82.Google Scholar
Croft, William and Cruse, Alan. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William, Denning, Keith, and Kemmer, Suzanne (eds.). 1990. Studies in typology and diachrony: Papers presented to Joseph H. Greenberg on his 75th birthday. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Croft, William and Poole, Keith T.. 2008. Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34: 1–37.Google Scholar
Crowley, Terry. 1982. The Paamese language of Vanuatu. (Pacific Linguistics B-87.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Crowley, Terry and Rigsby, Bruce. 1979. Cape York Creole. In Shopen 1979, pp. 152–207.Google Scholar
Cruz, Juan M. de la. 1977. Synchronic-diachronic remarks on the nature of prefixation. Orbis 26, 2: 262–92.Google Scholar
Csató, Éva Á. 2013. Growing apart in shared grammaticalization. In Robbeets and Cuyckens 2013, pp. 251–8.Google Scholar
Csepregi, Márta. 2008. Az osztjak TAHI ‘hely’ szo helye a mondatban. [The place of the Ostyak word TAHI ‘place’ in the sentence.] In Bereczki, Csepregi, and Klima 2008, pp. 125–35.Google Scholar
Csepregi, Marta 2013. Tobbfunkcios morfemakapcsolatok a szurguti hantiban. [Multifunctional morpheme combinations in Surgut Khanty.] Nyelvtudomanyi Kozlemenyek 109: 91–108.Google Scholar
Cuyckens, Hubert, Vandelanotte, Lieven, and Davidse, Kristin (eds.). 2010. Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen (ed.). 2000b. Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. (EALT/EUROTYP 20, 6.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2001. Inflationary effects in language and elsewhere. In Bybee and Hopper 2001, pp. 471–80.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. (Studies in Language Companion Series 71.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2008. Grammatical resources and linguistic complexity: Sirionó as a language without NP coordination. In Miestamo et al. 2008, pp. 153–64.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2009. Two pathways of grammatical evolution. In Givón and Shibatani 2009, pp. 239–48.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2011. Grammaticalization and linguistic complexity. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 153–62.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen 2015. Grammaticalization in the North: Noun phrase morphosyntax in Scandinavian vernaculars. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 6.) Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen and Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria (eds.). 2001a. Circum-Baltic languages: Typology and contact, vol. 1: Past and present. (Studies in Language and Companion Series 54.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen and Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria (eds.). 2001b. Circum-Baltic languages: Typology and contact, vol. 2: Grammar and typology. (Studies in Language and Companion Series 55.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen and Wälchli, Bernhard. 2016. Perfects and iamitives: Two gram types in one grammatical space. Letras de Hoje 51, 3: 325.Google Scholar
Dahmen, Wolfgang , Günter Holthus, Johannes Kramer, Michael Meltzeltin, Wolfgang Schweickard, and Otto Winkelmann (eds.). 1998. Neuere Beschreibungsmethoden der Syntax romanischer Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Daniel, Michael and Moravcsik, Edith. 2005. The associative plural. In Haspelmath et al. 2005, pp. 150–3.Google Scholar
Daniels, Kelsey. 2014. On the grammaticalization of venga ʽcomeʼ as a discourse marker in Peninsular Spanish. In Devos and van der Wal 2014, pp. 219–47.Google Scholar
Darmon, Chloé. 2017. The morpheme -(ä)ŋä in Xamtanga: Functions and grammaticalisation targets. In Treis and Vanhove 2017, 359–86.Google Scholar
Darnell, Michael, Moravcsik, Edith, Newmeyer, Frederick, Noonan, Michael, and Wheatley, Kathleen (eds.). 1999. Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics. Volume 1: General Papers. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin et al. (eds.). 2012. Grammaticalization and language change: New reflections. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
de León, , see LeónGoogle Scholar
De Guzman, Videa P. and Bender, Byron W. (eds.). 2000. Grammatical analysis of Austronesian and other languages: Studies in honor of Stanley Starosta. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.Google Scholar
De Mulder, Walter and Carlier, Anne. 2011. The grammaticalization of definite articles. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 519–31.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2010. Grammatical interference: Subject marker for and the phrasal verb particles out and forth. In Traugott and Trousdale 2010, pp. 75–104.Google Scholar
de Sousa, Hilário. 2015. Language contact in Nanning: Nanning Pinghua and Nanning Cantonese. In Chappell 2015a, pp. 157–89.Google Scholar
de Wolf, see WolfGoogle Scholar
DeCamp, David et al. (eds.). 1974. Pidgins and creoles: Current trends and prospects. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1983. Agentivity and causation: Data from Newari. Berkeley Linguistics Society 9: 54–63.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott 1986. Toward a history of Tai classifier systems. In Craig 1986b, pp. 437–52.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott 1991. The origins of verb serialization in modern Tibetan. Studies in Language 15, 1: 1–23.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1, 1: 33–52.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott 2004. Grammaticalization: from syntax to morphology. In Booij et al. 2004, pp. 1590–9.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott 2011. Grammaticalization and syntax: A functional perspective. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 365–77.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott and Tomlin, Russell (eds.). 1987. Proceedings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Pacific Linguistics Conference. Eugene: University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Dempwolff, Otto. 1934–5. Einführung in die Sprache der Nama-Hottentotten. Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen-Sprachen 25, 1: 30–67.Google Scholar
Denning, Keith. 1987. Obligation and space: The origins of markers of obligative modality. Chicago Linguistic Society 23: 45–55.Google Scholar
Dér, Csilla Ilona and Markó, Alexandra. 2010. A pilot study of Hungarian discourse markers. Language and Speech 53, 2: 135–80.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. 1985b. Hixkaryana and linguistic typology. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of Texas at Arlington Press.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. and Pullum, Geoffrey (eds.). 1986. Handbook of Amazonian languages, vol. 1. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. (eds.). 1990. Handbook of Amazonian languages, vol. 2. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. (eds.). 1998. Handbook of Amazonian Languages, vol. 4. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Detges, Ulrich. 2000. Time and truth: The grammaticalization of resultatives and perfects within a theory of subjectification. Studies in Language 24: 345–77.Google Scholar
Detges, Ulrich 2004. How cognitive is grammaticalization? The history of the Catalan perfet perifràstic. In Fischer, Norde, and Perridon 2004a, pp. 211–27.Google Scholar
Detges, Ulrich and Waltereit, Richard. 2007. Different functions, different histories: Modal particles and discourse markers from a diachronic point of view. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 6: 61–81.Google Scholar
Deutscher, Guy. 2000. Syntactic change in Akkadian: The evolution of sentential complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deutscher, Guy 2011. The grammaticalization of quotatives. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 643–52.Google Scholar
Devitt, Dan. 1990. The diachronic development of semantics in copulas. Berkeley Linguistics Society 16: 103–15.Google Scholar
Devitt, Dan 1994. Copula constructions in crosslinguistic and diachronic perspective. PhD dissertation, SUNY-Buffalo.Google Scholar
Devos, Maud 2014. Motion verbs in Shangaci: Lexical semantics and discourse functions. In Devos and van der Wal 2014, pp. 281–317.Google Scholar
Devos, Maud and Wal, Jenneke van der. 2010. ʽGoʼ on a rare grammaticalisation path to focus. In van Kampen and Nouwen 2010, pp. 4–58.Google Scholar
Devos, Maud and Wal, Jenneke van der (eds.). 2014. COME and GO off the beaten grammaticalization path. (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 272.) Berlin and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Devoto, Giacomo and Oli, Gian Carlo. 1971. Dizionario della lingua italiana. Florence: Le Monnier.Google Scholar
Dickens, Patrick. 2005. A concise grammar of Ju’hoan with a Ju’hoan–English glossary and a subject index, ed Vossen, Rainer and Biesele, Megan. (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 17.) Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 1997. The diachronic reanalysis of demonstratives in crosslinguistic perspective. Chicago Linguistic Society 33: 83–98.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger 1999a. The morphosyntax of demonstratives in synchrony and diachrony. Linguistic Typology 3: 1–49.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger 1999b. Demonstratives: Form, function, and grammaticalization. (Typological Studies in Language 42.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger 2003. The relationship between demonstratives and interrogatives. Studies in Language 27, 3: 635–55.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger 2006. Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 17, 4: 463–89.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger 2011. Grammaticalization and language acquisition. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 130–41.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele. 1997. Eine Einführung in Sein und Werden grammatischer Formen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele 2002. A model for relevant types of contexts in grammaticalization. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 103–120.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele 2011a. Grammaticalization and pragmaticalization. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 450–61.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele 2011b. Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics 49, 2: 365–90.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele and Ferraresi, Gisella. 2008. Semantic, syntactic and constructional restrictions in the diachronic rise of modal particles in German: A corpus-based study on the formation of a grammaticalization channel. In Seoane and López-Couso 2008, pp. 77–110.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele and Smirnova, Elena (eds.). 2010. Paradigmaticity and obligatoriness. Special issue: Acta Linguistica Hafnensia 42, 1.Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1987. Copula auxiliation: How and why? In Harris and Ramat 1987, pp. 53–84.Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of Functional Grammar, part 2: Complex and derived constructions. (Functional Grammar Series 21.) Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit Jan. 1983. The Turkana language. (Publications in African Languages and Linguistics 2.) Dordrecht and Cinnaminson: Foris.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit Jan (ed.). 1986. Current Approaches to African Linguistics, vol. 3. (Publications in African Languages and Linguistics 6.) Dordrecht and Cinnaminson: Foris.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit Jan 1995. The emergence of tense marking in the Nilotic-Bantu borderland as an instance of areal adaptation. In Zima 1995, pp. 29–43.Google Scholar
Disterheft, Dorothy. 1980. The syntactic development of the infinitive in Indo-European. Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 1980. The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 1994. Ergativity. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 69.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 2002. Australian languages: Their origin and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 2003. Evidentiality in Jarawara. In Aikhenvald and Dixon 2003, pp. 165–88.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 2004. The Jarawara language of southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 2010a. Basic linguistic theory, vol. 1: Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. B. 2010b. Basic linguistic theory, vol. 2: Grammatical topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Do-Hurinville, Danh Thành. 2010. Les parties du discours en vietnamien: Grammaticalisation et transcatégorialité. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 105, 1: 327–70.Google Scholar
Doke, Clement M. [1927] 1988. Textbook of Zulu grammar. 6th edn. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.Google Scholar
Doke, Clement M. and Mofokeng, S. M.. [1957] 1985. Textbook of Southern Sotho grammar. 2nd edn. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.Google Scholar
Dombrowsky-Hahn, Klaudia. 2012. Grammaticalization of the deictic verbs ʽcomeʼ and ʽgoʼ in Syer. In Mietzner and Claudi 2012, pp. 89–114.Google Scholar
Dostie, Gaetane. 2004. Pragmaticalisation et marqueurs discursifs: Analyse sémantique et traitement lexicographique. Brussels: De Boeck and Larcier.Google Scholar
Downing, Bruce T. 1978. Some universals of relative clause structure. In Greenberg, Ferguson, and Moravcsik 1978b, pp. 375–418.Google Scholar
Doyle, Aidan. 2002. Yesterday’s affixes as today’s clitics: A case-study in degrammaticalization. In Wischer and Diewald 2002, pp. 67–81.Google Scholar
Dragomirescu, Adina and Nicolae, Alexandru 2014. The multiple grammaticalization of Romanian veni ʽcomeʼ: Focusing on the passive construction. In Devos and van der Wal 2014, pp. 69–100.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U., Kastovsky, Dieter, Pfeiffer, Oskar E., and Rainer, Franz (eds.). 2005. Morphology and its demarcations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Driem, George van. 1987. A grammar of Limbu. (Mouton Grammar Library 4.) Berlin, New York, and Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Drinka, Birgit. 2012. The Balkan perfects: Grammaticalization and contact. In Wiemer et al. 2012, pp. 511–58.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2006a. Functionalism and the theory-metalanguage confusion. In Wiebe et al. 2006, pp. 27–59.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2006b. Descriptive theories, explanatory theories, and basic linguistic theory. In Ameka, Dench, and Evans 2006, pp. 207–234.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2008. The verbs for ‘and’ in Walman, a Torricelli language of Papua New Guinea. Language 84, 3: 528–65.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. and Haspelmath, Martin (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald and Vogt, Carlos. 1979. De magis à mais: Une hypothèse sémantique. Revue de Lingistique Romane 43: 317–41.Google Scholar
Dufter, Andreas and Stark, Elisabeth. 2008. Double direct object marking in Spanish and Italian. In Seoane and López-Couso 2008, pp. 111–29.Google Scholar
Dunn, Andrea Susan. The pragmatics of selected discourse markers in Swahili. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Early, Robert. 2000. Sit, stand, lie: Posture verbs and imperfective. In Palmer, B. and Geraghty, P. (eds.), Sicol. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Oceanic Linguistics, vol. 2: Historical and descriptive studies. (Pacific Linguistics 505.) Canberra: Australian National University, pp. 81–103.Google Scholar
Ebermann, Erwin. 1986. Kleines Wörterbuch der Bambara-Sprache (Deutsch–Bambara, Bambara–Deutsch). Vienna: Afro-Pub.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. 1987. Discourse function of motion verbs in Chadic. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere (AAP, Cologne) 10: 53–71.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. 1991. Vom Verbum dicendi zur Konjunktion: Ein Kapitel universaler Grammatikentwicklung. In Bisang and Rinderknecht 1991, pp. 77–95.Google Scholar
Eckhardt, Regine. 2011. Grammaticalization and semantic change. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 389–400.Google Scholar
Eckhardt, Regine 2012. Grammaticalization and semantic reanalysis. In Maienborn et al. 2012, pp. 2675–702.Google Scholar
Eckkrammer, Eva Martha. 2001. Grammatikalisierungsaspekte des Kreolischen der ABC-Inseln. In Schäfer-Prieß et al. 2001, pp. 169–190.Google Scholar
Egan, Thomas. 2017. The subjective and intersubjective uses of ‘fail to’ and ‘not fail to’. In Van Olmen et al. 2017, pp. 167–96.Google Scholar
Elliott, Jennifer R. 2000. Realis and irrealis: Forms and concepts of the grammaticalisation of reality. Linguistic Typology 4, 1: 55–90.Google Scholar
Emanatian, Michele. 1992. Chagga ‘come’ and ‘go’: Metaphor and the development of tense-aspect. Studies in Language 16, 1: 1–33.Google Scholar
Emkow, Carola. 2001. Intensifiers and reflexive markers from a typological perspective. MA thesis, Free University, Berlin.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. 2003. Linguistic epidemiology: Semantics and grammar of language contact in Mainland Southeast Asia. London: RoutledgeCurzon.Google Scholar
Eom, Sujin. 2003. Grammaticalization of quasi-modal auxiliaries: With special reference to be going to and have to. Journal of Linguistic Science 24: 167–88.Google Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2005. Areal diffusion and the development of evidentiality: Evidence from Hup. Studies in Language 29, 3: 617–50.Google Scholar
Erbaugh, Mary S. 1986. Taking stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Craig 1986b, pp. 339–436.Google Scholar
Erman, Britt and Kotsinas, Ulla-Britt. 1993. Pragmaticalization: The case of ba and you know. Studier i modern sprakvetenskap 10: 76–92.Google Scholar
Ernszt, Martina. 2012. On the different uses of the deictic directional verbs ʽgoʼ and ʽcomeʼ in Nǁng. In Mietzner and Claudi 2012, pp. 115–26.Google Scholar
Escure, Geneviève. 2012. The grammaticalization of evidential markers in Garifuna. In Wiemer et al. 2012, pp. 357–80.Google Scholar
Esseesy, Mohssen 2018. Typological features of grammaticalization in Semitic. In Narrog and Heine 2018, pp. 35–56.Google Scholar
Essien, Okon E. 1982. The so-called reflexive pronouns and reflexivization in Ibibio. Studies in African Linguistics 13, 2: 93–108.Google Scholar
Estrada-Fernández, Zarina. 2005. The pronominal form a- in Pima Bajo as a middle marker. International Journal of American Linguistics 71, 3: 277–302.Google Scholar
Estrada-Fernández, Zarina 2012. From demonstrative to a relative marker to clause linker: The relative clause formation in Pima Bajo. In Comrie and Estrada-Fernández 2012, pp. 127–46.Google Scholar
Estrada-Fernández, Zarina 2015. Grammaticalization pathways in Uto-Aztecan languages spoken at the highlands of northwestern Mexico: A diachronic view of how intragenetic variation evolves. Paper presented at the symposium on “Areal Patterns of Grammaticalization and Crosslinguistic Variation in Grammaticalization Scenarios”, Mainz, 12–14 March 2015.Google Scholar
Evans, M. fl., and Thomas, W. D.. 1963. J geiriadur Mawr (The Complete Welsh–English English–Welsh Dictionary). Llyfrau’r Dryw: Llandybie a gwasg Aberystwyth.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas 2003. Bininj Gun-wok: A pan-dialectal grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune. 2 vols. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas and Watanabe, Honoré (eds.). 2016. Insubordination. (Typological Studies in Language.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Everaert, Martin and van Riemsdijk, Henk (eds.). 2006. The Blackwell companion to Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Everbroeck, René van. 1958. Grammaire et exercises lingala. Anvers-Leopoldville: Standaard-Boekhandel S.A.Google Scholar
Everbroeck, René van 1969. Le lingala parlé et écrit. 4th edn. Anvers-Leopoldville: Standaard-Boekhandel S.A.Google Scholar
Everett, Daniel L. and Kern, Barbara. 1997. Wari’: The Pakaas Novos language of Western Brazil. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2008. Grammatical change and linguistic theory: The Rosendal papers. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ezard, Bryan. 1997. A grammar of Tawala: An Austronesian language of the Milne Bay area, Papua New Guinea. (Pacific Linguistics C-137.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Faltz, Leonard. [1977] 1985. Reflexivization: A study in universal syntax. [PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1977.] New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa, María López-Couso, José, and Pérez-Guerra, Javier (eds.). 2002. English historical syntax and morphology: Selected papers from 11 ICHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fedriani, Chiara, Manzelli, Gianguido, and Ramat, Paolo. 2013. Gradualness in contact-induced constructional replication: The Abstract Possession Construction in the Circum-Mediterranean area. In Giacalone Ramat, Mauri, and Molinelli 2013, pp. 391–417.Google Scholar
Fehn, Anne-Maria. 2014. A grammar of Ts’ixa (Kalahari Khoe). PhD dissertation. University of Cologne.Google Scholar
Feist, Timothy Richard. 2015. A grammar of Skolt Saami. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Feldman, Harry. 1986. A grammar of Awtuw. (Pacific Linguistics, Series B, 94.) Canberra: Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Fernándey, Zarina Estrada et al. (eds.). 2008. Studies in voice and transitivity. Munich: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Fernándey, Zarina Estrada 2009. The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ferrari, A. (ed.). 2009. Sintassi storica e sincronia dell’italiano: subordinazione, coordinazione, giustapposizione, vol. 1. Florence: Cesati.Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita, Meibauer, Jörg, and Wiese, Heike (eds.). 2016. Pejoration. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 2000. Grammaticalisation: Unidirectional, non-reversable? In Fischer, Rosenbach, and Stein 2000, pp. 149–69.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2007. Morphosyntactic change: Functional and formal perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2010a. An analogical approach to grammaticalisation. In Stathi, Gehweiler, and König 2010, pp. 181–220.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2010b. On problem areas in grammaticalization: Lehmann’s parameters and the issue of scope. In Van linden et al. 2010, pp. 17–42.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2011. Grammaticalization as analogically driven change? In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 31–42.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga 2013. An inquiry into unidirectionality as a foundational element of grammaticalization: On the role played by analogy and the synchronic grammar system in processes of language change. Studies in Language 37, 3: 515–33.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel, and Perridon, Harry (eds.). 2004a. Up and down the cline – the nature of grammaticalization. (Typological Studies in Language 59.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Norde, Muriel, and Perridon, Harry 2004b. Introduction: In search of grammaticalization. In Fischer, Norde, and Perridon 2004a, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Rosenbach, Anette, and Stein, Dieter (eds.). 2000. Pathways of change: Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fischer, Wolfdietrich and Jastrow, Otto. [1977] 1991. Lehrgang für die arabische Schriftsprache der Gegenwart, vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). 1985. Historical semantics, historical word formation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. and Minkova, Donka 2008. Studies in the history of the English language IV: Empirical and analytical advances in the study of English language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne. 1982a. The future in thought and language: Diachronic evidence from Romance. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 36.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne 1982b. The past and the future: Are they coming or going? Berkeley Linguistics Society 8: 322–34.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne 1983. From pragmatics to grammar: Diachronic reflections on complex pasts and futures in Romance. Lingua 60: 183–214.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne 1989. Temporal distance: A basic linguistic metaphor. Studies in Language 13, 1: 1–50.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne 1999. Pragmatic markers in comparative and historical perspective: Theoretical implications of a case study. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Vancouver, Canada, August 1999.Google Scholar
Floricic, Franck. 2010. Essais de typologie et de linguistique générale. (Langages.) Lyon: ENS Éditions.Google Scholar
Fodor, István. 1959. The origin of grammatical gender. Lingua 8, 1: 1–41; 8, 2: 186–214.Google Scholar
Foley, William A. (ed.). 1993. The role of theory in language description. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Foolen, Ad. 1993. De betekenis van partikels. PhD thesis, Radboud University, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael, Jensen, Eva Skafte, Mogensen, Jens Erik, and Schøsler, Lene (eds.). 2005. Historical Linguistics 2003: Selected papers from the 16th International Conference of Historical Linguistics, Copenhagen, 11–15 August 2003. (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 257.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fortune, George. 1955. An analytical grammar of Shona. London, Cape Town, and New York: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara (ed.). 1996. Studies in anaphora. (Typological Studies in Language 33.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara and Hopper, Paul J. (eds.). 1994. Voice: Form and function. (Typological Studies in Language 27.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A., Jurafsky, Daniel, and Michaelis, Laura A. (eds.). 1999. Cognition and function in language. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Fox, Greg J. 1979. Big Nambas grammar. (Pacific Linguistics, Series B, 60.) Canberra: Department of Linguistics Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987a. Encoding locative in Chadic. Journal of West African Languages 17, 1: 81–97.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1987c. Venitive and centrifugal in Chadic. Afrika und Übersee 70, 1: 31–47.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1989. A grammar of Pero. (Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik 4.) Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1991a. The de dicto domain in language. In Traugott and Heine 1991a, pp. 219–51.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1991b. A dictionary of Mupun. (Sprache und Oralität in Afrika 11.) Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1993. A grammar of Mupun. (Sprache und Oralität in Afrika 14.) Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1996a. On sources of demonstratives and anaphors. In Fox 1996, pp. 169–203.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1996b. Grammaticalization of the complex sentence: A case study in Chadic. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1997a. Grammaticalization of number: From demonstrative to nominal and verbal plural. Linguistic Typology 1: 193–242.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 1997b. Domains of affected subject and coreferentiality: System interactional approach to the study of reflexives. MS, Department of Linguistics, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 2001. A grammar of Lele. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 2005. Grammaticalization of switch reference: Motivation and means. In Voeltz 2005, pp. 113–30.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 2008. Grammaticalization, typology and semantics: Expanding the agenda. In López-Couso and Seoane 2008, pp. 61–102.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 2010. Grammaticalization within and outside of a domain. In Van linden et al. 2010, pp. 43–62.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt 2011. Grammaticalization of reference systems. In Narrog and Heine 2011, pp. 622–32.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Curl, Traci S. (eds.). 2000a. Reflexives: Forms and functions. (Typological Studies in Language 40.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Curl, Traci S. (eds.). 2000b. Reciprocals: Forms and functions. (Typological Studies in Language 41.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, Hodges, Adam, and Rood, David S. (eds.). 2004. Linguistic diversity and language theories. (Studies in Language Companion Series 72.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Johnston, Eric. 2005. A grammar of Mina. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Frank-Job, Barbara. 2006. A dynamic-interactional approach to discourse markers. In Fischer 2006, pp. 395–413.Google Scholar
Frank-Job, Barbara 2009. Die Entwicklung deiktischer Ausdrücke zu Diskursmarkern im Kontext von Interaktionsanalyse und Sprachwandelforschung. In Maaß and Schrott 2009, pp. 283–305.Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam. 2010. Grammaticalization and lexicalization effects in participial morphology: A Construction Grammar approach to language change. In Van linden et al. 2010, pp. 191–223.Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Hans von der. 1861. Über das Passivum: Eine sprachvergleichende Abhandlung. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 8: 450–546.Google Scholar
Gaeta, Livio. 1998. Some remarks on analogy, reanalysis and grammaticalization. In Giacalone Ramat and Hopper 1998, pp. 89–105.Google Scholar
Gaeta, Livio 2008. Mismatch: Grammatical distortion and grammaticalization. In López-Couso and Seoane 2008, pp. 103–27.Google Scholar
Gamillscheg, Ernst. 1928. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der französischen Sprache.Heidelberg: Winter.