Final particles in Asia: Establishing an areal feature

  • 1 Vilnius University, Universiteto g. 5, Vilnius, Lithuania
  • 2 Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 1 bld. 1 Bolshoi Kislovsky lane, Moscow, Russian Federation
Vladimir Panov
  • Corresponding author
  • [vlad'imir pan'of], Vilnius University, Universiteto g. 5, Vilnius, 01122, Lithuania
  • Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 1 bld. 1 Bolshoi Kislovsky lane, Moscow, 125009, Russian Federation
  • Email
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an areal study of the elements known as (sentence-)final particles (FPs) in the languages of Asia. FPs constitute a crucial part of many languages of the region and are reported in language-particular descriptions under various labels. However, they have not been the subject of large-scale areal studies. In this paper, I discuss the morphosyntactic and functional properties typically exhibited by the FPs of Asian languages and the parameters of their variation. On the basis of a sample of 53 languages and 6 sample functional types of FPs, I explore the areal distribution of FPs of the Asian type. I demonstrate that different FP-isoglosses exhibit different geographical coverage, but the overlap of some of them allows us to speak of a structural phenomenon highly typical of a macroarea which includes East, Southeast, and Northeast Asia.

  • Abish, Aynur. 2014. Modality of Kazakh as spoken in China. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2016. Sentence types. In Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Oxford handbook of mood and modality, 141–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Alpatov, Vladimir A., Peter Arkadiev & Vera Podlesskaya. 2008. Grammatika japonkogo jazyka. [A grammar of Japanese] Moskva: Natalis.

  • Andvik, Erik E. 2010. A grammar of Tshangla. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

  • Antonov, Anton. 2013. Grammaticalization of allocutivity markers in Japanese and Korean in a crosslinguistic perspective. In Martine Robbeets & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Shared grammaticalization: With special focus on the Transeurasian languages, 317–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Antonov, Anton. 2015. Verbal allocutivity in a cross-linguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 19(1). 55–85.

  • Arkadiev, Peter & Alexander Letuchiy. 2011. Prefixes and suffixes in the Adyghe polysynthetic wordform: Types of interaction. In Vittorio S. Tomelleri, Manana Topadze & Anna Lukianowicz (eds.), Languages and cultures in the Caucasus, 495–514. München & Berlin: Otto Sagner.

  • Arkadiev, Peter M. 2018. Morphology in typology: Traditional categories and recent approaches. Manuscript. Submitted to Rochelle Lieber et al. (eds.), The Oxford encyclopedia of morphology. August 2018 version.

  • Arkhangelskiy, Timofey A. Ms. Clitics in the Besermyan dialect of Udmurt https://wp.hse.ru/data/2014/10/02/1100269480/10LNG2014.pdf, (accessed 15 February 2019).

  • Avronin, Valentin A. 1961. Grammatika nanajskogo jazyka. Tom 2. [A Grammar of Nanai. Volume 2] Moskva & Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.

  • Bal, Krishna B. Ms. Structure of Nepali grammar. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237261579_Structure_of_Nepali_Grammar, (accessed 15 February 2019).

  • Bickel, Balthasar. 2000. On the syntax of agreement in Tibeto-Burman. Studies in Language 24(3). 583–610.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Bitkeyev, Piotr Ts., Roza P. Doraeva, Dordži A. Pavlov & Grigorij Ts. Piurbeev. 1983. Grammatika Kalmytskogo Jazyka. [A Grammar of Kalmyk] Elista: Kalmytskoje knizhnoje izdatel’stvo.

  • Bloomfield, Leonard. 1970[1933]. Language. London & Aylesbury: Compton Printing LTD.

  • Boye, Kasper 2016. The expression of epistemic modality. In Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera Oxford handbook of mood and modality, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Brassett, Cecilia, Philip Brassett & Meiyan Lu. 2006. The Tujia language. München: Lincom.

  • Bugaeva, Anna. 2012. Southern Kuril Ainu. In Nicolas Tranter (ed.), The languages of Japan and Korea, 461–509. London: Routledge.

  • Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time. The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Cinque, Guglielmo & Luigi Rizzi. 2010. The cartography of syntactic structures. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 51–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Comrie, Bernard 2013. Is Siberia a linguistic area? Paper presented at Voices from the Indigenous Siberia, with an emphasis on Yukaghir, 13 December 2013, Amsterdam.

  • Cooke, Joseph R. 1989. Thai sentence particles and other topics. Pacific Linguistics Series A-80, Papers in South-East Asian Linguistics No. 12 Canberra: The Australian National University.

  • Corcu-Gül, Devlet 2006. Analysis of discourse particles in relation to the information structure of texts & dialogues: Examples from Turkish www.semanticsarchive.net/Archive/DVkMDJkZ/Barcelona_Workshop_2005.pdf. (accessed 02 February 2019).

  • Coupe, Alexander R. 2007. A Grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Cristofaro, Sonia 2013. Using grammars for the purposes of cross-linguistic comparison. A presentation handout. LLACAN, 11/6/2013. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301690626_Using_grammars_for_the_purposes_of_cross-linguistic_comparison, (accessed 15 February 2019).

  • Cysouw, Michael & Jeff Good. 2013. Languoid, doculect, glossonym: Formalizing the notion ‘language’. Language Documentation and Conservation 7. 331–359.

  • Dahl, Östen. 2016. Thoughts on language-specific and crosslinguistic entities. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 427–437.

  • David, Anne Boyle. 2014. Descriptive grammar of Pashto and its dialects. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Dej-Amorn, Somruedee 2006. The grammar of Green Hmong particles. PhD thesis: Mahidol University.

  • DeLancey, Scott. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1(1). 33–52.

  • DeLancey, Scott. 2003. Classical Tibetan. In Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 255–270. London & New York: Routledge.

  • DeLancey, Scott. 2010. Towards a history of verb agreement in Tibeto-Burman. Himalayan Linguistics 9(1). 1–39.

  • DeLancey, Scott. 2012. Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology 16(3). 529–564.

  • Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of functional grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Donohue, Mark & Bronwen Whiting. 2011. Quantifying areality: A study of prenasalization in Southeast Asia and New Guinea. Linguistic Typology 15. 101–121.

  • Dryer, Mathew S. 2013. Polar questions. In Mathew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/116, (accessed 08 February 2019).

  • Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68(1). 81–138.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Dum-Tragut, Jasmine. 2009. Armenian: Modern East Armenian. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Enfield, Nick J. & Bernard Comrie. 2015. Mainland Southeast Asian languages. In Nick J. Enfield & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Languages of Mainland Southeast Asia: The state of the art, 1–28. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Fang, Hongmei. 2018. Mirativity in Mandarin: The Sentence-Final Particle Le (了). Open Linguistics 2018(4). 589–607.

  • Feuillet, Jack. 2001. Aire linguistique balkanique. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wolfgang Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals. Sprachtypologie und sprachliche Universalien. La typologie des langues et les universaux linguistiques: An international handbook: Ein internationales Handbuch: Manuel international, 1510–1529. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.

  • Gil, David. 2016. Describing languoids: When incommensurability meets the language-dialect continuum. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 432–462.

  • Goddard, Cliff. 2005. The languages of East and Southeast Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Gorelova, Liliya. 2002. Manchu grammar. Leiden, Boston & Köln: Brill.

  • Greed, Teija. 2014. The expression of knowledge in Tatar. In Y. Aikhenvald Alexandra & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), The grammar of knowledge: A cross-linguistic typology, 69–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Gupta, Anthea Fraser. 1992. The pragmatic particles of Singapore Colloquial English. Journal of Pragmatics 18. 31–57.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel & Martin Haspelmath. 2018. Glottolog 3.3. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. http://glottolog.org<http://glottolog.org (accessed 17 April 2019).

  • Hancil, Sylvie, Alexander Haselow & Margje Post (eds.). 2015a. Final particles. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Hancil, Sylvie, Alexander Haselow & Margje Post. 2015b. Introduction. In Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow & Margje Post (eds.), Final particles (2015a), 3–38. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Haselow, Alexander. 2013. Arguing for a wide conceptions of grammar: The case of final particles in spoken discourse. Folia Lnguistica 47/2. 375–424.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. The European linguistic area: Standard Average European. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wolfgang Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals. Sprachtypologie und sprachliche Universalien. La typologie des langues et les universaux linguistiques: An international handbook: Ein internationales Handbuch: Manuel international, 1492–1510. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2010a. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–687.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2010b. Framework-free grammatical theory. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 341–368. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45(1). 31–80.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. Argument indexing: A conceptual framework for the syntactic status of bound person forms. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in memory of Anna Siewierska, 197–225. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2015. Defining vs. diagnosing linguistic categories: A case study of clitic phenomena. In Joanna Błaszczak, Dorota Klimek-Jankowska & Krzysztof Migdalski (eds.), How categorical are categories? 273–303. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2018. How comparative concepts and descriptive linguistic categories are different. In Daniël Olmen, Tanja Mortelmans & Frank Brisard (eds.), Aspects of linguistic variation, 83–114. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Hewitt, B.G. 1995. Georgian: A structural reference grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Hölzl, Andreas. 2018. A typology of questions in Northeast Asia and beyond: An ecological perspective. Berlin: Language Science Press.

  • Ido, Shinji. 2005. Tajik. München: Lincom Europa.

  • Izuhara, Eiko. 1992. Ne’ no komyunikeeshon kinoo [Communicative functions of ne]. In Masanori Fujiwara, Hiroko Kakkenbusshu, Tanomu Kashima, Yosuke Momiyama & Akito Ozaki (eds.), Nihongo Kenkyuu to Nihongo Kyooiku, 159–172. Nagoya: Nagoya Daigaku Shuppankai.

  • Jakobson, Roman. 1971[1931]. K xarakteristike jevrazijskoko jazykovogo sojuza. In Roman. Jakobson (ed.), Selected Writings, vol. 1, 2nd edn., 143–201 The Hague: Mouton.

  • Janhunen, Juha. 2012. Mongolian. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Kabak, Barış & Irene Vogel. 2001. The phonological word and stress assignment in Turkish. Phonology 18. 315–360.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Kachru, Yamuna. 2006. Hindi. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Kibrik, Andrey. 2011. Cognitive discourse analysis: local discourse structure. In Marcin Grygiel & Laura A. Janda (eds.), Slavic linguistics in a cognitive framework, 273–304. Frankfurt/New York: Peter Lang Publishing Company.

  • Kibrik, Andrey & Vera Podlesskaya (eds.). 2009. Rasskazy o snovidenijax: Korpusnoe issledovanie ustnogo russkogo diskursa [Narrating dreams: A corpus study of Russian oral discourse]. Moskva: Metatekst.

  • Kim, Chonghyuck 2019. Korean question particles are pronominals: A transparent case of representing discourse participants in the syntax. Forthcoming. https://www.google.ru/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwilgJHCsMDgAhVNI5oKHeRxCzwQFjAAegQIEBAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fling.auf.net%2Flingbuzz%2F001157%2Fcurrent.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1bQrQfgczBQ1a8WV1k1y53. (accessed 16 February 2019).

  • Kim, So Yong & Krasimira Aleksova. 2003. Mirativity in Korean and Bulgarian. Paper presented at the Third International Academic Conference of KACEES Bulgaria, Korea, Central & East Europe – Humanities and Social Science, 14th – 15th July, 2003, Sofia University, Sofia, Bulgaria. http://georgesg.info/belb/personal/aleksova/admirativ_bulgarian_korean_trans.pdf. (accessed 15 February 2019).

  • King, John T. 2009. A grammar of Dhimal. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

  • Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria & Bernhard Wälchli. 2001. The circum-Baltic languages: An areal-typological approach. In Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), The circum-Baltic languages: Typology and contacts, 615–750. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. London & New York: Routledge.

  • Kullman, Rita & D. Tsyrempil. 2001[1996]. Mongolian grammar. Ulaanbaatar: Institute of Language and Literature, Academy of Sciences.

  • Kwok, Wai-Ying 2006. A study of Cantonese informative sentence-final particles aa3, laa3, wo3 and bo3. Masters thesis: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

  • LaPolla, Randy. 2003. A grammar of Qiang. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Le, Giang Ha. 2015. Vietnamese sentence-final particles. Masters thesis: University of Southern California.

  • Ler Soon Lay, Vivien. 2005. An in-depth study of discourse particles in Singapore English. PhD thesis. Singapore: National University of Singapore.

  • Li, Charles N. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1989[1981]. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, Los Angeles & London: University of California Press.

  • Li, Xia, Jingfang Li & Yongxian Luo. 2014. A grammar of Zoulei, Southwest China. Bern: Peter Lang.

  • Li, Yong-Song. 2011. A study of Dolgan. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.

  • Liljegren, Henrik. 2017. Profiling Indo-Aryan in Hindukush-Karakoram: A preliminary study of micro-typological patterns. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 4(1). 107–156.

  • Luke, Kang Kwong. 1990. Utterance particles in Cantonese conversation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Mair, Viktor H. & Jane Hickman (eds.). 2014. Reconfiguring the silk road: New research on the east-west exchange in antiquity. Philadelphia: University of Pensylvania Museum of Archeology and Anthropology.

  • Malchukov, Andrej L. 1995. Even. München: Lincom.

  • Malchukov, Andrej L. & Viktor S. Xrakovskij. 2016. The linguistic interaction of mood with modality and other categories. In Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Oxford handbook of mood and modality, 196–220. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Martin, Samuel. 1992. A reference grammar of Korean. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company.

  • Masica, Colin P. 1976. Defining a linguistic area: South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Maslova, Elena. 2003. A grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Matthews, Stephen & Virginia Yip. 1994. Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.

  • Moravcsik, Edith A. 2016. On linguistic categories. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 417–425.

  • Nedjalkov, Igor. 1997. Evenki. London: Routledge.

  • Nguyen, Tam & Thi Minh. 2013. A Grammar of Bih. PhD thesis: University of Oregon.

  • Nichols, Johanna. 2011. Ingush grammar. Berkeley Los Angeles & London: University of California Press.

  • Nikolaeva, Irina. 2014. A grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Nikolaeva, Irina. 2016. Analyses of the semantics of mood. In Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Oxford handbook of mood and modality, 68–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Nikolaeva, Irina & Maria Tolskaya. 2001. A grammar of Udihe. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Nuyts, Jan & Johan van der Auwera (eds.). 2016. Oxford handbook of mood and modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Pak, Miok 2004. Korean particles and clause types. Manuscript. Georgetown University. https://faculty.georgetown.edu/portnerp/Papers/KoreanParticlesMiokPak.pdf, (accessed 15 February 2019).

  • Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Panfilov, Vladimir Z. 1965. Grammatika nivxskogo jazyka. Čast’ 2. [A Grammar of Nivkh. Part 2] Moskva & Leningrad: Nauka.

  • Panov, Vladimir. 2016. Burjatskie zaključitel’nye časticy v areal’no-tipologičeskoj perspektive [Buryat final particles in the perspective of the areal typology]. Ural-Altaic Studies 4(23). 101–127.

  • Paul, Waltraud & Victor Junnan Pan. 2017. What you see is what you get: Chinese sentence-final particles as head-final complementisers. In Josef Bayer & Volker Struckmeier (eds.), Discourse Particles: Formal approaches to their syntax and semantics, 49–77. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Perry, John R. 2005. A Tajik Persian reference grammar. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

  • Person, Kirk Roger 2000. Sentence Final Particles in Bisu Narrative. PhD thesis. University of Texas in Arlington.

  • Peterson, John. 2011. A grammar of Kharia. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

  • Plaisier, Heleen. 2007. A grammar of Lepcha. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

  • Plungian, Vladimir & Johan van der Auwera. 2006. Towards a typology of discontinuous past marking. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung (STUF) 59(4). 317–349.

  • Post, Mark W. 2007. A Grammar of Galo. PhD thesis: La Trobe University.

  • Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1995. Outline of classical Chinese grammar. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

  • Robbeets, Martine. 2017. The Transeurasian languages. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics, 586–626. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Sabirov, Ravil’ A. 2006. Tatarskij jazyk izučit’ legko. [It’s easy to learn Tatar] Kazan’: Tatarname.

  • Saigo, Hideki. 2011. The Japanese sentence-final particles in talk-in-interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Sanzheyev, Garma D. 1962. Grammatika buriatskogo jazyka. [A Grammar of Buriat] Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Vostočnoj Literatury.

  • Say, Sergey S. 2009. Grammatičeskij očerk kalmyckogo jazyka [A sketch of Kalmyk grammar]. In Sergej S. Say, Vlada V. Baranova & Natalia V. Serdobolskaja (eds.), Issledovanija po grammatike kalmytskogo jazyka [Studies on the grammar of Kalmyk]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana V.2. St. Petersburg: Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences.

  • Shimada, Masaharu & Akiko Nagano. 2017. Miratives in Japanese: The rise of mirative markers via grammaticalization. In Silvio Cruschina & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds.), The rise and development of evidential and epistemic markers, 213–244. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Skorik, Pyotr Y. 1977. Grammatika čukotskogo jazyka. Čast’ vtoraja. [A Grammar of Chukchi. Part two] Leningrad: Nauka.

  • Smeets, Henricus Johannes. 1984. Studies in West Circassian phonology and morphology. Leiden: Hakuchi.

  • Smyth, David. 2002. Thai: An essential grammar. London, New York: Routledge.

  • Sneddon, James N. 1996. Indonesian: A comprehensive grammar. London & New York: Routledge.

  • Soe, Myint 1999. A grammar of Burmese. PhD thesis. Eugene: University of Oregon.

  • Sohn, Ho-Min. 2001 [1999]. The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Solnit, David B. 1997. Eastern Kayah Li: Grammar, texts, glossary. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.

  • Spencer, Andrew & Ana R. Luís. 2012a. A canonical clitic. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 123–150. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Spencer, Andrew & Ana R. Luís. 2012b. Clitics: An introduction. Cambridge: CUP.

  • Stapert, Eugénie. 2013. Contact-induced change in Dolgan: An investigation into the role of linguistic data for the reconstruction of a people’s (pre)history. Utrecht: LOT.

  • Sun, Hongkai & Guangkun Liu. 2009. A grammar of Anong: Language death under intense contact. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

  • Tamura, Suzuko. 2000. The Ainu language. Tokyo: Sanseido.

  • Thurgood, Graham, Ela Thurgood & Li Fengxiang. 2014. A grammatical sketch of Hainan Cham. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Tournadre, Nicholas & Sangda Dorje. 2005. Manual of standard Tibetan: Language and civilization. Boston: Shambhala.

  • Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso. 2001. Final auxiliary verbs in literary Tibetan and in the dialects. Linguistics of Tibeto-Burman Area 24(1). 49–111.

  • van Driem, George. 1993. Proto-Tibeto-Burman verbal agreement system. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 56(2). 292–334.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. 1993. A synopsis of role and reference grammar. In Robert D. van Valin Jr. (ed.), Advances in role and reference grammar, 1–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Vastenius, Anu. 2011. Expressive Particles in Serbian, Bulgarian, Greek, and Kurdish. BA thesis in General Linguistics. Lunds Universitet.

  • Vokurová, Zuzana 2008. Epistemic modalities in spoken standard Tibetan. PhD thesis: Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy – Université Paris 8.

  • Volodin, Alexander P. 1976. Itel’menskij jazyk. [The Itelmen Language] Moskva: Nauka.

  • Wagner-Nagy, Beáta Boglárka. 2018. A grammar of Nganasan. Leiden: Brill.

  • Wiemer, Björn. 2004. Population Linguistics on a micro-scale. Lessons to be learnt from Baltic and Slavic dialects in contact. In Bernd Kortmann (ed.), Dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective, 497–526. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Wright, Jonathan Michael. 2009. Hkongso Grammar Sketch. Masters thesis: Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics.

  • Yılmaz, Erkan. 2004. A Pragmatic Analysis of Turkish Discourse Particles Yani, İşte and Şey. PhD thesis: Middle East University.

  • Zheng, Yiqing. 1997. Huihui Yu Yanjiu. [A study of Cham] Shanghai: Shanghai Yuandong Chuban She.

  • Zubova, Yulia N. 2013. Sintaksis i semantika častic v besermianskom dielekte udmurtskogo jazyka [Syntax and Semantics of Particles in Besermyan Udmurt]. Masters degree thesis: Russian State University of Humanities (RGGU).

  • Zwicky, Arnold M. & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 1983. Cliticization vs. Inflection: English N’T. Language 3. 502–213.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
$42.00
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.


or
Log in with your institution

Journal + Issues

Linguistic Typology publishes research on linguistic diversity and unity. It welcomes articles that report empirical findings about crosslinguistic variation, advance our understanding of the patterns of diversity, or refine typological methodology.

Search