Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton September 18, 2020

Morphosyntactic isoglosses in Indo-European: An introduction

  • Artemij Keidan EMAIL logo , Leonid Kulikov and Nikolaos Lavidas

Artemij Keidan Sapienza University of Rome Institute of the Oriental Studies Circonvallazione Tiburtina 4 Roma, RM 00185 Italy


Alfieri, L. 2011. “A radical construction grammar approach to Vedic adjective”. Rivista degli Studi Orientali 84. 241–256.Search in Google Scholar

Anttila, R. 1989. Historical and comparative linguistics. (2nd ed.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.6Search in Google Scholar

Barðdal, J. and T. Smitherman. 2009. “Typological changes in the evolution of Indo-European syntax?” Diachronica 26(2). 253–263.10.1075/dia.26.2.04samSearch in Google Scholar

Barðdal, J. and T. Smitherman. 2013. “The quest for cognates: A reconstruction of oblique subject constructions in Proto-Indo-European”. Language Dynamics and Change 3(1). 28–67.10.1163/22105832-13030101Search in Google Scholar

Barðdal, J. et al. 2012. “Reconstructing constructional semantics: The dative subject construction in Old Norse-Icelandic, Latin, Ancient Greek, Old Russian and Old Lithuanian”. Studies in Language 36(3). 511–547.10.1075/bct.67.03barSearch in Google Scholar

Bauer, B.L.M. 2000. Archaic syntax in Indo-European. The spread of transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin: Mouton.10.1515/9783110825992Search in Google Scholar

Comrie, B. 1998. “The Indo-European linguistic family: Genetic and typological perspectives”. In: Ramat, A.G. and P. Ramat (eds.), The Indo-European languages. London – New York: Routledge. 74–97.Search in Google Scholar

De Decker, F. 2016. “The augment use in Iliad 6: An evidential marker”. Études Classiques 84(4). 259–317.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. 2004. “How hopeless is genealogical linguistics, and how advanced is areal linguistics?” Studies in Language 28(1). 209–223.10.1075/sl.28.1.10hasSearch in Google Scholar

Hewson, J. and V. Bubeník. 1997. Tense and aspect in Indo-European languages: Theory, typology, diachrony. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.145Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, P. 1981. “‘Decem’ and ‘Taihun’ languages: An Indo-European isogloss”. In: Arbeitman, Y.L. and A.R. Bomhard (eds.), Bono homini donum. Essays in historical linguistics in memory of J.A. Kerns. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 133–142.10.1075/cilt.16.17hopSearch in Google Scholar

Jasanoff, J.H. 2003. Hittite and the Indo-European verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249053.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kortlandt, F.H.H. 1983. “Proto-Indo-European verbal syntax”. JIES 11. 307–324.Search in Google Scholar

Kulikov, L. 2009. “Valency-changing categories in Indo-Aryan and Indo-European: A diachronic typological portrait of Vedic Sanskrit”. In: Saxena, A. and Å. Viberg (eds.), Multilingualism. Proceedings of the 23rd Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Uppsala University, 1–3 October 2008. Studia Linguistica Upsaliensia 8.) Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet. 75–92.Search in Google Scholar

Kulikov, L. 2011 [2012]. “The Proto-Indo-European case system and its reflexes in a diachronic typological perspective: Evidence for the linguistic prehistory of Eurasia”. Rivista degli studi orientali 84. 289–309.Search in Google Scholar

Kulikov, L. 2014. “Grammaticalization of reciprocal pronouns in Indo-Aryan: Evidence from Sanskrit and Indo-European for a diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions”. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 1(2). 117–156.10.1515/jsall-2014-0008Search in Google Scholar

Masica, C. 1991. The Indo-Aryan languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, W.P. 1974. Proto-Indo-European syntax. Austin: Univ. of Texas Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schmidt, K.H. 1992. “Contributions from new data to the reconstruction of the proto- language”. In: Polomé, E.C. and W. Winter (eds.), Reconstructing languages and cultures. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 35–62.10.1515/9783110867923.35Search in Google Scholar

Strunk, K. 1992 [1994]. „Der Ursprung des verbalen Augments – Ein Problem Franz Bopps aus heutiger Sicht“. In: Sternemann, R. (ed.), Bopp-Symposium 1992 der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin: Akten der Konferenz vom 24.3.–26.3.1992 aus Anlaß von Franz Bopps zweihundertjährigem Geburtstag am 14.9.1991. Heidelberg. 270–284.Search in Google Scholar

Watkins, C. 2001. “An Indo-European linguistic area and its characteristics: Ancient Anatolia; Areal diffusion as a challenge to the comparative method?” In: Aikhenvald, A.Y. and R.M.W. Dixon (ed.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 44–63.Search in Google Scholar

Zehnder, T. 2016. “Review of: G. Keydana. Infinitive im R̥gveda: Formen, Funktion, Diachronie. Leiden: Brill, 2013”. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 3(1). 133–139.10.1515/jsall-2016-0006Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-09-18
Published in Print: 2020-09-25

© 2020 Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

Downloaded on 4.12.2023 from
Scroll to top button