Abstract
The category of person has both inflectional and lexical aspects, and the distinction provides a finely graduated grammatical trait, relatively stable in both families and areas, and revealing for both typology and linguistic geography. Inflectional behavior includes reference to speech-act roles, indexation of arguments, discreteness from other categories such as number or gender, assignment and/or placement in syntax, arrangement in paradigms, and general resemblance to closed-class items. Lexical behavior includes sharing categories and/or forms and/or syntactic behavior with major lexical classes (usually nouns) and generally resembling open-class items. Criteria are given here for typologizing person as more vs. less inflectional, some basic typological correlations are tested, and the worldwide linguistic-geographical distribution is mapped.
Acknowledgements
Supported in part by a grant from the Russian Academic Excellence Project 5-100 to the Higher School of Economics, Moscow. I thank audiences at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, the LSA Linguistics Institute (University of Chicago, 2015), the University of Helsinki, the Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, and the University of Amsterdam for comments and questions on early versions of this work. Three anonymous reviewers helped greatly to improve the final version. Special thanks to Frans Plank for his patience with this article, and more importantly for founding, building up, and maintaining LT as the venue of choice for an article such as this one. And for writing Plank (1985), the intellectual cornerstone for work on person.
Abbreviations
- 1/2/3
1st/2nd/3rd person
- a
agentive argument of transitive verb
- abl
ablative
- acc
accusative
- adj
adjective
- art
article
- dat
dative
- desid
desiderative
- erg
ergative
- excl
exclusive
- f
feminine
- fgr
falling tone grade
- gen
genitive
- incl
inclusive
- ind
indicative
- iness
inessive
- lig
ligature
- m
masculine
- n
neuter
- neg
negation
- nom
nominative
- o
patientive argument of transitive verb
- obj
objective conjugation
- obl
oblique
- pf
perfective
- pl
plural
- poss
possessive
- pst
past
- ptcpl
participle
- pv
preverb
- s
single argument of intransitive verb
- sbj
subjective conjugation
- sbjv
subjunctive
- sg
singular
- tam
tense/aspect/mood
- th
thematic
Different glossings of same-named items from different sources were harmonized.
Appendix
A The 42 survey items in questionnaire form
| [1] | Person of A indexed on verb. |
| [2] | Person of O indexed on verb. |
| [3] | Person of possessor indexed on possessum (head of possessive NP). |
| [4] | Auto-person: the person of an independent pronoun is indexed on the pronoun itself, as a separate morpheme from the root. |
| [5] | Person of the possessor of an argument indexed on the verb. |
| [6] | Person of external possessor indexed on the verb. |
| [7] | Possessive relative: the person of a gapped subject of a relative clause is indexed on the head noun. |
| [8] | Person is marked on or attracted to the negative morpheme, which is separate from the lexical verb. |
| [9] | Generic pronoun base: the independent pronouns share the same root, which does not contain person as part of its meaning. |
| [10]* | Unique root per person or person-number, with person as a lexical property of the root. |
| [11] | Roots or stems rhyme, alliterate, etc. along person or number lines. |
| [12]* | There is no closed class of pronouns. |
| [13]* | Pronouns have the same cases (i.e., case categories) as nouns. |
| [14]* | Pronouns have the same case morphology as nouns. |
| [15]* | Pronouns have the same root or stem flexivity as nouns. |
| [16] | Pronouns have different number categories from nouns. |
| [17]* | Pronouns have the same number markers as nouns. |
| [18] | Any multiple marking of person per argument. |
| [19] | A and O markers are formally identical. |
| [20] | Person is the outermost verb inflection. |
| [21] | Person is the outermost noun inflection. |
| [22] | Inclusive/exclusive distinguished in independent pronouns. |
| [23] | Inclusive/exclusive distinguished in verb person indexes. |
| [24] | Inclusive/exclusive distinguished in noun possessive indexes. |
| [25] | Inclusive/exclusive distinguished in auto-person on pronouns. |
| [26] | Person and number discrete or factored out in independent pronouns. |
| [27a] | Person and number discrete or factored out in verb person index for A. |
| [27b] | Person and number discrete or factored out in verb person index for O. |
| [28] | Person and number discrete or factored out in noun possessive indexes. |
| [29] | Person and number discrete or factored out in auto-person on pronouns. |
| [30]* | Noun genders distinguished in independent pronouns. |
| [31a]* | Noun genders distinguished in verb person index for A. |
| [31b]* | Noun genders distinguished in verb person index for O. |
| [32]* | Noun genders distinguished in 3rd person independent pronouns. |
| [33a]* | Noun genders distinguished in 3rd person verb index for A. |
| [33b]* | Noun genders distinguished in 3rd person verb index for O. |
| [34]* | Inherent (lexical) gender in pronominals. |
| [35]* | Natural gender (not noun genders) distinguished in independent pronouns. |
| [36]* | Natural gender (not noun genders) distinguished in 3rd person independent pronouns. |
| [37]* | Natural gender (not noun genders) distinguished in verb person index for A and/or O. |
| [38] | Verb person index(es) cumulative with TAM. |
| [39] | Person involved in hierarchical marking on verbs. |
| [40] | Person involved in inverse marking on verbs. |
| [41] | Conjunct/disjunct marking on verbs. |
| [42] | Person determines access to (hierarchical, promiscuous) number marking on verbs. |
* marks lexical properties; the others are inflectional.
B Survey item responses from four sample languages
Somali has both lexical and inflectional person, Russian mostly lexical, Mandarin little of either, and Cree mostly inflectional
| Somali | Russian | Mandarin | Cree | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 5 | n.d. | 0 | 0 | n.d. |
| 6 | n.d. | 0 | 0 | n.d. |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 13 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.5 |
| 14 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | n.d. | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| 16 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 |
| 17 | 0 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 |
| 18 | n.d. | 0 | 0 | n.d. |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1 |
| 26 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 27 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | n/a | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 0 |
| 31 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 36 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 37 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 38 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 39 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 41 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 42 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a |
C Languages surveyed, by continent
| Language | Stock | Lex | Infl | %Infl |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Africa | ||||
| Tamazight | Afroasiatic: Berber | 5.0 | 6.5 | 0.57 |
| Arabic (Modern Standard Arabic) | Afroasiatic: Semitic | 5.0 | 9.0 | 0.64 |
| Dongolese Nubian | Nubian | 3.0 | 6.0 | 0.67 |
| Koyra Chiini | Songhai | 2.0 | 1.0 | |
| Jamsay | Dogon | 1.0 | 1.5 | |
| Mandinka | Mande | 1.0 | 0.0 | |
| Kunama | Kunama | 3.0 | 10.0 | 0.77 |
| Fula | North Atlantic | 2.0 | 13.0 | 0.87 |
| Fur | Fur | 3.0 | 1.5 | 0.33 |
| Hausa | Afroasiatic: Chadic: Hausa | 7.0 | 9.0 | 0.56 |
| Kanuri | Saharan | 3.0 | 5.5 | 0.65 |
| Gumuz | Gumuz | 3.0 | 7.0 | 0.70 |
| Uduk | Koman | 2.0 | 6.0 | 0.75 |
| Goemai | Afroasiatic: Chadic: Angas-Gerka | 2.0 | 1.0 | |
| Yoruba | Benue-Congo | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| Ewe | Kwa | 2.0 | 6.0 | 0.75 |
| Maale | Ta-Ne-Omotic | 2.0 | 0.0 | |
| Haro | Ta-Ne Omotic | 5.0 | 4.0 | 0.44 |
| Gbeya | Adamawa-Ubangi | 1.0 | 4.0 | 0.80 |
| Ik | Kuliak | 2.5 | 4.5 | 0.64 |
| Logbara | Central Sudanic: Moru-Madi | 0.0 | 2.0 | |
| Turkana | Eastern Nilotic | 4.0 | 2.0 | 0.33 |
| Somali | Afroasiatic: Cushitic | 5.0 | 10.0 | 0.67 |
| Lango | Western Nilotic | 1.0 | 10.5 | 0.91 |
| Ngiti | Eastern Central Sudanic | 1.5 | 9.0 | 0.86 |
| Luganda | Benue-Congo | 3.0 | 6.0 | 0.67 |
| Dahalo | Afroasiatic: Cushitic | 5.0 | 4.5 | 0.47 |
| Sandawe | Sandawe | 3.0 | 7.0 | 0.70 |
| !Kung | Ju | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| Nama | Kwadi-Khoe | 7.0 | 5.0 | 0.42 |
| Taa (!Xóõ) | Tuu (!Ui-Taa) | 3.0 | 4.5 | 0.60 |
| Europe | ||||
| English | Indo-European: Germanic | 2.0 | 2.0 | |
| Irish | Indo-European: Celtic | 2.5 | 4.5 | 0.64 |
| French | Indo-European: Italic | 4.0 | 4.5 | 0.53 |
| Italian | Indo-European: Italic | 4.0 | 3.5 | 0.47 |
| Catalan | Indo-European: Italic | 3.0 | 8.0 | 0.73 |
| German | Indo-European: Germanic | 5.0 | 3.0 | 0.38 |
| Norwegian | Indo-European: Germanic | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.20 |
| Swedish | Indo-European: Germanic | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.20 |
| Slovene | Indo-European:Balto-Slavic | 5.0 | 3.5 | 0.41 |
| Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (standard) | Indo-European:Balto-Slavic | 5.0 | 3.5 | 0.41 |
| Bulgarian | Indo-European:Balto-Slavic | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.50 |
| Macedonian | Indo-European:Balto-Slavic | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.50 |
| Romanian | Indo-European: Italic | 3.0 | 4.0 | 0.57 |
| Greek | Indo-European: Greek | 4.0 | 6.0 | 0.60 |
| Albanian | Indo-European:Albanian | 5.5 | 5.5 | 0.50 |
| Basque | Basque | 6.0 | 5.5 | 0.48 |
| Ingush | Nakh-Daghestanian: Nakh | 6.0 | 3.0 | 0.33 |
| Avar | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.5 | 2.5 | 0.42 |
| Godoberi | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 5.5 | 2.0 | 0.27 |
| Botlikh | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.0 | 1.0 | 0.25 |
| Hunzib | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.5 | 0.0 | 0.00 |
| Lak | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.5 | 4.0 | 0.53 |
| Akusha (standard) | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.0 | 6.5 | 0.68 |
| Icari | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 4.5 | 7.5 | 0.63 |
| Lezgi | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.33 |
| Tsakhur | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.0 | 1.0 | 0.25 |
| Kryz | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.50 |
| Archi | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.5 | 1.5 | 0.30 |
| Udi | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.33 |
| Xinalug | Nakh-Daghestanian: Daghestanian | 3.5 | 1.0 | 0.22 |
| Kabardian | West Caucasian | 1.5 | 8.0 | 0.84 |
| Abkhaz | West Caucasian | 3.5 | 8.5 | 0.71 |
| Georgian | Kartvelian | 2.0 | 4.5 | 0.69 |
| Svan | Kartvelian | 2.0 | 6.5 | 0.76 |
| Laz (Pazar) | Kartvelian | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.71 |
| Ossetic | Indo-European: Iranian | 3.0 | 4.0 | 0.57 |
| Persian | Indo-European: Iranian | 1.0 | 6.0 | 0.86 |
| Eastern Armenian | Indo-European: Armenian | 3.0 | 6.5 | 0.68 |
| Turkish | Turkic | 3.0 | 8.0 | 0.73 |
| Hungarian | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.71 |
| Lithuanian | Indo-European: Balto-Slavic | 5.0 | 3.0 | 0.38 |
| Russian | Indo-European: Balto-Slavic | 7.5 | 3.0 | 0.29 |
| Saami (generic) | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 3.0 | 8.5 | 0.74 |
| Finnish | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 3.0 | 7.0 | 0.70 |
| Estonian | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 3.0 | 7.0 | 0.57 |
| North-Central Asia | ||||
| Erzja | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 2.0 | 12.5 | 0.86 |
| Mari | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 2.0 | 8.0 | 0.80 |
| Udmurt | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | |||
| Komi | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 3.0 | 9.0 | 0.75 |
| Mansi | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 3.0 | 4.0 | 0.57 |
| Khanty (Northern) | Uralic: Finno-Ugric | 1.5 | 6.0 | 0.80 |
| Nganasan | Uralic: Samoyedic | 2.0 | 9.0 | 0.82 |
| Tundra Nenets | Uralic: Samoyedic | 2.5 | 7.0 | 0.74 |
| Selkup | Uralic: Samoyedic | 1.5 | 8.5 | 0.85 |
| Ket | Yeniseian | 5.0 | 8.0 | 0.62 |
| Yakut | Turkic | 2.5 | 7.5 | 0.75 |
| Mongolian | Mongolic | 2.0 | 8.0 | 0.80 |
| Manchu | Tungusic | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.50 |
| Nanai | Tungusic | 3.0 | 8.5 | 0.74 |
| Evenki | Tungusic | 2.5 | 14.0 | 0.85 |
| Even | Tungusic | 2.5 | 14.0 | 0.85 |
| Yukagir | Yukagir | 2.5 | 5.0 | 0.67 |
| Chukchi | Chukchi-Kamchadal | 3.5 | 8.0 | 0.70 |
| Itelmen | Chukchi-Kamchadal | 1.5 | 5.5 | 0.79 |
| Siberian Yup’ik | Eskimo-Aleut | 2.5 | 8.5 | 0.77 |
| Aleut | Eskimo-Aleut | 0.0 | 9.0 | 1.00 |
| Ainu | Ainu | 0.0 | 12.5 | 1.00 |
| Nivkh | Nivkh | 3.5 | 11.5 | 0.77 |
| Japanese | Japanese | 3.5 | 1.0 | 0.22 |
| South and Southeast Asia | ||||
| Waigali | Indo-European: Indo-Iranian | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.71 |
| Burushaski | Burushaski | 5.0 | 7.0 | 0.58 |
| Palula | Indo-European: Indo-Iranian: “Dardic” | 2.0 | 1.5 | 0.43 |
| Mandarin | Sino-Tibetan: Sinitic | 2.0 | 1.5 | |
| Hindi | Indo-European: Indo-Iranian | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.00 |
| Hakha Lai | Sino-Tibetan: Kuki-Chin | 2.0 | 13.0 | 0.87 |
| Kharia | Austroasiatic: Munda | 3.0 | 8.0 | 0.73 |
| Lhasa Tibetan | Sino-Tibetan: Bodish | 5.0 | 2.0 | 0.29 |
| Belhare | Sino-Tibetan:Kiranti | 4.0 | 11.0 | 0.73 |
| Brahui | Dravidian | 2.0 | 3.5 | 0.64 |
| Paiwan | Austronesian | 1.0 | 4.0 | 0.80 |
| Thai | Tai-Kadai | 2.0 | 0.5 | |
| Tagalog | Austronesian | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.50 |
| Great Andamanese | Great Andamanese | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Cambodian | Austroasiatic | 1.5 | 1.0 | |
| Kolami | Dravidian | 5.0 | 4.0 | 0.44 |
| Acehnese | Austronesian | 3.0 | 11.0 | 0.79 |
| Semelai | Austroasiatic | 3.0 | 5.5 | 0.65 |
| Car Nicobarese | Austroasiatic | 2.0 | 6.0 | 0.75 |
| New Guinea | ||||
| Maybrat | West Papuan | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.63 |
| Warembori | Austronesian: Lower Mamberamo | 1.0 | 10.5 | 0.91 |
| Meyah | East Bird’s Head | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Abun | Abun | 2.0 | 0.0 | |
| Hatam | Hatam | 1.0 | 7.0 | 0.88 |
| Inanwatan/Suabo | Inanwatan | 2.0 | 9.0 | 0.82 |
| Sentani | Sentani | 1.0 | 5.5 | 0.85 |
| Kuot | Kuot | 3.0 | 9.0 | 0.75 |
| Barupu | Macro-Skou | 5.0 | 7.0 | 0.58 |
| Imonda | Border | 3.5 | 2.0 | 0.36 |
| Dani | Dani | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Mali | Baining | 5.0 | 7.5 | 0.60 |
| Alamblak | Sepik | 3.0 | 5.5 | 0.65 |
| Yimas | Lower Sepik-Ramu | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.67 |
| Usan | Adelbert Range | 1.0 | 7.0 | 0.88 |
| Mian | Macro-Ok | 5.5 | 6.0 | 0.52 |
| Kobon | East New Guinea Highlands: Kalam | 1.5 | 4.5 | 0.75 |
| Amele | Madang | 2.0 | 5.5 | 0.73 |
| Tauya | Madang-Adelbert: Brahman | 3.0 | 10.0 | 0.77 |
| Kombai | Macro-Ok | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Asmat | Macro-Ok | 1.0 | 3.5 | 0.78 |
| Salt-Yui | Chimbu-Wahgi | 2.0 | 6.0 | 0.75 |
| Hua | Eastern Highlands | 2.0 | 6.5 | 0.76 |
| Kewa | Engan-Kewa | 3.0 | 5.5 | 0.65 |
| Motuna | South Bougainville | 4.0 | 12.0 | 0.75 |
| Kiwai | Kiwaian | 1.0 | 6.5 | 0.87 |
| Abui | Timor-Alor-Pantar | 1.0 | 13.0 | 0.93 |
| Menya | Angan | 2.5 | 5.5 | 0.69 |
| Bilua | Bilua | 3.0 | 9.0 | 0.75 |
| Teiwa | Alor-Pantar | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Lavukaleve | Lavukaleve | 3.0 | 13.5 | 0.82 |
| Koiari (Grass) | Koiarian | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.00 |
| Kambera | Austronesian | 1.0 | 13.0 | 0.93 |
| Tawala | Austronesian | 0.0 | 14.0 | 1.00 |
| Yelî Dnye | Yelî Dnye | 2.0 | 9.5 | 0.83 |
| Rapanui | Austronesian | 1.0 | 2.0 | |
| Australia | ||||
| Dyirbal | Pama-Nyungan | 1.0 | 3.0 | 0.75 |
| Jingulu | Mirndi | 2.5 | 7.0 | 0.74 |
| Kayardild | Tangkic | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.50 |
| Djapu | Pama-Nyungan | 1.5 | 3.0 | 0.67 |
| Bininj Gun-wok | Gunwingguan | 3.0 | 12.5 | 0.81 |
| Uradhi | Pama-Nyungan | 1.5 | 1.0 | |
| Mawng | Iwaidjan | 3.0 | 10.0 | 0.77 |
| Tiwi | Tiwi | 3.0 | 6.0 | 0.67 |
| Marrithiyel | Western Daly | 4.0 | 6.5 | 0.62 |
| Ngan’gityemerri | Southern Daly | 6.0 | 10.0 | 0.63 |
| Ungarinjin | Wororan | 2.0 | 8.5 | 0.81 |
| Bardi | Nyulnyulan | 3.0 | 12.5 | 0.81 |
| Kuniyanti | Bunuban | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Warlpiri | Pama-Nyungan | 4.0 | 8.0 | 0.67 |
| Martuthunira | Pama-Nyungan | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.33 |
| Pitjantjatjara | Pama-Nyungan | 2.0 | 0.0 | |
| Diyari | Pama-Nyungan | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.50 |
| Wembawemba | Pama-Nyungan | 1.0 | 10.0 | 0.91 |
| Western North America | ||||
| Central Alaskan Yup’ik | Eskimo-Aleut | 3.0 | 4.0 | 0.57 |
| Haida | Haida | 1.0 | 5.5 | 0.85 |
| Nisgha | Tsimshian | 0.0 | 7.0 | 1.00 |
| Kwak’wala | Wakashan | 0.0 | 15.0 | 1.00 |
| Nuuchahnulth | Wakashan | 1.0 | 8.5 | 0.89 |
| Yurok | Algic | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Hupa | Athabaskan | 0.5 | 5.0 | 0.91 |
| Chimariko | Chimariko | 2.0 | 8.0 | 0.80 |
| Karuk | Karuk | 1.0 | 6.5 | 0.87 |
| Yuki | Yuki-Wappo | 3.5 | 5.0 | 0.59 |
| Eastern Pomo | Pomoan | 2.0 | 2.5 | 0.56 |
| Kashaya Pomo | Pomoan | 4.5 | 3.5 | 0.44 |
| Wappo | Yuki-Wappo | 2.0 | 1.0 | |
| Wintu | Wintun | 2.0 | 8.0 | 0.80 |
| Klamath | Klamath-Modoc | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.50 |
| Takelma | Takelma-Kalapuya | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Hanis Coos | Coos | 0.0 | 13.0 | 1.00 |
| Wishram | Chinookan | 3.0 | 15.0 | 0.83 |
| Klallam | Salish | 1.0 | 7.5 | 0.88 |
| Halkomelem | Salish | 1.0 | 7.0 | 0.88 |
| Thompson | Salish | 1.0 | 5.0 | 0.83 |
| Maidu | Maidun | 2.0 | 7.0 | 0.78 |
| Ineseño Chumash | Chumashan | 1.0 | 7.0 | 0.88 |
| Southern Sierra Miwok | Miwok-Costanoan | 1.0 | 9.5 | 0.90 |
| Washo | Washo | 0.0 | 15.0 | 1.00 |
| Yokuts | Yokuts | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.67 |
| Kumeyaay | Yuman | 2.0 | 10.5 | 0.84 |
| Cupeño | Uto-Aztecan | 4.0 | 12.0 | 0.75 |
| Tümpisa | Uto-Aztecan | 2.0 | 3.0 | 0.60 |
| Eastern North America | ||||
| Slave | Athabaskan | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Nez Perce | Sahaptin | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Hopi | Uto-Aztecan | 1.5 | 4.5 | 0.75 |
| Zuni | Zuni | 0.5 | 3.0 | 0.86 |
| Acoma | Keresan | 0.0 | 13.0 | 1.00 |
| Kiowa | Kiowa-Tanoan | 0.0 | 9.0 | 1.00 |
| Wichita | Caddoan | 2.0 | 3.0 | 0.60 |
| Lakhota | Siouan | 0.0 | 8.0 | 1.00 |
| Tonkawa | Tonkawa | 3.0 | 6.5 | 0.68 |
| Chitimacha | Chitimacha | 1.0 | 4.5 | 0.82 |
| Tunica | Tunica | 4.0 | 11.0 | 0.73 |
| Atakapa | Atakapa | 1.0 | 6.0 | 0.86 |
| Timucua | Timucua | 2.0 | 9.0 | 0.82 |
| Koasati | Muskogean | 2.0 | 8.0 | 0.80 |
| Creek | Muskogean | 0.0 | 6.0 | 1.00 |
| Seneca | Iroquoian | 2.0 | 11.0 | 0.85 |
| Cherokee | Iroquoian | 1.0 | 12.0 | 0.92 |
| Cree | Algonquian | 0.5 | 17.0 | 0.97 |
| Pawnee | Caddoan | 0.0 | 15.5 | 1.00 |
| Natchez | Natchez | 0.0 | 6.5 | 1.00 |
| Mexico and Central America | ||||
| Seri | Seri | 1.0 | 7.0 | 0.88 |
| Rarámuri | Uto-Aztecan | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.71 |
| Yaqui | Uto-Aztecan | 2.0 | 7.5 | 0.79 |
| Cora | Uto-Aztecan | 1.0 | 8.5 | 0.89 |
| Chichimec | Otomanguean | 1.0 | 12.0 | 0.92 |
| Totonac (Filomeno Mata) | Totonac-Tepehuan | 1.0 | 12.0 | 0.92 |
| Purépecha | Purépecha | 3.0 | 6.0 | 0.67 |
| Olutec | Mixe-Zoque | 0.5 | 16.5 | 0.97 |
| Chalcatongo Mixtec | Otomanguean | 4.5 | 11.0 | 0.71 |
| Highland Chontal | Tequistlatecan | 1.0 | 9.0 | 0.90 |
| Huave | Huave | 0.0 | 11.0 | 1.00 |
| Tzutujil | Mayan | 1.0 | 4.0 | 0.80 |
| Pipil | Uto-Aztecan | 2.0 | 7.5 | 0.79 |
| South America | ||||
| Canela-Kraho | Macro-Ge | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Pirahã | Muran | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.50 |
| Sanuma | Yanomaman | 3.0 | 12.0 | 0.80 |
| Hup | Nadahup | 3.0 | 2.5 | 0.45 |
| Hixkaryana | Cariban | 2.0 | 12.0 | 0.86 |
| Apurinã | Arawakan | 3.0 | 6.0 | 0.67 |
| Shuar | Jivaroan | 2.0 | 5.5 | 0.73 |
| Paez | Paesan | 5.0 | 4.0 | 0.44 |
| Yagua | Yaguan | 2.0 | 10.0 | 0.83 |
| Macushi | Cariban | 4.0 | 13.5 | 0.77 |
| Urarina | Urarina | 1.5 | 8.0 | 0.84 |
| Shipibo-Conibo | Pano-Tacanan: Panoan | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.00 |
| Iskonawa | Pano-Tacanan: Panoan | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.50 |
| Awa Pit | Barbacoan | 1.5 | 7.5 | 0.83 |
| Mochica | Mochica | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.50 |
| Cholon | Cholonan | 4.0 | 9.0 | 0.69 |
| Karajá | Macro-Ge | 3.5 | 8.5 | 0.71 |
| Wari | Chapakuran | 4.0 | 8.0 | 0.67 |
| Kwaza | Kwaza | 2.5 | 5.5 | 0.69 |
| Nambikuara | Nambikuara | 2.0 | 10.0 | 0.83 |
| Jaqaru | Aymaran | 2.0 | 10.5 | 0.84 |
| Cavineña | Pano-Tacanan: Tacanan | 2.0 | 6.0 | 0.75 |
| Cayuvava | Cayuvava | 0.0 | 7.5 | 1.00 |
| Movima | Movima | 3.0 | 8.0 | 0.73 |
| Mosetén | Mosetén | 6.0 | 7.0 | 0.54 |
| Yurakare | Yurakare | 1.0 | 5.0 | 0.83 |
| Aymara | Aymaran | 4.0 | 12.0 | 0.75 |
| Alto Perené | Arawakan | 4.0 | 7.5 | 0.65 |
| Yanesha’ | Arawakan | 1.0 | 8.0 | 0.89 |
| Huallaga Quechua | Quechuan | 3.0 | 11.5 | 0.79 |
| Chipaya | Uru-Chipaya | 6.0 | 5.0 | 0.45 |
| Kadiwéu | Guaycuruan | 1.0 | 5.5 | 0.85 |
| Mataco | Matacoan | 1.0 | 11.5 | 0.92 |
| Xokleng | Macro-Ge | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0.20 |
| Guaraní | Tupian | 2.0 | 11.0 | 0.85 |
| Mapudungun | Mapudungun | 0.0 | 11.0 | 1.00 |
| Gününa Küne | Chon | 0.0 | 14.0 | 1.00 |
Lex, Infl=total points for lexical and inflectional properties. %Infl=the percent of the sum of Lex and Infl that is inflectional (calculated only where the total is high enough to make percentages meaningful).
References
Abbi, Anvita. 2013. A grammar of the Great Andamanese language: An ethnolinguistic study. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004246126Search in Google Scholar
Abondolo, Daniel (ed.). 1998. The Uralic languages. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell & Irina Nikolaeva. 2014. Descriptive typology and linguistic theory: A study in the morphosyntax of relative clauses. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1985. Inflectional morphology. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 3–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1988. Inflection. In Michael Hammond & Michael Noonan (eds.), Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modern linguistics, 23–43. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Arkad’ev, Pjotr M., Jurij A. Lander, Aleksandr B. Letučij, Nina R. Sumbatova & Jakov G. Testelets. 2009. Vvedenie: Osnovnye svedenija ob adygejskom jazyke. In Pjotr M. Arkad’ev, Jurij A. Lander, Aleksandr B. Letučij, Nina R. Sumbatova & Jakov G. Testelets (eds.), Aspekty polisintetizma: Očerki po grammatike adygejskogo jazyka, 17–120. Moskva: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet.Search in Google Scholar
Bender, Lionel. 1996. Kunama. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Benzing, Johannes. 1955. Lamutische Grammatik. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2003. Belhare. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 546–570. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2011. Grammatical relations typology. In Song (ed.) 2011, 399–444.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2005. Inclusive/exclusive as person vs. number categories worldwide. In Filimonova (ed.) 2005, 47–70.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2006. Oceania, the Pacific Rim, and the theory of linguistic areas. Berkeley Linguistics Society 32S. 3–15.10.3765/bls.v32i2.3488Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2007. Inflectional morphology. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (2nd edn.), Vol. 3: Grammatical relations and the lexicon, 169–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511618437.003Search in Google Scholar
Boas, Franz (ed.). 1922. Handbook of American Indian languages, Part 2. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Search in Google Scholar
Bowe, Heather. 1990. Categories, constituents, and constituent order in Pitjantjatjara: An Aboriginal language of Australia. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Bugaeva, Anna. 2012. Southern Hokkaido Ainu. In Nicolas Tranter (ed.), The languages of Japan and Korea, 461–507. Abingdon: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.9Search in Google Scholar
Casamiquela, Rodolfo M. 1983. Nociones de gramática del gününa küne: Présentation de la langue des tehuelche septentrionaux australs (Patagonie continentale). Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Search in Google Scholar
Charachidzé, Georges. 1981. Grammaire de la langue avare. Paris: Jean-Favard.Search in Google Scholar
Chirikba, Viacheslav A. 2003. Abkhaz. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Colarusso, John. 1992. A grammar of the Kabardian language. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.10.2307/j.ctv6gqvr4Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1988. General features of the Uralic languages. In Denis Sinor (ed.), The Uralic languages: Description, history, and foreign influences, 451–477. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004492493_020Search in Google Scholar
Cooke, Joseph R. 1968. Pronominal reference in Thai, Burmese, and Vietnamese. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Coppock, Elizabeth & Stephen Wechsler. 2012. The objective conjugation in Hungarian: Agreement without phi-features. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30. 699–740.10.1007/s11049-012-9165-5Search in Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 2013. Canonical morphosyntactic features. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 48–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199604326.003.0003Search in Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. & Matthew Baerman. 2006. Prolegomena to a typology of morphological features. Morphology 16. 231–246.10.1007/s11525-006-9105-3Search in Google Scholar
Curnow, Timothy J. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of southwestern Colombia. Canberra: Australian National University doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2013a. Inclusive/exclusive distinction in independent pronouns. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 39. http://wals.info/chapter/39Search in Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2013b. Inclusive/exclusive distinction in verbal inflection. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 40. http://wals.info/chapter/40Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2000. Animacy and the notion of semantic gender. In Barbara Unterbeck & Matti Rissanen (eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition, 99–115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110802603.99Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.71Search in Google Scholar
Daniel, Michael. 2005. Understanding inclusives. In Filimonova (ed.) 2005, 3–48.Search in Google Scholar
Daniel, Michael. 2013. Plurality in independent personal pronouns. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 35. http://wals.info/chapter/35 (accessed on 13 January 2017).Search in Google Scholar
Daniel, Michael. In preparation. Person in Archi revisited. Manuscript, Nacional’nyj issledovatel’skij universitet “Vysšaja škola èkonomiki”, Moskva.Search in Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1980. The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2000. Categories of the noun phrase in Jarawara. Journal of Linguistics 36. 487–510.10.1017/S0022226700008367Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013. Order of subject, object and verb. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 81. http://wals.info/chapter/81Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie. http://wals.info/Search in Google Scholar
Dunn, Michael John, 1999. A grammar of Chukchi. Canberra: Australian National University doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2008. A grammar of Hup. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110199079Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2003. Bininj Gun-Wok: A pan-dialectal grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune (Pacific Linguistics 541). Canberra: Australian National University.Search in Google Scholar
Filimonova, Elena (ed.). 2005. Clusivity: Typology and case studies of the inclusive-exclusive distinction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.63Search in Google Scholar
Foley, William A. In preparation. The epidemiology of language: The evolution of word class categorialization in the Austronesian languages.Search in Google Scholar
Forchheimer, Paul. 1953. The category of person in language. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783111562704Search in Google Scholar
Forker, Diana. 2013. A grammar of Hinuq. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110303971Search in Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael. 1998. Language relations across Bering Strait: Reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence. London: Cassell.Search in Google Scholar
Frachtenberg, Leo J. 1922a. Coos. In Boas (ed.) 1922, 297–429.Search in Google Scholar
Frachtenberg, Leo J. 1922b. Siuslawan (Lower Umpqua). In Boas (ed.) 1922, 431–629.Search in Google Scholar
Fromm, Hans. 1982. Finnische Grammatik. Heidelberg: Winter.Search in Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives (ed.). 1996. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 17: Languages. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Search in Google Scholar
Graczyk, Randolph. 2007. A grammar of Crow. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Andrea D. Sims. 2010. Understanding morphology. 2nd edn. London: Hodder Education.Search in Google Scholar
Hausenberg, Anu-Reet. 1998. Komi. In Abondolo (ed.) 1998, 305–326.Search in Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1991. Pragmatic disguise in pronominal-affix paradigms. In Frans Plank (ed.), Paradigms: The economy of inflection, 75–90. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110889109.75Search in Google Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2003. Politeness distinctions in second person pronouns. In Friedrich Lenz (ed.), Deictic conceptualization of space, time, and person, 185–202. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.112.10helSearch in Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 2012. Referential markers and agreement markers in Functional Discourse Grammar. Lanuguage Sciences 34. 468–479.10.1016/j.langsci.2012.03.001Search in Google Scholar
Hill, Kenneth C. (ed.). 1998. Hopi dictionary/Hopiikwa lavaytutuveni: A Hopi-English dictionary of the Third Mesa dialect. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.Search in Google Scholar
Iversen, Rune & Guus Kroonen. 2017. Talking Neolithic: Linguistic and archaeological perspectives on how Indo-European was implemented in southern Scandinavia. American Journal of Archaeology 121. 4511–4525.10.3764/aja.121.4.0511Search in Google Scholar
Janhunen, Juha. 2009. Proto-Uralic – what, where, and when? In Jussi Ylikoski (ed.), The Quasquicentennial of the Finno-Ugrian Society, 57–78. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura. http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust258/sust258.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Jelinek, Eloise. 1984. Empty categories, case, and configurationality. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 2. 39–76.10.1007/BF00233713Search in Google Scholar
Kallio, Petri. 2015. The language contact situation in prehistoric Northeastern Europe. In Robert Mailhammer, Theo Vennemann gen. Nierfeld & Birgit Anette Olsen (eds.), The linguistic roots of Europe: Origin and development of European languages, 77–102. København: Museum Tusculanums Forlag.Search in Google Scholar
Kari, James & Ben A. Potter (eds.). 2010. The Dene-Yeniseian connection. Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Language Center.Search in Google Scholar
Keraševa, Zajnab I. 1960. Kratkij grammatičeskij očerk adygejskogo jazyka. In Xadžimeta D. Vodoždokova (ed.), Russko-adygejskij slovar’, 1059–1098. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo inostrannyx i nacional’nyx slovarej.Search in Google Scholar
Keresztes, László. 1998. Mansi. In Abondolo (ed.) 1998, 387–427.Search in Google Scholar
Kibrik, Aleksandr E. 2003. Nominal inflection galore: Daghestanian, with side glances at Europe and the world. In Plank (ed.) 2003, 37–112.Search in Google Scholar
Killian, Don. 2015. Topics in Uduk phonology and morphosyntax. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto doctoral dissertation. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/156271Search in Google Scholar
Killian, Don. In press. Uduk gender from a Koman perspective. In Francesca Di Garbo & Bernhard Wälchli (eds.), Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity. Berlin: Language Science Press.Search in Google Scholar
Konstantinova, Ol’ga A. 1968. Èvenkijskij jazyk. In Pjotr Ja. Skorik (ed.), Jazyki narodov SSSR, Vol. 5: Mongol’skie, tunguso-man’čžurskie i paleoaziatskie jazyki, 68–87. Leningrad: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar
Kulonen, Ulla-Maija. 2001. Über die Deklination der Personalpronomina in der finnisch-ugrischen Grundsprache. In Anu Turk, Triinu Palo & Tõnu Seilenthal (eds.), Congressus Nonus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Vol. 5: Dissertationes sectionum: Linguistica II, 178–182. Tartu: Eesti Fennougristide Komitee.Search in Google Scholar
Lander, Jurij A. 2017. Reformulating head/dependent marking. Paper to be presented at the 12th Conference of the Association for Linguistic Typology, Canberra, December 2017.Search in Google Scholar
Leer, Jeff. 1991. Evidence for a Northern Northwest Coast language area: Promiscuous number marking and periphrastic possessive constructions in Haida, Eyak, and Aleut. International Journal of American Linguistics 57. 158–193.10.1086/ijal.57.2.3519765Search in Google Scholar
Lytkin, Vasilij I. 1966. Komi-zyrjanskij jazyk. In Vasilij I. Lytkin & Klara E. Majtinskaja (eds.), Jazyki narodov SSSR, Vol. 3: Finno-ugorskie i samodijskie jazyki, 281–299. Leningrad: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, Jack. 1999. External possession in Creek. In Payne & Barshi (eds.) 1999, 228–250.Search in Google Scholar
McGregor, William. 1990. A functional grammar of Gooniyandi. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.22Search in Google Scholar
McKay, Graham R. 1978. Pronominal person and number categories in Rembarrnga and Djeebbana. Oceanic Linguistics 17. 27–37.10.2307/3622826Search in Google Scholar
Merrifield, William R. 1959. Classification of Kiowa nouns. International Journal of American Linguistics 25. 269–271.10.1086/464544Search in Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in typological perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Dik Bakker & Antti Arppe. 2016. Sampling for variety. Linguistic Typology 20. 233–296.10.1515/lingty-2016-0006Search in Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.). 2008. Language complexity: Typology, contact, change. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94Search in Google Scholar
Montgomery-Anderson, Brad. 2015. Cherokee reference grammar. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226580593.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2001. Why “me” and “thee”? In Laurel J. Brinton (ed.), Historical Linguistics 1999, 253–276. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.215.18nicSearch in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2009. Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language compexity as an evolving variable, 110–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2011a. Ingush grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2011b. Causativization and contact in Nakh-Daghestanian. Berkeley Linguistics Society 37. 68–80.10.3765/bls.v37i2.811Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2013. The origin and evolution of case-suppletive pronouns: Eurasian evidence. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in memory of Anna Siewierska, 313–345. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110331127.313Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2016. Noun-based and verb-based languages. Poster at the 49th annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Napoli, 31 August – 3 September 2016.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2017a. Causativization as non-diversity: Linguistic and non-linguistic causes. Presented at the 50th annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Zürich, 10–13 September 2017.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2017b. Basic event structure: Phases and transitions. Paper presented at Universiteit van Amsterdam, June 2017.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. In press. Caronical complexity. In Peter Arkadiev & Francesco Gardani (eds.), Morphological complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Christian Bentz. In press. Morphological complexity of languages reflects the settlement history of the Americas. In Katerina Harvati, Gerhard Jäger & Hugo Reyes-Centano (eds.), New perspectives on the peopling of the Americas. Tübingen: Kerns.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Balthasar Bickel. 2013a. Locus of marking in the clause. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 23. http://wals.info/chapter/23 (accessed on 13 January 2017).Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Balthasar Bickel. 2013b. Locus of marking: Whole-language typology. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.), Chapter 25. http://wals.info/chapter/25 (accessed on 13 January 2017).Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Balthasar Bickel. 2013c. Possessive classification. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 59. http://wals.info/chapter/59 (accessed on 13 January 2017).Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna, David A. Peterson & Jonathan Barnes. 2004. Transitivizing and detransitivizing languages. Linguistic Typology 8. 149–211.10.1515/lity.2004.005Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna, Alena Witzlack-Makarevich & Balthasar Bickel. 2013. The Autotyp genealogy and geography. www.spw.uzh.ch/autotyp/Search in Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina. 2005. Modifier-head person concord. In Geert Booij, Emiliano Guevara, Angela Ralli, Salvatore Sgroi & Sergio Scalise (eds.), Morphology and linguistic typology: On-line proceedings of the Fourth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM4), Catania, 21–23 September 2003, 221–234. Bologna: Università degli Studi di Bologna. http://electra.lis.upatras.gr/index.php/mmm/article/view/2375/2634Search in Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina. 2014. A grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110320640Search in Google Scholar
Obata, Kazuko. 2003. A grammar of Bilua: A Papuan language of the Solomons (Pacific Linguistics 540). Canberra: Australian National University.Search in Google Scholar
Onishi, Masayuki. 1994. A grammar of Motuna (Bougainville, Papua New Guinea). Canberra: Australian National University doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Öztürk, Balkız & Markus A. Pöchtrager (eds.). 2011. Pazar Laz. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Payne, Doris L. & Immanuel Barshi (eds.). 1999. External possession. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.39Search in Google Scholar
Pitkin, Harvey. 1984. Wintu grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1985. Die Ordnung der Personen. Folia Linguistica 119. 111–176.10.1515/flin.1985.19.1-2.111Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1999. Split morphology: How agglutination and flection mix. Linguistic Typology 3. 279–340.10.1515/lity.1999.3.3.279Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 2003. The selective elaboration of nominal or pronominal inflection. In Plank (ed.) 2003, 253–287.Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans (ed.). 2003. Noun phrase structure in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197075Search in Google Scholar
Riese, Timothy. 2001. Vogul. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. 1958. The Yurok language: Grammar, texts, lexicon. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rood, David S. & Allan R. Taylor. 1996. Sketch of Lakhota, a Siouan language. In Goddard (ed.) 1996, 440–482.Search in Google Scholar
Rootsi, Siiri, Lev A. Zhivotovsky, Marian Baldovič, Manfred Kayser, Ildus A. Kutuev, Rita Khusainova, Marina A. Bermisheva, Marina Gubina, Sardana A. Fedorova, Anne-Mai Ilumäe, Elza A. Khusnutdinova, Mikhail I. Voevoda, Ludmila P. Osipova, Mark Stoneking, Alice A. Lin, Vladimir Ferak, Jüri Parik, Toomas Kivisild, Peter A. Underhill & Richard Villems. 2007. A counter-clockwise northern route of the Y-chromosome haplogroup N from Southeast Asia towards Europe. European Journal of Human Genetics 15. 204–211.10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201748Search in Google Scholar
Rude, Noel E. 1985. Studies in Nez Perce grammar and discourse. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Salminen, Tapani. 1997. Tundra Nenets inflection. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Salminen, Tapani. 2012. Tundra Nenets. Manuscript, Helsingin yliopisto. Revised version of “Nenets” in Abondolo (ed.) 1998, 516–547.Search in Google Scholar
Sammallahti, Pekka. 1998. Saamic. In Abondolo (ed.) 1998, 43–95.Search in Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511812729Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2011. Person marking. In Song (ed.) 2011, 322–345.Search in Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In R. M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies; Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sinnemäki, Kaius. 2011. Language universals and linguistic complexity: Three case studies in core argument marking. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto doctoral dissertation. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/27782Search in Google Scholar
Smeets, Ineke. 2008. A Mapuche grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Song, Jae Jung (ed.). 2011. The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Sumbatova, Nina R. & Rasul O. Mutalov. 2003. A grammar of Icari Dargwa. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Tamura, Suzuko. 2000. The Ainu language. Tokyo: Sanseido.Search in Google Scholar
Traill, Anthony. 1994. A !Xóõ dictionary. Köln: Köppe.Search in Google Scholar
Tryon, Darrell T. 1968. Iai grammar (Pacific Linguistics B-8). Canberra: Australian National University.Search in Google Scholar
Vajda, Edward. 2010. A Siberian link with Na-Dene languages. In James Kari & Ben A. Potter (eds.), The Dene-Yeniseian connection, 33–99. Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Languages Center.Search in Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. 1985. Case marking and the study of the Lakhota clause. In Johanna Nichols & Anthony C. Woodbury (eds.), Grammar inside and outside the clause: Approaches to theory from the field, 363–413. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Watkins, Laurel J. & Parker McKenzie. 1984. A grammar of Kiowa. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, David John. 1989. A grammar of Huallaga (Huanuco) Quechua. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena. 2010. Typological variation in grammatical relations. Leipzig: Universität Leipzig doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, Taras Zakharko, Lennart Bierkandt, Fernando Zúñiga & Balthasar Bickel. Forthcoming. Decomposing hierarchical alignment: Co-arguments as conditions on alignment and the limits of referential hierarchies as explanations in verb agreement. Linguistics.10.1515/ling-2016-0011Search in Google Scholar
Wolfart, H. Christoph. 1996. Sketch of Cree, an Algonquian language. In Goddard (ed.) 1996, 390–439.Search in Google Scholar
Wonderly, William, Lorna P. Gibson & Paul L. Kirk. 1954. Number in Kiowa: Nouns, demonstratives, and adjectives. International Journal of American Linguistics 20. 1–7.10.1086/464244Search in Google Scholar
Zúñiga, Fernando. 2006. Deixis and alignment: Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.70Search in Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1977. Hierarchies of person. Chicago Linguistic Society 13. 714–733.Search in Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1985. How to describe inflection. Berkeley Linguistics Society 19. 372–385.10.3765/bls.v11i0.1897Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
