Abstract
Recent work has cast doubt on the idea that all languages are equally complex; however, the notion of syntactic complexity remains underexplored. Taking complexity to equate to difficulty of acquisition for late L2 acquirers, we propose an operationalization of syntactic complexity in terms of uninterpretable features. Trudgill’s sociolinguistic typology predicts that sociohistorical situations involving substantial late L2 acquisition should be conducive to simplification, i.e. loss of such features. We sketch a programme for investigating this prediction. In particular, we suggest that the loss of bipartite negation in the history of Low German and other languages indicates that it may be on the right track.
References
Anderson, S. R. & D. Lightfoot. 2002. The language organ: linguistics as cognitive physiology. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511613869Search in Google Scholar
Atkinson, M., S. Kirby & K. Smith. 2015. Speaker input variability does not explain why larger populations have simpler languages. PloS One 10. e0129463.10.1371/journal.pone.0129463Search in Google Scholar
Auger, J. & A.-J. Villeneuve. 2008. Ne deletion in Picard and in regional French: Evidence for distinct grammars. In M. Meyerhoff & N. Nagy (eds.), Social lives in language, 223–247. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/impact.24.16augSearch in Google Scholar
Barbosa, P. 2011a. Pro-drop and theories of pro in the Minimalist Program, part 1: Consistent null subject languages and the pronominal-Agr hypothesis. Language and Linguistics Compass 5. 551–570.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00293.xSearch in Google Scholar
Barbosa, P. 2011b. Pro-drop and theories of pro in the Minimalist Program, part 2: Pronoun deletion analyses of null subjects and partial, discourse and semi pro-drop. Language and Linguistics Compass 5. 571–587.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00292.xSearch in Google Scholar
Barteld, F., K. Dreessen, S. Ihden & I. Schröder. 2017. Das Referenzkorpus Mittelniederdeutsch/Niederrheinisch (1200–1650) – Korpusdesign, Korpuserstellung und Korpusnutzung. In A. Becker & A. Hausmann (eds.), Mittelniederdeutsche Literatur. Mitteilungen des deutschen Germanistenverbandes, vol. 64. Jg./H. 3, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.10.14220/mdge.2017.64.3.226Search in Google Scholar
Beheydt, G. 1998. Het gebruik en de vorm van de negatie in het zuidelijke Nederlands in een diachronisch perspectief (15e–20e eeuw). University of Leuven Licentiate’s thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Bentz, C. & B. Winter. 2013. Languages with more second-language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change 3. 1–27.10.1163/22105832-13030105Search in Google Scholar
Bernini, G. & P. Ramat. 1996. Negative sentences in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Beyer, K. 2009. Double negation-marking. A case of contact-induced grammaticalization in West Africa? In N. Cyffer, et al. (eds.), Negation Patterns in West African Languages and Beyond, 205–222. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.87.11beySearch in Google Scholar
Biberauer, T., A. Holmberg, I. Roberts & M. Sheehan. 2014. Complexity in comparative syntax: The view from modern parametric theory. In F. J. Newmeyer & L. B. Preston (eds.), Measuring grammatical complexity, 103–127. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Biberauer, T. & G. Walkden. 2015. Introduction: Changing views of syntactic change. In T. Biberauer & G. Walkden (eds.), Syntax over time: Lexical, morphological, and information-structural interactions, 1–13. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199687923.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Bini, M. 1993. La adquisición del italiano: Más allá de las propiedades sintácticas del parámetro pro-drop. In J. M. Liceras (eds.), La lingüística y el análisis de los sistemas no nativos, 126–139. Ottawa: Dovehouse.Search in Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. 1989. What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. M. Gass & A. Schachter (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, 141–168. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005Search in Google Scholar
Braunmüller, K. 2007. Receptive multilingualism in Northern Europe in the Middle Ages: A description of a scenario. In J. D. ten Thije & L. Zeevaert (eds.), Receptive multilingualism, 25–47. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hsm.6.04braSearch in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. 2013. Negation in the history of Low German and Dutch. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 190–238. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. 2014a. The history of Low German negation. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199687282.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. 2014b. Dialect contact and the speed of Jespersen’s cycle in Middle Low German. Taal en Tongval 66. 1–20.10.5117/TET2014.1.BREISearch in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. 2015. Exceptive negation in Middle Low German. In E. Brandner, et al. (eds.), Charting the landscape of linguistics. On the scope of Josef Bayer’s work, 11–15. Konstanz. http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/WebschriftBayer/2015/contents_files/Webschrift_Bayer.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. 2017. Jespersen’s Cycle=Minimize Structure + Feature Economy. In S. Cruschina, et al. (eds.), Studies on negation : Syntax, semantics, and variation, vol. 3, 21–47. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.10.14220/9783737005609.21Search in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. & A.-S. Ghyselen. 2018. Ge had dien een keer moeten en zien! Het “Gesproken Corpus van de (Zuidelijk-)Nederlandse Dialecten”. Paper presented at the Dag van de Nederlandse zinsbouw, Ghent University, 21 Dec 2018.Search in Google Scholar
Breitbarth, A. & L. Haegeman. 2014. The distribution of preverbal en in (West) Flemish: syntactic and interpretive properties. Lingua 147. 69–86.10.1016/j.lingua.2013.11.001Search in Google Scholar
Buridant, C. 2000. Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: SEDES.Search in Google Scholar
Burridge, K. 1993. Syntactic change in Germanic: Aspects of language change in Germanic with particular reference to Middle Dutch. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.89Search in Google Scholar
Catalani, L. 2001. Die Negation im Mittelfranzösischen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Chociej, J. 2011. Polish null subjects: English influence on heritage Polish in Toronto. Ms., University of Toronto.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2008. On phases. In R. Freidin, et al. (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
Coveney, A. 1996. Variability in spoken French: A sociolinguistic study of interrogation and negation. Exeter: Elm Bank.Search in Google Scholar
D’Alessandro, R. 2015. Null subjects. In A. Fábregas, et al. (eds.), Contemporary linguistic parameters, 201–226. London: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. 1979. Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17. 79–106.10.1515/ling.1979.17.1-2.79Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.71Search in Google Scholar
Devos, M. & J. van der Auwera. 2013. Jespersen Cycles in Bantu: Double and triple negation. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 34/2. 205–274.10.1515/jall-2013-0008Search in Google Scholar
Diercks, M. 2012. Parameterizing case: Evidence from Bantu. Syntax 15. 253–286.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2011.00165.xSearch in Google Scholar
Dryer, M. S. & M. Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info.Search in Google Scholar
Ehret, K. & B. Szmrecsányi. 2019. Compressing learner language: An information-theoretic measure of complexity in SLA production data. Second Language Research 35(1). 23–45.10.1177/0267658316669559Search in Google Scholar
Ehret, K. & B. Szmrecsányi. 2016. An information-theoretic approach to assess linguistic complexity. In R. Baechler & G. Seiler (eds.), Complexity, isolation, and variation, 71–94. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348965-004Search in Google Scholar
Eythórsson, T. 2002. Negation in C: The syntax of negated verbs in Old Norse. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 25(2). 190–224.10.1080/033258602321093364Search in Google Scholar
Goss, E. L. 2002. Negotiated language change in Early Modern Holland. Immigration and linguistic variation in The Hague (1600–1670). University of Wisconsin-Madison Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Hagemeijer, T. 2008. Double-headed negation in Santome. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 7(2). 63–82.10.5334/jpl.128Search in Google Scholar
Hale, J. T. 2016. Information-theoretical complexity metrics. Language and Linguistics Compass 10. 397–412.10.1111/lnc3.12196Search in Google Scholar
Hale, M. 1998. Diachronic syntax. Syntax 1. 1–18.10.1111/1467-9612.00001Search in Google Scholar
Hansen, M.-B. M. 2013. Negation in the history of French. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 51–76. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. & H. Hattori. 2006. Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research 22. 269–301.10.1191/0267658306sr269oaSearch in Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. 2006. Persistent problems with case morphology in L2 acquisition. In C. Lleó (ed.), Interfaces in multilingualism: Acquisition and representation, 179–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hsm.4.08hazSearch in Google Scholar
Heap, D. & N. G. Nagy. 1998. Subject pronoun variation in Faetar and Francoprovençal. Papers in Sociolinguistics. NWAVE-26 à l’Université Laval, 291–300. Québec: Nota bene.Search in Google Scholar
Heine, B. & T. Kuteva. 2005. Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511614132Search in Google Scholar
Heycock, C. & J. Wallenberg. 2013. How variational acquisition drives syntactic change: The loss of verb movement in Scandinavian. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 16. 127–157.10.1007/s10828-013-9056-0Search in Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1958.tb00870.xSearch in Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. 2010. Null subject parameters. In T. Biberauer, et al. (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in Minimalist theory, 88–124. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511770784.003Search in Google Scholar
Howell, R. B. 2006. Immigration and koinéisation: The formation of early modern Dutch urban vernaculars. Transactions of the Philological Society 104. 207–227.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2006.00169.xSearch in Google Scholar
Ingham, R. 2008. Contact with Scandinavian and Late Middle English negative concord. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 44. 121–137.Search in Google Scholar
Ingham, R. 2013. Negation in the history of English. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 119–150. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Jäger, A. 2008. History of German negation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.118Search in Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1917. Negation in English and other languages. Kopenhagen: A.F. Høst. Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser I,5.Search in Google Scholar
Jon-And, A. & E. Aguilar. 2016. Modeling language change triggered by language shift. In S. G. Roberts, et al. (eds.), The evolution of language: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference (EVOLANG11). http://evolang.org/neworleans/papers/156.html.Search in Google Scholar
Juola, P. 1998. Measuring linguistic complexity: The morphological tier. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5. 206–213.10.1080/09296179808590128Search in Google Scholar
Juola, P. 2008. Assessing linguistic complexity. In In M. Miestamo, et al. (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 89–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94.07juoSearch in Google Scholar
Kato, M. A. 2012. Brazilian Portuguese and Caribbean Spanish: Similar changes in Romania Nova. In C. Galves, et al. (eds.), Parameter theory and linguistic change, 117–132. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199659203.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. 1997. The rise of positional licensing. In A. van Kemenade & N. Vincent (eds.), Parameters of morphosyntactic change, 460–494. Cambridge: CUP.Search in Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. & Condoravdi, C. 2006. Tracking Jespersen’s Cycle. In M. Janse, et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory, 172–197. Mytilene: Doukas.Search in Google Scholar
Koelmans, L. 1967. Over de verbreiding van het ontkennende en. De Nieuwe Taalgids 60. 12–18.Search in Google Scholar
Kolmogorov, A. N. 1965. Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 1. 3–11.10.1080/00207166808803030Search in Google Scholar
Kroch, A. & Taylor, A. 2000. Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English Prose, 2nd edn. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCME2-RELEASE-3/index.html.Search in Google Scholar
Laing, M. 2013–. A linguistic atlas of early middle English. Version 3.2. https://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme2/laeme2_framesZ.html.Search in Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. 2008. Feature assembly in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, et al. (eds.), The role of features in second language acquisition, 106–140. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.10.4324/9781315085340-5Search in Google Scholar
Lasch, A. 1914. Mittelniederdeutsche Grammatik. Halle: Niemeyer.Search in Google Scholar
Lucas, C. 2013. Negation in the history of Arabic and Afro-Asiatic. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 399–452. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0010Search in Google Scholar
Lucas, C. & E. Lash. 2010. Contact as catalyst: The case for Coptic influence in the development of Arabic negation. Journal of Linguistics 46(2). 379–413.10.1017/S0022226709990235Search in Google Scholar
Lupyan, G. & R. Dale. 2010. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PloS One 5. e8559.10.1371/journal.pone.0008559Search in Google Scholar
Martineau, F. & R. Mougeon. 2003. A sociolinguistic study of the origins of ne-deletion in European and Quebec French. Language 79. 118–152.10.1353/lan.2003.0090Search in Google Scholar
Mathieu, E. & R. Truswell. 2017. Micro-change and macro-change in diachronic syntax. In E. Mathieu & R. Truswell (eds.), Micro-change and macro-change in diachronic syntax, 1–9. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/oso/9780198747840.003.0001Search in Google Scholar
McFadden, T. 2004. The position of morphological case in the derivation: A study on the syntax-morphology interface. University of Pennsylvania PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. 2011. Bilingual language acquisition and theories of diachronic change: Bilingualism as cause and effect of grammatical change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14. 121–145.10.1017/S1366728910000143Search in Google Scholar
Miestamo, M., et al. (eds.). 2008. Language complexity: Typology, contact, change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94Search in Google Scholar
Neuckermans, A. 2008. Negatie in de Vlaamse dialecten volgens de gegevens van de Syntactische Atlas van de Nederlandse Dialecten (SAND). Ghent University PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. & L. B. Preston. (eds.). 2014. Measuring grammatical complexity. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Otheguy, R., A. C. Zentella & D. Livert. 2007. Language and dialect contact in Spanish in New York: Towards the formation of a speech community. Language 83. 1–33.10.1353/lan.2008.0019Search in Google Scholar
Owens, J. 2001. Creole Arabic: the orphan of all orphans. Anthropological Linguistics 43. 348–378.Search in Google Scholar
Peters, R. 2000. Sozio-kulturelle Voraussetzungen und Sprachraum des Mittelniederdeutschen. In W. Besch, et al. (eds.), Sprachgeschichte: Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung, 2. Teilband, 1408–1422. Berlin: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Peters, R. 2017. Das Referenzkorpus Mittelniederdeutsch/Niederrheinisch (1200–1650). Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 140. 35–42.Search in Google Scholar
Pohl, J. 1968. Ne dans le français parlé contemporain: les modalités de son abandon. In A. Quilis Morales, et al. (eds.), Actas del XI Congreso internacional de lingüística y filología románicas, 1343–1359. Madrid: Revista de Filología Española.Search in Google Scholar
Pollard, C. & I. Sag. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, I. & A. Holmberg. 2010. Introduction: Parameters in minimalist theory. In T. Biberauer, et al. (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory, 1–57. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511770784.001Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, I. & A. Roussou. 2003. Syntactic change: A Minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511486326Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, S. G. & J. Winters. 2013. Linguistic diversity and traffic accidents: Lessons from statistical studies of cultural traits. PloS One 8. e70902.10.1371/journal.pone.0070902Search in Google Scholar
Rohrbacher, B. 1999. Morphology-driven syntax: A theory of V-to-I-raising and pro-drop. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.15Search in Google Scholar
Rothman, J. & R. Slabakova. 2018. The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40. 417–442.10.1017/S0272263117000134Search in Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & M. van der Wal. 2013. Change, contact and conventions in the history of Dutch. Taal en Tongval 65(1). 97–123.10.5117/TET2013.1.RUTTSearch in Google Scholar
Rutten, G., M. van der Wal, J. Nobels & T. Simons. 2012. Negation in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Dutch: a historical-sociolinguistic perspective. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 113. 323–342.Search in Google Scholar
Sampson, G., D. Gil & P. Trudgill (eds.). 2009. Language complexity as an evolving variable. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. & D. Vincent. 1977. L’emploi productif du ne dans le français parlé à Montréal. Le Français Moderne 45. 243–256.Search in Google Scholar
Schüler, J. 2016. Alte und neue Fragen zur mittelhochdeutschen Negationssyntax. In A. Speyer & P. Rauth (eds.), Syntax aus Saarbrücker Sicht I. Beiträge der SaRDiS-Tagung zur Dialektsyntax. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, Beiheft 165, 91–107. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Schütze, C. T. 1997. INFL in Child and Adult Language: Agreement, Case and Licensing. MIT Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. & R. A. Sprouse. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model. Second Language Research 12. 40–72.10.1177/026765839601200103Search in Google Scholar
Sheehan, M. & J. van der Wal. 2018. Nominal licensing in caseless languages. Journal of Linguistics 54. 527–589.10.1017/S0022226718000178Search in Google Scholar
Simonenko, A., B. Crabbé & S. Prévost. To appear. Null subject loss and subject agreement syncretisation: Quantificational models for Medieval French. Language Variation and Change.Search in Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. 2009. What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language? In M. Bowles, et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference, 280–294. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2011. Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1. 1–33.10.1075/lab.1.1.01sorSearch in Google Scholar
Sorace, A., L. Serratrice, F. Filiaci & M. Baldo. 2009. Discourse conditions on subject pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of older bilingual children. Lingua 119. 460–477.10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.008Search in Google Scholar
Steedman, M. 2000. The syntactic process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6591.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Stellmacher, D. 1990. Niederdeutsche Sprache: Eine Einführung. Bern etc.: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Szmrecsányi, B. 2004. On operationalizing syntactic complexity. In G. Purnelle, et al. (eds.), Le poids des mots: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis, vol. 2, 1032–1039. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Search in Google Scholar
Thurston, W. 1989. How exoteric languages build a lexicon: Esoterogeny in West New Britain. In R. Harlow & R. Hooper (eds.), VICAL I: Papers in Oceanic linguistics, 555–579. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Search in Google Scholar
Toribio, A. J. 1996. Dialectal variation in the licensing of null referential and expletive subjects. In C. Prodi, et al. (eds.), Aspects of Romance linguistics, 409–432. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R. & C. E. Travis. 2011. Testing convergence via codeswitching: priming and the structure of variable subject expression. International Journal of Bilingualism 15. 241–267.10.1177/1367006910371025Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, E. & G. Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Trotzke, A. & C. J.-W. Zwart. 2014. The complexity of narrow syntax: Minimalism, representational economy, and Simplest Merge. In F. J. Newmeyer & L. B. Preston (eds.), Measuring grammatical complexity, 128–147. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. 2011. Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M. 2014. Early, late or very late? Timing acquisition and bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 4(3). 283–313.10.1075/lab.4.3.01tsiSearch in Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M. & M. Dimitrakopoulou. 2007. The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 23. 215–242.10.1177/0267658307076546Search in Google Scholar
van Gelderen, E. 2011. The linguistic cycle: Language change and the language faculty. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199756056.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Vandekerckhove, R. 2009. Dialect loss and dialect vitality in Flanders. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 196/197. 73–97.10.1515/IJSL.2009.017Search in Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J.-R. 1977. Letter to Noam Chomsky and Howard Lasnik. Ms.Search in Google Scholar
Vosters, R. & W. Vandenbussche 2012. Bipartite negation in 18th and early 19th century Southern Dutch: Sociolinguistic aspects of norms and variation. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 113. 343–364.Search in Google Scholar
Walkden, G. 2014. Syntactic Reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198712299.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Walkden, G. & D. A. Morrison. 2017. Regional variation in Jespersen’s Cycle in Early Middle English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 52. 173–201.10.1515/stap-2017-0007Search in Google Scholar
Wallage, P. 2005. Negation in early English: Parametric variation and grammatical competition. University of York Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Wallage, P. 2017. Negation in early English: Grammatical and functional change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316335185Search in Google Scholar
Weerman, F. 1993. The diachronic consequences of first and second language acquisition: The change from OV to VO. Linguistics 31. 903–931.10.1515/ling.1993.31.5.903Search in Google Scholar
Weerman, F. 2014. Input and age effects: quo vadis? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 4(3). 381–386.10.1075/lab.4.3.15weeSearch in Google Scholar
Weerman, F., M. Olson & R. A. Cloutier. 2013. Synchronic variation and loss of case: Formal and informal language in a Dutch corpus of 17th-century Amsterdam texts. Diachronica 30(3). 353–381.10.1075/dia.30.3.03weeSearch in Google Scholar
Willis, D., C. Lucas & A. Breitbarth. 2013. Comparing diachronies of negation. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 1–50. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0001Search in Google Scholar
Willmott, J. 2013. Negation in the history of Arabic and Afro-Asiatic. In D. Willis, et al. (eds.), The development of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. 1: Case studies, 299–340. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602537.003.0008Search in Google Scholar
Wittmann, H. 1995. Grammaire comparée des variétés coloniales du français populaire de Paris du 17e siècle et origines du français québécois. In R. Fournier & H. Wittmann (eds.), Le français des Amériques, 281–334. Trois-Rivières: Presses universitaires de Trois-Rivières.Search in Google Scholar
Witzenhausen, E. 2019. Von Negation zu Domänensubtraktion: Die Funktion der Negationspartikel ne/en im Mittelniederdeutschen. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 141(1). 1–30.10.1515/bgsl-2019-0001Search in Google Scholar
Woolford, E. 2006. Lexical Case, Inherent Case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37. 111–130.10.1162/002438906775321175Search in Google Scholar
Wray, A. & G. Grace. 2007. The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua 117. 543–578.10.1016/j.lingua.2005.05.005Search in Google Scholar
Zeijlstra, H. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston