Abbot, Miriam. 1991. Macushi. In Derbyshire, Desmond and Pullum, Geoffey K. (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages (vol. III). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 23–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad. 2003. Context-sensitive spell-out. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 681–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W.. 1998. Dependencies between grammatical systems. Language 74. 56–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anttila, Raimo. 1972. An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Arensen, Jon. 1971. A Murle grammar. Linguistic Monograph Papers No. 7. Khartoum: Sudan Research Unit, Faculty of Arts, University of Khartoum.Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Pëtr M. 2003. Tipologija padežnogo sinkretizma. Ms., Russian State University for the Humanities.

Armbruster, Charles Herbert. 1960. Dongolese Nubian: a grammar. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar

Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Aronson, Howard I. 1991. Modern Georgian. In Harris, Alice C. (ed.), The indigenous languages of the Caucasus (vol. I: Kartvelian languages). Delmar: Caravan Books. 219–312.Google Scholar

Ashton, E. O. 1947. Swahili grammar (second edition). London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar

Austin, Peter. 1981. A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Austin, Peter. 1986. Structural change in language obsolescence: some Eastern Australian examples. Australian Journal of Linguistics 6. 201–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew. 2002a. Syncretism: an annotated bibliography. Available on-line at http://www.surrey.ac.uk/LIS/MB/Bibliography.htm.

Baerman, Matthew.2002b. The Surrey person syncretism database. Available on-line at: http://www.smg.surrey.ac.uk/personsyncretism/index.aspx.

Baerman, Matthew. 2004. Directionality and (un)natural classes in syncretism. Language 80. 807–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew.2005. Typology and the formal modelling of syncretism. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2004. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew and Dunstan Brown. 2005a. Case syncretism. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baerman, Matthew and Dunstan Brown.2005b. Verbal person/number syncretism. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett. 2002a. The Surrey syncretisms database. Available online at: http://www.smg.surrey.ac.uk/syncretism/index.aspx.

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett.2002b. Case syncretism in and out of Indo-European. In Andronis, Mary, Ball, Christopher, Elston, Heidi and Neuvel, Sylvain (eds.), CLS 37: The main session. papers from the 37th meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (vol. I). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 15–28.Google Scholar

Bammesberger, Alfred. 1982. A handbook of Irish. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Bátori, István. 1990. Die Markierung des Objekts am Verb im Mordwinischen: morphologische Unterbestimmtheit und Homomorphie. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 91. 15–23.Google Scholar

Bavin, Edith L. and Shopen, Tim. 1987. Innovations and neutralizations in the Warlpiri pronominal system. Journal of Linguistics 23. 149–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bechhaus-Gerst, Marianne. 1996. Sprachwandel durch Sprachkontakt am Beispiel des Nubischen im Niltal. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar

Beeler, Madison S. 1976. Barbareño Chumash grammar: a farrago. In Langdon, Margaret and Silver, Shirley (eds.), Hokan studies. The Hague: Mouton. 251–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Béjar, Susana and Daniel Currie Hall. 1999. Marking markedness: the underlying order of diagonal syncretisms. Paper presented at the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, University of Connecticut.

Bender, Lionel M. 1996. Kunama. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Bentley, Delia and Thórhallur Eythórsson. 2001. Alternation according to person in Italo-Romance. In Brinton, Laurel J. (ed.), Historical linguistics 1999. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berger, Hermann. 1998. Die Burushaski-Sprache von Hunza und Nager (vol. I: Grammatik). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar

Berman, Ruth. 1997. Hebrew. In Hetzron, Robert (ed.), The Semitic languages. London: Routledge. 312–34.Google Scholar

Bierwisch, Manfred. 1967. Syntactic features in morphology: general problems of so-called pronominal inflection in German. In To honor Roman Jakobson: essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday. The Hague: Mouton. 239–70.Google Scholar

Blake, Barry J. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Bleiching, Doris, Guido Drexel and Dafydd Gibbon. 1996. Ein Synkretismusmodell für die deutsche Morphologie. In Gibbon, Dafydd (ed.), Natural language processing and speech technology. Results of the third KONVENS Conference, Bielefeld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 237–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blevins, James. 2003 Stems and paradigms. Language 79. 737–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2002. Syncretism without paradigms: remarks on Williams 1981, 1994. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 53–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boeder, Winfried. 1976. Morphologische Kategorien. In Braunmüller, K. and Kürschner, W. (eds.), Grammatik. Akten des 10. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Tübingen 1975 (vol. II). Tübingen: Niemeyer. 117–26.Google Scholar

Booij, Geert. 1996. Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995. Dordrecht: Foris. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bowe, Heather. 1990. Categories, constituents, and constituent order in Pitjantjatjara. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Boyeldieu, Pascal. 1982. Deux études laal. Berlin: D. Reimer.Google Scholar

Breedveld, J. O. 1995. Form and meaning in Fulfulde: a morphophonological study of Maasinankoore. Leiden: CNWS.Google Scholar

Breen, J. Gavan. 1976. Wagaya. In Dixon, Robert M. W. (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 590–4.Google Scholar

Bright, William. 1957. The Karok language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Brockelmann, Carl. 1908–13. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen. Berlin: Reuther and Reichard.Google Scholar

Bromley, H. Myron. 1981. A grammar of Lower Grand Valley Dani. (Pacific Linguistics C63). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Brown, Dunstan. 1998a. Defining ‘subgender’: virile and devirilised nouns in Polish. Lingua 104. 187–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, Dunstan. 1998b. From the general to the exceptional: a Network Morphology account of Russian nominal inflection. PhD thesis, University of Surrey.

Brown, Dunstan.2001. Constructing a typological database for inflectional morphology: the SMG database for syncretism. In Bird, Steven, Buneman, Peter and Liberman, Mark (eds.), Proceedings of the IRCS Workshop on Linguistic Databases. Philadelphia: Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. 56–64 (paper available at: http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/annotation/database/proceedings.html).Google Scholar

Brown, Dunstan, Corbett, Greville, Fraser, Norman, Hippisley, Andrew and Timberlake, Alan. 1996. Russian noun stress and network morphology. Linguistics 34. 53–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Browne, Gerald M. 2002. A grammar of Old Nubian. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Buck, Carl D. 1933. Comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Burrow, Thomas and Bhattacharya, Sudhibhushan. 1970. The Pengo language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Butt, John and Benjamin, Carmen. 2000. A new reference grammar of modern Spanish. London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahill, Lynne and Gazdar, Gerald. 1997. The inflectional phonology of German adjectives, determiners, and pronouns. Linguistics 35. 211–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahill, Lynne and Gazdar, Gerald. 1999. The German noun inflection. Journal of Linguistics 35. first person–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cairns, Charles E. 1986. Word structure, markedness, and applied linguistics. In Eckman, Fred R., Moravcsik, Edith A. and Wirth, Jessica R. (eds.), Markedness. Proceedings of the twelfth annual linguistics symposium of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, March 11–12, 1983. New York: Plenum Press. 13–38.Google Scholar

Calabrese, Andrea. 1998. Some remarks on the Latin case system and its development in Romance. In Lema, José and Treviño, Esthela (eds.), Theoretical analyses on Romance languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 71–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardona, George. 1964. A Gujarati reference grammar. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Cardona, George and Babu K. Suthar. 2003. Gujarati. In Cardona, George and Jain, Dhanesh (eds.), The Indo-Aryan languages. London: Routledge. 658–97.Google Scholar

Carmack, Stanford. 1997. Blocking in Georgian verb morphology. Language 72. 314–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs, Andrew. 1984. Outlines of a constraint on syncretism. Folia Linguistica 18. 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs, Andrew. 1987. Allomorphy in inflection. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1994. Inflection classes, gender, and the principle of contrast. Language 70. 737–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew.1998a. How lexical semantics constrains inflectional allomorphy. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1997. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew.1998b. Comments on the paper by Noyer. In Lapointe, Steven G., Brentari, Diane K., and Farrell, Patrick M. (eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 286–301.Google Scholar

Carter, Hazel and Makoondekwa, João. 1979. Kongo course: maloòngi makikóongo (dialect of Zoombo, Angola). London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar

Chafe, Wallace. 1997. Sketch of Seneca, an Iroquoian language. In Goddard, Ives (ed.) Handbook of North American Indians (vol. XVII: Languages). Washington: Smithsonian Institute. 551–79.Google Scholar

Chapman, Shirley and Desmond C. Derbyshire. 1990. Paumarì. In Derbyshire, Desmond C. and Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages (vol. III). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 161–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Charney, Jean Ormsbee. 1993. A grammar of Comanche. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Childs, George Tucker. 1995. transitive subject (where forms may differ from those of the intransitive subject) grammar of Kisi: a southern Atlantic language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Chvany, Catherine V. 1986. Jakobson's fourth and fifth dimensions: on reconciling the cube model of case meanings with the two-dimensional matrices for case forms. In Brecht, Richard D. and Levine, James S. (eds.), Case in Slavic. Columbus: Slavica. 107–29.Google Scholar

Clairis, Christos. 1985. El Qawasqar: lingüística fueguina, teoría y descripción. (Estudios filológicos, Anejo 12.) Valdivia, Chile: Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades, Universidad Austral de Chile.Google Scholar

Coleman, Robert. 1976. Patterns of Syncretism in Latin. In Davies, Anna M. and Meid, Wolfgang (eds.), Studies in Greek, Italic and Indo-European linguistics offered to Leonard R. Palmer. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck. 47–56.Google Scholar

Coleman, Robert.1991. The assessment of paradigm stability: some Indo-European case studies. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1975. Polite plurals and predicate agreement. Language 51. 406–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1980. Inverse verb forms in Siberia: evidence from Chukchee, Koryak, and Kamchadal. Folia Linguistica Historica 1/1. 61–74.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard.1991. Form and function in identifying cases. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 1983. Hierarchies, targets and controllers: agreement patterns in Slavic. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G.2005. The number of genders. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G., Matthew Baerman and Dunstan Brown. 2002. Domains of syncretism: a demonstration of the autonomy of morphology. In Andronis, Mary, Ball, Christopher, Elston, Heidi and Neuvel, Sylvain (eds.), CLS 37: The Panels. Papers from the 37th meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (vol. I). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 385–98.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. and Norman, M. Fraser. 1993. Network morphology: a DATR account of Russian nominal inflection. Journal of Linguistics 29. 113–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. and Norman M. Fraser. 1997. Komp′juternaja lingvistika i tipologija. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (ser. 9. Filologija, no. 2). 122–40.

Cowan, H. K. J. 1965. Grammar of the Sentani language. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Crowley, Terry. 1998. An Erromangan (Sye) grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar

Crowley, Terry. 1999. Ura: a disappearing language of southern Vanuatu. (Pacific Linguistics C156). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Curnow, Timothy J. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of South-western Colombia. PhD thesis, Australian National University.

Curtius, Georg. 1863. Erläuterungen zu meiner Griechischen Schulgrammatik. Prague: Tempsky.Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. Forthcoming. Syncretisms involving clusivity. In Elena Filimonova (ed.), Clusivity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dalrymple, Mary and Kaplan, Ronald M.. 2000. Feature indeterminancy and feature resolution. Language 76. 759–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies, John. 1981. Kobon (Lingua Descriptive Studies 3). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Angulo, Jaime. 1932. The Chichimeco language (Central Mexico). International Journal of American Linguistics 7. 152–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dedrick, John M. and Casad, Eugene H.. 1999. Sonora Yaqui language structures. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar

Dench, Alan C. 1995. Martuthunira: a language of the Pilbara region of western Australia. Canberra: Australian National University (Pacific Linguistics C125).Google Scholar

Dench, Alan C.2001. Descent and diffusion: the complexity of the Pilbara situation. In Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritence: problems in comparative linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 105–33.Google Scholar

Derbyshire, Desmond. 1979. Hixkaryana (Lingua Descriptive Studies 1). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Galindo, Deza, Francisco, Juan. 1992. Gramática de la lengua aymara. Lima: Artex Editores.Google Scholar

Dickens, Patrick. 1992. A Ju/′hoan grammar. Ms., Nyae Development Foundation of Namibia.

Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 1983. The Turkana language. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1977. A grammar of Yidiɲ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1988. A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donaldson, Tamsin. 1980. Ngiyambaa: the language of the Wangaaybuwan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drabbe, Peter. 1952. Spraakkunst van het Ekagi. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Drabbe, Peter. 1955. Spraakkunst van het Marind, zuidkust Nederlands Nieuw-Guinea. Mödling: Missiehuis St. Gabriël (Reprinted 1966 by Johnson Reprint Corp., New York).Google Scholar

Driem, George. 1987. A grammar of Limbu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dutton, Tom. 2003. A dictionary of Koiari, Papua New Guinea, with grammar notes. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Elliot, Eric. 1999. Dictionary of Rincón Luiseño. PhD thesis, University of California at San Diego.

Endzelīns [Endzelin], Jānis. 1922. Lettische Grammatik. Riga: Gulbis.Google Scholar

Engel, Ralph, Engel, Mary Allhiser and Alvarez, José Mateo. 1987. Diccionario zoque de Francisco Leon. Hidalgo: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild: with historical-comparative notes on Tangkic. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 2003. Bininj Gun-Wok: a pan-dialectal grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune (Pacific Linguistics 541). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett. 2001. Dalabon pronominal prefixes and the typology of syncretism: a Network Morphology analysis. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2000. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Nicholas, Brown, Dunstan, and Corbett, Greville G.. 2002. The semantics of gender in Mayali: partially parallel systems and formal implementation. Language 78. 111–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Roger and Gazdar, Gerald. 1996. DATR: a language for lexical knowledge representation. Computational Linguistics 22. 167–216.Google Scholar

Ezard, Bryan. 1997. A grammar of Tawala: an Austronesian language of the Milne Bay Area, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C137). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Feldstein, Ronald. 2003. On the structure of syncretism in Romanian conjugation. Ms., Indiana University.

Fennell, Trevor G. 1975. Is there an instrumental case in Latvian?Journal of Baltic Studies 6. 41–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feoktistov, Aleksandr p. 1966. Erzjanskij jazyk. Jazyki narodov SSSR (vol. III: Finno-ugorskie jazyki). Moscow: Nauka. 177–98.Google Scholar

Finkel, Raphael, Shen, Lei, Stump, Gregory and Thesayi, Suresh, 2002. KATR: a set-based extension of DATR (Technical report 346–02). University of Kentucky Department of Computer Science, Lexington, KY.Google Scholar

Fischer, Wolfdietrich. 1997. Classical Arabic. In Hetzron, Robert (ed.), The Semitic languages. London: Routledge. 187–219.Google Scholar

Foley, William A. 1986. The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Foley, William A. 1991. The Yimas language of New Guinea. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic (Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars). Dover, New Hampshire: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Frachtenberg, Leo J. 1922. Siuslaw. In Boas, Franz (ed.), Handbook of American Indian languages (vol. II) (Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin). Washington: Government Printing Office. 431–629.Google Scholar

Fradkin, Robert A. 1991. Marking, markedness, and person-gender-number patterning in the Arabic tenses and moods. Folia Linguistica 25. 609–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frank, Paul. 1990. Ika syntax (Studies in the Languages of Colombia 1). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Frank, Wright Jay. 1999. Nuer noun morphology. MA thesis, State University of New York, Buffalo.

Franklin, Karl James. 1971. A grammar of Kewa, New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C16). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Fraser, Norman M. and Greville G. Corbett. 1995. Gender, animacy and declensional class assignment: a unified account for Russian. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1994. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 123–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fraser, Norman M. and Corbett, Greville G.. 1997. Defaults in Arapesh. Lingua 103. 25–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fromm, Hans. 1982. Finnische Grammatik. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Glasgow, Kathleen. 1984. Burarra word classes. In Glasgow, Kathleen et al. (eds.), Papers in Australian linguistics 16 (Pacific Linguistics A68). Canberra: Australian National University. 1–54.Google Scholar

Goddard, Cliff. 1982. Case systems and case marking in Australian languages: a new interpretation. Australian Journal of linguistics second person. 167–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordon, Lynn. 1986. Maricopa morphology and syntax (University of California Publications in Linguistics 108). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Graudiņa, A. 1969. Literārās valodas un izlokšņu mijiedarbība. Latviešu valodas kultūras jautājumi. 16–20.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.), Universals of language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 73–113.Google Scholar

Gregores, Emma, and Suarez, Jorge A.. 1967. A description of colloquial Guarani. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimm, Jacob and Grimm, Willhelm. 2004. Deutsches Wörterbuch (Digital edition). Frankfurt am Main: Zweitausendeins.Google Scholar

Grjunberg, A. L. and Edel′man, D. I.. 1987. Afganskij jazyk. In Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija (vol. IV: Novoiranskie jazyki: vostočnaja gruppa). Moscow: Nauka. 6–154.Google Scholar

Grosse, Siegfried. 2000. Morphologie des Mittelhochdeutschen. In Besch, Werner, Betten, Anne, Reichmann, Oskar and Sonderegger, Stefan (eds.), Sprachgeschichte. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung (vol. 1.2). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1332–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gruzdeva, Elena Ju. 1997. Nivxskij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: paleoaziatskie jazyki. Moscow: Indrik. 139–54.Google Scholar

Güldemann, Tom and Rainer Vossen. 2000. Khoisan. In Heine, Bernd and Nurse, Derek (eds.), African languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 99–122.Google Scholar

Gvozdanović, Jadranka. 1991. Syncretism and the paradigmatic patterning of grammatical meaning. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 133–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hagman, Roy S. 1977. Nama Hottentot grammar. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar

Halle, Morris. 1997. Distributed morphology: impoverishment and fission. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30. 425–49.Google Scholar

Hamel, Patricia J. 1994. A grammar and lexicon of Loniu, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C103). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Hansson, Gunnar O. 1996. Productive syncretism and morphological theory: a case study of North Sami inflectional morphology. Ms., University of California, Berkeley.

Harbour, Daniel. 2003. Elements of number theory. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Harley, Heidi and Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: a feature-geometric analysis. Language 78. 482–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harvey, Mark. 2002. A grammar of Gaagudju. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), 2005. World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Haugen, Einar. 1982. Scandinavian language structures: a comparative historical survey. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Haviland, John. 1979. Guugu Yimidhirr. In Dixon, Robert M. W. and Blake, Barry J. (eds.), Handbook of Australian languages. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 27–180.Google Scholar

Hayward, Richard. 1984. The Arbore language. Hamburg: H. Buske.Google Scholar

Healy, Alan, Ambrose Isoroembo and Martin Chittleborough. 1969. Preliminary notes on Orokaiva grammar. In Papers in New Guinea Linguistics 9 (Pacific Linguistics A18). 33–64.

Heath, Jeffrey. 1984. Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Atlantic Highlands NJ: Humanities Press (and Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies).Google Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey.1991. Pragmatic disguise in pronominal-affix paradigms. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey. 1998. Pragmatic skewing in 1 ↔ 2 pronominal combinations in Native American languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 64. 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, Bernd. 1981. The non-Bantu languages of Kenya. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd.1982. African noun class systems. In Seiler, Hansjakob and Lehman, Christian (eds.), Apprehension: das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen (vol. I). Tübingen: Narr. 189–216.Google Scholar

Hekking, Ewald. 1995. El Otomí de Santiago Mexquititlán: desplazamiento lingüístico, préstamos y cambios gramaticales. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar

Helimski, Eugene. 1998. Selkup. In Abondolo, Daniel (ed.), The Uralic languages. London: Routledge. 548–79.Google Scholar

Helmbrecht, Johannes. 1999. The typology of 1st person marking and its cognitive background. In Hiraga, Masako K., Sinha, Chris and Wilcox, Sherman (eds.), Cultural, psychological and typological issues in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 285–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2003. Ikonizität in Personalpronomina (Arbeitspapiere des Seminars für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt nr. 5). Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt.Google Scholar

Henderson, James. 1995. Phonology and grammar of Yele, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics B112). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Herbermann, Charles G., Pace, Edward A., Pallen, Condé B., Shahan, Thomas J. and Wynne, John J.. 1907–18. The Catholic encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton.Google Scholar

Hetzron, Robert. 1967. Agaw numerals and incongruence in Semitic. Journal of Semitic Studies 12. 169–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hewitt, Brian G. 1995. Georgian: a structural reference grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hewson, John. 1989. Motivated syncretism. Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association/Revue de l‘Association de Linguistique des Provinces Atlantique 11. 39–56.Google Scholar

Hippisley, Andrew. 1997. Declarative derivation: a Network Morphology account of Russian word formation with reference to nouns denoting ‘person’. PhD thesis, University of Surrey.

Hippisley, Andrew.2001. Word formation rules in a default inheritance framework. In Marle, Jaap and Booij, Geert (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1999. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 221–61.Google Scholar

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1935–7. La catégorie des cas: étude de grammaire générale (Acta Jutlandica VII/1). Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar

Hoff, B. J. 1968. The Carib language. The Hague: M. Nyhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holton, David, Mackridge, Peter and Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1997. Greek: a comprehensive grammar of the modern language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Horton, A. E. 1949. A grammar of Luvale. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar

Hualde, José Ignacio and Urbina, Jon Ortiz (eds.). 2003. A grammar of Basque. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hudson, Richard A. 1974. A structural sketch of Beja. In Arnott, D. W. (ed.), African language studies. London: School of Oriental and African Studies. 111–42.Google Scholar

Huntley, David. 1980. The evolution of genitive-accusative animate and personal nouns in Slavic dialects. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical morphology. The Hague: Mouton. 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutchison, John P. 1981. The Kanuri language: a reference grammar. Madison: African Studies Program, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar

Innes, Gordon. 1966. An introduction to Grebo. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar

Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. 2001. Xettskij jazyk (second edition). Moscow: URSS.Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray S. 1985. Multiple subcategorization and the θ-criterion: the case of climb. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory third person. 271–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacobson, Steven A. 1995. A practical grammar of the Central Alaskan Yup'ik Eskimo language. Fairbanks: Alaska: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar

Jakobi, Angelika. 1990. A Fur grammar: phonology, morphophonology, and morphology. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar

Jakobson, Roman O. 1936 [1971]. Beitrag zur allgemeinen Kasuslehre: Gesamtbedeutung der russischen Kasus. Reprinted in Selected writings (vol. II: Word and language). The Hague: Mouton. 23–71 (originally in Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague VI. 240–99).

Jakobson, Roman O. 1958. Morfologičeskie nabljudenija nad slavjanskim skloneniem. In American contributions to the Fourth International Congress of Slavists, Moscow. 's-Gravenhage: Mouton. 127–56.

Johnston, Jason. 1997. Systematic homonymy and the structure of morphological categories: some lessons from paradigm geometry. PhD thesis, University of Sydney.

Kachru, Braj B. 1969. A reference grammar of Kashmiri. Urbana: Department of Linguistics, Univerity of Illinois.Google Scholar

Kariņš, A. Krišjānis. 1994. Functionalism and linguistic change in Latvian verb morphology. Linguistica Baltica third person. 109–20.Google Scholar

Karlson, Fred. 1999. Finnish: an essential grammar. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Kathol, Andreas. 2002. Nominal head-marking constructions: two case studies from Luiseño. In Eynde, Frank, Hellan, Lars and Beermann, Dorothee (eds.), Proceedings of the eighth international conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 189–201.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Benjamin Hall. 1955. The revised Latin primer (edited and further revised by Sir James Mountford). London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar

Kettunen, Lauri. 1938. Livisches Wörterbuch mit grammatischer Einleitung. Helsinki: Suomalais Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar

Key, Harold H. 1967. Morphology of Cayuvava. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Khubchandani, Lachman M. 2003. Sindhi. In Cardona, George and Jain, Dhanesh (eds.), The Indo-Aryan languages. London: Routledge. 622–58.Google Scholar

Kibrik, Aleksandr E. 1997. Ierarxii, roli, nuli, markirovannost′ i ‘anomal′naja’ upakovka grammatičeskoj semantiki. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 4. 27–57.Google Scholar

Kibrik, Aleksandr E. (ed.) 1999. Èlementy caxurskogo jazyka v tipologičeskom osveščenii. Moscow: Nasledie.Google Scholar

Kienast, Burkhart. 2001. Historische semitische Sprachwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 2001. Structural case in Finnish. Lingua 111. 315–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klenin, Emily. 1983. Animacy in Russian: a new interpretation. Columbus: Slavica.Google Scholar

Koneski, Blaže. 1996. Istorija na makedonskiot jazik (reprint of 1986 edition). Skopje: Detska Radost.Google Scholar

Kotyczka, Jozef. 1980. Kurze polnische Sprachlehre. Berlin: Volk und Wissen.Google Scholar

Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju and Gwynn, John P. L.. 1985. A grammar of modern Telugu. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1949 [1960]. De la nature des procès dits ‘analogiques’. Reprinted in: Esquisses linguistiques. Wroctław: Zaktład narodowy im. Ossolińskich. 66–86.Google Scholar

Kutsch Lojenga, Constance. 1994. Ngiti: A Central-Sudanic language of Zaire. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar

Lakämper, Renate and Dieter, Wunderlich. 1998. Person marking in Quechua – a constraint-based minimalist analysis. Lingua 105. 113–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lamberti, Marcello. 1993. Die Shinassha-Sprache. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Lefebvre, Claire and Brousseau, Anne-Marie. 2002. A grammar of Fongbe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leumann, Manu. 1977. Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre (fifth edition). Munich: Beck.Google Scholar

Henry, Liddell G. and Scott, Robert. 1996. A Greek–English lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Lindstrom, Lamont and Lynch, John. 1994. Kwamera. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Lipkind, William. 1945. Winnebago grammar. New York: King's Crown Press.Google Scholar

Lorimer, David L. R. 1939. The Dumāki Language: outlines of the speech of the Doma, or Bēricho, of Hunza. Nijmegen: Dekker and van de Vegt.Google Scholar

Luraghi, Silvia. 2000. Synkretismus. In Booij, Geert, Lehmann, Christian and Mugdan, Joachim (eds.), Morphologie: ein Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 638–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lynch, John. 2000. A grammar of Anejom. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Magometbekova, Z. M. 1967. Karatinskij jazyk. In Bokarev, E. A. and Lomatidze, K. V. (eds.), Jazyki narodov SSSR (vol. IV: Iberijsko-kavkazskie jazyki). Moscow: Nauka. 323–35.Google Scholar

Maiden, Martin. 1992. Irregularity as a determinant of morphological change. Journal of Linguistics 28/2. 285–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malécot, André. 1963. Luiseño, a structural analysis II: morphosyntax. International Journal of American Linguistics 29. 196–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maslova, Elena. 2003. A grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mathiassen, Terje. 1997. A short grammar of Latvian. Columbus: Slavica.Google Scholar

Matras, Yaron. 2002. Romani: a linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mayerthaler, Willi. 1987. System-independent morphological naturalness. In Dressler, Wolfgang U. (ed.), Leitmotifs in natural morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 25–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCarthy, John J. 2002. A thematic guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

McCreight, Katherine and Catherine V. Chvany. 1991. Geometric representation of paradigms in a modular theory of grammar. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGregor, Ronald S. 1977. Outline of Hindi grammar. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

McGregor, William. 1990. A functional grammar of Gooniyandi. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGuckin, Catherine. 2002. Gapapaiwa. In Lynch, John, Ross, Malcom and Crowley, Terry (eds.), The Oceanic languages. Richmond: Curzon. 297–321.Google Scholar

Meillet, Paul and Vaillant, André. 1934. Le slave commun. Paris: Institut d'études slaves.Google Scholar

Meiser, G. 1992. Syncretism in Indo-European languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 90/2. 187–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Merlan, Francesca. 1982. Mangarayi (Lingua Descriptive Studies 4). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Miller, Raymond. 1990. Form and function of the peripheral cases in some Slovene dialects. Slovene Studies 12/1. 5–22.Google Scholar

Minassian, Martiros. 1980. Grammaire d'Armenien oriental. Delmar: Caravan Books.Google Scholar

Mitchell, Terence F. 1962. Colloquial Arabic: the living language of Egypt. London: English Universities Press.Google Scholar

Moravcsik, Edith and Jessica Wirth. 1986. Markedness – an overview. In Eckman, Fred R., Moravcsik, Edith A. and Wirth, Jessica R. (eds.), Markedness: proceedings of the twelfth annual linguistics symposium of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, March 11–12, 1983. New York: Plenum Press. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morgenstierne, Georg. 1941. Notes on Phalūra, an unknown language of Chitral. Oslo: Hos Jacob Dybwad (Skirfter utgit av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo II. Hist.-Filos. Klasse. No. 5).Google Scholar

Mous, Maarten. 1993. A grammar of Iraqw (Kuschitische Sprachstudien 9). Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar

Müller, Gereon. Forthcoming. A Distributed Morphology approach to syncretism in Russian noun inflection. In Olga Arnaudova, Wayles Browne, Maria Luisa Rivero and Dejan Stojanović (eds.), Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 12. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.

Munro, Pamela. 1976. Mojave syntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Murane, Elizabeth. 1974. Daga grammar: from morpheme to discourse. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Muysken, Pieter. 1997. Callahuaya. In: Thomasan, Sally G. (ed.), Contact languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 427–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Myachina, E. N. 1981. The Swahili language: a descriptive grammar (translated by G. L. Campdell). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Najlis, Elena. 1966. Lengua abipona (vol. I). Buenos Aires: Centro de Estudios, Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar

Neidle, Carol J. 1988. The role of case in Russian syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neue, Friedrich and Wagener, C.. 1902. Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache (vol. I: Das Substantivum). Leipzig: O. R. Reisland.Google Scholar

Newmark, Leonard. 1982. Standard Albanian: a reference grammar for students. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1994. Ingush. In Smeets, Rieks (ed.), The indigenous languages of the Caucasus (vol. IV). Delmar, New York: Caravan Books. 79–145.Google Scholar

Nikolaeva, Irina and Xelimskij, Evgenij A.. 1997. Jukagirskij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: paleoaziatskie jazyki. Moscow: Indrik. 155–68.Google Scholar

Nikolaeva, Irina and Tolskaya, Maria. 2001. A grammar of Udihe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Noonan, Michael. 1992. A grammar of Lango. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nordlinger, Rachel. 1998. A grammar of Wambaya, Northern Territory (Australia) (Pacific Linguistics C140). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Noreen, Adolf. 1923. Altislandische und altnorwegische Grammatik. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Noyer, Rolf. 1997. Features, positions and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Noyer, Rolf.1998. Impoverishment theory and morphosyntactic markedness. In Lapointe, Steven G., Brentari, Diane K., and Farrell, Patrick M. (eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 264–85.Google Scholar

Noyer, Rolf. 2001. Clitic sequences in Nunggubuyu and PF convergence. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19/4. 751–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nussbaum, Loren V., Gage, William W. and Varre, Daniel. 1970. Dakar Wolof: a basic course. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Oates, William J. and Oates, Lynette F.. 1968. Kapau pedagogical grammar (Pacific Linguistics C10). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Osborne, Charles R. 1974. The Tiwi language. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar

Owens, Jonathan. 1985. A grammar of Harar Oromo (northeastern Ethiopia). Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar

Oxotina, Natalija V. 1961. Jazyk zulu. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

Perlmutter, David M. and Janez Orešnik. 1973. Language-particular rules and explanation in syntax. In Anderson, Steven R. and Kiparsky, Paul (eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt Rinehart. 419–59.Google Scholar

Pike, Kenneth. 1965. Non-linear order and anti-redundancy in German morphological matrices. Zeitschrift für Mundartforschung 32. 193–221.Google Scholar

Pitman, Donald. 1980. Bosquejo de la gramatica araona (Notas Lingüísticas, no. 9). Riberalta, Bolivia: Instituto Linguistico de Verano.Google Scholar

Plank, Frans. 1991. Rasmus Rask's dilemma. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 161–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Plungian, Vladimir. 1995. Dogon. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Pokorny, Julius. 1923. A historical reader of Old Irish. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Popjes, Jack, and Jo Popjes. 1986. Canela-Kraho. In Derbyshire, Desmond C. and Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages (vol. I). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 128–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pott, August. 1836. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen (vol. II). Lemgo: Meyer'sche Hof-Buchhandlung.Google Scholar

Pott, August. 1859. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen (vol. I: Prepositionen). Lemgo and Detmold: Meyer'sche Hof-Buchhandlung.Google Scholar

Priestly, T. M. S. 1993. Slovene. In Comrie, Bernard and Corbett, Greville G. (eds.), The Slavonic languages. London: Routledge. 388–451.Google Scholar

Reesink, Ger P. 1987. Structures and their functions in Usan: a Papuan language of Papua New Guinea. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reesink, Ger P. (ed.), 2002. Languages of the Eastern Bird's Head. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Reh, Mechthild. 1985. Die Krongo-Sprache (Niino Mo-Di). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar

Rice, Keren. 2000. Morpheme order and semantic scope. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ringe, Donald. 1995. Nominative-accusative syncretism and syntactic case. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics second person. 45–81.Google Scholar

Roberts, John R. 1987. Amele. London: Croom-Helm.Google Scholar

Robins, R. H. 1958. The Yurok language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Romero-Figueroa, Andres. 1997. transitive subject (where forms may differ from those of the intransitive subject) reference grammar of Warao. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Rothe, Wolfgang. 1957. Einführung in die historische Laut- und Formenlehre des Rumänischen. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Rounds, Carol. 2001. Hungarian: an essential grammar. London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rumsey, Alan. 1982. An intra-sentence grammar of Ungarinjin, North-Western Australia (Pacific linguistics B86). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Rupp, James E. 1989. Lealao Chinantec syntax (Studies in Chinantec Languages 2). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Saeed, John. 1999. Somali. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Salminen, Tapani. 1997. Tundra Nenets inflection (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 227). Helsinki: Suomolais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar

Sapir, J. David. 1965. A grammar of Diola-Fogny (West African Language Monographs 3). Ibadan: Cambridge University Press in association with the West African Languages Survey and the Institute of African Studies.Google Scholar

Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1976. Dasenech. In Lionel Bender, M. (ed.), The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia. East Lansing: African Studies Center, Michigan State University. 196–221.Google Scholar

Schenker, Alexander M. 1964. Polish declension. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Serzisko, Fritz. 1982. Numerus/Genus-Kongruenz und das Phänomen der Polarität am Beispiel einiger ostkuschitischer Sprachen. In Seiler, Hansjakob and Stachowiak, Franz Josef (eds.), Apprehension: das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen (vol. II). Tübingen: Narr. 179–200.Google Scholar

Sharma, D. D. 1988. transitive subject (where forms may differ from those of the intransitive subject) descriptive grammar of Kinnauri. Delhi: Mittal Publications.Google Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Dixon, Robert M. W. (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 112–71.Google Scholar

Sims-Williams, Nicholas. 1982. The double system of nominal inflection in Sogdian. Transactions of the Philogical Society 80. 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Skorik, Pëtr Ia. 1961–77. Grammatika čukotskogo iazyka (vols. I and II). Leningrad: Izdatel′stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.Google Scholar

Smith, Lawrence R. 1979. Labrador Inittut inverted number marking, exchange rules and morphological markedness. Linguistics 17/1–2. 153–67.Google Scholar

Šołćina, Jana and Wornar, Edward. 2002. Obersorbisch im Selbststudium: ein Sprachkurs für Unerschrockene. Budyšin: LND (on-line edition available at http://www.serbski-institut.de/).Google Scholar

Sologub, A. I. 1983. O sinkretizme form v sklonenii suščestvitel′nyx ženskogo roda edinstvennogo čisla po dialektnym dannym. In Avanesov, Ruben I. (ed.), Russkie narodnye govory. Moscow: Nauka. 82–8.Google Scholar

Soukka, Maria. 2000. A descriptive grammar of Noon: a Cangin language of Senegal. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew. 1991. Morphological theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew.2000. Agreement morphology in Chukotkan. In Dressler, Wolfgang U., Pfeiffer, Oskar E., Pöchtrager, Markus A. and Rennison, John R. (eds.), Morphological analysis in comparison. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 191–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sridhar, Shikaripur N. 1989. Kannada. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Stevenson, R. C. 1969. Bagirmi grammar (Linguistic Monograph Series No. 3). Khartoum: Sudan Research Unit, University of Khartoum.Google Scholar

Stone, Gerald. 1993. Sorbian. In Comrie, Bernard and Corbett, Greville G. (eds.), The Slavonic languages. London: Routledge. 593–686.Google Scholar

Stump, Gregory T. 1993. On rules of referral. Language 69. 449–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stump, Gregory T. 2001. Inflectional morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sunik, O. P. 1997. Udègejskij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: mongol′skie jazyki, tunguso-man′čžurskie jazyki, japonskij jazyk, korejskij jazyk. Moscow: Indrik. 236–48.Google Scholar

Szemerényi, Oswald. 1989. Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenchaft. Darmstadt: Wissenshaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar

Taylor, Charles V. 1985. Nkore-Kiga. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Terrill, Angela. 2003. A grammar of Lavukaleve. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tesnière, Lucien. 1925. Les formes du duel en slovène. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar

Timberlake, Alan. 1975. Hierarchies in the genitive of negation, Slavic and East European Journal 19. 123–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Todaeva, Buljaš X. 1997. Baoan′skij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: mongol′skie jazyki, tunguso-man′čžurskie jazyki, japonskij jazyk, korejskij jazyk. Moscow: Indrik. 29–36.Google Scholar

Tokarski, J. 1993. Schematyczny indeks a tergo polskich form wyrazowych (revised and edited by Zygmunt Saloni). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar

Toporišič, Jože. 1976. Slovenska slovnica. Maribor: Obzorja.Google Scholar

Tosco, Mauro. 2001. The Dhaasanac language. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar

Trask, R. L. 1997. A student's dictionary of language and linguistics. London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Tucker, Archibald N. and Bryan, Margaret A.. 1966. Linguistic analysis: the non-Bantu languages of North-Eastern Africa. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Turton, David. 1981. Le Mun (Mursi). In Manessy, G. (ed.), Les langues de l'Afrique subsaharienne (Les langues dans le monde ancien et moderne, vol. 1.1). Paris. Editions du CNRS. 335–49.Google Scholar

Upadhyaya, U. Padmanabha. 1976. A comparative study of Kannada dialects: Bellary, Gulbarga, Kumta, and Nanjangud dialects. Mysore: Prasaranga, University of Mysore.Google Scholar

Uspensky, Boris A. 1965. Strukturnaja tipologija jazykov. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar

Verner, G. K. [Werner, Heinrich]. 1999. Ketskij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: paleoaziatskie jazyki. Moscow: Indrik. 177–87.Google Scholar

Viitso, Tiit-Rein. 1998. Fennic. In Abondolo, Daniel (ed.), The Uralic languages. London: Routledge. 96–114.Google Scholar

Voorhoeve, C. L. 1965. The Flamingo Bay dialect of the Asmat language. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Voorhoeve, C. L.1975. Central and western Trans-New Guinea phylum languages. In Wurm, Stephan A. (ed.), Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene (Pacific Linguistics C38). Canberra: Australian National University. 345–459.Google Scholar

Wackernagel, Jacob. 1924. Vorlesungen über Syntax (vol. I). Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar

Watkins, Calvert. 1962. Indo-European origins of the Celtic verb. Dublin: Institute of Advanced Studies.Google Scholar

Watkins, Laurel J. 1984. A grammar of Kiowa. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Watters, David E. 2003. A grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wegera, Klaus Peter. 2000. Morphologie des Frühneuhochdeutschen. In Besch, Werner, Betten, Anne, Reichmann, Oskar and Sonderegger, Stefan (eds.), Sprachgeschichte: ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung (vol. 1.2). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1313–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Werner, Roland. 1987. Grammatik des Nobiin (Nilnubisch). Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar

West, Dorothy. 1973. Wojokeso sentence, paragraph and discourse analysis (Pacific Linguistics B28). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Westermann, Diedrich. 1930. A study of the Ewe language. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Whitney, William Dwight. 1889. Sanskrit grammar. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wiese, Bernd. 1996. Iconicity and syncretism. In Sackmann, Robin (ed.), Theoretical linguistics and grammatical description: papers in honour of Hans-Heinrich Lieb on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 323–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wiese, Bernd.2003. Zur lateinischen Nominalflexion: die Form-Funktion-Beziehung. Ms., Institut für deutsche Sprache, Mannheim.

Williams, Edwin. 1981. On the notions ‘lexically related’ and ‘head of a word’. Linguistic Inquiry 12/2. 245–74.Google Scholar

Williams, Edwin. 1994. Remarks on lexical knowledge. Lingua 92. 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilson, Darryl. 1974. Suena grammar (Workpapers in Papua New Guinea languages 8). Ukarumpa, Papua New Guinea: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Windisch, Rudolf. 1973. Genusprobleme im Romanischen: das Neutrum im Rumänischen. Tübingen: Präzis.Google Scholar

Wright, Joseph. 1930. Grammar of the Gothic language. Oxford: Oxford University Press (reprint of 1910 edition).Google Scholar

Wunderlich, Dieter. 2001a. A correspondence-theoretic analysis of Dalabon transitive paradigms. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2000Dordrecht: Kluwer. 233–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wunderlich, Dieter. 2001b. How gaps and substitutions can become optimal: the pronominal affix paradigms of Yimas. Transactions of the Philological Society 99. 315–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wunderlich, Dieter.2004. Is there any need for the concept of directional syncretism? In Gunkel, L., Müller, G. and Zifonun, G. (eds.), Explorations in nominal inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 373–395.Google Scholar

Wurm, Stephan A. 1975. The Trans-Fly (sub phylum level) stock. In Wurm, Stephan A. (ed.), Papuan languages and the New Guinea linguistic scene (Pacific Linguistics C38). Canberra: Australian National University. 323–44.Google Scholar

Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1987. System-dependent morphological naturalness in inflection. In Dressler, Wolfgang U. (ed.), Leitmotifs in natural morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 59–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Xajdakov, S. M. 1980. Principy immennoj klassifikacii v dagestanskix jazykax. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar

Xajdakov, S. M.2001. Lakskij jazyk. In Alekseev, M. E. (ed.), Jazyki mira: kavkazskie jazyki. Moscow: Academia. 347–57.Google Scholar

Zaliznjak, Andrej A. 1973 [2002]. O ponimanii termina ‘padež’ v lingvističeskix opisanijax. In Russkoe imennoe slovoizmenenie. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul′tury. 613–47 (originally in Andrej, A. Zaliznjak (ed.), Problemy grammatičeskogo modelirovanija. Moscow: Nauka. 53–87).Google Scholar

Zasorina, L. N. 1977. Častotnyi slovar′ russkogo jazyka. Moscow: Russkij jazyk.Google Scholar

Žirkov, L. I. 1955. Lakskij jazyk. Moscow: Izdatel′stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.Google Scholar

Žukova, Alevtina N. 1972. Grammatika korjakskogo iazyka: fonetika, morfologija. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar

Zwicky, Arnold. 1985. How to describe inflection. In Proceedings of the eleventh annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 372–86.

Zwicky, Arnold.1991. Systematic versus accidental phonological identity. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zwicky, Arnold.2000. Describing syncretism: rules of referral after fifteen years. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (26), University of California, Berkeley.

Abbot, Miriam. 1991. Macushi. In Derbyshire, Desmond and Pullum, Geoffey K. (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages (vol. III). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 23–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad. 2003. Context-sensitive spell-out. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 681–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W.. 1998. Dependencies between grammatical systems. Language 74. 56–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anttila, Raimo. 1972. An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Arensen, Jon. 1971. A Murle grammar. Linguistic Monograph Papers No. 7. Khartoum: Sudan Research Unit, Faculty of Arts, University of Khartoum.Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Pëtr M. 2003. Tipologija padežnogo sinkretizma. Ms., Russian State University for the Humanities.

Armbruster, Charles Herbert. 1960. Dongolese Nubian: a grammar. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar

Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by itself. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Aronson, Howard I. 1991. Modern Georgian. In Harris, Alice C. (ed.), The indigenous languages of the Caucasus (vol. I: Kartvelian languages). Delmar: Caravan Books. 219–312.Google Scholar

Ashton, E. O. 1947. Swahili grammar (second edition). London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar

Austin, Peter. 1981. A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Austin, Peter. 1986. Structural change in language obsolescence: some Eastern Australian examples. Australian Journal of Linguistics 6. 201–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew. 2002a. Syncretism: an annotated bibliography. Available on-line at http://www.surrey.ac.uk/LIS/MB/Bibliography.htm.

Baerman, Matthew.2002b. The Surrey person syncretism database. Available on-line at: http://www.smg.surrey.ac.uk/personsyncretism/index.aspx.

Baerman, Matthew. 2004. Directionality and (un)natural classes in syncretism. Language 80. 807–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew.2005. Typology and the formal modelling of syncretism. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2004. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baerman, Matthew and Dunstan Brown. 2005a. Case syncretism. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baerman, Matthew and Dunstan Brown.2005b. Verbal person/number syncretism. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett. 2002a. The Surrey syncretisms database. Available online at: http://www.smg.surrey.ac.uk/syncretism/index.aspx.

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett.2002b. Case syncretism in and out of Indo-European. In Andronis, Mary, Ball, Christopher, Elston, Heidi and Neuvel, Sylvain (eds.), CLS 37: The main session. papers from the 37th meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (vol. I). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 15–28.Google Scholar

Bammesberger, Alfred. 1982. A handbook of Irish. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Bátori, István. 1990. Die Markierung des Objekts am Verb im Mordwinischen: morphologische Unterbestimmtheit und Homomorphie. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 91. 15–23.Google Scholar

Bavin, Edith L. and Shopen, Tim. 1987. Innovations and neutralizations in the Warlpiri pronominal system. Journal of Linguistics 23. 149–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bechhaus-Gerst, Marianne. 1996. Sprachwandel durch Sprachkontakt am Beispiel des Nubischen im Niltal. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar

Beeler, Madison S. 1976. Barbareño Chumash grammar: a farrago. In Langdon, Margaret and Silver, Shirley (eds.), Hokan studies. The Hague: Mouton. 251–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Béjar, Susana and Daniel Currie Hall. 1999. Marking markedness: the underlying order of diagonal syncretisms. Paper presented at the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, University of Connecticut.

Bender, Lionel M. 1996. Kunama. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Bentley, Delia and Thórhallur Eythórsson. 2001. Alternation according to person in Italo-Romance. In Brinton, Laurel J. (ed.), Historical linguistics 1999. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berger, Hermann. 1998. Die Burushaski-Sprache von Hunza und Nager (vol. I: Grammatik). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar

Berman, Ruth. 1997. Hebrew. In Hetzron, Robert (ed.), The Semitic languages. London: Routledge. 312–34.Google Scholar

Bierwisch, Manfred. 1967. Syntactic features in morphology: general problems of so-called pronominal inflection in German. In To honor Roman Jakobson: essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday. The Hague: Mouton. 239–70.Google Scholar

Blake, Barry J. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Bleiching, Doris, Guido Drexel and Dafydd Gibbon. 1996. Ein Synkretismusmodell für die deutsche Morphologie. In Gibbon, Dafydd (ed.), Natural language processing and speech technology. Results of the third KONVENS Conference, Bielefeld. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 237–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blevins, James. 2003 Stems and paradigms. Language 79. 737–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2002. Syncretism without paradigms: remarks on Williams 1981, 1994. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 53–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boeder, Winfried. 1976. Morphologische Kategorien. In Braunmüller, K. and Kürschner, W. (eds.), Grammatik. Akten des 10. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Tübingen 1975 (vol. II). Tübingen: Niemeyer. 117–26.Google Scholar

Booij, Geert. 1996. Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1995. Dordrecht: Foris. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bowe, Heather. 1990. Categories, constituents, and constituent order in Pitjantjatjara. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Boyeldieu, Pascal. 1982. Deux études laal. Berlin: D. Reimer.Google Scholar

Breedveld, J. O. 1995. Form and meaning in Fulfulde: a morphophonological study of Maasinankoore. Leiden: CNWS.Google Scholar

Breen, J. Gavan. 1976. Wagaya. In Dixon, Robert M. W. (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 590–4.Google Scholar

Bright, William. 1957. The Karok language. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Brockelmann, Carl. 1908–13. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen. Berlin: Reuther and Reichard.Google Scholar

Bromley, H. Myron. 1981. A grammar of Lower Grand Valley Dani. (Pacific Linguistics C63). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Brown, Dunstan. 1998a. Defining ‘subgender’: virile and devirilised nouns in Polish. Lingua 104. 187–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, Dunstan. 1998b. From the general to the exceptional: a Network Morphology account of Russian nominal inflection. PhD thesis, University of Surrey.

Brown, Dunstan.2001. Constructing a typological database for inflectional morphology: the SMG database for syncretism. In Bird, Steven, Buneman, Peter and Liberman, Mark (eds.), Proceedings of the IRCS Workshop on Linguistic Databases. Philadelphia: Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. 56–64 (paper available at: http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/annotation/database/proceedings.html).Google Scholar

Brown, Dunstan, Corbett, Greville, Fraser, Norman, Hippisley, Andrew and Timberlake, Alan. 1996. Russian noun stress and network morphology. Linguistics 34. 53–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Browne, Gerald M. 2002. A grammar of Old Nubian. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar

Buck, Carl D. 1933. Comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Burrow, Thomas and Bhattacharya, Sudhibhushan. 1970. The Pengo language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Butt, John and Benjamin, Carmen. 2000. A new reference grammar of modern Spanish. London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahill, Lynne and Gazdar, Gerald. 1997. The inflectional phonology of German adjectives, determiners, and pronouns. Linguistics 35. 211–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahill, Lynne and Gazdar, Gerald. 1999. The German noun inflection. Journal of Linguistics 35. first person–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cairns, Charles E. 1986. Word structure, markedness, and applied linguistics. In Eckman, Fred R., Moravcsik, Edith A. and Wirth, Jessica R. (eds.), Markedness. Proceedings of the twelfth annual linguistics symposium of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, March 11–12, 1983. New York: Plenum Press. 13–38.Google Scholar

Calabrese, Andrea. 1998. Some remarks on the Latin case system and its development in Romance. In Lema, José and Treviño, Esthela (eds.), Theoretical analyses on Romance languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 71–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardona, George. 1964. A Gujarati reference grammar. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Cardona, George and Babu K. Suthar. 2003. Gujarati. In Cardona, George and Jain, Dhanesh (eds.), The Indo-Aryan languages. London: Routledge. 658–97.Google Scholar

Carmack, Stanford. 1997. Blocking in Georgian verb morphology. Language 72. 314–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs, Andrew. 1984. Outlines of a constraint on syncretism. Folia Linguistica 18. 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs, Andrew. 1987. Allomorphy in inflection. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1994. Inflection classes, gender, and the principle of contrast. Language 70. 737–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew.1998a. How lexical semantics constrains inflectional allomorphy. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1997. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew.1998b. Comments on the paper by Noyer. In Lapointe, Steven G., Brentari, Diane K., and Farrell, Patrick M. (eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 286–301.Google Scholar

Carter, Hazel and Makoondekwa, João. 1979. Kongo course: maloòngi makikóongo (dialect of Zoombo, Angola). London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar

Chafe, Wallace. 1997. Sketch of Seneca, an Iroquoian language. In Goddard, Ives (ed.) Handbook of North American Indians (vol. XVII: Languages). Washington: Smithsonian Institute. 551–79.Google Scholar

Chapman, Shirley and Desmond C. Derbyshire. 1990. Paumarì. In Derbyshire, Desmond C. and Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages (vol. III). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 161–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Charney, Jean Ormsbee. 1993. A grammar of Comanche. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Childs, George Tucker. 1995. transitive subject (where forms may differ from those of the intransitive subject) grammar of Kisi: a southern Atlantic language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Chvany, Catherine V. 1986. Jakobson's fourth and fifth dimensions: on reconciling the cube model of case meanings with the two-dimensional matrices for case forms. In Brecht, Richard D. and Levine, James S. (eds.), Case in Slavic. Columbus: Slavica. 107–29.Google Scholar

Clairis, Christos. 1985. El Qawasqar: lingüística fueguina, teoría y descripción. (Estudios filológicos, Anejo 12.) Valdivia, Chile: Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades, Universidad Austral de Chile.Google Scholar

Coleman, Robert. 1976. Patterns of Syncretism in Latin. In Davies, Anna M. and Meid, Wolfgang (eds.), Studies in Greek, Italic and Indo-European linguistics offered to Leonard R. Palmer. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck. 47–56.Google Scholar

Coleman, Robert.1991. The assessment of paradigm stability: some Indo-European case studies. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1975. Polite plurals and predicate agreement. Language 51. 406–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1980. Inverse verb forms in Siberia: evidence from Chukchee, Koryak, and Kamchadal. Folia Linguistica Historica 1/1. 61–74.Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard.1991. Form and function in identifying cases. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 1983. Hierarchies, targets and controllers: agreement patterns in Slavic. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G.2005. The number of genders. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G., Matthew Baerman and Dunstan Brown. 2002. Domains of syncretism: a demonstration of the autonomy of morphology. In Andronis, Mary, Ball, Christopher, Elston, Heidi and Neuvel, Sylvain (eds.), CLS 37: The Panels. Papers from the 37th meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (vol. I). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 385–98.Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. and Norman, M. Fraser. 1993. Network morphology: a DATR account of Russian nominal inflection. Journal of Linguistics 29. 113–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. and Norman M. Fraser. 1997. Komp′juternaja lingvistika i tipologija. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta (ser. 9. Filologija, no. 2). 122–40.

Cowan, H. K. J. 1965. Grammar of the Sentani language. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Crowley, Terry. 1998. An Erromangan (Sye) grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar

Crowley, Terry. 1999. Ura: a disappearing language of southern Vanuatu. (Pacific Linguistics C156). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Curnow, Timothy J. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of South-western Colombia. PhD thesis, Australian National University.

Curtius, Georg. 1863. Erläuterungen zu meiner Griechischen Schulgrammatik. Prague: Tempsky.Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. Forthcoming. Syncretisms involving clusivity. In Elena Filimonova (ed.), Clusivity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dalrymple, Mary and Kaplan, Ronald M.. 2000. Feature indeterminancy and feature resolution. Language 76. 759–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies, John. 1981. Kobon (Lingua Descriptive Studies 3). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Angulo, Jaime. 1932. The Chichimeco language (Central Mexico). International Journal of American Linguistics 7. 152–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dedrick, John M. and Casad, Eugene H.. 1999. Sonora Yaqui language structures. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar

Dench, Alan C. 1995. Martuthunira: a language of the Pilbara region of western Australia. Canberra: Australian National University (Pacific Linguistics C125).Google Scholar

Dench, Alan C.2001. Descent and diffusion: the complexity of the Pilbara situation. In Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. and Dixon, Robert M. W. (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritence: problems in comparative linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 105–33.Google Scholar

Derbyshire, Desmond. 1979. Hixkaryana (Lingua Descriptive Studies 1). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Galindo, Deza, Francisco, Juan. 1992. Gramática de la lengua aymara. Lima: Artex Editores.Google Scholar

Dickens, Patrick. 1992. A Ju/′hoan grammar. Ms., Nyae Development Foundation of Namibia.

Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 1983. The Turkana language. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1977. A grammar of Yidiɲ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1988. A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Dixon, Robert M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donaldson, Tamsin. 1980. Ngiyambaa: the language of the Wangaaybuwan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drabbe, Peter. 1952. Spraakkunst van het Ekagi. 's-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Drabbe, Peter. 1955. Spraakkunst van het Marind, zuidkust Nederlands Nieuw-Guinea. Mödling: Missiehuis St. Gabriël (Reprinted 1966 by Johnson Reprint Corp., New York).Google Scholar

Driem, George. 1987. A grammar of Limbu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dutton, Tom. 2003. A dictionary of Koiari, Papua New Guinea, with grammar notes. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Elliot, Eric. 1999. Dictionary of Rincón Luiseño. PhD thesis, University of California at San Diego.

Endzelīns [Endzelin], Jānis. 1922. Lettische Grammatik. Riga: Gulbis.Google Scholar

Engel, Ralph, Engel, Mary Allhiser and Alvarez, José Mateo. 1987. Diccionario zoque de Francisco Leon. Hidalgo: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild: with historical-comparative notes on Tangkic. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 2003. Bininj Gun-Wok: a pan-dialectal grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune (Pacific Linguistics 541). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas, Dunstan Brown and Greville G. Corbett. 2001. Dalabon pronominal prefixes and the typology of syncretism: a Network Morphology analysis. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2000. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Nicholas, Brown, Dunstan, and Corbett, Greville G.. 2002. The semantics of gender in Mayali: partially parallel systems and formal implementation. Language 78. 111–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Evans, Roger and Gazdar, Gerald. 1996. DATR: a language for lexical knowledge representation. Computational Linguistics 22. 167–216.Google Scholar

Ezard, Bryan. 1997. A grammar of Tawala: an Austronesian language of the Milne Bay Area, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C137). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Feldstein, Ronald. 2003. On the structure of syncretism in Romanian conjugation. Ms., Indiana University.

Fennell, Trevor G. 1975. Is there an instrumental case in Latvian?Journal of Baltic Studies 6. 41–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feoktistov, Aleksandr p. 1966. Erzjanskij jazyk. Jazyki narodov SSSR (vol. III: Finno-ugorskie jazyki). Moscow: Nauka. 177–98.Google Scholar

Finkel, Raphael, Shen, Lei, Stump, Gregory and Thesayi, Suresh, 2002. KATR: a set-based extension of DATR (Technical report 346–02). University of Kentucky Department of Computer Science, Lexington, KY.Google Scholar

Fischer, Wolfdietrich. 1997. Classical Arabic. In Hetzron, Robert (ed.), The Semitic languages. London: Routledge. 187–219.Google Scholar

Foley, William A. 1986. The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Foley, William A. 1991. The Yimas language of New Guinea. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic (Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars). Dover, New Hampshire: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Frachtenberg, Leo J. 1922. Siuslaw. In Boas, Franz (ed.), Handbook of American Indian languages (vol. II) (Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin). Washington: Government Printing Office. 431–629.Google Scholar

Fradkin, Robert A. 1991. Marking, markedness, and person-gender-number patterning in the Arabic tenses and moods. Folia Linguistica 25. 609–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frank, Paul. 1990. Ika syntax (Studies in the Languages of Colombia 1). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Frank, Wright Jay. 1999. Nuer noun morphology. MA thesis, State University of New York, Buffalo.

Franklin, Karl James. 1971. A grammar of Kewa, New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C16). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Fraser, Norman M. and Greville G. Corbett. 1995. Gender, animacy and declensional class assignment: a unified account for Russian. In Booij, Geert and Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1994. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 123–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fraser, Norman M. and Corbett, Greville G.. 1997. Defaults in Arapesh. Lingua 103. 25–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fromm, Hans. 1982. Finnische Grammatik. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar

Glasgow, Kathleen. 1984. Burarra word classes. In Glasgow, Kathleen et al. (eds.), Papers in Australian linguistics 16 (Pacific Linguistics A68). Canberra: Australian National University. 1–54.Google Scholar

Goddard, Cliff. 1982. Case systems and case marking in Australian languages: a new interpretation. Australian Journal of linguistics second person. 167–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordon, Lynn. 1986. Maricopa morphology and syntax (University of California Publications in Linguistics 108). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Graudiņa, A. 1969. Literārās valodas un izlokšņu mijiedarbība. Latviešu valodas kultūras jautājumi. 16–20.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.), Universals of language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 73–113.Google Scholar

Gregores, Emma, and Suarez, Jorge A.. 1967. A description of colloquial Guarani. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grimm, Jacob and Grimm, Willhelm. 2004. Deutsches Wörterbuch (Digital edition). Frankfurt am Main: Zweitausendeins.Google Scholar

Grjunberg, A. L. and Edel′man, D. I.. 1987. Afganskij jazyk. In Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija (vol. IV: Novoiranskie jazyki: vostočnaja gruppa). Moscow: Nauka. 6–154.Google Scholar

Grosse, Siegfried. 2000. Morphologie des Mittelhochdeutschen. In Besch, Werner, Betten, Anne, Reichmann, Oskar and Sonderegger, Stefan (eds.), Sprachgeschichte. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung (vol. 1.2). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1332–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gruzdeva, Elena Ju. 1997. Nivxskij jazyk. In Jazyki mira: paleoaziatskie jazyki. Moscow: Indrik. 139–54.Google Scholar

Güldemann, Tom and Rainer Vossen. 2000. Khoisan. In Heine, Bernd and Nurse, Derek (eds.), African languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 99–122.Google Scholar

Gvozdanović, Jadranka. 1991. Syncretism and the paradigmatic patterning of grammatical meaning. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 133–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hagman, Roy S. 1977. Nama Hottentot grammar. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar

Halle, Morris. 1997. Distributed morphology: impoverishment and fission. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30. 425–49.Google Scholar

Hamel, Patricia J. 1994. A grammar and lexicon of Loniu, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics C103). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Hansson, Gunnar O. 1996. Productive syncretism and morphological theory: a case study of North Sami inflectional morphology. Ms., University of California, Berkeley.

Harbour, Daniel. 2003. Elements of number theory. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Harley, Heidi and Ritter, Elizabeth. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: a feature-geometric analysis. Language 78. 482–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harvey, Mark. 2002. A grammar of Gaagudju. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), 2005. World atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Haugen, Einar. 1982. Scandinavian language structures: a comparative historical survey. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Haviland, John. 1979. Guugu Yimidhirr. In Dixon, Robert M. W. and Blake, Barry J. (eds.), Handbook of Australian languages. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 27–180.Google Scholar

Hayward, Richard. 1984. The Arbore language. Hamburg: H. Buske.Google Scholar

Healy, Alan, Ambrose Isoroembo and Martin Chittleborough. 1969. Preliminary notes on Orokaiva grammar. In Papers in New Guinea Linguistics 9 (Pacific Linguistics A18). 33–64.

Heath, Jeffrey. 1984. Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Atlantic Highlands NJ: Humanities Press (and Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies).Google Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey.1991. Pragmatic disguise in pronominal-affix paradigms. In Plank, Frans (ed.), Paradigms: the economy of inflection. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey. 1998. Pragmatic skewing in 1 ↔ 2 pronominal combinations in Native American languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 64. 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heine, Bernd. 1981. The non-Bantu languages of Kenya. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd.1982. African noun class systems. In Seiler, Hansjakob and Lehman, Christian (eds.), Apprehension: das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen (vol. I). Tübingen: Narr. 189–216.Google Scholar

Hekking, Ewald. 1995. El Otomí de Santiago Mexquititlán: desplazamiento lingüístico, préstamos y cambios gramaticales. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use.Google Scholar

Helimski, Eugene. 1998. Selkup. In Abondolo, Daniel (ed.), The Uralic languages. London: Routledge. 548–79.Google Scholar

Helmbrecht, Johannes. 1999. The typology of 1st person marking and its cognitive background. In Hiraga, Masako K., Sinha, Chris and Wilcox, Sherman (eds.), Cultural, psychological and typological issues in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 285–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2003. Ikonizität in Personalpronomina (Arbeitspapiere des Seminars für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt nr. 5). Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt.Google Scholar

Henderson, James. 1995. Phonology and grammar of Yele, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics B112). Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar

Herbermann, Charles G., Pace, Edward A., Pallen, Condé B., Shahan, Thomas J. and Wynne, John J.. 1907–18. The Catholic encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton.Google Scholar

Hetzron, Robert. 1967. Agaw numerals and incongruence in Semitic. Journal of Semitic Studies 12. 169–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hewitt, Brian G. 1995. Georgian: a structural reference grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hewson, John. 1989. Motivated syncretism. Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association/Revue de l‘Association de Linguistique des Provinces Atlantique 11. 39–56.Google Scholar

Hippisley, Andrew. 1997. Declarative derivation: a Network Morphology account of Russian word formation with reference to nouns denoting ‘person’. PhD thesis, University of Surrey.

Hippisley, Andrew.2001. Word formation rules in a default inheritance framework. In Marle, Jaap and Booij, Geert (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1999. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 221–61.Google Scholar

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1935–7. La catégorie des cas: étude de grammaire générale (Acta Jutlandica VII/1). Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar

Hoff, B. J. 1968. The Carib language. The Hague: M. Nyhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holton, David, Mackridge, Peter and Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1997. Greek: a comprehensive grammar of the modern language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Horton, A. E. 1949. A grammar of Luvale. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar

Hualde, José Ignacio and Urbina, Jon Ortiz (eds.). 2003. A grammar of Basque. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hudson, Richard A. 1974. A structural sketch of Beja. In Arnott, D. W. (ed.), African language studies. London: School of Oriental and African Studies. 111–42.Google Scholar

Huntley, David. 1980. The evolution of genitive-accusative animate and personal nouns in Slavic dialects. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical morphology. The Hague: Mouton. 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutchison, John P. 1981. The Kanuri language: a reference grammar. Madison: African Studies Program, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar

Innes, Gordon. 1966. An introduction to Grebo. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar

Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. 2001. Xettskij jazyk (second edition). Moscow: URSS.Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray S. 1985. Multiple subcategorization and the θ-criterion: the case of climb. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory third person. 271–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jacobson, Steven A. 1995. A practical grammar of the Central Alaskan Yup'ik Eskimo language. Fairbanks: Alaska: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar

Jakobi, Angelika. 1990. A Fur grammar: phonology, morphophonology, and morphology. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar

Jakobson, Roman O. 1936 [1971]. Beitrag zur allgemeinen Kasuslehre: Gesamtbedeutung der russischen Kasus. Reprinted in Selected writings (vol. II: Word and language). The Hague: Mouton. 23–71 (originally in Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague VI. 240–99).

Jakobson, Roman O. 1958. Morfologičeskie nabljudenija nad slavjanskim skloneniem. In American contributions to the Fourth International Congress of Slavists, Moscow. 's-Gravenhage: Mouton. 127–56.

Johnston, Jason. 1997. Systematic homonymy and the structure of morphological categories: some lessons from paradigm geometry. PhD thesis, University of Sydney.

Kachru, Braj B. 1969. A reference grammar of Kashmiri. Urbana: Department of Linguistics, Univerity of Illinois.Google Scholar