Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Journals
  4. Content listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2102725 results in Journals

Page 280 of 105137

  • Active/Agentive Case Marking and Its Motivations

  • Marianne Mithun
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 67 / Issue 3 / September 1991
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    12 March 2026, pp. 510-546

  • A kind of case marking—termed variously active, active-neutral, active-inactive, active-static, stative-active, agentive, agent-patient, split S. and split intransitive—is shown to be less arbitrary than is sometimes assumed. Its semantic bases can be missed if sought only in immediate one-to-one correspondences between meaning and form. Case systems of this kind are often the products of successive diachronic developments, each individually motivated. Several factors can obscure the motivations, including not only crosslinguistic differences in detail, but also shifts of defining features over time, grammaticization, and lexicalization. To explain why these case systems have the shapes they do, we must appreciate both the diversity of features that can underlie them and the dynamic processes that mold them.

  • Chinook Jargon in Areal and Historical Context

  • Sarah Grey Thomason
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 59 / Issue 4 / December 1983
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    12 March 2026, pp. 820-870

  • This paper addresses two current controversies about the nature and origin of Chinook Jargon. First, evidence is presented to support the claim that CJ is a true pidgin—rather than a jargon, in Silverstein's sense (1972) of a speech form without independent grammatical status. When structural features of CJ, as used by English (and French) speakers and by Indians, are compared with those of the speakers' native languages, we see that CJ possesses a grammatical norm that differs in non-simplificatory ways from the native languages. Second, the paper explores the implications of CJ structure for the older controversy as to whether CJ existed before Europeans set up permanent trading posts in the Northwest. The major point here is that phonological and syntactic features of CJ fit well with typological features of Northwest Amerindian languages, but they are markedly non-European. This weakens the case for a post-European origin, since it is hard to explain on the hypothesis that CJ arose from Indian–white communication.

Page 280 of 105137