We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
References
REFERENCES
Comrie, B. (1981). Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Foley, W. A. & Van Valin, R. D.Jr, (1984). Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1984). Syntax. A functional-typological introduction. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hale, K. L. (1976). The adjoined relative clause in Australia. In Dixon, R. M. W. (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 78–105.Google Scholar
Kühner, R. & Stegmann, C. (1962). Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, 4th ed. Teil 2: Satzlehre. 2 vols. Leverkusen: Gottschalk.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Ch. (1984a). Progress in general comparative linguistics. Studies in Language8: 259–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Ch. (1984b). Der Relativsatz. Typologie seiner Strukturen — Theorie seiner Funktionen—Kompendium seiner Grammatik. Tübingen: G. Narr.Google Scholar
Mallinson, G. & Blake, B. J. (1981). Language typology. Cross-linguistic studies in syntax. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar