Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:30:52.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language Universals: A Survey of Recent Developments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2008

Bernard Comrie
Bernard Comrie
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Survey Article
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , October 1981 , pp. 219 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

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

AKUP (= Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts). Cologne: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Köln.Google Scholar
Bach, E. (1965). On some recurrent types of transformations. In Kreidler, C. W. (ed.), Georgetown University Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, 18, 3–18.Google Scholar
Bach, E. & Harms, R. T. (1968). Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1978). Language samples. In Greenberg, J. H.et al. (eds.) (1978), 1, 123–56.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Capell, A. (1969). A survey of New Guinea languages. Sydney: University of Sydney Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1968/1972). Language and mind. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, R. A. & Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn, 184–221.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1975). Causatives and universal grammar. Transactions of the Philological Society 1974, 1–32.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1978a). Ergativity. In Lehmann, W. P. (ed.), Syntactic typology: studies in the phenomenology of language. Austin: University of Texas Press, 329–94.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1978b). Linguistics is about languages. In Kachru, B. B. (ed), Linguistics in the seventies: directions and prospects. Urbana, Ill.: Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois, 221–36.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1979). On the bases of syntactic reanalysis. Buffalo Papers in Linguistics (Department of Linguistics, State University of New York at Buffalo), 1, 3, 85–110.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1980). Morphology and word order reconstruction: problems and prospects. In Fisiak, J. (ed), Historical morphology. The Hague: Mouton, 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. (1981a). Aspect and voice: some reflections on perfect and passive. In Tedeschi, P. J. & Zsenen, A. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, 14. Tense and aspect. New York: Academic Press, 65–78.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1981b). Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. & Smith, N. (1977). Lingua Descriptive Series: questionnaire. Lingua, 42, 1–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (1979). Ergativity. Language, 55, 59–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1980). An investigation of syntactic transfer in adult second language learners. In Scarcella, R. C. & Krashen, S. D. (eds.), Research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 132–41.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1976). Topic, pronoun, and grammatical agreement. In Li, C. N. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, 149–88.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1979). On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1954/1960). A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language. International Journal of American Linguistics, 26, 178–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1963a/1966a). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. H. (ed.) (1963b/1966b), 73–113.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (ed.) (1963b/1966b). Universals of language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1973/1974). Language typology: a historical and analytic overview. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H., Ferguson, C. A. & Moravcsik, E. A. (eds.) (1978). Universals of human language. 4 vols. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H., Osgood, C. E. & Jenkins, J. J. (1963/1966). Memorandum concerning language universals. In Greenberg, J. H. (ed.) (1963b/1966b), xv–xxvii.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1979). Implicational universals as predictors of word order change. Language, 55, 618–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1980). On implicational and distributional universals of word order. Journal of Linguistics, 16, 193–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1963/1966). The problem of universals in language. In Greenberg, J. H. (ed.) (1963b/1966b), 1–29.Google Scholar
Humboldt, W. von (1836). Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts. Berlin: Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. M. & Schuh, R. G. (1974). Universals of tone rules: evidence from West Africa. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 81–115.Google Scholar
Joos, M. (1957). Comments on B. Bloch (1941), ‘Phonemic overlapping’. In Joos, M. (ed), Readings in linguistics I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 96.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. (1975). Logical expressive power and syntactic variation in natural language. In Keenan, E. L. (ed.), Formal semantics of natural language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 406–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, E. L. (1976). Towards a universal definition of subject. In Li, C. N. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, 303–33.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. (1978). Language variation and the logical structure of universal grammar. In Seiler, H. (ed.), Language universals. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 89–123.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1974). The position of relative clauses and conjunctions. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 117–36.Google Scholar
Lehmann, W. P. (1973). A structural principle of language and its implications. Language, 49, 47–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, W. P. (1974). Proto-Indo-European syntax. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David W. (1979). Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, , Lingua Descriptive Studies. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1978). Language universals in linguistic argumentation. In Kachru, B. B. (ed.), Linguistics in the seventies: directions and prospects. Urbana, Ill.: Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois, 205–19.Google Scholar
Sapir, E. (1926). Language: an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Schachter, P. (1976). The subject in Philippine languages: topic, actor, actor-topic, or none of the above. In Li, C. N. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press, 491–518.Google Scholar
Schachter, P. (1977). Reference-related and role-related properties of subjects. In Cole, P. & Sadock, J. M. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, 8. Grammatical relations. New York: Academic Press, 279–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlegel, K. W. F. von (1808). Über die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier. Heidelberg: Mohr & Zimmer.Google Scholar
Schleicher, A. (1861–1862). Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Weimar.Google Scholar
Shopen, T. (ed.) (in preparation). Syntactic typology and linguistic fieldwork. 3 vols.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1976). Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Dixon, R. M. W. (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, 112–71.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1972). Analogy in generative grammar, the origin of word order. In Heilmann, L. (ed), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Congress of Linguists, vol. 2. Bologna: Il Mulino, 79–83.Google Scholar
Vennemann, T. (1974). Topics, subjects, and word order: from SXV to SVX via TVX. In Anderson, J. M. & Jones, C. (eds.), Historical linguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 339–76.Google Scholar
Working Papers on Language Universals. Stanford, Calif.: Language Universals Project, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Xolodovič, A. A. (ed.) (1969). Tipologija kauzativnyx konstrukcij: morfologičesij kauzativ. Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo ‘Nauka’.Google Scholar