References

Ackerman, Farrell & Robert Malouf. 2013. Morphological organization: The low conditional entropy conjecture. Language 89(3). 429–464. https://www.linguisticsociety.org/sites/default/files/439-464.pdf (accessed 20 June 2018).10.1353/lan.2013.0054Search in Google Scholar

Aston, Guy & Lou Burnard. 1998. The BNC handbook: Exploring the British national Corpus with SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Baechler, Raffaela & Guido Seiler (eds.). 2016. Complexity, isolation, and variation. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348965Search in Google Scholar

Baerman, Matthew, Dunston Brown & Greville G. Corbett (eds.). 2015. Understanding and measuring morphological complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723769.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Beckner, Clay, Richard Blythe, Joan Bybee, Morten H. Christiansen, William Croft, Nick C. Ellis, John Holland, Jinyun Ke, Diane Larsen-Freeman & Tom Schoenemann. 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning 59 (s1).1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x (accessed 17 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Bentz, Christian & Aleksandrs Berdicevskis. 2016. Learning pressures reduce morphological complexity: Linking corpus, computational and experimental evidence. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity, Osaka, Japan, 222–232. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W16-4125 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Bentz, Christian, Tatyana Ruzsics, Alexander Koplenig & Tanja Samardzic. 2016. A comparison between morphological complexity measures: Typological data vs. language corpora. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity (CL4LC), Osaka, Japan. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W16-4117 (accessed 27 November 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Bentz, Christian & Bodo Winter. 2013. Languages with more second language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change 3. 1–27. http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/22105832-13030105 (accessed 3 April 2018).10.1163/22105832-13030105Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621024Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1995. Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519871Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Bethany Gray & Kornwipa Poonpon. 2011. Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly 45(1). 5–35. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.244483 (accessed 1 July 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Crystal, David. 1987. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dale, Rick & Gary Lupyan. 2012. Understanding the origins of morphological diversity: The linguistic niche hypothesis. Advances in Complex Systems 15(03n04). 1150017/1–1150017/16. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525911500172 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Deutscher, Guy. 2009. “Overall complexity”: a wild goose chase? In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 243–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199545216.003.0017Search in Google Scholar

Ehret, Katharina. 2014. Kolmogorov complexity of morphs and constructions in English. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology 2(11). 43–71. http://csli-lilt.stanford.edu/ojs/index.php/LiLT/article/view/18 (accessed 6 July 2014).10.33011/lilt.v11i.1363Search in Google Scholar

Ehret, Katharina. 2017. An information-theoretic approach to language complexity: Variation in naturalistic corpora. Freiburg: University of Freiburg dissertation. https://freidok.uni-freiburg.de/data/12243 (accessed 25 October 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Ehret, Katharina & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2016a. An information-theoretic approach to assess linguistic complexity. In Raffaela Baechler & Guido Seiler (eds.), Complexity, isolation, and variation, 71–94. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348965-004Search in Google Scholar

Ehret, Katharina & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2016b. Compressing learner language: An information-theoretic measure of complexity in SLA production data. Second Language Research (Sage Online First). http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0267658316669559 (accessed 3 April 2018).10.1177/0267658316669559Search in Google Scholar

Fenk-Oczlon, Gertraud & August Fenk. 2014. Complexity trade-offs do not prove the equal complexity hypothesis. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 50(2). 145–155. https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/psicl.2014.50.issue-2/psicl-2014-0010/psicl-2014-0010.xml (accessed 24 June 2018).10.1515/psicl-2014-0010Search in Google Scholar

Gell-Mann, Murray & Seth Lloyd. 1996. Information measures, effective complexity, and total information. Complexity 2(1). 44–52.10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199609/10)2:1<44::AID-CPLX10>3.0.CO;2-XSearch in Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1960. A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language. International Journal of American Linguistics 26(3). 178–194.10.1086/464575Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2009. An efficiency theory of complexity and related phenomena. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 252–268. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199545216.003.0018Search in Google Scholar

Hockett, Charles Francis. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1958.tb00870.xSearch in Google Scholar

Juola, Patrick. 1998. Measuring linguistic complexity: The morphological tier. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5(3). 206–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09296179808590128 (accessed 14 December 2010).Search in Google Scholar

Juola, Patrick. 2008. Assessing linguistic complexity. In Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 89–107. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94.07juoSearch in Google Scholar

Kolmogorov, Andrej. 1965. Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 1(1). 3–11.10.1080/00207166808803030Search in Google Scholar

Koplenig, Alexander, Peter Meyer, Sascha Wolfer & Carolin Müller-Spitzer. 2017, March. The statistical trade-off between word order and word structure - Large-scale evidence for the principle of least effort. PLOS ONE 12 (3).e0173614. http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173614 (accessed 17 March 2017).10.1371/journal.pone.0173614Search in Google Scholar

Kortmann, Bernd & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.). 2012. Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact. Lingua & Litterae. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110229226Search in Google Scholar

Kusters, Wouter. 2003. Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Ming, Xin Chen, Xin Li, Bin Ma & Paul M. B. Vitányi. 2004. The similarity metric. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 50(12). 3250–3264. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1362909/ (accessed 3 April 2018).10.1109/TIT.2004.838101Search in Google Scholar

Li, Ming & Paul M. B. Vitányi. 1997. An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4757-2606-0Search in Google Scholar

Lupyan, Gary & Rick Dale. 2010. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5(1). 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008559 (accessed 4 November 2014).Search in Google Scholar

McWhorter, John. 2001. The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars. Linguistic Typology 6. 125–166. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2001.001 (accessed 19 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar

McWhorter, John. 2012. Complexity hotspot: The copula in Saramaccan and its implications. In Bernd Kortmann & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.), Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact, Linguae & Litterae, 243–246. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110229226.243Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2006. On the feasibility of complexity metrics. In Krista Kerge & Maria-Maren Sepper (eds.), FinEst Linguistics. Proceedings of the Annual Finnish and Estonian Conference of Linguistics [Publications of the Department of Estonian of Tallinn University 8], 11–26. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikooli Kirjastus.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2008. Grammatical complexity in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.), Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, 23–41. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94.04mieSearch in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson (eds.). 2008. Language Complexity: Typology, contact, change. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.94Search in Google Scholar

Moscoso del Prado Martin, Fermin. 2011. The mirage of morphological complexity. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 3524–529.Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 2013. The vertical archipelago: Adding the third dimension to linguistic geography. In Peter Auer, Martin Hilpert, Anja Stukenbrock & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.), Space in language and linguistics: Geographical, interactional, and cognitive perspectives. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110312027.38Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 2016. Complex edges, transparent frontiers: Grammatical complexity and language spreads. In Raffaela Baechler & Guido Seiler (eds.), Complexity, isolation, and variation, 117–138. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110348965-006Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2017. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Search in Google Scholar

Sadeniemi, Markus, Kimmo Kettunen, Tiina Lindh-Knuutila & Timo Honkela. 2008. Complexity of European Union languages: A comparative approach. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 15(2). 185–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09296170801961843 (accessed 10 December 2010).Search in Google Scholar

Sampson, Geoffrey, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.). 2009. Language complexity as an evolving variable. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199545216.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Schlegel, August Wilhelm von. 1818. Observations sur la langue et littérature provençale. Paris: Librairie Grecque-Latine-Allemande.Search in Google Scholar

Shannon, Claude E. 1948. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27. 379–423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x (accessed 6 April 2011).Search in Google Scholar

Steger, Maria & Edgar W. Schneider. 2012. Complexity as a function of iconicity: The case of complement clause constructions in New Englishes. In Bernd Kortmann & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (eds.), Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact, Linguae & Litterae, 156–191. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110229226.156Search in Google Scholar

Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2009. Typological parameters of intralingual variability: Grammatical analyticity versus syntheticity in varieties of English. Language Variation and Change 21(3). 319–353. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509990123 (accessed 15 November 2012).Search in Google Scholar

Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt & Bernd Kortmann. 2009. Between simplification and complexification: non-standard varieties of English around the world. In Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable, 64–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199545216.003.0005Search in Google Scholar

Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

van der Lubbe, J. C. A. 1997. Information theory. Cambridge, England/New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Zipf, George Kingsley. 1949. Human behavior and the principle of least effort: An introduction to human ecology. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ziv, Jacob & Abraham Lempel. 1977. A universal algorithm for sequential data compression. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory IT-23(3). 337–343. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1055714/ (accessed 6 April 2011).10.1109/TIT.1977.1055714Search in Google Scholar