Abstract
Against a multidisciplinary background this contribution explores the areal typology of western Middle and South America. Based on a new language sample and a typological questionnaire that is specifically designed to bring some of the poorly documented and extinct languages into the debate, we explore the areal distribution of 77 linguistic traits in 44 languages. While one of the goals of the present article is to provide a general up-to-date view of the areal patterning of these traits on a large scale, we also explore a number of specific questions in more detail. In particular, we address the relationship between known language areas like Mesoamerica and the Central Andes with their respective peripheries, the possibility of detecting an areal-typological signal that predates the rise of these linguistic areas, and, finally, the question of linguistic convergence along the Pacific coast. We find that, while the languages of the Mesoamerican periphery are rather diffuse typologically, the structural profiles of the Central Andean languages are embedded organically into a more general cluster of Andean typological affinities that alters continuously as one moves through geographical space. In different ways, the typological properties of the peripheral languages may reflect a situation that goes back to time depths which are greater than that of the emergence of the Mesoamerican and Central Andean linguistic areas. Finally, while we can confirm typological affinities with Mesoamerica for some languages of coastal South America, we do not find support for large-scale linguistic convergence on the Pacific coast.
Acknowledgements
Work on this article was supported by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)/ERC grant agreement no. 295918, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – Project Nos. UR 310/1-1 and FOR 2237. We thank Willem F.H. Adelaar, former members of the MesAndLin(g)k project in Leiden, and two anonymous reviewers for commenting on earlier drafts of this article.
Appendix
The full template of the questionnaire.
No. | Area | Subarea | Description | Comments/cross-references |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Phonology | Consonants | Is there a voicing contrast in stops? | |
2 | Phonology | Consonants | Are there phonemic glottalized/ejective consonants? | cf. Maddieson (2013a) |
3 | Phonology | Consonants | Are there phonemic aspirated consonants? | |
4 | Phonology | Consonants | Are there phonemic uvulars? | cf. Maddieson (2013b) |
5 | Phonology | Consonants | Is there a labiodental fricative? | |
6 | Phonology | Vowels | Is there a phonemic high central vowel? | |
7 | Phonology | Vowels | Is there phonemic vowel length? | |
8 | Phonology | Vowels | Is there phonemic vowel nasalization? | cf. Hajek (2013) |
9 | Phonology | Vowels | Are there more than two phonemically relevant degrees of aperture? | i. e. are there phonemic mid vowels (/e/, /o/) |
10 | Phonology | Vowels | Are there more than three phonemically relevant degrees of aperture? | i. e. are there any near-high or close-mid vowel phonemes (/ɪ/, /ɛ/, /ʊ/, /ʌ/, /ɔ/) |
11 | Phonology | Suprasegmental | Are there contrastive tones? | |
12 | Phonology | Suprasegmental | Is there contrastive stress? | |
13 | Phonology | Syllable Structure | Are there codas? | “no” also if highly constrained |
14 | Phonology | Syllable Structure | Are there complex onsets? | “no” also if highly constrained |
15 | Morphology | General | Is there a preference for prefixes in nominal inflectional morphology? | A language is said to have a preference for prefixing if (1) there is at most one inflectional category in nouns realized as a suffix and (2) there are at least two realized as prefixes. Categories need not be obligatory. Clitics do not count. |
16 | Morphology | General | Is there a preference for suffixes in nominal inflectional morphology? | A language is said to have a preference for suffixing if (1) there is at most one inflectional category in nouns realized as a prefix and (2) there are at least two realized as suffixes. Categories need not be obligatory. Clitics do not count. |
17 | Morphology | General | Is there a preference for prefixes in verbal inflectional morphology? | A language is said to have a preference for prefixing if (1) there is at most one inflectional category in verbs realized as a suffix and (2) there are at least two realized as prefixes. Categories need not be obligatory. Clitics do not count. |
18 | Morphology | General | Is there a preference for suffixes in verbal inflectional morphology? | A language is said to have a preference for suffixing if (1) there is at most one inflectional category in verbs realized as a prefix and (2) there are at least two realized as suffixes. Categories need not be obligatory. Clitics do not count. |
19 | Morphology | General | Is there productive reduplication? | cf. Rubino (2013) |
20 | Morphology | Transcategorical operations | Is there productive nominalizing morphology? | |
21 | Morphology | Transcategorical operations | Is there productive verbalizing morphology? | |
22 | Morphology | Parts of speech | Is there a morphosyntactically definable class of adjectives? | “no” also if adjectives are described as a subclass of either nouns or verbs |
23 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Are there possessive classes? | defined as in Nichols and Bickel (2013b) |
24 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Are there numeral classifiers? | cf. Gil (2013) |
25 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Are there noun classes/genders? | trigger agreement |
26 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Are there noun classifiers? | do not normally trigger agreement |
27 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Is there an inclusive/exclusive distinction in independent prounouns? | cf. Cysouw (2013) |
28 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Can inanimates be marked for plurality? | cf. Haspelmath (2013) |
29 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Can human nouns be marked for plurality? | cf. Haspelmath (2013) |
30 | Morphology | Nominal morphology | Are there cases for other than core relations? | adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts. |
31 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is there verbal person marking only for the A argument? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013c) |
32 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is there verbal person marking only for the P argument? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013c) |
33 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is there verbal person marking for the A or the P argument, but not both? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013c) |
34 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is there verbal person marking for both A and P arguments? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013c) |
35 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is tense a verbal category? | as expressed by affixes (not necessarily obligatory) in the verb complex to the exclusion of adverbs etc. |
36 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Is aspect a verbal category? | as expressed by affixes (not necessarily obligatory) in the verb complex to the exclusion of adverbs etc. |
37 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Are there directional affixes on verbs? | |
38 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Are there valency-changing prefixes? | including but not limited to causative morphology; Uto-Aztecan “unspecified object prefixes” trigger answer “yes”. |
39 | Morphology | Verbal morphology | Are there valency-changing suffixes? | including but not limited to causative morphology |
40 | Syntax | Possession | Are possessive phrases dependent-marked? | cf. Nichols and Bickel (2013a); here, we target constructions where both possessor and possessed are lexical NPs |
41 | Syntax | Possession | Are possessive phrases head-marked? | cf. Nichols and Bickel (2013a); here, we target constructions where both possessor and possessed are lexical NPs |
42 | Syntax | Possession | Is there a verb ‘to have’ in predicative possession? | cf. Stassen (2013) |
43 | Syntax | Alignment | Does case marking in full NPs operate on a nominative-accusative-basis? | cf. Comrie (2013a). In the absence of core case marking “no”; adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts. |
44 | Syntax | Alignment | Does case marking in full NPs operate on an ergative-absolutive basis? | cf. Comrie (2013a). In the absence of core case marking “no”; adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts. |
45 | Syntax | Alignment | Does case marking in full NPs operate on a tripartite basis? | cf. Comrie (2013a). In the absence of core case marking “no”; adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts. |
46 | Syntax | Alignment | Does case marking in full NPs operate on a active-inactive basis? | cf. Comrie (2013a). In the absence of core case marking “no”; adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts. |
47 | Syntax | Alignment | Does verbal person marking operate on a nominative-accusative-basis? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013a); pronominal clitics in the absence of full NPs are also taken into account. |
48 | Syntax | Alignment | Does verbal person marking operate on an ergative-absolutive-basis? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013a); pronominal clitics in the absence of full NPs are also taken into account. |
49 | Syntax | Alignment | Does verbal person marking operate on an active-stative-basis? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013a); pronominal clitics in the absence of full NPs are also taken into account. |
50 | Syntax | Alignment | Does verbal person marking operate on a hierarchical basis? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013a); pronominal clitics in the absence of full NPs are also taken into account. |
51 | Syntax | Alignment | Does verbal person marking operate on more than one of the above systems? | Coding follows Siewierska (2013a); pronominal clitics in the absence of full NPs are also taken into account. |
52 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant constituent order in intransitive clauses VS? | cf. Dryer (2013f) |
53 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant constituent order in intransitive clauses SV? | cf. Dryer (2013f) |
54 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses VS? | cf. Dryer (2013g) |
55 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses VO? | cf. Dryer (2013g) |
56 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses OS? | cf. Dryer (2013g) |
57 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in possessive phrases possessor-possessed? | cf. Dryer (2013d) |
58 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in possessive phrases possessed-possessor? | cf. Dryer (2013d) |
59 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs adjective-noun? | cf. Dryer (2013b) |
60 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs noun-adjective? | cf. Dryer (2013b) |
61 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs demonstrative-noun? | cf. Dryer (2013c) |
62 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs noun-demonstrative? | cf. Dryer (2013c) |
63 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs numeral-noun? | cf. Dryer (2013e) |
64 | Syntax | Word order | Is the dominant order in NPs noun-numeral? | cf. Dryer (2013e) |
65 | Syntax | Word order | Is the element indicating clausal negation preceding the verb (root)? | Assessed in declarative sentences and regardless of morphosyntactic boundness, cf. Dryer (2013a) |
66 | Syntax | Complex constructions | Are there structural similarities between nominalization and relativization? | e. g. relative clauses involving a nominalized verb or homophony between relativizer and nominalizer |
67 | Syntax | Complex constructions | Is there a system of switch-reference? | |
68 | Syntax | Complex constructions | Is there a morphological passive? | cf. Siewierska (2013b) |
69 | Lexicon | Morpheme Canon | Are nominal roots predominantly monosyllabic? | Sometimes reference grammars provide information on root structure, in which case what the authors say is to be taken over. If no information can be found in grammars, syllables of equivalents to items 16–23 and 35–52 for nouns and 54–71 for verbs on the Swadesh-100 list are counted as a small sample. Roots must be reasonably well identifiable and any inflectional and derivational morphology stripped off. Also excluded are complex forms (e. g. ‘eye’ = ‘see-instrument’) and redundantly complex forms (e. g. ‘eye’ = ‘eye-round.object’); in the latter case only the actual lexical root is counted. If the consulted source has more than one equivalent for a meaning, all are evaluated. Technically, “predominantly monosyllabic” and “predominantly disyllabic” is diagnosed if >75% of the items have the respective structure. |
70 | Lexicon | Morpheme Canon | Are nominal roots predominantly disyllabic? | see above |
71 | Lexicon | Morpheme Canon | Are verbal roots predominantly monosyllabic? | see above |
72 | Lexicon | Morpheme Canon | Are verbal roots predominantly disyllabic? | see above |
73 | Lexicon | Numerals | Is some part of the numeral system organized on a quinary basis? | cf. Comrie (2013b) |
74 | Lexicon | Numerals | Is some part of the numeral system organized on a decimal basis? | cf. Comrie (2013b) |
75 | Lexicon | Numerals | Is some part of the numeral system organized on a vigesimal basis? | cf. Comrie (2013b) |
76 | Lexicon | Basic orientation | Is the underived word for ‘smoke’ a verb? | |
77 | Lexicon | Basic orientation | Is the underived word for ‘black’ a verb? |
The full data underlying this study. Each row represents the typological profile of one language. Languages can be identified by the numbers in the first column, which are identical to those in Table 1. Each column represents a typological feature. Features can be identified by cross-checking the feature numbers with the full template of the questionnaire in Appendix 1.
1 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 |
5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? |
8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? |
9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? |
10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
11 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 |
12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 |
13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? |
14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
15 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? |
16 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? |
17 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
18 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
19 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? |
21 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
22 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
23 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
24 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
26 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? |
28 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 |
29 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? |
30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
31 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? |
32 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? |
33 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
35 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
36 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | ? | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
37 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 |
38 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
39 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
40 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 |
41 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 |
42 | 0 | ? | 0 | ? | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | ? |
43 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
44 | 0 | 1 | ? | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 1 | ? | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ? | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? | 1 | ? | ? | ? | ? | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | ? |
References
Abrahamson, Arne. 1962. Cayapa: Grammatical notes and texts. In Benjamin Elson (ed.), Studies in Ecuadorian Indian languages, vol. 1 (Linguistic Series 6), 217–247. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma.Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem. 1995. Les catégories verbales ‘conjugaison’ et ‘genre’ dans les grammaires de la langue chibcha. Amerindia 19/20. 173–182.Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2003. Clasificación genética y tipológica del Atacameño. Paper presented at the 51st International Congress of Americanists, Santiago de Chile, 14–18 July 2003.Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem F. H. with the collaboration of Pieter C. Muysken. 2004. The languages of the Andes (Cambridge Language Surveys). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486852Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2005. El esmeraldeño – un idioma de la costa del Ecuador. In Sabine Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz (ed.), Contribuciones a las lenguas y culturas de los Andes: Homenaje a Alfredo Torero (Bonner Amerikanistische Studien 42), 233–246. Aachen: Shaker.Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2010. Trayectoria histórica de la familia lingüística quechua y sus relaciones con la familia lingüística aimara. Boletín De Arqueología 14. 239–254.10.18800/boletindearqueologiapucp.201001.012Search in Google Scholar
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2012. Languages of the Middle Andes in areal-typological perspective: Emphasis on Quechuan and Aymaran. In Lyle Campbell & Verónica Grondona (eds.), The indigenous languages of South America: A comprehensive guide (The World of Linguistics 2), 575–624. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110258035.575Search in Google Scholar
Aguilera, F, Oscar E. 2001. Gramática de la lengua kawésqar. Temuco: Corporación Nacional de Desarollo Indígena.Search in Google Scholar
Aguirre Licht, Daniel. 1999. Embera (Languages of the World/Materials 208). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Aguirre Licht, Daniel. 2009. Choco languages. In Keith Brown & Sarah Ogilvie (eds.), Concise encyclopedia of languages of the world, 224–238. Oxford: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2007. Languages of the Pacific coast of South America. In Osahito Miyaoka, Osamu Sakiyama & Michael E. Krauss (eds.), The vanishing languages of the Pacific Rim, 183–205. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199266623.003.0010Search in Google Scholar
Alexander-Bakkerus, Astrid. 2005. Eighteenth-century Cholón (LOT Dissertation Series 120). Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Alphonse, Ephraim S. 1956. Guaymí grammar and dictionary with some ethnological notes. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.Search in Google Scholar
Anawalt, Patricia Rieff. 1992. Ancient cultural contacts between Ecuador, West Mexico, and the American Southwest: Clothing similarities. Latin American Antiquity 3(2). 114–129.10.2307/971939Search in Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1868 [~1605]. 2.a parte de la descripción de Guayaquil, en que se trata de la ciudad de Puerto Viejo y su distrito. In D. Luis Torres de Mendoza (ed.), Colleción de documentos inéditos, relativos al descubrimiento, conquista, y organización de las antiguas posesiones españolas de América y Oceanía, sacados de los archivos del reino, y muy especialmente del de Indias, vol. ix., 276–309. Madrid: Frias y Compañía.Search in Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1987. ‘Diccionario y gramática chibcha’: Manuscrito anónimo de la Biblioteca Nacional de Colombia [ed. by María Stella González de Pérez]. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Search in Google Scholar
Augusta, Felix José de. 1996 [1916]. Diccionario araucano–español y español–araucano, vol. 1: Araucano–español. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Cerro Manquehue.Search in Google Scholar
Bartholomew, Doris. 1980. Otomanguean influence on Pochutla Aztec. International Journal of American Linguistics 46(2). 106–116.10.1086/465640Search in Google Scholar
Beam de Azcona, Rosemary Grace. 2004. A Coatlán-Loxicha Zapotec grammar (Mexico). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Bellamy, Kate. 2018. Investigating interaction between South America and West Mexico through the lexicon of metallurgy. In Rune Iversen & Guus Kroonen (eds.), Digging for words: Archaeolinguistic case studies from the XV Nordic Tag Conference held at the University of Copenhagen, 16–18 April 2015 (BAR International Series 2888), 1–19. Oxford: Archaeopress.Search in Google Scholar
Belle, Elise M.S. & Guido Barbujani. 2007. Worldwide analysis of multiple microsatellites: Language diversity has a detectable influence on DNA diversity. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 133(4). 1137–1146.10.1002/ajpa.20622Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2006. Oceania, the Pacific Rim, and the theory of linguistic areas. Berkeley Linguistics Society 32(2). 3–15.10.3765/bls.v32i2.3488Search in Google Scholar
Birchall, Joshua. 2014. Verbal argument marking patterns in South American languages. In Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken (eds.), The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology, 223–249. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107360105.013Search in Google Scholar
Blench, Roger. 2012. Two vanished African maritime traditions and a parallel from South America. African Archaeological Review 29. 273–292.10.1007/s10437-012-9115-ySearch in Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1917. El dialecto mexicano de Pochutla, Oaxaca. International Journal of American Linguistics 1(1). 9–44.10.1086/463709Search in Google Scholar
Bodner, Martin, Ugo A. Perego, Gabriela Huber, Liane Fendt, Alexander W. Röck, Bettina Zimmermann, Anna Olivieri, Alberto Gómez-Carballa, Hovirag Lancioni, Norman Angerhofer, Maria Cecilia Bobillo, Daniel Corach, Scott R. Woodward, Antonio Salas, Alessandro Achilli, Antonio Torroni, Hans-Jürgen Bandelt & Walther Parson. 2012. Rapid coastal spread of First Americans: Novel insights from South America’s Southern Cone mitochondrial genomes. Genome Research 22(5). 811–820.10.1101/gr.131722.111Search in Google Scholar
Bradley, C. Henry. 1970. A linguistic sketch of Jicaltepec Mixtec. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma.Search in Google Scholar
Braje, Todd J., Tom D. Dillehay, Jon M. Erlandson, Richard G. Klein & Torben C. Rick. 2017. Finding the first Americans. Science 358. 592–594.10.1126/science.aao5473Search in Google Scholar
Brand, Donald D. 1943. An historical sketch of geography and anthropology in the Tarascan region: Part I. New Mexico Anthropologist 6/7(2). 37–108.10.1086/newmexianthr.6_7.2.4291263Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Cecil H. 2011. The role of Nahuatl in the formation of Mesoamerica as a linguistic area. Language Dynamics and Change 1. 171–204.10.1163/221058212X643969Search in Google Scholar
Burgess, Don. 1984. Western Tarahumara. In Ronald W. Langacker (ed.), Studies in Uto-Aztecan grammar, vol. 4: Southern Uto-Aztecan grammatical sketches, 2–149. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics & The University of Texas at Arlington.Search in Google Scholar
Calvache Dueñas, Rocío. 2000. Fonología y aproximación a la morfosintaxis del Awa Pit. In María Stella González de Pérez & María Luisa Rodríguez de Montes (eds.), Lenguas Indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva, 97–116. Santafé de Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle Richard. 1976a. The last Lenca. International Journal of American Linguistics 42(1). 73–78.10.1086/465390Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1976b. The linguistic prehistory of the Southern Mesoamerican periphery. In Las fronteras de Mesoamérica: XIV Mesa Redonda de la Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología, vol. 1, 157–183. México: Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología.Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1979. Middle American languages. In Lyle Campbell & Marianne Mithun (eds.), The languages of Native America: Historical and comparative assessment, 902–1000. Austin & London: University of Texas Press.10.7560/746244-018Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1985. The Pipil language of El Salvador (Mouton Grammar Library 1). Berlin & New York: Mouton.10.1515/9783110881998Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1997. American Indian languages: The historical linguistics of Native America (Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics). New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195094275.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 2012. Typological characteristics of South American indigenous languages. In Lyle Campbell & Verónica Grondona (eds.), The indigenous languages of South America: A comprehensive guide (The World of Linguistics 2), 259–330. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110258035.259Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle & Terrence Kaufman. 1976. A linguistic look at the Olmecs. American Antiquity 41(1). 80–89.10.2307/279044Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle, Terrence Kaufman & Thomas C. Smith-Stark. 1986. Mesoamerica as a linguistic area. Language 62(3). 530–570.10.1353/lan.1986.0105Search in Google Scholar
Carter, Benjamin P. 2011. Spondylus in South American prehistory. In Fotis Ifantidis & Marianna Nikolaidou (eds.), Spondylus in prehistory. New data and approaches: Contributions to the archaeology of shell technologies (BAR International Series 2216), 63–89. Oxford: Archaeopress.Search in Google Scholar
Castillo i Orosco, Eujenio del & Ezequiel Uricoechea. 1968 [1877]. Vocabulario páez–castellano, catecismo, nociones gramaticales i dos pláticas, conforme a lo que escribió el señor Eujenio del Castillo i Orosco, Cura de Tálaga, con adiciones, correcciones i un vocabulario castellano–páez por Ezequiel Uricoechea. Nendeln & Liechtenstein: Klaus reprint.Search in Google Scholar
Cerrón-Palomino, Rodolfo. 1995. La lengua de Naimlap (reconstrucción y obsolescencia del mochica). Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Search in Google Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine. 2000. Grammaire du Purépecha, parlé sur les îles de Patzcuaro (Lincom Studies in Native American Linguistics 34). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine. Forthcoming. Purepecha: An isolate non-Mesoamerican language in Mesoamerica. In Søren Wichmann (ed.), The languages and linguistics of Middle and Central America: A comprehensive guide (The World of Linguistics 12). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Clairis, Christos. 1985. El Qawasqar: Lingüística fueguina, teoría y descripción. Valdivia: Universidad Austral de Chile, Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades.Search in Google Scholar
Colville, Jeffrey Keith. 1986. The structure of Mesoamerican numeral systems with a comparison to non-Mesoamerican systems. New Orleans, LA: Tulane University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 2013a. Alignment of case marking of full noun phrases. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/98 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 2013b. Numeral bases. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/131 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Constenla, Adolfo. 1981. Comparative Chibchan phonology. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1991. Las lenguas del área intermedia: Introducción a su estudio areal. San José: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica.Search in Google Scholar
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1992/1993. Las lenguas de la Gran Nicoya. Vinculos 18/19. 191–208.Search in Google Scholar
Cook, Noble David. 1981. Demographic collapse: Indian Peru, 1520–1620 (Cambridge Latin American Studies 41). Cambridge & London: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511572715Search in Google Scholar
Cordy-Collins, Alana. 1994. An unshaggy dog story: A bizarre canine is living evidence of prehistoric contact between Mexico and Peru. Natural History 103(2). 34–41.Search in Google Scholar
Creanza, Nicole, Merritt Ruhlen, Trevor J. Pemberton, Noah A. Rosenberg, Marcus W. Feldman & Sohini Ramachandran. 2015. A comparison of worldwide phonemic and genetic variation in human populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112(5). 1265–1272.10.1073/pnas.1424033112Search in Google Scholar
Crevels, Mily & Hein van der Voort. 2008. The Guaporé-Mamoré region as a linguistic area. In Pieter Muysken (ed.), From linguistic areas to areal linguistics (Studies in Language Companion Series 90), 151–179. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.90.04creSearch in Google Scholar
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of south-western Colombia. Canberra: Australian National University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2013. Inclusive/exclusive distinction in independent pronouns. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/39 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dedrick, John M. & Eugene H. Casad. 1999. Sonora Yaqui language structures. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.10.2307/j.ctv1jf2crmSearch in Google Scholar
Del Río Urrutia, Ximena. 1999. El Lenca de Chilanga. Filología y Lingüística 25(1). 193–209.10.15517/rfl.v25i1.20547Search in Google Scholar
Dennis, Ronald K. & Margaret Royce de Dennis. 1983. Diccionario tol (jícaque)–español y español–tol (Jícaque). Tegucigalpa: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano & Instituto Hondureño de Antropología e Historia.Search in Google Scholar
Diniz-Filho, José Alexandre F., Thannya N. Soares, Jacqueline S. Lima, Ricardo Dobrovolski, Victor Lemes Landeiro, Mariana Pires de Campos Telles, Thiago F. Rangel & Luis Mauricio Bini. 2013. Mantel test in population genetics. Genetics and Molecular Biology 36(4). 475–485.10.1590/S1415-47572013000400002Search in Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. 1999. Introduction. In R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), The Amazonian languages (Cambridge Language Surveys), 1–21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Donohue, Mark, Simon Musgrave, Bronwen Whiting & Søren Wichmann. 2011. Typological feature analysis models linguistic geography. Language 87(2). 369–383.10.1353/lan.2011.0033Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2007. Word order. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 1: Clause structure, 2nd edn., 61–131. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511619427.002Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013a. Negative morphemes. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://walsinfo/chapter/112 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013b. Order of adjective and noun. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/87 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013c. Order of demonstrative and noun. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/88 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013d. Order of genitive and noun. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/86 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013e. Order of numeral and noun. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/89 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013f. Order of subject and verb. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/82 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013g. Order of subject, object and verb. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/81 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/ (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Edwards, Clinton R. 1965. Aboriginal watercraft of the Pacific coast of South America. (Ibero-Americana 47) Berkeley, CA & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Elías Ortiz, Sergio. 1946. Los Indios Yurumanguies. Acta Americana 4. 10–25.Search in Google Scholar
Emlen, Nicholas Q. 2017. Perspectives on the Quechua-Aymara contact relationship and the lexicon and phonology of pre-proto-Aymara. International Journal of American Linguistics 83(2). 307–340.10.1086/689911Search in Google Scholar
England, Nora C. 1983. A grammar of Mam, a Mayan language (Texas Linguistics Series). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.10.7560/727267Search in Google Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2016. South American languages. In Claire Bowern, Patience Epps, Jane Hill & Patrick McConvell (eds.), Languages of hunter-gatherers and their neighbors: Database. https://huntergatherer.la.utexas.edu (accessed 20 May 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Epps, Patience. forthcoming. Amazonian linguistic diversity and its sociocultural correlates. In Mily Crevels & Pieter Muysken (eds.), Language dispersal, diversification, and contact: A global perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Erlandson, Jon M., Michael H. Graham, Bruce J. Bourque, Debra Corbett, James A. Estes & Robert S. Steneck. 2007. The Kelp Highway Hypothesis: Marine ecology, the coastal migration theory, and the peopling of the Americas. Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 2(2). 161–174.10.1080/15564890701628612Search in Google Scholar
Escalante Hernández, Roberto. 1962. El Cuitlateco (Publicaciones, Departamento de Investigaciones Antropológicas 9). México: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Search in Google Scholar
Gálvez Astorayme, Isabel. 2003 [1999]. Evidencias quechuas en el léxico de ‘cultivo’ de Caral-Supe. In Ruth Shady & Carlos Leyva (eds.), La ciudad sagrada de Caral-Supe: Los orígines de la civilización andina y la formación del estado prístino en el antiguo Perú, 313–314. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura.Search in Google Scholar
Gil, David. 2013. Numeral classifiers. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/55 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Goebel, Ted, Michael R. Waters & Dennis H. O’Rourke. 2008. The late Pleistocene dispersal of modern humans in the Americas. Science 319. 1497–1502.10.1126/science.1153569Search in Google Scholar
Gómez Rendón, Jorge. 2011. Deslindes lingüísticos en las tierras bajas del pacífico ecuatoriano. Primera parte. Antropología: Cuadernos de Investigación 10. 1–31.10.26807/ant.v0i10.49Search in Google Scholar
Green, Thomas Michael. 1999. A lexicographic study of Ulwa. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Greenacre, Michael. 2010. Biplots in practice. Bilbao & Madrid: Fundación BBVA.Search in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1960. The general classification of Central and South American languages. In Anthony F. C. Wallace (ed.), Men and cultures: Selected papers of the 5th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 791–794. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9781512819526-121Search in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1987. Language in the Americas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Guillot, Gilles & François Rousset. 2013. Dismantling the Mantel tests. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4(4). 336–344.10.1111/2041-210x.12018Search in Google Scholar
Hajek, John. 2013. Vowel nasalization. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/10 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel, Martin Haspelmath & Sebastian Bank. 2016. Glottolog 2.7. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. http://glottolog.org (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Hardman, Martha James. 2000. Jaqaru (Languages of the World/Materials 183). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. Occurrence of nominal plurality. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/34 (accessed 29 March 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Heggarty, Paul & David Beresford-Jones (eds.). 2012. Archaeology and language in the Andes: A cross-disciplinary exploration of prehistory (Proceedings of the British Academy 173). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hendrichs, P. R. 1939. Un estudio preliminar sobre la lengua cuitlateca de San Miguel Totolapan, Gro. El México Antiguo 4. 329–362.Search in Google Scholar
Hijmans, Robert J., Ed Williams & Chris Vennes 2015. Geosphere: Spherical trigonometry. R Package, version 1.5-1.Search in Google Scholar
Hinkle, Dennis E., William Wiersma & Stephen G. Jurs. 2003. Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. 5th edn. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Search in Google Scholar
Hocquenghem, Anne-Marie. 1998. Para vencer la muerte: Piura y Tumbes. Raíces en el bosque seco y en la selva alta – Horizontes en el Pacífico y en la Amazonia (Travaux de l’Institut Français d’Études Andines 109). Lima: Centro Nacional de la Investigación Científica, Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos & Instituto de la Naturaleza y el Conocimiento Ambiental Humano.10.4000/books.ifea.10783Search in Google Scholar
Hofling, Charles Andrew, with the collaboration of Félix Fernando Tesucún. 1997. Itzaj Maya–Spanish–English dictionary=Diccionario maya itzaj–español–ingles. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hofling, Charles Andrew, with the collaboration of Félix Fernando Tesucún. 2000. Itzaj Maya grammar. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Search in Google Scholar
Holmer, Nils M. 1963. Gramatica comparada de un dialecto del Choco (con textos, índice y vocabulario). Etnologiska Studier 26. 79–248.Search in Google Scholar
Holt, Dennis. 1999. Tol (Jicaque) (Languages of the World/Materials 170). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Hosler, Dorothy. 1994. The sounds and colors of power: The sacred metallurgical technology of ancient West Mexico. Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hosler, Dorothy. 2009. West Mexican metallurgy: Revisited and revised. Journal of World Prehistory 22. 185–212.10.1007/s10963-009-9021-7Search in Google Scholar
Hovdhaugen, Even. 2004. Mochica (Languages of the World/Materials 433). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Ixchajchal Batz, Estanislao Augusto, Luis Mateo Cumez & Candelaria Dominga López Ixcoy. 1996. Gramática del idioma k’iche’. La Antigua Guatemala: Proyecto Lingüístico Francisco Marroquín.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Heidi Anna. 2000. A grammar of San Miguel Chimalapa Zoque. Austin: University of Texas at Austin dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Jolkesky, Marcelo Pinho de Valhery. 2016. Estudo arqueo-ecolinguístico das terras tropicais sul-americanas [Archaeo-ecolinguistic study of the tropical lands of South America]. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Jung, Ingrid. 2008. Gramática del páez o nasa yuwe: Descripción de una lengua indígena de Colombia (Languages of the World/Materials 469). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1973. Areal linguistics and Middle America. In Thomas A. Sebeok, Henry M. Hoenigswald, Robert E. Longacre & Lucia Hadd Zoercher (eds.), Diachronic, areal, and typological linguistics (Current Trends in Linguistics 11), 459–483. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.10.1515/9783111418797-019Search in Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 2007. Meso-America. In R. E. Asher & Christopher Moseley (eds.), Atlas of the world’s languages, 2nd edn., 47–57. Abingdon-on-Thames & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315829845-4Search in Google Scholar
Kaulicke, Peter, Rodolfo Cerrón-Palomino, Paul Heggarty & David Beresford-Jones. (eds.). 2010. Lenguas y sociedades en el antiguo Perú: Hacia un enfoque interdisciplinario. [Special Issue]. In Boletín de Arqueología, 14.Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Yuni. 2008. Topics in the phonology and morphology of San Francisco del Mar Huave. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Kirchhoff, Paul. 1960 [1943]. Mesoamérica: Sus límites geográficos, composición étnica y caracteres culturales (Tlatoani Supplemento 3). México: Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Search in Google Scholar
Kirk, David B. 1973. On the numerical approximation of the bivariate normal (tetrachoric) correlation coefficient. Psychometrika38. 259–268.10.1007/BF02291118Search in Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria & Bernhard Wälchli. 2001. The Circum-Baltic languages: An areal typological approach. In Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), The Circum-Baltic languages: Typology and contact, vol. 2: Grammar and typology (Studies in Language Companion Series 55), 615–750. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.55.15kopSearch in Google Scholar
Krasnoukhova, Olga. 2012. The noun phrase in the languages of South America (LOT Dissertation Series 301). Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Larsen, Thomas Walter. 1988. Manifestations of ergativity in Quiché grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Laylander, Don. 1997. The linguistic prehistory of Baja California. In Gary S. Breschini & Trudy Haversat (eds.), Contributions to the linguistic prehistory of Central and Baja California (Archives of California Prehistory 44), 1–94. Salinas, CA: Coyote Press.Search in Google Scholar
LeCron Foster, Mary. 1969. The Tarascan language. Berkeley, CA & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Legendre, Pierre & Marie-Josée Fortin. 2010. Comparison of the Mantel test and alternative approaches for detecting complex multivariate relationships in the spatial analysis of genetic data. Molecular Ecology Resources 10(5). 831–844.10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02866.xSearch in Google Scholar
Legendre, Pierre, Marie-Josée Fortin & Daniel Borcard. 2015. Should the Mantel test be used in spatial analysis? Methods in Ecology and Evolution 6(11). 1239–1247.10.1111/2041-210X.12425Search in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Walter. 1920. Zentral-Amerika, Teil 1: Die Sprachen Zentral-Amerikas in ihren Beziehungen zueinander sowie zu Süd-Amerika und Mexiko. Berlin: Verlag Dietrich Reimer (Ernst Vohsen).Search in Google Scholar
Liedtke, Stefan. 1996. The languages of the ‘first nations’: Comparison of Native American languages from an ethnolinguistic perspective (Lincom Handbooks in Linguistics 1). Munich & Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Lindskoog, John N. & Ruth M. Brend. 1962. Cayapa phonemics. In Benjamin Elson (ed.), Studies in Ecuadorian Indian languages, vol. 1 (Linguistic Series 6), 31–44. Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma.Search in Google Scholar
Lindskoog, John N. & Carrie A. Lindskoog. 1964. Vocabulario cayapa (Vocabularios Indígenas 9). Quito: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano en cooperación con el Ministerio de Educación Publica.Search in Google Scholar
Llamas, Bastien, Lars Fehren-Schmitz, Guido Valverde, Julien Soubrier, Swapan Mallick, Nadin Rohland, Susanne Nordenfelt, Cristina Valdiosera, Stephen M. Richards, Adam Rohrlach, Maria Inés Barreto Romero, Isabel Flores Espinoza, Elsa Tomasto Cagigao, Lucía Watson Jiménez, Krzysztof Makowski, Ilán Santiago Leboreiro Reyna, Josefina Mansilla Lory, Julio Alejandro Ballivián Torrez, Mario A. Rivera, Richard L. Burger, Maria Constanza Ceruti, Johan Reinhard, R. Spencer Wells, Gustavo Politis, Calogero M. Santoro, Vivien G. Standen, Colin Smith, David Reich, Simon Y. W. Ho, Alan Cooper & Wolfgang Haak. 2016. Ancient mitochondrial DNA provides high-resolution time scale of the peopling of the Americas. Science Advances 2(4). e1501385. http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/4/e1501385 (accessed 20 May 2018).10.1126/sciadv.1501385Search in Google Scholar
Loewen, Jacob Abram. 1954. Waunana grammar: A descriptive analysis. Seattle, WA: University of Washington MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe & Cristina Guardiano. 2009. Evidence for syntax as a signal of historical relatedness. Lingua 119(11). 1679–1706.10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.012Search in Google Scholar
Lugo, Bernardo de. 1978 [1619]. Gramática de la lengua general del Nuevo Reyno, llamada mosca. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispánica del Centro Iberoamericano de Cooperación.Search in Google Scholar
Lumholtz, Carl. 1902. Unknown Mexico: A record of five years’ exploration among the tribes of the western Sierra Madre; in the tierra caliente of Tepic and Jalisco; and among the Tarascos of Michoacán, vol. 1. New York, NY: Scribner.10.2307/197404Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2013a. Glottalized consonants. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/7 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2013b. Uvular consonants. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/6 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian, Heriberto Avelino & Loretta O’Connor. 2009. The phonetic structures of Oaxaca Chontal. International Journal of American Linguistics 75(1). 69–101.10.1086/598205Search in Google Scholar
Marcos, Jorge G. 1977/1978. Cruising to Acapulco and back with the thorny oyster set: A model for a lineal exchange system. Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 9(1/2). 99–132.Search in Google Scholar
Marlett, Stephen A. 1981. The structure of Seri. San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
McQuown, Norman A. 1941. La fonémica del cuitlateco. El México Antiguo 5. 239–254.Search in Google Scholar
Mejía Fonnegra, Gustavo. 2000. Presentación y descripción fonológica y morfosintáctica del waunana. In María Stella González de Pérez & María Luisa Rodríguez de Montes (eds.), Lenguas Indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva, 85–96. Santafé de Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Search in Google Scholar
Michael, Lev, Will Chang & Tammy Stark. 2014. Exploring phonological areality in the circum-Andean region using a naive Bayes classifier. Language Dynamics and Change 4(1). 27–86.10.1163/22105832-00401004Search in Google Scholar
Miller, Wick R. 1983. A note on extinct languages of Northwest Mexico of supposed Uto-Aztecan affiliation. International Journal of American Linguistics 49(3). 328–334.10.1086/465793Search in Google Scholar
Mixco, Mauricio Jesús. 1971. Kiliwa grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Mixco, Mauricio J. 1985. Kiliwa dictionary (Anthropological Papers 109). Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah.Search in Google Scholar
Mixco, Mauricio J. 2000. Kiliwa (Languages of the World/Materials 193). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Moseley, Michael E. 1975. The maritime foundations of Andean civilization. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.Search in Google Scholar
Moser, Mary & Esteban Marlett. 1994. El desarrollo de clases nominales en seri. In Gerardo López Cruz & José Luis Moctezuma Zamarrón (eds.), Estudios de lingüística y sociolingüística, 97–105. Hermosillo: Departamento de Letras y Lingüística, División de Humanidades y Bellas Artes, Universidad de Sonora & Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Search in Google Scholar
Moser, Mary Beck with the collaboration of Stephen Marlett. 1995. Seri de Sonora (Archivo de Lenguas Indígenas de México 19). México, D. F.: El Colegio de México.Search in Google Scholar
Moser, Mary Beck & Stephen A. Marlett. 2004. Comcáac quih yaza quih hant ihíip hac. Cmiique Iitom–Cocsar Iitom–Maricáana Iitom. Diccionario seri–español–inglés. Con índices español–seri, inglés–seri, y con gramática. Hermosillo & México, D.F.: Universidad de Sonora, Maestría en Lingüística, Centro de las Artes Rosales y Luis Donaldo Colosio & Plaza y Valdés Editores.Search in Google Scholar
Murra, John V. 2002 [1972]. El control vertical de un máximo de pisos ecológicos en la economía de las sociedades andinas. In El mundo andino: Población, medio ambiente y economía (Historia Andina 24), 85–125. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos/Fondo Editorial de la Pontifícia Universidad Católica del Perú.Search in Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter, Harald Hammarström, Joshua Birchall, Swintha Danielsen, Love Eriksen, Ana Vilacy Galucio, Rik van Gijn, Simon van de Kerke, Vishnupraya Kolipakam, Olga Krasnoukhova, Neele Müller & Loretta O’Connor. 2014. The languages of South America: Deep families, areal relationships, and language contact. In Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken (eds.), The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology, 299–322. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107360105.017Search in Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter, Harald Hammarström, Joshua Birchall, Rik van Gijn, Olga Krasnoukhova & Neele Müller. 2015. Linguistic areas, bottom-up or top-down? The case of the Guaporé-Mamoré. In Bernard Comrie & Lucía Golluscio (eds.), Language contact and documentation/Contacto lingüístico y documentación, 205–237. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Nardi, Ricardo L. J. 1979. El kakán, lengua de los Diaguitas. Sapiens 3. 1–33.Search in Google Scholar
Nettle, Daniel. 1999. Linguistic diversity. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198238584.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62(1). 56–119.10.1353/lan.1986.0014Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1990. Linguistic diversity and the first settlement of the New World. Language 66(3). 475–521.10.2307/414609Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2002. The first American languages. In Nina G. Jablonski (ed.), The first Americans: The Pleistocene colonization of the New World (Wattis Symposium Series in Anthropology, Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences 27), 273–293. San Francisco, CA: California Academy of Sciences.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2003. Diversity and stability in language. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 283–310. Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756393.ch5Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2010. Indeterminate motion verbs are denominal. In Victoria Hasko & Renee Perelmutter (eds.), New approaches to Slavic verbs of motion (Studies in Language Companion Series 115), 47–65. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.115.05nicSearch in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Balthasar Bickel. 2013a. Locus of marking in possessive noun phrases. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/24 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & Balthasar Bickel. 2013b. Possessive classes. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/24 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & David A. Peterson. 1996. The Amerind personal pronouns. Language 72(2). 336–371.10.2307/416653Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Lynn & Johanna Nichols. 2007. Lexical derivational properties resist diffusion. Paper presented at the Workshop on Language Contact and Morphosyntactic Variation and Change, Seventh Biennial Conference of the Association of Linguistic Typology 2007, Paris.Search in Google Scholar
O’Connor, Loretta. 2007. Motion, transfer and transformation: The grammar of change in Lowland Chontal (Studies in Language Companion Series 95). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.95Search in Google Scholar
O’Connor, Loretta. 2014. Structural features and language contact in the Isthmo-Colombian area. In Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken (eds.), The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology, 73–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107360105.006Search in Google Scholar
O’Connor, Loretta & Peter C. Kroefges. 2008. The land remembers: Landscape terms and placenames in Lowland Chontal of Oaxaca, Mexico. Language Sciences 30(2/3). 291–315.10.1016/j.langsci.2006.12.007Search in Google Scholar
O’Connor, Loretta & Pieter Muysken (eds.). 2004. The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
O’Fallon, Brendan D. & Lars Fehren-Schmitz. 2011. Native Americans experienced a strong population bottleneck coincident with European contact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108(51). 20444–20448.10.1073/pnas.1112563108Search in Google Scholar
Oksanen, Jari, F. Guillaume Blanchet, Roeland Kindt, Pierre Legendre, Peter R. Minchin, R. B. O’Hara, Gavin L. Simpson, Peter Solymos, M. Henry, H. Stevens & Helene Wagner. 2016. The vegan community ecology package. R Package, version 1.5-1.Search in Google Scholar
Ostler, Nicholas. 1993. Cases, directionals and conjunctions in Chibcha. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 12. 7–33.Search in Google Scholar
Ostler, Nicholas. 1994. Syntactic typology of Muisca – a sketch. In Peter Cole, Gabriella Hermon & Mario Daniel Martín (eds.), Language in the Andes (Occasional Monographs in Latin American Studies 4), 205–230. Newark, NJ: Latin American Studies Program, University of Delaware.Search in Google Scholar
Overall, Simon E. 2007. A grammar of Aguaruna. Melbourne: La Trobe University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2014. Lexical evidence for pre-Inca language contact of Mapudungun (Mapuche) with Quechuan and Aymaran. Journal of Language Contact 7(2). 345–379.10.1163/19552629-00702005Search in Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2015. Morphosyntactic properties of Chibchan verbal person marking. Linguistic Discovery 13(2). 80–95.10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.462Search in Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2016. Pumé (Yaruro) and Chocoan: Evidence for a new genealogical link in northern South America. Language Dynamics and Change 6(1). 99–155.10.1163/22105832-00601001Search in Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2018. Lengua X: An Andean puzzle. International Journal of American Linguistics 84(2). 265–285.10.1086/696199Search in Google Scholar
Paulsen, Allison C. 1974. The thorny oyster and the voice of god: Spondylus and strombus in Andean prehistory. American Antiquity 39(4). 597–607.10.2307/278907Search in Google Scholar
Perego, Ugo A., Alessandro Achilli, Norman Angerhofer, Matteo Accetturo, Maria Pala, Anna Olivieri, Baharak Hooshiar Kashani, Kathleen H. Ritchie, Rosaria Scozzari, Qing-Peng Kong, Natalie M. Myres, Antonio Salas, Ornella Semino, Hans-Jürgen Bandelt, Scott R. Woodward & Antonio Torroni. 2009. Distinctive Paleo-Indian migration routes from Beringia marked by two rare mtDNA Haplogroups. Current Biology 19(1). 1–8.10.1016/j.cub.2008.11.058Search in Google Scholar
Pérez Alonso, Juventino de Jesús, (ed.). n.d. Pujb’il Yol Mam. Diccionario bilingüe mam–español. [n. p.]: Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala.Search in Google Scholar
Peyró García, Miguel. 2005. Estructuras gramaticales en el glosario de la lengua atacameña (1896). LIAMES: Línguas Indígenas Americanas 5. 25–42.10.20396/liames.v5i1.1437Search in Google Scholar
Pickett, Velma. 2007. Vocabulario zapoteco del Istmo: Español–zapoteco y zapoteco–español. 5th edn. Tlalpan, D.F.: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Pickett, Velma B., Cheryl Black & Vicente Marcial Cerqueda. 1998. Gramática popular del zapoteco del Istmo. Juchitán & Tucson, AZ: Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo Binnizá & Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Pickett, Velma B., María Villalobos Villalobos & Stephen A. Marlett. 2010. Isthmus (Juchitán) Zapotec. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 40(3). 365–372.10.1017/S0025100310000174Search in Google Scholar
Pollard, Helen Perlstein. 1997. Recent research in West Mexican archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 5(4). 345–384.10.1007/BF02229257Search in Google Scholar
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2008. Gramática de la lengua guaymí (ngäbe) (Languages of the World/Materials 474). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Quinto-Cortés, Consuelo D., Luis A. Arriola, Gianella García-Hughes, Rodrigo García-López, Diana P. Molina, Margarita Flores, Rafael Palacios & Daniel Piñero. 2010. Genetic characterization of indigenous peoples from Oaxaca, Mexico, and its relation to linguistic and geographic isolation. Human Biology 82(4). 409–432.10.3378/027.082.0405Search in Google Scholar
Quirós Rodríguez, Juan Santiago. 1985. Observaciones sobre la tipología de la lengua chorotega o mangue. Filología y Lingüística 11(2). 93–97.10.15517/rfl.v11i2.16696Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed 20 May 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Rasch, Jeffrey Walter. 2002. The basic morpho-syntax of Yaitepec Chatino. Houston, TX: Rice University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Revelle, William R. 2017. Psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. R Package, version 1.5-8.Search in Google Scholar
Reyes-Centeno, Hugo, Katerina Harvati & Gerhard Jäger. 2016. Tracking modern human population history from linguistic and cranial phenotype. Scientific Reports 6. 36645. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep36645 (accessed 20 May 2018).10.1038/srep36645Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2017. Harmony, symmetry, and dominance in word order universals. In Michelle Sheehan, Theresa Biberauer, Ian Roberts & Anders Holmberg (eds.), The final-over-final condition: A syntactic universal (Linguistic Inquiry monographs 76), 27–42. Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/8687.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Roewer, Lutz, Michael Nothnagel, Leonor Gusmão, Veronica Gomes, Miguel González, Daniel Corach, Andrea Sala, Evguenia Alechine, Teresinha Palha, Ney Santos, Andrea Ribeiro-dos-Santos, Maria Geppert, Sascha Willuweit, Marion Nagy, Sarah Zweynert, Miriam Baeta, Carolina Núñez, Begoña Martínez-Jarreta, Fabricio González-Andrade, Elizeu Fagundes de Carvalho, Dayse Aparecida Da Silva, Juan José Builes, Daniel Turbón, Ana Maria Lopez Parra, Eduardo Arroyo-Pardo, Ulises Toscanini, Lisbeth Borjas, Claudia Barletta, Elizabeth Ewart, Sidney Santos & Michael Krawczak. 2013. Continent-wide decoupling of Y-chromosomal genetic variation from language and geography in Native South Americans. PLoS Genetics 9(4). e1003460. http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003460 (accessed 20 May 2018).10.1371/journal.pgen.1003460Search in Google Scholar
Romoli, Kathleen. 1987. Los de la lengua de Cueva: Los grupos indígenas del istmo oriental en la época de la conquista española. Bogotá: Instituto Colombiano de Antropología & Instituto Colombiano de Cultura.Search in Google Scholar
Rowe, John Howland. 1950. The Idabaez: Unknown Indians of the Chocó coast. Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers 1. 34–44.Search in Google Scholar
Rubino, Carl. 2013. Reduplication. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/27 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Sachse, Frauke. 2010. Reconstructive description of eighteenth-century Xinka grammar (LOT Dissertation Series 254). Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Sadowsky, Scott, Héctor Painequeo, Gastón Salamanca & Heriberto Avelino. 2013. Illustrations of the IPA: Mapudungun. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 43(1). 87–96.10.1017/S0025100312000369Search in Google Scholar
Sáez Godoy, Leopoldo, et al. 1974. Diccionario español–kunsa, kunsa–español. Valparaíso: Universidad Católica de Valparaíso.Search in Google Scholar
Salas García, José Antonio. 2002. Diccionario mochica–castellano. Lima: Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Escuela Profesional de Turismo y Hotelería.Search in Google Scholar
Salomon, Frank. 1977/1978. Pochteca and Mindalá: A comparison of long-distance traders in Ecuador and Mesoamerica. Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 9(1/2). 231–247.Search in Google Scholar
Seler, Eduard. 1902. Die Sprache der Indianer von Esmeraldas. In Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur amerikanischen Sprach- und Alterthumskunde, vol. 1: Sprachliches, Bilderschriften, Kalender und Hieroglyphenentzifferung, 49–64. Berlin: A. Asher & Co.Search in Google Scholar
Shady Solis, Ruth. 2008. America’s first city? The case of late Archaic Caral. [trans. by Catherine M. Bencic]. In William H. Isbell & Helaine Silverman (eds.), Andean archaeology III: North and south, 28–66. New York: Springer.10.1007/0-387-28940-2_3Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2013a. Alignment of verbal person marking. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/100 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2013b. Passive constructions. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/107 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2013c. Verbal person marking. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/102 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Sischo, William R. 1979. Michoacán Nahuatl. In Ronald W. Langacker (ed.), Studies in Uto-Aztecan grammar, vol. 4: Southern Uto-Aztecan grammatical sketches, 307–380. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics & The University of Texas at Arlington.Search in Google Scholar
Slocum, Marianna C. & Florence L. Gerdel. 1983. Diccionario páez–español, español–páez. Lomalinda & Meta: Editorial Townsend.Search in Google Scholar
Smeets, Ineke. 2008. A grammar of Mapuche (Mouton Grammar Library 41). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Michael E. 1977/1978. A model for the diffusion of the shaft tomb complex from South America to West Mexico. Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 9(1/2). 179–204.Search in Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas C. 1994. Mesoamerican calques. In Carolyn J. MacKay & Verónica Vázquez (eds.), Investigaciones lingüisticas en Mesoamérica (Estudios sobre Lenguas Americanas 1), 15–50. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Search in Google Scholar
Stark, Louisa Rowell. 1968. Mayan affinities with Yunga of Peru. New York, NY: New York University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon. 2013. Predicative Possession. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/117 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Suárez, Jorge A. 1983. La lengua tlapaneca de Malinaltepec. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Search in Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris. 1956. Problems of long-range comparison in Penutian. Language 32(1). 17–41.10.2307/410650Search in Google Scholar
Swadesh, Morris. 1967. Lexicostatistic classification. In Robert Wauchope & Norman A. McQuown (eds.), The handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 5: Linguistics, 79–115. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.10.7560/736658-004Search in Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language contact: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Torero, Alfredo. 2002. Idiomas de los Andes: Lingüística e historia (Travaux de l’Insitut Français d’Études Andines 162). Lima: Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos & Editorial Horizonte.Search in Google Scholar
Tuggy, David H. 1979. Tetelcingo Nahuatl. In Ronald W. Langacker (ed.), Studies in Uto-Aztecan grammar, vol. 4: Southern Uto-Aztecan grammatical sketches, 1–140. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics & The University of Texas at Arlington.Search in Google Scholar
Turner, Paul Raymond. 1966. Highland Chontal grammar. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Matthias. 2012. Analyzability and semantic associations in referring expressions: A study in comparative lexicology. Leiden: Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Matthias. 2018. Maritime loanwords in languages of Pacific Meso- and Southamerica? An explorative study. In Katerina Harvati, Gerhard Jäger & Hugo Reyes-Centeno (eds.), New perspectives on the peopling of the Americas, 27–60. Tübingen: Kerns.Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Matthias. 2019a. Is there a Central Andean linguistic area? A view from the perspective of the “minor” languages. Journal of Language Contact 12(2). 271–304.10.1163/19552629-01202002Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Matthias. 2019b. Lost languages of the Peruvian North Coast. Berlin: Gebr. Mann & Ibero-American Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Matthias. 2019c. Notes on Yurumanguí lexicon and grammar. LIAMES: Línguas Indígenas Americanas 19. 1–25.10.20396/liames.v19i0.8656013Search in Google Scholar
Valiñas Coalla, Leopoldo, Mario Cortina Borja, and Miguel Mireles Padilla. 1984. Notas sobre el cuitlateco. Anales De Antropología 21(1). 171–197.Search in Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Pilar M. 2015. ¿Qué tan “amazónicas” son las lenguas kawapana? Contacto con las lenguas centro-andinas y elementos para un área lingüística intermedia. Lexis 39(1). 5–56.10.18800/lexis.201501.001Search in Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan. 2011. Standard Average European. In Bernd Kortmann & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Europe: A comprehensive guide (The World of Linguistics 1), 291–306. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110220261.291Search in Google Scholar
van Gijn, Rik. 2014. The Andean foothills and adjacent Amazonian fringe. In Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken (eds.), The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology, 102–125. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107360105.007Search in Google Scholar
Viegas, Pedro Barros. 2005. Voces en el viento: Raíces lingüísticas de la Patagonia. Buenos Aires: Mondragon.Search in Google Scholar
Vittadello, P. Alberto. 1988. Cha’palaachi: El idioma cayapa. Guayaquil: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador & Museos del Banco Central del Ecuador.Search in Google Scholar
Waterhouse, Viola Grace. 1962. The grammatical structure of Oaxaca Chontal. Bloomington: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Waterhouse, Viola. 1985. Counting in Oaxaca Chontal. International Journal of American Linguistics 51(2). 237–240.10.1086/465869Search in Google Scholar
Weber, David John. 1989. A grammar of Huallaga (Huánuco) Quechua (University of California Publications in Linguistics 112). Berkeley, CA & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, David John, Félix Cayco Zambrano, Teodoro Cayco Villar & Marlene Ballena Dávila. 1998. Rimaycuna: Quechua de Huánuco. Diccionario del quechua del Huallaga con índices castellano e inglés (Serie Lingüística Peruana 48). Lima: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 2007. The reference-tracking system of Tlapanec: Between obviation and switch-reference. Studies in Language 31(4). 801–827.10.1075/sl.31.4.04wicSearch in Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 2009. Case relations in Tlapanec, a head-marking language. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case (Oxford Handbooks in Linguistics), 797–807. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199206476.013.0057Search in Google Scholar
Wiebe, Neil & Ruth Wiebe. 2015. Cayapa dictionary. In Mary Ritchie Key & Bernard Comrie (eds.), The intercontinental dictionary series (IDS). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://ids.clld.org/contributions/245 (accessed 3 April 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Wipio Deicat, Gerardo. 1996. Diccionario aguaruna–castellano, castellano–aguaruna (Serie Lingüística Peruana 39). Revised by Alejandro Paati Antunce Segundo & Martha Jakway. Lima: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Zamponi, Raoul. 2004. Fragments of Waikuri (Baja California). Anthropological Linguistics 46(2). 156–193.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- West Caucasian relative pronouns as resumptives
- General knowledge as an evidential category
- Predication over aspects of human individuals
- Metalinguistic conditionals and the role of explicit content
- Quantifying geographical variation in acceptability judgments in regional American English dialect syntax
- The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view
- Erratum
- Erratum to: Japanese subject markers in linguistic change: A quantitative analysis of data spanning 90 years and its theoretical implications
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- West Caucasian relative pronouns as resumptives
- General knowledge as an evidential category
- Predication over aspects of human individuals
- Metalinguistic conditionals and the role of explicit content
- Quantifying geographical variation in acceptability judgments in regional American English dialect syntax
- The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view
- Erratum
- Erratum to: Japanese subject markers in linguistic change: A quantitative analysis of data spanning 90 years and its theoretical implications