Home The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view

  • Matthias Urban EMAIL logo , Hugo Reyes-Centeno , Kate Bellamy and Matthias Pache
Published/Copyright: November 9, 2019

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

Appendix 1:

The full template of the questionnaire.

No.AreaSubareaDescriptionComments/cross-references
1PhonologyConsonantsIs there a voicing contrast in stops?
2PhonologyConsonantsAre there phonemic glottalized/ejective consonants?cf. Maddieson (2013a)
3PhonologyConsonantsAre there phonemic aspirated consonants?
4PhonologyConsonantsAre there phonemic uvulars?cf. Maddieson (2013b)
5PhonologyConsonantsIs there a labiodental fricative?
6PhonologyVowelsIs there a phonemic high central vowel?
7PhonologyVowelsIs there phonemic vowel length?
8PhonologyVowelsIs there phonemic vowel nasalization?cf. Hajek (2013)
9PhonologyVowelsAre there more than two phonemically relevant degrees of aperture?i. e. are there phonemic mid vowels (/e/, /o/)
10PhonologyVowelsAre 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/)
11PhonologySuprasegmentalAre there contrastive tones?
12PhonologySuprasegmentalIs there contrastive stress?
13PhonologySyllable StructureAre there codas?“no” also if highly constrained
14PhonologySyllable StructureAre there complex onsets?“no” also if highly constrained
15MorphologyGeneralIs 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.
16MorphologyGeneralIs 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.
17MorphologyGeneralIs 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.
18MorphologyGeneralIs 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.
19MorphologyGeneralIs there productive reduplication?cf. Rubino (2013)
20MorphologyTranscategorical operationsIs there productive nominalizing morphology?
21MorphologyTranscategorical operationsIs there productive verbalizing morphology?
22MorphologyParts of speechIs there a morphosyntactically definable class of adjectives?“no” also if adjectives are described as a subclass of either nouns or verbs
23MorphologyNominal morphologyAre there possessive classes?defined as in Nichols and Bickel (2013b)
24MorphologyNominal morphologyAre there numeral classifiers?cf. Gil (2013)
25MorphologyNominal morphologyAre there noun classes/genders?trigger agreement
26MorphologyNominal morphologyAre there noun classifiers?do not normally trigger agreement
27MorphologyNominal morphologyIs there an inclusive/exclusive distinction in independent prounouns?cf. Cysouw (2013)
28MorphologyNominal morphologyCan inanimates be marked for plurality?cf. Haspelmath (2013)
29MorphologyNominal morphologyCan human nouns be marked for plurality?cf. Haspelmath (2013)
30MorphologyNominal morphologyAre there cases for other than core relations?adpositions are considered here only if they cliticize and NPs can be hosts.
31MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs there verbal person marking only for the A argument?Coding follows Siewierska (2013c)
32MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs there verbal person marking only for the P argument?Coding follows Siewierska (2013c)
33MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs there verbal person marking for the A or the P argument, but not both?Coding follows Siewierska (2013c)
34MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs there verbal person marking for both A and P arguments?Coding follows Siewierska (2013c)
35MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs tense a verbal category?as expressed by affixes (not necessarily obligatory) in the verb complex to the exclusion of adverbs etc.
36MorphologyVerbal morphologyIs aspect a verbal category?as expressed by affixes (not necessarily obligatory) in the verb complex to the exclusion of adverbs etc.
37MorphologyVerbal morphologyAre there directional affixes on verbs?
38MorphologyVerbal morphologyAre there valency-changing prefixes?including but not limited to causative morphology; Uto-Aztecan “unspecified object prefixes” trigger answer “yes”.
39MorphologyVerbal morphologyAre there valency-changing suffixes?including but not limited to causative morphology
40SyntaxPossessionAre possessive phrases dependent-marked?cf. Nichols and Bickel (2013a); here, we target constructions where both possessor and possessed are lexical NPs
41SyntaxPossessionAre possessive phrases head-marked?cf. Nichols and Bickel (2013a); here, we target constructions where both possessor and possessed are lexical NPs
42SyntaxPossessionIs there a verb ‘to have’ in predicative possession?cf. Stassen (2013)
43SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
44SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
45SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
46SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
47SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
48SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
49SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
50SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
51SyntaxAlignmentDoes 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.
52SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant constituent order in intransitive clauses VS?cf. Dryer (2013f)
53SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant constituent order in intransitive clauses SV?cf. Dryer (2013f)
54SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses VS?cf. Dryer (2013g)
55SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses VO?cf. Dryer (2013g)
56SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant constituent order in transitive clauses OS?cf. Dryer (2013g)
57SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in possessive phrases possessor-possessed?cf. Dryer (2013d)
58SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in possessive phrases possessed-possessor?cf. Dryer (2013d)
59SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs adjective-noun?cf. Dryer (2013b)
60SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs noun-adjective?cf. Dryer (2013b)
61SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs demonstrative-noun?cf. Dryer (2013c)
62SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs noun-demonstrative?cf. Dryer (2013c)
63SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs numeral-noun?cf. Dryer (2013e)
64SyntaxWord orderIs the dominant order in NPs noun-numeral?cf. Dryer (2013e)
65SyntaxWord orderIs the element indicating clausal negation preceding the verb (root)?Assessed in declarative sentences and regardless of morphosyntactic boundness, cf. Dryer (2013a)
66SyntaxComplex constructionsAre there structural similarities between nominalization and relativization?e. g. relative clauses involving a nominalized verb or homophony between relativizer and nominalizer
67SyntaxComplex constructionsIs there a system of switch-reference?
68SyntaxComplex constructionsIs there a morphological passive?cf. Siewierska (2013b)
69LexiconMorpheme CanonAre 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.
70LexiconMorpheme CanonAre nominal roots predominantly disyllabic?see above
71LexiconMorpheme CanonAre verbal roots predominantly monosyllabic?see above
72LexiconMorpheme CanonAre verbal roots predominantly disyllabic?see above
73LexiconNumeralsIs some part of the numeral system organized on a quinary basis?cf. Comrie (2013b)
74LexiconNumeralsIs some part of the numeral system organized on a decimal basis?cf. Comrie (2013b)
75LexiconNumeralsIs some part of the numeral system organized on a vigesimal basis?cf. Comrie (2013b)
76LexiconBasic orientationIs the underived word for ‘smoke’ a verb?
77LexiconBasic orientationIs the underived word for ‘black’ a verb?
Appendix 2:

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.

   110203040506070
10001001000?111??00111010010111000101111??11000?????01000??0101010111101011011
210000000101?100100111100000111????110111111000100000100010??101011010101011??
3000100?010001110000111100101100001??11001100001000001000100101011111000001011
4000000001001??01001111?0000?11????111110110000?????010001010101011?1????011?0
51000000010??001000???11?000?10000011???11?00000000010100010010100??0?????????
6001001001001010101110?11000110000111101101100010000010100101101010010101111??
700000000110010000011110000011100011111101100001000010010010110101001????101??
8000000001000100000111?0000011000011101101100001000010010000110101001????1????
9100001000001100100?1??1?0?0110000110???011000010000???????????10????01010110?
10100000111010010000?00000101010000111010011000000001101000101011011??010011100
110100011010001000001111110111100001?100101000000000111011011010101011101001?00
12000000001000100000111?0000111000010111101100000000100010101010101001????011?0
13100000001011010010?1?11?10111?100011?10???00001000010100010101101???0100001??
1400000001101100?????110??1?1??01000?1?1?00??????????10100010101101???0101011??
1510000000100010??001101100010100001110010110000000010001001101010100110100110?
16?10000?0101?0100??0101100110001000010101000000100001010001010110110010100110?
17110010001000111000010?100?011000011110101?000010000??01001101010100?001001100
1801000000111011101001??1111100?0001?1?101010000?????1010001????101???1010?11??
1911001000100?110000110?1100011000010110101000000010010100011010101?0?????011??
200000000010?011????1???0?????1?00011??????????????????????????????????????1???
210101001010001000001111?101?11000010110101?00000100010100010010101001101001000
22011001001001100100?0?11000001000011100000?100010000??0001001????1000100000100
230101001010001000001111110?0010000111001?1?00000100010011??1010??10?1??10011??
24010001?0100?10010111111?010010100011001???00000000110011??10011010?0010001100
2500000010100011000011?11?0001100001111110110000100001001101101010?001000010100
260100000010?010????11???00?011?0001??1??0?10000100000?0001001100?0???00???????
27000000??????00???????01????11?????11???????????????10???0101??????????????1??
2810000010000010010111010?011??010001?00001?00001000001000100110010?10001011?00
2910000101100101010101010100101000001101????01000000001000??0101??100?0000011??
30000001001000110100011100000001????110111000000?????01000100110010101010001100
311010000110001001011111101?0011000011?0100?01000000001000100110010???0000101??
3210000001?00010010001110011011100001100100?01000000001000100110010100??10000??
3300100011100011010011010010011110000101100110001000001000100110100111000001000
3400000100?0001000010101000000000010110011011000000100100010101010?010000000000
35????????????10???????????1???1?????????????????????10?1???0010??1???00???????
3610001000000011010?11????0?0?11???011?011011000?????01000101010100?1?001011000
37?0000101000100010111111000000100011101111?100010000010001001101000100000110?0
38?00010?010??100101010111000111100000001110????1000010010101010101001101001000
390001001000001001011110000011110001111011111000100000100010101010?111011001010
40000000001000100000111001100111000111001010?????????01000101010??01110000010?0
410111001001001?010111110001111100011110111?1000100000000010101010??100101010?0
420?0?0?101???11????1??1????0111????1???1??????????????000??1010100???1000010??
4300001100100010010101110000000000011110101100000001010000101010100101010001000
4401?11000?0001101??011?0?00?00100101101010?0000?????0100?1001??000??1????000??

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

Published Online: 2019-11-09
Published in Print: 2019-11-18

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 6.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ling-2019-0032/html
Scroll to top button