Abstract
Typology based on codable traits has its heyday early in the development of any biological science. In mature disciplines it has long since given way to diachronic models of how complex structures evolve in shifting environments. Linguistic typology is no different. It also faces existential crises from recognition that its categories are dubiously universal and that global samples conceal macroareal biases. To avoid irrelevance, typology should blend into the linguistic landscape. It should defragment by refocusing on interdomain interactions (e.g., between mood and anaphora), and rediscover extreme languages and Sapirean types. Simultaneously, it must decentralize operationally into more manageable and illuminating family-level synchronic-diachronic microtypology.
References
Abraham, Werner & Theo Janssen (eds.). 1989. Tempus – Aspekt – Modus: Die lexikalischen und grammatischen Formen in den germanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783111635200Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Casagrande, Joseph. 1963. Language universals in anthropological perspective. In Greenberg (ed.) 1963, 220–235.Suche in Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2013. Pronominal and adnominal demonstratives. In Dryer & Haspelmath (eds.) 2013, Chapter 42. http://wals.info/chapter/42Suche in Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1979. Ergativity. Language 55. 59–138.10.1017/CBO9780511611896Suche in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13. 257–292.10.1075/sl.13.2.03drySuche in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie. http://wals.infoSuche in Google Scholar
Eggan, Fred. 1954. Social anthropology and the method of controlled comparison. American Anthropologist 56. 743–763.10.1525/aa.1954.56.5.02a00020Suche in Google Scholar
Fischer, J. L. 1968. Microethnology: Small-scale comparative studies. In James A. Clifton (ed.), Introduction to cultural anthropology: Essays in the scope and methods of the science of man, 374–401. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Suche in Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1971. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist’s field trip. Chicago Linguistic Society 7. 394–415.Suche in Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1975. Algonquian, Wiyot, and Yurok: Proving a distant genetic relationship. In M. Dale Kinkade, Kenneth L. Hale & Oswald Werner (eds.), Linguistics and anthropology in honor of C. F. Voegelin, 249–262. Lisse: De Ridder.10.1515/9783112420461Suche in Google Scholar
Graffi, Giorgio. 2011. The pioneers of linguistic typology: From Gabelentz to Greenberg. In Song (ed.) 2011, 25–42.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0003Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1957a. The nature and uses of linguistic typologies. International Journal of American Linguistics 23. 68–77.10.1086/464395Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1957b. Essays in linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg (ed.) 1963, 58–90.Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. The languages of Africa. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics.Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1974. Language typology: A historical and analytic overview. Den Haag: Mouton.10.1515/9783110886436Suche in Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.). 1963. Universals of language: Report of a conference held at Dobbs Ferry, New York, April 13–15, 1961. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 2011. Competing motivations. In Song (ed.) 2011, 148–165.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0009Suche in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 11. 119–132.10.1515/LINGTY.2007.011Suche in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86. 663–687.10.1353/lan.2010.0021Suche in Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1985. Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Suche in Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1997. Lost wax: Abrupt replacement of key morphemes in Australian agreement complexes. Diachronica 14. 197–232.10.1075/dia.14.2.02heaSuche in Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey & Vadim Dyachkov. 2015. Subject and addressee in Dogon imperatives and hortatives. Studies in Language 39. 555–593.10.1075/sl.39.3.02heaSuche in Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Derek Nurse (eds.). 2008. A linguistic geography of Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486272Suche in Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 2009. How (not) to do phonological typology: The case of pitch-accent. Language Sciences 31. 213–238.10.1016/j.langsci.2008.12.007Suche in Google Scholar
Koch, Peter & Thomas Krefeld (eds.). 1991. Connexiones Romanicae: Dependenz und Valenz in romanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783111633817Suche in Google Scholar
Kroeber, Alfred L. 1960. On typological indices I: Ranking of language. International Journal of American Linguistics 26. 171–177.10.1086/464574Suche in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1977. Syntactic reanalysis. In Charles Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 57–139. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.10.7560/750357-005Suche in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1972. Converging theories in linguistics. Language 48. 166–275.10.2307/412134Suche in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1973. A structural principle of language and its implications. Language 49. 47–66.10.2307/412102Suche in Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1949. Les structures élémentaires de la parenté. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Suche in Google Scholar
Meinhof, Carl. 1916–1917. Sprachstudien im egyptischen Sudan. Zeitschrift für Kolonialsprachen 7. 36–80, 105–133, 212–250, 326–335.Suche in Google Scholar
Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1871. Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family (Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge 218). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.10.5962/bhl.title.29577Suche in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62. 56–119.10.1353/lan.1986.0014Suche in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226580593.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2003. Diversity and stability in language. In Brian Joseph & Richard Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 283–310. Malden, MA: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756393.ch5Suche in Google Scholar
Ramat, Paolo. 2011. The (early) history of linguistic typology. In Song (ed.) 2011, 9–24.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Renzi, Lorenzo. 1976. Histoire et objectifs de la typologie linguistique. In Herman Parret (ed.), History of linguistic thought and contemporary linguistics, 633–657. Berlin: De Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1913. Wiyot and Yurok, Algonkin languages of California. American Anthropologist 15. 617–646.10.1525/aa.1913.15.4.02a00040Suche in Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1924. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Suche in Google Scholar
Song, Jae Jung (ed.). 2011. The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Szemerényi, Oswald. 1967. The new look of Indo-European. Phonetica 17. 65–99.10.1159/000258579Suche in Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1938. The punctual and segmentative aspects of verbs in Hopi. Language 12. 127–131. Reprinted in Whorf 1956, 51–56.Suche in Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1940. Science and linguistics. The Technology Review (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) 42. 229–231. Reprinted in Whorf 1956, 207–219.Suche in Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1941. Languages and logic. The Technology Review (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) 43. 250–252, 266, 268, 272. Reprinted in Whorf 1956, 233–245.Suche in Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1956. Language, thought, and reality. Edited by John Carroll. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Suche in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Discussion
- Is typology relevant?
- Typology, documentation, description, and typology
- What about typology is useful for language documentation?
- Type-ology or typ-ology?
- Inspiration and corrective: Typology can be more than a mere pastime for historical linguists
- Typology and coevolutionary linguistics
- The mutual relevance of typology and variation studies
- Language contact: Trojan horse or new potential for cross-fertilization?
- Positive signs: How sign language typology benefits deaf communities and linguistic theory
- Typology and the study of writing systems
- What can linguistic typology contribute to research on language evolution?
- Typology for the masses
- Typological bottlenecks: How large-scale regional language typologies help us interpret global prehistory
- Contributions of linguistic typology to psycholinguistics
- The importance of linguistic typology for the neurobiology of language
- Do language-specific word meanings shape sensory and motor brain systems? The relevance of semantic typology to cognitive neuroscience
- Language typology in speech and language technology
- Linguistic typology in natural language processing
- Book Reviews
- Tasaku Tsunoda: A grammar of Warrongo
- Roland Kießling: Verbal serialisation in Isu (West-Ring) – a Grassfields language of Cameroon
- Jonathan David Bobaljik: Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives and the structure of words
- Editorial Report
- Editorial Report
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Discussion
- Is typology relevant?
- Typology, documentation, description, and typology
- What about typology is useful for language documentation?
- Type-ology or typ-ology?
- Inspiration and corrective: Typology can be more than a mere pastime for historical linguists
- Typology and coevolutionary linguistics
- The mutual relevance of typology and variation studies
- Language contact: Trojan horse or new potential for cross-fertilization?
- Positive signs: How sign language typology benefits deaf communities and linguistic theory
- Typology and the study of writing systems
- What can linguistic typology contribute to research on language evolution?
- Typology for the masses
- Typological bottlenecks: How large-scale regional language typologies help us interpret global prehistory
- Contributions of linguistic typology to psycholinguistics
- The importance of linguistic typology for the neurobiology of language
- Do language-specific word meanings shape sensory and motor brain systems? The relevance of semantic typology to cognitive neuroscience
- Language typology in speech and language technology
- Linguistic typology in natural language processing
- Book Reviews
- Tasaku Tsunoda: A grammar of Warrongo
- Roland Kießling: Verbal serialisation in Isu (West-Ring) – a Grassfields language of Cameroon
- Jonathan David Bobaljik: Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives and the structure of words
- Editorial Report
- Editorial Report