Search Results
Abstract
Although AA languages seem to fall neatly into two word order types based on their location, namely verb-medial in Mainland Southeast Asia, verb-final in South Asia, verb-initial structures are found in different groups of AA, especially in peripheral languages. In most cases these structures cannot be accounted for by language contact. Based on the geographical distribution, data from a wide range of AA languages is invoked to claim that verb-initiality or predicate-initiality is inherited from the protolanguage and retained in some languages due to both linguistic and societal factors.
Abstract
Although AA languages seem to fall neatly into two word order types based on their location, namely verb-medial in Mainland Southeast Asia, verb-final in South Asia, verb-initial structures are found in different groups of AA, especially in peripheral languages. In most cases these structures cannot be accounted for by language contact. Based on the geographical distribution, data from a wide range of AA languages is invoked to claim that verb-initiality or predicate-initiality is inherited from the protolanguage and retained in some languages due to both linguistic and societal factors.
The handbook comprises two parts, Overviews and Grammar Sketches:
Part 1) The overview chapters cover typology, classification, historical reconstruction, plus a special overview of the Munda languages.
Part 2) Some 27 scholars present grammar sketches of 21 languages, representing 12 of the 13 branches. The sketches are carefully prepared according to the editors’ unifying typological approach, ensuring analytical and notational comparability throughout.
The handbook comprises two parts, Overviews and Grammar Sketches:
Part 1) The overview chapters cover typology, classification, historical reconstruction, plus a special overview of the Munda languages.
Part 2) Some 27 scholars present grammar sketches of 21 languages, representing 12 of the 13 branches. The sketches are carefully prepared according to the editors’ unifying typological approach, ensuring analytical and notational comparability throughout.
We encourage a unifying typological approach, so that these volumes are both accessible to typologists coming from different theoretical backgrounds and intelligible to the wider linguistic readership. Authors are expected to follow Leipzig glossing rules and IPA conventions. The editors may specify the TOC structure and the list of abbreviations; these will be discussed with authors at the book proposal stage.
This is a peer-reviewed series; the editors will work with authors to ensure high standards. We seek to build a diverse and highly qualified Advisory Board; interested scholars should contact the editors. For information on book proposals and publishing with Brill, please see the Resources for Authors pages.
Abstract
In this paper we discuss two cases of contact-induced language change where lexical and grammatical borrowing appear to have gone in opposite directions: one language has borrowed large amounts of vocabulary from another while at the same time being the source of structural borrowings into the other language. Furthermore, it appears in both cases that the structural borrowing has come about through bilingualism in L1 speakers of the source language, while L1 speakers of the language undergoing the structural change are largely monolingual. We propose that these two unusual factors are not unrelated, but that the latter is the cause of the former: Under circumstances where the numerically much smaller language in a contact situation is the contact language, the L2 speakers' variety, influenced by their L1, may spread into the monolingual community. e lexical borrowing naturally happens from the bilingual speakers' L2 into their L1, resulting in opposite directions of lexical and structural borrowing. Similar processes have been described in cases of language shift, but we show that it may take place even in situations where shift does not occur.