[1]
|
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 435-483.
doi:10.1023/A:1024109008573
|
[2]
|
Blansitt, E. Jr. (1973). Bitransitive clauses. Working Papers on Language Universals, Stanford: Stanford University.
|
[3]
|
Bossong, G. (1985). Empirische universalienforschung: Differentielle objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.
|
[4]
|
Chelliah, S. (2009). Semantic role to new information in Meithei. In J. Baredal, & S. Chelliah (Eds.), The role of semantic, pragmatic, and discourse factors in the development of case (pp. 377-400). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benja-mins.
|
[5]
|
Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
|
[6]
|
Ebert, K. (1997). Camling. München/Newcastle: Lincom Europa.
|
[7]
|
Gair, J. W., & Paolillo, J. C. (1997). Sinhala. München/Newcastle: Lincom Europa.
|
[8]
|
Gasser, M. (1983). Topic continuity in written Amharic narrative. In T. Givón (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative crosslanguage study (pp. 95-139). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
|
[9]
|
Haspelmath, M. (2007). Ditransitive alignment splits and inverse alignment. Functions of Language, 14, 79-102.doi:10.1075/fol.14.1.06has
|
[10]
|
Kittil?, S. (2006a). The anomaly of the verb ‘give’ explained by its high (formal and semantic) transitivity. Linguistics, 44, 569–612.
|
[11]
|
Kittil?, S. (2006b). The woman showed the baby to her sister: On resolving humanness-driven ambiguity in ditransitives. In L. Kulikov, A. Malchukov, & P. de Swart (Eds.), Case valency and transitivity (pp. 291-308). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
|
[12]
|
Kittil?, S. (2007). On the encoding of transitivity-related features on the indirect object. Functions of Language, 14, 149-164.
|
[13]
|
Kittil?, S. (2008). Animacy effects on differential Goal Marking. Lin-guistic Typology, 12, 245-268.
|
[14]
|
Lazard, G. (1998). Actancy. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
doi:10.1515/9783110808100
|
[15]
|
Lefebvre, C. & Brousseau, A-M. (2002). A grammar of Fongbe. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
|
[16]
|
MacDonald, L. (1990). A grammar of Tauya. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
|
[17]
|
Meakins, F. (2009). The case of the shifty ergative marker: A pragmatic shift in the ergative marker of one Australian mixed language. In J. Baredal, & S. Chelliah (Eds.), The role of semantic, pragmatic, and discourse factors in the development of case (pp. 59-91). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
|
[18]
|
Mohanan, T. (1994). Argument structure in Hindi. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
|
[19]
|
Moyse-Faurie, C. (1983). Le drehu, langue de Lifou (Iles Loyauté). Paris: SELAF.
|
[20]
|
N?ss, ?. (2003). What markedness marks: The markedness problem with direct objects. Lingua, 114, 1186-1212.
|
[21]
|
N?ss, ?. (2007). Prototypical transitivity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
|
[22]
|
Nagaraja, K. S. (1999). Korku language: Grammar, texts and vocabulary. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.
|
[23]
|
Newman, J. (1996). Give: A cognitive linguistic study. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
|
[24]
|
Pilot-Raichoor, C. (1991). Le badaga, langue dravidienne: description et analyse. Ph.D. Thesis, Paris: University of Paris III.
|
[25]
|
Pilot-Raichoor, C. (1994). L’objet en badaga. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, 89, 359-397.
|
[26]
|
Sáàh, K., & ézè, é. (1997). Double objects in àkán amd ìgbo. In R. Déchaine, & V. Manfredi (Eds.), Object positions in Benue-Kwa (pp. 139-151). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
|
[27]
|
Sedlak, P. A. S. (1975). Direct/indirect object word order: A cross-linguistic analysis. Working Papers on Language Universals, Los Angeles: University of Southern California.
|
[28]
|
Song, J-J. (2001). Linguistic typology: Morphology and syntax. Harlow & London: Pearson Education.
|
[29]
|
Taylor, J. (1985). Nkore-Kiga. London: Routledge.
|