Books: Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology: Johanson, Robbeets (Eds)
Editor for this issue: Danniella Hornby
<daniellalinguistlist.org>
Date: 11-Jul-2012 From: Els van Egmond <egmondebrill.nl> Subject: Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology: Johanson, Robbeets (Eds) E-mail this message to a friend
Title: Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology
Series Title: Brill's Studies in Language, Cognition and Culture
Published: 2012
Publisher: Brill
http://www.brill.nl
Editor: Lars Johanson
Editor: Martine Irma Robbeets
Hardback: ISBN: 9789004224070 Pages: 470 Price: Europe EURO 136
Hardback: ISBN: 9789004224070 Pages: 470 Price: U.S. $ 189
Abstract:
Genealogical linguistics and areal linguistics are rarely treated from an integrated perspective even if they are twin faces of diachronic linguistics. In "Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology" Lars Johanson and Martine Robbeets take up this challenge. The result is a wealth of empirical facts and different theoretical approaches, advanced by internationally renowned specialists and young scholars whose research is highly pertinent to the topic.
"Copies versus Cognates in Bound Morphology" puts genealogical and areal explanation for shared morphology in a balanced perspective and works out criteria to distinguish between morphological cognates and copies. Lars Johanson and Martine Robbeets provide nothing less than the foundations for a new perspective on diachronic linguistics between genealogical and areal linguistics.
Contributors include: Alexandra Aikhenvald, Ad Backus, Dik Bakker, Peter Bakker, Éva Csató, Stig Eliasson, Victor Friedman, Francesco Gardani, Anthony Grant, Salomé Gutiérrez-Morales, Tooru Hayasi, Ewald Hekking, Juha Janhunen, Lars Johanson, Brian Joseph, Folke Josephson, Judith Josephson, Johanna Nichols, Martine Robbeets, Marshall Unger, Nikki van de Pol, Anna Verschik, Lindsay Whaley
Linguistic Field(s):
Historical Linguistics
Morphology
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.