Hostname: page-component-68c7f8b79f-4ct9c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-01-01T21:56:58.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Language Documentation Twenty-Five Years On

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Frank Seifart*
Affiliation:
CNRS & Université de Lyon, University of Amsterdam, and University of Cologne
Nicholas Evans*
Affiliation:
ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language, The Australian National University
Harald Hammarström*
Affiliation:
Uppsala University and Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Stephen C. Levinson*
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics
Get access

Abstract

This discussion note reviews responses of the linguistics profession to the grave issues of language endangerment identified a quarter of a century ago in the journal Language by Krauss, Hale, England, Craig, and others (Hale et al. 1992). Two and a half decades of worldwide research not only have given us a much more accurate picture of the number, phylogeny, and typological variety of the world's languages, but they have also seen the development of a wide range of new approaches, conceptual and technological, to the problem of documenting them. We review these approaches and the manifold discoveries they have unearthed about the enormous variety of linguistic structures. The reach of our knowledge has increased by about 15% of the world's languages, especially in terms of digitally archived material, with about 500 languages now reasonably documented thanks to such major programs as DoBeS, ELDP, and DEL. But linguists are still falling behind in the race to document the planet's rapidly dwindling linguistic diversity, with around 35–42% of the world's languages still substantially undocumented, and in certain countries (such as the US) the call by Krauss (1992) for a significant professional realignment toward language documentation has only been heeded in a few institutions. Apart from the need for an intensified documentarist push in the face of accelerating language loss, we argue that existing language documentation efforts need to do much more to focus on crosslinguistically comparable data sets, sociolinguistic context, semantics, and interpretation of text material, and on methods for bridging the ‘transcription bottleneck’, which is creating a huge gap between the amount we can record and the amount in our transcribed corpora.

Information

Type
Discussion
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

We thank Language editor Andries W. Coetzee and two anonymous Language referees for comments on earlier versions of this discussion note. We acknowledge support for new ways of carrying out comparative work on underresearched languages by the Volkswagen Foundation, through its DoBeS program, the Arcadia Foundation, through its ELDP program, and the Max Planck Society, through its Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, its Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, and its Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena. N. Evans would also like to thank the Australian Research Council (projects: The Wellsprings of Linguistic Diversity and the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language).

References

Adams, Oliver, Cohn, Trevor, Neubig, Graham, Cruz, Hilaria, Bird, Steven; and Michaud, Alexis. 2018. Evaluating phonemic transcription of low-resource tonal languages for language documentation. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan, 3356-65. Online: http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2018/pdf/490.pdf.Google Scholar
Adda, Gilles, Stüker, Sebastian, Adda-Decker, Martine, Ambouroue, Odette, Besacier, Laurent, Blachon, David, Bonneau-Maynard, Hélène; et al. 2016. Breaking the unwritten language barrier: The BULB project. Procedia Computer Science (Special issue: 5th Workshop on Spoken Language Technologies for Under-resourced Languages (SLTU-2016), Yogyakarta, Indonesia) 81. 814. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.04.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Shanley E. M. 2017. Polysynthesis in the acquisition of Inuit languages. The Oxford handbook of polysynthesis, ed. by Fortescue, Michael, Mithun, Marianne, and Evans, Nicholas, 449-72. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199683208.013.25.Google Scholar
Amery, Rob. 2009. Phoenix or relic? Documentation of languages with revitalization in mind. Language Documentation & Conservation 3. 138-48. DOI: 10125/4436.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 2010. How many languages are there in the world? (Linguistic Society of America brochure series: Frequently asked questions.) Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America. Online: http://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/how-many-languages-are-there-world.Google Scholar
Bavin, Edith L., and Stoll, Sabine (eds.) 2013. The acquisition of ergativity. (Trends in language acquisition research 9.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tilar.9.Google Scholar
Berez-Kroeker, Andrea L., Andreassen, Helene N., Gawne, Lauren, Holton, Gary, Kung, Susan Smythe, Pulsifer, Peter, Collister, Lauren B., Citation The Data and Group Attribution in Linguistics Group; and The Linguistics Data Interest. 2018. The Austin Principles of data citation in linguistics. Version 1.0. Online: http://site.uit.no/linguisticsdatacitation/austinprinciples/.Google Scholar
Bergqvist, Henrik. 2016. Complex epistemic perspective in Kogi (Arwako). International Journal of American Linguistics 82. 134. DOI: 10.1086/684422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Nichols, Johanna, Zakharko, Taras, Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, Hildebrandt, Kristine, Rießler, Michael, Bierkandt, Lennart, Zúñiga, Fernando; and Lowe, John B.. 2017. The AUTOTYP typological databases. Version 0.1.0. Online: https://github.com/autotyp/autotyp-data/tree/0.1.0.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, Choudhary, Kamal K., Schlesewsky, Matthias; and Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina. 2015. The neurophysiology of language processing shapes the evolution of grammar: Evidence from case marking. PLoS ONE 10:e0132819. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird, Stephen, Hanke, Florian R., Adams, Oliver; and Lee, Haejoong. 2014. Aikuma: A mobile app for collaborative language documentation. Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on the Use of Computational Methods in the Study of Endangered Languages, Baltimore, 15.Google Scholar
Blasi, Damián E., Wichmann, Søren, Hammarström, Harald, Stadler, Peter F.; and Christiansen, Morten H.. 2016. Sound–meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113. 10818-23. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1605782113.Google ScholarPubMed
Bochnak, M. Ryan, and Matthewson, Lisa (eds.) 2015. Methodologies in semantic fieldwork. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul, and Weenink, David. 2018. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Online: http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire. 2017. Language vitality: Theorizing language loss, shift, and reclamation (Response to Mufwene). Language 93.e243e253. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenzinger, Matthias (ed.) 2007. Language diversity endangered. (Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs 181.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brickell, Timothy C., and Schnell, Stefan. 2017. Do grammatical relations reflect information status? Reassessing preferred argument structure theory against discourse data from Tondano. Linguistic Typology 21. 177208. DOI: 10.1515/lingty-2017-0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Lea, and Dryer, Matthew S.. 2008. The verbs for ‘and’ in Walman, a Torricelli language of Papua New Guinea. Language 84. 528-65. DOI: 10.1353/lan.0.0044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capell, Arthur. 1962. Linguistic research needed in Australia. Bulletin of the International Committee on Urgent Anthropological Ethnological Research 5. 2328.Google Scholar
Ćavar, Małgorzata, Cavar, Damir; and Cruz, Hilaria. 2016. Endangered language documentation: Bootstrapping a Chatino speech corpus, forced aligner, ASR. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016), Paris, 2328. Online: http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2016/pdf/1006_Paper.pdf.Google Scholar
Childs, Tucker, Good, Jeff; and Mitchell, Alice. 2014. Beyond the ancestral code: Towards a model for sociolinguistic language documentation. Language Documentation & Conservation 8. 168-91. DOI: 10125/24601.Google Scholar
Crippen, James A., and Robinson, Laura C.. 2013. In defense of the lone wolf: Collaboration in language documentation. Language Documentation & Conservation 7. 123-35. DOI: 10125/4577.Google Scholar
Cruz, Emiliana, and Woodbury, Anthony C.. 2014. Finding a way into a family of tone languages: The story and methods of the Chatino Language Documentation Project. Language Documentation & Conservation 8. 490524. DOI: 10125/24615.Google Scholar
Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa. 2009. Research models, community engagement, and linguistic fieldwork: Reflections on working within Canadian indigenous communities. Language Documentation & Conservation 3. 1550. DOI: 10125/4423.Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2010. Naive v. expert intuitions: An empirical study of acceptability judgments. The Linguistic Review 27. 123. DOI: 10.1515/tlir.2010.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, Kanazawa, Makoto, Kim, Yookyung, Mchombo, Sam; and Peters, Stanley. 1998. Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics and Philosophy 21. 159210. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25001700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, Charles. 1874. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. 2nd edn. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dediu, Dan, and Ladd, D. Robert. 2007. Linguistic tone is related to the population frequency of the adaptive haplogroups of two brain size genes, ASPM and Microcephalin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104. 10944-49. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0610848104.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C. 1995. Darwin's dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Di Carlo, Pierpaolo, and Good, Jeff. 2017. The vitality and diversity of multilingual repertoires: Commentary on Mufwene. Language 93.e254e262. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, Jared. 2012. The world until yesterday: What can we learn from traditional societies? New York: Viking.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian T. 2009. The phonetics of register in Takhian Thong Chong. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 39. 162-88. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100309003879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobrin, Lise M. 2008. From linguistic elicitation to eliciting the linguist: Lessons in community empowerment from Melanesia. Language 84. 300324. DOI: 10.1353/lan.0.0009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobrin, Lise M., Austin, Peter K.; and Nathan, David. 2007. Dying to be counted: The commodification of endangered languages in documentary linguistics. Language Documentation and Description 6. 3752. Online: http://www.elpublishing.org/PID/070.Google Scholar
Donohue, Mark, Hetherington, Rebecca, McElvenny, James; and Dawson, Virginia. 2013. World phonotactics database. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, The Australian National University. Online: http://phonotactics.anu.edu.au.Google Scholar
Dorian, Nancy C. (ed.) 1989. Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death. (Studies in the social and cultural foundations of language 7.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dow, James R. (ed.) 1987. New perspectives on language maintenance and language shift I. (Special issue of International Journal of the Sociology of Language 68.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl.1987.68.0.Google Scholar
Dow, James R. (ed.) 1988. New perspectives on language maintenance and language shift II. (Special issue of International Journal of the Sociology of Language 69.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl.1988.69.0.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U., and Wodak-Leodolter, Ruth (eds.) 1977. Language death. (Special issue of International Journal of the Sociology of Language 12.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl.1977.12.0.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S., and Haspelmath, Martin (eds.) 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Online: http://wals.info/.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63. 805-53. DOI: 10.2307/415719.Google Scholar
Dunn, Michael, Greenhill, Simon J., Levinson, Stephen C.; and Gray, Russell D.. 2011. Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature 473. 7982. DOI: 10.1038/nature09923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, Michael, Terrill, Angela, Reesink, Ger, Foley, Robert A.; and Levinson, Stephen C.. 2005. Structural phylogenetics and the reconstruction of ancient language history. Science 309. 2072-75. DOI: 10.1126/science.1114615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmondson, Jerold A., and Esling, John H.. 2006. The valves of the throat and their functioning in tone, vocal register and stress: Laryngoscopic case studies. Phonology 23. 157-91. DOI: 10.1017/S095267570600087X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
England, Nora C. 1992. Doing Mayan linguistics in Guatemala. Language 68. 2935. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2019. Amazonian linguistic diversity and its sociocultural correlates. Language dispersal, diversification, and contact: A global perspective, ed. by Crevels, Mily and Muysken, Pieter. Oxford: Oxford University Press, to appear.Google Scholar
Esposito, Christina Marie. 2004. Santa Ana del Valle Zapotec phonation. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 103. 71105. Online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2c70d80m.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2006. View with a view: Towards a typology of multiple perspective constructions. Berkeley Linguistics Society 31. 93120. DOI: 10.3765/bls.v31i1.3429.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2008. Review of Gippert et al. 2006. Language Documentation & Conservation 2. 340-50. DOI: 10125/4353.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2010. Dying words: Endangered languages and what they have to tell us. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Bergqvist, Henrik; and Roque, Lila San. 2018a. The grammar of engagement I: Framework and initial exemplification. Language and Cognition 10. 110-40. DOI: 10.1017/langcog.2017.21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Bergqvist, Henrik; and Roque, Lila San. 2018b. The grammar of engagement II: Typology and diachrony. Language and Cognition 10. 141-70. DOI: 10.1017/langcog.2017.22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Gaby, Alice, Levinson, Stephen C.; and Majid, Asifa (eds.) 2011. Reciprocals and semantic typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, and Levinson, Stephen C.. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32. 429-92. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X0999094X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, Nicholas, and Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 2007. Searching for meaning in the library of Babel: Field semantics and problems of digital archiving. Archives and Social Studies: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 1. 63123.Google Scholar
Fabricant, Daniel S., and Farnsworth, Norman R.. 2001. The value of plants used in traditional medicine for drug discovery. Environmental Health Perspectives (Supplement 1: Reviews in environmental health) 109. 6975. DOI: 10.2307/3434847.Google ScholarPubMed
Fast, Annicka. 2007. Moral incoherence in documentary linguistics: Theorizing the interventionist aspect of the field. Proceedings of the Fifth University of Cambridge Postgraduate Conference in Language Research, Cambridge, 6471. Online: http://www.ling.cam.ac.uk/camling/Manuscripts/CamLing2007_Fast.pdf.Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna, and Pütz, Martin (eds.) 2016. Endangered languages and languages in danger: Issues of documentation, policy, and language rights. (IMPACT: Studies in language and society 42.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/impact.42.Google Scholar
Fishman, Joshua A. 1982. Whorfianism of the third kind: Ethnolinguistic diversity as a worldwide societal asset (The Whorfian hypothesis: Varieties of validation, confirmation, and disconfirmation II). Language in Society 11. 114. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4167289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishman, Joshua A. 1991. Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. (Multilingual matters 76.) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, Colleen M. 2017. Understanding language vitality and reclamation as resilience: A framework for language endangerment and ‘loss’ (Commentary on Mufwene). Language 93.e280e297. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, Colleen M. 2018. Creating sustainable models of language documentation and revitalization. Insights from practices in community-based research: From theory to practice around the globe (Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs 319), ed. by Bischoff, Shannon T. and Jany, Carmen, 94111. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: 10.1515/9783110527018-005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, Colleen M., and Linn, Mary S.. 2013. Training communities, training graduate students: The 2012 Oklahoma Breath of Life Workshop. Language Documentation & Conservation 7. 185206. DOI: 10125/4596.Google Scholar
Fleck, David W. 2003. A grammar of Matses. Houston: Rice University dissertation.Google Scholar
Fleck, David W. 2007. Evidentiality and double tense in Matses. Language 83. 589614. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Norcliffe, Elizabeth; and Roque, Lila San (eds.) 2018. Egophoricity. (Typological studies in language 118.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tsl.118.Google Scholar
Forshaw, Bill, Davidson, Lucinda, Kelly, Barbara, Nordlinger, Rachel, Wigglesworth, Gillian; and Blythe, Joe. 2017. The acquisition of Murrinhpatha (Northern Australia). The Oxford handbook of polysynthesis, ed. by Fortescue, Michael, Mithun, Marianne, and Evans, Nicholas, 473-94. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199683208.013.27.Google Scholar
Gauthier, Elodie, Blachon, David, Besacier, Laurent, Kouarata, Guy-Noel, Adda-Decker, Martine, Rialland, Annie, Adda, Gilles; and Bachman, Grégoire. 2016. Lig-Aikuma: A mobile app to collect parallel speech for under-resourced language studies. INTERSPEECH 2016: Show & Tell contribution, San-Francisco. Online: https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/Interspeech_2016/pdfs/2003.PDF.Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol, and Siemens, Rebekka. 2013. Training as empowering social action: An ethical response to language endangerment. Responses to language endangerment: In honor of Mickey Noonan: New directions in language documentation and language revitalization (Studies in language companion series 142), ed. by Mihas, Elena, Perley, Bernard, Rei-Doval, Gabriel, and Wheatley, Kathleen, 5978. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/slcs.142.04gen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, Edward, and Fedorenko, Evelina. 2013. The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research. Language and Cognitive Processes 28. 88124. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.515080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gippert, Jost, Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.; and Mosel, Ulrike (eds.) 2006. Essentials of language documentation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Jennifer. 2014. Drawn from the ground: Sound, sign and inscription in Central Australian sand stories. (Language, culture & cognition 13.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore A. 2016. A response to ‘Assessing levels of endangerment in the Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat) using the Language Endangerment Index (LEI)‘, by Nala Huiying Lee & John Van Way. Language in Society 45. 293300. DOI: 10.1017/S0047404515000950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haig, Geoffrey, and Schnell, Stefan. 2016. The discourse basis of ergativity revisited. Language 92. 591618. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2016.0049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Ken. 1992. Language endangerment and the human value of linguistic diversity. Language 68. 3542. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Ken, Krauss, Michael, Watahomigie, Lucille J., Yamamoto, Akira Y., Craig, Colette, Jeanne, LaVerne Masayesva; and England, Nora C.. 1992. Endangered languages. Language 68. 142. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0052.Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Bank, Sebastian, Forkel, Robert; and Haspelmath, Martin (eds.) 2017. Glottolog 3.1. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. Online: http://glottolog.org/.Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Castermans, Thom, Forkel, Robert, Verbeek, Kevin, Westenberg, Michel A.; and Speckmann, Bettina. 2018. Simultaneous visualization of language endangerment and language description. Language Documentation & Conservation 12. 359-92. DOI: 10125/24792.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, David. 2005. Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar. Himalayan Linguistics 5. 148. DOI: 10.5070/H95022977.Google Scholar
Harmon, David, and Loh, Jonathan. 2010. The index of linguistic diversity: A new quantitative measure of trends in the status of the world's languages. Language Documentation & Conservation 4. 97151. DOI: 10125/4474.Google Scholar
Harrison, David K. 2007. When languages die: The extinction of the world's languages and the erosion of human knowledge. (Oxford studies in sociolinguistics.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1984. Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Henderson, Brent, Rohloff, Peter; and Henderson, Robert. 2014. More than words: Towards a development-based approach to language revitalization. Language Documentation & Conservation 8. 7591. DOI: 10125/4611.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Kristine A., Jany, Carmen; and Silva, Wilson (eds.) 2017. Documenting variation in endangered languages. (Language Documentation & Conservation special publication 13.) Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. DOI: 10125/24754.Google Scholar
Hill, Jane H. 2006. The ethnography of language and language documentation. In Gippert et al., 113-28.Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1998. Documentary and descriptive linguistics. Linguistics 36. 161-95. DOI: 10.1515/ling.1998.36.1.161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2006. Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for? In Gippert et al., 130.Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne. 2001. The use of linguistic archives in language revitalization: The Native California Language Restoration Workshop. The green book of language revitalization in practice, ed. by Hinton, Leanne and Hale, Kenneth, 419-28. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hou, Lynn Yong-Shi. 2016. ‘Making hands’: Family sign languages in the San Juan Quiahije community. Austin: University of Texas at Austin dissertation. DOI: 10.15781/T2W08WN5V.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 2007. Elicitation as experimental phonology: Thlantland Lai tonology. Experimental approaches to phonology, ed. by Solé, Maria-Josep, Beddor, Patrice Speeter, and Ohala, Manjari, 724. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2016. Morphological tonal assignments in conflict: Who wins? Tone and inflection: New facts and new perspectives (Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs 296), ed. by Palancar, Enrique L. and Léonard, Jean Léo, 1539. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: 10.1515/9783110452754-002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeanne, LaVerne Masayesva. 1992. An institutional response to language endangerment: A proposal to create a Native American Language Centre. Language 68. 2428. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jukes, Anthony. 2011. Researcher training and capacity development in language documentation. The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, ed. by Austin, Peter K. and Sallabank, Julia, 423-45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511975981.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2006 [1798]. Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view, trans. by Louden, Robert B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaxinawá, Joaquim Paulo de Lima. 2014. Hãtxa kuĩ haska xarabu. Brasilia: Universidade de Brasília dissertation. Online: http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/18984.Google Scholar
Kovach, Margaret. 2010. Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations and contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Krauss, Michael. 1992. The world's languages in crisis. Language 68. 410. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kung, Susan Smythe, and Sherzer, Joel. 2013. The Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America: An overview. Oral Tradition 28. 379-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1975. Empirical foundations of linguistic theory. The scope of American linguistics, ed. by Austerlitz, Robert, 77113. Lisse: Peter de Ridder.Google Scholar
Landaburu, Jon. 2007. La modalisation du savoir en langue andoke (Amazonie Colombienne). L'énonciation médiatisée II: Le traitement épistémologique de l'information, ed. by Guentchéva, Zlatka and Landaburu, Jon, 2347. Louvain: Peeters.Google Scholar
Léonard, Jean Léo, and González, Karla Janiré Avilés (eds.) 2015. Documentation et revitalisation des langues en danger: Épistémologie et praxis. Paris: Michel Houdiard.Google Scholar
Leonard, Wesley Y. 2017. Producing language reclamation by decolonising ‘language’. Language Documentation and Description 14. 1336. Online: http://www.elpublishing.org/PID/150.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C., Cutfield, Sarah, Dunn, Michael, Enfield, N. J.; and Meira, Sérgio (eds.) 2018. Demonstratives in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C., and Majid, Asifa. 2014. Differential ineffability and the senses. Mind & Language 29. 407-27. DOI: 10.1111/mila.12057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C., and Wilkins, David P. (eds.) 2006. Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. (Language, culture & cognition 6.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511486753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, and Simons, Gary F.. 2010. Assessing endangerment: Expanding Fishman's GIDS. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 55. 103-20.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F.; and Fennig, Charles D. (eds.) 2016. Ethnologue: Languages of the world. 19th edn. Dallas: SIL International. Online: http://www.ethnologue.com/19/.Google Scholar
Linn, Mary S. 2014. Living archives: A community-based language archive model. Language Documentation and Description (Special issue on language documentation and archiving) 12. 5367. Online: http://www.elpublishing.org/PID/137.Google Scholar
Loh, Jonathan, and Harmon, David. 2005. A global index of biocultural diversity. Ecological Indicators 5. 231-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.02.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovegren, Jesse. 2012. Sparse notes on Baazəm. Buffalo: University at Buffalo, ms.Google Scholar
Lüpke, Friederike. 2017. African(ist) perspectives on vitality: Fluidity, small speaker numbers, and adaptive multilingualism make vibrant ecologies (Response to Mufwene). Language 93.e275e279. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian, and Coupé, Christophe. 2015. Human spoken language diversity and the acoustic adaptation hypothesis. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 138. 1838. DOI: 10.1121/1.4933848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maffi, Luisa. 2005. Linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. Annual Review of Anthropology 34. 599617. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majid, Asifa, and Burenhult, Niclas. 2014. Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language. Cognition 130. 266-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsaja, I. Gede. 2008. Desa kolok—A deaf village and its sign language in Bali, Indonesia. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.Google Scholar
Mateo Pedro, Pedro. 2015. The acquisition of inflection in Q'anjob'al Maya. (Trends in language acquisition research 14.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tilar.14.Google Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa. 2001. Quantification and the nature of crosslinguistic variation. Natural Language Semantics 9. 145-89. DOI: 10.1023/A:1012492911285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa. 2004. On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics 70. 369415. DOI: 10.1086/429207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa. 2008. Pronouns, presuppositions, and semantic variation. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 18. 527-50. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v18i0.2505.Google Scholar
McConvell, Patrick, and Meakins, Felicity. 2005. Gurindji Kriol: A mixed language emerges from code-switching. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25. 930. DOI: 10.1080/07268600500110456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGill, Stuart, and Blench, Roger. 2012. Documentation, development, and ideology in the northwestern Kainji languages. Language Documentation and Description 11. 90135. Online: http://www.elpublishing.org/PID/130.Google Scholar
McPherson, Laura. 2016. The talking xylophone of the Sambla: Seenku phonology in a speech surrogate system. Paper presented at Harvard University, April 29, 2016.Google Scholar
Moran, Steven, McCloy, Daniel; and Wright, Richard. 2012. Revisiting population size vs. phoneme inventory size. Language 88. 877-93. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2012.0087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, Steven, McCloy, Daniel; and Wright, Richard (eds.) 2014. PHOIBLE online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Online: http://phoible.org/.Google Scholar
Morgan, Juliet. 2017. The learner varieties of the Chikasha Academy: Chickasaw adult language acquisition, change, and revitalization. Norman: University of Oklahoma dissertation. Online: https://shareok.org/handle/11244/50825.Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike. 2006. Sketch grammar. In Gippert et al., 301-9.Google Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2002. Colonisation, globalisation, and the future of languages in the twenty-first century. International Journal on Multicultural Societies 4. 162-93. Online: www.unesco.org/shs/ijms/vol4/issue2/art2.Google Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2017. Language vitality: The weak theoretical underpinnings of what can be an exciting research area. Language 93.e202e223. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Sarah. 2017. The semantics of evidentials. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, Christfried. 2016. The phoneme inventory of Taa (West !Xoon Dialect). Lone Tree—Scholarship in the service of the Koon: Essays in memory of Anthony T. Traill, ed. by Voßen, Rainer and Haacke, Wilfrid H. G., 311-51. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Nettle, Daniel. 1999. Linguistic diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nettle, Daniel. 2012. Social scale and structural complexity in human languages. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367. 1829-36. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nettle, Daniel, and Romaine, Suzanne. 2000. Vanishing voices: The extinction of the world's languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norcliffe, Elisabeth, Konopka, Agnieszka E., Brown, Penelope; and Levinson, Stephen C.. 2015. Word order affects the time course of sentence formulation in Tzeltal. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30. 11871208. DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1006238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyst, Victoria Anna. 2007. A descriptive analysis of Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana). Utrecht: LOT. Online: https://www.lotpublications.nl/Documents/151_fulltext.pdf.Google Scholar
O'Meara, Carolyn, and Majid, Asifa. 2016. How changing lifestyles impact Seri smell-scapes and smell language. Anthropological Linguistics 58. 107-31. DOI: 10.1353/anl.2016.0024.Google Scholar
O'Shannessy, Carmel. 2013. The role of multiple sources in the formation of an innovative auxiliary category in Light Warlpiri, a new Australian mixed language. Language 89. 328-53. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2013.0025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paperno, Denis, and Keenan, Edward L. (eds.) 2017. Handbook of quantifiers in natural language, vol. 2. Springer: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimm, S. L., Jenkins, C. N., Abell, R., Brooks, T. M., Gittleman, J. L., Joppa, L. N., Raven, P. H., Roberts, C. M.; and Sexton, J. O.. 2014. The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344. 1246752. DOI: 10.1126/science.1246752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, Steven. 1997. How the mind works. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria, and Potsdam, Eric. 2001. Long-distance agreement and topic in Tsez. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19. 583646. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010757806504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pye, Clifton. 2017. The comparative method of language acquisition research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, Richard A., Grenoble, Lenore A., Berge, Anna; and Radetzky, Paula. 2006. Adequacy of documentation: A preliminary report to the CELP [Committee on Endangered Languages and their Preservation, Linguistic Society of America]. Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America, ms.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2006. The role of linguistic theory in writing grammars. Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, ed. by Ameka, Felix K., Dench, Alan Charles, and Evans, Nicholas, 235-68. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H., and Uhlenbeck, Eugenius M.. 1991. Endangered languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sammons, Olivia, and Leonard, Wesley. 2015. Breathing new life into Algonquian languages: Lessons from the Breath of Life Archival Institute for Indigenous Languages. Papers of the Forty-Third Algonquian Conference: Actes du Congrès des Algonquinistes, 207-24. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
San Roque, Lila. 2015. Using you to get to me: Addressee perspective and speaker stance in Duna evidential marking. STUF—Language Typology and Universals 68. 187210. DOI: 10.1515/stuf-2015-0010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Aronoff, Mark, Meir, Irit; and Padden, Carol. 2011. The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29. 503-43. DOI: 10.1007/s11049-011-9128-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauppe, Sebastian. 2017. Symmetrical and asymmetrical voice systems and processing load: Pupillometric evidence from sentence production in Tagalog and German. Language 93. 288313. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifart, Frank, Meyer, Julien, Grawunder, Sven; and Dentel, Laure. 2018. Reducing language to rhythm: Amazonian Bora drummed language exploits speech rhythm for long-distance communication. Royal Society Open Science 5. 170354. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.170354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seifart, Frank, Strunk, Jan, Danielsen, Swintha, Hartmann, Iren, Pakendorf, Brigitte, Wichmann, Søren, Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, de Jong, Nivja H.; and Bickel, Balthasar. 2018. Nouns slow down speech across structurally and culturally diverse languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 115. 5720-25. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1800708115.Google ScholarPubMed
Sicoli, Mark A. 2016. Repair organization in Chinantec whistled speech. Language 92. 411-32. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2016.0028.Google Scholar
Simons, Gary F., and Fennig, Charles D.. 2017. Ethnologue: Languages of the world. 20th edn. Dallas: SIL International. Online: https://www.ethnologue.com/20/.Google Scholar
Simons, Gary F., and Lewis, M. Paul. 2013. The world's languages in crisis: A 20-year update. Responses to language endangerment in honor of Mickey Noonan: New directions in language documentation and language revitalization, ed. by Mihas, Elena, Perley, Bernard, Rei-Doval, Gabriel, and Wheatley, Kathleen, 320. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, Ruth, and Harris, Salome. 2016. What practices and ideologies support small-scale multilingualism? A case study of Warruwi community, Northern Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2016. 163208. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl-2016-0029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 2012. Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. 2nd edn. New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. 1974. Rethinking symbolism, trans. by Morton, Alice L.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stanford, James N. 2009. Clan as a sociolinguistic variable: Three approaches to Sui clans. Variation in indigenous minority languages (IMPACT: Studies in language and society 25), ed. by Stanford, James N. and Preston, Dennis R., 463-84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/impact.25.23sta.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoll, Sabine, Bickel, Balthasar; and Mažara, Jekaterina. 2017. The acquisition of polysynthetic verb forms in Chintang. The Oxford handbook of polysynthesis, ed. by Fortescue, Michael, Mithun, Marianne, and Evans, Nicholas, 495515. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199683208.013.28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Doris. 1962. Urgent tasks of research concerning the cultures and languages of Central American Indian tribes. Bulletin of the International Committee on Urgent Anthropological Ethnological Research 5. 6569.Google Scholar
Sutherland, William J. 2003. Parallel extinction risk and global distribution of languages and species. Nature 423. 276-79. DOI: 10.1038/nature01607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thieberger, Nicholas. 2006. A grammar of South Efate: An Oceanic language of Vanuatu. (Oceanic Linguistics special publication 33.) Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. DOI: 11343/31242.Google Scholar
Thieberger, Nicholas. 2012. Using language documentation data in a broader context. Potentials of language documentation: Methods, analyses, and utilization (Language Documentation & Conservation special publication 3), ed. Frank Seifart, Geoffrey Haig, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, Dagmar Jung, Anna Margetts, and Paul Trilsbeek, 129-34. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. DOI: 10125/4527.Google Scholar
Thongkum, Therapan L. 1988. Phonation types in Mon-Khmer languages. Vocal physiology: Voice production, mechanisms and functions, ed. by Fujimura, Osamu, 319-33. New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar
UNESCO. 2010. Atlas of the world's languages in danger. 3rd edn. Ed. by Christopher Moseley. Paris: UNESCO Publications Office.Google Scholar
Volk, Erez. 2011. Mijikenda tonology. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University dissertation.Google Scholar
Watahomigie, Lucille J., and Yamamoto, Akira Y.. 1992. Endangered languages. Language 68. 1017. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1992.0052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichmann, Søren. 2008. Om opdagelsen af et gränseoverskridende nyt sprog. De mange veje til Mesoamerika: Hyldestskrift til Una Canger, ed. by Nielsen, Jesper and Hansen, Mettelise Fritz, 6380. Copenhagen: Afdelingen for Indianske Sprog og Kulturer, Institut for Tvärkulturelle og Regionale Studier, Københavns Universitet.Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren, Holman, Eric W.; and Brown, Cecil H. (eds.) 2018. The ASJP database (version 18). Online: http://asjp.clld.org/.Google Scholar
Wilson, Shawn. 2008. Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Black Point, NS: Fernwood. Online: https://epubs.scu.edu.au/gnibi_pubs/17.Google Scholar
Wnuk, Ewelina, and Majid, Asifa. 2014. Revisiting the limits of language: The odor lexicon of Maniq. Cognition 131. 125-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yamada, Racquel-Maria. 2007. Collaborative linguistic fieldwork: Practical application of the empowerment model. Language Documentation & Conservation 1. 257-82. DOI: 10125/1717.Google Scholar
Yuehchen, Chien, and Shinji, Sanada. 2010. Yilan Creole in Taiwan. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 25. 350-57. DOI: 10.1075/jpcl.25.2.11yue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeshan, Ulrike, and Panda, Sibaji. 2011. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language. Reciprocals and semantic typology, ed. by Evans, Nicholas, Gaby, Alice, Levinson, Stephen C., and Majid, Asifa, 91113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tsl.98.05zes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar