Constructed Languages

Literature Cited

1. Alexander T. 2014. Comprehensive illustrated Pakuni dictionary. Fiat Lingua FL-00001D-00 https://fiatlingua.org/2014/02/
   [Google Scholar]
2. Anderson SR, de Saussure L, eds. 2018. Classics in Linguistics, Vol. 6: René de Saussure and the Theory of Word Formation Berlin: Lang. Sci.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Aronoff M, Xu Z. 2010. A Realization Optimality-Theoretic approach to affix order. Morphology 20:2381–411
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bergen BK. 2001. Nativization processes in L1 Esperanto. J. Child Lang. 28:3575–95
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bjork RA, Bjork EL. 2020. Desirable difficulties in theory and practice. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 9:4475–79 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.09.003
   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
6. Blanke D. 2009. Causes of the relative success of Esperanto. Lang. Probl. Lang. Plan. 33:3251–66
   [Google Scholar]
7. Blanke D. 2015. How not to reinvent the wheel: the essential scholarly literature in interlinguistics and Esperantology. Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst. 13:2200–15
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bybee JL. 1985. Typological Studies in Language, Vol. 9: Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form Amsterdam: John Benjamins
   [Google Scholar]
9. Cheng LSP, Burgess D, Vernooij N, Solís-Barroso C, McDermott A, Namboodiripad S. 2021. The problematic concept of native speaker in psycholinguistics: replacing vague and harmful terminology with inclusive and accurate measures. Front. Psychol. 12:715843
   [Google Scholar]
10. Chomsky N. 2010. Lingvo kaj menso Rotterdam, Neth: Univers. Esperanto Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Collitz H. 1925. World languages. Language 2:11–13
    [Google Scholar]
12. Comrie B. 1996. Natural and artificial international languages: a typologist's assessment. J. Univers. Lang. 1:135–55
    [Google Scholar]
13. Corsetti R. 1996. A mother tongue spoken mainly by fathers. Lang. Probl. Lang. Plan. 20:3263–73
    [Google Scholar]
14. Corsetti R, Pinto MA, Tolomeo M. 2004. Regularizing the regular: the phenomenon of overregularization in Esperanto-speaking children. Lang. Probl. Lang. Plan 28:3261–82
    [Google Scholar]
15. Couturat L, Leau L. 1903. Histoire de la langue universelle Paris: Hachette
    [Google Scholar]
16. Culbertson J, Schuler K. 2019. Artificial language learning in children. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 5:353–73
    [Google Scholar]
17. Dankova N. 1997. Temporalité en Esperanto: etude du transfert. PhD Diss., Univ. Paris 8, Paris
    [Google Scholar]
18. Dankova N. 2009. Temporality in spoken Esperanto. Esperantologio/Esperanto Stud 4:43–60
    [Google Scholar]
19. Dankova N. 2015. Future participles in Esperanto. Esperantologio/Esperanto Stud 7:63–74
    [Google Scholar]
20. Dasgupta P. 1989. Degree words in Esperanto and categories in Universal Grammar. Interlinguistics: Aspects of the Science of Planned Languages K Schubert 231–48 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
    [Google Scholar]
21. Dasgupta P. 1993. Idiomaticity and Esperanto texts: an empirical study. Linguistics 31:2367–86
    [Google Scholar]
22. Dasgupta P. 2018. Du problemoj en la sintakso de Esperanto. See Kiselman 2018 65–77
23. Drezen E. 1931. Historio de la Mondolingvo: Tri Jarcentoj da Serĉado Leipzig, Ger: Ekrelo
    [Google Scholar]
24. Dulichenko A. 1990. Mezhdunarodnye vspomogatel'nye iazyki [International Auxiliary Languages] Tallinn, Estonia: Valgus
    [Google Scholar]
25. Eberhard DM, Simons GF, Fennig CD, eds. 2022. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Dallas, TX: SIL Int. , 25th ed.. http://www.ethnologue.com
    [Google Scholar]
26. Esper EA. 1925. A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial language material. Lang. Monogr. 1:1–47
    [Google Scholar]
27. Ettlinger M, Morgan-Short K, Faretta-Stutenberg M, Wong PC. 2016. The relationship between artificial and second language learning. Cogn. Sci. 40:4822–47
    [Google Scholar]
28. Falk JS. 1995. Words without grammar: linguists and the international auxiliary language movement in the United States. Lang. Commun. 15:3241–59
    [Google Scholar]
29. Falk JS. 2002. Women, Language and Linguistics: Three American Stories from the First Half of the Twentieth Century London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
30. Fedzechkina M, Jaeger TF, Newport EL. 2012. Language learners restructure their input to facilitate efficient communication. PNAS 109:4417897–902
    [Google Scholar]
31. Fedzechkina M, Newport EL, Jaeger TF. 2017. Balancing effort and information transmission during language acquisition: evidence from word order and case marking. Cogn. Sci. 41:2416–46
    [Google Scholar]
32. Garvía R. 2015. Esperanto and Its Rivals: The Struggle for an International Language Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
    [Google Scholar]
33. Gledhill C. 2000. Languages of the World/Materials, Vol. 190: The Grammar of Esperanto: A Corpus-Based Description Munich: Lincom Eur.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Gobbo F. 2011. The case of correlatives: a comparison between natural and planned languages. J. Univ. Lang. 12:245–79
    [Google Scholar]
35. Gobbo F. 2017. Are planned languages less complex than natural languages?. Lang. Sci. 60:36–52
    [Google Scholar]
36. Goodall G. 1988. Kelkaj rimarkoj pri la subjekto en Esperanto. Waiguoyu/J. Foreign Lang. Shanghai Int. Stud. Univ. 1988:391–93, 104
    [Google Scholar]
37. Goodall G 2001. Pri la transitiveco de verboj en Esperanto. Language Planning and Lexicology: Proceedings of an International Symposium C Kiselman, G Mattos 115–31 Brasília/Chapecó, Brazil: Fonto
    [Google Scholar]
38. Goodall G 2021. The design(ing) of language. Language Invention in Linguistics Pedagogy J Punske, N Sanders, AV Fountain 69–85 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
39. Greenberg JH 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of Language JH Greenberg 73–113 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
40. Hopp H. 2013. Introduction: the development of L2 morphology. Second Lang. Res. 29:13–6
    [Google Scholar]
41. Hudson Kam CL, Newport E 2005. Regularizing unpredictable variation: the roles of adult and child learner in language formation and change. Lang. Learn. Dev. 1:151–95
    [Google Scholar]
42. Jansen W. 2007. Woordvolgorde in het Esperanto: Normen, tallgebruik en universalia PhD Thesis, LOT, Utrecht, Neth.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Jansen W. 2012. The learnability of the reflexive in Esperanto. Linguist. Amsterdam 5:157–80
    [Google Scholar]
44. Jespersen O. 1928. An International Language London: Allen & Unwin
    [Google Scholar]
45. Jespersen O. 1931. A new science: interlinguistics. Psyche 11:57–67
    [Google Scholar]
46. Kiselman CO 2018. Aliroj al Esperanto Dobřichovice Czech Repub: KAVA-PECH
    [Google Scholar]
47. Koutny I. 2018. Tipologia karakterizo de esperanto kiel natura lingvo. See Kiselman 2018 129–46
48. Kováts K. 2020. Manlibro pri Instruado de Esperanto Partizánske, Slovak: E@I
    [Google Scholar]
49. Large A. 1985. The Artificial Language Movement Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
50. Levin B, Hovav MR. 1995. Unaccusativity Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
51. Lindstedt J. 2006. Native Esperanto as a test case for natural language. SKY J. Linguist. 19:47–55
    [Google Scholar]
52. Lindstedt J. 2009. Esperanto—an East European contact language?. Ein Beitrag der kultur- und sprachrelativistischen Linguistik, Vol. 2: Die Europäizität der Slawia oder dies Slawizität Europas C Voß, A Nagórko 125–34 Munich/Berlin: Otto Sagner
    [Google Scholar]
53. Liu H. 2018. Kvantaj aliroj. See Kiselman 2018 147–67
54. Maat J. 2004. Philosophical Languages in the Seventeenth Century: Dalgarno, Wilkins, Leibniz Dordrecht, Neth: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
55. Monaghan P, Ruiz S, Rebuschat P. 2021. The role of feedback and instruction on the cross-situational learning of vocabulary and morphosyntax: mixed effects models reveal local and global effects on acquisition. Second Lang. Res. 37:2261–89
    [Google Scholar]
56. Nagata H, Corsetti R. 2005. Influoj de gepatra lingvo sur la lernadon de esperanto: psikolingvistika esploro. Esperantologio/Esperanto Stud 3:5–39
    [Google Scholar]
57. Nagata H, Corsetti R. 2018. Rezigno pri libereco ne ĉie kaj ne ĉiam: la vortordo en Esperanto. See Kiselman 2018 181–99
58. Nate R 1996. The interjection as a grammatical category in John Wilkins' philosophical language. Historiogr. Linguist 23:1–289–109
    [Google Scholar]
59. Okrent A. 2009.. In the Land of Invented Languages New York: Spiegel & Grau
    [Google Scholar]
60. Parkvall M. 2010. How European is Esperanto? A typological study. Lang. Probl. Lang. Plan 34:163–79
    [Google Scholar]
61. Pereltsvaig A. 2017. Esperanto linguistics: state of the art. Lang. Probl. Lang. Plan 41:2168–91
    [Google Scholar]
62. Pesetsky D. 2017. Complementizer-trace effects. Blackwell Companion to Syntax Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. , 2nd ed.. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom108
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
63. Peterson DJ. 2015. The Art of Language Invention: From Horse-Lords to Dark Elves to Sand Worms, the Words Behind World-Building New York: Penguin
    [Google Scholar]
64. Polinsky M. 2018. Heritage Languages and Their Speakers Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
65. Punske J, Sanders N, Fountain AV, eds. 2020. Language Invention in Linguistics Pedagogy Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
66. Reber AS. 1967. Implicit learning of artificial grammars. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 6:855–63
    [Google Scholar]
67. Saffran JR, Aslin RN, Newport EL. 1996. Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science 274:52941926–28
    [Google Scholar]
68. Sapir E. 1925. Memorandum on the problem of an international auxiliary language. Romanic Rev 16:244–56
    [Google Scholar]
69. Schreyer C. 2021. Constructed languages. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 50:327–44
    [Google Scholar]
70. Schubert K 1989. Interlinguistics: Aspects of the Science of Planned Languages Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter
    [Google Scholar]
71. Schuler K, Yang C, Newport E. 2016. Testing the Tolerance Principle: Children form productive rules when it is more computationally efficient to do so. Proceedings from the 38th Cognitive Society Annual Meeting2321–26 Mahwah, NJ: Cogn. Sci. Soc.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Sherwood BA. 1982. Statistical analysis of conversational Esperanto, with discussion of the accusative. Stud. Linguist. Sci. 12:1165–82
    [Google Scholar]
73. Subbiondo JL 1992. John Wilkins and 17th-Century British Linguistics Amsterdam: John Benjamins
    [Google Scholar]
74. Tolkien JRR. 1954–1955. The Lord of the Rings. 3 vols London: George Allen & Unwin
    [Google Scholar]
75. Tolkien JRR 1983. A secret vice. The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays C Tolkien 198–223 London: George Allen & Unwin
    [Google Scholar]
76. van Oostendorp M. 1999. Syllable structure in Esperanto as an instantiation of universal phonology. Esperantologio/Esperanto Stud 1:52–80
    [Google Scholar]
77. van Oostendorp M. 2001. Constructed language and linguistic theory: on the notions possible, impossible, and actual language. Interface: Tijdschrift Toegep. Linguïst 15:2203–22
    [Google Scholar]
78. van Oostendorp M. 2018. The Esperantist background of René de Saussure's work. See Anderson & de Saussure 2018 201–8
79. Versteegh K. 1993. Esperanto as a first language: language acquisition with a restricted input. Linguistics 31:3539–55
    [Google Scholar]
80. Vilborg E. 1989–2001. Etimologia vortaro de Esperanto, 1989–2001. 5 vols Malmö, Swed: Eldona Soc. Esperanto
    [Google Scholar]
81. Wandel A. 2015. How many people speak Esperanto? Or: Esperanto on the Web. Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst 13:2318–21
    [Google Scholar]
82. Weiner ESC, Marshall J 2011. Tolkien's invented languages. From Elvish to Klingon: Exploring Invented Languages M Adams 75–109 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
83. Wells JC. 1978. Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto Rotterdam, Neth: Univers. Esperanto Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
84. Wennergren B. 2020. Plena Manlibro pri Esperanta Gramatiko Partizánske, Slovak: E@I
    [Google Scholar]
85. Wiese H, Alexiadou A, Allen S, Bunk O, Gagarina N et al. 2022. Heritage speakers as part of the native language continuum. Front. Psychol. 12:717973
    [Google Scholar]
86. Windsor JW, Stewart R 2017. Can unnatural stress patterns be learned: new evidence from Klingon. Proceedings of the 2017 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association AA Monti. https://cla-acl.artsci.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/actes-2017/Windsor_J.Stewart_R.2017CLAProceedingsPaper.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
87. Yang C. 2016. The Price of Linguistic Productivity: How Children Learn to Break the Rules of Language Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]