References

References

Askonen, E.
(2001) Objektin aspektuaalinen sijanvalinta [Aspectual choice of the object case]. Oulun yliopisto: Publications of the Department of Finnish, Saami and Logopedics, 19.Google Scholar
Austerlitz, R.
(1968) L’ouralien. In André Martinet (éd.), Le langage (Encyclopédie de la Pléïade 25, pp. 1331–1387). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Benveniste, E.
(1966) Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Camus, A.
(2005) [1942]L’Étranger. Paris: Gallimard, Folioplus classiques.Google Scholar
(2015 [1947]) Sivullinen. (L’Étranger, 1942) Suomentanut Kalle Salo. Helsinki: Otava.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
(2005) La typologie des langues ouraliennes, comparées avec les autres grandes familles d’Eurasie septentrionale. In M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest (Dir.), Les langues ouraliennes aujourd’hui. Approches linguistiques et cognitives – The Uralic languages today. A linguistic and cognitive approach (Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes 340, pp. 75–86). Paris: Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. & Velupillai, V.
(2013) The Perfect. In M. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://​wals​.info)
De Sivers, F.
(1968) L’adverbialisation des conjonctions dans quelques parlers populaires. Word, 24 (1-2-3), 463–468. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Swart, H. E.
(2016) Perfect usage across languages. Questions and Answers in Linguistics, 3 (2), 57–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Swart, H. & Molendijk, A.
(2002) Le passé composé narratif : une analyse discursive de L’Étranger de Camus. In B. Laca (Ed.), Temps et Aspect – De la morphologie à l’interprétation (pp. 193–211). Saint-Denis: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Vest, M.M.J.
(1994) Les Particules Énonciatives dans la construction du discours (Linguistique nouvelle). Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
(2008) Subordination et degrés de phrasticité dans quelques langues ouraliennes nord-occidentales : exemples samiques et fenniques. La Linguistique, 44, 2, 99–116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Les langues ouraliennes. In A. Peyraube, E. Bonvini & D. Kouloughli (Éds.), Encyclopédie des Sciences du langage: III. Dictionnaire des langues (pages ?). Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
(2012a) SAMI. An introduction to the language and culture, with a Sami-English-Sami lexicon. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.Google Scholar
(2012b) Information structuring aspects of object case alternation: Finnish translated from Sami. In H. H. Bartens, C. Hasselblatt, & E. Winkler (Eds.), Festschrift to Lars-Gunnar Larsson on his 65th birthday. Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica, (pp. 55–62).Google Scholar
(2014) Finnish Partitive and resultativity in translation(s): a discourse-cognitive approach. In S. Luraghi & T. Huumo (Eds.), Partitive cases and related categories (EALT 54, pp. 258–287). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
(2015) Detachments for Cohesion – Toward an Information Grammar of Oral Languages (EALT 56). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
(2016) Detachment Linguistics and Information Grammar of Oral Languages. In M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest & Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. (Eds.), Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective (TILSM 283, pp. 25–32). Berlin/Munich/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
(2017) Ecology of Northern Sami: its typological evolution from oral to written language. In U. Tuomarla, I. Piechnik & B. Bíró (Eds.), Festschrift Finland Suomi 100: language, culture and history (pp. 27–44). Kraków / Helsinki: Jagiellonian Library & University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
(2018) Information Structuring and typology: Finnic and Samic word order revisited through the prism of orality. In: A. Marcantonio (Ed.), The state of the art of Uralic studies: tradition vs. innovation (Studi umanistici – Philologica, p. 33–48). Roma: Sapienza Università Editrice.Google Scholar
(2019) Parlons finnois – les Finlandais, langues et cultures, avec un lexique bilingue français-finnois-français (coll. Parlons). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, A.
(1976) Reports on text linguistics: suomen kielen generatiivista lauseoppia 2 [Generative syntax of the Finnish language. Syntax and pragmatics of the enclitic particle -han/-hän ] (MÅASF 7, pp. 1–61). Åbo: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Herlin, I., & Visapää, L.
(2005) Elävä kielioppi. Suomen infinittirakenteiden dynamiikkaa. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
ISK = Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T. R., & Alho, I.
(2004) Iso suomen kielioppi [A Comprehensive Grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
Karlsson, F.
(2007) [1999]Finnish: An Essential Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kok, M.
(2015) [2014]Borrowing metalanguage: Finnish Past Tense terminology in grammar descriptions and teaching. In H. Paulasto, L. Meriläinen, H. Riionheimo, & M. Kok (Eds.), Language Contacts at the Crossroads of Disciplines (pp. 347–396). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. & Wälchli, B.
(2001) The Circum-Baltic languages: an areal-typological approach. In Ö. Dahl, & M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Eds.), The Circum-Baltic languages. Typology and contact. Volume 2: Grammar and typology (pp. 615–750). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leinonen, M.
(2005) La syntaxe komi-zyriène au contact du russe. In M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest (Dir.), Les langues ouraliennes aujourd’hui. Approches linguistiques et cognitives – The Uralic languages today. A linguistic and cognitive approach (Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes 340, pp. 479–494). Paris: Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Lindstedt, J.
(2000) The perfect – aspectual, temporal and evidential. In Ö. Dahl (Ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe (pp. 365–383). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Luraghi, S., & Huumo, T.
Eds. Partitive cases and related categories EALT 54 Berlin & New York De Gruyter Mouton Crossref
Markkanen, R.
(1979) Tense and aspect in English and Finnish. A contrastive study (Studia Philologica Jyväskyläensia 13). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
Martinet, A.
(2000 [1990]) La syntaxe de l’oral. Les introuvables d’André Martinet; La linguistique, 36 (1–2), 449–455.Google Scholar
Metslang, H.
(2000) Analytism and synthetism in the development of tense and aspect systems of literary Estonian. In M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest (Dir.), Grammaticalisation aréale et sémantique cognitive: les langues fenniques et sames. Actes du Colloque International du C.N.R.S. tenu les 9 et 10 avril 1999 en Sorbonne / Areal grammaticalization and cognitive semantics: the Finnic and Sami languages (Oural-Ural 1, pp. 119–133). Tallinn: Fondation de la Langue Estonienne.Google Scholar
(2009) Estonian grammar between Finnic and SAE : some comparisons. In H. Metslang (Ed.), Estonian in typological perspective; Language Typology and Universals – Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung (STUF), Vol. 62, 1/2, 49–71.Google Scholar
Metslang, H., & Tommola, H.
(1995) Zum tempusystem des Etnischen. In Rolf Thieroff (Ed.), Tense systems in European languages. II. (Linguistische Arbeiten 338, pp. 299–326). Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J., & M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest
(2006) Spoken and written language. In G. Bernini, & M. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Pragmatic organization of discourse (Eurotyp 20–8, Empirical approaches to language typology, pp. 9–64). Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Miller, J., & Weinert, R.
(2009 [1998]) Spontaneous spoken language (Oxford Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, V. P.
(1995) Some typological parameters of converbs. In M. Haspelmath, & E. König (Eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspectives (97–136). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sartre, J. P.
(1947) Explication de L’Étranger . In Situations, I (pp. 92–112). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Tamm, A.
(2006) Estonian transitive verb and object case. In M. Butt, & T. H. King (Eds.), Proceedings of the LFG06 Conference Universitä Konstanz. Stanford, CA: CSL http://​csli​-publications​-stanford​.edu​/LFG​/11​/lfg06​.pdf
(2014) The partitive concept versus linguistic partitives: from abstract concepts to evidentiality in the Uralic languages. In S. Luraghi, & T. Huumo (Eds.), Partitive cases and related categories (EALT 54, pp. 89–152). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1957) Verbs and times, The Philosophical review, 6, 143–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, L.
(2006) A grammar book of Finnish. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.Google Scholar
Wilmet, M.
(1997) Grammaire critique du français, Bruxelles: De Boeck Supérieur.Google Scholar