37.2209, Reviews: Lexical Reconstruction in Central Chadic: H. Ekkehard Wolff (2026)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-37-2209. Mon Jun 29 2026. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 37.2209, Reviews: Lexical Reconstruction in Central Chadic: H. Ekkehard Wolff (2026)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Valeriia Vyshnevetska
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Mara Baccaro, Daniel Swanson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Helen Aristar-Dry <hdry at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 29-Jun-2026
From: Philemon Victor Gomwalk [philgomwalk at gmail.com]
Subject: H. Ekkehard Wolff (2026)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/37-1132

Title: Lexical Reconstruction in Central Chadic
Subtitle: A Comparative Study of Vowels, Consonants and Prosodies
Publication Year: 2026

Publisher: Cambridge University Press
           http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics
Book URL:
https://www.cambridge.org/ch/universitypress/subjects/languages-linguistics/african-and-caribbean-language-and-linguistics/lexical-reconstruction-central-chadic-comparative-study-vowels-consonants-and-prosodies?format=PB&isbn=9781009346405#about-the-authors

Author(s): H. Ekkehard Wolff

Reviewer: Philemon Victor Gomwalk

Introduction
H. Ekkehard Wolff’s volume Lexical Reconstruction in Chadic, in my
critical valuation, represents a significant ‘new’ addition to the
relatively restricted list of ‘academic’ references currently
available on comparative Chadic linguistics.  This judgment is partly
elucidated in evaluative comments that I make on specific chapters and
sections of the volume at the end of this review report.  But before I
offer my comments, I need to indicate that I support and appreciate
the validity of the assertion (made by Wolff on the acknowledgement
page of the volume) that Chadic-related languages are genetically and
typologically diverse. And true to type, they also constitute an
intriguing sub-set within the broader Afroasiatic language phylum,
which has enjoyed very restricted academic attention and been largely
‘under-described’ and ‘under-analysed’, in diachronic linguistic
terms. This is particularly so in terms of their respective
phonological and morphophonological systems.
Wolff succeeds admirably in drawing upon his deep knowledge and
extensive fieldwork experience in Chadic-related linguistics to
identify and explore key aspects of the phonological and
morphophonemic diversity observable across Central Chadic languages in
particular and the broader Chadic sub-language phylum in general. In
this respect, he is able to reveal specific phonological and
morphophonemic prosody effects that arise from the underlying
operations of some of the diachronic segmental processes, which he
correctly identifies and discusses in his volume.
Summary
Chapter 1: Introduction (pp.1-50)
Section 1.1 of this chapter offers some preliminary explanations for
why comparative Chadic linguistics, and in particular Central Chadic
(CC) linguistics, is still in a poor state of knowledge. Section 1.2
outlines the aims as well as the methodological fundamentals of the
discussion and analyses that dominate subsequent chapters in the
volume. Section 1.3 presents the frames of diachronic reference and
limitations associated with the discussion and analyses of diachronic
CC morphophonemics provided in Chapters 2-5 of the volume. Section 1.4
documents key methodological observations concerning the necessary
combination of historical-comparative and dialectological approaches.
Section 1.5 offers a limited discussion of, and plausible
interpretations about, competing lexical isoglosses, as applied to a
sample database of 228 lexical items, within Central Chadic. Section
1.6 offers an introductory framework for different levels of
morphophonemic analysis of the sample database used for anchoring the
detailed discussions carried out in Chapters 2-5 in the volume. The
framework essentially involves the use of different formats of data
representation and diachronic morphophonemic citation formulae.
Chapter 2: A Survey of PCC Historical Phonology and Morphophonology
(pp. 51- 90)
The chapter offers a general survey of aspects of Proto-Central Chadic
(PCC) historical phonology and morphophonology that have been
reconstructed with confidence. Section 2.1 of this chapter outlines
research-attested inventories of consonants, approximants, and vowels
in sampled Central Chadic (CC) languages. Section 2.2 introduces a
relevant typological feature of CC languages under research, namely an
early (primaeval) ‘root-and-pattern structure’, often cited (in
current diachronic CC literature) as being inherited from
Proto-Afroasiatic. Section 2.3 highlights the nature, relevance and
transcriptional representation of the ‘schwa’ (з) feature in sampled
CC languages. Next, Sections 2.4 and 2.5 explore the morphophonemic
frameworks of ‘so-called’ augmented roots, in which (mostly)
semantically bleached and petrified grammatical markers have fused
with original simple roots across sampled CC languages. Finally,
Section 2.6 offers a broad survey of the complex structure of the
‘vocalic domain’ in Central Chadic languages and the characteristic
role that prosodies play in the diachronic development from
reconstructed PCC lexical items to the synchronic forms in the modern
CC languages.
Chapter 3, Major Diachronic Processes in Central Chadic (pp. 91- 166)
This chapter highlights and discusses some major diachronic
(morphophonemic) processes that are evident and operate within a
sample of 228 lexical items, derived from 79 known modern CC
languages. For example, Section 3.1 of this chapter focuses on the
underlying nature of the deletion of phonological segments in CC
languages. Section 3.2 highlights and discusses ‘prosodification’ of
certain PCC segments. Section 3.3 explores the underlying nature of
consonant metathesis: in particular, the ‘desegmentalisation’ of some
CC consonants; the ‘re-segmentalisation’ (phoneme splits) of certain
coarticulated consonants; and the metathesis involving consonants and
approximants. Sections 3.4 and 3.5 highlight and discuss other
relevant types of diachronic changes, not mentioned in previous
sections, but which provide additional perspectives on the diachronic
fusion/diffusion of segments in Central Chadic languages.
Chapter 4, Selected Issues in Central Chadic Historical Linguistics
(pp. 167- 414)
This chapter, the longest in the volume, highlights and discusses
several key linguistic issues in the evolution of CC phonology and
morphophonology that make historical-comparative Chadic a challenging
and in parts potentially controversial field of both general
typological and historical Afroasiatic linguistics, not the least from
theoretical and methodological points of view.
Chapter 5, Hidden Reflexes of Proto-Afroasiatic Language Features (pp.
415 - 422)
This chapter summarises salient genetic and typological features that
attempt to link CC language structures and morphemes to both their
hypothetical and attested genetic (diachronic) linkages, traceable
from historical-comparative typologies of Proto-Afroasiatic. Many such
genetic and typological features/patterns have largely remained
undocumented in prior investigations of Chadic and Afroasiatic
comparative linguistics. These must be highlighted and documented in
this chapter by the volume author.
Chapter 6, Outlook (pp. 423 - 424)
In this chapter, the author of the volume highlights six future
research areas that he believes can complement the historical and
typological analyses he has presented in the volume. In identifying
these specific research areas, he is hoping to redirect the interest
of diachronic linguists towards the areas in particular, as well as
stimulate fresh intellectual investigations into Chadic and
Afroasiatic (comparative) linguistics in general.
Evaluation
My critical consideration of the six chapters in Wolff’s volume
convinces me that he has been able to identify and comprehensively
explain many key features of Proto-Central Chadic (PCC), mainly at the
phonological and morphophonological levels. In different chapters of
the volume, Wolff provides several significant theoretical,
descriptive, and methodological observations on key phonological and
morphophonological features of Proto-Central Chadic (PCC) and
contemporary Central Chadic (CC) that amply demonstrate the depth of
his understanding of relevant issues in current Chadic diachronic
linguistic research. I consider these observations very insightful in
a systematic consideration and understanding of the core subject
matter of the volume.
In Chapter 1, for example, Wolff identifies and explores five key
factors that make historical-comparative work on the almost eighty
Central Chadic languages difficult and at times still allow only
tentative hypotheses and generalisations (see Section 1.1, pp.1- 3).
These are listed as follows: first, CC languages are largely still
under-researched, in that we lack satisfactory numbers of reliable
language descriptions and fully-fledged dictionaries; second, these
languages stand out in their marked internal diversification, possibly
resulting from an enormous historical time-depth and long periods of
relative isolation in their habitats; third, they share typological
features that pose methodological challenges to the application of the
classic comparative method when applied in a multilateral
macro-perspective; fourth, low-level dialectological studies of
closely related languages are practically absent, with very limited
reliable information about diachronic changes within Central Chadic
language groups in a micro-perspective and, fifth, prior attempts at
phonological and lexical reconstruction of PCC, occasionally within a
wider context of Afroasiatic, apart from being rare, were highly
tentative if not speculative, and partially abortive.
Wolff also offers three extrinsic as well as four intrinsic reasons
for the limited state of research in Central Chadic from his
experience (see Section 1.1, pp.2-3).  The extrinsic reasons are,
namely, (i) the small number of linguists worldwide who direct their
research to, and develop professional expertise on, Chadic languages
apart from well-studied Hausa; (ii) except for Hausa, cover periods in
the past and/or in present times, have been affected by security risks
due to military operations provoked by terrorist activities. This has
made linguistic fieldwork temporarily inadvisable if not non-feasible
in certain areas in the vicinity of Lake Chad, where the languages of
the Central Chadic branch are spoken. Additionally, Wolff lists and
extensively explains the following four reasons for the restricted
scope of research in Central Chadic (see Section 1.1, pp. 3-5).
The first is that for the many decades since Chadic has been accepted
as belonging to the Afroasiatic phylum, even specialists have remained
under the impression that the linguistic history of  Chadic languages
somehow does not fit into the application of the comparative method of
the Neogrammarian tradition, particularly in the vocalic domain.
The second intrinsic reason relates to inadequate comparative
methodology, whose apparatus needs to be adapted to the typological
peculiarities of Chadic language structures and their histories in
individual languages and closely related language groups. This is
particularly true about the languages of the Central Chadic branch of
the family, which in its almost eighty named languages constitutes one
of the two major branches out of four branches altogether, namely West
Chadic, Central Chadic (formerly and sometimes still referred to as
‘Biu-Mandara’), Masa, and East Chadic.
The third intrinsic reason for the poor state of Chadic comparative
linguistics relates to the hesitation of many professional linguists
to accept the somewhat counter-intuitive insight that the common
proto-language had no classic ‘vowel system’ based on contrasts
between several phonemic vowels, but rather organised its vocalic
domain in terms of allophonic realisations of both approximants and a
highly restricted set of vowels.
The fourth intrinsic reason rests on the almost total neglect of the
relevance of diachronic root augmentation in most
historical-comparative work on Chadic. This refers to the failure to
recognise a fairly large set of semantically bleached frozen/petrified
grammatical markers that have fused with the original simple root to
create ‘augmented roots’ in the modern CC languages.
In Chapter 3, Wolff is able to describe and discuss in detail the
major diachronic processes that have changed the reconstructed common
proto-language PCC into the shapes of the modern Central Chadic
languages as contained and transcribed in the database. In five
succeeding sections of the chapter, he provides a survey and detailed
discussion and exemplification of the essential diachronic processes
in Central Chadic. In doing this, Wolff succeeds in providing a very
coherent picture of Central Chadic language evolution from the
proto-language to its modern language forms. For example, he
specifically highlights and exemplifies the deletion of segments (see
Section 3.1, pp. 91-93); the desegmentalisation and prosodification of
segments (see Section 3.2, pp.93-97); the metathesis of consonantal
segments (see Section 3.3, pp. 97-100); the sound changes affecting
consonants and vowels either by ‘linear’ intergenerational natural
sound change or by contact-induced ‘broken’ language transmission (see
Section 3.4, pp. 100-164); and finally, the petrification and fusion
of simple roots with root-augmental material to compensate for losses
of simple-root material (see Section 3.5, pp. 164-165).
It is also significant to note that in Chapter 4, Wolff is able to
paint a coherent and convincing picture of Proto-Central Chadic (PCC)
as a highly agglutinative and inflexional language. He succeeds in
showing that PCC inflexional characteristics are mirrored by the ‘root
types’ which allow different vowel patterns in terms of the
distribution of */a/ in medial positions of the simple root, which
could be plausibly linked to the marking of nominal plurality (similar
to the broader ‘Afroasiatic’ notion of ‘broken’ plurals).
Additionally, he is also able to reveal that PCC’s agglutinative
characteristics are mirrored by the mostly petrified/fused
root-augmental morphemes, through the use of fifteen grammatical
morphemes.
Specifically, in Section 4.1 (pp.168-334), he is able to reveal
‘regular’ and ‘sporadic’ sound changes, especially as these relate to
scenarios of intergenerational ‘linear’ and ‘broken’ transmission of
language. In Section 4.2 (pp. 334-336), he draws attention to the
emergence of synchronic multi-vowel systems from diachronically
underlying minimal vowel systems. In Sections 4.3–4.5 (pp. 336-347),
he is able to identify the shapes, functionality, and choice of
diachronic root types resulting from the historically underlying
root-and-pattern structure.
In Sections 4.6–4.11 (pp.348-396), he succeeds in highlighting and
comprehensively discussing the forms, functions, and prosodising
effects of reconstructed, root-augmental morphological markers. In
Section 4.12   (p. 396-399), he is able to address specific
identifiable cases of re-segmentalisation of coarticulated consonants.
In Section 4.13-4.15 (pp. 399-414), he is able to highlight and
discuss, in appreciable detail, the diachronic emergence of
glottalisation and prenasalisation prosodies, suggesting valuable
insights into the relative chronology of some sound changes. Finally,
in Section 4.16 (p.414), he reflects on the theoretical significance
of monophthongisation of final diphthongs in contemporary CC
languages. I have carefully observed that all 16 sub-sections of this
chapter provide significant new analytical information on key aspects
of the Central Chadic (CC) phonological and morphophonology, citing
specific features and making use of apt tabulated illustrations and
interpretations of individual phonological features and hypothetical
and research-attested morphophonemic patterns. All observations and
analyses offered are based on a sampled data set of 228 lexical items,
derived from 79 known modern CC languages.
In the seven sections found in Chapter 5, Wolff is able to list,
describe and expertly interpret the occurrence of a number of salient
typological features that accompany and thereby strengthen the
Greenbergian hypothesis of a genetic affiliation of all Chadic
languages to Afroasiatic. For example, in Section 5.1 (pp.417-418), he
offers some tangible evidence to show that Proto-Central Chadic shares
in the fundamental root-and-pattern morphology of Afroasiatic typology
and heritage. He points to four significant morphophonological
features that may hypothetically apply to PCC:
that PCC operated an early type of root-and-pattern structure, in
which the phonemic vowel */a/ could enter one or more medial
inter-consonantal positions, or none at all.
that PCC permits the existence of the default lexical final vowel */a/
that does not count in the formation of various root types that are
formed by vowel ‘patterns’ based on the distribution of */a/ within
the root.
that the vowel */a/ in PCC (which often stands in equivalence with
contemporary schwa /∂/ in Afro-Asiatic languages) is permitted to
enter into the formation of vocalisation ‘patterns’ of the consonantal
roots in some Afro-Asiatic languages, particularly Semitic.
that the occurrence of phonetic [i] and [u] were permitted in PCC, but
were conditioned allophones of the approximants */y/ and */w/ in
syllable-nucleus positions and, in terms of root structure, were
counted as belonging to the consonantal skeleton of the root (see
Section 5.1, p. 417 for an elaboration on these hypothetical
assertions by Wolff).
With specific reference to the morphophonology of contemporary Central
Chadic (CC) languages, Wolff offers the following significant opinion:
. . . that among root types, /a-/vocalised roots remain stable even
under single or multiple metathesis of consonantal segments; that is,
radical consonants may shift positions irrespective of any vowel that
may be considered associated with them in terms of syllable structure.
This is strong evidence that templatic root-and-pattern structure is
an essential typological feature of Central Chadic, which strongly
reflects its Afroasiatic heritage
( Section 51, p. 418).
In other sections of Chapter 5, notably from Section 5.2 to Section
5.7 (pp. 418-422), Wolff reviews and concisely discusses several
hidden morphophonological features of Afro-Asiatic (AA) vis-à-vis
Central Chadic (CC) languages. In Section 5.2, for example, he reveals
that past research experiences have led him to arrive at a number of
significant hypothetical conclusions, relating to both AA and CC:
that Central Chadic roots are predominantly bi- and mono-radical in
nature.
that massive deletion of segments possibly occurred in the pre-history
of Central Chadic. languages, leading to a significant reduction of
the reflexes of radical consonants which occur in surface
morphophonological representations in the present-day CC languages.
that PCC possibly had a majority of tri-radical roots, despite the
impression given by most modern CC languages, which suggest a
predominance of bi-radical roots (see Section 5.2, p.419 for
additional explanations on these conclusions).
In Section 5.5, Wolff also opines that, although prenasalised
obstruents are historically explained by the effects of N-prosody
and/or nasal+obstruent clusters, recent available data evidence,
however, suggests that this belief is still open to debate and needs
to be subjected to more rigorous field data verification. Wolff
further hypothesises that the common ‘drift’ towards the development
of phonological systems that would include prenasalised obstruents in
(Central) Chadic languages may have been supported by contact with and
interference from neighbouring non- Chadic languages, which already
possessed such systems. He, however, admits that this is a tentative
hypothesis which deserves further investigation (see Section 5.5, p.
421 for additional explanations on these assertions and hypotheses
conclusions).
Diachronic sources for the synchronic presence of nasal+obstruent
clusters and/or prenasalised obstruents under the effect of N-prosody
are any PCC nasals. The most frequent source is the common Afroasiatic
prefix *{ma-}, which apparently had a rather wide distribution in
combination with both verbs and nouns in PCC (see 5.6).
Concluding remarks
Given the extensive data and in-depth analyses and diachronic
interpretations provided on Central Chadic in respective chapters of
the volume, Wolff is able to promote and provide the basic groundwork
for comparable investigation into other branches of Chadic that have
remained largely under-researched by diachronic linguists to date. The
volume provides a comprehensive and diverse exploration of diachronic
phonological reconstruction features across diverse Central Chadic
languages. The presentation of both hypothetical and definitive
diachronic phonological features and patterns in sampled Central
Chadic language data serves to considerably deepen prevailing global
understanding of these fundamental features of language.
It also encourages a critical rethinking of the boundaries between
tentative postulations and definitive data-driven explanations about
critical diachronic phonological characteristics of Central Chadic
languages. The respective chapters in the volume thus offer valuable
insights into how languages are able to embody and project diachronic
changes through their linguistic structures, opening up new avenues
for understanding the intricate relationships between historical
factors, universal linguistic meaning categories, and contemporary
syntactic structures in different languages of the world. The type of
in-depth description and analyses provided in Wolff’s (2024) volume
has obvious relevance for a fuller understanding of the linguistic
evolution of the Afroasiatic language phylum as a whole, which, by its
documented history, plays an important role in the diachronic study of
natural human language.
The volume also provides, for the convenience of its potential
readers, two useful appendices containing reconstructed lexical items
and Proto-Central Chadic simple roots (including some ‘areal roots’
and borrowed ‘pseudo-PCC roots’). To compare the synchronic
transcriptions for individual languages with their reconstructed
prosodic–phonemic proto-forms, as well as for all details of
individual word reconstructions and diachronic changes affecting the
reconstructions, the reader is referred to the two parts of the online
component that accompanies the print edition of this book. The online
component is accessible under the title.
References
Sample List of Publications by H.E. Wolff (1983-2022)
Wolff, [H.] Ekkehard. 1983a. A Grammar of the Lamang Language (Gwàɗ
Làmàŋ) (Afrikanistische Forschungen, 10). Glückstadt: J. J. Augustin.
---1983b. Tonogenese in tschadischen Sprachen: Studies on
consonant-tone interference in Chadic languages I. Afrika und Übersee
66.1: 203–220.
---1984. Adverb and verbal noun formation in the Musgu language of
Mogroum
(Vulum/Mulwi): Studies on consonant-tone interference in Chadic
languages II.
Afrika und Übersee 67.1: 175–197.
---1985. The verbal aspect system in Zime-Mesme: Studies on
consonant-tone interference in Chadic languages III. Afrika und
Übersee 68.1: 1–22.
---1987. Consonant-tone interference in Chadic and its implications
for a theory of
tonogenesis in Afroasiatic. In Langues et Cultures dans le Bassin du
Lac Tchad,
ed. by D. Barreteau, 23–41. Paris:Editions de ORSTOM.
---1988. ‘Ablaut’ and accent in Chadic. In Progressive Traditions in
African and
Oriental Studies (Asia, Africa, Latin America Special Issue 21), ed.
by S. Brauner
and E. Wolff, 165–179. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
---2001. Verbal plurality in Chadic: Grammaticalization chains and
early Chadic history. In Berkeley Linguistics Society: Special Session
on Afroasiatic Languages (March 22–25, 2001), ed. by Andrew Simpson,
123–167. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society
---2006. Genealogical discontinuity and recontinuity in Hidkala oral
traditions. In
Africa in the Long Run. Festschrift in the Honour of Professor Arvi
Hurskainen
(Studia Orientalia, 103), ed. by L. Harjula and M. Ylänkö, 111–129.
Helsinki: The
Finnish Oriental Society.
---2009. Another look at ‘internal a’ in Chadic. In Topics in Chadic
Linguistics V:
Comparative and Descriptive Studies. Papers from the 4th Biennial
International
Colloquium on the Chadic Languages, ed. by Eva Rothmaler, 161–172.
Cologne:
Rüdiger Köppe.
---2011. Semitic-Chadic relations. In Semitic Languages. An
International
Handbook, ed. by Stefan Weninger, 27–38. Berlin: De Gruyter-Mouton.
---2013. On the diachronics of Chadic tone systems: From pitch to tone
in Lamang-
Hdi.In Topics in Chadic Linguistics VII (Chadic Linguistics –
Linguistique
tchadique –Tschadistik 8), ed. by Henry Tourneux, 203–228. Cologne:
Rüdiger Köppe.
---2015. The Lamang Language and Dictionary. Vol. 1: The Lamang
Language; Vol.
2:A Dictionary of Lamang. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
---2017. Vocalogenesis in (Central) Chadic languages. In African
Linguistics in the
21st Century: Essays in Honor of Paul Newman, ed. by Samuel G. Obeng
and
Christopher R. Green, 13–32. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
---2019. On morphological palatalisation in Chadic. In Schuhschrift:
Papers in Honor of Russell Schuh, ed. by Margit Bowler, Travis Major,
and Harold Torrence, 178–191.
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7c42d7th.
---2021. Contact-induced disturbances in personal pronoun systems in
the Chadic–
Benue–Congo convergence zone in central Nigeria. Afrika und Übersee
93: 158–192.
---2022. A Historical Phonology of Central Chadic. Prosodies and
Reconstructions.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
---in press a. Chadic linguistics in the 21st century: Attempting a
state-of-the-art account. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of
the North Atlantic Conferences on Afroasiatic Linguistics, Paris, June
24–26, 2019, ed. by Lameen Souag and MenaLafkioui. Villejuif: Les
Publications du LACITO.
---in press b. Typology and evolution of minimal vowel systems in
Central Chadic
(Afroasiatic). In Rarities in Phonetics and Phonology: Evolutionary,
Structural,
Typological and Social Dimensions, ed. by C. Anderson, N. Kuznetsova,
and Sh.
Easterday. Berlin: Language Science Press.
About the Reviewer
Philemon Gomwalk is a teacher and researcher, currently affiliated
with the University of Jos in Nigeria, with research interests in the
diachronic linguistic study and analysis of languages belonging to the
Chadic sub-phylum of Afro-Asiatic within the Nigerian sociolinguistic
environment



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List, a U.S. 501(c)(3) not for profit organization:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Australian Linguistics Society https://als.asn.au/Home

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Brill https://www.degruyterbrill.com/?changeLang=en

Edinburgh University Press http://www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

MDPI Languages https://www.mdpi.com/journal/languages

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Peter Lang AG http://www.peterlang.com

SIL International Publications http://www.sil.org/resources/publications

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-37-2209
----------------------------------------------------------