Is there any possessive perfect in North Russian?

REFERENCES

• Ambrazas, Vytautas. 1979. Lietuviu kalbos dalyviu istorine sintaksė. Vilnius: Mokslas.
   Google Scholar
• Ambrazas, Vytautas. et al. 1997. Lithuanian grammar. Vilnius: Baltos lankos.
   Google Scholar
• Bartnicka, Barbara. 1969. “Imiesłowy przymiotnikowe w gwarach polskich.” Prace filologiczne 19:127–33.
   Google Scholar
• Benveniste, Émile. 1948. Noms d'agent et noms d'action en indo-européen. Paris: Adrien-Maison- neuve.
   Google Scholar
• Benveniste, Émile.. 1952. “La construction passive du parfait transitif.” Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 48:52–62.
   Google Scholar
• Benveniste, Émile. 1960. “Être’ et ‘avoir’ dans leur fonctions linguistiques.” Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 55:113–34.
   Google Scholar
• Besters-Dilger, Juliane. 2000. “Das Ukrainische zwischen West- und Ostslavischem—sprachvergleichende und typologische Bemerkungen.” Sprache und Literatur der Ukraine zwischen Ost und West. Eds. Juliane Besters-Dilger, Michael Moser and Stefan Simonek. Bern, etc.: Peter Lang. pp. 221–33.
   Google Scholar
• BH = Belaruskaja hramatyka. Part 2: Sintaksis. 1986. Minsk: Navuka i texnika.
   Google Scholar
• Billing, Loren and Joan Maling. 1995. “Accusative-assigning participial -nol-to constructions in Ukrainian, Polish, and neighboring languages: an annotated bibliography.” Journal of Slavic linguistics 3 (1): 177–217; 3 (2):396–430.
   Google Scholar
• Borkovskij, V[iktor] I[vanovič], ed. 1978. Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka. [Vol. 1:] Sintaksis. Prstoje predloženie. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Braune, Wilhelm. 1959. Althochdeutsche Grammatik. 8.-9. Aufl. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
   Google Scholar
• Brugmann, Karl. 1895. “Die mit dem Suffix -to- gebildeten Partizipia im Verbalsystem des lateinischen und des Umbrisch-Oskischen: Eine syntaktische Untersuchung.” Indogermanische Forschungen 5:89–152.
   Google Scholar
• Brugmann, Karl.. 1906. Vergleichende Laut-, Stammbildungs- und Flexionslehre nebst Lehre vom Gebrauch der Wortformen der indogermanischen Sprachen. Bd. 2 (1). 2. Aufl. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.
   Google Scholar
• Brückner, A[lexander]. 1891. “Der litauisch-polnische Catechismus vom Jahre 1598.” Archiv für Slavische Philologie 13:557–90.
   Google Scholar
• Bulaxovskij. L[eonid] A[rsen'jevič], 1954. Russkij literaturnyj jazyk pervoj poloviny XIX veka. Moskva: Gos. Učebno-pedagogičeskoje izdatel'stvo Ministerstva prosveščenija RSFSR.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins and William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the World. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, Östen. 2000. “The tense-aspect systems of European languages in a typological perspective.” Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Ed. Östen Dahl. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 3–25.
   Google Scholar
• Danylenko, Andrii. 1997. Review of Linguistic Interrelations in Early Rus’: Northmen, Finns, and East Slavs (Ninth to Eleventh Centuries), by Bohdan Strumiński. Harvard Ukrainian Studies 21:197–200.
   Google Scholar
• Danylenko, Andrii.. 2000 (1997). “The genitive of agent and the instrumental of means in Old Ukrainian: An old idea worth revising?” General linguistics 37:41–70.
   Google Scholar
• Danylenko, Andrii. 2001. “Russian čto za, Ukrainian ščo za, Polish co za ‘was für ein’: A case of contact-induced or parallel change?” Diachronica 18 (2):241–65.
   Google Scholar
• Danylenko, Andrii. 2002. “The East Slavic ‘HAVE’: Revising a developmental scenario.” Proceedings of the thirteenth annual UCLA Indo-European conference. Los Angeles, November 9–10. 2001. Eds. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph Series. 44, Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man. pp. 105–27.
   Google Scholar
• Danylenko, Andrii. 2003. Predykaty, vidminky i diatezy v ukrajins'kij movi: istoryčnyj i typologyčnyj aspekty. Xarkiv: Oko.
   Google Scholar
• Décsy, Gyula. 1967. “Is there a Finnic substratum in Russian?” Orbis 16:150–60.
   Google Scholar
• Demiraj, Shaban. 1985. “About the origin of the possessive perfect in Albanian and in some other languages.” Sprachwissenschaftliche Forschungen. Festschrift für Johann Knobloch zum 65. Geburtstag am 5. Jänner 1984. Eds. Hermann M. Ölberg et al. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker Gesellschaft zur Pflege der Geisteswissenschaften. pp. 81–85.
   Google Scholar
• Drinka, Bridget. 1995. The sigmatic aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the space-time hypothesis. Journal of the Indo-European Studies Monograph, 13. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man.
   Google Scholar
• Drinka, Bridget.. 2003. “Areal factors in the development of the European periphrastic perfect.” WORD 54: 1–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faßke, Helmut and Siegfried Michalk. 1981. Grammatik der obersorbischen Schriftsprache der Gegenwart. Morphologie. Leipzig: VEB Domowina-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Flier, Michael. S. 2000. “Surzhyk: The rules of engagement.” Cultures and nations of Central and Eastern Europe: Essays in honor of Roman Szporluk. Eds. Zvi Gitelman et al. Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. pp. 113–36.
   Google Scholar
• Flobert, Pierre. 1975. Les verbes déponents latins des Origines à Charlemagne. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel. Ernst. 1928. Syntax der litauischen Kasus. Kaunas: Valstybés spaustuvé.
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel. Ernst 1929. Syntax der litauischen Postpositionen und Präpositionen. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel. Ernst 1947. Sprachliche, besonders syntaktische Untersuchung des kalvinistischen litauischen Katechismus des Malcher Pietkiewicz von 1598. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel. Ernst 1962. Litauisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bd. 1: A-Privekinóti. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, Viktor A. 1976. “Dialectal synchrony and diachronic syntax: The Macedonian perfect.” Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax. Eds. Sanford B. Steever, Carol A. Walker, and Salikoko S. Mufwene. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society. pp. 96–104.
   Google Scholar
• Gołąb, Zbigniew. 1975. “Endocentricity and endocentralization of verbal predicates: illustrated with Latin and Slavic material.” General linguistics 15(1): 1–35.
   Google Scholar
• Gonda, Jan. 1960. “Reflexions on the Indo-European medium.” Lingua 9:30–67, 175–93.
   Google Scholar
• Graves, Nina. 2000. “Macedonian—a language with three perfects?” Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Ed. Östen Dahl. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 479–94.
   Google Scholar
• Haudry, Jean. 1979. L'Emploi des cas en védique. Introduction à l'étude des cas en indo-européen. Lyon: L'Hermés.
   Google Scholar
• Havránek, Bohuslav. 1937. Genera verbi v slovanských juzycích. Part II. Praha: Kr. České Spol. Nauk.
   Google Scholar
• Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession. Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• L'Hermitte, René. 1978. “Un type de phrase impersonelle en slave: les participles passifs à valeur predicative.” Revue des Études slaves 51 (1–2): 147–54.
   Google Scholar
• Hirt, Hermann. 1928. Indogermanische Grammatik. 4. Teil: Doppelung. Zusammensetzung. Verbum. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   Google Scholar
• Holvoet, Axel, 1994. “Notes on the possessive perfect.” Lingua posnaniensis 36:43–48.
   Google Scholar
• Holvoet, Axel. 1995. “On the evolution of the passive in Lithuanian and Latvian.” Analecta Indoeuropaea Cracoviensia. loannis Safarewicz memoriae dicata. Ed. Wojciech Smoczyński. Cracoviae: Universitas. pp. 173–82.
   Google Scholar
• Holvoet, Axel 2001. “Impersonals and passives in Baltic and Finnic.” The Circum-Baltic languages. Typology and contact. Eds. Östen Dahl and Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm. Vol. 2: Grammar and typology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 363–89.
   Google Scholar
• Hopper, Paul J. and Elizabeth Gloss Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ivanov, Vjač[eslav] Vs[evolodovič], ed. 1989. Kategoriju posessivnosti v slavjanskix i balkanskix jazykax. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Janda, Richard D. 2001. “Beyond ‘pathways’ and ‘unidirectionality’: On the discontinuity of language transmission and the counterability of grammaticalization.” Language sciences 23:265–340.
   Google Scholar
• Joffre, Marie-Dominique. 1995. Le verbe latin: voix et diathése. Louvain and Paris: Éditions Peters.
   Google Scholar
• Joseph, Brian D. 2001. “Is there such a thing as grammaticalization?” Language sciences 23: 163–86.
   Google Scholar
• Justus, Carol F. 1999. “Indo-European ‘have’: a grammatical etymology.” Language change and typological variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of his 83rd birthday. Vol. 2: Grammatical universals and typology. Eds. Carol F. Justus and Edgar C. Polomé. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph. 31. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man. pp. 613–41.
   Google Scholar
• Karskij, È[vfimij] F[edorovič]. 1956. Belorusy. Jazyk belorusskogo naroda. Vyp. 2–3. Moskva: Akademija nauk SSSR.
   Google Scholar
• Klenin, Emily. Animacy in Russian. A new interpretation. Columbus, OH: Slavic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Koneski, Blaže. 1967. Istorija na makedonskiot jazik. Skopje: Kultura.
   Google Scholar
• Krause, Wolfgang. 1968. Handbuch des Gotischen. München: C. H. Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Kruopas, Jonas. 1970. “1598 m. Merkelio Petkevičiaus katekizmo leksika.” Lietuviu kalbotyros klausimai 12:83–154.
   Google Scholar
• Krys'ko, V[adim] B[orisovič], 1995. “Zalogovye otnošenija.” Drevnerusskaja grammatika XII-X11I vv. Moskva: Nauka. pp. 465–506.
   Google Scholar
• Krys'ko, V[adim] B[orisovič]. 1997. Istoričeskij sintaksis russkogo jazyka: objekt I perexodnost'. Moskva: Indrik.
   Google Scholar
• Kurzová, Helena. 1999. “Syntax in the Indo-European Morphosyntactic Type.” Language change and typological variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of his 83rd birthday. Vol. 2: Grammatical universals and typology. Eds. Carol F. Justus and Edgar C. Polomé. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, 31. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man. pp. 510–20.
   Google Scholar
• Kuteva, Tania and Bernd Heine. 2004. “On the possessive perfect in North Russian.” WORD 55.1: 37–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuz'mina, Irina Borisovna. 1993. Sintaksis russkix govorov v lingvogeografičeskom aspekte. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Kuz'mina I[rina] B[orisovna] and E[lena] V[asil'jevna] Nemčenko. 1971. Sintaksis pričastnyx form v russkix govorux. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Lavine, James E. 1999. “Subject properties and ergativity in North Russian and Lithuanian.” Workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics. The Seattle meeting 1998. Eds. Herbert Coats. Katarzyna Dzwirek and Cynthia M. Vakareliyska. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. pp. 307–28.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann. Winfred P. 2002. Pre-Indo-European. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph. 41. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man.
   Google Scholar
• Leskien. A[ugust]. 1919. Litauisches Lesebuch mit Grammatik und Wörterbuch. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   Google Scholar
• Lindstedt. Jouko. 2000. “The perfect—aspectual, temporal and evidential.” Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Ed. Östen Dahl. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 365–83.
   Google Scholar
• LKG = Lietuviu kalbos gramatika. 1976. T. 3: Sintaksé. Vilnius: Mokslas.
   Google Scholar
• LLP = Slovnik jazyla staroslověnského. Lexikon linguae palaeoslovenicae. 1976. T. Ill. Praha: Československá Akademie věd.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonell. Arthur A. 1971. A Sanscrit Grammar for Students, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maslov, J[urij] S[ergeevič]. 1984 [first version published in 1949]. “K voprosu o proisxoždenii posessivnogo perfekta.” Maslov, J[urij] S[ergeevič]. Očerki po aspektologii. Leningrad: Izd. Leningradskogo universiteta. pp. 224–48.
   Google Scholar
• Maslov, J[urij] S[ergeevič].. 1988. “Resultative, perfect, and aspect.” Typology of the resultative constructions. Ed. Vladimir P. Nedjalkov. (Translation, ed. by Bernard Comrie, of Tipologija rezul'tativnyx konstrukcij. 1983. Leningrad: Nauka) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. pp. 63–85.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, W[illiam] K[leesmann], 1955. “Lithuanian constructions with neuter passive participles.” The Slavonic and East European review 81:350–71.
   Google Scholar
• Matveenko, V[era] A[lekseevna], 1960. “Stradatel'no-bezlichnyj oborot v govorakh vostochno- slavjanskikh jazykov.” Slavia 29 (3):350–65.
   Google Scholar
• McCawley, Noriko. 1976. “From OE/ME ‘Impersonal’ constructions: What is a subject-less S?” Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax. Eds. Sanford B. Steever, Carol A. Walker, and Salikoko S. Mufwene. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society. pp. 192–204.
   Google Scholar
• Meillet. Antoine. 1902–1905. Études sur l'étymologie et le vocabulaire au vieux slave. Pars 1–2. Paris: Émile Bouillon.
   Google Scholar
• Meillet. Antoine 1924. Le slave commun. Paris: Champion.
   Google Scholar
• Meillet. Antoine 1929. Les adjectives grecs en -τOσ(final);. In: Donum Natalicium Schrijnen. Verzameling van opstellen. Nijmegen; Utrecht: N. V. Dekker & van de Vegt. pp. 635–639.
   Google Scholar
• Moser, Michael. 1998. Die polnische, ukrainische und weißrussische Interferenzschicht im russischen Satzbau des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Moser, Michael.. 2002. ‘Čto takoe “prostaja mova”?” Studia Slavica Hung. 47 (34):221–60.
   Google Scholar
• Mrázek. Roman. 1973. “Funkční distribuce haber a esse v slovanské vete.” Československé přednášky pro VII. mezinárodní sjezd slavistu ve Varšavě. Lingvistiku. Praha: Akademia. pp. 175–82.
   Google Scholar
• Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. and Sergej Je. Jaxontov. 1988. “The typology of resultative constructions.” Typology of the resultative constructions. Ed. Vladimir P. Nedjalkov. (Translation, Ed. by Bernard Comrie, of Tipologija rezul'tativnyx konstrukcij. 1983. Leningrad: Nauka) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. pp. 3–62.
   Google Scholar
• Nimčuk. V[asyl'] V[asyljovyč], 1962. “Sufiksal'ne tvorennja dijesliv, dijeprykmetnykiv i dijeprys- livnykiv u verxnjonadboržavs'kyx hovirkax.” Doslidžennja z. movoznavstva (Zbirnyk statej aspiranitiv i dysertantiv). Kyjiv: Vyd. Akademiji nauk Ukrajins'koji RSR. pp. 120–39.
   Google Scholar
• Nimčuk. V[asyl'] V[asyljovyč] ed. 1978. Istorija ukrajins'koji movy. Morfololiija. Kyjiv: Naukova dunika.
   Google Scholar
• NTG = Nestle, Eberhard and Erwin Nestle, eds. 1981. Novum Testamentum Graece. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgeselschaft.
   Google Scholar
• NZ = Nouvi Zákon ali Testamentom goszpodna nasega Jezusa Krisztusa zdaj oprvics z. grcskoga na sztári szlovenszki jezik obrnyeni po Stevan Kuzmicsi Surdánszkom. 1774. V Halli Saxon- skoj.
   Google Scholar
• OD = Humeri opera. T. III: Odysseae libros I-XII. Ed. altera. Ed. Thomas W. Allen. 1917. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Orr. Robert. 1989. “A Russo-Goidelic syntactic parallel: U nego svoja izba postavlena.” General linguistics 29 (1):1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Palmaitis, L. 1984. “Indo-European masdar as the 3rd person and yrà in Baltic.” Baltistica 20 (2): 126–35.
   Google Scholar
• Panzer, Baldur. 1984. “Parallel internal development or interference? Post-positive article and possessive perfect in North Germanic and northern Russian.” Scandinavian language contacts. Eds. Sture Ureland and laian Clarkson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 111–132.
   Google Scholar
• Paykin, Katia and Marleen van Peteghem. 2003. “External vs. internal possessor structures and inalienability in Russian.” Russian linguistics 27:329–48.
   Google Scholar
• Potebnja, A[leksandr] A[fanas'jevič], 1958. Iz zupisok po russkoj grammatike. T. 1–2. Moskva: Učpedgiz.
   Google Scholar
• Potebnja, A[leksandr] A[fanas'jevič]. 1968. Iz zapisok po russkoj grammatike. T. 3. Moskva: Prosveščenije.
   Google Scholar
• PS= Šyrwids Punktay sakimu (Punkty kazań). Teil I: 1629. Teil II: 1644. Litauisch und polnisch. Ed. Franz Specht. 1929. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Renou, Louis. 1961. Grammaire sanscrite. 2-me éd. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.
   Google Scholar
• Rygǐskiu [Jablonskis], Jonas. 1922. Lietuviu kalbos gramatika. Etimologija. Kaunas and Vilnius: Švyturio.
   Google Scholar
• Schmalstieg, William R. 1988. A Lithuanian historical syntax. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Schmalstieg, William R.. 2000. The historical morphology of the Baltic verb. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, 37. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man.
   Google Scholar
• Schwyzer, Eduard. 1939. Griechische Grammatik. Bd. 1: Allgemeiner Teil. Lautlehre. Wortbildung. München: C. H. Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Schwyzer, Eduard.. 1950. Griechische Grammatik. Bd. 2: Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik. München: C.H. Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Shevelov, George Y. 1963. The syntax of Modern Literary Ukrainian. The simple sentence. The Hague: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Shevelov, George Y.. 1964. A prehistory of Slavic. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   Google Scholar
• Shevelov, George Y. 1969. “The vicissitudes of a syntactic construction in Eastern Slavic.” Scando-Slavica 15:171–86.
   Google Scholar
• Sihler, Andrew L. 1995. New comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stang, Christian. 1966. Vergleichende Grammatik der baltischen Sprachen. Oslo: Universitetsfor-laget.
   Google Scholar
• Staniševa, Dina. 1966. Vinitel'nyj padež v vostočnoslavjanskix jazykax. Sofija: Bolgarskaja Akademija nauk.x
   Google Scholar
• Szemerényi, Oswald J. L. 1996. Introduction to Indo-European linguistics. (Translated from Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft. 4th rev. ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Šaxmatov, A[leksej] A[leksandrovič]. 1941. Sintaksis russkogo jazyka. Leningrad: Učpedgiz.
   Google Scholar
• Thomason, Sarah Grey and Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization. and genetic linguistics. Berkley, Los Angeles and Oxford: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tommola, Hannu. 2000. “On the perfect in North Slavic.” Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Ed. Östen Dahl. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 441–78.
   Google Scholar
• Trask, Robert. 1979. “On the origin of ergativity.” Ergativity: Towards a theory of grammatical relations. Ed. Frans Plank. London: Academic Press. pp. 385–404.
   Google Scholar
• Trubinskij, V[alentin] I[vanovič]. 1984. Očerki russkogo dialektnogo sintaksisa. Leningrad: Izd. Leningradskogo universiteta.
   Google Scholar
• Trubinskij, V[alentin] I[vanovič].. 1988. “Resultative, passive, and perfect in Russian dialects.” Typology of the resultative constructions. Ed. Vladimir P. Nedjalkov. (Translation, Ed. by Bernard Comrie, of Tipologija rezul'tativnyx konstrukcij. 1983. Leningrad: Nauka) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. pp. 388–409.
   Google Scholar
• Vaillant, André. 1966. Grammaire comparée des langues slaves, vol. III: Le verbe. Paris: C. Klincksieck.
   Google Scholar
• Vasilev, Christo. 1968. “Der romanische Perfekttyp im Slavischen.” Slavistische Studien zum VI. Internationalen Slavistenkongress in Prag 1968. Eds. Erwin Koschmieder and Maximilian Braun. München: Dr. Rudolf Trofenik. pp. 215–30.
   Google Scholar
• Vasilev, Christo.. 1973. “Ist die Konstruktion u menja est' russisch oder urslavisch?” Die Welt der Slaven 18 (2):36l–67.
   Google Scholar
• Vasmer, Max. 1955. Russisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bd. 2: L-Ssuda. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
   Google Scholar
• Večerka, Radoslav. 1993. Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax. Bd. Il: Die innere Satzstruktur. Freiburg in Breisgau: U. W. Weiher.
   Google Scholar
• Večerka, Radoslav.. 1996. Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax. Bd. Ill: Die Satztypen: Der einfache Satz. Freiburg in Breisgau: U. W. Weiher.
   Google Scholar
• Veenker, Wolfgang. 1967. Die Frage des finnougrischen Substrats in der russischen Sprache. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vendryes, Joseph. 1937. “Sur l'emploi de l'auxiliaire “avoir” pour marquer le passé.” Mélanges de linguistique et de philologie offerts à Jacq. van Ginneken à l'occasion du soixantiéme anniversaire de sa naissance (21 Avril 1937). Paris: C. Klincksieck. pp. 85–92.
   Google Scholar
• Vondrák, Wenzel. 1912. Altkirschenslavische Grammatik. 2. Aufl. Berlin: Weidmanische Buchhandlung.
   Google Scholar
• Vondrák, Wenzel.. 1924. Vergleichende Slavische Grammatik. Bd. I: Lautlehre und Stammbildungslehre. 2. Aufl. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Wackernagel, Jacob. 1905. Altindische Grammatik. Bd. II (1): Einleitung zur Wortlehre. Nominalkomposition. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Wackernagel, Jacob and Albert Debrunner. 1954. Altindische Grammatik. Bd. Il (2): Die Nominalsuffixe. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Wijk, N. van. 1926. “Die slavischen Partizipia auf -to- und die Aoristformen auf -tЪ”. Indogermanische Forschungen 43:281–89.
   Google Scholar
• Xodova, K[apitolina] I[vanovna], 1971. Padeži s predlogami v staroslavjanskom jazyke. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Zaliznjak, A[ndrej] A[natol'jevič], 1995. Drevnenovgorodskij dialekt. Moskva: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Zatovkanjuk, M. 1984. “Do xarakterystyky ukrajins'kyx konstrukcij typu ‘kozačen'ka vbyto’.” Slavia 53(1):1–11.
   Google Scholar