Why Historical Linguists Need Children: Birch Bark Letters in Light of Written Language Acquisition

References

• Applebee, A. (2000). Alternative models of writing development. In R. Indrisano & J. Squire (Eds.), Perspectives on writing: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 90–110). Newark, DE: IRA
   Google Scholar
• Bagnall, R. S., & Cribiore, R. (2006). Women’s letters from ancient Egypt: 300 B.C.-A.D. 800. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2011). Writing development in four genres from grades three to seven: Syntactic complexity and genre differentiation. Reading and Writing, 24, 183–202. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9264-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berninger, V., & Chanquoy, L. (2012). What writing is and how it changes across early and middle childhood development: A multidisciplinary perspective. In E. Grigorenko, E. Mambrino, & D. Preiss (Eds.), Writing: A mosaic of new perspectives (pp. 65–84). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chafe, W. L. (1982). Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp. 35–53). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Chafe, W. (1985). Linguistic differences produced by differences between speaking and writing. In D. Olson, N. Torrance, & A. Hildyard (Eds.), Literacy, language, and learning: The nature and consequences of reading and writing (pp. 105–123). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Christy, T. C. (1983). Uniformitarianism in linguistics [Studies in the History of Linguistics, 31]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Clay, M. (1966). The reading behaviour of five year old children: A research report. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 2, 11–31.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, M. (1992). Context, modularity, and the cultural constitution of human development. In L. T. Winegar & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Children’s development within social context (pp. 5–31). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, M. (2005). Cross-cultural and historical perspectives on the developmental consequences of education. Human Development, 48, 195–216. doi:10.1159/000086855
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cossu, G. (1997). Domain-specificity and fractionability of neuropsychological processes in literacy acquisition. In C. Pontecorvo (Ed.), Writing development: An interdisciplinary view (pp. 243–258). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Cossu, G., & Marshall, J. C. (1990). Are cognitive skills a prerequisite for learning to read and write? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 7, 21–40. doi:10.1080/02643299008253433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowhurst, M. (1987). Cohesion in argument and narration at three grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 185–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels, P. T. (2009). Grammatology. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of literacy (025–45). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeFrancis, J. (1989). Visible speech: The diverse oneness of writing systems. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeGraff, M. (2009). Language acquisition in creolization and, thus, language change: Some Cartesian-Uniformitarian boundary conditions. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 888–971. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2009.00135.x
   Google Scholar
• Dyson, A. H. (1991). Towards a reconceptualization of written language development. Linguistics and Education, 3, 139–161. doi:10.1016/0898-5898(91)90003-2
   Google Scholar
• Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387. doi:10.2307/356600
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, S. (2002). Writing, society, and culture in Early Rus, c. 950-1300. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gee, J. P. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gippius, A. A. (2012). Birchbark literacy and the rise of written communication in Early Rus’. In K. Zilmer & J. Jesch (Eds.), Epigraphic literacy and Christian identity: Modes of written discourse in the newly Christian European North (pp. 225–250). Utrecht Studies in Medieval Literacy, 4. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.
   Google Scholar
• Günther, H. (1997). Aspects of a history of written language processing: Examples from the Roman world and the early Middle Ages. In C. Pontecorvo (Ed.), Writing development: An interdisciplinary view (pp. 129–148). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Halla-aho, H. (2009). The non-literary Latin letters. A study of their syntax and pragmatics. Helsinki, Finland: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
   Google Scholar
• Halla-aho, H. (2011). Epistolary Latin. In J. Clackson (Ed.), A companion to the Latin language (Vol. 82, pp. 426–444). Malden, MA: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, J. R. (1983). Defining the genre of the letter: Juan Luis Vives’ De Conscribendis Epistolis. Renaissance and Reformation/Renaissance et Réforme, 19, 89–105.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffner, H. A. (2009). Letters from the Hittite Kingdom (No. 15). Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Lit.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, K. W. (1965). A synopsis of clause-to-sentence length factors. The English Journal, 54, 300–309. doi:10.2307/811114
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35, iii. doi:10.2307/1165818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janda, R., & Joseph, B. (2003). On language, change, and language change — Or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics. In B. Joseph & R. Janda (Eds.), Handbook of historical linguistics (pp. 3–183). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Kantor, K. J., & Rubin, D. L. (1981). Between speaking and writing: Processes of differentiation. In B. M. Kroll & R. J. Vann (Eds.), Exploring speaking-writing relationships: Connections and contrasts (pp. 55–81). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
   Google Scholar
• Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of Writing Research, 1, 1–26. doi:10.17239/jowr-2008.01.01.1
   Google Scholar
• Kroll, B. M. (1981). Developmental relationships between speaking and writing. In B. M. Kroll & R. J. Vann (Eds.), Exploring speaking-writing relationships: Connections and contrasts (pp. 32–54). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
   Google Scholar
• Labov, W. (1994). Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 1: Internal factors. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, R. (1984). The pragmatics of subordination. In C. Brugman & M. Macaulay (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society (pp. 481–492). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen-Freeman, D. (1978). An ESL index of development. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 439–448. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3586142?origin=JSTOR-pdf
   Google Scholar
• Loban, W. (1976). Language development: Kindergarten through grade twelve (Research Report 18). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED128818.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lunt, H. (1988). The language of Rus’ in the eleventh century: Some observations about facts and theories. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 12/13, 276–313.
   Google Scholar
• Luria, A. (1933). “Psixologia ras” i fašistskaia nauka [“Psychology of race” and fascist science]. Front nauki i texniki, 12, 97–108. Retrieved from http://luria.ucsd.edu/Articles-by-Luria/PDFs/Luria_Race.Fascists.Science.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Luria, A. (1950). Očerki psixofiziologii pis’ma [Essays on psycho-physiology of writing]. Moscow, Russia: Izd-vo APN RSFSR.
   Google Scholar
• Luria, A. (1971). Psixologiia kak istoričeskaia nauka [Psychology as a historical science]. In B. F. Poršnev (Ed.), Istoriia i psikhologiia (pp. 32–62). Moscow, Russia: Nauka.
   Google Scholar
• Luria, A. (1978). The development of writing in the child. In M. Cole (Ed.), The selected writings of A. R. Luria (pp. 146–194). New York, NY: M. E. Sharpe. (Original work published 1929)
   Google Scholar
• MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of writing research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meecham, H. G. (1923). Light from ancient letters. London, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Myhill, D. (2012). The ordeal of deliberate choice: Metalinguistic development in secondary writers. In V. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions to cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 247–274). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, D. R. (1993). How writing represents speech. Language & Communication, 13, 1–17. doi:10.1016/0271-5309(93)90017-H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London, New York, NY: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Parkes, M. B. (1992). Pause and effect: An introduction to the history of punctuation in the West. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Perera, K. (1984). Children’s writing and reading. Analysing classroom language. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Read, C. (1986). Children’s creative spelling. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Rentel, V. M., & King, M. L. (1983). A longitudinal study of coherence in children’s written narratives. Columbus: Ohio State University.
   Google Scholar
• Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. Advances in Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 142–175.
   Google Scholar
• Scinto, L. F. M. (1986). Written language and psychological development. London, UK: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, C. M., & Windsor, J. (2000). General language performance measures in spoken and written narrative and expository discourse of school-age children with language learning disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 43, 324–340. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4302.324
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Song, S., & Kellogg, D. (2011). Word meaning as a palimpsest: A defense of sociocultural theory. The Modern Language Journal, 95, 589–604. doi:10.1111/modl.2011.95.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice (Vol. 9). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Temple, C. A., Nathan, A. G., & Burris, N. A. (1982). The beginnings of writing. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Tolchinsky, L. (2003). The cradle of culture and what children know about writing and numbers before being taught. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Hout, M. (1949). Studies in early Greek letter-writing. In Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, Vol. 2, Fasc. 1 Retrieved from (pp. 19–41). http://www.jstor.org/stable/4427157.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1935). The problem of environment. In R. van der Veer (Ed.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–354). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, I. Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–285). New York, NY: Plenum. (Original work published 1934)
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: The history of the development of higher mental functions, Vol. 4 (R. W. Rieber, Ed., & M. J. Hall, Trans.). New York, NY: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1931)
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky [Vygotskij], L. S. (2008). O pedologičeskom analize pedagogičeskogo processa. In V. V. Davydov (Ed.), Pedagogičeskaja psixologija (pp. 373–391). Moscow, Russia: AST, Astrel’ Xranitel’. (Original work published 1933)
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, A., Barnsley, G., Hanna, P., & Swan, M. (1980). Assessing language development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Worth, D. S. (1984). Mirror reversals in Novgorod paleography. In B. A. Stolz, I. R. Titunik, & L. Doležel (Eds.), Language and literary theory: In honor of Ladislav Matejka (=Papers in Slavic Philology, 5) (pp. 205–214). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yokoyama, O. (2008). Russian peasant letters: Texts and contexts (2 vols). Wiesbaden, Germany: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Zaliznjak, A. A. (2002). Drevnerusskaja grafika so smešeniem ъ–о and ь–е. In A. A. Zliznjak (Eds.), Russkoe imennoe slovoizmenenie (pp. 577–612). Moscow, Russia: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury..
   Google Scholar
• Zaliznjak, A. A. (2004). Drevnenovgorodskij dialekt (2nd ed.). Moscow, Russia: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury.
   Google Scholar
• Živov, V. M. (2006). Vostočnoslavjanskoe pravopisanie XI–XII v. Moscow, Russia: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury.
   Google Scholar
• Živov, V. M., & Timberlejk [Timberlake], A. (1997). Rasstavaias´ so strukturalizmom (tezisy dlia diskussii). Voprosy Jazykoznanija, 3, 3–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar