{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["report2"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":1,"defined_names":1,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"report2","index":0,"n_rows":21,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":21,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,2,0,3],[0,4,0,5],[1,2,1,3],[1,4,1,5],[2,2,2,3],[4,2,4,3],[5,2,5,3],[6,2,6,3],[7,2,7,3],[8,2,8,3],[10,2,10,3],[11,2,11,3],[15,2,15,3]],"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
[null,"1.","Record Nr.",null,"UNINA9910808007703321"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"Negation in Uralic languages / / editors, Matti Miestamo, Anne Tamm, Beáta Wagner-Nagy"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Amsterdam ; ; Philadelphia : , : John Benjamins Publishing Company, , 2015"]
[{"$nulls":4},"©2015"]
[null,null,"ISBN",null,"90-272-6864-9"]
[null,null,"Descrizione fisica",null,"1 online resource (677 pages) : illustrations, maps"]
[null,null,"Collana",null,"Typological Studies in Language (TSL), , 0167-7373 ; ; Volume 108"]
[null,null,"Disciplina",null,"494.5"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Uralic languages - Negatives"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Uralic languages - Grammar, Comparative"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Inglese"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,null,null,"Note generali","Description based upon print version of record."]
[null,null,null,"Nota di bibliografia","Includes bibliographical references at the end of each chapters and index."]
[null,null,"Nota di contenuto",null,"Negation in Uralic Languages; Editorial page; Title page; LCC data; Table of contents; Abbreviations; Negation in Uralic languages - Introduction; 1. Presentation of the volume; 2. The Uralic languages; 2.1 Areal spread and sociolinguistic status; 2.2 Genealogy; 2.3 Typology; 3. Negation in typology and in Uralic; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Clausal negation; 3.3 Non-clausal negation constructions; 3.4 Other aspects of negation; 3.5 Conclusion; 4. Conclusion and acknowledgements; References; Appendix: The questionnaire; Questionnaire for describing the negation system of a (Uralic) language"]
[{"$nulls":4},"General remarks and instructions The Questionnaire:; 1. The language; Constructions expressing negation (Sections 2-3); 2. Clausal negation; 2.1 Standard negation; 2.2 Negation in non-declaratives; 2.3 Negation in non-verbal clauses; 2.4 Negation in dependent/subordinate clauses; 2.5 Other clausal negation constructions; 3. Non-clausal negation; 3.1 Negative replies; 3.2 Negative indefinites and quantifiers; 3.3 Abessive/caritive/privative negation; 3.4 Other negative constructions/expressions; 4. Other aspects of negation; 4.1 The scope of negation; 4.2 Negative polarity"]
[{"$nulls":4},"4.3 Case marking under negation 4.4 Reinforcing negation; 4.5 Negation and complex clauses; 4.6 Further aspects of negation; References; Part I. Describing negation systemsin Uralic languages; Negation in Forest Enets; 1. Introduction; 2. Clausal negation; 2.1 Standard negation; 2.2 Negation in non-declaratives; 2.2.1 Negation in "]
[{"$nulls":4},"non-declaratives excluding the hortative and imperative moods; 2.2.2 The hortative and imperative mood"]
[{"$nulls":4},"2.2.3.3 Assumptative mood. Apparently, the assumptative in -isi is yet another mood that derives from the type of reversed negation construction (i+si) that has been sketched above. Formally, -isi is closer to the assertative mood because the morpheme bou"]
[null,null,null,"Sommario/riassunto","More than a millenium of contact between Finno-Ugric (Mordvin, Mari and Permic) and Turkic languages (Bulgar-Chuvash and Volga Kipchak) in the Volga-Kama area have produced conditions of multilingualism and mutual linguistic influence. Lexical borrowings have been well studied and offer a starting point for exploring less treated aspects such as phonological and syntactic features. The present paper scrutinizes four possible cases of linguistic interference between Finno-Ugric and Turkic languages in the Volga basin in standard negation and prohibitives."]