{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02378854625550661, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.802395209580839, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Shaping typology through grammaticalization: North America

North America shows great genealogical diversity, yet many of the languages share a fundamental typological characteristic: elaborate morphology. Certain kinds of elaboration show areal distributions, suggesting contact effects. Many bound morphemes show the kinds of meanings expected of grammatical affixes, such as the Wintu perfective suffix -suk. But others show surprisingly concrete meanings, like the Kutenai suffix ‑quwaʔt ‘fur’. A well-known effect of grammaticalization is the loss of concrete lexical content, with abstraction and generalization over time. But other factors can come into play as well. One is the sequencing of grammaticalization processes, whether semantic/pragmatic changes precede univerbation or follow. Another is the moment at which contact enters in. Here pathways of development exemplifying these variables are traced, with first grammaticalization via auxiliation in Northern California, and second grammaticalization via compounding in the Northwest and elsewhere. Both can be seen to have spread in contact-induced grammaticalization.