Language Universals 2009
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305432.003.0003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Universals and the Diachronic Life Cycle of Languages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The regression line gives the intercept age of 28.07 ± 0.35 Ma (95% confi dence, MSWD = 3.7), which is 1.2% younger than that of the SHRIMP data. But the present age data are in good agreement with the 39 Ar-40 Ar age (27.8 ± 0.2 Ma; Hurford & Hammerschmidt, 1985 ). For the SL13 zircon, the 206 Pb/ 238 U and 207 Pb/ 206 Pb ratios were monitored for 15 spot analyses on a single grain.…”
Section: Fct and Sl13 Zirconssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…The regression line gives the intercept age of 28.07 ± 0.35 Ma (95% confi dence, MSWD = 3.7), which is 1.2% younger than that of the SHRIMP data. But the present age data are in good agreement with the 39 Ar-40 Ar age (27.8 ± 0.2 Ma; Hurford & Hammerschmidt, 1985 ). For the SL13 zircon, the 206 Pb/ 238 U and 207 Pb/ 206 Pb ratios were monitored for 15 spot analyses on a single grain.…”
Section: Fct and Sl13 Zirconssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Third, it was agreed from the start that the calibration against age standards was an interim measure and that an independent calibration should be pursued in parallel (Hurford 1998). For example, the reported radiometric ages of the Fish Canyon Tuff, one of the age standards, vary between 27.4 Ma and 28.5 Ma depending on the dating method, or vary between laboratories even when the same method is used (Hurford & Hammerschmidt 1985;Lanphere & Baadsgaard 2001;Schmitz & Bowring 2001;Spell & McDougall 2003;Bachmann et al 2007). Which value should be adopted as the reference age in fission track dating?…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%