1. Hawkins 1983: 67 himself mentions four languages as Prep & N A & GN: Kaliai-Kove, Gitua (both E. Malayo-Polynesian, Austronesian); Arapesh (Toricelli); Karen (Tibeto-Burman, Sino-Tibetan). They are all SVO, and therefore Hawkins adds an additional constraint to the implication: see #70. 2. Prep & NA & GN: Kilivila (Oceanic, Austronesian); Garawa (Garawan, Australian) (Dryer 1991, 2000). Bwe Karen, Sgaw Karen (Karen, Tibeto-Burman); Hmong Njua (Miao-Yao), Buru, Nuaulu, Alune, Paulohi, Tetun (Central Malayo-Polynesian, Austronesian); Kaliai-Kove, Patep, Kilivila (Oceanic, Austronesian); Irarutu, Taba, Mor (South Halmahera-NW New Guinea); Sahu, West Makian (Noth Halmaheran); Abun (Birds Head, West Papuan); Arapesh (Toricelli); Palikur (Maipuran, Arawak); Mataco (Mataco) (Dryer 2000).
1. Dryer 1988: 198: “There is no clear evidence for the correlation between Adposition-Noun and Adjective-Noun order.”Dryer 1988: 200: “There is no clear evidence for the correlation between Genitive-Noun and Adjective-Noun order.” 2. Since the 1990s, Hawkins proposes alternative explanations of his universals (see e.g. Hawkins 1993: 234).
1. Dryer 1988: 198: “There is no clear evidence for the correlation between Adposition-Noun and Adjective-Noun order.”Dryer 1988: 200: “There is no clear evidence for the correlation between Genitive-Noun and Adjective-Noun order.” 2. Since the 1990s, Hawkins proposes alternative explanations of his universals (see e.g. Hawkins 1993: 234).