Article published in:
Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba Conference
Edited by Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány
[Approaches to Hungarian 14] 2015
► pp. 121145
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Alberti, Gábor & Judit Farkas
2015. Az elidegeníthető birtoklást kifejező -j- képző esete a -(Vt)t főnévképzővel és más főnévképzőkkel. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 2:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
den Dikken, Marcel
2018.  In Boundaries Crossed, at the Interfaces of Morphosyntax, Phonology, Pragmatics and Semantics [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 94],  pp. 147 ff. Crossref logo
Farkas, Judit & Gábor Alberti
2017. Általánosítások a potenciális magyar birtokszóváltozatokra vonatkozóan. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 4:1  pp. 59 ff. Crossref logo
Hegedüs, Veronika & Éva Dékány
2017.  In Approaches to Hungarian [Approaches to Hungarian, 15],  pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 december 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.



Bennis, Hans, Norbert Corver & Marcel den Dikken
(1998) Predication in nominal phrases. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 1. 85–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1967Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18. 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diesing, Molly
1992Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den
1999On the structural representation of possession and agreement. The case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases. In István Kenesei (ed.), Crossing boundaries: Theoretical advances in Central and Eastern European languages, 137–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2011On the strategies for forming long A′–dependencies: Evidence from Hungarian. In Balázs Surányi (ed.), [title tbd] (volume of papers from the conference on Minimalist Approaches to Syntactic Locality). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (to appear).Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den & Anikó Lipták
1997 Csoda egy nyelv . In Jane Coerts & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1997. 61–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den, Anikó Lipták & Zsófia Zvolenszky
2001On inclusive reference anaphora: New perspectives from Hungarian. In Karine Megerdoomian & Leora Anne Bar-El (eds.), WCCFL 20 Proceedings, 137–49. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Dobler, Eva
2008The morpho-phonology of (in)alienable possession. In Susie Jones (ed.), Proceedings of the 2008 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association/Actes du congrès annuel de l’Association canadienne de linguistique 2008.Google Scholar
Elekfi, László
2000Semantic differences of suffix alternates in Huangarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 47. 145–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerland, Doris & Albert Ortmann
2012What counts as relational in Hungarian, Uralic and beyond? CTF 2012, Düsseldorf.
Guéron, Jacqueline
1985Inalienable possession, PRO-inclusion and lexical chains. In Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer & Jean-Yves Pollock (eds.), Grammatical representation. Dordrecht: Foris. 43–86.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2008Syntactic universals and usage frequency, 3: Alienable vs. inalienable possessive constructions. Handout, Leipzig Spring School on Linguistic Diversity.
Heine, Bernd & Kézié Lébikaza
1997On attributive possession in Kabiye. In Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type, 217–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kenesei, István
1995On bracketing paradoxes. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 43. 153–173.Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc
1985Natural morphology. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 35. 85–105.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1995Stage-level/individual-level predicates. In Gregory Carlson & Francis Pelletier (eds.), The generic book, 125–175. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard & Franc Marušić
2004Indefinite pronoun structures with APs. Linguistic Inquiry 35. 268–287. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek
1985Possessive constructions in Oceanic languages and Proto-Oceanic. In Andrew Pawley & Lois Carrington (eds.), Austronesian linguistics at the 15th Pacific Science Congress. Pacific Linguistics C-88. 93–140.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith
2003Inflectional morphology in the Hungarian noun phrase: A typological assessment. In Frans Plank (ed.), Noun phrase structure in the languages of Europe. Berlin: de Gruyter. 113–252.Google Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo
1989Predication theory: A case study for indexing theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
1988On alienable and inalienable possession. In W. Shipley (ed.), In honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics, 557–609. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rácz, Péter
2010Hungarian phonology and morphology: Discord in the possessive allomorphy of Hungarian. MA thesis, ELTE.
Rácz, Péter & Péter Rebrus
2012Complexity and distinctiveness in Hungarian possessive allomorphy. In Ferenc Kiefer, Mária Ladányi & Péter Siptár (eds.), Current issues in morphological theory: (Ir)regularity, analogy and frequency, 51–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schirm, Anita
2009Alienable and inalienable possession in Hungarian. Paper presented at New Trends in Uralistics , Szeged, 3–5 September 2009. Earlier version published as ‘Az elidegeníthető és az elidegeníthetetlen birtoklás kifejezésmódjairól’, in Nyelvtudomány I (2005). 155–169.
Szabolcsi, Anna
1983The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review 3. 89–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994The noun phrase. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian. Syntax and Semantics 27, 179–274. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna & Tibor Laczkó
1992A főnévi csoport szerkezete. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan I. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 179–298.Google Scholar