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. 245265


Alberti, Gábor
1997Argument hierarchy and reflexivization. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 45 (3-4). 215–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bartos, Huba
2011Hungarian external causatives: monoclausal but bi-eventive. In Tibor Laczkó & Catherine O. Ringen (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. Volume 12: Papers from the 2009 Debrecen Conference, 1–37. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana & Luigi Rizzi
1988Psych-verbs and θ-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. 291–352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bene, Annamária
2005Az igék bennható/tranzitív/mediális felosztásának morfoszintaktikai következményei. [The applicability of the unergative/ transitive/unaccusative categorization of verbs in the explanation of certain syntactic and morphological features of Hungarian.] PhD dissertation. Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.
Chomsky, Noam
1995The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin
1987Configurationality in Hungarian. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991The primacy condition of anaphora and pronominal variable binding. In Jan Koster & Eric Reuland (eds.), Long-distance anaphora, 245–262. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1994aSentence structure and word order. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian: Syntax and Semantics 27, 1–90. San Diego/New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1994bScrambling as the base generation of random complement order. In Norbert Corver & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Studies on scrambling. Movement and non-movement approaches to free-word-order phenomena, 221–256. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002The Syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Free word order, (non)configurationality and phases. Linguistic Inquiry 39 (3). 441–475. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Everaert, Martin, Marijana Marelj & Tal Siloni
2012The Theta System: an introduction. In Martin Everaert, Marijana Marelj & Tal Siloni (eds.), The Theta System. Argument structure at the interface, 1–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fadlon, Julie
2012Hidden entries: a psycholingustic study of derivational gaps. In Martin Everaert, Marijana Marelj & Tal Siloni (eds.), The Theta System. Argument structure at the interface, 220–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert
2001Features, θ-roles, and free constituent order. Linguistic Inquiry 32 (3). 405–437. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Free constituent order: a Minimalist interface account. Folia Linguistica XXXVII (1-2). 191–231.Google Scholar
Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni
2011Causatives across components. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29. 657–704. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horvath, Julia & Tal, Siloni
To appear. The thematic phase and the architecture of grammar. In Martin Everaert, Marijana Marelj, Eric Reuland & Tal Siloni eds. Concepts, syntax and their interface Cambridge, MA The MIT Press
Jackendoff, Ray
1991Mme Tussaud meets the Binding Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10. 1–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray & Peter W. Culicover
2005Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kenesei, István, Robert M. Vago & Anna Fenyvesi
1998Hungarian. London/New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc
1992Az aspektus és a mondat szerkezete. In Ferenc Kiefer (eds.), Strukturális Magyar Nyelvtan I. Mondattan, 797–886. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1996Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laczkó, Tibor
2000A melléknévi és a határozói igeképzők. [The adjectival and the adverbial participial suffixes.] In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. 3. kötet: Morfológia. [A structural grammar of Hungarian. Volume 3: Morphology.], 409–452. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan
2010The locative syntax of experiencers. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 53. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marelj, Marijana
2013Experiencing linking: Psych verbs at the interface. In Elly van Gelderen, Jóhanna Barðdal & Michela Cennamo (eds.), Argument Structure in Flux: the Naples-Capri Papers. Studies in Language Companion Series 131, 135–168. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Neeleman, Ad & Tanya Reinhart
1998Scrambling and PF interface. In Miriam Butt & Willhelm Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments: lexical and compositional factors, 309–353. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David
1995Zero syntax. Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M.
1971Cross-over phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinheart and Winston.Google Scholar
Preminger, Omer
2006Argument-mapping and extraction. Master’s thesis. Tel-Aviv University.
Rákosi, György
2006Dative Experiencer Predicates in Hungarian. PhD dissertation. Utrecht. Published as Volume 146 of the LOT Dissertation Series.
2009Én, magam, önmagam. [I, me, myself.] In Márta Maleczki & Enikő Németh T. (eds.), A mai magyar nyelv leírásának újabb módszerei VII. Modellek, elméletek és elvek érvényessége nyelvi adatok tükrében. [New approaches to the description of contemporary Hungarian VII. The validity of models, theories and principles in view of the linguistic data.], 179–196. Szeged: SZTE: Általános Nyelvészet Tanszék.Google Scholar
2011Összetett visszaható névmások a magyarban. [Complex reflexive anaphors in Hungarian] In Huba Bartos (eds.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XXIII, 351–376. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
2013Myself, the armchair linguist: two complex anaphors in Hungarian. Argumentum 9. Debrecen: Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó. 239–267.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya
1983Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. London & Sydney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
2000The Theta System: syntactic realization of verbal concepts. UIL-OTS Working Papers in Linguistics (00,01/TL). University of Utrecht. http://​www​.let​.uu​.nl​/~tanya​.reinhart​/personal​/Papers​/pdf​/Lexic​_00​.pdf. (23 July, 2014.)
2001Experiencing derivations. In Rachel Hastings, Brendan Jackson & Zsófia Zvolenszky (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) XI, 365–387. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
2002The Theta System: an overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28. 229–290.Google Scholar
2006Interface Strategies. Optimal and Costly Computations. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 45. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Tal Siloni
2005The lexicon-syntax parameter: reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 36 (3). 389–436. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian
1991NP movement, crossover, and chain formation. In Hubert Haider & Netter Klaus (eds.), Representation and derivation in the theory of grammar, 17–52. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siloni, Tal
2001Construct states at the PF interface. In Pierre Pica (eds.), Linguistic variation yearbook 1, 229–266. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Surányi, Balázs
2006aScrambling in Hungarian. Acta Linguistics Hungarica 53. 393–432. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006bHungarian as a Japanese-type scrambling language. In Christopher Davis, Amy Rose Deal & Youri Zabbal (eds.), Proceedings of the 36th North East Linguistic Society Conference (NELS) 36, Volume 2, 561–574. University of Massachusetts, Amherst: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar
Szalontai, Ádám
2012On the configurationality of Hungarian dative constructions: An experimental study. In Balázs Surányi & Diána Varga (eds.), Proceedings of the First Central European Conference in Linguistics for Postgraduate Students, 294–317. Budapest: Pázmány Péter Catholic University.Google Scholar
Temme, Anne & Elisabeth Verhoeven
Submitted. Verb class, case, and order: A cross-linguistic experiment.
Tenny, Carol
1998Psych verbs and verbal passives in Pittsburghese. Linguistics 36 (3). 591–597.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Bondaruk, Anna
2020.  In Beyond Emotions in Language [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 263],  pp. 141 ff. Crossref logo
Rákosi, György
2020.  In Approaches to Hungarian [Approaches to Hungarian, 16],  pp. 116 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.