Alboiu, G. & Hill, V
2012Early Modern Romanian and Wackernagel’s law. Journal of the Linguistic Association of Finland 25: 7–28.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. & Starke, M
1999The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, van Riemsdijk (ed.), 145–235. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chiriacescu, S. & von Heusinger, K
2009Pe-marking and referential persistence in Romanian. In Focus at the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Working Papers of the SFB 732, Vol. 3, A. Riester & E. Onea (eds). Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N
2001Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, M. Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000Minimalist inquiries. In Step by Step, R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds), 89–155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1981Lectures in Government and Binding [Studies in Generative Grammar 9]. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Déchaine, R.-M. & Wiltschko, M
2002Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 409–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M
2012Perspectives on morphological complexity. In Morphology. (Ir)regularity, Frequency, Typology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 322], F. Kiefer, M. Ladanyi & P. Siptar (eds),105–135. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011A biolinguistic approach to variation. In The Biolinguisitic Entreprise. New Perspectives on the Evolution and Nature of the Human Language Faculty, Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (eds).Google Scholar
2005Asymmetry in Morphology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1990On the properties of clitics. In Binding in Romance. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, A.M. Di Sciullo & A. Rochette (eds), 209–223. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. & Somesfalean, S
2015Object pronouns in the evolution of Romanian: a biolinguistic perspective. In Formal Approaches to DPs in Old Romanian, V. Hill (ed.), 269-290. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. & Nicolis, M
2013Third factor in the development of P. In NELS 42. Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, S. Keine & S. Sloggett (eds). Amherst MA: GSLA.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. & Somesfalean, S
2013Variation in the position of the definite determiner in Romanian: A biolinguistic perspective. In Romance Linguistics in the Pacific: Variation in Time and Space. Special Issue of the Australian Journal of Linguistics 33(2): 121–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. & Aguero Bautista, C
2008The delay of condition B effect and its absence in certain languages. Language and Speech 51: 77–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emonds, J
1978The verbal complex V’-V in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9: 49–77.Google Scholar
Frâncu, C
2009Gramatica limbii române vechi (1521-1780). Iasi: Demiurg.Google Scholar
Graham J., Freeman, D.C. & Emlen, J.M
1993Antisymmetry, directional asymmetry, and dynamic morphogenesis. Genetica 89: 121–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granfeldt, J. & Schlyter, S
2004Cliticisation in the acquisition of French as L1 and L2. In The Acquisition of French in Different Contexts: Focus on Functional Categories [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 32], J. Paradis & P. Prévost (eds), 333–370. Amsterdam: John Bejamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graur, A
1929A propos de l’article postposé. Romania 55: 475–481.Google Scholar
Hill, V
2013The direct object marker in Romanian: A historical perspective. Romance Linguistics in the Pacific: Variation in Time and Space. Special Issue of the Australian Journal of Linguistics. 33(2): 140–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höhle, T
1992Über Verum Fokus in Deutschen. Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 4: 112–141.Google Scholar
Irimia, M
2015DPs in Adjectival Small Clauses in Romanian: a Diachronic Perspective. In Formal Approaches to DPs in Old Romanian, V. Hill (ed.), 290-328. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isac, D
1998Sentence Negation in English and Romanian: a Syntactic and Semantic Approach. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Bucharest.Google Scholar
Kayne, R
1994The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1991Romance clitics, verb movement, and PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 647–686.Google Scholar
Krifka, M
2007Basic notions of information structure. In Interdisciplinary Studies of Information Structure 6, C. Fery, G. Fanselow & M. Krifka (eds). Potsdam: University of Potsdam.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R
1970The units of selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1974The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, A.R
2004Symmetry breaking and the evolution of development. Science 306: 828–833. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D. & Torrego, E
2006Probes, goals and syntactic categories. In Proceedings of the Seventh Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, Y. Otsu (ed.), 25–60. Tokyo.Google Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y
1989Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365–424.Google Scholar
Postal, P.M
1969On so-called ‘pronouns’ in English. In Modern Studies in English: Readings in Transformational Grammar, D.A. Reibel & S.A. Schane (eds), 201–224. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Richter, N. & Mehlhorn, G
2006Focus on contrast and emphasis: Evidence from prosody. In The Architecture of Focus, V. Molnar & S. Winkler (eds), 347–373. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L
1997The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, L. Haegeman (ed.), 281–339. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Henk
(ed.) 1999Clitics in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rivero, M.L
1991Long head movement and negation: Serbo-Croatian vs Slovak and Czech. The Linguistic Review 8: 319–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. & Roussou, A
2003Syntactic Change. A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sportiche, D
1999Pronominal clitic dependencies. In van Riemsdijk (ed.), 679–708.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J
1995Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 79–123.Google Scholar
von Heusinger, K. & Onea Gaspar, E
2008Triggering and blocking effects in the diachronic development of DOM in Romanian. Probus 20: 67–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zafiu, R
2014Auxiliary encliticization in the 16th century Romanian: Restrictions and regularities. Linguistica Atlantica 33(2): 71–86.Google Scholar