Chapter published in:
Boundaries, Phases and Interfaces: Case studies in honor of Violeta Demonte
Edited by Olga Fernández-Soriano, Elena Castroviejo Miró and Isabel Pérez-Jiménez
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 239] 2017
► pp. 130150
References

References

Aguilar-Guevara, Ana
2014Weak Definites: Semantics, Lexicon and Pragmatics. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana & Zwarts, Joost
2010Weak definites and reference to kinds. Proceedings of SALT 20: 1–15.
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana & Zwarts, Joost 2013Weak definites refer to kinds. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 42: 33–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beavers, John
2011On affectedness. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29: 335–370. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Birner, Betty & Ward, Gregory
1994Uniqueness, familiarity and the definite article in English. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20: 93–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert
2010Construction Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Borik, Olga & Espinal, M. Teresa
2012On definite kinds. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 41: 123–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Reference to kinds and to other generic expressions: Definiteness and number. The Linguistic Review 32(2): 167–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borthen, Kaja
2003Norwegian Bare Singulars. PhD Dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Carlson, Greg
1977References to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Published by Garland, New York 1980.Google Scholar
2006The meaningful bounds of incorporation. In Non- Definiteness and Plurality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 95], Svetlana Vogeleer & Liliane Tasmowski (eds), 35–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Generics and concepts. In Kinds, Things and Stuff: Mass Terms and Generics, Francis J. Pelletier (ed.), 16–35. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Carlson, Greg & Sussman, Rachel S.
2005Seemingly indefinite definites. In Linguistic Evidence: Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Perspectives, Stephan Kepser & Marga Reis (eds), 71–85. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Greg, Sussman, Rachel S., Klein, Natalie M. & Tanenhaus, Michael K.
2006Weak definite noun phrases. In NELS 36 Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, Christopher Davis, Amy Rose Deal & Youri Zabbal (eds), 179–196. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro
1984Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
1995Individual-level predicates as inherent generics. In The Generic Book, Carlson, Greg & Francis J. Pelletier (eds), 176–223. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1998Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6: 339- 405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Christophersen, Paul
1939The Articles: A Study of their Theory and Use in English. Copenhagen: Einar Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra & Ladusaw, William
2004Restriction and Saturation. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Corblin, Francis
2013Weak definites as bound relational definites. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 42: 91–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cyrino, Sonia & Espinal, M. Teresa
2015Bare nominals in Brazilian Portuguese: More on the DP/NP analysis. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33(2): 471–521. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dayal, Veneeta
2003A semantics for pseudo incorporation. Ms, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
2004Number marking and (in)definiteness in kind terms. Linguistics & Philosophy 27: 393–450. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Hindi pseudo-incorporation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 29(1): 1–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen, Bleam, Tania & Espinal, M. Teresa
2006Bare nouns, number and types of incorporation. In Non−definiteness and Plurality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 95], Svetlana Vogeleer & Liliane Tasmowski (eds), 51–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen & Pires de Oliveira, Roberta
2007Reference to kinds in Brazilian Portuguese: Bare singulars vs. definite singulars. Sinn und Bedeutung 12, Atle Grønn (ed.), 107–121. Oslo: Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages.Google Scholar
Doron, Edit & Meyr, Irit 2013Amount definites. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 42: 139–165. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David
1991Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa
2010Bare nominals in Catalan and Spanish. Their structure and meaning. Lingua 120: 984–1009. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa. (
In press). Morphosyntactic defectiveness in complex predicate predication. In On Verb Valency Change: Theoretical and typological perspectives, Ía Navarro & Albert Álvarez (eds) Amsterdam John Benjamins
Espinal, M. Teresa & Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen
2006Tipología semántica de los nombres escuetos. El caso particular de los nombres escuetos singulares contables. In Homenaje a Andolin Eguzkitza, Beatriz Fernández & Itziar Laka (eds), 269–285. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco.Google Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa & McNally, Louise
2007aBare singular nominals and incorporating verbs. In Definiteness, Specificity and Animacy in Ibero-Romance Languages, Georg Kaiser & Manuel Leonetti (eds). Arbeitspapier 122: 45–62. Konstanz: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
2007bBare singulars: Variation at the syntax-semantics interface. Paper presented at the Workshop on Bare Nouns and Nominalizations , University of Stuttgart, June 22.
2011Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Catalan and Spanish. Journal of Linguistics 47: 87–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Donka & de Swart, Henriette
2003The Semantics of Incorporation: From Argument Structure to Discourse Transparency. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Grimm, Scott & Louise McNally
2015The -ing dynasty: Rebuilding the semantics of nominalizations. Proceedings of SALT 25, 82–102.
Hale, Kenneth
1986Notes on world view and semantic categories: Some Warlpiri examples. In Features and Projections, Peter Muysken, & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 233–254. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene
1982The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Ionin, Tania & Matushansky, Ora
2006The composition of complex cardinals. Journal of Semantics 23: 315–360. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Natalie M., Gegg-Harrison, Whitney M., Carlson, Greg N. & Tanenhaus, Michael K.
2013Experimental investigations of weak definite and weak indefinite noun phrases. Cognition 128: 187–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1995Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In The Generic Book, Greg Carlson & Francis J. Pelletier (eds), 125–175. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
1998The origins of telicity. In Events and Grammar, Susan Rothstein (ed.), 197–235. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred, Francis J. Pelletier, Greg Carlson, Alice ter Meulen, Godehard Link & Gennaro Chierchia
1995Introduction. In Greg Carlson & Francis J. Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book, 1–124. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe
1994Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry 25(4): 609–665.Google Scholar
McNally, Louise & Boleda, Gemma
2004Relational adjectives as properties of kinds. In Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics, Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hoffher (eds), 5: 179–196. http://​www​.cssp​.cnrs​.fr​/eiss5​/mcnally​-boleda​/index​_en​.html Google Scholar
McNally, Louise & van Geenhoven, Veerle 1998Redefining the weak/strong distinction. Paper presented at the Second Paris Syntax and Semantics Colloquium.
Mithun, Marianne
1984The evolution of noun incorporation. Language 60(4): 847–894. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Munn, Alan & Schmitt, Cristina
2005Number and indefinites. Lingua 115: 821–855. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Partee, Barbara
1987Noun phrase interpretability and type-shifting principles. In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, Jeroen A.G. Groenendijk, Dick de Jongh & Martin J.B. Stokhof (eds), 115–144. Foris: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, Asya
2011On numberlessness and paucal numerals in Russian. Paper presented at Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 20. MIT, 13–15 May.
Pustejovsky, James
1995The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Florian
2014How weak and how definite are weak definites? In Weak Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219], Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn & Joost Zwarts (eds), 213–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stvan, Laurel S.
1998The Semantics and Pragmatics of Bare Singular Noun Phrases. PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, Jean-Roger & Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa
1992The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and in English. Linguistic Inquiry 23(4): 595–652.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, Roberto
2002Definite and bare kind-denoting nouns phrases. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 200. Selected Papers from Going Romance 2000 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 232], Frank Drijkoningen, Claire Beyssade, Paola Monachesi & Reineke Bok-Bennema (eds), 305–342. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, Joost
2014Functional frames in the interpretation of weak nominals. In Weak Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219], Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn & Joost Zwarts (eds), 265–285. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Real-Puigdollers, Cristina
2021. A minimalist approach to the syntax of p . Linguistic Variation 21:1  pp. 90 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 2021. 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.