Article published in:
Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces
Edited by Peter Kosta, Steven L. Franks, Teodora Radeva-Bork and Lilia Schürcks
[Language Faculty and Beyond 11] 2014
► pp. 130166
References

References

Abels, Klaus
2003 “Successive Cyclicity, Anti-locality, and Adposition Stranding.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
Adger, David
2003Core Syntax: A Minimalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis and Anagnostopoulou, Elena
2001“The subject-in-situ generalization and the role of case in driving computations.” Linguistic Inquiry 32(2): 193–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark
1997“Thematic roles and syntactic structure.” In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bjorkman, Bronwyn Alma Moore
2011 “BE-ing Default: The Morphosyntax of Auxiliaries.” Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Bloemhoff, Henk
1979“Heranalyse van een Stellingwerver oppervlaktestructuur”. Us Wurk: Tydskrift foar Frisistyk 28: 31–38.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D.
1994“What does adjacency do?” In The Morphology-syntax Connection, Heidi Harley and Colin Phillips (eds), 1–32. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 22. Cambridge, MA: MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.Google Scholar
1995“In terms of merge: Copy and head-movement.” In Papers in Minimalist Syntax, ed. by Rob Pensalfini and Hiroyuki Ura, 41–64. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27. Cambridge, MA: MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.Google Scholar
2002“A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and ‘covert’ movement.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(2): 197–267. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008“Where’s phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation.” In Phi-Theory: Phi Features Across Interfaces and Modules, Daniel Harbour, David Adger and Susana Béjar (eds), 295–328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. and Harley, Heidi
2012 “Suppletion is local: Evidence from Hiaki.” Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs and University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko
1997The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2007“On the locality and motivation of move and agree: An even more minimal theory.” Linguistic Inquiry 38(4): 589–644. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009“Unifying first and last conjunct agreement.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27(3): 455–496. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis.” Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko and Lasnik, Howard
2003 “On the distribution of null complementizers.”Linguistic Inquiry 34(4): 527–546. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan
1991“Locative case vs. locative gender.” In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, ed. by Laurel A. Sutton, Christopher Johnson and Ruth Shields, 53–66. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
2000“Minimalist inquiries: The framework.” In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001“Derivation by phase.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard
1977“Filters and control.” Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Google Scholar
Collins, Chris
1997Local Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2002“Eliminating labels.” In Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Samuel David Epstein and Daniel Seely (eds), 42–64. Malden, MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den and Hoekstra, Eric
1997“Parasitic participles.” Linguistics 35: 1057–1089.Google Scholar
Doherty, Cathal
1993“Clauses without that: The case for bare sentential complementation in English.” Doctoral dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
1997“Clauses without complementizers: Finite IP-complementation in English.” The Linguistic Review 14: 197–220. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000Clauses Without “That”: The Case for Bare Sentential Complementation in English. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Donati, Caterina
2000La sintassi della comparazione. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert
2004“Cyclic phonology-syntax interaction: Movement to first position in German.” In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, ed. by Shinichiro Ishihara and Michaela Schmitz, 1–42. Working papers of the SFB 632 1. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert and Lenertová, Denisa
2011 “Left peripheral focus: mismatches between syntax and information structure.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29, 169–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Danny
2000Economy and Semantic Interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/MITWPL.Google Scholar
Fox, Danny and Nissenbaum, Jon
1999“Extraposition and Scope: A case for overt QR.” In Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Sonya Bird, Andrew Carnie, Jason D. Haugen and Peter Norquest (eds), 132–144. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Franks, Steven
2005“What is that?” In Indiana University Working Papers in Linguistics 5, Y. Kitagawa and Dorian Roehrs (eds), 33–62. Indiana.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner
2005“Zur Syntax der linken Peripherie im Deutschen.” In Deutsche Syntax: Empirie und Theorie, ed. by Franz Josef d’Avis, 147–171. Göteborg.Google Scholar
Gallego, Ángel
2010Phase Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gärtner, Hans-Martin
2001“Are there V2 relative clauses in German.” Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 3(2): 97–141. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grønn, Atle and von Stechow, Arnim
Haegeman, Liliane and Lohndal, Terje
2010“Negative concord and (multiple) agree: A case study of West Flemish.” Linguistic Inquiry 41(2): 181–211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay
1993“On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.” In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honour of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Ken Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hegarty, Michael
1991“Adjunct extraction and chain configurations.” Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline
2006“Embedded root phenomena.” In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), Volume II, Chapter 23, vol. 2, 174–209. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, Glyn
2009The Derivation of Anaphoric Relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. and Thompson, Sandra A.
1973“On the applicability of root transformations.” Linguistic Inquiry 4: 465–497.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert and Nunes, Jairo
2008“Adjunction, Labeling, and Bare Phrase Structure.” Biolinguistics 2(1): 57–86.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1994“On external arguments.” In Functional Projections, ed. by Elena Benedicto and Jeffrey T. Runner, 103–130. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2001“Quantifying into question acts.” Natural Language Semantics 9(1): 1–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan
2010“The explicit syntax of implicit arguments.” Linguistic Inquiry 41(3): 357–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, Howard
1995“Verbal morphology: Syntactic structures meets the minimalist program.” In Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Carlos Otero, Héctor Campos and Paula Kempchinsky (eds), 251–275. Washington, D. C.: Gerorgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lebeaux, David
1991“Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of derivation.” In Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, Susan D. Rothstein (eds), 209–240. San Diego, Calif: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1995“Where does binding theory apply?” In Papers in Syntax, Syntax-Semantics Interface and Phonology, Ricardo Echepare and Viola Miglio (eds), 63–88. College Park: University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
2009Where Does Binding Theory Apply?Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne
2010 “The structure of agents in implicit passives.” Talk given at the 41st Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistics Society, Philadelphia.
2012“Subjects in Acehnese and the Nature of the Passive.” Language 88(3): 495–525. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meinunger, André
2004 “Verb position, verbal mood and the anchoring (potential) of sentences.” In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein and Susanne Trissler, 313–341. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason
2007 “Voice and ellipsis.” Ms., University of Chicago. Chicago. http://​home​.uchicago​.edu​/~merchant​/pubs​/voice​.and​.ellipsis​.pdf.Google Scholar
2008“An asymmetry in voice mismatches in VP-ellipsis and pseudogapping.” Linguistic Inquiry 39(1): 169–179. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009/11 “Ellipsis.” Ms., University of Chicago. Article for Handbook of Contemporary Syntax, 2nd edition, Artemis Alexiadou, Tibor Kiss and Miriam Butt (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://​home​.uchicago​.edu​/~merchant​/pubs​/merchant​.ellipsis​.pdf.Google Scholar
2011“Aleut case matters.” In Pragmatics and Autolexical Grammar: In honor of Jerry Sadock, Etsuyo Yuasa Yuasa, Tista Bagchi and Katharine P. Beals (eds), 382–411. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Neeleman, Ad. and van de Koot, Hans
2002“The configurational matrix.” Linguistic Inquiry 33(4): 529–574. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, Jairo
1995“The copy theory of movement and linearization of chains in the minimalist program.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
1999“Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links.” In Working Minimalism, ed. by Samuel David Epstein and Norbert Hornstein, 217–249. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2004Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2011 “The copy theory.”InThe Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, Cedric Boeckx (eds), Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nunes, Jairo and Zocca, Cynthia
2005“Morphological identity in ellipsis.” In Leiden Papers in Linguistics, Noureddine Elouazizi, Frank Landsbergen, Mika Poss and Martin Salzmann (eds), 29–42. Leiden: Leiden University.Google Scholar
2009“Lack of morphological identity and ellipsis resolution in Brazilian Portuguese.” In Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax, ed. by Jairo Nunes, 215–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, David
1998“Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation.” In Is the Best Good Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntax, Pilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis and David Pesetsky (eds), 337–383. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and MITWPL.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther
2001“T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (eds), 355–426. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2004“Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories.” In The syntax of time, Jacqueline Guéron and Jacqueline Lecarme (eds), 495–537. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2006 “Probes, goals and syntactic categories.” In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. Keio University, Japan.
2007“The Syntax of Valuation and the Interpretability of Features.” In Phrasal and clausal architecture, Simin Karimi, Samiian Vida and Wendy Wilkins (eds), 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potsdam, Eric
1997“English verbal morphology and VP ellipsis.” In Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting 27, Kiyomi Kusumoto (eds), 353–368. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney, Greenbaum, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan
1972A Grammar of Contemporary English. New York: Seminar.Google Scholar
Reis, Marga
1995a“Extractions from verb-second clauses in German?” In On Extraction and Extraposition in German, Uli Lutz and Jürgen Pafel (eds), 45–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1995b“Wer glaubst du hat recht? On so-called extractions from verb second clauses and verb first parenthetical constructions in German.” Sprache und Pragmatik 36: 27–83.Google Scholar
1997“Zum syntaktischen Status unselbständiger Verbzweit-Sätze.” In Sprache im Fokus. Festschrift für Heinz Vater zum 65. Geburtstag, Christa Dürscheid, Karl Heinz Rahmers and Monika Schwarz (eds), 121–144. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
2006“Is German V-to-C movement really semantically motivated? Some empirical problems.” Theoretical Linguistics 32(3): 369–380. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sag, Ivan
1976“Deletion and Logical Form.” Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Şener, Serkan
2008Non-Canonical Case Licensing is Canonical: Accusative subjects of CPs in Turkish. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
Smith, Peter
To appear. “Collective (dis)agreement: On a 3/4 pattern of British English collective NPs.” In Proceedings of ConSOLE XX. http://​homepages​.uconn​.edu​/~pws10003​/Current​_Research​_files​/console20​-firstdraft​-smith​.pdf.
Svenonius, Peter
1994“Dependent nexus: Subordinate predication structures in English and the Scandinavian languages.” Doctoral dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert
2006“On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German.” Theoretical Linguistics 32(3): 257–306.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony
1986“Ellipsis conditions and the status of the English copula.” York Papers in Linguistics 12: 153–172.Google Scholar
Watanabe, Akira
1996Case Absorption and Wh-Agreement. Dordrecth: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Webelhuth, Gert
1992Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen
1991“Verb second and illocutionary force.” In Views on Phrase Structure, Katherine Leffel and Denis Bouchard (eds), 177–191. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wegener, Heide
1993“Weil—das hat schon seinen Grund. Zur Verbstellung in Kausalsaätzen mit weil im gegenwaärtigen Deutsch.” Deutsche Sprache 21: 289–305.Google Scholar
Wiklund, Anna-Lena
2001“Dressing up for vocabulary insertion: The parasitic supine.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(1): 199–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi
2006“Licensing case.” Journal of Germanic Linguistics 18(3): 175–234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012aAgreement: Looking Up or Looking Down? Lecture Given in Agreement Seminar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Handout available: http://​wurmbrand​.uconn​.edu​/Papers​/MIT​-2012​.pdf.Google Scholar
2012b. Parasitic participles in Germanic: Evidence for the theory of verb clusters. Taal en Tongval.
2012c “The syntax of valuation in auxiliary–participle constructions.” In Coyote Working Papers: Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 29), Jaehoon Choi et al. (eds), University of Arizona: Tucson. http://​hdl​.handle​.net​/10150​/253431.Google Scholar
2012d “The timing of merge: Deriving certain clause-linking mismatches.” Talk given at the workshop (Mis)matches in Clause Linkage, ZAS, Berlin. Handout available: http://​wurmbrand​.uconn​.edu​/Papers​/MiCL​.pdf.
2013“QR and selection: Covert evidence for phasehood.” In Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting 42, ed. by Stefan Keine and Shayne Sloggett, 619–632. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA. http://​wurmbrand​.uconn​.edu​/Papers​/NELS42​.pdf.Google Scholar
To appear. “Tense and aspect in English infinitives.” Linguistic Inquiry.
Zeijlstra, Hedde
To appear. “There is only one way to agree.” The Linguistic Review.
Zimmermann, Ilse
2009“Satzmodus.” In Die slavischn Sprachen/The Slavic Languages, Sebastian Kempgen, Peter Kosta, Tilman Berger and Gutschidt Karl (eds), 484–509. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter
1995“A note on verb clusters in the Stellingwerf dialect.” In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1995, Marcel den Dikken and Kees Hengeveld (eds), 215–226. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 12 other publications

Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou
2021.  In Non-canonical Control in a Cross-linguistic Perspective [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 270],  pp. 15 ff. Crossref logo
Alok, Deepak
2021. The Morphosyntax of Magahi Addressee Agreement. Syntax 24:3  pp. 263 ff. Crossref logo
Bjorkman, Bronwyn M. & Hedde Zeijlstra
2019. Checking Up on (ϕ-)Agree. Linguistic Inquiry 50:3  pp. 527 ff. Crossref logo
Bošković, Željko
2018. On Movement out of Moved Elements, Labels, and Phases. Linguistic Inquiry 49:2  pp. 247 ff. Crossref logo
Bárány, András & Irina Nikolaeva
2021. On Adjoined Possessors. Linguistic Inquiry 52:1  pp. 181 ff. Crossref logo
Haddad, Youssef A.
2014. Attitude datives in Lebanese Arabic and the interplay of syntax and pragmatics. Lingua 145  pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo
Nóbrega, Vitor A. & Shigeru Miyagawa
2015. The precedence of syntax in the rapid emergence of human language in evolution as defined by the integration hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology 6 Crossref logo
Sanfelici, Emanuela, Caroline Féry & Petra Schulz
2020. What verb-final and V2 have in common: evidence from the prosody of German restrictive relative clauses in adults and children. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 39:2  pp. 201 ff. Crossref logo
Toquero-Pérez, Luis Miguel
2021. Revisiting extraction and subextraction patterns from arguments. Linguistic Variation Crossref logo
Weisser, Philipp
2020. On the Symmetry of Case in Conjunction. Syntax 23:1  pp. 42 ff. Crossref logo
Wurmbrand, Susi
2017. Stripping and Topless Complements. Linguistic Inquiry 48:2  pp. 341 ff. Crossref logo
Wurmbrand, Susi & Youssef A. Haddad
2016.  In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXVIII [Studies in Arabic Linguistics, 4],  pp. 193 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 october 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.