Article published in:
Differential objects and datives – a homogeneous class?
Edited by Monica Alexandrina Irimia and Anna Pineda
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 42:1] 2019
► pp. 82101
References

References

Alexiadou, A.
2001Functional Structure in Nominals. Nominalization and Ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anand, P. & Nevins, A.
2005The locus of ergative Case assignment: Evidence from scope. In A. Johns, D. Massam & J. Ndayiragije (Eds.), Ergativity: Emerging issues, 143–171. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Barker, C.
1998Partitives, double genitives and anti-uniqueness. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 679–717. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A. & Rizzi, L.
1996Su alcuni casi di accordo del participio passato in francese e in italiano. In P. Benincà, G. Cinque, T. De Mauro & N. Vincent (Eds.), Italiano e dialetti nel tempo: saggi di grammatica per Giulio C. Lepschy, 7–22. Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
Belvin, R., & den Dikken, M.
1997 There, happens, to, be, have . Lingua, 101, 151–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berwick, R. & Chomsky, N.
2011The biolinguistic program: the current state of its evolution and development. In A. M. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise, 19–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I., & Sheehan, M.
2014Complexity in comparative syntax: the view from modern parametric theory. In F. Newmeyer & L. Preston (Eds.), Measuring Linguistic Complexity, 103–127. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carstens, V.
2000Concord in Minimalist Theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 2: 319–355. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, G.
1998Partitives, reference to kinds and semantic variation. In A. Lawson (Ed.), Proceedings of Semantics And Linguistic Theory Volume VII, 73–98. Cornell University: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
1981Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1986Knowledge of Language. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
2001Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: a life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Danon, G.
2013Agreement alternations with quantified nominals in Modern Hebrew. Journal of Linguistics, 49, 55–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Demonte, V. & Pérez-Jiménez, I.
2015Construcciones partitivas y pseudopartivas en español. In E. Hernández & P. M. Butragueño (Eds.), Variación y diversidad lingüística, 15–98. Ciudad de México: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
[ p. 99 ]
Fillmore, C. J.
1968The Case for Case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Franco, L., Manzini, M. R. & L. Savoia
2015Linkers and agreement. The Linguistic Review, 32, 277–332.Google Scholar
Franco, L. & Manzini, M. R.
2017Instrumental prepositions and case: Contexts of occurrence and alternations with datives. Glossa, 2(1): 8, 1–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Franco, L., Manzini, M. R. & Savoia, L.
To appear. Locative Ps as general relators: Location, direction, DOM in Romance. In V. Acedo Matellan et al. Eds. Linguistic Variation Special Issue
Franks, S.
1994Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 12, 597–674. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 100 ]
Grosz, P. & Patel-Grosz, P.
2014Agreement and verb types in Kutchi Gujarati. In P. Chandra & R. Srishti (Eds.), The lexicon-syntax interface: Perspectives from South Asian languages, 217–243. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Irimia, M. A.
2018Differential objects and other structural objects. Linguistics Society of America 2018 Proceedings, 3, 50:1–15.Google Scholar
Johns, A.
1992Deriving ergativity. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 57–87.Google Scholar
Kayne, R.
1984Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P.
2008Universals constrain change, change results in typological generalizations. In J. Good (Ed.), Linguistic Universals and Language Change, 23–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Korn, A.
2008Marking of Arguments in Balochi Ergative and Mixed Constructions. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian & D. Stilo (Eds.), Aspects of Iranian linguistics, 249–276. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Laka, I.
2006Deriving split ergativity in the progressive: the case of Basque. In A. Johns, D. Massam & J. Ndayiragije (Eds.), Ergativity: Emerging issues, 173–196. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Longobardi, G.
2001The Structure of DPs: Some Principles, Parameters, and Problems. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (Eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, 562–603. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lorusso, P. & Franco, L.
2017Patterns of syntactic agreement with embedded NPs, Lingua, 195, 39–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R.
2019Parameters and the design of the Language Faculty. Northern Italian partial null subjects. Evolutionary Linguistic Theory 1: 24–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R. & L. Franco
2016Goal and DOM datives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 34, 197–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R., & L. M. Savoia
2005I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa (3 volumes). Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. R., Savoia, L. & Franco, L.
2015Ergative Case, Aspect and Person Splits: Two Case Studies. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 62, 297–351. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R., Savoia, L.
2018The morphosyntax of Albanian and Aromanian varieties. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nash, L.
2017The structural source of split ergativity and ergative case in Georgian. In J. Coon, D. Massam & L. Travis (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity, 175–204. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Patel-Grosz, P. & Grosz, P.
2014Agreement and verb types in Kutchi Gujarati, In P. Chandra & R. Srishti (Eds.), The Lexicon – Syntax Interface: Perspectives from South Asian languages, 217–244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D.
1982Paths and Categories (PhD dissertation), MIT.Google Scholar
Pineda, A.
2014(In)transitivity borders. A study of applicatives in Romance languages and Basque (PhD Dissertation), UAB.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M.
2016Deconstructing Ergativity. Two Types of Ergative Languages and Their Features. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rezac, M., Albizu, P. & Etxepare, R.
2014The structural ergative of Basque and the theory of Case. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 32, 1273–1330. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwarzschild, R.
2006The role of dimensions in the syntax of noun phrases. Syntax, 9, 67–110. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E.
1977Some remarks on noun phrase structure. In P. Culicover, T. Wasow & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal Syntax, 285–316. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Svenonius, P.
2002Icelandic case and the structure of events. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 5, 197–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toosarvandani, M. & Nasser, H.
2017Quantification in Persian. In D. Paperno & E. L. Keenan (Eds.), Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language: Volume II, 665–696. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torrego, E.
2009Variability in the Case Patterns of Causative Formation in Romance and Its Implications. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 445–470. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, S.
2013Alignment and ergativity in new Indo-Aryan languages. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Woolford, E.
2006Lexical Case, Inherent Case, and Argument Structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 37, 111–130. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zamparelli, R.
2008Dei ex-machina: a note on plural/mass indefinite determiners, Studia Linguistica, 63, 301–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 101 ]