Article published in:
Differential objects and datives – a homogeneous class?
Edited by Monica Alexandrina Irimia and Anna Pineda
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 42:1] 2019
► pp. 102131
References

References

Aissen, J.
1999Markedness and subject choice in Optimality Theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 17, 673–711. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Differential Object Marking: Iconicity Vs. Economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 21, 435–483. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alcaraz, A.
2019Configurations of A-movement. PhD. Thesis, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU).Google Scholar
Baker, M. C.
1988Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1996The Polysynthesis Parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C. & Vinokurova, N.
2010Two modalities of case assignment: case in Sakha. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 28:3, 593–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 128 ]
Béjar, S. & Rezac, M.
2003Person licensing and the derivation of PCC effects. In A. T. Pérez-Leroux & Y. Roberge (Eds.), Romance Linguistics: Theory and Acquisition. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. 49–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Cyclic agree. Linguistic Inquiry, 40, 35–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A. & Menetti, C.
In press. Topics and passives in Italian-speaking children and adults. Language acquisition.
Bernstein, J., Ordóñez, F. & Roca, F.
2018 dom and DP layers in romance. Talk presented at Differential Object Marking in romance-towards microvariation , Inalco, Paris Nov. 10 2018.
Berro, A. & Fernández, B.
2018Applicatives without verbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, first on line Dec 2018 doi:  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bossong, G.
1991Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In D. Wanner & D. A. Kibbee (Eds.) New analyses in Romance linguistics, 143–170. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brugè, L. & Brugger, G.
1996On the accusative a in Spanish. Probus, 8:1, 1–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B.
1981Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
1990Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W. & Poole, K. T.
2008Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical linguistics, 34, 1–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Danon, G.
2006Caseless nominals and the projection of DP. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 24, 977–1008. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D.
1991Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language, 67:3, 547–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.
1986Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative. Language, 62, 808–845. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fábregas, A.
2015Direccionales con con y Marcado Diferencial de Objeto. Revue Romane, 50:2, 163–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fernández, B. & Rezac, M.
2016Differential Object Marking in Basque varieties. In B. Fernández & J. Ortiz de Urbina (eds.), Microparameters in the Grammar of Basque, 93–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
García García, M.
2007Differential object marking with inanimate objects. In G. A. Kaiser & M. Leonetti (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop “Definiteness, Specificity and Animacy in Ibero-Romance Languages”, 63–84. Arbeitspapier 122. Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
Glushan, Zhanna
2010Deriving case syncretism in Differential Object marking systems. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Green, G.
1974Semantics and syntactic regularity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Ritter, E.
2002Person and number in pronouns: A feature geometric analysis. Language, 78, 482–526. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
2004Explaining the Ditransitive Person-Role Constraint: a usage-based account. Constructions 2.Google Scholar
2008Descriptive scales versus comparative scales. In M. Richards & A. L. Malchukov (Eds.), Scales, 39–53. Linguistische Arbeits Berichte 86, Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
[ p. 129 ]
2018Are we making progress in understanding differential object marking? https://​dlc​.hypotheses​.org​/1119
Ingason, A. K.
2016Applicatives in the noun phrase. Ms. University of Iceland.Google Scholar
Irimia, M. A.
2018Variation in differential object marking: on some differences between Romanian and Spanish. Ms. University Modena and Reggio Emilia.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O.
1982Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Jones, M. A.
1999The pronoun determiner debate: evidence for Sardinian and repercussions for French. In E. Treviño & J. Lema (Eds.), Semantic Issues in Romance Syntax, 121–140. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laca, B.
1995Sobre el uso del acusativo preposicional en español. In C. Pensado (Ed.), El complemento directo preposicional, 61–91. Madrid: Visor.Google Scholar
Larson, R. K.
1988On the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19:3, 335–391.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, A.
2012From Latin to Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2018Parametric variation in dom in the dialects of Southern Italy. Talk, International workshop Differential Object Marking in Romance. Towards Microvariation. INALCO, Paris 2018/11/9-10
Leonetti, M.
2008Specificity in Clitic Doubling and in Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Probus 20, 33–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
López, L.
2012Indefinite objects. Cambridge, MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marantz, A.
1991Case and licensing. In ESCOL ’91: proceedings of the eighth eastern states conference on linguistics, 234–253.Google Scholar
Mendikoetxea, A.
1999Construcciones con se: Medias, Pasivas e Impersonales. In I. Bosque & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española, 1631–1722. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Mithun, M.
1984The evolution of noun incorporation. Language, 60, 847–94. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Odria, A.
2017Differential Object Marking and Datives in Basque Syntax. PhD dissertation, University of the Basque Country.Google Scholar
2018 dom and datives in Basque: not as homogeneous as they look like. Manuscript, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU).Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J. & Romero, J.
2007The Object Agreement Constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 315–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013aObject Clitics, Agreement and Dialectal Variation. Probus, 25, 301–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013bNon accusative objects. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 12, 155–173. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013cDifferential Object Marking, case and agreement. Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 2, 221–239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Historical Changes in Basque Dative Alternations: Evidence for a P-based (neo)derivational analysis. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 2:1, 78, 1–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019aDeconstructing se constructions. Ms. UPV/EHU & Universidad de Extremadura.Google Scholar
2019bThe formal properties of non paradigmatic se . To appear in Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 8, 55–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 130 ]
Pensado, C.
1995El complemento directo preposicional. Estado de la cuestión y bibliografía comentada. In C. Pensado (Ed.), El complemento directo preposicional, 11–59. Madrid: Visor.Google Scholar
Paul, W. & Whitman, J.
2010Applicative structure and Mandarin ditransitives. In M. Duguine et al. (Eds.), Argument Structure and syntactic relations from a crosslinguistic perspective, 261–282. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, D. A.
2006Applicative constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pineda, A.
2018Differential object marking in Catalan varieties. Talk, International workshop Differential Object Marking in Romance. Towards Microvariation. INALCO, Paris 2018/11/9-10.
Rappaport-Hovav, M. & Levin, B.
2008The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics, 44, 129–167. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rezac, M.
2011Phi-features and the modular architecture of language. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rigau, G.
1988Strong pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 503–511.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Ordoñez, I.
2016Differential Object Marking in Basque: Grammaticalization, attitudes and ideological representations. Urbana-Champaign: UIUC PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Ordóñez, I.
2017Reexamining differential object marking as a linguistic contact-phenomenon in Gernika Basque. Journal of Language Contact, 10:2, 318–352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez Mondoñedo, M.
2007The syntax of objects: Agree and differential object marking. Ph Dissertation, U. of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. Á.
2004The syntax of Person, Tense, and speech features. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 16, 219–251.Google Scholar
2006The Nominative Puzzle and the Low Nominative Hypothesis. Linguistic Inquiry, 37, 289–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M.
1976Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In R. M. W. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. [Reprinted in P. Muysken, & H. van Riemsdijk 1986 Features and projections, Foris, Dordrecht, 163–232.]Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J.
1996Warps: some thoughts on categorization. Cuadernos de Lingüística del I.U. Ortega y Gasset, 4, 1–38.Google Scholar
von Heusinger, K. & Kaiser, G. A.
2005The evolution of differential object marking in Spanish. In K. von Heusinger, G. A. Kaiser & E. Stark (Eds.). Proceedings of the Workshop “Specificity and the Evolution / Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance”, 33–70. Arbeitspapier Nr. 119. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
[ p. 131 ]