Article published in:
Lingvisticæ Investigationes
Vol. 39:1 (2016) ► pp. 4887
References

References

Akmajian, A.
(1970) On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences. Linguistic Inquiry, 1, 149–168.Google Scholar
Bally, Ch
(1922) Copule zéro et faits connexes. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris, 23, 1–6.Google Scholar
(1965 [1932]) Linguistique générale et linguistique française, 4th ed. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Y.
(1954) Logical syntax and semantics. Language, 30, 230–237. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1970) Aspects of language. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press.Google Scholar
Barsky, R. F.
(2011) Zellig Harris: From American linguistics to socialist zionism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L.
(1933) Language. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1953) Systems of syntactic analysis. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 18, 242–256. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1955) Logical syntax and semantics: Their linguistic relevance. Language, 31, 36–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1956) Three models for the description of language. I.R.E. Transactions on Information Theory, IT-2, 113–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1957) Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton (2nd edition with an introduction by D. W. Lightfoot, Berlin-New York: Mouton-De Gruyter, 2002).Google Scholar
(1964a) A transformational approach to syntax. In Jerry A. Fodor & Jerrold J. Katz (Eds.), The structure of language. Readings in the philosophy of language (pp. 211–245). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall [originally published in A. A. Hill, ed., Proceedings of the Third Texas Conference on Problems of Linguistic Analysis in English, pp. 124-158. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press].Google Scholar
(1964b) Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
(1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1970) Remarks on nominalization. In R. A. Jacobs & P. S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 184–221). Waltham, Mass.: Ginn & Co.Google Scholar
(1975a [1955–56]) The logical structure of linguistic theory. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. (Cited as LSLT ).Google Scholar
(1975b) Introduction 1973. In Chomsky 1975a, The logical structure of linguistic theory, pp. 1–53.Google Scholar
(1977) On Wh-movement. In P. W. Culicover, Th. Wasow, & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal syntax (pp. 71–132). New York-San Francisco-London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1980) On binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 1–46.Google Scholar
(1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2009) Cartesian linguistics. A chapter in the history of rationalist thought, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diderichsen, P.
(1976) Ganzheit und Struktur. Ausgewählte sprachwissenschaftliche Abhandlungen. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Frei, H.
(1929) La grammaire des fautes. Paris & Genève: Geuthner. (Reprint Genève: Slatkine, 1971.)Google Scholar
Graffi, G.
(2001) 200 years of syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Z. S.
(1945) Discontinuous morphemes. Language, 21, 121–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1946) From morpheme to utterance. Language, 22, 161–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1951) Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1952a) Discourse analysis. Language, 28, 1–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1952b) Discourse analysis: A sample text. Language, 28, 474–494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1954a) Distributional structure. Word, 10, 142–162. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1954b) Transfer grammar. International Journal of American Linguistics, 20, 259–270. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1956) Introduction to transformations (= Transformations and Discourse Analysis Papers, No.2.) Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. (Repr. in Harris 1970, pp. 383-389.)Google Scholar
(1957) Cooccurrence and transformation in linguistic structure. Language, 33, 283–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1959a) Computable syntactic analysis. (= Transformations and Discourse Analysis Papers, No.15.) Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. (excerpted, with the added subtitle “The 1959 computer sentence-analyzer”, in Harris 1970, pp. 253-277).Google Scholar
(1959b) The transformational model of language structure. Anthropological Linguistics, 1, 27–29.Google Scholar
(1964) Transformations in linguistic structure. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 108(5), 418–422. (Repr. in Harris 1970, pp. 472-481.)Google Scholar
(1965) Transformational theory. Language, 41, 363–401. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1970) Papers in structural and transformational linguistics. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1976) Notes du cours de syntaxe (ed. by M. Gross). Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
(1991) A theory of language and information. A mathematical approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hockett, Ch. F.
(1952) A formal statement of morphemic analysis. Studies in Linguistics, 10, 27–39.Google Scholar
(1954) Two models of grammatical description. Word, 10, 210–234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1958) A course in modern linguistics. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R.
(1939) Signe zéro. In Mélanges de linguistique offerts à Charles Bally (pp. 143–152). Genève: Georg & Cie.Google Scholar
Jenkins, L.
(1974) The English existential. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Milner, J.-C.
(1973) Écoles de Cambridge et de Pennsylvanie: deux théories de la transformation. Langages, 29, 98–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. O.
(1994) Theory groups and the study of language in North America: A social history. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nevin, B.
(2010) Noam and Zellig. In D. A. Kibbee (Ed.), Chomskyan (R)evolutions (pp. 103–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nevin, B., & Johnson, S. B.
(Eds.) (2002) The legacy of Zellig Harris: Language and information into the 21st century (Current issues in linguistic theory). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J.
(1986) Linguistic theory in America, 2nd ed. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nida, E.
(1966 [1943]) A synopsis of English syntax, 2nd ed. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Pike, K. L.
(1943) Taxemes and immediate constituents. Language, 19, 65–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. R.
(1967) Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph. D. diss.: MIT.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de
(1922 [1916]) Cours de linguistique générale, 2nd ed. Paris: Payot. (English translation by R. Harris. London: Duckworth, 1983).Google Scholar
Seuren, P.
(2009) Concerning the roots of transformational generative grammar. Historiographia Linguistica, 36, 97–115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swadesh, M.
(1934) The phonemic principle. Language, 10, 117–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wells, R. S.
(1947) Immediate constituents. Language, 23, 81–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wundt, W.
(1912) Völkerpsychologie. I. Die Sprache, 3rd ed. Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar